Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Council, 22 March 2005, Corrected Copy)

The Chair of Committees (The Hon. Amanda Fazio), in the absence of the President, took the chair as Deputy-President at 2.30 p.m.

The Deputy-President offered the Prayers.

The Hon. TONY KELLY: Madam Deputy-President, as honourable members have been delayed returning from a State funeral, I suggest that you do now leave the chair until the ringing of one long bell.

[The Deputy-President (The Hon. Amanda Fazio) left the chair at 2.34 p.m. The House resumed at 2.50 p.m.]

Assent to the following bills reported:

Court Security Bill
Forestry (Darling Mills State Forest Revocation) Bill
Historic Houses Amendment Bill
Marine Safety Amendment (Random Breath Testing) Bill
Police Integrity Commission Amendment Bill
Sheriff Bill
Standard Time Amendment (Co-ordinated Universal Time) Bill
State Records Amendment Bill

THE DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): On 21 December 2004 the University Legislation Amendment Act 2004 commenced. The Act removes the requirement for university governing bodies to include a member appointed by the House. Consequently, members appointed as university representatives by resolutions of the House of 7 May 2003 and 29 June 2004 ceased to hold those offices on the date of the commencement of the amending Act.

The Deputy-President (The Hon. Amanda Fazio) announced the receipt, pursuant to the Forestry and National Park Estate Act 1998, of amendments to the Integrated Forestry Operations Approvals for Eden, Lower North East, Upper North East and Southern regions dated 28 February 2005.

The Deputy-President (The Hon. Amanda Fazio) announced further that it had been authorised that the documents be made public.

Motion by Mr Ian Cohen agreed to:

That the reporting date for the reference to General Purpose Standing Committee No. 5 relating to the budget estimates and related papers be extended to Friday 29 April 2005.

The Hon. John Hatzistergos tabled, pursuant to Standing Order 59, a list of papers tabled in the previous month and not ordered to be printed.

The following papers were ordered to be printed:

Commission for Children and Young People Act 1998—Report of the NSW Child Death Review Team entitled "Sudden Unexpected Deaths in Infancy: The New South Wales Experience", dated January 2005

Public Finance and Audit Act 1983—Performance Audit Report of the Auditor-General entitled "Follow-up of Performance Audit: Environmental Impact Assessment of Major Projects", dated February 2005

Public Finance and Audit Act 1983—Performance Audit Report of the Auditor-General entitled "Fraud Control: Current Progress and Future Directions", dated February 2005

The Hon. John Hatzistergos tabled a list detailing all legislation unproclaimed 90 calendar days after assent as at 21 March 2005.

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of 24 February 2005, documents relating to the grey nurse shark received on 10 March 2005 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of the documents.

The Clerk tabled also advice rom the Director-General of the Premier's Department indicating that two documents identified in the resolution had not been provided as they formed part of a Cabinet minute, and asserting that as such the documents are exempt from Standing Order 52 requests.

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of 24 February 2005, documents relating to the audit of restricted rail lines received on 10 March 2005 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of the documents.

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of 24 February 2005, documents relating to road tunnel filtration received on 10 March 2005 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of the documents.

The Clerk tabled a return identifying those of the documents that are claimed to be privileged and should not be tabled or made public. The Clerk advised that pursuant to standing orders the documents are available for inspection by members of the Legislative Council only.

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of 2 March 2005, documents relating to coastal shack licences in the Royal National Park received on 16 March 2005 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of the documents.
The Clerk tabled a return identifying those of the documents that are claimed to be privileged and should not be tabled or made public. The Clerk advised that pursuant to standing orders the documents are available for inspection by members of the Legislative Council only.

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of 3 March 2005, documents relating to the wood product extraction operations received on 17 March 2005 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of the documents.

The Clerk tabled a return identifying those documents that are claimed to be privileged and should not be tabled or made public. The Clerk advised that pursuant to standing orders the documents are available for inspection by members of the Legislative Council only.

The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, of the Financial Audits Report, Volume One 2005, dated March 2005.

The Clerk announced further that, pursuant to the Act, it had been authorised that the report be printed.

The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, of the performance audit report entitled "Follow-up of Performance Audit: Collecting Outstanding Fines and Penalties", dated March 2005.

The Clerk announced further that, pursuant to the Act, it had been authorised that the report be printed.

The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Legislation Review Act 1987, of a report entitled "Legislation Review Digest No. 3 of 2005", dated 18 March 2005.

The Clerk announced further that, pursuant to the Act, it had been authorised that the report be printed.

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

Petition requesting that Bondi Junction Post Office be restored to an integrated shopfront location, received from Ms Lee Rhiannon.

Petitions requesting the withdrawal of changes to the rental structure of Crown land leases, particularly enclosed road permits, received from the Hon. Rick Colless and the Hon. Melinda Pavey.
The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS: I inform the House that on 17 March 2005 the Standing Committee on Social Issues received the following reference from the Minister for Police:

That the Standing Committee on Social Issues inquire into and report on the public disturbances at Macquarie Fields, and in particular on:

(a) policing strategies and resources in the Macquarie Fields area, particularly in the immediate period leading up to and following the motor vehicle accident involving two fatalities on 25 February 2005,

(b) the extent to which the actions of any member of Parliament who, behaving like "armchair generals", compromised police operations in the Macquarie Fields area,

(c) government programs and service provision in the Macquarie Fields area, including local, State and Federal programs,

(d) non-government services and service provision in the Macquarie Fields area,

(e) whether the lessons learned from the Social Issues Committee and Coburn reports resulting from the Redfern disturbance have been utilised in this incident,

(f) the underlying causes and problems which may have contributed to individual and collective acts of violence and social disorder, and

(g) any other matters arising from these terms of reference.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE: I inform the House that on 21 March 2005 General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 resolved that the reporting date relating to the inquiry into the operation of Mona Vale Hospital be extended to Thursday 26 May 2005.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE: I inform House that on 21 March 2005 General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 resolved that the reporting date for the inquiry into post-school disability programs be Friday 29 July 2005.

Government Business Order of the Day No. 1 postponed on motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES, by leave: I thank the House for giving me leave to respond to an article that appeared in the Manly Daily under the heading, "Witness Complains" written by Belinda Lawton on 17 March 2005. The article states:

A Manly Hospital nurse has alleged she was intimidated by a committee member at the Inquiry into the services and future of Mona Vale Hospital.

Miss Lyn Hopper alleged that after she gave evidence Christian Democrat Gordon Moyes engaged in "intimidating behaviour outside the committee room. I found his behaviour intimidating and an attempt to solicit information that would not be available to other committee members", Miss Hopper wrote.

I place on the record my version of what happened. This is not disputed by Miss Hopper. While walking back to my office after the hearing I saw Miss Hopper and a staff person who works for David Barr, member of Parliament, walking towards me in the Fountain Court. As we came toward each other I said, "Miss Hopper, excuse me, Miss Hopper, but can you confirm you told the committee that BEACHES organised a rally at Manly where more than a thousand people were present to support the Dee Why site?" Miss Hopper replied, "Yes." I said, "Thank you", and continued on my way.

There was no further conversation. There was no harassment and no seeking of information beyond that already given to the inquiry. I was not contacted by the Manly Daily over this matter. The committee is seeking further advice from the Clerks to ensure that this matter is handled in a transparent way.

Debate resumed from 2 March 2005.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [3.14 p.m.]: The Opposition does not oppose the Noxious Weeds Amendment Bill. However, I state from the outset that we have a number of concerns that we will ask the Minister to clarify and provide assurances on at a later stage. That is, if the Minister—

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! Members wishing to engage in conversations about matters other than the Noxious Weeds Amendment Bill should leave the Chamber.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Is there anyone in attendance from the Minister's office?

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is supposed to be speaking to the bill, not asking questions about who is in the gallery.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: We are asking questions of the Minister. Noxious weeds have had a major impact on agricultural productivity and the environment in New South Wales. The Co-operative Research Centre for Australian Weeds Management reports that weeds cost Australia in excess of $4 billion annually. In New South Wales alone, $600 million is lost in agricultural production and control costs. Last year New South Wales Primary Industries agronomist Harry Kemp was reported on Bega radio 2EC news as saying that noxious weeds represent the biggest problem facing catchment management authorities. According to local control authorities, the Government's funding for noxious weeds does not match the growing problem. Judging from Labor's budget figures, this comes as no surprise.

Over the last 10 years this tired old Government has increased its noxious weeds budget from $5 million in 1995-96 to just $7 million in 2004-05. This is an insubstantial increase in funding of just $2 million over 10 years. This miserable, miserly, tired old Labor Government has spent next to nothing to help the State's farmers and local control authorities to control a noxious weeds problem worth $600 million per year. It is another example of Scrooge Macdonald's failure to attract funding from Treasury to adequately fund his portfolio of Primary Industries. This bloke, as I have indicated on many occasions, is the worst agriculture minister in the country.

The Hon. Robyn Parker: Absolutely! He is tired and old.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Everyone is saying that—everyone. He cannot hold his own with Treasury and get the funding that his portfolio deserves. The fact that he stood aside and allowed Treasury to roll over him when it came to funding is just ridiculous.

[Interruption]

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! I remind the Hon. Melinda Pavey that interjections are disorderly at all times and she should cease making them.

The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: Point of order: There are two issues. The first is relevance and the second is that the Hon. Melinda Pavey is misleading the House by talking about principles when, clearly, The Nationals have no principles.
The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! With regard to the first matter raised by way of point of order, a member speaking on behalf of the Opposition in debate on the second reading of a bill may do so in fairly broad terms. Nonetheless, I remind the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that his contribution must be relevant to the bill. No point of order is involved in the second point taken by the Hon. Eric Roozendaal. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition may continue.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is further indication that no-one is more irrelevant than the Minister for Primary Industries. He does not have a clue what he is doing. This is the first real job he has ever had, and he is failing in it. The Opposition's biggest concern is that the limited resources of local control authorities responsible for eradicating noxious weeds will be stretched even further by virtue of the legislative changes proposed in the bill. While the Opposition does not oppose the provisions that genuinely appear to make the control of noxious weeds more effective, it is concerned that the legislation represents another of the Government's unfunded mandates—which I, in my previous capacity as the shadow Minister for Local Government, became so familiar with. It is interesting that the Government is always short on detail.

The Hon. Melinda Pavey: This tired old Government.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: This tired old Government is short on detail when it comes to these matters, yet it asks people to trust it. By way of background, the Noxious Weeds Act 1993 was reviewed under national competition policy guidelines in 1998. The review made a range of recommendations to improve weeds management in New South Wales, and the recommendations that require legislative changes are represented in the bill. The vast majority of those recommendations have the in-principle support of the Opposition. While the Government claims that the bill is the result of extensive consultation with industry and local government organisations, such consultation was undertaken in 1998. Judging from the Opposition's consultation with various stakeholder groups, it is disappointing to hear that little consultation has taken place since. In fact, many stakeholder groups indicated that they had not been contacted at all. This is pretty much the normal track record of the Minister for Primary Industries; he is lazy in his portfolio.

One of the main concerns raised with the Opposition by organisations including the Southern Councils Group and the Local Government and Shires Associations is that consultation with the Government on the bill, where it did occur, was somewhat rushed. The Local Government and Shires Associations indicated to the Opposition that they would have preferred to consult more widely with member councils but they were not given the opportunity to do so. Whilst the Opposition welcomes the provisions in the bill that will allow land-holders to better meet their land management obligations, we are concerned there will be increased administration requirements for local authorities that have not been met with additional resources. In short, the Opposition is concerned that some aspects of the bill represent yet another of the Government's cost-shifting exercises.

Under the bill, the Minister, based on the advice of the Noxious Weeds Advisory Committee, will classify noxious weeds into five categories or new control classes: State-prohibited weeds, regionally prohibited weeds, regionally controlled weeds, locally controlled weeds and restricted plants. Before such control orders are made, they must be subject to a 21-day public consultation period. The bill also requires that noxious weed control orders be reviewed at the end of every five years to ensure they remain current.

The Opposition certainly supports these provisions, which we believe will establish procedures that will provide the government of the day with accurate and current information regarding the location and extent of noxious weeds throughout the State. The bill enables the Minister to make emergency weed control orders where he considers that action needs to be taken immediately and that the 21-day consultation period would lead to an irreversible weed spread. This will be effective for up to three months. In cases where an emergency weed control order has been issued, a local control authority can serve an emergency control notice on an owner or occupier.

While the great majority of land-holders are vigilant and conscientious about their weed management responsibilities, unfortunately some are not. I can imagine that it must be particularly frustrating for a grazier who has been attentive in managing noxious weeds on his property to look across the fence onto his neighbour's property and see acres of Bathurst burr or, in the case of the North Coast, giant Parramatta grass, or Yass tussock, also known as serrated tussock, that have been left unchecked. The problem is not limited to private land-holders. As we have seen in many areas, given the large increase in national parks in New South Wales the State Government is often the offending neighbour. In many areas of the State the Government has increased the number of national parks but it has not increased the funding to tackle the problems of weeds in those parks. The emergency control order will hopefully alleviate such situations.
While the Opposition welcomes provisions in the bill to allow the taking of emergency action to control noxious weeds, these additional responsibilities of local control authorities must be matched with additional resources for on-ground work. To some degree this concern has been appeased by the fact that the original draft bill has been amended to allow local control authorities to recover the cost of taking emergency action. However, that is simply moving the responsibility from the State to somewhere else.

Notwithstanding that, a large number of concerns have been brought to the Opposition's attention by county councils and local councils that their noxious weeds management budgets are stretched to the limit by virtue of a large proportion of these funds having to be tied up in administrative functions. Judging from the Minister's second reading speech, there is a great deal of emphasis on extra administration and information having to be provided by local authorities. Some of the organisation representatives I met during my time as shadow Minister for Local Government told me that almost one-third of the grant they eventually received had already been wasted in preparing the bid to obtain the grant, which they were not guaranteed to receive. For example, if they were to receive a grant of $30,000—they would be very lucky to get that amount—it could cost them up to $10,000 to prepare the grant. That is the ridiculous situation that the bill certainly does not overcome.

The bill provides that local government control authorities must collect and record information regarding the presence and extent of noxious weed infestations, and prepare reports about weed-related matters for the New South Wales Government when requested to do so. Although local authorities are already having to do this to report for other purposes, such as preparing state of the environment reports, I am aware that these authorities held initial concerns that such additional reporting responsibilities would not be met with additional resources to help meet such commitments. The Opposition hopes that the Department of Primary Industries will continue with programs to assist councils to report in a consistent manner. If that does not occur, it will once again weaken the amount of money available to control weeds.

As I said, some local authorities have advised the Opposition that up to 30 per cent of their noxious weeds budget can be taken up in administrative requirements rather than on-ground work, where it is needed. It is incumbent on the Government to address these inefficiencies through streamlining the administrative requirements of local authorities, rather than creating more. The bill provides that if the Minister considers that a local control authority is not fulfilling its responsibilities for weed control, and/or is not effectively requiring land-holders to do so, the Minister is to direct a local control authority to take action or issue a notice.

In severe cases, an administrator can be appointed for the local control authority's weed control responsibilities, and the cost of the administrator's duties after that date is a debt recoverable from the local control authority. The Local Government and Shires Associations were originally concerned that this power within the bill could allow the Minister to strip a local control authority of its power in the same way as the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act allows the Minister to strip a council's planning powers.

I understand that this concern has been somewhat appeased by proposed section 24 (2), which requires the Minister to consult a local control authority before giving a direction for the appointment of a weeds control administrator. The Opposition welcomes this amendment. The Opposition does not oppose the fact that the bill will widen the scope of weeds grants to include education and some types of research. However, it is equally important that the current focus of physically controlling weeds remains, and that it remains properly funded.

A number of county councils have raised concerns that since the amalgamation of local council areas, the number of roads on which they have a responsibility to control weeds will increase. This has not been matched by additional funding from the State Government. If the Government is serious about controlling weeds, I urge it to increase the budget of these county councils so they can immediately and more effectively remove weeds from an increased number of roadside areas.

Another aspect of the bill that has been met with concern from the Local Government and Shires Associations is that which limits the fees imposed by local control authorities for services. This includes issuing notices. That is a concern shared by the Opposition, as it will mean there is the potential for a council's revenue to be limited by this amendment. I am aware that the department has noted that the maximum fees will be set by regulation, and that the drafting of this regulation would be subject to a consultation process and a regulatory impact statement early in 2005. Even so, the Opposition has reservations on signing off on this particular part of the legislation when it has not seen the regulations.

The final point I make in relation to this legislation is that in some cases a local control authority can be made responsible for the control of aquatic weeds. In most cases this will be because the watercourse, or the weed problem in the watercourse, will be too large for a land-holder or occupier to control. Under the current Act the control of aquatic weeds is the responsibility of those occupiers that are situated along the banks of a watercourse. The Local Government and Shires Associations and local county councils have raised concerns that there could be potential resourcing implications if the Minister determines that a council is responsible for the control of aquatic weeds.

I have received correspondence from the Hawkesbury River County Council that makes a very good point in regard to the bill. The Noxious Weeds Act was originally drafted to deal with terrestrial weeds, not aquatic weeds. The council's main concern is that under the bill it will be given the responsibility for keeping the Hawkesbury River clear of aquatic weeds, even though it is not being provided with the resources to do so. I am sure this is a concern that is shared by many other county councils throughout the State. The Hawkesbury River County Council has also brought to my attention an inequitable situation whereby it has the responsibility of clearing the whole river of weeds, even though it is made up of four constituent councils: Baulkham Hills, Blacktown, Penrith and Hawkesbury.

The Hawkesbury River County Council has indicated that either the council should comprise all the councils along the river and be adequately resourced by the State Government, or it should be made responsible for only terrestrial weeds and the Catchment Management Authority should be made responsible for the control of aquatic weeds. Equally, the same could be said for a land-holder, not a council, along the river where either a State body or another land-holder is not controlling aquatic weeds. If a land-holder is controlling the aquatic weeds in his or her area but the river is being reinfested from upstream, where does the responsibility lie?

Before I conclude I wish to bring the attention of the House to an important program that was launched just a few weeks ago by the World Wildlife Fund and the CSIRO, titled "Jumping the Fence: Invasive Garden Plants in Australia and their environmental and agricultural impact". It is not a group that I normally identify with, but I was most impressed with its presentation and documentation. If it kept showing commonsense like that, it would get more support, but, sadly, that is not always the case. I encourage honourable members to look at this report, which is available on the World Wildlife Fund web site, www.wwf.org.au. It contains some very interesting information about how introduced invasive plants are harming our biodiversity and agricultural systems. The Opposition does not oppose this bill. As I indicated earlier, we have some very real concerns about the cost to the already overstretched budgets of local control authorities by virtue of the increased weed control and, in particular, the increased administration requirements that are within the bill, without any extra money.

Mr IAN COHEN [3.36 p.m.]: On behalf of the Greens I support the Noxious Weeds Amendment Bill. I appreciate the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoting the research of the World Wildlife Fund in conjunction with the CSIRO. It is important that we recognise—and I think everyone in this House is aware of the fact—that weeds are a major threat to the environment and to agricultural industries in Australia. I am pleased to be working with The Nationals and farmer representatives on these issues because it is something that the Greens are very passionate about; we believe that there are significant problems of invasive weeds in New South Wales and these problems cross over with impacts on both farmers and the environment.

This type of detrimental impact on agriculture has been evaluated in economic terms and the figures are quite frightening. It is very difficult to put a monetary figure on the cost to the environment of weeds because at this point no-one has done the calculations. It is perhaps an issue relating to our landmass, where weed infestation causes the loss of biodiversity and areas become dominated by weed species. There are many cases of this happening, and it means native species of both flora and fauna cannot survive. Agricultural industries are suffering greatly. I believe there is a crossover and, therefore, a great incentive for both environmentalists and the agricultural industry to work together, as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said in his contribution.

Whilst we clearly cannot put a monetary value on the environmental impact, it is clear that weeds threaten biodiversity by competing with native species, and that is a major problem to the environment in all areas of New South Wales. The Noxious Weeds Act in this State is the central legal element of weed control, and it is, therefore, a very important piece of legislation. I welcome the opportunity for the New South Wales Parliament to consider the long overdue amendments to that legislation. I welcome some of the amendments proposed by the Government. I am pleased to see that within the objectives the bill identifies the threat weeds pose to the economy, the community and the environment. Until now the Act has completely ignored the reality of the threat of weeds on these elements. Historically, plants were recognised as weeds only if they threatened agriculture. In more recent times the impact on the environment got a mention in the policies of the Noxious Weeds Advisory Committee.
It is pleasing that the legislation will finally catch up with reality. I cannot emphasise enough that weeds are moving from the agriculture sector to the environment and back again. Indeed, it has been acknowledged that certain weed species are still for sale in plant nurseries and other outlets, and that exacerbates the proliferation of those species in the New South Wales environment. The bill also outlines the criteria for determining what class will be applied to a particular species. To date, the criteria have been stipulated only in the policies of the Noxious Weeds Advisory Committee and can be changed by the Minister without oversight by the Parliament. Therefore the inclusion of criteria in the legislation is a welcome change.

The Greens also support the inclusion of public consultation procedures to enable increased input from the community in the process of establishing weed control obligations. The Greens are concerned that the measures with respect to prohibition on the sale of all declared noxious weeds do not go far enough. The Noxious Weeds Advisory Committee stated that, under the current legislation, only W1 category weeds and weeds listed in regulations are prohibited from sale. They are weeds that are of limited distribution or that do not occur in this State but would pose a severe threat to agriculture, the environment, or the community. The Government amendments improve on this slightly but only to include the Government's proposed class 1, 2 and 5 weeds as species that must not be sold. The question is: Why should one be able to sell a plant that the Government has declared a weed that must be controlled?

I will give some examples of weeds that are currently available for sale. They include Mexican feather grass, which is an apparently drought-proof, ornamental tussock grass that was imported in 1996 and quickly became naturalised. It became established in the wild in New South Wales in late 2004. If this weed escapes or spreads, the potential estimated cost to agriculture in New South Wales is $39 million, just in the early stage of invasion. The cost will obviously multiply later. Despite this, Mexican feather grass was still being sold commercially in Victoria in 2004.

Bearskin fescue is an ornamental tussock grass that was imported in 2003 and was available for sale from November 2004. It failed a weed risk assessment by the Western Australian Department of Agriculture and is a prohibited import. It is not prohibited for sale in New South Wales and it has the potential to become a grazing and environmental weed in the New South Wales tablelands—so The Nationals should share the Greens' concern about bearskin fescue.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You would not be verballing me, would you?

Mr IAN COHEN: Have I ever verballed you? I purely highlight a common interest between The Nationals and the Greens. That is particularly relevant because the Government representatives who are oversighting the bill have little knowledge of anything other than their garden lawns in the eastern suburbs. It is a pity the Minister for Primary Industries is not present in the Chamber, because this is an important area of the Primary Industries portfolio and it spills into the portfolio of the Minister for the Environment. This weed has the great potential to threaten agricultural production and our ecology.

The CSIRO report entitled "Jumping the Garden Fence", which was published in February 2005, provides the following figures for invasive garden plants in New South Wales. Of the 720 naturalised garden species in Australia, 279 or 38.8 per cent are available for sale in New South Wales. Of the 205 naturalised garden plants species in New South Wales, only 37, or 18 per cent, are prohibited from sale in New South Wales. With respect to mutual recognition benefit, of the 99 garden plants that have been naturalised in Australia and/or New South Wales and are declared noxious, more than one-third, or 36 per cent, are available for sale in those jurisdictions. The report states:

While plants can be freely moved interstate, such a situation becomes untenable nationally. For instance, lantana camara is both declared noxious and prohibited from sale in Queensland but in neighbouring northern NSW it is still available for sale from some nurseries.

On the North Coast of New South Wales and in the areas inland around Shannon, Dunoon—subtropical, high rainfall areas that were cleared of rainforest many years ago—the proliferation of lantana must be seen to be believed. Although it is regarded as a weed, it has the benefit of holding together the soil and adding fertiliser. It also provides protection for certain bird species and nesting. On the whole, though, it is a rampaging weed that smothers the regrowth of native plants. Despite the massive problems it creates, it is still available for sale.

The Land of 17 March 2005, under the heading "Garden Weed Escape", dealt with a CSIRO report that showed that 40 per cent of agriculture's worst weeds have escaped from Australian gardens. The report was commissioned by WWF-Australia and specifies banana passionfruit, broom, cat's claw creeper, glory lily, holly leafed senecio, hybrid mother of millions, which is almost impossible to remove, lippia, madeira vine, mother of millions and yerba de hicotea as weeds that cause major problems. However, nurseries still sell these weeds. The Land stated:

At the moment, this is a freeway for the spread of weeds, and the environment and agriculture are the big losers.

Of the World Conservation Union's list of the world's 100 worst invasive alien species, 36 are land and aquatic plants, 20 are naturalised garden plants in Australia and nine, or 25 per cent, are still for sale. Those listed for sale in New South Wales include giant reed, kahili ginger and tamarisk. Of the national alert list of environmental weeds, rosewood is listed for sale in New South Wales. Of the invasive plants that have a direct impact on rare or threatened Australian plants, five are listed for sale in New South Wales. These are bridal creeper, baboon flower, coffee, Scotch broom and black poplar.

There are 45 garden plants that have been naturalised in Australia and are considered to be primary agricultural or ruderal weeds available for sale in New South Wales. The list also refers to selected invasive garden plants that are cropping weeds, including Paterson's curse and Scotch thistle. Emerging grazing weeds identified by a Meat and Livestock Australia report that impact on New South Wales and are available for sale in Australia include chincherinchee and mother of millions.

In principle, the Greens believe, and would like it to be the practice, that once a species is declared a weed, regardless of the class it falls within, it should not be sold in New South Wales. However, we acknowledge the problem with a broad-scale prohibition on sales, given that some noxious weeds, such as the blackberry and the olive, are also commercial plants. We hope that the flexibility of the legislation will be used effectively in relation to a prohibition on sale, and that class 5 be used to its full potential. There will also need to be vigilance by the Noxious Weeds Advisory Committee and local groups in this respect.

The Greens believe that the Government should again review the Noxious Weeds Act, which was reviewed in 1998 as required by section 76. The report of that review was made public recently. We support the ongoing review of the legislation to ensure its continued effectiveness. The Greens would like to see the Noxious Weeds Advisory Committee recognised in legislation, with its membership specified, to ensure that a diversity of opinions and interests are available. In addition to these proposals, I seek clarification from the Minister regarding what effect any amendments will have on policies currently enforced through the advisory committee. Obviously legislation would override any such policies. However, what does the Government intend to do to clarify which parts of the current advisory committee policies, if any, remain in operation?

The Greens also believe that weed control in Australia must be a co-operative effort between local, State, and Federal governments. As has already been recognised at the national level, some weeds are of national significance, and they must be included in the list of weeds under this Act. The Act should explicitly include the principle of mutual recognition. On a similar point, there needs to be harmony with related New South Wales legislation. The current environmental legislation in New South Wales is a bit of a mess and needs to be better co-ordinated. However, we do not need established yet another committee or department that simply repeats what other agencies are doing, as is occurring at the moment. One way that this may happen is through the newly created catchment management authorities, or CMAs, which will hopefully take a catchment or regional approach to environmental management and bring the many disparate regulations together with regard to working on the ground.

Another aspect of the bill that the Greens are concerned about is the interaction between weed control orders under the Act, threat abatement plans under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, and the activities of the catchment management authorities. The interaction between these processes needs to be spelt out in the Act. Weed control orders must be taken into account in the preparation of threat abatement plans under the Threatened Species Conservation Act. In the same vein, I ask the Minister to clarify the relationship between weed control orders and the catchment planning process. However, the Greens support the positive move taken by the Government of proposing to include in a weed control order the method of control for various species. However, this should be done in a manner that allows for different methods to be adopted in different circumstances, in order to recognise the differing effectiveness and potential detrimental impacts of control methods.

We encourage the public consultation process regarding weed control orders as it will allow input from the community with respect to control methods that have been trialled by landholders. Weeds are a threat to the environment and agriculture, and, therefore, the economy, as well as to human health in some instances. Therefore, they require control. However, the methods adopted to deal with weeds must take into account the environmental impact of the control itself. If clearing, herbicides or burning are used in an insensitive manner, the control method could cause more damage than the weeds. Therefore there should be some guidance in the legislation to ensure that control methods are not environmentally damaging.

This is a balancing act that should not reduce the flexibility that we anticipate will result from the new-look weed control orders as proposed in the Government's amendments. We understand that, through the public consultation process, environmental issues can be taken into account. We support the consultation process. However, an amendment requiring that the environment be considered in the drafting of a weed control order would provide stronger protection than would reactive responses to comments made in the consultation process. Of particular concern is the use of herbicides and their impact on the environment and on human health. In making weed control orders, the environmental impact of any control measures must be taken into account.

This House has debated the potential of cross-pollination of genetically engineered crops with other weeds. This results in weeds becoming Round-up resistant—in effect, super weeds that could spread further in the environment. These issues have arisen time and time again during debate in this House on genetically engineered crops. In this case the issue is compounded by the use of herbicides and by the unknown genetic makeup of these crops. We could end up with yet another type of super weed in the agricultural sector, which could jump across to certain insensitive environments, creating major problems once again not only for the agricultural and export industries in New South Wales but also for the environment.

The impact of pesticides on the environment and on community health is of ongoing concern to the Greens. People from around the State frequently contact the Greens to report their adverse reaction to pesticides. Pesticide spray drift accumulates in the environment and is a known major cause of severe illness in humans. Warning signs do not stop spray drift. The arbitrary figure of a 500-metre radius for a no-spray zone has no basis in science or experience. When the air flow is three kilometres per hour spray drift can enter a property 500 metres away in 10 minutes or less, penetrating buildings and vehicles, and destroying bushes, trees and plants haphazardly. I was involved in the inquiry by the Standing Committee on State Development into pesticides. We heard stories from people, particularly cotton growers in the Moree area, about the devastating effect of aerial spraying drifting onto students on school buses and into water sources, including drinking water, tank water and the like from roofs as the spray landed on houses. There were many incidents of spray trespass, which is of great concern to people in country areas.

A no-spray zone with a 10-kilometre radius is considered a reasonable distance by doctors experienced in the field. Nevertheless, farmers can and do claim damage from spray drift 15 to 20 kilometres away causing holes in their crops and death to farm animals. The Greens are also concerned about the rapid clearing of certain noxious weeds that provide habitat and/or food resources for native animals. An example of this is camphor laurel on the New South Wales North Coast. I acknowledge that camphor laurel is a vexed issue because people have different perspectives on it. Some people consider it should be declared a noxious week, and others consider that in certain circumstances—

[Interruption]

We have the high-brow entry of the Minister for Roads. He is another Minister who would not know anything about weeds beyond the garden lawn in his suburban back yard.

The Hon. Michael Costa: At least I don't smoke my grass like you.

Mr IAN COHEN: The Minister cannot help himself, but I can tell the House that he would smoke more grass than I do these days.

The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: Why don't you have a bong-off?

Mr IAN COHEN: It is typical of the trivialisation of debate in this House that we have a Minister—

The Hon. Christine Robertson: You started it!

Mr IAN COHEN: If the Hon. Christine Robertson does not mind, the Minister interjected when he walked into the Chamber. I was taking this debate very seriously. Ministers and junior Ministers in this House constantly trivialise any subject that honourable members raise with sincerity. That is symptomatic of this Labor Government, which is going downhill so fast that it deserves—
The Hon. Rick Colless: You're dead right there.

Mr IAN COHEN: Members opposite do not deserve to win at the next election, but the Government deserves to lose. Again, this trivialisation of an argument by a Minister who does not deserve to be here is typical of what we have come to expect. An example of the severity of weeds, their impact, and the need to rid the environment of them is camphor laurel on the North Coast of New South Wales. Large areas of rainforest have been removed, leaving massive areas of bare land, and that has been colonised by camphor laurel, a successful weed with great growth capacity.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Roads, Minister for Economic Reform, Minister for Ports, and Minister for the Hunter. When did the Minister tell the Premier about his plan to cut 20 per cent of the State's public sector work force? Was it before he made the announcement at the meeting in relation to displaced Pacific Power workers or after he read it in the paper this morning? Given that he has a plan to cut 20 per cent of the public sector work force, will he detail to the House exactly where these cuts will be made? Is he still committed to the Government's no-forced-redundancies policy or is his plan to cut 20 per cent of the public sector work force an admission that this policy has now been abandoned?

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: Good question!

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: Good question? The honourable member took out $1.20 and bought the Sydney Morning Herald this morning. I refer to my statement this morning on this matter.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: No, you cannot refer to that. This is on the record, not what you said on the radio.

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I did not say anything on the radio. I refer to the statement I put out this morning. That clarifies the matter. The Government does not have any plans to cut 20 per cent of the public service. The honourable member is obviously scraping around for something to make himself relevant. The Government is committed to managing the resources under its administration in an effective and efficient way.

The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: My question is addressed to the Minister for Commerce. Will the Minister update the House on the latest workplace injury and fatality figures for New South Wales?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I thank the honourable member for his question and commend him for his ongoing interest in occupational health and safety. It is with great pleasure that I advise the House that work-related fatalities and employment injury rates have dropped to their lowest levels in 15 years. WorkCover's latest statistical bulletin shows there were 136 work-related deaths in 2002-03 and 51,000 injuries. It is tragic and regrettable that anyone should be killed or injured while earning their living, but the trend is down, and fewer people are dying or being injured in New South Wales workplaces. The figures are 10.8 injuries per million hours worked and 18.5 injuries per 1,000 employees—the lowest levels since the current workers compensation scheme started in 1987.

The 2002-03 statistical bulletin reports a significant reduction in the number and cost of injuries over the previous year. In particular, compensable fatalities were down 23 per cent. Fatal injuries occurring at the workplace were down almost 33 per cent. Fatalities resulting from occupational diseases were down more than 22 per cent. All injuries occurring at the workplace were down 7 per cent and the average cost of a workers compensation claim was down almost 13 per cent.

The Carr Government has made a substantial effort to reduce the incidence of accidents and injuries in the State's workplaces by introducing modern, flexible and co-operative safety laws and ensuring that WorkCover has the resources to tackle problems. New South Wales has the largest, best-resourced and most active occupational health and safety body in Australia—an inspectorate with practical experience and technical expertise in a wide range of industries and occupations.

The emphasis is on education and prevention. WorkCover's inspectors are 40 times more likely to issue written safety advice than they are to initiate a prosecution. Campaigns to improve safety have been innovative and range from workplace visits and business assistance unit seminars and workshops in locations around the State to incentive schemes such as ShearSafety and the Roll-Over Protective Structures [ROPS] rebate scheme. During the ROPS initiative, WorkCover provided $200 rebates to 10,000 New South Wales farmers, at a cost of approximately $2 million. There is evidence that this scheme is saving lives in rural New South Wales. In the four years prior to the commencement of the ROPS scheme there were six work-related fatalities. In the four years since there have been two.

The figures are a clear indication that New South Wales employers and employees are making strong progress towards the Government's target of reducing workplace injury and illness by 20 per cent and fatalities by 10 per cent by 2007. These latest figures are extremely encouraging but we must continue to work hard to further reduce workplace injuries and fatalities. The Carr Government will continue its partnership with industry and employees to further reduce the rate of injury and illness in New South Wales.

The Hon. JOHN RYAN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Disability Services. Have service providers received funding from the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care to commence community participation programs for 2004 school leavers? Have these service providers already been allocated clients and asked to commence services without additional funding? In Port Macquarie has the agency known as IDAFE, which stands for individual development and further education, been using money raised from monthly sausage sizzles to fully fund programs for five new community participation clients? Are other service providers in a similar position? What plans has your Government made to expedite the allocation of funding to agencies for community participation programs?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: As the honourable member is aware, the community participation program is currently being rolled out.

The Hon. John Ryan: Without money, apparently.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The honourable member makes a number of assertions by way of interjection that are not accurate, but the substance of his question was excellent and I will provide further detail to him prior to the end of question time.

Ms SYLVIA HALE: I address my question to the Minister for Fair Trading. Given the imminent closure and redevelopment of residential parks such as Lansdowne Caravan Park near Cabramatta, and in light of the comments of the Minister for Housing on Stateline last Friday that the social impact of the proposed development is such that I think [the proposal] should be knocked over", what is the Department of Fair Trading doing to protect residents from unfair evictions? Will the current review of the Residential Parks Act include improved protection for residents? What is the department doing to protect residents currently facing eviction?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I have instructed the Office of Fair Trading to closely monitor the situation to ensure that the rights of residents are upheld. Like any residential tenants in New South Wales, those who have homes in residential parks have rights under relevant laws. Officers from Fair Trading have been on site at the Lansdowne Caravan Park to inform residents of their rights in the event of the park closing. Fair Trading will be joined by other New South Wales government agencies to provide information and assistance to residents.

New South Wales residential parks laws provide specific protection for park residents in situations like this, such as a minimum of 60 days notice to terminate the tenancy. I also reassure the Lansdowne residents that they do not have to leave their homes until the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal makes an order for them to vacate. Should the tribunal make orders to vacate, it can extend the time to vacate depending on individual residents' circumstances. I urge residents to contact Fair Trading on 13 32 20 if they have any concerns or questions regarding their rights in relation to the review of the Act. All will be revealed in due course.
The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO: My question is addressed to the Minister for Justice, and Minister for Fair Trading. Will the Minister advise what the Government is doing to protect consumers who buy properties off the plan?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Very recently my colleague the Hon. Henry Tsang joined me to warn the Chinese community about the dangers involved in buying properties off the plan and not obtaining independent advice. It was suggested that people in the Chinese community were particularly at risk of being exploited by salespersons peddling apartments off the plan. Whilst selling property off the plan is not illegal, there have been reports, particularly in the Chinese community, of consumers being sold properties in Sydney when the salesperson also organised the legal representation and financial dealings. It is invariably a recipe for disaster when the salesman, the solicitor and the financier are working together for the seller, not the buyer. It is even more disconcerting that these salespersons are taking advantage of consumers' lack of proficiency in the English language.

Buying a house or unit is one of the biggest investments that people will make. An easy mistake in doing so is to accept the advice given by an agent without checking that the advice is correct. People often forget that the agent has the vendor's interests at heart—interests sharing the same bed as their commission. I urge buyers always to get their own solicitor or conveyancer to check all the contracts before signing anything. Similarly, buyers should do their own research about the various kinds of finance available and use an independent, reputable mortgage broker.

New South Wales has laws in place to protect unwary buyers from those who wish to rip them off. Those laws include the Property, Stock and Business Agents Act, the Home Building Act, the Conveyancers Licensing Act and, of course, the Fair Trading Act. Real estate agents must have licences from the Office of Fair Trading and their salespeople must have a licence or certificate of registration. It is illegal for an agent or salesperson to give false or misleading information to buyers about the price of the property or any other aspect of the property. Before signing an off-the-plan sale contract, buyers need to be sure that they will have the money to pay for the unit when it is complete. Otherwise they may have to pay financial penalties to the developer. It is very important to check a sales contract before signing to see what the buyers financial obligations are when a building is finished sooner than expected.

A booklet produced by the Office of Fair Trading entitled "Strata Living" tells people what they need to know before buying into a strata scheme. The booklet has been translated into Chinese to ensure people from the Chinese language communities can find out what they need to know before buying. Fair Trading has also developed a new brochure specifically aimed at people buying property off the plan. It has just been translated into Chinese. Fair Trading also has a dedicated ethnic consumer education program called Think Smart, which has been operating since 2002. Think Smart focuses on building long-term relationships with ethnic community organisations and media because they are pivotal in delivering information directly to their communities. The program includes delivering information through regular ethnic media and community leaders conferences and community information centres, and providing outreach services to local ethnic groups and participating in local festivals and events. The Think Smart program has been taken a step further by having two consumer issues workshops and community partners in 2004, allowing the identification of the ethnic consumer issues and methods of addressing them. However, when all is said and done, it is not only ethnic communities that are susceptible to predators posing as salespeople. For this reason we all need to be vigilant. The Office of Fair Trading is doing as much as possible to arm consumers with knowledge and awareness and will not hesitate to intervene directly when the occasion calls for it.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I ask the Minister for Education and Training, on behalf of the Minister for Health: Is the Minister aware that Professor Vaughan Carr, the head of the Neuroscience Institute of Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders at Newcastle University, was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald as saying, "It's past the bounds of theory now, there is enough evidence to indicate that marijuana use in young people has a causal role in the development of schizophrenia"? Is the Minister aware that studies referred to in the article estimate that daily users of pot had rates of psychotic symptoms between 1.6 and 1.8 times higher than those of non-users and 150 per cent more chance of developing schizophrenia? What action is the Government taking to address this problem given the prevalence of mental health issues in our State and the need for clear, effective and truthful communication about the harmful impact of illicit drugs particularly on matters of mental health?
The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: While I have no doubt that the Hon. John Della Bosca would have some views on the question, Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes has asked that the question be referred to the Minister for Health. I will do that and I undertake to get a response as soon as possible.

The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: Is the Minister for Education and Training aware of the proposal for a new K-12 school on a greenfield site at Goonoo Goonoo Road in Tamworth which has been developed by three school communities—Tamworth West, Tamworth High and Bullimbal Special School? Will the Minister give favourable consideration to this positive and detailed solution to the problems of the schools? As part of this consideration, will the Minister personally visit Tamworth and meet with the school communities?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I am aware of this matter: it has received coverage in the local media. I note that the Hon. Catherine Cusack and the shadow Minister, Jillian Skinner, have been doing a bit of a road show around the State, and I congratulate them on that. Nonetheless I would suggest that such a road show would be more effective if it were accompanied by a real attempt to grapple with some of the complexities of the education portfolio.

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: This is one of the solutions.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: It may well be one of the solutions. The honourable member for North Shore indicated that she wants the construction of a super school to become a community issue in Tamworth. She said it has the opportunity to be a dream school for country New South Wales. The Coalition goes in, makes these comments and raises community expectations. But does it ever follow through with any plans to deliver on some of these announcements? I am not aware that it does.

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: They have already got a plan.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: The local community may well have a plan but does the Coalition have any intention of funding the range of commitments it makes when it visits the communities? Does the Opposition have any intention of funding the commitments it makes or is it just about, like its Federal colleagues, with the Federal Minister—

The Hon. Duncan Gay: The last time I noticed, you were in government. You are short on policies and short on action. It is a tired old government.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: At the Federal level your colleagues are in government. The Federal Minister has written to communities saying that he will fund a school yet he offers no new money. It is all about raising community expectations and politically expediently using communities. That is unacceptable. With regard to Tamworth, the advice I have is that there is a draft facilities review report. It has been provided to representatives of the school communities and the school communities' comments have been received by the department. I am also advised that a draft demographic study has been completed, and the study is assisting the department in planning for government school provision in Tamworth. I will follow up the issues that the honourable member has raised and look further into the matters.

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: Will you visit Tamworth?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I hope to visit Tamworth, as I hope to visit many parts of the State. I have ongoing discussions with the honourable member for Tamworth. I know that he takes a close interest in the educational needs of his community, and I congratulate him on that. I am hopeful of getting to Tamworth at some stage in the future to hear the concerns of the community directly.

The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN: Will the Minister for Emergency Services please advise the House of NSW Fire Brigades efforts at the recent Brescia factory fire?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: The fire at the Brescia furniture factory on Parramatta Road at Ashfield on Friday 11 March was one of the largest that NSW Fire Brigades has faced in the Sydney metropolitan area for many years. About 200 people, including workers and people from adjoining residential buildings, were evacuated and Parramatta Road was closed to traffic in both directions. The fire was so aggressive that over the next three and half days more than 900 of Sydney's firefighters—or more than one in three of those across the city—from 28 stations were at the site. Efforts were hampered by a tremendous fuel load and extreme heat. Eventually the fire completely gutted the building. I point out at this stage that claims about the decommissioning of Alexandria station's aerial appliance, which was one of those used on this fire, are mischievous and quite simply wrong. Detailed Fire Brigades research has shown that there has been an oversupply of these cherry picker appliances in the inner city with more needed in the northern corridor between Chatswood, Ryde, Hornsby and Palm Beach.

To address this inequity, while the 20-year-old Alexandria appliance has been decommissioned because of its age, a more modern appliance is being supplied to the Hornsby station. This is an operational decision by Fire Brigades to ensure adequate coverage of the metropolitan region with these appliances. There are five other aerial appliances at surrounding stations, all of which could reach Alexandria within 15 or 20 minutes of the first request that they were needed to support regular fire engines on the scene. With regard to the Brescia fire, eight nearby appliances were available, leaving 12 others throughout Sydney that could have been used if needed there or at other emergencies.

Whilst the Fire Brigades Employees Union imposed administrative work bans in relation to this matter on 14 March, the bans were withdrawn the same day after conciliation talks before the Industrial Relations Commission. There has been no reduction in the size of the aerial appliance fleet in Sydney, but a significant increase in public safety due to a more thorough and equitable distribution of aerial appliances. Fire Brigades officially ceased active operations at the Brescia site at 1.00 p.m. on Monday, 14 March. Fire Brigades Fire Investigation and Research Unit is working with police to determine the cause and circumstances of the fire, and it would be inappropriate to speculate at this time. I am sure every member of the House would join with me in extending thanks to all those involved in controlling this huge fire.

[Questions without notice interrupted.]

The PRESIDENT: I welcome into the public gallery a delegation of parliamentary officers of the Secretariat of the Senate of the Kingdom of Thailand, comprising Mr Apichart On-soi, Miss Chompunuth Prompak, Miss Bongkot Wongthai and Mr Tawat Tunkum. They are here as part of an exchange program between our parliaments, which was established in 1994.

[Questions without notice resumed.]

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask the Minister for Industrial Relations a question without notice. Is it a fact that a major retailer, Myer, is planning to trade on Easter Sunday and is rostering retail staff to work on Easter Sunday? Is the Government in favour of Myer's proposal for Easter Sunday's sales drive? Will the Government take action to protect Easter Sunday from commercial exploitation by major retailers, and to also protect retail staff so they can enjoy Easter celebrations and holy days with their families?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I advise at the outset that it is apparently the case that at least one of the major departmental retailers in the Sydney central business district will be trading this Easter Sunday. I suspect the other major retailers will trade on that day also. This is a matter of some concern to the Government and a matter of considerable concern to those who expressed a positive attitude to the Government's decision to preserve the Christmas Day holiday break for retail employees by prohibiting retail trading on Boxing Day 2004. The fact that the major retailers intend to trade this Easter Sunday underlines a problem in the current legislation that has been referred to often in this House, and about which I have spoken to Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile on a number of occasions: the anomalous nature of our public holidays and bank holidays legislation.

Many of the holidays noted in that legislation are no longer as relevant as they once were; when the legislation was drafted, no-one would have conceived that a retailer might wish to trade on those days. When the legislation was drafted, Anzac Day, Christmas Day and Easter Sunday would not have been considered for gazettal as trade-free days because it was assumed then that no-one would want to trade on those days. The Government is concerned not only for the reasons outlined in the honourable member's question—the matter of cultural considerations such as the religious holiday—but also because of the importance of family relief and the acknowledgement of the need for certain holidays to provide relief for families.

Concern has been expressed also that staff in these circumstances should not be obliged to work, that is, that all rostering should be voluntary on days that are otherwise public holidays. Given the lack of notice—the Government did not become aware of this intention to trade until only a few days ago—it is not proposed that legislation be introduced to prevent trading on Easter Sunday. Obviously the Government will keep under very close scrutiny the issue of trading on Easter Sunday Anzac Day and Christmas Day. With the major retailers, the union and consumer groups we hope to develop a satisfactory framework for public holidays and trade-free days.

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Education and Training. Is the Minister aware that the Farrer Memorial Agricultural High School at Tamworth has repeatedly asked the department to ensure there is adequate power supply to the school so that dormitories can be airconditioned? Is the Minister further aware that the school's dormitories can be stiflingly hot during a typical Tamworth summer? Does the Minister accept that the provision of an adequate power supply to a State school is the State Government's responsibility? Has Farrer's request for this project to be included on the current capital works budget been heeded? If it has not, will the Minister undertake to put it in the next State budget so that airconditioning can be supplied to the boarders at Farrer before next summer? In the meantime, if the Minister visits Tamworth, will she undertake to visit Farrer Memorial Agricultural High School?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I am advised that the former Minister approved initial funding for an electrical upgrade at Farrer Memorial Agricultural High School in this year's capital program. However, I understand that it is likely that a further upgrade will be necessary to support the airconditioning of the dormitories. The department informs me there have been ongoing discussions between the principal and the department regarding airconditioning of the dormitories and my officers have asked the department for further information on this matter. I will make further comment once I have considered all the relevant information.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: My question is addressed to the Minister for Education and Training. Will the Minister please inform the House about plans to increase the numbers of apprentices in New South Wales?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I am sure all members of this House will be aware that skills shortages have been identified across the national economy. They have received considerable attention, particularly in recent times. The New South Wales Government has assigned a high priority to reducing industry skills shortages, particularly in the traditional trades, in which skills shortages predominate. Since this Government came to office, the vocational education system has been expanded through significant increases in TAFE places, new vocational courses in the High School Certificate and new partnerships with industry.

Our achievements in this regard are worth putting on the record. For example, New South Wales Government trading enterprises have more than doubled their apprentice numbers over the past five years, from 535 in 2000-01 to 1,140 in 2004-05. The Government has improved incentives for industry to take on apprentices and trainees through the introduction of payroll tax exemptions. The Government has also supported trainees and first, second and third year apprentices through increased public transport concessions for travel on New South Wales Government buses, ferries and trains.

There has been unprecedented expansion in TAFE, with student enrolments jumping from 356,000 in 1996 to 508,000 in 2004. TAFE has targeted areas of skills shortage and worked with local industries to develop more than 400 formal partnerships to meet local training needs. Over 200 joint industry TAFE scholarships have been established. These can support TAFE students in a number of ways, either through financial assistance or guaranteed work placement. These initiatives are working. In the past 12 months a record number of people have started apprenticeships, a 26.4 per cent increase on the number in 2003, and TAFE was able to respond to a significant increase in the number of approved apprenticeship applications that nominated the organisation as provider.

In 2005 TAFE has planned for an increase of around 13,000 students with a focus on areas of skills shortage. For example, the Hunter Institute has established 23 new classes across the full range of skills shortage areas; in Campbelltown there are 90 new apprenticeships in light automotive courses, compared with 45 last year; and at the Parkes Western Institute an additional 48 students are attending national engineering module classes. There are many more examples.

The Government has a detailed plan to address skills shortages and secure a skilled work force for New South Wales. This plan includes more than $7 million in extra funds for apprenticeship training and incentive programs. These new programs provide incentives for young people to take up apprenticeships. Employers looking for well-trained, "job ready" workers will also benefit from our plan.

The Government will help around 5,000 apprentices who need to travel from regional and rural areas, by doubling their accommodation allowance when they have to be away from home for more than two days. First-year and second-year apprentices will also be eligible for a $100 rebate on the cost of their car registration. That will be very welcome by first-year and second-year apprentices, whose wages, as we know, are quite low. TAFE New South Wales will pilot a new scheme called TradeStart, which will allow 450 apprentices to complete the equivalent of a year's TAFE training in just 16 weeks. A job matching service will link TradeStart graduates to employers. The Government will also invest additional funding in group training.

The Hon. DAVID OLDFIELD: My question is directed to the Special Minister of State, representing the Premier in his role as Minister for Citizenship. What consideration is being given to breaking down the ancestral basis of sport-related violence? Does the Government place any importance on the need for people of ethnic ancestry to leave feuds in their country of origin? While ethnicity-based sporting violence is nothing new, does the Government have a particular strategy for addressing such problems as those highlighted recently by soccer-related violence? Might the Government consider a long-term social approach, including assisting those involved to accept and embrace being Australians, rather than carrying on the old fights of people from other lands? Given the Premier's new-found interest in soccer—as evidenced by claims of a recent meeting with Frank Lowy—as Minister for Citizenship might he become personally involved in addressing this inexcusable and imported behaviour?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I take it that the Hon. David Oldfield's question is a serious one. I simply make the observation that initially I thought the honourable member was referring to either the upcoming State of Origin matches or the Rugby World Cup, at which there have been, in the past, many tribal ancestral disputes involving people from the British Isles. The matter would be better referred to the Premier, and I will ask the Premier to provide an answer to the Hon. David Oldfield as soon as practicable.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Primary Industries. Is the Minister aware of concerns in the Hume Rural Lands Protection Board area about directions from his office assigning a locust control helicopter to a property in the Holbrook area ahead of other more needy properties? Does the Minister recognise that this sort of queue jumping is unfair to other landholders and that it upsets carefully laid plans made on a needs basis? Why did the Minister do this?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I am not aware of the matter to which the Deputy Leader of the Opposition refers. I will have to speak to the Hon. Richard Bull, who lives in Holbrook, and check out what could have been the reasons behind it. We do not interfere in operational matters.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You did.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: As I said, we do not interfere in operational matters. We certainly do not push helicopters around. This is absolute nonsense.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You did.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: We did not do anything like that whatsoever.

The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI: My question is addressed to the Minister for Primary Industries. Will the Minister update the House on the rollout of a new system for managing our commercial fisheries in New South Wales?
The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: This will be of great interest to the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: How are the rockmelons out at the Royal Easter Show? Did you see any melons out there?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: They certainly were not thrown at me. The commercial fishing industry has been undergoing important change over the last 12 months, as the steady rollout of share management progresses. Members might recall that share management is being introduced across five major fisheries, to literally give fishers "shares" in their own industry. It will give fishers a much more secure future because they will have this long-term statutory fishing right.

[Interruption]

At the Royal Easter Show it was interesting to note that amongst the district exhibits there was a 400-kilogram pumpkin. That would have made a mess outside the Hon. Melinda Pavey's room! The shares about which I have spoken will be tradable and will encourage better long-term and sustainable planning by these fisheries. Importantly, they will give industry a greater role in deciding how, where and when fish can be harvested. These shares will also boost stakeholder confidence in the industry and help fishers plan for the future. The State Government has been working closely with industry to progress this roll-out, which will bring real benefits for individuals, for the seafood industry, which feeds so many people, and for the New South Wales economy as a whole.

I am pleased to inform members that limited access under provisional share allocations for the five fisheries involved will begin on Good Friday, and that is appropriate. This follows 12 months of careful discussions to ensure the new management system is as practicable as possible. In May last year the State Government called for fishers to apply for shares in the ocean trawl, ocean hauling, estuary prawn trawl, estuary general, and ocean trap and line fisheries.

Of the 1,250 fishing business owners who were issued provisional share allocations, around 80 have appealed, as they are entitled to do. In other words, more than 93 per cent of fishers were happy with their initial allocation and just over 6 per cent decided to appeal. From Friday this week, those initial allocations will take effect, on a provisional basis, until the small percentage of appeals have been resolved and the allocations can be finalised. The next step is to develop a draft management plan for each fishery. Overall, this is part of the State Government's strong and detailed plan to give long-term security to the commercial fishing industry in New South Wales.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Point of order: The Minister is misleading the House, because the plan is short on detail.

The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: It must be remembered that this industry supports more than 4,000 jobs and injects more than half a billion dollars into the State's economy each year. But the industry has also come under significant pressure in recent decades, including from the growing population and the booming demand for fresh seafood. I am pleased to have spoken directly with many commercial fishers about these issues during visits to fishing co-operatives and while observing estuary and ocean prawn trawlers in action on the New South Wales North Coast.

The message has been very clear: We need to offer the next generation of fishers more long-term opportunities based on a sustainable and profitable industry. Share management is one important tool to help achieve that. It has been supported by the former peak commercial industry groups, the Seafood Industry Advisory Forum and the Advisory Council on Commercial Fishing. Incidentally, these groups have now been integrated into one, single body to advise the Government directly on commercial fishing and aquaculture issues. I look forward to updating members on developments in the commercial fishing industry in the near future.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: I direct my question to the Minister for Roads. How can the Minister justify his ad hoc decision to exhume the F6 from the Government's policy vault when the idea had already been trashed by the former Minister for Roads, Carl Scully, and where does this "flip-flop" sit with the Government's floundering metropolitan strategy? How does the Minister intend to sell this to residents living in the motorway's path, when it will see their suburbs bulldozed, wetlands destroyed, open space lost, roads clogged, and air quality destroyed? Does the Minister know, or care about, the position on the F6 of the local member for Rockdale, Frank Sartor, or is this a stunt to try to embarrass Mr Sartor and ruin his chances of becoming the next Premier of New South Wales?

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I refer to my public comments about this matter. I do not intend to add anything further.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, Minister for Economic Reform, Minister for Ports, and Minister for the Hunter. Has the Minister been invited to attend this month's ministerial council meeting on the intergovernmental agreement on Commonwealth-State financial relations, which was signed by the Premier in June 1999 and has delivered the windfall GST revenue now flooding into New South Wales, now projected to reach a record $9.87 million in 2004-05? If not, what action will the Minister take to implement the intergovernmental agreement's objective that by 2005 numerous inefficient taxes be abolished in the State's budget?

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: This is a very good question because it once again gives me the opportunity to highlight the fact that New South Wales is the only State that loses out on the GST. Of the $13 billion collected from New South Wales' taxpayers from GST-related taxes, $10 billion is returned to the State. If the honourable member were serious about helping New South Wales, he would lobby his Federal colleagues to move some of the $10 billion surplus, the majority of which has been taken from the taxpayers of New South Wales, back to frontline services in New South Wales. This will be an important meeting. The Treasurer and the Premier will ensure that the dubious State-Federal financial arrangements in place at the moment are exposed for what they are—a rip-off and a rort on taxpayers in New South Wales.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: The honourable member refers to taxation, but he fails to refer to a range of competition measures that the States are forced to take on board as part of State- Federal financial arrangements, which will lead to discrimination against key sectors of the New South Wales economy. It is one thing to come here and talk about taxation—taxation that has issues related to it—and another thing to be able to look objectively at State-Federal financial arrangements. We see, for example, in the roads area the extraction from New South Wales road users of approximately $5 billion in fuel excise and a return to the States in road funding of less than $600 million.

Clearly there are real problems, and I am glad the honourable member has raised this matter. We will certainly do all we can to expose the $3 billion rort that the Federal Government is perpetrating on New South Wales citizens in relation to GST revenue: the $10 billion that New South Wales gets returned to it after $13 billion is collected. We will also point to the fact that fuel excise is primarily a tax that falls on New South Wales motorists and is not returned in commensurate road funding. We can go through a list of other State-related measures that are put in place because the Commonwealth Government will not equitably distribute revenue and will not equitably distribute the $10 billion projected surplus.

I would have thought it would be embarrassing for members opposite to come into this House and try to make a virtue of GST taxation measures, try to make a virtue of fuel excise and try to make a virtue of a $10 billion surplus when frontline services in New South Wales, and other States for that matter, are under pressure. The Federal Government should do the right thing and return the bulk of that revenue to New South Wales and other States to ensure that we have frontline services adequately funded. This State Government will make sure that members opposite are held accountable.

The Hon. IAN WEST: My question is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. Will the Minister inform the House about the latest moves to make cigarettes less of a fire risk?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I am pleased to advise the House that New South Wales has secured the agreement of the Commonwealth and all the other States and Territories for the development of a national fire safety standard for cigarettes. This is an important decision that will help reduce the fire risk from cigarettes and, hopefully, save lives. New South Wales put this issue high on the agenda of the meeting of the Augmented Australasian Police Ministers' Council in Canberra earlier this month as a vital matter of public safety. I acknowledge the Ministers' support for this initiative and their recognition of the compelling arguments for the introduction of reduced fire risk cigarettes, which are designed to self-extinguish rather than keep burning.

The Ministers agreed to work towards the development of a draft national fire safety standard for cigarettes by 31 March 2006. In effect, this means that all cigarettes manufactured or imported for sale in Australia will have to be reduced fire risk [RFR] cigarettes. This then removes all non-RFR cigarettes from the market. This decision follows the lead of Canada and New York State, which have both introduced legislation making RFR cigarettes mandatory. This decision was welcomed by health groups around the country and by the nation's fire services. Indeed, the New South Wales Fire Brigades Commissioner, Greg Mullins, said that Australia's fire chiefs were "100 per cent behind the initiative".

I believe that in years to come this will rank alongside the safety decisions to introduce childproof cigarette lighters and bike helmets. It will be a major advance in fire prevention, boosting the safety of both the community and firefighters around Australia. In Australia at least 4,574 fires a year, or an average of one fire every two hours, are caused by cigarettes and smoking materials. Statistics indicate cigarettes are involved in igniting 5 per cent of all structure fires in Australia, and matches are involved in another 8.2 per cent. We have also seen the devastation that can be caused when discarded cigarettes ignite bushfires. In New South Wales alone, blazes ignited by cigarettes resulted in 20 out of 141 fire deaths over the five years from 1997 to 2002.

There is no such thing as a fire safe cigarette, and I want to stress in the strongest possible terms that this decision in no way condones or encourages smoking. The health dangers are well documented and, of course, we would all encourage smokers—particularly now that the former Treasurer has left the House—to make every effort to quit. However, the reality is that people continue to smoke, and cigarettes can cause fires that result in deaths, injury and major property damage and endanger the safety of our firefighters. This is a simple, sensible and effective plan to reduce the fire risk from cigarettes. I again congratulate all the Ministers in the Augmented Australasian Police Ministers' Council for their responsible approach to safeguarding the community and our firefighters.

The Hon. JOHN TINGLE: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for Police. Can the Minister supply figures for the current number of licensed firearm owners and the current number of registered firearms in New South Wales? Have the numbers of licensees and registered firearms increased or decreased in the past 12 months, or in whatever statistical period applies? If there have been increases in either number, has this produced a significant increase in revenue from the increased licence fees applied last year and from the fees for Permits to Acquire? Can the Minister assure the House that, as promised by a previous Minister, "every cent" of the higher firearm licence fees is being directed to the operation of the Firearms Registry?

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

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Local Government. Is the Minister aware that recently an elected Clarence Valley councillor and Australian Labor Party member, Ian Tiley, was subject to adverse findings by the local government inquiry when he was Shire Clerk at Merriwa Council? Is the Minister further aware that the findings included that Mr Tiley, as Shire Clerk, had not correctly prepared quarterly financial statements, that the Shire Clerk had been taking time off during office hours to conduct his own business, that the Shire Clerk had used the council's administration vehicle for his own use, and that the Shire Clerk had been undercharged in respect of two accounts from council to do private work on his properties? Is the Minister aware that council suspended him as a result of these findings?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: This appears to be yet again another scurrilous campaign by The Nationals.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Tell us about Tweed council.

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I will soon. When The Nationals are down and out, they reach into the gutter to make outrageous and offensive allegations about those who do not meet their agenda.
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: My question is addressed to the Special Minister of State. Will the Minister provide details on any recent initiatives being undertaken by the Government to educate younger people about the dangers of alcohol use?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I thank the Hon. Eric Roozendaal for his question.

The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Is it detailed?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Yes. It is indeed detailed. Alcohol-related deaths each year exceed the number of deaths associated with all illegal drugs by a factor of four. To further educate younger people about the dangers, I had the pleasure this week of launching the Play Now-Act Now short films DVD. I was joined by the young film-makers and crew members, who participated in this valuable activity. This initiative is an important part of the New South Wales Government's Youth Alcohol Action Plan. Its release follows the New South Wales Summit on Alcohol Abuse and is a good example of our strong commitment to achieving cultural change in alcohol use among younger people. The DVD provides peer education to young people on the risks of alcohol and illicit drug abuse. The films will strike a chord with young people and the messages contained are accessible, important and timely.

The films delve into the fall-out effect that comes with extreme drinking, including physical and mental health consequences, as well as a range of social and legal repercussions, including crime, violence, anti-social behaviour and road trauma. The Play Now-Act Now DVD features 14 films from the recent film and video competition. To reach the target audience of young people, NSW Health will distribute the Play Now-Act Now DVD to 1,800 key youth, health and community agencies throughout New South Wales. The DVD can be screened to large groups as a stand-alone activity or used in targeted small groups, classes or individual settings as a focus for discussions, in counselling and as a reference for follow-up activities. The project has been a partnership between NSW Health and Metro Screen, with support from agencies such as the Premier's Department, Youthsafe, Screen Sound Australia, and many professionals in the drug and alcohol, health promotion, cinema and community sectors. Play Now-Act Now is a great example of agencies operating in partnership and collaboration across government and non-government agencies and interest groups.

The Hon. Dr PETER WONG: My question without notice is directed to the Hon. John Della Bosca, Minister for the Central Coast. Is the Minister aware of the article that appeared in the Central Coast Sun Weekly on Thursday 17 March in which the Premier blamed immigration as a major cause of the problems of infrastructure on the Central Coast, including local water supply? Is the Minister also aware that such accusations were made despite expert evidence given by the General Manager of Wyong Shire Council, Mr Kerry Yates, who stated, "the Central Coast would never run short of water". Does the Minister, who is an immigrant, fall into the category defined by the Premier as the cause of the problem? As the Minister for the Central Coast, is he aware of any research to support the Premier's outrageous accusations? Will the Minister condemn such blatant untruth as an incitement of intolerance?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I resent the member's outrageous allegation that I am the Minister for the Central Coast. The honourable member must not have been listening to the announcement made in the House some months ago that I am no longer the Minister for the Central Coast. The honourable member directed his question to me, believing me to be the Minister for the Central Coast, but he obviously was mistaken. The most appropriate course of action is to refer the question to the Minister for the Central Coast, the Hon. Grant McBride, and I am happy to do so.

The Hon. DON HARWIN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Roads. Is the Minister aware of a campaign by bus drivers at Ryde, Burwood and Leichhardt bus depots for the Roads and Traffic Authority to implement a bus-only lane on Victoria Road? Is he aware of local community concerns about the level of traffic congestion, particularly during peak hour, which is impacting on the time it takes bus commuters to travel to and from work? What action has the Minister taken to address these calls for a bus-only lane?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: The Government is very firmly committed to bus-only lanes on our major arterials to improve public transport. The Government has committed a range of funds as a result of the Unsworth report, which looked into measures such as bus priority, and certainly it will continue to roll out—

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Rollover?

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I said roll out. You guys are going to roll over. The soft Left is about to get done over by the hard Right over here—

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: I wouldn't talk about being rolled if I were you.

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: Look at poor old Ned Flanders over there. He is not amused. David Clarke crawls along and they have formed an alliance.

The Hon. Don Harwin: Point of order: Victoria Road is important to the people of Drummoyne and Ryde. The Minister not only is irrelevant but is straying into areas that are clearly outside the ambit of the question and therefore contrary to the sessional orders.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the Minister that his answer must be relevant to the question asked.

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: As I said, the Government is strongly committed to bus priority measures and will continue to roll out detailed plans in these areas.

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Education and Training. What action is the Government taking to assist students with special needs in New South Wales public schools?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: The Government has a strong commitment to students with special needs and to equity in educational opportunities. I am sure it will surprise no-one that we have strong and detailed plans in this area.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I am pleased to say that over $33 million has recently been provided in funding for students with special needs in New South Wales public schools. The funds have been provided for two programs—the learning assistance program and the funding support program. A payment of over $4 million will be distributed to 1,997 schools for the learning assistance program for the first two terms of this year. The learning assistance program was introduced in 2003 to support students experiencing difficulties in learning, including students with mild intellectual disabilities and language disorders enrolled in regular classes. A second payment will be made in semester 2.

In 2003 the Government established a low support needs advisory group to streamline the allocation of support for students with difficulties in learning. The advisory group supported the use of assessment data, such as the basic skills test and the English language and literacy assessment, to allocate funds in both primary and high schools on a needs basis. The learning assistance program funding provides crucial support to teachers working with students with special education needs in regular classes. Through the program schools will receive both funding and specialist support teachers. Using statewide assessments to allocate funding means that funding and specialist support are available to students when and where they need it. The new process significantly reduces red tape for schools. It also means that school counsellors have more time to help students rather than filling out time-consuming assessments and funding applications.

The second program, the funding support program, is a $29 million program to support over 10,000 students with disabilities who have moderate and high support needs and are enrolled in regular classes. These students have severe intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities, mental health disorders, autism, hearing and vision impairments, and are enrolled in regular classes. In 2004 over 10,000 students were supported through this program. In 2005 over 10,400 students will be supported through the program. These newly funded students have entered kindergarten in 2005, moved from primary school to high school, enrolled in a public school in 2005 or their educational support needs have changed significantly and they are currently enrolled in a public school. Funding can be used for additional teacher time, training and development, additional teacher's aide support or time for teachers to co-ordinate student learning programs.

However, most schools utilise the funding for additional teacher aide special support. As well as the learning assistance program and the funding support program, in 2004 the Government allocated an additional $15.6 million over the 2005-07 period so that each special education class will have a teacher and a teacher's aide, special, by 2007. Through this strategy, in 2005 each class for students with emotional disturbance, behaviour disorder or autism has been provided with a full-time teacher's aide, special. In excess of 300 teacher's aides, special, have been employed through this initiative. The initiative enables regions and schools to respond to the specific needs of students in these classes. These programs clearly demonstrate the Government's commitment to the inclusion of students with disabilities in public schools.

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Justice, representing the Attorney General. Given the success of the Drug Court, which was set up in 1998, with regard to the rehabilitation of offenders and cost effectiveness, when will the Minister move to establish other drug courts in New South Wales?

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

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: If honourable members have further question, I suggest they put them on notice.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Earlier in question time the Hon. John Ryan asked me a question about the new Community Participation program. The bulk of new community participation clients are scheduled to commence on 4 April. Service description schedules for all services have been approved, and payments to providers, which are made quarterly, will be forthcoming once contracts are signed, which is expected to be within the next two weeks. The department has offered to make alternative arrangements for services during the interim period. No service will be allocated clients without funding attached to those clients. I am unable to comment on why a particular organisation is running sausage sizzles, but I emphasise that the community participation program is a new program; it is not, and was never intended to be, a continuation of the former Adult Training, Learning and Support program.

Questions without notice concluded.

The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Emergency Services, and Minister for Lands) [5.02 p.m.]: I move:

That this House do now adjourn.

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [5.02 p.m.]: Recently I had the pleasure of representing the Premier at two important functions for the Indian community. On Saturday 5 March 2005 I represented the Premier at the Bharatha Natya Arengetram of Suganiya and Neshevida Balsubramanian at the Greenhalgh Auditorium at the Ku-Ring-Gai Campus of the University of Technology. Also present were Ms Virginia Judge, the member for Strathfield, Ms Julie Owens, the Federal Member for Parramatta, and Mrs Jayalukshmi Kandiah OAM. I extended the Premier's congratulations to Suganiya and Neshevida on their achievements, which are significant milestones reached after years of training. They are the 29th and 30th graduates of the Natanalaya Dance Academy in Sydney. This is one of the many achievements of these two talented sisters, who have received several prizes for cultural activities, including the prestigious Minister's Award for Student Excellence.

Suganiya was born in Saudi Arabia in 1988 and began learning the classical art form of Bharatha Natyam at the age of 5. Neshevida was born in Sri Lanka in 1990 and commenced studying this art form at the age of 7. They have participated in many dance and charity productions staged by Natanalaya. They both attend Sydney Girls High School and are in years 11 and 10 respectively. The sisters have represented their school in an array of extracurricular activities, such as soccer, cross country and debating. Arengetram means "ascending the stage" and the performance of Bharatha Natyam marks the graduation of Suganiya and Neshevida from the Natanalaya Dance Academy of Indian Classical Dance and Music. Those in attendance were privileged to experience a first-rate cultural performance of one of the seven classical dance forms of India, featuring a repertoire of nine different dances.

Bharatha Natyam is one of the seven classical dance forms of India, with ancient roots that are more than 4,000 years old. Bharatha Natyam is based on principles set down by the Nataya Shastra written by the Hindu sage Bharata. This dance form is based on devotional love songs with the dancer being the devotee and the God being her beloved. The term is derived from Bhava, emotion, Ragar, melody, and Thalam, rhythm, which are the three basic components on which this dance form is based. The performance showcased Indian culture and demonstrated the important role that Mrs Jayalukshmi Kandiah OAM, founder of and teacher at the Natanalaya Dance Academy, plays in continuing the tradition and promoting a better understanding of Indian culture and multiculturalism. Suganiya and Neshevida's parents, Mr and Mrs Balasubramanian, are very proud of their daughters' achievements, and rightly so.

I was greatly impressed by the sisters' performance and enthusiasm. To give an understanding of the significance of the importance of this performance, the many costumes of Suganiya and Neshevida were purchased on a special trip to India. I congratulate Mrs Kandiah, the musicians who travelled from Singapore for the performance, and Suganiya and Neshevida on their achievement. I also wish Suganiya and Neshevida every success for the completion of their high school studies in Tamil this year and in their ongoing journey as performing artists.

On Saturday 19 March I represented the Premier at a charity performance of Durga Ban Gai Gauri, a spectacular Indian musical dance drama, which was staged by SEWA International at the Hurstville Entertainment Centre. I acknowledge the attendance of Ms Manju Channan from the Consulate General of India, the members of the executive committee of SEWA International and more than 800 audience members who travelled from across New South Wales to attend the performance of this play. The original producer of the play, Ms Sulabha Deshpande, a major star of stage and screen in India, was also present and was received with great enthusiasm by all. There were about 120 dancers from the Marathi, Hindi, Bengali and Gujarati communities, and the age of the performers ranged from 4 to 60 years. The drama tells the story of a spoilt young princess, Durga, who through her exposure to working people in a rural area becomes a caring and responsible young women, Gauri. The performance was very colourful and most enjoyable. It is a celebration of the many cultural backgrounds that form the Indian community.

The performance demonstrated the important role that members of SEWA International play in promoting Indian cultural heritage and in managing fundraising programs. SEWA International started in the United Kingdom with some young men and women joining hands to help the earthquake victims of Latur, Maharastra state, India in 1991. Since then, the movement has spread to 15 countries. Since 1997, SEWA International (Australia) Inc. has been supporting a number of projects in the areas of children's education and programs to support community needs and environmental activities. Activities undertaken by SEWA International in Australia include blood donation campaigns, tree planting campaigns, participating in Clean Up Australia day and holding regular meetings for Indian senior citizens. As well, SEWA International support the activities of SEWA in India, helping bring education to tribal communities and running programs for people with disabilities, running orphanages, schools for boys and student exchange programs.

SEWA also raised around one million rupiah for the tsunami victims. The funds raised during the performance will be donated to charities in both India and Sri Lanka. Also, I was presented with a cheque for $1,000, which was a donation to the appeal for the victims of the bushfires on Eyre Peninsula in South Australia. What is special about SEWA International is that people undertake all of these good works voluntarily, which is particularly commendable. Events such as Durga Ban Gai Gauri provide the whole community with an opportunity to experience first hand the vibrancy and passion of another culture and some of the traditions that are part of the culturally diverse society in New South Wales.

I congratulate SEWA International and all the performers on a wonderful performance and evening. I trust that their fundraising activities were successful, and I wish them every success for the future. The Indian community has made a powerful contribution to the development of our State and our community. The skills, education and dedication of Australians of Indian background will make us a more dynamic and outward looking country in years to come. I have enjoyed very much attending these events and many others involving the Indian and Sri Lankan communities.
The Hon. JOHN RYAN [5.07 p.m.]: On 30 January this year historic elections took place in the troubled country of Iraq. While we all welcome the introduction of democracy in Iraq, I believe that it is also important to highlight some concerns expressed by the Assyrian community in Australia about irregularities that may have adversely influenced the election outcome for the Christian minority living in that country. These concerns do not invalidate the great significance of the steps taken in Iraq towards democracy, but they must be addressed if all Iraqis are to enjoy the full benefits of democracy. Before I speak further about this matter, I extend my warmest wishes to His Grace Bishop Mar Meelis Zaia, the Diocesan Bishop of the Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East Diocese of Australia and New Zealand. I wish him and his congregation a happy and prosperous Assyrian new year. I also look forward to working more closely with him and members of his church, many of whom I have met and who live in the Fairfield area, where his church was first established in the mid-1960s.

I also extend my congratulations to Bishop Mar and his congregation on the introduction of an English liturgy to their services, which has been translated with great effort and faithfulness from the Aramaic liturgy. As I mentioned previously, the recent Iraqi elections appear to have been conducted in a way that has disadvantaged Assyrians and has limited their representation within the interim Iraqi Government. This may have serious and profound implications for the safety of the Assyrians and their representation in that country. Australian Assyrian Christians are particularly worried that the minority Assyrian Christian community in Iraq may not be able to enjoy human rights such as the right to freedom of worship and freedom from discrimination. Their anxiety is reasonably based because there have been many calls from the Shi'ite majority in Iraq for an Iranian-style Islamic state to be enshrined in the new Iraqi constitution.

The 30 January elections in Iraq were an historic breakthrough in the development of Iraq as a free and democratic society and were widely supported by Assyrians in Iraq and around the world. Never before has Iraq had free, fair and transparent elections, with thousands of candidates and hundreds of political parties. Never before had the Christian Assyrians, who are a unique and indigenous people in Iraq, been allowed to participate in elections with their own independent parties. But on election day several irregularities took place, affecting at least 300,000 Assyrians, Yezidis and Turkmen in northern Iraq, and a significant number of the 500,000 Assyrians in the worldwide diaspora. For example, on polling day voting boxes and supplies were not delivered to some northern districts in Iraq. These districts have a population of 300,000 and Assyrian Christians make up a high component of that population. Despite assurances from the head of the Iraqi Electoral Commission the official voting boxes did not arrive from Kurdish-controlled Arbil. This effectively limited the ability of people, Assyrians included, to exercise their democratic right to vote.

The Al-Rafidayn Democratic Coalition, the main party representing the Christian Chaldo Assyrians, has rejected the Iraqi Independent Electoral High Commission's report on voting irregularities in northern Iraq and has strongly criticised the opening of only 93 of the 330 voting centres in the Nineveh governorate on election day. Expatriate Assyrians also found it difficult to vote in some countries. Depriving 300,000 eligible Assyrians of their right to vote may have cost that community up to 10 seats in the 275-seat Iraqi National Assembly. This was not an auspicious beginning to Iraqi democracy for the Assyrian community, who view these events as a possible continuation of the 1,400 years of discrimination and marginalisation that many have endured in Iraq to date because of their minority status in a predominately Muslim country.

Assyrians in Iraq are calling for a minimum number of seats in the new Iraqi Government and have requested that this should be between 22 and 27 seats. This is proportional to the Assyrian population in and out of Iraq, estimated to be between 8 per cent and 10 per cent of Iraq's population. Australian Assyrians supported this claim by demonstrating recently outside the American Consulate in Sydney and outside the New South Wales Parliament. I support the petition from the Australian Chapter of the Assyrian Universal Alliance, which has called on the Federal Government to urge the new Iraqi Government to designate a geographically protected administrative area in Iraq for Christian Assyrians and for other similar minority groups who are currently underrepresented. I have also written to the Prime Minister, the Hon. John Howard, in this regard to express my concerns and I eagerly await his reply.

Mr IAN COHEN [5.12 p.m.]: Zhizhen Dai is a 38-year-old Chinese-born woman with a bachelor's degree in economics. She and her daughter, Fadu Chen, are Australian citizens living in Hurstville. They have suffered greatly. Ms Dai's husband, Mr Chengyong Chen, was a Chinese citizen. His body was found in an abandoned hut in a suburb of Guangzhou in July 2001. Ms Dai's family had been persecuted by the Chinese Government from 20 July 1999 simply because they were Falun Gong practitioners who believed in the principles of truth, compassion and tolerance.

Her husband lived in the Haizhu district of Guangzhou in Guangdong province, and was an electrician at the Guangzhou Paper Manufacturing Corporation. Because he went to Beijing many times to appeal for the cause of Falun Gong he lost his job. In November 2000, to avoid brainwashing classes, he left home and rented another place in which to live. His body was identified by his sister. It was significantly decomposed, which indicated that he had been dead for some time, so the exact time of death is unknown. He had been detained for 15 days in Guangzhou in January 2000 for appealing for Falun Gong. In July 2000 he was taken away by police for three weeks. He was also detained in Beijing for one day for unfurling a Falun Gong banner in Tiananmen Square on 31 December 2000.

Ms Dai lost contact with her husband after 10 January 2001. Mr Chengyong Chen's sister, also a Falun Gong practitioner, was sentenced to two years in a labour camp without any legal proceedings. When their father heard the tragic news of his son's death and his daughter's sentence he suffered from shock, which led to a recurrence of his illness. He was hospitalised, and recently died. Since the crackdown on Falun Gong started the police have searched Ms Dai's brother's home without a warrant and threatened him that he would lose his job and his house. Against his will, he agreed to give up his practice of Falun Gong.

In Canberra on 11 March 2002 the widow of the practitioner killed in China expressed her thanks to the Australian Government for returning his ashes. He died because he belonged to an organisation—a religious movement, a cult, whatever it may be. Mr Dai, a Chinese citizen, was beaten to death because he was seen to be some sort of threat to the Chinese Government. It is clear that these people are being persecuted in China. There has been verification of the deaths of some 375 practitioners, and of 20,000 being sentenced to periods of forced labour. Former Olympic swimmer Jan Becker, arrested in Tiananmen Square last week for unfurling a Falun Gong banner and deported, said governments throughout the world must unite to press China to end the persecution. It is quite clear that this movement, and perhaps others, suffer greatly from persecution by a centralised, totalitarian and very dictatorial government. What is it fearful of? Perhaps it has reason to be fearful, if this movement presents some sort of threat to the government.

I refer also to Ms Zhang Cuiying, an Australian artist who is also a Falun Gong practitioner. She filed a law suit in the New South Wales Supreme Court on 15 September 2004 in which she claims that former Chinese dictator Jiang Zemin and his "610 Office"—which was established to eradicate Falun Gong through arbitrary incarceration, brainwashing, torture and murder—are responsible for the torture she suffered while imprisoned for her beliefs and advocacy of Falun Gong. After being detained for eight months at the No. 1 Shangmeilin Detention Centre in Shenzhen City during a visit to her Chinese homeland, she was released, thanks to the assistance of the Australian Government. Ms Zhang was nominated for the Bankstown 2004 Citizen of the Year Award.

Her case was listed for a second conference, and I spoke at a rally outside the court on 28 February. I have seen this woman's artwork, and it is exceptional. I have met these people on many occasions and I am very concerned that they are seen to be a threat to the Chinese Government for practising what is essentially a peaceful religious practice.

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS [5.17 p.m.]: Tonight I refer to two reports that have appeared in the metropolitan newspapers over the past few weeks. They both relate to issues of homosexuality, sexual relations and the murder of gays. The first report appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald and a few other newspapers a couple of weeks ago and referred to the findings of the Senior Deputy State Coroner, Jacqueline Milledge, in relation to two murders and a third probable murder. Ross Warren disappeared in July 1989 and John Russell disappeared in November 1989, and their bodies were found at the foot of Marks Park cliff in Tamarama. It is suspected that a third man, who has been missing since 1985, was thrown over the same cliff.

I refer to these matters now because the good news is that our attitudes—and those of the police, the community and probably everyone concerned—to the victimisation, brutality and even murder of gay men or lesbian women have changed considerably for the better since the two deaths in 1989 and the suspicious disappearance in 1985. The good news is that as a community we have improved considerably in our attitudes to such matters. I congratulate former sergeant Page of the New South Wales Police Force, the coroner and others who have been involved, and the family of one of the young men, who has fought so hard for this matter to be dealt with and the truth faced, which is important.

The report that appeared at the very end of January was far more worrying: the conviction of a Catholic priest for a homosexual act which occurred in 1982—before the law reforms of 1984 and before the most recent reforms arising from the age of consent changes. Although Judge Bell made a number of very sensible remarks and the man in question was sentenced only until the rising of the court, a few seconds later, a very brief encounter in a swimming pool involving a man of 29—I am not sure how old the other person was—occurring more than 20 years ago became the subject of a criminal prosecution.

The case arose out of a complaint to the Catholic church in 2002 and the seeking of $100,000 in compensation. The then Archbishop, George Pell, in writing after an eight-month investigation by the church, offered his sympathy and promised to discipline the priest concerned. But he told the complainant, "I cannot be reasonably satisfied that abusive and criminal behaviour were involved." I am very concerned that after that the police in a particular part of New South Wales should then have got the complainant to phone the priest and used a listening device to record the conversation. Reading the text, it seems to me that the admission the priest made was of a religious or moral nature, not of a criminal nature. Nevertheless, we do have the conviction that I referred to. This is a bad precedent. [Time expired.]

The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK [5.22 p.m.]: Last Tuesday, 8 March, I was honoured to be invited to address a breakfast at Broken Hill to mark International Women's Day. The Broken Hill community was one of the original New South Wales communities to mark the event in 1931 during the Great Depression. Next year will be its seventy-fifth celebration. A relative of mine, the author Dymphna Cusack, was an English teacher in Broken Hill about that time. She was part of a remarkable generation of women whose views were shaped by two world wars and the Great Depression. I have read Dymphna's moving accounts of the hardship experienced by Broken Hill women and their families who were battling drought, depression and a cutback in investment by mining companies. The International Women's Day breakfast was an opportunity to reflect on the great struggles of early suffragettes and feminists—the campaign for the vote, property rights, peace, rights to the custody of children, access to separate bank accounts, the right to work after marriage and the ongoing campaign to stop violence against women.

The day was organised by Eleanor Blow of the Immigrant Women's Association, and I thank and congratulate her on her deep commitment to her clients and community. During my visit I met informally with women's service providers, who raised a number of issues including the lack of local apprenticeships for youth in Broken Hill. This is forcing many young people to relocate to Adelaide—a very costly exercise. More important is the dislocation from family and community. It is a very difficult challenge for a young person aged 16 to 18 to move from the support of family and friends in a remote community to live independently in a major city.

Indeed, I heard the story of an outstanding Aboriginal youth who was offered the rare opportunity to play for a major Adelaide Australian Football League [AFL] club. This offer is the dream of almost every boy playing AFL. So he accepted it and moved to live in Adelaide. However, a few weeks later he gave up the opportunity and moved back home because he missed his family too much. I understand that both the club and the boy's family made many efforts to try to relieve his homesickness in Adelaide—to no avail. He is back playing great footy in the local competition and happily living with his people at home. The story highlights the hardship experienced by young people and their families when they are forced to seek education and training opportunities away from their home towns.

I also had the privilege of meeting with Aboriginal women from the Menindee and Broken Hill communities, organised by Tanya King, who is the regional violence prevention specialist for the lower far west region of the Department of Community Services. We had very positive discussions on a number of issues including access to health, education and transport services. We talked at length about the justice system, housing and other issues affecting their communities. These impressive women shared their time, their views and their humour, for which I was most grateful. On a previous visit to Broken Hill I met with a woman who became famous throughout Australia as Janine Whitehair. Janine took on the issue of women being allowed to work after they marry. It was a very significant antidiscrimination case. Janine is a warm, intelligent and delightful person who played down her accomplishments for women. It was a privilege to meet Janine and I wish her every success in her future career.
On the afternoon of 8 March I returned by air to Sydney to attend the Premier's reception at Government House. Having spent the day discussing serious issues affecting the quality of life of women and the life chances of their children, I was surprised to find that the Premier's theme was sport. The Minister for Women, Sandra Nori, reannounced a program to attract women to non-traditional sports. I assume that means sports such as football. This is not a credible agenda for women and not an appropriate theme for International Women's Day. International Women's Day is a day of protest and for remembering the heroic work of past feminists, whose radicalism and bravery changed the world for all of us. I do not believe that women in Australia wish to become a separate race of football-playing Amazons.

Their issues continue to emphasise the welfare and future of their children—their sons as well as their daughters. Australian women oppose violence in the home and want greater safety in public places. Women's health, access to financial resources and women as carers are also great and continuing causes. I urge the Carr Government to adopt a serious agenda for women, to realise that there is a continuing role for advocacy within the Government. The lack of innovation and performance by the current Minister for Women is eroding support for the very idea of a women's agenda. It is evidence of a tired Carr Government that has run out of ideas. It is now grasping at marginal issues such as football in order to construct a so-called strong and detailed plan for women. It is a great shame that the gains women have made over so many years are being squandered in this way.

The Hon. Dr PETER WONG [5.27 p.m.]: Last week I had the privilege of hosting, for one week on work experience, a very talented year 10 student from James Ruse Agricultural College by the name of Edith Tom. She has a passion for human rights, and has entered and won many essay competitions. Her ability to analyse and write would surprise many in this House. As part of her work experience, my office gave Edith what we believed would be two very challenging tasks, one of which was titled the "Chinese Immigration Restriction Act of 1861". I was very surprised when Edith, on her last day, presented two reports to me. One of the reports appears to be reminiscent of more recent changes that we are experiencing within society as a whole, where intolerance and fear of the new and different is on the increase, and appears to be clouding our perception on the realms of a changing world. In celebrating Harmony Day this week, and in recognition of this young lady's talent, I have decided to read one of these papers. A shortened version of the paper presented to me reads as follows:

Australia is regarded as one of the most culturally diverse nations in the world. According to the 2001 Census, over 4 million people in Australia were born overseas, and 21 per cent of Australians spoke a language in addition to English in their homes. Our country has the highest proportion of overseas-born people in the Western world, and our population has over 200 racial ancestries. Australia's place in the world has been characterised by a culture of tolerance and multiculturalism. Yet ironically, the diversity of our nation's people, culture and lifestyle has been shaped by our unique history, in which racial injustice is a major component. On the 7th of June 1884, the Bendigo Bulletin published an article referring to Chinese immigrants in Australia, and their portrayal of the Chinese race was not an uncommon perception at the time. The article read:

This animal has been—and is to be—found in large numbers near Bridge Street, and presents the singular feature of having the head and tail on the same end of his body. It is commonly known by the names of 'John Chinaman', 'monkey', 'Chinkie', etc. It affects hen roots, and has often been caught in the night near sluice boxes and puddling machines. It will take anything it can lay its paws on. When in numbers, it will turn if pursued; but generally it is a timorous animal and gets away, if possible. Its flesh is not eaten by Europeans, but is much relished by the Queensland blacks.

Discrimination, and eventually resentment towards the Chinese developed in the years following the discovery of Gold in Australia. Although people came from Britain, Russia, Denmark, France, America and a host of other countries, it was the Chinese who suffered the most from racial prejudice, because of their different customs and traditions. During the years of the gold rush, protests and riots frequently broke out as white miners attempted to force the Chinese from the goldfields in the area. In the Lambing Flats riots of 1860-61, 3,000 diggers assembled to attack the Chinese, who were subsequently whipped and bludgeoned, and had their property stolen or burnt. Police finally restored order by mid-1861, but the protests had alarmed the Government, and had laid the foundations for the Chinese Restriction and Regulation Act, and eventually the White Australia Policy.

The Chinese Immigration Restriction Act that was passed in November 1861 allowed for the unrest to die down until the depression of the 1890s, which saw Chinese and European workers coming into direct competition again. This led to the formation of many anti-Chinese unions, and the extension of the Chinese Restriction and Regulation Act to include all coloured races, as the Government tried to implement their "White Australia Policy". The Chinese Restriction and Regulation Bill (1888) and the Coloured Races Restriction and Regulation Bill (1896) were both attempts to discourage non-European people fro migrating to Australia. Although these bills did not become law, they are examples of discrimination against non-Europeans. The main reason for reserving the bills was due to Britain's economic relations with Asian countries. A part of the Chinese Restriction and Regulation Bill read:

All Members of the Executive Government, or any Member thereof in that behalf who may have committed any act in preventing the landing of the Chinese, or otherwise in relation to Chinese immigrants, or to vessels carrying such immigrants since the first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight, are hereby fully indemnified, and shall in all Courts of Law in New South Wales and elsewhere be held harmless in respect thereof.

Whilst another part states: "After the passing of this Act no certificate of naturalisation shall be issued to any Chinese on any ground whatever." Another method of discouraging non-European immigrants was by charging fees that did not apply to European immigrants. These were stated in the Act:

Every Chinese arriving in this Colony after the passing of this Act shall pay the sum of one hundred pounds … If any vessel having on board a greater number of Chinese than in the proportion of one Chinese to every three hundred tons of tonnage of such vessel … the owner, master, or charterer of such vessel shall be liable on conviction to a penalty of five hundred pounds for each Chinese carried in excess of the foregoing limitation.

In 1901, the Immigration Restriction Act was one of the first Acts passed by the newly formed Australian Parliament. The Act allowed for the exclusion of people from non-European decent by administering a dictation test of a specified language to any immigrant during the first year of residence. Out of the 805 times the dictation test was administered in 1902-03, 46 people passed, and only 6 people out of 554 passed the test between 1904 and 1909. After 1909, no person passed the dictation test and people who failed were refused entry or deported. These discriminatory immigration restrictions, which formed the basis of the "White Australia Policy" continued until after World War II, when they began to ease due to the "populate or perish" situation.

Minister Holt's decision in 1949 that allowed 800 non-European refugees to remain in Australia was one of the first steps towards eventually eroding the "White Australia Policy". In 1958, the Migration Act was revised, which allowed for a simpler set of entry permits, as well as abolishing the dictation test. In 1966, the Immigration Minister Hubert Opperman announced that non-Europeans would be accepted into Australia based on their qualifications and ability to integrate into Australian society. As the focus of Australia's immigration policy shifted from assimilation to integration in the 1960s, the "White Australia Policy" was gradually removed.

I seek leave to have the remainder of my lengthy speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.
__________

So with all the prejudice of our past, what makes me proud to be an Australian? It is because of the determination we have to move forward, creating a better future. It is this spirit that has allowed us to come so far from atrocities such as Lambing Flats Riots and the Myall Creek Massacre. Although the concept of multiculturalism was introduced in 1972, we still have a long way to go before we can achieve a truly multicultural society. Even though our nation is so culturally diverse and tolerance has become part of what being "Australian" is, there are some attitudes of the past that have survived to the present. Such views are completely irrational to the majority, but they do exist in the hatred of the minority. Have not the injustices, massacres and wars shown us that there is nothing to gain, yet, everything to lose if we discriminate? The economic and social contributions that our diversity of cultures has made for Australia are immeasurable, yet author Cameron McKenzie deems multiculturalism a "menace".

Almost 40 years after the concept of assimilation had been abandoned, we continue to criticise a race for having their own language and culture. Multiculturalism isn't a "menace"—it's a powerful tool that can bring together all the different people of the world. It represents the tolerance, understanding, unity and strength of humanity. It's not about the destruction of the Australian culture, but rather, it's about learning from the cultures of one another and living together in harmony. We need to work together to eradicate all forms of racism, and establish a world that embraces cultural diversity. It's not simply asking the racists to suppress their voices by creating a new generation of pretenders who hide their hatred in their closets. We need to change our way of thinking and overcome the fear of the new and different.

__________

Motion agreed to.