thursday, 5 may 2016 - parliament of nsw · 2016-06-01 · thursday, 5 may 2016 legislative...
TRANSCRIPT
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 1
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Thursday, 5 May 2016
The PRESIDENT (The Hon. Donald Thomas Harwin) took the chair at 10:00.
The PRESIDENT read the prayer and acknowledged the Gadigal clan of the Eora nation and its elders
and thanked them for their custodianship of this land.
Bills
FINES AMENDMENT BILL 2016
Returned
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of a message from the Legislative Assembly returning the Fines
Amendment Bill 2016 without amendment.
Announcements
HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II NINETIETH BIRTHDAY
The PRESIDENT: I inform the House that on behalf of the members of the Legislative Council and
the people of New South Wales, a message of congratulations was sent to Her Majesty the Queen on the occasion
of her ninetieth birthday on 21 April 2016.
Motions
NOTICES OF MOTIONS REALLOCATION
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE (10:02:4): I move:
That, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the standing or sessional orders, notices of motions listed in the name of Dr Kaye
on the Notice Paper for today be reallocated as follows:
(1) Item No. 10 in the Order of Precedence relating to the Drug Legislation Amendment (Cannabis for Medical Purposes)
Bill be listed in the name of Mr Buckingham.
(2) Item No. 4 outside the Order of Precedence relating to the TAFE Changes Moratorium (Secure Future for Public
Provision of Vocational Education and Training) Bill be listed in the name of Mr Shoebridge.
(3) Item No. 36 outside the Order of Precedence relating to the Transforming NSW Energy Sector (Towards 100 per cent
Renewables) Bill be listed in the name of Mr Buckingham.
(4) Item No. 76 outside the Order of Precedence relating to the Greyhound Racing Prohibition Bill be listed in the name of
Dr Faruqi.
(5) Item No. 159 outside the Order of Precedence relating to the Electricity Feed-in (Large-scale Renewable Energy
Generation) Bill be listed in the name of Mr Buckingham.
(6) Item No. 224 outside the Order of Precedence relating to the Gaming Machines Amendment (Gambling Harm
Minimisation) Bill be listed in the name of Ms Barham.
(7) Item No. 582 outside the Order of Precedence relating to an order for papers regarding service contracts for schools and
TAFEs in New South Wales be listed in the name of Mr Shoebridge.
(8) Item No. 583 outside the Order of Precedence relating to funding cuts to the Illawarra TAFE Institute be listed in the
name of Mr Shoebridge.
(9) Item No. 584 outside the Order of Precedence relating to an order for papers regarding future options for Land and
Property Information be listed in the name of Mr Shoebridge.
(10) Item No. 585 outside the Order of Precedence relating to a further order for papers regarding greyhound welfare be
listed in the name of Mr Shoebridge.
(11) Item No. 703 outside the Order of Precedence relating to an order for papers regarding free range egg labelling be listed
in the name of Dr Faruqi.
Motion agreed to.
TRIBUTE TO MR EUGENE SEETO, OAM
The Hon. ERNEST WONG (10:03:2): I move:
That this House:
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 2
(a) congratulates Mr Eugene Seeto of Revesby in New South Wales, Director of Yu-Mei Chinese School and former
Director of the Sydney Chinese Culture and Educational Centre, on becoming a recipient of the Order of Australia
Medallion on Australia Day in 2016;
(b) recognises the outstanding contribution Mr Seeto has made over the years to the community, particularly in the
promotion of multiculturalism and humanitarian works, including establishing a library at the Sydney Chinese Culture
and Educational Centre after sourcing donations for the purchase of Chinese books and movies to promote an
understanding of the Chinese culture and traditions among Australian-Chinese, both here and overseas;
(c) commends Mr Seeto for his dedication and unwavering support of his local community, including through the planning
and direction he provides to the overall running of the Chinese community language school and his commitment to
preserving early Chinese historical documents and records relevant to the social, political and business development of
the Chinese community in Sydney; and
(d) notes Mr Seeto's great community advocacy and service, which has been honoured through this prestigious award.
Motion agreed to.
BAPTISM OF POLAND 1050TH ANNIVERSARY
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (10:03:5): I move:
(1) That this House notes that:
(a) 2016 marks the 1050th anniversary of the conversion and baptism of the first ruler of Poland, Mieszko I, also
known as the Baptism of Poland;
(b) to mark the event, a Holy Mass celebrated at St Mary's Cathedral, Sydney was held on Tuesday 3 May 2016,
jointly organised by the Consul General of Poland in Sydney, Mrs Regina Jurkowska, and the Polish Catholic
Chaplaincy in Sydney and attended by several hundred members of the Polish-Australian community; and
(c) those who attended as guests included:
(i) Reverend Father Adam Staszczak, Delegate of the Superior General of the Society of Christ,
Poland, who was the celebrant;
(ii) the Hon. David Clarke, MLC, Parliamentary Secretary for Justice, representing the Hon. Mike
Baird, MP, Premier;
(iii) the Hon. Greg Donnelly, MLC, representing Mr Luke Foley, MP, Leader of the Opposition;
(iv) representatives of Sydney's Consular Corps; and
(v) leaders and representatives of numerous Polish-Australian community organisations.
(2) That this House congratulates and extends its best wishes to the Polish-Australian community on the occasion of the
1050th anniversary of the Baptism of Poland.
Motion agreed to.
POLAND'S CONSTITUTION DAY
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (10:04:2): I move:
(1) That this House notes that:
(a) on Monday 2 May 2016, a reception and concert by the Polish pianist Mr Artur Dutkiecz to celebrate Poland's
Constitution Day was held at the Consulate-General of the Republic of Poland, Woollahra, hosted by
Mrs Regina Jurkowska, Consul General of Poland; and
(b) those who attended as guests included:
(i) Mr Simon Target, who was presented with the Decoration of Honour "Meritorious for Polish
Culture" by the Consul General on behalf of the Government of Poland;
(ii) the Hon. David Clarke, MLC, Parliamentary Secretary for Justice, representing the Hon. Mike
Baird, MP, Premier;
(iii) Ms Jenny Aitchison, MP, shadow Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Sexual
Assault, shadow Minister for Small Business and member for Maitland, representing the leader
of the Opposition, Mr Luke Foley, MP;
(iv) representatives of Sydney Consular Corps;
(v) representatives of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies; and
(vi) representatives of numerous Polish-Australian community organisations.
(2) That this House:
(a) congratulates Mr Simon Target on the occasion of his presentation by the Polish Government of the
Decoration of Honour "Meritorious for Polish Culture"; and
(b) congratulates and extends its best wishes to the Polish-Australian community on the occasion of the 2016
anniversary of Poland's Constitution Day.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 3
Motion agreed to.
MR LI HUAXIN, CONSUL GENERAL OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
The Hon. ERNEST WONG (10:04): I move:
That this House:
(a) congratulates His Excellency, Mr Li Huaxin, Consul General of the People's Republic of China in Sydney,
ambassadorial rank, for the outstanding contribution he has made to the people of New South Wales during his tenure
in this very honourable role;
(b) acknowledges the progress Mr Huaxin has made in the enhancement of friendly relations between Australia and China,
and the way in which he has represented the mutual interests of this bilateral relationship in such a positive light;
(c) acknowledges that Mr Huaxin is a highly respected leader of, and within, the Chinese community for his promotion of
multiculturalism and cultural diversity in New South Wales and across the globe;
(d) recognises the demands and sacrifices, both professional and personal, that a role of this nature requires, not only by the
Consul General, but by his wife, son, family and friends;
(e) notes that while Mr Huaxin and his wife will leave Australia shortly for a new posting in Saudi Arabia, his son will
remain behind to complete his Higher School Certificate later in the year and that this highlights the personal cost that
attends a role such as his; and
(f) commends Mr Huaxin for the professionalism and humility he has brought to this role during his tenure, and wishes
him every success for what lies ahead.
Motion agreed to.
NATIONAL VOLUNTEER WEEK
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE (10:05): On behalf of Ms Jan Barham: I move:
(1) That this House notes that:
(a) National Volunteer Week for 2016 is from 9 to 15 May; and
(b) the theme introduced for National Volunteer Week 2015 of 'Give Happy, Live Happy' continues for another
year, in recognition of evidence showing the positive impacts of volunteering for both those who give their
time and those who are the beneficiaries.
(2) That this House:
(a) notes that the most recent data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics General Social Survey 2014 shows
that there were 5.8 million volunteers nationally in 2014 and that the percentage of the population who engage
in volunteering had dropped from 36 per cent in 2010 to 31 per cent, the first decline in the volunteering rate
in almost 20 years; and
(b) acknowledges the need to address the barriers to volunteering identified in Volunteering Australia's report
entitled "The State of Volunteering in Australia 2016", including:
(i) the challenge of matching the preferred areas of volunteering with the most pressing needs for
volunteers;
(ii) a lack of funds for reimbursement of volunteers' expenses; and
(iii) a lack of resources to engage and support volunteers with special needs such as disabilities or
limited English.
(3) That this House:
(a) congratulates the volunteer organisations in New South Wales and the long standing and the new volunteers
across this State for the essential role they play in the welfare and wellbeing of the people of New South
Wales;
(b) reiterates its recognition of the social benefits and financial savings to this State because of the selfless
activities of volunteers; and
(c) recognises that the volunteer sector requires adequate support and funding so that it can continue its role as
an essential adjunct to government and non-government services.
CLUBS OF SOROPTIMIST INTERNATIONAL SOUTH WEST PACIFIC CONFERENCE
Dr MEHREEN FARUQI (10:06): I move:
(1) That this House notes that:
(a) the 20th Conference of Clubs of Soroptimist International South West Pacific was held from Friday 29 April
to Sunday 1 May 2016 at Bicentennial Park;
(b) the theme of the 2016 conference was "Challenge the Future—Women Accepting the Challenge";
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 4
(c) the conference was attended by several hundred delegates from around the region and focused on challenges
facing women around the world, including domestic violence and human trafficking; and
(d) the Soroptimist International South West Pacific has grown to include 13 countries, including Australia,
New Zealand, Fiji, Mongolia, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Papua New
Guinea and Solomon Islands.
(2) That this House congratulates Soroptimist International of Sydney and Soroptimist International South West Pacific on
their successful conference and for their work in supporting women's and girls' rights and empowerment.
Documents
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(10:06): I table the following papers:
(1) Report of the Department of Family and Community Services entitled "Ready Together: Annual Report 2015"
(2) Report of Multicultural NSW entitled "The state of community relations in NSW: Community Relations Report
2014-15"
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: I move:
That the reports be printed.
Motion agreed to.
Business of the House
ORDER OF BUSINESS
The Hon. NATASHA MACLAREN-JONES (10:17): I move:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the moving of a motion forthwith relating to the conduct of business of
the House.
Motion agreed to.
The Hon. NATASHA MACLAREN-JONES: I move:
That the order of Private Members' Business for today be as follows:
(1) Private Members' Business item No. 746 outside the Order of Precedence standing in the name of Mr Green relating to
Anzac Day.
(2) Private Members' Business item No. 2 in the Order of Precedence standing in the name of Mr Shoebridge relating to the
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015.
(3) If not previously concluded, Private Members' Business item No. 746 outside the Order of Precedence standing in the
name of Mr Green relating to Anzac Day.
(4) Private Members' Business item No. 6 in the Order of Precedence standing in the name of Mr Primrose relating to the
sub-continental community in New South Wales.
(5) Private Members' Business item No. 8 in the Order of Precedence standing in the name of Mr Amato relating to
Fairfield's Youth off the Streets program.
Motions
ANZAC DAY
The Hon. PAUL GREEN (10:18): I move:
(1) That this House acknowledges the service and sacrifice of our war veterans.
(2) That this House notes that:
(a) Anzac Day, 25 April, is one of Australia's most important national occasions, marking the anniversary of the first major
military action fought by Australian and New Zealand forces during the First World War;
(b) in subsequent years, Anzac Day also served to commemorate those who lost their lives in all the military and
peacekeeping operations in which Australia has been involved; and
(c) the spirit of Anzac, with its qualities of courage, mateship, and sacrifice, continues to have meaning and relevance for
our sense of national identity.
I have moved this motion on behalf of the Christian Democratic Party because it is an honour to continue a
dedication so passionately served in this House by a former member, the Hon. Charlie Lynn, MLC. Anzac Day,
25 April, is one of Australia's most important national occasions. It marks the anniversary of the first major
military action fought by Australian and New Zealand Forces during the First World War. Gallipoli was different
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 5
for Australia as it was the first major battle we, as Australians, fought as a nation. Soldiers from every State from
the newly federated Australia volunteered and fought. What was to sear itself into our national soul was the sheer
scale of casualties that we faced.
The battle at Gallipoli lasted eight and half months, during which time 7,600 Australians and 2,500 New
Zealanders were killed and 24,000 were wounded. Gallipoli was not the first time that Australians had been in
battle, and it was by no means an outstanding success. In fact, Gallipoli was a battle we lost. I note Charlie Lynn
would say, "And Kokoda we won." People still ask why we celebrate defeat, but there is something very Australian
in coming together for such a cause. In subsequent years Anzac Day has served to commemorate those who served
and/or lost their lives in military and peacekeeping operations in which Australia was involved. Anzac Day is
when we mark our respect and gratitude for their service and the very freedom that we enjoy today. The Australian
Army states:
It is sometimes difficult to understand why it is with gratitude that we should remember, but we have enjoyed the benefits of the
peace and easy existence, which was purchased at the cost of many lives. Few of us have ever had to risk everything ourselves, or
chance our loved ones to the dangers of war. But, for older generations of Australians, remembering such things is easier. War and
death came far too frequently into their lives as, in the past, the men and women of our armed forces saw active service in places
such as Belgium, Borneo, France, Korea, Malaya, the Middle East, New Guinea, Palestine, Turkey and Vietnam.
Today a new generation of soldiers, airmen and sailors are serving in the troubled locations, including Afghanistan, Timor-Leste,
Egypt, Iraq, the Middle East, Sudan and Solomon Islands. It is now a long standing tradition that on ANZAC Day we all pause to
remember those who offered up their lives in the defence of their nation and communities, which is the greatest contribution any
one citizen can make.
The Army continues:
Future generations need to be reminded that happiness has a price. For surely if happiness is the product of freedom, then freedom
is the reward of courage. We should be grateful to those that have helped preserve our nation and way of life through their sacrifice.
In doing so, we keep bright the memory of those lives. It is in the remembrance of these things that communities across the nation
come together on this day.
As per my usual custom, this year I attended the Nowra RSL Sub-Branch Anzac Day dawn service at Greenwell
Point to commemorate the immortal day when our young men, by their deeds and sacrifice, demonstrated to the
world at Gallipoli that Australia was truly a nation. On that day we remembered the sacrifice those men and
women made for an ideal, a way of life. We were asked to take strength in the knowledge and hope that our sons
and daughters will never forget the example of their forefathers. We were asked to mourn with pride but also
remember with pride those who served and fell and those who live.
On Anzac Day we are asked to remember the brave and gallant soldiers, undaunted airmen and noble
women who were faithful to this country unto death; the men and women who gave up their jobs, passions,
pastimes, families and friends to lay down their lives; and the doctors, nurses and workers under the Red Cross
and those fulfilling ministry of help and healing who saved others but could not save themselves. On Anzac Day
we are asked to remember the innocent and helpless lives that have been lost and the beloved sons, brothers,
fathers, husbands and friends who did not come home. The spirit of Anzac, with its qualities of courage, mateship,
and sacrifice, continues to have meaning and relevance for our sense of national identity. The Anzac spirit is a
concept that suggests that Australian and New Zealand soldiers possess shared characteristics, specifically the
qualities those soldiers exemplified on the battlefields of World War I such as endurance, courage, ingenuity,
good humour, larrikinism and mateship. In our research for this debate my adviser and I came across an interesting
quote. It reads:
I am an Australian soldier
I am a warrior and a member of a team
I serve the people of Australia
I will always place the mission first
I will never accept defeat
I will never quit
I will never leave a fallen comrade
I am a guardian of freedom and
the Australian way of life
I am an Australian soldier
In my journey to become a politician I have enjoyed learning about the lives of those who have gone before me.
As Mayor of Shoalhaven I had the privilege of being part of a team that led some young people along the Kokoda
Track. I must admit that being part of the political process has led me to become more involved with Anzac Day
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 6
and Remembrance Day as well as commemorations of the Boer War and other conflicts. My enthusiasm to attend
such events is constantly renewed when I reflect upon the importance of never forgetting the price others have
paid for us.
In my life I have had the sad privilege of attending my pop's funeral. At his service members of the RSL
performed a small ceremony to honour him as a former soldier. I do not think many of those people knew my pop
and I do not think he had a particular association with the RSL. In fact, he was a keen bowler and spent most of
his time on the bowling green. At the time of his funeral I was not aware of the depth of my pop's history of
service but I loved the way in which the RSL members honoured him for the things he had done in times gone by
but never spoken to us about. Recently I have been discovering more about his journey through applications for
information to the Australian War Memorial. I will share his story now.
My pop, Private Edwards George Phipps, enlisted in Paddington, New South Wales, on 21 October 1941.
He joined the 2/4 Australian Infantry Battalion. I learnt from my research at the Australian War Memorial that the
2/4 Battalion's first drafts of recruits arrived at Ingleburn camp on 3 November 1939, following the formation of
its headquarters at Victoria Barracks in Sydney the previous week.
The battalion departed Sydney to serve overseas on 10 January 1940 as part of the 16th Brigade of the
6th Australian Division. While the battalion was en route for the Middle East, Australian Infantry brigades were
reorganised along that British lines, with three pertains instead of four. This meant that the 2/4 Battalion was
eventually transferred to the 19th Brigade but remained part of the 6th Division.
Arriving in the Middle East on 14 February 1940, the 2/4 Brigade trained in Palestine and Egypt in
preparation for its campaign against the Italians in eastern Libya but was more active during the battle of Tobruk
from 21 to 22 January 1941. In early April 1941 the 2/4 Battalion, together with the rest of the 6th Division, was
deployed to Greece to resist the anticipated German invasion. After a period of training in Palestine, the
2/4 Battalion joined in the force garrisoning Syria. It completed this duty in mid-January 1942, embarked for
home on 12 February and arrived in Adelaide on 27 March.
In June the 19th Brigade was deployed to defend Darwin and the 2/4 Battalion remained there for what
became a boring and frustrating year. The brigade rejoined the rest of the 6th Division, training in northern
Queensland in June 1943, but another 18 months would pass before it again saw action. The 2/4 Battalion landed
at Aitape in New Guinea on 2 November 1944 to undertake its only campaign against the Japanese. Its most
intense effort took place between April and July of that year. Following the Japanese surrender on 15 August,
drafts of 2/4 Battalion men began returning to Australia for discharge. The remainder of the battalion arrived home
on 26 October and disbanded at Chermside in Queensland on 12 November 1945.
My pop was discharged on 12 December 1945. He never mentioned any of this war service. Indeed,
many servicemen were silent about what they saw and did. I think, sadly, that was because of the deprivation they
experienced and the carnage they witnessed. No good comes from humans hurting each other. It would be one's
worst nightmare to be confronted with firearms and bombs. It is little wonder that so many returned service men
and women did not share their stories.
Shared images of life's experiences can stick and some images cannot be erased from our minds. Our
Anzac forefathers kept their experiences to themselves in order to protect our hearts and minds. It is to their credit
that they protected us from the unintended consequences of learning about the evil of war but I am sure that for
many the suppression of their emotions came at a great cost to their marriages and families. Christopher Reeve
once said, "A hero is an ordinary individual who finds the strength to persevere and endure in spite of
overwhelming obstacles." My pop, Private Edward George Phipps, among many others, was a hero. I am honoured
and humbled to share a history and legacy with the Anzacs through my pop.
They shall not grow old, as we that are left grow old;
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.
The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ (10:35): I thank the Hon. Paul Green for moving this important motion. In
this House we often acknowledge the service of Australians who have fought in past conflicts and those who are
still involved. This July marks the centenary of the battles of Fromelles and Pozieres. A century later both those
battles are still deeply etched in the memories of many Australian families.
The Battle of Fromelles was the first major battle fought by Australian troops on the Western Front. In a
single night of battle 5,533 Australian casualties were claimed, and of that number 1,917 troops were killed. That
was the greatest loss of Australian life in a single 24-hour period—not just in the war, but ever. The sheer scale
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 7
of that loss has changed the history of this nation forever. The Battle of Fromelles began 19 days after the
beginning of the Battle of the Somme. Its aim was to prevent the Germans from redeploying forces from areas of
the front to reinforce the Somme front, which was 80 kilometres to the south.
The first day of the Battle of the Somme was the second bloodiest in the history of the British Army. The
British suffered 57,420 casualties, including 19,240 dead. Justifiably, the British wanted to prevent further
German troop reinforcements to the area. At the same time, the Battle for Verdun, a German offensive, was still
raging and was costing both the French and the Germans heavy casualties. Only two divisions were deployed in
the battle because of serious troop shortages in the British Army.
The battle was fought by the inexperienced troops of the 5th Australian Division and the under-strength
61st Territorial British Division. The 5th Division of the Australian Imperial Force comprised troops from the 8th,
14th and 15th brigades. This division was the last to arrive in France from Egypt and was the most inexperienced
of all the Australian divisions. However, it was the first to launch into serious battle on the front. Of the
12 battalions that made up the 5th Division, one had yet to set foot on the front, three had been on the front for
part of a day, and two more had been on the Western Front for two days. The 5th Division, which was largely
unfamiliar with the terrain or the nature of fighting, was now committed, with short notice, to attack a defence
system that was described 14 months earlier as "well-developed".
The 5th Division launched an offensive against the troops of the 6th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Division,
which had been stationed on the front and maintaining the defences for more than a year. Initially, the plan at
Fromelles was to launch a surprise attack on German troops in a strongly held German area known as the Sugar
Loaf salient. This was designed to make the German military believe that a serious and large-scale operation was
being launched in the area. It was hoped this would result in Germany drawing its troops away from the main
battle at Verdun and the Somme.
In spite of this, a change of plan took place just days before which favoured a three-day artillery
bombardment to weaken the German position before the offensive. However, due to wet weather and other
limitations, the artillery bombardment originally scheduled for three days was reduced to seven hours. It was also
intended to commence at 4.00 a.m. but did not begin until the mist cleared at 11.00 a.m. on the morning of
Wednesday 19 July.
With the element of surprise eliminated and a greatly reduced period of bombardment, the German troops
had ample warning that an offensive was imminent. In response, the German artillery began to shell the
communication trenches and the reserve and support lines of both attacking divisions. In the Australian area, the
ammunition and bomb dump of the 31st Battalion was blown up and the battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel
Toll, and most of his battalion signallers, messengers and medical staff were wounded.
At 1800 hours the Australian and British infantry courageously began their advance, with just over two
hours of daylight remaining. The frontline to the north of Sugar Loaf was, on average, 200 metres wide and the
Australians quickly seized the German frontline. The first wave of troops was left to consolidate the position while
the second, third and fourth waves pushed on for 140 metres in search of the third and last line of the German
trench system.
However, as often happened to Australian soldiers, no such line existed and the Australians began
forming a thin, disjointed series of posts, confused about their objectives. In addition, the shallow Laies River,
which intersected the Sugar Loaf salient, was mistaken for a trench and many Australian troops advanced too far
into the enemy position, leaving their flanks vulnerable to counterattack. The Germans survived the British
shelling and quickly manned their machine guns. Within 15 minutes they had decimated the attacking waves of
Australians, forcing the survivors to find shelter. At no stage did the British division succeed in neutralising Sugar
Loaf, its primary objective.
The German defenders concentrated their counterattack forces on the two Australian brigades that had
captured part of their line. The first, at dusk on 19 July, was driven off, but the second succeeded. At 0800 hours
the remaining defenders of the 14th Brigade, under attack from three sides by the German troops, were ordered to
retire. Soon after, the line returned to the same state it was in before the attack. The wounded were left lying on
the battlefield for days while attempts were made to arrange a ceasefire to enable their collection. The high death
rate among Australians can be attributed in part to the failure to arrange such a truce; many Australians risked
their lives trying to rescue their fallen comrades on the field.
The Battle of Pozières occurred a few days later. At this point, I would like to acknowledge the Australian
War Memorial for its account and, more importantly, for the work it does archiving essential war histories and
making the information accessible to all Australians. While researching for this speech, I read the handwritten
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 8
notes in the diaries of Charles Bean. His account; although cryptic in places, adds a direct link to the horrors of
these battles. Of Pozières, Charles Bean notes:
After an awful series of adventures with shrapnel and gas shells arrive at Gen Macagans dugout—
I assume that is the name; it is hard to read his writing—
In the scurry of the last 100 yards across shrapnel swept road in middle of which I had to put on my gas helmet. Felt very sick just
before getting in but helmet is certainly a help. We have had several men lose their way here already … Musty gas smell in the
dugout all the time, explosives outside about 3 and a half to the second.
The Australian War Memorial appears to stand almost alone, amongst a handful of places, in providing the nation
with this type of free research. I will put on the record the Australian War Memorial's account of the Battle of
Pozières. In late July 1916 the Australians fought their first action in the Battle of the Somme. At this point the
British strategy focused on the seizure of the ridge east of Pozières village from where an attack could be mounted
on German strongholds. By the time the Australians entered the Somme battle the operation had become a series
of attacks aimed not so much at a breakthrough of the German lines as the capture of key positions and the wearing
down of the enemy.
Between 23 July and 5 August 1916, the Australian 1st and 2nd divisions captured Pozières village and
Pozières heights, a ridge 500 metres east of the village. The initial attack began at 12.30 a.m. on Sunday 23 July
when the 1st Division seized the German frontline and in the following hour reached the main road through
Pozières. At dawn the Germans counterattacked, but the Australians held on. The rest of Pozières fell on the night
of 23 and 24 July and further gains were made on the night of 24 and 25 July. The Germans reacted to the seizure
of Pozières by concentrating the bulk of their artillery on the Australians. Constant barrages were directed onto
the village and the narrow approaches, creating a nightmarish situation for troops forming up and attacking in the
dark. By 27 July the 2nd Division had taken over in Pozières.
The 2nd Division was ordered to take Pozières heights. The attack commenced at 12.15 a.m. on 29 July,
but the Germans were ready and the attack failed, at a cost of 3,500 Australian casualties. The Australian
commander of the 2nd Division asked that his men might attack again rather than be withdrawn after failure.
Following an intense bombardment on 4 August 1916, the Australians seized Pozières heights. The exhausted
2nd Division was now rested and the 4th Division took up positions on the Pozières heights.
Attacking north along the ridge, the Australians, in 10 days of continuous action, reached Mouquet Farm.
The 4th Division was now relieved. Mouquet Farm resisted capture until 26 September 1916, the day after the
commencement of a major British offensive. In less than seven weeks in the fighting at Pozières and Mouquet
Farm, three Australian divisions suffered 23,000 casualties. Of these, 6,800 men were killed or died of wounds.
It was a loss comparable with the casualties sustained by the Australians over eight months at Gallipoli in 1915.
This year I will be fortunate to travel to the north of France to join many other Australians to mark the
centenary of the battles of Frommelles and Pozières. As part of that trip I will stay in the town of Albert, six
kilometres from Pozières. This holds special significance for me for this is where my great-grandfather David
Lumsden fought as part of the Kings Own Scottish Borderers. He died when I was 15 and he is one of the few
people I can ever recall meeting who also had fought in the Boer War.
David Lumsden was one of 13 Lumsdens who went to war from his immediate family. He called himself
lucky because, despite losing a hand, he came back, unlike many of his brothers and nephews. He called his lost
hand the million-dollar wound, as his being sent home saved his life. However, it meant that he could not work in
the coalmines, so he moved his family, with my grandmother Jeannie in tow, to New Zealand.
The participation of this country in wars, particularly the First World War, changed the direction and
history of our nation. Those who were left behind to suffer and grieve often struggled on alone, never able to
overcome their loss. In the modern era of war, many more families are coming to grips with their loss from
conflicts in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
We should always remember the bravery of our soldiers, such as Sergeant Brett Till, who was conducting
a route clearance to establish a safe path for his mates and the people who live in the area. Sergeant Till was a
10-year-plus Army veteran and a member of the elite Explosive Ordinance Disposal Unit of the Corps of
Engineers. He was killed as he tried to defuse a bomb. He leaves behind his wife, Brianna Barclay, and his three
children.
Corporal Mathew Hopkins, a member of the Mentoring and Reconstruction Task Force from 7RAR, was
killed in a firefight with the Taliban near a village 12 kilometres north of Tarin Kowt. He leaves behind his wife,
Victoria, and their son, Alexander. Private Gregory Michael Sher, from the Sydney-based 1st Commando
Regiment, was killed as a result of an indirect rocket attack in Oruzgan Province. Private Sher, who was born in
South Africa, leaves behind his parents, two brothers and a partner.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 9
Lieutenant Michael Fussell, from the Sydney-based 4RAR, was killed during an operation against
Taliban insurgents in Oruzgan Province after an improvised explosive device was detonated. Michael leaves
behind two loving parents, his younger brother, Daniel—who also served—and two younger foster sisters, Nikki
and Nyah. Signaller Sean Patrick McCarthy, from the Perth-based Special Air Service, was killed by an
improvised explosive device [IED]. Sergeant Matthew Locke, from the Special Air Service, who was born in
Bellingen, was killed by Taliban fighters in Oruzgan Province.
Lance Corporal Jason Marks, also from 4RAR commando unit in Sydney, was killed in a battle with the
Taliban in Oruzgan Province. Lance Corporal Marks leaves behind his partner, Cassandra, and their two children.
Trooper David Pearce was killed in a roadside bomb attack in Oruzgan Province. Trooper Pearce, a member of
the Brisbane-based 2/14 Light Horse, was serving in the Reconstruction Task Force when he died. Trooper Pearce
was born in Liverpool, New South Wales, and leaves behind his wife and two daughters.
Sergeant Andrew Russell, from the Special Air Service, was the first to be struck down in Afghanistan.
He was killed when the vehicle in which he was travelling struck a landmine in southern Afghanistan. He leaves
behind his wife, Kylie, and his daughter, Leisa. Australian Special Forces soldier Lance Corporal Todd Chidgey
was killed whilst serving with protective services in Afghanistan. Corporal Cameron Baird, from the Special
Operations Task Group, was killed in small arms fire engagement in Afghanistan. He was posthumously awarded
the Victoria Cross after leading his team to come to the aid of another team that had come under small arms fire
and whose leader had been wounded.
Corporal Scott James Smith of the Special Operations Task Group was killed in an IED explosion. Private
Nathanael Galagher and Lance Corporal Mervyn McDonald were killed when an International Security Assistance
Force [ISAF] helicopter they were travelling in crashed while attempting to land in Helmand Province. Sapper
James Martin, Lance Corporal Stjepan Milosevic and Private Robert Poate were killed in southern Uruzgan by a
man wearing an Afghan Army uniform.
Sergeant Blaine Diddams was killed during an engagement with insurgents while on a partnered mission
with Afghan security forces targeting an insurgent commander. He was a member of the Perth-based Special Air
Service Regiment. Corporal Ashley Birt, Lance Corporal Luke Gavin and Captain Bryce Duffy were killed inside
a forward operating base at Shah Wali Kot in Kandahar province. Private Matthew Lambert, who was a member
of the Mentoring Task Force, was killed when an improvised explosive device [IED] detonated as he was on a
night patrol near an outpost patrol base in the Khaz Oruzgan region.
Sydney-based 2nd Commando Sergeant Todd Langley died from a gunshot wound to the head after an
incident in southern Afghanistan. Australian soldier Sapper Rowan Jaie Robinson was shot dead by insurgents in
the northern Helmand province. Lance Corporal Andrew Gordon Jones was shot by an Afghan soldier who fled
the scene, while another, Lieutenant Marcus Sean Case, died when the Chinook helicopter he was travelling in
crashed. Sergeant Brett Wood was killed conducting clearance operations in southern Afghanistan.
Sapper Jamie Larcombe was killed during an un-partnered patrol in Oruzgan province where insurgents
launched a coordinated attack with machine-gun and small arms fire. Corporal Richard Edward Atkinson was
killed by a roadside bomb while conducting a foot patrol with the Afghan National Army. Lance Corporal Jared
MacKinney was killed in a firefight. The soldier from the 6th Battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment was
patrolling in the Green Zone in the Oruzgan province, which had recently been handed over by the Dutch.
Private Grant Kirby and Private Tomas Dale from the sixth Battalion Royal Australian Regiment were
both killed by an improvised explosive device, which went off when the pair were overseeing an Afghan army
patrol in the Baluchi Valley. Trooper Jason Thomas Brown from Perth's Special Air Service Regiment died after
being shot during an engagement with insurgents. Private Nathan Bewes of the 6th Battalion of the Royal
Australian Regiment was also killed by an IED. A helicopter crash killed three Australian Army Special Forces
soldiers from the 2nd Commando Regiment: Private Timothy Aplin, Private Scott Palmer and Private Benjamin
Chuck.
A Taliban bomb killed Brisbane-based 2nd Combat Engineer Regiment's Sapper Jacob Moerland and
Sapper Darren Smith, as well as their bomb sniffing dog. An improvised explosive device claimed the life of
Private Benjamin Ranaudo from the 1st battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment north of Tarin Kowt. Two
Australian soldiers were also lost in Iraq. David Nary Warrant Officer Nary died as a result of injuries suffered
during a training activity in the Middle East and Jake Kovco died from mishandling a pistol in Iraq. It is important
that their families know that our thoughts are still with them and that this Chamber acknowledges that a century
after the Great War Australian families are still being affected by the involvement of our defence personnel in
present-day conflicts.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 10
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(10:52): I make a contribution to this debate and associate myself with the motion moved by the Hon. Paul Green.
It is a worthy motion that I think will be supported by all members, as Anzac Day has meaning for each of us.
Anzac Day should be commemorated, not celebrated. It allows us to remember our family and community
members who have paid the ultimate sacrifice so that we can stand here today to debate and fight for what we
believe in and we can all be free from the restrictions that are placed on people in other parts of the world.
I place on record my appreciation to the Parliament, particularly the Presiding Officers, the Clerks and
parliamentary staff, for the efforts that have been made to commemorate the Centenary of the First World War
and for providing information on the history of the roles played by the Legislative Assembly and Legislative
Council and the members of Parliament as well as on the battles and decisions that were taken at the time of
conflict. It is a very worthy exercise for the President in this Chamber and the Speaker in the other place, at the
commencement of proceedings, to reflect on Australia's contribution to the war effort. It allows all members to
gain a greater understanding and appreciation of the role played by those who have gone before us in shaping our
nation, particularly during those difficult times, as well as the role played by the State.
I appreciate, as I am sure do other members, the stories of those who were sitting on the benches in this
Chamber and, putting their money where their mouth is, backed up their words with actions and signed up. I am
in a different position to many other members in this Chamber, particularly that of the last two speakers. I am a
first generation Australian and I do not have any family who served in the Great War as part of the Australian
Imperial Forces. However, I have learned to appreciate the sacrifices that their family members have made for
this State and nation.
I learned about the significance of their sacrifices at different stages throughout my life. The first time
was when I attended Hawkesbury Agricultural College. New students to the college are presented to the Fairy
Circle, which is dedicated to past students who paid the ultimate sacrifice, and the memorial hall, which was built
as a mark of respect to those students. In addition, large images are displayed around the campus depicting
returned soldiers who paid the ultimate sacrifice. I had the privilege of attending the 100th year commemoration
dinner at Hawkesbury last year. It was held exactly 100 years to the day when students, lecturers and teachers
from Hawkesbury Agricultural College who were on their way to the conflict in Gallipoli and who during a
stopover in Egypt for training purposes decided to hold a Hawkesbury dinner in Cairo.
At the commemoration dinner there was a list of all the students and lecturers who had signed up. It was
significant that the students and lecturers of Hawkesbury Agricultural College had signed up side by side. They
were on different levels in the classroom but had signed up as equals in the Armed Forces. The attendees at the
commemoration dinner were able to enjoy the same menu that had been enjoyed 100 years earlier. A menu was
found from the archives showing the order of proceedings for the dinner in Cairo. We enjoyed the same menu and
had the same toasts and speeches, albeit 100 years later in a very different location. It was truly an amazing
experience and I am honoured to have attended that dinner.
At the dinner, one seat was left vacant at each table and at that spot a postcard or photo was placed of the
former student who had paid the ultimate sacrifice, together with information about his role in the conflict and his
background. Hawkesbury Agricultural College paid an enormous price for their involvement. The majority of the
students and lecturers who signed up came from rural backgrounds and many were accomplished horsemen.
Therefore, they made up a large contingent of the Light Horse Brigade and suffered significant losses.
We also learnt about the families of the students, some of whom were prominent. They included a former
Premier of this State who lost one of his children as part of the Hawkesbury team in the Great War. I have a link
to the Anzacs through Hawkesbury Agricultural College, like the Hon. Paul Green and the Hon. Rick Colless,
who also attended that school. I was honoured to attend the dinner.
I am a first generation Australian. My parents come from Northern Ireland. It would be remiss of me not
to inform the House that there are many Anzac memorials in Northern Ireland. Members may not be aware of
that. They list the names of people who lost their lives as part of the Australian Imperial Force and whose grieving
families back in Northern Ireland established memorials in their villages.
I want to put on record my view of the evolution of our remembrance of those who paid the ultimate
sacrifice. I have attended the Anzac ceremony and march in Bowral for many years. There was a record crowd at
last year's 100-year commemoration, but this year the crowd was just as large. A great number of schoolchildren
participated in the parade, my son included. I believe that future generations will continue to pay their respects
and mark the ultimate sacrifice that people across this country made to allow us to enjoy our freedoms. I had not
previously thought about the fact that when the returned service men and women marched at the front of the
parade in Bowral there was nothing but silence. The parade was three or four people deep. There was nothing but
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 11
silence until the service men and women drew level with the people standing at the side of the road and then there
was sombre but strong and proud applause as they marched past.
The veterans were followed by a stream of schoolchildren, proudly wearing their school uniforms at the
end of school holidays. It is always a feat to convince your child—in my case a 12-year-old—that they need to
dig out the school uniform at the end of school holidays. I was overwhelmed to see the number of children proudly
wearing the medals of their relatives. Those without medals proudly displayed a piece of rosemary on their chest.
Schools in our area have also established pipe bands. This year, for the first time, Oxley College had a pipe band
in the parade. That was significant. Something else that stood out for me this year was the address delivered by
the school captain from Chevalier College. It was outstanding. All those factors will contribute to a strong presence
at these ceremonies for generations to come. We should be proud that we are getting the message through to
children in particular that they need to be a part of this.
I have one other thing to say, and I did not think I would say this. I have previously attended the Anzac
Day rugby league match between my mighty Dragons—who, unfortunately, are not so mighty at the moment—
and the Sydney Roosters. In years gone by I have been disappointed that the minute's silence has not been
respected by some in the crowd. I put on record that this year the silence was absolute. The minute's silence was
respected. Other people have commented in the past that the minute's silence has not been respected. The message
is getting through. No matter the forum, whether the minute's silence is at the start of proceedings here in this
Chamber, at a dawn service, at the end of an Anzac Day march or during a rugby league match, we all understand
the price paid by those who have gone before us. We want to pay homage and pay our respects to them.
I thank the Hon. Paul Green for moving this motion so that we can reiterate what it means to us, to our
families and to our communities. This debate allows us to share our reflections. We must make sure that we, as
custodians of those memories, keep the fire burning into the future.
The Hon. SHAYNE MALLARD (11:05): I speak in support of the motion moved by the Hon. Paul
Green and thank him for bringing it to the attention of the House. I associate myself with the comments of all
members who have preceded me in this contribution on the Anzac commemoration. Anzac Day has many
meanings for many people. It has evolved over the one hundred years since the landings at Gallipoli. More than
8,000 Australians were killed on that peninsula. The initial Anzac Day was to commemorate that loss. As we have
heard from other speakers, the number of losses in World War I continued to multiply. The unfolding tragedy of
lives lost had a dimension which still deeply moves our nation today.
Anzac Day has a meaning for the nation. There is a national commemoration of the sacrifice of those in
not only World War I but all conflicts, including all those occurring now. As the Hon. Lynda Voltz reminded us,
the loss of life in service to our nation continues. Anzac Day is not just a commemoration of the loss of life; it
also shows respect for those who served in conflicts. It is important to note that. As the Hon. Paul Green said, we
who are left grow old, and veterans are growing old. They carry the lifelong scars of the conflict that they shared
with others who did not return from it. World War I veterans have passed away into history and the number of
World War II veterans is dwindling.
Anzac Day is not just a national commemoration; it is also a community commemoration. The Hon. Niall
Blair spoke about the Anzac Day commemoration in his community. I spoke in debate on an earlier motion about
the service I attended at Memorial Park in Penrith, which is the epicentre of commemoration for the community
of Penrith. In World War I and World War II Penrith was a semi-rural community. I grew up there in the seventies,
and it was still a satellite township. In Penrith we felt keenly the losses from World War I and World War II. My
school, Castlereagh Upper Public School, had a war memorial in the playground that we maintained. I do not
recall any services there in the 1970s. There was also a memorial board in the classroom. I remember, as a child,
seeing the asterisks next to the names and knowing that those people had died in service. It was a one-teacher
school and that memorial board was in the classroom.
As a councillor on the City of Sydney Council I had the honour of representing the city on many memorial
occasions. It is always moving to see those giant memorial rolls of honour in town halls and churches. To see the
scale of the contribution by working class men, many of Irish working class stock, from the inner city, one need
only go upstairs at Redfern Town Hall to see the huge memorial roll of honour there. There are so many names
there, and many of those who departed did not return.
Recently I represented Minister Elliott at the rededication of the restored World War I roll of honour at
St John the Evangelist in Birchgrove. Again that roll reflected the commitment of the working class in responding
to the call to arms in World War I. So the story of local communities and their sacrifice is another part of the
Anzac story, and in particular the family stories. We heard a number of members talk about this. In particular, the
Hon. Paul Green spoke about his father. Unlike the Minister, I am a seventh generation Australian, directly
descended from a First Fleeter. My great-great uncle Frank Farrar fell in World War I. My grandfather on my
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 12
mother's side fought in Papua New Guinea in World War II and was injured. So my family always felt great pain
around this issue and an emptiness. As the Hon. Paul Green said in his contribution, nothing was ever said about
these things.
I attended the funeral service of a 100-year-old gentleman recently. He was the father of a friend of mine.
I was not aware previously but he was an Australian Imperial Force [AIF] pilot who was captured during
Operation Market Garden and imprisoned by the Germans. He did not talk about that much, and only ever to his
family. I had met him and I had no idea about that until I was at the funeral service and the RSL members came.
I sat next to them. They commemorated his service. There are many stories unfolding around our nation as we
learn more about the past. I asked myself whether if I had known when I was younger I would have asked more
questions. But you cannot ask those questions. I have tried to ask those questions and found that people did not
want to open up.
There are many parts to the Anzac story. There is the loss of those who did not return. There are the
wounds of those who did return and who lived on. There is the impact on families. The Anzac story also includes
those who served on the home front. When my nana passed away I inherited the family archives. It had to go
somewhere, and I inherited it. I found the letters from my great-great uncle Frank Farrar from the war and the
letters in reply from family here as they corresponded backwards and forwards. I found the telegram confirming
his death at Perrone in 1918 from a shell. I also found my nana's certificate saying that she was a trained volunteer
air raid warden in Sydney. So in particular the women who stayed behind served as well and supported the
overseas service of our troops.
I have a whole file on my great-great uncle Frank Farrer and I will speak more about him, his service and
his letters on another occasion. He enrolled at the age of 19 in 1917. His family had a farm at Badgery's Creek,
which is now the site of the proposed airport. He enrolled as a very young man, but quite late in the war. I suspect,
looking at the history, that the cooee posters played an important role in recruitment. The posters had the headline
"Cooee" and said, "Your mates need you." It was a very moving call to action. The poster with the image of
Kitchener was designed to recruit the English. The cooee poster was really the call to action for young Australian
men to go and help their mates. It is a very moving poster and an emotional call to action.
Frank enrolled at Liverpool. I attended a service at Liverpool right next to the historic train station from
which he would have departed. I can imagine him going down there and getting on the steam train to Sydney to
go and fight. He fought in the 5th Australian Division and he was killed on the Western Front at the battle of
Perrone on 1 September 1918, which was the first day of that battle. There is a poignant photo of his division
taken on 3 September during that battle. It is just the one photo that I found. I wonder if those in the photo were
his "cooee" mates who fought with him. So I was aware of the pain of his loss for my family.
One of the things that we had hanging on the walls of the house at Badgery's Creek were pictures of
battles. There were no pictures of him but we had pictures on the walls of other soldiers. We had no photos of
him. I just wanted to reflect on that. My grandfather Bruce Peterson was in the Citizen Military Forces [CMF],
which is the reserve army. So our army went to fight in World War II and then when the Japanese invaded Papua
New Guinea we sent the CMF to hold them back. He went over there and was involved in the medical corps. He
was injured and came back to Australia. His external injuries healed but he was much more injured on the inside.
Ultimately he suffered a marriage breakdown and alcoholism.
So for me as a young man Anzac Day was tinged with a whole lot of anxiety because it brought up a lot
of family emotion. For me as a young man, medals were associated with family anguish. It is only in recent years
that I have really worked out what that was about. My examples are but a small way to touch upon what Anzac
means to families, individuals and communities across Australia. I am an avid plaque reader, so I often stop to
read a plaque or to look at a foundation stone to see who unveiled it. These are often the most tangible records of
history. Wherever I go as I travel around, whether in country towns or in the suburbs, I stop and look at these
records and I remember the sacrifice of our troops during wartime. I remember them and why they made that
sacrifice. Now that I am in this place, I remember that they fought to preserve a true liberal democracy. It is
democracy that we appreciate today and that is why we are in this place. We must never forget their sacrifice.
The Hon. ERNEST WONG (11:16): I join my colleagues in this House in briefly contributing to this
debate to acknowledge Anzac Day. I congratulate the Hon. Paul Green for this motion reflecting on the spirit of
Anzac and the qualities of courage, mateship and sacrifice, which continue to have meaning and relevance for our
sense of national identity in Australia. Anzac Day was originally marked to honour the members of the Australian
and New Zealand Army Corps who fought at Gallipoli against the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Now the
day goes beyond the anniversary of the landing at Gallipoli in 1915. It is now the day on which we remember all
Australians who served and died in war and on operational service, and indeed those who continue to serve today.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 13
All across Australia, people gather to remember and reflect on the great sacrifice our Anzacs made for
our country. Some 101 years have passed since our troops first landed in Gallipoli, yet Anzac Day continues to
be recognised as a vital part of the Australian story. It is a national day of remembrance in Australia and New
Zealand that broadly commemorates all Australians and New Zealanders "who served and died in all wars,
conflicts, and peacekeeping operations" and "the contribution and suffering of all those who have served". Anzac
Day marks the anniversary of the first major military action fought by Australia and New Zealand forces during
the First World War. This was to be "the war to end all wars".
To the outside world and to those who do not share our patriotism and pride, it seems almost absurd that
we celebrate an event that many view as Australia’s greatest defeat. For us, however, it is a celebration of the
lifestyle we are able to enjoy today due to the ultimate sacrifice that those troops made in our honour. On Anzac
Day we come together to honour them and to reflect on and commemorate those fine young men and women,
many of whom died in battle. Whether or not someone believes in the premise of war, they would be hard pressed
to ignore the leadership and bravery that our troops display when they go into combat, particularly those who pay
the ultimate sacrifice.
Dawn is central to Anzac Day services as this was one of the most favoured times for an attack. Soldiers
were woken in the dark so that their eyes had time to adjust to the dull grey light that crept across the battlefield.
This way, at first light, our troops were awake and alert, and the fresh light instilled a sense of optimism for the
new day—tempered by fear that it could indeed be their last.
Anzac Day is also observed in the Cook Islands, Niue, Pitcairn Islands and Tonga, and previously also
as a national holiday in Papua New Guinea and Samoa. I speak on this matter as an Australian, as a member of
this Parliament and, most important of all, as an immigrant who made the choice to be a member of this community
that I am proud of. I want to be a role model for any of the new settlers in this beautiful land of Australia to
appreciate the history of Australia, the core value of Australia, which is the utmost important element of making
this a home that we treasure. In conclusion, I will recite a poem by D. Hunter, a veteran of Shaggy Ridge with the
2/12 Battalion in World War II:
Anzac Day
I saw a kid marchin’ with medals on his chest.
He marched alongside Diggers marching six abreast.
He knew that it was ANZAC Day - he walked along with pride.
He did his best to keep in step with the Diggers by his side.
And when the march was over the kid was rather tired.
A Digger said “Whose medals, son?” to which the kid replied:
“They belong to daddy, but he did not come back.
He died up in New Guinea on a lonely jungle track”.
The kid looked rather sad then and a tear came to his eye.
The Digger said “Don’t cry my son and I will tell you why.
Your daddy marched with us today - all the blooming way.
We Diggers know that he was there - it’s like that on Anzac Day”.
The kid looked rather puzzled and didn’t understand,
But the Digger went on talking and started to wave his hand.
“For this great land we live in, there’s a price we have to pay
For we all love fun and merriment in this country where we live.
The price was that some soldier his precious life must give.
For you to go to school my lad and worship God at will,
Someone had to pay the price so the Diggers paid the bill.
Your daddy died for us my son - for all things good and true.
I wonder if you understand the things I’ve said to you”.
The kid looked up at the Digger - just for a little while
And with a changed expression, said, with a lovely smile:
“I know my dad marched here today - this is ANZAC Day.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 14
I know he did. I know he did, all the bloomin’ way”.
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS (11:21): The past is another country. The Australia of 1915 is not the
Australia of 2015; it is not even the Australia of 1955. While I can agree with paragraph (1) of the motion moved
by the Hon. Paul Green, I find paragraph (2) far more problematic for the simple reason that as a historian one
has to question the gradual transmission of the mythologised view of the Anzac tradition into some sort of all-
encompassing understanding of the Australian condition.
A search for national identity was something which we would assume would have been lost in the great
post-Soviet era; when the wall came down, old ideologies disappeared, a new era of internationalism would
bravely come upon us and old nationalisms would go swiftly away. That was quickly dispelled by events in the
Balkans. There is something vaguely attractive about nationalism and how nationalism is constructed. Of course,
prior to Britain's entry into the European Union, Australians were Britons and Britons were Australians. The idea
that there was some sort of indigenous understanding of what it meant to be an Australian above and beyond being
a British Australian would have been considered laughable.
Post Britain's entry into the European Union things became a little more difficult and so in the 1970s we
had the rise of a sort of new nationalism; an attempt to create a fabricated Australian nationalism which could be
accepted by all. Unfortunately that too met a barrier between the sort of ocker supremacy of the working class and
I might call it, the Peter Weir elites of Picnic at Hanging Rock, and this remained a matter of some concern until
the 1980s. The 1980s were a formative time in the creation of this new Australian nationalism. It was a time when
films such as Gallipoli, the Anzacs and The Lighthorsemen were released.
And so as many other nations did, we chose to appropriate a military version of nationalism which could
encompass all presumptive classes within Australian society. We had the good old working class, dinky-di, blue-
singletted digger out there looking after his mates, and we had the bourgeois left, anti-British residual effort from
the new nationalism of the 1970s, giving rise of course to that ludicrous scene in Gallipoli where the charge at
The Nek is ordered to be continued by a British officer. That is terrible: sipping tea on the beaches of Gallipoli
sending our poor Aussie lads into the machine guns that awaited them. Of course, that is utter nonsense. The order
to continue the charge was given by an Australian officer, John Antill. But that did not fit the narrative of certain
people.
There had to be a villain, and the villain could not be us. It had to be the British. Fortunately that has also
ameliorated somewhat over time with a little more understanding of the nature of it. But what we have instead
today is a nationalism—and many in the Left proclaim it was a John Howard fabricated nationalism which looked
to our military past. Of course, the first Prime Minister to really give evidence of this was Hawke, but it
culminated, ironically enough, in, of all people, Paul Keating.
Paul Keating sought to create an indigenous Australian nationalism over the Tomb of the Unknown
Soldier when he said, "We are him, and he is us." That is a very interesting thing to say, especially by a Labor
leader, but it has undoubtedly resonated with the Australian population, especially younger Australians. But is he
us and are we him? The person who is lying in the tomb is, axiomatically, unknown but we know pretty much
what he might have been like. We know he probably would have been a working class, white, male;
proportionately the chances are he was one of the Protestant denominations who probably strongly believed in the
White Australia Policy, trade unionism, high tariff walls and the British Empire.
Of course the idea that somehow the Anzac tradition unified Australia is palpably false from a historical
point of view. It was of course in the First World War that the first and proportionately greatest split in the Labor
Party took place—Billy Hughes left and became a nationalist Prime Minister, and even in this Parliament Premier
Holman left the Labor Party and took a large number of his colleagues with him again to form a nationalist party.
So there was no unity there. There was no unity amongst the socialists and the more radical trade unionists, the
Industrial Workers of the World, the workers on the North Coast railways, and certain elements of the Roman
Catholic community who after the 1916 Easter Uprising did not look so favourably upon military service.
It certainly was not the case in the 1920s when the Returned Sailor's Soldier's Airmen's Imperial League,
now the RSL, was essentially a very conservative organisation which often had not just arguments but physical
fights. If members read a book on the red flag riots in Brisbane at the time they will understand exactly what the
case was. It was not the case when these same members were also key members of the Old Guard and New Guard,
who were concerned about a possible socialist rising in Australia in the 1920s and the 1930s and even had plans
to blockade the Sydney Harbour Bridge so that the socialists from south of the harbour would not invade the
northern suburbs of Sydney.
It was not the case amongst the Jindyworobaks of the 1950s. It was not the case when The One Day of
The Year was a popular play in the 1960s.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 15
break
It was not the case when the RSL was mocked and ridiculed. It was not the case during the moratorium riots. It
was not the case during the 1970s when Anzac Day marches were dwindling down to nothing. It was not the case
when Women Against Rape in War decided to protest the Anzac Day marches in the mid-1980s. But we just
discard all of that.
Even though I consider myself to be somewhat right wing, I will acknowledge the excellent work of a
number of what might be described as left wing historians on this matter. For those who are interested,
I particularly recommend the Honest History website, although I come to different conclusions from the people
who operate that site. They are outraged that this national mythology has now become part of Australian
nationalism. I am a little more sanguine, but we have to acknowledge what it is. When servicemen returned and
decided to use their own funds to build their own memorials from their own subscription committees made up of
their own members they did not write on those memorials "mateship", "red bandannas on your head", "good times
overseas" or "having a bit of a jolly old stoush". They wrote on them things along the lines of "God, King, Empire"
and "God, King, Country". Let us not, as some choose to do, infantilise what people went overseas to fight for.
People might not like it but we should not hide the fact that those who went to the Second World War were
fighting essentially—as Menzies pointed out—a war for empire.
Of course, after 1941 when Germany attacked the Soviet Union a larger number of people decided that
it was probably a good time to start fighting Hitler. The so-called second wave of people who only bothered to
start fighting when their beloved Stalin was attacked is another rather sad thing that is consistently overlooked in
the historiography of Australia's warfare. The people who fought in Korea were all volunteers. They were
overwhelmingly World War II veterans who made a conscience choice to fight communism, just as those who
volunteered after World War I to fight against communism in north Russia. Let us not infantilise what those people
fought for and stood for. Anyone who has joined the military after 11 September 2001 is unambiguously clear
about what they are and are not fighting for. In that respect I read the following passage written by a contemporary
serviceman about Anzac Day:
March. Observe with humble gratitude the genuine folk who respect what you've seen and done, wearing their ancestors' medals
with genuine pride, not the hubris of those "marching the medals". Fall out and mill around some more. Sit. Listen to some
bare-chested politician blather on about how "fantastic" it is to see *us* here, as if it's his event. Roll your eyes as said politician
chants, teenage-like, "In Flanders Fields" in the stale ennui of the iambic tetrameter.
Sing hymns, as one of the ten percent who know the words. Recompose after the narcissism and recall what actually happens in
war-like operations as you try to sing Abide with Me and The Lord is My Shepherd, knowing that the words of the latter were the
last thing some soldiers heard as they gave their lives for our freedom. Stop, 70% of the way through Abide with Me, lest you
embarrass yourself. Recite the Lord's Prayer, as one of the five percent who know the words.
Listen to a child read a poem they wrote about what the ANZAC spirit means to them, that is, recite the usual post-1960s claptrap
about both sides being wrong in the First World War and oh just aren't we evil but our great-grandfathers were just pawns with no
moral agency of their own so we can't blame them but we all know the evil British sent them to their deaths while they drank tea
on the beach at Gallipoli because we saw it in Peter Weir's film so it must be true and my teacher said it was.
Sing the first verse of the national anthem. Sing the second verse as one of twenty to thirty percent who know the words. Sing the
Royal Anthem as one of the twenty percent who know the words. Stand in respectful silence as the NZ national anthem is sung.
Fall out, resume positions at RSL for lunch and chat about old times.
The acts of our servicemen throughout many wars have been remarkable and have brought glory to them and the
name of this country, but we must always be aware and concerned about the appropriation of certain images for
nationalistic mythology. I strongly recommend that anyone who wants to read further on this subject gets hold of
the book entitled The Unknown Nation: Australia After Empire by James Curran and Stuart Ward. Through that
they will gain a deeper understanding of what it means to be Australian and the role that the national mythologising
of warriors has played in that.
The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE (11:35): I am honoured to speak in debate on this motion
moved by the Hon. Paul Green that acknowledges those who have sacrificed their lives on the battlefield and calls
on this House to note that:
(a) Anzac Day, 25 April, is one of Australia's most important national occasions, marking the anniversary of the
first major military action fought by Australian and New Zealand forces during the First World War;
(b) in subsequent years, Anzac Day also served to commemorate those who lost their lives in all the military and
peacekeeping operations in which Australia has been involved; and
(c) the spirit of Anzac, with its qualities of courage, mateship, and sacrifice, continues to have meaning and
relevance for our sense of national identity.
For more than two decades I have attended the dawn service held each year at the Arncliffe RSL Sub-Branch.
Every dawn service is as moving an occasion as the other as many people from across the community come
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 16
together to be part of a most important and defining commemoration. This year I had the honour of attending my
first overseas Anzac commemorative dawn service marking the 101st anniversary of the Gallipoli campaign at
the Commonwealth War Cemetery in Qasqas in Beirut, Lebanon. Led by Leader of the Opposition Luke Foley,
I was proud to join with a number of my Labor colleagues including Tania Mihailuk, MP, Clayton Barr, MP, Julia
Finn, MP, and Jihad Dib, MP, as well as Canterbury councillor Karl Saleh and community representative Omar
Yassine on a friendship delegation to Lebanon. The occasion presented an opportunity for Julia Finn to proudly
don the medals that her father, William Thomas Finn, received as an airman in the RAAF in the Pacific War.
Along with my colleagues I had the honour of visiting the graves of many soldiers including that of
Sapper Kevin Thomas, service number NX1Q440. Kevin Thomas was an apprentice carpenter from Adaminaby
in New South Wales, in the electorate of Monaro, who was killed at just 20 years old in 1942. He spent two years
with the 3rd Battalion militia before enlisting in the AIF in May 1941. He arrived in the Middle East the following
September and joined the 1st Railway Construction Company as a Grade III Platelayer. In March 1942 he was
graded as a Group III Driver Transport Plant and was sent to Syria. On 5 November 1942 he was admitted to the
3rd New Zealand General Hospital suffering second degree burns and hypostatic pneumonia. According to an
investigation, Sapper Thomas suffered severe burns to his face, neck, chest, arms, hands, feet, legs, thighs and
buttocks after an unexplained explosion. His final resting place is the Beirut War Cemetery in Syria, now known
as the Lebanese Republic. Tragically for the Thomas family, Kevin's younger brother Private Harold Thomas was
killed in 1944 serving in New Guinea.
To participate in an Anzac dawn service is a moving experience in itself. To visit the actual graves of our
soldiers on Anzac Day is even more moving.
Gratitude must go to Australia's Ambassador-Designate to Lebanon, Mr Glenn Miles, for organising our visit to
the dawn service ceremony and bestowing upon us the honour of attending that most moving and wonderful
occasion, where we offered our homage and sincere prayers to those who gave their lives. I thank Ambassador
Miles, his acting deputy at the time, Ed Russel, and all embassy staff for their organisation of more than 120 senior
government officials, officers from the Lebanese Armed Forces and security services, as well as ambassadors,
United Nations personnel and civilians. Ambassador Miles spoke of the sacrifice of more than 8,000 Australians
and almost 3,000 New Zealand soldiers, and a further 25,000 who were wounded in the campaign. The
Ambassador focused on the theme of loss and reconciliation, and spoke of how Anzac Day allows us to share with
Turkey a deep and long-lasting mutual respect—a friendship borne out of shared horror of the trenches.
The Ambassador spoke of the story of one young soldier whose grave he had walked past a decade ago
near Gallipoli. The grave was that of Private James Martin, an Australian soldier with a New Zealand father.
Martin died of typhoid aboard a medical vessel, having survived a torpedo attack on the transport ship carrying
him to fight in the trenches at Gallipoli. Martin was a child; he was only 14 years of age. Martin was the youngest
Anzac. Like many, he lied about his age in order to join up. Luke Foley had the honour of reading John McCrae's
poem In Flanders Fields during the ceremony. I quote:
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie,
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
The final address was given by His Excellency Mr Cagatay Erciyes, the Turkish Ambassador. I read onto the
record some of the wonderful words he said at that time:
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 17
There are events which change the destiny of nations and flow of history. No doubt, the Gallipoli campaign/the Battle of Canakkale
was among such events. It was a defining moment in the history of Australia, New Zealand and Turkey in their revolution has
modern nations.
Despite heavy casualties on both sides and no matter which side was victorious or defeated, the Gallipoli campaign has gone down
in the annals of history as the war of valour courage and chivalry. It was a battle where both sides respected each other not only
soldiers but also as human beings.
Out of the horrors of war grew mutual respect that over the years has grown into friendship between Turkey, Australia and New
Zealand.
So I believe today's ceremony symbolises also the wisdom of reconciliation and strength of compassion between our nations who
fought against each a century ago.
In conclusion he recited the words of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk who had sent a message to the Anzac mothers who
came to the shores of Gallipoli in 1934. I quote:
Heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives! You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There
is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side now here in this country of ours. You, the
mothers, who sent their sons from faraway countries, wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace.
After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well.
I congratulate the Hon. Paul Green on moving this important motion and thank the House for supporting it.
The Hon. BRONNIE TAYLOR (11:44): I make a brief contribution to this debate, which reflects on
one of Australia's most important national occasions. My father is no longer with us but he always reiterated to
my family the importance of our service men and women. I am making this contribution in his honour. Anzac
Day holds a special place in our hearts. It is a day when we reflect on our national identity and those in our defence
forces who dedicate their lives to protecting that identity. Today I remember those who participated in the Men
from Snowy River Recruitment March in 1916.
Recruitment marches had been held across rural New South Wales in late 1915 and early 1916. The Men
from Snowy River began their march in Delegate, which is not that far from where I live, on 6 January 1916. On
setting out there were 12 men and four Army personnel destined for the new Australian Infantry Force training
camp at Goulburn, also in the mighty south of New South Wales. The small group set off in what has been
described as "rain and enthusiasm". Their route included Bombala, Nimmitabel, Cooma, Queanbeyan and
Bungendore, where they were greeted by local residents. Along the way the marchers were greeted with civic
receptions, complete with bands, flags and stirring recruitment speeches.
On 29 January 1916 the Men from Snowy River arrived at Goulburn, having marched 325 kilometres.
Their numbers had grown to 144; noted to be small in number but of impressive quality. After completing their
training in Goulburn at the newly opened Australian Infantry Force camp, the Men from Snowy River travelled
by train to Sydney, and after marching through the streets they departed on the Port Sydney bound for England
via Africa. The majority of the Men from Snowy River joined the 55th Battalion and after further training in
England were sent to the frontlines in France. Of the 144 men who enlisted in the march, 39 were killed in action
and 75 were casualties.
Ernest Albert Corey, a blacksmith's striker, was one of the marchers. He joined the march in Cooma.
Ernest bravely volunteered, along with other men, and went on to become a distinguished Australian soldier. In
1917 he was twice awarded the Military Medal for his devotion to duty in aiding wounded soldiers, and then twice
again in 1918. He was the only person to be awarded the Military Medal four times. On every occasion, under
heavy fire, he continually assisted the wounded with first aid and carried them to medical stations. Ernest was a
true Australian hero. He embodied the qualities of the spirit of the Anzac with his courage and sacrifice. Indeed,
he put everything on the line to help those in need. In circumstances that any of us could hardly imagine, Corporal
Corey went above and beyond for his fellow men.
The Men from Snowy River Recruitment March has since been repeated, with a recruitment drive
following the same route during World War II, and re-enactment marches in 2006 and 2015. Across New South
Wales other communities have re-enacted marches that passed through during World War I and remembered all
those involved. We also need to remember the men and women who returned to us. We must continue to look
after not only their physical health and needs but also their mental health.
I am patron of the NSW Young Nationals and I am proud to inform the House that at this year's
conference there was a terrific and heartfelt debate about the need to look after our veterans and they should be
honoured with the care they need on their return home.
That was a terrific motion from a group of young people, which embodies and encapsulates how they still feel
about our ability to recognise our veterans. We thank all those who volunteered to defend our nation, from the
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 18
men from Snowy River who joined that march in 1915 through to those men and women who serve in our forces
today. It is hard to put into words just how very much we owe them. Lest we forget.
The Hon. COURTNEY HOUSSOS (11:50): I make a brief contribution to this important debate today.
I congratulate the Hon. Paul Green on moving such an important motion. As the motion notes, Anzac Day was
the date of the ill-fated Gallipoli invasion, but we now commemorate all those men and women who have served
or who continue to serve their country in the armed services. I take this opportunity to thank them for their service.
Anzac Day serves as a solemn reminder to the Australian community of the tragedy of war and conflict.
Like so many members in this place and in the other place, I attended a range of events around Anzac
Day to pay tribute to the service of our ongoing service personnel and to those who made the ultimate sacrifice.
I laid a wreath at the Martin Place Cenotaph on behalf of the New South Wales Opposition with a number of
consular officials and I attended the large Anzac Day march in the city with my daughter Anna. Anzac Day
marches never cease to give me goosebumps. An incredible mix of people take part—older men and women who
often struggle but are determined to march in memory of their fallen comrades and as a reminder of the service
they gave to our country, together with younger people who often now walk carrying photographs of their relatives
who served our country. It is an incredible display of the service that has been given to our country and it is a
really special day for everyone.
I particularly took the time to attend several events in the lead-up to Anzac Day to commemorate the
sacrifice and loss of some of the innocent victims of war who are sadly forgotten in too many aspects of our
day-to-day life. One of those events was the inaugural Legacy Women's Breakfast held by Sydney Legacy. A large
number of people attended the breakfast and people spoke a lot about not only the past challenges that Legacy
dealt with but also the modern-day challenges and how the work of Legacy has been renewed due to so many
Australians now serving overseas. I pay tribute in particular to Detective Superintendent Deborah Wallace, who
spoke at the Legacy Women's Breakfast in a very entertaining way and showed her ongoing support for the
organisation.
I also attended the War Widows' Guild of Australia's sixty-fifth Anzac Field of Remembrance Service at
St Andrew's Cathedral. Widows attended from each period of conflict—World War I, World War II, Vietnam and
Korea, and more recent conflicts. It was incredibly confronting to see women of a similar age to me
commemorating the ultimate sacrifice that was paid by their partners and to know that that will be a lifelong
reminder to them and their families. I also put on the record my sincere thanks and congratulations to the
RSL NSW Chief Executive Officer, Glenn Kolomeitz—a friend of mine—and the RSL NSW President, Rod
White, who worked tirelessly in the lead-up to Anzac Day to ensure that the many services, particularly around
the city, were conducted properly.
I had the opportunity to hear David Morrison, the Australian of the Year, speak in the lead-up to Anzac
Day. He is far more qualified than I am to reflect on this but he spoke about how the modern connotations of an
Australian digger are generally of a white male who has a fair amount of cynicism about authority. But he made
the important point that that fails to consider the women and the Muslim men and women who serve our country
and it does not reflect the modern-day reality of our armed forces. As we consider the important role that Anzac
Day has come to play in our national identity, we need to ensure that it is an inclusive day and one that is
particularly mindful of the modern make-up of our armed forces.
With that in mind, I particularly pay tribute to the Hellenic Club, the Joint Committee for the
Commemoration of the Battle of Crete and also the Greek Consul General, who brought out for both the
seventy-fifth anniversary of the Battle of Crete and for Anzac Day the Hellenic Presidential Guard, the Evzones,
who were a spectacular display of the ongoing and immediate connection Australia continues to have with Greece.
It was an excellent initiative to ensure that Anzac Day becomes an inclusive and commemorative day for all of
our Australian community.
In closing I will read some remarks from another friend of mine, Dr Mike Kelly, OAM, who spoke about
Anzac Day. After more than 20 years service in the army and having served overseas in Kenya, Somalia, Bosnia,
East Timor and Iraq, he spoke about the essential need to remember the sacrifices but also bringing the idea of
serving others into everyday life. He said:
You don't need to join the military, service is something you can do every day. In your career or life always look for an opportunity
to do something above yourself. That's how you honour the legacy of Anzacs.
When reflecting on the suffering and sacrifice of the Anzac tradition think of the service they fought for, our values. It's not about
a community of race or religion; it's a commitment to values of inclusion, service and endurance, it's about making the country
better.
Lest we forget.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 19
The Hon. SCOTT FARLOW (11:56:4): I speak in support of the motion moved by the Hon. Paul
Green and I commend him for moving this motion. The Hon. Paul Green and I reflected on this in the wee hours
of this morning and, as the Hon. Paul Green said to me, it is important for this House to be able to recognise the
importance of the service of so many and of their sacrifice, and how it is a wonderful way to do it through this
motion. I would like to speak about the celebrations and the commemorations within our community because it
was not always so that our community commemorated Anzac Day as it does today. Many years ago, probably
through the 1990s, people started to question whether Anzac Day would continue when those men and women
who had served in World War I and World War II had all passed.
This year I attended the dawn service at Davistown on the Central Coast. An interesting address was
given by the padre Allan Bate, the senior minister of Kincumber Anglican Church. He reflected on his time in
Western Australia in the 1990s and on the desecration of the King's Park War Memorial. King's Park is a
significant park on the headland in Perth. A group of Anzacs passed by and said—this is unparliamentary
language—"Darn those bastards for everything that we gave them that they should treat us like this." He remarked
on how from the 1990s, when people thought that Anzac Day was dead, when people thought the community had
forgotten their sacrifice and their service, there is now a renewed gratitude for the service and the sacrifice of so
many through World War I, World War II and, quite rightly, through the other conflicts that have occurred since.
That feeling was obvious at that dawn service in Davistown on Anzac Day.
Many people thought that perhaps the high point would be the centenary of Anzac, but more people
attended this 100th Anzac Day service—the 101st year—in Davistown than there had ever been before. From a
community of a little under 6,000, more than 1,000 people attended the service. It was quite a remarkable sight to
see in the electorate of Terrigal.
I caught up with the member for Terrigal, Mr Adam Crouch, MP, after that service. He had been to a
couple of other services that morning as well and commented on the huge turnout across the Central Coast. I noted
that also when I attended at Gosford. Last year I attended the 11.00 a.m. service at Poppy Park to commemorate
100 years of Anzac. This year at Terrigal Haven poppies were placed throughout the area to remember the service
and sacrifice made by our service men and women. I was surprised to see as large a crowd as had attended the
year before, when the 100-year commemoration service had been a focal point of the community. More and more
people are becoming engaged to thank and remember the sacrifice of those who gave so much for all of us.
Those involved in discussions in the mid-1990s about the changing face of government and the nation
could not have foreseen this situation; it has definitely changed over the last 15 to 20 years. Australians, and young
Australians in particular—my generation—are conscious of the sacrifice and the need to ensure that we do not
forget and that the words "Lest We Forget" live on. At the Gosford service Seo Kyoung and Connor, two recipients
of the Kokoda Youth Leadership Challenge from the Central Coast, told their stories of the Kokoda trek. They
told of their hardships but acknowledged that it would have been much harder for those who served there during
World War II to protect Australia and Papua New Guinea.
Interestingly, Seo Kyoung, a relatively new Australian who had come from Korea, said that she had not
considered herself as a proud Australian until she did that walk. On the trek, she felt the pride that Australians
have for the sacrifice made by the Anzacs. We have much to be proud of in this country but there is nothing more
to be proud of than the service and sacrifice of those who have gone before us, what they have done for us and
how they have given their lives for the protection of their fellow Australians and so that future generations of
Australians could live in a free country.
I note the point made by the Hon. Courtney Houssos about the diversity of our military today. I attended
the annual Anzac Day service held at my church. The member for Davidson, Jonathon O'Dea, also attended. In
an address made during the service, Commodore Lee Goddard, RAN, reflected on a Navy deployment of which
very few people know. This year the Navy had two deployments that were headed by females. This historic first
was not publicised because the two females in charge requested that no fuss be made; they just wanted to do their
job. That is typical of our modern military, which has done an exceptional job in encouraging people from a broad
range of backgrounds to be involved in military service.
My wife comes from a naval family. Two of her brothers have served in the Navy and one continues to
serve. Her father served in the Navy and her grandfather was a naval chaplain. Before she was diagnosed with
diabetes she was looking to enlist in the Army. Military service is something that is passed down from generation
to generation. Indeed, it is open and welcoming to those who come to our country without military service and
their inclusion will assist Australia into the future and reflect our broad and diverse nation.
Anzac Day this year is the 101st anniversary of the Gallipoli landings. It is important that our country
reflects on that service. I want to reflect on the meaning of the word "Anzac"—which I was encouraged to see
displayed throughout the Anzac services this year—and recognise New Zealand's contribution as well as
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 20
Australia's contribution. We are divided by sea but we are brothers in arms. I was particularly impressed to see on
the Central Coast the involvement of the New Zealand military service, particularly at the Davistown service.
A local New Zealand family with members in military service was very much involved in the service. They sang
the New Zealand national anthem and took part on behalf of the New Zealand military forces.
It is important for us to remember that we are not alone and that our brothers and sisters across the ditch
have been shoulder to shoulder with us in military combat through many theatres of war. It is important for us to
be thankful and to recognise on Anzac Day the service of New Zealand soldiers as well as Australian soldiers and
to acknowledge the sacrifice they made for their country and for our freedoms as well.
I turn to Gallipoli 101 years on. It is rare for nations to commemorate military defeats. Many nations
around the world trumpet their victories but it says something about Australia and our respect for our soldiers that
we commemorate a defeat in Gallipoli. Indeed, it is one of the most significant days on our calendar. Why do we
do it? We do it to recognise the contribution of the soldiers who sacrificed their lives for us, to remember the
British Empire at the time and to commemorate this historic time for Australia. It was the first time that Australians
came as a nation into battle in their own right and that the Australian corps was recognised in its own right. Last
year I moved a motion in this House relating to Lemnos, particularly the start of that campaign, because there
could be no Gallipoli without Lemnos. I thank the House for its indulgence in allowing me to contribute to this
debate.
Debate adjourned.
Bills
CRIMES (APPEAL AND REVIEW) AMENDMENT (DOUBLE JEOPARDY) BILL 2015
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 4 June 2015.
Dr MEHREEN FARUQI (12:08): I strongly and proudly support The Greens bill introduced by my
colleague Mr David Shoebridge. Outside Parliament today I have seen once again the passion, the need and the
strong and loud call for justice. I welcome all of those people inside Parliament, where we also need to see the
same strength, passion and call to find peace and justice. Between September 1990 and January 1991 three
children went missing from the same street in Bowraville. Colleen Walker was aged 16, Evelyn Greenup was four
and Clinton Speedy-Duroux was 16. The bodies of Evelyn Greenup and Clinton Speedy-Duroux were both found
in the same stretch of bushland, and there has only ever been one person of interest connected to the cases.
Tragically, while Colleen's clothes were found weighed down on the bed of a nearby river, her body has
not yet been found. The three cases have never been tried together in a court and there has never been a conviction.
If this had happened on the north shore or in the eastern suburbs of Sydney, if there had been a serial killer and
three murdered children, extraordinary steps would have been taken to bring the alleged offender to justice.
Instead, after 26 years, two court cases and a coronial inquest, the families are still waiting for justice. As Dr Tracy
Westerman of Indigenous Psychological Services commented at the parliamentary inquiry:
In a country where the names of missing or murdered children remain indelibly in the national consciousness, why do the
Bowraville children not figure? The Beaumont children, Samantha Knight, Jaidin Leskie—these and many more are embedded in the
Australian lexicon of tragedy. Why are Colleen Walker, Evelyn Greenup and Clinton Speedy-Duroux not firmly fixed in our national memory?
Federal Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care Ken Wyatt has said:
If this had been three children in Sydney's Point Piper, then would there have been a different approach? The approach would have
been tackled with a lot more rigour ... by police, by authorities. There would have been an outcry.
The initial police investigation was riddled with inadequacies and oversights and plagued by racism. Some of the
officers involved in the initial investigation were dismissive of the concerns of the families. I note for the record
the extraordinary effort of the police since then. The team, led by Detective Inspector Gary Jubelin, has sought to
overcome many of the failings and inadequacies of the initial police investigation and has slowly and meticulously
rebuilt trust with the families and the community. In considering the part failure of the initial police investigation
it is essential that we acknowledge the efforts since of Detective Inspector Jubelin's team.
The fact is, though, that after two separate trials no conviction has been secured. This is the only unsolved
serial murder in the modern history of New South Wales. This bill would implement a crucial reform that could
change that. The purpose of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015 is to
amend the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 to extend an exception to the rule against double jeopardy in
relation to an acquitted person where previously inadmissible evidence becomes admissible.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 21
This proposed amendment is designed to give effect to what many thought were the intentions of double
jeopardy reforms implemented in 2006. Through a drafting technicality, those reforms have continued to fail the
Bowraville families in their search for justice. This bill is necessary because despite the 2006 legislation being
passed with Bowraville in mind there has been a difficulty with the interpretation of the term "adduced" in section
102. It was considered that the Bowraville case could not be retried because the prosecution tendered some
evidence of one murder in the trial of another of the murders but it was not admitted under the common law of
evidence. What "adduced" means is untested in New South Wales courts.
One legal interpretation of "adduced" is that if the evidence is presented to the judge but rejected as
inadmissible under the law of evidence then it has been adduced. An alternative interpretation is that evidence is
only adduced once it is both presented to the court and admitted into the evidence before a jury. This is important
in the Bowraville case because if "adduced" has the former meaning then the tendency and coincidence evidence
linking all three murders cannot be fresh under the New South Wales double jeopardy laws. If it is the latter
meaning then the evidence could be the basis for a double jeopardy application.
These reforms balance against the principle of finality an acknowledgement that the criminal justice
system is an imperfect one that has been demonstrated to produce serious miscarriages of justice on occasion. The
proposed bill contains a narrow clarification of the meaning of the word "adduced" that is highly unlikely to
produce a flood of retrials. It continues to be subject to all the checks and balances set out above, including the
essential "interests of justice" test in the Court of Criminal Appeal. The current definition of "adduced" is untried
in New South Wales courts but adopted by the Attorney General, making it an artificial legal barrier that prevents
the case from being heard in the Court of Criminal Appeal. The parliamentary inquiry recognised this by
recommending that:
The NSW Government review of section 102 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 to clarify the definition of "adduced",
and in doing so consider:
• the legal or other ramifications of defining adduced as "admitted", particularly on the finality of prosecutions
• the matters considered by the English courts under the equivalent UK legislation
• the merit of replacing section 102 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 with the provisions in section 461 of
the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), and
• the merit of expressly broadening the scope of the provision to enable a retrial where a change in the law renders
evidence admissible at a later date.
This bill seeks to implement the intent of this recommendation. Three innocent children were murdered in
Bowraville. Families told the inquiry that the loss of their three children was not valued by some of the police
who conducted the initial investigation or by the courts and the Parliament in the same way that the loss of any
other children in this State would have been valued. The justice system failed Colleen Walker, Evelyn Greenup
and Clinton Speedy-Duroux. We should not be ignorant of the fact that part of the reason for this was the colour
of their skin. As a parliament we have an obligation to recognise and act on that. Elaine Walker told the inquiry:
The saddest thing today is that we are still being judged by the colour of our skin and looking back our children were judged
wrongly then by the colour of their skin as the proper procedures were not carried out. Today we are still suffering.
Nothing can take away the pain and suffering of losing a child, but at the very least we can finally clear the path
to justice. On the T-shirts of the Bowraville community members in the public gallery today there is this message:
The path we have travelled is long and hard but we will never give up until we find peace and get justice.
I assure you that we will never give up either until you find peace and justice. I commend the bill to the House.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (The Hon. Trevor Khan): I welcome to the public gallery members of
the Bowraville community and Detective Jubelin. I also welcome students from regional New South Wales who
are participating in the Secondary School Leadership Program.
THE HON. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (12:16): I lead on behalf of the Government in debate on the Crimes (Appeal and Review)
Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015. As did Mr David Shoebridge in his second reading speech on
4 June 2015, I begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land and pay my respects to elders past
and present. I also pay my respects to the families of Colleen Walker-Craig, Clinton Speedy-Duroux and Evelyn
Greenup. I understand why Mr Shoebridge brings this bill before the House. I know that he does so with the best
intentions. However, the Government is unable to support the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment (Double
Jeopardy) Bill 2015, for reasons that I will outline.
The Standing Committee on Law and Justice held an inquiry into the Bowraville murders. The members
of that committee heard the heartbreaking stories of the families of three innocent children. They listened to their
experiences. They heard about the trauma they suffered and how it had affected them and their entire community.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 22
I acknowledge the pain that the families suffered then and clearly continue to suffer to this day, almost a quarter
of a century after the death of these three innocent children. I acknowledge their continued determination to
achieve justice. Their determination has not wavered. The committee received more than 30 submissions from
family and friends of the three victims, as well as from the NSW Police Force, community support workers, legal
representatives and the New South Wales Government. The committee tabled its report on 6 November 2014,
recommending that the Government review the operation of section 102 of part 8 of the Crimes (Appeal and
Review) Act 2001 to clarify the definition of "adduced".
I take this opportunity to commend the work of all committee members: the Hon. David Clarke, chair;
the Hon. Peter Primrose, deputy chair; the Hon. Catherin Cusack; Mr Scot MacDonald; the Hon. Sarah Mitchell;
the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane; and Mr David Shoebridge, who brought forward this bill. The Government tabled
its response on 2 June 2015 accepting the recommendations. In response to recommendation 8 of the committee's
report, the Government commissioned the Hon. James Wood, AO, QC, to review the operation of section 102 of
part 8 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 and consider possible options for reform to the statutory
exception to the common law rule against double jeopardy. Mr Wood is a former Supreme Court judge, former
chairman of the NSW Law Reform Commission and current chairperson of the NSW Sentencing Council.
Part 8 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 provides that the Court of Appeal may order a retrial
of an offence punishable by a life sentence on an application from the Director of Public Prosecutions based on
evidence that is "fresh" and "compelling". For the purposes of determining whether evidence is "fresh" and
"compelling", the evidence must be evidence that has not previously been adduced in a trial and could not have
been adduced even with the exercise of "reasonable diligence" by the prosecution.
Part 8 commenced on 15 December 2006 and was the result of extensive consultation, which took into
account developments in other jurisdictions and work undertaken at a national level by the then Model Criminal
Code Officers Committee. It is consistent with other jurisdictions. The provisions were carefully drafted to ensure
that police and prosecutors carry out their duties diligently and that the principle of finality is retained as far as
possible. This principle of finality is a fundamental tenet of our criminal justice system and seeks to ensure that
the finality of proceedings is not able to be altered by the political whim of the government of the day.
Mr Wood considered the arguments for and against amending part 8 and recommended that no change
to the double jeopardy law be made. Mr Wood's report "Review of Section 102 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review)
Act 2001 (NSW)" was tabled on 18 December 2015. Mr Wood's recommendation is supported by the Office of
the Director of Public Prosecutions, Legal Aid NSW, NSW Public Defenders, the New South Wales Bar
Association, the Law Society of New South Wales, NSW Young Lawyers and the District Court of New South
Wales. Mr Wood confirmed that the word "adduced" bears its common meaning and does not mean "admitted".
He noted stakeholders' strong arguments against amendment, which he considered persuasive, and the difficulty
in estimating the potential reach of any of the options for change.
Mr Wood concluded that the disadvantages of changing section 102 of Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act
2001 were clear and included: it would further erode the longstanding rule against double jeopardy, that is, a
person should only be tried for an offence once; it would be impossible to anticipate how many past acquittals
could potentially be subject to applications for retrial if a change in the law could make evidence "fresh", noting
that the introduction of the Evidence Act 1995 significantly changed the law of evidence across the board, and
may lead to different outcomes were the cases tried before it to be reconsidered today; and it would create
inconsistencies between the legislation in New South Wales and other jurisdictions. Providing a means by which
the legislature could change the law in response to an acquittal in a specific case would also breach the
longstanding principle that changes to criminal laws should not operate retrospectively. In his report, Mr Wood
stated:
In my view, the damage to the principle of finality of prosecutions, and the uncertainty it would create outweighs its potential to
aid justice. Accordingly, I am unable to recommend any amendment to section 102 of Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 at
this time. I do, however, see value in Government conducting another review of the provision at some future date, giving time for
applications under the provision to have been heard in NSW and other Australian jurisdictions.
The Government understands that the families want justice for the victims, these three young children who were
murdered in Bowraville almost 25 years ago. However, the 2006 amendments altered the long-established law of
double jeopardy and finality and also inserted strong safeguards so that the interests of justice and the rights of an
accused were finely balanced.
This bill is not consistent with the findings of the Wood review that there should be no changes made to
double jeopardy laws. It is also not consistent with the commitment that members of this House make to act in the
interests of justice for all members of the community and not to create a new law for a specific circumstance that
is likely to have significant and untold effects on an innumerable number of people. For the reasons I have
mentioned, the Government is unable to support this bill.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 23
The Hon. ADAM SEARLE (12:24): I lead for the New South Wales Opposition on this bill. The
Opposition also does not support the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015. This
of course is an enormously difficult issue. No doubt in this particular case, the Bowraville murders, a gross
injustice has been done to not only three families but also of course the wider community, and that is to say nothing
of the wider impact that such matters have on the administration of the system of criminal justice. I think instances
such as the Bowraville murders really do bring the administration of our criminal justice system into disrepute.
Of course it is a testament to the commitment and resilience of that community and the families that they
have kept their campaign for justice going since the time of those murders, even to the present moment. I take this
opportunity to acknowledge their efforts, their commitment and their resilience. Given the way this debate is
going, that journey still has some way to go. Like the Minister, I acknowledge that we meet on the lands of
traditional owners and I pay my respects to their elders past and present.
I also recognise the efforts of Detective Inspector Gary Jubelin in this matter. I encountered Detective
Inspector Jubelin when he was a witness in a trial that I had carriage of many years ago and I was impressed by
him as an officer of the NSW Police Force. What I have learned of his role in connection with this matter has
deepened my appreciation of Detective Inspector Jubelin as an officer. Nevertheless, although this legislation has
been brought forward to try to correct the injustice that has occurred, for the reasons that I will shortly outline,
I do not believe that it would do so. In trying to correct a past wrong to particular families and to a particular
community, we may do further harm to the administration of criminal justice in this State.
In 2006 the New South Wales Parliament did change the law with respect to double jeopardy to allow an
exception to the rule that citizens should not be tried for the same offence twice. Of course, the rule against double
jeopardy prevents a person who has been acquitted from being tried again for the same offence. It is one of the
key protections in our legal system for individuals. Its rationale is to prevent multiple attempts to convict an
individual and also to bring finality to criminal proceedings.
It is a statement of the obvious to say that the State will always have vastly greater resources than any
individual in a criminal trial. So the principle is also one of fairness—allowing multiple attempts to pursue an
individual through a criminal prosecution encourages inadequacies in prosecution. There is also something
unseemly about the power of the State being brought to bear against a citizen for the same offence or for the same
facts situation more than once. That is why in the debate yesterday on those cognate crimes bills the Opposition
took the view that we thought there was something seriously untoward about serious crime prevention orders
being brought on the same facts situation against persons who are in fact acquitted of serous criminal offences.
It would be inconsistent with our approach taken yesterday to support this legislation today. We know
that two trials in relation to the Bowraville murders resulted in acquittals. It is a matter of record now, and I think
it is broadly accepted, that the police investigation was bungled, incompetent and, in my view, racist.
The consequences for the families, the wider community and I think the system of criminal justice have been
appalling. The 2006 change to the law was at the time controversial. Its intention was to allow a retrial following
a murder acquittal if there is "fresh and compelling evidence and it is in the interests of justice". It is quite clear
that the intention of the legislature in enacting that provision as an exception to the rule against double jeopardy
was that fresh evidence really meant newly acquired or newly discovered evidence, as I understand it.
The bill before the House proposes to redefine that to say that evidence is also fresh if it was merely
inadmissible in the proceedings in which the person was acquitted, and as a result of substantive legislative change
in the law of evidence since the acquittal, it would now be admissible. If enacted, that would bring about a great
and fundamental change to the law. I pay tribute to the work of the Legislative Council Standing Committee on
Law and Justice and its inquiry, and I congratulate all of its members on the unanimous recommendations it made.
The Minister has identified two of those recommendations, one of which is that the New South Wales
Government review section 102 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act to clarify the definition of "adduced" and
to consider certain things which have been outlined and which I will not repeat. A former Chief Judge at Common
Law and former Royal Commissioner, Mr James Wood, QC, delivered a report after he inquired into those matters.
He examined, as he was required to do, a number of potential issues, one of which was: what does the word
"adduced" mean? Does it merely mean evidence that was brought to the court although not admitted into evidence?
Does it mean evidence that was admitted?
The consensus from the expert legal bodies was that its technical meaning was evidence produced but
not necessarily brought into evidence. I must say from my decade and a half of legal practice the meaning was
not so clear. I think the term "adduced" has been used fairly interchangeably with both of those concepts. Former
Justice Wood reached the obvious conclusion in regard to making substantive changes to the law, in light of the
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 24
fact that the 2006 amendments have not been subject to any judicial interpretation and have not been used or
engaged with, that there should not be any legislative change.
A range of stakeholders were asked to comment on different reform proposals, one of which was
changing "adduced" and "admitted", and another was a change which is embodied in the legislation that is now
before the Parliament which was whether fresh evidence in section 102 should be expressly extended to include
evidence previously inadmissible but made admissible due to a later change. Stakeholders gave a lot of
consideration to that second proposition.
The Director of Public Prosecutions, the Law Society of NSW, the NSW Bar Association and Legal Aid
NSW made the point that its effect would not only be in connection with the Bowraville matter but there would
be unintended increases in applications for retrials because it would have a broader impact. They also pointed out
that there would be a significant departure from the current provision and it would provide the foundation to
greatly broaden the number of matters that may well be considered. Of significant concern was the fact that
previously unadmitted evidence could, if this change were made, constitute fresh evidence following a change in
the law and that could lead to a wider number of matters.
The Public Defenders described such a change as being totally unacceptable and a scandalous erosion of
the fundamental human right, that is, the right to protection against being pursued twice for the same criminal
matter. There was a fair degree of consensus amongst the stakeholders most directly concerned with this area that
none of the reform options should be embraced: the terms "adduced" and "admitted" should not be interchanged
and there should not be the extension of the definition of "fresh". The Western Australian legislation was described
as strange, unhelpful and uncertain and, having read it, I tend to agree. It too has not been the subject of judicial
interpretation.
The English and Welsh cases do not really provide much support or assistance in the difficulties in which
we find ourselves. Former Justice Wood concluded that the disadvantages of changing the law were clear and
certainly outweighed any advantages to the interests of justice and would be a further encroachment on the rule
against double jeopardy. The uncertainty of the effect of any proposed amendments to the statute was not a good
thing and should not be embarked upon. There would also be a departure from the approach across many
jurisdictions and there would be damage to the principle of finality of prosecutions. The Opposition fully agrees
with those observations.
The Opposition believes that changing the law in the way sought would involve some retrospectivity in
the criminal law by applying laws other than those that were applicable at the time, which is a very significant
change in the way in which we ordinarily approach criminal matters. Even with proposed changes in the criminal
law, the usual rule is that those changes, even procedural ones, are prospective, not retrospective. I think the
intention of this bill is that it would reach back in time to assist those in the Bowraville community and while that
is an understandable objective in order to try to secure justice for those families and that community, it would not
be limited to that matter.
The Opposition believes that the rule against double jeopardy has a sound basis in principle and its
weakening imposes dangers to the rule of law and protection of individuals. We know that persons from
Indigenous backgrounds are well and truly over-represented in our criminal justice system and people may well
be brought unintentionally into the net of these expanded provisions, if they were enacted. I do not say that in any
way being critical of the author of this bill; I understand that like all the members of the law and justice committee
he is trying to right an historic wrong.
Having closely considered the matter the Opposition respectfully but profoundly disagrees with the path
chosen in this bill and is not able to support it. The difficulty is obviously with the original police investigation.
The Opposition notes that the NSW Police Force is one of only two stakeholders to support the changes, and given
the embarrassment it must feel in this matter, that is understandable. The Opposition also thinks the prospect of
this legislative change effectively being used against a particular individual is also troubling. The idea of
Parliament legislating with respect to a single matter or a single individual is also troubling as a matter of principle,
and that is one of the reasons why the Kable legislation was struck down by the High Court. It is possible this
legislation could face the same fate.
For all of those reasons, and with the best will in the world, and recognising the goodwill and the good
intentions of the author of the bill and those who will support it in this place, the Government and the Opposition
as the alternative government, are forced to take that broader view of the impact of the change on the system, not
without mindfulness and being cognisant of the impact on the individual case and the families and the
communities. It is a hard call, and we have to make that call by opposing this legislation.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 25
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN (12:38): I will speak briefly on the Crimes (Appeal and Review)
Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015. It is a mouthful of words. This seems to be a story about the views of
what I term—please do not take offence, ladies and gentlemen—the legal elite. Of course we have to take into
account the findings of learned committee inquiries.
However, I would say generally speaking that if we polled everyone in Australia and asked whether they think
the justice system delivers justice—
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: The legal system.
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN: I should have said whether the legal system delivers justice. That is
what I am talking about: we are dealing with definitions and getting carried away with reading previous decisions
and those sorts of things. I will interrupt my line of thought to say that the representatives of the Bowraville
community have returned to the gallery. That is a promising sign. It means that irrespective of their high level of
feeling the people of Bowraville are prepared not to let this go. It is obvious that this bill will be defeated; I can
count and so can everyone else. I will not call for the Christian Democratic Party members but I believe they will
join with us in voting for this bill.
If because of all of the good legal reasons that have been given this Parliament cannot support this bill
and allow for an exemption in this case, my question is what are we going to do? What is each individual member
going to do to try to ameliorate the sense of loss and injustice that the people in the gallery and their community
feel? I cannot answer that question, but I will say that members from both major parties had better get their heads
together and think seriously about this issue. It is not all right for them to say that with all due respect they agree
they cannot do it and therefore the bill is defeated. What does that do? It only leaves an empty place in the hearts
of the people who are affected. I am not a lawyer, I cannot comment on any of the learned assertions that have
been made today, but this bill seems as though it is a worthwhile attempt. We do not normally agree with The
Greens on anything but on this issue I commend Mr David Shoebridge for having a go. We will support the bill.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN (12:41): In light of the limited time remaining I will quickly place on record
my thoughts about the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015. The Bible says "a
hope deferred makes the heart grow sick". Another saying is that justice delayed can be justice denied. The
Christian Democratic Party supports justice above the spirit of the double jeopardy law. I cannot accept that in
this day and age in which we can build driverless cars and operate crewless ships we in this Chamber cannot
change a law that might bring justice to a long-running situation. We are the masters of this ship and the masters
of the law. I acknowledge the points made by my learned friends but at the end of the day if justice is denied what
sort of society are we living in?
Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM (12:42): In debate on the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment
(Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015 I lend my support to my colleague Mr David Shoebridge and commend him for his
efforts over many years to bring justice to the people of Bowraville. I acknowledge that I live on Gumbaynggirr
country in Bellingen and I am beginning to understand a little bit more about that country. To the people of
Bowraville I say giinagay. I join with my colleague in fighting for justice for three murdered children. That is
what this is about: We are attempting to catch a murderer. Walking amongst us is a murderer who snuffed out the
lives of three children and we can do something about it. I ask members to just for a moment imagine it was their
child. What would they do today? They would demand that this bill be passed. It is natural justice. A sign out the
front of this Parliament read, "There can be no healing without justice". That is the case.
I do not accept the argument of the Hon. Adam Searle that there will be a flood of cases. This bill applies
to the most heinous of crimes—murder and serious sexual offences. So what if we err on the side of the victims?
Some people may be brought back to court to face a retrial and they may be acquitted again, but we should err on
the side of the victims in this matter. This bill is about ensuring that if previously inadmissible evidence—which
in this case I think was inadmissible through a bungling of the court and a failure of the judicial system—is
considered fresh it should be made admissible and justice should be served. The Bowraville community has
already been through so much. They have been ignored time and again by the police and the judicial system.
Without the efforts of Mr David Shoebridge to bring this matter to the House we would not be having this debate.
As the Hon. Robert Brown and the Hon. Paul Green said, this matter will not go away. It will fester because there
is a murderer amongst us. I had prepared a much longer contribution about the inquiry and its recommendations
but time is short and we need to go to a vote. I will wrap up now by asking members to imagine that they were in
this situation.
The Hon. MARK PEARSON (12:46): I speak in debate on the Crimes (Appeal and Review)
Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015. A great deal of work and struggle went into a major change to bring
justice for prisoners facing the death penalty. That change was to be able to use DNA material to free people who
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 26
were unlawfully imprisoned, many of whom were facing death. In this case three children faced death. Members
of this House are in a position to turn things around so that justice can be done for those young souls.
This is not a one-off; it is a test case in which we are looking for a precedent. The courts bring precedents
all the time. We take matters to higher levels in the courts to ask the judiciary to turn its mind to something which
is out of date, draconian, cruel or against the fundamental principles of a society that protects the vulnerable. This
is about turning around a terrible situation because there is new and compelling evidence. The evidence is provable
and has standing. It is not fickle evidence or hearsay and it will not bring into question somebody who should not
be brought into question. The Animal Justice Party commends this visionary and compellingly important bill to
the House.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE (12:48): On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party I support the
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment (Double Jeopardy) Bill 2015, which is a very simple bill to extend an
exception to the rule against double jeopardy in relation to an acquitted person where previously inadmissible
evidence becomes admissible.
Disappointingly, the Government and the Opposition appear to have adopted the position taken by Justice Wood,
who undertook the review of the legislation. Justice Wood said at page 68 of his report:
In my view, the damage to the principle of finality of prosecutions, and the uncertainty it would create outweighs its potential to
aid justice. Accordingly, I am unable to recommend any amendment to [the legislation] …
He said he had to weigh up how this bill will affect justice in this State in the future. But as other members who
spoke in support of this bill have said, we need to look at ways of solving this problem. Three children have been
murdered and the murderer walks free on the streets of New South Wales. I thought the job of members of
Parliament was to aid justice. I reject the conclusion of Justice Wood. We have to ensure justice in this matter and
support this legislation.
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE (12:51): In reply, I thank all members who have contributed to this debate.
When I first spoke to this bill last year it seemed as if we may have had a real chance. I thank my colleagues Dr
Mehreen Faruqi and Mr Jeremy Buckingham, the Hon. John Ajaka for the Government, the Hon. Adam Searle
for the Opposition, the Hon. Robert Brown, for the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, the Hon. Paul Green and
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile for the Christian Democratic Party, and the Hon. Mark Pearson, for the Animal
Justice Party. They all made their contributions in a genuine and positive way, but ultimately we are not going to
be delivering justice today.
In November 2014 the Standing Committee on Law and Justice presented its report into the Bowraville
murders. At that time we made a collective commitment to move heaven and earth to deliver justice for these
families. We listened to the Hon. David Clarke, who chaired that committee with courage, decency, humanity and
compassion—David and I do not agree on a lot but for I commend him for his work on this. We listened to what
the Hon. Melinda Pavey, the now local member, said in her touching contribution. We listened to what the
members of the Labor Party said. We all committed to do justice; we committed to right a wrong. We said 25 years
was too long to wait for justice—26 years will be even longer. It is an appalling shame.
The matter was then referred to Justice Wood. He had a look it and said that it was all very tricky. He
said that the word "adduced" can be read in different ways. In this State we have a set principle about double
jeopardy, and as a general rule we do not allow people to be retried—it is unjust to keep retrying people. But as
my colleague Mr Jeremy Buckingham made clear, we are talking about a marginal increase in a very narrow
gateway that applies only to the most heinous crimes—murder and the most appalling sexual assaults. We are
talking about a tiny handful of crimes and a tiny widening of the window of clarification. We contend that the
definition of fresh evidence we have here under the 2006 laws should be the same as they have in the United
Kingdom.
The lead case in the United Kingdom was decided in 2009, so it is clear that the very change that the
Bowraville families are asking for and demanding here, the change that we want to make to the laws, has been
operating in the United Kingdom for the better part of a decade. I challenge any member in this Chamber to review
the cases that have been decided under the United Kingdom law and not say, "Thank goodness that application
got up. Thank goodness there was a retrial. Thank goodness that miscreant was brought to justice." I have reviewed
them. It is a good law; producing just outcomes. I accept the genuineness of the contribution of the Hon. John
Ajaka. I accept also that there are many friends for this law reform on the Government benches but they have not
won the day. I accept this is a challenging moment for many Government and Opposition members. I accept that
genuineness, but for the last five years this Government has ridden roughshod over concepts of criminal justice.
It has retreated on the presumption of innocence on bail and just last night it gave huge new powers to police
contrary to established principles of the criminal law.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 27
The Government has put in place consorting laws that jail people for mixing with the wrong people—
criminalised association. Time after time this Government has passed laws that in their application will almost
certainly act adversely against the Aboriginal community. We will see more Aboriginal people in jail and more
Aboriginals brought to the courts as subjects of the criminal law. On this one occasion when the Aboriginal
community has come to the Government and said, "We would like a little bit of tightening of the criminal law to
deliver justice for the murder of our kids", it slams the door on them. The reason for not doing so is given as some
belated respect for those civil liberties that have been trashed repeatedly for five years. How would members feel
as a member of the Aboriginal community if the one occasion on which they want the criminal law changed to
deliver justice is the one occasion when the civil liberties argument is raised by the Government to say no?
I do not agree that this change will have a significant or real impact on civil liberties. This change will
still be governed by the interests of justice test, by an appeal before the Court of Criminal Appeal and by the
fundamental rules of evidence. We are talking about a marginal change to a law that has fundamentally failed. In
2006 this Parliament passed double jeopardy laws and those sitting in the gallery—the Bowraville community—
are the principal reason it was raised at that time. We put these double jeopardy laws through in 2006 to give these
families a shot at justice. They are still sitting in the gallery and the laws have failed them. We want the laws
fixed. I read the contribution of Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile in 2006; he wanted the laws to be fixed. This will
not end here. Like the Hon. Robert Brown, I can do the numbers. We might have The Greens, the Christian
Democratic Party, the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, and the Animal Justice Party supporting the bill but
we are going to lose this.
Earlier I was speaking with Detective Inspector Gary Jubelin and he assures me, and through him I assure
the community, that the police are ready to put a fresh application to the Attorney General, albeit under the laws
that we have failed to fix today. Recommendation No. 9 of the committee's inquiry was to ensure that the
application be heard outside this room, outside this system and outside this State. It was to be heard by someone
genuinely independent—a senior judge or prosecutor from outside New South Wales. It looks to me as if this pool
has been poisoned when it comes to considering the application for these families. We ask the Attorney General
to live up to the commitment to ensure that that application is seen by somebody genuinely independent of New
South Wales. I give my heartfelt hope and thoughts to the families that we will get that application before a
genuine pair of eyes. I feel as if I should apologise to the families for not delivering; and I do. We have not done
the right thing by them, but we will not forget and we will not stop. We will stay with them until they get their
justice.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (The Hon. Trevor Khan): The question is that this bill be now read a
second time.
The House divided.
Ayes ................... 8
Noes ................... 25
Majority .............. 17
AYES
Dr Faruqi (teller) Mr Borsak Mr Brown (teller)
Mr Buckingham Mr Green Mr Pearson
Mr Shoebridge Reverend Nile
NOES
Dr Phelps Mr Ajaka Mr Amato
Mr Blair Mr Colless Mr Donnelly (teller)
Mr Farlow Mr Franklin Mr Gallacher
Mr Gay Mr Khan Mr MacDonald
Mr Mallard Mr Mookhey Mr Pearce
Mr Primrose Mr Searle Mr Veitch
Mr Wong Ms Houssos Ms Maclaren-Jones (teller)
Ms Mitchell Ms Sharpe Ms Taylor
Ms Voltz
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 28
PAIRS
Mr Clarke Mr Moselmane Mr Secord
Ms Cusack Ms Cotsis Mr Mason-Cox
Motion negatived.
THE HON. JOHN AJAKA: Mr President, to suit the convenience of the House I suggest that you do
now leave the chair and cause the bells to be rung at 2.30 p.m.
The PRESIDENT: I will now leave the chair and the House will resume at 2.30 p.m.
Questions Without Notice
FEDERAL BUDGET AND REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT
The Hon. ADAM SEARLE (14:30): My question is directed to the Minister for Ageing, Minister for
Disability Services, and Minister for Multiculturalism. Given that this week's Federal budget cut $80 million from
support from refugee resettlement, how will it impact on the Baird Government's promise to settle up to 7,000
Syrian refugees in New South Wales?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:30): I thank the honourable member for his question. The member fails to realise that we
in New South Wales are undertaking our own extensive work in the resettlement of refugees. The Premier has
appointed Professor Peter Shergold as the Coordinator-General for Refugee Resettlement to ensure a
whole-of-government approach to refugee settlement. That is what is occurring and what will continue to occur.
I indicate how proud I am of my agency, Multicultural NSW, for the great work it is undertaking in refugee
resettlement. I am proud of not only the work it is undertaking to settle the approximately 7,000 refugees who will
be coming to New South Wales but also its previous work on refugee resettlement. In New South Wales we are
welcoming refugees. We will ensure that they are resettled appropriately. I am proud of all communities in New
South Wales for their great work—
The Hon. Greg Donnelly: That is beautiful.
THE HON. JOHN AJAKA: I acknowledge that. What they are doing is beautiful. I thank the Hon. Greg
Donnelly for that interjection. Communities are welcoming refugees. They are opening their hearts, their minds
and their homes to refugees to ensure proper settlement. I congratulate the Premier, who took appropriate control
and who ensured that the right man, in Professor Peter Shergold, was appointed. That is what we are doing and
that is what we will continue to do.
CRUISE SHIP INDUSTRY
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN (14:32): My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime and
Freight. Would the Minister update the House on the most recent cruise season in New South Wales?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (14:33): I thank the honourable member for his question. I acknowledge his interest in
cruising. The cruise industry continues to be the fastest growing tourism sector in Australia, with cruise ship visits
to Sydney showing no signs of slowing.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I encourage members on both sides of the Chamber to come to order and
listen to the Minister.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: A record 302 ships are expected to visit Sydney this financial year—
20 more than the previous year—bringing more than half a million passengers to the city's shores. The growing
trend of cruising has cemented Sydney's place as the premier and unrivalled cruise destination in Australia and
the South Pacific. The latest statistics from the 2015 economic impact study released by the Cruise Lines Industry
Association show that the cruise industry is worth $3.6 billion nationally, with 67 per cent attributed to New South
Wales.
The record season comes at a time when the New South Wales Government has invested in new facilities
and infrastructure to ensure that Sydney can continue to cater for existing cruise ships and attract new ones from
around the world. Late last year I had the honour of opening the upgraded overseas passenger terminal at Circular
Quay. What a cracker it is. It has significantly improved processing capabilities and enhanced passenger
experience and ship turnaround time. The overseas passenger terminal is Australia's premier cruise gateway. The
new facility meets ship turnaround time needs better than ever before, potentially doubling the number of cruises
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 29
on offer to tourists. The upgrade also means that two cruise ships can dock simultaneously at the overseas
passenger terminal for the first time.
Work will start this month to install a new super-mooring at the southern end of the overseas passenger
terminal to allow access for the next generation of cruise ships, which hold up to 5,000 passengers. It will be used
for the first time in December, when the mega-liner Ovation of the Seas arrives. I know the Hon. Trevor Khan
will be there with me to meet it. That will be the first time Sydney has hosted a newly launched cruise ship—an
honour usually reserved for ports in North America and Europe. Work on the mooring will involve the installation
of four piles, a concrete pile cap and two kidney-shaped mooring bollards and is expected to be completed by
September. The industry keeps growing and the New South Wales Government continues to spread the word that
New South Wales is ready and open for business.
As former Ministers on the Opposition side of the Chamber would know, departmental liaison officers
work with us—always for a short time so that they cannot influence us too much and we cannot influence them
too much. This week Adrian Toovey, who has been with me for 12 months, is going back to the department. We
wish him well. I acknowledge him for the work that he has done. I know that members on both sides who have
worked with Adrian have found him good to work with. We will miss him, but the department will benefit from
his return. I am sure that his wife will be happy that he is no longer working at Parliament House.
FEDERAL BUDGET AND AGED CARE
The Hon. WALT SECORD (14:37): My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Ageing,
Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Multiculturalism. Given the $1.2 billion in cuts in
Commonwealth aged-care funding in this week's Federal budget, what will be the impact on older residents in
New South Wales?
THE HON. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:37): I thank the honourable member for his question. Opposition members fail to realise
that this Coalition Government continues to deliver for the residents of New South Wales. The problem is that
when Labor was in government it could not deliver anything. Labor relied on the Federal Government —
The Hon.Walt Secord: Point of order—
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister will resume his seat. The Hon. Sophie Cotsis will remain silent.
The Hon.Walt Secord: My point of order goes to relevance. My question was about Commonwealth
cuts and their impact on New South Wales residents. It did not ask for a historical discourse from the Minister.
The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order.
THE HON. JOHN AJAKA: Labor relied on the Federal Government to do everything because it could
not do anything in government. It could not deliver. The problem Labor had was that it had to rely on the
Rudd-Gillard-Rudd Government. So there was no action from State Labor in government and no assistance from
its Federal colleagues. Where did that leave Australia? In an utter mess. We now have a Federal Government that
understands the concept of delivering a responsible budget. At the same time, the people of New South Wales
have the Baird-Grant Government, which knows how to deliver. That is why I am confident we will continue to
deliver for our seniors. We will continue to maintain the Ageing Strategy, which this Government implemented.
Those opposite did not introduce the strategy—they did not care about seniors and the Ageing Strategy when they
were in government.
I am confident that this Government will continue to deliver for our seniors. I am proud of the fact that
we are currently reviewing the Ageing Strategy to again deliver more for our seniors, and that is what we will
continue to do. If only those opposite had done a little work on this when they were in government. If only they
had been able to ensure that their Federal colleagues did not continue to destroy this great country. Shame on
them.
The Hon. WALT SECORD (14:40:2): I ask a supplementary question. Would the Minister elucidate
his answer in regard to his description of the Federal budget and the cuts as "reasonable" in his answer, and does
he stand by that description?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:40:4): The term I used was "responsible". As I have indicated, this Coalition Government
will continue to look after our seniors. We will continue to ensure that they live an active, healthy and inclusive
life, and we will continue to deal with Federal Government in relation to that. Those opposite are well aware that
aged care falls within the domain of the Federal Government, and those opposite know that the irresponsible
behaviour of the Rudd-Gillard Government put our seniors in the worst possible position. Those opposite should
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 30
hang their heads in shame, each and every one of them. There was not a peep out of them when they saw what
their Federal colleagues were doing.
ROYAL NATIONAL PARK
Dr MEHREEN FARUQI (14:42): My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Ageing,
representing the Minister for the Environment. What progress has been made in nominating the Royal National
Park for World Heritage status, given it has been more than a year since the Federal and New South Wales
governments announced the joint bid?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:42:2): I thank Dr Mehreen Faruqi for her question. I will refer it to the Minister for the
Environment and come back with an answer in due course.
MULTICULTURAL NSW REGIONAL ADVISORY COUNCILS
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (14:42): My question is directed to the Minister for Ageing, Minister for
Disability Services, and Minister for Multiculturalism. What is the Government doing to understand and resolve
issues faced by our culturally diverse communities in Sydney and regional New South Wales?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:43:0): I thank the Hon. David Clarke for his question. I am very proud to say that the
Government has established new Multicultural NSW Regional Advisory Councils [RACs] across the State.
Regional Advisory Councils are established under the Multicultural NSW Act 2000, and their operation is central
to building social cohesion and community harmony. Each RAC is chaired by a board member of the Multicultural
NSW Advisory Board. The RACs will identify issues that affect communities across regional and metropolitan
centres, and work to resolve them through cooperation and partnerships among community groups, specialist
service providers and government agencies.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Greg Pearce to order for the first time. I call the Hon. Walt
Secord to order for the first time.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: By actively engaging with the broader community and bringing issues of
cultural diversity to the table, the RACs will be able to act on and support solutions that are guided by people at
the front line of their community. There are five metropolitan RACs, covering every local government area in
Sydney, and seven RACs covering all regional areas of the State. The result is that, for the first time, all geographic
areas are represented across metropolitan Sydney and regional New South Wales. This will significantly improve
engagement with local communities and maximise opportunities to link the objectives of government and the
priorities of communities.
Each RAC is composed of community members, and State and local government representatives. I have
complete confidence that we have the right mix of people who will play an active role in discussions, decisions
and solutions. The first round of RAC meetings began last week, and I was delighted to attend the first meetings
of the West Sydney RAC in Parramatta, the Murray-Lower Darling RAC in Albury, the Illawarra-South East
RAC in Wollongong and the North Sydney RAC in Ryde. I look forward to attending all the others in due course.
[Interruption]
It is a real shame that those opposite continue to interject and to treat this as a joke.
The PRESIDENT: Order! Members will come to order. Indeed it is. I call the Hon. Walt Secord to order
for the second time.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: I want to ensure that consultation, participation and cooperation happens at
a grassroots level between all communities, from those in the Murray-Lower Darling regions in the south to those
in the northern regions, and everywhere else in between. The abilities of the community representatives, coupled
with the expertise and experience of our local government and State Government representatives—many of whom
work tirelessly to include, to support and to build the capacity of our communities—place the RACs in a prime
position to make a real and significant difference to the lives of people in New South Wales.
While RACs have been created to cover all geographic areas in metro Sydney and across the State, we
recognise the challenges that vast distances can create. To help break down barriers created by distance, we have
developed an online forum that will enable members to stay engaged and continue discussions between meetings.
This collaborative response will assist us in expanding our reach and help us to stay connected. There is much to
celebrate in this culturally rich State of ours, and I am proud of the continued contribution our community
members make to strengthening community harmony and social cohesion. I very much look forward to hearing
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 31
about the important work each RAC has started to undertake, and the remarkable achievements each RAC will
make as a united forum of committed and engaged community and Government members.
NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME
The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS (14:47): My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Ageing,
Minister for Disabilities, and Minister for Multiculturalism. What is the response of the New South Wales
Government to the 28 April request by the NSW Council for Intellectual Disability for independent oversight of
the transfer of Ageing, Disability and Home Care [ADHC] services to the non-government sector, which will
ensure the rights of people with disability are protected during the process?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:47:3): I thank the Hon. Sophie Cotsis for her question. It is important to remember—and
this is what the members opposite should remember—that this Government is undertaking extensive consultation
with the entire community in relation to the transition of disability services to the non-government sector. It has
been accepted by all, and I have repeated numerous quotes in this House by the relevant stakeholders. They
support the Government's move to transition disability services to the non-government sector. It allows for the
best possible outcomes. At the same time we want to ensure that it is undertaken appropriately. We want to ensure
that we are consulting with the entire community—with people with disability, their families, their carers, the
non-government organisations, the academics and the experts—to ensure that the transition occurs appropriately,
and that is what will occur, with the appropriate safeguards. I will continue to maintain that process.
The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS (14:49): I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister elucidate his
answer in relation to safeguards and protections?
THE HON. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:49): On numerous occasions I have spoken about the work being undertaken by this
Government, together with all State governments and the Commonwealth Government, to ensure there are
appropriate safeguards during the transition to the National Disability Insurance Scheme and post-transition. The
Commonwealth and other States are looking at the safeguards currently applied by the State of New South Wales
as the example. The Hon. Sophie Cotsis has no idea. [Time expired.]
NORTH STRATHFIELD LAND REZONING
The Hon. PAUL GREEN (14:50): My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime and
Freight, representing the Minister for Local Government. Given that the area of North Strathfield along the
Powells Creek canal has a noted history of flooding and that a new road and bridge has been proposed to pass
through the protected habitat of Mason Park Bird Sanctuary and Wetlands, how will the issues of flooding, a
protected bird sanctuary and rare vegetation saltmarshes be addressed if the current zoning for residential homes
is rezoned for high density development?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (14:51): The short answer to this question is that it will not be easy. A number of issues have
serendipitously arrived at the one spot at the one time.
The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: Say it again.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: No, do not mock my lisp. How dare you. That is a disgrace.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I know we had a very late night last night. I encourage members to listen to
the answers given by Ministers in relative silence. The Minister has the call.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: As I indicated, there is a degree of serendipity with the number of issues
occurring in the one place. Obviously I am not aware of the detail of this particular site. I am more than happy to
do the research and refer the question to the Minister for Local Government, and if it is a Roads and Maritime
Services matter I will also address that.
SHARK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
The Hon. BEN FRANKLIN (14:52): My question is addressed to the Minister for Primary Industries.
Will the Minister update the House on the rollout of the New South Wales Government's $16 million Shark
Management Strategy?
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(14:53): The New South Wales Government is forging ahead with the rollout of trials of emerging technology as
part of its $16 million Shark Management Strategy.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane to order for the first time.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 32
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: Last week I joined the team from Shark Mitigation Systems at Bondi Beach,
along with some of its most famous residents, the Bondi lifeguards, to see firsthand the results of the Clever Buoy
trial. The use of sonar technology is the Holy Grail of shark detection and will be another great tool that can be
used to better inform lifeguards and beachgoers of the movements of sharks around our beaches. We will now
look to deploy the Clever Buoy at a location with a known shark aggregation so as our scientists can truly put it
through its paces.
A number of drone trials on the north coast have been completed and we are impressed so far with the
capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles. Another trial is planned for Port Macquarie shortly. We are also poised
to install the first of two new technology shark barriers with the first Eco Shark Barrier to be installed at Lighthouse
Beach, Ballina. After Easter, divers from the Eco Shark Barrier team have made attempts to begin installation but
recent storms and large waves have deposited huge amounts of sand in the wave zone. This has made it too
dangerous for the divers to safely install the barrier and has led to an unfortunate delay. The team from Eco Shark
Barrier will continue to monitor water depths and will begin installation of the barrier at the earliest and safest
opportunity.
We are in uncharted territory here: this is the first time this technology has ever been deployed in New
South Wales. Dealing with Mother Nature can be challenging, but we are determined to see these barriers in the
water as soon as possible. Meanwhile, construction of the Aquarius Barrier for Lennox Head is well underway,
with installation expected in the coming months. In addition, our Shark Tagging Programs continue, with 14 white
sharks tagged on the north coast last year and 15 bull sharks tagged so far along the New South Wales coast. I am
very pleased to report that we have also now installed a total of nine VR4G listening stations. These are now in
place at Ballina, Byron Bay, Coffs Harbour, South West Rocks, Port Macquarie, Forster, Lennox Head, Yamba
and Kingscliff.
We have recently completed an increased and extended aerial surveillance schedule up and down the
New South Wales coast over the busy Easter and April school holiday period. Last month I announced that aerial
shark surveillance along the New South Wales coast will be conducted year round for the next 12 months. We
have some of the best beaches in the world and it does not have to be the middle of summer to attract people to
the beach. This is why aerial surveillance will be carried out on selected weekdays, weekends, school holidays
and public holidays over the next year.
The surveillance will take place over six regions from Moruya all the way up to Tweed Heads, to ensure
we have the right measures in place to give people extra confidence when hitting the water all year round. New
South Wales is at the forefront of trialling a wide range of new and innovative technologies to minimise risk to
beachgoers. Our strategy is unparalleled in this space and New South Wales is proudly leading the world in rolling
out innovative shark mitigation measures to bring back confidence to our New South Wales beachgoers and we
can all continue to do what we love year round, that is, going to the beach.
The PRESIDENT: I welcome to the public gallery Dr Cameron Archer, Chairman of the Primary
Industries Education Foundation of Australia, together with visitors in international food and fibre education,
guests of the Hon. Rick Colless.
SCHOOL CHAPLAINCY PROGRAM FUNDING
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE (14:56): My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime
and Freight, representing the Premier. Is there uncertainty concerning the Federal Government's future funding of
360 chaplains, of whom 200 receive the maximum $20,000 and 103 receive $10,000 per annum, in New South
Wales State schools? If the Turnbull Federal Government axes the funding for chaplains in New South Wales
State schools, will the New South Wales Government fund this vital chaplaincy program to help meet the total
wellbeing needs of New South Wales students?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (14:58): Thank God the Premier gets paid more than I do because that is a tough question.
I will refer it to the Premier; I am not making decisions above my pay scale.
MINISTER FOR DISABILITY SERVICES OFFICE FURNITURE
The Hon. GREG DONNELLY (14:58): My question is directed to the Minister for Disability Services.
Why is the Minister the only parliamentarian who insists he does not need a work desk in his parliamentary office
to carry out his ministerial and parliamentary duties?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (14:59): That is a very good question. I recommend the arrangement to other members.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 33
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister does not need the assistance of Government backbench
members to answer the question.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: As the Minister for Disability Services who introduced the Disability
Inclusion Act to this Parliament and the Minister responsible for ensuring the inclusion for all people—
The Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane: You're speaking too fast, John. We can't hear you.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: This is a very serious question.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane to order for the first time.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: This is a serious question because it allows me to explain that my office is
inclusive for people with disability and people in wheelchairs. The Hon. Greg Donnelly is welcome to come to
my office any time he wants. Walt can be the perfect example in his wheelchair.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the Hon. Walt Secord that he is on two calls to order. He will be
removed from the Chamber is he makes another outburst. The Minister has the call.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: When I hold meetings with people with disability and people in wheelchairs
or with mobility issues I ensure that they are comfortable in my office. That is why I do not have a work desk. I
am happy to say that I have the same arrangement in my ministerial office. I have a conference table that I am
more than capable of working from. At that table I can do my paperwork, make phone calls and hold meetings if
needed.
If my saving this Parliament the cost of a desk upsets the Hon. Greg Donnelly I do not care. I care about
ensuring that people with disability are included. People in wheelchairs are grateful that I have made arrangements
so that at my meetings people can sit on chairs and lounges and everyone can be included on the same level. The
Hon. Greg Donnelly should learn about being inclusive. It is unbelievable. Members opposite truly have no idea.
The Hon. GREG DONNELLY (15:01): I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister elucidate
his answer with further details about why he does not have a desk to work at in his parliamentary office?
The PRESIDENT: Order! The question is out of order; it merely restates the original question.
HARWOOD BRIDGE
The Hon. SHAYNE MALLARD (15:02): My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime
and Freight. Will the Minister update the House on the recent announcement by the New South Wales and Federal
governments relating to Harwood bridge on the Pacific Highway?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:02): I thank the member for his question and acknowledge that he is a regular visitor to
the area. Last week I visited the tidy town of Harwood to announce the preferred tenderer for the new Harwood
bridge across the Clarence River, which is an important feature of the $4.36 billion Federal and New South Wales
government-funded Woolgoolga to Ballina Pacific Highway upgrade. Alongside my colleagues the member for
Clarence, Chris Gulaptis, and the Federal member for Page, Kevin Hogan, I was proud to announce Acciona
Ferrovial Joint Venture as the preferred tenderer.
This will be no walk in the park. Those guys will design and build a 1.5 kilometre new Harwood bridge
across the mighty Clarence River. The bridge will be built some 70 metres downstream from the existing bridge
and will be the longest of more than 100 bridges to be built as part of the Woolgoolga to Ballina Pacific Highway
upgrade. Including the Harwood bridge, we now have an impressive 38 kilometres of the 155 kilometre project
under construction with an additional 53 kilometres being currently prepared for major work.
The new bridge will not only be a key part of the important highway duplication but also remove a
notorious traffic hotspot for locals and will be futureproofed to meet increased traffic demand. The existing
Harwood bridge is opened about five times a week to allow vessels to pass underneath, creating lengthy traffic
hold-ups on the Pacific Highway. The new bridge will fix those delays by removing the need for it to be opened
thanks to a 30 metre clearance for passing boats. When the existing bridge was opened in 1966 the old girl was
the third-longest bridge in the State.
The Hon. Lynda Voltz: The old girl?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is now.
The Hon. Lynda Voltz: Why is it a girl?
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 34
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Because it is a delightful bridge that plays an important role. Girls play
important roles. The Hon. Lynda Voltz wants to demean women. When will members opposite learn?
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister will ignore interjections.
Mr Jeremy Buckingham: What happened when you opened the bridge?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Funny you should ask whether I opened the bridge in 1966. Unfortunately,
I was too young but I did travel on the punt that was there before it. When my mother, father, sister and I went on
our holidays in the caravan we travelled across the punt that was in place before 1966. It was really exciting. The
bridge construction will create around 200 jobs as part of the 2,500 direct and 4,500 indirect jobs being created
on the Woolgoolga to Ballina section of the upgrade. The old bridge will turn half a century old this year and will
remain as part of the local road network so that local people do not have to go onto the highway for local
commutes. We hope to turn the first sod for the new bridge on its birthday in August and to have it completed in
2019.
KANGAROO MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Hon. MARK PEARSON (15:06): My question is directed to the Minister for Ageing, representing
the Minister for the Environment. Recently, along with Uncle Max Harrison, elder of the Yuin people, I discussed
with the Minister the significance of the kangaroo, or malu, to the Indigenous people and their lore. Concerns
around cruelty and sustainability practices were also raised. Considering the Kangaroo Management Plan has not
been reviewed in 20 years, will the Minister recommend the plan be sent to the relevant general standing
committee for review? If so, will the review include a term of reference in regards to the cultural and spiritual
significance of the malu to the Indigenous people and their lore and laws?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (15:07): I note the member mentioned in his very good question that he has recently discussed
this matter with the Minister. As I am not aware of those discussions and he is seeking specifics I will refer the
question to the Minister and come back with an answer.
THOMPSON SQUARE, WINDSOR
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (15:08): My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime and
Freight. Is the Minister aware of the 24-hour-a-day vigil at Thompson Square in Windsor that has now been going
for 1,000 days, and is he aware of the forecasted population growth in Windsor over the next two decades? Given
those two issues, will he reconsider the bypass route to save an important and unique piece of Australian heritage
and also meet the future planning needs of Windsor?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:08): I hear the Labor Party and their political allies The Greens, who have been espousing
civil disobedience across the State in recent days. The Greens who beat the Hon. Penny Sharpe, Jenny Leong—
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: This is clearly irrelevant to my question.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is relevant to what is happening here. The member is talking about people
who are running a 24-hour-a-day vigil in Thompson Square.
Thompson Square and the building of Windsor Bridge has gone through the full community process, including
planning and court processes. The very small group that opposes this, as against the larger community group that
supports it, has tried everything to stop this project and it has lost. The New South Wales Land and Environment
Court threw out its allegations as untrue. If one cares to examine what the Government is doing, we are restoring
the square—the square that has not been there for several decades—and replacing the bridge. As a result of
consultation and, I suspect in part, the action of people in relation to the square, we have made changes that will
deliver a better outcome for the community.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: You are knocking down more of the heritage buildings.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: You asked the question, listen to the answer. You obviously did not learn
much when you were in this role.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister has the call.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Otherwise you would still have it.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: How long were you in Opposition, Duncan?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Long enough to learn that I do not want to go back there. We did make
changes as a result of community liaison. That is appropriate and we will have a better project. But to perpetuate
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 35
a view that the great majority of the community are against the bridge and the outcomes is just plain wrong and
dishonest.
NSW STRATEGIC PLAN FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE
The Hon. BRONNIE TAYLOR (15:11): My question is addressed to the Minister for Ageing, Minister
for Disability Services, and Minister for Multiculturalism. Will the Minister outline the findings of the
consultations with children and young people on the NSW Strategic Plan for Children and Young People?
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (15:11): The Baird Government is of the strong view that children and young people should
have a voice within government. As the Minister responsible for youth, I am proud to inform the House that work
is progressing on the State's first legislated strategic plan for children and young people. The Government is
determined that this plan will be a product of those it is intended to serve.
For that reason, I asked the Advocate for Children and Young People, Andrew Johnson, to conduct
extensive consultations with children and young people. As members will be aware from the extensive media
coverage, the Advocate has recently delivered his findings, which I will now share with the House. The report of
the consultations with children and young people contains input from more than 4,000 children and young people
of all backgrounds from across this State. The consultations focused on four questions: what is and is not working
well for children and young people in New South Wales, their priorities for government, and the qualities of a
good society.
As one would expect from such open and genuine consultations, there were some diverse views on these
questions. More surprisingly, however, was the extent to which children and young people held broadly shared
views. Children and young people across New South Wales want to live in a place where they are safe, respected,
connected and healthy. They also want opportunities and a voice in the decisions that affect them. They identified
several areas that they believe the New South Wales Government should focus on to improve their lives, and
education, transport, employment, healthcare, and mental health were mentioned as key priorities.
The results of the consultations and related polling show that this generation of children and young people
is strongly motivated to bring about positive change to the world in which they live. When asked about their hopes
for the future, the top response was to receive a good education and to make their world a better place. So simple,
yet so powerful. Three in five New South Wales children and young people have undertaken volunteer work and
their motivations for doing so were overwhelmingly to give back to the community.
We acknowledge and celebrate this "generation compassion" and will continue to work with them to
make New South Wales a great place for children and young people to live in and grow. One of the ways we will
be doing this is by ensuring that the voices of children and young people are strongly reflected in the forthcoming
NSW Strategic Plan for Children and Young People. We also will be ensuring that their voices are heard in the
work being done in the interests of children and young people across all portfolios. I look forward to releasing the
plan with the Advocate shortly.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Sophie Cotsis to order for the first time.
NORTHERN BASIN WATER ALLOCATIONS
Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM (15:15): My question without notice is directed to the Minister for
Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water. I recently visited southern Queensland where I saw a
large amount of cotton coming off Cubbie Station and irrigated farms near St George and Dirranbandi. Can the
Minister update the House on the representations he previously stated he would make to the Queensland
Government regarding water allocations in the Darling, Culgoa, Condamine and Balonne river systems?
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(15:15): I would be delighted to update the House because I recently made representations—I am trying to
remember; I do not want to mislead the House—two or three Fridays ago when the water Ministers met in
Brisbane. Not only did I make representations but I did it on their turf. One issue I raised on behalf of New South
Wales was the Northern Basin Review and the work that is being done by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority.
New South Wales has met a lot of its obligations under that review, including the water recovery that has
occurred from our system. Queensland is lagging behind, and that frustrates me as the New South Wales Minister
for Lands and Water. Indeed, I have commented at every ministerial council meeting that the results of the
Northern Basin Review are outstanding—meaning they are overdue. The Murray-Darling Basin Authority
engaged consultants to conduct this review but, unfortunately, they made a mess of it and we had to engage another
set of consultants. They messed up part of the socioeconomic review relating to the northern communities, which
for a long time have relied upon a strong agricultural sector and the use of productive water.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 36
That is the first matter I have addressed with my Queensland counterparts. The other measure—and it
was a win at the ministerial council, on behalf of the people of New South Wales—was to make sure as we move
through the key decision points of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan that New South Wales continues to advocate
for infrastructure projects to deliver water savings. We need to start thinking outside the box in order to deliver
those water savings and so that we do not see productive water being purchased out of New South Wales and
flowing downstream to South Australia and then eventually out to sea.
If that water and those savings can be made through infrastructure projects or projects such as the carp
eradication program, we know that we can do great things for the environment and our agricultural sector.
Significantly, at the last ministerial council meeting, all States and the Commonwealth agreed to look at non-flow
related projects to help bridge the gap, particularly for the sustainable diversion limit [SDL] projects and the
required 650 gigalitres.
What does that mean for New South Wales? If we can stop the release of cold water or black water events
in our river systems, then we can deliver proper outcomes for the environment, such as the eradication of carp or
the prevention of the death of fish populations. It will mean that we will not have to enter the market and buy
productive water from our producers in regional New South Wales, and it will ensure that we have better rivers,
more productive regional businesses and better socioeconomic outcomes for the people of regional New South
Wales.
I thank the member for the Dixer. I thank him for giving me the opportunity to stand up and show that we are
advocating on behalf of all of New South Wales and that if we have to have uncomfortable conversations with
other States or the Commonwealth we will.
HILLSBOROUGH ROAD CONSTRUCTION
The Hon. COURTNEY HOUSSOS (15:19): My question is directed to the Minister for Roads,
Maritime and Freight. Given in 2015 the New South Wales Government announced $4 million for planning and
pre-construction along Hillsborough Road near Lake Macquarie, why has construction work not commenced and
when will it begin?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:20): I thank the honourable member for her question. Before a government undertakes
a project it has to do the planning and we have put forward $4 million to do that. I have 4,600 projects underway
in New South Wales and I am more than happy to take this question on notice and come back with a detailed
answer.
LOCAL LAND SERVICES
The Hon. SCOTT FARLOW (15:20): My question is addressed to the Minister for Primary Industries,
and Minister for Land and Water. Will the Minister update the House on Local Land Services activities and his
recent tour with the chair of Local Land Services?
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(15:20): The New South Wales Government is committed to supporting landholders, primary producers and
industries across New South Wales. We know that engaging communities in environmental conservation and
management at the local and regional levels through a range of programs and initiatives is essential for
sustainability within the primary industries sector. That is why the New South Wales Government and agencies
such as Local Land Services are working with communities to educate them and ensure the right measures are put
in place at all levels to protect primary production.
In early April I travelled around the State with the recently appointed chairman of Local Land Services,
Tim de Mestre, to meet with a range of organisations and community members doing great innovative work within
their region. In the Central West region we met with Local Land Services staff to hear about how technology is
being used in the ongoing fight against wild dogs. Wild dogs are devastating to landholders, both in terms of
financial losses and the emotional impact of having to deal with continued loss of stock. Local Land Services staff
are working closely with landholders and the community to roll out new canid pest ejectors, which deliver a
precise dose of the toxin 1080 when activated by wild dogs.
The New South Wales Government recently regulated the use of these ejectors, which are an
improvement on previous baiting measures. Landholders can access information and training from Local Land
Services to ensure that the ejectors are used properly and that landholders are in the know about other new
technologies and approaches to wild dog and fox control.
I also had the chance to see the Feral Fighters program in action in the south-east region. This program
commenced in 2015 and involves large-scale baiting programs across two districts in the south east. More than
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 37
650 landholders will be provided with baits and they will work together to lay them over a 350,000 hectare area.
By participating in a strategic control program, these landholders are working with their neighbours and local
networks. This means they will achieve better results for themselves, the community, local industries and the
environment.
In Richmond, in the Greater Sydney Local Land Services region, I visited a demonstration site for the
Next Generation Compost project—a joint venture between Local Land Services, NSW Farmers and the Institute
for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney. Through this initiative two growers in the Greater
Sydney region will be supplied with compost at a subsidised rate and the sites will be monitored to determine how
composted sites perform compared to non-composted sites. This is a fantastic initiative and demonstrates the type
of innovation that the New South Wales Government is fostering in all sectors, including in agriculture, and I will
keep the House informed of those results. It also aligns with our commitment to the environment in supporting
sustainable practices and reducing waste.
I also visited the Eight Mile Travelling Stock Reserve near Young to see how the local Wiradjuri
community is working with the New South Wales Government to preserve cultural heritage. At Eight Mile an
innovative pilot is being led by the Local Land Services that involves Wiradjuri assessors locating sites of cultural
significance on travelling stock reserves and making recommendations for their maintenance and protection. Right
across the State the hardworking staff in Local Land Services are always looking for new and better ways to assist
landholders and their communities. These are just some of the examples; there are plenty more. I commend Local
Land Services for the great work they are carrying out to ensure that landholders, industry and farmers are kept
up to date with the latest information. The new chairman of Local Land Services, Tim de Mestre, has hit the
ground running. He is a man from the industry; he is well known and well respected and is doing great things for
Local Land Services.
BIOFUELS INDUSTRY JOBS
Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM (15:24): My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime
and Freight, the Hon. Duncan Gay, representing the Premier. Is the Minister aware that the Minister for Innovation
and Better Regulation recently corrected the record regarding inflated jobs figures he included in his second
reading speech to the Biofuels Amendment Bill 2016 and that he has admitted that these figures came directly
from ethanol producer Manildra? Is it normal government practice to include information from an outside source
that is benefited by legislation, and what due diligence does the Government undertake to ensure that the
Parliament is provided with accurate information and is not misled?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:25): I thank the member for his question. For his greater education I direct him to
Hansard on that day.
ABORIGINAL REMAINS BURIAL
The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE (15:26): My question is directed to the Minister for Primary
Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water. Given Western Australia is developing a statewide policy on the
burial of Aboriginal remains in traditional country, what steps is the New South Wales Government taking in this
regard?
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(15:26): I thank the member for his question; it is a very good question. I was not aware of the situation in
Western Australia. I recently met with the NSW Aboriginal Land Council at its office and sat down with its board
as the Minister responsible for Aboriginal land claims. It was a good opportunity to discuss a range of issues but
that was not something that was discussed . I am not saying that to be smart, I am just saying that that was not
something that was on the council's radar. I will undertake to look into this issue and speak to the department
through Cemeteries and Crematoria NSW to find out if they have had a look at what has happened in Western
Australia.
If it is something that warrants further discussion I am happy to initiate those discussions in conjunction
with my other counterparts, particularly the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the Hon. Leslie Williams, and to help
to facilitate any meetings with the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council—that is, of course, if this issue has
not been addressed or looked at in the past. At this stage I am not aware of that, but it is a good question and I will
take it on notice and come back to the member with some information.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 38
SYDNEY MOTORWAY NETWORK
The Hon. GREG PEARCE (15:28): My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, Maritime and
Freight. Will the Minister update the House on progress in improving Sydney's motorway network to help relieve
congestion across Australia's largest city?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:28): I thank the honourable member for his question and for his knowledge. He at least
knows where the M5 is, unlike some others. I am pleased to report that work continues steadily on much-needed
improvements to Sydney's motorway network as we continue to fill in the missing pieces. State Government
approval was given last month for the second part of WestConnex, the New M5, which will double capacity of
the existing M5 East corridor. We are also proceeding well on early works for the M4 East twin tunnels, and it is
great to see all the construction being done along the section of the M4 that is being widened between Parramatta
and Homebush.
Unlike The Greens, who have only a call for civil disobedience to fall back on, which is practically
nothing—ask what they stand for: "We stand for civil disobedience"; good on you, guys—this Government has
solid plans and is delivering solid results. I was heartened to see the Leader of the Opposition throw his support
behind the M4 East and the new M5 in a Daily Telegraph interview—he is there for the west. However, I was
further concerned to see that the Hon. Luke Foley described the most crucial element of WestConnex, the link
that will join the M4 and M5, as 'highly dubious'—the thing that makes it really hum, the thing that makes it work
as 'highly dubious'.
For the full benefits of WestConnex to be realised that link is of utmost importance. It will be the final
element in creating the free-flowing motorway network. It will create a city and inner west bypass and mean
considerable time savings for motorists, including those in Western Sydney who are headed to the airport and the
port. Crucially, it will take traffic congestion off local roads. How does Labor hope to achieve this without the
M4 to M5 link, the missing link? What plan does it have? Does Labor have any plan at all or is this something the
Hon. Penny Sharpe dreamed up? While I am talking about Labor and its plans or lack of them, I want to know
how Labor members are going to fund it. They have done the "me too". They say, "If you can build it, we'll build
it as well", but they have not said how they are going to fund it. Are they going to toll it? Tell us that you are not
going to toll it. Here is your chance. Stand up and say, "No, we are not going to toll it."
The Hon.Walt Secord: How are you going to pay for it?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: We are going to toll it; we have said we are going to toll it right up front
and the Hon. Walt Secord has told everyone that we have said we are going to toll it, but he has not said how
Labor is going to pay for it. The question is: if they are not going to put it a toll on it and they are not going to
lease any infrastructure, how are they going to pay for it? The only way they can pay for it is to cut funding to
schools, cut funding to hospitals, cut funding to police. If you are not going to toll it, tell the people of the inner
west, the south-west and the west which schools you are not going to build, which ambulance stations you are not
going to upgrade and which hospitals you are not going to build. Come on, tell us. You have got the plan; where
are the answers? [Time expired.]
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is with great reluctance that I indicate that the time for questions is over.
HILLSBOROUGH ROAD CONSTRUCTION
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:32): Earlier in question time I was asked a quite appropriate question about $4 million
for planning along Hillsborough Road. Roads and Maritime Services is currently carrying out a traffic study for
Lake Macquarie which was extended in August-September 2015 to include all State roads between Warners Bay
and Charlestown. The investigations are considering options such as widening and providing additional lanes
along Hillsborough Road—and my colleague the Parliamentary Secretary has indicated sadly there was a tragic
accident involving a young girl yesterday—traffic lights at Chadwick and Crockett streets and upgrades to the
Warners Bay and inner city bypass roundabouts. The studies will allow Roads and Maritime to develop short,
medium and long-term priorities for the road network to support future funding requests. Community consultation
is expected to be carried out on the Lake Macquarie traffic study in the coming months and the draft Charlestown
to Warners Bay corridor strategy is expected to be displayed for community feedback later this year.
Announcements
TRIBUTE TO SUSANNA MONTRONE
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:34): I was asked a number of times yesterday why Susanna Montrone is leaving us; the
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 39
answer is that frankly she needs and deserves a break from members—and especially from me. Susanna came to
my office described as potentially a Young Liberal, which gave me very grave concerns. I was relieved to discover
she was not a Young Liberal and has not been a member of the Young Liberals, but is a young woman with
incredible motivation.
She was one of the originals in our ministerial team. She stuck by us and has grown with the office as it
evolved over the years. In each and every role she has carried out with me, which included parliamentary liaison
officer [PLO], adviser, senior adviser and legislative director, she has surpassed expectation—and we had high
expectations. If I had a dollar for every member from every side of politics who has complimented me on
Susanna's role here over the five years, I would be a very, very rich man. And I have been rich with luck to have
had such a supportive staffer, and now friend, working so closely in our crew for half a decade, which in Susanna's
short life is a very large amount of time.
She is strong, yet kind, determined and almost always open to solutions. She has proved to us all that she
is an outstanding staffer and a woman who is intelligent, competent, confident and reliable. There is not a job that
she cannot do or a task too hard. I am sure each and every member in this Chamber and in the other place will
agree that her hard work and dedication have been proven time and time again to make our jobs in a hard area
seamless. Susanna, you will be missed by the Parliament, the members, the staffers and our office but mostly by
me. We wish you all the best in your future endeavours and I am sure you will attack your next appointment with
as much grace and fortitude as you have here with me from day one. I know you will be working on your farewell
in the bar this afternoon but I am still paying you tomorrow and I want you at work early!
The Hon. ADAM SEARLE (15:37): On behalf of the Labor Opposition I, too, would like to record our
thanks and appreciation for the hard work of Susanna Montrone in her time working for the Leader of the
Government in this place. Having been both an Opposition and Government staffer in this place I know how
difficult such a role can be. Trying to run the upper House is a little like herding cats, particularly when it seems
that governments, no matter their political stripes and being focused in the other place, fail to have an appreciation
of the ways of the upper House and sometimes the unique challenges government faces in managing the legislative
agenda in this place.
It is not an easy role but it is one that Susanna has undertaken always with courtesy and good humour
within the constraints of her role. We as members have appreciated our relationship with you, as have our staff
who have worked closely with you. We wish you all the best in your future endeavours. Some of us may have a
drink with you in the bar this afternoon. We will miss you as well.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA (Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for
Multiculturalism) (15:38): The second saddest aspect is that Susanna is actually leaving the Leader of the
Government. The saddest aspect is that she is not coming to work for me. That would have justified her leaving
the Leader of the Government.
Mr Scot MacDonald: It is not about you, John.
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: I know it is not about me. Susanna, I am well aware that you are an incredible
assistant, adviser and manager in any office that you are part of. I am well aware of that because in 2011, when
I was appointed the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Roads, you took me under your wing. You were
the person I worked most closely with in that period as Parliamentary Secretary. I saw firsthand what you bring
to an office. I saw firsthand what you bring to a team. You have continued in that role. The assistance that you
have afforded me as a Minister, and my entire office, has been wonderful and I am eternally grateful. I too wish
you the very best for your future. I am confident that in whatever role you take on you will again be the one person
who brings everything to that office. I wish you all the very best.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE (15:40): I put on record the appreciation of the Christian Democratic
Party for the cooperation and help we have received from Susanna Montrone over the past five years. She has
helped us greatly. As members know, it is critical that those of us in the upper House know what the Government
is doing and what the agenda is. Susanna has always been honest and frank with us. We appreciate her help. She
said in a note to me that we should look her up when we are in London, if we have time. I probably will! Thank
you.
The PRESIDENT: Only Susanna would warrant a fifth speech. I call Mr Jeremy Buckingham.
Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM (15:41): I will be brief. I join other members in thanking Susanna
Montrone for her fantastic work over the years. I wish her all the best with her move to the United Kingdom. I am
sure she will be as successful there as she has been here—worse luck. She has done a great job of shepherding
Government legislation through and representing the Government in a good-natured way. She has dealt well with
the challenges and the late nights. It is a difficult place in which to work, with late nights and all kinds of pressure
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 40
in her role at the pointy end of delivering Government legislation. She has done it amiably and in good spirits.
She has always been warmly received by The Greens, in all our variations. We thank her for her work over the
years and wish her all the best. We will join her in the parliamentary bar for a cold drink very soon.
Members
PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARIES
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (15:42): I inform the House that on 5 May 2016 Mr Kevin Anderson, MP, was appointed as
Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Premier and for Regional Roads and Rail.
Documents
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Lands and Water)
(15:42): I table the following report:
Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984—Report of Cemeteries and Crematoria NSW for year ended 30 June 2016.
I move:
That the report be printed.
Motion agreed to.
Motions
ANZAC DAY
Debate resumed from an earlier hour.
The Hon. SCOTT FARLOW (15:43): I continue my remarks on the commemoration of Anzac Day.
An event that reflected the broad contribution of the community was held by the NSW Association of Jewish Ex-
Servicemen and Women. I recognise the attendance at that event of the Hon. Greg Donnelly, representing the
Leader of the Opposition. I represented the Premier. The Hon. David Clarke also attended. The event highlighted
the broad commitment to service by communities across New South Wales and the recognition by diverse
communities of our military service. In the lead-up to Anzac Day I had the good fortune to speak to the Australian
Korean Friendship Group about the relationship between Australia and Korea, our involvement in the Korean
War and the ties that Australia and Korea forged through that encounter. The Korean community is now significant
in New South Wales, but at the time of the Korean War it was not. Australia was unaware of Korea. Nowhere was
the fight for freedom more evident than in the Korean War.
I turn to the contribution of my own family. I mentioned this before in my contribution to a debate about
Lemnos. My family does not have a history of overseas service. My great-grandfather and great-uncle served in
the military in World War I and World War II on the home front. They were not deployed overseas.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN (15:46): I move:
That, according to sessional order:
(1) the time for debate on this motion be extended for 90 minutes; and
(2) the member speaking prior to the interruption of the debate be permitted to conclude their contribution for a total
speaking time of no longer than 15 minutes.
Motion agreed to.
The Hon. SCOTT FARLOW: I was speaking about my great-grandfather, Rupert Stanley Reeves, and
my great-uncle, Victor Stanley Reeves. Another uncle, Cyril, had an intellectual disability. In one of the darker
moments of our military history, he received white feather letters because he was not active in military service.
He was very proud. Although intellectually disabled and unable to serve, he tried every day to enlist and was
turned down. That incident caused my family a great deal of distress. The Anzac spirit meant that people enlisted
voluntarily. They wanted to serve for the greater good and to ensure the freedoms that we share today. I thank the
House for its indulgence.
The Hon. BEN FRANKLIN (15:48): I am proud to speak to this motion. This motion speaks to an
extremely important sentiment to Australians, a sentiment that is just as important now as it was in 1915. I thank
the Hon. Paul Green for his timely motion and the Legislative Council for allowing debate on this important topic.
Last week I was honoured to lay a wreath on behalf of the New South Wales Government at the Byron Bay Anzac
Day service alongside veterans, members of the RSL and representatives of almost 50 community organisations.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 41
It was inspiring to see how many people from the community of Byron Bay turned out for the dawn service as
well as the parade and mid-morning service. Servicemen, veterans and members of the community stood together
to honour our diggers, as they did at services all around Australia.
In Byron Bay, the service was held at the Byron Bay Memorial Gates, which were built in 1955. They
list the names of locals who did not return from the First World War on the left-hand pillars and the names of the
fallen from the Second World War on the right-hand pillars. The memorial gates have just undergone a major
upgrade, with three natural finish granite columns added to the existing structure. It is a great addition and a
worthy upgrade. However, some funds are still needed to pay for the work. The Byron Bay RSL Sub-Branch is
doing fantastic job fundraising within the community to make up this shortfall, and I encourage anyone in the
community who wishes to make a contribution to contact the sub-branch. I know everyone in the community will
rally around this important local cause.
As Australians, the legend of the Anzacs is something we all hold dear. On Anzac Day we remember our
first participation in a global conflict, and all conflicts since then. They have seen us mature as a nation and keep
the flame of the Anzac tradition alive. From Gallipoli in World War I to the Kokoda Track in World War II, the
battle of Long Tan in the Vietnam War and Operation Slipper in Afghanistan, we remember the sacrifice so many
Australians have made in these conflicts. Most of all, on Anzac Day we show our gratitude to our service men
and women. Their service to our nation is the very reason that our children will grow up in safety, with a brighter
future than any who came before. I think many who fought and fell in these wars would have gained some solace
in knowing that they were protecting the freedoms of their descendants.
My own grandfather, Dad's father, Frank, was a signalman in the Second World War and was killed on
the Sandakan Death March in 1945. It was the single worst atrocity suffered by Australian servicemen during the
Second World War—where only six Australians survived. Some say that you cannot miss what you never had,
but growing up without my grandfather is a loss I have always felt deeply. But of course it impacted far more
seriously on my father. As an only child and Legacy kid, he never knew his father; and he has been affected by
this loss for his entire life. In my inaugural speech in this place I said that his tragic and unnecessary death taught
me three things: that we must always honour those who fell for us, that we must always support the families of
those who do not return and that as a society we have a moral obligation to provide whatever support is needed to
those who have returned from conflict but still carry the mental or physical scars of their service to our nation.
Looking after our veterans is so very important. To keep us safe we need a defence force, and
consequently we need people to serve in it. We ask a great deal of these people. We ask them to spend long periods
of time away from their families; we ask them to bear an incredible workload; and we ask them to endure
extraordinary mental and physical pressures which impact on them for the rest of their lives. But their job is not
done when they return home. Many of our veterans need our help. They have seen and endured horrors most of
us will never know or ever understand.
There has been an attempt in the last decade to de-stigmatise and properly deal with mental health issues
in the military and veteran communities. Given the Australian Defence Force's increasingly high operational pace
and the current number of personnel who have experienced multiple operational deployments, addressing mental
health issues has never been a more important priority. Let us never forget what these men and women have
sacrificed for the rest of us.
I sometimes wonder what the world today would look like without our Anzacs, but it does not bear
thinking about. Instead, we should be grateful for their courage and their sacrifice and know that today we enjoy
the privilege and freedoms we have because of those who fought for them. Throughout Australia's military history
there have been scores of young men and women who have stood prepared to give their life for the safety, security
and freedom of their nation. It is an extraordinary sacrifice, and one that we must always honour.
In conclusion, I will read an excerpt from a letter sent home by 20-year-old Lieutenant William Sydney
Duchesne. He was one of 20,000 Australian Imperial Force [AIF] personnel who were in the first contingent of
Anzac troops at Gallipoli. This letter was written from the Australian Imperial Force camp in Egypt. He wrote:
Tell them, Dad, that for them and our country, we who are from Australia are ready to give what is most precious to all—that is
our life.
That if by doing so we help to keep you all safe and free tell Mother and Aunt Ada that I wish them to remember the text of one of
Canon Vaughan's sermons, "Weep not for the dead but for the living."
If by chance my time has come to leave this world I wish not for a better death than one on the battlefield helping Englishmen keep
our Empire in freedom.
I know that my father will only be too pleased to know that his son was able to go and take the share of his family's safekeeping.
Remember mother I am only a son and that many a husband with families are here and it is for them who we must pray that they
be spared to return to their wives and families, and not for us single boys, who have nobody depending on us.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 42
Mother don't worry; I am enjoying myself and am happy.
From Egypt, this young man travelled to the Greek island of Lemnos and onto the battlefields of Gallipoli, where
he was one of 903 Australians and New Zealanders who died on the first day of the Gallipoli campaign. This was
exactly one month before his twenty-first birthday. He, like so many, was prepared to give his life for his family
and his country. It is that spirit of courage and sacrifice that we honour on Anzac Day. Lest we forget.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE (15:55): I am pleased to speak in support of the motion moved by the
Hon. Paul Green that:
(1) That this House acknowledges the service and sacrifice of our war veterans.
(2) That this House notes that:
(a) Anzac Day, 25 April, is one of Australia's most important national occasions, marking the anniversary of the
first major military action fought by Australian and New Zealand forces during the First World War;
(b) in subsequent years, Anzac Day also served to commemorate those who lost their lives in all the military and
peacekeeping operations in which Australia has been involved; and
(c) the spirit of Anzac, with its qualities of courage, mateship, and sacrifice, continues to have meaning and
relevance for our sense of national identity.
I was very proud of my father. He served in World War I. He was born in Britain and was a British citizen. He
served in the British Army and so technically is not an Anzac. He fought in World War I. His regiment, the
Gloucestershire regiment, was very active in France. During the various engagements he was machine gunned.
We heard the Hon. Lynda Voltz talking about machine guns earlier. He was machine gunned in his leg and sent
back to the United Kingdom to a military hospital. One may expect that he was then sent home but, no, he was
sent back to France to continue fighting. Thankfully he survived those years.
He was only 17 years old when he enlisted in the British Army. If that machine gun had been successful
and had killed him then, of course, I would not be standing here today. So I am very appreciative of the fact that
he survived World War I and migrated to Australia at the age of 20. I was always very proud to take part in the
Anzac Day marches, along with other members of the British Army contingent in our Anzac Day marches
division. They had their own contingent in the Anzac Day march.
The Gloucestershire regiment is a famous regiment. It is known as the "back to fronts" because it has an
unusual cap. Everybody has a military badge on their cap, but the Gloucestershire regiment has the badge on both
the front and the back. The idea is that if the regiment is surrounded by the enemy, the enemy will always know
that they are dealing with the Gloucestershire regiment. It is amazing to learn that in so many battles the regiment
was literally surrounded. For example, in the Korean War the regiment was surrounded by the Chinese Army on
some hilltop and it was very fortunate to survive. That is where the nickname the "back to fronts" was again
proven correct. The regiment survived being totally surrounded on that occasion, but the same thing happened in
many other battles throughout the years.
Due to the participation of my father in the British Army, he had put the idea of military service into my
mind. So when I turned 14 I joined the 45th battalion regimental cadets. I was treated the same as an 18-year-old.
I did the same training and was issued with a .303 rifle, which in those days we could take home with us after
training. So when National Service started in 1952 I was worried I might miss out on being called up because the
ballot system they had was based on birth date. I went down to the Army depot in Belmore and said, "I'm only
17 but I don't want to miss out on National Service. Can I enlist now?"
As it was the Army, it immediately enlisted me into a National Service Battalion at Ingleburn. I finished
my National Service full-time training three months before I turned 18 years of age. I appreciated the opportunity
to be part of the defence of our nation. I am a very patriotic Australian, as members have probably already
gathered. I continued to serve in the Citizens Military Forces [CMF], which became the Army Reserve, for
22 years to 1974. I was an Infantry Company Commander in the 4th Battalion Royal New South Wales Regiment,
something which was very unusual for a clergyman, a minister.
In 1955 I was commissioned in the St George Regiment, the 45th Battalion as a lieutenant. I was very
proud to receive a Queen's Commission and later I was promoted to a captain. I then served as a company
commander in the 4th Battalion, Royal New South Wales Regiment. During those years, especially when I had
my own D-Company at Merrylands, I emphasised the importance of Anzac Day. I would send a detachment of
soldiers from the company to take part in the various Anzac Day commemorations that were being held by the
RSL in the western suburbs.
The National Service Association asked me join one of its three contingents in the Anzac Day parade.
Each contingent had about 100 men. It is one of the largest groups in the Anzac Day march in Sydney, and I have
taken part in it every year since. This year I was asked to lead that detachment, which I was very pleased to do.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 43
I commend all those who have served in the Australian Military Forces, as well as the Navy and Air Force.
I commend them for their outstanding qualities of courage, mateship and sacrifice, as noted by military forces
from other nations who have been very proud to serve with Australian soldiers in the Boer War, World War I,
World War II, Vietnam, Korea and so on.
In 1952 I was trained in National Service by experienced sergeants who were sent back from Korea. At
the time the rule was that national servicemen could not be sent overseas, but when that changed they were sent
to serve in the Vietnam War. Again I commend those people in our Army, Navy and Air Force who have served
our nation. Lest they be forgotten for their service. Lest we never forget those who have given their lives to serve
our nation. God bless them.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (The Hon. Shayne Mallard): Pursuant to sessional orders proceedings
are interrupted to permit the Minister to move the adjournment motion if he desires.
Adjournment Debate
ADJOURNMENT
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and Vice-President of the
Executive Council) (16:03): I move:
That this House do now adjourn.
ETHANOL PRODUCTION
Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM (16:03): I refer to the debacle, shambles and corruption regarding
biofuels and ethanol in Australia. I will start by putting forward the Federal timeline for the development of
ethanol, if I can call it that, in Australia.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: May ethanol live and reign.
Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: Yes. In February 1980 the Fraser Government abolished the
$19.25 per litre excise on ethanol when used as a fuel, to encourage research into the production of ethanol as a
fuel in internal combustion engines. In 1994 Paul Keating introduced an 18¢ per litre bounty payable to ethanol
companies. In 1996 the program was quickly discontinued because "evidence concerning the greenhouse gas and
pollution impacts of fuel ethanol is ambiguous" and "current production and use of fuel ethanol is not cost effective
in reducing emissions of greenhouse gas and environmental pollutants".
On 12 September 2002 John Howard introduced the Ethanol Production Grants Program, a production
subsidy of 38¢ per litre for Australian ethanol producers in order to prevent a shipment of 12,000 litres of ethanol
from Brazil. John Howard went on to mislead Parliament about whether he met with Dick Honan prior to this
decision, after documents released under freedom of information proved he met Dick Honan on 1 August 2002 to
discuss subsidising ethanol. In July 2012 a specific program with objectives and outcomes for the ethanol subsidy
were finally introduced, 10 years after its initial introduction.
On 30 June 2015 a Federal ethanol subsidy finally ends at a total cost to the Commonwealth of some
$895 million over the program's life with one participant, Honan Holdings Pty Ltd, receiving $543.4 million or
70.2 per cent of all program funding. In January 2015 the Australian Audit Office found:
The Australian Government's recent decision to close the EPGP was informed by a consistent body of analysis and advice—
provided to successive governments since the program's earliest days—drawing attention to shortcomings in the overall policy
approach and the likelihood that program costs would exceed benefits.
In relation to donations that run parallel to these developments, since 2010 Manildra has donated $574,867 to
Labor and $1,306,071 to the Coalition. Since 1998 Manildra has donated $4.3 million to the various Coalition and
Labor entities of which we are currently aware. After this Manildra quickly moved off the Federal teat and onto
the State teat at the expense of motorists and fuel retailers in this State. Leaked Cabinet documents show that in
2011 the New South Wales Coalition Government ignored advice from energy Minister Chris Hartcher, senior
bureaucrats, the Crown Solicitor and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on removing the
ethanol mandate and former Premier Barry O'Farrell chose to double the mandate instead. According to a story in
the Daily Telegraph in January 2012:
A senior government source said last night the only producer of ethanol in NSW, Manildra, "gives a lot of money to political parties
and has bought (itself) a monopoly".
Customers don't want it and we have a mandate to make people take it. If you (were to) dump the mandate, then you don't have to
abolish unleaded petrol," the source said.
Subsequently there were 20 meetings with senior Ministers in three months. This week the Hon. Victor Dominello,
the responsible Minister, was caught misleading the House by an order of magnitude by simply using Manildra's
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 44
job figures—figures that members relied on—without bothering to check them. I can tell this House that the dots
are being joined, the rocks are being flipped and investigations are ongoing. This scandal may well be the undoing
of the Government, but it is at the expense of all the motorists and the retailers of New South Wales. As the
Hon. Dr Peter Phelps has said, it is the antithesis of Liberal doctrine to support this sort of crony capitalism. The
people of New South Wales are watching and investigating. [Time expired.]
NSW POLITICIANS AND MEDIA ALLEGATIONS
The Hon. GREG PEARCE (16:08): Last month the Daily Telegraph engaged in one of its favourite
obsessions, an attack on New South Wales politicians. Under a barrage of front-page headlines—including "Jobs
for the boys", "Baird's MPs get a bit on the side", "Where the money is", "How our pollies make pay dirt"—
Andrew Clennell claimed under red "Exclusive" banners that:
The vast majority of Baird Government MPs are earning tens of thousands of dollars on top of their generous base salaries through
parliamentary side roles, some of which require hardly any work at all.
He claimed to reveal this as a result of a Daily Telegraph "Investigation". What a lame effort. Where was the
Tele's trademark parody and ridicule? They could not even be bothered photoshopping the MPs. In fact, all of the
appointments are publicly disclosed in multiple locations and are consistent with similar arrangements in all
Australian parliaments with governments of all persuasions. The remuneration arrangements are also consistent
with Australian governments of all persuasions. The quantum of remuneration is determined by the Independent
Parliamentary Remuneration Tribunal and published.
Consistent with this tabloid's record of lazy work, the story is not a result of any "Investigation" but is,
as disclosed in the article, the work of an Opposition member. Also consistent with that lazy approach and
unethical journalistic practices, as one of the committee chairs named I was not contacted or given any opportunity
to comment before being slurred again by this newspaper. The State Development Committee that I chair is
undertaking two very important inquiries—one into Aboriginal enterprise and development and the other into
regional planning. I also serve on several other committees including what is probably the busiest committee, the
Legislation Review Committee.
When my ministerial career ended in 2013, I was not allowed to defend myself. Media responses were
suffocatingly controlled by the then Premier's office. I am not going to continue to allow this newspaper and other
lazy media organisations to carry on peddling the line that I was "sacked" for a "jobs for the boys scandal".
Members know the campaign that was conducted against me. They also know of the mistakes I made and the fact
that I accepted the outcome and have got on with life and my job since. However, getting onto three years from
the event it really is time for the Daily Telegraph to stop repeating the slur. Then Premier O'Farrell stated that
I was being removed because of a "perceived conflict of interest", which he said was not disclosed. His action
came after nearly two months of a campaign led by the Daily Telegraph, during which time he had continued to
support me.
For the record, I did not make the appointment in question and there was no conflict of interest. I was
portfolio Minister for Sydney Water. Under the legislation directors of Sydney Water are appointed by the
shareholding Ministers, who at the time included the then Premier. All appointments were subject to personal
approval by the then Premier. For the record, to the extent that there was any perceived potential conflict of interest
I had disclosed that relationship to the Premier in writing in accordance with the requirements. Several of my
colleagues have seen the letter. For the record, the appointment was not a Cabinet appointment or decision. As
with other appointments, Cabinet was provided with a list that foreshadowed the appointments for information.
Andrew Clennell and others know full well that the appointment was by the shareholding Ministers. Indeed, on
the day of my removal Clennell had emailed the then Premier a list of questions indicating that he understood this
and foreshadowing that he was going to implicate the then Premier in the story. He also wrote an article on
27 November 2013 outlining the process and roles.
It is not as though my position has not been aired. I am sure Clennell read the Sean Nicholls story headed
"Pearce says conflict was disclosed" in the Sydney Morning Herald on 4 September 2013. There was no "jobs for
the boys scandal". It existed in Clennell's mind and in his paper. As I have said before, despite all of Clennell's
innuendo, misrepresentation, defamation and slurs, and his resort to guilt by association, there has never been any
evidence of inappropriate influence, unqualified or improper appointments or incompetence in my ministerial
performance—because there was none. I have no argument with Barry O'Farrell, although he has been known to
have a faulty memory. I also have no problem with the Daily Telegraph doing what it thinks it has to do, but I do
expect it to at least make some attempt to be even handed and accurate.
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 45
NSW STADIA STRATEGY
The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ (16:13): Recently the Baird Government's stadia policy has been a movable
feast. On the eve of last years' budget estimates hearings the Premier was on Channel 7 announcing that the Sydney
Cricket Ground Trust and Stadium Australia Group had signed a heads of agreement whereby the control and
operation of ANZ Stadium would be returned to the New South Wales Government via the Sydney Cricket Ground
and Sport Trust. How those two entities came to be negotiating a heads of agreement that appeared in the Brogden
Stadia Strategy is anyone's guess. That the Brogden report seemed to have already decided that the control of
stadiums was going to the Sydney Cricket Ground Trust is even more interesting. In light of the current outcome,
the government's stadia strategy—although the term "strategy" may give the wrong impression—is extraordinary.
Try getting a copy of the heads of agreement and you will come up with nought. Where that heads of agreement
is now is anyone's guess, but I think I can safely say it will never see the light of day.
The most poignant comment within the Brogden report is that the heads of agreement centralised control
within the Sydney Cricket Ground Trust. The views of the Sydney Cricket Ground Trust on the Sydney Olympic
Park stadium are well known in sporting communities. The lobbying by the Sydney Cricket Ground Trust for a
55,000 to 60,000 seat stadium to be built at either Centennial Park and Moore Park Lands, which is the Minister
for Sport's preferred option, or a new stadium built on the site of the Sydney Football Stadium, which is the
Premier's preferred option, rested on a view that the stadium in Western Sydney was a white elephant and all
sporting events should be centred around Moore Park. That view belied the growth of events in the west at a
stadium built closer to the geographic heart of Sydney. It would appear the Government did not flinch at the idea
that the Sydney Cricket Ground Trust would be given control of the site under the heads of agreement.
With the heads of agreement now dead and the Government committed to investment in a rectangular,
covered stadium at Sydney Olympic Park the big question now is what is the Minister for Sport's vision for the
so-called super trust? In February this year he was talking up a super trust to create in his words "an entity with
positive cash flows" that would "reduce cross city duelling for major events". That sounds awfully like that very
un-liberal idea of a monopoly. I am sure the members of the sporting codes will see it as such. Rather than the
earlier comments that the Government would not tell sports where to play, it sounds awfully as though they will
and that they will tell them how much they will pay. Even more extraordinarily, the Minister for Sport argues the
competition is not between Moore Park and Sydney Olympic Park but between Singapore and Sydney. Really?
I am not sure the last time he was in Singapore but certainly John Brogden never visited the Sports Hub whilst
writing his report.
I was in Singapore earlier this year when there Sports Hub had only three events. One of those was a
Super Rugby game with new Japanese team the Sunwolves—hardly an event taken from the Sydney market.
Another was a World Rugby Sevens tournament, which, by the way, we also still play in Sydney. The only
upcoming sporting events I could find in Hong Kong was the Mega Ice Hockey and the Hong Kong Cricket Sixers.
They are hardly competition to the Sydney market. If the competition is with Melbourne would not a rectangular
stadium of 77,000 seats—something the Minister has consistently railed against—make more sense than a 55,000
seat boutique stadium? The so-called stadia strategy is sounding less and less like a strategy every day and more
and more like a Byzantine court. It is pretty short on detail. Crucially, it will be interesting to see if the Government
will hand control of Western Sydney's sporting infrastructure over to a super trust from the big end of town in the
eastern suburbs.
PORT OF NEWCASTLE PROTEST
Mr SCOT MacDONALD (16:16): This Sunday an anti-fossil fuel protest is planned with the intention
of disrupting shipping in the Port of Newcastle. The protest has already succeeded. The Oceania cruise line
announced earlier this week that its ship the Insignia has cancelled its visit to Newcastle this weekend due to
concerns about the risky activities of the protesters. This narcissistic, selfish behaviour by Break Free, 350.org,
Greenpeace, The Greens and allied groups has had a material economic impact on Hunter businesses. The tourism
sector estimates that $250,000 has been lost by family businesses that were to supply tours, food, Hunter produce
and other activities that passengers of the Insignia had planned.
More than 300 tour places were booked to the wine country, Nelson Bay and other sites around the
region. The Insignia is one of the Oceania ships that operates out of North America. The Port of Newcastle and
those involved in developing Newcastle's cruise industry have been working with the Oceania group for nearly
two years to encourage them to visit the Hunter. The cruise operators plan their schedules years out. It was quite
a coup to attract this ship. I am advised that the Insignia is now unlikely to consider a stopover in Newcastle for
a least another year.
There are many means of lawful protesting. An endless array of mainstream media, social media,
petitions, political activity and protests can be undertaken to convey people's beliefs, but 350.org has chosen a
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 46
strategy that hurts small businesses across the Hunter. The strategy of placing kayaks and small craft in the path
of large ships endangers activists, police, port workers, commercial fishers and maritime workers. Most of the
activists come from outside of Newcastle. As I have pointed out before, they come, they protest and disrupt the
community and then return to their inner-city, fossil-fuel dependent lives.
The 350.org campaign organiser is based in Melbourne. They do not bear the cost of the disruption. They
do not contribute to the wellbeing of Newcastle. You will not find them helping out in floods or storms. They are
not members of the State Emergency Service, service clubs or sporting organisations in the Hunter. For them the
damage to the harmony and family businesses of the Hunter are collateral damage. In their view that is an
acceptable price to pay for a few seconds on the weekend news.
One of the most perverse aspects to this protest is the damage it is doing to the Hunter as it endeavours
to diversify its economy. Developing tourism and hospitality is identified as a future growth strategy. Visitation,
food and culture have always been important to the region. Local operators, Aboriginal organisations, chambers
of commerce and all levels of government have been investing in infrastructure and a range of programs to boost
economic activity in the sector.
Competing for and expanding the cruise industry is one of the tools in the toolbox to drive tourism, but
it is a highly competitive global business. It can take years to woo an operator and book in ships. Cruising
schedules are locked in years in advance. They will go where the experience is rich, varied and safe. The Oceania
line has now determined the visit to Newcastle on 8 May is not worth the risk. These protesters are undermining
the transformation of the Hunter.
I call on Breakfree, Greenpeace, 350.org and The Greens to reconsider their tactics. They should
acknowledge that they cannot control every activist once they are on the harbour. Past protests have seen unsafe
behaviour and it is this risky activity that has caused widespread economic harm to the Hunter. It is not too late
to direct their supporters to stay off the water. There is ample room to demonstrate and make their presence felt
on the foreshores around the port. That would be legal and safe and would not go unnoticed by the media. The
response by Breakfree organiser Charlie Woods to the news of the cancellation of the visit by the Insignia is not
credible. She said on ABC Newcastle radio:
All interactions with the harbour will be conducted entirely peacefully and safely.
We have a very robust risk management plan.
There'll be people from all walks of life out on the water who've not participated in these kinds of activities before, but who will
be equipped and trained adequately.
The safety risks are negligible, to non-existent.
It's not intended at all to interfere with the operation of non-coal shipping.
We will be able to identify ships that are not coal ships and let them into the harbour.
So, it's a shame that this cruise ship has decided to take that decision.
Ms Charlie Woods may think it is a shame. The professional port workers, emergency service personnel and cruise
operators understand Ms Woods claims about risk are hollow. Unfortunately, it is Hunter businesses and families
that have paid the price for the stunt planned on Sunday.
DEATH OF MR JOHN CREIGHTON
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN (16:21): The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party unequivocally
supports the right of people to protest. Indeed, when we had the debate on the changes to the Inclosed Lands,
Crimes and Law Enforcement Legislation Amendment (Interference) Bill 2016 some people locked themselves
to the front gate of Parliament House. During that debate I raised the death of logging worker John Creighton at
Whian Whian as one of the reasons why the Shooters and Fishers Party, as it was known at that time, was
supporting the legislation. His death came about whilst he was acting as a lookout for the safety of protesters
illegally trespassing on a logging site and he was tragically struck by a falling tree branch.
At the time of that debate members of The Greens were calling me a "liar" and a "grub" from across the
Chamber for raising this example. I did not take points of order—I have broad shoulders. Mr Hans Lovejoy of the
Byron Shire Echo misled his readers in the 30 March edition of his paper when he said there was no correlation
between the protesters and Mr Creighton's tragic passing. Today I will correct the record with the facts.
I have the Coroner's report from the death of Mr Creighton, and I have received permission from his
widow, Barbara, to read the relevant part of it onto the record in this place. She is particularly upset at the Coroner's
handling of the matter, that the Coroner's report has not been made public, and that the protesters involved have
not had to face consequences for their actions—consequences that Barbara has had to live with. I hope to right
Thursday, 5 May 2016 Legislative Council- PROOF Page 47
some of these wrongs today. The report is dated 17 February 2015 and its file number is 2013/350429. Coroner J.
A. Linden said:
I find that the deceased died at about 7:45 p.m. on 10 October 2013 at Southport as a result of a traumatic head injury sustained
when struck by a falling tree branch during the course of his employment at Whian Whian.
Having made the formal findings, I make the following comments in respect of the matter.
The necessity of the deceased being on the site at all related directly and solely to the presence of unlawful protesters. The logging
contractor was acting lawfully pursuant to licences to fell timber on the property. The protesters were conducting guerrilla tactics
part of which involved an activity described as a "black wallaby". This action placed the protesters in the vicinity of trees being
felled thereby endangering their lives.
The deceased was brought on the site as a lookout for such activity to ensure the safety of all persons.
Following the tragic accident that saw the death of Mr Creighton some unlawful protesters were heard by police and workers to
comment that it was "Karma". This is of course a cynical and disgusting excuse and/or justification for their unlawful activities
which led to his death.
At a conference with the deceased's widow and family, concern was expressed at the lack of communication between police and
the family. I recommend that within the Local Area Command, the informant be designated the responsibility of liaising with
family about the progress of Coronial matters.
I am satisfied that an inquest will not take this matter any further and pursuant to section 25 of the Coroner's Act 2009 I dispense
with holding an inquest.
The content of that report and the assertions made by people following my speech disgust me. Tragedies such as
Mr Creighton's death must be prevented. Not only was he doing the right thing but also he was selflessly looking
out for the safety of others. He was going about his daily work. He was just another worker doing the job he was
supposed to do. The Greens and their supporters should think twice before launching their next campaign of fear
and misinformation; real people are affected.
The TEMPORARY CHAIR (The Hon. Shayne Mallard): The question is that this House do now
adjourn.
Motion agreed to.
The House adjourned at 16:26 until Tuesday 10 May 2016 at 14:30.