Our State of Health – The Rudd plan

While Kevin Rudd has previously talked of the Commonwealth assuming broader responsibility for health, it would be fair to say that the issue had slipped below the horizon for quite a while. No doubt the deaths and injuries associated with the Insulation program spurred his memory and his admission that the Government could have done better across a range of issues made a further major initiative timely.

The implications for the states are substantial and while some of the apparent reluctance from states may include an element of “turf” protection, it is evident that there just wasn’t a level of detail in the proposal that would allow the states to be able to understand the full implications.

Public sentiment in favour of the proposal is high but that is based on a broad perception that the states have, or are failing to provide the level of care demanded by the community. The reality is that the public are also unaware of how the proposed Commonwealth intervention will work. Premier Keneally has given support to the principle but has rightly identified some major issues that would need to be addressed or understood before NSW can agree to the proposal. She is right to be cautious and the failure to understand the proposal falls squarely on Mr Rudd and the Commonwealth for having announced their intention without sufficient detail or discussion with the states.

On the other hand, the implications of the growing health budgets are huge and the need for a new model to deal with increasing demand is clear. If done properly I have no doubt that Australians will benefit but this will be a further reduction in state autonomy. With so many other nationalised polices and programs, the argument that states are becoming increasingly irrelevant will grow.

NSW Parliament 2010 - Sitting 1 in review

With the NSW Parliament resuming this week with a new Premier and a re-jigged Cabinet people could have been worried that there might have been a change in the way the Parliament behaves.  They need not have worried! If consistency is a significant benchmark of how a Government, or for that matter, an Opposition performs, both sides did very well. 

It is true that Kristina Keneally works the crowd well – media opportunities that her predecessor, Nathan Rees would have failed to make an impact with even though he threw everything into it, have been masterfully managed by Premier Keneally.  Under the glare of the Parliamentary spotlights, Ms Keneally took to the stage in the latest episode of the longest running theatre production in Australia – “Question Time”. 

The critics have given mixed reviews including the predictable commentary on the Premiers attire.  In that regard she apparently did well.  The rest of the show seemed to draw heavily from old scripts with the main theme being allegations by the Opposition of Government incompetence.  David Campbell, now sporting the addition of Roads to his Ministerial titles certainly helped the Opposition.  His attack on the media for having apparently illegally obtained and then published details of the new Transport Blueprint was great theatre, a real bombshell; which unfortunately for the Minister and Government blew up in their own camp when it was revealed his information was wrong.  An embarrassment that would have seen a lesser performer stumble and freeze.  The masterful improvisation must be commended though it was beneficial that an off stage player, the online consultation website, Bang the Table, was there to take most of the blame.

This unusual mistake from the Minister lead to some improvised lines by the Premier in his support.  Performing to a gallery audience including visiting dignitaries from Vietnam and Bangladesh, the Premier’s defence initiated a raucous response and verbal exchanges across the stage leading to the need for the Speaker to rise and admonish the members for of all things – “unparliamentary behaviour”!  This term always causes some amusement for anyone who has been an observer of parliamentary behaviour.  

The first sitting week of 2010 scored well for consistency – unfortunately, that may be the best that can be said.

Premier attraction - “no one’s girl”

We certainly have seen a huge style change since Kristina Keneally became Premier of NSW.  The Premier seems to be everywhere and comments about her glamorous appearance are are likewise common.  There seems no doubt that her looks will be a large part of the attention she attracts but not even Kristina Keneally could have planned that.  She is who she is.  On the other hand it might be reasonable to presume that her looks were at least part of the reason she won over some of the Labor caucus in rolling Nathan Rees.  Not a personal attraction mind you, but rather a political calculation that looks and gender might be a winner with sectors of the voting community – after all, Labor were on a hiding to nothing anyway. 

Keneally says she is “no one’s girl” and I believe her.  She is no fool and will no doubt make her mark on her owns terms.  She does however seem to have been well schooled in Machiavellian politics with one of her main teachers and mentors being Joe Tripodi.  Joe of course seems widely disliked but for one so often embroiled in controversy he seems to have survived very well.  Not blessed with a pretty face, Joe must have plenty of smarts.  It remains to be seen if Kristina Keneally has enough of both to win over the electorate in 2011. 

Under Keneally the Government has already begun to distance themselves from bad or unpopular policy that is deemed not worth the fight (for now) or is seen as un-winnable.  Retail power privatisation is conveniently delayed till later in 2010; will anyone be surprised if it is further delayed until after the election?  (A Labor member told me within days of the change of leadership that it would be killed-off).  The Rozelle Metro looks dead in the water and we can expect a number of other strategic withdrawals throughout the year.  And is it hypocrisy that we now see the Premier ready to address the unfair treatment of Gillian Sneddon?  I think most people from around this area will see it that way but at the same time hope that Gillian finally gets some fairness from the NSW Government.  

Under Iemma and Rees I found that the government could be arrogant and rude to non-Labor MP’s even in their own area.  This wasn’t so much a problem for me as the snubs at public functions were so overt that the Premiers and other Labor members looked very petty and rude.  It did them damage while not hurting me.  Kristina Keneally on the other hand has already shown herself to be very different while attending a function at the Ourimbah Campus recently.  This was a Labor show, a policy announcement attended by government MP’s, Minister Ian MacDonald and the Premier.  The Premier was very gracious in recognising me and, after  the formalities, insisting that I joined them for a photo.  A very different approach from before and it’s difficult to know if she was genuine or just understands that pettiness is noticed.  Either way, I have to acknowledge that she can be very charming.  Now to see how she performs as Premier in Question Time – that will be revealing!

Terenzini to call it quits

I don't know the reason behind Member for Maitland, Frank Terenzini, deciding not to contest the next state election in 2011 but it's not hard to imagine that he had "a better offer".

While maybe not well known outside of Maitland and immediate surrounds, Frank has been pretty noticeable within the Parliament.  He has been a regular contributor for the Government to a range of debates and in my view has done more than his share of "heavy lifting".

There may be some merit in the view that the polling for Labor in Maitland wasn't looking good for Frank.  Nothing personal I would guess .... just sick of Labor. If I had to guess at least one other contributing factor it would be that Frank's conscience didn't need to be compromised anymore.  It can't have been easy having to support some of the awful decisions taken by the Government over the last 3 years let alone watch first hand the brutality and ineptitude of factional brawling.  Whatever the reason for Frank's decision I'm guessing he will enjoy being back in the legal profession as a public prosecutor; dealing with thugs, rapists, murderers and the like couldn't be more difficult and disheartening as what he's had to deal with over the last 3 years amongst some of his own colleagues in the NSW Labor Party.  

Frank has been a good member and in Government or Opposition after March 2011 I think Labor will miss him.

F3 Freeway

I was "bumped" from being able to make a Private Member's Statement on the last day of Parliament sitting - a few of us missed out due to the quaint, if not disingenuous custom of Christmas Felicitations. This is where a few from Government and Opposition make kind comments about each other and staff of the Parliament - that part I agree with, member's staff and staff of the Parliament are generally very good.

Anyhow, below is the speech I was going to make.

The 127-kilometre long F3 Freeway is one of the most important components of the eastern seaboard road network. The Lake Macquarie electorate has the greatest share of this road, with 59 kilometres either within or forming part of its boundary. It is one of the two most important roads in the electorate - the other being main road 217, which I have raised in this House on numerous occasions and for which I still seek urgent improvements.

The F3 typically carries over 80,000 vehicles daily with this exceeding 100,000 on weekends and holidays. It provides Sydney’s main connection to Queensland and the New England area.

On 27 February last year I spoke in this house about unsatisfactory hold-ups caused by traffic incidents on the F3, probably the worst of which was a seven hour delay caused by a truck crash and resulting fire. Incidents such as these may be beyond the RTA’s control, but the response to them isn’t. At that time I mentioned the importance of diverting traffic onto at least one lane of the opposite carriageway.

It was a great relief for many Lake Macquarie Residents when the F3 Emergency Traffic Management Plan of March last year included numerous contra-flow crossovers to allow the bypassing of accident scenes. According to the RTA’s website, fifteen crossovers are now available for use and others will be introduced progressively.

The completion of roadwork to widen a 12.5 km section of the F3 between Mt Colah and Cowan to six lanes has also been well received. This section is of great importance in meeting the combined needs of the Central Coast and the Lower Hunter. As a regular user of this road, I can attest to the quality of the construction. The project was a long time in the delivery, but it appears to be an excellent piece of engineering.

The wet weather speed zone between Mooney Mooney and Mt White, however, remains a significant discrepancy between the planned and actual quality of road. I don’t question the data showing this as a problem area, but I believe that there should be an engineering solution that will deliver the standard of road originally planned. I acknowledge, however, that it would be unfair to blame the road for the actions of drivers and that the driving behaviour of many motorists leaves a great deal to be desired. I can’t speak for all roads but it is my guess that some of the silliest and most dangerous driving in the state can regularly be observed on the F3 – this is something that needs to be addressed through a greater visible presence of Highway Patrol vehicles on the road.

The recent improvements in southern sections of the F3 now bring into sharp focus the need to improve capacity and travel times to the north and northwest of the end of the F3, particularly via the proposed Hunter Expressway. Residents of Lake Macquarie have often expressed their concerns for this project and I support their views that it should be expedited. The 40 km link from Seahampton to Branxton will greatly reduce travel times from Newcastle and Lake Macquarie to the Upper Hunter and New England. A joint media release by the Federal Member for Hunter and the Minister for Roads pointed to a tender being selected this year for a first stage of the project, with the second stage to be confirmed in 2010. People throughout the region are waiting for signs of progress.

Concerns have also been raised over the capacity of Lower Hunter roads to cope with increased traffic volumes related to the Hunter Expressway and these concerns need to be addressed.

There is also another significant step that needs to be taken to improve traffic on the F3 and that is to reduce the number of commuters choosing road in preference to rail. I spoke in this House last week about the inadequacy of existing rail services, particularly journey times. If the improvements in road travel times were at all paralleled by improvements in rail journey times there would be an entirely different level of patronage of rail services. In an era where we are increasingly conscious of the finite nature of our traditional energy sources more resources need to be allocated to public transport.

The RTA is not perfect and is frequently criticised by politicians and by the public but it should be acknowledged that the vast majority of their projects are completed to a very high standard and the recent improvements to the F3 are an example of this.

Surface Coal Mining Prohibition (Lake Macquarie) Bill 2009

December 1, I met with the Minister for Planning, Kristina Keneally, one of her advisors and a senior person from the Department of Planning to discuss the Government’s position on the Bill.

It is my understanding that a Cabinet decision on whether to support such a Bill is based largely if not solely on the recommendation of the relevant Minister. The Minister indicated from the start of the meeting that she had decided not to support the Bill.

Her reasons included the view that the existing provisions for Lake Macquarie contained within SEPP (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007, are sufficient to ensure that open cut, including the recent auger mining proposal, remain a prohibition with Lake Macquarie.

The Minister referred to advice from legal counsel on which they have based this view. Even more surprisingly, she indicated to me that this advice - or part thereof - was the reason Centennial Coal withdrew its proposal for the Olstan project. This is completely at odds with the reasons stated by Centennial and raises questions as to why any decisive opinion was not released or even referred to by the Government at that time.

Local residents and myself had been waiting for the release of advice from Counsel and many were disappointed when we were told that the seeking of advice was discontinued when the project was withdrawn. Something just doesn’t add up with that view, however the Minister responded to my question by saying that she would find out why the advice wasn’t referred to. In the meantime, I have lodged an FOI application with the Department of Planning for information relating to any legal or technical advice it may have received regarding the permissibility of the project.

The Minister also said that the DoP had concerns that provisions of my Bill may have unforeseen impacts on underground mining operations by inadvertently prohibiting associated surface works such as buildings, drifts and other infrastructure. I do not believe that there is any likelihood that such an interpretation could be made of the Bill and can only see both purported reasons as an attempt to justify what seems to be a political decision to not support a Private Member’s Bill, particularly a Private Member who holds a notional Labor seat!

Advancing the Bill at this stage would see it “killed” by the Government, so I will be postponing debate on the Bill until next year and use the ensuing time to meet with local residents, particularly the executives of BAM, SCAM and NOCMFA to discuss where to from here.

The Bill is inherently sensible and supports and improves on State policy. It is about ensuring that no clever use of definitions can bring about another proposal for an open cut mine or anything that looks or smells like an open cut mine. I remain supportive of the coal mining industry in Lake Macquarie where coal is retrieved using traditional underground methods. This Bill should be passed.

The Entrance of Chris Spence

One of the almost inevitable features of a Parliamentary sitting day is that a motion to be accorded priority will be afforded the Government based on their ability to use their majority in the House. The motion is the first item following Question Time and regardless of the merit of the motion proposed by the Government or the Opposition, the Government will invariably force their motion to be the one accorded priority.

It is therefore disappointing that these motions are almost always either a motion of self-congratulation or an attack on the Opposition. This has been a long-standing process and is unlikely to change. It is often very difficult for an Independent to take aside on what is clearly a party political stoush.

Last week and again today the Government has chosen to use the priority motion to attack the Liberal endorsed candidate for The Entrance, Chris Spence. Chris Spence was a high-ranking member of One Nation, serving with Pauline Hanson and David Oldfield some 10 years ago.

As a political target for the NSW ALP he certainly would appear to make a good one. The nature of the policies that he would have supported at that stage would be repugnant to most people, policies that I personally find to have been completely unacceptable.

That said I do not know the person and I have no idea whether he has changed his views since then. I do know that there are examples of people from all walks of life that have made major changes to their lives and thinking as they grow and mature. Atheists have found God, religious have lost their faith, conservatives have joined the left, socialists have been drawn to the right, and bigots and racists have changed their views and sought to atone for their previous actions – while not common, it is not rare.

I voted against the Government’s motion calling for amongst other things for the Liberal Party to disendorse Mr Spence. I believe that apart from whatever Mr Spence’s views might be today, the decision is for the Liberal Party and if they have got it wrong the electorate will deal with their candidate appropriately. In a sense, if Mr Spence is as objectionable as the Government suggests then his candidacy should be to their benefit, as I do not believe that the people of The Entrance would wish to be represented by someone espousing right wing and extreme views.

I should mention that while I voted against this Government motion I also voted against the Opposition amendment, which was couched in similar partisan terms against the Government. Those who enjoy the cut and thrust of debate within the “bear pit” may enjoy this style of debate. I believe that it does a disservice to the standing of the Parliament in the eyes of the public and only serves to reinforce negative views of politicians within NSW. If nothing else this debate consumed a lot of Parliamentary time; and an almost identical motion was moved and debated just last week!