Author: gordonmoyes.com

The Civil Chaplaincies Advisory Committee NSW has produced their 2009 Annual Report, entitled Reaching Out, with 2009 also being the year in which they celebrated their 50th anniversary. I have very much appreciated the work of the Chaplains over the years and congratulate them on their many achievements and accomplishments in their first half-century of existence.

The Civil Chaplaincies Advisory Committee deals with individual chaplaincy placements in agencies across the state, and liaises with State Government bodies and member organisations in the three major areas of Health Services, Corrective Services and Juvenile Justice.

One of the Committee’s main achievements over the past 50 years has been to not only expand the membership to include most of the major Christian denominations, but to also embrace chaplains from other faiths. The active membership of Buddhist, Islamic and Jewish organisations has created an uplifting atmosphere of shared purpose and inclusiveness that has continued to strengthen the work and influence of the committee.

During the past 50 years there has also been an expansion in the role of chaplains. For instance, in the early 1980s there were just 4 full-time chaplains in all of the State Corrective Services; now there are over 30 full-time, and a number of part-time and volunteer chaplains. It is interesting to note that while Australian society seems to have become more secular during that time there has actually been an increasing demand for the services that chaplains provide, which demonstrates the actual value the community places on spiritual and pastoral care during times of crisis.

One of the most interesting challenges that occurred during the past year was the need to develop a protocol for the display of religious symbols in hospital chapels, at the request of Hon John Della Bosca in his role as then Minister for Health. The question arose when the Royal North Shore Hospital chapel removed its cross when it was internally determined that it was an inappropriate religious symbol.

The resulting policy of the Civil Chaplaincies Advisory Committee recognises that all people are spiritual beings, whether or not they adhere to any specific faith, and that the chapel is there to serve all patients, families, visitors, and hospital staff who need a place for prayer, contemplation or reflection. It is therefore not appropriate for any one faith to dominate the space with their symbols. Some chapels have removable symbols for use only during their worship services, while other chapels have a shelf with all the faith’s particular symbols or texts equally available. It is a triumph of tolerance, harmony and multiculturalism at its best. The entire policy can be read by clicking here.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

Dr Gordon Moyes, along with other Members of the General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2, will investigate how the NSW Government has managed the Commonwealth’s Building the Education Revolution (BER) Program.

There have been numerous reports of BER school building projects costing thousands of dollars more than market cost and soaking up millions of dollars in project management fees. It has also been reported that large sums of money have been spent on very standard building designs.

The purpose of this Inquiry is to review the BER program and consider whether the outcomes of its construction projects are of acceptable quality and suitable to the needs of schools in NSW. The Committee will also look at the effectiveness of government oversight and review of contracts between contractors and the NSW Government.

GPSC No.2 will inquire into and report on the Building the Education Revolution (BER) Program, and in particular: 1. The levels and appropriateness of fees and charges imposed by various NSW Government agencies, 2. Whether costs charged for construction of BER projects are in line with industry standards, 3. The effectiveness of government oversight and review of contracts signed between Head Contractors and the NSW Government, 4. The use of local builders and tradespeople during the construction of BER projects, and 5. Whether outcomes were of acceptable quality and suitable to the needs of each individual school.

In 2009, to combat the GFC the Federal Government announced $42 billion in economic stimulus spending, including the BER which would deliver 24,000 new libraries, halls, classrooms, and science and language laboratories to the nation’s 9,500 schools.

The Australian has reported widespread criticism of the BER scheme, including claims of inflexibility, inflated prices and gouging from states and contractors, particularly those working on government schools. According to The Australian, many of the complaints about the BER have come from NSW where the State Government releases information about the progress of the scheme and last September created a team of auditors to keep track of the projects.

A small primary school located in eastern NSW could have been effectively rebuilt for almost $200,000 less than the cost of one prefabricated double demountable classroom under the BER program. Nashdale Public School in NSW authorised a local builder with costings and concept drawings to overhaul the school’s ageing facilities. According to Bruce Hackett, the local builder, it would cost $740,000 to substantially replace the existing school with two large brick buildings (three classrooms and a library) and administration centre (including staff room, principal’s office, sick bay, interview room and toilets), disabled facilities, ramps, verandas, reverse A/C and floor coverings.

The Australian reported that the NSW Department of Educating and Training informed Nashdale P&C that it could not “self-manage” the project and proceed with Mr Hackett’s quote as it did not have 10 per cent of the allocated budget of $900,000 already set aside in a trust account. As a result, the school was forced to proceed with the managing contractor, Laing O’Rourke, and a cookie cutter building design. Under those new plans, the school could afford only one modular double classroom, costed at $907,000.

Another issue of major concern is the issue of contractors. A group of major construction companies handling the Federal Government’s schools building program will reap more than $300 million in profits in the eastern states alone. Managing contractors in Victoria, NSW and Queensland will share in profits estimated at $313 million. NSW has the largest number of projects at 1,784 with a potential profit of $134 million. In NSW, managing contractors are paid a 2.85 per cent profit on all jobs and an “incentive fee” of between 1 and 3.25 per cent of all money allocated.

We encourage readers to send in their written submissions before Monday 7 June 2010. Submissions can be provided via email at [email protected] or by post to The Director, General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2, Parliament House, Macquarie Street, Sydney NSW 2000. Public hearings will be scheduled in late June.

Reference: D. Warne-Smith, School can be rebuilt for less than cost of two rooms, The Australian, 25/03/10.

24 March 2010.

Roadside tests are detecting an alarming number of drivers affected by drugs. NSW Police have stepped up the number of roadside drug tests undertaken in NSW and caught 480 offenders in 2009 – up by 24 per cent on the previous year. According to Police Minister Michael Daley, “On average, that’s one positive test for every 52 drivers pulled over by NSW Police Force roadside drug testing vans”.

Those caught driving while affected by illegal drugs face a fine of up to $2,000 and/or a nine month prison sentence for a first offence. Repeat offenders face a fine of up to $3,000 and/or a 12 month prison sentence.

Back in 2008, Rev the Hon. Gordon Dr Moyes raised this issue in NSW Parliament: “My question is directed to the Minister for Roads. Is the Minister aware that in recent years there has been increasing concern about the prevalence of drug driving in Australia, and that many drug users appear unconcerned about driving following the use of drugs other than alcohol and their possible detection by police? I ask the Minister whether he is aware of a recent finding by the Australian Institute of Criminology that states: One in every four Australians (aged 14 years of age and over) had driven a motor vehicle after they had used illicit drugs, and that over half the detainees who had driven a car or other vehicle in the past 12 months reported driving after they had used drugs other than alcohol. Given that there has been an increase in Sydney in both the availability and the usage of the illicit drugs ice, cannabis, cocaine and ecstasy, can the Minister inform the House what educational campaigns and programs will be established to monitor and reduce the trend of drug driving on the State’s roads?

In 2007, the Australian Drug Foundation (ADF) conducted a comprehensive year-long study into the drug-driving habits of Australian motorists. Among the major findings: 51.3 per cent of respondents who used cannabis reported driving within three hours of drug use; 52.7 per cent of respondents who used methamphetamine reported driving within three hours of drug use; 37.5 per cent of respondents who used ecstasy reported driving within three hours of drug use, and 30.3 per cent of respondents who used benzodiazepines (also known as minor tranquilisers) reported driving within three hours of drug use. This compares to 13.8 per cent of alcohol users who admitted driving with a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) greater than .05.

Dr Moyes, NSW Family First Parliamentary Leader, commented, “I welcome the increased number of roadside drug tests undertaken. Clearly, the research shows that more programs are needed in order to reduce drug driving in the State’s roads. We have seen a shift from drink driving to drug driving as more and more marijuana and ecstasy are readily available. There is an urgent need to provide widespread, targeted education and information to drug-using group”.

“Increasing drug driving tests will prevent the number of fatalities in our roads. This preventative approach will effectively deal with the risks associated with a person driving under the influence of the effects of drugs and prevent further deaths in NSW roads”, Dr Moyes concluded. END.

Dr Gordon Moyes, NSW Family First Parliamentary Leader, welcomes the key finding of the Peters Inquiry into the future of Hurlstone Agricultural High School, which recommends that the school retains much of the current landholding. This will ensure the school’s capacity to continue to deliver a credible and authentic agricultural educational program, based on scientific and practical application.

The key finding represents a significant reversal to the privatisation of public assets and the downgrading of public education provision in New South Wales. The Inquiry was established as a result of considerable public and local school community outcry over plans by the NSW Government to sell off the majority portion of the site for private housing as a short term grab for cash by the State government.

It is likely that very little, if any, proceeds from the sale would have found their way back to the area. As well, the possibility of more private housing in the area would only provide further strain on an area of Sydney already witnessing the sale of private farms to address the housing demand.

The commitment from key stakeholders from the school community, together with a local community group known as SHEAP (Save Hurlstone Educational Agricultural Property) have actively campaigned to oppose the proposed sell off. NSW Family First recognises and congratulates all campaigners for their significant contribution in achieving this outcome from the Inquiry. To read Dr Moyes’ speech on Hurlstone Agricultural High School Site Bill, click on the link.

On Friday the 19th of March 2010 hundreds of local Coptic Christians and supporters from many other Christian churches came together to pray for the safety of Christians in Egypt. Orderly crowds carrying crosses, signs and candles filled Martin Place to hear the dignitaries and choirs, and to join their hearts together in prayer, as a sincere plea for public recognition of the humanitarian disaster that is befalling their people in Egypt.

Egypt has been Christian since 54 AD, and there are currently 12 million Christian Copts in modern Egypt, which is 15% of the population. There has been an escalation by the majority population in recent years of unprovoked attacks on the homes, businesses, churches and community centres, as well as individuals identified as Coptic Christian. In fact there have been nearly 300 major attacks over the past 3 decades, including the 6 January 2010 Nag Hammadi drive-by shooting murders outside a church after Christmas services – but there has been scant media coverage of this event or analysis of how it fits into the ongoing reality of the outright discrimination and persecution of Copts by the majority culture in Egypt. Copts suspect that the government was aware of the attack ahead of time because there was an unusual absence of the security forces normally on-site during festivities in order to guard churches and direct traffic.

Indeed, it is evident that many of these attacks have been carried out by the National Security Forces of Egypt, who should have been responsible for the protection of all Egyptian citizens. There is also a blatant pattern of acquittal or light sentences for murders of Copts, which should appal all humanitarians and those who respect the rule of law. There is now an average of one attack weekly on the Coptic community.

His Grace Bishop Anba Suriel of Melbourne recently spoke out against this state of affairs, asserting that it is basically evolving into a form of apartheid because no Member of Parliament is ever a Copt, nor it there one Copt head of a university, despite the Copts being a very well-educated people. At the Martin Place vigil a Youth representative from the Australian Coptic Movement expressed solidarity with other Copts across the world who now intend to address the issue of human rights in Egypt in a more vocal and unified manner.

The Egyptian Constitution states that ‘all people are equal under the law’ but in practice this is not observed. There is a great deal of indignation and outrage amongst the 70,000 Coptic Australians, many of whom have contacted the Australian Ministry of Foreign Affairs with letters, emails and telephone calls about these issues. In response the Australian authorities have done nothing. They should have told the Egyptian ambassador that human rights violations in Egypt are condemned by the Australian Government and people, and called the genocide against Egypt’s Christians what it is: extermination of a culture. As signatories to the UN Convention on Human Rights Australia should be outspoken on these issues but instead are doing nothing about it, not standing up for human rights as have the USA and EU in their statements to the Government of Egypt.

I support the Coptic Christian community in Australia in their ongoing efforts to bring worldwide attention to the situation in Egypt, and join my prayers with theirs that we may all live in harmony someday.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

Family First supports the motion moved by the Hon. Christine Robertson and congratulates the excellent speakers who have outlined many points that we support. Two weeks ago I read an article written by Mia Freedman entitled “We’ve Come a Long Way, Baby” and was so impressed by it that I reproduced it and circulated it to people I know—of course, with acknowledgment. Ms Freedman picked up many of the current issues that other members have referred to that still need to be confronted, and Family First generally supports them.

Two or three weeks ago in “Christian Voice: Family Values”—an electronic magazine I produce each week—I published an editorial about empowering women to end poverty by 2015. Of course, that is the theme of International Women’s Day 2010. I indicated Family First’s support for achieving movement towards gender equality. However, I made the point that there is still so much more to be done. Women, and in particular women with a disability, experience more poverty and discrimination than most.

The following is a list of examples of what is meant by empowering women to end poverty: action taken to promote women’s greater involvement in public life, legal and social programs to protect women from violence, the promotion of social change—encouraging more equitable sharing of domestic duties, providing greater access for women and girls to technical training in information and communication technologies, and the reform of social services with greater priority being given to the needs of women.

This International Women’s Day we remember those women who still live in bondage, fear and poverty. It is estimated that women comprise 70 per cent of all people in the world living in poverty. We have also raised in the past few weeks the fact that violent rape is now seen as an acceptable weapon of war in some countries, particularly African countries. I note the increasing tendency in western countries to home-based violence.

I never use the term “domestic violence” because it seems to make it more acceptable than other kinds of violence. Violence is always violence. Family First is committed not only to fighting against these tendencies but also to continuing to support Australian women in improving gender equality and, in particular, seeking salary equity and equal representation in senior management positions.

About 40 years ago I was impressed while at university by a series of lectures I was privileged to hear given by Germaine Greer based on her book The Female Eunuch. Since that time I have consistently done whatever I could to obtain domestic and religious equity in terms of female leadership, not only in the community but also in the church.

In my earlier life I organised springboard programs for young women managers, mentoring programs and management training programs for in excess of 3,000 women. When I was responsible for payroll levels for 4,600 staff I realised there was still so much more to be done to achieve equity and sought to achieve it by providing child care, parental leave and equality in superannuation benefits and at all levels of pay.

A member who spoke earlier made a reference to the image of yummy mummies. The reason I do not appreciate that reference is that the woman I married is a yummy mummy. However, I did appreciate the fact that when Therese Rein, the wife of the Prime Minister, spoke about significant women achievers last week she included Dr Catherine Hamlin, AC, for her work in establishing fistula surgery in Ethiopia. My wife and I rejoiced at the highlighting of Dr Hamlin’s work because we have financially supported Dr Hamlin and her work in a major way for more than 20 years. I commend her biography to everyone.

I was personally thrilled to be able to congratulate her and to welcome her into the group of Companions of the Order of Australia some time ago when she was awarded that high honour. She richly deserves that highest of honours that our country bestows. I also congratulate the New South Wales Premier’s Council for Women and the Office for Women’s Policy on raising some of the issues that concern us during International Women’s Day. I pledge that Family First will continue to work on these important issues.

Family First associates itself with this motion and I commend Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane for moving it.

Harmony Day is celebrated annually on 21 March to coincide with the United Nations International Day for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It promotes the simple, but important, notion that everyone belongs and recognises the most important of human rights principles, that is: all rights belong to all humans no matter their nationality, culture, race, or any other characteristics which define them as human beings.

Many members have contributed to this debate, including the Hon. Helen Westwood, who developed a very important rationale for Harmony Day. I add two points that have not been previously mentioned. First, Parliament supports the work of Harmony Day. At the moment approximately 60 pieces of artwork celebrating various aspects of Harmony Day are hanging in the Parliament’s Fountain Court. I encourage all members to view those artworks to see how artists among our youth and children at our public schools have expressed their thoughts and beliefs about Harmony Day.

Second, over the past few years on my visits to various public schools I have noticed that Harmony Day has a permanent place. It is often painted up in schoolyards. I am thinking particularly of Wyong public school, which I attended a week so ago, which has major Harmony Day features displayed in its library. I was pleased that the young indigenous people and their contributions to this land were also included.

On behalf of Family First I speak on the Waste Recycling and Processing Corporation (Authorised Transaction) Bill 2010 (No 2), the object of which is to authorise and facilitate the transfer to the private sector of the assets, rights and liabilities of the Waste Recycling and Processing Corporation. The Waste Recycling and Processing Corporation, known as WSN, which trades as WSN Environmental Solutions, operates a State-owned waste collection and processing business.

Part 2 of the bill authorises the transfer of WSN to the private sector. To provide flexibility, part 3 authorises the transfer of WSN to the private sector through various methods: the direct vesting of assets and liabilities, the conversion of WSN to a Corporations Act 2001 company and the subsequent transfer of its shares, or the establishment and transfer of a new company.

The bill provides the Treasurer with the relevant powers and methods. It includes a provision allowing the new owner to be excluded from the payment of State taxes relating to this transaction, such as, stamp duty. Section 52A of the Conveyancing Act 1919 will not apply to a contract for the sale of the land that is entered into for the purposes of this transaction.

Clause 19 makes it clear that provisions in the State Owned Corporations Act 1989 do not prevent, restrict or otherwise limit the carrying out of this transaction. This applies also to the Waste Recycling and Processing Corporation Act 2001. There are provisions to allow for the repeal of that Act after the successful completion of the transaction.

The bill establishes the Waste Assets Management Corporation, which will retain and manage sites not transferred to the new owner as part of this transaction. The Waste Assets Management Corporation will be under the direction and control of the Treasurer. A general manager will be appointed and staff may be employed under chapter lA of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act 2002. I congratulate the Opposition on negotiating with the Government the inclusion of the amendments, which we envisaged moving to this bill.

The bill authorises the transfer of employees to the private sector and the continuation of their existing leave and superannuation entitlements, as well as a three-year employment guarantee for permanent employees. Temporary employees will receive a three-year guarantee or to the end of their fixed term, whichever occurs first. This bill also empowers the Treasurer to provide transfer payments to employees who choose to move to the private sector. It also includes a provision to allow permanent and temporary WSN employees to remain with the public sector.

In late 2008 the New South Wales Government announced that it intended to investigate the possible sale of WSN. Financial, legal, tax, accounting and environmental advisers were appointed to undertake a review of WSN. Following the completion of this review, the Government announced its intention to proceed with the transaction and now is introducing this enabling legislation. According to the agreement in principle speech in the other place, the Government has decided to proceed with this transaction for a number of important reasons.

Firstly, the sale of WSN addresses the inherent conflict between the Government being both owner and regulator of this business. Previous speakers have pointed out the difficulties in this regard. Secondly, WSN operates in an increasingly competitive market along with private sector operators, who are best placed to make the significant technological development and capital investment necessary in a growing waste industry. Government members who spoke in this debate indicated how important this is to the future of our State.

There is growing demand for alternate waste technology facilities, which serve the critical function of diverting waste from landfill and providing recycling opportunities. The previous speaker, Greens member Ms Sylvia Hale, said that Penrith City Council and other councils have advised citizens how to store their waste for fortnightly collections. Rather than keeping waste food in a freezer for a fortnight, with all the problems that creates, such as, an increase in electricity consumption, I recommend keeping four chickens in the backyard. They will clear up all the waste created by a family and supply the family with fresh eggs at no cost. I also suggest there is nothing better than a worm farm because it improves the soil in the garden.

I join the Opposition and crossbench in highlighting key questions that need to be addressed, including the structure of the sale, the handling of closed sites, and whether money will be put aside for the remediation of closed sites and any liabilities that may occur as a result of closure. The longstanding market expectation is that the New South Wales Government will retain control of closed facilities, stripping out of WSN’s big liabilities to maximise the value of its other assets. This will lead to long-term and perhaps serious liabilities still to be paid by the taxpayer.

WSN is the largest waste management network in Australia, with 11 waste recycling, processing and disposal facilities across Sydney, and the sale is expected to be worth around $300 million. WSN has applied to extend the final date for acceptance of putrescible waste at its Eastern Creek landfill site from June 2014 to June 2016. However, the Eastern Creek facility is likely to be included in the grouping of dead assets that the Government will retain.

I join other members who have stated that we must ensure that liability is fully funded before the Government spends the sale proceeds on other projects. There must be more assurances about processes to ensure social and environmental outcomes will be achieved. I congratulate the Opposition on its negotiations with the Government in this regard.

WSN has a bevy of council waste collection contracts. Despite its competitors regularly referring it to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission alleging that it uses its near monopoly on disposal to underbid on collection, market scuttlebutt suggests that several operators will be very keen to get their hands on this business. The network of transfer stations dotted around Sydney will also be a key attraction for any potential bidders.

According to Inside Waste Weekly, there is plenty of industry speculation about the form of the sale. Would selling the entire business create anti-competition concerns? It seems unlikely Veolia—which broke WSN’s disposal monopoly when it opened the Woodlawn facility near Goulburn—would be allowed to restore that monopoly in its own favour. But would a duopoly with two players in the municipal disposal market be enough for Sydney? The waste and environment levy is paid by councils for every tonne of rubbish that goes to landfill and is meant to fund community education and other waste reduction projects. Councils in Sydney, the Hunter region, the Central Coast and Illawarra, and in Wollondilly and Blue Mountains local government areas currently pay the levy, and councils in coastal areas from the Hunter to the Queensland border will be paying as well.

By 2012 approximately $150 million will be collected and supposedly funnelled into “new or expanded environmental programs”. But New South Wales has only budgeted to spend $10.5 million on these activities. The rest of the money will sweeten the deal for SITA Environmental Solutions, associated with the French giant Suez Environment Corporation, or Transpacific Industries, which are reportedly competing to buy Waste Services. Inside Waste Weekly stated that spending “$300 million would potentially offer its buyer an (almost) instant monopoly in the Sydney waste disposal market”. Members of the crossbench were concerned when they discussed that matter.

The Government can learn from residential waste collection in Finland. Finland is one of relatively few countries to have a system of competition in the market for residential waste collection. Sixty-one per cent of municipalities in Finland have adopted a system whereby each household is obligated to contract individually with a waste collection company for waste collection and disposal services. In addition, housing cooperatives can tender privately for waste collection services.

The role of the local authority is limited to a form of regulation—the local authority decides what type of waste are to be encompassed by the system, what maximum prices the largest companies can charge and in what regions companies are obliged to offer their services. I echo the concerns raised by other members regarding the economic, environmental and social costs of WSN.

In principle I support the bill but I want assurance from the Government that the sale of WSN will not be to the detriment of the State’s citizens.

Scripture: Matthew 6:19-24

More families founder on the rocks of poor money management than any other single issue. The inability of people to control their spending, earn enough to live as they desire, control the debts they have accepted and handle credit that is offered to them, causes more conflict between parents, and between parents and children than any other issue.

Other issues can be used to fight this battle. Sometimes conflict that is started over financial matters is fought in bed with sexual relationships being used as weapons. Sometimes the weapons are irrational behaviour or the threat to leave the home. But many families founder on their inability to manage money in their marriage. [See Marriage Works. April 2006. Dealing with Money Related Tension]

Over the past five years, I have introduced a number of excellent, practical articles on money management for families in the magazine my wife and I own, “Marriage Works”. We have indicated where online you can find those articles in this study.

Very little is done to teach us how to manage money in a marriage. In 1978, when I drew up my list of 150 ideas I would like to develop when I came to Sydney, included were new concepts people in Sydney had not ever considered, including equity funded retirement villages, the development of a national television and radio programs, and the establishment of a financial counselling service that I proposed calling “DEBTLINE”.

One of the first things that the first manager I appointed, Betty Weule, did when we appointed her to develop the service was to suggest we change its name to Credit Line, a much more user-friendly term. Eventually Credit Line has become the means of helping tens of thousands of families stay together, keep their homes, and work through the maze of debt. Founding that financial counselling service has been one of my proudest achievements.

Families rich and poor need to be taught money management. Even wealthy families. You can be an honest, intelligent, wealthy young person with good business sense and even a Harvard MBA and still lose it all – just ask young Warwick Fairfax! Or lose a lot of it – ask Jamie Packer.

Poor families have even less opportunity to learn how to gain, use and control money, and so are particularly vulnerable. Poor families are not given credit, are never taught how to discipline their spending on credit cards, are encouraged to try quick fixes through gambling, and rarely have good educational opportunities. So even though it is harder for the poor to get money, it is easier for them to lose it. [See Marriage Works April 2008. Eliminating Debt]

David Claerbaut in his excellent 2005 book “Urban Ministry” (p.76), says “Those who have been raised in poverty have never had much money to be handled in the first place. Consequently such childhood socialisers as allowances, toy purchases, and school banking are non-existent, giving the people little or no training in money management. Adults do not have credit cards, chequebooks, tax accountants, and deductions on which they sharpen their fiscal acumen and pass it along to their youth. There are simply no models. In female-headed families, the oldest child is often saddled with the shopping. Because they have no knowledge of how to handle money shrewdly and have little cash to begin with, they are often victim of economic exploitation.”

I remember one family of five children including a baby with a hole in the heart. Father had been sick for three months. Their only debt to a finance company was $3,000, but with the sickness, a consolidating loan was taken out to cover the Finance Company, which increased the debt to $11,000 with not one cent more to them. A George Adams loan at 140% interest paid the finance company. A Walter Pugh loan charging 162.4% interest was used to pay the George Adams loan. Bankruptcy was real. Yet for ten years this family had stayed home. No car. No outings. It was 9 1/2 years since the parents had been out at night alone.

Credit Line continued to work with the family. For the first time they had a small balance in the Credit Union for Christmas. Then came the surprise of a weekend holiday without cost at Vision Valley. Some of my donor friends paid for that. The children were excited as they were driven to the Valley – “Look at the horses, there’s a cow, what’s that?” Sunday afternoon we collected the children: “We rode the horses and the canoes. We had scones and cream and chicken for dinner.” The parents were so relaxed and happy. “I haven’t cooked a meal for two days, I just can’t believe it’s happening!” [See Marriage Works October 2008. Things to consider before buying a home]

People need to be taught how to manage money in their marriage, and Christian people have a wonderful head start on everybody else. For the Christian faith puts money management high on the list of requirements for all believers. Family wisdom in handling money is essential. Jewish families are taught to read the book of Proverbs regularly which is packed with scores of examples of good tips on managing money.

A survey of 34,000 people by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, found that many people rely on their family for financial assistance. Professor Bettina Cass, said the survey refuted “alarmist suggestions that we are seeing the death of the family. This information makes it quite clear that families are very strong in Australian society.” What then should families learn about money, marriage and managing?

1. Learn that money management is a part of life

Many people go along never anticipating that the time will come when their circumstances will change. That’s the shock that comes when a woman suddenly realises her husband is gone for good and she will just have to manage the children and the home on her own. That’s the stunning realisation that has come to many middle managers who have been secure in their jobs only to be made redundant at the time when their family expenses have been at their height. That’s the shock that comes when sickness suddenly cuts the family income by half. Mortgages still have to be paid. Food still costs money. Children still have to be supported.

Retrenchment from employment requires careful management of the family resources. A Life Line Phone In I once organized for retrenched workers revealed that all persons had commitments like mortgage repayments, credit cards, household debts, car repayments, etc.

A year later 60% of the callers still were not working; 12% were offered voluntary redundancy, 71% were retrenched involuntarily and 17% were forced to resign. 30% received no payout upon being sacked. 20% received less than $5000, and only 10% received a payout of over $50,000. Few could survive long unemployed with debt.

Since being retrenched only 18% had gained new full-time work. 60% were still without work one year later. Whereas the average income before being terminated was $34,500, their new jobs paid an average of $21,780. At this level house repayments were virtually impossible. If there were other payments of any kind, such as car repayments, credit card debt and store charge cards, these families were in severe trouble.

They were suddenly going to learn lessons about the accumulation of interest, the advisability of cutting up their cards, of starting a budget, of negotiating repayment levels with their bank, stores and credit providers, of repayment schedules and saving for anticipated expenditure. How sad that people should have to go through the pain of learning family money management at the very time when they can least afford it! The time to start learning is now! [See Marriage Works Oct 2009. Finances in Tough Times]

2. Know what the Bible teaches about money

The Bible says much about how to handle money and possessions. The problem of money is summed up by Jesus: “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money” (Matt 6:24). The word serve translates “to be a slave to”. It is not a question of advisability, “You should not serve both God and money.” That would be a priority choice. It is not a question of accountability, “You must not serve both God and money.” That would be a moral choice. Rather, it is a matter of impossibility, “You cannot serve both God and money.” There is no choice, we each can serve only one master: we are either slaves to God or slaves to money.

Why did Jesus say we cannot serve both? Solomon wisely said: “Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income. This too is meaningless.” (Ecclesiastes 5:10). Jesus knows the need for money we face. He knows the pressure we can be under to make money. He knows its allure would pull us away from God. That is why we must have a proper theology to guide our beliefs about how we are to gain, save, use and give our money and possessions. That’s why John Wesley taught about money constantly. [See: Marriage Works July 2008. Finance – God’s Way or the World’s Way]

3. Adopt a sound theology of money management

There are many families who would not be interested in a theology of management of money. But could I suggest you just read on because you may have been influenced more than you think by one of the three theologies followed by Christians.

I. Poverty Theology is seen in a Christian disgusted with worldliness and money. He believes possessions are a curse and has a strong bias toward helping the poor. He has few resources to actually help with the solution and usually advocates left-wing political ideas, especially socialist views on the means of the making of money and the exchange of property. This theology of Christian socialism has influenced all communist, socialist and left-wing political parties, especially in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

II.Prosperity Theology is seen in many Pentecostal Christians who follow the teachings of Kenneth Copeland and others like him. The disciple of prosperity theology believes ‘you have not because you ask not’. They usually tithe and have experienced the material blessings available by tithing and because of their success with tithing are preoccupied with money. Others not experiencing God’s financial blessings are said to show lack of faith. Many disciples of prosperity theology live consumptive lifestyles and support right-wing politics.

III. Stewardship Theology is seen in Christians who believe God owns and controls everything. Possessions are a privilege and not a right; the steward gives up his rights. He reads Scripture to say possessions are a trust given in varying proportions, depending upon the God-given abilities he has and his faithfulness and obedience in following Biblical principles. The steward believes prosperity results from faithfully administering his talents, as given by God. He is not busy in accumulating wealth or renouncing it, but with being wise in the conduct of his affairs. His goal is to be like the man described in Psalm 112: “Good will come to him who is generous and lends freely, who conducts his affairs with justice…who scatters abroad his gifts to the poor.” His politics are middle of the road.

The perspectives of Poverty and Prosperity theologies are rife with flaws. The Prosperity gospel claims you can give to get, that you can create a transaction on God in which He is obligated to bless you. This view disregards your motives, whether or not you are living in sin, and God’s plan for your life. Likewise Poverty theology is flawed. The person who thinks you must be poor to be humble is mistaken. He doesn’t understand God’s mandate to be industrious and use his talents, and has a view that says poverty is romantic and ethical.

Stewardship theology weaves the virtues of Prosperity and Poverty theology together with the balance of God’s Word about money and possessions. Being a steward is more of an attitude, a way of looking at life as a caretaker. It is an approach to our faith – it is looking out not only for our own interests but also for the interests of others. Poverty theology exaggerates the role of sacrificial work, while the Prosperity gospel overemphasises the pursuit of financial rewards. The steward leads a balanced life, enjoying God’s abundance while always serving others in love. [See Marriage Works October 2006 The Fun of Budgeting (Part 1)
See Marriage Works January 2007 The Fun of Budgeting (Part 2)]

4. Follow the teachings of Jesus in managing money

Jesus understood the seduction of things and the liberation that comes through the right management of the things we possess. Sixteen of his thirty-eight parables are concerned with how we manage our money and possessions. One in every ten verses in the gospels, 288 in all, deal directly with how we gain, save, use and give our possessions.

It is said that there are five hundred verses in the Bible on prayer and 500 verses about faith, but some 2,350 verses on how to handle money and possessions! The Bible tells us that money, marriage and managing is fundamental to life.

Without being caught in the deceitfulness of riches we can focus on generosity, knowing that Jesus gave all, even His very life. Through His example, we know liberality is a mark of largeness in living. A man reveals the condition of his heart by his attitude toward money. No wonder Jesus sat in temples watching people give their offerings. “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matthew 6:21).

Christians who learn to tithe demonstrate good management principles. They know how to work out their income and expenditure and how to take a tenth of it to give to God’s work. Such budgeting is the beginning of control over expenditure and planning of income. A tithe is the money we give God before our offerings. The tithe is the “first fruit” of a person’s earnings or wealth, which always belongs to God (Exodus. 34:26). The tithe is the Lord’s (Leviticus 27:30) and if we do not give the tithe we rob God. Our offerings are on top of that.

The biggest problem with families who get into heavy debt is that they have no finance plan. We have to teach them to write down their income and opposite it all they require to live, together with a strategy for earning the income and a time plan for paying their expenditure regularly and proportionately. Christians who tithe have to do that first in order to work out their tenth they promise for God’s work. Managing marriage and money matters start best when you first give to God, for the rest is then ordered and planned. [See Marriage Works May 2009. Be Proactive – Establish a Financial Plan]

When we give, especially when we give beyond our tithes, we enter into true sowing and reaping. When you tithe, God promises to save you from disasters (Malachi. 3:11). But when you give offerings, something will be “given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over” (Luke 6:38).

The process started with God giving His best, Jesus Christ; it continues when a person surrenders his or her life in commitment to the Lord; and is visibly expressed in tithes and offerings. What a great statement of love and trust toward God, to give the very means by which we live – money. Money is an expression of our love.

Giving money follows the giving of self (2 Cor 8:1-5). When Zacchaeus became a believer the evidence of his changed heart was his desire to make restitution of what he had criminally and fraudulently obtained. The condition of his heart was shown in the use of his money (Luke 19:5-9). Restitution was not a word, but an action. He was generous and his life was in order.

In a later story, Cornelius the centurion qualified to become the gateway of the gospel to the Gentiles, by his praying and his offerings (Acts 10:2-8). Later still, the letter to the church at Corinth tells how those who willingly gave of their means to support the Gospel had first given themselves to God (2 Corinthians 8:5).

Families founder on the rock of unplanned finances and thoughtless debt. When we get our heart right with God we also get our money right, and when our money is right, our marriage and family life is also right.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

The Bible has 800 references to light. One frequently refers to Jesus as light. In the Old Testament God was light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19). Light was the great act of creation (Gen. 1:3-5). Light was the essence of God’s gifts, an energy of God expressly for the benefit of humankind.

In the New Testament Jesus is called the light of the world, especially in John who has an elaborate theology of light (Jn 1:4-5, 7-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12-46; 1 Jn 1: 5-7). Other religions in the New Testament times – Greek, Persian, Roman, Jewish and Egyptian, all had emphasis upon the clash between light and darkness as symbols of good and evil. In the presence of all other religions Jesus claimed to be the light of the world.

The time of this claim was important. It was at the Feast of the Tabernacles when on the first evening in the Court of Women there was the ceremonial lighting of sixteen giant lamps on four candelabra, which lit brilliantly the whole of the temple and the surrounding city. Jesus claimed to be God’s light to humanity. Believers are children of light (Lk. 16:8; Jn 12:36; 1 Thess. 5;5), and are to be the light of the world reflecting His light (Matt.5:14; Acts 13:47; Phil. 2:15). In the Heavenly City there will be no darkness (Rev. 22:5).

FOR TODAY

When the World Council of Churches Assembly met in New Delhi, India, among the great heathen religions of the world, the Christian community there chose as their theme “Jesus Christ is the Light of the World”.

The early Church chose to celebrate the birth of Jesus, not at the actual time (probably April), but in December at the Roman Saturnalia, which was a holiday to the Sun God in remembrance of the growing length of day and the coming of light to the world after the night of winter. The early Church saw Jesus both as the Son of God and as the bringer of light to humankind.

We must reflect His light and use it as a weapon against darkness (Rom. 3:12; Eph. 6:12;). Even our most feeble witness is effective. The smallest light can shatter total darkness and darkness, no matter how great, can never extinguish it. One local Church, set on a hill on a busy highway and passed by 140,000 cars each day, is floodlit at night with its white tower pointing into the night sky – a reminder in light that Jesus Christ is the light of the world, and that through Him, people can find God.

The Quakers have a motto that has been adopted by several international philanthropic organisations. It could well be each Christian’s motto: “It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness”. When Peter Milne, the missionary to the New Hebrides island of Nguna, died, the native wrote under his picture this description of his service: “When he came there was no light, when he died there was no darkness”. Christians, both in mission lands and in city streets, have the same privilege and responsibility to shatter darkness by His light.

REV THE HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC

I have written previously about Professor Richard Dawkins after a trip to Cambridge University and the publication of his book “The God Delusion.” See the “Two differing professors”. Professor Dawkins is Professor of Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He believes that an understanding of evolution will lead to atheism. His aim is to convert his hearers to atheism. He is the author of “The Selfish Gene” (1976) and “The God Delusion” (2006).

Richard Dawkins was born in 1941. He was educated at Oxford University and has taught zoology at the universities of California and Oxford. His books about evolution and science include The Selfish Gene, The Extended Phenotype, The Blind Watchmaker, River Out of Eden, Climbing Mount Improbable, and most recently, Unweaving the Rainbow.

Dawkins first came to prominence with his 1976 book The Selfish Gene, which popularised the gene-centred view of evolution and introduced the term meme into the lexicon. Dawkins is an outspoken atheist, secular humanist, and sceptic.

Dawkins describes his childhood as “a normal Anglican upbringing” in Malawi, but reveals that he began doubting the existence of God when he was about nine years old. When he better understood evolution, at the age of sixteen, his religious position again changed because he felt that evolution could account for the complexity of life in purely material terms, and thus that a designer was not necessary.

He married in 1967 but divorced in 1984. He remarried in 1984, had a daughter, and subsequently divorced again. He married for a third time in 1992. He studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, and gained a BA degree in zoology in 1962, followed by MA and DPhil degrees in 1966, and a DSc in 1989. He is a fellow of New College, Oxford since 1970. He has delivered a number of inaugural and other notable lectures. He has also been called the nearest thing to a professional atheist we have had since Bertrand Russell, the late British philosopher, logician, and mathematician.

Dawkins was the main guest at an international Atheist Convention held in Melbourne. He was more than disappointing. 2500 hardcore believers in the absence of religion packed into the Global Atheists’ Convention in Melbourne last weekend to give a hero’s welcome to their high priest of belief in unbelief, Richard Dawkins.

He was also on ABC’s Q&A, and in both appearances he was snobbish, rude to others, and claiming too much. He regarded sainthood for Mary MacKillop as being like something out of Monty Python and referred to the Pope as a Nazi. He went on to ridicule the Family First federal senator Steve Fielding, describing him as ‘more stupid than an earthworm’.

As Melanie Phillips pointed out in the Australian, with Dawkins’s claim that religion is responsible for the ills of the world, he forgot that the worst horrors in human history – the French revolution, Nazism, communism, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, to name a few – have all been atheistic ideologies. And although terrible things indeed have been done in the name of religion, the fact remains that Judeo Christian belief forms the foundation stone of Western civilisation and its great cause of human equality and freedom, she reminds us.

Dawkins says everything in the universe has a materialist explanation and must answer to the rules of empirical scientific evidence; to believe anything else is irrational. Books assessing his arguments using scientific reason have been recently published by a number of scientists and philosophers, including mathematicians David Berlinski and John Lennox, biochemist Alister McGrath, (under whom I sat in Cambridge), geneticist Francis Collins, and philosopher and the ex-atheist Anthony Flew. These authors have revealed Dawkins’s many mistakes, sloppy thinking, contradictions, and lack of logic.

He seems to believe that everyone who believes in God is stupid or evil, and that people who oppose him can be treated with scorn. Why is Dawkins so adamant in his rejection of religion? There are many religious scientists who can testify that science and religion are not at all incompatible. Dawkins is a calamity. Atheists must feel very let down by his visit and Christians must feel strengthened.

Reference: Dawkins preaches to the deluded against the divine, Melanie Phillips, The Australian, March 16 2010.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

NSW consumers are set to face the biggest increases in household electricity bills ever seen, according to the NSW Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART). From July 1 this year, bills for those on standard tariffs will rise by a cumulative total of up to 64 per cent by 2013. The increases will allow energy providers to increase investment in infrastructure and improve network security and reliability of supply in line with the new licence conditions imposed by the NSW Government.

The projected rise takes into account the Federal Government’s planned Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), which still has a start date of 2011-12. But even without the CPRS, power bills would still rise by up to 42 per cent over the three-year period, under changes announced by IPART today.

The rises are greater than those first proposed in December and will send average electricity bills rocketing by between $577 and $918 more by 2013, after including the impact of the CPRS. The increases will also come on top of already significant price rises in July last year.

For instance, Energy Australia bills would rise 60 per cent under a CPRS, adding $754 to a typical household customer’s bill by 2013. Integral Energy and Country Energy bills will rise 46 per cent and 64 per cent respectively over the same period, adding $577 and $918 to typical customers’ bills.

NSW businesses have blamed the forthcoming electricity price rises on the NSW Government’s failure to properly manage electricity assets. According to the NSW Business Chamber, the NSW Government stripped dividends from electricity companies and under invested in necessary poles and wires.

It was timely that the Institute for Sustainable Futures in the University of Technology Sydney launched their latest report “Meeting NSW Electricity Needs in a Carbon Constrained World” in NSW Parliament. The launch received multi-partisan support in NSW Parliament. Members of different political parties attended the event with all agreeing that NSW is at a critical point and must address climate change through various policy alternatives.

The report examined the current projections for energy consumption and generation, and how they differ from the Owen Inquiry results. It then examined peak demand projections, and identified when potential shortfalls may occur. In 2007, the NSW Government established an Inquiry into Electricity Supply in NSW chaired by Professor Anthony Owen. The Owen Inquiry concluded that there was a potential shortfall in baseload supply from 2013/14, and recommended that planning for new power stations should commence immediately as the lead time for a coal-fired power station could be 6-7 years.

What the report found was that meeting the growth in demand with distributed energy is significantly cheaper than building a new coal fired power station or meeting electricity growth needs with gas turbines. The maximum distributed energy scenario considered (energy efficiency, cogeneration, demand side response and retiring 1000 MW of coal fired power generation) saves 7 million tonnes of emissions and $0.5 billion compared to the business as usual approach currently taken by the NSW Government.

The report recommended 7 key reforms to the NSW Government. It is worth mentioning the first two. Recommendation 1: The NSW Government should adopt a target of meeting all forecast growth in energy consumption and peak demand between 2010 and 2020 from “green” energy sources, i.e. renewable energy and distributed energy (including energy efficiency, demand side response, and cogeneration). Recommendation 2: The NSW Government should nominate a suitable agency within Government with appropriate resources and authority to coordinate its Distributed Energy strategy to implement these recommendations.

The authors of the report have highlighted that these economic and environmental benefits will not be realised unless there is deliberate and effective electricity policy reform in NSW. This policy reform does not need additional government funding, but it does require strong and sustained political leadership to break with the centralised energy paradigm of the past.

Reference: Rutovitz, J. and Dunstan, C., Meeting NSW Electricity Needs in a Carbon Constrained World, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, 2009.

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer, on behalf of the Minister for Community Services. Is the Minister aware of a recent survey by the Australian Council of Social Services that found that New South Wales agencies are struggling to meet the rising demand for services and are forced to turn people away? Is the Minister aware that New South Wales fared the worst in the survey, of any State or Territory? In particular, is the Minister aware that more than 110,000 people in New South Wales who were otherwise eligible for services were turned away, and that 75 per cent of the people who were turned away were seeking financial and material support, housing, and food and health services? Will the Government continue to provide additional funding for much-needed program delivery as well as adequate funding to ensure the ongoing sustainability of organisations that deliver such critical services to the State’s most vulnerable people?

The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: I thank Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes for his question and interest in this matter. It is a wide-ranging question, and I am not aware of the particular survey the honourable member refers to. However, I think it is worth reflecting on what is in the budget in terms of the many areas of service he raises. I have spoken previously in the House about the Health budget. Indeed, I have spoken about a record $15.1 billion being invested in Health in New South Wales, a record $14.7 billion being invested in Education and Training, a record $2.3 billion being invested in Ageing, Disability and Home Care, and the $1.6 billion invested this year in Community Services. And so it goes on. We are absolutely committed to delivering the best set of services to the people of New South Wales. That is precisely the objective of the budget, and it is precisely what we are doing on a daily basis right around New South Wales.

It is important that when we talk about delivering services to the people of New South Wales we recognise that the challenge of delivering services across the State is taken by all levels of government—local, State and Federal. That is why I am so pleased that there is a new opportunity presented by the Rudd Labor Government nationally to sit down and talk about dealing with a number of issues to improve services for the people of New South Wales.

One can contrast the relationship between the Rudd Labor Government and the New South Wales Labor Government with the relationship between Tony Abbott and Barry O’Farrell. As we know, Tony Abbott has been very critical of the Barry O’Farrell’s teensy-weensy, itsy-bitsy target strategies. I have probably embellished that slightly on what Tony Abbott said. Nevertheless, he has exposed the laziness of the New South Wales Opposition in not putting forward any policies whatsoever. Tony Abbott has exposed that he does not want to be associated with the New South Wales Opposition. He has made it very clear that he wants to be at arm’s length from the New South Wales Opposition.

It is not surprising that Tony Abbott wants to distance himself from the New South Wales Opposition, when one looks at some of the candidates the Liberals have coughed up in their recent round of preselections.

The Hon. Don Harwin: Point of order: The response of the Treasurer has nothing to do with the question he was asked.

The President: Order! I assume the Hon. Don Harwin is taking his point of order on relevance. The Treasurer will continue to be generally relevant.

The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: I remind the House that there were a number of new initiatives contained in this year’s budget to help communities and to deliver better services. The Local Infrastructure Fund is a $200 million fund to assist councils with loans to bring forward infrastructure and improve delivery. There is also the very popular Community Building Partnerships fund. I cannot recall the number of times I have seen Opposition members praising that program in the media and happily posing for the happy snaps, trying to steal credit for yet another New South Wales Government initiative. However, I welcome Opposition members supporting New South Wales Government initiatives. That was one of the many initiatives the Government included in the budget to support the people of New South Wales and to improve services.

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. I ask the Minister whether he would pass my question onto the Minister for Community Services for answer.

The President: Order! The time for the Treasurer to answer has expired. However, I believe that at the commencement of his answer the Treasurer said that he would refer the specifics of the question to the Minister responsible.

Secrecy laws, and the prosecution of public servants for the unauthorised disclosure of Commonwealth information, can sit uneasily with the Australian Government’s commitment to open and accountable government.

The Australian Law Reform Commission report into Commonwealth secrecy laws, Secrecy Laws and Open Government in Australia (ALRC Report 112) tabled in Federal Parliament today, is the result of a 15-month inquiry which identified 506 secrecy provisions in 176 pieces of Commonwealth legislation, including 358 criminal secrecy offences. It sets out a new and principled framework designed to reinforce open and accountable government while ensuring adequate protection for Commonwealth information that should be legitimately kept confidential.

Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland ordered the review in August 2008 after retired customs officer Allan Kessing was charged with disclosing information without due authorisation.

The Commissioner in charge of the inquiry, now ALRC President, Professor Rosalind Croucher, stated that a key focus of the ALRC report was to “wind back” the use of criminal sanctions, for the unauthorised disclosure of information, including the repeal of s 70 of the Crimes Act 1914, which has attracted consisted criticism over the years. “Criminal sanctions should only be imposed where the unauthorised release of information has caused, or is likely to cause, harm to identified public interests.”

The Final Report makes 61 recommendations for reform and sets out a new and principled framework designed to reinforce open and accountable government while ensuring adequate protection for Commonwealth information that should legitimately be kept confidential.

The ALRC recommends that every Australian Government agency should develop and publish information-handling policies and guidelines to clarify the application of secrecy laws. The ALRC also recommends a role for the proposed new Office of the Information Commissioner to provide independent oversight of the manner in which Australian Government agencies discharge their information-handling responsibilities. Professor Croucher said the ALRC’s report suggested changes that would achieve greater clarity for public servants and others who handle Commonwealth information.

The full report can be viewed at: http://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiries/title/alrc112/index.html

1. In the CBD. Many people and organisations were outraged that the bronze statue of Governor Lachlan Macquarie was removed from the forecourt of Parliament House and left in the car park. The removal was to make way for new exit gates from the Parliament. No statements had been made of what will happen to the Statue.

However, I can reliably inform you that the Cabinet is being asked to pay for a large sandstone plinth on which the statue of the great Governor will be re-erected, outside the Land Titles Office and adjacent to the Hyde Park Barracks which he had constructed at the St Mary’s Cathedral end of Macquarie Street. A fitting position for the statue.

2. On the Central Coast. I have commented several times on the seeming decrease in sparrows in our area. Last week I read there was being conducted a worldwide sparrow count because the house sparrow (Passer domesticus) is showing population declines in many parts of Europe, with recent declines being particularly severe in urban areas.

Changing house designs leaving no niches for nests, private gardens being converted to continuous housing and increased demand for housing, specifically from the infilling of green space within urban areas, are all reasons advanced for the decline in their numbers. Plus one other – unproven but suspected, radiation from mobile telephone towers in built up areas. The bird specifically mentioned by Jesus is in serious decline.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

Recently the FamilyVoice SA sent surveys to 327 candidates in the upcoming South Australia state election, canvassing their policies regarding the critical family values issues of abortion law, child porn, same-sex relationship registers, euthanasia, prostitution, child abuse, cannabis, and poker machines.

All three of the Family First SA candidates got 100 points out of 100 possible for their total commitment in each of these areas. That is compared to the paltry 40 points the ALP managed to score, with 52 points for the Liberal Party, and 74 points for the Shooters Party. Many other parties did not even respond to the survey so earned only zeros, including the Greens, and the Independents reaped a range of scores, which reflected their personal stands on these issues.

The mainstream media do not frequently address such issues, so the FamilyVoice SA survey and its results offer key information to South Australian voters to assist them with making the right choices for selecting who should be responsible for representing their family values in government. I am glad to see that Family First came out on top.

In a statement to the ACL, Family First says that they recognise that Australia has a rich Christian heritage, and acknowledge the Christian foundations of our legal and parliamentary systems. They say that Christians should have an important voice, and that people of faith can play a valuable role in the democratic process.

More information about the poll, as well as detailed results are available at:
http://polls.fol.org.au/survey/el/1587/q/38/view
http://www.fava.org.au/election-surveys/south-australia/
http://www.savotes.org/policies/index.php?election_id=6&topic_ids=all&party_ids=70

The Australian Childhood Foundation released in September 2009 its third report in a series regarding community attitudes about child abuse and child protection across the nation. Entitled “Doing nothing hurts children” the report was published in partnership with the Child Abuse Prevention Research Australia centre at Monash University.

One of the most distressing findings was that 1 in 4 adults has personally witnessed a case of child abuse or neglect in the past five years somewhere in Australia. And of these, 44% were so anxious about the safety of the child that they made a report to the child protection authorities or the police. Another 21% had discussed their concerns with another kind of authority, but 16%, that is 1 in 16, had done nothing at all. Of those who took no action it was because they were unsure about who was the best person or agency to contact (53%) or they were simply unwilling to become involved (24%).

Other findings of note included the fact that 93% of Australians agreed that a parent who caused an injury to a child should be charged by the police; 85% believed that a child who witnessed domestic violence between their parents had experienced a form of abuse; 1 in 3 Australians would not believe a child who told them they were being abused; and 1 in 5 lacked the confidence to know what to do if they thought that a child was being abused or neglected.

The findings also revealed that unless they come face-to-face with the issue, most Australians rate petrol prices, public transport and roads as issues of greater importance than child abuse. That said 86% believed that the government should invest more money in protecting children from abuse and neglect and 90% believes that the public needs to be better informed about the problem.

In response to their findings the Foundation has urged the Commonwealth Government to fund a sustained public awareness program that engages the community to develop a shared sense of responsibility for the protection of our nation’s children. To read about the work of the foundation go to http://www.childhood.org.au/home/

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Energy. Is the Minister aware that EnergyAustralia, Integral Energy and Country Energy are expected to generate a further $5.3 billion in government earnings between now and 2012-13? Is the Minister aware of the soaring electricity prices that are forcing working families into fuel poverty as they seek an increasing number of payment extensions over their electricity bills in New South Wales? In particular, is the Minister aware that EnergyAustralia has an extra 36,000 customers on bill extension or payment plans, and Integral Energy has 19,000 more customers on assistance schemes? Given the massive profits of the three energy companies and the huge burden of price increases on household budgets, why are working families paying for the New South Wales Government’s lack of investment and maintenance in the States electricity infrastructure and not benefiting from government subsidies in their fuel bills?

The Hon. John Robertson: The New South Wales Government is deeply concerned about the impact of the proposed price rises and the effect they will have on New South Wales customers. It is important to note that the independent regulator, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal, sets electricity prices. The Government has made a submission to the tribunal to set the final regulated prices at a level that is no more than required to ensure the ongoing financial viability of the New South Wales standard electricity retailers.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: What would that do?

The Hon. John Robertson: As shadow Minister the Hon. Duncan Gay ought to know, and it is probably a reflection on him and his incapacity to understand how the electricity industry works that he would interject with a question like that. If prices are not set at levels that reflect the cost of production, retailers may go broke. More than $272 million in customer assistance is being rolled out over five years to reduce the impact of price increases, including direct financial assistance through rebates and emergency payment vouchers. We have expanded and increased the energy rebate for pensioners plus select health-care cardholders. This rebate now provides $130 a year off electricity bills and will increase in line with inflation from 1 July 2010 and each year thereafter. A new medical energy rebate commenced on 1 January 2010, providing $130 a year to people with medical conditions who need extra heating and cooling at home to stay well, and last year the Government boosted funding for the life-support rebate and added two new machines to the scheme.

We have also introduced tough new regulations at the beginning of this month that make it harder for energy companies to disconnect customers and require that everyone be afforded two opportunities to pay their bills over a 12-month period. It is important to note that in 2008-09 the rate of electricity disconnections remained unchanged from the previous year at 0.6 per cent. It is worth reinforcing that point—it is 0.6 per cent. More recently, EnergyAustralia has reported a 5 per cent drop in customers being disconnected for non-payment of their electricity account over the past nine months. I assure the House that the New South Wales Government will continue to work hard to reduce the impact of electricity price rises on New South Wales families and small businesses through effective consumer protection measures.

On behalf of Family First I speak to the Historic Houses Amendment (Throsby Park Historic Site) Bill 2009, which will revoke the site from reservation as a historic site under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and transfer its ownership and management to the Historic Houses Trust. The bill will also amend the Historic Houses Act to safeguard the land from being sold or otherwise disposed of without an Act of Parliament.

In the beautiful Southern Highlands of New South Wales, in the outskirts of Moss Vale and encompassing 75 hectares or approximately 150 acres, sits the property of Throsby Park. This Georgian-style house, a perfect example of colonial style, was built in 1834 by Charles Throsby and his wife, out of sandstone, marble and cedar, on land granted to his family from Governor Macquarie nearly 20 years earlier. One of the first properties to be settled in that region, it was long to be home to their 17 children and then for six generations until 2006 when the last Throsby living there died. It was run as a mixed farm over the generations and as a riding school for many decades.

The property and all of its valuable period furnishings were originally donated by the family to the New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service in 1975, with the proviso that Miss Delicia Throsby could continue living there. Its transfer to the Historic Houses Trust will be advantageous because that organisation has the specialised expertise required to care for and show historic houses at their best. The bill will also amend the Historic Houses Act in order to prevent the Throsby Park property from being sold without an Act of Parliament, thus guaranteeing that this wonderful heritage site will belong to the people of New South Wales in perpetuity.

The Historic Houses Trust was established in 1980 in order to manage, conserve and interpret historic buildings and places. It currently manages many houses, public buildings, gardens and parklands, and holds extensive heritage collections. The trust has world-class expertise in areas such as building conservation, architecture, historical research, and the management of historic gardens, furnishings and interiors. The trust will manage the site under its Endangered Houses Fund, which is used to acquire historic buildings that are at risk of demolition or insensitive development. They then conserve and protect them before putting them on the market either for sale or on a long-term lease—which will be the case for the Throsby Park property. The long-term residential lease is believed to provide the best option for conserving the site’s heritage value. There will be specific conditions in the lease to ensure public access is provided, so that the people of New South Wales will continue to have the opportunity to see and appreciate their cultural heritage. I support the bill on behalf of Family First.

I speak on behalf of Family First in support of Ms Lee Rhiannon’s motion. The Federal Government is constantly talking about the need to gain better facilities for our increasing population. Federally we are faced with a recommended inquiry into the expected increase in population by 2035 and the increased number of persons living in Australia over the age of 65 years. We all know the demographics. We all know we have more and more people living in this country, the greater percentage of which are becoming older as the baby boomers reach old age. An increased percentage of people are living longer, due to good health care, but are suffering increased health problems, particularly those over the age of 75 years. The closure of State-owned nursing homes and the desire of the Government to get the not-for-profit sector engaged in running nursing homes is a real trap. In order to get money from the private sector and to boost its own funds the Government is selling off all kinds of assets. Among those assets are government-owned nursing homes.

The Hon. Robert Brown spoke of the local capital funding of $750,000 that went into the Carramar nursing home. For many years I ran half a dozen different nursing homes, retirement centres and villages for more than 1,5000 people and I know that the capital cost is the least cost put into the ongoing running of nursing homes. The capital cost is less than half of what a community will put into the ongoing running of nursing homes. This will involve the use of volunteers and a number of persons involved in fundraising committees to raise money for the purchase of ongoing facilities to make elderly people more comfortable in their nursing home or respite care beds. The Government wants to flick past the local support, volunteers and fundraising to the not-for-profit sector. When the not-for-profit sector takes over a nursing home such as Carramar it will not mean that Government support will continue—

Every move to get rid of a local nursing home to the not-for-profit sector does not mean that costs of the nursing home evaporate. The costs go to the not-for-profit sector, which means the organisation running the nursing home has to develop local community fundraising. Therefore if a not-for-profit sector decided to accept this sale it would have to immediately set up fundraising in the Leeton area to support the ongoing work of Carramar.

Maintenance and upgrading, and the rebuilding of nursing homes where necessary are major issues. All 10 nursing homes that the Government has been seeking to offload are reaching the end of their viable life, which will mean relocation and total reconstruction, which will cost a major amount of money. Aged care facilities face constantly changing government regulations to improve the safety, security and wellbeing of residents, and that means the upgrading of nursing homes from fire prevention measures to extending the width of doorways to entrances and shower facilities. All those things have to be upgraded. The only way the not-for-profit sector can get money to do this work is to raise it in the local community. The Government will not provide the money; local people will be urged to put more money into the upgrading of facilities in the aged care sector.

The Minister for Health must meet with the community members and carers who have come to Parliament House today. I congratulate them on their energy in coming here. I am concerned not only with the Leeton and Wallsend nursing homes, which we debated two weeks ago, but all 10 State nursing homes. If they are sold to private operators in the for-profit sector—who realise the changing demographics, which the Government seems to ignore, and the increasing demand for nursing home and respite beds in the future—fees will increase. Nursing homes such as Carramar accept concessional patients. Usually concessional patients cannot afford to pay additional fees and increases. The only way a for-profit organisation can gain money to upgrade facilities is by increasing fees. That is also the case in respect of respite beds.

Often, patients who do not have family, friends or support people who can pay the fees require respite beds. The net result is that the State Government avoids its responsibility of care for the aged by passing it on to either the not for-profit sector whose only resource of getting money is from the local community or the for-profit sector whose only way to gain income is from the patients. The Government says it wants to continue quality care. The only way the Government can continue to provide quality care is to ensure that the Government funds it. I support the Greens motion.