NSW government

22nd September signs that Tony Burke is listening. WSCA had been lobbying Tony Burke for nearly two years to ensure guarantees in place that all of the promised $530 million conservation fund be spent within Western Sydney to protect bushland remnants promised as offsets.

Cautious optimism

On 22nd December, the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance (WSCA) cautiously welcomes the announcement today by Tony Burke that he will sign off on the Strategic Assessment of the Sydney Growth Centres. WSCA had been lobbying Tony Burke for nearly two years warning him not to rush in and sign off on the plan unless guarantees were in place to ensure that all of the promised $530 million conservation fund (the money promised to offset the destruction of 2000 ha of bushland within the growth centres) was spent entirely within Western Sydney protecting bushland remnants promised as offsets.

The NSW Government had been shifting towards raiding this $530 million conservation offset fund and spending up to 75% of it outside of Western Sydney in order to get more bang for its buck.

Tony Burke

"Tony Burke has listened to our concerns about this looming rip-off and has inserted new conditions into the plan guaranteeing that the entire $530 million fund would be spent in western Sydney. This may have saved thousands of hectares of rare bushland from the O'Farrell Government who intended to raid the $530 million conservation fund and spend it outside of western Sydney. The O'Farrell Government has a plan to increase urban sprawl in Western Sydney beyond development within the Growth Centres and that would have been made all the more easier if the majority of the $530 million fund disappeared from western Sydney.

Thanks to local Labor members

We specifically thank local Labor Members: Michelle Rowland, David Bradbury and Ed Husic for helping to stop this rip-off. They shared in our concerns about the inequity of the NSW Governments plans.

We believe the new conditions insisted upon by Tony Burke include that all the $530 million be spent in western Sydney and that only in exceptional circumstance could it be considered going off the Cumberland Plain to acquire offset lands. That exceptional circumstance would have to be approved by a new committee."

"That committee needs to be thoroughly transparent and it would be good if the community had a say in any decisions."

Growth Centers remain on-course for environmental disaster

"We must not lose sight though that the Sydney Growth Centres is an environmental disaster that will clear about 2000 ha of endangered woodland including about 9% of all remaining Cumberland Plain Woodland. So this announcement, whilst promising much in terms of a future conservation fund, also heralds the destruction of large areas of western Sydney's irreplaceable natural heritage"

Comments: Geoff Brown President WSCA - 0431 222602 www.wsca.org.au

Media Release
Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Inc

22nd December 2011

Growth Centres Plan go ahead by Tony Burke
Federal Government rescues bushland from O'Farrell Government

Brad Hazzard tells protesters at Liberal launch he's committed to saving another 100 hectares of critically endangered bushland at ADI Site. Lend Lease would be slugged $100 million in lost revenue

There was actually a legitimate protest today at Barry O'Farrell's campaign launch (not the stunt protest put on by the ALP) by Western Sydney residents and environmentalists. They had gathered to raise awareness about the Liberal/Nationals urban sprawl policy and how that would devastate what little is left of Western Sydney's bushland and of course how it would affect the quality of life of it residents.

The legitimate protesters were also wanting to speak with Brad Hazzard, the Shadow Planning Minister, to question why he has gone quiet on his commitment before the Penrith by-election that the Liberal/Nationals would conserve an additional 100 hectares of critically endangered Cumberland Plain Woodland at the controversial ADI Site. The ADI Site contains vast areas of bushland that the NSW Government and the pro development Penrith Council are allowing to be developed by developer giant Lend Lease. Brad Hazzard also committed to creating new Western Sydney ecological corridors.

Brad Hazzard was confronted, when leaving todays campaign launch in Penrith, and asked by Geoff Brown, President of the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance (in the presence of others) when he would formally honour his Penrith by-election commitment and announce the additional 100 hectares at the ADI Site.

"Brad Hazzard said he was committed to delivering the 100 hectares and the ecological corridors. I asked him when an announcement was due and he said he wanted to make sure it could be done legally. I reminded Mr Hazzard of legal advice already given to him by myself from the Environmental Defenders Office outlining how the bushland could be conserved using several pieces of NSW legislation with no cost to the NSW taxpayer. Mr Hazzard then said well that is only the advice from the Environmental Defenders Office." (see attached EDO advice given to Brad Hazzard)

"Whilst Mr Hazzard says to our face he is committed to the 100 hectares at ADI our fear is the Lib/Nats will try to squirm out of this major conservation promise. It appears they may be already looking for a legal loophole to argue their hands are tied. Brad Hazzard has the law on his side to save this bushland so there is no point delaying a formal announcement.

"Mr Hazzard was also told that this very 100 ha is under immediate threat of imminent clearing as Lend Lease has a Development Application lodged with Penrith Council to clear up to half of this 100 Ha. Tanya Davies the Liberal Candidate for Mulgoa is a Penrith Councillor and Mr Hazzard was told of the need for the Liberal dominated Penrith Council to reject that DA in order to prevent a major embarrassment. A failure of the Libs on Council to protect the 100 ha committed by Brad Hazzard will be a major embarrassment to Brad Hazzard and Barry O'Farrell. It will come back to bite them in the electorate.

"Lend Lease have obviously been exerting pressure on the local Liberal candidates including Stuart Ayres, Tanya Davies and Bart Bassett to drop this commitment as they will be hit for about $100 million in lost revenue as their mega development is reduced by 1000 lots.

"The public however will cheer the scaling back of this unpopular development and applaud Brad Hazzard and the Lib/Nats for conserving critically endangered Cumberland Plain Woodland of which only 8% of its original extent remains with only 8% of that protected by the current NSW Govt.

"We want this additional 100 hectares formally announced in the next few weeks."

Source: Media Release
Western Sydney Conservation Alliance
Sunday 20th February 2010

Comments by Geoff Brown President Western Sydney Conservation Alliance and spokesperson for ADI Residents Action Group
0431 222602

Ed. Australians need help from the world's ecologists! Royal National Park, known to many tourists as the closest to Sydney, is the world's second-oldest National Park and Australia's first. It is also of enormous importance to conservationists and ecologists and contains an impressive range of fauna in rare habitats including coastal rainforest which has often been destroyed by early Australian development elsewhere. It is under threat through selfish and stupid adjacent overdevelopment by the growth-mad New South Wales government. Even Australia's primeminister doesn't want growth now and Sydney's expansion must be stopped. Royal National Park is of world class historic and ecological significance and it is incomprehensible and alarming that the NSW Government is allowing development to encroach.

From Greg Petty, Public Officer of the Otford Protection Society Incorporated

Wikipedia entry

Illawarra Escarpment and proposed rezoning by Wollongong City Council

Many of us here in Otford, Helensburgh, Stanwell Park and Stanwell Tops have been campaigning for years to protect this beautiful and sensitive region, and always too with the backing of groups such as the National Parks Association and the Total Environment Centre.

This land is adjacent to “Royal National Park”, Australia’s first and the worlds 2nd oldest National Park, and now being lobbied for World heritage listing, plus source of the (Class P “Pristine”) Hacking River Catchment.

Public clearly against adjacent development

We achieved 3,447 submissions last year during the exhibition period of the Wollongong DLEP and proposed rezoning of 7D land, but the 'fight' still continues, and WCC have asked for further submissions in particular specific to the different precincts of 2508.

To speed and ease requests to conserve the green belt of the escarpment to the Royal National Park and say No to overdevelopment, we have compiled a number of e-forms. Responders have a choice of general letters, a letter to 'save' the Symbio Wildlife Park precinct, the crucial Otford precinct (remaining habit corridor between Bald Hill and the Royal National Park) and an e-form for the submitter to cut 'n' paste selected key points.

If able can I please ask you to email the link/s to submissions, to your members? Please feel free to send onto ALL your “Contact List” or your local club, community group, etc. Kindly remove the previous “SEND TO” information first, the FWD in the Subject box and put your name and suburb below. Submissions close July 17, 2010 but may be extended – link will be automatically removed when submissions eventually close.

http://www.otfordeco.com/submission.php

Or for more information and photographs, and links to more e-submissions Otford Protection website http://www.otfordeco.com.au WCC's deadline for submissions is July 17, 2010

Signed by

Greg Petty - Public Officer

Otford Protection Society Incorporated

Helensburgh NSW 2508

AUSTRALIA

Phone (0407) 473 889

Follow us on Twitter - Save SYMBIO WILDLIFE PARK and ROYAL NATIONAL PARK from encroaching developers Plz e-sign

PS To find out more about this beautiful part of Helensburgh & Otford, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, Click Here

ADI Site -

Vandals prevail

Bulldozing of rare bushland signals the beginning of the end for Western Sydney's last great bushland remnants. Vandals prevail in New South Wales, reducing to rubble the equivalent of nature's great monasteries and old churches, for short term gain by a tiny tyrannical minority. This scourge is led for the profit of Delfin Developments, against democracy and the local people who love their living landscape.

JK Williams Bulldozers roll over precious woodland habitat

Bulldozers today rolled at the ADI Site in Penrith clearing 6 hectares of the critically endangered ecological community, Cumberland Plain Woodland. The clearing by J K Williams on behalf of developer, Delfin Lend Lease, is the first of 6ha of a total of 360 ha within the Penrith LGA. 3500 lots dwellings, with some up to 6 stories are proposed.

Garrett protects malignant growth lobby project

The news of the clearing has been met with sadness by the many opponents of the development. Recently they called on Peter Garrett the Federal Environment Minister to intervene in the imminent clearing. Peter Garrett was called on to act to overturn a dubious approval decision by the former Howard Govt in 2002 that allows Delfin Lend Lease immunity from Peter Garrett's Federal Environmental Law. Meaning they do not have to refer any development proposals to the Federal Minister for assessment. Peter Garrett was asked to consider, as he is allowed to do under section 207A of his federal environment law, to list additional areas of the sites critically endangered CPW as Critical Habitat.

But correspondence recently received from the Minister in response to that call from the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance indicated a complete lack of political will and an unwillingness to interfere in Delfins development plans.

Geoff Brown, President of the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Inc., said,

"Peter Garrett could of acted, he has the capacity under his legislation to intervene, but he has turned his back on us and our environment. The reality though is he is just one of many of our political leaders that have done the same. The same is true of Kristina Kenneally who had the opportunity when she was Planning Minister to amend the ADI Site zoning plan. She was called on by WSCA to rezone CPW at the site from urban to conservation. She ignored our calls. So sorry is this ADI story is that the finger of blame must be pointed at hundreds of political leaders across all levels of government. This has been a shameful chapter in the history of Western Sydney one which its residents should never forget".

Keep fighting for what is right!

Brown added:

"People should never give up though. This is just 6 ha's and there are many more approval processes that Delfin need to get in order to get their way. We must take a stand and say enough is enough. In this day and age we should never accept housing that comes at the cost of our critically endangered natural heritage. Everyone should pick up their phones today and speak directly to their local elected representative from Council, State and Federal Government to let them know enough, its just not on anymore. What is happening here at ADI is the thin edge of the wedge and unless we collectively say no to the overdevelopment of our suburbs, this development cancer will move right across Western Sydney and before we know it we will have no bushland, no rural areas and another million people to cope with."

Merciless Moonscaping

Only one tree appears to have been left on the 6 ha site. The massive bulldozers of JK Williams, a local civil engineering firm, remain on the site ready to resume earth works on Thursday

Comments attributed to Geoff Brown President of the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Inc
0431 222602
www.wsca.org.au

Western Sydney Conservation Alliance
Wednesday 28th April 2010

Madame the Mayor of Ambazac delivers her vote against privatisation of the French Post Office

In Australia we are watching the erosion of public services by changes to their statute ('authorities', 'corporations') turn into an avalanche of privatisation. The unions, who, by organising a general strike, could stop this rot almost immediately, bluster ever so quietly and shuffle symbolically.

We have seen outrageously undemocratic proceedings in the NSW parliament and in the Queensland elections.

In the first, Morris Iemma was finally toppled when the Labor Party which had placed him in power sacked him due to his perseverative campaign to privatise State Electricity despite the obvious disagreement of his party and the public and his own earlier promises. The unions and the ALP were remarkably slow and weak to resist this. The NSW Greens showed more leadership. In the end, the ALP did resist, but the person they replaced Iemma with - Rees - has persisted with privatisation moves and has gone ahead with other policies (here, for example) and here and here, quite shocking in nature and alien to Australian values.

In the second, the recent Queensland election (2009) the government consistently masked its policy and denied its intention to privatise more public assets. See "Queensland Elections". This democratic aberration met with almost no reporting from the mainstream media or resistance from other political parties. Even the Queensland Greens have been very weak on the privatisation of public assets in Queensland.

French democracy healthier than English-speaking countries' democracy

In France, democracy is doing much better. We bring this news to you to show you that the whole of the industrialised so-called "developed world" is not as enthralled by savage capitalism as Australia, America and Canada. The French (and most Western Europeans, except of course the down-trodden English) also don't suffer from politically engineered overpopulation and high immigration. [1] Yes, the French Revolution actually accomplished something useful and long-lasting between 1789 and 1846.

French Citizens organise nationally against road to Privatisation of the French Post Office

[Source: French News on France2 4 October 2009, 2000hrs]

In France the Government gave its assurance that, despite a mooted change of legal status, the French Postal Service (La Poste) will remain 100% public.

The Left doubted this and, at the beginning of October 2009, organised, with citizens, townhalls and unions, a national citizens vote via a National Committee against the Privatisation of the Post Office - ""Comité nationale contre la Privatisation de la Poste." See below for the signatories to the committee organising the citizens' vote.[2] Many or all of these votes were conducted in the local post offices themselves.

In the tiny village of Ambazac (Haute-Vienne) near Limoges, the 88 villagers voted 85 to 3 against privatisation of the Poste. The mayor delivered her own vote against privatisation publicly. She also said, "It would be unreasonable for a President of the Republic and a government to ignore the People's voice. In the rural region there are so many people who rely utterly on the public postal services."

The local postie took heart at the concerned and conscientious public reaction, which he could see taking place, since the ballot box was on the counter of the local post office.

All over France citizens voted in villages, towns and cities in this way.

French New Anti-Capitalist Party calls for Referendum on Privatisation

Responding to the news that already more than 2 million people had voted on the night of 4 October, Olivier Besancecot, spokesperson for the Anti-Capitalism Party (Le Nouveau Parti Anti-Capitaliste) in France called for a referendum based on the enormous participation in the activist-organised citizens' vote: "If there are many more than a million people who have shown the way on that issue then we have a right to a referendum as to whether people want to change the status of the post or not."

The dominant political party in a multi-party government, the UNP, said, via its spokesperson, Frederique LeFebvre, that it was all a beat-up and that the UNP was never going to privatise and that if there were a referendum, no-one in France would vote for privatisation.

The French socialist alliance mobilised against privatisation where Oz left weak and ambiguous

Unlike the left in Australia, the Socialist Party in France, along with the Unions and other political parties and presences of the Left has gone solidly to bat against privatisation of French assets.

If you can understand French, the
Video interview with Alexandre Canet, spokesperson for Rouen Socialist Party tells you that the Socialist Party (Parti Socialiste) has worked with other parties on the Left, with unions, and with local town halls to organise a citizens' vote on this matter.

The spokesman states (along with French subtitles) that "The change of statute represents a move towards privatisation, which would cause a deterioration in services."

Change of statute represents move towards privatisation: History of Privatisation process in Australia

The Hon Justice Michael Kirby AC CMG*, went to the trouble in 2006 to warn Australians about the dangers of privatization removing important government functions to a position beyond the laws made to administer them fairly.

Kirby said “The ‘commercialisation’ of the public sector means that isolating the activities and decisions of government from those of the private sector is becoming a more complicated, and sometimes, seemingly, an impossible exercise.”(p.3)

“The exercise of public power is fundamentally different in character to the making of a decision in a purely private context. Decisions are then being made on behalf of the people, typically involving the use of money raised from, and power derived from, the people. Higher standards of accountability and responsibility are therefore attached to the decisionmaker. Public power imports public accountability, including before the courts.” (p.4)

“This reduction in accountability is a result of removing control over day-to-day actions and decisions from the relevant Minister and government departments to private sector bodies whose ultimate legal responsibility is to their shareholders, rather than to the public interest more generally.” (p.6)

He goes on to describe the outcome of a series of cases involving the High Court where the law encountered problems in getting public accountability. This problem arose in NEAT Domestic Trading Pty Ltd v AWB Ltd (2003) 216 CLR 277. It involved officials of the Wheat Board who had refused six applications from another trader(NEAT) to export bulk wheat. The AWB had acquired through its creation by government, the power to prevent by veto bulk wheat exports from Australia. It could do this by withholding approval. The power to approve or veto exports normally belongs to a government body because it is a legal power. As such it is normally reviewable and controllable through the courts. That is, the judicial representatives of “we the public” can ensure that Australian trade is conducted fairly.

The outcome of this case was that Australians had lost the power to control the nation’s wheat exports by giving that power to this private body.

Source.

NOTES

[1]Note that, in Australia where there is another extraordinarily far-reaching undemocratic policy to politically engineer population growth on behalf of the corporate commercial sector, one man has stood up to this fatal policy - Kelvin Thomson.

[12] CFTC Postes et Télécommunications • Confédération CFTC • Fédération des Activités Postales et des Télécommunications CGT • CGT Finances • CGT Banque de France • Confédération CGT • Confédération Nationale du Travail CNT- PTT • Confédération Paysanne • FO Communication • FNEM FO Fédération nationale de l’énergie et des mines Force Ouvrière • Confédération FO • SUD Crédit Foncier • Fédération SUD PTT • FSU Fédération Syndicale Unitaire • SUD Caisses d’Epargne • Union Syndicale SOLIDAIRES • Fédération CNT-PTT • ACU (Association des communistes unitaires) • Alter Ecolo • Alternative Libertaire • ANECR Association Nationale des Elus Communistes et Républicains • CAP 21 Citoyenneté, Action, Participation pour le 21ème siècle • Club Gauche Avenir • CNCU Coordination Nationale des Collectifs Unitaires pour une Alternative au Libéralisme • Debout la République • Fédération des élu/es Verts et Ecologistes • La Fédération pour une alternative sociale et écologique • Fédération Nationale des Elus Socialistes Républicains • Gauche Unitaire • GUE/NGL Composante française du groupe de la Gauche Unie européenne/Gauche verte Nordique • Les Alternatifs • Les Objecteurs de Croissance • Les Verts • Mouvement de la Jeunesse Communiste • Mouvement des Jeunes Socialistes • MRC Mouvement Républicain et Citoyen • NPA Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste • PCF Parti Communiste Français • Parti Communiste Ouvrier Français • Parti de Gauche • PRG Parti Radical de Gauche • PS Parti Socialiste • République et Socialisme • Action Consommation • AFOC Association Force Ouvrière des Consommateurs • AITEC Association Internationale de Techniciens, Experts et Chercheurs • Amis de la Confédération paysanne • Confédération Paysanne • AC Agir contre le Chômage • APEIS Association Pour l’Emploi, l’Information, et la Solidarité • ATTAC • CNR Conseil National de la Résistance • Convergence des Collectifs de Défense et de Développement des Services Publics • DAL Droit au Logement • Fondation Copernic • INDECOSA CGT • IPAM Initiatives pour un Autre Monde • Jeunes Laïques et Solidaires • Jeunes Radicaux de Gauche • Marches Européennes • M’PEP Mouvement politique d’éducation populaire • Réseau Européen des Missions Publiques • Résistance Sociale • UFAL Union des Familles Laïques • UNEF Union nationale des Etudiants de France • UNRPA Union Nationale des Retraités et Personnes Agées

National Parks & Wildlife have given two licences to Bathurst Regional Council to shoot 140 kangaroos on Mnt Panorama, home of Bathurst’s car race to be held in 2 weeks.

The Western Advocate said they were advised this was for “public safety” for the race.

The NSW Wildlife Rescue and Education Service, WIRES[1] members have to continually deal with kangaroos at Mount Panorama tangled in fences, hit by cars, dispersing into suburbs etc.

These are the last of the actual town’s kangaroos – the last of thousands of generations that have been pushed into the small pocket of Mnt Panorama and managing to survive.

Out of proportion

140 roos is certainly much more than the 15% allowed in commercial killing zones, and observers who have walked the environs over many years specifically noting the kangaroos in the area, suggest this represents most of the remaining population there. NPWS reportedly refused to answer the question of what percentage it represents.

National Parks and Wildlife have also reportedly refused to answer the following questions, which should also be asked of Bathurst Council:

· How many kangaroos are actually up on the Mount and its “nature reserves” and environs?

· What consideration has been given to the wallaroos and swamp wallabies on the Mount – are they to be shot also?

· What is happening to the young at foot – who are still fed by their mothers?

· What about the young in pouch?

· What consideration is given to the big male roos, who represent the most important genetic lines for the future?

· Has any consideration been given to creating corridors to allow roos to disperse, eg at the back of the Mount?

· Where is the kangaroo management plan that has determined this is to happen after due consideration of all other ecological factors – or is this a knee jerk reaction to terrified kangaroos on the racing track at last year’s Big Race?

Do the race sponsors condone this cruelty?

Questions of the sponsors of the race – SuperCheap Auto; Lawrence & Hanson; XXXX beer; as well as the sponsors of the driving teams

· Would you be proud to publicise that 140 kangaroos were shot as part of the preparation for the Bathurst 1000 race?

Are you prepared to allow this to happen without a whimper?

WIRES spokesperson, Helen Bergen, in Bathurst, said, "Platitudes to do with 'public safety' (the big race) [and even with] with 'sustaining the kangaroo population' [!] do not provide answers to the questions above.

"Is this how we thoughtfully care for our wildlife? This is how wildlife disappears from our landscapes – and we accept it as inevitable, so make no noise as it happens."

What you can do

Bathurst NPWS, Bathurst Regional Council, the media and the race sponsors all need to realise that some people feel extremely distressed about this situation.

Motor Racing Circuit Bathurst (official Bathurst Regional Council website):-

http://www.mount-panorama.com/contact-us
PMB 17 or 158 Russell Street
Bathurst
NSW
2795

02-6333 6158
02-6331-7211

NOTES

[1] WIRES - NSW Wildlife Rescue and Education Service is the largest wildlife rescue group in the country and has branches across NSW.
The website is www.wires.org.au

ABC Australian news reported that someone somehow placed rocks on the road where rally cars would pass at some time prior to the Repco Rally event. Apparently stones or rocks were also thrown. See Rally rock-throwing 'could have killed', ABC news, September 5, 2009 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/05/2677430.htm

First day of the rally

The picture of the car trailing dust has been included for educational purposes because it shows how much dust is being thrown up by a rally car on the unpaved roads that pass through national parks of World Heritage significance. One can imagine the noise and the speed from the picture. Unless you like noise, speed, metal and dust, this would be a very unpleasant experience. For wildlife it could be a fatal experience. Politically it could represent a fatal breech in the wall of law that has preserved Australia’s wild spaces to date.

Would Repco race cars through a cathedral?

The idea alone of racing cars through national parks is appalling to many. With the position of National Parks in Australia it is a bit like racing cars through cathedrals in Italy or France, except that the damage it is likely to do in the long term is that much more significant.

It may not result directly in the extinction of endangered species but, whether it does or not, it is like a big breech in the wall. If government can get away with doing this to our National natural cathedrals, they may soon be running the equivalent of brothels in cathedrals there. Indeed, the same NSW government which overturned local democracy (the most immediate form of democracy) to force this race on Australians, is also apparently prepared to allow the Shooters Party to shoot indigenous animals in National Parks.

The car is not exactly an endangered species

Many of us live on highways or have to drive to work and find this difficult enough. It is amazing to think that the NSW Parliament actually legislated away 12 environmental laws in order to import such a rally to this area, which, to date, was a sanctuary for animals, trees and humans. The local inhabitants have complained of the risk to life for humans and other animals in the area.

Today we received a letter to candobetter.org claiming that “Greenies” threw rocks at the rally drivers.

“Rally Australia"

On September 5th, 2009 Jack (not verified) wrote:

"You greenies who are responsible for putting boulders on the road and throwing rocks might get charged with attempted manslaughter or murder if you are not careful. It is not a joke to do these things, one could expect it in a third world country but one would have hoped that in a so called educated society things like this would not happen. If you want to protest then do it in a more effective way than risking the life of another human being!”

The writer assumes that ‘Greenies’ were responsible for putting boulders on the road and throwing rocks. In fact we do not know who was responsible. However, let us take his other assertions in this paragraph. He says that we could expect such activity in a third world country, but not in an educated society. However it has been the anti-rally protesters’ contention that an educated society would not put a rally through international heritage rainforest national parks including 16 km of koala habitat. To many people the notion that we are an ‘educated society’ does not hold up because of this. Regarding third world societies: what are the criteria that make this kind of protest likely in the third world? Perhaps the quality of not having any other means to protest?

Is the writer actually unaware that 12 environmental laws were overturned to permit the rally?

Is the writer actually unaware that 12 environmental laws were overturned to permit the rally? This event has been enabled by the NSW Motor Sports (WRC) Bill 2009, which overrode 12 different planning, environmental protection and heritage laws and removed all right of appeal.[1] Or has his enthusiasm for the rally diminished the importance of this fact in his eyes? If that is the case, I suggest that he reconsider these inconvenient facts.

What more effective ways are open to people in the Green Cauldron? They have protested peacefully in the streets, written to politicians, and invoked the law. The response from the government was extreme: The government abrogated the very environmental laws that the people had invoked to stop the race. Then, when a councilor took the matter to the courts, she felt that it was given the bum’s rush. Behind the abrogation of the 12 environmental laws was pressure from Repco, a global corporation of retailers of car parts, which apparently had far more pull with the NSW Government than the democratic wishes of members of its electorate.

Even some of the competitors sound as if they understand.

"Some people don't like us in front of their house but I didn't ask to come here," French competitor, Loeb reportedly said.
"I can understand why some people don't like the rally, but I have to do my job."

Indeed he does. But the problems are not the fault of the people defending their rights and their environment. (Source: "Rock throwers halt Rally Australia", ABC News, 4 September.)

What would have been much better is if the FIA had adhered to its stated high principles of environmental standards and good governance, saying, “No, Premier Rees, we want to be good global citizens. You must find a venue for this event which is acceptable to your citizens. We cannot stand by and let you overturn your own peoples’ laws in order to run a mere race. It will not do our reputations or yours any good. People have a right to self-government. We cannot impose things they hate on them. The French Revolution taught us that.”

So much for an educated, first world society.

“And do not bother denying it had anything to do with your movement, you ARE tarred with the brush in the same way that you like to tar motorsport with the "hooning" brush.”

Why didn't the FIA or drivers stand up for democracy against Repco and the NSW Government?

It would be reassuring if people in the rally movement had stood up for democracy. Since they have not it is hard not to see them as hoons. And since their representatives have not spoken up, they look like representatives of hoons. Those perceptions will change when rally-people stand up for democracy and justice along with the environmentalists. As long as you do not you defend the wholesale destruction of laws by a dictatorial government. Candobetter.org cannot comment on allegations about people who used rocks as weapons since we have absolutely no idea who those people were. It is even conceivable that people wishing to give the environmentally concerned a bad name threw the rocks themselves. That would seem to me more likely since, from the point of view of an environmentalist – a person who defends wild spaces – throwing rocks is rather similar, although not as bad, as driving racing cars through world heritage landscapes and biodiverse hotspots.

False argument pretends area not worth protecting

"I watched the you tube video and I have never seen so much rubbish in all my life,
Mostly it looks like farming country, overgrown with weeds, so much for the environment."

I am not a resident of the area, but, to me this is what the videos have conveyed. We saw a koala crossing the road and we have been told elsewhere that the rally passes through 16km of koala habitat. We know that koalas are endangered. That, to me, is enough to tell me that the area cannot be totally degraded.

Secondly, it would not be surprising if the area is being degraded, given the kinds of forces it is subjected to. That is not the fault of environmentalists. The area was rural with forested parts. There is obviously a tension between rural, other commercial values and the environmental values of local constituents. Environmental has to win out, however, because the area is internationally recognized for its biodiverse and landscape qualities. Car races, shops and farms already take up substantial parts of this country and if we still cannot make a go of what we have already got economically, then destroying more wildlife habitat is not likely to help.

Impact of farming

"Farming does far more harm to the environment than Rally could ever do!

After having experienced Rally Australia in Western Australia for 18 years I can assure you that there will not be hundreds of wild animals killed, in any way!
If the people who live and run businesses in the towns involved have any clues they will see the prospects for adding value to what they do or in fact even starting up new ventures all because of the Rally."

Farming is certainly problematic because it converts wild-spaces for food. However the farms are already there. The rally was not. It was an additional stressor. As for the damage it might do. I have compared it to racing through cathedrals and I stand by that. This country is absolutely covered and ringbarked with roads, for Pete’s sake – how could racing car drivers possibly justify taking roadspace in National Parks? And, I do not see how you could argue to put a koala at risk just for some ephemeral potential ‘profits’ which will not sustain any human in the long term.

Little evidence for much touted 'economic advantages' and no amount of money could make this right

The Rally will bring economic benefit to the area and to the state in general, you lot rave on about eco tourism, I can assure you that if the area does indeed have something to offer then the Rally will bring thousands of international tourists.

The insistance that this rally will bring lots of money to Tweed has been knocked down over and over. Our definitions of what constitutes 'economic benefit' must differ.

"Same Rally cost WA tax-payers $6m+ p.a.

Previous speakers who praised the rally indicated that it will bring $100 million of value to the area. They do not understand what they are talking about. For example, $100 million over what period? It is certainly not for this one race that is coming up; nor for the one in two years time or the one in 10 years time. It is the accumulated value they think they might get if everything is done and all options are accepted between now and 2027. A more true picture comes from Western Australia. The Western Australian Government no longer wanted the rally, indicating that it was costing Western Australia $6 million a year and it was not getting economic value to make up for that $6 million." Source For more on the debate read here.

Our definitions of ‘eco-tourism’ must also differ. Who want’s tourists in national parks who come to watch noisy cars go round and round and tear up the earth and vegetation, kill wildlife, and pollute the atmosphere with petroleum fumes and dead soil organisms from the dust? How could anyone consider that desirable? For someone who likes quietly walking through a forest amid a community of other species, just like someone who might enjoy praying in a cathedral and looking up through the stained-glass windows and imagining they were in God’s house, your idea that racing cars through these quiet and otherly places might add to their ‘value’ seems really strange.

And the thing is, nature preservation does not cause the extinction of car-rallies, since there are roads for rallies everywhere, but roads and rallies do destroy nature. I mean, what environmentalists do and like does not stop rally fans from doing what they do and like somewhere else. For instance, the Goldcoast Super GP Rally will be staged next month, through city streets, just across the border from this one. However, if you want to do your thing in our quiet places, you destroy what we have. Look around you: the world is absolutely full of roads and noisy cars. Your kind of ‘paradise’ is proliferating daily. Ours isn’t. It is disappearing. Have a sense of proportion.

There is a huge contingent of International Rally people who follow the WRC around the world, just like the people who follow Tennis or Cricket or Footy, Yep just the same, and they will be coming to your part of the world, generally speaking they have a few bucks in their back pocket and have great fun unloading the stuff, so do not think there is no money to be made.

Obviously money is very important to you, much more important to you than beauty, wildlife, peace and quiet and democracy. Even if money were more important than place for environmentalists, it has already been shown many times that the rally has brought a net financial loss when costs are taken into account or no benefit to other communities where it has been held.

You need to try to see that environmentalists need to protect what they love and that rally values will harm what they treasure most. The rally is invading green environmental space and trying to change it. It has also destroyed democratic space, by forcing the overturning of laws. That alone should signal "Danger! Danger!" On the other side, environmentalists are not invading road-space. The huge contingent of International Rally people have lots of places made of concrete and tar and cement where they can go and they will possibly even be welcome there.

"If you think however that you should just need to stand in line with your hand out to get your share then you have your head in the sand (or somewhere else!)"

Honestly, this stuff about making lots of money out of these rallies just sounds like pie in the sky. After the rally has been run, however, I think that residents would be justified in demanding compensation for the trauma of having their democratic self-government annihilated and their environmental laws overturned, as well as their peace disturbed and their happiness destroyed by the need to go out of their way to try to protect what they love due to the failure of their governments to enforce protections which were available at law prior to the rally and were overturned because of the rally and for no other reason. Those environmentalists would be justified in demanding ongoing compensation since the intention is to continue to stage this rally for decades.

Democracy is the big question

"An event like this will always have those who are against having it, well we live in a democracy, so if it is taking place then there must be a higher number of people who want it than don't, bad luck!"

But that is the very problem. We DON'T live in a democracy in Australia anymore, and things have got particularly desperate in Tweed Shire due to the Repco Rally. By removing legal protections from the community's right to environmental protection and self-government the NSW Government has left the community in a situation of lawlessness and injustice. Did you not realise that 12 laws were put aside to run this rally? Why would the NSW government and Repco have had to go to such extraordinary lengths to impose the rally - and overturn democracy - if so many people, as you believe, wanted this rally? Why did they not just allow democracy to prevail, instead of removing it?

"I suggest that you greenies would be better off spending your time and money trying to fix up a couple of the countries biggest environmental disasters which are on your back doorstep, like the Murray Darling disaster for one!"

At candobetter we continue to represent problems with the Murray Darling and other threatened waters. If environmentalists were not busy defending multiple cherished places under attack by developers and now democracy under this rally, they would indeed have more time to dedicate to these ongoing other threats. If the rally were withdrawn from the Green Cauldron we could all get on with the other jobs.

[1] "" Source: http://www.norallygroup.org/

BYRRILL CREEK ROAD (Friday September 4th,
After driving for 7 hours along most of the Kyogle stages today, it became very apparent to me that the most idyllic of all the Repco rally routes is indeed Byrrill Creek. According to an independent survey done by a local resident Joanna Gardner, comprising accounts of sightings of threatened species by 18 neighbours on the road, some going back 15 years, this is core koala habitat which was not picked up by Repco's ecology report. (See youtube footage of a digitally sped up drive along Byrrill Creek Road including koala and platypus footage at www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Sw18zvU5yU and embedded on this page below)

The most distressing thing about this setting is the proximity of extremely pure water to the road. For example, Cabbage Tree Creek flows right over the water.

The nationally endangered Giant Barred Frog and the Fleays Barred Frog live in these creeks. Repco plans to erect barriers to protect the creeks from the massive amount of dust generated by the speeding cars - but how on earth can you stop dust flying over the top of these barriers? Massive amounts of dust deposited in the water during breeding season would kill the eggs and larvae of these endangered frogs. See how clean the water is on the right?

The wildlife in this most diverse habitat was similarly amazing. I saw animals I have never seen in my life and could not even identify - beautiful birds that live and forage by the side of the road. How would these birds fare with 100 rally cars screaming by at 200+ kph? How many would abandon their nests and/or fledglings or be hit themselves as many (particularly the Albert's Lyrebird and Bush Turkey run along the road for hundreds of metres).

Then further along the road was a council-owned house in the worst possible position considering cars tear around corners at 160kph sidewise and out of control. I could just imagine them ploughing right into that house, destroying the renters' life forever. I heard that Repco had no intention of erecting any barriers in this incredibly vulnerable location.

Byrrill Creek is core koala habitat and locals have been watching and documenting the local population for decades.

(This video was made by a local who drove down the road and speeded the footage up digitally. However, this was ridiculed by an ex-rally driver who said that in reality it should have been way faster and a rally driver would have the car airborne and taken corners sideways with the foot on the brake hard.)

MOOBALL NATIONAL PARK ROUTE (Friday September 4th, 9.30am – 6pm)
From there I checked out other routes such as Mooball National Park which is 1100 ha in size. I called Parks and Wildlife ask some questions. The ranger told me that Cooradilla Rd is Ministerial Road and Minister can do whatever he wants even though there is an abundance of threatened species either side. Mooball National park is a lowland area and a rare subtropical rainforest making it a threatened ecological community. To preserve plants and animals camping is not allowed but some bushwalking is. As a Nature Conservation area it has a lower level of protection than a Nature Reserve.

I asked why on earth a rally race could go through a national park where even horses and camping is not allowed. He said Parks and Wildlife had no say as to what goes on but has the power only to make conditions such as fences and conditions (i.e. devices to scare away the animals that Repco is already using). However this would not be as good as a proper exclusion fence and overpasses and discounts the effect of stress on native animals of the scare devices.

At the entrance I noticed a sign saying "FINE; LITTERING $330". Can you imagine how much littering will be happening during a rally? I noticed this road was very rough and has not yet been graded like other rally routes.

CUDGERA CREEK RD (Friday Sept 4th, 9.30am - 6.30pm)
Next I went to Cudgera Creek Road where extensive grading has been done by Tweed Shire Council. Koalas have also been seen on this road. Some of the locals are very angry about this rally and are campaigning to try to stop it by hanging banners in their yards. A bush turkey ran into the bush by the roadside.

URLIUP RD (Saturday September 5th, 8am - 1.30pm)
Even though this road had been graded, I noticed an extreme amount of dust covering foliage in all directions, much worse than Cudgera Creek Road which made me wonder if there were hoons practising on this road illegally late at night. I stopped and spoke to a man who lived close to the beginning of the route. He was extremely aggressive and pro-rally so I was eager to exit. He asserted that the road graders were privately contracted and not council staff (even though this was not correct). He said that there were no koalas on Urliup (also wrong) and no animals would get killed and I should just get used to it because it was going to happen whether I liked it or not. There would be a lot of money coming to the area etc. blah blah. He told me that the snakes cause more damage to animals than a rally - in fact his neighbour lost 4 sheep from snake bites. They get Taipan, Tiger, Roughscale and Brown snakes.

On the way between these routes I saw horrifically mangled possum and bird on the main road.

SARGENTS RD (Saturday September 5th, 5.30am – 4.30pm)
This Road has been officially changed to 'Armor All Rd' in honour of the rally sponsor. I approached this road from the Homeleigh Rd end which is very flat, deforested and basically cattle ranches. Half way along Homeleigh Rd is the beginning of the route. Even though there is little habitat for wildlife, the cows on the road looked perilously close to the road to me. If a car went ploughing into the field out of control it would easily break the very weak fence and possibly kill the animals.

I noticed a calf had escaped from its enclosure as the mother looked on from inside. It ran right on the road in front of my car which made me worry. Will the dairy farmer be able to get all his cattle in on the rally day so none of them get struck? What an horrific experience for a young animal that would be.

At the end of Homeleigh Rd is a sharp turn which crosses a creek and the road becomes Sargents Rd. Take a look at the picture. Can you imagine a car going so fast around this bend that it loses control and smashes into the metal fence and falls into the creek below? It would destroy the creek. Or what if it ploughed into the field on the other side of the bridge on the left where a bunch of very frightened looking cows stared at me as I drove by. This road was not graded yet either.

Further along the terrain changed as the elevation rose higher into more koala tree habitat. Tried as I did I could not see any koalas. This is where Kathryn Kermode lives who documents on a daily basis her koala sightings then plots them on google maps. She has been trying to get Kyogle to take this route off the map because it is core koala habitat. Repco have approached her and asked her to help spot koalas so they don't run onto the road and get struck. The audacity of them, invading the koalas' homes then expecting the protectors to work for the enemy for free while they make millions on television rights!

Just today she found a mother and baby, which is not common. And will become even less common as stress interferes with breeding of koalas and causes local extinction. Some of her neighbours are pro-rally and have never even seen a koala. The koala-friendly neighbours who have been participating in her community-based koala project, documenting koala sightings and their movements, regard the first 5 km of Sargeants Rd as ‘koala real estate’ with certain sections regarded as ‘Sam’s territory’ and so on. To them, koalas are neighbours too, not just animals living in the bush.

Besides koalas, other species found on Sargeants Rd are Common Quail, Coucal Pheasant (cuckoo-like) (which are at risk during rally as they fly right into your car), Wallaby, Echidna, Glossy Black Cockatoo (not in the repco report), Powerful Owl, Brushdale Fascagale, Squirrel Glider and Sugar Glider.

She plans to go to the council after the rally and show them how they can make money other ways than the rally by building a lookout for tourists on the ridge with fabulous views to Mt. Lindsay, Mt Barker and Mt Warning etc. So far Kyogle Council have said they would erect koala warning signs on her road but they still don't have a Koala Management Plan which they need under SEPP 44.

Kathryn's koala video can be seen here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_ot_-GUgVs or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJiUW37KLOQ&NR=1 and photo album here - http://picasaweb.google.com/k.komodo

I also saw a kid goat that was somehow tied up outside the fence and quite freaked out. Was it also being terrorised by hoon drivers on that road at night? Why were all the animals on this street looking so frightened?

LYNCHES CREEK (Saturday September 5th, 5.30am – 6.00pm)
This is a very long stretch of road, mainly pastoral, flat land, cows, houses, not a lot of habitat for wildlife. I did see a purplish snake crossing the bridge at Lynches Creek Road.

ETTRICK - OLD COB O CORN RD (no sign) (Friday September 4th, 5.30am – 12 noon)
One house near the Ettrick end had big 'No Rally' sign and big 'No Rally' banner and on the adjoining property with hummers parked in front was a sign saying 'WRC BRING IT ON.' I can imagine emotions running very high in that neighbourhood!

AFTERLEE - UPPER CLARENCE (Sunday September 6th, 6am – 3.30pm
I saw a small dead goanna + 2 wallabies + 3 quail at the entrance of this route. This is Toonumbar State Forest! Hardly a place for an international car crash rally.
Between Eden Creek Rd to Upper Clarence saw another 2 wallabies at 4pm grazing by the roadside.

TOONUMBAR (Friday 4th September, 5.30am - 11.30am and Sunday 6th September, 9am - 4.30pm)
Driving through this scenic area I saw many small birds flying low across the road into roadside lantana and bushes. Their beautiful song enchanted my ears and it made me terribly sad to think that a single bird could be killed by this rally.

On Ghinni Ghi Rd a small dog tore out of the property and tried to chase my car on this stage. I hope they keep this dog indoors on both days or he will be beserk and/or dead!
In this area a Wedgetail eaglea flew right in front of my car very low into a tree. Had I been going fast I would have hit it.

Many of these roads have been specially graded for the rally. In just one day I saw independent contractors in hired vehicles working on various sections of road either grading, making the white lines even whiter and shinier, putting new posts in. Where is all the money for roadworks coming from? Of course, Events NSW gave Repco $6 million of taxpayers' money for this rally, that we don't want, how could I forget? Just when we have over $1 million shortfall in our local hospital budget and are suffering from the global economic crisis. And Tweed Shire recently raised the rates by 9%. No I didn't forget that Tweed Shire council gave $120,000 to Repco for this rally - along with free office space, free mechanical workshop facilities and other undisclosed perks. The list goes on.

On the highway many signs had 'No Rally' spray painted on them. Rally enthusiasts quickly changed it to just 'Rally' or 'Go Rally'. The division in the community is palpable.

Then on Iron Pot Rd (part of the Toonumbar route) two kangaroos ran into bush. Another wedgetail flew low in front of car. Another two kangaroos ran into bush. This area is alive with unusual native animals. In fact, This area is the Richmond Range which is of international conservation value with the highest diversity of marsupials in the world. It also has World Heritage values and contains numerous endemic Gondwanan relict plant species listed on the EPBC Act.

The rally will generate a major impact upon ecosystem function and processes essential to the viability of these areas. This is a biodiversity hotspot and one of 17 iconic landscapes in the world.

In fact, we have close to the most biodiversity than anywhere in Australia, even more than Kakadu! In Tweed Shire 2/3rds of our plant and animal species are threatened. Is having an international car crash rally going through State Forests, National Parks, Koala colonies and core habitats, World Heritage areas, areas where over 12 nationally-listed threatened species of animals and more plants live, in breeding season for the next 10-20 years going to do anything to lessen Australia's reputation as having the world's worst record of mammal extinctions? We are in the period of the 6th Mass Extinction Event and this is how we behave? I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the human race. Either we are collectively deluded, stupid or criminally insane.

People in this town are saying 'Give it a go, let's run the race once and see how we like it' but they forget that in Western Australia they decided after 2 years they didn't like it and it took them 17 years to get rid of it. Once Repco is in, they are in for their contract. People are saying 'It will make a lot of money' and I ask how? Most of the accommodation will go to the Gold Coast. In fact on checking with the Chamber of Commerce, bookings with local hotels is about the same as this time last year. Kyogle has enough space for 6000 campers but only 6 bookings. No economic proof of how this money will be made has been forthcoming from Repco. They are also saying 'The animals will be all right, none will die' but that is another lie. Many will die from stress alone and the young will be abandoned as families are fractured as they flee in terror from the assault of 100 speeding cars and low-flying helicopters, sirens, air horns, and tens of thousands of spectators.

Why are we allowing this to happen? People, WAKE UP!!! Don't believe the fairy tale Repco has woven! Wake up from the Repco Dream and realise it is a Repco NIGHTMARE.

WHAT YOU CAN DO: CONTACT PETER GARRETT'S OFFICE AND DEMAND HE STOP THE RALLY BEFORE THEY ARE LOCKED IN FOR 10-20 YEARS. IT IS HIS DUTY AND HIS MINISTERIAL OBLIGATION TO PROTECT OUR ENDANGERED SPECIES!

Visit www.norallygroup.org to learn more. Get involved!

See also: URGENT! Contact Peter Garrett re Injunction to stop Repco Rally of 26 Aug 09.

Injunction to prevent suffering to native animals fails in Australian World Heritage National Park

Councillor Katie Milne of Tweed Shire Council, NSW, failed in her attempt to prevent the staging of a 3 day long international car rally through Tweed and Kyogle Shire national parks, state forests, World Heritage areas, nature conservation areas, major koala colonies, core koala habitats and habitat where over 12 nationally-threatened species live. In September 2008, the Minister for the Environment, Peter Garrett dubbed the area as the ‘Green Cauldron’, one of 8 national iconic landscapes.

On 27th August, 2009, in Milne v. Rally Australia Pty Ltd, Federal Court Justice Stone was assigned to hear the case in Sydney for 3 hours. The Judge had only just received the last of the reports an hour before the hearing and admitted she had not had time to read all the material.

Fastest case in the history of Tweed Shire?

“It was the fastest case in the history of Tweed Shire. The Judge was able to somehow determine the case in about 10 mins flat after we began," commented Cr Milne. "We didn’t even have a chance for all the issues to be heard. The rally has assigned 600 police for 5 days including training, but they couldn’t even assign a Judge for a proper full day trial to hear all the evidence."

She said, "We knew we were gone when the Judge said, 'Times up, you’ve got one more issue you can raise’.'"

"We had barely started. We had only just got past our argument when the judge dismissed both our ecologists’ reports."

Ecological expertise wasted

Ecologist Dr Stephen Ambrose was there to present his report which challenged Repco's assertion that there would be no significant impact on any nationally-listed threatened species. Dr Ambrose had presented a 12 page resume of his qualifications, his published papers, committees he had chaired and court cases he was involved with. He had supplied a huge dossier of issues including a comparative study and a raft of arguments refuting Dr Phillip’s methodology and many assumptions made. For instance, he claimed that there is a higher probability of mortality as animals actually frequent roadside verges.

Councillor Milne said it was frustrating that he had been available as a witness but the court wouldn’t interview him.

"Dr Ambrose was the key ecologist in the V8 Homebush Supercar case. He is a bird specialist and familiar with the problems a rally is likely to cause. There is a population 35-45 Black Breasted Button Quails near the Mebbin locality Byrill Creek stage of the rally route and it is believed that the loss of one or disruption to their breeding cycle could be fatal to the viability of the entire population."

She added that another ecologist, Mr Mark Graham, who also presented a damning report "had extensive and specific local experience of the area, having coincidently carried out a 3 month ground survey of the endangered Giant Barred Frogs on the Byrill Creek route. The spray of dust can settle on their eggs and larvae and totally destroy their breeding cycle."

Arcane-seeming technicalities defeated community’s try for justice

“The Judge said we had not presented the argument in the manner required by the Courts. It was our ecologist’s case that this was not possible. She made no attempt to ascertain the validity of the arguments with Dr Ambrose. The whole crux of the ecological case was not even argued. It was absolutely appalling” said Cr Milne.

She went on to say that Repco Rally Australia had employed Dr Stephen Phillips (Biolink Pty Ltd) to conduct an ecological report on the impacts on species living on the rally route in autumn. As a result many species that were not visible at that time were visible in spring, breeding season for many species. Had Dr Phillips found any significant impacts to any of the nationally-listed threatened species, the matter would need to be referred to the Minister for the Environment for assessment as these are matters of national environmental significance.

"In the first report released by Repco in April 2009, Dr Phillips actually did recommend that the rally be referred to Minister Peter Garrett. However Repco claimed in the Court that this was a mistaken release of a draft document. Dr Phillips was not in court to confirm or deny this." Cr Milne said that regardless of whether the document was a draft or not, Dr Phillips had actually stated that the rally should be referred to Minister Garrett up until July and therefore the community had believed this would happen. While Dr Phillips may have changed his mind in his July report, it shows that the matter was in contention and that a precautionary approach should have been taken. The matter of referral to the Minister should have been debated by the ecologists but never was. "It feels like we haven't even had a proper hearing and it feels extremely unjust," said Cr Milne.

Late timing issue a non-sequitur and not our fault

Cr Milne said “The late timing of filing for this injunction was being used as if it was something we were responsible for. The fact that the community has been asking the Environment Minister Garrett to make a decision on this right from the start, and that the Minister had failed to do so, did not seem to worry the Judge at all. Nor did the fact that the community was misled up until July by the Repco report and that a Development Application was also promised up until July, seem to worry the Judge.”

"When were we supposed to take an injunction?" she wondered. "We only had between July and August after the special legislation Motor Sports Bill 2009 was brought into force. The community have done everything in their power to seek a legal outcome including commissioning not one, but two, ecological reports. Minister Garrett has joined with the State government and local Council to ignore this community and this World Heritage environment completely."

She said, "Rally Australia's claims that 'this is going to be the most environmental friendly rally in the world' is a joke. How can this rally be 'environmentally friendly' when it needed to bypass State environmental laws to be held? Many of our environmental laws have had to be extinguished to force this otherwise illegal event through. This race will set a new environmental standard but it’s an absolutely appalling one, one that allows such extreme sports races to run between World heritage corridors and through National Parks and Conservation areas."

Non-profit organization well-provided for in legal counsel

Repco Rally had five lawyers present in court at a cost of $40,000 in three days. “They won on legal technicalities, not on issues”, said Councillor Milne. She added that she was surprised that a non profit organisation could afford such representation. "They have threatened that they will vigorously pursue costs. The costs order case is going to be rushed through as well, in less than a week for this Wednesday", she concluded.

This rally is intended to become a bi-annual event until 2027.

Not a good look for the Fédération internationale de l'automobile

These political and environmental impacts must also be doing great harm to La Fédération Internationale de l'automobile and the road safety and green reputation it promotes on its pages:

"Formula for the Environment: As the governing body of motor sport and the representative of more than 100 million consumers worldwide, the FIA has been actively putting the environment on the top of its dual agendas. Formula for the environment outlines the FIA’s environmental efforts, from proposals for global emission benchmarks by policy makers to forward thinking environmentally relevant initiatives in motor sport such as the introduction of energy recovery systems in Formula One, highlighting what the FIA is doing to reduce the impact of motoring on the environment." Source: http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mobility/policy/Pages/FIAPolicyCentre.aspx

Residents of the community are reportedly devastated.

One has written to candobetter: I am so sad!! Today I drove on most of the rally routes and saw so many beautiful animals, right by the road. Many kangaroos mostly, wedgetail eagles, low-flying little birds, lots of snakes, very sad looking cows and sheep and horses all looking at me as if to say 'please save me, take me away from here' .... the grief is so deep inside me right now....I am utterly inconsolable."

The making of a new law to disempower environmental laws and local government powers in order to hold the rally means that democracy has been extinguished in Tweed Shire. Environmental damage and loss of democracy always seem to go together. This is surely a matter which should concern judges all over the land.

How to make donations to court costs

Something just as bad could easily happen to a place you love, now that it has happened in Tweed Shire. Downsizing democracy is a pernicious trend in Australia. Australians need to fight these trends as hard as they can and prevent communities from being destroyed by financial costs. Perhaps there will be an appeal. People can make donations towards the $40,000 court costs. It has been suggested that if 200 people can donate $200 each the shire will be able to pay.

Bank details are:
No Rally Group
BSB 062 580
A/C 10275161
Commonwealth Bank

See also: Repco Rally route - the calm before the storm of 26 Aug 09, URGENT! Contact Peter Garrett re Injunction to stop Repco Rally of 29 Aug 09.

For MPs who voted FOR this awful bill, click here

NSW Bill to override local democracy and to privilege private business and protect Ministers from legal challenge

The following is from a speech to the Legislative Council of the NSW parliament by the Reverend Dr Gordon Moyes [1]. (Headings and new punctuation have been added by a Candobetter editor):

The Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009 is a bill for an Act to facilitate the conduct of the international motor sport known as the World Rally Championship. Clauses 13, 14 and 15 override the Local Government Act 1993, the Forestry Act 1916, and the Water Management Act 2000 by allowing the Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009 to authorise people to take actions that are expressly not permitted by those Acts. Clause 20 protects the exercise of certain functions of the Minister, or any delegate of the Minister, or a public authority, from challenge or review before a court or administrative review body, or from being restrained, removed or otherwise affected by any proceedings.

An affront and an injury to Northern Rivers area in NSW

The Northern Rivers area of New South Wales is pristine and beautiful. It is incredibly rich in flora and fauna, with more species of fish, birds, amphibians and mammals than even the world-famous Kakadu area of the Northern Territory. The region also has many threatened fauna and plant species that need to be protected. The area is recognised as having diverse ecosystems, including different kinds of rainforest, wetlands, heath lands and important zones between the land and the water.

Area already officially consacrated as a national landscape icon

Some areas of Australia are so special and unique that they have received official recognition, and this is one of them. In 2008 the Federal Government launched the National Landscape Program, selecting only a handful of regions. Along with Kakadu and the Great Ocean Road, the Mount Warning Wollumbin Caldera was awarded special status as a national landscape icon by the Ministers for Tourism and the Environment. The green cauldron, as it is commonly called, is a designated area stretching from Byron Bay up past the State border into the Gold Coast, and was selected because of its distinctive natural features, including the world's second-largest shield volcano crater, which has shallow sloping sides, awesome environmental biodiversity and a very rich Aboriginal heritage.

Gordon Moyes MP: personal observations

I have wonderful memories of visiting this area on many occasions, particularly the area around Kyogle, which my family has visited several times. Kyogle is a town of approximately 4,000 people in the Northern Rivers region of northern New South Wales. It was founded as a lumber camp in the 1930s, with red cedar and hoop pine being the main timber trees. It is about 750 kilometres north of Sydney, quite close to the border. The Kyogle area has cattle grazing, dairy farming and forestry as its primary industries, and is a tourist gateway to many national parks. The mad rush of the modern lifestyle has lost so much of the simplicity and beauty of the more natural pace of life and the smaller scale of living on the land. The people living in Kyogle and Tweed shires have purposely set out to recapture this preferred quality of life and are living their vision in the most committed way.

REPCO Rally assails regional community world-view

The back-to-the-land lifestyle is a homey, environmentally based world view that embraces home-grown organic food, handmade items of daily life, eating actual cooked meals rather than fast food on the run, raising poultry and cattle, birdwatching, bushwalking and a philosophy that supports the ongoing daily work of a commitment to recycling and a deep love and respect for, and the protection of, wildlife. These are the kinds of quiet pursuits that they embrace and encourage in their region. The people of Kyogle and Tweed collectively have identified the environment and its protection and enhancement as their top priorities, and the extraordinary natural environment is the reason people choose to live there. I emphasise the fact that the people as a community and as a region have purposely chosen that natural, life-affirming, low-carbon-footprint, close-to-the-land lifestyle.

As part and parcel of that worldview, they have eschewed big, noisy, air- and water-polluting, old-fashioned, high-energy-using pastimes from the manic-paced cities, such as international motorcar racing. It is true that there has been a small Speed for Tweed race of historic motorcars for the past five years on the streets of Murwillumbah, but it is very small scale, low key and charming. It is run as a non-profit event by the locals for the benefit of locals. It has raised thousands of dollars for local charities and Murwillumbah hospital. The race is tiny in comparison with the major-event motor car races of a scale threatened by the Repco Rally, which is simply not welcome there for many reasons—one of which is that it is an international business. It does not even pretend to benefit or serve the interests of local people. It is merely a commercial enterprise, a business. It does not share the ethos of the region and will offer nothing of value to the community.

An insulting imposition on the locals by external parties

Most of all, the Repco Rally simply does not belong there; it is seriously out of place. If the rally proceeds, it is an insulting imposition on the locals by external parties with truly alien values who are apparently such arrogant people that they will not take the broad hint that they are not wanted. Indeed, the local people could hardly be more expressive of their point of view on this matter, having written to their representatives and to the newspapers, marched in their localities, attended consultations, and done everything else they could think of to get someone to pay attention to their concerns—which range from indignation at being treated shoddily by the State Government to concerns about damage to the environment, and to issues with the suspect economic claims behind the decision to hold this race in their vulnerable natural environment.

Same Rally cost WA tax-payers $6m+ p.a.

Previous speakers who praised the rally indicated that it will bring $100 million of value to the area. They do not understand what they are talking about. For example, $100 million over what period? It is certainly not for this one race that is coming up; nor for the one in two years time or the one in 10 years time. It is the accumulated value they think they might get if everything is done and all options are accepted between now and 2027. A more true picture comes from Western Australia. The Western Australian Government no longer wanted the rally, indicating that it was costing Western Australia $6 million a year and it was not getting economic value to make up for that $6 million.

Sham public consultation

I have received, as I guess have many members, hundreds of emails, letters and visits from people in the area pointing out many different aspects. Obviously I will not go through all of them now. However, one concerned citizen, Dr Jules Lewin of Stokers Siding, pointed out to me that Repco Rally's socioeconomic impact assessment was so poorly put together, without being substantiated or having verifiable projections or references, that in scientific, medical and management circles it would be flatly rejected. The methodology was inappropriate, the numbers were inadequate, the data presentation was obscure and the analysis was unsound and contradictory.

In the assessment there was no consideration of the current economic crisis; nor were there any references to current social trends, such as green driving, concern for many environmental issues, the concept of sustainability or the impact of peak oil. With such a lack of insight and grasp of elemental issues, the so-called impact assessment is utterly irrelevant. No multimillion-dollar contract meant to last a minimum of 10 years, plus a 10-year extension, should be allowed to proceed on the basis of the authenticity, accuracy or recommendations of this flimsy report.

Also, in the socioeconomic impact assessment the Repco Rally organisers claim to have consulted with the community, but a letter written to a number of local newspapers stated the following:

"We the undersigned wish to advise the community that our respective community associations have been totally misrepresented in the report entitled Rally Australia Socio-economic Impact Statement, which was committed by Repco Rally Australia. We have been listed on page 29 of the report as being the representatives of our respective community associations who were supposedly part of the community consultation process. We wish to advise that no such community consultation ever took place."

The letter is signed by a significant number of leaders of community organisations from the area. Claiming that community consultation took place might look good on paper, but it has now been completely discredited as an untruth. If the Repco Rally organisers have not provided meaningful background research, presented accurate information or genuinely consulted with the community, and they have misrepresented their own activities, what is their word worth on anything else? One lady wrote to me about Sargents Road in Kyogle, where she lives, which is a core koala habitat crucial for the survival of the species. She cited the New South Wales Department of Environment and Climate Change [DECC] November 2008 Recovery Plan for the Koala, which seeks to ensure the survival of the koala in the wild. This State report reinforces the need to recognise the value of koalas to the community in terms of their presence in the landscape and their potential to attract eco-tourism.

Chaotic policy causing wildlife calvary

How then can another State department come along and act in opposition to those interests already committed to by that department? Sargents Road is not the kind of road recommended for racing—not if we care about animals and their habitats. In fact, the busy local wildlife rescue volunteers say that already far too much wildlife is injured and killed on the roads by automobiles, and that more cars racing on those roads is the last thing the animals need. They also mention that the methods proposed to scare the animals away from the roads—I wonder how many Government members understand this—will likely lead to stress reactions and heart failure in the animals. There will be extremely loud noises, such as banging and so on, to frighten animals away.

Road carnage bad enough without Repco adding to it

Additional concerns have been reported to me in letters from people, such as problem driving and street racing. I will not comment on those. We all know that streets and roads are already deadly to innocent drivers and pedestrians. The news is always full of copycat racing in every area after it hosts such races. Do we really want to inspire more of them? The answer from the people of the North Coast is a resounding "No". The local Kyogle and Tweed Landcare teams, made up of people who give their time free cleaning up, salvaging and repairing damaged ecosystems, dread the havoc that will be wreaked by such an event in this area—one that they have tended with such devotion over the years. The members of the Tweed Valley Wildlife Carers and the Caldera Environment Centre, who have worked for decades protecting the natural environment, are sick at heart over this bill, which will force on the rally in an area where it should not be allowed.

So many reasons to scotch the Repco rally

I assure members that local residents in this area are informed and intelligent; they know their special environment is critical to the growth of tourism in the area and is, in fact, its greatest attraction. Any activities that are destructive of the environment are anathema to them. Some believe that the Government will be in contravention of the Convention on Biological Diversity, which was signed in 1992. Motor sports are an incompatible activity and irrelevant to the local agricultural industry, and can only undermine the World Heritage value of the area. Any anticipated profits from motor sport enthusiasts would be dwarfed by the year-round loss of ecotourists once the green branding of the area is tainted. In addition to the danger to wildlife at risk from the rally, there are also many companion animals and domestic stock living in this area that are very sensitive to noise and can be terrified by screeching, careening and unpredictable motor-generated noises. Even if they were able to stay safely indoors, they will be bombarded by noise, which to animals is perceived as a threat. Such noise permeates and penetrates residential walls as if they were not there. This kind of noise should be isolated away from population centres—and not allowed in an area known for its nurturing silence.

Noise pollution

The excessive noise pollution will be imposed on the human population too, of course. The standards set to protect people and animals will be overruled by this bill that we are considering passing, so that people will have no right to complain—and that is wrong. Those standards were established for a purpose, and to remove them casually in this way is a great wrong. Exposure to excess noise is known to raise the heart rate and blood pressure of many people and to contribute to anxiety; it should not be inflicted on populations as if it is of no importance. The wives, families, counsellors and companions of 4,000 war veterans living in the area have expressed their great concern over the anticipated helicopter noise—which they anticipate will cause psychological disturbance and deep anxiety as it triggers post traumatic stress episodes in the vulnerable, particularly Vietnam War veterans.

Solistalgia

Even the anticipation of one helicopter circling above them is unbearable, much less the dozens of helicopters that will be used over the three-day event. To put veterans through such stress is just unconscionable. Their absolute dread is really escalating into a serious mental health issue for them, their families and their communities. Previously I have mentioned that I was responsible for establishing a mental health facility in Taree to handle post-war traumatic syndrome. Hundreds of Vietnam veterans from the northern rivers came to the Wesley Mayo clinic at Taree for psychological services. In fact, the recently named psychological condition of "solistalgia" is now widespread in the North Coast area. Solistalgia is defined as "the deep distress induced by environmental change, which is exacerbated by the sense of powerlessness and loss of control over the changes that are occurring".

Copious chemical and atmospheric pollution

Then there is the spillage of oil, petrol and other wastes that will seep into the ground, into the atmosphere and onto roads, which is unconscionable in such a pristine area. The air pollution generated from motor racing is unhealthy for people and all other living things, including trees close to the track. The amount of dust that is raised is dangerous for asthmatics and people with respiratory conditions, not to mention dirty and distressing for the people whose homes it will fill. Advising them to go inside and turn on the air conditioning is not good enough. People have outdoor work and busy lives to live and cannot easily take refuge indoors, and many do not have the option of air conditioning. Nothing will help animals cope with the particulate matter in the air that will sicken them.

On the topic of pollution, it is reported that every member of the world rally racing team travels over 130,000 kilometres by air each year. Add that to all the carbon emitted by the activities associated with the rally and a thoughtful person cannot help but recognise that it is an unacceptable carbon footprint.

Car-racing anathema to crucial environmental concerns - Why is government encouraging them?

In fact, in this era of climate change, in response to the deadly global threat of increasing greenhouse gases, it would be far more sensible for the State Government to discourage all human activities that produce such a massive carbon footprint. Perhaps the rich race organisers think they do not have to worry about such matters, but climate change will eventually affect them too. There are also all the prudent economic arguments that many of my constituents have pointed out. Locals believe almost universally there will be far more irremediable damage than any possible benefit accruing from having full restaurants and accommodation for a few days every other year.

The proposed benefits of showcasing the northern area to an estimated 51 million people worldwide, who are supposedly going to watch the racing on television, is outweighed by the actual damage done to the whole fabric of society, the already ill-maintained roads, the environment and the people. Some things just do not bounce back that easily, and having had an event of this magnitude forced upon them is not going to sit easy with residents. Many are simply not resilient enough to cope with the magnitude of the change being thrust upon them.

It just does not make sense on any level

West Australian Government on record as saying it was deceived by rally organisers

I will say very little more. It just does not make sense on any level. The history of the rally in other States has been lacklustre, leading to large financial losses by taxpayers. The Western Australia Government expressed that by not being willing to let it continue in that State. It is on record as saying they it was deceived by rally organisers. Why have Suzuki and Subaru withdrawn their sponsorship of the rally? Why did Victoria or Queensland not want it? Why did the Welsh Assembly Government recently terminate its five-year contract after just two years? I will tell you why. Because all the promised benefits that have been presented to members of the Government and the Opposition were hyped to them were not forthcoming, after all—and if we in New South Wales are sold the same bill of goods, the same thing will happen on the North Coast.

People have asked me why are the taxpayers of New South Wales being asked to fund this rich-people's sport? Why is the State Government promising this international commercial enterprise free labour of hundreds of local volunteers, particularly, who are already overstretched by their efforts and services during two recent floods in the area? As well as the money paid to the Repco rally organisers the State intends to provide free of charge a number of bushfire brigades, 150 extra police, the services of the State Emergency Service, hospitals and all their associated staff on stand-by, on and on ad infinitum. This event will run at a loss for the State, but not for the organisers. Even though the people who thought the idea had some merit now recognise the contempt in which their region's concerns are being held by the arrogant rally organisers who act as if they have been given carte blanche to do whatever they like. The residents know full well it is not democratic, not respectful, not what they expect or deserve, and not right.

One wrote to me and said:
"Apart from being a very bad idea and unpopular with residents, this is a dangerous practice: taking control over events that the local councils should be regulating, in order to benefit outside elites."

Another wrote:
"Have our governing bodies become so anesthetised to the fact that they are elected to represent the citizens, and not given the divine rights of kings?"

Githabul Aboriginal women say attack on their sacred areas of life and death importance

There is one more group whose interests and concerns I have not yet mentioned, the Aboriginal women of the Githabul people, whose representative contacted my office when they heard that I was listening to all sides of the issue. The representative of the Githabul people explained that under the agreement reached in late 2007 the Githabul people were going to be allowed joint management of national parks and State forests with the New South Wales State Government. Regarding the Repco rally, there was consultation carried out with one sole male elder. But he, as a male, was not in a position to know anything about the areas that are sacred to the Githabul women and apparently the women are very distraught that they have had no voice in presenting their deeply honoured cultural concerns to the rally organisers and the New South Wales Government, and they call upon both to recognise that they too have a right to be heard. To them these issues are of life and death importance and they do not want the Repco rally to have access to particular areas on the race route as announced that are actually sacred territory.

Undemocratic bill to say the least

Forcing through the bill does not demonstrate respect for the opinions, needs and lives of people and their families in these areas. This is not good manners, it is not social justice, and it is not democracy. In fact it is a blatant flouting of the democratic process and does not represent the value system that Australians have gone to war to defend and protect. It is an insult to war veterans and families in that area. I am disturbed to note that this is becoming an all too familiar pattern, with bills being used by the Government to disregard other tiers of government or authorities in order to force its own way without regard for the feelings or safety of the people on the receiving end. Our political system has been built up over many years with multiple layers of power and checks and balances, and we must not give them away.

Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament

I conclude, Mr President, by reading a passage from the Code of Conduct for Members, which you signed and sent to every member of this House. I am sure that it has been quite a while since many of us read or thought about it. It states:
Members of Parliament acknowledge their responsibility to maintain the public trust placed in them by performing their duties with honesty and integrity, respecting the law and the institution of Parliament, and using their influence to advance the common good of the people of New South Wales.

Dr Gordon Moyes (MP) draws the line

I will not support any bill that allows large-scale events unwanted by the people who would have to host them.

Not all of my constituents are against motor racing per se, if it can be held in an area that will be undamaged by it and if nearby residents actively want it happening there. It is a hard ask, though. No residents that I have spoken to in the area, or anywhere near it, want motor races to be held near their children's schools, on their village streets or on rural roads. I do not approve of anything that can be construed as a misuse of power and, therefore, I will not support any bill that allows large-scale events unwanted by the people who would have to host them. I encourage any other members here today who still think they have either an environmental or a social conscience to join me in refusing to support what I believe is an ill-conceived bill. I thank you, Mr President, for extending me the privilege of being able to speak.

[1] Source: Text of Rev Hon Dr Gordon Moyes ANTI REPCO RALLY speech 23/6/09 on the Motor Sport (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009

Candobetter Ed. Record of debate, remarks and conduct below has been edited, for instance, headings have been inserted to highlight parts, and some repetitive items have been left out, as indicated by square brackets. The source of the entire document may be accessed in its original form here http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/parlment/hanstrans.nsf/V3ByKey/LC20090623:

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Tuesday 23 June 2009
[...]
__________

MOTOR SPORTS (WORLD RALLY CHAMPIONSHIP) BILL 2009
Second Reading

Debate resumed from 17 June 2009.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN [6.15 p.m.]: The Liberal-Nationals will not oppose the bill, but at the outset I make it clear that we will seek to ensure that there is a full and independent review of the rally following the initial running of the event this year. It is anticipated that the Government will support the amendment. I clearly state that the amendment directly reflects the hard work and quite intense lobbying conducted by the member for Tweed, Geoff Provest, and the member for Lismore, Thomas George, both of whom have worked tirelessly to ensure that people who live in the Far North Coast have a voice at the table when Parliament is dealing with legislation relating to the rally. I commend both the member for Tweed and the member for Lismore for their effective advocacy on this issue.

The object of the bill is to facilitate the conduct of a major sport known as the World Rally Championship. It is worth noting that in September 2008 Events New South Wales and the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport announced that the northern rivers region of New South Wales would host the Australian round of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile [FIA] World Rally Championship in 2009 and then every two years until 2027. It is worth noting that only now has the legislation been introduced after many months of relatively little action. That is one of the issues that has motivated the Far North Coast community to express concern.

Nevertheless, it is estimated that the rally will generate up to $100 million in direct economic benefits to New South Wales over the life of the agreement through the creation of up to 2,000 new jobs and an estimated 92,000 visitor nights. These are significant benefits to the local community and, self-evidently, also for the entire State of New South Wales. The first event, the Repco Rally Australia, will be held in the Tweed and Kyogle local government areas from 3 to 6 September 2009. This bill provides that the legislation will be reviewed five years after it receives assent. The Liberal-Nationals, understanding the need to give certainty to the local community, to the rally proponents and to millions of World Rally Championship fans throughout the world—and I have to admit to being one of them—will not oppose the bill but will seek to move an amendment in Committee that is aimed at producing a full and independent review of the rally following the initial 2009 event.

One of the purposes of the amendment is not only to ensure that the review takes place but also to ensure that the review includes, in a spirit of cooperation, the Kyogle Council and the Tweed Shire Council, thereby remitting some ownership of the event to the local community and ensuring a degree of transparency that presently is lacking. The Liberal-Nationals believe that the amendment will give the legislation reasonable balance between the need for the proponents to get on with the job of planning this year's event and the local community to determine what impact an event such as this will have on their region in the future.

Liberal-Nationals are advised that the Kyogle Council supports the rally, but has requested that a review mechanism be built into the legislation to enable any issues that may arise from the initial event to be examined and resolved. The Liberal-Nationals are advised that the Tweed Shire Council also wants a review mechanism built into the legislation. In a press release dated 10 September 2008, the Tweed Shire Council's general manager, Mike Rayner, welcomed the announcement, saying that the event would boost the local economy and showcase the Tweed to a worldwide television audience as a tourist destination.

Mr Rayner is quoted as saying:

This event has a massive audience—last year 50 million people in 180 countries watched each round of the World Rally. That will bring immeasurable exposure to the Tweed and northern rivers region, both nationally and internationally.

In a press release dated 3 June 2009 Tweed Shire Council's mayor, Councillor Joan van Lieshout, indicated that on 3 June representatives from Tweed and Kyogle councils met with the Minister for State Development. Councillor van Lieshout is quoted as saying:

We were advised that the decision was made by the Department in order to secure the event following commitments for the delivery of relevant equipment from overseas.

While I am obviously very disappointed that the event has been taken out of the hands of local government, I have uppermost in my mind the concerns of the community in regard to transparency and full communication with all negotiations.

It has been on the agenda for many months awaiting relevant development application and during this time community members have expressed their concerns that a 'fast car rally' is not within the vision for the "Tweed Naturally" imagine which is foremost in our strategic tourism planning for the future of the Tweed.

I am determined that the process will be fully transparent and have requested that a review of the whole event be taken prior to any further agreements for the future.

We have the opportunity now to set the forum for all future events of this nature through the democratic examples set by this event.

Members of the local community are angered by the course of action taken by this State Labor Government. There has been a lack of proper process and the community has been locked out of the decision-making process. While the Liberal-Nationals support the rally and will not oppose the bill, we condemn the State Labor Government for its heavy-handed approach when dealing with the local community. The role of the Government is to ensure that the local community is fully informed and taken through the process, rather than railroaded. Clearly, there are benefits to the local community and to the entire State. That is why the Liberal-Nationals will not oppose the bill.

However, this does not excuse the State Labor Government from locking the community out in the manner it has. All too often that is what we see from this State Labor Government. We see a lack of proper process, a lack of planning and a lack of infrastructure, and now we see tourism projects drawn up on the back of a desire to achieve positive headlines in the paper. This is not how our State should be run, and the local community is justified in its anger that once again the State Labor Government has demonstrated that it is more interested in a headline than what is right for the local community and, indeed, the State. Once again I congratulate the local member for Tweed and the local member for Lismore on their considerable advocacy on this matter.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [6.22 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009, the purpose of which is to facilitate the conduct of the Australian rounds of the motor rally known as the World Rally Championship on a biennial basis in the northern rivers region of New South Wales. The Christian Democratic Party support the bill because of the advantages to the economy and to tourism—I am a bit surprised by the criticism of the tourism aspect—and in terms of jobs. The world rally championship organisation is one of the highest profile international four-wheel motor sport championships after Formula One, with approximately 51 million people viewing each round of the televised world rally championship. In September 2008 Events New South Wales and the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport announced that the Australian round of the world rally championship would be staged every second year in the northern rivers region of New South Wales from 2009 until 2017, with an option to extend until 2027.

Events New South Wales estimates that the event will generate more than $100 million for the New South Wales economy over the duration of the agreement. It is also anticipated that it will boost tourism and jobs and deliver major economic benefits to regional New South Wales. The first event, Repco Rally Australia, will be held in Kyogle and Tweed local government areas from 3 to 6 September 2009. Obviously, when putting on such a large event—as was necessary for the staging of the super 8 event at Olympic Park—special legislation is necessary to streamline what has become a complicated maze of approval processes. If one were forced through the maze of approval processes, the first Repco event would probably not take place until 2027, if at all. It is important to have legislation that will allow a similar approval process to operate but still ensure that appropriate conditions can be imposed to address matters such as public safety and environmental protection.

I have received many requests to oppose the legislation. When I read those requests it became clear to me that it is easy to stir up opposition, as happened recently with mining legislation that was before the House. It is easy to create an atmosphere of fear and concern, and that has been happening with this event. Some have even said that many teenage drivers will go mad and kill each other after this event. In my view what encourages dangerous driving in teenagers are video games which are played by children—not necessarily teenagers—that encourage the smashing of cars and the ramming of police cars and so on. Many children engage in that form of entertainment day after day. I think that video games will have more effect to encourage speed and carelessness by teenage drivers, than will a Repco event that will take place between 3 and 6 September. The Christian Democratic Party supports the bill as it will facilitate this event.

[The Deputy-President (The Hon. Amanda Fazio) left the chair at 6.27 p.m. The House resumed at 8.00 p.m.]

The Hon. HENRY TSANG (Parliamentary Secretary) [8.00 p.m.], in reply: I thank members for their contributions to this debate. The Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009 is designed to facilitate the conduct of the Australian round of the World Rally Championship, an internationally popular motorsport that was watched by 860 million people around the world in 2007. The bill puts in place a mechanism to consider important matters such as the environment and public safety. It provides certainty for the event and secures the estimated $100 million boost to the New South Wales economy. The boost to the economy is recognised by the Murwillumbah and District Chamber of Commerce and Tweed Tourism. Tony Zuschke, business owner and President of the Murwillumbah and District Chamber of Commerce, said:

This event has the potential to deliver massive economic benefit to the region and, recognising that, the Chamber is working with business and with the community to ensure we're geared up fully to make the most of the opportunity. Visitors to the rally can expect a fantastic experience during their stay here, and we're confident that they will take away plenty more reasons to keep coming back.

Phil Villiers, General Manager of Tweed Tourism, said that the rally would give a huge boost to tourism in the region. He said:

From a marketing and promotional perspective the rally will provide the Tweed and surrounding area with a tremendous opportunity to showcase our story to the world. With major corporate attendance expected at the event, we will also be working actively to encourage businesses to discover the Tweed for many other reasons besides the rally, for instance for conferences and events.

Mr Ian Cohen: This is the biggest shaft I've ever had. Were you shafted as well, Reverend Moyes?

[Interruption]

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: Mr President, as we will consider the bill in Committee, I am sure that Mr Ian Cohen can make his comments at that time. Is that all right?

Mr Ian Cohen: No, it is not all right.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: You were not here—

Mr Ian Cohen: You knew that I wanted to speak on this bill.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: You were not here.

Mr Ian Cohen: You knew I wanted to speak.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: You were not here.

Mr Ian Cohen: You and the Liberals wouldn't give me the opportunity to speak.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: The bell was ringing and you were not here.

Mr Ian Cohen: I thought Fred was still speaking.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: You may have thought that, but he was not speaking. The member will have the opportunity to speak in Committee.

The PRESIDENT: Order! Members will speak through the Chair.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: As I said, the House will give Mr Ian Cohen the opportunity to comment on whatever he likes. He should not get so angry; life is too short. Consultation with the community and with councils is a priority. The Minister for State Development met with Tweed and Kyogle councils, and is committed to ongoing close consultation with them. I commend the bill to the House.

Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put.

The House divided.
Ayes, 21 [i.e. those in favour of a second reading of the bill]
Mr Ajaka
Mr Catanzariti
Mr Clarke
Ms Fazio
Ms Ficarra
Mr Gallacher
Ms Griffin
Mr Khan Mr Lynn
Mr Mason-Cox
Reverend Nile
Ms Parker
Ms Robertson
Ms Sharpe
Mr Tsang
Mr Veitch Ms Voltz
Mr West
Ms Westwood

Tellers,
Mr Donnelly
Mr Harwin

Noes, 5 [Ed. i.e. those against a second reading of the bill.]
Mr Cohen
Reverend Dr Moyes
Ms Rhiannon
Tellers,
Ms Hale
Dr Kaye
Question resolved in the affirmative. [Ed. i.e. Moyes and the other five who voted against the bill lost the motion, so the bill was put to the house a second time.]

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG (Parliamentary Secretary) [8.09 p.m.]: I move:

That the President do now leave the chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the bill in detail.

Question put.

Division called for.

[In division]

Member Gordon Moyes physically locked out of debating Chamber

The PRESIDENT: Order! An unfortunate situation has suddenly arisen. A member who intended to contribute to the second reading debate on this bill was locked out of the Chamber at a time when he, if present in the Chamber, could have sought the call. The member sought to gain entry to the Chamber through a side door but the door was locked. The member then knocked on the door but was unable to gain entry to the Chamber. Because no member at that time sought the call, I gave the call to the Parliamentary Secretary to reply to the second reading debate.

That members are not present to participate in debate when the bells have been rung and the House begins to sit is neither here nor there: that is a matter for members. If members wish to contribute to a particular debate, they should be present when that debate is called on. However, if a member is prepared to speak and intends to do so but is physically unable to enter the Chamber, a matter of privilege arises.

I propose to call off the division and to give the call as a matter of privilege to Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes, the member who was unable to enter the Chamber, to allow him to contribute to the second reading of the bill. At the conclusion of that speech I will ask the Parliamentary Secretary to move again the motion to enable the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the bill in detail.

Division called off.

Privilege

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call on Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes to address the House, as he wished to do earlier but was unable because he could not enter the Chamber.

[Candobetter Ed. Note that the speech below is published here, with editorial headings and punctuation changes. Scroll to end of speech here for more interesting comments, conduct and debate]

Gordon Moyes' Speech against the Bill

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [8.17 p.m.]: I thank the House for extending this privilege. It is very rare that one gets the opportunity, in an institution as old as State Parliament, to set precedent in the regulation and conduct of the House. The Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009 is a bill for an Act to facilitate the conduct of the international motor sport known as the World Rally Championship. Clauses 13, 14 and 15 override the Local Government Act 1993, the Forestry Act 1916, and the Water Management Act 2000 by allowing the Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Bill 2009 to authorise people to take actions that are expressly not permitted by those Acts. Clause 20 protects the exercise of certain functions of the Minister, or any delegate of the Minister, or a public authority, from challenge or review before a court or administrative review body, or from being restrained, removed or otherwise affected by any proceedings.

The Northern Rivers area of New South Wales is pristine and beautiful. It is incredibly rich in flora and fauna, with more species of fish, birds, amphibians and mammals than even the world-famous Kakadu area of the Northern Territory.

The region also has many threatened fauna and plant species that need to be protected. The area is recognised as having diverse ecosystems, including different kinds of rainforest, wetlands, heath lands and important zones between the land and the water.

Some areas of Australia are so special and unique that they have received official recognition, and this is one of them. In 2008 the Federal Government launched the National Landscape Program, selecting only a handful of regions. Along with Kakadu and the Great Ocean Road, the Mount Warning Wollumbin Caldera was awarded special status as a national landscape icon by the Ministers for tourism and the environment. The green cauldron, as it is commonly called, is a designated area stretching from Byron Bay up past the State border into the Gold Coast, and was selected because of its distinctive natural features, including the world's second-largest shield volcano crater, which has shallow sloping sides, awesome environmental biodiversity and a very rich Aboriginal heritage.

I have wonderful memories of visiting this area on many occasions, particularly the area around Kyogle, which my family has visited several times. Kyogle is a town of approximately 4,000 people in the Northern Rivers region of northern New South Wales. It was founded as a lumber camp in the 1930s, with red cedar and hoop pine being the main timber trees. It is about 750 kilometres north of Sydney, quite close to the border. The Kyogle area has cattle grazing, dairy farming and forestry as its primary industries, and is a tourist gateway to many national parks. The mad rush of the modern lifestyle has lost so much of the simplicity and beauty of the more natural pace of life and the smaller scale of living on the land. The people living in Kyogle and Tweed shires have purposely set out to recapture this preferred quality of life and are living their vision in the most committed way.

The back-to-the-land lifestyle is a homey, environmentally based world view that embraces home-grown organic food, handmade items of daily life, eating actual cooked meals rather than fast food on the run, raising poultry and cattle, birdwatching, bushwalking and a philosophy that supports the ongoing daily work of a commitment to recycling and a deep love and respect for, and the protection of, wildlife. These are the kinds of quiet pursuits that they embrace and encourage in their region. The people of Kyogle and Tweed collectively have identified the environment and its protection and enhancement as their top priorities, and the extraordinary natural environment is the reason people choose to live there. I emphasise the fact that the people as a community and as a region have purposely chosen that natural, life-affirming, low-carbon-footprint, close-to-the-land lifestyle.

As part and parcel of that world view, they have eschewed big, noisy, air- and water-polluting, old-fashioned, high-energy-using pastimes from the manic-paced cities, such as international motor car racing. It is true that there has been a small Speed for Tweed race of historic motor cars for the past five years on the streets of Murwillumbah, but it is very small scale, low key and charming. It is run as a non-profit event by the locals for the benefit of locals. It has raised thousands of dollars for local charities and Murwillumbah hospital. The race is tiny in comparison with the major-event motor car races of a scale threatened by the Repco Rally, which is simply not welcome there for many reasons—one of which is that it is an international business. It does not even pretend to benefit or serve the interests of local people. It is merely a commercial enterprise, a business. It does not share the ethos of the region and will offer nothing of value to the community.

Most of all, the Repco Rally simply does not belong there; it is seriously out of place. If the rally proceeds, it is an insulting imposition on the locals by external parties with truly alien values who are apparently such arrogant people that they will not take the broad hint that they are not wanted. Indeed, the local people could hardly be more expressive of their point of view on this matter, having written to their representatives and to the newspapers, marched in their localities, attended consultations, and done everything else they could think of to get someone to pay attention to their concerns—which range from indignation at being treated shoddily by the State Government to concerns about damage to the environment, and to issues with the suspect economic claims behind the decision to hold this race in their vulnerable natural environment.

Previous speakers who praised the rally indicated that it will bring $100 million of value to the area. They do not understand what they are talking about. For example, $100 million over what period? It is certainly not for this one race that is coming up; nor for the one in two years time or the one in 10 years time. It is the accumulated value they think they might get if everything is done and all options are accepted between now and 2027. A more true picture comes from Western Australia. The Western Australian Government no longer wanted the rally, indicating that it was costing Western Australia $6 million a year and it was not getting economic value to make up for that $6 million.

I have received, as I guess have many members, hundreds of emails, letters and visits from people in the area pointing out many different aspects. Obviously I will not go through all of them now. However, one concerned citizen, Dr Jules Lewin of Stokers Siding, pointed out to me that Repco Rally's socioeconomic impact assessment was so poorly put together, without being substantiated or having verifiable projections or references, that in scientific, medical and management circles it would be flatly rejected. The methodology was inappropriate, the numbers were inadequate, the data presentation was obscure and the analysis was unsound and contradictory.

In the assessment there was no consideration of the current economic crisis; nor were there any references to current social trends, such as green driving, concern for many environmental issues, the concept of sustainability or the impact of peak oil. With such a lack of insight and grasp of elemental issues, the so-called impact assessment is utterly irrelevant. No multimillion-dollar contract meant to last a minimum of 10 years, plus a 10-year extension, should be allowed to proceed on the basis of the authenticity, accuracy or recommendations of this flimsy report. Also, in the socioeconomic impact assessment the Repco Rally organisers claim to have consulted with the community, but a letter written to a number of local newspapers stated the following:

We the undersigned wish to advise the community that our respective community associations have been totally misrepresented in the report entitled Rally Australia Socio-economic Impact Statement, which was committed by Repco Rally Australia. We have been listed on page 29 of the report as being the representatives of our respective community associations who were supposedly part of the community consultation process. We wish to advise that no such community consultation ever took place.

The letter is signed by a significant number of leaders of community organisations from the area. Claiming that community consultation took place might look good on paper, but it has now been completely discredited as an untruth. If the Repco Rally organisers have not provided meaningful background research, presented accurate information or genuinely consulted with the community, and they have misrepresented their own activities, what is their word worth on anything else? One lady wrote to me about Sargents Road in Kyogle, where she lives, which is a core koala habitat crucial for the survival of the species. She cited the New South Wales Department of Environment and Climate Change [DECC] November 2008 Recovery Plan for the Koala, which seeks to ensure the survival of the koala in the wild. This State report reinforces the need to recognise the value of koalas to the community in terms of their presence in the landscape and their potential to attract eco-tourism.

How then can another State department come along and act in opposition to those interests already committed to by that department? Sargents Road is not the kind of road recommended for racing—not if we care about animals and their habitats. In fact, the busy local wildlife rescue volunteers say that already far too much wildlife is injured and killed on the roads by automobiles, and that more cars racing on those roads is the last thing the animals need. They also mention that the methods proposed to scare the animals away from the roads—I wonder how many Government members understand this—will likely lead to stress reactions and heart failure in the animals. There will be extremely loud noises, such as banging and so on, to frighten animals away.

Additional concerns have been reported to me in letters from people, such as problem driving and street racing. I will not comment on those. We all know that streets and roads are already deadly to innocent drivers and pedestrians. The news is always full of copycat racing in every area after it hosts such races. Do we really want to inspire more of them? The answer from the people of the North Coast is a resounding "No". The local Kyogle and Tweed Landcare teams, made up of people who give their time free cleaning up, salvaging and repairing damaged ecosystems, dread the havoc that will be wreaked by such an event in this area—one that they have tended with such devotion over the years. The members of the Tweed Valley Wildlife Carers and the Caldera Environment Centre, who have worked for decades protecting the natural environment, are sick at heart over this bill, which will force on the rally in an area where it should not be allowed.

I assure members that local residents in this area are informed and intelligent; they know their special environment is critical to the growth of tourism in the area and is, in fact, its greatest attraction. Any activities that are destructive of the environment are anathema to them. Some believe that the Government will be in contravention of the Convention on Biological Diversity, which was signed in 1992. Motor sports are an incompatible activity and irrelevant to the local agricultural industry, and can only undermine the World Heritage value of the area. Any anticipated profits from motor sport enthusiasts would be dwarfed by the year-round loss of ecotourists once the green branding of the area is tainted. In addition to the danger to wildlife at risk from the rally, there are also many companion animals and domestic stock living in this area that are very sensitive to noise and can be terrified by screeching, careening and unpredictable motor-generated noises. Even if they were able to stay safely indoors, they will be bombarded by noise, which to animals is perceived as a threat. Such noise permeates and penetrates residential walls as if they were not there. This kind of noise should be isolated away from population centres—and not allowed in an area known for its nurturing silence.

The excessive noise pollution will be imposed on the human population too, of course. The standards set to protect people and animals will be overruled by this bill that we are considering passing, so that people will have no right to complain—and that is wrong. Those standards were established for a purpose, and to remove them casually in this way is a great wrong. Exposure to excess noise is known to raise the heart rate and blood pressure of many people and to contribute to anxiety; it should not be inflicted on populations as if it is of no importance. The wives, families, counsellors and companions of 4,000 war veterans living in the area have expressed their great concern over the anticipated helicopter noise—which they anticipate will cause psychological disturbance and deep anxiety as it triggers post traumatic stress episodes in the vulnerable, particularly Vietnam War veterans.

Even the anticipation of one helicopter circling above them is unbearable, much less the dozens of helicopters that will be used over the three-day event. To put veterans through such stress is just unconscionable. Their absolute dread is really escalating into a serious mental health issue for them, their families and their communities. Previously I have mentioned that I was responsible for establishing a mental health facility in Taree to handle post-war traumatic syndrome. Hundreds of Vietnam veterans from the northern rivers came to the Wesley Mayo clinic at Taree for psychological services. In fact, the recently named psychological condition of "solistalgia" is now widespread in the North Coast area. Solistalgia is defined as "the deep distress induced by environmental change, which is exacerbated by the sense of powerlessness and loss of control over the changes that are occurring".

Then there is the spillage of oil, petrol and other wastes that will seep into the ground, into the atmosphere and onto roads, which is unconscionable in such a pristine area. The air pollution generated from motor racing is unhealthy for people and all other living things, including trees close to the track. The amount of dust that is raised is dangerous for asthmatics and people with respiratory conditions, not to mention dirty and distressing for the people whose homes it will fill. Advising them to go inside and turn on the air conditioning is not good enough. People have outdoor work and busy lives to live and cannot easily take refuge indoors, and many do not have the option of air conditioning. Nothing will help animals cope with the particulate matter in the air that will sicken them. On the topic of pollution, it is reported that every member of the world rally racing team travels over 130,000 kilometres by air each year. Add that to all the carbon emitted by the activities associated with the rally and a thoughtful person cannot help but recognise that it is an unacceptable carbon footprint.

In fact, in this era of climate change, in response to the deadly global threat of increasing greenhouse gases, it would be far more sensible for the State Government to discourage all human activities that produce such a massive carbon footprint. Perhaps the rich race organisers think they do not have to worry about such matters, but climate change will eventually affect them too. There are also all the prudent economic arguments that many of my constituents have pointed out. Locals believe almost universally there will be far more irremediable damage than any possible benefit accruing from having full restaurants and accommodation for a few days every other year. The proposed benefits of showcasing the northern area to an estimated 51 million people worldwide, who are supposedly going to watch the racing on television, is outweighed by the actual damage done to the whole fabric of society, the already ill-maintained roads, the environment and the people. Some things just do not bounce back that easily, and having had an event of this magnitude forced upon them is not going to sit easy with residents. Many are simply not resilient enough to cope with the magnitude of the change being thrust upon them.

I will say very little more. It just does not make sense on any level. The history of the rally in other States has been lacklustre, leading to large financial losses by taxpayers. The Western Australia Government expressed that by not being willing to let it continue in that State? It is on record as saying they it was deceived by rally organisers. Why have Suzuki and Subaru withdrawn their sponsorship of the rally? Why did Victoria or Queensland not want it? Why did the Welsh Assembly Government recently terminate its five-year contract after just two years? I will tell you why. Because all the promised benefits that have been presented to members of the Government and the Opposition were hyped to them were not forthcoming, after all—and if we in New South Wales are sold the same bill of goods, the same thing will happen on the North Coast.

People have asked me why are the taxpayers of New South Wales being asked to fund this rich-people's sport? Why is the State Government promising this international commercial enterprise free labour of hundreds of local volunteers, particularly, who are already overstretched by their efforts and services during two recent floods in the area? As well as the money paid to the Repco rally organisers the State intends to provide free of charge a number of bushfire brigades, 150 extra police, the services of the State Emergency Service, hospitals and all their associated staff on stand-by, on and on ad infinitum. This event will run at a loss for the State, but not for the organisers. Even though the people who thought the idea had some merit now recognise the contempt in which their region's concerns are being held by the arrogant rally organisers who act as if they have been given carte blanche to do whatever they like. The residents know full well it is not democratic, not respectful, not what they expect or deserve, and not right. One wrote to me and said:

Apart from being a very bad idea and unpopular with residents, this is a dangerous practice: taking control over events that the local councils should be regulating, in order to benefit outside elites.

Another wrote:

Have our governing bodies become so anesthetised to the fact that they are elected to represent the citizens, and not given the divine rights of kings?

There is one more group whose interests and concerns I have not yet mentioned, the Aboriginal women of the Githabul people, whose representative contacted my office when they heard that I was listening to all sides of the issue.

The representative of the Githabul people explained that under the agreement reached in late 2007 the Githabul people were going to be allowed joint management of national parks and State forests with the New South Wales State Government. Regarding the Repco rally, there was consultation carried out with one sole male elder. But he, as a male, was not in a position to know anything about the areas that are sacred to the Githabul women and apparently the women are very distraught that they have had no voice in presenting their deeply honoured cultural concerns to the rally organisers and the New South Wales Government, and they call upon both to recognise that they too have a right to be heard. To them these issues are of life and death importance and they do not want the Repco rally to have access to particular areas on the race route as announced that are actually sacred territory.

Forcing through the bill does not demonstrate respect for the opinions, needs and lives of people and their families in these areas. This is not good manners, it is not social justice, and it is not democracy. In fact it is a blatant flouting of the democratic process and does not represent the value system that Australians have gone to war to defend and protect. It is an insult to war veterans and families in that area. I am disturbed to note that this is becoming an all too familiar pattern, with bills being used by the Government to disregard other tiers of government or authorities in order to force its own way without regard for the feelings or safety of the people on the receiving end. Our political system has been built up over many years with multiple layers of power and checks and balances, and we must not give them away.

I conclude, Mr President, by reading a passage from the Code of Conduct for Members, which you signed and sent to every member of this House. I am sure that it has been quite a while since many of us read or thought about it. It states:

Members of Parliament acknowledge their responsibility to maintain the public trust placed in them by performing their duties with honesty and integrity, respecting the law and the institution of Parliament, and using their influence to advance the common good of the people of New South Wales.

Not all of my constituents are against motor racing per se, if it can be held in an area that will be undamaged by it and if nearby residents actively want it happening there. It is a hard ask, though. No residents that I have spoken to in the area, or anywhere near it, want motor races to be held near their children's schools, on their village streets or on rural roads. I do not approve of anything that can be construed as a misuse of power and, therefore, I will not support any bill that allows large-scale events unwanted by the people who would have to host them. I encourage any other members here today who still think they have either an environmental or a social conscience to join me in refusing to support what I believe is an ill-conceived bill. I thank you, Mr President, for extending me the privilege of being able to speak.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: I move:

That the President now leave the chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the bill in detail.

Question put and resolved in the affirmative.
In Committee

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): I propose to deal with the bill by parts. There being no objection, the Committee will proceed to consider part 1.

Mr IAN COHEN [8.44 p.m.]: On behalf of the Greens, I say in Committee that I strongly oppose the Motor Sports (World Rally Championships) Bill 2009, which is a burning indictment of the pervading culture of the New South Wales Labor Party. I am constantly amazed by the amount of special legislation that the New South Wales Labor Party regurgitates in this Chamber to facilitate all manner of incursion on basic rights. However, I was not at all surprised at the Government putting forward special legislation to enable this rally to go ahead. As I feared when I spoke in this Chamber in May, the rally deal was stitched up a long time ago. The rally organisers have been taking bookings and proceeding with great confidence without even lodging a development application.

The people have been robbed of their capacity to determine what happens in their area

The people of the North Coast have been waiting to see the rally be considered by their local council, which should be the determining authority. But it has been robbed of its capacity to participate in determining what happens in its area. The bill has the usual grubby and sleazy hallmarks of Labor's special legislation turning off key environment and land use planning legislation because there is one rule for the New South Wales masses and one for the international racing crowd. Taking away residents' common law rights and usurping the will of local communities is all encompassed within the bill—all hallmarks of this brave and noble Labor Government.

The bill overrides the National Parks and Wildlife Act, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, the Threatened Species Conservation Act, the Forestry Act, the Water Management Act, the Fisheries Management Act and the Local Government Act.

The special legislation will foist a car rally on the Tweed and Kyogle shires of northern New South Wales this September and a further four more rallies to be held biannually until 2017. On top of turning off the State's key environmental legislation, the bill will also allow the Minister to accommodate any requirements of the rally organisers. The legislation is not restricted to the northern rivers region. It will allow the Minister to prescribe any area in New South Wales as part of the declared rally area by regulation. This means technically that the Minister can declare the whole State one big rally course and turn off every key piece of environmental legislation, and the decision to do so would be immune from any judicial review at all. Some might say it is total insanity. Has this Minister gone mad? Is he somewhat of a modern-day Nero? There is no personal advantage, or will the Minister gain some personal advantage by building up his credit and riding off to some corporate retirement? Worst of all, Minister Macdonald has inserted a double-glazed privative clause in proposed section 20—

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! The member should be speaking to part 1 of the bill, which incorporates clauses 1, 2 and 3, and should not be making reflections on other members.

Mr IAN COHEN: I am expressing myself in Committee due to circumstances somewhat outside leave—
The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): I am aware of that. Please proceed.

Mr IAN COHEN: If that means that I have to go through every section of my speech at every point of the Committee, I will do so. I would ask the indulgence of the Committee to allow me to at least express myself, which is a right that I have as an elected member of this House—

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! Nobody is disputing the right of the member to speak to different parts of the bill, but in doing so he must not make reflections on other members.

Mr IAN COHEN: Even the improper exercise of functions by protected persons is exempt from any judicial or administrative challenge whatsoever. This is probably one of the most extreme privative clauses crafted by the hands of Minister Macdonald, who refuses to be accountable for his decisions. It is a total joke and this level of legislative extremism to secure commercial certainty should be thrown out.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: Point of order: I do not mind the member making points about the bill, but he should not use the Committee stage to say outrageously stupid things about me. He should be brought to heel. There are other forms of the House available to him if he wishes to attack, and the Committee is not one of them. It was not my fault that he missed the call.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): I remind Mr Ian Cohen that he should not make reflections on other members unless by way of a substantive motion. It is in order for him to speak about his concerns about the bill, but he must not speak about the Minister who has carriage of the bill.

Mr IAN COHEN: Thank you, and I must apologise to the Minister. I did not realise he was such a sensitive character.

The Hon. Rick Colless: Precious.

Mr IAN COHEN: It is rather precious, and I acknowledge the interjection of the Hon. Rick Colless. The Minister is good at dishing it out but cannot take a little bit of criticism. I am surprised he finds this such a sensitive issue.

I read on the Rally's website that the world controlling body for motor sport, the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile [FIA], was understood to have been concerned with media reports about the event and sought an assurance from the Government that it would proceed. With this legislation it will do more than just proceed.

The FIA and Rally Australia, a private company, can just sit back and let the Government do all the work. Inconvenient local planning laws? Consider it solved. This proposed legislation will sweep them under the carpet. Endangered wildlife getting underfoot or under a wheel? This legislation will override the National Parks and Wildlife Act and the Endangered Species Act, and hopefully the helicopters will scare the koalas away. Annoying local council and residents? Do not worry, just go over their heads.

I would like to commend the Hon. Gordon Moyes for his speech on this bill in which he raised a number of issues that I was not aware. He referred to the number of Vietnam War veterans living in that part of the world, and I commend him for raising that issue. It shows how in touch he is as a church representative, as well as a representative of this House, about the problems and issues in country areas. There is the clear example of the Vietnam War veterans, but many others with all sorts of problems retire to the country for a quiet life. They go there deliberately for that reason and, as the Hon. Gordon Moyes said, to get away from the rat race in the city. People go to these areas to escape the insanity that is highlighted by this type of event. There has been no development application, no council meetings and no problems. Funding from Events NSW? "No problem again. Just keep it commercial in confidence so no-one knows how much we are spending." This is said to be commercial in confidence but where are the competitors? There are none.

The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: Queanbeyan.

Mr IAN COHEN: I acknowledge the interjection by the honourable member. But where are the competitors who would demonstrate the commercial viability of this event? There are none. It is a sewn-up deal, so why is it commercial in confidence? Why do we not have some degree of transparency from this Government? It is certainly quick to assess the profit to be derived and to make a statement about that. It just tosses up the figure of $100 million to indicate the sort of money that will be made. Is there a proper assessment of the event? No. It is commercial in confidence even though there is no competition for the event. We are heading in the right direction if we are heading for a State built on cheap, snake oil salesman-style entrepreneurialism. The Minister is looking like some sort of corporate Rambo. He has gone way beyond the principles that the Labor Party once stood for so that not even the hard Left can reel him in.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: Ms Lee Rhiannon has certainly stirred you right up.

Mr IAN COHEN: I acknowledge the interjection by the honourable Minister claiming that my reaction is somehow caused by my fellow Green Lee Rhiannon. I have to say that everything that has occurred recently has had no input into my feeling of revulsion at what this Government is doing and the way it is acting. Talks about the rally are reported to have been going on for two years yet Repco Rally Australia [RRA] could not manage to prepare a development application that could possibly justify this event. The FIA, headed by Max Mosley, applied a bit of pressure and the caped crusader, Minister Macdonald, stepped in to save the day. As I pointed out in the question to the Minister—

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: Point of order: The member should stop the gratuitous slights he is making in this contribution. He is absolutely abusing the forms of this Chamber. If I had the right to reply to his comments, as I would in a second reading debate, I would certainly make a few comments about the nonsense he is talking. After all, the first I learnt about all of this was on 17 May.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! As I ruled earlier, the member should not make comments about the Minister who has carriage of the bill. He should confine his remarks to the bill.

Mr IAN COHEN: I withdraw the comment. The Minister is no caped crusader. As I pointed out in a question I asked Minister Macdonald last week, I find it curious that a New South Wales Government that has become obsessed about marketing and branding our iconic natural tourist attractions, such as the Green Cauldron, could then turn around and hold a rally car race through the same areas. It is totally illogical. There are no criteria put forward by the Government to indicate that this rally is a good idea. It is simply a case of the Minister trying to circumvent our environmental planning laws for a corporate patron's convenience. The event will not be a boost to the economy. A bit of research would have shown the Minister that Western Australia withdrew its support for the rally in that State because as the Western Australian tourism Minister said—and I would suggest he would be pretty much in favour of a profit-making event:

$6 million for one single event that returns $1.60 for every dollar invested by the state, when the average return is about $8 for every dollar invested by the state, is not a good return on investment.

The Minister for State Development, Ian Macdonald, says it will boost the economy by $100 million. It is a dubious figure and I would like to know how it was arrived at and how much the taxpayers of New South Wales are expected to shell out to get this return. As I said earlier, it is commercial in confidence; despite the fact there is no competition the details are protected. The same amount is quoted as the return that we can expect from the V8 Supercars event. I wonder if this is just a shelf figure that is trotted out for such events. It seems to have the consistency of an Iranian election result.

Elsewhere throughout the world such rallies are increasingly on the nose. Rally Finland is reducing the organising budget for this year's event by as much as 40 per cent after the loss of 1,000 pre-booked VIP guests. The Welsh Assembly Government served notice of termination of its agreement with the FIA World Rally Championship organisers, and the British Motor Sport Association has had to jump in with £2.2 million to ensure the events go ahead. In referring to the 2006 Wales Rally, Mr Ieuan Wyn Jones, the Deputy First Minister and Minister for the Economy and Transport in the Welsh Assembly said:

… the event has only had a marginal impact on the development of the Welsh motorsport/advanced engineering sector, and in terms of repeat visitation generates a modest tourism spend of circa £1 million per annum. The report confirmed that the 2006 Rally generated £3.3 million of gross value added, which represents a return on investment of less than 2:1. In comparison, even Event Scotland, the national events agency in Scotland aim for a return on investment of 8:1 across their portfolio of supported events.

So-called motor sports increasingly irrelevant in energy constrained world: Restoring a rail link would help people become more mobile and travel to work and between towns

If New South Wales is to have five of these events over the next 10 years, how reliable is the supposed revenue likely to be? The so-called motor sports—and I do wonder about this being a sport at all—are increasingly unpopular and irrelevant in an increasingly energy constrained world. If this Government were really serious about boosting the local economy of northern New South Wales, it would restore the Casino to Murwillumbah rail link. An event that occurs for a few days every two years is not going to sustain the local economy. The return of the rail link would help people to become more mobile and allow them to travel to work and between towns for commercial purposes.

With good transport links so many opportunities would arise and businesses would be facilitated. The whole community and the local economy would flourish. The funds this Government is committing to a brief and intermittent so-called sporting event would be better diverted to restoring that rail link. The people of the Tweed and Kyogle shires are really angry about this legislation. Mr Rick Wagner, a resident who lives along the proposed route writes:

Since this event was brought to the Public attention I have been in contact with RRA [Repco Rally Australia], Kyogle Council and Councillors on a regular basis to try and find out how this event will affect my life. I live on the route, in fact my property is on both sides of Sargent Rd which is on one of the special stages of the event.

All along RRA have said trust me and wait for the Development Application to be lodged with Council. Council has said I have to wait for the DA to be lodged before I can make any submission in regard to how it will adversely affect my life.

It now appears that any rights I may have had in this regard are being taken away by this legislation which will just about allow Repco Rally Australia to do anything they wish. The proposed legislation certainly appears to waive many other existing legislations that have been put in place to protect ordinary people and their civil rights. Noise, Dust Intrusion in the use of my property, environment, ecological even my own access to my property are all things that will be over-ruled by this legislation.

RRA is going to make millions of dollars from this event but for them to do this I, and many other residents along the route, will be severely inconvenienced and impacted not only financially but in the quality of our right to enjoy the environment in which we live. Many are already sick with worry about the impact of this event. Communities have become divided over the event and this in itself is unhealthy.

Denise Ewin from Tweed shire wrote:

I am a retired teacher with over 30 years as a practising pastor and teacher and 15 years during that time as an assistant principal. I was also the accredited manager in New South Wales and Queensland of our family-owned business operating tours, which encompassed many areas of the Tweed Valley, the granite belt and the outback town of Lightning Ridge. All our tours went to the world heritage listed Border Ranges National Park in the Kyogle Shire.

Whilst I am not in favour of this type of rally in any environment I am particularly opposed to it being held in this unique area of physical beauty which should not be intruded upon by speeding cars, helicopters and all that goes with this type of event causing havoc to the environment and to the people who live there.

Most people come to this area because of the special beauty and serenity, which is not only in this very scenic area but which also has some of the most diverse wildlife in New South Wales. This is indeed a blow to the people of the shires involved and might I say a very big mistake by our Government. The Government would do well to remember who elected it and to care for all the people of the State regardless of political affiliations.

The people who are writing to me are not the hysterical ferals that the Minister would like to dismiss; they are ordinary people with a genuine grievance.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: Point of order: The member is straying outside the legitimate issues to which he should be confining himself. He just made another gratuitous insult and he should withdraw it.

Mr IAN COHEN: To the point of order—

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: I have never accused anyone of being a feral in relation to this bill or in relation to any other area.

Mr IAN COHEN: To the point of order: It is reasonable to say that on a number of occasions the Minister has insulted people that I represent. I would have to go through the Hansard to verify it, but on a number of occasions the Minister has spoken disparagingly about them. It is reasonable to raise issues that have occurred in the past in this House.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: I ask him to withdraw it.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! The Minister has advised the Chamber that he has not referred to anyone in relation to this matter in the terms referred to by Mr Ian Cohen. The Minister has asked Mr Ian Cohen to withdraw that comment and I suggest that he does so.

Mr IAN COHEN: I withdraw the comment. These are ordinary people with genuine grievances. John and Janet Townsend of Murwillumbah—a community-minded couple in their late sixties—wrote to me and to the Minister. They are disgusted about what they call the most breathtaking subversion of the democratic process that they have ever seen in Australia. They also said in a letter to the Minister, of which I received a copy:

You know perfectly well that this would not have been necessary if our Shire warmly welcomed the destructive event in the middle of one of the two most important areas in the east coast of Australia ...

The opposition to the event is NOT a rabble of 50 ratbags ...

We hope you have not been taken in by Garry Connolly of Repco Rally Australia telling you that the rally organisers have been collaborating on a carbon offsetting plan with Tweed LandCare Inc. ... or that esteemed consultant ecologist Dr Stephen Phillips has given the rally the go-ahead after completing his environmental assessment of the impact of the event.

Both these claims are made by Repco Rally Australia and seriously backfired on them. Angry Landcarers phoned them (we know, as we were two of them) and wrote letters to local newspapers refuting the implied association of Tweed LandCare Inc. ...

Doctor Philips for Kyogle Shire ... his brief has been limited to assessing "which particular threatened species may be at risk along a given stage, and why", and really all he has been able to conclude is that the rally will not kill enough rare or threatened species this year as to jeopardise the viability of the local species.

This Government has shown scant regard for indigenous cultural heritage and the rally shows a continuation of that pattern, with indigenous people shabbily treated in consideration of the rally. One person was selected to represent all Aboriginal interests. The draft Cultural Heritage Assessment [CHS], which should consider the possible impacts on significant Aboriginal sites, has been considered for only three of the rally's 15 competitive stages. The Cultural Heritage Assessment for the rally has not yet been finalised but decisions have already been made. This Government is prepared to trash Aboriginal cultural heritage and ignore Aboriginal people's concerns just to make a quick buck, if indeed there is a buck to be made.

I commend Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes for elucidating that issue in his earlier speech. This Government proposes to override State planning laws to allow this rally to carve through an area designated under the National Landscapes scheme and named Australia's Green Cauldron—an internationally renowned biodiversity hotspot. This very spot was recognised by the New South Wales Government's task force on tourism and national parks. The task force made 20 recommendations that were all adopted by the Government and reinforced the importance of branding and marketing iconic sustainable nature tourism experiences in our national parks. I doubt whether anyone would come to the conclusion that this rally was an iconic sustainable nature tourism experience.

The Government's failure to heed the recommendation of its own task force and instead foist this utterly unsuitable event on the area shows an incredible lack of understanding of what north-east New South Wales is about. Tourists go to that part of New South Wales because of its natural beauty. They go to see the beauty of the rainforests, the beaches, the rivers and the wildlife; they do not go to see cars carving through these beautiful places. The Green Cauldron is so named by government agencies because people who live in that area have fought long and hard to protect it from logging, mining and now car rally racing. Those who live in the area have long known the incredible value of this place now recognised under the National Landscapes scheme.

This car rally is not only completely dissonant with the spirit of this landscape; it is also a blunt instrument carving through a masterpiece. Local people are genuinely concerned about the rally going through habitats of threatened or protected species. One hundred vulnerable species of wildlife and 23 endangered species in the Tweed area will be placed at greater risk as a result of this rally that will occur in September, coinciding with the breeding season of many animal species. The death of animals is a terrible thing, but the death of young people is a tragedy. I have seen horrific accidents involving young people on the roads where I live. I quote from the Roads and Traffic Authority website which states:

... the aim of the "Speeding—no-one thinks big of you" campaign is to make speeding socially unacceptable. In NSW speeding is a factor in about 40 per cent of road deaths each year. This means more than 200 people die each year in NSW because of speeding. In addition to those killed, more than 4,000 people are injured in speed-related crashes each year. The estimated cost to the community of speed-related crashes is about $780 million a year.

That is more than seven times the expected revenue from the rally, but we cannot put a price on the suffering caused by motor vehicle accidents.

There is a proven correlation between the interest in motor racing and risky driving behaviours of young male drivers. "Life in the Fast Lane: Environmental, Economic and Public Health Outcomes of Motorsport Spectacles in Australia" is a study co-authored by Paul Tranter of the Australian Defence Force Academy [ADFA].

The study, which was published last month in the Journal of Sport and Social Issues, shows the negative social effects of motor racing as well as citing a number of studies that directly link motor racing to dangerous copycat driving behaviour in Adelaide and Melbourne after the Grand Prix. I cite another study by Paul Tranter and James Warn from the Australian Defence Force Academy entitled "Relationships between interest in motor racing and driver attitudes and behaviours amongst mature drivers." The study states:

As well as the obvious dangers to drivers and spectators from crashes during motor racing events, there is evidence that motor racing events are linked to an increase in road accidents off the racetrack ... Accident rates can also be higher in localities that have been associated with motor racing events. Road accidents in South Australia around the time of the Adelaide first Grand Prix increased significantly. This increase, which could not be explained by variables such as traffic volumes and weather conditions, was believed to be due to the glorification of speed and daring associated with the motor racing event. In another instance, casualty accident rates on public roads more than doubled after the roads around Melbourne's Albert Park more than doubled after the roads were used as a Formula One race circuit. A New Zealand study found that young males who were interested in legal motor sport events were more likely to engage in risky driving behaviours (as measured by a violations scale) as well as more likely to be involved in illegal street racing.

The Minister for State Development has chosen to ignore the experts and his Government's own anti-speeding message.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: I haven't chosen to do anything.

Mr IAN COHEN: Well, you certainly have not taken any notice of it.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: This is Government legislation.

Mr IAN COHEN: You still have not taken any notice of it. This is something I have raised in this House before.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! Members should not interject, and members with the call should not respond to interjections.

Mr IAN COHEN: I have raised in this House a number of times issues about speed driving and impressionable young people who are vulnerable to that sort of behaviour. The fact is that we do not measure the resultant cost of hospital and medical bills. It seems as though there is an inability of government to say, "Look, we've got issues here" that spin off from a particular project. I shall refer to that in more detail shortly. I received an email from a person named Wayne Smith who said simply:

Drivers are already practicing the rally course on Byril Creek road. There are many people living along this road who report that they are practicing late at night with their number plates covered or removed. This has been reported to the police on several occations who ignor the reports.

The proposed rally already is having an impact. I guess young people will do what young people do: they are practising at night along this bush rally route, not taking into account any road kill along the way. I hope a serious accident does not occur on those very narrow and dangerous roads. I can stand being abused in this House for all manner of things, including being irrelevant, but I do question priorities in this House when compelling evidence against a proposal is ignored. I ask the Minister for Police to at least investigate the situation. I understand that police have a huge task patrolling the Murwillumbah area and they are understaffed. The rally route is a fair distance from the town and the chances of catching these young people may be remote, but they are covering up their registration plates and are revving along the road at night with no controls. This is happening months before the rally is even scheduled to start. One can only imagine what will happen after the event. I hope no serious accident results from this behaviour.

It is difficult for police to be patrolling that bush rally route area because they have many other activities and responsibilities. Residents beyond the route have complained to me about the current activities, yet somehow it is not the responsibility of the decisions or actions of this Government; somehow it does not count.

This is a despicable situation.

I hope the police Minister's office can at least go a small part of the way to remedy the problem. Perhaps the cost of providing a police presence to curtail this activity this can be taken from the profits the rally organisers claim will be made. Perhaps they would like also to take into account some of the other impacts of this dangerous activity, particularly hospitalisation, motor accidents and also wildlife destruction.

Many community people give selflessly of their time to protect our wildlife. Sometimes the priorities in this Parliament are quite farcical.

This bill takes away the power of the people most affected by this rally to have any say through the normal planning process. The New South Wales Government wants this event irrespective of environmental or human concerns. If this event is such a good thing, as the Minister said recently in Parliament, why does the Minister need special legislation? The people of northern New South Wales should not have to cop deals this Government has done to appease an international motor racing organisation and underwrite a private company, Rally Australia. The State should not be creating special legislation for one single corporate beneficiary—it is undemocratic. The unique environment of the North Coast cannot be rented out to whoever wants to use it. The due planning process should be allowed to proceed. I was ridiculed by the Minister a few weeks ago when I asked a question on this very matter, and the Minister invited himself to my residence. It is okay to dish it out.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: I wasn't dishing it out.

Mr IAN COHEN: The Minister assumed somehow that he was going to be welcome at my residence. There are a number of reasons why you are not welcome to my house, Minister. I do not accommodate an abject hypocrite and leader of the hard left doing the bidding of the extreme right. You are not welcome as a Minister who is engineering the most environmentally destructive action against forests in New South Wales at this point in time. Minister, you are a man who ridicules safety issues and is abusing his power.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: When?

Mr IAN COHEN: Right now with this Repco Rally.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: Point of order: the Committee is indulging this member. Through his incompetence he missed the second reading debate. We have allowed him to speak in the Committee stage, totally outside the rules of the House. He now is personalising this debate by having a go at me all the time. I do not mind, generally. If he did it in the second reading debate, it would not worry me. However, he should not be doing it in Committee. For all his animated carry-on, he fails to grasp the point that the first I heard of this race was in May when I was asked to propose it by the Premier. The Premier is responsible for Events New South Wales. I am just carrying this legislation forward as a member of the Government. I have had nothing to do it other than that.

Mr IAN COHEN: So you are retracting what you said about me in the House?

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: I just made a joke at the end of the speech.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! Both members will sit down.

Ms Lee Rhiannon: To the point of order—

The CHAIR: Order! I will not take further argument on the point of order. When members contribute to debate they must confine their comments either to the bill or to a point of order. They should not engage in slanging matches across the table with other members. They must also direct their comments through the Chair. I ruled previously that Mr Ian Cohen should refrain from making imputations about other members in his speech. Equally, it is not appropriate for the Minister, when taking a point of order, to make imputations about Mr Ian Cohen. The member may proceed but will not make further imputations about the Minister or his carriage of the bill.

Mr IAN COHEN: Thank you, Madam Chair, for your balanced assessment of these points of order. I thank you also for allowing me in these rather unusual circumstances to at least place on record what I believe is a reasonable representation of the many people in northern New South Wales who are quite abhorred at this proposal. I agree with the Minister wholeheartedly: I have been incompetent. Yes, I missed the opportunity to contribute to the second reading debate and I feel frustrated at the resulting circumstances: my incompetence created that. At times I have been incompetent—I agree with the Minister—in that I have failed to convince my fellow Greens party members across New South Wales to desist from giving preferences to this Labor Government. I will not be so incompetent at the next election.

Dr JOHN KAYE [9.18 p.m.]: I support the remarks of my colleague Ian Cohen and Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes. I doubt whether I can match their eloquent passion on this matter, but I certainly match them unequivocally in that I and Greens members to whom I have spoken around New South Wales oppose this legislation and this rally.

I will begin by referring to the opposition from the local community. I notice that once again Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile suggested that opposition to the rally was stirred up and, once again, Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile is wrong. Just nine days ago I attended an environment fair in Murwillumbah and I have to say that opposition to the rally was palpable.

Everywhere I went, and not just at the environment fair, but especially when I walked down the street and spoke to people in the street at Murwillumbah, there was no question of overwhelming opposition to the race and overwhelming support for the work of the groups and members of Parliament who have opposed the rally as well as absolute and utter concern for the impact of the rally on the community. Northern Rivers people constitute a community that strongly values its natural environment, its peace and quiet, and personal safety—all of which will be undermined by the Repco rally and this legislation.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile is wrong in suggesting there is any need to stir up anger: the anger was stirred up by the Rees Government, by the proposal for the rally, and by this legislation. Moreover there is anger that the community has been ignored. One of the recurrent themes was a complaint about the complete absence of any meaningful community consultation. Many members of the community mentioned to me that a great degree of deception had been perpetrated on the community about the level of community consultation. The community is not only angry about being ignored but also angry about the consequences of the rally for their community.

One of the recurring themes was concern for the natural environment and for the values of the Green Cauldron. High speed vehicles and low speed marsupials and other fauna are an inherently bad mix. Particular concern was expressed for koalas and the way in which koalas will suffer both from the noise and the risk of impact as well as from chemical pollution. The koala population in the area has declined. The koalas are vulnerable in that area and could be savagely damaged—all for a car race. The environmental concerns relate not only to noise and animal strikes but also to air and water pollution and road run-off. These types of assaults and insults to the environment have no place in areas with high degrees of natural values and natural beauty.

There is no question that if nothing else happens, the noise that will scare the animals away will have an impact per se. There is an overriding concern that the flora and fauna of the area around the race will be damaged to the extent that some may never recover. They will be damaged by one race, by another race two years later, and they will continue to be damaged as long as the race goes on, with cumulative effects on the ecosystem. The only way that the race can be justified is if people admit they have no concern for the natural environment and for the natural values of the Green Cauldron.

Another matter of huge concern is the almost complete absence of meaningful consultation with the local Aboriginal people. The Githabul people, for whom the Green Cauldron has deep and lasting social and religious significance, have not been appropriately consulted. For many of them, a car race through the Green Cauldron will be like a car race through a cathedral. We owe a great debt to the Aboriginal people of the State, and we are exacerbating that by hosting a car race without even bothering to appropriately consult with the traditional owners of the land.

Both Mr Khan and Reverend Moyes spoke about the encouragement of copycat high-risk driving behaviour. Rally driving, however highly skilled it is, clearly encourages emulation, particularly by young and adolescent males. What we are doing with this car rally is sending an appalling message to young men and young women whom we are trying to discourage from risky driving behaviours. The Government has invested heavily in the prevention of hoon driving, but by officially sanctioning a car race and ramming through legislation that will put on display what can only be described as risky car driving behaviour, it sends an appallingly mixed message.

The poor quality of the socioeconomic and cost benefit analyses of this race are outstanding. Not only are the methodology and data dodgy, but so is the way the results have been interpreted to justify supposedly a $100 million benefit from the car rally. The figure of $100 million is highly questionable, if not entirely fictitious, but even if there were $100 million in supposedly economic benefits, the proposal ignores the social and environmental impacts, and the impacts upon the longer-term economy of the region. Western Australia had the right idea by kicking out its Repco rally because the Western Australian Government recognised that when all matters are taken into consideration, the dollars simply do not stack up.

To the extent that any money is to be made from this rally, it will be purchased at the expense of the local amenity of residents, the future of green tourism and other natural values that are derived from the green branding of the area and from the integrity of the environment. In reality, any proper analysis of this car race would result in the conclusion that it is simply not worth doing. When the damage inflicted on the environment, the community, and the individuals within the area are all taken into account, the proposal simply cannot be justified by a fistful of dollars, especially when the magnitude of the profit is questionable. Reverend Moyes and Ian Cohen have referred to the appalling process that has led to the introduction of this legislation; the way the legislation will undermine important protections for people, animals and the environment; the way it takes away a right of appeal; the way it takes away the ability of a community to stand up for the environment and the way in which it rides roughshod over the important protections that exist in other legislation.

From my point of view and for many Greens, the worst aspect of this legislation and the car rally is the absolute and complete lack of vision for the region. It is a lack of vision that could come only from a total misunderstanding of the environmental values of the region and the values of the population of the region. Surely anybody who has spent any time in the Tweed and in Kyogle would automatically start thinking about ecotourism, cycle tourism, and tourism that includes activities based on respect for the environment.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Point of order: I have listened to the contribution being made to debate by the member. I know the amendment that is before the Committee. I have a sneaking suspicion that the member is making a second reading speech.

Dr John Kaye: You were not here. We decided we were going to do this.

CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda FAZIO): Order! Dr John Kaye will not interrupt the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Duncan Gay, when he is taking a point of order.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: I have just arrived in the Chamber and I am saying what I am seeing—a member making a second reading speech during the Committee stage. There is an amendment before the Committee and, from what I could hear, the member's remarks were not even close. I request that he be directed to confine his remarks to the amendment that is before the Committee.

CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda FAZIO): An amendment has not been moved. We are dealing with part 1 of the bill. In a very roundabout way, members are speaking against the adoption of part 1 of the bill. Dr Kaye may proceed.

Dr JOHN KAYE: I oppose part 1 of the bill, which is the long title of the legislation. The Greens oppose the legislation not only in detail but also in its substance. Our opposition to the bill includes part 1 of the bill. I appreciate the ruling of the Chair. I conclude my speech by pointing out that the Repco rally is not a sensible use of the landscape or a sensible imposition on the people of the area, and it is not a sensible imposition on the environment. I urge all members to vote against this part of the bill.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [9.28 p.m.]:

I congratulate my colleague Ian Cohen on his speech in the Chamber and his work with the community and the No Rally Group Inc., which has set out very clearly why this legislation should not be passed. The Repco rally should not be held in northern New South Wales. That would be a huge mistake and would result in a huge setback not only for the region but also for the standing of New South Wales. It will just make us look even more of a laughingstock and show that this Government is more dysfunctional than people realise.

There are many reasons the event should not go ahead, and the environmental concerns have been well set out.

More than a decade ago I did a great deal of work with the Rainforest Information Centre based at Lismore. Obviously I had an opportunity to enjoy the delights of that area. The green cauldron, as many speakers have referred to it, is wondrous. I imagine that when people stand on the lip of the crater, which is millions of years old, they are spellbound by the sheer beauty of what they see when they take in the full panorama. And the Government is pushing this madness onto the local environment and the local community. This is not the area in which to hold this rally. Again, the Greens are not saying we are against all car races, but holding street car races particularly through natural areas is a deeply flawed policy that reflects on the Minister. One must wonder how many long lunches he had to participate in—

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: Point of order: I ask Ms Lee Rhiannon to withdraw that comment. Dr John Kaye made his second reading contribution in Committee with a great deal of dignity. Ms Lee Rhiannon is straying into sleights, insults and imputations. Obviously she missed the point that my involvement with this event began in May. I do not have carriage for Events New South Wales. So I ask the member to withdraw those imputations.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio)

: Order! I ask Ms Lee Rhiannon to withdraw the comments to which the Minister objected. I advise the member that at this stage she should be speaking only to the reasons she is opposed to part 1 of the bill. She should not be making imputations against other members.

Ms LEE RHIANNON

: As requested by the Minister, I withdraw those comments. There are many reasons to oppose part 1 of the bill. Madam Chair, I appreciate that you have highlighted the need to set out those reasons. One issue that should be of concern to any responsible government is public safety. Many scientific studies have demonstrated that there is a clear association between interest in motor racing and driver attitudes. Surely the Government should recognise and respond to that, and recognise that this event should be cancelled. Paul Tranter and James Warn established this disturbing link in an article entitled "Relationships between interest in motor racing and driver attitudes and behaviour amongst mature drivers: An Australian case study", which appeared in the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention 40 (2008). They stated:

Results indicate that the level of interest in motor racing is significantly related to attitudes towards speeding, controlling for age, education level and sensation seeking propensity.

I recommend that the Minister and members make themselves aware of that detailed paper. When street races are held, the impact on public safety is considerable. My colleague Ian Cohen also spoke about this in his contribution and I want to add some comments because it is one of the disturbing aspects of the legislation. On top of extreme environmental damage and damage to local communities, there is the wider issue of public safety. When people attend these events and then leave to travel home or wherever they are going, often there are terrible accidents. J. R. Warn, P. J. Tranter and S. Kingham wrote a paper entitled "Fast and Furious 3: illegal street racing, sensation seeking and risky driving behaviours in New Zealand", which was presented at a forum held in Adelaide.

The authors of the paper looked at how motorsport influences risky driving behaviour through the influence on attitude to speeding. It should trouble members that it has been clearly established that after such events have been watched and enjoyed, particularly by young men, when people get in their cars and travel on public roads the level of speeding becomes dangerous. We cannot deny that involvement in motorsport has an impact on driving behaviour. These are some of the conclusions set out by Warn, Tranter and Kingham. They detail how involvement in motorsport produces a negative effect for road safety. The effect of motor racing on attitudes to speeding can be wide ranging. Motor racing enthusiasts are more likely to believe that speed limits are too restrictive or that driving over the speed limit is acceptable if they are skilful drivers.

Others who have written in this area include P. Ulleberg and T. Rundmo, who produced a paper in 2003 for Safety Science. They reported that risky driving behaviour is influenced by attitudes to speeding. Also, research in America has found that racing car drivers are more likely to have been fined for speeding and involved in accidents than other drivers. The findings of the research undertaken by Warn, Tranter and Kingham demonstrate that it is important to counteract the pro-speeding messages such as the glorification of speed and risky driving behaviour emanating from motorsport. This has to be undertaken in order to shape attitudes about driving behaviour on public roads and to reduce risky driving.

We hear many messages and have had some good campaigns about reducing risky driving behaviour. However, those messages and campaigns are undermined by events like this. Good work to make our roads safer is periodically undertaken, with expensive campaigns run by the Roads and Traffic Authority. But these sorts of events are a setback. One problem with motor racing as a sport is that spectators who wish to emulate the behaviour of motor racing drivers can emulate this behaviour only on public roads. That is the essence of the problem. The risky behaviour ends up occurring on public roads, putting the public at risk. The burden of risk is then redistributed to other road users who may happen to be in the vicinity of any illegal racing activity.

The broader response that is put forward by these authors is the need to deglorify the car, and they argue that one way to do this is to ensure that motorsport events are never allowed to be staged in significant public spaces as this signifies that such events are an accepted part of the culture of a city or a society. That point has been taken up by P. J. Tranter and T. J. Keeffe in a paper published in 2004 in the Urban Policy and Research journal. Members can see that the extensive work on this issue is thorough and evidence based. It is time the Government took notice of the research and brought some balance to how it is managing this sport. Again, I acknowledge that many people enjoy the sport, but it does not need to take place around northern New South Wales in the Tweed and Kyogle shires.

Another aspect that is relevant to this debate is how the socioeconomic impact assessment report was drawn up. It is extremely difficult to analyse the report critically because it is much poorer than the environmental report. The socioeconomic impact assessment report is entirely unreferenced. It is unbelievable that something so central to establishing the case for this Repco Rally, the socioeconomic impact assessment report, is not referenced.

Without citations of any source material in the report, all claims and projections are unsubstantiated and unverifiable. In scientific circles at least such a report would be rejected out of hand. The terms of reference lead one to conclude very quickly that the report is inadequate.

I thank Dr Jules Lewin for providing material, which I acknowledge I have not gone through in detail, on the socioeconomic impacts. Terms of reference No. 2 refers to analysing the feasibility alternatives to carrying out the development, which did not occur. No. 3 refers to identifying likely impacts, in relation to which the underlying research was flawed and the likely impacts were not explored. Terms of reference No. 4a refers to identifying issues and affected groups. The key issues identified were unreferenced, which demonstrates the inadequacy of the report. No. 4b refers to looking at historical trends and social and economic issues. It is extraordinary that the global economic crisis was not mentioned once. Surely that trend should have come into that term of reference. Again, there is no mention of the issue of peak oil—the price of oil is increasing—and that we are facing severe oil vulnerability for which our societies need to plan.

That demonstrates the poor way in which the project has been managed at every turn. Dr Lewin said, "Last week I attended the latest public consultation gathering". As other members have said, people have become very angry not only about this outrageous event that is being imposed on them but also because of the meaningless consultation. Dr Lewin attended the so-called third public consultation—the first since the reports were released—and states:

Besides the fact that there was no-one qualified to discuss the SEIA or answer some fairly basic questions, notice of the meetings was only released on the Sunday of a long weekend, with the first meeting scheduled at 9am Wednesday.

That is just one small example of how poorly the preparations for this project have been managed. It draws one to the conclusion that the proponents knew they had this project in the bag. They went through the motions of ticking the boxes, producing a report that did not need to be referenced, and conducted consultation that did not need to be advertised because they were confident that the legislation would be passed and the project would be up and running because the Government is onside. This bill should be defeated. We understand that the Government has the numbers—the Government, the Liberals and The Nationals, and some conservative crossbenchers are backing the legislation. It is shameful that we have arrived at this point. Any part of New South Wales that is open to the public should not have this project thrust upon it, but it should never have even been proposed for the far north of New South Wales, which is so exquisite and unique.

Parts 1 to 4 agreed to.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! There are two amendments to clause 25 that are in conflict. Greens amendment No. 1, on sheet C2009-058, was lodged first so it will take precedence over The Nationals amendment No. 1, on sheet C2009-064.

Mr IAN COHEN [9.44 p.m.]: I have had a productive discussion with the Hon. Trevor Khan and he has agreed to modify The Nationals amendment. Having reconsidered the matter, I am happy to seek the leave of the Committee to withdraw the amendment.

Greens amendment No. 1, by leave, withdrawn by Mr Ian Cohen.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN [9.45 p.m.]: I move The Nationals amendment No. 1:

No. 1 Page 12, clause 25, lines 10-17. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:
25 Review of Act
(1) The Minister is to conduct a review of the impact in the Northern Rivers region of the rally event to determine whether future rally events should be conducted in that region. The review is to include, but not limited to, the impact of the rally event on:

(a) the tourism industry, and

(b) the environment, and

(c) Aboriginal cultural heritage, and

(d) public safety, and

(e) the local community.
(2) The review is to be undertaken as soon as practicable after the end of the declared rally period in 2009.

(3) The Minister is to ensure that the review includes consultation with the local community of the Northern Rivers region, Kyogle Council and Tweed Shire Council.

(4) A report on the outcome of the review is to be tabled in each House of Parliament within 12 months from the end of the declared rally period in 2009.

Clause 25 of the bill provides for a review of the objects and terms of the Act some five years after the commencement of the Act. The proposed amendment seeks a more precise review, as set out in new subclause (1), to deal with the impact upon the five specified areas, although not exclusive to other issues. Equally importantly, the review is to take place within 12 months and as soon as possible. It also provides that the review must include consultation with the local community of the Northern Rivers region, Kyogle Council and Tweed Shire Council.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! Members will not engage in conversations in the Chamber.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: I thank Mr Ian Cohen for his input into the matter. As he verballed me in a sense, I note that he acknowledges the appropriateness of subclause (3) in particular, in that it ensures that appropriate consultation occurs with the local community. When dealing with part 1, members expressed various concerns about different matters, which I will not canvass. But the proof will be in the pudding. The running of the event in early September 2009 will be an opportunity to see how the rally goes. The oversight of it will obviously reinforce people's views as to the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the event. The review is required to be tabled within 12 months from the end of the declared rally period, which will no doubt offer a further opportunity for discussion on the matter.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! I ask members to set their mobile phones to silent alert, otherwise I will be compelled to call to order members whose mobiles are heard to ring in the Chamber.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD (Minister for Primary Industries, Minister for Energy, Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for State Development) [9.48 p.m.]: The Government supports amendment No. 1 moved by The Nationals. I note that the Government made a commitment to hold an informal review next year. The Government is happy to enshrine this amendment in the legislation and conduct the appropriate consultation.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [9.49 p.m.]: I pay tribute to the two members of Parliament in the area, Geoff Provest and Thomas George.

[Interruption]

I know my colleague did, but the key to the amendment—which the Minister has gracefully accepted—comes from those two men acting on behalf of their communities.

We certainly appreciate the pressure that they put on us to bring the amendment forward. At this stage I believe it is proper to recognise the role that these two great local members have playing in supporting their communities, and we thank the Minister for accepting the amendment when we approached him on their behalf.

Mr IAN COHEN [9.50 p.m.]:

As I said earlier, The Nationals amendment No. 1 is very much in the same spirit as the amendment that my office had prepared. It replaces the existing provision for review of the Act, which was a standard five-year legislative review. I am pleased that all parties are supporting the amendment. It certainly does not resolve the many problems that I and other members have raised with the project or concept. Nevertheless, I am sure that conducting a proper review within a period before any further rallies are held will unearth some worthwhile information. We can examine whether the economic benefits put forward by the Minister stand up, and whether those benefits compensate for the environmental damage. The report will be required to consider impacts on the tourism industry, the environment, Aboriginal cultural heritage, public safety and the local community. I think it is a worthwhile amendment, and the Greens support it.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [9.51 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports The Nationals amendment No. 1. It is reasonable to review the Act to take into account the impact of the rally on tourism, the environment, Aboriginal cultural heritage, public safety and the local community. Will the Minister confirm that this event will be held between 3 and 6 September, and not every day of the year? I got the impression from most speakers that the rally will tear New South Wales apart.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD (Minister for Primary Industries, Minister for Energy, Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for State Development) [9.52 p.m.]: The rally will be held on 3 to 6 September this year, and the next event is in 2011.

Question—That The Nationals amendment No. 1 be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.

The Nationals amendment No. 1 agreed to.

Clause 25 as amended agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported from Committee with an amendment.
Adoption of Report

Motion by the Hon. Ian Macdonald agreed to:

That the report be adopted.

Report adopted.
Third Reading

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD (Minister for Primary Industries, Minister for Energy, Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for State Development) [9.52 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The Committee divided.
Ayes, 27 [Those in favour of the bill]
Mr Ajaka
Mr Catanzariti
Mr Clarke
Mr Colless
Ms Fazio
Ms Ficarra
Miss Gardiner
Mr Gay
Ms Griffin
Mr Hatzistergos Mr Kelly
Mr Khan
Mr Lynn
Mr Macdonald
Mr Mason-Cox
Reverend Nile
Ms Parker
Mrs Pavey
Ms Robertson
Ms Sharpe Mr Tsang
Mr Veitch
Ms Voltz
Mr West
Ms Westwood

Tellers,
Mr Donnelly
Mr Harwin

Noes, 5 [Those AGAINST the bill]
Ms Hale
Dr Kaye
Ms Rhiannon
Tellers,
Mr Cohen
Reverend Dr Moyes
Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Legislative Assembly with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.

[...]

Source dated as Last modified 24/06/2009 14:05:20

government source at biodiversity site

Sustained protest delays nasty political act

Sustained protests from Australians who are horrified at the cold-blooded policies pushed by the NSW Cabinet seem to have had an effect for the moment. It is believed that public reaction to this bill has put the wind up members in marginal seats. The proposal has the obvious 'pay-off' for a cash-strapped spendthrift government of pushing through another unpopular privatisation - this time of a state lottery.

"A decision was deferred until further talks could be held with the Shooters. The Opposition, the Greens and environmental groups oppose the bill and the Government had been accused of supporting it because it relied on the Shooters Party for critical support [to sell off a state lottery] in the upper house."Source:The Sydney Morning Herald

Shooters Party & NSW Labor - Rees Government

The Shooters Party had introduced a private member's bill to "allow recreational hunters to shoot native animals and birds and to allow for private game reserves to be set up for professional safari hunters."Source:The Sydney Morning Herald

NSW Liberal Nationals declare strong opposition to notion of sporting shooting in National Parks

The NSW Liberal Nationals portray themselves as strongly opposed to the shooting of Australian native species in National Parks, and the establishment of private shooting reserves. SourceThey say they will introduce amendments to the Game and Feral Animal Control Amendment Bill to ban it, according to Shadow Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Catherine Cusack MLC, and the Shadow Minister for Primary Industries Duncan Gay.

"The NSW Liberal / Nationals' move comes following a backdoor attempt - with the apparent support of the NSW Labor Government - to introduce unprecedented shooting of Australian native animals, including in National Parks, as well as private game reserves,” said Ms Cusack.

“We will oppose this and introduce other amendments aimed at genuinely managing the real environmental and other threats posed by feral animals - not Australian native species.

"The shooting of Australian native species in our National Parks or exotic species in private 'game parks' are offensive concepts. If this legislation is brought on the NSW Liberal / Nationals are armed and ready to move legislative amendments to make sure it doesn't happen.”

Illegal release of animals for hunting purposes & feral pig and deer problem

One of these amendments includes changing the Game Act to increase the penalty by four times as much for anyone caught illegally releasing animals for the purpose of hunting. The fine will now be $22,000 for persons caught illegally releasing animals.

“The feral pig problem in NSW is due to the deliberate release of piglets and juveniles for the purposes of hunting,” said Ms Cusack.

“We are also seeing deer being released in many National Parks - they are spreading weeds and are an incredible threat to agriculture as well as the environment.

“I challenge the NSW Labor Government to support our tougher penalties.”

Mr Gay said NSW National Parks and their neighbours needed a comprehensive and strong approach to managing the threat of feral animals - especially as the State comes out of drought and feral animal numbers go up.

“Strongly regulated professional shooting is part of that - unprecedented and unrelated new rights for people like wealthy overseas hunting tourists should not be," Mr Gay said.

"We need comprehensive and strong management of feral species including professional conservation shooting - we don't need for NSW to inadvertently become the Safari State of the Southern Hemisphere.”

Details of Other legislative amendments to be moved by the NSW Liberal / Nationals

Other legislative amendments to be moved by the NSW Liberal / Nationals will:

* Put strong regulatory limits and controls on the use of professional, limited shooting for the appropriate management of feral animals;

* Give Forestry and DECC officers stronger powers to oversee feral animal shooting - rather than the proposal to make it an offence for them to approach hunters;

* Give the Minister for Environment the regulatory power to classify in which National Parks feral animal shooting should take place - rather than the proposed 'one size fits all' approach that makes all National Parks - be they urban or rural - public hunting lands;

* Continue to allow farmers to appropriate manage feral animals on their properties - rather than requiring the proposal that they be forced to pay for licences;

* Ban trap shooting with live birds

Mr Gay said the NSW Liberal / Nationals would fight strongly for these and other amendments because of the need to protect Australian native animals and manage feral animals.

“That's in the best interests of both the environment and rural communities that border National Parks,” he said.

Ms Cusack urgently called on NSW Labor to do the right thing and support the Coalition’s amendments.

NSW Premier Rees is set to pass into law a 'Game and Feral Animal Control Amendment Bill 2009' to permit recreational hunters shooting everything and anything in protected National Parks across NSW including native wildlife.

Controlling feral animals is a science, not a sport. Rees' passion for sport is compromised by influential cronies and naivety. Problem is, Rees has no knowledge, experience in or aptitude for science. His inaugural 'red hot go' says it all and threatens to be his legacy.

The enabling legislataion foreshadowed on 29 May by NSW State development Minister Ian Macdonald has been introduced to parliament. The legislation is even more draconian than we had feared. It gives the rally organisers the right to do whatever they want in National Parks, State Forests and Crown Land Reserves! It gives the organisers an "out" if they don't want to effect repairs to roads or property damaged during the rally. All they have to do is claim that the damage was caused by "vandals" or "protesters". Then the legislation lets them off the hook. Have a look at the proposed legislation in the attachment. It is scary. In his "second reading speech" the Minister admits it is based on recent legislation to enable the V8 Supercares in Olympic Park and World Youth Day. What you can do: Contact NSW Members of Parliament and Members of the Upper House (Legislative Council) and encourage them to vote against the legislation. Our local member for Tweed has announced he will be voting against the bill.

Dr Gordon Moyes, a member of the NSW Legislative Council describes the environmental, social and economic harm that will result if the NSW Government proceeds with its plan to convert the Sydney Olympic Park into a V8 Racing area against the wishes of local residents. Nathan Rees, the Premier of NSW, who has a personal fetish for the ecologically destructive sport of motor racing, is also threatening to impose the World Rally motor race on the Kyogle and Tweed Shires, also against the wishes of local residents.

See also: "Repco Rally... driven by Rees' selfish 'Red Hot Go!'" of 18 May 09.

The Sydney Olympic Park is a wonderful development of which the citizens of Sydney and the whole state are justly proud. It is a jewel in the New South Wales crown, and it took a lot of time and tax dollars, very careful design for the creation of a green and sustainable site, and effective implementation to bring to life the dream of so many.

Now it is thoroughly established and thriving, a masterpiece of excellent planning, enjoyed by over 8 ½ million users annually, as a place to take one's family for picnics, for jogging and walking, exploring the historical sites, attending various cultural events, an excellent facility for bird watching, riding bicycles, and other healthy activities – the kind of activities we have health promotion campaigns to convince people to participate in – and they have responded whole heartedly and taken up these activities at the Sydney Olympic Park. The people of Sydney and New South Wales love their Sydney Olympic Park, and make excellent use of it.

Changing the essential character of the Sydney Olympic Park by converting it into a V8 Racing area is not just a local issue; it is an international one, which may surprise you. Let me explain: Australia has trade treaties with many nations in Asia who are in danger of over-developing every single metre of natural space within their borders, even those wetland areas that have been used for millennia for annual migratory purposes by the species of migratory birds that live in all our nations.

Most bird species are seasonal in their habits, and spend the winter in the warmer climes and the summers in the cooler ones. They are trans-national citizens, seeing the stretch from Australia up the flyway to Korea and Japan as their home. They deserve acknowledgement from us, and access to their habitats. If not they will die – because this land is where they rest, feed, raise their young, and prepare to return north when it is time. If this parkland is destroyed or made uninhabitable by pollution or noise, they have nowhere else to go to perform the basic activities of life. In Asia it is reported that many birds simply drop dead from the sky, starved and exhausted while trying to fly farther in the search for appropriate sites when theirs have been built over.

To prevent this terrible scenario from coming about here, Australia has entered into Trade Agreements with these Asian nations, with all signatories agreeing to protect the environments of the migratory birds that use their areas. Such agreements include provisions that expressly state that the Government shall "seek means to prevent damage to such birds and their environment". Well these are those birds, and this is their environment here at the Sydney Olympic Park.

We owe it to the nations to which we pledged this, to the people who live there, and to the birds themselves, not to destroy this place for any reason. To breach those agreements would be very bad form, internationally, and would give the other nations carte blanche to, in turn, do the same. We have to do the right thing, not only because it is right but because of our responsibility to meet and model the highest standards of international citizenship regarding such treaties. So, you see, it is an international environmental issue. Pointing out that fact should be enough to change the nature of this debate, but it may not, so I shall point out several other drawbacks of the plan to convert the Sydney Olympic Park into a raceway.

There are so many other environmental reasons, in addition to the migratory bird treaties, that on the environmental basis alone it should never even have been considered. The removal of hundreds of beloved and beautiful trees is a terrible thing – every tree in the urban environment is a blessing, and each one works hard to filter our pollution-filled city air of car exhaust and industrial fumes, making the air breathable, making the city liveable. The preliminary estimate of trees destined to be destroyed to make way for concrete barriers and racing roadways is in the many hundreds. Let us think about this for a moment: trees are the precious home and habitat for birds and creatures, and a soothing, welcoming, lovely landscape for the people who live in and visit the area.

With so many absolutely barren places in this brown land why would we even consider the destruction of a beautifully treed area that is called a Green Precinct? Race organisers' promises to replace the trees later mean nothing. A living tree now is worth more than all those promises of future activity that may or may not be honoured. The air filtering which provides a healthy atmosphere, the shade, habitat, beauty and pleasure they provide now is needed and desired by the affected animals and humans alike, on an ongoing basis, more than ever. Trees are not to be treated so lightly, they should not be so easily expendable. This is genuinely a significant quality-of-life issue for the surrounding population.

Besides the 140 species of birds living in the Sydney Olympic Park area, many of which are considered threatened or endangered, there are endangered frogs and plant species. Worldwide the health of frogs is used as an ecological indicator of environmental health, and these creatures are already under threat from human activities. That they have found some refuge and are able to live in this area attests to its success as a green and sustainable environment. Destruction of their habitat, the Sydney Olympic Park, will only be exponentially worse for them. All of them are under further threat from this proposed Bill.

The State and Federal Governments have a plan in effect until the year 2010 to protect the habitat of the Green and Golden Bellfrog. The Frog is listed as a vulnerable species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; also listed as endangered under Schedule 1 of the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act. These frogs breed mostly in the brickpit, but the runoff from the proposed racecar pit area – which is slated to be located next to the brickpit – will potentially damage this environment with ethanol, oil and gasoline waste. No technology exists which can prevent that entirely, despite assurances from organisers that environmental socks will be placed to soak up these wastes.

Speaking of animals, there are also many hundreds of companion cats, dogs and birds living in the homes in this area. Such creatures are exquisitely sensitive to noise and many are terrified by loud screeching, careening and unpredictable noises. It will be very harmful for them to be bombarded with the high decibels expected. Reacting in alarm to it the pets may try to escape, injure themselves in the process, be hit by cars or lost, or even just fly into the walls in terror. But even if they stay safely indoors they will still be at the mercy of the noise, which will be perceived as threatening. Such noise permeates and penetrates residential walls as if they were not there. This kind of noise should be isolated – away from population centres.

The inevitable spillage of oil, petrol and other wastes that will seep into the ground or down the gutters will make its way into the Recycled Water Plant causing problems that may potentially cost the taxpayers millions of dollars to fix. This pollution of water is unconscionable in our drought-affected state!

The air pollution generated from the use of ethanol is unhealthy for people living in close proximity to the track. In this era of climate change, in response to the deadly global threat of increasing greenhouse gases, it would be far more sensible to discourage all human activities that produce massive amounts of pollution. Motor racing should go the way of the Roman gladiatorial games, as belonging to another age, one that we look back upon and shake our heads in wonder and dismay.

Excessive noise pollution will be imposed on the population – upwards of 95 decibels from 300 cars for 3 days as well as the 1200 odd semi-trailer movements in and out of the park to set up and dismantle the track. Exposure to excess noise is known to raise the heart rate and blood pressure and contribute to anxiety; it should not be inflicted on populations as if it is of no importance. Earplugs from the chemist are of no use in such situations.

There are additional concerns reported to me in letters from other people, such as the issue of problem driving and street racing. Our city and suburban streets are already deadly to the innocent drivers killed regularly by uncontrolled and apparently uncontrollable car racers. But instead of discouraging racing we turn around and set up an activity that will lionise racers – do we really want to inspire more of them? The answer from the public is a resounding "NO".

There are also aesthetic reasons when you consider that seven kilometres of concrete barriers and fencing are to be erected every year (and then dismantled, as they are to be there temporarily). However in other states that were promised the same thing the concrete barriers were eventually made into permanent fixtures since it was too expensive and too much trouble for race organisers to bring them in and remove them every year. Those guarantees had been in writing stating that this would never occur – but it did. The same empty promises could be entered into here.

There are also all the prudent economic arguments that many of my constituents have pointed out. The expenditure of up to $30 million on any activity with no guaranteed economic return at an unprecedented time of international monetary meltdown, when the state hospitals are desperate for money – women in labour being turned away from understaffed hospitals, education suffering, the Sydney transport infrastructure creaking under the weight of an expanding population, unemployment on the rise and public servants (police, fire fighters, nurses, teachers and ambulance officers) refused real wage increases – this is not good stewardship of the taxpayers' resources entrusted into our hands.

It doesn't make sense on any level, particularly the economic. The history of the V8 Supercar Race in other states has been abysmal, leading to large losses by taxpayers over the years – just ask the people in Victoria about their experience with Albert Park.

Assurances that there would be a "cap" of government contributions at $30 million do not take into consideration the other costs, and there are many – such as provision of security services, the major advertising campaigns attracting people to the event, infrastructure upheaval such as re-siting over 100 light poles and the electrical cables for street lighting and domestic supply, as well as the removal and re-placement of bus shelters.

The people who write to me are appalled at the way their concerns are being ignored and belittled by both the Premier and the Minister for State Development, Ian MacDonald. Their quiet neighbourhoods are being threatened with an inundation of unbearable motor noise, road chaos, crowds and the usual antisocial behaviours that accompany such spectacles especially when there is alcohol.

Up to 10 weeks of the year there will be limited or no use of the park by the citizenry who have incorporated it into their daily lives – six weeks before the event to set it up and four weeks afterwards to pull it all back down.

Residents are also concerned that they will not be able to park outside their homes when the crowds pour in, and that the Olympic Park Station will not be able to cater for the influx of estimated 100,000 people at the race – the station is too small and not enough trains run in and out of there. If buses are to be provided they will be yet another cost to the taxpayers. There has also been no indication from the government whether buses will provide regular commuters a vital link to Parramatta and Strathfield/Burwood Stations during the event.

Others are very concerned that property values will decline sharply in surrounding suburbs if this goes ahead because most people do not want to live next to a racetrack. Residents want to know if they will be compensated for this fall in value?

And it was actually suggested to them by the Minister that if they didn't like it they could just rent their place out during that time and leave the area like many people in Queensland apparently do! At least he was admitting that people do want to get away from these events, if they can manage it. But that ease of mobility is just not how most people's lives work. This is not an attitude respectful of the lives of people and their families in these areas. This is not social justice. There has been no public consultation and the residents have a right to know all the details, and the right to be heard when they say they don't want it.

The Sydney Olympic Park Authority Act has strong environmental protection measures that will require special legislation to be enacted to bypass it and allow the race to proceed. The Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA) has already voted on the issue, and rejected unanimously the idea for this race happening there, but their stance has been ignored. How can this happen? They are the authority responsible for managing and maintaining the Park as a lasting legacy for the people of New South Wales, and this decision that will devastate the Park is being completely taken out of their hands.

The Local Councils around the Sydney Olympic Park, those of Parramatta, Strathfield, Auburn and Ryde have also whole-heartedly opposed the plan.

My understanding of the very basic, foundational premise of the concept of democracy is that the people get a voice both directly and through their elected representatives, in what happens to them, to their tax dollars, and to their environment, as well as the actions taken by their leaders. Is that what we are observing here? To me what we are seeing sounds more like this definition of bullying: "To force one's own way aggressively or by intimidation without regard to the feelings of the person or people on the receiving end."

My constituents are NOT against V8 Racing nor am I, although I must admit that I have never seen the appeal – my constituents are just against holding it at Sydney Olympic Park especially when there is a purpose built track for this at Eastern Creek International Raceway, where the population density is much less.

I believe that the Eastern Creek site is far preferable for this event for a number of reasons. It is an excellent facility that is already owned by the Government, so that any monies spent will be an investment – improving a facility already owned by the people. It is a specialised motor racing area already booked throughout the year by commercial organisations, trade shows, driver training, etc. It operates at a profit, and the accumulated surpluses are enough to contribute to the funding for the desired re-surfacing of the track. There is easy vehicle access from both the M4 freeway straight into the car park, and from Wallgrove Road. Having this site will enable a variety of motor races in different configurations without any set up or dismantling costs involved, and lastly it inconveniences a much smaller number of residents.

I will not support any plan or Bill that allows V8 Supercar Racing at Sydney Olympic Park and I will encourage all other MPs who have a social conscience to also refuse to support it.

Rev Hon Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC
Research Officer: Leslie McCawley BS MPH

The NSW state government has taken the decision about planning approval for the proposed Repco Rally Australia leg of the World Rally Championships away from local councils by announcing that it would prepare special events legislation to ensure the rally goes ahead despite growing local opposition.

In a sign of growing desperation the Minister for State Development, Ian MacDonald, made the announcement on Friday.

Local residents are outraged and appalled! The fact that the announcement was made the day after a well supported protest rally was held in Murwillumbah to oppose the rally was a real slap in the face for locals residents.

It demonstrates yet again that this government is not interested in listening to the views of locals, preferring instead to listen to the assurances of "flim flam men".

At the same time that the state government is ripping the guts out of local health and transport infrastucture it can find up to $8 million to support a bash and crash rally though National Parks and rural gravel roads.

The Minister calims that “The legislation will permit the Government to impose environmental protection measures to manage any temporary impacts on affected local areas.” This begs the question ... Upon what evidence will the imposed conditions be based? Will the government undertake its own environmental studies? Because the studies undertaken on behalf of the organisers are seriously lacking!!!

All the studies acknowledge that they are walking on untested ground and thy don't know whether their suggested strategies will work! In other words, the Tweed and Kyogle areas are to be used as a laboratory to test untried strategies. Is it any wonder that local residents are not impressed???

The noise (acoustic) study acknowledges that the organisers are unable to meet the recommended standards.

The dust report recommends that residents on the route either "go out for the day" or " close their windows and doors and turn on their air conditioners".

The waste report recommends the use of split waste bins (recyclables at the rear), that even the council is replacing, rather than separate bins for recyclables.

The Carbon Offset Plan consists of one page on their website plus Q&As.

And they wonder why we don't want the bloody thing here!!!!!

We will continue to fight on!

Join us ...
- write / email / phone the NSW government
- write / email / phone your local MP if you live in NSW and encourage them to vote against the special legislation being introduced to allow the rally
- if you have contacts in Greenpeace, WWF, GetUp or other similar organisations urge them to get involved.

Our contact details are:
No Rally Group
Tel: 0438 357 452 (Australia)
Web: sites.google.com/site/norallygroup
Email: no.rally[AT]yahoo.com

A slightly pythonesque moment occurred when I rang the Premiers Department to speak with someone from the "Office of Protocol and Special Events" (who are the organisers of government support for the rally) and found out that they had been renamed as "Community Engagement and Events". George Orwell lives !!!

FEARS that the NSW Government is about to override council planning powers to approve the world championship car rally heightened yesterday as hundreds of protesters marched against the event.

At the same time concerns were raised that if the rally was approved, future
protest actions could disrupt it as objectors took matters into their own
hands.

Police escorted about 300 protesters, some in cardboard mock-ups of rally cars and some dressed as koalas, wallabies or other animals which they said would be put at risk by rally cars on rural roads, through Murwillumbah.

...

Outside the Tweed Shire Council chambers anti-rally speakers addressed the
crowd on environmental and other concerns.

Byron-based NSW Greens Party Upper House member Ian Cohen said he was worried the government could override council planning powers to approve the event which it has promised the help fund.

...

   - from "Protestors ready for long fight" in the Tweed Daily News of 28 May 09.

See also: sites.google.com/site/norallygroup, Direct link to YouTube broadcast.

Tuesday, 16 December 2008

Developer reveals last minute meeting with Planning Minister and Council bastardry condemns Western Sydney Woodland at ADI Site.

These sites and sounds files reveal just how important and beautiful this site is. Anyone should be able to see that not to preserve it is to defile traditional Australian values as well as environmental integrity.

Residents shocked as their democracy trashed for development

Concerned residents sat in amazement last night as Penrith Council voted to condemn hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland which NSW Scientists claim is verging on extinction. Council voted 14/15 to enter into a Planning Agreement with developer Delfin Lend Lease to build 3500 houses and clear approx 300 ha of Cumberland Plain Woodland from the ADI Site.

Penrith Council had recently exhibited Delfins Western and Central Precinct Plans as well as the Planning Agreement. Concurrently the Planning Minister had exhibited amendments to the zoning plan for the ADI site allowing the public to call for radical changes to the development.

Councillors were urged by residents that addressed the meeting to defer their decision to enter into the Planning Agreement if they did not understand fully what it is they were voting on and in any case until after the Planning Minister publicly made her final determination and after Councillors had assessed and adopted the Precinct Plans.

Delfin urges Councillors to dismiss views of residents

Arthur Ilias, Delfin Project Manager, addressed the meeting and urged Councillors to dismiss the views of residents urging the protection of more of the site. He went on to claim a meeting occurred that day with Kristina Keneally the Planning Minister and that she assured Delfin that the NSW Government would not amend the zoning plan to protect any more of the site.

Residents Action Group ADI alleges undeclared vested interest

According to Geoff Brown, spokesman for the Residents' Action group, "Several Councillors who supported Delfin Lend Lease, including the Mayor, failed to declare a pecuniary interest. Council Officers presented a clearly misleading email to Councilors prior to the meeting from Peter Goth, a Dept of Planning bureaucrat, claiming the Planning Minister had limited authority to rezone and protect more bushland. Council officers also led councilors to believe there would be further community consultation on the Agreement and that there was also the spurious claim by Planners that the NSW Government may at any time put restrictions on how Councils can collect and use developer levies and therefore the need to rush and lock in this decision."

Brown claims that "The 6 Liberal Councillors who supported the developer voted in contradiction to NSW Liberal policy which since 2003 has been to seek a 100 ha reduction in Delfins housing development."

In his opinion, “This was one of the worst, most undemocratic decisions of all time. These Councillors had no idea what they were supporting and clearly wanted it that way."

Councillor Kevin Crameri alone stood up for Woodlands

"Only one councillor, Independent Kevin Crameri, voted against it. Crameri declared a 'non-pecuniary interest' in that he lived near the proposed development. Prior to the vote he stood up and peppered the council officers with questions on detail, eliciting very confusing responses."

Brown says Council appeared confused

Geoff Brown, who addressed Council for the Residents Action Group, states that these responses seemed to him to indicate that the Councillors had not gone into the matter seriously. On the morning after the Council meeting he said that it had appeared to him that the council were all confused.

"They showed no concern that in allowing the clearing of hundreds of hectares of endangered Cumberland Plain Woodland that they were pushing it towards extinction. They seemed to have no concern with locking ratepayers into a deal with a developer before they had even debated and adopted the Precinct Plans. They had no concern for the fact the Planning Minister had yet to make a final determination on public submissions calling for more of the site to be protected.”

Mayor is himself a real-estate agent for the region and other councillors have pecuniary links

Brown gave his opinion that, “Jim Aitken the Independent Mayor, who heads the massive Jim Aitken and Partners Real Estate group, should not have voted as he will eventually make money from this development approval." He added, "I think that, arguably, Greg Davies the Labor Clr should have declared a pecuniary interest as he is employed by Diane Beamer the Member for Mulgoa and Delfin have financially supported the re-election campaign of Diane Beamer. The evidence for this is available from NSW electoral office. We intend to explore this dodgy approval process further. This is yet another sorry chapter in this planning debacle.”

Residents Action Group will seek urgent clarification from Planning Minister, Kristina Keneally

“These Councillors did their parties a great political disservice and this may play itself out at the NSW Election. We will seek urgent clarification from the Planning Minister about her position as she told the Sydney media only a week ago she was considering protecting more of the site,” said Brown.

Further Comment Geoff Brown 0431 222602
Source Media Release and interview with Geoff Brown
ADI Residents Action Group

The following was adapted from Green's MLC Lee Rhiannon's media release "World Youth Day cost blowout: independent review needed" of 26 Nov 08 - JS

Those who have accepted the necessity of the current fire sale of NSW government assets included in the recent "slash and burn" budget, which is taking that state into recession, may be amazed to learn of the staggering cost blow-out of the World Youth Day celebrations held in Sydney from Tuesday 15 to Sunday 20 July 2008.

The NSW Auditor-General's report released on 26 November reported that the cost to NSW taxpayers increased from an initial estimate of AU$20million (all amounts in Australian dollars) to its final cost of over $120 million. In addition, the Federal Government contributed $20.5 million bringing the total cost to Australian taxpayers to over $140 million. As some costs incurred by NSW Government agencies may be unobtainable, the full cost to taxpayers may never be known. For its part, the Catholic Church contributed only $10 million to meeting the costs of the event.

The Sydney Morning Herald of 27 reports that the Department of State and Regional Development claimed that NSW had gained $152 million, but had yet to substantiate that claim.

On top of this, the NSW Government plans to throw tens of millions more taxpayer dollars at a planned V8 supercar races to be held at Olympic Park. The Minister for State Development having given in principle support for NSW to incur losses of up to $86million over three years.

As consquence of the World Youth Day Fiasco Greens MP Lee Rhiannon says the NSW Auditor-General, not the government, should conduct an independent performance audit of World Youth Day because the government cannot be trusted to provide an impartial, comprehensive evaluation of the event.

The Auditor General today recommended that the government undertake a cost benefit review of its involvement in World Youth Day.

"It is not in the public interest to let the government conduct a post-event review of World Youth Day, as recommended by the Auditor-General today," Ms Rhiannon said.

"The history of this government suggests an internal post-event review would be shabby and unhelpful. A thorough review into all aspects of World Youth Day 2008 by an independent body like the Auditor General is required.

"In June this year I met with the Auditor-General to ask him to conduct a performance review to delve into the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of agencies involved in organising the event.

"The Auditor-General has powers to conduct a performance audit and investigate allegations of serious and substantial waste of public money.

"There are many aspects of World Youth Day 2008 that deserve to be put under the microscope, not just why the final cost was six times the original budget estimate.

"The Auditor-General could analyse whether the additional APEC like police powers given were excessive or appropriate, and uncover the full story behind the decision to use Randwick racecourse for the papal mass and the resulting compensation deal.

"Mr Achterstraat's office could also examine the continued failure of the government to publicly release key reports and papers detailing predicted costs and benefits, despite repeated demands before the event was held.

"The Rees government is keen to put Sydney back on the events circuit. The flawed decision to bring V8 supercar racing to Olympic Park is a prime example.

"A proper independent evaluation of World Youth Day by the Auditor General is important to learn lessons for the future of this state," Ms Rhiannon said.

See also: NSW Electricity Privatisation, "Youth day ran $100m over budget" in SMH of 27 Nov 08 and more subdued reporting in "World Youth Day bill $100m over budget" of 26 Nov 08 in Rupert Murdoch's Australian newspaper which lavishly promoted the event at the time, NSW Auditor-General's World Youth Day Report (pdf, 45K).

Appendix: Community will Carry the Cost of V8s at Olympic Park

Greens Media Release of 26 Sep 08

New laws to ban compensation claims by local businesses adversely affected by V8 car racing at Olympic Park in addition to a $35 million injection of public funds shows that the community, not the organisers, will pay the costs of the Supercar event.

This legislation is reported to remove the right of local business operators to seek compensation for disruptions to their business caused by the event. It is also reported to circumvent environmental and planning legislation to stop legal challenges to the event.

“This government has a track record of arbitrarily removing citizens’ rights and throwing around government money to support private sector events. It does not have a track record of ensuring the public gets any return on that public investment,” said Ms Hale.

“Legislation to remove the rights of Olympic Park leaseholders is unacceptable. Leases were signed on the understanding that business owners had a suitable environment to operate their businesses. The government is taking that environment away to benefit another commercial enterprise.”

“If the government is going to renege on the promises it made in the leases, the V8 promoters should pay compensation.

“Similarly any attempt to remove the rights of local residents to take legal action in response to the months of disruption and the environmental damage that will be caused by holding the V8 event at Olympic Park is also unacceptable.”

“Today’s Auditor-General’s report into the $100 million blow out in public funding for World Youth Day shows just how inept this government is when it uses public funds to promote private events.”

“The V8 event at Olympic Park will have many negative impacts on local residents and businesses. The event should be moved to the existing motor racing precinct at Eastern Creek where the negative impact will be significantly less,” said Ms Hale.

See also: NSW Electricity Privatisation, "Why the V8 Supercars will be taxpayer-injected" in SMH of 29 Sep 08, "O'Farrell vows to restore free travel" on the ABC on 13 Nov 08, "Say no to v8 supercar racing at Olympic Park" on Lee Rhiannon's website, Parliamantary debate of V8 Supercar Races at Sydney Olympic Park of 24 Nov 08.

See also "Treasurer talks tax rises, job cuts" in SMH of 13 Oct 08, "Tax hike risk if NSW remains in the red" in the Australian of 12 Oct 08.

NSW Greens Media Release: 14 October 2008

The reliability of the companies behind the state's AAA credit rating has been called into question before a NSW Legislative Council budget estimates committee today.

Standard and Poor's and Moody's have been heavily implicated in the subprime mortgage crisis, according to Greens NSW MP John Kaye.

Dr Kaye said: "They rated many Collateralised Debt Obligations based on highly unreliable mortgages as AAA.

"NSW Treasurer Eric Roozendaal is relying on Standard and Poor's and Moody's to justify a slash and burn mini-budget despite their fingerprints being all over the current global financial meltdown.

"Treasurer Roozendaal laughed off concern about Standard and Poor's and Moody's track record with Iceland and the CDOs.

"A fortnight ago Moody's rated Iceland Aa1.

"Since then the Icelandic financial system has collapsed and Britain has been forced to step in to guarantee bank deposits.

"NSW pays Standard and Poor's and Moody's for the privilege of being rated in what is effectively a ‘cash for comment' arrangement.

"The one unpaid credit agency, Fitch, rates NSW as AA+, one down from AAA.

"Cutting spending on services and infrastructure at a time when the state is experiencing negative growth will undermine the Federal Government's stimulus package.

"It is a recipe to throw the state into recession," Dr Kaye said.

For more information: John Kaye 0407 195 455

The report, 'Sydney bursting at the Seams' in today's Herald says it all. "Population growth in such areas will be a big test for the city's future infrastructure needs. A soaring immigration rate means Sydney will need to squeeze in a third more houses and flats by 2031 than was estimated only three years ago. The city's flagging infrastructure is already struggling to cope with population pressures. But falling tax revenue had left the Government little choice but to slash spending, Mr Rees said." "On the same day that it emerged Sydney will need almost 900,000 extra homes by 2031 - a third more than estimated three years ago - Mr Rees told a news conference: "Governments can boast about capital works programs extending out five, 10, 15 years. But essentially what you're boasting about is the level of debt you have." So there you have it people, the choice is yours (or rather, the NSW government's, since you most surely WON'T be asked..) . crumbling infrastructure and declining quality of life and/or . higher taxes and charges and/or . increased state debt. And why? To support a record immigration program that's based on the flimsiest of excuses since GWB attacked Iraq. The so-called 'skills crisis'. How the shamelessly selfish and myopic lobbying of the housing and assorted other 'industry' bodies for bigger markets and cheaper labour destroyed a city. Nathan Rees should now publicly ask Federal Labor to cut immigration to 30 - 35,000 per annum immediately and to provide incentives for decentralisation as a priority.