Legislative Assembly 16th November 2007

Mr PETER DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [4.05 p.m.]: I have to ask again, as I asked before, who wrote that speech? The member for Maroubra makes his office available to the bureaucrats. Walt Secord is running around Australia but he is still writing his speeches. Delivering speeches like that is the reason for the 7.4 per cent swing against him. That is his problem.

The member for Maroubra is making a bid for the frontbench or trying to make amends for the massive swing against him in the State election. People vote against him because he is not doing his job, which is to represent the community, not to read ridiculous speeches written by Walt Secord or some bureaucrat that pretend to paper over all the problems the Government has created in 12 years. There was a statewide swing against the Government because it has done a lousy job over the past 12 years, especially the member for Maroubra, who had a 7.5 swing against him.

Mr Steve Whan: Point of order: I know that the member for Vaucluse is having trouble talking about this issue. He is two minutes into his speech and he has not mentioned the substance of the debate. I ask you to draw him back to the motion. I also remind him that he lost the last election quite embarrassingly.

ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Diane Beamer): Order! I am sure the member for Vaucluse is about to deal with the motion.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: The point of this motion is to cover over the problems of State Labor, but they cannot be covered over because they are evident to us all. One only need ask the member for Newcastle. Every day she is the Newcastle what does she see when she looks out to sea?

Mr Michael Daley: Water.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: No, she does not. She does not see the water because the port is covered by about 60 to 80 ships.

Ms Noreen Hay: Point of order: You have already advised the member for Vaucluse to speak to the motion. He has not mentioned the port. He should speak to the motion.

ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Diane Beamer): Order! I am sure the member for Vaucluse will move to the substance of the debate right now.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: I know that I have their attention because I am talking about the real problems with ports in New South Wales. They should talk to the member for Newcastle because when she looks out to sea, she does not see water; she sees 60 to 80 ships. The member for Mount Druitt might remember back in the early 80s all the ships moored off Newcastle. They were called Wran's navy. There were 40 to 50 ships weighing in the order of 50,000 tonnes. Today there are about 60 to 80 ships weighing about 100,000 to 150,000 tonnes but it is not called Iemma's navy because those ships have been there so long. It is called Iemma's mothball fleet. They even park some of them on the beach. There are so many ships because the Government cannot manage or invest in infrastructure.

Why has this motion been moved today? In moving this motion today members opposite are trying to attack John Howard yet again because they are embarrassed that Kevin Rudd turned his back on them. What is today about? Kevin Rudd is in Queensland. Why is he in Queensland? It is as far as he can go to get away from Morris Iemma! Some of the members opposite are relatively new but a few of them have been here for a while. This motion is about all the problems that Government members have created in this State. Members opposite are simply embarrassed about the failures of State Labor.

Mr Frank Terenzini: Point of order: I am going to try something different. I am going to mention Standing Order 76, for the member for Vaucluse's benefit. He can look it up—

Mr PETER DEBNAM: Which one?

Mr Frank Terenzini: He doesn't know. Of course he doesn't know! We have been trying to tell him that it is there in bold letters: "relevance".

ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Diane Beamer): Order! The member for Vaucluse will speak to the motion.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: This motion is about the failure of State Labor to invest in ports and infrastructure. The Minister for Police, who is now at the table, will not even back up his own police. You swear at police. We are talking about the Hunter and the fact that the member for Newcastle cannot even see any water in the ocean at Newcastle because it is covered with ships. The Government sends you to the Hunter, and you betray police with regard to a commitment that was made to them many times in relation to police staffing matters. What did you do? You lost your temper and swore at front-line police. You then have the hide to come into this place and pretend to your mother that you support the police.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Minister will come to order.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: The Minister, David Campbell, swears at New South Wales front-line police. That is the bottom line. You are an absolute disgrace in his portfolio. It is a disgrace that the rest of the members opposite will not acknowledge—

Mr Steve Whan: Point of order: I have taken pity on the member for Vaucluse. He does not have anything to say, so we will waste a bit of time by taking another point of order on him. The member for Vaucluse must address members by their title, through the Chair. Saying "You, you, you" and pointing at the Minister for Police is disorderly.

ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Diane Beamer): Order! I am sure the member for Vaucluse will comply with parliamentary procedure and address members by their proper titles.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: One of the points that one of the members opposite will make in the next contribution to this debate is that there will be a third coal loader in Newcastle. A third coal loader has certainly been approved, but by the time it is built we will need a fourth coal loader! Government members are totally behind the times in everything in relation to infrastructure. They should ring any of their constituents who might now be on the M4 or the M5 to see how they feel about the Government's investment in infrastructure. They dearly love Carl Scully and the fact that he constrained the M5 to two lanes. Members opposite should ask them today what they think about anything the Government does with infrastructure in this State, including ports.

Ms Noreen Hay: Point of order: Simply throwing in the word "ports" after waffling on about police and other matters that are not referred to in the motion is not good enough. As has been said in this House before in decisions by former Speakers, members speaking to the motion must keep their comments to the motion. I ask you to ensure that the member for Vaucluse, who we know is on his way out, complies with the standing orders.

ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Diane Beamer): Order! I remind the member for Vaucluse that Standing Order 76 provides that members' contributions must be relevant to the subject matter of the debate. I draw the member for Vaucluse back to the substance of the motion.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: As a member of the Labor Party, Madam Acting-Speaker, you know that everything I have said today is relevant to this topic. The member for Wollongong got a swing against her in her seat. If she wants to talk about Wollongong, she should talk to her constituents about all the problems. Every time I went to her electorate to talk about policing problems, she got upset. Her constituents were absolutely delighted!

The SPEAKER: Order! Government members will cease interjecting.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: This motion is about a couple of things. First, it is about attempting to embarrass the Prime Minister. Members opposite are not going to do that.

The SPEAKER: Order! Government members will cease interjecting.

Mr PETER DEBNAM: Members opposite are simply covering up their embarrassment about the Government's failures in infrastructure. Ports are an issue for everyone in New South Wales because the Government has failed. Ask the member for Newcastle. I am sure she will not give a prepared speech today written by Walt Secord. I am sure she will speak on behalf of her constituents and highlight the fact that there are 60 to 80 ships, every one of them 100,000 tonnes-plus, off Newcastle. Why? Because the Government has failed in managing infrastructure.

Government members talk about economic reform in this State generally. I think the member for Maroubra, who suffered a 7.5 per cent swing against him in the last State election, made mention of the New South Wales economy. Members opposite have fought against every single bit of economic reform in Australia for the last 11 years. They have taken every opportunity to avoid doing the right thing by the people of New South Wales and Australia when it comes to economic reform. I refer to improving efficiencies in delivering services, improving efficiencies in using infrastructure, and improving investment in infrastructure.

Members opposite simply have not been interested. The lot opposite have the hide of an elephant! They are extraordinary. They are absolutely world-class hypocrites, led by the Minister at the table, who swears at front-line police. What members opposite ought to do in their contributions this afternoon is simply apologise. David Campbell should be the first to apologise to the front-line police he blasphemed. The Minister is a disgrace. Every single member opposite ought to make a contribution on behalf of their communities—not from prepared speeches written by bureaucrats or spin doctors.