Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - I think I will be supporting the Budget, recognising that errors of judgment by past Labor governments have frittered away reserves and created the potential for the Government to again have to borrow to meet demand for recurrent expenditure.

Mr Harriss - You were threatening to block the Budget a couple of weeks ago.

Mr DEAN - The downward spiral has been as alarming as it has been speedy. It is time to repair the damage. Perhaps I should answer that question now. I had it in here to answer it and I will probably return straightaway to that because I had it fairly early in the piece to provide an answer to my comments in relation to that.

Mr Harriss - You thought the Leader might have challenged you, did you?

Mr DEAN - Well, I thought somebody was going to raise it but I certainly have some comment here somewhere on that point. You have come in too early for me. What I might do is, when I get to that point, which will not be too long, I will answer it for you.

Mr Harriss - I thought you might have had it.

Mr DEAN - Other than to say at this stage that I was simply stating a fact, not an intention.

Mr Harriss - What was the fact? That you were going to block it?

Mr DEAN - No, I was stating a fact - this House does have the ability, to my knowledge, to block a budget or vote against a budget.

Ms Rattray - With a majority.

Mr DEAN - That is right and I am saying 'the House'.

Mr Harriss - Is that your position then?

Mr DEAN - I simply stated a fact, as I said, not an intention.

Mr Harriss - Oh come on. Is that your position?

Mr DEAN - I stated a fact, not an intention.

Ms Forrest - So you did not threaten to block it then as was widely reported?

Ms Rattray - It was reported like that.

Ms Forrest - It was certainly reported as a threat.

Mr DEAN - Mr Deputy President, I can take it no further than that and I will continue on.

Mr Harriss - You speculated as to the possibility of blocking it.

Mr DEAN - That is right. That is all I am saying. It is something that could occur but I did not say it was my intention to do it.

Ms Forrest - That is how people downstairs saw it, as a threat.

Mr DEAN - I understand Mr McKim has taken off on it and has moved some sort of a motion in the Lower House. I would have thought that he would have made some inquiry to find out exactly what was said in the first instance, but it probably does not suit his purpose or intention in wanting to find out exactly what was said and how it came up. Good on him and good luck to him.

Mr Harriss - He is just misrepresenting the truth again, is he?

Mr DEAN - He is taking it straight from the paper perhaps. I do not know and I am not quite sure because I do not think I even read it in the paper but it is obviously in there somewhere.

This Budget and the indicative forward Estimates paint a very gloomy picture or period for this Tasmanian public sector. The budget constraints, needed though they are, apply a blanket of suppression on the broader economy. In saying that I try to step away from most of those issues that have been referred to; I do not think there is a lot to be gained from going back over the grounds that have been covered and other members have done that very well.

I also take the opportunity to congratulate the member for Rumney on his inaugural speech yesterday. It covered many topics and some topics of great interest to me, of course, relating to the police and the appointment of a certain individual and I thought made a very good point. He made a very strong point in relation to the separation of powers and I have raised that previously in this House as well and I have raised it in a number of other circles. It is not right and it needs to be corrected. There need to be changes.

I have heard the Premier cite the reduction of payroll tax as the incentive to spark the resurgence in the private sector. Let me warn the Government it will take more than a marginal reduction in tax to spark the private sector. It really needs a change in culture, a change in attitude towards planning, business activity, the need for profit and the desirability of value-adding project development. It almost seems as though we as a community of people have had it too good and have become too precious about things that are of minor importance. Our mentality seems to be, 'Let us find ways to stop progress rather than seeking ways to facilitate progress'.

When business activity slows, GST revenues reduce, payments to the State reduce, the budget constraints have to be tightened and services to the community have to be reduced. It seems to me patently obvious that we as a State need to recognise the links that support our State's service delivery. We need to better understand where the revenue stream comes from and who pays the piper.

I note that the Premier has failed to identify the specific services to be cut in this Budget. Be very careful about that.

I presume that the global appropriation for each agency has been reduced in line with the Premier's public statements and the press releases, and that the agency managers have been instructed to fund the service to the public within those budget constraints. I have no strong feelings against that action. I support the notion that Tasmania must live within its means and further I support the notion that we should let the managers manage. It is very important to let them do what they are required to do. I will of course watch with interest and guarantee that I will continue to inquire in an effort to determine if for any political reasons the Government intervenes to change the priorities of the agency managers. Unfortunately, that is likely to occur, I would think, throughout the year.

Whichever way it goes, whether there be retrenchments or productivity gains or a combination of both for the period of the Budget and the forward Estimates, the public sector employees and those Tasmanians relying on public sector essential services are in for a much tougher and more costly time and I do not think there is any doubt about that whatsoever.

We are all aware of the actual and potential reduction of GST payments to the State and we understand that Tasmania is in that group of States that are suffering from the downside of the national two-speed economy. If the Premier is right in her predictions, the State's progress over the next period will be pedestrian at best. It is my contention that this perilous period has come about because of a combination of wilfully wasted spending during the good times and members of the Legislative Council have highlighted aspects of this wasteful spending. I believe that members have done that quite well throughout the years.

Further, the wasteful spending has occurred at the same time as the influence of an overindulgent section of our community has aimed their poisonous pens to oppose every development initiative created by the investment community. In regard to the first of those reasons, and if you indulge me with a mixed metaphor, it is now a matter of the Bacon coming home to roost. The days of indulgence must be put behind us.

Mrs Taylor - Bacon coming home to roost.

Mr DEAN - A mixed metaphor; I told you that. You need to work it out; just think about it.

In regard to the second of those reasons, it surely is a watershed. If, during this period of crisis in State and public sector management, the private sector remains in the doldrums, Tasmania will indeed have a basket case economy. I am unashamedly a supporter of planned, sustainable, private sector development and I will give support to all those who plan value-adding processes to the harvesting of our raw materials. I give encouragement to those investors who look at our State and see opportunities. I understand that a healthy State economy enabling quality service delivery to those in need requires a productive, vibrant private sector making the most of its opportunities.

I do not accept the cheap shot or jargon that labels big business as rapacious and greedy. I know that a very significant proportion of the revenue raised by major businesses is spent in purchasing goods and services from other corporations and individuals working in the local economy. I understand that primary dollars, those dollars generated by the industries that dig things up, grow things and harvest things are the keystones of our economy.

I want to provide encouragement to the private sector, Tasmanians, and to get off the back of those who would invest in Tasmania and give them a go. I restate my fundamental belief that now, more than ever before, we Tasmanians need the private sector to add momentum to the economy as a counterbalance to the negative impacts that will flow to the economy by a sure and certain contraction in public sector spending. Let me be specific to the electorate I represent; the electorate of Windermere. Much of Windermere, particularly the George Town base of Windermere, has been flattened by the very serious contraction in forest-based industries. Unemployment has increased, shops in the main street are vacant and retailers generally report that business is slow.

I am heartened by the news that Gunns is soon to let contracts for civil works at the pulp mill site. It is expected that the civil contracts will be let to a Tasmanian firm or firms. It is further expected that these works, approved by the board of Gunns Limited, will involve the expenditure of about $30 million at this early stage. Surely those involved in contracting civil works in Tasmania need an urgent boost at this time. This project provides hope, not only for Windermere, but also more broadly for the north of the State and, to a lesser but not insignificant degree, for the rest of the State as well. The whole State will benefit from this.

To bring some optimism to what the public service generally considers to be a depressing State Budget, I want to dwell for a few moments on the opportunities that will flow from the pulp mill development and I trust other members will add - and some have added - to reports of positive private sector activity in the communities they represent. Unfortunately, there has not been a lot of positive comment coming out.

Mrs Armitage - There's not much to have.

Mr DEAN - Well, there probably is not much around; you are right.

Not a lot has been brought forward of positive developments and positive activity in the areas. I will quote from a publicly available document, the Inside Economics Report to Gunns Ltd. This report has been publicly available for many months. It has been widely distributed and the media has made much of it. Those who oppose the pulp mill development have chosen to demean the message by attacking the messenger. I restate that the messenger is Inside Economics, a highly reputable firm with a national standing and that Inside Economics has used a Monash multiregional forecasting model specifically designed to evaluate the impact of changes in policy or of other shocks such as significant new investment. They are a well-recognised organisation and well credentialled.

Mr Parkinson - Huge benefits for Launceston.


Mr DEAN - Absolutely. Both the authors and the statistical model are ideally credentialled to produce this report. It is not my intention to read from the report but I will briefly summarise the conclusions on page 4 - under the heading 'Conclusions' obviously. The analysis presented in this report demonstrates a proposed pulp mill will bring very substantial economic benefits, particularly to the Tasmanian community. There would be strong gains in GSP and employment, with all four regions of the State enjoying significant benefits. The pulp mill would represent the largest ever private sector investment in the island State and would come at a time when major investment projects are difficult to secure in non-resourced states because of the impact of the resources boom on the exchange rate for the Australian dollar. The pulp mill could play a very considerable role in offsetting the negative impact of a two-speed economy on Tasmania. The macroeconomic report demonstrates that a pulp mill will bring economic benefit for the nation but by far the greatest positive benefit will flow to our State. It concludes that the pulp mill will represent the largest ever private sector investment, as I have said.

The report also identifies that the mill will deliver, on a macroeconomic basis, strong gains in gross state product and employment and be an offset to the negative impacts of a two-speed economy in Tasmania. From an employment perspective, the report concludes that the greatest number of jobs will be created in the area where the pulp mill is located but it does not address the number of jobs created during the construction phase but cites that during the operational stage there will be more than 2 600 jobs per year in the northern region than there otherwise would have been; an annual increase of 12 per cent over the 'business as usual' projection.

Mr Deputy President, an extra 800 jobs are predicted for the Mersey lower region, which is plus 4 per cent, and employment in the southern region is predicted to be around 6 per cent greater than otherwise each year as a result of the mill. The report predicts that the economic benefit to the State over the life of the mill to be around $10 billion.

Mr Deputy President, the summary of key economic impacts on page 2 of the report shows the net present value of increased taxation revenue to Tasmania will be $597 million. I think the Government could do with that right at this very moment. There is another $391 million to flow directly to the Australian Government coffers, so it even goes across to the Federal area. How desperately do we need the first tranche of the $597 million to flow to the State coffers? How desperately do we need the first of those $10 billion to feed into the Tasmanian economy? The need is now.

The Budget highlights a critical need and I urge Gunns to get on with it. We need you now more than ever before.

Mr Deputy President, while I have been considering the macroeconomic impacts on the national, State and regional economies, I also see a marvellous opportunity for there to be greater interface between Gunns Limited as a developer and the hundreds and perhaps thousands of micro businesses in the northern region of the State that can probably feed off the back of this major development. The question arises, why not go the next step? Either the developer, Gunns Limited, and/or the Government needs to work with local businesses to maximise the opportunity during the construction stage of the mill; over the next 30 months, $2.3 billion will be spent. Some of that spend will be overseas, some may be on mainland Australia but the opportunity exists for a very significant proportion of that $2.3 billion to be spent in the Tamar Valley. The challenge now is to establish the links that enable local businesses to capture as much of the market as possible.

[3.30 p.m.]
Questions to be asked - how many employees are needed and when will the peaks and troughs of that need arise? How many beds are needed to meet the employee requirements? Can that demand be met by existing hotels, motels, guesthouses, serviced apartments and local rental properties? What are the needs for training? Will the new trade training centres at George Town have a role to play? What are the particular skill sets required for both the development and operational stages? Are there training opportunities for the Skills Institute? I can tell you that these questions will be answered in the report to be handed down very shortly, probably next week, on advice. That is a report entitled The Bell Bay Pulp Mill Economic Development Plan and Local Procurement Policy - quite a long title, and completed by Essential Economics in Victoria. That report should provide answers to those questions that I have identified that need answering and I understand will provide answers to a lot of other questions as well.

Clearly there will be enormous opportunity and not only in those areas that I have mentioned. Unprecedented opportunity now exists in every corner of retail, hospitality and construction-related endeavours. The Tamar Valley is on the cusp of an economic boom.

It will not last forever. My advice to the businesspeople of the Tamar Valley is to get as much information as you can about the emerging demand. Plan ahead to meet that demand. Understand and be excited by the spectacular business opportunities that will come your way over the next 30 months.

I reiterate again that the boom conditions created by the development stage of the Bell Bay pulp mill will last but 30 months. People of business and commerce should make every post a winner. There are a number of issues in relation to that matter. I do not think that too many others have referred to it and perhaps because it is in the middle of my electorate that it has been left for me.

I wanted to raise the issue of a headline in today's Mercury - 'Fines, bonds for protestors'. What annoys me and a lot of other members of the public, is the fact that penalties for people carrying out unlawful and illegal protests are treated with contempt. The penalties are very low and in some instances really have little impact at all. In fact, people now simply protest in relation to the pulp mill and want to be fined because they say that they will be continuing that activity. They are deliberately flouting the law by going out deliberately to commit an offence.

I have no problem with people protesting. We can protest and that is one of the great things about this country, but there are boundaries to it, there are controls over it and you should remain within those boundaries, in my view.

I commented by way of interjection on Tuesday, that Tony McCall's comments in relation to the Budget on that very first night it was released, Thursday night of last week, were very interesting. He referred to the Budget as being 'aspirational rather than reality'. He does not believe that the Budget can be met, quite obviously by making that sort of a comment.

The Budget is going to create much heartache for many people and there will be a lot of cuts that people will see. No doubt queues will become longer in the hospital systems, queues will become longer in just about every other activity you want to be engaged in. I have no doubt that the queues at Service Tasmania will become longer. It does not matter where you go, that will happen. Hospital waiting times will become longer. There will be more crime, which I will go into in a moment.

There will be longer attendance times for police and fire service personnel, and complaints will rise in just about every area. That in itself creates more work for some of the organisations that will be losing staff. I am not quite sure of the correlation there as to how it is going to balance out.

I think 'Disastrous' in the Examiner on Saturday summed it up well when he said this, and I quote:

'The State Government mismanages our money, then expects us to 'feel the pain'. Maybe we should put our hands out for disaster relief.'

I think he is pretty right. That was Mark Taylor from Mount Seymour. Mount Seymour is a lovely place. The member for Apsley is looking at me quizzically. Parattah is just near Baden. It is the highest area above sea level in that locality.

Ms Rattray - I am familiar with Mount Seymour. I am just wondering why you are dabbling in my electorate.

Mr DEAN - I was born and bred very close to Mount Seymour.

Ms Rattray - I know you were born and bred - a Levendale boy, I know.

Mr DEAN - My parents had a fairly large property right near Mount Seymour and they grow the best spuds in Tasmania

Mr Parkinson - They cannot beat South Arm pink eyes.

Ms Rattray - That is the only reason I was looking quizzical.

Mr DEAN - In relation to the blocking of the Budget, I think I have discussed that adequately and I think that the member for Huon fully appreciates and understands what I said in relation to that. As I said, I stated a fact, not an intention.

Mr Harriss - I thought you were just sucking up a bit and you were really going to take it up to him.

Mr DEAN - Maybe, if it had been a direct amount of money taken out of this Budget to fund a football team I might have done but, inasmuch as the Government is still paying that money but in a different sort of a way, it makes it a little more difficult for me.

Mr Harriss - Oh, so you have backed off?

Mr DEAN - I have backed off to some degree but I have never said that I would vote against the Budget.

Mr Harriss - Jelly knees.

Mr DEAN - Not quite. I think we would have been much better off wearing the global financial crisis at the time it was occurring. I think it probably would have been easier for us because we are now going to pay very dearly over the next 12-month, two-year, three-year period. It is going to take us some time now to get out of this black hole that we are in. I think we would have been better off simply trying to weather it like some other places have done. I do not think it has done us a lot of good.

The cost of living has been referred to by some members. It is a fairly gloomy picture for a lot of people, particularly gloomy for the electorate for which I have a responsibility. I have in my electorate most of the lower socioeconomic group areas. In fact, if I look at many of them, those broadacre developments are in fact nearly all in my locality in the north of the State, including Rocherlea, Newnham, Mayfield, Ravenswood, Waverley and George Town - a number in George Town. My area will suffer immensely as a result of the cost of living and the way it is going. In actual fact, I am now inundated with calls from people living in these areas as to how they are going to live, where they are going to get their next feed from and how they are going to stay warm in their homes at night. That to me is a tragedy. It is a tragedy when people are concerned about how they are going to keep warm. It really is a situation that is creating mayhem.

Related to keeping warm, I refer to the gas situation. I do not think that this State has done enough, and I have raised this in this Chamber on many occasions, that these people should have another option for their energy resources. Currently we have the gas and if you follow where gas has been rolled out, at this present time it goes through most affluent areas but rarely touches on those areas that really do need this support. Launceston is a classic example of where gas is currently being rolled out. As I understand it, they will put in that infrastructure if you can come up with a large number of people in an area that will connect, but they cannot get that sort of a commitment of course from some of these areas that I am talking about.

Mr Mulder - Try living on the Eastern Shore. There is no gas anywhere.

Mr DEAN - None at all? To me it is tragic. Mr Deputy President, this is creating more problems. In the last two or three weeks we have had comments about the air exceedences. We were pretty much on top of it up until probably this last 12 months. We had recovered from a number of exceedences beyond the acceptable level and now we look as if we will start going back out again because people are returning to wood and you cannot blame them for doing that. They have to keep warm.

Currently I have three sons building houses and they are certainly keeping me on my toes.

Mr Mulder - You can take a pay cut then?

Mr DEAN - No, I cannot take a pay cut. I am supporting them in many ways. The two who are building in this State are putting in wood heaters. I suggested and recommended it to them. I told them they have to put in a wood heater and that is exactly what has happened.

Mrs Taylor - So the smog is your fault.

Mr DEAN - No, it is not my fault. My son who is building in Melbourne is unable to do that because he is right in the middle of a built-up area. Getting wood is a problem over there so he is not doing that there. It is creating issues, people are returning to wood, and not only does it create wood fire problems it is also creating the problem of where people source their wood. You probably saw in the paper recently where people are sourcing a lot of their wood from reserves, from park areas.

Ms Rattray - There is plenty of wood there.

Mr DEAN - For instance, people are wood hooking in the Gorge at Launceston. This creates all of those other problems. Without real change that will support the fringes and those living below the poverty line we are heading towards disaster, in my opinion. There is some funding in the Budget for strugglers like the $1 million for the next 12 months and $2.5 million in the following two years for energy-efficient measures. There is a small piece in the paper about draft stoppers. They are going to do up some draft stoppers for people from this money - draft stoppers, new light globes and new shower roses. It is interesting that they are going to buy the draft stoppers. I would have thought most people would have had draft stoppers or could have afforded their own. I think what they refer to is the long snake like thing you put at the bottom of your door to keep the drafts out.

Mr Farrell - There is not enough sawdust now to make them.

Mr DEAN - Isn't there?

Mr Farrell - No.

Mr DEAN - The mind boggles. It is almost akin to the set-top box thing that the Federal Government became involved in and provided.

Ms Rattray - That set-top box program has gone a bit quiet.

Mr DEAN - It has gone quiet. I am not quite sure why, or whether people have made their fortunes out of it and retired and moved on by now.

Ms Rattray - I think most people realised that most people had a small little digital TV and they did not need a set-top box.

Mr DEAN - Maybe that is the reason for it. All of this is happening at the same time that power prices have gone up, and water and sewerage caps are being removed, and increasing these costs by another $100 or thereabouts. A cap was put on at election time and now is to be removed one year later.

The flat rate rent scheme, which has been covered I think by the member for Pembroke, will raise rents for about 60 per cent of the people in Housing Tasmania homes to an amount of about $10 per week, for about 60 per cent of those people. About 60 per cent of those people, I am told, will receive a rent increase. That again is on top of all of these other soaring costs.

Welfare recipient numbers are increasing and aged care recipients numbers have increased from 53 266 in 2005 to 59 000 in round figures in 2009, and it is continuing to go up. We are becoming an aged society, an aged country and that will bring with it a lot of other issues as well. Carers have gone from 3 437 people in the State in 2005 to 5 356 people in 2009. Disability support pensioners have gone from 24 857 people in 2005 to 26 090 people in 2009. Newstart allowance numbers have remained constant around the 15 500 mark. When you start looking at these figures you can see the trends and you can see what is happening and all of the areas are becoming greater in number in most respects. It is going to create with it lots of other problems.

Mr Harriss - Is the member for Western Tiers trying to help you?

[3.45 p.m.]
Mr DEAN - He is trying to be helpful and I recognise that.

I just harken back to what some of the others have said and I can remember when I first came into this place with the Treasurer at the time, the member for Derwent, when he was releasing all of these budgets and I cannot remember all of the names of these -

Ms Rattray - But he wouldn't have been Treasurer then when you first came in.

Mr DEAN - He was the Treasurer in this House at the time.

Ms Rattray - When you first came in?

Mr DEAN - Yes. He was the only Treasurer that I have known in this House, I think. No, David Crean was here for a very short time and then Michael Aird but ever since the member for Derwent, Mr Aird, was here we kept getting these names attached to these budgets that he was handing down and I specifically remember the heart of gold budgets and all of that sort of thing that were being handed down. I can remember how it was being pushed and moved by the Treasurer of the time and I think most of us were shaking our heads then as to just how long this could go for and what was going to happen. There had to be a breaking period somewhere, or a breaking time.

The prison system has been pretty well covered by the member for Pembroke but all I want to say there is, Mr Deputy President, that during the Estimates process over the last three-year period I raised and with the able support of the then member for Rosevears, we raised issues within that prison that very clearly identified systemic problems in that system but we were almost laughed out of the Estimates processes. Ministers would look at us quizzically wondering why we would be raising those things. We raised things like the amount of overtime that was being worked in that organisation. The amount of overtime was horrendous.

We looked at the amount of sick leave in the organisation. We looked at a number of other areas in that organisation and we did that for three to four years running, to my knowledge, and nothing was happening. Each year was exactly the same or in fact those areas had increased. Nothing was happening. Certainly, it will happen now and at a cost of almost $500 000. The report was handed down by Mr Palmer, who has identified lots of issues and problems there and it will cost them a huge amount of money to correct it. I have no doubt that if we asked those similar questions again this year in the Estimates process, we would get different answers.

It is just annoying when you identify an issue, when you raise an issue and nothing happens. It is just ignored. It should not have reached the stage that it did.

I am going to touch, Mr Deputy President - and nobody would be expecting me to do it -

Ms Rattray - On foxes.

Mr DEAN - on the matter of foxes, and this is an important issue.

Ms Rattray - Sorry, I shouldn't have laughed.

Mr DEAN - This is an important issue, Mr Deputy President, and if you look at the amount of money that is being spent on this program and with the return that is coming from it, its productivity measurements, performance measurements unknown, is just incredible - incredible, to say the least as to why it has gone on for so long.

The Liberal Party position that they have put forward is one that I have been advocating forever and a day, ever since I have been in this place. I do say this; I have not had a lot of support anywhere. My issues started with this program back when I was Commander of Police. That is where it started because of my initial inquiries, my initial investigations, into evidence that was provided to the police at the time. I have mentioned it many times in this Chamber and you all know what my position there is. There was nothing then, there, at that time to support any of the information or evidence that was provided and that is the way the report was written up. Now, what has happened, of course, since that report was written up and the investigation was completed by some of the best detectives in this State - one member has been referred to in the press and made comment on it over a number of the last two or three weeks, Bob Coad. I take the opportunity here to commend him on his background and what he did for policing in this State. He was involved in that investigation and it was a good investigation, a report well done. Since then, of course, the honourable Mr Llewellyn, who is now not with us, condemned that police inquiry saying it was not and did not give a good position at all; of course it didn't because it did not support what the Fox Eradication Program wanted. He, at the time, was the Minister for Police as well and he received that report through his position as the Minister for Police and accepted the report. Then later on, of course, about 12 months ago or whatever it was - 6 months ago - condemned it.

It just really raises lots of issues but, as I said, there has got to be an end to this program and there has got to be an exit program for it somewhere along the line. As I said, I do not know how much money has been spent on the program. I will be asking the question in Estimates as to exactly what has been spent on the program and I will be asking what they are doing, what the 45 or 47 members are doing. We know they are included in a baiting program. Nothing, not a single thing in relation to foxes has been found from any baiting program - not one piece of evidence. Not a fox; nothing. What we are now being told is that the baiting lines that they are running are being successful. Now, how you can prove success when there is no evidence, I just do not know. It just defies belief as far as I am concerned. Now they are running, of course, in behind those lines to ensure that they pick up any foxes that might have been left behind. I would like to see the foxes that they got in front of the line first of all before they start looking for the foxes behind the line.

Mr Mulder - They need a new fox line.

Mr DEAN - They need a new fox line; I don't know.

Dr Kinnear, who has a string of initials after his name - Bachelor of Science, Master of Science, PhD - and who is a wildlife consultant and extremely credentialed in the area of fox matters and fox issues said to us back in 2003 that if there were foxes in this State, if they were not killed off within three years, it was a lost cause; the game was all over. Here it is. I might add, the Fox Eradication Program ran with that as well. They did not take issue with that. They accepted it. Here we are now eight years on and the program is still running. If we sit back, the Government sits back, it will run for the next 20 or 30 years or whatever.

I have a lot here but I am not going to go into it other than to mention the budget decrease. There is a budget decrease of $5.962 million and I understand that comes about as a result of the cessation of the Australian Government funding for the Fox Eradication Program. I am not sure what that really means. The State, however, continues to throw money at a program that cannot be measured. I do notice that over the next three or four years there is a decrease through to 2014-15, from $20.99 million to $18.766 million. I am not quite sure whether that is -

Ms Rattray - They might be winding it back.

Mr DEAN - Probably. To me, perhaps it is a sign of them winding it back and if they wind it back like that, it will be -

Ms Rattray - Twenty years.

Mr DEAN - like I said. I just hope that the employment of the new manager, Craig Elliot, will make changes in that organisation. However, if he has only received briefings from members within the organisation and from personnel like Mr Mooney, then I am afraid he is going to come out with a very strong position one way only. That there are heaps of foxes here and they are all over the place.

I hope that he has been able to look at this in the right manner and talk to a lot of people outside of the organisation as well.

Mr Gaffney - Through you, Mr Deputy President - there might be an opportunity there to expand its goals, to look at other feral animals, which I think would be most acceptable by most Tasmanians.

Mr DEAN - I thank the member for Mersey for raising that. It is not often I bag an organisation where I do not come out with what I think should happen. I think that it is all very well to do it but you need to also have a positive side to it. I have said here, my position was very similar to what the Liberal Party has now come out with, that this organisation needs to be abolished. There is no doubt about that. It needs to be wound into other parts of that department. It should be moved into a biosecurity area. We do not want foxes in the State. I am the first to admit that. Nobody wants foxes in this State; they would be devastating and cause mayhem if they came here. So we need a better and much improved biosecurity area.

We need to look at that because we have other issues. A cane toad was recently found in the State. If you look at some of the other things that we have had in this State; we know that we have feral cats, we know that there are probably millions of them, and we know that they are taking hundreds of tonnes of native animals annually. So it is not a small matter. Yet they are running around all over the place, clearly visible and nothing is happening.

Ms Rattray - And they look like foxes.

Mr DEAN - And they look like foxes, a lot of them. You are damn right they look like foxes. In fact I will tell a quick story where I was travelling home her a few months ago with my wife and she said, 'That was a fox'. I said, 'I do not know, I did not really see it'.

Ms Rattray - You said, 'Out of the car'.

Mr DEAN - It was about midnight. So we reversed back up the road and I was able to light down the side of the road and there it was a big, mangy, ginger tom. I guess it was a tom, but it was a huge cat. That is the sort of thing that can happen. People have identified red possums as foxes. There was one case - I made a short statement in this Chamber two or three years go - where a lady from the mainland had found a fox. It was on the side of the road, it was a fox, she knew foxes, and she had lived with foxes all her life. They called down an officer from Wynyard to Westbury to get this fox and asked her to stay there. Of course they arrived there and it was an old red possum on the side of the road.

People have made mistakes. These are the changes that should be made. We need these changes made very quickly and it will save several million dollars to this State. By my calculations we will probably pick up in the region of $6 million by simply making that change and still ensuring that we have an adequate fox patrol operating in this State.

Interestingly, when this was run by the Premier, her position was, what would you do with the 45 members who currently are in the Fox Eradication Task Force? Well, the Premier has not worried too much about some of those areas that she is closing down, the laundry - linen area at Launceston; where they are going and what is going to happen to them. I am not too sure and I will mention that in a moment. But here, what you are doing is moving some of these members over into another part of the biosecurity part if that is where it was set up. That would take care of some of them. But a lot of those employees are on permanent part-time positions only. They are not permanent employees as such. They are on a limited duration. That is a very poor and lame argument that the Premier puts up as to why it might not or could not occur.

[4.00 p.m.]
I continue to say this program will be wound up in time. It has to be wound up in time. What it will say is we have been very successful and we now believe there are no foxes in the State with no evidence to show that there were any here before - no unchallengeable evidence.

The signs are interesting in this State, too, Mr Deputy President. If you read the signs, the signs say and I think I am right in saying this, 'Let's keep Tasmania fox free'. What does that indicate to me?

Mrs Taylor - That there are no foxes.

Mr DEAN - That there are no foxes in the State, 'Let's keep Tasmania fox free' - an interesting sign.

People have covered schools, Mr Deputy President, but I just want to touch on the Waverley Primary School. I was delighted to see that that was not in the list, because two years ago this school was going to be closed. Right or wrong. How it escapes I am not too sure, but I am very pleased it has.

Ms Rattray - I think it's the campaign Rob Soward is running.

Mr DEAN - Rob Soward has taken on credit for something that he was not really responsible for. I can tell you now that Michael Ferguson was involved very much in it. He had some involvement, Michael Ferguson, I and a number of other people were involved in the discussions and the debate that was going on and, as you might recall, I raised it in this Chamber a number of times with the Minister for Education at the time. The last time I questioned the minister in this House on this matter earlier this year, she indicated that a decision on Waverley would be made at the end of this year. Whether it was the end of this financial year we are coming to right now or the end of this calendar year, I am not too sure now, but she said a decision would be made. Now that school does not feature in the 20 identified schools for closure.

Mr Farrell - It might now.

Mr DEAN - It might now, you are damned right.

This State does things in some strange ways. At Waverley - and I would hope that they do not do the same with these schools here now - they sent a document out to all the people living in the area, to all the parents, asking them to answer a number of questions in relation to the closure of the Waverley school. They said a non-return of the document meant that they supported the closure of the school. As I understand it, it was not clearly articulated on the document that if you failed to return it it would be taken that you support it. That is how the department took it. If you did not return it you supported the closure of the school.

We know very well that if you send out documents to people that the return rate - and I do not know what it is - is normally about 30 or 40 per cent, if it is that high. People just do not return documentation and questionnaires.

Ms Rattray - Through you, Mr Deputy President - in this particular case parents won't be asked to fill in forms directly, it will be the school associations. There will be little chance of not returning forms, I expect.

Mr DEAN - Yes. Other members have touched on this. I am not going to add any more other than that there are cases where quite obviously schools should be closed. I do not think there is any doubt about that. Demographics change, people move on and very clearly you cannot keep schools open where you have very small numbers of people and huge numbers of staff and normally they do not get the education that they really are entitled to. A good example was where they wanted to close Rocherlea Primary School, move it to another area co-located with Brooks High School and provide modern-day facilities. The public did not accept that initially, until it was properly explained to them. I was involved in the committee that was set up to sell it to the public and I feel it was properly explained to them that their children would receive a much-improved standard of education, the most modern computer systems, technology, a very modern library, which they did not have at the school and everything else would be much better, greatly improved. It was sold on that basis and those people accepted it at the end. It happened fairly quickly thereafter. There are ways that it can occur and, as I said, some schools do need to be closed and they do need to look at times but I am not quite sure if the process is right on this occasion.

Mr Harriss - How many schools do you think might be capable of being kept open with the $15 million Hawthorn deal when they finished that? It could save the schools, what do you reckon?

Mr DEAN - I thought I was going to talk on the Hawthorn deal to finish up with but you are bringing it forward, aren't you. All I want to say on the Hawthorn deal is that I think it is a good deal. I think the Leader certainly got this right by way of interjection yesterday, I think it was. He got this right. If you look at the Hawthorn deal -

Mr Parkinson - Can you repeat that again please?

Mr DEAN - Listen to this. If you look at the Hawthorn deal and what this State has paid out, let me just tell you, in 2008 there were four rostered games at Launceston and one pre-season game at Launceston. That brought into this State, not just Launceston, an extra $15 million in spending.

Mr Harriss - What was the outlay for one year - $3 million?

Mr DEAN - In a one-year period, the outlay is about $3 million a year.

Mr Harriss - So, five to one.

Mr DEAN - Yes. It brought in about $15 million; a bit over.

Mr Harriss - So it's a five to one generator.

Mr DEAN - Well, I don't know.

Mr Harriss - So the North Melbourne deal is probably going to do the same and yet you don't accept the evidence for that.

Mr Mulder - It will be much bigger because there is less of an investment but the same return. So it won't be five to one; it will be a 15 to one generator.

Members interjecting.

Mr DEAN - Mr Deputy President, to suggest that the return will be similar to what the return of Hawthorn is in the north of the State is to live in fantasy land. If all else was equal, it could well be the case.

Mr Harriss - Even if it was two to one or three to one -

Members interjecting.

Mr DEAN - Nothing else is equal, Mr Deputy President. If you look at the membership bases of both these clubs, 57 000 or 58 000 for Hawthorn, about 28 000 for North Melbourne, about 7 000 members in this State are members of Hawthorn -

Mrs Taylor - But not when they started.

Mr DEAN - I think about 2 000 are members of North Melbourne.

Mr Harriss - Five-hundred thousand people in this State are members of Hawthorn.

Mr DEAN - I can show you the documentation.

Mr Harriss - A whole lot of us pay for it. We are all members.

Mr DEAN - There is some good documentation here.

Mr DEPUTY PRESIDENT - Order. I think the honourable member has mentioned the war, which probably was not wise.

Mr DEAN - Mr Deputy President, with the greatest respect to you, it was mentioned by way of interjection. I did not raise it. It was raised by way of interjection by the member for Huon.

Mr Harriss - He is trying to bail you out. The Deputy President is trying to bail you out.

Members interjecting.

Mr DEAN - Mr Deputy President, just let me say this to end. People would have seen the attendance records of North Melbourne, in Melbourne and away from Melbourne. The attendance records of North Melbourne to attract a crowd - anywhere - is abysmal. If you look at what happened with them and you then compare the attraction that Hawthorn has, either in Melbourne or away, they draw a crowd significantly greater.

Mr Harriss - Hawthorn were in the same boat before they came here and we propped up their finances. They were struggling; they were down the chute and that is in Melbourne.

Mr DEAN - North Melbourne is a basket case. The fact is that the AFL wanted to give Hawthorn, I think it was $7.5 million over five years to stay in Melbourne. They did not want them at any cost to enter into a further deal with this State because they wanted to offload North Melbourne at all cost. The fact is, Mr Deputy President, and I say this in all seriousness, we cannot afford, in this State, two AFL standard ovals. We cannot afford two international standard cricket ovals in this State. We cannot do that.

Mr Harriss - We have already got two AFL standard ovals.

Mr DEAN - We have not got that at all and the member for Huon knows very well -

Mr Harriss - Go and talk to Alastair Clarkson, he will tell you. He wanted to play at Bellerive.

Mr DEAN - The member for Huon knows very well that, for that oval to be successful at Bellerive, it has to be updated with an extra $21 million and we know very well that the 21 or 22 -

Mrs Taylor - No it doesn't; rubbish.

Dr Goodwin - That is for cricket.

Mr Wilkinson - That is for cricket.

Mr Harriss - Now you are in fantasy land.

Mr Wilkinson - Seriously, you have got your facts wrong in relation to that. Ask cricket; ask how many it takes to get into a cricket game. You are looking at the whole day at a cricket match; a completely different accommodation type set-up, number one. If you are worried about the south and the way they hunger for football, you have 8 000 people going along to see Akermanis play. I went last week to the same game and there were probably 300. So that is why they are thirsting for first-class footy. You multiply that because it is an AFL game and I think the proof of the pudding will be in the eating next year, we are probably premature talking about it now.

Mr DEAN - I am blaming you for raising this.

Mr Harriss - I was trying to help you.

Members laughing.

Mr DEAN - Mr Deputy President, let me just say this, it is interesting, isn't it, that in Western Australia there are two AFL teams playing in Western Australia.

Members interjecting.

Mr DEAN - How many AFL standard ovals do they have in Western Australia?

Mr Harriss - Two.

Mr DEAN - One.

Mr Harriss - The WACA is still AFL standard.

Mr DEAN - One ground that they play their AFL football games on in Western Australia.

Mr Harriss - By choice.

Mr DEAN - What about South Australia?

Members interjecting.

Mr DEAN - They had two AFL standard ovals in Adelaide but they have found that they cannot continue with that so they are now updating the one oval in Adelaide and the two teams, the two state sides will then play on that one ground. In Melbourne, what do they have in Melbourne? How many grounds do they have in Melbourne for all the games that are played in Melbourne? How many AFL standard ovals in Melbourne?

Mr Harriss - It's two - strategic directional change.

Mr DEAN - Two - Etihad stadium and the MCG.

Mr Harriss - Princess Park is AFL standard.

Mr DEAN - What I want to say, now that we are talking about that, is the position in relation to the deal - the deal that was done in relation to the funding of North Melbourne. Very clearly, and I do not think any member in this Chamber would be able to say, that the way that that deal panned out was not a good look. For the Premier to say that this State would not be providing any finance at all, would not be providing the $250 000 at all -

Mr Parkinson - TT-Line were happy.

Mr DEAN - and then all of a sudden, what she kept saying was, and I got sick of the phrase and I think other members would have too, she kept making the statement 'I could not help but think there was another way around this'. We all knew then when that started to come out there was going to be a GBE or a SOC - one or the other.

We knew that it was going to be one or the other but we did not know which one.

Mrs Taylor - It is just coming out of their normal marketing budget.

Mr DEAN - No, to do a $500 000 deal overnight is incredulous - and not even know the repercussions. To not even know what you are going to get out of it. To not even know what advertising you are going to get out of it is absolutely absurd in my view. Nobody else would do that sort of a deal. No private enterprise would do it. Nobody, except a government business or a SOC and very clearly the Premier put a position to them they could not refuse. There is no doubt about that. She called the meeting, she asked that the board meeting be called -

Mr Parkinson - You are being very parochial.

Mr DEAN - I am not being parochial at all. What annoys me, Mr Deputy President, now that has been raised -

Mr Parkinson - Think of Tasmania, my friend.

Mr DEAN - It annoys me that when you put a position that I believe, and many others believe is in the best interests of the State and the sustainability of AFL football in this State, or when you challenge anything that involves the north-south, north-west or Devonport versus Burnie, whenever you put up any issue like this you are challenged as being parochial. That is not the case. I am born and bred in the south of this State. I have strong connections in the south of the State and I have just as much interest in the south of the State as I do in the north of the State.

Mr Wilkinson - But this State is terribly parochial and that is part of the reason why it tears us apart. We have to think of the State as a whole.

Mr DEAN - You have to look over what you think and what you are saying is just simply that people are being parochial. You have to look over that, over the top of the parochial issue and look at the facts, the real facts of the whole thing. That is the only way, in my view, to make a judgment on this. It is comments like those made by the Lord Mayor of Hobart that really annoy me and I will not retaliate because I would not let myself down, when he referred to those in the north of the State as 'dumb decisions'. He used the word 'dumb' on a number of occasions. We are a 'dumb' lot or whatever it was, and 'dumb' decisions and so on. It is not what I would do.

Mr Mulder - I think the Hawthorn President was the one who accused you of being parochial, as far as I can recall.

Mr DEAN - No, he did not accuse any, he said there was parochialism. But I do not think that he involved any particular person as being parochial. I have not taken it that he said I was being parochial. He certainly used it in his blurb.

Mr Wilkinson - Like George Bailey and Ricky Ponting; they said the same thing, didn't they?

[4.15 p.m.]
Mr DEAN - They are from the south of the State. Ricky Ponting is not but there are many other issues, in my view, that are issues that should be determined before another football side comes into Tasmania. That is my view, and it needs to be sorted out.

Mr Parkinson - The business case stacks up.

Mr DEAN - I am glad you raised that. I was going to get off this subject as the Deputy President wanted me to leave this alone but they will not let me go, Mr Deputy President.

If you look at Deloitte's report, if you look at the Gemba report and then if you look at the other report that was done by the Chamber of Commerce I think and some of the businesses down here and by the Hobart City Council, there are lots of issues that arise within them that just do not stack up. For instance, that two games down here would bring $16 million, which has been put around by I think the Sextons and the Marti Zuccos. What these reports say is anywhere from three point something million dollars up to $8 million or whatever it is a game would probably be coming into the State. Now, all of a sudden, it became those two games would bring in $16 million.

The four games in 2008 with Hawthorn, which is a much better side with much stronger support in centrally located Launceston, only brought in fifteen point something million dollars to the State. So how the heck can two games in Hobart bring in $16 million?

Mr Wilkinson - Just wait and see next year.

Mr Parkinson - You have to give it a chance.

Mr Wilkinson - All the people who do the figures say that is what it is going to be. All we can do is give it a chance.

Mr DEAN - I am just going to touch a little bit on policing. The member for Elwick raised this and made some very important points.

These cuts to Tasmania Police will be devastating. I commend the Commissioner of Police for in effect not supporting the Minister for Police, David O'Byrne, for his comments that this Government was determined to keep Tasmania safe and secure by providing the most effective and efficient police service possible. How can you make that sort of statement when you are cutting large numbers out of the police service - numbers that it will take a number of years to recover from? You cannot replace police overnight. You cannot advertise for people out there with policing skills to come into the police organisation. The recruit course is almost a year. It takes almost 12 months to train. I think it is 35 or 37 weeks to train a recruit at a course at the academy of about 30 personnel. You cannot do it overnight. Once you drop behind it takes a long time to pick those numbers up and we have already heard about the numbers that simply leave the organisation throughout the year for some reason or another. Natural attrition also removes a lot of police.

I commend the Commissioner of Police for his stance on this. A lot of commissioners would have probably relented and would not have said too much in relation to it but the Commissioner of Police in this instance, Darren Hine, said that it was unrealistic to expect that changes will be made without impact, without a negative impact on the police service. He is absolutely right. Very clearly he or his organisation is going to suffer and it would be interesting just to see where it goes at the end of the day.

With the greatest respect to David O'Byrne, this is what happens when you have ministers responsible for portfolios who do not have a strong knowledge of those organisations and how they operate.

Mr Mulder - They are never there long enough.

Mr DEAN - They are never there long enough. They do not have an absolute appreciation of all of the issues. It is a recipe for danger and it has happened now over a period of time.

I was critical of the previous Minister for Police in this Chamber and of some of the issues that were occurring. I did not think the minister at the time had her head around them. To me, it is a poor way to do business and that is why we are getting ourselves into the problems that we are currently getting ourselves into. How can you provide the most effective and efficient police service possible by cutting its numbers so drastically? You just cannot do it, it is just impossible.

The Commissioner of Police has told us what will suffer in policing, Mr Deputy President. The cold case unit will be disbanded. That unit has resolved some very serious crime in this State. The Lake Leake one, for instance, was resolved as a result of cold case. The Devonport stabbing, a serious matter in Devonport, was resolved by this unit. Another South Hobart case, a murder, was a longstanding unsolved crime that was resolved by this unit, and there were many other cases resolved as a result of that. This will be abandoned as a result of these cuts. That to me is just not acceptable.

Mrs Taylor - It possibly supports PCYCs, which will make a huge difference.

Mr DEAN - You are right. We do not know where the rest of the cuts will come from. It just defies commonsense. What the police association is saying is right. The crooks will be rubbing their hands together. Less police, less likelihood of being caught. The issue made by the member for Rumney in his inaugural speech yesterday was critical. It is not about detecting crime, it is about preventing crime. It is about being able to prevent crime. You need all those prevention strategies and community programs in place. If PCYCs start to fall apart then you will find that there will be a greater opportunity to commit crime. It is a pretty sad situation. It will take a long time to catch up, there is no doubt about that.

Upgrading equipment is important and I support the Government for that but it is no good upgrading equipment if it is going to require more police personnel. It is a waste of time if it is going to require more police personnel to operate it and work with it. I notice that there are some more candy-coloured cars covered by it but you have to have police to put in them. They do not work by themselves. They are not remote-controlled vehicles.

Mr Mulder - They are saving some money on fuel for the Fortescue.

Mr DEAN - Well, the Fortescue cannot leave Constitution Dock so they are already saving a lot of money there. You are right, they put that into police vehicles.

Crashes and fatality rates on our roads have decreased over a period of time through a number of strategies. Are we likely to see those numbers increasing as a result of fewer police, because it will be fewer police? To say there will be as many police retained on the roads is absolute nonsense. That misleads the people. There will be more reports of crime and assaults and offences and so on. We know already that a lot is not being reported. We know that there are huge numbers of assaults and offences not being reported to police. Only one in four or five assaults and indecent assaults are said to be reported. It is huge numbers not reported.

Mr Parkinson - To the police?

Mr DEAN - Yes, not reported to the police. The police can only deal with what they know of.

Mr Wilkinson - What do you call it when you ring up and ask for some assistance, let us say because someone is breaking into your house and the police, you hope, are going to be on your doorstep in five or 10 minutes?

Mr Mulder - Response.

Mr Wilkinson - It has to affect the response time, hasn't it?

Mr DEAN - It has to affect the response times for the police. It will affect the response times for fire services and ambulance services and all of these other organisations as well. It will be right across the board but police response times will have to be slower.

Mr Mulder - Of course, reported crime will fall if there is no-one to report it to.

Mr DEAN - You are absolutely right. On the subject of police in courts, Mr Deputy President, it is tragic that this Government has never moved at all in relation to the removal of police from the Launceston courts. It is absolutely despicable. I can remember when the previous Minister for Police, the Honourable Lin Thorp, told us here in this Chamber that a report was being put together to go into Cabinet in relation to the removal of police from the courts in Launceston. That is what we were told earlier this year by the then Minister for Police. Where did that go? The minister finished up telling us that the report did not even get to Cabinet. They had made a decision to pull it before it even got to Cabinet. To me, it is just a disgraceful situation.

They were removed from Hobart 15 years ago -

Mr Wilkinson - Yes, it would be about that.

Mr DEAN - About 15 years, to my knowledge, I recall and I cannot understand why, because it would be much cheaper in the end, I would have thought, to have kept security personnel in those environments rather than police and it would have helped in this instance with the numbers of police. Those police would be released to come back out onto the streets where they should be on a full-time basis. It just does not make sense. It is illogical. I just cannot work it out.

I just wanted to finish with police by making a proposition that the State ought to look at. The SES is currently a part of Tasmania Police. I believe the SES would be most suited to coming under the arm of TFS - Tasmania Fire Service. They are more suited and fit in better to that area and although I have not discussed this with any of the services - police, fire and/or SES - I am just floating the situation now. I will tell you some of the benefits and advantages; there would be a lot of financial savings if that occurred.

If you look at some of the things that we should take into account, the TFS and SES could be combined to form Tas Fire and Emergency Services. Over time TFS and SES regional and statewide management positions could be integrated, with savings on a number of senior management positions. TFS and SES planning processes are becoming more closely aligned now. TFS projects, community fire safety plans, SES regional and State hazard plans, they are all becoming very closely aligned.

Many volunteers in small communities wear two or three hats - SES, ambulance and Tasmania Fire Service. One organisation would lessen the demands on volunteers with integrated training by putting the three of them together. Physical integration has already commenced with dual occupancy of facilities; in St Marys and George Town Tasmania Fire Service and SES stations are under the one roof. Over time, vehicles and equipment could be integrated, potentially requiring less vehicles. Similar skill sets are required for working at heights, urban search and rescue, general search and rescue and road accident rescue. There are similarities between TFS and SES.

Funding from SES complements would become more consistent across the State, that is the Tasmania Fire Service levy model, so there are opportunities there as well. I would float that and I would urge the Government to have a look at it. I have not spoken to the organisations and I will, but I believe that those two organisations would be much suited coming together, the TFS and the SES. Perhaps the State might consider that moving forward. They might have already considered it. The Leader might be able to tell us whether it has been considered or is likely to be considered. I believe that there are potential savings there for the State.

Mr Deputy President, there is funding in the Budget for the siltation in the Tamar River and estuaries, and I am not sure whether the member for Rosevears missed it or whether I am interpreting this incorrectly. There is an amount of money there, $5.750 million, which I think was committed in the last Budget and rolled over into this Budget. The Leader might be able to tell me more about that. That is in the Budget for both sedimentation in the Tamar River and for levee integrity. I am not quite sure how much goes to what - what the component is for the levees and what the component is for sedimentation extraction - but I would certainly like to know and maybe the Leader can tell me that. The member for Rosevears covered this well. There is no doubt about it; Launceston has been treated in a very shoddy manner in relation to the protection and support that it needs to keep these rivers flowing in Launceston. People who travel there would know what we are talking about. It is a disgrace; it is getting worse. It can never return to what it was because we have built on half of it. Invermay is built on the flood plain area; completely over it. A lot of people say it is returning to where it was, well, that cannot happen because the area and space is not there for it to return to where it was. It is an issue, it is a problem and it does need sorting out.

[4.30 p.m.]
The single statutory authority, as referred to by our select committee that I was involved in, is the way to go. Without doubt, it is the way to go. I think the member for Rosevears mentioned Mr Graeme Dear from the catchment management authority in Victoria of the system that they have in place at Bairnsdale, how it operates, what it did and just how successful it is. We could have a similar program here. No problem, that I am aware of, has ever been resolved where you have about 20 or 30 odd different organisations involved in it. There are just too many organisations involved in this to get it fixed. Nobody wants to take responsibility for it and there is too much duck shoving.

The main objector to this whole issue has been the NRM. They have not been really supportive of it at all. They may well be the organisation that should be set up to act as the single statutory authority. They are the ones with a lot of expertise and ability, current office space and everything else. It could be set up under the auspices of NRM.

Ms Rattray - Through you, Mr Deputy President - that was exactly the message that came from that briefing.

Mr DEAN - Yes, the member for Apsley was at that meeting at Launceston and it was a very good presentation from Graeme Dear. He highlighted a lot of these issues; you are right.

Mr Parkinson - What would the authority do?

Mr DEAN - The authority would accept responsibility for the whole of the Tamar, catchment areas and estuaries. That is what it would do. We would have one controlling body that would make the decisions and would be responsible for ensuring that things were happening. They would not necessarily do the work because of some of the other groups that would still be there but they would set it up the same as the catchment management authority does in Victoria. I would ask the Leader to have a look at the documentation that is in place from the catchment management authority in Victoria. It is a succinct document.

Mr Parkinson - Yes, but in the case of the Tamar it would be a dredging authority, would it?

Mr DEAN - Well, no. They would be responsible for ensuring that a dredging program was in place if that is what was needed; they would ensure that it was in place. They would be the organisation that would be required to access the funding and they would be responsible for the programs set in place. They would not do the work but they would be there as the administrators of it all, getting it all organised, making sure it was being done, putting things into place, as the catchment management authority does in Victoria. They do a lot of that with support of the community, volunteers and the farming area. TFGA would be involved and everybody would have a part in it. It is working extremely well. What happens here is that the Government keeps putting up this artificial figure, I think it is 16 to 18 million dollars to set up this authority. I think that is the amount. It is an artificial figure; it is not right. We did not identify any figure at all in the report but it would certainly be far less than that. Who knows, there could be sufficient funding there now for it. It would not require a lot more to get it up and it would fix a lot of these issues and problems.

I am taking notice of the sign in front of me, Mr Deputy President, and I think I probably need to finish fairly quickly. I have a couple of other issues I want to finish on.

On the Worker Assist program I want to compliment the Government. The Government has provided $100 000 to Unions Tasmania to administer Worker Assist and provide assistance to those injured at work. As a result of that - and once again, it was a great opening on the weekend - at Launceston we opened a workers' memorial park in Elizabeth Gardens at Inveresk. It is a State memorial park for the State and it is part of the Aurora Stadium precinct there, very close to it near the bowls club in Invermay Road. It is to recognise persons killed in their workplace.

I was intrigued to hear on the weekend from a Mr Harkins, I think it was, the union representative there, that in 2009, 9 273 Tasmanians were injured at work and 15 were killed. It seems a high number but I am confident that is the number he gave us at the opening of this memorial on the weekend.

It was great to see some of the parents and siblings of those who had been killed at work. It was a fairly emotional occasion. If you are in Launceston I would suggest you have a quick look at it. It is only a small memorial but it really identifies very clearly what it is about and gives people a place to think about their loved ones. It is a great spot and I commend the Government for their support there.

Hospital funding - I will not cover that. I have no doubt the member for Launceston will touch on that and other members have touched on it so I will leave that other than the fact that the three local areas of control has certainly been the way to go.

Sustainable transport - I will just quickly touch on that. Once again there is more funding in the Budget for sustainable transport moving forward. I just ask here that the State or the minister responsible, Mr McKim, not forget Launceston. Launceston have had a park and ride in place for some time and were in fact the first area of the State to have one in place and therefore I would ask that he give some consideration to providing some funds there. We have applied for them. We have written to the minister very recently because we do fit the criteria and I would hope that that does occur. In the current budget papers he is indicating there that there is an implementation strategy I think currently being considered for Hobart and Launceston. I would ask him to give Launceston some consideration because currently the ratepayer of Launceston is paying $250 000 or thereabouts a year to support this free park and ride option that we have in place. It is gradually building up and becoming a good position for us.

The last matter, Mr Deputy President, is the Office of the Ombudsman at Launceston. This is why you have to be so very careful in reading these budget papers. One of my officers picked this up by chance. About two lines were devoted to this in the budget papers where it says that the Office of Ombudsman at Launceston will close its doors as of next year I think sometime. I am not sure when but it says it is going to close the doors anyway and as a result of that they will be saving the great amount of $115 000. Well, Mr Deputy President, that is not right either because, as a result of the closure of that office, officers from this end of the State will have to travel to Launceston I would have thought on a fairly regular basis. Last year this office received probably more than 114 complaints. It is a fairly busy office. This is, once again, moving officers from the north of the State to the south of the State. If the Honourable Don Wing were here -

Ms Rattray - He would be horrified.

Mr DEAN - he would be horrified at, once again, public servants and staff being centralised in Hobart. He used to refer to it as the Hobart-centric public service that we had, and the managers in those organisations.

Mr Tony Byard has been in that office I think ever since it was opened in about 1999. He is not that far away from retirement age. What will happen to Mr Byard? He is domiciled in Launceston and his family is in Launceston. Is he likely to be offered a job in Hobart or will he simply be thrown out on his ear? It is a pretty devastating situation for him. I will talk to him when I get a chance to see just what is going on but, there you are, a decision made to shut off Launceston - get rid of the Launceston office. The whole thing is fairly tragic.

I do not think that Launceston will take it sitting down and in actual fact I think you have Mr Lynch saying that the Launceston community needs to stand up and be counted and should not be accepting all the losses that are going to occur in Launceston. He refers to the cutbacks in the laundering and tourism jobs in the north of the State - 23 jobs from the northern laundry service are now going to be done away with.

Mrs Taylor - It's going to a contractor, though. The work will still be done in Launceston but not by the hospital.

Mr DEAN - No, it is closing down the government linen service.

Mrs Taylor - Yes, but somebody else will still do the work.

Mr DEAN - But there are currently businesses in Launceston that are probably capable of picking up the work.

Mrs Taylor - If they don't need any more staff then this efficiency ought to be done

Mr DEAN - I just do not know. They might need more staff and some of these people will be employed in those areas, I would suspect, but I do not know how many. It was a fairly quick decision and we did not know too much about it. Then of course there is the other area in relation to Tourism Tasmania. That office used to employ 100 personnel going back a few years ago and now it will suddenly close and there will be nobody employed in it.

Where do all those people go? Probably out of Launceston. They will probably need to move to the south of the State or somewhere else for a position, so that also impacts.

Pretty clearly, it is a fairly devastating budget for a lot of people. It will be interesting to see where it goes from this point and it will be even more interesting, Mr Deputy President, to see the speeches and reviews that will be occurring this time next year. I think it will be a very interesting session. I will also be interested to hear and see the changes through the year. I think there will be a number of those changes.

I do not disagree with what other members have said, that there should be shorter reporting periods and quarterly reporting is probably the way that we should be asking to be adhered to. I heard what the Premier said on it at the business meeting - that is, that she does not want her officers working on reports all of the time and not doing what they should be doing, but I do think we need to know where we stand on some of these issues. Having said that, I will listen to the rest of the debate and will most likely be supporting the Budget.