Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - I, too, will be supporting this bill, Madam President, and I think this is one of those times when very clearly this legislation does have to get through and does have to get through at a certain time in order that the contract can be concluded. When I make that statement I draw a parallel between that and some of the other legislation that we have had to deal with from time to time where we have been put under pressure to pass legislation very quickly and you think back to the times that you have probably been burned in doing that. The Tasmania Tomorrow legislation is one of those occasions where through this procedure here we discussed the need for that to have been rushed through in the time at which it was, that we had concerns about. I certainly raised my concerns about it here and I think other members raised their concerns about it as well and now that position has been on the news, a train colloquialism here I suppose, has been absolutely derailed and -

Mr Parkinson - No, it hasn't.

Mr DEAN - Well, there are a lot of issues about it and the State cannot deliver as they said that they would with some of the schools now being deferred until they come on board with the Tasmania Tomorrow so there are problems with that.

Mr Parkinson - That doesn't -

Madam PRESIDENT - Before we get into a debate about Tasmania Tomorrow can we revert to the bill, thank you.

Mr DEAN - I raised that as an issue but in this instance I can see the reasons that this needs to go through and needs to go through in accordance with the requirements of the contract.

Mr Parkinson - It's not being rushed.

Mr DEAN - I do not have a problem in supporting this.

Mr Parkinson - There's no rush, take your time.

Mr DEAN - I will.

Very clearly we need a good rail service, Madam President, and I think that not only I, but all of those people during the last derailment where trains were off the track for quite a long period of time, noticed the increase in truck movements on the road. Travelling between Launceston and Hobart at all hours of the day and night the number of extra trucks on the road was incredible; a continual passing of them and them passing you et cetera. Very clearly we do need a good rail service. And when you look at the state of some of our roads I think that is another reason why it is important for this State to have a rail service that is exemplary.

The rail service needs to be a very good service. It needs to be a service that can move freight quickly. We were given an indication today during a briefing that if the rail is improved in the way in which it is indicated it will be, there will be four to five hours taken off the travel time with freight moving from Hobart to Launceston and back again.

If that sort of time can be taken off freight travel between those areas then very clearly there will be more people who would be wanting to use that service. People need to be confident of the service, they need to be assured that the service is going to be running on a continual basis and not being stopped because of derailments and whatever else happens. They need to have confidence in the service. I think that it can be a good service moving forward. During the briefing today, and I am not parochial by any means, the position of the headquarters of the service being in Launceston was mentioned and there was an indication given during the briefing that will remain the situation. If you look back at rail and look at Launceston's history with rail, it has been one of the strategic locations for rail in this State almost since its existence. If you look at the Inveresk site and what was there and the significance of that area to rail in this State. I am putting it on the record that an indication was given that that would be in Launceston. There are other occasions where we have been told that headquarters would be in Launceston for certain services and it has never eventuated.

I remind people in this Chamber of the water and sewerage services, the common services element of that change. Will it ever be in Launceston? I doubt it. This Government had an agreement or position given that it would be. We need to stand up so that there is some protection provided to Launceston and to the headquarters being retained in that area.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - Perhaps we could start locking the gate at Oatlands again.

Mr DEAN - Maybe. Metro have made the decision to move everything to Hobart so it will not be long before all the buses operate out of Hobart and there will be a bit of a move to Launceston occasionally. The other matter that I raised during the briefing was the need for the current employees to be protected throughout this change - 140 employees. We have been told that notices have already been sent out to them and that there have been a number of responses already by those people.

We were told that there is hope that 75 to 80 per cent, and it might even be higher, will be retained within that service. And all conditions will be retained. Conditions will be preserved and that is important for these people.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - Through you, Madam President - we were informed at the briefing that the Government would be happy to have 100 per cent of employees.

Mr DEAN - Yes, that is a good point made. I think everyone would hope that all those who do want to come back in will be there, 100 per cent of them but I suspect there may well be one or two who want to leave for whatever reason. That is normally the case. The Government have given an undertaking that nobody will be urged to leave the organisation and that they will be protected. That is one of the most important parts of this whole process.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - I am assuming then in that case there will be no redundancies. If there is the 100 per cent retention rate hoped for, there would obviously be no redundancies.

Mr DEAN - That is a question that the Treasurer might be able to answer later on but I would suspect in the circumstances that if anybody wishes to leave they would simply leave with the entitlements they are entitled to and that would be it but no redundancy would be offered in the circumstances. It is very important, Madam President, that that does occur.

I thank the Government for their briefing today which answered a lot of my questions and I think expedited this process through the Chamber.

Mr McIlfatrick's comment this morning was interesting in relation to dividends and the money that may well be generated through this rail service. He was saying that if there were a dividend it could be worth $2 million or $3 million. He was hopeful that the Government would allow that to remain within the service and to be put back into improving rail. I would suggest that there would be plenty of places where that money could be spent on rail to improve it over the next decade or so.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - I have a few ideas. I'm hoping that they will want to visit me to talk about it.

Mr DEAN - That is good. I think it is very important that this infrastructure be built up to a very high standard and as quickly as is possible. It is vital that we have that good service. I reiterate my position concerning the need for the headquarters to be in Launceston where it ought to be.