John's speech in Parliament on the Hurlstone Agricultural High School Site Bill

Dr JOHN KAYE [3.03 p.m.]: On behalf of the Greens I give enthusiastic support to the Hurlstone Agricultural High School Site Bill 2009. The Greens enthusiastically support this bill because it is extremely clear to anybody who has their eyes open that the agricultural land at Hurlstone Agricultural High School should not be sold. It is extremely clear that every single square metre of land at the Hurlstone Agricultural High School site contributes to quality educational outcomes and quality agricultural educational outcomes in a multicultural, public education setting. It is clear that the sale of the land is bad for public education, it is bad for agriculture and food production, and it is bad for the future of south-western Sydney.

I urge any members of Parliament, including the Hon. Lynda Voltz, who are considering opposing the bill to visit the Hurlstone Agricultural High School, as I did on a very hot and steamy Saturday afternoon in late February as a guest of the parents and citizens association. When you see the site and talk to the kids you are infected by the enthusiasm of those young people for their farm—they refer to it as "their" farm and they refer to the cows as "our" cows—it is their farm and not ours to sell. When you see the goats—which you do in this place a lot—the sheep, the alpacas, the vegetable plots, the pigs, the dairy and beef cattle, and you see the interaction between the students and those animals, when you see the sense of ownership that the children have over that farm, you know that the Government just cannot sell it.

Go to the school at 5.00 a.m. and see the kids getting up for squad. You will see them getting up at that time to volunteer to work in the dairy, to muster the animals and to work on the vegetable plots, and you will understand that these children are committed to public education and agricultural education at Hurlstone. I urge the Hon. Lynda Voltz to go and talk to the teachers and learn from them about their commitment to public education in an agricultural setting being available to all children throughout the State, and not just to the wealthy who can afford private schools.

But you do not need to take this from me, or from Charlie Lynn, or from any of the Opposition spokespeople. You do not even need to take it from your own colleague, Dr Andrew McDonald, who came out against the sale. You want to take it from groups like the Save Hurlstone's Educational Agricultural Property, New South Wales Farmers, the Parents and Citizens Federation, the school council, the teachers, the New South Wales Teachers Federation, the Isolated Children's Parents' Association, the Australian Livestock and Property Agents Association, the Australian Ayrshire Breeders' Association, Professor Peter Wynn from Charles Sturt University, Dr Russell Bush from the University of Sydney, the Australian Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, the Australasian Register of Agricultural Consultants, the Royal Agricultural Society, the Sydney Food Fairness Alliance, Campbelltown and Camden councils—and the Labor councillors on those councils—and the Shires Associations, and countless more organisations that have more sense than the Labor Government and understand that we should not sell this land. The land does not belong to us to sell: it belongs to the current and future generations of public education students from the city and the bush.

Anyone who opposes this bill should have the courage to go out there and confront those children and tell them the Government is going to sell off their land. Tell them as they are raising those cattle for the Royal Easter show. Tell them as they are milking those cows. Tell them as they are producing prize-winning dairy cattle for the Royal Easter show that you want to take that away from them.

The Hon. Robert Brown: Get a bit of passion into you, John! Tell us how you feel.

Dr JOHN KAYE: I try. I appreciate your advice. Hurlstone Agricultural High School has produced leaders, not only leaders in agriculture but doctors, lawyers, accountants and even, I might say, politicians—even Labor politicians. Two very famous Labor politicians have come through Hurlstone Agricultural High School. I note that the one Hurlstone graduate in this Parliament, even though a member of the Labor Party, has put his career on the line to oppose this sale. He has had the courage to come out and say it is wrong. Those who have been through Hurlstone Agricultural High School, even if they do not go into agriculture, understand the importance of the interplay between agriculture and education.

The opportunity that city kids get to understand food and fibre production is extremely important. Right now, like never before, we should be concerned about the future of food and fibre production because we are running out of the professionals and the farmers who are responsible for keeping us fed and clothed. The average age of a farmer in Australia is 54 years, and 50 per cent of Australian public sector agricultural employees—and that figure is climbing—are due to retire in the next five years. In 2001, there were 850 agricultural graduates from Australian universities. By 2006, that number had fallen to 780. By 2011, the Australian Council of Deans of Agriculture predicts it will fall to 720—a steady long-term decline in the number of people who understand the profession of agriculture.

In agriculture last year there were 2,000 vacancies for 780 graduates. This is the worst possible time in the history of humanity to be losing agricultural specialty. Whether or not members believe in climate change, we are now in the middle of a drought that rivals the Federation drought in terms of its impact on agriculture. The economic changes, including deregulation and the recent collapse in the price of dairy milk, are putting huge stress on the survival of Australian farmers. We are facing international competition for core produce such as we have never seen before. The future of Australia's food and fibre production hangs in the balance.

It is senseless and irresponsible to be selling off land at Hurlstone Agricultural High School at a time when agriculture faces historically high levels of stress. Despite what Minister Verity Firth, Premier Nathan Rees and the Government have said, Hurlstone Agricultural High School is unique. It is not comparable to James Ruse High School. James Ruse is an excellent school, one of the country's leading high schools. I will never let a bad word be said about it. But it is no substitute for Hurlstone Agricultural High School. Hurlstone has boarding and a fully functional farm. James Ruse, a great school, has less than 15 hectares of farmland.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Buy more land.

Dr JOHN KAYE: Reverend Fred Nile is going to find money to buy more land for James Ruse. Agriculture cannot be taught by modelling a farm on a few cows and sheep. Students cannot learn agriculture techniques by watching somebody else handling a few cows and sheep. Agriculture is a hands-on activity, and agricultural students need to learn in a hands-on environment. Agriculture is not only about animals; it is also about sustainable land management. Without land to manage, students cannot be taught sustainable land management. This does not take away from James Ruse High School as an excellent high school. But Hurlstone is different and unique and provides opportunities for students to understand sustainable land management.

Hurlstone is not like Yanco Agricultural High School or Farrer Memorial Agricultural High School. Both those schools are truly excellent schools, but neither is located in the Sydney Basin. Neither school has opportunities for urban children to live at home and attend an agricultural high school. I have met students at Hurlstone who come from south-western Sydney. They had no idea about agriculture until they attended Hurlstone. They are going to be the food and fibre production leaders of tomorrow because of their experience at Hurlstone. Using its favourite party trick, the Government says that Hurlstone's farm is on 140 hectares or 160 hectares, depending on the day of the week. That is not true. Hurlstone cohabits the site with three other specialist schools, a Department of Education and Training facility and a memorial forest. The Government discovered the memorial forest only after it had told the public that it was going to sell it off for real estate development.

The Hon. Charlie Lynn: They didn't know and didn't care.

Dr JOHN KAYE: They did not care until it was shoved down their throats. The Government says that Hurlstone Agricultural High School has surplus land. That is not true. Every square metre of Hurlstone is used. It may not be obvious to inner-city people such as me, but I went out there and put my feet on the ground. I urge the Government members who are busy talking to close their mouths, go out to Hurlstone, put their feet on the ground and talk to the students. They will then understand that every square metre is used. There are empty paddocks, but those empty paddocks are used to teach students about rotating crops as part of pastoral management to control intestinal parasites. Government members would know all about intestinal parasites.

This school teaches young people, the farmers and agricultural scientists of tomorrow, that agriculture is not just about using chemicals. It teaches them that there are sustainable rotational techniques for treating parasites. If the Government sells off just one hectare of Hurlstone, it will undermine the ability of the school to teach ethical, sustainable agriculture in a hands-on, multicultural, city-country balanced fashion. It is a shocking time—it is like no other—to sell the land.

I refer now to the origin of the sale. Hurlstone is not the only target of the Rees Government in public education. The mini-budget identified $239 million of accelerated land sales. Half of that was to go back into public education buildings. The medical profession refers to that as autophagia, which means eating oneself, or self-cannibalism. According to a memorandum dated 11 November 2008 from Michael Coutts-Trotter, the Director General of the Department of Education and Training, the money was to be used to pay the salaries of nurses and police officers. I have no problems with paying the salaries of nurses and police, but the Government is embarking on the sale of a capital asset to balance the operational costs of the budget. Not only is that economic insanity, but also the Government will run out of property to sell and the State will have no assets. It is not sensible.

The Government fails economics 101 and household management 101 if it sells capital assets to pay for its ongoing costs. If the Government has a problem, it should borrow the money or find other revenue sources, but it should not sell capital assets. Minister Verity Firth was caught with a memorandum from the Department of Education and Training saying that the Government will target every public high school site over six hectares and every public primary school site over three hectares. They are the targets for the sell-off. At that point the Minister hopped up and said, "Goodness gracious me, I didn't know about that. No, we certainly would not do that."

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: You should be happy about that.

Dr JOHN KAYE: I am happy about that. But what is she going to sell? She has Joe Tripodi and Eric Roozendaal holding her by the scruff of the neck telling her that she has to raise $239 million in cash from the sales over the next three years. It is up to her to demonstrate to the people of New South Wales which schools will be targeted. If it is not every high school over six hectares or every primary school over three hectares, exactly what schools are on her chopping block? When the Minister was challenged on this she ran away and she still refuses to tell the people of New South Wales how she will raise that $239 million in accelerated land sales. That means that every public school in New South Wales has to take a close look at this.

This is not just a battle to save Hurlstone; this is a battle to save public education from the economic vandals who run Treasury and call the shots, Treasurer Eric Roozendaal and the finance Minister Joe Tripodi. The call by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for papers reveals some extremely interesting facts: not only that this was an incompetent effort to sell off Hurlstone but also it was an effort motivated by malign intent. Following advice from Chris Taggart, the Department of Education and Training initially thought it was going to raise $217 million. Within days of the announcement of the sale Minister Verity Firth's adviser David Boyd and Director General Michael Coutts Trotter received an email from Kate Meagher, which said:

We are happy to work up a holding line with you in terms of the potential land available for sale—but it doesn't look anything near 140 hectares available—more like 50.

Ms Meagher found that out by looking at a few maps of the site. No-one from the department bothered to go out to Hurlstone and talk to the teachers and students and look at the site. After they announced that they were going to sell 145 hectares, their initial bid, they decided to look at a few maps and found there were lots of areas at Hurlstone they could not sell. By February 2009 consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers told them that it was not a good time to sell land and the price had gone down.

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: Any buyers in New York?

Dr JOHN KAYE: Maybe that is what Joe was doing over there. The $270 million has fallen back to a maximum of $78 million. At that stage the department told PricewaterhouseCoopers and PricewaterhouseCoopers blew the whistle in its report, which stated:

The Department is expecting to realise the money by March 2011

The Department discussed the following regarding the sale of the land at Hurlstone: To maximise the value realised from the sale in time for 2011.

March 2011! Can the interjectors on the Labor benches remind me what is happening in March 2011? They are selling off this land to meet their election commitments. They are selling off the future of public education so they can look good at the election. It is not going to work; it will simply make them look even cruddier than they currently look. There is huge community resistance to this sale. I pay tribute to Dr Andrew McDonald—the good McDonald in Labor, not the one we have to put up with in this place. In a media release on 14 April Dr McDonald said:

I will be opposing the sale at any inquiry.

I have had representations from all sections of the community covering the whole of the political spectrum.

I think that includes the Greens—

There is very little support in the Community for the sale.

Adding up all the issues, this sale is unnecessary and will have no net benefit to South Western Sydney or the rest of New South Wales. I urge the Government to abandon this proposed sale.

He is not alone in saying that. Perhaps the shoddiest issue relates to the inquiry. In the documents obtained by the House we see the following key quote from a member:

The cost of engaging the leader of the enquiry and consultant support would be funded out of the gross proceeds of the sale of land.

It will be an independent inquiry that will be paid for out of the proceeds of the sale of the land! Will an inquirer say, "No, the land should not be sold because I do not want to get paid for the inquiry"? Even with the best will in the world, the inquiry is compromised before it begins. But it gets worse. The inquiry will be overseen by a steering committee comprising a representative of the Minister of Education, an officer from the Department of Education, an officer from the Department of Premier and Cabinet, an officer from Treasury and an officer from the Department of Planning. Every move the independent inquirer makes will be overseen by a bunch of bureaucrats and political advisers. That is not an independent inquiry; that is a recipe to ensure that the site is sold off. However, we have now seen the terms of reference for the inquiry, which were released yesterday, interestingly enough, during the progress of debate on this bill. The terms of reference still contain at paragraph 7 (b):

(b) which parts or part of the land the current site of Hurlstone Agricultural High School should be sold, having regard to the uses to which the proceeds of any sale will be put

It is more evidence of the autophagia agenda of the Rees Government. It is selling off public education to fund improvements to public education that should be happening anyway. If the inquirers are honest and honourable and if this is done fairly and squarely, any independent examination of the values of Hurlstone ought not just conclude that the land should not be sold but that none of the land should be sold. I am not convinced that with the constraints that have been put on the inquirer and on the steering committee, and with the financial perverse incentive that has been put onto the inquirer, that that is what we will get.

It is time for the Government to recognise that it has bitten off far more than it can chew with the students, the public, the alumni of Hurlstone Agricultural High School, the teachers and the organisations, who are not going anywhere until 100 per cent of Hurlstone Agricultural High School is safe and secure in public ownership. Those who put public education ahead of balancing a short-term bottom line in the budget will not go away, the Greens will not go away, the Coalition will not go away, and the people of New South Wales will not go away on this issue. [Time expired.]