Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 (Proof)

Hansard & Papers » Legislative Assembly » 23 November 2011 » Full Day Hansard Transcript » Item 8 of 51 »

Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 (Proof)
About this Item
Speakers - Mihailuk Ms Tania; Rowell Mr Jai; Gee Mr Andrew; Assistant-Speaker (Mr Andrew Fraser); Anderson Mr Kevin; Torbay Mr Richard; Rohan Mr Andrew; Lee Dr Geoff; Amery Mr Richard; Cornwell Mr Andrew; Flowers Mr John; Roberts Mr Anthony
Business - Bill, Message, Agreement in Principle, Passing of the Bill, Motion

AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES AMENDMENT BILL 2011
Page: 16
Agreement in Principle

Debate resumed from 9 November 2011.

Ms TANIA MIHAILUK (Bankstown) [11.40 a.m.]: I lead for the Opposition on the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. The Opposition will not oppose this bill. I thank the Minister for Fair Trading for providing my office with a copy of the bill and accompanying briefing documents. The bill aims "to replace the current arbitration system for determining disputes relating to agricultural tenancies with dispute resolution and determination by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal". I will briefly outline some of the features of the bill. The provisions in section 21 (3) of schedule 1 [12] to the bill limits the tribunal to making orders of up to $500,000. It also increases the previous limit for these matters from $100,000. The tribunal routinely handles matters up to $500,000 and as such the increase in limit for agricultural tenancy matters brings this in line with those matters. This is a sensible limit that is appropriate for the subject matter given the size of the land allotments usually in question.

Section 22 of schedule 1 [12] ensures that matters are required to go through alternative dispute resolution before progressing to a tribunal determination. This is also commendable as it provides parties with an opportunity to resolve their differences in a more informal setting before appearing before the tribunal. As a result of the bill the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal will be able to handle agricultural tenancy matters concerning evictions and rental arrears. Presently these matters have to be resolved in the courts. We support the amendment to have these matters heard by the tribunal instead. During the past two weeks my office has had discussions with the NSW Farmers Association and the Public Service Association, which represent the major stakeholders in this matter.

The Farmers Association has assured me that its concern with the bill has been adequately addressed. The association was concerned that the proposal to shift the arbitration of agricultural tenancy to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal might result in a loss of expertise of the Department of Primary Industries personnel involved in these matters. However, the association has been guaranteed that the Department of Primary Industries personnel will be available to provide expert advice. Furthermore, many tribunal offices are located in rural and regional areas. As such, the staff of the tribunal are likely to have experience with rural and regional matters.

I have also received advice from the Public Service Association. It was initially concerned that the proposal might lead to job losses in the Department of Primary Industries. However, the Public Service Association has confirmed that it has no concerns about job losses as a result of the bill. Presently, all initial inquiries regarding agricultural tenancies to the Department of Primary Industries are handled by existing legal staff rather than a separate officer or officers. The arbitration work is then outsourced by the Department of Primary Industries with the costs borne by both parties involved in the matter. The Public Service Association is of the view that this proposal will reduce costs for those farmers involved in agricultural tenancy matters. I ask the Minister to address the issue of job losses in his speech in reply and to confirm that the understanding that the Public Service Associations and I have is correct.

As with all matters in the Minister's portfolio, we would expect that the bill when in force will be subject to a process of review to determine the effectiveness of this amendment. There does not appear to be a formal mechanism for review within the bill, but I hope that some provision exists by which the Minister can be assured that there are no issues with this proposal. I ask the Minister to also address this issue in his speech in reply and to confirm that the amendment will be subject to review. I also put on record that the State Government is presently undertaking a review of the structure and potential merger of State tribunals. In fact, submissions for that review close this Friday. While I will not pre-empt or presume the outcome of that review, its determination is likely to affect the subject matter of the bill. I ask that the Minister address how the different models proposed in the issues paper might affect the ability of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal to resolve agricultural disputes.

In particular, should the tribunal be merged with another body, would it be likely to result in the closure of the rural and regionally based tribunal offices? If that were to occur the NSW Farmers Association may well have cause for concern. As I have outlined previously, the Farmers Association has been assured that existing expertise will remain within the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal and the Department of Fair Trading due to the fact that many officers of these bodies are based in rural and regional areas. I am sure that the Minister is well aware of the potential unintended outcomes of this review. I ask that he reassure the House regarding this matter. In conclusion, I repeat that the Opposition does not oppose this bill. The proposal is sound and well thought out—with the exception of the issues I have raised. I look forward to the Minister's response regarding those issues. I commend the Minister for introducing this bill and I commend it to the House.

Mr JAI ROWELL (Wollondilly) [11.46 a.m.]: I congratulate the member for Bankstown on her first ministerial response. I note that the member for Keira is watching eagerly from his office.

Ms Tania Mihailuk: He wants to speak to this bill too.

Mr JAI ROWELL: We will wait for the member for Keira to into the Chamber to hear what he has to say about this bill.

Mr Mark Coure: He'll be a shadow Minister by Christmas.

Mr JAI ROWELL: He will be a shadow Minister by Christmas. That is certainly what he is saying. I support the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. The agricultural sector has had a lot to deal with. In recent times we have seen droughts, floods, bushfires and major pest plagues. For most of the populace these are usually the types of events that are experienced by other people who live in faraway places. That our State continues to provide a high level of agricultural produce in the face of these challenges is a major testament to the skill, knowledge and perseverance of our farming industry.

Anything that can help the farmers has my support. That is one of the reasons I am pleased to speak in support of the bill today. The Minister has consulted on the proposals contained in the bill and they are supported by the NSW Farmers Association. As members have heard, the proposed amendments in the bill will confer jurisdiction to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal to determine agricultural tenancy disputes. Currently these disputes are dealt with by the legal branch of the Department of Primary Industries with the assistance of external mediators and arbitrators. The tribunal will be able to carry out these roles in-house in a far more efficient and cost effective way.

For the past decade the tribunal has provided dispute resolution services for residential tenants and landlords, retirement village residents and operators, general consumer claims about goods or services, home building matters, residential park residents and operators, strata and community schemes, and a range of commercial matters such as consumer credit and estate agents' commissions. Each year the services of the tribunal are sought out by an increasing number of people as more members of the public discover what the tribunal can do for them. The tribunal's annual workload is quite significant. I congratulate the staff of the tribunal on their work.

During the 2010-11 financial year the tribunal received 58,808 applications, held 72,836 hearings and made 88,339 orders. Even more impressive is the fact that 74 per cent of those matters were finalised at or before the first hearing. I know from my background in law that that certainly is not the case in other sectors of the judiciary. There is no doubt that the tribunal is ideally placed to provide a dispute resolution system for agricultural tenancies. The tribunal has the experience and expertise required to take on this role. It is committed to providing a high quality service to its clients and it maintains a high standard of transparency and accountability.

It is important that the essential features of the current arbitration system are being retained, with conciliation to be attempted before a matter can go to a formal hearing. The tribunal already places a strong emphasis on the use of alternate dispute resolution measures such as mediation and conciliation. During my training at the University of Western Sydney, Macarthur, I too studied these techniques. They certainly are a much better way of doing things. This is the same approach used by the current arbitration system for agricultural tenancies disputes, where mediation has proved to be a very effective tool. The tribunal is also subject to the rules of procedural fairness, which ensure the impartiality of proceedings.

The amendment bill proposes a number of enhancements that will provide a more comprehensive service than the one currently provided for under the Agricultural Tenancies Act. The current arbitration system has some limitations and cannot deal with disputes involving rent arrears, evictions or amounts in excess of $100,000. These matters can be heard only in the courts. Under the new system the tribunal will be able to resolve these types of disputes and the jurisdictional limit will be increased to $500,000. This is equivalent to the tribunal's existing jurisdiction under other legislation. Providing for a wide range of disputes to be settled outside the courts will reduce costs both for landowners and tenant farmers and also help to reduce pressure on the court system.

There are a number of other measures in the bill that will make the new dispute resolution system more affordable. Agricultural tenancy disputes will be handled by the tribunal's commercial division. There will be a sliding scale for application fees based on the amount of money involved. The fees range from $36 to a maximum of $191. Of course, the tribunal can reduce fees for pensioners and in special circumstances such as hardship the fees can be waived. Under the tribunal's system, parties to disputes will not have to pay for the cost of mediation, assessors or hearings, which will reduce their costs significantly. For example, under the existing arbitration system, assessors can cost around $800 per day. Under the current arbitration system appeals can be made on an error of law and are heard by the Supreme Court. As the tribunal has its own re-hearing procedures and appeals are made to the District Court this provides for further cost savings.

Members of the tribunal are independent statutory officers are appointed by the Governor. The required qualifications for tribunal members are listed in the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act. Tribunal members must have experience in one or more of the areas under the tribunal's jurisdiction as well as having ability and experience in alternate dispute resolution procedures. Members will be pleased to know that a number of tribunal members live and work in regional and rural areas and will already be quite familiar with local industries and issues. There will also be training of tribunal members before the new system commences and the Department of Primary Industries will continue to provide expert advice to the tribunal under a memorandum of understanding that will be entered into. A number of questions have been raised about the bill. I congratulate the Minister—

Mr Troy Grant: A good Minister.

Mr JAI ROWELL: He is a great Minister as evidenced by all the work he is doing. It is great to see Ministers take an interest in these types of issues. He is working day and night to make New South Wales number one again. The question was raised as to why the Agricultural Tenancies Act was transferred to the Fair Trading portfolio. The idea came from an internal review of the Department of Primary Industries' functions, which found that dispute arbitration was not a core function of the department. Dispute arbitration is handled by a paralegal officer in the Legal Services Branch of Primary Industries and requires specific procedures that have limited application as they are relevant only to the handful of matters that arise each year. The review also found there is a potential conflict of interest between the department's roles in administering the legislation and arbitration of disputes.

Mr Troy Grant: That is correct.

Mr JAI ROWELL: It is. It was suggested it would be more appropriate to transfer the dispute resolution role to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal given the tribunal's expertise in tenancy issues and resolving disputes.

Mr Troy Grant: The right people.

Mr JAI ROWELL: As the member says, it is the right people doing the right job. That is fundamental to this Government—creating jobs to deliver outcomes for the people of New South Wales, not just creating jobs for the sake of creating jobs. It was agreed that if responsibility for the dispute resolution role was transferred it would also be appropriate to transfer the administration of the Agricultural Tenancies Act to the Fair Trading portfolio. The Minister has been working very hard and has undertaken a lot of consultation. The key industry stakeholder in agricultural tenancies is the NSW Farmers Association. The association has been consulted a number of times since the transfer of responsibility for agricultural dispute resolution was initially proposed. Before the drafting of the bill the association was consulted again and has confirmed its support for the transfer of the dispute resolution role. Ongoing consultation was also undertaken with the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal to address any issues concerning the proposed transfer. Both the NSW Farmers Association and the tribunal have been consulted, as has the Law Society of New South Wales, and all comments were taken into account and helped guide the final form of the bill.

The question has also been raised as to whether the new dispute resolution service will increase the tribunal's operating costs. The additional responsibility for agricultural tenancy disputes is not expected to have a measurable impact on the tribunal's operational costs. During the last financial year the tribunal received almost 60,000 applications and held almost 80,000 hearings across the State. In comparison, the Department of Primary Industries receives roughly 20 inquiries a year about agricultural tenancy disputes and about 12 of these matters progress to an application. Most of these disputes are resolved by mediation or conciliation and there are only one or two hearings a year. This is a very small number of additional matters and will not have a significant impact.

Mr Troy Grant: It will be absorbed in the current framework.

Mr JAI ROWELL: It certainly will be. Will the tribunal's dispute resolution service be accessible in farming regions? Absolutely; the services provided by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal are highly accessible. The tribunal has eight registries, including three in rural and regional areas, and conducts hearings in more than 70 locations around the State. This widespread choice of venues will make it easier for hearings to be held in a convenient location for the parties to a dispute. It will also be easier for people to lodge applications. Applications can be lodged online, by fax, by post or in person at any tribunal registry or Fair Trading centre. Information about the tribunal's service is available from any Fair Trading centre. People also have the option of calling the tribunal or Fair Trading telephone inquiry centres, or visiting the tribunal's website or the Fair Trading website.

Under the tribunal's dispute resolution service parties to a dispute will have the same rights they have under the current arbitration process. The tribunal's dispute resolution system will be very similar to the current process. Disputes will be dealt with by a combination of mediation, conciliation and hearings. However, parties to a dispute will have an additional right to seek a re-hearing of a dispute and will still be able to appeal decisions to a higher court, which is very important. The tribunal will be able to determine disputes about any matter that comes under the Agricultural Tenancies Act. This includes disputes about improvements carried out by tenants or landowners, tenants' fixtures, compensation for stored products and compensation for deterioration in the condition of a farm. Under the current arbitration system applications cannot be accepted for disputes about evictions, rent arrears or amounts in excess of $100,000.

The tribunal will have jurisdiction over a broader range of disputes. The tribunal will be able to accept applications for disputes relating to evictions, rental arrears or disputes involving amounts up to $500,000. The tribunal's existing dispute resolution processes emphasise the use of mediation and conciliation, as I indicated earlier. The bill makes it mandatory for all agricultural tenancy dispute applications to be referred to mediation. If the mediation is unsuccessful, the dispute can go to a hearing. However, the chairperson of the tribunal will still retain the option of appointing an assessor to inquire into and report on a dispute before it progresses to a formal hearing. Most matters that are dealt with under the existing dispute resolution process are resolved by discussion or mediation and do not require a formal hearing. It is anticipated that these outcomes will continue to be achieved for agricultural tenancy disputes.

To ensure that technical assistance on agricultural tenancies is readily available a memorandum of understanding will be entered into with the Department of Primary Industries for the provision of advice as may be required. Tribunal members are already experienced in the whole gamut of issues involving various kinds of tenancies as well as commercial matters. I also note that tribunal members who live in rural and regional areas where agricultural tenancy disputes are likely to arise may already be quite familiar with a whole range of farming activities. Having grown up in places like Mudgee and spent a few months in Coonamble as well I certainly know how important this bill and its impact will be to those communities.

I note that the member for Orange is nodding his head. It will certainly help the people in his electorate. I also note that all of my Nationals colleagues in the Chamber today are nodding and are excited about this bill. This is the New South Wales Liberal-Nationals Government getting on with the job. The Minister for Fair Trading has done a fantastic job in making sure that this bill is before the House within our first year of government. There is every reason to support the measures in the bill. Those measures will ensure the ongoing provision of an accessible and affordable dispute resolution system for agricultural tenancies. I commend the Minister for Fair Trading and I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ANDREW GEE (Orange) [12.02 p.m.]: I support the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. The apparent lack of interest in this important piece of legislation by those on the Labor benches is sad to behold.

Mr Troy Grant: There is none there.

Mr ANDREW GEE: I gaze across the table and see the empty benches but I am not surprised because, after all, this is a bill that deals with agricultural issues.

Mr Troy Grant: There are five Nationals members in the Chamber.

Mr ANDREW GEE: There are five Nationals members in the Chamber today, which is fantastic to see. This is a bill that deals with agricultural issues and we know that Labor has never really been focused on agricultural issues. It is fair to say that Labor Party members of Parliament from country New South Wales are pretty thin on the ground at the moment.

Mr Troy Grant: Where are they?

Mr ANDREW GEE: That is a good question. I need to inform the House of an important piece of information that has come to my attention.

The ASSISTANT-SPEAKER (Mr Andrew Fraser): Order! The member will be heard in silence.

Mr ANDREW GEE: It is a relevant point that needs to be made. The member for Monaro has pointed out to me today that apparently meetings of Country Labor are now held in phone boxes in either Newtown or Glebe. It is a very exclusive club.

Mrs Barbara Perry: You cut me.

Mr Troy Grant: Six Nationals in the Chamber.

Mr ANDREW GEE: Six Nationals in the Chamber now. Apparently to get into the meeting—

Mrs Barbara Perry: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. I ask that you bring the member back to the leave of the bill. He clearly has nothing to say about the bill if he has to carry on.

The ASSISTANT-SPEAKER (Mr Andrew Fraser): Order! The member for Orange will return to the leave of the bill and ignore interjections.

Mr ANDREW GEE: I will move on. Suffice it to say that I will note Country Labor is an exclusive club because, to get into the phone boxes at Newtown or Glebe, you need to have a bottle of chardonnay and be wearing roman sandals. If you do not have those, you do not get into Country Labor meetings. You know where they are because they attach a set of wind chimes to the outside of the phone box—they hitch them up and away they go. That is Country Labor in 2011. I endorse the comments of the member for Wollondilly. This bill will introduce a new dispute resolution process that will now be provided be the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The proposals in the bill are the result of the transfer of the responsibility for the Agricultural Tenancies Act to the Fair Trading portfolio.

The Minister for Fair Trading is to be commended on moving forward quickly to put legislative arrangements in place to establish the new dispute resolution process. I am happy also to see that the proposed new process has the support of the New South Wales Farmers Association. It is great to see that organisation on board. Although the administration of the Agricultural Tenancies Act was transferred from the Primary Industries portfolio to the Fair Trading portfolio in June this year, the arbitration and disputes under the Act remain within the responsibility of the Director General of the Department of Primary Industries. The Department of Primary Industries is based at Orange. One of the features of dispute resolutions under the Act was that the dispute resolution took place in Orange and parties would have to come to Orange from all over New South Wales to participate in the dispute resolution process.

Mr Troy Grant: It was not practical.

Mr ANDREW GEE: The member for Dubbo points out that it was not practical. From my own experience it was practical because one of the highlights of my legal career was a brief but shining appearance at the Department of Primary Industries for an Agricultural Tenancies Act matter. Although it was convenient and practical for me, for parties and practitioners it was not practical as they had to travel from all over New South Wales. Under the new regime, under the umbrella of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal, agricultural tenancy disputes will be able to be held anywhere where the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal sits, which will be all over New South Wales.

The Department of Primary Industries receives about 20 inquiries a year on agricultural tenancy disputes. Most of these inquiries cannot go any further because they concern matters that are not covered by the current terms of the Act such as evictions, rent arrears or matters involving amounts over $10,000. It is good to see that the proposed tribunal process will expand the current dispute resolution service to cover evictions and rent arrears as well as increase the jurisdictional limit to $500,000. These matters will now be dealt with using low-cost, alternative dispute resolution instead of going to the overworked court system. I note the entrance of the member for Toongabbie. I do not think he has any Roman sandals, but I do not know about the chardonnay.

Agricultural tenancies can involve millions of dollars, so the increased limit of $500,000 for the alternative dispute resolution system is appropriate. Most of the other inquiries received by the Department of Primary Industries about agricultural tenancy disputes are able to be resolved by discussion or mediation and do not progress to formal arbitration. I understand that most parties to a dispute manage to work out their differences at the conciliation stage and come to an agreement without the need for a hearing. At the end of the day, about two matters each year proceed through all the steps of the arbitration process and are resolved at a formal hearing. These hearings generally take between one and three days to finalise. In comparison to the handful of agricultural tenancy disputes handled by the Department of Primary Industries each year, the tribunal provides dispute resolution services to tens of thousands of people every year.

The tribunal currently has eight registries, including three in regional and rural areas, and conducts hearings in over 70 locations around the State, mostly heard by locally based members. This wide choice of venues will make it easier for hearings to be held in a convenient location for parties to a dispute. It is also common sense to integrate the isolated single-issue dispute arbitration service for agricultural tenancies into the tribunal's wide-ranging responsibilities. New South Wales has numerous dispute resolution services, ranging from the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal to small health tribunals that deal with a specific profession. The current dispute resolution service for agricultural tenancies is an example of an entire bureaucratic process being established to handle a single issue.

The New South Wales Government is currently exploring the possibility of a super tribunal to replace many of the existing smaller dispute resolution bodies. The super tribunal could provide a more cost-effective and far more efficient system for resolving a broad range of disputes. The proposed changes to the agricultural tenancy dispute resolution process will contribute to reducing the current proliferation of small dispute resolution services. Another positive impact of these proposals is that existing provisions of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act cover virtually all the procedural matters currently provided for in the Agricultural Tenancies Act.

This will allow for the duplicate provisions to be deleted and the Agricultural Tenancies Act will be streamlined, thereby removing some unnecessary regulation from the statute books. The bill also provides for the Agricultural Tenancies Regulation to be repealed. This is in keeping with the O'Farrell-Stoner Government's commitment to eliminating unnecessary regulation and achieving a 20 per cent reduction in red tape within its first term. These common-sense changes to the agricultural tenancy laws are important to the State's agricultural sector which has given its wholehearted support and will continue to be closely consulted in implementing these changes. One important feature to note is that these changes will result in no job losses at the Department of Primary Industries.

Mr Troy Grant: What does Steve Whan say about that?

Mr ANDREW GEE: The member for Dubbo asks what Mr Whan says about that. Of course, we all remember the heady and wild days before the last State budget when Second Chance Steve and his cohort of friends descended upon Orange and whipped up a huge scare campaign about job losses at the Department of Primary Industries. Of course, no job losses eventuated. Second Chance Steve was at his best in the central west whipping up the usual scare campaign. Importantly, Second Chance has not returned to Orange since that fateful day. The member for Monaro still has the egg flipper with the blue ribbon attached, which will be presented to Second Chance at the earliest available opportunity in the good seat of Monaro. There is plenty to look forward to in Monaro. The member for Toongabbie perhaps should not smile too much because Country Labor is recruiting members and if he is not careful he could be pacing the halls of this place in roman sandals.

The Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal has extensive experience in tenancy-related matters and has a strong emphasis on low-cost mechanisms for resolving disputes. As the member for Wollondilly pointed out, a number of members of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal travel extensively to deal with disputes around New South Wales. I commend the Minister for making these changes to the dispute resolution process in New South Wales. This bill promotes the efficient administration of justice and the efficient resolution of disputes in New South Wales. I commend the Minister for making this important contribution to justice in New South Wales. I commend this bill to the House.

Mr KEVIN ANDERSON (Tamworth) [12.11 p.m.]: I am pleased to support the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. I am pleased also to support the Minister for Fair Trading, who has brought fresh eyes and ears to this issue. Coming to fruition is the common-sense approach the O'Farrell-Stoner Government promised during the election campaign. The common sense being applied to many policies, procedures and bureaucracy is filtering down to grass roots level. I am pleased that the focus on regional New South Wales is high on the agenda. I am delighted that a number of The Nationals members are present during the debate on this important bill. I acknowledge also my Liberal Party colleagues whose electorates are on the fringes of regional areas. The member for Parramatta points out that he too has a role to play, as does the member for Mulgoa, who has many agricultural areas to look after and is busily taking notes about the way the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 will impact on and help refine the dispute resolution process.

A large percentage of my electorate is agricultural, including the key primary industry areas of poultry, timber, farming and grazing, utilising many contractors and itinerant workers. That fits nicely with this debate because a number of issues arise regarding tenants on farming and agricultural land. This bill will ensure that agricultural landowners and tenant farmers will have ongoing access to a quality service for resolution of disputes. Quite often one is confronted with a brick wall regarding a problem: The bureaucracy tends to be heavy handed about what can and cannot be done.

I am pleased that this particular avenue for resolution of disputes is now open to many agricultural landowners and tenant farmers. The transfer of the dispute resolution process to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal will make a notable difference to the level of client service and support. The accessibility of government services is an important issue for those who live and work in rural and regional areas, and accessibility is a key feature of the tribunal's operation. Accessibility raises a number of issues because quite often rural and regional people face communication challenges. Mobile phone access will drop out in a number of areas when driving from Tamworth to Gunnedah.

The ASSISTANT-SPEAKER (Mr Andrew Fraser): Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber.

Mr KEVIN ANDERSON: People in rural and regional areas face challenges when trying to communicate with or gain access to government agencies. Quite often one cannot get any mobile telephone service or internet access to download and upload reliable baseload data, making communication with bureaucracy and government services very difficult. The Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 opens things up to enable the wider community to have access. The Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal is like an octopus in that it has a hub and a number of spokes that provide an excellent method of communication and in providing services. Apart from urban registries in Sydney the tribunal has regional registries at Newcastle, Tamworth and Wollongong with each registry managing a specific geographical catchment area. The catchment area managed by the Newcastle registry covers Newcastle, Gosford, Port Macquarie and the Hunter region.

I am interested most in the catchment area managed by the Tamworth registry. It has a wide geography including the far North Coast, north and far west, upper Hunter, upper central west and the northern tablelands. The catchment area managed by the Wollongong registry also is considerable and covers the Illawarra through Wollongong, down the South Coast to the Victorian border, through to the Southern Tablelands, the Riverina and far west regions. To provide greater accessibility for its clients, the tribunal has an arrangement with NSW Fair Trading to enable tribunal applications to be lodged at any Fair Trading centre. Those centres are located at Albury, Armidale, Bathurst, Broken Hill, Coffs Harbour, Dubbo, Gosford, Goulburn, Grafton, Lismore, Newcastle, Orange, Port Macquarie, Queanbeyan, Tamworth, Tweed Heads, Wagga Wagga and Wollongong.

I duck back to mention Grafton, which is in the Clarence electorate. Of course, The Nationals regained that seat at the by-election held last Saturday and we will welcome our newest member, Mr Chris Gulaptis, in the near future. We congratulate him and The Nationals on his win and on retaining the seat of Clarence. Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal applications can be lodged also at regional government offices throughout the State. For example, applications can be lodged at the Bourke Court House, Coonabarabran Motor Registry, Deniliquin Business Enterprise Centre, the Government Access Centre at Gilgandra, the Business Enterprise Centre—Western Riverina—Griffith, Mudgee Business Enterprise Centre, Narrandera Motor Registry, Tenterfield Motor Registry and Wilcannia Court House.

Mr Richard Torbay: Hear! Hear! The Tenterfield Motor Registry; what a great motor registry it is.

Mr KEVIN ANDERSON: This is not an exclusive list. This is the hub and spoke approach to enable access by rural and regional people. The member for Northern Tablelands voices his approval of the Tenterfield Motor Registry. The Tamworth Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal office covers the Northern Tablelands area. It is not an exclusive list; it is a handful of court houses and motor registries that are located throughout New South Wales where tribunal applications will be accepted. The Toongabbie electorate will have one because this Government is about including everyone—rural, regional and metropolitan.

The tribunal provides another entry point to its services through the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal online. This enables people to lodge applications online at their own convenience, 24-hours a day, seven days a week. That is the way to go when people work longer hours and find themselves time poor. The Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal online access allows applicants to lodge, manage and track the progress of their application online via the tribunal's web site. When you lodge an application or try to access Government services quite often it is thought they are lost in the labyrinth of bureaucracy. This system allows people to get online and track the progress of their application at any time via the tribunal's website. I think that is fantastic.

The tribunal sits at more than 70 locations around the State. The parties to a dispute rarely have to travel far to have the matter resolved. Many tribunal members are based in regional areas and are familiar with the issues that are important to the people on the land. I encourage members to take a trip down to the nearest Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal office and say hello to your tribunal members. It puts a face to a name so when disputes come up resolutions are quite often easier to reach. The tribunal is committed to increasing community awareness and making sure that its services and processes are crystal clear. It has developed a range of integrated education and information resources. The tribunal conducts information sessions throughout New South Wales on a regular basis and tribunal members and staff also attend as guest speakers key functions and events organised by key client groups.

I would encourage members to contact Fair Trading and the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal because chambers of commerce and other organisations are often looking for guest speakers. A guest speaker is a good way to get information out into the community. The tribunal is committed to increasing awareness and a good way to do that is to through local organisations. The tribunal provides a vast range of useful information on its web site. This includes fact sheets and how the tribunal operates, what people need to do to prepare for hearings and application forms for each division that can be downloaded for free. Tribunal registries and Fair Trading centres provide face-to-face point of contact which I think is critical in terms of dispute resolution. People can get information on matters such as how to lodge an application, tribunal operations, procedures and what information an applicant needs to provide. There is also the option of calling the tribunal's toll-free information line.

To improve its performance the tribunal uses performance monitoring and reporting systems, a computerised case management system and has a well-developed complaints management system. On top of all this the tribunal is highly committed to continuous improvement. That is something that the O'Farrell-Stoner Government is continually looking to do. The Government continues to ask of its departments, agencies and bureaucrats, how can services be improved for the community? How can service delivery be improved? How can communication with communities be improved to ensure issues raised are acted upon? It is clear that the tribunal is a professional organisation that provides an important service to the community. It is wholly appropriate that jurisdiction for agricultural tenancy disputes is conferred on the tribunal.

The tribunals hear a number of complaints throughout the year using a process of mediation followed by a hearing if that mediation fails. It is well known that face-to-face mediation—sitting down across the table where you can eyeball the person that you are trying to get your point across to—listening, learning, understanding and gaining a greater appreciation of the challenge helps in the mediation process. Quite often a true understanding of a person's problem is not possible until you walk a mile in their shoes: Sit, listen, learn, understand and it might then help shape the view you take to find balance and determination in resolution of the dispute.

It gives me great pleasure to note that the New South Wales Farmers Association, the peak industry body representing our agricultural sector, which includes landowners and tenant farmers in its membership, has endorsed the proposal for the tribunal to handle disputes and will be working closely with the Government in putting in the new system. I commend the New South Wales Farmers Association for its interest and assistance. The new Chief Executive Officer of New South Wales Farmers Association, Fiona Simpson, is doing a sensational job. We commend the work she is doing representing the interests of the agricultural sector.

This is an important bill because it will ease the process of resolution between parties that cannot come to an agreement and quite often have disputes that date back many years. Let us break down the barriers, open the lines of communication, and resolve these disputes. A lot of the complaints backlog will clear with the introduction of the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. I commend the Minister for Fair Trading, Anthony Roberts. I am pleased to support the bill and I commend it to the House.

Mr RICHARD TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [12.26 p.m.]: I support the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 and commend the Minister for Fair Trading for the bill and the work he is doing in the area. His recent visit to the Northern Tablelands was well received. The Minister wanted to taste good steak from the New England and I took him to the appropriate place to give him a taste of agricultural issues in the New England. This review has been long overdue and it has been done well. The long title of the bill is:

An Act to amend the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990 and the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 with respect to the resolution of disputes and to confer jurisdiction relating to agricultural tenancies on the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal; and for other purposes.

A number of members have spoken about regional, rural and agricultural issues. Issues can come up that have not been considered. Given the unique nature of some matters that arise when a dispute has occurred in rural, regional and coastal New South Wales, I have to say—

Dr Geoff Lee: What do you have to say?

Mr RICHARD TORBAY: The member for Parramatta interjects. He likes to look after the farmers of Parramatta.

Dr Geoff Lee: I am a strong supporter of farmers.

Mr RICHARD TORBAY: I commend him for it. I can see him nodding in furious approval of this legislation. I remember an interjection from the member for Parramatta when I was talking about agricultural issues and my status as a farmer. I indicated to the House at that time that I had nine heifers and three steers—which I again announce to the House—to which the member for Parramatta interjected, "Name them". I am yet to forgive him for that interjection. I can name them too, but enough of these distractions. I tend to invoke interjection; I am not sure why that is.

The system for dispute resolution in regional areas should be streamlined and overseen by a body that is able to understand the issues involved. Previously this area has been dealt with on an ad hoc basis. It has been difficult for parties to understand the dispute resolution process and, importantly, the information available to access the process proved to be fractious and difficult to obtain and understand. Bringing this dispute resolution process under the banner of the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 is a worthwhile initiative. I commend the Minister for introducing this bill. He is doing good things in this area within his portfolio. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ANDREW ROHAN (Smithfield) [12.30 p.m.]: I strongly support the measures contained in the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. I congratulate the Minister for Fair Trading on introducing it. The amendment bill proposes changes to the system for resolving agricultural tenancy disputes and rewrites a significant portion of the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990. As members have heard, the Agricultural Tenancies Act regulates the rights and responsibilities of landowners, tenants and share farmers in relation to agricultural tenancies and provides for the resolution of disputes. Agricultural tenancy laws have been in existence in various parts of the world since at least the late nineteenth century. For example, in Scotland the Agricultural Holdings Act 1883 ensured that tenant farmers could receive the benefits of improvements they had made to the land. The Act also encouraged tenants to maintain the land in good condition until a lease was finished. This proposal went on to become an enduring aspect of agricultural tenancy laws.

Agricultural tenancy laws were first enacted in New South Wales during the First World War. In the early twentieth century it appeared that the existing methods of agricultural production were not maintaining land in good condition. At that time many tenant farmers had little farming knowledge and experience and were not flush with funds. To protect both agricultural resources and the vulnerability of tenant farmers, the Rural Tenants Improvements Act 1916 was introduced. With increasing numbers of servicemen returning from the war, soldier settlement schemes were established and share farming and tenant farming grew in importance. By 1924 approximately 24 million acres of land had been acquired for or allocated under the settlement schemes and a total of 23,367 returned soldiers and sailors had taken up farming.

By the end of the 1980s the position of tenant farmers and share farmers had changed considerably. Far fewer people were employed in farming and the number of farms had shrunk significantly. The introduction of the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990 modernised the laws. Compensation procedures were simplified and the parties to an agricultural lease could make their own arrangements for compensation, notices and other matters. Compensation for landowners was made possible, particularly in regard to compensation for owners' improvements and for deterioration as a result of the tenant's failure to properly cultivate the farm. The overall purpose of the new provisions was to encourage tenants to use good farming practices throughout the period of a lease and not allow or cause deterioration of the land. A review of the Agricultural Tenancies Act was conducted in 1998-99. The review found that the Act was meeting its objectives and that there was a net public benefit in retaining the Act. The agricultural tenancy laws have remained substantially unaltered since that time.

The primary purpose of the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 is to establish a new and enhanced dispute resolution process that will be provided by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The proposed changes follow the transfer of the Agricultural Tenancies Act from the Department of Primary Industries to the Fair Trading portfolio. This move was necessary, as there was a potential conflict of interest between the department's roles of administering the legislation and the arbitration of disputes. The measures in the amendment bill will help ensure that the Act can continue to meet its objectives, as well as ensure the continued availability of alternative dispute resolution services for the agricultural sector.

The Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal has extensive experience in resolving matters related to tenancy as well as having the mechanisms for resolving disputes on a low-cost basis. The inclusion of this additional responsibility for agricultural tenancy disputes will not impact greatly on the tribunal's operational costs. Further, there will be no additional cost to applicants. In fact, the parties' costs will be lower under the new process. In the past year the tribunal received 59,403 applications and held 78,822 hearings across New South Wales. The Department of Primary Industries received about 20 inquiries, of which 12 matters progressed to an application. I am pleased that the dispute resolution role will be taken on by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The tribunal has a solid track record and extensive experience in dispute resolution and well-established administrative procedures and provides a high level of customer service. It is the most appropriate body to take on this role.

I understand that the New South Wales Farmers Association is the key stakeholder for agricultural tenancies, representing both landowners and tenant farmers. The association has been consulted during the development of the bill. The association supports the measures in the bill and will provide ongoing input as the administrative details of the new dispute resolution system are finalised. The measures in the bill will streamline the Act significantly, removing a number of redundant procedural requirements while providing for a greater range of disputes to be dealt with under the tribunal's procedures. I note that the previous changes to agricultural tenancy laws have attracted strong bipartisan support. I see no reason why it should not be the same for this amendment bill. I commend the bill to the House.

Dr GEOFF LEE (Parramatta) [12.37 p.m.]: It gives me great pleasure to support the Minister for Fair Trading in introducing the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. Again, it shows the commitment of the Liberal-Nationals Government to reform and improve the efficiency of the State and especially to assist those involved in agriculture and horticulture—an area dear to my heart having been a horticulturist. I note that the member for Toongabbie is nodding in agreement. He too was a horticulturist. It is great to see horticulturists represented in this place today.

The amendments proposed in the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 include, first, that jurisdiction over agricultural tenancy disputes will be conferred on the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal and the tribunal will have the power to make orders in relation to those disputes. Secondly, the existing range of matters that may be the subject of an application for dispute resolution will be expanded to include eviction and rent arrears. Under the current arbitration system, these matters must be determined in courts. However, the tribunal has extensive experience in resolving tenancy-related disputes over evictions and rent arrears. It is considered appropriate to enhance the existing dispute resolution service and give the tribunal jurisdiction over these matters.

Courts are already clogged up with so many people seeking litigation. Anything we can do to free up the courts and make dispute resolution faster and less expensive for not only the landholder but also the tenant must be applauded. This bill goes some way to doing that by providing a mechanism for mediation and reconciliation. Thirdly, the existing jurisdiction limit of $100,000 will be increased to $500,000. Agricultural tenancies can involve amounts in the millions of dollars. Therefore, a limit of $500,000 for the tribunal is considered appropriate. This limit also broadly aligns with the tribunal's jurisdiction limit in the home building division of $500,000. Fourthly, procedural matters will be delegated from the Agricultural Tenancies Act and the equivalent provisions in the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act will apply. Fifthly, the arbitration procedures in the Commercial Arbitrations Act 2011 will cease to apply to agricultural tenancies and disputes. Finally, the Agricultural Tenancies Regulation 2006 will be repealed.

The member for Toongabbie may ask how the Agricultural Tenancies Act helps the community. That is probably because the Opposition did not look after people in rural areas, which is disappointing. But the Liberal-Nationals Government cares deeply about people involved in agriculture and horticulture. The Agricultural Tenancies Act encourages sustainable farming practices, which is particularly important these days. Farmers have a long and good history in maintaining sustainable agriculture. I have run the Woolworths-sponsored Young Leaders Program for many years and I know that farmers are well aware of the need for sustainable farming practices. The bill encourages the use of written agreements that set out the key terms relating to tenancy, such as rights to the property, improvements to the property, and the dates for completion and termination of the tenancy. It also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes between the parties.

I understand that agricultural land can be particularly problematic in regard to the ongoing valuation of improvements made to the land. The bill also provides for an arbitration mechanism, which will reduce court time by transferring matters to arbitration and mediation. The bill is an important piece of legislation that will be administered by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal plays a very important role and it has a fantastic history. In 2010-11 the tribunal dealt with more than 58,000 applications and finalised nearly 60,000 matters. The tribunal is involved in community education and it held more than 72,000 hearings in 70 venues across the State, which was particularly helpful for people in rural communities. As other members have mentioned, applications to the tribunal for dispute resolution can be made online, which will be especially important for rural and remote communities.

One could ask what my electorate of Parramatta has to do with agriculture. I remind members that in 1788 Governor Phillip came to Parramatta to start the first farm. It was the first farm to feed the starving colony—planting wheat, fruit trees and so on—and the first successful farm in Australia. I remind the House that Parramatta is not only the capital of western Sydney but the birthplace of our nation. Western Sydney has its own agricultural lands and they are being impacted by urbanisation, so it is particularly important that we take care of those who are involved in horticultural and agricultural activities. The report of the University of Western Sydney entitled "Sydney's Agricultural Lands: An Analysis" found that in 2007-08 around 82,000 hectares of land were under cultivation, with agriculture, vegetables, poultry, eggs, nurseries and cut flowers. It was estimated that more than 2,200 people were involved in agricultural and horticultural enterprises.

Western Sydney certainly plays its part in feeding Sydney. Around 80 per cent of our fresh fruit and vegetables come from the Hawkesbury Nepean Valley, which is an important area that we need to manage properly in order to preserve our agricultural land and allow for sustainable urban development to accommodate Sydney's growing population. This bill is an important way to resolve disputes relating to agricultural tenancies in a transparent and speedy way. It outlines a commonsense, cost-effective approach for both landowners and tenants and provides alternative dispute resolution. As an aside, I mention that I was lucky enough to meet Sir Laurence Street, who is accredited with being the father of alternative dispute resolution. The bill provides for the efficient ongoing resolution of disputes and, as such, I commend it to the House. I commend the Minister for Fair Trading for his initiative.

Mr RICHARD AMERY (Mount Druitt) [12.46 p.m.]: I am impressed with the number of members who wish to speak to the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. This is important legislation, the type of which was introduced in this Parliament in 1916. I indicate to the House that I did not speak on that occasion. However, I did speak on the bill that was debated in this place on 5 September 1990 after its introduction by the then Minister for Agriculture, Ian Armstrong, who is in the building today. There have been a number of changes to legislation regarding the resolution of disputes between agricultural tenants and landlords throughout the past century, particularly in 1941, and this bill amends the bill that came into effect in 1990. The object of the 1990 legislation was to change the legal relationship between landlords and tenants.

The main area of dispute occurs when a tenant farmer has leased land through some legal arrangement from a landlord. They may have had a good working relationship during which many undertakings were given and the tenant has made substantial improvements to the property, such as building sheds, putting in drainage, erecting fencing and so on, which cost a substantial amount of money. But then the parties fall out for some reason and the tenancy comes to an end. In years gone by tenants had difficulty claiming compensation for the capital improvements they had made to a property and disputes arose that often resulted in court cases. The 1990 legislation introduced an out-of-court system. A committee was established, chaired by a barrister or solicitor, that comprised qualified people experienced in the field of dispute resolution. The committee took disputes between landlord and tenant out of the court system.

The proposed changes to the legislation are not in contention, but the farming community will be watching the progress of this legislation because it shifts the process from perhaps a locally established committee involving a lawyer, who may or may not be a local, to a Fair Trading tribunal. At this stage farmers may say they have no concerns with it, particularly if they have had no problems with the dispute resolution provided by Fair Trading organisations. But after a year or so members of this House from rural areas may receive representations from the farming community if the Fair Trading tribunals do not deliver the same results and efficiencies as have been achieved in the past. Overall, this is a fairly non-contentious piece of legislation, but it effects an interesting shift from the Agriculture portfolio with which the farming community has a long-term established relationship to the Fair Trading portfolio, which will be something new for many people. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ANDREW CORNWELL (Charlestown) [12.50 p.m.]: I am pleased to support the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. The purpose of the bill is to establish a new process for resolving agricultural tenancy disputes by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. Earlier this year the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990 was transferred from the Primary Industries portfolio to the Fair Trading portfolio. This fits well with other tenancy-related responsibilities within the Fair Trading portfolio. Agricultural tenancy laws have been in operation in New South Wales since 1916. The member for Mount Druitt said he did not have the opportunity to speak on that legislation but has made subsequent contributions. The laws were introduced to address the power imbalance between landlords and tenants and to protect agricultural land from bad farming practices. The Act also provides an arbitration process for resolving disputes that may arise during a tenancy.

The Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal already provides dispute resolution services and has extensive experience in tenancy-related matters. It is the perfect venue to provide this service. The tribunal has offices throughout the State and it will therefore improve convenience. The tribunal still has the ability to seek advice or technical assistance from the Department of Primary Industries if necessary, but this is a sensible piece of legislation that will ensure that landowners and tenants have access to cost-effective, timely and accessible dispute resolution. The bill follows a long line of legislation introduced by the Minister for Fair Trading, such as the plumbing bill, the home building amendment, residential parks amendment and credit amendment legislation, to name a few. A couple of months ago I had the great pleasure of visiting the Newcastle office of the Department of Fair Trading with the Minister. Seeing the way he related to the staff gave me an insight into the mind of the great man. The opening words of his address to them were, "I love Fair Trading." The raft of legislation that the Minister has brought before the House reflects his passion for his portfolio.

To paraphrase the Minister on that visit, he said that he has come to realise that the Fair Trading portfolio is about more than just dangerous toys and exploding Christmas trees—as the legislation he has brought to the House demonstrates. The appointment of the new Fair Trading Commissioner, Rod Stowe, was greeted with great enthusiasm by staff at the Newcastle office. They know he is a man with Fair Trading in his heart and in his blood. That is certainly another fantastic appointment by the Government. It is my great pleasure to support the bill. It is a sensible amendment and I commend it to the House.

Mr JOHN FLOWERS (Rockdale) [12.53 p.m.]: I support the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011. Agricultural tenancy laws have been in operation in New South Wales since 1916. The laws were enacted to address the power imbalance between landowners and tenants and to prevent the degradation of important agricultural land that had resulted from poor farming. As developments in agricultural practices and circumstances of tenant farmers have changed over the years, so too have the laws changed to keep up with these developments. The Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990 now deals with agricultural tenancies for those matters that regulate the rights and responsibilities of landowners, tenants and sharefarmers. In June this year the administration of the Agricultural Tenancy Act was transferred from the Minister for Primary Industries to the Minister for Fair Trading. That is appropriate because the Fair Trading portfolio already has responsibility for tenancy-related issues.

Dispute mediation and arbitration is currently handled by the Department of Primary Industries. This amendment will transfer responsibility for the dispute resolution process to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The dispute resolution process will remain similar to the existing process, with an emphasis on using mediation and conciliation. The tribunal's eight registries that conduct hearings in over 70 locations statewide will be accessible and the costs to parties involved in a dispute will be reduced. The Department of Primary Industries will provide expert tactical assistance to the tribunal as required.

This bill will amend and provide jurisdiction over agricultural tenancy disputes. These will be conferred on the tribunal and the tribunal will have the power to make orders regarding those disputes. The existing range of matters that may be the subject of an application for dispute resolution will be expanded to include evictions and rental arrears. The current arbitration system requires these matters to be determined in the courts. This can be costly and time consuming for all parties. This amendment makes sense, considering the tribunal's extensive experience in resolving tenancy-related disputes over evictions and rental arrears and it will reduce costs for parties involved.

This bill will increase the current jurisdictional limit of $100,000 to $500,000. When agricultural tenancies can be worth millions of dollars, the new limit of $500,000 is appropriate and also aligns with the tribunal's jurisdictional limits in the home building division. Procedural matters will be deleted from the Agricultural Tenancies Act and the equivalent provisions in the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Act will apply. The arbitration procedures in the Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 will cease to apply to agricultural tenancy disputes and will repeal the Agricultural Tenancies Regulation 2006. I commend the Government for consulting with the New South Wales Farmers Association. I also commend the Farmers Association for its input and support for this bill. The Government values and appreciates the association as an important stakeholder. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ANTHONY ROBERTS (Lane Cove—Minister for Fair Trading) [12.57 p.m.], in reply: The purpose of the Agricultural Tenancies Amendment Bill 2011 is to amend the Agricultural Tenancies Act and the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act to transfer responsibility to the tribunal for resolving agricultural tenancy disputes. As I have outlined, the new dispute resolution system proposed under the bill continues the current emphasis on mediation and conciliation of disputes. At the same time, costs for the parties will be reduced and a highly accessible service will be provided throughout the State. The bill has been developed in consultation with key stakeholders. I thank the New South Wales Farmers Association for its input.

I will comment briefly on a few specific issues raised during the debate. I assure the House that the transfer of agricultural tenancy dispute resolution to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal will not result in any job losses in the Department of Primary Industries. This role is currently managed by a paralegal clerk in the department's legal services division. I am advised that this role only takes up a small part of that officer's workload. Therefore, it is clear that there will be no job losses as a result of the transfer of the dispute resolution role. Following implementation of the new dispute resolution process, the tribunal, NSW Fair Trading and my office will monitor the ongoing impact of the changes. I am happy to take action, if necessary, to address any problems that arise in practice, including through a review if appropriate.

The upper House inquiry into the potential to consolidate the numerous small tribunals of New South Wales into a super tribunal is still underway. The outcome of the inquiry will not be known for some time yet, but there is no reason to reduce the existing services provided by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal in regional areas of New South Wales. Whatever the outcome of the inquiry, there will be an ongoing need for the dispute resolution services that are provided by the tribunal. The provision of those services in rural and regional areas will be maintained. I thank members representing the electorates of Bankstown, Orange, Tamworth, Northern Tablelands, Smithfield, Parramatta, Wollondilly, Rockdale and Mount Druitt. I particularly thank the member for Charlestown for his fine words. He serves his community incredibly well and is a strong advocate of Fair Trading in protecting his constituents from everything from dodgy show bags to exploding Christmas toys. I thank all speakers for their support of this bill. I commend the bill to the House.

Question—That this bill be now agreed to in principle—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Bill agreed to in principle.


Passing of the Bill

Bill declared passed and transmitted to the Legislative Council with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.