Mr GAFFNEY (Mersey) - Mr President, I thank other members for their contributions and will listen to those remaining as well.

I rise today to make a few brief comments in response to the Premier's Address 2022 delivered in the other place earlier in March. As the Premier's speech commenced with an acknowledgement of the pandemic and its effects on all Tasmanians, I feel it is appropriate to take a moment to extend my personal thanks to all those in our state who have worked so hard to promote and deliver vaccinations, to the experts at Public Health who have provided guidance to the Government and advice and support to the public, including Tasmanian residents and visitors, and to the dedicated individuals employed in our frontline services.

Without a doubt the pandemic has affected all of us to varying degrees. I believe it is important to recognise the impact of the COVID-19 threat and its management on our economy, government services, especially those involved in small businesses, where supply chains have been interrupted, health and safety measures have impacted on venue capacity and event surety and customers and clients have been less inclined to make non-essential visits to retail and hospitality businesses.

I welcome the Government's increasing support for students who may have been impacted by trauma, especially given the ongoing challenges that families are facing in light of COVID-19 and the increasing costs of maintaining a stable and secure family home. I note the recent announcement by the minister, Mr Ferguson, in relation to the bus fare subsidy, which would make bus travel free for the next five weeks. This is indeed welcome news for many road users and students in our state in easing the cost of living and potentially reducing the impact on the environment should commuters who previously travelled by car take up the opportunity to use community transport.

However, in the longer term, for many families, especially those in my electorate, it comes across as a weird game of chance. If your child's bus route happens to be across a notional urban boundary to get their child to school, it will trigger an additional cost that can be up to $760 per year per child. For a family with more children at school, the cost to your family just multiplies. Members may recall my questions to the Leader, now some two-and-a-half years ago, on the technicalities of student transport and our subsequent briefing on this from Mr Ferguson.

I thank the Government for its response, as it has given us a little bit more clarity on what is a complex and seemingly arbitrary plethora of rules and regulations and the lottery for students on whether they have to pay to get to their local school or not. However, nothing has changed. Student transport costs the government about $90 million per year, with a fare income from those who have to pay it, of about $2 million. If fares for those routes that have them were ended, ticketing, administration and cash handling costs would go too. We would all see a net positive benefit to the Treasurer's bottom line with reduced overall contract costs, more timely services, reduced traffic congestion, together with an improved student attendance and retention.

It is time for the Government to revisit the fares amnesty from 2020. COVID-19 is an issue in our schools, our families are worried, out teachers are worried, we are worried, and case numbers in schools seem to be rising, especially in the north-west. A fares amnesty would allow students to rapidly board their school buses, with no need for interaction or contact with the driver and no need for cash handling or exchange of tickets. This would give the Government time to revisit the unfair urban boundary fare-triggering rule, whilst helping to keep our families safe in difficult times. With a new minister for Education, who happens also to be the Minister for State Growth, and who lives in the north-west, maybe the planets have now aligned with some genuine reform possible.

It is usual that the media, individuals and groups will be drawn to particular areas covered by the Premier's Address, and that certain topics receive much more airplay and public discourse than others. Likewise, it is only natural and a positive thing that members in this Council and those who serve in the other place will also focus on and examine thoroughly different aspects of the Address, whether that is because the statement directly relates to constituents in their electorate, or because of a particular interest in an industry or sector.

Perhaps the biggest announcement contained in the Premier's Address was the proposal for the new southern stadium at Regatta Point. The $750 million project achieved the front page of the Mercury, as might be expected. It has also generated significant interest and public discourse, not all of it positive.

The member for Elwick mentioned the idea of a floating stadium. When I did play an odd game of football, you were either kicking with or against the wind. Now, you will be kicking with or against the tide.

As a member based in the north-west I am well aware of perceptions of city-centric spending in this state. More specifically, capital-centric spending. I will take a moment to read a short editorial from The Advocate newspaper on 3 March. It offers a viewpoint that may not have been shared previously. It reads:

Peter Gutwein's plan for a $750 million stadium in Hobart has been labelled bold.

That is one word; there are others.

It's been billed as the final piece in the puzzle, the last box to be ticked, for Tasmania to get our own AFL team.

But the big problem, beside the eye-watering price tag, is that the team is meant to be for the entire state, not just the capital.

There is a strong expectation, which is very much part of the sales pitch, that the Tassie side will play home games in the North and in the South.

Currently, AFL games have 11 rostered home fixtures, not including the pre-season warm-ups and finals, and we are told a Tasmanian team would elect to have a five/six split between Launceston and Hobart, alternating each year.

So, we're talking about an investment of taxpayers' money that would rival the spend on the new Spirits in return for, maybe, six games a season.

It's clear why the government is wanting to present this as a multi-purpose stadium, and is talking up the prospect of other sporting and entertainment events being held at the venue, with its retractable roof.

We could count on the Hobart Hurricanes playing games at the new stadium, though they too commit to have at least some of their home fixtures in the North.

Others, however, are possibilities, not certainties, and we have seen it is often the case that more public funds are needed to secure such events. This is because Tasmania just does not have the population to make them safe commercial bets.

We are left with a business case, if one can call it that, for a stadium based on half a dozen games in each of the football and cricket seasons.
That's going to mean pressure will be applied for more of the so-called marquee games to be played in the South, and/or for a greater number of games overall.

The North, and by extension the NorthWest would lose out either way.

If not, then for the amount of usage it would see, at $750 million, the stadium would hardly be a good investment.

Politically, promising funding to build it will not help with any seats, and may well cost the votes of those who believe the money would be better spent on hospitals.

That is the end of the quote.

Further to this, I note Dr Helen McArdle's comments recently on the radio echoing the words of many from my electorate that there is a huge need for health spending before something is built that will only be used by a few people a few times a year in Hobart.

I probably enjoy sports as much as the next person, possibly more than many Tasmanians who enjoy other pursuits. I do find it somewhat concerning and perplexing that the visual aspect and feel of our capital city for future generations actually rests in the hands of an AFL board and management subcommittee responsible for issuing AFL club licences. That is possibly a simplification of the situation. However, it must be noted that many Tasmanians do not regard infrastructure spending on sports facilities to be a priority.

The electorate of Mersey, although compact, has many things going for it. Devonport is the figurative gateway to Tasmania for many of our visitors. As such, the evolution of our port is vital not only to the tourism industry but for the hundreds of Tasmanian businesses that rely on efficient freight and logistics systems to get their goods to market, or to receive the components required for the manufacturing or retailing of operations. Mersey is home to some of the most innovative and enduring business success stories in the state, with a substantial number of people employed in Tasmanian companies in the electorate.

I and others were quite excited about the announcements regarding the Spirit of Tasmania vessels upgrade by the TT-Line and by the Premier. To think in the midst of all the pandemic interruptions, that the construction of Spirit 1V remains on track is very positive news, if somewhat expected. I am keen to welcome the new ships in Devonport in 2023 and 2024 if they reach those deadlines. Indications from TT-Line are that Spirit 1V and Spirit V will be more comfortable, have increased freight capacity and will continue to provide employment for many Tasmanians.

Some members may be aware of the recent maritime incident in the port of Devonport. On 28 January, a collision occurred between the commercial cement carrier Goliath and two stationary tug boats Campbell Cove and York Cove. The two tugs were destroyed and partially sunk. Thankfully, no one was injured from the incident. However, an immense effort was required to manage the resultant fuel and oil spills. In an interview with the ABC, the EPA State Pollution Control Officer, Mr Tony Port, said the quick use of booms had contained most of the oil and really minimised the impacts it had on the environment. I thank and sincerely congratulate the port workers, the EPA volunteers and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, for their efficient and diligent response to this incident which had not only a large financial cost but the potential to have a huge and irreversible impact on our waterways and the foreshore environment.

In 2020 I spoke in support of the establishment of a ministerial portfolio for climate change. I note the comments made by the Premier this year regarding renewable energy, the 2030 net zero target, the $12.3 million hydrogen bus trial and aim of Tasmania becoming a carbon-neutral destination by 2025. These initiatives and targets are indeed welcome, but I reiterate the advice shared by the Tasmanian Climate Change Office with respect to a proposed economic transition from fossil fuels. There is definitely scope for more attention to this area. The Tasmanian Climate Change Office said:

First, start immediately. Postponing the phase out of fossil fuels just speeds up that rate of change needed, increasing both cost and degree of difficulty. Next, make equity a key objective, this needs to be a just transition aiming to protect those potentially disadvantaged by it. Thirdly, place the greatest requirements for action on the largest user of fossil fuels and government agencies and enterprises, the groups best resourced to start the transition. Finally, and importantly, it would be advisable to create a dedicated independent statutory authority and energy transition authority, whose job is to bring about a just transition; and when its work is done to disband. It is incumbent on all of us as community leaders and as individuals to do all we can to address the climate change challenge by making a genuine commitment to paying heed to the scientific evidence and projections at our disposal. By making what may be the hard decisions.

There have been some criticisms of the initiatives for home owners and landlords. While I believe there are valid arguments for both sides of that debate, my interest was especially piqued with the changes made to improve the accessibly of the HomeShare and Housing Market Entry Program. Reducing the deposit requirement to 2 per cent and increasing the income thresholds would have a huge impact on the number of Tasmanians who would now be eligible to utilise this program to get into their first home.

In the Mersey electorate, both the Devonport and the Latrobe municipalities have seen unprecedented growth in property prices and rents, as in most areas. Obviously, this situation of upwards pressure makes things very difficult for the young and families who are attempting to save a deposit to secure their first home. Not only is this a greater proportion of their disposable income allocated to rent, but the cost of securing a home has gone through the roof. Pardon the pun.

The Housing Market Entry Program stands to see many more Tasmanians becoming home owners much sooner. I note the increase of equity will mean up to 250 more purchases will be supported. I commend the Government for refining and improving this scheme and indeed the extent of the First Home Owner Grant. With the two programs, it appears the great Australian dream may be a reality for some who would otherwise struggle to achieve home ownership.

A reply to the Premier's Address by the member for Mersey would not be complete without reference to the Mersey Community Hospital. As the Premier and Health minister described, there has been an expanded investment, with a further $20 million for a new kitchen and new ward, which will increase the available beds at the MCH. Mersey is and always has been a political hot potato. In fact, I referred to that terminology in one of my earlier response speeches. However, the Mersey hospital appears to have well and truly secured its place in the Tasmanian health system, now and also into the future, as it should be.

Having been part of the Rural Health inquiry, I have been increasingly aware of the incredible work of the professionals in our hospitals and health facilities across the state. I am extremely keen to bend the ear of the Minister for Health on behalf of those hardworking people. In particular - I am probably at risk of labouring the point here - there is a need to promote and support pathways for our ENs, RNs and nurse practitioners to upskill and broaden their scopes of practice. We have a great pool of talent in our nursing professionals in Tasmania. I will continue to support innovative and commonsense policies which allow, for example, ENs to become qualified to administer medication, or for a palliative care EN to train and qualify as a PC, RN or - here it comes again, Mr President - to provide financial incentives and job security for registered nurses wishing to support our health system by training as nurse practitioners.

I am tired of hearing from all fronts that Tasmania is over 100 GPs short. We are and we have been for a long time and will continue to be so. I do not see this shortage being alleviated anytime soon. Perhaps we need to consider that more GPs, even if we could magic them up, might not be the answer. It is time to think outside the box. In fact, we know New Zealand has put $50 million in the next five years to increase the number of nurse practitioners in that country because they have similar problems to those we have here.

It was at this time last year, the members in this place finalised the Tasmanian End-of-Life Choices (Voluntary Assisted Dying) Bill 2020, nearly 12 months ago. I congratulate all members of this place for their role and once again, have the opportunity to say we are the only House of Parliament in the world which has unanimously voted in favour of voluntary assisted dying legislation. Since the act received royal assent on 23 April and as we know, there is the 18 month legislated requirement, the Tasmanian VAD option will be available to Tasmanians from 23 October this year.

I felt that there was still a small role for me to play by keeping the community connected and informed and I tried to do so in a positive manner. I think it is very important, especially for Tasmanians and their families, to assure them that the VAD act will be available, it will be effective and accessible from 23 October this year. One of the advantages of me being connected with the Education department in my previous life is that voluntary assisted dying was an end-of-year topic for our year 11 and 12 high school certificate legal studies students. Last year, I presented a forum to my local college. Word got around and I was then invited to and ended up presenting 22 forums to 15 of our HSC colleges, government, private and Catholic schools in June, July and August of last year.

Ms Rattray - Well done, member.

Mr GAFFNEY - Thank you. The media was also interested and I was able to say I was undertaking community forums to help people understand the act and what was happening. I ended up doing another 26 community forums with a variety of community groups, Lions and Rotary Clubs, aged care homes and council led forums. I was invited to be a keynote speaker at an environment conference because the theme was Changing the World Around Us, and at the ANF conference, a lawyers' conference in Hobart. I am even having another forum next month for Huntingtons Tasmania. I also recently went on the front foot with Q&A fact sheets and it should be well known that the implementation task force, managed by Lisa Caswell the manager, has been doing a wonderful job. Indeed, other states are envious of how the task force and recently announced commission have been operating.

Whilst it is tempting to cover a laundry list of issues in the Premier's Address response, I promised to keep my comments brief. Therefore, I should wrap up with a bit of a plug for the electorate of Mersey.

Things are really happening on the coast. I encourage members to step outside the big cities, as it were, and come and see all the good things happening in Devonport.

Ms Rattray - I bought two pairs of shoes in Latrobe, only about a week ago.

Mr GAFFNEY - I heard about that. I got it firsthand and your mum was a delightful lady. The Foreshore Hotel is well underway, the redevelopment of Victoria Parade and the foreshore precinct is looking wonderful, and the new gallery within the Paranaple Centre area is providing a beautiful and well-attended space for local and visiting artists.

I am honoured to remain patron of the Devonport Orchid Society, the Mersey Community Care, Latrobe Basketball Association, the Devonport Poultry Club, Tasmanian Masters Games, the Devonport City Strikers and the Devonport Junior Soccer association. It has been incredibly pleasing to see the upgrades to infrastructure value-add to Meercroft Park. Given the rise of football - or soccer in the old language - in this state, it is great to see the facilities getting much needed improvements and indeed, the needs of the growing female cohort met with new change rooms and showers. Similarly, the plans for the showground's redevelopment are progressing and I must congratulate the developers on their genuine commitment to community engagement and thoughtful negotiation throughout the process. Some of the members may not be aware, but the old racing track and showgrounds in Devonport have been sold and will be developed into a residential area. I was so impressed because the Devonport Poultry Club has been there for 111 years or even longer at that site and now has to relocate. The person in charge of that development actually came to their end-of-year Christmas function and brought their little 12 year old boy because he is concerned about it. I felt that was a really good move from that person because he was putting people first and trying to make a connection and helping out.

Ms Rattray - Did they find a new home?

Mr GAFFNEY - They are looking at it. Yes, they are. I will now wind up. I will watch and listen with interest, as I am sure all members will, to see how the promises and projections shared by the Premier pan out over the next 12 months. I note the Premier's Address.