Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thirty-nine years ago on 4 July 1975, Juanita Nielsen went to Abe Saffron's Carousel Club in Kings Cross. She was never seen again. As another year passes and as we mark one more anniversary of Juanita's disappearance, I rise to pay tribute to Juanita and remember her life. Juanita's story reminds us there is much more to the world of politics and power than even the boldest journalist or newspaper editor would report. Juanita paid the ultimate price for challenging the powerful and daring to expose the greed and corruption in Sydney over 30 years ago. The story of Juanita's disappearance and murder has intrigued Sydney for decades. Her story is not only about greedy developers and corruption but also about speaking out and protest, about challenging power and the dangers in standing up to it.

Juanita was 38 when she disappeared in 1975. She was born in 1937 to a wealthy family. She worked at the family's retail company, Mark Foy's, in the 1960s. In the early 1970s, she used family money that she had inherited to buy her now famous terrace house on Victoria Street and publish a community newspaper called NOW. It was around this time that opposition to the demolition of Victorian terraces and people's homes by developers around The Rocks and Woolloomooloo areas was building. It was also building in Juanita's street in Kings Cross.

A proposed redevelopment of Victoria Street by developer Frank Theeman and his company, Victoria Point, saw Juanita join with her neighbours, including union activist Mick Fowler, a member of the then Seaman's Union of Australia, to campaign against Theeman's proposal. This campaign led to the Builders Labourers Federation to impose a green ban on the site in 1972. The Victoria Street residents continued to campaign with the strength of the BLF behind them, and Juanita's newspaper publicised the issue.

The residents' campaign cost Frank Theeman millions of dollars. For every day that Juanita and other locals held on, Theeman and his company, Victoria Point, lost about $3,000. Mr Theeman was known to use intimidation to bully his opponents, and Juanita and others had received death threats because of their anti-development campaign. One of Juanita's fellow activists was abducted for three days. He was eventually returned, and it was understood it was on the condition that he cease campaigning. And that is what happened.

Juanita never returned from her visit to the Carousel Club in Kings Cross at 10.30 am on 4 July 1975. She had apparently gone to the club in response to an inquiry about advertising in her newspaper. Juanita is believed to have died on, or shortly after, the day she disappeared. Two inquiries—a coronial inquiry in 1983 and a parliamentary inquiry in 1994—had found that Nielsen had been killed and that police corruption crippled the investigation into her death at the time.

Every year the Greens host a memorial lecture to pay tribute to Juanita Nielsen and the green ban era and to reflect on what her murder represents. Remembering Juanita is about ensuring she did not stand up to the big end of town for nothing. In honouring her determination we need to also stand up for our right to protest, which is under continuing attack in Australia. Ruby Hamad, who gave the 2014 Juanita Nielsen memorial lecture, noted:

We need to believe in the power of protest—that it's something bigger than ourselves. Regardless of whether protests are successful or not, it is the act of protesting itself, of making our voices heard and our bodies seen that is empowering and vital.

Unfortunately, some things have not changed since Juanita's disappearance. Murders and abductions are no longer the preferred way to intimidate opponents, but developers continue to exert excessive influence on the political process, as recent ICAC hearings have shown. The good news is there are hundreds of grassroots campaigns and thousands of activists who are standing up to developers and complicit governments. They are fighting appalling developments that would bring negative impacts to their community and local environments and, in many cases, they are having success.

Activists like Juanita would be appalled to see the situation in New South Wales today and just how close both Labor and Liberal governments have been to developers. She would expect those of us who have followed to take a stand as she did. Jenny Leong, who also spoke at this year's Juanita Nielsen memorial lecture, took this theme up. She said:

Juanita Nielsen paid the ultimate price for taking a stand—for being willing to stand up in the face of power, violence and vested interests, for her community, for what she believed in. Looking back at this community struggle, of the life and times of Juanita and the green bans, should not be a passive reflection. It should be a call for action for us to ensure we make sure to step up—to not sit by—to resist, to fight, to take a stand.

Juanita Nielsen's work for a livable Sydney went far beyond Victoria Street. She opposed overdevelopment in The Rocks and Millers Point and I am sure she would raise her voice against the latest plan for another Liberal government to get rid of public housing from this area. There are 293 public housing properties in Millers Point and The Rocks slated to go under the Liberal government's plan. The government has failed to undertake a complete assessment of the housing stock in question and it has not developed a staged strategy to ensure certainty for public housing tenants who are affected. In the face of the severe housing affordability crisis across Sydney, the government is selling off some of the most centrally located public housing in the city. At the same time, the government has failed to provide any affordable housing units in the state's largest construction site at Barangaroo. The Liberals clearly see no place for public housing anywhere in the CBD. Juanita Nielsen worked for a housing mix that served people, not developers. That is what has made Millers Point and The Rocks and, fortunately, Victoria Road still successful communities. This is what we need to retain at Millers Point and build across the city.

On another point, I take up the issue of WestConnex, a proposed motorway development for Sydney. In one of the Prime Minister's books, Battlelines, he states that even the 'humblest person is king in his own car'. We might well ask: what about the Queen's? Managing to be both subtly discriminatory and antiquated at the same time is an interesting attribute of Mr Abbott's. Here he has provided an insight into his vision for transport infrastructure.

The concrete outcome of this conservative ideology in New South Wales is now the multibillion dollar mess of the WestConnex toll road. WestConnex was first revealed as a con as far back as 2008, when the then Labor state government attempted to bury a damning report on the project. It revealed that a tollway would cause more problems for the community than it was attempting to solve. Jim Steer, the leading British transport consultant who authored the report, argued that it would bring Sydney's CBD and surrounding roads to a standstill. Steer also argued that the tollway ran counter to the Labor government's metropolitan plan, with its aim of clearer, cleaner air and increased public transport use. So it is clear why that report was buried.

Subsequent investigations by planning experts, community groups and the New South Wales Greens MP Mehreen Faruqi have backed Steer's criticisms. Research shows that, in cities comparable to Sydney, car use is declining due to fuel prices and cost-of-living pressures, while demand for public transport is growing. Planning should embrace this shift in the interests of more liveable urban environments; instead, WestConnex, if constructed, would end our chance of building a liveable, sustainable urban environment. WestConnex would increase transport costs, with commuters being slugged $7.5 billion in tolls to fund the project.

It is interesting how this issue has played out for Labor in New South Wales, because, coming into the last federal election, the then Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Mr Anthony Albanese, announced support for the $20 billion WestConnex motorway even before the business case, traffic modelling and environmental impacts had been investigated. This was part of a total con job that something was being done about the traffic problems in Western Sydney. The great irony of it is that WestConnex is actually planned for inner Sydney and would just add to traffic problems there while robbing the people of far Western Sydney of the public money badly needed for public transport projects there.

When dealing with limited infrastructure funds, the trade-offs have to be carefully weighed in the best interest of the public. WestConnex will not increase the efficiency or usability of Sydney's transport system. Close examination suggests those who will benefit are the corporate mates of the Liberal Party. Dr Michelle Zeibots, who has researched in this area for well over a decade, argues that the best solution to road congestion is public transport—and that is not arguing against the trucks and the cars that use our roads; they will travel more efficiently if we can reduce congestion, and we can do that with better and more public transport. Good public transport provides a cheap and efficient option to driving a car. If precious public funds are wasted on WestConnex, commuters will be forced to use their cars or expensive privatised mass transit options.

The environment of Sydney will also be negatively impacted by WestConnex. Huge exhaust stacks will blanket the surrounding areas in fumes. The government is yet to reveal the location of these stacks. Like the locals, the government knows these stacks are a bad-news story. Filtration systems have been deemed not to be value for money, leaving local residents wondering what dollar value the government has placed on their lungs. They will be wondering for a while longer because the environmental impact statement is still yet to be publicly released.

While a cloud hangs over the air the locals will breathe, there is added uncertainty, with concern the bulldozers will be coming to houses where people live and sleep. Late last year, Presbyterian Aged Care in Haberfield were told that their building would be knocked down. The manager then cancelled safety upgrades to their fire extinguisher system and electronic care program. Just two weeks ago, the WestConnex Delivery Authority made the situation worse by telling residents that the decision was, in fact, not final and would not be made until the middle of 2015. Working with the community and local Greens groups, New South Wales MP Dr Faruqi attempted to get to the bottom of issues like this through a parliamentary inquiry. In a development symbolic of this scandal, the inquiry was virtually squashed when a Shooters and Fishers MP cut a deal with the Minister for Roads and Freight, Duncan Gay. Interestingly, a park near the home of the Shooters MP was saved from demolition—but at what cost to the community?

WestConnex will not serve the community and its implementation is already a debacle. Are the state and federal coalition governments incompetent or serving someone else's interests, or both? There are two clues for anyone seeking to shine a light on this shady mess. One clue is that the WestConnex Delivery Authority is chaired by Tony Shepherd, the former president of the powerful Business Council of Australia and also the head of the Commission of Audit, which laid the ground for the most devastating budget in living memory. Another clue is where the Liberal Party gets its campaign funds—and this is just one example: in the past two years alone the Liberal aligned Cormack Foundation has raked in over $220,000 in dividends from the private toll road operator Transurban, the largest tollway company in Australia.

Although they are up against power, wealth and a stubborn conservative ideology, the community is not lying down. I give my congratulations to all involved, who are currently working to expose the bias of the project's business case. Last month, the community group No WestConnex held a packed meeting where residents continued to organise and advocate for better public transport options. The Petersham-Newtown and Port Jackson local Greens groups are continuing to work with Greens councillors in Marrickville and the community against this misuse of public funds. There are practical alternatives, like the inner west light-rail extensions being promoted by Greens MP for Balmain Jamie Parker, the north-south light-rail plan that Parramatta city councillors developed and the network of heavy-rail and tram projects that Ecotransit has proposed and which will benefit the south-west of Sydney in particular. That is where the billions allocated to WestConnex should be channelled.

On another matter, the world's three major pandemics—AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria—cause an enormous amount of death and disability, generally striking those in the most productive years of their lives as well those who are the most vulnerable. For years the fatalistic view prevailed that nothing could be done to stem the tide, but in recent years scientific advances have led to highly effective interventions which have become affordable. Now these diseases can be treated and prevented on a massive scale; all that is needed is investment. That is why I will be moving a motion tomorrow to recognise the work of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which is working to eventually eradicate deaths from these diseases, and to call on the Australian government to consider the next stage of replenishment of the global fund.

I recently met with representatives of the global fund, which supports countries in their fight against three of the world's most devastating diseases. As a partnership between governments, civil society and affected communities, the global fund channels billions of dollars each year to health professionals to treat and prevent AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in their countries. The global fund does not implement or manage programs on the ground, relying instead on local experts to select and administer the programs that save the most lives. It is a most impressive model. In the AIDS sector this model is an innovative approach, based on the principle of community ownership. Health professionals in each country clearly know best how to meet the health challenges their country faces, but they may need support and appropriate tools. Community ownership allows people to determine their own priorities and also makes sure they are responsible for ensuring the implementation of their country's programs. The fund does not preallocate funding to specific countries or diseases but instead responds to genuine demand.

Civil society is also at the heart of the global fund's work. Civil society organisations played a key role in the creation of the fund, helping to conceive the funding model that exists today. The global fund's financing is intended to be in addition to, not in replacement of, national health budgets. The fund and its partners have been campaigning for wealthy countries like Australia to contribute a portion of the program costs. This would help make funding available to those most in need and those who can make the most effective use of it. Those decisions take into account a country's ability to contribute. From 2004 to 2013, Australia contributed a total of $400 million to the global fund and in this period the global fund invested a total of $4 billion in the Asia-Pacific region. Clearly our government and the global fund are to be congratulated for this work.

Tomorrow I will be asking the Senate to note that an appropriate contribution to the global fund by the Australian government would be $125 million. This would take Australia's total contribution over three years to $325 million and ensure that Australia is playing a role in the global fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. The Greens believe this would be an excellent investment, and the results achieved by the global fund speak for themselves. The motion to be moved will ask the government to consider the next stage of replenishment.

In 2000, AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria together killed approximately six million people. The devastation to families, societies and economies caused by these three pandemics was considered a global emergency. We can all clearly imagine the personal hardship and tragedies. Little more than a decade later, the global fund and many other organisations are starting to have an impact on the three diseases. As at the end of 2013, more than six million people are receiving lifesaving antiretroviral therapy through fund supported programs—how impressive is that? Diagnosis and treatment for TB has reached 11.2 million people and 360 million insecticide-treated nets have been distributed to families to protect them from malaria. Thanks to these programs, and the efforts of all the partners, total mortality from AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria has decreased by 40 per cent since 2000. I congratulate all who have been involved.

In all, the fund estimates it has saved the lives of more than 7.9 million people around the world. Australia has a role here and, I believe, a responsibility to recognise this work and consider the next stage of support we should offer.