2014-03-25
Power and Water – Delay in Split
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
While Territorians are suffering under the pain of your cost of living increases and your government becoming so dysfunctional, at the 11th hour you are ditching your much lauded plans to split Power and Water this sittings period. News of the back down broke overnight when your Treasurer advised the member for Nelson, coincidentally, with whom you would need to strike a deal if you lose the seat of Blain and if the three bush MLAs break away from your party.
Can you explain to Territorians why you are not proceeding with this split? Is it because the Chair of Power and Water outlined significant problems for Indigenous Essential Services in an energy committee meeting on Thursday? Will you finally agree to refer this legislation to scrutiny of the Public Accounts Committee and, if not, what are you hiding from Territorians?
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This matter has been circulated as an MPI. I seek a ruling on anticipation of debate.
Madam SPEAKER: Just a minute, members. Anticipation relates to items on the Notice Paper, Leader of Government Business. The MPI is not on the Notice Paper so the question is in order.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I do not think anyone in the Northern Territory would be in doubt about our proposed changes to Power and Water. We recognise the hard work of the people at Power and Water - whether in the office or out in the field - but also recognise we need to make structural reform to Power and Water to drive down the price pressure points in Power and Water and seek to provide a reform agenda to improve delivery of services.
I spoke in the Chamber last week, I think, about the urban aspects of Power and Water and how we are seeking to bring competition into the generation component. Labor brought competition in throughout the retail sector, so there are now two providers of retail services. We want to see competition in the generation sector.
There were challenges with competition in the generation sector previously, partly because there was no access to gas for a new generation provider to come to the Territory as we reserved it all for Gove. The dynamics have changed and there is an opportunity to bring in generation competition. The structural reform will allow it.
There has been commentary in this Chamber and outside about the time frame on legislation being passed. We want to see changes occur by 1 July. The member for Nelson raised the main concern about the time frame for consultation. The bill has been introduced and the second reading speech has been made. The legislation is there for all to see and is open for consultation. The member for Fong Lim – who is also the Treasurer, Deputy Chief Minister and shareholding minister in Power and Water - advised me he had contacted the member for Nelson after our conversation and he advised we will debate the legislation later. It gives an opportunity for further consultation from that point of view ...
Ms Fyles: He will not support it; refer it to PAC.
Mr GILES: I am listening to the interjections from the member for Nightcliff in regard to remote power and water. This does not have a bearing on the aspects of Indigenous Essential Services and the subsidies provided; this is in relation to structural separation of Power and Water for urban areas and how it is provided. It is an opportunity for providing competition in the generation sector and protecting the network aspect.
In remote power generation, we are working with Infrastructure Australia and a consulting firm called GHD to provide a proposal to the federal government somewhere to the tune of $500m - not exactly $500m, but close to it. We are trying to work out how we can network bush communities to provide efficiencies and continuity in the service provided, so there is reliability of services provided in Aboriginal communities. It has been going on for about 12 months and is still a work in progress, but the more opportunities we have to provide networking capabilities to remote communities, the better reliability of power.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION
Power and Water – Delay in Split
Power and Water – Delay in Split
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
You did not answer this part of the question so I will ask it again as a supplementary. Will you finally agree to refer your plans to split Power and Water to the Public Accounts Committee?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, we have laid out the legislative approach we will take in regard to Power and Water. There is a range of things the PAC do with inquiries. We will not refer this to the PAC, but we are happy to chat in this Chamber and discuss the structural reform outside the Chamber. We speak about it wherever we can, because we believe it is an integral part of reforming Power and Water into the future, to put downward price pressures on and improve the reliability and delivery of service.
Elizabeth River Damming
Ms ANDERSON to CHIEF MINISTER
The opposition has been busy spreading all sorts of rumours about alleged plans to dam the Elizabeth River. Can you clear this up once and for all; will the Country Liberals dam the Elizabeth River?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Namatjira for her question. It is very easy, when answering questions like this, to make the political mistake of clearly saying ‘No’ and sitting down. People expect some clarity from this and I will provide a little more detail.
The Elizabeth River will not be dammed by this government. It will not have a weir built, or anything in that regard.
Let us provide a bit of clarity. We established the independent Planning Commission, a statutory authority to come up with ideas and plans for the Northern Territory, for government to consider the way it will move forward with development. There have been a number of plans released already – a Katherine and a Darwin plan. It will soon work on the plan for Port Keats and Alice Springs and it has produced a Borroloola plan. There are a range of plans being undertaken. The one the opposition is leading, with its lies and mistruths, is in regard to …
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, please withdraw those words.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. The Leader of the Opposition is spreading mistruths about the Planning Commission report on the draft greater Darwin plan. In it, no doubt, it says we should be considering - I do not have the exact words - damming the Elizabeth River. I have made it clear we are not damming the Elizabeth River, we are not …
Ms Lawrie: No, you did not.
Mr GILES: I am telling you now, Leader of the Opposition, if you care to listen.
There are no plans. This is why you do not talk, because people do not want to listen. We are not damming it. We have not had any plans for it. We have never looked at damming it and there has never been any proposal to dam it. The only thing is an independent statutory authority, the Planning Commission, which provides us many proposals about a range of things.
I see the member for Johnston holding up the little plan behind him. I was on radio today talking about how there is a very poor level of debate inside this Chamber and in the Northern Territory, about issues which may be sensitive. Someone puts together an idea about damming the Elizabeth River; instead of having a sensible debate about the pros and cons - because there are plenty of people who support it - you run the populous policy approach of trying to scare everybody to a point where you cannot feel free to debate a real issue. We will not debate the issue in this Chamber, because you will not have a proper debate. We will make it clear again: there are no plans to dam or build a weir on the Elizabeth River.
Power and Water – Refer Restructuring to Committee
Mr WOOD to TREASURER
My question is similar to the previous question from the Opposition Leader. Thank you for your announcement last night, stating the government would delay the debate on the proposed legislation dealing with the restructuring of Power and Water Corporation. Will you, therefore, officially send these bills to the Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future - if it is not going to go to the PAC - so they can be thoroughly scrutinised and analysed, claims on both sides of the debate can be tested properly by experts who have experience in these matters, and so the public can have a say and hear from others in an open and transparent public process through public committee hearings?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. We have simply allowed the bill to sit on the Notice Paper until the May sittings. This is because I am concerned there has not been a level of informed, public debate, and there are mistruths being circulated about the reasons for the structural separation and the market reforms being put in place.
I was greatly concerned by a committee meeting last week, in which the Power and Water board was involved. It appeared to me there was an enormous amount of confusion among members of parliament on the issue. These reforms are required; they are the sensible way to go. They will put us into the 21st century, allow us to move forward on developing north Australia and put downward pressure on tariffs. It is only fair people have the opportunity to understand before the debate occurs in parliament.
Member for Nelson, Madam Speaker should be aware last week, on General Business day, we passed a motion which will allow the Public Accounts Committee to self-refer. I do not think this is a matter for a parliamentary committee. This is more a matter for public discussion and the like.
I am disappointed with the attitude of the opposition. This runs completely across their party lines, the position they have taken. In the main, it has been the Labor states across Australia which have introduced these reforms and it was the previous Labor federal government which pushed for more reforms. In most of Australia now, the view is these reforms were essential, similar to the structural separation of the PMG which occurred in the 1970s. These days, anybody who advocates for buying all of the telecommunications companies in Australia and combining them with Australia Post would be considered crazy.
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was: would you send it to the Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future?
Mr TOLLNER: As I was saying, we will not be sending anything to a committee, but the Public Accounts Committee can self-refer. If they want to look at it over the next month or so, they are welcome to do so, but we will be debating the legislation in the May sittings.
Bush Members – Negotiation with CLP
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
Despite your denials last week, Territorians have been watching the CLP implode. Three CLP bush MLAs are threatening to break away, saying they are negotiating. The member for Daly, in reference to the member for Namatjira, has said most of the CLP:
… would be very happy to see her leave the party.
The member for Namatjira, one of the breakaway trio, said:
- It is all in, all out.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the question. I will focus, in my answer, on how Labor is more focused on us than developing and announcing its own policies. We have a plan for the Northern Territory and you do not. All you want to do is spread mistruths and inaccuracies throughout the Northern Territory.
We gave an answer last week about the plan for the Northern Territory, how we are facilitating the Framing the Future documents, a key focus on the economy on the social, cultural and the environmental aspects of the Northern Territory, how we are driving them through the agenda of northern Australia and what this means for building infrastructure across the Northern Territory.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Will you now be honest with Territorians and explain what has been negotiated so you can tenuously cling to power?
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point order. Chief Minister, you have three minutes to finish.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I think in response to a censure motion we spoke about how we are building roads, bridges, and telecommunications, and how our plan for the Northern Territory’s future is to ensure we have the economic growth opportunities and jobs for our kids for the future. We spoke about these things.
When you talk about a deal, the deal is we have a plan. The deal is you do not have a plan. The deal is we are out there finding investment to come to the Northern Territory, to ensure we open up horticultural opportunities, get investment in primary industry, have the biggest land release strategy in the Territory’s history, crime is at the lowest level since figures have been collected and alcohol supply is the lowest on record. We have mandatory alcohol treatment, which is helping people like never before ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Quite specifically, will you be honest with Territorians and explain what you are negotiating with the breakaway trio to tenuously cling to power?
Mr ELFERINK: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition Leader, there is no point of order.
Mr GILES: With regard to the plan we are delivering, we are not delivering these aspects in isolation, we are delivering them in the frame of a $5.5bn debt legacy. The deal we offer all Territorians is a plan for the Territory’s future. Some of the members on your side wish they were part of what we are doing. You have colleagues on your side of the Chamber who like what we are doing, believe in what we are doing, say a 22% reduction in alcohol-fuelled violent assaults between February this year and February last year, as a result of the APO, is a good thing.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was specific. You have 20 seconds left if you want to answer it.
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition Leader, I have already ruled it is not a point of order.
Mr GILES: If you want to talk about deals, let us talk about Stella Maris. Let us talk about Labor, the unions and dirty, dodgy deals.
Ms Lawrie interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition Leader, cease interjecting.
Mr GILES: The fundamental thing is we have a plan, you do not have a plan. We have policies, you do not have policies.
Ms Lawrie: What is the deal?
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, please pause. Opposition Leader, you are on a warning. I asked you to cease interjecting.
Palmerston Regional Hospital – Update
Ms LEE to MINISTER for HEALTH
Can you update the House on the work under way to deliver the Palmerston regional hospital?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arnhem for her question. She is a qualified Aboriginal health practitioner who cares about health services throughout the Northern Territory. As the Chief Minister said, we have a plan. We have policies, a plan and are building a new Palmerston hospital. Things are well under way.
Last week, I had pleasure in announcing a time line, which will give people in the Palmerston and greater Darwin area an indication of how things are happening. We lodged our scoping study in February, which outlines what the Palmerston hospital will consist of and what services will be provided. It was a substantial piece of work and has been welcomed by people within the industry and from the Palmerston area.
In April, an environmental assessment will be done on a huge area of land this government identified, very quickly, upon coming into government. It is 15 times the size of the block of land chosen by the former Labor government. It means we have a vision for a bigger hospital. Stage one will get under way in 2016 – when construction will commence - and the doors will open in 2018 on this large piece of land. Then we will start work on stages two and three of this modern hospital service based in the Palmerston area.
What we also launched last week was a concept design, a flyover, and we have had positive feedback on what this new hospital may look like. It will be a modern facility and it will include all the features of what you find interstate in any modern health facility.
This will be the largest public funded project during the term of this government. We are building; we have a policy and a plan. Unlike Labor, our plan for the Palmerston hospital is big. It is a big and a real vision, as the member for Katherine said. It will service the health needs of the greater Darwin area well into the future, not just in 10 years’ time, but in 20, 30 and 40 years’ time.
We are proud and things are well under way. In July, we will be putting out expressions of interest for businesses interested in constructing and operating the new Palmerston hospital.
Bullying in the Workplace – Chief Minister’s Knowledge of Swearing
Mr VOWLES to CHIEF MINISTER
Do you stand by your comments on Territory FM on 10 March, in relation to the bullying and swearing fiasco, stating, ‘Matt Conlan did not say that?’ If you stand by this statement, how do you explain this e-mail from the member for Greatorex sent to every member of your parliamentary wing dated 18 February apologising for the swearing you say never happened?
I seek leave to table the document.
Leave granted.
Mr VOWLES: Why can you not be honest with Territorians on this matter? When and how will you discipline the member for Greatorex?
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, please pause.
Member for Johnston, I will allow the question at this point in time. It is more a matter for the party, not public affairs, but I will allow it.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, does Mr Treasurer have any money to give the Minister for Infrastructure, so he can help the member for Johnston build a bridge and get over his problems? We are talking about many weeks ago. It is an internal party matter, we deal with our staff, we have a plan and are moving forward.
We have just heard a good answer from the Minister for Health about what we are doing in Palmerston. We listen to every member on this side: as ministers and what they are doing in their portfolios; and as local members and what they want in their electorates. We are trying to drive reform.
Member for Johnston, Rapid Creek is in your electorate. You have tidal surges and problems with houses being inundated with water. We are working with the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment and the Minister for Infrastructure on ways to fix this. We are trying to establish future plans through TIO to ensure we have solutions for people in your electorate, in Rapid Creek. However, you come into this Chamber and do not mention one thing about your electorate, you do not put forward plans and ideas …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was specific around the unanimous motion of this parliament for the Chief Minister to discipline the member for Greatorex and how he has disciplined him.
Madam SPEAKER: It is not a point of order and not what the question was about.
Mr GILES: The question is about what Labor is doing in this Chamber to be a viable opposition in the Northern Territory, in government, to ensure we develop the Northern Territory.
Have we had any questions today from your side of the Chamber about developing the Northern Territory? I say to constituents in Johnston: this is the quality of your representative in this Chamber. People who live anywhere in the electorate of Johnston must be highly disappointed their local member is not standing up for development in the area, for the protection and security of the mums and dads …
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was in regard to the discipline of the member for Greatorex. The Chief Minister is not addressing the question.
Madam SPEAKER: The Chief Minister has three minutes to answer the question as he sees fit.
Mr GILES: I was just reminded by the Deputy Chief Minister about the discipline of those opposite. The discipline to come here and fight as a viable opposition, to ensure government is working towards developing the Northern Territory and northern Australia that we have jobs for the Territory’s future. They are the plans and policies we have across the Northern Territory. We are driving reform and it may not look good to see members fighting for their electorate, but at least people on this side of the Chamber have a fight in them. People on the other side of the Chamber do not have that fight.
The member for Nhulunbuy sits here carping and whining, but not providing any positive solutions for Nhulunbuy. We do not have anybody …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the Chief Minister to withdraw ‘carping and whining’.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, do you find the comments offensive?
Ms WALKER: Madam Speaker, I find it offensive, I have been listening to it for months. It is also untrue.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, please withdraw the comments.
Mr GILES: I withdraw.
It would be good if the local members on the other side of the Chamber fought for their electorates and got some policies together, because at the moment they do not have one policy. The Labor Party is bereft of policy in the Northern Territory. You should be ashamed of yourselves. You are not standing up for your own constituents.
Port Plans for East Arm
Mr KURRUPUWU to CHIEF MINISTER
Can you update the Assembly on the government’s plans to make East Arm Port more competitive?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arafura for his question. He has a new port on the Tiwi Islands. He is very keen on seeing development occur and wants to see greater utilisation of the port facility, the establishment of a hard stand area and greater role of employment training for local Tiwi people. We are also working hard to find solutions to the barge landing area in Maningrida and a range of other port and sea-based infrastructure solutions to provide a more competitive environment.
I announced, late last month, the government had taken the next step in planning for the future of Darwin’s harbour and foreshore. We have appointed independent advisors, Flagstaff Partners, to help develop an overarching strategy for attracting investment to the port. Competitive port services are crucial to our plans for the development of northern Australia …
Ms Lawrie: Privatisation.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, we talk about lies and mistruths. We have had the …
Mr Vowles: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Mr GILES: I have not accused you of anything, it is a word.
Madam SPEAKER: You are fine, Chief Minister.
Mr GILES: The word ‘lie’ is simply a word. We talk about lies and mistruths. We had the thing about the Elizabeth River and the proposed dam you keep talking about. We dealt with that one today and now we are talking about the port. As soon as you mention the port Labor says, ‘You are selling it’. You cannot mention the word. You cannot have a debate or get financial investment in the port without Labor coming forth with these lies and mistruths.
Private investment in our port infrastructure will make the facility more competitive, reducing freight charges and the cost of living for Territorians. We need to get financial investment into the port so we can get more product over the port - whether it be more containers or otherwise - which provides greater economies of scale and will reduce the cost of port services being delivered. When you look at the cost of delivering containers, as an example, over the port in Darwin versus the port in Melbourne or Port Botany in Sydney, we are not cost competitive in this regard. But we need more customers and more product over the wharf to bring down the cost.
Flagstaff Partners are involved in looking globally at how we can get financial investment in the port, increasing quay line, hard stand area and so forth. At the moment we have a proposal through the marine infrastructure park at East Arm, which is also being marketed internationally, and we are working out what we can do with the waterfront at Stokes Hill and Fort Hill Wharf, increasing the size of the duck pond, trying to make it palatable or appetising for big marina berth opportunities, and seeking how we can partner up with the Gobi Desert for development there. I would like to see opportunity for some fish markets in the area, providing greater service for the greater Darwin area.
We are working very …
Ms Lawrie: That would be a Labor plan.
Mr GILES: Labor plans? Eleven-and-a-half years did not do it.
We are working with Flagstaff Partners, trying to get financial investment into the Darwin waterfront, foreshore development and East Arm Port. We believe it will provide a great opportunity for growth in the Territory in the future and drive down cost of living pressures.
Power and Water – Increases
Ms MANISON to CHIEF MINISTER referred to TREASURER
You have imposed savage price hikes on electricity, water and sewerage tariffs on Territory families and businesses. Large households are paying $2000 more per year and small businesses are paying at least $4000 more per year.
What calculations have you done to assess the social and economic impacts of another 9% electricity tariff increase in July, which you approved through CPI, and 5% in January? Or, do you keep pretending the cost of living pain is not happening, and stay stuck in your ideological rant about the carbon price - which equates to about 4% - while you ignore the 34% electricity tariff increase occurring under the CLP? Do you wonder why you lack credibility?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the question. The fact is …
Ms Lawrie: You just do not like the truth.
Mr GILES: Let us go through your numbers; let us go through the truth.
Ms Lawrie: The 20%, 5%, 4.4%, 5% …
Mr GILES: You spoke about a 9% price increase. Presumably within your 9% price increase you had 4% CPI and a 5% power price increase on 1 January next to it, is that right? CPI is running at about 3.9% - to clear up another Labor lie, CPI is not on power prices for 1 July. This is about the third sittings of parliament where they have spoken about CPI on power prices; it is not on power prices. You can get rid of that 3.94% - gone.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The standing order for misleading. The government has signed off a CPI gazettal.
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition Leader, if you do not know the standing order, there is no point of order.
Mr GILES: The CPI is not being applied to power prices …
Ms Lawrie: Yes, it is.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, Opposition Leader! I remind you, you are on a warning.
Mr GILES: The next power price increase will be 5% on 1 January next year, this is an accurate reflection. The carbon tax adds about $20m to the cost of producing power in the Northern Territory right now. If you want to see a reduction in the price of power in the Northern Territory, phone Bill Shorten, the Opposition Leader in Canberra, and ask him to support the legislation in getting rid of the carbon tax. You will have a reduction in price costs on everyone’s bill in the Northern Territory of 5.5%, I am advised by the shareholding minister of Power and Water.
I could talk about this all day, but your question was misleading in that there were some inaccuracies in it. I ask the shareholding minister of Power and Water to go through the intricacies of the carbon tax and what it means for the price of power in the Northern Territory.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister because it is an important point. We could have a price decrease in electricity tariffs now. The only thing standing in the way of that is the federal Labor Party. If the Opposition Leader has any relevance in the Australian Labor Party it should be easy for her to pick up the telephone to Bill Shorten, or some of her federal Labor colleagues in the Senate, and say, ‘Look, get out of the way’.
Tony Abbott went to an election on dumping the carbon tax. Territorians are hurting with cost of living pressures and we are telling everybody in the Northern Territory how bad the cost of living is. We need to demonstrate this by our own measure and we want you to get out of the way; let the carbon tax abolition legislation go through - that is all the Opposition Leader has to do. If she is concerned about cost of living pressures in the Northern Territory, have the federal Labor Party get out of the way and allow the repeal of the carbon tax to go ahead.
Business Support for NGOs
Mr HIGGINS to CHIEF MINISTER
Can you inform the Assembly about the government’s plans for supporting non-government organisations to further develop their business skills?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Daly for his question. Yesterday, I was at a meeting of non-government organisations in Alice Springs. I meet with non-government organisations, in the Top End and the bottom of the Territory, every six months. At the meeting, I had the opportunity to announce a new program to the non-government organisational sector, known as a business support pilot program. It is a $210 000 program, designed for the non-government organisation sector to assist them in moving towards business ideas and realigning themselves as commercial operating businesses in a social setting.
We have been running a model of contestability through government, working out ways we are able to further outsource delivery of some services to the non-government organisational sector. They have responded across a wide range of areas as we seek to facilitate the growth and development of those organisations, to become more robust in their ability to competitively tender for government services and government opportunities and assist them to become more commercially viable in the way they deliver services. We have put this program out and we think it is very positive.
Wendy Morton from NTCOSS said the sector had been calling for better support to build the capacity of their organisation and the pilot program has the potential to help achieve this. It is a positive program.
It was interesting talking with Will MacGregor from BushMob, who spoke about how this program will assist him further to realign its business modelling. It provides a range of services to young Central Australians who, quite often, have alcohol or drug issues and provides accommodation for them at night. It is currently moving into a new building on Priest Street through the old CAT facility - some people in the Chamber would know that facility.
It provides a fee-for-service basis for unused beds. There may be youth from South Australia or Western Australia - and potentially the APY lands or around the Warburton area - where, if the SA or WA government wishes to have accommodation for those youth, it can do so on a fee-for-service basis. The fee-for-service basis allows it to reinvest money to provide more accommodation services to Central Australian kids, which is a good business model.
This business support pilot program will enable other organisations to work towards a model like Will MacGregor at BushMob is using to invest in how they can get business opportunities on a fee-for-service-type basis - not necessarily, but it can be - to gain greater sustainability in their organisation, to deliver their services as part of their constitution, deliver services as part of a contestable model of outsourcing and deliver other services to the corporate and non-corporate areas across the jurisdiction they work in.
I commend the program to the House.
Indigenous Essential Services – Funding
Mr McCARTHY to CHIEF MINISTER referred to TREASURER
During a public hearing of the energy committee on Thursday, the Chair of Power and Water, Ken Clarke, admitted to an existing $5m to $6m shortfall in Indigenous Essential Services per year. Mr Clarke admitted the demand on Indigenous Essential Services for the bush was increasing and the split up of the Power and Water Corporation would produce a reduced revenue stream to the new Power and Water Corporation. Why has your government ignored the revenue needs of Indigenous Essential Services to the bush to improve services in the bush? What commitment will you make today to fund the Indigenous Essential Services shortfall of around $5m to $6m each year?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, before I hand over to the shareholding minister, the government provides a CSO to Indigenous Essential Services every year to ensure we provide Power and Water services into remote areas. It has happened for many a long year in the Northern Territory and will continue to operate in that sense; nothing will change.
We are trying to work – as I announced in my first answer – with Infrastructure Australia and the infrastructure council, through consultants GHD, to identify ways we can come up with a model to network more communities so they can run off mainstream power generators to gain greater reliability in services. We are working on what the cost structure might be. We believe it might be up to $500m. We will pass the proposal to Infrastructure Australia to see how we can get greater reliability in those services.
In many remote locations, most generators operate off diesel. There are a few solar opportunities here and there, and some networked power, but not very much. We want to see how we can make changes in this regard and will continue investing.
The CSO will continue to operate the way it has. We will continue to provide the service. Everyone still gets the service in a regulated environment.
I will hand over to the Treasurer who can provide greater detail on the CSO.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister. I welcome the question from the member for Barkly. It is a relevant question and gives me the opportunity to say here and now, so all can be informed, the structural separation of Power and Water and the market reforms being put in place will not affect Indigenous Essential Services one jot. It will be completely unaffected by the reforms being put in place.
Indigenous Essential Services - so people are aware of what we are talking about - is a wholly-owned not-for-profit subsidiary company of the Power and Water Corporation. It operates solely on taxpayer funds and provides - not quite solely …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. His time is nearly up. How will you address the $5m to $6m shortfall?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, it is not a point of order.
Mr TOLLNER: People in the bush pay electricity tariffs through the purchase of cards and the like. There is a universal tariff operating across the Northern Territory, which means people in the bush will pay no different to people in the cities or the regional areas.
The issue with Indigenous Essential Services is how we get innovation and efficiencies into the system. When you have a not-for-profit organisation, which is funded to a large part through taxpayer subsidies, there are areas we can increase efficiencies and reduce costs. This is an area I would like the energy committee to focus on.
School Attendance Figures – Notified Absences
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for EDUCATION
Last August you met with Taminmin College School Council. One matter the council wanted you to address was the issue of notified absences being included as attendance for the purpose of calculating staff numbers. This would enable schools not to lose teachers if students were not in the classroom due to sickness, family travel, family emergencies or suspension when the statistics were taken. Those students would be returning to the classroom. Sometimes teachers would be marking, setting and assisting students with work via e-mail when they were away. As you can see, it is unfair that schools lose teachers if the statistics are taken on a week when those students may not be present.
The school council believes you supported the change, but a letter from the Chief Executive in December seems to have reversed what you said. Will you state your promise for notified absences to be included in school attendance figures?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson. From the outset, my commitment has not changed. There are many valid reasons children are away from schools. Whilst we want to see, as a government, every child in a classroom every day, there will always be reasons for a child not to be there.
In opposition I complained loudly for a while because I had come across schools getting students to mark the roll. Dealing with a number of parents, it would suggest they had evidence their children were at school on the day, they had produced work assignments on the day, according to the school records, they were absent from school. It started to make you question how accurate the systems in place were. We have done a great deal of work in that area to ensure we get the accuracy right.
At the end of the day, it is important for our schools to provide accurate information because the more accurate their information on attendance rates, the more they will be resourced.
My commitment has not changed in that area. Schools need to have accurate information regarding a student’s whereabouts. The more accurate those figures, the reasons set out - and, from time to time, there are reasons why students are absent from …
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question was: will you restate your promise for notified absences to be included in school attendance figures?
Mr CHANDLER: I said so in the first line, member for Nelson. It is still my commitment. As I have tried to explain, there are many reasons a student may not be present at school, and the valid reason should be included in the statistics. If it was not for the sickness - let us say it was a sickness - the student would be at school.
There are certain reasons students are absent from school which may not be acceptable. Let us face it, today there are parents, for a number of reasons, who may choose to take their children out of school, maybe for a holiday. It may not be a reasonable excuse to have a child away from school. However, if a child is sick, for every other reason the child would be in school that day and the absence should acceptable.
My commitment has not changed from the meeting I had with Taminmin College last year; it is still the same.
Royal Visit to Central Australia
Ms ANDERSON to MINISTER for CENTRAL AUSTRALIA
In less than a month, the eyes of the world will be on the Northern Territory, when the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visit Uluru on Tuesday 22 April, during the royal couple’s 10-day visit to Australia. Can you please inform the House how the Country Liberals government will capitalise on the trip to attract more visitors to the Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Namatjira for her question. She, unlike the members opposite, is interested in growing tourism in the Northern Territory and, in this case, in Central Australia. We have a fabulous opportunity to capitalise on the royal visit to Uluru.
The impact on the tourism industry will be huge, something money cannot buy. The Duke and Duchess are global icons and superstars in the UK - being our biggest international market. We predict the royal visit will provide us with a wealth of material and opportunity, to tap into our key market of the United Kingdom and entice more Brits to holiday in the Northern Territory.
Planning is already under way for marketing campaigns in the lead up, during and after the visit, in the UK and domestic market in Australia. Our new marketing campaigns around the royal visit will ensure the royal effect translates into bookings and - this is the important component - it is great to have the image across the world. We want it to translate, or convert, into holiday bookings and sales.
The campaigns will target couples who might also be looking for a romantic outback getaway, just like Prince William and Kate will be doing at Uluru, for a holiday full of adventure and culture as well as the romantic component. We will encourage our English tourists, who have already booked a trip to Australia, to add Uluru and the Northern Territory to their itinerary and go on their own tour of the royal Red Centre. The member for Namatjira will be there with bells on, encouraging many holiday tourists to enjoy those fabulous parts of the Northern Territory.
Some of the marketing activity currently planned includes: weekly social media content, with a royal theme across the global channels; content fact sheets highlighting activities in the Red Centre; potential creation of a royal inspired travel package; content pieces reflecting the royal visit in 1983 of Princess Diana and Prince Charles with a very young Prince William at the time; and online amplification following the visit. These new campaigns will be helped by the additional $8m this government invested into our international marketing budget.
It is a key market. We recognise our key markets, unlike those opposite who stripped money out of our key traditional market of the UK. In 2011-12, the marketing budget under the Labor government for our key international market was $863 000. The Country Liberals government recognises this as our key international market. Some 35 000 visitors have come to these shores under the Country Liberals government, which invested $1.7m into attracting more UK visitors to the Northern Territory.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Firefighters – Compensation Legislation
Mr GUNNER to CHIEF MINISTER referred to MINISTER for BUSINESS
Will you provide bipartisan support, in this sittings period, for the introduction of legislation which will provide critical coverage to our hard working firefighters who are battling cancer as a result of their careers protecting the lives of Territorians?
Since I introduced this legislation last August, your own consultants have said they support the principle of the legislation. Three former firefighters have tragically died due to cancer. Firefighters are battling cancer today. The opposition is asking for your bipartisan support to introduce our legislation in this sittings period. Would you support the introduction of my private member’s bill, the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Fire-Fighters) Bill tomorrow and allow suspension of Standing Orders in notices today to clear the way for its introduction?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I support the principle of the legislation the member for Fannie Bay discusses. I have supported it from day one when it was first brought in.
Mr Gunner interjecting.
Mr GILES: I will give you a fair and reasonable answer, shadow minister. I have said we need to have a fair and reasonable look at it. It is the first time …
Members interjecting.
Mr GILES: It is a serious issue. Firefighters and their health concerns are serious.
Ms Lawrie: Do something then. You have had enough time.
Mr GILES: I would not be interjecting on such a serious matter. We said we will look at it. There has been a Senate inquiry in Canberra. Two other jurisdictions in the country have had a serious look at this. There has been a lot of work done in the US and overseas in relation to this same issue. I had a discussion about it with the Minister for Business when you first raised it because this legislation comes under his portfolio. He will give you a further update in a second.
What David and I have discussed, both in government and personally, is to not only look at the firefighters in this frame. Let us see what other occupations this can seriously look at, which is what our consultants and the review have undertaken. We will have a proposal on how to move forward in the near future. The Minister for Business will give you an update.
The concerns of those firefighters are at the forefront of our minds. It is not a political issue for us, or something we should be interjecting on and trying to score political points with. We will be moving towards a supportive environment.
As I said at the outset of answering this question, the principles of what you are trying to do are fully supported by me and this government.
Mr TOLLNER (Business): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister is right; we are undertaking a comprehensive review of the entirety of work health acts. The issue of firefighters sits squarely in the middle of this. I heard interjections coming across the floor, ‘What other occupations’ and the like.
For the benefit of members opposite, you must be aware presumptive legislation applies for a number of occupations, most notably in the health area, where you have doctors and nurses who may or may not contract HIV. There is a presumption this is occurring through their work. The onus of proof is reliant upon the employer or the insurer to suggest it has not happened through their work. This is a case of presumptive legislation for other occupations; it is not just about firefighters.
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! We have 15 seconds left and I want to know if they would support a suspension of standing orders today to allow the introduction of the bill tomorrow.
Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order.
Mr TOLLNER: As I said, there is a comprehensive review happening of all the work health acts. This is the first time in 30 years any such review has taken place and it is only fair time is given for the review to be completed.
ICT Businesses
Mr HIGGINS to MINISTER for CORPORATE and INFORMATION SERVICES
The Territory’s information, communication and technology businesses rely on servicing the government’s ICT needs as a major revenue stream. Can you please advise whether the government has made any recent strategic decisions which will provide additional work for local ICT businesses?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, in IT circles it is well known the previous government was responsible for creating a new style of fly-in fly-out worker. When we think of fly-in fly-out workers, we think of people driving technical mining machinery or using their engineering skills to develop specific downstream gas or mineral processing facilities and the like, but the previous government created a new type of FIFO, which was the IT professional. The Asset Management System, which the previous government tried to put in place, utilised a program put up by a company called SAP. There were no skills in the Northern Territory for it, so everyone who worked on the system had to be flown from interstate.
Unlike normal FIFO, those in the mining or gas industries who generally stay in workers camps, this type - the IT professional - stayed in some of the top hotels in Darwin, had restaurant meals, would stay for five days and be flown home to their states on the weekend before being flown back the following Monday to continue work on this failed AMS system. I saw the front page of today’s NT News - $70m which we might as well have piled up in cash on the steps of Parliament House and set alight, because it is $70m of wasted money.
You ask what you could get with $70m: work could happen in the bush, the northern suburbs and in each of the Labor members’ electorates. It is a lot of money to waste. This government has made a hard decision to scrap the program in its entirety.
We are worse off now than when we started. The program was expected to cost $7m. It blew out to 10 times more. It was a big decision to scrap it, but we have a simple solution which involves putting a layer of middleware in place and can be done by local IT businesses.
As a government, we not only have an obligation to get the best systems in place for ourselves, we want to grow the capacity and capability of local IT businesses. This solution will bode well for the Territory and support our local IT businesses.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Elizabeth River Damming
Mr VOWLES to CHIEF MINISTER
You have hit the panic button on the Blain by-election now a loss spells the potential of losing government if the three bush MLAs break away from the CLP. This panic reached flashpoint on Saturday, when you belatedly ditched CLP plans to dam the Elizabeth River. I seek leave to table a copy of the Darwin regional land use plan, which shows the dam and Lake Elizabeth.
Leave granted.
Mr VOWLES: This is the old discredited CLP plan from the 1990s which your handpicked planning mates dusted off and brought back as your government’s vision. If you cannot get basic planning right after 18 months, and ditch your plans in a panic, what does this mean for the growth of Darwin and Palmerston? Where to now?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am not sure what the question was about. It went back to the allegation about damming or weiring the Elizabeth River. I think I have said it 15 times today: it will not happen. An independent Planning Commissioner has designed detailed plans about opportunities for future directions of the greater Darwin region. We not are damming or building a weir and I reject the premise of the question.
Three-Hub Economy – Independent Research
Mr HIGGINS to TREASURER
The Giles government has a plan for a three-hub economy focusing on mining and energy, tourism and education, and food exports. Can the Treasurer advise if any independent research has confirmed the merits of this government’s approach?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Daly for this good question. I acknowledge the strength of the member’s concern about the Northern Territory economy. He is right; there is research by independent, professional, arm’s length bodies, which supports the Adam Giles government’s plans.
Deloitte has found the Giles government plans to continue the economic development of the Northern Territory is on track. I see the way the Opposition Leader is looking at me, upset by the news.
Deloitte found:
- … the Northern Territory is well positioned to continue growing as it capitalises on a coming wave of five super-growth sectors linked to Asia’s evolving boom - gas, agribusiness, tourism, international education and wealth management …
The NT’s announced 3-Hub strategy focusing on mining and energy, tourism and education, and food exports shows that the economy is already preparing for the coming shift.
This government has a plan.
Mr McCarthy: You have not delivered a block of land.
Mr TOLLNER: I pick up on the interjection by the member for Barkly, he said we have not delivered a block of land. We have the fastest growing residential construction rate in the Northern Territory’s history. We have land release every day. It irks the opposition the Northern Territory is going from strength to strength and the reason for this is finally we have a plan to develop the Territory economy. We have a plan to pay down Labor’s $5.5bn worth of debt and balance the budget. This is a government with plans and those plans are seeing fruit.
Every economic indicator you look at shows the Territory is on the brink of booming. I congratulate the Chief Minister, not just for laying out the plans, but for getting on with delivering them, and for the work he has done with Tony Abbott and the federal government in outlining a north Australia development plan and his work travelling throughout Asia and attracting private investment to the Territory.
Our plans are working and what a great thing for the Northern Territory. While we are getting on with business, the opposition wants to do nothing but carp and bag and talk the Territory down.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Written Question Paper.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016