2013-12-04
Gove Refinery – Impact of Closure
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
Territorians are wondering why you have completely rolled over to Rio Tinto, allowing the closure of the Nhulunbuy refinery, despite the 2011 lease requiring a refinery to be operable. Territorians are wondering why you would follow a Rio Tinto time line of curtailment of just eight months, despite all major industrial shutdowns in Australia, whether it is steelworks at Newcastle, car manufacturing in Geelong or Broadmeadows, having a lead time for structural adjustment and alternative employment arrangements of more than two years.
Territorians are wondering why you have not done a social and economic impact analysis and are now scrambling now to put a team together. Why do you expect Territorians to accept such abject failure of your responsibilities when it has truly dire consequences for the people of Nhulunbuy and, indeed, the region?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question. Talking about irresponsibility, you have to hand a lot of irresponsibility to the former Labor government.
The government’s long-stated position is to keep the refinery open in Nhulunbuy, but Rio Tinto announced its decision last Friday to move to curtailment. As a government, in reflecting some questions from yesterday and some comments by the expert fisherman Paul Howse in media yesterday about the government looking through the lease, we have looked through all the leases dating back to 1969, 1990 and 2011. I can tell you that …
Ms Fyles: Table the documents. You said you would release them.
Mr GILES: You can search the Internet and find them if you like.
In 1968, the document said …
Ms Fyles: We are talking about 2013.
Mr GILES: You might want to listen and learn:
- The Commonwealth and Swiss Aluminium Australia agree that the Gove Alumina, as the Australian venturer, shall be entitled to export from Australia up to 40 million geometric tonnes of bauxite from the Gove deposits over the period of 20 years.
- … this approval for export of bauxite is subject to your agreement as joint venturers that you and Nabalco Proprietary Limited shall continuously, during the substance of the Gove agreement and any extension or variation thereof and, whether novated to the Northern Territory or not, operate the bauxite treatment plant at Gove in a good and proper manner for the actual production of alumina.
It goes on to talk about the conditions under the …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question. Why has the Chief Minister let down the people of Nhulunbuy?
Madam SPEAKER: It is not a point of order.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, in that 1990 agreement, minister Coulter explained the conditions. However, in 2011, the then minister for Mines, Mr Kon Vatskalis, current member for Casuarina, sent a letter which did not outline any conditions about the operations of the Gove refinery, removing all conditions about the operation of the refinery and the continuity of it. It said:
- In accordance with clause 1(i) of SML 11, I grant approval to Swiss Aluminium Australia Limited and Gove Aluminium Ltd to export bauxite from the Northern Territory for the renewed term of SML 11, being for a term of 10 years …
He did not explain any conditions about operating the refinery, not one condition at all.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION.
Gove Refinery – Impact of Closure
Gove Refinery – Impact of Closure
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
You did your utmost to not answer the question so I will put it back to you. We ask again that you table the lease. In the lease, it is very clear there is a requirement for the refinery to be operable. That has been confirmed by your own officials in a briefing to me and the member for Nhulunbuy. You said it on Hansard yesterday in the censure motion. In the lease there is a requirement. Table the lease, Chief Minister. Why are you rolling over to Rio Tinto? Why are you allowing an eight-month curtailment instead of a minimum of two years …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question is in breach of Standing Order 112 and contains arguments.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am happy to answer the question. I am glad I get a bit more time to talk about this because we know in 1969 and 1990, under the lease arrangements, there were many categoric conditions about the operation of the plant, the refinery …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 255 in relation to tabling the document. Table the lease so we can see it.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much. The new member for Nightcliff does not seem to understand commercial realities. When you have an agreement between two parties, both parties have to agree for the lease to be tabled. So, go and learn something, member for Nightcliff. If you want more information come and get a briefing …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Why are you allowing a curtailment of only eight months …
Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order!
Mr GILES: Clearly, the Leader of the Opposition does not understand that commercial decisions are made by commercial operators. However, this letter by former minister Kon Vatskalis removed the conditions on which the operator could operate a refinery.
It is not even listed in the letter! It should have been written in the letter ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Quite specifically, why are you rolling over allowing an eight-month curtailment …
Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. Sit down! You are on a warning, Opposition Leader!
Mr GILES: This is despite advice from the department advising otherwise. You did not even put it in your letter. The advice says otherwise. You did not put those conditions in the letter of offer …
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, your time has expired.
Tiwi Island Agreement –
Economic Development
Economic Development
Mr KURRUPUWU to CHIEF MINISTER
I joined you yesterday at Wurrumiyanga for the signing of an historic agreement between Tiwi people and the NT government. Could you please update the Assembly on this important step in bringing economic development to the Tiwi Islands?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arafura. It was a great day being on the Tiwi Islands yesterday. We were only there for a short time; however, to sit there and have a chat with the full Tiwi Land Council was a fantastic and historic occasion.
We had the opportunity to sign the first memorandum of understanding with the Tiwi people, the Tiwi Land Council, and the Tiwi Aboriginal Land Trust on setting a pathway forward for economic development on the Tiwi Islands – a first time, a first step. We had a full land council meeting there, with everyone in support of us driving economic development. It was a proud moment, not just for the member for Arafura, but for me and all my colleagues who were not there, who fight for economic development in Aboriginal communities of the Northern Territory.
This is just a first step in a memorandum of understanding. Our next step is to move towards a full partnership agreement by the end of January where we can set out the framework of how we will get our in-practice projects under way into the future. We look forward to that time at the end of January.
We have agreed we will consult, from the Northern Territory government point of view, about what we can do in a government response, and the Tiwi Land Council will consult with Tiwi people about what they would like to see happen on the Tiwi Islands.
We have a massive passion for driving economic development in all Aboriginal communities around the Northern Territory. The approach by the Tiwi Islanders to the Northern Territory government to want to drive change on the Tiwi Islands is a fantastic outcome. We have been working tirelessly, through the Department of the Chief Minister, with Indigenous regional development staff in driving forward this memorandum of understanding, working towards business development.
Horticulture, agribusiness, hotel development, working with the new port that has been built there; this is a fantastic outcome and it was a proud moment to be there signing this memorandum of understanding yesterday. The only disappointment was that parliament was on yesterday and not everybody could be there. All colleagues on this side of the Chamber would have liked to have been there, unlike those on the other side of the Chamber who, for eleven-and-a-half years, did not support economic development in any Aboriginal communities.
They would not drive anything. They stifled development; they took away people’s voices in the bush. All they wanted was organisational welfare, individual welfare, not driving business, not driving jobs, and not driving a future.
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Could the Chief Minister advise where the public meeting was held and who was invited on the Tiwi Islands?
Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order, member for Nhulunbuy. Chief Minister.
Mr GILES: The member for Nhulunbuy comes in with another irrelevant point of order. A full land council meeting signing up to drive growth on the Tiwi Islands, for the future of the Tiwi people, is a fantastic outcome and is something we should all be proud of.
Nhulunbuy Student Numbers
Ms WALKER to CHIEF MINISTER
Last Friday in Nhulunbuy, triggered by your reneging on the deal with Rio Tinto, you told the community that school student numbers would tumble from 950 to 275. Yesterday morning in Question Time, you confirmed these figures. Why did senior bureaucrats in Nhulunbuy yesterday advise they have not done any number crunching on student numbers? Why did they say they have no projections which set out your expected decline in student numbers during the eight-month curtailment period? Who is telling the truth, the experts in the department or have you been caught out making numbers up to cover up your bungling of the Nhulunbuy crisis?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, this comes from the member for Nhulunbuy, who for four years, 2008 to 2011, never fought for the constituents of Nhulunbuy or the continued operation of the refinery, and stood in the way of every development we tried …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question about student numbers in Nhulunbuy. Are you making them up?
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, will you get to the point, please?
Mr GILES: I will use my three minutes to get to the point. As I was saying, for four years, the member for Nhulunbuy did not say anything. I bet she never even knew the former minister for Mines, the member for Casuarina, sent a letter to Rio Tinto on 16 May 2011, not even identifying any specific conditions in the lease they had to comply with to keep the refinery open. Barry Coulter, the former minister did that. In 1969, that was part of the agreement.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. He has not even touched on education or the student numbers.
Madam SPEAKER: Please be seated, the minister has three minutes to answer the question.
Mr GILES: This is the interjection from the Leader of the Opposition who in her first question asked about a social impact assessment and in her second asked for numbers from the social impact assessment.
Mr VATSKALIS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 255. The Chief Minister is waving a letter. I would like him to table the public document. It is a letter, not a list, it is not covered by privilege. Table the letter you are reading from.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, are you prepared to table the document?
Mr GILES: It is tabled, Madam Speaker.
Mr McCarthy: One page.
Mr GILES: A very good point from the member for Barkly; one page, that is exactly right. It was not a 10-page document detailing any conditions. ‘Dear Rio, I love you. Here, export bauxite.’ It did not say how much bauxite could be exported. It did not state any other conditions at all.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nightcliff, I have warned you before. You have to get the call from the Speaker before you start speaking. What is your point of order?
Ms FYLES: Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question: is the Chief Minister or the department making up the numbers?
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, if you could get to the point please.
Mr GILES: I will go back to what I was saying a couple of interjections ago in the first question, ‘Will you table any social impact assessment?’ The second question referred to information I have tabled about a social impact assessment. I told you the numbers yesterday. You heard about the changes expected by Rio, as assessed, in your briefing. I do not have the exact numbers in front of me, but I said there would be a reduction from about 970 students to about 225. That was a component of the student numbers. This is the information Rio has obtained in its assessment. I am not sure if you have asked Rio for this. I have asked Rio to put it out publicly so everyone can understand what they anticipate to change over the next eight months at Gove. We all understand it will be a challenge …
Ms Walker: Why are you not taking the lead on this? Stop hiding behind Rio and stand up for people in Nhulunbuy.
Mr GILES: … and we have committed …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy! Chief Minister, you have the call.
Mr GILES: The people who want to play politics with Nhulunbuy do not want to find solutions for Nhulunbuy. This decision has been coming for some time. We worked tirelessly to provide solutions to reduce the cost for Rio Tinto in Nhulunbuy. We are as disappointed as anyone. We now have to provide longer term solutions to Gove. Be part of the solution or get out of the way.
Stella Maris
Ms FINOCCHIARO to CHIEF MINISTER
Yesterday you outlined to the House how the Labor Party was to directly benefit financially from the decision by the former Labor government to gift the $3m Stella Maris asset to the unions on the last day before the 2012 election. The Opposition Leader has said, and I quote from a radio interview with her last week defending the dirty Stella Maris deal:
- It is intrinsically linked with the seafarers Maritime Union and broader union movement. They have been operating that site forever.
Is this true?
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member for Drysdale for her question. I imagine there are plenty on this side who wanted to ask, because it is serious question about a dirty stinking deal done by Labor. The member for Drysdale is clearly concerned with the revelations that continue surfacing about this slimy deal and the flimsy explanations the Opposition Leader has been using to excuse her role in orchestrating this dodgy arrangement with union mates.
The House should be aware the Opposition Leader was also the Planning minister when this smelly deal was first hatched. She later let the member for Barkly be the stool pigeon signatory for this dodgy deal when he became Planning minister.
As has been revealed, Unions NT outlined intentions, as far back as 2009, to make commercial profit out of relocating to the Stella Maris site at the same time as the current Opposition Leader was Planning minister. Now that her major part in this has been exposed, the former Treasurer keeps making up claims which do not back up why she did not consider the financial ramifications of this dodgy deal. Her bluster that the unions have been operating the Stella Maris site has never been the case. I am informed that as far back as 1937 – more than 70 years ago – unions have never had a principal role in the site.
The real operator of the Stella Maris site for most of the period was Stella Maris, the Apostleship of the Sea ….
Mr McCarthy: Rubbish. Ever go to the Stella Maris, Dave? Hey Dave, have you been drinking at the Stella Maris?
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Barkly
Mr McCarthy: I have.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, please pause. Member for Barkly, withdraw those comments and cease interjecting.
Mr McCARTHY: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, you have the call.
Mr GILES: The real operator of the Stella Maris site for most of that period was Stella Maris, the Apostleship of the Sea, a Catholic organisation which takes care of seafarers worldwide, not the unions.
The Opposition Leader cannot keep hiding behind the member for Barkly, who was the Planning minister on the stroke of midnight before the 2012 election, when her former Labor Cabinet endorsed the dirty deal she was the architect of.
She could come clean on her central role in pushing this through the former Labor Cabinet. She gave a two-decade lease for a $3m CBD government asset to unions for zero rent. The annual rent on the Stella Maris site is valued at $150 000, and she gave it away for zilch to union mates. She knew Unions NT had planned to commercially develop Stella Maris at 38 Wood Street, and she has to come clean to Territorians about what she knew in regard to how the Labor Party would ultimately be a beneficiary of this dodgy deal, through their ownership of the site. The stench around this firmly sits with the Opposition Leader, who should apologise to Territorians for trying to pull the wool over their eyes on this dirty, stinking, rotten deal.
Alcohol-Related Violence –
Parliamentary Inquiry
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr GUNNER to CHIEF MINISTER
Alcohol-related crime in the Territory is out of control. Alcohol-related assaults are up by 11.4%. Tragically, domestic violence is up. Violent assault in Katherine has increased by 20% since the Banned Drinker Register was scrapped. Traders at the transit centre have said problems with drunks have increased since the Banned Drinker Register was scrapped. I quote a trader at the transit centre from this morning:
- When we had the Banned Drinker Register that was working really well for us, but since that has been gone and done away with the problem seems to be escalating back up and very quickly.
Your alcohol policies are a tragic failure. Will you agree to a parliamentary inquiry to find ways to stop grog-fuelled violence?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the question. Our policies around alcohol are working in a fantastic way. The alcohol rehabilitation model which has been rolled out by the Minister for Alcohol Rehabilitation is changing people’s lives. We do not walk away from that.
The new legislation that went through last week around alcohol protection orders will now help people get off the grog, or not drink as much, and will help to change people’s lives. Our intensive policing efforts are now getting people to not consume as much alcohol. We are seeing a reduction in property crime; I know you do not relate this to alcohol. In most areas of the Northern Territory it is down substantially, with a 58% reduction in Palmerston alone.
There are now fewer people breaking into properties, getting grog and being locked up. The reason assaults are going up - I have explained this before - is because under your watch, only about 25% of assaults, particularly domestic violence involving alcohol, were prosecuted.
I have encouraged police to prosecute all those cases, and that is why the numbers are going up. The police are doing a fantastic job. The numbers will keep going up until we get in control of these assault cases, which you were not prosecuting, You were allowing 75% of domestic violence cases to go unheard, with people not charged.
What would happen? A man - I am generalising because it is not all men versus women - might go back and assault his wife again and again, because you were not intervening. We have police intervening now. We now have programs like SupportLink which are linking government services trying to drive change. It is a fantastic outcome that we are achieving. You do not reap results in 12 months after a change from a very poor performing Labor government. We are firmly committed to addressing the scourge of alcohol, particularly those people who have domestic violence and assault issues. It is a challenge.
I commend, first of all, our side of the Chamber, whose members stand firm on addressing alcohol-related issues. Alcohol rehabilitation, alcohol protection orders, SupportLink, and standing up for the police are fantastic outcomes.
I must also commend the opposition, which includes the member for Nelson who votes with Labor every time, because they only have one policy: the Banned Drinker Register. When it is all going bad …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question. Will you agree to a parliamentary enquiry to find ways of stopping the grog-fuelled violence?
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, get to the point.
Mr GILES: They only have one policy, the banned drinker policy.
Stella Maris comes in - all their failures all over the place. What do you do? You run to the only policy you have. What other policies do you have? Where is the spreadsheet which shows what Labor stands for? One policy!
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, your time has expired.
Stella Maris
Mr HIGGINS to CHIEF MINISTER
Yesterday in setting out his reasons for gifting the $3m Stella Maris site to unions, the Deputy Opposition Leader stated:
- Cabinet approved the proposal which had been discussed with my department and authorised me to make the offer set out in my letter of 3 August 2012.
Given the current Leader of the Opposition was a Cabinet member and Treasurer at the time, was she obligated to declare an interest in regard to the Stella Maris decision?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Daly for his question. You must have come second in, ‘How can we ask a question about Stella Maris?’
It is a very good question. The Opposition Leader was the minister for Planning in 2009 when Unions NT approached her with their proposal to operate the Stella Maris site as a commercial proposition. Even though, pathetically, according to the Opposition Leader, Unions NT is a so-called not-for-profit organisation.
In 2009, Unions NT Secretary, Matthew Gardiner, approached Labor’s then Planning minister, now the Opposition Leader, to outline how they would make money from the Stella Maris site if the Labor government gave it to them for free.
Do not forget that at this time the Labor government was already spending around $300 000 on improvement works at the Stella Maris property. Two years before this, Matthew Gardiner stood for Labor pre-selection for the 2007 federal election. In 2009, one would suspect the Planning minister, who was also the Treasurer, took the time to listen carefully to her mate, Matthew Gardiner - who by 2010 was Labor’s second Senate candidate and the Vice-President of the Territory Labor Party - about his views on how they would develop their building at 38 Wood Street.
They are very quiet during this one, are they not? Later, when the Labor Cabinet endorsed the decision to gift the Stella Maris site to the unions for free, the Treasurer and member for Karama should have declared an interest. Why is that? Because she was the Treasurer, beholden to taxpayers to look after their money and she knew the Labor Party, through its political slush company called Harold Nelson Holdings, would benefit from their decision.
Who is one of the current directors of that Labor party slush company now? Well, that is the same Matthew Gardiner, the Opposition Leader’s mate, who has been involved in cooking up this dirty deal since at least 2009. Maybe not Gerry Obeid, maybe Delia Obeid.
Today, that same Matthew Gardiner took off his President of the Labor Party hat, put on his Unions NT Secretary T-shirt and called for the government to honour this dodgy deal. They have paid $442 in paperwork fees for a rent free long-term lease of a $3m site. I have $442 here; I am happy to pay that back, although I suspect the Leader of the Opposition should pay it back - $442 for a $3m site where Labor would benefit. Better still, Delia should be paying this money back because she is the beneficiary of the redevelopment of the 38 Wood Street site, as well as the Stella Maris.
Leader of the Opposition, will you pay that money back? It is time to come clean on your involvement in this dirty, stinking, rotten deal.
Mango Season Challenges
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for PRIMARY INDUSTRY and FISHERIES
During this year’s mango season, a number of mango growers in the Darwin region were badly affected by resin canal disorder. Some growers were affected worse than others. The growers held a meeting at Howard Springs earlier this year, which I was asked to attend. They believe resin canal disorder has the potential to seriously affect mango production in the Top End and they felt the government should put more research effort into finding out what causes this disorder before it gets worse.
Does the department regard this disorder as a potential major threat to the mango industry - which is one of the biggest horticultural industries in the Territory - and what will the department do to investigate the causes of this disorder and possible solutions?
Just for the Chief Minister, I vote on legislation independently, on its merit, not whether it is CLP or ALP.
Members interjecting.
Mr Wood: Well, he speaks crap.
Mr Tollner: Stand on your record.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Nelson!
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the member for Nelson to withdraw that expletive.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of Government Business, I did not hear any expletives, but if you used an expletive, member for Nelson, please withdraw it.
Mr WOOD: We could argue whether it is an expletive or a common word for ‘a load of rubbish’. I will withdraw if it is regarded as an expletive by the member for Port Darwin. I believe it is the right term for what the Chief Minister said.
Madam SPEAKER: The Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries has the call.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am keen to answer this question because it is important, and all I am getting is bickering from the member for Nhulunbuy and the member for Nelson, which is surprising at it is his question.
The 2013 mango season has been challenging for our industry, with a total production loss of about 40%, due mostly to the poor Wet Season followed by a very warm period at the start of the Dry.
The incidence of the condition referred to as resin canal has been identified in a number of mango production regions across Australia for many years, however, always at quite a low level. In the 2012-13 harvest season there were elevated levels of the defect observed at some farms in the Darwin and Katherine regions in the NT, and a number of farms in Mareeba reported elevated levels. The Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has a large post-harvest research team which leads a number of national projects on mango post-harvest defects. Many of the activities within these projects are in collaboration with my Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries.
The combined research team has been working with packers and growers for most of this season to achieve the outcomes of these projects. Some of the suppliers have nil or very low levels of the resin canal defect, while some are very high. The Australian Mango Industry Association (AMIA) has contracted consultants to assess product in the Sydney and Melbourne markets. Preliminary indications are that the defect is present in a wide range of fruit; however, practices within the supply chain are exacerbating the problem. AMIA, together with a local mango packing shed, have requested Queensland DAFF to develop a new project with the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries here for Horticulture Australia funding. The project committee, to be mediated by NT Farmers Association, will improve communications between growers, packers and researchers.
Other projects - supported by AMIA and/or the NT Mango Industry Association and the department - have been considered a higher priority than resin canal, and resources have been committed to these projects. Many of these projects are closely linked to fruit quality and have outcomes aligned to resin canal.
We consider this a serious issue. It is one we are addressing by contributing to the research being done through the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.
Badminton Petition
Mr VOWLES to MINISTER for SPORT, RECREATION and RACING
Nearly 12 000 Territorians, including the Deputy Chief Minister, I understand, have now signed a petition urging you to defer the eviction of badminton from Sports House. They were out the front in force this morning. The petition urges you to allocate funding for NT Badminton’s proposal for a new facility. Given the huge backlash to the ignorant and cold-hearted decision to evict badminton from Sports House, will you now reconsider your decision to forcibly remove NT Badminton from their premises and accept responsibility to provide them with an appropriate facility at a peppercorn rent like other sports?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, despite the fact there is a motion before this House, this question could be deemed out of order. It is pre-empting debate; however, I am more than happy to answer the question.
Mr VOWLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance - I am not really sure. I do not think he should be running this parliament. It is your job to see what is out of order and what is not.
Madam SPEAKER: Sit down. He has just started the answer.
Mr CONLAN: Madam Speaker, I am prepared to answer the question, but I will be brief because this will be debated in full at 5:30 pm. You mentioned 12 000 Territorians. I would like to see that petition and see if they are all Territorians, because I know a number of the signatories were from cruise boats or were interstate visitors signing at markets. We might be able to flesh that out tonight.
Sports House has had major infrastructure failings and has reached the end of its economic life after about 30 years. As of September 2013, badminton in Darwin had 200 members and another 40 casual non-member players. The proposal for a new facility is for a very large building to house three sports: badminton, judo and table tennis. The proposed facility would be significantly larger than Marrara Indoor Stadium, at an estimated cost which has been provided to me by NT Badminton - I acknowledge they are in the gallery today. The cost is $9.6m for an air-conditioned venue or $6.8m for a facility without air conditioning. Based on the current membership of these three sports, that equates to about $22 000 per member for the higher cost option or $15 000 per member for the lower cost option.
The Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing has investigated the availability and suitability of existing sporting facilities including schools, Marrara Indoor Stadium and Palmerston Community Centre. Considered together, there is sufficient court space to generally meet badminton’s needs. However, they would have to share with other sports and spread their games between venues, which is something they are not prepared to do, this is despite NT Badminton accepting a $20 000 grant to assist them with new equipment as a result of their relocation.
A summary of some of the offers are Marrara Indoor Stadium for day time social play at 50% of the standard hiring fee …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question: will you provide a facility at peppercorn rent for badminton?
Madam SPEAKER: The minister has three minutes to answer the question. He is doing an okay job. Minister, you have the call.
Mr CONLAN: Thank you for your confidence in my answer, Madam Speaker.
… Palmerston Recreation Centre to assist and negotiate extra booking times, or community school halls to assist negotiated playing times. None of this has been acceptable to NT Badminton. I congratulate them for their passion and their determination, and professionally presented proposal to my office. I look forward to expanding on this tonight at 5.30 pm on general business day.
Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Program – Phase Two
Ms FINOCCHIARO to MINISTER for ALCOHOL REHABILITATION
The Country Liberals government is proud to have rolled out a ground-breaking and unprecedented system that is treating some of the most vulnerable and chronically ill people in the Territory. Can you please outline what is planned for phase two of the program?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Drysdale for her question. We are extremely proud of this bold new initiative that has been rolled out by the Country Liberals government in just 15 months. It took the opposition, the former Labor government, 10 years to come up with the Banned Drinker Register, which failed on all accounts.
It did not stop people from drinking. The rivers of grog still flowed with the Banned Drinker Register in place. That is why we took the initiative, on coming to government, dumping the Banned Drinker Register and implementing a strategy based on addressing the demand for alcohol. Unlike the former Labor government, which was obsessed with supply strategies, we are obsessed with a balanced perspective. The Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Program is about addressing a very serious problem of chronic alcoholism across the Northern Territory. We are very proud we have been able to do that successfully ...
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Your doctor quit, violence is up, trade is the same, but you are failing …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fannie Bay, that is not a point of order, sit down!
Mr Gunner: When will you admit you are failing?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fannie Bay, you are on a warning!
Mrs LAMBLEY: We have rolled the program out across the Northern Territory - Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs, soon to be Tennant Creek and Gove. We have a 100-bed facility in Darwin called the medi-hotel, which will be going back to its original purpose in August/September next year. We will move to the Berrimah low security unit and embrace the opportunity to set up a much more suitable facility …
Ms Lawrie: Flying people from Katherine to Darwin.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw her last assertion or proceed by way of a substantive motion.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of Government Business, I did not hear anything. I was listening to the minister.
Ms LAWRIE: Madam Speaker, I am happy to withdraw that you are flying people from Katherine to Darwin, even though that is what is happening.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, you have withdrawn.
Mrs LAMBLEY: I do not expect to hear anything positive from the opposition about our alcohol mandatory treatment program because they are fixated on the past and their failed initiative. We have done something new, bold, and courageous which is showing results at this very early stage.
In just three months, over 100 people had gone through the alcohol mandatory treatment program. A handful of them, at that stage, were progressing back into the community, transitioning into community care.
Next year is an exciting year. It continues the phase two roll-out of the program. You will see more beds in Alice Springs, the set-up of a new facility in Tennant Creek, and a new facility in Katherine will be well under way, if not up and running.
We make no apologies for what we have done in this space. As I have said several times before in this Chamber, we are identifying the most disadvantaged people in our community who are suffering from chronic diseases and chronic alcohol problems. These people are now undergoing care and medical treatment as we have never seen before, as they have never experienced before.
The whole community is embracing this new initiative. Our former critics are now praising us. They are saying, ‘We want to get on board, we want to be a part of it’. Even former members of the Labor Party are saying, ‘We agree, we can see this is a good initiative’. Alcohol mandatory treatment is something we are proud of and we will continue to update this parliament on its progress.
School Staffing Allocations
Ms FYLES to MINISTER for EDUCATION
You crow about achieving a one-off infrastructure payment from the Commonwealth to build schools which you already committed to in your forward capital works, yet you remain silent on your failure to deliver one new cent for recurrent funding in education. What are bricks and mortar compared to 120 teachers and 150 support staff who make a real improvement to our children’s lives today and will be sacked in a couple of weeks?
By now, all schools should have their staffing allocations. Will you table these allocations right now, later today or even tomorrow at the latest, to show Territorians you are proud to defend your new education policy and are not making it up as you go? You have not finished three reviews, but you hope they will give you some clue as to what education you have dismantled. Why are you letting down the students and teachers of the Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the rotten rumour continues. What figures do we have from the member for Nightcliff today? Every second week you come into this place the figures are different.
What we have done from the outset is put forward exactly what we are achieving in education. There are three reviews of education at the moment and even the latest figures come show what you did in the last ten years was a miserable failure. It is the only thing you can do in this House, member for Nightcliff, to say, ‘Let us continue to do things the way we have always done them’.
Mr VOWLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 49: Can the minister please address the Speaker rather than addressing the member for Nightcliff in a threatening manner?
Madam SPEAKER: If you can address your comments through the Chair please, minister.
Mr CHANDLER: I certainly will do that, but let us look at some of the facts in recent times. There was $1.2bn taken out by Bill Shorten when he was the federal Education minister.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 255: documents. I have asked the minister to table the staffing allocations today in this parliament.
Madam SPEAKER: What standing order did you reference member for Nightcliff?
Ms FYLES: 255: public documents.
Madam SPEAKER: It is not a point of order. The minister is just talking generally. Minister, you have the call.
Mr CHANDLER: Every school has its allocations, member for Nightcliff; it is their business. The allocations have been provided. It is now up to the principals, the Department of Education and the school councils to use their allocation.
You want us to continue to do things the way we have always done them, the way you have done them. We have found that our country’s education results are going backwards, not just in the Northern Territory, but right across Australia. It is madness to continue to do things the way we have always done them. That is why this government has called three reviews into education.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. I asked a very direct question. Table the documents. He will not, because schools cannot make their staffing allocations work.
Madam SPEAKER: It is not a point of order, sit down. Minister, you have the call.
Mr CHANDLER: Every school has its allocation. It is now up to the principals and school councils to work out how they will use their allocations - their business, their schools. It is not up to me to tell them how they should allocate their resources. They are given the resources and it is their job to allocate them, unlike the former Labor government which tried to treat education from a federal as well as Territory perspective – they were trying to tie everything down to partnerships and bureaucracy; that is all it was. We now have a federal government that has not only put the $1.2bn back into the federal budget …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. We are getting to the end of his time to answer the question and he has not answered. Will he table the documents?
Madam SPEAKER: The minister has time to answer the question however he sees fit. It is not a point of order.
Mr CHANDLER: I think I have already answered that. Each school has been given its allocation. It is now up to the principals to use that allocation, working with their school councils to find out how to use their resources. I am happy to say most of the schools in the Northern Territory are getting more resources next year than they received the previous year.
Ms Fyles: Taminmin, Nightcliff, those schools …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please pause. Member for Nightcliff, I asked you to cease interjecting. You are on a warning. Minister, you have the call.
Mr CHANDLER: Research tells us we should be focusing on the early years of school: Transition to Year 3. Sixty-six additional teachers are going into primary schools, and the evidence tells us that is where we should be focusing. The reviews will give us more recommendations, and that is where we will focus our resources.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, you time has expired.
Asset Management System – Cost
Ms LEE to MINISTER for CORPORATE and INFORMATION SERVICES
In 2006, the former Labor government approved a proposal to replace nine ICT systems with a new asset management system, at an estimated cost of $7m. Can the minister advise the House what this decision, by the then Labor government, has cost Territory taxpayers to date?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arnhem for her question. The member for Arnhem has constantly asked me why there is not more money to put into bush communities. One of the reasons is that the asset management system, which government inherited from the previous Labor government, administers somewhere around $11bn of government owned assets. It is a very important computer system put in place by the previous Labor government in 2006, at an estimated cost of $7.2m. It was to combine nine older systems and deliver savings five years into its operations.
To date, that system has cost government more than $50m and is haemorrhaging badly. The bill is expected to grow higher because the system is still not working properly and still requires expensive fly-in fly-out interstate staff to keep it running.
It is a scandalous waste of taxpayers’ money, which could have been avoided by the former Labor government. It is a scandal of epic proportions, and the former Labor government should have invoked a get-out clause for non-performance by Fujitsu, which was the contracted systems integrator for the new asset management system.
Over the life of the project, Fujitsu has had more than 11 project managers and at least 100 different specialist contractor resources working on the AMS. On the day the system went live, there were 70 known defects. Today, there are more than 200 known defects which require fixing. This is hampering government in a major way.
Something which may alarm people about the level of Labor incompetence is that when the go live time occurred in April 2012, contractors, many of whom were foreign backpackers with a poor grasp of the English language, were used to resource the AMS Help Desk answering phone calls and logging inquiries. This level of incompetence is beyond belief.
We have not ruled out seeking a legal remedy for non-delivery by the supplier. There is a team within my department which is working hard to investigate and fix this Labor mess, and I expect they will be in touch with me early in 2014. This is a scandal …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Firefighters Suffering from Cancer
Mr GUNNER to POLICE, FIRE and EMERGENCY SERVICES referred to MINISTER for BUSINESS
You are the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services and responsible for the health and safety of our firefighters. Four Territory firefighters are fighting cancer, but the Deputy Chief Minister has said he will not consider their situation, including running out of sick leave, until a complete review of workers compensation is complete.
As both Chief Minister and the minister responsible, you can seek a resolution for these four Territory firefighters now. South Australia and Western Australia have passed legislation which looks after their firefighters, joining the Commonwealth and Tasmania.
Your government is failing our frontline workers: teachers, nurses and firefighters. Firefighters have lodged an application for protected action. Will you, in a demonstration of good faith, agree to work with TIO to help these four Territory firefighters suffering from cancer?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, as the shadow minister knows, the Deputy Chief Minister is reviewing, within the purview of his responsibilities as Minister for Business. We are very sympathetic to the issues these four firefighters are dealing with. We are looking at other legislation and Senate reports in Australia and around the world. The review will identify the way we should move forward. I am very happy for you to get some information from the Deputy Chief Minister. However, I ask the Deputy Chief Minister to provide an update on where the review is up to.
Mr TOLLNER: Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay for the question. It is sad, the way Labor wants to play politics with this issue. For 11 years, Labor had the opportunity to do something for firefighters. On coming into government, we immediately started a review of WorkSafe and all of the practices around workers rehabilitation and compensation. The firefighters are part of that review.
As I said in this Chamber some time ago, we have sympathy for the plight of firefighters, but things have to be done across the board, and we are looking at all occupations, not just firefighters. There is a range of questions which was not answered by the previous government and …
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It was a very direct question. In good faith for these firefighters, will you agree to work with TIO right now to help them, as they are suffering from cancer? Yes or no?
Mr TOLLNER: I do not know whether the member for Nightcliff is deaf, but I have just said we are completely reviewing workers compensation and rehabilitation. TIO is involved in that. They have been consulted. This is not just about firefighters; this is about workers across the board.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. It is about firefighters who have run out of sick leave.
Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order.
Mr TOLLNER: She has cloth ears, Madam Speakers.
Ms Fyles: I have cloth ears, but you need to support them.
Mr TOLLNER: The fact is …
________________________________
Suspension of Member
Member for Nightcliff
Suspension of Member
Member for Nightcliff
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please pause. Member for Nightcliff, you were on a warning. Please leave the Chamber for one hour, pursuant to Standing Order 240A.
________________________________
Mr TOLLNER: There is a review happening at the moment. It would be wrong of me not to express my concern at the actions of the Labor Party. They seem to think by the passing of presumptive legislation, firefighters will automatically be put on workers compensation to cover all the costs of cancer. This is completely misleading information. Presumptive legislation simply changes the onus of proof from the employee to the employer. It does not guarantee a payment or a compensation payout.
I find it abhorrent that the Labor Party would try to politicise this issue on one hand and create an expectation in firefighters that their claims will be automatically improved. It is disgusting behaviour. You ought to sit back and wait for the review to be completed, which we are doing in good faith. We said we have sympathy with firefighters; wait and see what happens.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Power and Water Corporation –
Cost of Asset Management System
Cost of Asset Management System
Ms ANDERSON to MINISTER for CORPORATE and INFORMATION SERVICES
What was the result of the post-implementation review of the assets management system developed by Power and Water Corporation and the corporation’s Maxima system? Is it true the Auditor-General for the Northern Territory’s August 2013 report reveals the project ended up costing Territory taxpayers more than three times the initial budget approved by Power and Water Corporation?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Namatjira for her question. She cares about services in her electorate, wondering why government has no money in the coffers to do more in her electorate.
This is a similar situation to what the former government did to the government AMS - a system put in place at an estimated cost of $15m, which came in at $60m, more than four times the cost of the estimate of the former Labor government.
What the member for Namatjira said is exactly right. The Auditor-General reported on this in the August 2013 report. I have looked at this; it is an absolute horror story. As you look at the things that occurred in 2006 - as I said, the project was estimated to cost $15m. In 2009 the cost was $27.4m, which grew to $32.4m in 2010, and the go live date had shifted from March to August. By December 2011, the figure was $43.7m and the revised go live date was March 2012. In March 2012, the cost had again blown out; it was now $54m and this was increased to $57.81m in July 2012.
The system finally went live on 21 August 2012, and you can just imagine how many interstate consultants were flown in and how many hotel rooms were booked up in this debacle.
It is a debacle not far off the epic proportions of the asset management system of government, which is still haemorrhaging and still costing government tens of millions of dollars. At this stage, there is no light at the end of the tunnel.
You wonder why Power and Water was having trouble operating; it was because the Opposition Leader was the shareholding minister and had scrutiny over what they were doing. There was no scrutiny. It was a great big black hole which taxpayers were expected to pour more money into and watch it flounder even more.
Power and Water is one reason Moody’s put us on a negative outlook for our credit rating. This system is part of the mismanagement which went on under the former Labor government, particularly the shareholding minister at the time. It is a shameful disgrace and an abuse of taxpayers’ money.
Hydrology Study
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for LANDS, PLANNING and the ENVIRONMENT
For many years, a number of legacy blocks in Howard Springs near Wadham Lagoon have been flooded. Some years ago, a hydrology study was offered by the government of the day for the Litchfield Council, but it was rejected by the council. There has been more flooding of houses since and attempts by the council to construct more drains under Whitewood Road were thwarted when a landowner threatened legal action.
Your government has told Litchfield Council it would assist with a hydrology study, but as the Wet Season is now on us the residents are worried they will be flooded again. Can you say when this study will happen, and why has it been delayed?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. Wadham Lagoon is located on Lot 2982, 100 Bagot, which is private freehold land. As a result of the extraordinary rainfall during cyclone Carlos, a number of residents in Darwin’s urban and rural areas experienced some flooding. A joint tender between the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment and council was advertised on 18 November this year and it closes at 2 pm today.
Council and the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment are working together on this important project, with both council and the department financially contributing to the study. The purpose of the study is twofold: (1) to undertake a flood study; and (2) to identify any mitigation options.
Prior to advertising this tender, it was important for a survey of features and levels to be undertaken to inform flood modelling. The Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment funded this work to assist the joint tender and study being progressed.
This survey was completed in the last couple of weeks. The department and council have met regularly leading up to the release of the tender to finalise the brief and requirements. The department most recently met with council and the mayor also attended that meeting.
The Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment will work with council to finalise the tender process as quickly as possible so work can commence. The tender allows for a 16-week consultancy. It could be less, but this depends on what tenders come back in.
In response to cyclone Carlos and the residents’ flood matters arising, the department’s development assessment services require that developers now provide sufficient evidence to the DCA to demonstrate land capability, including hydrological studies where required. Development assessment services in the Department of Land Resource Management meet on receipt of development applications to comprehensively consider the land capability matters to inform the Development Consent Authority.
Similarly to Rapid Creek, there is no silver bullet in relation to resolving storm water issues in Darwin, given the unpredictable nature of rainfall and water flow in the Wet Season. The Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment is committed to working with council on this important issue for the community.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Written Question Paper, and take special note of the wistful nostalgia of the former members in the Speaker’s Gallery.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, during Question Time I intended to table a copy of the 1990 letter in regard to the Gove mine. I am happy to table that now.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016