2002-05-14
Parliament House Security
Mr BURKE to the SPEAKER
Madam Speaker, we have seen today another example of the erosion of law and order in the Territory with a forced entry into this Chamber. Can you give Territorians an assurance that this House will be protected from further break-ins and ensure that charges are laid for this incident and that these people are banned from the precincts of parliament in the future?
ANSWER
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question because it gives me an opportunity to speak to members generally on the incident that occurred this morning. As you are aware, I have met with the police and parliamentary security at lunch time. Unfortunately, I have to admit that there was a security breach on our part, in fact, that the door to the Chamber was unlocked. As many of you know, you exit that quite often. In the past it hasn’t been necessary for us to secure that door at all times, but it will be from now on. You will need to exit via the lobby or, if you’re talking to the Table Office, go through the door. I admit that was a breach on our part and the Chamber door was left open. It won’t be in future.
I have spoken to the police. I am laying trespass notices against all the people who have been identified. For the duration of the Sittings, at the moment, it may need to be necessary to be longer, but for at least the next two weeks the Chamber doors will be kept locked for your safety and the safety of all the staff. It is possible there will be further charges laid under the Legislative Assembly (Security) Act. I will seek advice from the police on this matter. They have the video, and I have cause to believe there will be further charges laid, but I cannot tell you at the moment exactly what they will be.
I have said very clearly to the press that, no, the video and the audio is not available. I don’t think that is something that we would want to be screened across Australia. I think its important that, if that is to be used as evidence in any legal situation, we would not want to prejudice the case by releasing that video. So there has been a very clear no on the release of that video.
I have also met with our security, then we will upgrade security during the duration of the Sittings. I have said that every parliament has to balance those two things - the right of people to protest and the safety of the members and staff. I am not saying at all that people shouldn’t have the right to protest. This trespass notice will exclude them from the steps of the parliament and into Parliament House. If they wish to protest on the parliamentary forecourt then they still should have that democratic right to do so. I still maintain they do have a right to do that but, of course, they do not have a right to invade this Chamber, disrupt Sittings and procedures, and abuse members. This is where they go too far and break the law, and that’s what we need to stop immediately.
Unfortunately, it is another incident that we could do without. I advise members that it is best for you to leave the Chamber when incidents of this nature occur. There have been all sorts of accusations made by the press on the behaviour of members as well as the protestors. In the future, I will ask you to leave the House via those exits, or those ones behind me. I do not think anyone was in a situation where they could not leave the House if they had so wished. However, to avoid any confrontation and any accusations by the protestors who, I believe, will be looking at laying charges themselves, that it is incumbent upon us to do the right thing and get out. So I just ask in future, if I do suspend Sittings that members leave very quickly and that will save a lot of anger and confrontation which occurred.
It is unfortunate, it happens in all parliaments around the world, but we have to be ever alert. We received a message a few weeks ago, but somehow or other we did not really act as strongly as we could when we received that first message. Even today, I guess all of you saw the protesters in the gallery, and thought: ‘Okay, we confine them to the enclosed gallery’. As you may have noticed, we closed the public galleries so they could not be there. You probably thought, like I: ‘Okay, they have sat very peacefully through the condolence motions’. When they moved out, of course, even security did not anticipate what they were going to do.
I hope I have addressed it as strongly as I can. What we will do each morning is make sure that we have a conference with security. The police have given us their assurance that they will be on hand whenever we need them. Just bear in mind, members, that your safety and the safety of the staff are of paramount importance.
Mini-Budget – Construction of Hospice at Royal Darwin Hospital
Mr DUNHAM to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
In Labor’s financial statement issued before the election - the so-called fully costed Access Economics document - and again in the mini-budget Paper No 3, $3m was allocated in 2002-03, which is next financial year, for the construction of a hospice at the Royal Darwin Hospital campus. Could the minister explain why this has now been postponed?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the hospice has not been postponed. There is a working party currently organising this construction. There has been a consultant in the Northern Territory who has been working with stakeholders. There is no suggestion that this has been postponed.
Government’s Action against Drug Dealers
Mr BONSON to CHIEF MINISTER
Notice has been given today that a package of legislation will be introduced this week to tackle illicit drugs and drug dealers operating in our community. Will the Chief Minister outline why this legislation is necessary, and will the position adopted by the CLP opposition, or this morning’s invasion of the Legislative Assembly, dissuade the government from it’s course?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, let me put very clearly on the record that disgraceful events like this morning’s invasion of Parliament House will not deter this government from tackling the drug distribution, drug traffickers and drug dealers right across the Territory. I put drug dealers, drug traffickers, drug manufacturers - those who want to stand up, as we saw this morning, for those people who are doing this in our society - on notice, because we are not deterred. We, as a government, are not deterred from bringing in our very effective drug legislation into this sittings of parliament.
Madam Speaker, I share your sentiments, it was a disgrace this morning. I make it very clear that we will not be dissuaded from tackling the drug-related problems in our community. I am disappointed that, when you said: ‘Leave the Chamber’, that there wasn’t an immediate leaving of the Chamber by all members - and that’s on both sides. What also disappoints me is that we have the opposition now attempting to make political capital from this event where we should be standing side by side …
Mr BURKE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The opposition has sat silently whilst the Leader of Government Business brought forth on this issue, and now the Chief Minister is having her say. If we are going to have a debate, let’s have an open debate, and we will all have a say. But I would ask in the interim that the Chief Minister confines her comments to the question that was asked.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, I would prefer you to confine your comments to the question asked. If you wish later in the day to debate the incident which occurred, there are many members who might like the opportunity to make comments because it did affect all of us. So, could you address the question?
Ms MARTIN: I am addressing the question, Madam Speaker, about the relationship between the disgraceful invasion you saw this morning, and our determination to move forward, and I was just saying …
Madam SPEAKER: Good, continue on that line.
Ms MARTIN: … reinforcing your comments, and saying we have to have a bipartisan approach to this.
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: To briefly talk about this - if the member for Drysdale would stop giggling in a silly voice - we had the opposition outside saying: ‘This is typical of the Labor Party. This is’ …
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker! You did make a ruling, and whether the Chief Minister is the Chief Minister or not, she has to abide by that ruling.
Madam SPEAKER: That’s right. And I did say, Chief Minister, that I want you to address the question. I do not want you to debate the incident, unless we do it specifically by question from a member. I have already ruled on that question and given you my advice. I ask that you stick to the question you have been asked, which is about your government’s drugs legislation.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I appreciate this, and this relationship between this invasion and our drug package is very clear, and I am addressing this issue. I think that we, as a parliament, should have a very strong bipartisan stance on this. So, it disappoints me that you would have the opposition running outside this parliament and saying, ‘What would you expect from the Labor Party, they preferenced this lot’, saying they had to be the Socialist Alliance. Madam Speaker, I would like to table the CLP’s how to vote ballot cards from the last election.
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I know the Chief Minister wants to get a word across, but the fact is that you have ruled, twice indeed, and the Chief Minister should show some respect, both for this House and for your ruling.
Madam SPEAKER: The member for Katherine is right. I have asked you twice, Chief Minister, and I really think in the spirit of what we need to do at the moment it is best for us all to work together to make sure that we are seen to be united on this matter, and that you confine your answer to the question asked.
Ms MARTIN: Exactly, Madam Speaker. I think we should be united. We should have a bipartisan position, so why is the opposition running outside saying, ‘These are your friends, you preferenced them’, When you in the last election preferenced them as well. Let’s just look at the how to vote ballot paper for the CLP. Fannie Bay – Mary Cunningham, first preference. Second preference to Peter Johnston, Socialist Alliance. Third preference to Clare Martin. Let’s get it quite straight. So if we are going to talk about having a side by side attitude …
Mr Burke: We have all your cards here.
Ms MARTIN: We have your cards. We have your cards.
Madam Speaker, I just go back to your point. This is a serious issue for this parliament, and I would say to the opposition, don’t go outside playing stupid politics that you get sprung on. Stand side by side with everyone in this parliament and make sure that this disgraceful event does not happen again by adopting the legislative action that we are taking to tackle drugs in this community that you now support strongly. We will not remind you that you did not support this kind of legislation for 26 years. The opposition leader previously described the problem of drug addiction, the problem of drug use in the Territory as ‘minuscule’. Do you remember the word ‘minuscule’, Madam Speaker?
The now opposition simply put their collective heads in the sand about this very important issue for the Territory, and why, Madam Speaker? Why is it so important for the Territory? National figures show quite clearly that almost 50% of property crime is related to drug use - almost 50% of property crime. It is a major issue for the Territory and it needs to be tackled. Could we get the CLP in government to tackle it? No. Not at all.
The second point is, and an equally important if not more important point, is the growing …
Mr BURKE: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Ms MARTIN: Oh sit down, for heaven’s sake.
Mr BURKE: I thought you were saying get a life. You’ve got a new phrase now.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I am appalled that the Chief Minister can trot out statistics in this Chamber pointing to an investigation that was done …
Madam SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr BURKE: … no reference to the Northern Territory, try to extrapolate that as Northern Territory data. This is typical, Madam Speaker, of the sort of the sort of misinformation that is being …
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, what is your point of order?
Mr BURKE: …peddled to the Northern Territory.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Chief Minister, would you round off your answer, thank you. I think we have spent long enough on this question.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, it is important, and it does go to the heart of what happened here this morning which we supported you very strongly on. The second point of why we need to be so determined as a parliament to tackle the Territory’s drug problem is the effect it has on our community. The effect it has on our young people, particularly young people in our urban centres and in our remote communities. The damage is growing, and I would expect bipartisan support on this problem. Look, we could go through the statistics. It shows, if you look at, for example, last year’s Australian Illicit Drug Report …
Mr Burke: The Police Commissioner does not agree with the Minister for Justice, that is the problem. The Police Commissioner …
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: If you look at the Australian Illicit Drug Report from last year, statistics show the growth of amphetamine and opiate use. In 1999, in the Territory, the prescriptions of morphine were almost 15 times the national average, and morphine is still the most commonly used opiate in the Territory. We have seen the growing use of cannabis. We have seen the nature of cannabis that is available change quite dramatically. The THC level in cannabis, because of genetics and the way it is grown, is increasing. This is a more dangerous drug than the one that we saw around 20 years ago.
The link between illicit drug use and property crime is established. The Leader of the Opposition can say: ‘These are down south figures’. I say: ‘Grow up’ about that. This is a problem. It is identified, and you as a government failed to do anything about it. We need to make very clear to those who are dealing drugs, those who are manufacturing, those who are trafficking in drugs in the Territory, that displays like the one we saw this morning will not deter this parliament, will not deter this government from getting tough on drugs and those who are dealing them.
Madam SPEAKER: Can I just say that answer was far too long, Chief Minister.
Mini-Budget – Construction of Hospice at Royal Darwin Hospital
Mr DUNHAM to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
In the Major Projects Directory, which has a Foreword by the Chief Minister and was launched by the Business minister only last week, the construction of a hospice at Royal Darwin Hospital is listed as ‘proposed’, not ‘planned’, not ‘committed’, but proposed for 2003-04, a blowout of a year. Could the minister explain which story is true, her last answer given earlier today, or the Chief Minister’s and her colleague the minister for Business’s story ?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, as part of our election commitments, there is a commitment to establishing a hospice at the Royal Darwin Hospital. There have been stakeholder meetings very recently, a report is being put together as we speak and I expect to receive that report by the end of this month.
Ms Carter: When will it be built?
Mrs AAGAARD: It is my understanding …
Ms Martin: You built it, did you? Oh, wonderful.
Ms Carter: Well, you haven’t yet.
Mrs AAGAARD: It is in the mini-budget. It will be built in the next financial year.
Government Policy on Drug-related Crime
Ms SCRYMGOUR to MINISTER for JUSTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL
The opposition has opposed the government’s initiative to tackle drug related crime. Yesterday, the opposition claimed the government’s legislation contained nothing new. What do you say about this claim?
ANSWER
I thank the member for her question. It is very interesting to hear the Leader of the Opposition in his pronouncements to date on our drug policies. On one hand he is saying there is nothing new being proposed, and on the other hand, he is saying we are following the CLP. I will tell you one thing: if we followed the CLP on this matter, nothing new would come out of this.
The reason that something new has come out of it is because we have made our own initiatives on this very important issue. This is a key threat to the stability of our community; it is a key threat to the health of our kids and it is an issue that our government intends to take urgent and immediate action on.
We expect to see from the miniscule member for Brennan and his team some constructive debate on these bills. We want to see what you think is going to be in the best interests of the Northern Territory community. So far you have very little idea what you think is in the best interests of the Northern Territory community on this issue. You did nothing in government, said nothing coherent since you lost government and we intend, in the absence of any ideas from your side, to continue to put our ideas into place with every confidence that we are going to have a positive impact on this problem.
This week I will be introducing legislation that has no precedent in the Northern Territory. We developed it specifically to plug gaps that have been left in the protection of our community by your inaction. Under our Drug Premises Bill, police will be able to seek to have houses, hotels and nightclubs being used to supply drugs declared by a court to be declared drug premises, searched without warrant for evidence to close them down and advise landlords that their premises are being used to supply illicit drugs so that they can take action to evict their undesirable tenants.
Again, our Criminal Property Forfeiture Bill has no precedent in the Northern Territory. It proposes a civil process to replace the conviction-based process previously put in place by the CLP government to absolutely no effect. There has been one confiscation of drug-related property - I think something like $7000. Compared to the sales in the drug trade in the Northern Territory, that is minuscule. That is minuscule.
What you got out of the drug dealers is minuscule. The CLP law has relied on criminal-based procedure. By the time you’ve got a conviction, the assets are gone, so you’ve got absolutely nothing to show for the law that you put into place. We are following Western Australia, and will get stuck into these people and their assets that they have accumulated from their illegal activities.
Our Witness Intimidation Bill will prevent the intimidation of witnesses who could give vital evidence to allow the conviction of drug dealers in our community. Why this provision has not been put in the body of law many, many years ago is absolutely beyond us. Everyone out there in the streets cannot believe that it is still legal in the Northern Territory to intimidate a witness. I mean, for heaven’s sake, if that point hadn’t been put into law, we wonder what all the previous Attorneys-General have been doing with their time.
We are pressing on with this, and we are actually encouraged by the Chamber invasion today. We are saying to those people - and it was good to look them straight in the eye and see the sort of people that we are bringing these laws in to counter the interests of – you can go somewhere else, the dealers can go somewhere else, we don’t want to make it any easier for you here.
Crime Statistics
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for JUSTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL
During the debate on mandatory sentencing, I raised the issue of a review of the crime statistics six months after the justice amendment bills were passed. In your statement to parliament on 18 October last year you said:
- In response to the member for Nelson’s query about whether we could have a review in six months, I can make an undertaking today: we will bring this back as a ministerial statement in six months time, or thereabouts, and we’ll throw that open for debate. We, as a parliament, can decide how things are going.
As we are now six months and 28 days from when you made that statement, which I am sure would be regarded as six months or thereabouts by the shadow Attorney-General, could I ask you, when will you make that ministerial statement to parliament? Will you include an independent analysis of the crime statistics? Will you include an analysis of sentences handed out for property offences and how many times the exceptional circumstances clause has been used, and a comparison between jail terms and community orders?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. It is a fair bit to put into seven minutes in terms of an answer. I will give you an interim answer right now that will give the outline of what has happened since our sentencing laws were brought into effect.
The new regime with our laws under the six-point plan commenced on 22 October 2001. The statistics for offences finalised by the courts between 22 October 2001 and 31 March 2002, which included offences committed prior to 22 October 2001 for which the guidelines of the new sentencing regime apply, are available and are as follows: 153 individuals were convicted of an aggravated property offence under the new sentencing regime as of 31 March. Of those offenders, 90% were male, 60% were under 25 years of age. One hundred and twenty-nine, or 85%, had committed unlawful entry with intent. Thirteen, or 8%, had committed unlawful use of a motor car. Ninety individuals, or 59% of these were imprisoned. Sixteen per cent, or 25 individuals, received community work orders. One individual, or .7%, received a home detention order, and 37 individuals, or 24%, received other dispensations.
Direct comparison of the old to new regime is difficult because of the different offence types and the recent implementation. It is anticipated by mid-year under the new regime we will be capable of some comparison with the old, and in that analysis we will be able to establish how many persons have been imprisoned under the new regime compared to the old regime. There are three appeals on foot - two against the severity of the sentence, and one against the imprisonment order itself.
I hope that helps the member for Nelson to give you an overview of what has happened to date.
Royal Darwin Hospital – Birthing Centre
Ms CARTER to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
Before the election, the Labor Party promised to build a birthing centre at Royal Darwin Hospital. This commitment was reinforced in the mini-budget with the allocation of $2.5m set aside for the year 2004-05. Could the minister tell this House why this commitment has now been abandoned and will not now be on the agenda during the term of your government?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, a very curious question. I would have to say that I have no idea what the member for Port Darwin is talking about because this certainly is on our agenda. It is part of our election commitments and will be provided.
Witness Intimidation Protection Legislation
Dr BURNS to MINISTER for JUSTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL
What is the government doing to protect witnesses to crimes, and how does that support the government’s drug crime initiatives?
ANSWER
I thank you for your question, member for Johnston. Madam Speaker, the law of the Northern Territory never made it a specific offence to intimidate a witness or their family or their friends, because of evidence the witness is giving, or has given, or may choose to give in a hearing. At the moment, the NT legislation has some offences of broad application in relation to witnesses, but those offences did not protect the son of a concerned parent who brought his case to my attention. After the son had given evidence in a case, he was being subjected to threats and abuse by the accused. Police were aware of the situation but were unable to do anything because it was not an offence.
Comprehensively protecting witnesses to ensure that they are not threatened, menaced or intimidated into refusing to give evidence is essential to the operation of our justice system. Witnesses are integral to the operation of our criminal justice system. We must support and protect people who are willing to speak out against crime - not just witnesses but their family and friends as well.
This government is going to do this on two fronts. Our Witness Protection Bill, which was passed today in this parliament, enables the Northern Territory to participate in a national witness protection scheme. That scheme is designed for witnesses who, agree to give evidence against organised crime groups or in relation to other major crimes, may be at risk of serious reprisals or injury, either before or after trial. Police already provide protection for those witnesses by locating them in a secure accommodation before they give evidence. The bill will address longer term and ongoing threats by providing mechanisms for witnesses to change identity and start a new life in another location. Hopefully, this will be in rare cases.
The Witness Intimidation Bill, which I will be introducing later this week, complements the legislation by making it a criminal offence in the Northern Territory to menace, intimidate, threaten, injure or cause any detriment to a witness or to their families and friends.
The offence will be punishable by a maximum of seven years imprisonment, an indication of just how seriously we view this type of behaviour. This legislation will support our three-point plan on drug crime by protecting witnesses who are prepared to speak out against drug dealers and organised crime. Witnesses who are prepared to come forward and give evidence are often crucial to a successful drug conviction, but it will help protect people who witness any crime who subsequently give evidence before court.
What I can’t understand is why the CLP, in their long period in governing the Northern Territory, were prepared to leave witnesses exposed to this type of intimidation. I think it is one of the shameful areas of neglect that we found in the body of law.
Royal Darwin Hospital – Birthing Centre
Ms CARTER to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
I was delighted to hear the minister’s response to the last question regarding the birthing centre and when it will be built. However, it raises the issue of whether or not she knows her portfolio and what is happening. The reason I ask the next question will make that fairly obvious.
In the mini-budget, you made a commitment to build a birthing centre by the year 2004-05 within the term of your government. However, in this document, Northern Territory Major Projects, launched recently by the minister for Business, on page 11, I draw your attention to the fact that the birthing centre has now been dropped down two years to the year 2005-06, and is listed only as proposed. Which is the correct answer?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, this is an election commitment which will be provided. I now have a copy of the page of this document that you refer to. You might remember that in the year 2004-05 that it actually goes July, August, September blah, blah, blah. So, in that time, it could be that this project might start at the beginning of the year 2005 …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mrs AAGAARD: This is in the mini-budget and it will be provided.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Members, you know the minister has a fairly soft voice, please do not interrupt her when she is speaking.
Northern Territory Labour Market
Mr KIELY to CHIEF MINISTER
After several years of a flat local economy, what is the latest news on the labour market for the Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is a very timely question because this government came into office almost nine months ago and our commitment was very clearly given to job creation, health, education and building a safe community, but top of that was job creation. Part of that commitment was to create a ministry that brought together employment and training - one that had never been given any significance in the previous 26 years by the CLP - and now we have, at Deputy Chief Minister level, Employment, Education and Training. The decision to do this is starting to bear fruit.
We have had in the Territory a tough couple of years and for many parts of the community it is still tough. But the figures now show - and if the opposition was talking to the community, doing the work they should be doing, they would also see this - that we are starting to turn the economy around in the Territory. Let us look at some of the latest figures.
Since October 2001, Australian Bureau of Statistics figures now show that employment has risen from 96 900 in trend terms to 100 500 last month, April 2002. That is an increase of 3600 jobs and in annual terms that is 7.4% growth. A good news story for the Territory. Correspondingly, unemployment has fallen by 1800, which is less than the increase in employment. So that means that not only are those on unemployment queues finding work but more are seeking to enter the job market, they are coming into the market and they are finding jobs. The unemployment rate, which last October was 8% and unacceptably high for the Territory, is now below the national average at 6.2% and we should be cheering. We should be absolutely cheering for this turnaround because what it means especially is that young Territorians are starting to get jobs and this is what building our society is all about.
For the first year and a half of the former Chief Minister’s reign, employment fell. At the time of the last election there were a mere 1900 more in the workforce than there was when he became leader. When we highlighted the situation in our employment position paper, the CLP simply ignored it, denied it was happening, would not even engage, would not even tackle the problem, simply said it is not happening. We are not losing jobs, it is not happening.
Clearly the railway has had an impact in this with direct employment - and this is fantastic, this is great. It is a great Territory project. At the end of March, 508 people were directly employed by the railway project, but that is only 15% of the increase in employment since last October. That is a very valuable 15%, but 15%. Labor’s additional funding of capital works and minor new works has helped, as well as QuickStart II. There have been more than 100 applications received for QuickStart II.
The story is reinforced by the monthly ANZ job advertisements. These declined under the former Chief Minister, reaching a low of 163 in April last year. In April this year, Territory job advertisements were up by 70% to 275. Skilled vacancies, as advised by the Commonwealth Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, were also up 22.4% on the same time last year. Underpinning that are the predictions from Access Economics and BIS Schrapnel that forecast growth this year – respectively from Access we have 4.4% and from BIS Schrapnel 5%.
As I said, not all sectors of our community are sharing in this turnaround and we are still working to tackle that but the trend we are seeing is great news for everyone right across the Territory. Businesses are responding to this new confidence. I congratulate the TIO, which today announced that they will be building their new 12 level office building on the old police station site, next door to Northern Territory House in Mitchell Street. That project will start late May. They are out there today making the announcement, this is a decision, its going ahead. They have announced that the building contract has been awarded to Barclay Mowlem Construction. It will start at the end of May and, very importantly, Barclay Mowlem has committed to use local contractors and suppliers for approximately 94% of this new building, and that’s $24m into the Territory economy. I congratulate the TIO, this is one aspect of business confidence in the Territory - as we stand here in this parliament - and there should be cheers all round in May 2002.
Minister for Health and Community Services - Office Budget and Related Expenditure
Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
Minister, you told the ABC’s Fred McCue on 8 May that you thought your office budget was around $700 000, but that you weren’t sure. Do you now know what your office budget is and, if so, can you tell Territorians what it is? Can you also tell Territorians whether the department will be paying Dr Ashbridge’s salary when he is working in your office? Furthermore, can you tell the House how much of the budget your office has expended up until the end of April as per the figures your office received this week?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am very happy to answer this question. When I was interviewed by Fred McCue, I wasn’t aware he was going to ask me that question. I was actually thinking of the figure which I had in front of me, which was how much had been spent on the former minister’s office, which was $671 000 a year. So in looking at that, I actually said I don’t know how much it is for my office. I can tell you that, to date, my office actually spent $332 000, which is a significantly smaller amount of dollars than the previous minister - a very much smaller amount of money. My total budget for the full year is $452 000.
Ms Carney: And Dr Ashbridge?
Mrs AAGAARD: At this stage there has been a postponement of this situation. There are significant issues in the department in relation to the realignment project and various restructuring in the department, and it was considered appropriate that he should stay in the department. At this stage, I am uncertain as to whether he is coming over. I must say that he has not enjoyed the political attention that has been given to him, and I would have to say to him he wants to consider whether or not he wants to come over to the office because why would he want to receive this kind of attention? He is a senior public servant who doesn’t deserve this, and it’s the usual practice in parliaments not to discuss matters in relation to senior public servants.
Senator Nigel Scullion – Eligibility to sit in the Senate and Implications for the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
Can the Chief Minister please advise the House what role, if any, this Assembly may play in relation to the uncertainty surrounding Senator Scullion?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the controversy surrounding the current eligibility of Senator Scullion to sit in the Senate is a very serious matter. One of our two Senators representing the interests of the Territory in the Senate, his eligibility and the fact that it is being questioned is a very serious matter. I understand from media reports that Senator Scullion has written to the President of the Senate concerning his eligibility and that letter is expected to be tabled in the Senate this afternoon. The Senate will then decide upon what action to take. I am advised a referral to the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns is a possibility. Due to the seriousness of these types of matters, I understand they are usually dealt with as quickly as possible.
There area a number of possible scenarios here, and I think its important that we as a parliament understand these. Senator Scullion may be declared to have not been qualified as a Senator. He may be declared to not be capable of being chosen or sitting as a Senator, or the Court may find there has been no breach of the Constitution at all. Because these are complex constitutional and legal issues, and a large amount of uncertainty exists about Senator Scullion’s position, I have sought legal advice from the Department of Justice about what role the Territory government may have should the Senate position become vacant.
As members may be aware, in the event of a casual vacancy in the Senate, this Assembly is required to choose a person to hold the place vacated until the term expires. If the Legislative Assembly is not in session when the vacancy is notified, then the Administrator, on advice of Executive Council, may appoint a person to hold the place until the expiration of 14 days from the beginning of the next session of the Legislative Assembly. So there are some legal details there.
The Territory is not in a position to deal with the merits of Senator Scullion’s position which, in any event, can only be dealt with by the Senate or by the High Court. The role of the Northern Territory government, as outlined, does not become relevant unless or until the President of the Senate notifies the Administrator of a vacancy within the meaning of section 45 of the Constitution.
There was a second Senate candidate from the CLP, John Lopez, and I note that Mr Lopez was on ABC Radio yesterday, and he believes he has taken the necessary action to be eligible for election. Let’s hope so, since he did not get the first one right, it seems, let’s hope the second one was. I would certainly urge the CLP and Mr Lopez to ensure that matters relating to eligibility, notably nationality and business interests, are dealt with properly. It is surely not too much to ask for the CLP machine to get its act together, enough to make sure at least that one of their candidates is eligible for election to the Senate.
To be clear, because many outcomes are possible in relation to Senator Scullion’s position, I have sought legal advice about the Territory parliament’s possible role in Senator Scullion’s replacement should that be necessary, and I will be updating the House when I receive that information.
Dr Haydn Lowe - Resignation
Ms CARTER to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
After less than 12 months into the job, Dr Haydn Lowe has resigned because he does not agree with the way the department is implementing your strategies. Have you investigated this claim? Do you plan to investigate it, or is this also an area that has nothing to do with you?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am sure the member for Port Darwin has some idea of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act and the role of the minister in departments. The relationship does not involve me becoming involved in personnel matters. This is an operational matter which is being handled by my CEO, as it should be. This is something which should be handled by the CEO and also the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment.
St Francis of Assisi School – Dental Clinic Caravan
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
Minister, you wrote to me recently regarding the loss of the dental clinic caravan at St Francis of Assisi School at Humpty Doo. Minister, who made the decision to stop the clinic at St Francis of Assisi School, even though there had been a caravan there since at least 1999, and I believe before that as well. Was there any consultation with the school community regarding these changes?
Is it not also true that although Girraween School had the facilities in place when it was being constructed, it also is not to receive the caravan. Is it true that decisions about the use of this caravan service is inconsistent and discriminatory because parents of children at schools such as Girraween Primary, St Francis of Assisi and Middle Point Primary have to make arrangements for their children to attend the clinic after hours when other children can attend during school times. Is there a policy regarding the Dental Caravan Clinic and would that be available please?
ANSWER
Yes, I have written to the member for Nelson. Madam Speaker, my understanding is there have been no cuts or reductions in service to children in the area. I understand that there was a demand period where a van went to that particular school, the St Francis of Assisi School, and then the demand dropped. Following the concerns raised by the member for Nelson with me, my office has been in conversation with the principal of the school, and the department is going to be having conversations with that school to see whether or not there needs to be a change to services.
Alice Springs Hospital - Update
Mr McADAM to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
Minister, during the last sittings you told the House about the difficulties being experienced at Alice Springs Hospital. Are you able to provide the House with an update on the situation?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am up again. I am very pleased to say there has been a big improvement in the Alice Springs Hospital. Since we last met at the sittings, I have been to Alice Springs three times and have met with staff at the hospital on each occasion, usually more than once. I have met with staff at all levels in the hospital, made many tours of the hospital as well, and I have had two meetings with the hospital board.
I am also happy to report that the hospital is faring a lot better; morale is certainly higher. There were significant issues with morale last year, but I really feel that this is being addressed by the staff - in particular by Ron Parker, who is the consultant looking after this, and who is doing an excellent job.
One of the key things which has happened in Alice Springs is that there’s been a big turnaround in the number of nurses. I am happy to say that there are two over establishment in the nurses figures in Alice Springs, which has meant that elective surgery is now on track. There are still issues in relation to the mix of nurses and there are some skills shortages in the area of surgery nurses and a few other types of specialist nurses, but we are still addressing that issue.
Some members opposite will be particularly pleased to know that I have received a business analysis for the private wing of the hospital, which is being considered at the moment, and will be presented to Cabinet in the near future.
Finally, I would like to say that the $30m development is now complete and staff are finding the new facilities excellent. I think it is a wonderful thing for both staff and patients and will also help with the …
Mr Burke: What about the private wing?
Mrs AAGAARD: Madam Speaker, I already made a comment on the private wing. I am sorry that the members opposite seem to have a hearing problem today. When we have something to say further on that, I will report to the House. Essentially, the Alice Springs Hospital is looking up, and I think that is a very wonderful thing for the Northern Territory.
Mini-Budget – Appropriation for Department of Health and Community Services
Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
In the mini-budget you added $34m to the appropriation for the Department of Health and Community Services. Can you detail to the House how much of that $34m is recurrent spending - and thus added to the base of Health’s funding - and how much is for one-off items?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, there seems to be a lot of interest in health today, which is a good thing. It is a bit sad isn’t it, that when these people were in government their interest in health was so small that they left us with this huge black hole …
Ms Martin: Under-funded by $34m. Under-funded.
Members interjecting.
Mrs AAGAARD: Madam Speaker, I have actually detailed this several times in the reply to the mini-budget in November. I have also responded to this, to the Public Accounts Committee. I would refer the honourable members to the mini-budget documents.
Remote Community Access to Medicare Services
Ms SCRYMGOUR to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
We should just keep Jane on her feet, as it seems popular for this side of the House. As I understand the situation, there has been no capacity for services provided to communities by your department’s District Medical Officers to attract Medicare reimbursements. Is anything being done to redress this situation?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, honourable members may be aware that there are around 70 communities in the Northern Territory who do not have access to Medicare bulk billing, as they do not have a private GP in their communities, and so their access to medical services is only through the District Medical Officer. This means that many Territorians have not had the same access to Medicare which other Territorians and Australians take for granted.
I am very happy to announce that my department has successfully negotiated with the Commonwealth for $755 573 to fund the transition of District Medical Officer services from a health program grant to Medicare. This means that from 1 January 2003, residents in these 70 remote communities will have access to Medicare bulk billing, which is a very positive step in the improvement of health services in remote areas.
The key point is that people in the bush will have access to a wider range of services, including specialist services and screening services, all of which can be bulk billed. It will also bring the funding of District Medical Officers’ consultations in remote communities in line with mainstream funding mechanisms.
Mr STIRLING (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that further questions be placed on the Question Paper.
Mr Burke: How many questions did we have today?
A member: Seventeen.
Mr STIRLING: Seventeen is still ahead of you, mate.
Mr WOOD: Madam Speaker, as we did not start till 2.15 pm could I ask that we continue?
Madam SPEAKER: We normally do have an hour but it is up to the Leader of Government Business to determine the length of Question Time.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Could we please settle down while the cameras leave. For your information, there were 17 questions.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016