2004-12-01
Darwin City Waterfront Project - Cost
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
You have variously described the waterfront project as a $600m project; a $1.2bn project; and now a $1bn project. Given the significant amount of money involved, on what basis were these figures arrived at, and on what basis have they been subsequently changed?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, when we put the waterfront project out for expressions of interest, we believed it was of the size of $600m. With the preferred tenderer’s project, we are confident of a $1bn project. With all due respect to my colleague, the Minister for Business and Industry, he slipped up a bit yesterday and called it a $1.2bn project. This is, with much pride, a $1bn project for Darwin.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Lifestyle Improvement
Mr BONSON to CHIEF MINISTER
Can the Chief Minister please inform the House how the waterfront development will move the Territory ahead and add to our great Territory lifestyle?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, what an important question. After Question Time yesterday, when every single question from the opposition was knocking what is a great project for the Territory - one that goes to the heart of what the waterfront redevelopment is all about, and is about a great project for the Territory. What did we hear yesterday, Madam Speaker? Knocking! Knocking of a team that has a vision and the ability to make it happen - starkly contrasting with a previous team that talked about it and had glossy brochures, and nothing happened.
What do we have in this great project? We have jobs for Territorians and great business opportunities for a decade - in fact, 11 years of its construction. What else? A major stimulus to our economy. What did we hear yesterday in question after question from the opposition - knock, knock, knock.
What kind of benefits were the opposition knocking yesterday? They were knocking a $1bn investment in the Territory, in our future and our lifestyle. What else were they knocking? They were knocking a convention and exhibition centre which they, when in government, looked at, kind of promised, and nothing ever came of it. We just lost the Hotel Darwin; we never got the convention centre. What else are they knocking? They are knocking the transformation of a key part of our city - currently an old bedraggled industrial site - into something which will support lifestyle and development in the future. Knock, knock, knock!
I would like to look at some of the elements of that $1bn investment – and I make the point that it is still a proposal, we have a preferred tenderer. Think of a Darwin family. When they think about the waterfront and what the opportunities will be, in the future when all this comes about - and I am confident it will - they will be able to have an easy walk down an Avenue of Honour from the mall to the waterfront - very easy and very comfortable. They will go there, and what will they look at? Here is a picture of part of Stage 1, the $250m …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: It goes to say - knock, knock, knock! Not supporting development, not supporting what is a great vision for the Territory.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, cease for a moment. Members of the opposition, we should allow the Chief Minister to answer the question in silence.
Mr Baldwin: She is being provocative.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly! I believe I know where the provocation is coming also.
Ms MARTIN: Our Darwin families, perhaps young singles, coming down to the waterfront, for the first time, will have a permanent water body with a sea wall. Also, for the first time, we have a stinger-free swimming area, in here. Back here, we have two toddler pools. Great for a family, great for recreation. Also - and I know the member for Drysdale does not like this - a wave pool. He does not like the wave pool. The family can also take a walk around the more than 2 km of waterfront walkway, much of it under cover, and then go across the sea wall - great walking, great promenading. We have a beach and a marina, there is sailing, fishing and canoeing. When the family needs to eat, there are cafes and restaurants. There is a public amphitheatre for public recreation and a heritage trail. This is what the opposition is knocking. This is what families in Darwin can do: go to the waterfront, enjoy new recreation, new opportunities, new amenities, supporting our great lifestyle. However, the CLP, our opposition, all they can do is knock. Knock, knock, knock - in stark contrast to the editorial in the NT News on 25 November:
- Darwin is going through one of the most dramatic development periods in its history.
There has not been as much building work under way or on the drawing board since the reconstruction program after Cyclone Tracy 30 years ago.
The biggest project is the $1bn Darwin City Waterfront.
I will leave out the next piece and go to the last couple of paragraphs:
- The development should add sophistication, outline and excitement to Darwin’s skyline.
- It is likely that in 10 years’ time the Darwin City Waterfront will be the pride of the north - and everybody will wonder what the fuss was all about.
A ringing endorsement of the waterfront, but not shared by the knockers on the other side of this House. You are not even supporting your own on this. Peter Murphy, in last weekend’s Sunday Territorian said:
- Actually, the concept is brilliant, and the higher buildings to the front of the escarpment appear to be far enough out so as not to cause a problem.
Mr Dunham: We consulted for 18 months.
Mr Maley: A fantastic picture, a fantastic vision.
Mr Dunham: Lots of open space, owned by the people.
Ms MARTIN: Lots of retail, lots of car parking – vast areas of car parking. He does not want …
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, just cease. This answer is going on and on. It is being provocative and we are getting too many interruptions from the opposition. Let us have shorter answers today.
Ms MARTIN: I will be quick, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Good.
Ms MARTIN: The member for Drysdale does not like the waterfront; he said it very clearly to Daryl Manzie last week. He does not want any residential development. He does not like the convention centre, the lock that creates the marina, or the open space. There were a number of questions from Daryl Manzie to the member for Drysdale saying things like:
- What would you say if people said what you are doing is trying to prevent the only thing that is probably going to give an economic boost to the city prior to the next election?
The member for Drysdale:
- Look, Daryl, it really comes hard for the CLP to talk down the development on this site.
And these were the ...
Mr Dunham: Go on, keep going. Read it out.
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: He said the development is incongruous, it is not in keeping with the wishes of the people and the CLP does not want to see it go ahead. Spell out your point of view on this: you do not want to see it happen; you are knocking it and, in the words of the member for Drysdale, you want to scrap it.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Building Height
Mr DUNHAM to MINISTER for LANDS and PLANNING
Yesterday, your Chief Minister told this House that 10% of the buildings on the Darwin waterfront development would be above the level of the escarpment, which we know to be 25 m AHD. Can you please explain why, in your proposed amendment to the Central Darwin Plan, there is an allowance made for height to exceed the escarpment in over 90% of the development blocks?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the answer is very simple: those areas that are shown quite clearly in this document are the areas on which buildings can be built. Not every entire block that is on here is a building. That is the simple answer.
However, in answer to the member for Drysdale’s question - he wants to get into height. The residents of Bridgeport came to see me at the markets. Most members know that I go to the Rapid Creek Markets nearly every Sunday between 8 am and 12 noon. They came to me with their concern, that they felt they had been given an undertaking, under the previous government’s plans for that area, that buildings would not exceed 15 m AHD. I had a good look at the plan that the previous government put out - this is the one that was circulated yesterday - just to find out what the basis for this was. As the Chief Minister pointed out yesterday, the area in green, of course, is the waterfront area. Right in the middle there you can see a big brown bit, that is 120 m …
Mr BALDWIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Mr Dunham: Now, back to your plan.
Mr Maley: He is being deliberately misleading.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, thank you. What is your point of order?
Mr BALDWIN: I ask the minister to be accurate in his pointing to the area. It is not in the middle of the plan.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Mr Baldwin: Well, it is very important.
Dr BURNS: I went on further to try and investigate the basis of this particular area. Most of the green bit says, maximum height without demonstrated ...
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Dr Burns: You do not want to hear it?
Mr DUNHAM: The minister is seeking to discard the very plan he is talking about and introduce another one. My question is about the one he is introducing which has heights. It had nothing to do with that. They are your heights.
Madam SPEAKER: That is a good point of order. I ask the minister to answer the question. However, as you know, member for Drysdale, he is able to answer it with a lot of freedom.
Dr BURNS: Well, Madam Speaker, I will cut to the chase. Reading very carefully what is here, these structures on the remainder - apart from the 120 m bit - could have gone to any height at all. What I sought to do through the amendments of the Planning Scheme – which, incidentally, are open for public comment, and there will be a hearing of the DCA on this issue. People can make submissions, and I will see each and every one of those submissions and I will be making a decision on the basis of the recommendations of the DCA.
Mr Dunham: Tell us about your heights.
Dr BURNS: Under your plan, it could have been anything. So, do not come in here talking about heights because you do not have a leg to stand on.
Mr Dunham: Table it!
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, you are getting noisy again today. Resume your seat.
Waterfowl Hunting – Survey Forms
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for PARKS and WILDLIFE
I have been told that the waterfowl shooting permit holders who do not fill in their waterfowl survey forms this year will be banned from having a permit for five years. Could you say if this is true? If it is true, why doesn’t your department encourage shooters to fill in the survey forms using incentives rather than the big stick - after all, we are talking about a waterfowl survey, not a tax return. Or is this big stick approach part of a long-term plan by your department to get rid of shooters and close down waterfowl hunting altogether?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his very good question. Since I have become Minister for Parks and Wildlife, I have received a number of representations from shooters. I have talked to a number of shooters and people, such as the those at Fishing and Outdoor World in Cavenagh Street. Yes, I agree. I am looking into this issue very seriously.
I do not want to see hunters penalised, and I have arranged meetings with peak bodies on this issue. I hope to progress this issue and report back to the House. I certainly do not want to see people banned and I agree there should be incentives rather than the big stick approach.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Local Jobs
Mrs AAGAARD to MINISTER for BUSINESS and INDUSTRY
Can you please inform the House how the waterfront development will provide a significant boost in local jobs for Territorians, and what this will mean in attracting and developing further skilled labour for the Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for her question. As someone who has had a small business background prior to coming into this parliament, I know how passionate she is about small business. As Business minister, this is why I am passionate about this particular project, because this is going to provide great opportunities for Territory business and workers during the construction and, then, during the operating phase of this particular project.
To put these into perspective, Stage 1 is a $250m construction project. To put that into further perspective, it is $100m worth of investment in Darwin over the next 2 years. It is going to create an enormous number of opportunities for businesses in the civil, marine and other construction areas, as well as in the supply, service and architecture design areas of the economy. There will be fantastic opportunities for Territory contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and workers.
This is going to affect and support some sectors of the construction industry not only during Stage 1 for the first 2 years, but for the next 10 to 11 years. We are talking about businesses in the areas of plant operations, road crews, concreters, structural steel specialists, crane operators, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, tilers, fit-out specialists, the list goes on. These are the business and job opportunities that the opposition is knocking in trying to denigrate this particular project. Stage 1 will create 1000 jobs in the Territory.
You would think the opposition would applaud that, would you not? You would think they would applaud 1000 jobs in the Northern Territory, $250m worth of confidence and investment in our economy. And where will those jobs go? They will go to the sheds and businesses in Winnellie, Berrimah, Palmerston, Yarrawonga and across the Northern Territory. There are not only jobs for existing workers, but opportunities for apprenticeships, to skill people up for our work force over an integrated project going for 10 to 11 years. This is what the once proud CLP are now knocking and opposing.
One of the things I was pleased to see around the Cabinet table, as Minister for Business and Industry, is the commitment by this consortium to local content. The railway achieved about 85% local content; this is going to be bigger. It is not only going to be bigger, it is going to be monitored and there are going to be accountabilities and key targets to meet. Partnerships are already being developed with NTICN, the Industry Capability Network, the old ISO, Territory Construction Association and the NLC to maximise local participation - a commitment to skills development, research and development, developing networks and alliances, encouraging international standards and a focus on technologies.
Again, it is wonderful outcomes for our economy, yet the opposition would seek to knock and denigrate and see this project cancelled. What is the opposition putting up as an alternative? What constructive policies or initiatives are they putting before the people of the Northern Territory? Last night, we had the wonderful, edifying experience of the member for Greatorex, the shadow Treasurer, reporting to the parliament on his recent visit to Malaysia and India. We all know that the member for Greatorex was in desperate search of a policy - any policy. They were going to award $50 to the most successful innovative policy. Let us just reinvent the alternative economic polices that may be available.
Mr BURKE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! We have a limited amount of time in Question Time and we want to get through some important questions. I ask the minister to desist or stay on the subject.
Madam SPEAKER: I am sure the member for Nightcliff probably feels this is an important question. However, the answers are very long today, so wrap up quickly, minister.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, quickly, because it is important for Territorians who listen to this broadcast to compare and contrast the vision for the Northern Territory the government has, as opposed to the vision the opposition has. I will be very brief. The member for Greatorex was talking about call centres in India.
- Obviously, a call centre such as that can be easily based in Australia or India. The reason why businesses have based their call centres in India is because of the cheaper cost of running those call centres. Therefore, you would use India as your base because of the cost-effectiveness …
And going on further:
- … therefore, from a business point of view, it is cheaper to have a call centre in New Delhi. There is a cost saving so you have your call centres in a country that has cheaper labour.
The Territory taxpayer has paid the member for Greatorex about $25 000 to swan off to India to encourage Territory businesses to export their call centres to India because they are cheaper.
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: Moving on, a convention centre would be a huge boost to the tourism industry - a major boost. I have not heard one tourism operator knock this project. They know that a convention centre for 1500 people will be a huge boost for the economy - for airlines, hotels, restaurants, and tour operators. Knock, knock, knock! That is all the opposition do. The CLP are a party of distant memories. They have no vision and no confidence in investment in the Northern Territory, as opposed to this government, which will deliver a project that will deliver $1bn worth of investment in Darwin over the next 10 years.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Building Height
Mr DUNHAM to MINISTER for LANDS and PLANNING
Is it not true, minister, that following the passage of your Planning Scheme amendments - the green book that you did not want to talk about last time - any future development application for waterfront development, the sole determining documentation - that green book, the one you did not want to talk about - which you have said in the foreword you will ‘direct the Development Consent Authority to use’. That book will allow for building heights to range from 34 m to 106 m AHD, all of which will be above the height of the escarpment? Read your foreword, down the bottom.
ANSWER
The member for Drysdale is conveniently forgetting some of the process here. Each and every building that will be built as part of this development will be subject to a development consent process. The amendments to the Planning Scheme simply give a framework for those applications to occur. As we saw, the big kafuffle the opposition was going on about last week regarding the height of the convention centre itself: it was going to bubble up over the escarpment and do all sort of things …
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: It could go a lot higher if it wanted to, but it is at 24 m AHD, which is acceptable.
This government has always given a commitment that the building heights within that development will, generally, be below the level of the escarpment. The advertisement in the paper clearly shows that, and for those members who want to go to the Mall and have a look at the model, which is accurate, and which will also be displayed at Casuarina in the coming weeks, will see that for themselves.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Public Consultation
Mr KIELY to MINISTER for LANDS and PLANNING
My question expands on the question from the member for Drysdale. Can the minister advise the Assembly of the planning processes for the Darwin City Waterfront project and the public consultation this involves for all stages of the process?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is an important issue, because there is a focus on it. As government, we are ensuring that there is transparency through this whole development consent process, in which members of the public can make submissions to the Development Consent Authority, and can come and give evidence to the authority. The Development Consent Authority then makes reports to the minister, along with those submissions, and decisions are made.
In October, I approved the display of the amendment to the Planning Scheme for public comment. The Planning Scheme, as I said in answer to the previous question, provides a legal framework for future development.
It has been on display to engage the public, and 15 submissions have been received. The Development Consent Authority will hold a hearing on this Planning Scheme amendment on 8 December. All who have made a submission will be invited to that hearing. They will then prepare a report, which they will send, together with every single submission, to me. It is then my job to decide whether the exhibited document should be formally included in the Planning Scheme, or amended in some way before they are included.
When the Planning Scheme is in place, all future construction and development must go through the normal development application process with the Development Consent Authority. There are three such applications currently on exhibition. Again, this is done in order to seek public comment and input.
The applications that are currently on exhibition are for the convention centre, which I mentioned previously, the marine infrastructure, which has also been mentioned earlier this Question Time, the community infrastructure, including the lagoons, the wave pool, the boardwalk and the public park and amphitheatre. Comments on those may be made to the DCA up until 17 December. They will then hold hearings in mid-January.
I am not involved in the decisions, which are entirely a matter for the DCA which, members here would know, comprises a whole range of stakeholders, including representatives from the Darwin City Council in a special role. Every single building in this fantastic waterfront development has to go through the approvals process. There is no Hotel Darwin scenario, where buildings appear or disappear overnight - and that is about as close as the opposition ever got. What a mob of goners! They were going to build a convention centre, they did not do it, we are doing it, they are jealous.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Minister, I want you to withdraw that comment. We said we would not make unparliamentary comments today, so just withdraw. Without comment.
Dr BURNS: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Planning Scheme Amendment
Mr BURKE to MINISTER for LANDS and PLANNING
I have listened to your previous answers. Could we now try a little yes or no, rather than confusing waffle? Is it true that you are bringing forward a new Planning Scheme amendment for the waterfront development, which you have directed the Development Consent Authority to follow – yes or no?
Is it also technically correct …
Mr Kiely: That is a question.
Mr BURKE: He can lodge the questions.
Are you bringing forward a Planing Scheme amendment which you have directed the Development Consent Authority to follow - first question? Second question – is it technically correct …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Could we have less interruptions and let the question be asked.
Mr BURKE: The second point to my question: under that new Planning Scheme, is it technically correct that building heights on almost all development blocks at the waterfront development will be able to exceed the level of the escarpment under your direction to the Development Consent Authority? Is it also correct that these decisions are not appealable, so the public cannot appeal them? Is it also not true that town planner and Labor stalwart, June D’Rozario, is correct when she says: ‘The formal document, which is the Planning Scheme amendment, is clearly seeking building heights far in excess of anything we have been told’?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, in answer to the question, the Development Consent Authority is considering an amendment to the Planning Scheme, which has been on exhibition - as I said in my previous answer. They will then consider that matter in light of the submissions from the public, and prepare a report to me, which I will consider and make a decision on.
In answer to the question the member for Brennan asked about heights, we made it very plain, throughout the whole process, that the majority of the development on that waterfront site will be below the escarpment …
Mr Burke: Not according to your scheme.
Mr Baldwin: Is it correct that, under your scheme, they will be able to go over the escarpment?
Dr BURNS: Well, you are trying to count a footprint as a number of buildings. It was quite evident within the model - if people care to go and look at that model - and the advertisement that was in the paper, just exactly which buildings there will exceed the height of the escarpment. I believe the number is somewhere around 10 or 11.
Alice Springs - Heritage Listing of Building
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for the ENVIRONMENT and HERITAGE
My question is on behalf of Madam Speaker, as the member for Braitling. A petition has been presented to the parliament today requesting that your decision to not list the Rieff Building in Alice Springs as a heritage building be reviewed. Your decision is against the recommendation of the Heritage Advisory Council and the wishes of many people in Alice Springs. Will you reconsider your decision?
ANSWER
I thank the member for asking the question on your behalf, Madam Speaker. This morning, when I delivered the report, I did state my reasons for going against the advice of the Heritage Advisory Council. I said that I will not be going back on that decision. I thought I outlined very clearly that it was a hard decision, which took many months - six months, in fact - to weigh up and look at all of the evidence and the information that was put to me. However, no, I will not be going back over my decision.
Madam SPEAKER: The reason for the question, minister, is because this is broadcast to Alice Springs as well. We wanted people to hear your answer.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Protection of Heritage Sites
Ms LAWRIE to MINISTER for the ENVIRONMENT and HERITAGE
We have heard in discussion today that the business community is very excited about the jobs that the convention centre and the waterfront project will bring. At the other end of the socioeconomic scale, my kids are certainly excited about the wave pool.
However, we know the waterfront area also has some very important heritage sites. Can you advise the House if these sites will be protected as part of the waterfront development?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Karama for her question. I also know several kids who are excited about the wave pool, and that includes several big kids. It is not just little kids, but big kids who are excited about the wave pool.
The waterfront development is a big and exciting project. It is always important with projects like this that historical and heritage values are preserved and interpreted in a way that explains the history and tells the story. We all remember that, when the CLP tried to build a convention centre, as far as they got was bulldozing the Darwin Hotel.
The waterfront site has a rich history. Before European settlement, the site was an important part of Larrakia land. Since then, it has witnessed the first settlement by Europeans in Darwin, the coming of the Overland Telegraph Line, the bombing and loss of lives during World War II, the fury of Cyclone Tracy and, more recently, industrial activity that has been pivotal to the economic development of the Territory.
There are several important sites in the waterfront and surrounding areas that serve to remind us of this history, such as Goyder’s Camp, the World War II oil tunnels, and the steam pump house, to name a few. Several of these sites are currently surrounded by disused petrol tanks and industrial sheds. The waterfront project not only preserves and protects the historical sites, it promotes and celebrates them. It will make them more accessible and meaningful to the public and tourists.
Another exciting aspect of the waterfront project is the new cultural interpretive centre. This centre will provide an overview of the heritage of Darwin from its origins to the present day, and will cover the history of its people, its maritime and military history, and modern aspects of our city. The centre will be a prominent tourist attraction in its own right.
The CLP are opposed to the project; we are getting on with the job, and will not delay this project for Darwin and the Territory.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Consortium Financial Closure
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
You claimed yesterday that you were consulting the public for their views on the Darwin waterfront development. How can the public have any confidence in your consultation when, at the very same time, you have told the preferred consortium to submit development applications on the land which is still owned by the Territory taxpayer, and financial closure is yet to be reached?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I welcome questions about the waterfront. You are still knocking it, but I welcome your questions.
This is a case of walking and chewing gum. What we are doing is going through a preferred tenderer process. It will take a number of months because it is very complex, there are lots of detailed risk elements to take into account; for example, financial returns to government. All those aspects of the project are taking a number of months.
In the interim, we are looking at the first stage, and those different elements of the first stage - the public amenity, the convention centre - are going through development applications. If the very worst happened and we did not reach financial close on this, they would go nowhere. This is a matter of carrying on one set of negotiations while you do other things at the same time.
Mr Henderson: We will hit the ground running.
Ms MARTIN: We will hit the ground running, as the member for Wanguri said, when we get to that financial close. I am confident we will get there because, when you look at the members of the consortium, they want to have this happen.
Henry Walker Eltin, a really long-term Territory company that wants to make the Territory and the economy grow, and Sitzler are in this consortium. They have the Territory at heart; they want to see the Territory grow. There are so many Territory companies involved in this consortium. They want to see it happen. They have put forward a project that really is a unique response to our tropical environment - it looks forward.
What we are doing is assisting the process. If I talk to any tourism person in Darwin, what they want yesterday is a convention centre, and we are going to make that happen as soon as we can.
Asbestos Handling Practices
Mr BONSON to MINISTER for EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION and TRAINING
Can you advise the House on the steps being taken to ensure world’s best practice in handling asbestos in the Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Millner for his question. It is a topical issue. It has been made topical over recent weeks and months with exposure of and the difficulties that surround James Hardie as a company, and their workers who have been exposed to asbestos over the years. Also, in the Territory with a number of incidents within schools. If anything good has come out of those situations - tragic as it is in the case of the James Hardie workers - it has been the fact that we have heightened awareness around asbestos issues.
There are a large number of buildings in the Northern Territory that contain asbestos. Many buildings built prior to 1990 probably contain elements of asbestos. Government agencies, generally, have handled the issues pretty well. However, we were very concerned with the recent incident where a school’s asbestos register came up short on what was actually found in the building.
To ensure that we are, indeed, implementing world’s best practice, we instituted a review of all of the procedures and handling of asbestos, and the question of asbestos registers held by government. That review is being headed up by David Rolfe within the Chief Minister’s Department, and it contains private industry people represented by the TCA, and the unions represented by the Trades and Labour Council.
We also decided to have an asbestos awareness campaign, and we have brought that forward. I was pleased to launch that campaign at lunchtime. It is multimedia - it will be newspaper, television and radio. A number of brochures and information booklets are to go out with it. These advertisements are tremendous, and I congratulate Media and Marketing in DEET, headed up by Jayne Gray, and Simon Manzie from the production company that worked on these, because it was done very quickly. The ads are terrific and they will run tonight.
They focus on three crucial areas: in schools, contractors and tradespersons, and do-it-yourself renovators. The key messages are to stop, think asbestos, and seek advice. The message is as simple as that, which is what we urge Territorians to do. So, when working on a building constructed before 1990, exactly that: stop, think asbestos, seek advice.
We wish to assure Territorians that asbestos, in its pristine state, is not a health risk if it is in good condition and if it is left undisturbed. However, breaking, drilling or removal of asbestos material can pose serious health risks with the fibres and dust that can occur if safety precautions are not taken.
Efforts are being made to raise awareness in remote areas as well. All schools will receive a kit, all contractors will receive a booklet, and advertising will appear on Imparja Television. A couple of the booklets are information for the do-it-yourself renovator; information for schools; information for trade contractors are part of the awareness campaign. I table those.
In addition, the government has announced a register for recording potential exposure by individuals, which has still to be established, and a regime exists for the registration and use of licensed asbestos removalists.
It is intended that a national code of practice and standards will be in place by July 2005. Registers and the like are necessary. However, the most important thing is for everyone to adopt a change of attitude. That is what will save lives. Until now, you could probably say the attitude has been one that treats a building as if it does not contain asbestos. We want to reverse that attitude. We do not want people to panic, we do not want to scare them, but we do want them to be aware of the potential dangers around asbestos, and they need to think: ‘This might contain asbestos’. If in doubt, seek advice, get it checked out and obtain all the advice on how to proceed.
Darwin City Waterfront Project - Value of Land
Mr BURKE to CHIEF MINISTER
In respect of the waterfront, 25 ha of prime capital city waterfront land is a significant component of the Darwin city waterfront development. What is the 25 ha of land currently valued at?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I dealt with the 25 ha of land and details to do with cost and return to government in an answer yesterday. I would have thought the member for Brennan would have listened to that answer because, despite the knocking, I believe they are interested in the waterfront.
I made it very clear that, once the financial issues with the preferred developer are worked through, I would stand in here and account to Territorians on every aspect of this ...
Mr Burke: After you have committed them.
Ms MARTIN: The member for Brennan said: ‘After we have committed’. We are the government! We have a project …
Mr Burke: You do not own the land; the taxpayer owns the land! Not you! The taxpayer wants to know what their contribution is going to be.
Ms MARTIN: We have said that our contribution to the development is the land. Is that clear? We are in detailed financial negotiations. Why should I give that detail when we are in detailed financial negotiation? Be sensible about this.
I will come in here once we have a wonderful deal for Territorians, with return coming to them over the life of the development. As the land grows in value, the return will be substantial. It will be a winner for Territorians. We will get a return and we will have a wonderful development on the waterfront.
Ms Carney: This has a real smell.
Ms MARTIN: Again, it is knock, knock, knock. The member for Drysdale has been the only one in the opposition getting anywhere near honesty on this. He thinks, and has said quite clearly, they would scrap it - they would scrap the waterfront development. Go out and tell Territorians that you want to scrap the jobs, the business opportunities, the new amenity for Territorians, and the recreation opportunities. Go and tell Territorians that.
I would expect a former Chief Minister to understand about commercial-in-confidence negotiations. Having gone through the railway, I would think you would understand that. However, obviously, no. It is a bit sad, isn’t it?
Mr Burke: A supplementary, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: No, no supplementary. I believe the Chief Minister has answered.
Work Force Skills Base – Initiatives for Improvement
Mr McADAM to MINISTER for EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION and TRAINING
Will you please advise the House on initiatives the government is taking to build a skilled work force across the Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Barkly for his question. It is interesting that, quite recently, the federal government has woken up: ‘Hello! There is a skills shortage’. The Northern Territory has suffered skills shortages, particularly in traditional trade areas, for all of the time I have lived here and, no doubt, before. However, it is interesting that the Commonwealth has finally switched on that there is problem with skilled trades across industry by industry, region by region.
We have taken on the challenge of building and planning for a skilled work force in two ways. In the first place, by growing our own, because we think we are going to get big bang for our dollar in that and, in the second place, seeking to make the Territory a more attractive place to live, work and invest.
This is what we have done to grow our own: we have put a focus on training through better agency organisation; we abolished the old NTETA and replaced it with a division in DEET dedicated to employment and training; we put that division under the control of a senior public servant with extensive experience in training issues, and he has served us well; we put together the first ever Jobs Plan for the Territory, and the first Work Force Training Strategy; we put together the Work Force Report, identifying long-term needs in our economy, the first one ever - and that will be made public in the next couple of weeks; and we put effective incentives to employers. There is $7700 for the traditional hard trades and, already, there are an additional 100 of those on the books that would not necessarily have been there without that subsidy, which has not come cheap - $777 000, of course. There are also small business incentives of $2200; and local government incentives of $4400 to put on trainees and apprentices.
We have worked closely with major projects to both train our own, to upskill existing people in the work force, to maximise their chances of obtaining local input, in employment terms, on these big projects. Around half of the work force at Bechtel are locals. We were told at the start of that: ‘Do not expect or hold your hopes any higher than 30%’. Well, it is around half, from the start of that project right through to now. At least 100 Territorians have been trained in the latest international welding skills, a particularly important skill in light of oil and gas and the Alcan project coming up. The same effort has been put in with Alcan, to work out what their needs will be, and to ensure, as far as possible, that we have our own ready to take advantage of those positions.
We are promoting the message to young people to get them into careers in these skill shortage areas. The Get VET campaign was the first step in that. We have improved the provision of vocational education training in schools. We have increased numbers by 180% in government since we came in. We are improving career advice, and we have more to do on that front. We have 2900 apprentices and trainees in training – a 20% to 30% increase from June 2001 to June 2004, and a high rate of apprentices in those traditional trades. It is an important figure: around 30% of all of our trainees are in those traditional trades areas. That is the second highest ratio in Australia. To date, we have 325 apprentices and trainees under the Employer Incentive Scheme.
The other things we are doing is advertising the Territory interstate, making it a better place to live, work and invest, and travelling interstate with major advertising campaigns. We are also bringing in the portable long service leave for the construction industry that will improve conditions and make employment conditions more attractive to workers interstate. We are promoting the lifestyle of the Territory by putting real money into improvement of services across Health, Education, our police and our teachers. We are the lowest-taxing jurisdiction for businesses under 20 staff and, from 1 July 2005, we will be the lowest-taxing jurisdiction in Australia for businesses under 40 staff. On top of that, is the lifestyle issue. We have the best home affordability scheme in Australia.
They are not bad messages to be selling at all. I look forward to any trip I make interstate as an opportunity, in my role as Treasurer as well, to be talking about some of these lifestyle factors, because they are, indeed, incentives in their own right for people to come to the Territory.
Darwin City Waterfront Project – Value of Land
Mr BURKE to CHIEF MINISTER
Regarding my last question, which you refused to answer, I do understand commercial-in-confidence issues, but I do not understand why you are so secretive about this whole project. There is nothing preventing you telling Territorians what the framework of their contribution to this major project is. You have said $100m will be provided for the convention centre, and you have also said the government is handing over 25 ha of taxpayers’ land. Please tell Territorians what the current value of their 25 ha of waterfront land is?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is a repetitive question. I answered it fully last time.
Health Staff - Recruitment
Ms LAWRIE to MINISTER for HEALTH
What initiative is the government currently putting in place to recruit and retain quality Health staff?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, recently I had the pleasure to host the launch of the new work force development organisation, General Practice and Primary Health Care, and listen to representatives from the organisation praise our Health Department for rising to the challenge of recruiting and retaining quality Health staff …
Ms Carney interjecting.
Dr TOYNE: … for the Northern Territory. These words are heartening to me because I believe, despite the arrogant comments of the member for Araluen on these issues which I hope, over time, might be tempered by some actual understanding of what it takes to actually run a health system in the Northern Territory.
Here we have a group of professional people who actually do understand that it is difficult to get professionals to come to the Northern Territory. It is difficult because of our remoteness and the shortages, both nationally and internationally, of key professional areas. We are always competing with southern cities, coastal towns, and this is always going to be the challenge for us. We also know that the Territory is a great place to live and work, and we are increasingly using those facts to attract people to the Northern Territory.
I would like to give a couple of examples to members of some initiatives that demonstrate that approach to recruitment. The General Manager of Oral Health Services visited universities in Queensland, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Western Australia to inform final-year students of dentistry about the professional and personal opportunities of working in the Northern Territory. Eight expressions of interest have so far been received from these students, and at least two have requested employment with the department. That is a great result, given the chronic shortage of dentists in the Northern Territory and, in general, around Australia.
Senior Health staff from the Royal Darwin Hospital travelled to the United Kingdom in November to participate in the British Medical Journal Careers Fair. The event is an excellent opportunity to sell the Territory and its hospitals, to promote our hospitals in a premier medical journal and, at the same time, explore relationships with clinical training centres in the UK. Almost 30 people were interviewed at the careers fair out of many more who have shown interest. Applications are still coming in for processing by our department. Again, the experience of our recruitment officer to follow in on those opportunities that are being created by that trip is another way that will guarantee some progress being made in the recruitment of staff into our system.
We have created good conditions for recruiting staff; we have good EBAs now for our doctors and nurses. We continue to acknowledge the work of our current staff through our Nursing and Midwifery Awards. We have also allocated $1.4m to get rid of one of the hardest posts of all to recruit anyone into - those of the single nurse posts out bush.
It is interesting that you never hear from the opposition about service delivery in our bush sites. I doubt the member for Araluen has even been in a remote clinic, let alone understands the issues that we are dealing with out there.
Members interjecting.
Ms Carney: I will just keep writing you letters, and one day you might even answer one. Who knows?
Dr TOYNE: There is a lot more to the health system than the Alice Springs Hospital and the Royal Darwin Hospital.
Ms Carney: Don’t you point at me, Dr Doolittle!
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Araluen, withdraw that remark.
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw it, Madam Speaker.
Dr Toyne: And rightly so, too.
Madam SPEAKER: And minister, do not point.
Dr TOYNE: I recently announced the appointment of Dr Rod Mitchell as the Head of Anaesthesia in Alice Springs Hospital who will join the current consultant, Mr Muthiah, and two others who will join the department in the next two months. Four permanent anaesthetist appointments to the Alice Springs Hospital is a major achievement in recruiting staff into our health system, and I applaud the department for pulling that recruitment off. It is excellent.
We have already funded 97 additional nursing positions. They are all on the staffing graphs and we all know where they work …
Members interjecting.
Dr TOYNE: We have informed this House - despite the incessant cynicism over there - of where those positions are in our system. Seventy-six of those are now filled; we are currently recruiting the other 21.
Despite the knocking, we are making good progress in our health system, and I applaud the department for the work it is doing.
Darwin City Waterfront Project - Taxpayer Contributions
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
You are committing Territorians to a project they know little about. You refuse to tell Territorians what their land component is worth. Apart from that, and the $100m, can you tell taxpayers what other contributions they will be making to this project so that they can fully understand this investment?
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is Question Time; it is not the time for the Leader of the Opposition to be making a statement. I urge him to get on with his question.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Complete your question. Repeat the last question again.
Mr MILLS: They did not understand the question? I had a question mark at the end.
You refuse to tell Territorians what their land component is worth. Apart from that, and the $100m, can you tell taxpayers what other contributions they will be making to this project so that they can fully understand their investment?
ANSWER
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, the tone of the Opposition Leader’s question is one of accusation, and lacks any sense of support for this project. Again, we hear that knock, knock, knock.
Up-front, when we called for expressions of interest, we said $100m goes towards supporting the convention and exhibition centre, so that we can have it happen, as opposed to what the CLP did when in government, which was talk about it a lot. They knocked down the Hotel Darwin and we got nothing. So, $100m to the convention …
Mr Baldwin interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Listen. It is $100m to the convention centre and some associated infrastructure.
I cannot give you the market value of the land. However, I can give you the unimproved capital value - the market value is a very different thing - and that is $25m. Okay? The market value is a very different aspect …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Of course, the market value is different. It is very different.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, it is important for the opposition that we make this very clear: part of the negotiating process is what return to government, to taxpayers, there will be from that land over the time of the construction of the project. We are looking at 11 years. Part of our negotiations - and I am not going to spell out any details here - are about return to taxpayers, to Territorians, on that land over the development time. Many things are associated with that - final zoning and infrastructure development. You cannot say what the market value is; it is just impossible. We can say what the unimproved capital value is; that is a very different question - it was not asked - and that is $25m.
When you are talking about Territory contribution, there is also the work that is being done now by the waterfront team. Of course, that could have a dollar value on it. However, why the nitpicking when I have said, when this project has finalised - and I hope it does finalise - I will be accountable? I will account for every dollar. We are going to make this great project happen. I want to stand and tell Territorians that I have jobs and business opportunities secured for a decade.
We are putting in place something that the previous government made lots of words about, made trips about - and nothing ever happened. We are going to make this happen. We are going to have a development for the Territory’s future.
In the words of the Editorial in the NT News: the development will add sophistication, outline and excitement to the Darwin skyline; a new recreation for Territorians; new living, new lifestyle for Territorians. All we are getting from that side of the House is knock, knock, knock.
Territorians are excited about this project. If the Opposition Leader - and if his former Opposition Leader would have a word to him about it; although from the questions he has asked, he obviously does not understand - when you are doing a process like this, it requires commercial-in-confidence. At the end of the project, we will spell out what the costs are and what the return and the benefit to Territorians is. I know who will be excited at that time. It will be Territorians, but not this bunch. Not the anti-development, knocking CLP. I remember a time …
Madam SPEAKER: Wrap up, Chief Minister.
Ms MARTIN: … and you probably remember a time, Madam Speaker, when the CLP would be the Territory party and proudly developing our Territory. What a different sound now. What a sad little team.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order! Chief Minister I really believe you have answered the question.
NT Fire Service – Service Provision to Commonwealth Installations
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for POLICE, FIRE and EMERGENCY SERVICES
I am understand that Robertson Barracks has its own firefighting personnel and equipment; however, if there is a fire on the barracks, it is the responsibility of the Northern Territory Fire Service. Could you say whether this is true? If it is true, and we are trying to use our firefighting resources efficiently, why are we using the resources of the NT Fire Service, which may be required somewhere else, when there is a perfectly good fire service on the barracks?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is great to see the member for Nelson advocating for the barracks already. Good on him; he is neither slow nor shy. Certainly, that is the role of members of parliament to advocate on behalf of potential constituents.
Madam SPEAKER: Can we get to the answer?
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, I can advise the honourable member that there is a memorandum of understanding with the Commonwealth which covers the manner in which fire services are delivered to all Commonwealth facilities in the Northern Territory. There is a long-standing arrangement with the Commonwealth, and the NT Fire Service attend all emergency calls at Robertson Barracks under the requirement of the MOU.
The regiment at Robertson Barracks does have a Fire and Rescue Unit stationed there; however, the unit does not normally respond to incidents within the barracks. The fire service responding to Robertson Barracks is handled in this way, as the Army’s firefighting unit is not always at full strength as it regularly supports the regiment in its activities on exercises out of Darwin, and the entire firefighting unit is often out of town. There is an MOU which we have with the Commonwealth to cover all Commonwealth facilities in the Northern Territory.
As Minister for Defence Support, I have been to the barracks on many occasions and, as minister for fire services in the Territory, I have never had any representation to me about concerns in regard to this arrangement. If the honourable member has a specific concern that he wishes to address with me, I would be pleased to follow it up. However, this is a government which is investing in our fire services in the Northern Territory with an additional 16 firefighters and a new police and fire facility in Humpty Doo. We are investing in our fire services. I thank the honourable member for his question.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Question Paper.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016