2001-10-23
Juvenile Diversionary Programs
Mr BURKE to CHIEF MINISTER
In July last year, my government signed off on a program that meant the Commonwealth gave the Territory $20m over four years to help fund the Aboriginal Interpreter Service and diversionary programs for juveniles. I am sure the Chief Minister would acknowledge that both have been remarkably successful. Now that you have repealed mandatory sentencing, Chief Minister, are you going to continue these programs and, if so, how do you intend to fund them?
ANSWER
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. Madam Speaker, these are very important programs for the Territory. The Aboriginal Interpreter Service and the juvenile diversion programs, are key elements for the Territory and particularly for indigenous Territorians who, for many years under the Country Liberal Party, did not have such an interpreter service. We know the impact of not having that service on delivery, particularly in the courts, is whether they are having successful outcomes for those in front of the courts and also in the health system. Labor called long and hard for an interpreter service, and were delighted when the federal government gave the funds to the Territory to be able to do that.
With diversionary programs for our youth, another key element of what Labor is about, we are confident that a federal Labor government is absolutely committed to keeping that funding going. I say to John Howard, if Australia is unfortunate enough to have the conservative government returned, that we will be fighting tooth and nail - and I hope in a bipartisan way - to have that funding retained.
I have had no information coming from Canberra that we will lose that funding, but I would say to a federal Coalition government: maintain that funding, it is absolutely important for the Territory that we keep that funding. This side of the House - and I hope joined by the opposition - will fight tooth and nail to keep it. But it is assured if Kim Beazley is Prime Minister.
Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report
Dr BURNS to TREASURER
Madam Speaker, in last week’s report to parliament, the Auditor-General described the CLP’s budget as unreliable, as a measure of their fiscal stewardship and accountability. Now that the report card is in, in the form of the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report, what is the result?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Johnston for his question. Very sadly, for Territorians, the result is a very sad and sorry one. At the time of last year’s budget, the then Treasurer, the member for Katherine, the now Deputy Opposition Leader, said there would be a deficit of $45m. We know his track record, we should not have believed him, and the statement …
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I believe this is anticipating debate. This is a matter that is on the notice paper and will be debated in the parliament.
Ms Martin: It is not on the notice paper.
Madam SPEAKER: I believe it is okay as a question.
Mr Stirling: It wouldn’t matter if it was.
Ms MARTIN: It certainly would not matter. This is about the fiscal management of the previous government. The then Treasurer said there would be a deficit in the 2000-01 year of $45m. What was the result, tabled this morning - $140m in deficit. In between the budget in May and the outcome that we get today, the then Treasurer tried to fudge the bottom line, and he tried to repeat that again this morning. He tried to fudge the bottom line with the Conditions of Service Trust, moving money from one bucket to the other to say that his administration - his and the member for Brennan’s administration - has not run up a deficit, irresponsibly, that is now to be borne by all Territorians.
This annual financial report tells the truth. We have had enough weasel words from the opposition about trying to reinvent what were the facts. These are the facts, in the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report, and it shows a deficit that the man who claims he is fiscally responsible said would be for the 2000-01 year - $140m worth of deficit, $140m. The fact that the then Treasurer tried to manipulate the budget just shows how desperate the Country Liberal Party were, just how desperate in the run-up to an election they were, to try and manipulate the budget figures, to do a paper shuffle, to raid the Conditions of Service Trust, and try and tell Territorians, within matters of weeks before an election was called, that the year had actually produced $1m surplus.
The word ‘fraud’ is a serious word, but that was a fraud. It was a fraud.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I do not think that it has been demonstrated that this is in fact fraud. The word is used in a legal context and I think if the allegation that the Chief Minister …
Madam SPEAKER: What Standing Order are you referring to?
Mr DUNHAM: I am working to the Standing Order that says you cannot make an allegation of improper behaviour of a member unless you do so by substantive motion.
Madam SPEAKER: I think in the terms the Chief Minister used it, it was quite acceptable. There is no point of order.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, the use of the word ‘fraud’ is the only one that I have to describe …
Madam SPEAKER: I did ask the Chief Minister the other day not to use the word ‘fraud’. I suggest you use it very carefully, otherwise I am going to rule against it.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, a gross misrepresentation to Territorians, a deception of Territorians when this former administration - the then Treasurer, the then Chief Minister and the then Cabinet ministers - told Territorians that 2000-01 had produced a surplus of $1m. They knew that was not the truth, they knew it would out. $140m was that deficit. The so-called fiscal managers, responsible fiscal managers - $1m surplus they tried to claim - now $140m of deficit left to Territorians, to add to that growing interest bill. $500 000 a day we pay in interest, and it is going up.
The CLP was not interested in sound fiscal management or telling the truth to Territorians. The CLP was only interested in saving their own electoral skins. Thankfully, Territorians saw right through it.
Commonwealth Funding Withdrawal Under Labor
Mr BURKE to CHIEF MINISTER
Madam Speaker, I listened closely to the Chief Minister’s words that she had an undertaking from the Beazley Labor government, if it were to be elected federally, that funding currently flowing to the Northern Territory through mandatory sentencing agreements for diversionary programs and interpreter services, would be maintained. She stated that categorically. Has she seen the policy issued by her federal Labor counterpart yesterday, entitled Kim Beazley’s Plan for Safer Communities? I seek leave to table the costings of that policy for the benefit of honourable members.
Leave granted.
Mr BURKE: I draw her attention to the line in those costings which says: ‘Redirected mandatory sentencing funds’. According to the chart, he has removed the remaining $15m for the funding deal with the Commonwealth. Given your statement earlier, Chief Minister, can you please explain to me how this money will flow to the Northern Territory when, in Kim Beazley’s Plan for Safer Communities, it is fully costed, in his opinion. There is no reference to money flowing back to the Northern Territory but, in fact, a direct reference that that money would be withdrawn from those programs?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, we have had direct contact with our federal colleagues. That money is absolutely assured. The Leader of the Opposition can read documents whichever way he likes, and we know how he reads budget papers - I don’t think at all. Let me say, absolutely categorically, that Labor is committed to continuing the funding for the interpreter service and diversionary programs. The only party that we do know that has not made that commitment is your mates, the Coalition. I cannot make it any clearer than that.
Madam SPEAKER: I just remind members, do not refer to members of other parliaments by their Christian names or surnames, please. Give them the office that they occupy.
Performance of Former Treasurer
Ms SCRYMGOUR to TREASURER
In delivering the 2000-01 budget, the former Treasurer described it as an action budget and responsible. He promised to close the gap between revenue and expenditure significantly. Did he deliver?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, absolutely not. The budget deficit was $140m, and that was $95m worse than was budgeted for. In contrast to the rhetoric that we heard from the then Treasurer, and still runs in his fantasy world, the Auditor-General has described the budget as unreliable. I refer the opposition to page 16 of the August report from the Auditor-General. I refer the opposition to the words used by the Auditor-General:
- The government’s ability to transfer significant amounts in or out of its budget scope highlights that the budget scope is unreliable as a measure of the government’s fiscal stewardship and accountability’
The Under Treasurer described the budget situation as unsustainable. I would say, if the new Treasurer had the description given by Treasury as ‘unsustainable’ of the budget, I would bet that that same description was given to the then Treasurer. Did he make it public? No, Madam Speaker. Yet again, ‘unsustainable’ was the word used by Professor Percy Allan in his assessment of where the budget papers were at. So we have from the Auditor-General, ‘unreliable’; we have from Treasury, ‘unsustainable’ for the budget; and we have from one of Australia’s leading experts, Percy Allan - a man with impeccable credentials when it comes to budgets - saying also the budget position for the Territory is ‘unsustainable’.
The member for Katherine is the man who described this same budget in his 2000-01 budget speech as an ‘action budget’. He opened his words with: ‘This is an action budget’. We know what kind of action it had. It was a running-the-deficit-up action. Let’s look at some of the other words that were used. ‘It is a budget,’ said the then Treasurer, ‘that builds on the sound economic management of this government’. Sound economic management! And: ‘This government has struck a responsible balance between revenue measures and asset spending’. A responsible balance that gives us a deficit of $140m.
I do not know where the then Treasurer gets his vision of what fiscal management is about, but he repeated the same kind of words in the next budget speech. It is like fiction, it is like fantasy. The budget speech started in May saying: ‘The budget is economically responsible and fiscally sustainable’. ‘Fiscally sustainable’, was our Treasurer then saying in May, and within a blink, a matter of weeks really, the Under Treasurer was saying: ‘It is unsustainable’. So, can you believe a word that this man has said as Treasurer when the figures, when they come out, are so patently contradictory of what was said?
The member for Katherine’s budgets were unreliable. That is what the Auditor-General says. They were unsustainable. That is what his own Treasury says, that is what Percy Allen says. And the bottom line for Territorians is they were unbelievable.
Mandatory Sentencing - Continuity of Funding
Mr BURKE to CHIEF MINISTER
When it comes to who will believed or not, I once again, refer her to what is called Kim Beazley’s Plan for Safer Communities. It totals spending of $17.85m in the financial year 2001-02; $30.75m in 2002-03; $40.75m in 2003-04; and $45.75m in 2004-05. He includes in his funding a redirection of mandatory sentencing funds, which total $15m. That is the residual of the mandatory sentencing funds that would have flowed to the Northern Territory. He also says in his costing table that the above figures reflect the full value of Kim Beazley’s Plan for Safer Communities. He also goes on to say the net impact on the budget in each of those years is: first year $1m; second year $10m; third year $25m; and fourth year $30m.
My question to the Chief Minister is simply this: has Kim Beazley made a mistake? Or, how can you guarantee to this parliament and to Territorians that the money will continue to flow to the Northern Territory, because there is no accommodation made in Kim Beazley’s Plan for Safer Communities for that money to flow to the Northern Territory?
ANSWER
There are two points here. One is, the opposition obviously feels as though Beazley is going to win the election, which is great. That is terrific. That is a real indictment on your federal colleagues. So the question is …
Mr Burke: Just answer the question. It is guaranteed under the Howard government.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Let me clarify something clearly to you. I agree that the Leader of the Opposition should use the word Kim Beazley when he was referring to the paper he was reading from, but when other people are referring to the federal Leader of the Opposition that is what they should refer to him as. Give him that courtesy.
Ms MARTIN: I will, Madam Speaker. It is interesting to hear the Opposition Leader refer to the federal Opposition Leader as the man who will be running the next government in Australia, and I welcome your support.
Let me just say very clearly: the Territory’s programs - the interpreter service, the diversionary programs - fit within federal Labor’s criteria ...
Mr Burke: Not on his costings, they don’t.
Ms MARTIN: Listen! Listen! We know that you do not have much imagination when it comes to asking questions, and ask the same one again and again and again. But listen, and I will give you the same answer.
The Office of Aboriginal Affairs spokesperson has confirmed, absolutely, that the Territory’s dollars will stay. I cannot make it any clearer. I do add a bottom line. It is terrific to think that the Opposition Leader feels that Australia will benefit from having the Beazley government in power in Canberra. I am confident the Territory will benefit as well.
Draft Information Bill
Mr BONSON to CHIEF MINISTER
Can the Chief Minister tell the House the significance of the discussion paper and draft information bill tabled in this House today?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable member for Millner for his question. This is indeed a momentous day for Territorians. For many long years, Labor fought to have the CLP administration introduce legislation to provide access to information and protect the information privacy of Territorians. Time and time again, the Country Liberal Party administration refused. In fact, the then Chief Minister, now Leader of the Opposition, referred to freedom of information legislation as: ‘A sham and a farce’. He said that he did not believe in FOI legislation. He said that he considered it unnecessary and overly bureaucratic. He said he did not believe that Territorians wanted access to government information. Perhaps he should have listened more closely to Territorians.
The significance of the tabling of this draft bill and discussion paper is that this government has fulfilled our promise to Territorians. We said we would introduce freedom of information legislation. We said we would do it as soon as we could. This is draft legislation and a discussion paper that goes into the parliament today. We promised to introduce legislation to extend, as far as possible, the right of all Territorians to access information held by the Territory government. This draft bill does that. We promised to balance the right of access with the protection of personal privacy. This draft bill strikes that balance. This is very important legislation. Freedom of information will enhance government decision making and discussion. It is a pillar of open and accountable government and one that was very sadly lacking under the previous administration.
We will have an extensive program of community consultation because we have introduced this draft legislation. This is a bill, this is legislation for all Territorians. We want feedback from the community generally, we want feedback from the business community, all aspects of the community, so that this is a bill that is owned by the Territory. Territorians have said very loudly and clearly they want freedom of information and this bill must be Territorians’ bill. I look forward to the introduction of the final bill next year.
Litchfield Shire Local Government Election
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Could you please give the Assembly a report on the recent local government election in the Litchfield Shire? Could the minister also consider, as a matter of urgency, the possibility of changing the Local Government or Electoral Act regulations, in consultation with local government, to enable postal ballots to be used as an optional - and I stress the word ‘optional’ - system of voting? This system is presently used in other states such as Tasmania and Victoria. This would mean that voters would not have to attend the polling booth again, and again, if a possible subsequent by-election was called due to a current councillor being elected as Shire President.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. It was an unfortunate incident. I was advised that there was a break-in in the Litchfield Shire building and a ballot box was stolen. The ballot box contained 15 ballot papers for the president of the shire and two for a Southport councillor. It was one of those strange events. I was advised of the incident and, of course, we had the unfortunate outcome that both candidates for the position of Shire President received the same number of votes. The Electoral Office advised us of what happened after the counting of the ballots took place, and they also obtained legal advice. The legal advice was that the election had to be repeated. Some people in the Litchfield Shire have to vote four times, in other cases five times, and it is something in which we cannot interfere. We are not going to interfere with the democratic process. The Electoral Office has the whole situation in hand.
With regards to the other question about the ballot votes, certainly I am going to discuss this issue with the community, and with the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory. If I see there is overwhelming support, I will seriously consider it.
Land Tax
Mr REED to CHIEF MINISTER
Trevor Dalton, from the Property Council, said on ABC radio this morning that business wants an unequivocal statement from you, ruling out a land tax. Can you give business such an assurance or will you continue to erode business confidence by continuing to state that such a tax may be imposed at some stage of the current parliament?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the question should be accurate. To quote me as saying that the tax might be imposed at some stage of this present parliament is absolutely wrong, absolutely wrong. I ask the member for Katherine to table where those words were said, because I think they are absolute fantasy. Like your budgets, that is more fantasy. I have said very clearly, Labor went to this election with very carefully outlined policies, as opposed to the then government, which had a kind of grab-bag of uncosted initiatives. We said very clearly - and read my lips …
Mr Reed: It’s a no for this term. No land tax?
Ms MARTIN: … no new taxes and charges. Okay? No new taxes and charges. I say to the member for Katherine, who is not always quick on the uptake, that means no land tax.
Draft Information Bill
Mr KIELY to ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Can the Attorney-General outline the process this government will undertake before finalising the information legislation to be brought to this House?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Sanderson for his question. We are engaging in a very exciting period in the Territory democratic processes now. It is very appropriate that the information bill is the vehicle for that consultation. For the next four months, we are going to receive and consider returns from all sections of the Territory community, even the opposition. We will be very happy to see the offerings of various groups and individuals. Whether they be by electronic transfer on to the web site, whether people want to put it in a letter, whether they want to have verbal presentation, we will take it in any form that people want to give us.
We expect the draft legislation that is being put in front of the House today will be fully tested against public opinion and expert advice by sections of the community. If those opposite want to get paranoiac about changes that we might put into the draft, we are certainly not trying to hide anything. Why would we go out to the community …
Members interjecting.
Dr TOYNE: The general intention is to have the returns from the community groups by 28 February. We will then carefully consider all those returns. Where there are valid arguments and constructive amendments put up, they will be written into the legislation prior to it being re-introduced to parliament. We would expect that it would come back to parliament somewhere around May or June, and be passed through by August. After the passage of the legislation in its final form, we then have to give the departments in the Northern Territory government system, and the private sector organisations that are in contractual arrangements with the government, time to get their records in sufficient order so that they can respond to the provisions of the act. I think you can see that this is going to be a prolonged process, a very transparent process, a very open process, and that is very fitting for an information bill.
Mini-budget
Mr REED to CHIEF MINISTER
Madam Speaker, without indulging in blame politics, what arrangements will the Chief Minister put in place for a full appropriation-style debate for your mini-budget? Do you plan to rush the budget through in the next sittings on urgency, or will you acknowledge the appropriateness of the importance of a mini-budget and afford this Chamber, on behalf of Territorians, a full, open and honest debate on your mini-budget without rushing it through on urgency in the November sittings?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, you cannot win with the now opposition. Either we had to have this mini-budget three weeks ago, or now we are being accused of trying to rush it through the parliament at the end of November. I think it was the Opposition Leader who was on the media saying: ‘It is no good, you are leaving it too late to go to the end of November. It should be right now’. Which was probably a few weeks ago, maybe even late September.
Mr Burke: Come on, answer the question.
Mr Stirling: She’s trying to.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: Thank you, from the floor. The mini-budget that we will be bringing down with, I hope, the support of that side of the House, will be an amendment to the budget. It is a mini-budget. It is a very important mini-budget because it will restore the rights in the budget, which we have seen - and I refer the opposition again to the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report and other documentation, which includes the Auditor-General’s August report, which includes Percy Allan’s report, which I do not have here with me now.
This mini-budget is very important. It will be a mini-budget that is an amendment. It is not a full budget process, it is amending the budget that was so poorly done in May. That was not factual, it was deceitful, so we are fixing that. The mini-budget will go through in one sittings of parliament, and it will go through on urgency. We are doing the work now to make sure that the initiatives that we are committed to bringing in, and the rectifying of the false figures we saw in the May budget, are properly restored. I say to the former Treasurer, this is a mini-budget, it is amendment to the 2001-02 budget, and it will go through on urgency in the November sittings.
Rebuilding the Relationship between NT and East Timor
Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER
Madam Speaker, can the Chief Minister inform the House on the progress that is being made to rebuild the crucial relationship between East Timor and the Northern Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the relationship between the Territory and East Timor is a very important one. The East Timorese, the newest nation in the world, are our neighbours, and I can say very proudly to this House and Territorians, they are our friends. Our futures are linked and, as we all know, our paths have been linked.
I have met with the Chief Minister designate of East Timor, Dr Mari Alkatiri, four times since coming to government. It really was a privilege to be able to go to the swearing-in of the new Assembly of East Timor a number of weeks ago. I make note, in referring to that swearing-in of the Assembly, the fantastic work that was done by a Territory builder, Karl Ozolins, and the work he did in taking a building that was in pretty poor shape, and restoring it just beautifully, to be the Assembly building for the East Timorese. So, there was a double sense of pride that Territorian labour had restored this building - and a beautiful building it is - and also being there for the swearing-in of the 88 new members of the East Timorese government. I think Territorians, generally, were delighted to have Dr Alkatiri here last week for the opening of the Assembly. It was very heartening, when he was referred to in the Administrator’s speech, to hear the applause and the recognition for our nearest neighbour and their Chief Minister.
The rebuilding of our relationship with East Timor is symptomatic of this new government’s concentration on our Asian neighbours, one that was sadly neglected by the Country Liberal Party. After working very hard with the nineties …
Mr Burke: We did host a few thousand refugees for a few days.
Ms MARTIN: When you have the Minister for Asian Relations and Trade, who only travelled in Asia four times in one year - four times as the Minister for Asian Relations and Trade – there was no commitment from the previous administration willing to build those relationships. Well, this government has those commitments. We will certainly be working very closely within this inst, the East Timorese and their new government. We will be looking at how we can work with them in terms of how we can assist with their economy, particularly in areas like training, how we can work with trade and building Territory business in East Timor, and how both the Territory and East Timor can work together to exploit the oil and gas reserves in the Timor Sea and create revenue, and create jobs, and create prosperity.
Land Use – Owen Springs Station
Dr LIM to MINISTER for LANDS, PLANNING and ENVIRONMENT
The minister said on radio last week that the CLP government paid too much for Owen Springs, ignoring the fact that the value of the land was a realistic market price as advised by the Australian Valuation Office. The people of Alice Springs have expressed their total support for the CLP government’s purchase of Owen Springs, an action that has preserved, for the community, a large area of land which can be used for future development of the community, including the unhindered expansion of the town. I ask the minister what he meant by his statement that he is reviewing the purposes for which the land will be used?
ANSWER
Thank you very much to the member for Greatorex for his question. I did not make the comment on my own, I read the Valuer-General’s report. I will refer to the report which stated: ‘the unimproved value’ …
Mr Burke: You don’t have an opinion?
Mr VATSKALIS: No, I don’t give my opinion. I have said I am quoting what the Valuer-General, who is a public servant, said: ‘The unimproved value of the station was $812 000 and all the facilities were valued at about $2.1m’. The CLP paid $1.3m for the unimproved value and $1.7m-plus for the facilities.
Mr Baldwin: Don’t you know the difference between unimproved capital value and market value?
- Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: I can refer you back to the Valuer-General’s report. You can take it and have a look at it. They paid too much. Ask the Valuer-General, who refers to it as an ‘anxious buyer’s transaction’.
GST – Labor Policy on Energy Bills
Mr BONSON to CHIEF MINISTER
The federal Labor Party has announced that it will remove GST on energy bills. Can you advise the House of the effect of this policy on Territory households?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, as we all know in this House, the GST is a regressive tax and it impacts most heavily on the poorest households. The CLP wants to expand this regressive tax and wants to see it include food. The candidate the CLP has for Solomon says he wants to have the GST right across everything, no exemptions, particularly on food. He wants it on vital items like water and sewerage. It is no wonder you wanted to dump him. He opens his mouth and says: ‘Let’s extend GST. Let’s have it on …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, would you resume your Chair for one moment, please. Clerk, could you perhaps give me some advice about members referring to candidates in a federal election, whether it is appropriate that this type of debate should go on?
Can I say, Chief Minister, that you are leaving yourself open to points of order from the opposition when you do this. I suggest that you be very careful - both sides - when you are referring to candidates in a federal election and discussing it within this House. Remember that this is, in fact, the Northern Territory parliament, and you should not be casting aspersions upon candidates who are standing for a federal election.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, in terms of the Territory, this is the Country Liberal Party’s candidate for the federal election for the seat of Solomon, and he is on the record
Madam SPEAKER: At least you said the seat of Solomon then. Just be careful you are not …
Ms MARTIN: The candidate for the seat of Solomon is on the record as saying he would like to see the GST expanded to include food.
Madam SPEAKER: I am concerned that we are into a federal election, and I do not want this House to become the target of debate against candidates who are standing for that federal election. I think you have to be very careful with what you actually say.
Mr BURKE : A point of order, Madam Speaker. I wondered if we were having a discussion on your ruling because I would like to contribute.
Madam SPEAKER: I think I have made my ruling fairly clear.
Ms MARTIN: The Beazley Labor pledge is that a GST will be removed from household energy bills, and I think every Territorian will welcome this. Despite the fact of the Country Liberal Party candidate saying that he would like to see GST on food, then …
Mr Burke: Oh, don’t be silly. Come on, answer the question.
Ms MARTIN: Your candidate said it. We have a very strong announcement from the federal Labor Party, through its leader, Kim Beazley, that the GST will be taken off electricity.
Mr Reed: $2 a week. It will allow them to buy an NT News each week.
Ms MARTIN: We all know, every Territorian, every time you get a bill, how tough those power bills are. The average power bill is probably something like $1200 a year. Some will be much more than that, but you would be hard pressed to find ones that are much lower than that. Currently, that sum is inclusive of GST. Removing the GST will provide - the member for Katherine dismissively says $2 per week - $100 per year. $100 per year to take the GST off power - very welcomed by the Electricity Supply Association of Australia on radio this morning. Their spokesperson recognises the high cost of power in the Territory, and says that because we pay that higher cost, when the GST comes off power here, there will actually be a greater saving than for other Australians. So, a very welcome initiative from federal Labor.
The savings that could be made from that, just extrapolating, of over $7.5m a year, right across the Territory. Imagine the injection of that into the Territory economy, just taking the GST off our power bills. This policy of rolling back the GST on essential items is a good policy for Territory households, and it is a good policy for the Territory economy.
Costs of Essential Services
Ms CARTER to MINISTER for ESSENTIAL SERVICES
Can the minister confirm that power, water and sewerage costs will rise this term in accordance with Professor Percy Allan’s report?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, in regards to the cost of power, we went into the election with a clear commitment that there would not be any power increases.
Ms Martin: Absolutely clear commitment.
Mr AH KIT: There would not be any electricity increases. I am hoping that you can understand that. It seems to me that you are having problems understanding a few of the matters raised in Question Time, in what we are telling you. My colleague, the Minister for Industries and Business, in a response last week in Question Time, said that there would be no new taxes. That was another election commitment. You seem to have trouble understanding that also.
We said that the power will not be increased and we will stand by that. We have inherited, as you well know, a black hole of $170m, and it is rising. We are a responsible government, the Martin government. We have inherited your budget and the headaches that you have left behind, but that is not going to deter us from fixing up this problem. We will be working overtime to ensure that we get the Territory’s economy going again. We will get economic development happening.
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker. We were not talking about black holes or anything else. The question was specifically: will, in this term, as recommended by Mr Percy Allan, the government’s consultant, water, sewerage and electricity prices increase? The honourable member has answered in relation to electricity. Territorians would like to know if water and sewerage is to be increased in line with their consultant’s report this parliamentary term?
Madam SPEAKER: I am quite sure you will recall that the minister may answer the question as he feels fit. Minister, would you complete your answer, please.
Mr AH KIT: Territorians need to understand the problem that you have left us …
Mr Reed: No, will you increase water and sewerage charges?
Mr AH KIT: … as a government. It is not ‘no’. It is easy for you, the member for Katherine and the ex-Treasurer, to say let us forget about this, do not talk about the past. Of course, Territorians want to know what we are doing for them in the future. I have said that the capital works that we have to do will happen, those that have dollars beside them. We have said that we will not increase electricity. We are going to have an economic summit, we will talk through and be guided by Territorians in their participation and recommendations to us. We will look at that situation overall, in an economic sense, and plan for the future of the Territory.
Agribusiness
Ms LAWRIE to MINISTER for INDUSTRIES and BUSINESS
Agribusiness has long been talked about as having potential in the Territory. Can the minister inform the House if there have been any recent developments in this area?
ANSWER
I thank the member for her question, Madam Speaker. It is my pleasure to report to the House today that there is further evidence that, despite recent events, business and investment in the Northern Territory goes on and the Territory is moving forward positively, in spite of recent events. Over the last two weekends, I have had the pleasure of officiating at both the Export Awards and the Darwin Business Awards. There are any number of success stories of businesses that are out there, in tough economic times, kicking goals and doing good business.
One area of great potential for the Northern Territory is agribusiness. Last week I had a positive meeting with Marcus Elgin of the Australian Agribusiness Group. This group plans to start capital raising next month for a $50m venture capital fund focused on agribusiness Australia-wide. The new $50m fund …
Mr Elferink: Why wasn’t this a ministerial report?
Mr HENDERSON: You might be interested to know, member for Macdonnell, in terms of the potential for your part of the world, in terms of value-adding, and you might want to listen to this.
Now, if you are not interested …
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Minister, would you direct your remarks to me. Member for Macdonnell, would you stop addressing your remarks across the floor.
Mr HENDERSON: I defer to your ruling, Madam Speaker, but interjections from the other side are sometimes hard to resist in terms of following up on.
The new $50m agribusiness fund will have strong interest in identifying Northern Territory agribusiness investment opportunities, and take a leading role in helping those businesses to be investment ready, and then to access those equity funds.
The Australian Agribusiness Group will be opening an office in Darwin in February next year because they see the opportunities here in the Northern Territory as being very exciting, and amongst the best opportunities for investments in these industries in Australia. They will be opening an office here next year, and it gives our primary producers, people in the agricultural sector, an opportunity to access a further source of funds.
The Northern Territory is in an exciting stage of our development. The Leader of the Opposition did mention this, that in despite of the doom and gloom around current circumstances, we still are the land of opportunity. There are major opportunities occurring, in spite of the opposition continually trying to talk down what is currently occurring.
Our economy is diversifying, it is maturing, and this group is excited about the impact of the railway and/or Timor Sea gas, and the new investment which these will attract. In their view, we have the land, the water, the energy, the logistics and access to the huge Asian markets, which place us at the very forefront of Australian agribusiness opportunities. This is indeed a good news story.
Marcus Elgin is not alone in being bullish. He is bullish about the future of the Northern Territory. Our new government is working closely with business in partnership - that will be extended at the economic summit - and we will build a better Territory, looking at every opportunity possible to talk up what is happening out in our economy at the moment.
It is important to understand that agribusiness is also about value-adding. It is talking about packaging, storage, transport and marketing, and the services and the jobs that these opportunities will create. The Territory can only benefit from being brought up to date with new technologies and new ideas. I am very pleased to see that this fund will be opening up their doors in February next year. I look forward to reporting back to the House with further information as it comes to hand.
Indemnity of Flight West
Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for TOURISM
In light of the Ansett collapse and the devastating effects on tourism, why does your government continue to ignore the requests to indemnify the liquidator of Flight West in respect of an innovative proposal by tourist operators to launch daily flight services from Brisbane to a number of key locations in the Territory, including your own electorate?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her question. It is quite true, it has been a difficult situation for the Cairns/Gove/Darwin route in the absence of Ansett, after their collapse on 14 September.
There have been a number of proposals mooted in relation to how this flight service might be reinstated. Very early, we went to the federal government on the basis of the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme, that there might be funding from the Commonwealth government to, in fact, help get a form of Flight West or a service back on the route. In those very early days, under that scheme, the Commonwealth did, in fact, move quite quickly so that Air North were able to re-establish the Groote connection which was lost as a result of the Ansett collapse. That was up and running within 48 hours.
There did not seem, in those initial stages, that there were any guidelines or any criteria to which the Commonwealth government was referring, when they were dipping into this bucket entitled the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme. Given that, we went, again, very early to the Commonwealth government to say: ‘What is available to get something back on the route?’ We were told then, very early, that a set of rules had appeared. Apparently, they had a look and thought they needed some sort of criteria by which to issue this money.
If I refer to the rules, it said - and I notice it was revised guidelines, presumably on the pretext that there were a set of guidelines in the first instance, although we never got to see these. We were told very clearly that it was provided as a one-off grant, limited to the continuation of services to communities which would otherwise be without air services. It was an impossible ask under the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme because, of course, Qantas was still swinging through south, in the morning, and again back through in the evening. So you could apply it, and apply for money out of the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme, only on those services and those routes which had lost their service altogether. Faced with that advice, there did not seem to be any assistance forthcoming from the federal government.
We wrote then, on 2 October, to the Flight West liquidator, requesting urgent information on any proposals before them in relation to getting this route back up and running, and we never heard back. In the meantime, we were still mindful of the fact that 54% of the capacity on that route had gone with the Ansett collapse. It was tight with a BAE 146 tracking through with Qantas, and we needed to alleviate that pressure. I mentioned the other day that it is impossible to go back to September, October, November last year figures and say: ‘This is the ask, this is the need’. The figures simply are not there, in view of the uncertainty around scheduling around Australia at the moment, and people are not travelling.
That does not mean to say that we did not need something back. That is where - and I spoke about it in the House last week - the Air North proposal, which we thought was a better configuration, was more likely to be sustainable in terms of profit returns to the company, rather than the $85 000 ask that the government was being asked, for a return trip Cairns/Gove/Darwin and back. $85 000 we were being asked to underwrite. We could not get the money out of the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme. We could not get it from the federal government. We are certainly not in a possible to sink $0.5m a week into a service when we have no idea what capacity was going to be on it.
There was then a view that - people were making comments that: ‘It is sustainable, it will make a profit of 40%’. Well, that is an absolute untruth. No aircraft company, no aircraft in the world on any route in the world, breaks even until they are about 65% of capacity, minimum. We are told now, given the situation, some of these companies on the routes want 70%, 75%, 80% before they will even enter the market.
On 19 October, we have had Flight West Administrator, Ian Hall, from Price Waterhouse Coopers, come back seeking financial support for a proposed Brisbane/Cairns/Gove/Darwin service.
Mr Reed: You just said you hadn’t heard from them.
Mr STIRLING: Exactly, up until the 19th. We wrote on the 2nd. When we had no response, on the 10th we moved to the Air North proposal which, of course, gives us that certainty. It is a Territory company looking to become a major player on regional routes. I would have thought the opposition would be right behind Air North. They are a great Territory company and this establishes them on a route between Cairns/Gove/Darwin/Kununurra, four times a week initially from 28 October, and moving - and I would think with every confidence - to a daily service once they are well established on that route.
Even now, there is no clear information as to whether Flight West have money out of the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme. Some are saying yes, they do, although no one has seen the colour of the money. Others are saying, well they cannot, because it breaches the guidelines that I talked about which could only be applied on routes to which no service at all applied.
This proposal has no detail, no detail at all in relation to fares, in relation to demand that they would need to make it work, the operating arrangements, whether there is federal government support or other support, in order to get it up. In the absence of that sort of detail, it is impossible for government, or myself as minister, to even have a view as to whether, and what form of support we could offer that operation, given our commitment to Air North to get back on that route and provide the capacity that we think is lacking. It is a nerve-racking game, aviation. Unless there is certainty there, they simply do not want to come on to the route. We can see room for Air North, a Territory company, to grow their business, and we look forward with confidence that that route will work.
If there are other games being played out that we are unaware of, in terms of hundreds of thousands of dollars being sunk in against the Commonwealth’s own guidelines, we need to be advised. The other point in relation to that is that, in the caretaker mode of government, the federal minister responsible for this ought to be talking to his shadow ministerial counterpart because of the bipartisan nature required for these sorts of agreements. Our advice is there has been absolutely no contact, no contact at all, with the opposition.
We are out there in the breeze a bit in relation to this proposal. Very, very scarce on detail - no confirmation of whether there is money into it at all or not. We wait for further information. In the meantime, we acted to get Air North up and running, and we expect that route to commence on 28 October.
Indemnity of Flight West
Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for TOURISM
Is the minister aware that the Flight West proposal has the in-principle support, as of last night, from the Alice Springs Town Council? In addition, it has the in-principle support of the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Central Australian Tourism Industry Association. Minister, the federal and Queensland governments have agreed to indemnify Flight West. Why doesn’t your government do the same?
ANSWER
Again, obviously, the member has information not before the minister, Madam Speaker. In relation to confirmation, as at lunch time, we could get no confirmation from anybody whether in fact moneys out of the Rapid Route Recovery Scheme had been applied, and could be applied to Flight West on this route.
In relation to Alice Springs, yet again on the floor of parliament, we have another aspect introduced here. The original proposal put to us, was flights to Alice Springs via Brisbane or Cairns/Gove/Darwin. No idea of how often, what times they would run or fare structures, no detail at all on that. As I said, as of lunchtime, I certainly had no confirmation of a commitment from the federal government.
In relation to Alice Springs, the best part of that proposal is that it would provide that additional capacity into Alice Springs, which does remain, of course, a great concern to this government. Certainly, no confirmation received, or before me on my desk, that federal money is available for use to get this route up and running again.
Breast Cancer Awareness
Ms SCRYMGOUR to MINISTER for HEALTH, FAMILY and CHILDREN’S SERVICES
Can the minister tell the parliament what measures the Martin Labor government has agreed to put in place to help Territory women diagnosed with breast cancer?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arafura for her question. The question is particularly relevant, given that this is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Yesterday, I attended the official launch of Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and I presented a cheque for $10 000 to the Cancer Council to honour a commitment made by the former minister, the member for Drysdale.
Last year in the Northern Territory, sadly, 15 women died from breast cancer. This year, about 50 Territory women are expected to be diagnosed with breast cancer. It is extremely upsetting for Territory women that breast cancer patients have to leave the Territory for treatment because we do not have radiotherapy services in Darwin. In fact, many women who are diagnosed with breast cancer who could have had breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy, instead choose to have a full mastectomy rather than leave their families and homes for seven weeks of treatment down south.
I am very pleased to report the Martin Labor government has promised a $14m cancer treatment unit, which includes radiotherapy services. This is good news for the Northern Territory and a further example of how the Northern Territory Labor government will improve the delivery of services to Territorians.
On a more positive note, more women are surviving breast cancer than ever before. Early diagnosis and treatment is vital to improve survival rates, and access to radiotherapy plays a vital role in quality treatment.
Darwin Family Centre Funding
Mr KIELY to MINISTER for LANDS, PLANNING and ENVIRONMENT
During the course of the election, the Labor Party promised to provide $10 000 this financial year to the Darwin Family Centre. Can the minister tell the House whether this promise will be kept?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Sanderson for his question. I know his keen interest on this matter. This government will fulfill its election promise to provide $10 000 to the Darwin Family Centre. The money will be coming out of the Department of Lands, Planning and Environment, since we are the landlord, and the money will be used to install reticulation and to improve the grounds to be used by the centre. This money is going to be divided between the Toy Library Association and the Darwin Playgroup Association. Once again, I say that this government will fulfill all its election promises.
Darwin Harbour and Extractive Mining
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
The extractive industry is important for the development of the Territory. There are already many areas set aside in the Darwin rural area. Recently, a petition of over 6000 people presented in this parliament, stated that they wanted the Darwin Harbour to become a national conservation park. The government has said it has concerns for the harbour, but extractive industry in the Ware Peninsula is destroying parts of that area. In fact, some of the mining goes to the very edge of the mangroves. Minister, will you stop extractive mining on the Ware Peninsular until we have a public inquiry as to what is going to happen with the Ware Peninsula and the Darwin Harbour?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Nelson for his question. The extractive industry is a significant part of the local mining industry in the Northern Territory, particularly around Darwin. With the urban spread of population over the last 10 years, this has put pressure on extractive mineral leases, and these extractive leases are, more and more, having an affect in terms of local urban communities.
I met with the Extractive Industries Association a couple of weeks ago, and agreed to have an ongoing dialogue with them in terms of ensuring that we can provide for our future infrastructure growth, in and around Darwin, in terms of materials for roads and other infrastructure developments that need to be quarried. Mindful of the planning issues regarding the Ware Peninsular, I have to say to the honourable member that I will take your question on notice and get back to the House with an answer, regarding the specific issues surrounding the peninsula at the moment.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016