2002-08-20
Budget 2002-03 – Increased Taxes and Charges
Mr REED to TREASURER
I refer to Budget Paper No 3, pages 279 and 282 respectively, and ask the Chief Minister and Treasurer to now admit that her government has received an additional allocation from GST disbursements of $134.2m in untied grants. In light of this incredible increase in financial services from the Commonwealth this financial year, which will continue every year hereafter, how can she justify getting into the pockets of Territorians in the way that she has over the last 12 months with increased taxes and charges; and will she finally agree to reduce those taxes and charges she has imposed on Territorians?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I welcome the question from the previous Treasurer. There is some inaccuracy, which is disappointing to see from the previous Treasurer, but we are used to that. It is $131m that we received in extra funding from the federal government; $76.1m of that was because of increased relativities. The other was the natural growth that you get because of CPI and other factors, which the former Treasurer, I think, understands. Part of that, the $76.1m, was increased relativities funding. We have to understand what relativities are all about; they recognise the increased costs of service delivery in the Territory. What we properly did in this budget was to put that increased relativity towards what I proudly outlined this morning in my first budget – the budget of this Labor government.
We came into government just over 12 months ago, and we came on a very strong platform: jobs growth, providing the best facilities and services we can in education, the same for health, and providing a safe community for Territorians. This budget replicates that commitment, delivers on those promises and those increased funds from the federal government are targetted there. There is $43m extra into capital works to be able to underpin those key strategy priorities: health, education, building a safe community and, more importantly, underpinning our construction industry in the Territory and helping keep skilled tradespeople in the Territory. The other $30m has gone towards programs in education, health, and across police and justice, and we are incredibly proud of this.
The shame that the member for Katherine is part of when he raises this issue is about the debt and deceit that was left to Territorians when last time a budget came down in this House, because we know how the bottom line figures were written in that budget. We know how they were - by the then Treasurer up in his office, who said: ‘We are going into an election, we cannot have figures like this. Let us put a very low figure on the deficit for the coming year. Let us put a really low figure – what do I like? Oh, let us try single figures’.
Well, we found out soon enough what a facade that was; what a mistruth for Territorians that was. We on this side of the House are very proud of the fact that we have a deficit reduction strategy that we are keeping to, and we will have the Territory’s budget back in balance by 2004-05. That is against the government sector. In the mini-budget last year, it was against the total public sector. However, in this budget we are bringing it forward a year and it is against the general government sector. We are very proud of that.
The former Treasurer, the member for Katherine, stands in here and says: ‘You know you will get this extra funding for year after year after year’. Not true! Absolutely not true. We know that, in the cycle for the Grants Commission, in two years time those reviews will happen. The man who was Treasurer for a long time knows that that money is not assured, and that increased funding is not assured past this year and perhaps a little for next. So let us make sure that there is no distortion coming from the opposition. We recognise an increase in growth, as happens every time the funding comes in from the federal government. Part of that increased $131m is that funding, then a recognition of the increased costs of delivering services across …
Mr Burke: No, it is not! It is GST.
Ms MARTIN: … the Territory - something you never did. You never stood in here and said: ‘There are needs for remote communities and we are going to tackle them’ Never! Never stood in here and recognised those needs, and you are a disgrace after 27 years that you did not.
Mr Reed: You could not lie straight in bed.
Ms MARTIN: I stood here proudly this morning …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I would ask him to withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: That is a reflection upon the Chief Minister. I think you should withdraw.
Mr REED: She may lay straight in bed.
Madam SPEAKER: Just withdraw.
Mr REED: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Ms MARTIN: We had a question from the member for Katherine that contained very little truth, and it tries to distort the fact of what has happened. We are proudly saying that those extra relativities have been put where they were given to us for: to be able to achieve an average state-like service in the Territory. We have a long way to go, but this budget today has made an important first step and I am proud of it.
Budget 2002-03 – Highlights
Mr McADAM to TREASURER
Can you please advise what you see as the highlights of your first budget?
ANSWER
Certainly, member for Barkly, it is a great question. Madam Speaker, this budget today is about delivering for today for Territorians and investing for our future. That is done within a responsible financial management strategy and a responsible – and heaven help us from the other side - deficit reduction strategy.
There are four key areas. In job creation, figures show that over the last year, 3600 extra jobs were created and more than half of those were full-time jobs around the Territory. A good start. In health, extra funds, an increase of 4%. In education, extra funds, an increase of 3%. In the area of community safety, which involves police and other initiatives, an increase of 6%. Real dollars going to key areas for Territorians. We are proud of that. Putting $20m extra into the health portfolio, $14m into education and training, and $8m into police will really see some effect start to be made. It is the first step on the way to really delivering today and investing for our future.
Put this together with real spending in infrastructure. We have seen the facades over the last years when we have looked at budgets from the previous government. However, in this one, $333m worth of cash against our capital works program - that is a record for the Territory since self-government. We on this side are very proud of that. It is not some ad hoc arrangement about ‘We will just have a scatter gun approach to capital works’. It is not. That $333m that is allocated to capital works is to support our key initiatives. We are building schools, refurbishing schools, building health clinics, building police stations, making sure that service delivery in towns and cities across the Territory and in remote communities can work.
It is a very strategic approach, but it also recognises that our construction industry needs strong support, and we are working with them on that. It keeps our skilled tradespeople in town. Importantly, when you look at the project component of that capital works budget, you will see that significant funds in the program delivery have been allocated. Across the Territory it is an increase of $3.7m up to $25m, or an increase of 17%, to keep our architects, surveyors, draftspeople and engineers working on the designing of projects for this year and into the future.
We also have initiatives in home ownership, lifting the threshold on stamp duty payable, and a whole lot of initiatives across the housing area. Because, as you know, Madam Speaker, as someone who came from an educational background, if we want to get education really happening in remote communities, what we need is good infrastructure and housing for our teachers. Housing right across that outstanding need in the bush is something that has to be tackled. All up, through the IHANT program this year, there is $57m to start tackling that outstanding area for houses in remote communities.
It is a budget we are very proud of, with targetted and responsible funding. I am very proud to have just come from a Chamber of Commerce and Industry lunch where our budget was well received. The tag that we got from business people around town was ‘responsible and responsive’. That is what this budget is about. It is about delivering for today, it is about investing for our future. To use the words of our business community, it is a responsible budget, this first Labor government budget, and it is a responsive one.
Budget 2002-03 - Increase in Water Charges
Mr REED to TREASURER
Madam Speaker, on behalf of Territorians listening to this program, I hope the Treasurer will give them an honest answer. She has just admitted …
Ms MARTIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: I do not think you should reflect on the answer before you have even heard it.
Mr REED: Well, I just assume she will give an honest answer, Madam Speaker. Should we question otherwise?
The Chief Minister and Treasurer has just admitted to receiving an extra $130m this year from the Commonwealth. I would like her to explain to Territorians, given that circumstance, how can she justify to continue the increase of 7.5% in water charges to Territorians since she came to government, an extra $60 each year that Territorians have to pay in their water rates, while this Labor government receives an extra $131m by the Chief Minister’s own admission? That is not the way to make life easier and the cost of living less for Territorians. I would like the Chief Minister to explain that to those listening.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is interesting to hear the ‘hand on the heart’ approach we now have from the former government when it comes to increased charges. We heard last week how coming up to the election last year, when it came to MACA premiums, suddenly the cloth ears were on government. They could not hear. They made commitments about keeping premiums indexed each year, and when it came to MACA last year, because there was a run-up to an election, did nothing. They then turn around and criticise this government for making sure that premiums can actually meet the needs of the scheme – with a 1.6% increase over two years.
Do you know what, Madam Speaker? It has been the same with power and water - the exact same. July 2000, a 5% increase from the then government - 5%. What about last year? The cost of delivery of water and sewerage in the Territory, with pay rises in the public sector and other flow-on costs of supplies and things - yes, it becomes more expensive to deliver those services. But in the run-up to an election, what action did we have? Not a thing. No courage, no public policy responsibility, nothing. They then turn around with the greatest hypocrisy and blame us for good public policy, for making sure that services can be delivered across the Territory, and that we can make sure that water and sewerage services are being repaired; that repairs and maintenance are happening effectively, and that delivery can happen across the Territory.
We have this mob who simply, in the run-up to an election last year, refused to make the important decisions. To stand here now and ask questions with such hypocrisy - it is not worth answering.
Budget 2002-03 – Benefits to Home Buyers
Mr BONSON to TREASURER
What benefits are there for people buying their home in this budget?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, in this first Labor budget, which is about delivering today and investing for the future, every Territorian purchasing a home where they are going to live will get a rebate on their stamp duty - every single Territorian. This is a wonderful initiative. In a place like the Territory, where we want people to stay, where we have low home ownerships, this is a wonderful initiative; a really targetted initiative to build our home ownership and support our real estate and construction industries. For a long time now, year after year, the threshold for stamp duty was $80 000. $80 000 did not relate to a house in the Territory. We have lifted that to $125 000. That means for a rebate, it takes it from $2096 through to $3640 for first home buyers.
This is an enormous attraction and increase, and we are saying: ‘We want you to buy your first home in the Territory’. Together with the $1500 for buying your principal place of residence – that means everyone gets that. The higher sum of $3640 is for those who are first home owners. These are the people we want to target, this is a strong equity issue from this Labor government. But for everyone buying a home, there will be a concession on that stamp duty. So if you are buying your first home, $3640; if you are buying your principal place of residence, $1500. Calculations show that 2500 Territory households will benefit each year from this. There is a 74% increase in being able to get a rebate on buying that home in the Territory.
In terms of extra assistance, it is $2.9m. I could not be prouder to stand here and talk about this initiative, which really starts looking at how we get people to buy their first home in the Territory and to say: ‘Well, I am going to make a commitment to live here but I would like to upgrade where I am living’. We will give assistance to move there. Put that together with an extra $3m for HomeStart, to a record $28m to help low and medium income earners to be able to buy, again, their first home, and this is a budget that delivers. It delivers for today, it delivers for next year, and it does certainly invest in our future.
Budget 2002-03 – Budget Improvement Levy
Mr MALEY to TREASURER
Treasurer, you admitted a few moments ago that your government has received an extra $131m. We have just heard you try to explain and justify the increased power and water charges. However, how can you justify slugging Territory families an extra $90 per car to raise an extra $4m in light of the $131m windfall?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I believe the member for Goyder is talking about the Budget Improvement Levy which raises - if he could read the Budget Papers - $8m a year, and will over three years. In November 2004, that Budget Improvement Levy disappears. The Budget Improvement Levy - and this is something that the opposition doesn’t like to hear - is your responsibility for lying about the previous budget that was brought in here; for a deficit that blew out of control. And they would not admit it …
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I would ask the Treasurer to withdraw the word ‘lying’. You know that it is unparliamentary.
Madam SPEAKER: We have ruled that using the word ‘lie’ or ‘lying’ is out of order. Treasurer, withdraw.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I should not use the word ‘lie’, I know, but it does …
Madam SPEAKER: Just withdraw it.
Ms MARTIN: I withdraw it. Not telling the truth about the previous budget.
It is only a year ago that we were elected and, within the first week of being in government, we were told that that bottom line of the budget was absolute rubbish. It was absolute rubbish, and what it meant for our budget situation was that we had an unsustainable budget situation, and entirely the responsibility of the Country Liberal Party and the previous Treasurer, the member for Katherine. We had to change that from an unsustainable situation to a sustainable one. I have said I am sorry to Territorians about the Budget Improvement Levy. We had to fix that budget up; the deficit situation had to be fixed.
Again, the hypocrisy of a man who should not have been Treasurer because he did not have the proper professional behaviour to be Treasurer. The hypocrisy of that is just outstanding.
Mr Dunham interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: What I can say to this House is - and you were part of that too, member for Drysdale, so do not try and …
A member interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: What I can say to this House, is we now have a Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. This budget brought down today is based on that Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. The figures that you have in this budget are real figures; you can trust those figures. I did not sit in my office upstairs and say: ‘What is a nice bottom line I can have in this budget?’ I did not sit there and say that.
These are Treasury figures and are real figures. The opposition understands the hypocrisy of their question. Let me put two facts here. The Budget Improvement Levy is directly due to the financial incompetence of the previous government. It will go in two-and-a-half years time. What I can say to Territorians is that, per capita, we have the second lowest level of taxes in Australia. When it comes to what we pay in motor registrations, we are simply at an average, and that includes the levy. In two-and-a-half years time, we will be way below that average. In terms of why we have that tax, why we have that increase, why we have the Budget Improvement Levy, is directly responsible to the previous administration.
Budget 2002-03 - Aquaculture Project in Darwin Harbour
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for BUSINESS, INDUSTRY and RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
In the budget there is talk of employment increasing. One area expected to create additional employment is aquaculture. Minister, could you please explain to the House why the prawn farm located near the Blackmore River in Darwin Harbour, which received approvals about two years ago from the Development Consent Authority, has not yet started construction and has this project been abandoned?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. It is a very important question. One day when the history of this project comes to light in this House, there will be a very full and succinct statement as to what have been the problems with this particular project over a number of years now.
I advise the House that the government has significantly progressed this project and we will be making an announcement on this in the very near future. There are still some legal issues to be resolved regarding the development contract held by the developer that was signed with the previous government. However, we have moved a long way forward on that; significant progress has been made. My colleague, the minister responsible for the Department of Industry, Planning and Environment, has carriage of this. He is in discussions with the company and will be making an announcement in the near future.
Budget 2002-03 - Schools Infrastructure
Ms SCRYMGOUR to MINISTER for EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION and TRAINING
Can you advise the House what has been funded in the 2002-03 budget to improve the infrastructure of schools?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arafura for her question. This is equal to my proudest day in parliament, to stand alongside the Chief Minister as minister with responsibility for Employment, Education and Training, because she has mandated a very clear direction for this government in placing employment, training and educational opportunities for all Territorians at the very top of priorities for this government - including opportunities for indigenous Territorians. We know education in itself is about investing for the future but, sadly, much of the school infrastructure across the Territory has deteriorated over the years and, in some cases, is in quite desperate need of repair and replacement.
This government has committed an additional $5m per year for repairs and maintenance to schools, commencing this 2002-03 year, in the belief that this will help to overcome some of the backlog in maintenance, and ensure essential maintenance is carried out into the future. New and upgraded facilities, if I could just mention a few: Parap Primary School, stage one upgrade; Nhulunbuy High School, new multipurpose hall, something promised by you blokes as far back as 1995 - seven years. That is why I am proud to stand here today, because I can deliver over the top of your broken promises - your broken promises, year in and year out. Nothing gives me more pleasure than to see that right up at the top of the budget papers.
Minyerri School – this mob here would never have heard of Minyerri, seen it on a map or visited there. A little school going quite well, building enrolments and numbers. They need a new classroom. We are going to do it for about $400 000. Those little places never ever got in the budget papers under our predecessors. They will get a new library, classroom, storage and toilets.
Alice Springs High School, upgrade airconditioning stage two, something we commenced in and around the Christmas break last year. $3m to upgrade remote schools in the Northern Territory. Within this, Maningrida Community Education Centre stage one, upgrade facilities - $1m. Papunya School stage one, upgrade facilities - $1.05m. Milyakburra School on Bickerton Island, extension to existing school - comes in at what, $460 400. The member for Arnhem is very pleased. Homeland centres in the Centre, Alyawarra Anmatjere cluster, again in that order of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Teacher housing will receive a huge boost, and the Minister for Housing will elaborate on that in future debate in this House.
These allocations do underline the priority that this government is placing on employment, education and training. I am very pleased to see it, and I am sure all Territorians will be as well.
HIH Tax - Financial Burden on Business
Mr MILLS to TREASURER
The $131m additional revenue from the GST provides an opportunity to relieve pressure on Territorians. In light of this $131m, how can the Chief Minister justify the imposition of a $4m burden on small business through the HIH tax?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, today is about this budget. Today is about delivering for Territorians, it is about investing in the future. What we have done for every Territorian today is say: ‘Education, we are valuing it’. We had a government previously that did not value education. They did not value education. School supplies - just as one element – had no increase per capita allocation since 1993-94. Even kids I know said to me: ‘The teachers are so mean about pencils and things. They keep saying: “Don’t wreck them, don’t wreck them, we need to have them back”.’ Schools that struggled to keep up with the needs of supplies had no increase for almost a decade. We have made our increase 21% and CPI’d it. Is this valuing education? For every single business person in the Territory this is valuing education, starting to get education for our young people and training for the future, so that we will have a skilled work force emerging in the Territory.
There are dollars going into health - more nurses, better services. We are valuing health right across. Housing - where are Territorians going to live? How are they going to afford housing? Initiatives today will see that happening. Right across the board, a good news budget. A good news budget because, together with those initiatives, $333m - real dollars, not the pretend dollars we saw in the past. The same kind of program we saw last year, but $165m against it. Promises: ‘We will promise you anything. We are running up to an election, we will promise you anything; we will build anything. We do not have the money to do it, we are not telling the truth about the deficit. We are not telling the truth about the deficit, but we will promise you anything’.
Well, for Territory businesses, for those working in our construction industries and supplies, $333m this year - $333m for the builders, the subbies, the engineers, the draftspeople, the architects, all the supplies. This is a very exciting budget. In terms of what we are delivering – yes, we are delivering right across the board. We are growing the Territory and we are doing the important …
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker! What the Chief Minister is not delivering is an answer to the question, which was, specifically: in light of the fact that they have an extra $131m, will they do away with the HIH tax?
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Ms MARTIN: We have gone through the issues for a previous government that came in here with this legislation and an initiative that they wanted to put in place. We funded $9m over the last financial year to take the initial burden of that. You were not going to do it. The then minister: ‘Oh, we’ll give you a $3m loan’. A $3m loan, and he did not tell them it was a loan. We put the down payment …
Mr BALDWIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I think the Chief Minister may have just misled parliament in what she has just said about the reference to me and the HIH monies that were put forward to the nominal insurer. She should check Hansard before she makes those remarks.
Madam SPEAKER: I cannot rule whether what the Chief Minister has said is right or wrong, it is up to any member in the House to make sure what they say is accurate.
Ms MARTIN: We have a very sensitive minister who did not perform well at the time. Shows a little more energy about things now, which is surprising.
When it comes to the hypocrisy, again, of this former government coming in here and saying: ‘Why didn’t you do things?’ that they themselves initiated, it is just too hard to take.
This budget is about delivering across the board. It is about real dollars going into key priorities for Territorians, and I am proud of it. We are delivering today. Let me just use the Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s words again at the lunch: ‘A responsive budget, and a responsible budget’.
Madam SPEAKER: Before we go on, could I just ask members to cease the chatting that is going across the Chamber? It must be very difficult for people listening to the broadcast to actually hear the answers.
Budget 2002-03 – Crime Prevention Initiatives
Dr BURNS to MINISTER for JUSTICE
Since taking office a year ago, this government has worked tirelessly to introduce a range of crime prevention initiatives across government agencies and in partnership with the community. How does the first full budget of this government continue to build safer communities for all Territorians?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Johnston for his question because it is, indeed, a vital part of our commitment to the Northern Territory electorate and a vital priority for our government.
To do something about crime, to carry out some genuine crime prevention programs in the community, needs more than just slogans. It means more than what the previous government did in coming in here talking about how tough they were on crime, and how we were not going to be tough on crime, and so on. There has to be more than just words. This empty rhetoric does not change one iota what is going on in the streets and households of the Northern Territory. The reality is that, unless the government takes very strong action, burglaries, break and enters and car thefts will be continuing. That is the legacy we got from the CLP government in the time that they were in power. You talked a lot but did very little about it.
Well, we are going to do plenty about it. We are maintaining, in real terms, the funding to the Department of Justice through the quite considerable restructuring that was carried out in our agency. The mini-budget improvement process, in real terms, will maintain the effort in those areas.
The Office of Crime Prevention is a key area for us as a crime prevention initiative. We are increasing its funding in this budget by 88% to $2.3m. That will include money to Crime Prevention NT, Community Grants Scheme - $400 000 going out to grassroots initiatives in our communities. We are going to work with Territorians. They are going to come up with the ideas, neighbourhood by neighbourhood. We will give them the grants to carry out and initiate those projects. That will have the type of impact that was never realised under the previous government. $100 000 will go to Neighbourhood Watch, more money than they have ever enjoyed under the previous government, and they will stand beside Crime Prevention NT and the Office of Crime Prevention.
We have several arms now to work with our citizens and bring forward some of these improvements. There is $150 000 for the establishment of a Drug Court. This is the drug problem that did not exist under the previous government. It constantly denied that we had a significant drug problem in the Northern Territory yet, time after time, we see in the newspapers the connection between chronic drug use and break and enters and other property crimes. There is $150 000 to get those Drug Courts going, and $300 000 in each following year to maintain the effort of getting drug addicts into rehabilitation and out of the crime cycle, and out of the homes of Territorians from where they have been taking property.
Even after people have gone to gaol, we are spending $50 000 a year to initiate an integrated offender management system within our gaols. That will enable us to rehabilitate people who have gone into the crime cycle back into the community so they do not reoffend. We are following best practice from New Zealand. We are going to start the development here in the Northern Territory prisons and with our community-based Correctional Services, we will see the impact made there.
Finally, for the Community Justice Centre there is $150 000 to start to look for smarter ways of keeping young people, particularly, out of the crime cycle. We will work with them outside the courts and alongside the courts. If they break the law, they will end up in court as should happen but, if we can prevent it through mediation and bring them back into a more constructive relationship with their community, that is what we are going to do. We are going to get started on real initiatives in the community in partnership with the Territory people. We will get a lot further than the last government ever did.
Budget 2002-03 – Increased Sewerage Rates
Mr DUNHAM to TREASURER
Given your admission that your budget bottom line has been improved by $131m extra from the Commonwealth, why is it necessary to increase sewerage rates by 7.5%, and a whopping $11 000 extra per annum for large commercial premises?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, service delivery underpins this budget today. To be able to do that in an environmentally responsible way is very important. It is interesting that there is a focus from the opposition about: ‘You have increased some charges’. Last week, there was an increase announced at 2.5% in water and sewerage, because it does not stand well against some of the increases that have come from this previous government. Let me remind some of those members. I take you back to July 1998, when there was a 44.5% increase in water charges in one hit. A 44.5% increase in water charges in July 1998. It was a double whammy actually. It was an increase in water charges and it was imposed on a fixed daily rate. Here we have an opposition, 27 years in government, saying: ‘Look how responsible we were,’ by implication. ‘Do not count budgets’, for example, ‘but look how responsible we were’. Look at this ‘dreadful’ new government in here, in a year, responding in a responsible CPI way to be able to meet the service delivery charges. In July 1998, 44.5%, a king hit on Territorians in one go - an absolute king hit. Put that together with your lack of responsibility - to put it kindly - last year before the election when you would not talk about any kind of responsible CPI-related rises ‘because we were going to an election’, then these questions lack credibility and integrity.
This budget today is about using funds responsibly. I am grateful to the Commonwealth Grants Commission for the $83m that we received in extra relativities, because we can start turning around the neglect we have seen in the Territory. The previous Country Liberal Party government did not govern for all Territorians. As the Deputy Chief Minister and education minister said, you would not know where Minyerri was. You would not know where these schools are around the Territory. We are funding education and health, and we are funding it right around the Territory. We are underpinning that by a proper capital works program with $333m worth of cash, and the delight in our business community is palpable. This is a responsible and responsive budget.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! My question was specifically about sewerage, and while the Chief Minister is talking on that subject generally, I would prefer she talk specifically about sewerage rates.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of ruling, and you know it.
Budget 2002-03 - Finniss River Subdivision
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Your government has recently announced the possible subdivision of a further 700 blocks of land in the Finniss River area. What is the government doing about local government in the Dundee, Finniss, Silkwood and Leaning Tree/Marrakai subdivision areas? As these areas do not have a rate base, does the budget include …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker! There are two parts to it. One, one question and, secondly, the questions are getting too long. I think there are at least three parts to this question already.
Madam SPEAKER: The minister can always pass the question to the minister responsible.
Mr WOOD: I do not think the question was too long.
As these areas do not have a rate base, does the budget include a fee for the maintenance of roads and rubbish tips, and how much is it; and does the government support the principle that freehold land owners in some parts of the Territory should not have to pay rates and others do?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question, as long as it is. I have had no approaches formally. There is no doubt that work has been going on with DIPE. I am sure my colleague, the Minister for DIPE, would like to respond to the part of the question in respect of the rates etc, shortly.
However, in respect of Dundee, my department is meeting with Dundee residents. It is important that we talk through local government with them; they have some ideas. There are concerns out there. On one hand, I have been told people really enjoy living out there. They bought land and they knew that they were getting into a situation where they were going to be without those types of services – power, water, sewerage etc - but that is what they wanted.
On the other hand, people have bought land fairly cheaply, moved out there, and are now looking for these services. As was said in this House last week by one of the government ministers – I am not quite sure who, but I remember the discussion and debate about it, and I think it was the Chief Minister - we want to make sure we start preparing and putting infrastructure in place properly before these blocks are going out for sale. Therefore, we do not create this expectation where people buy land and then expect the services should automatically follow. We have to be smarter, and that means being better than the former government in being able to plan the infrastructure properly.
I am quite happy to report back to the member for Nelson on the consultations and discussions my departmental officers are having with Dundee residents. We do have people there who are vocal and concerned about where we are going with this, but we need to do it properly.
In respect of the other half of the question, I would like to pass that onto Minister Vatskalis.
Mr VATSKALIS (Lands and Planning): I thank the member for his question. Yes, we have a problem with who is going to pay for the maintenance and construction of the roads because the previous government released land which was not serviced and was not incorporated. Land releases like that never happen anywhere else in Australia. Not only did they release land that was not serviced, a few years later they put in a school and a clinic. Again, there is no power, water, sewerage; there is no service. Where there are no roads, they put the school and the clinic. What it really did was attract more people to an unserviced area to live.
This is quite right, the first half of the question is, what happened to our rubbish tips. I remember very well as an environmental health officer going to Dundee Beach and then writing to the then Minister for Lands, Planning and Environment advising him that what was happening down there was illegal, and how to rectify it. I was ignored several times until, before the elections, money all of a sudden was found and the tip was cleared. These things do not happen anywhere in Australia. It happens only in third world countries, in Uganda somewhere, not in Australia.
The problem we have now is, we have land that is not serviced and not incorporated and, as a result, we cannot get any money from the federal government for the roads, because the federal government allocates money only to local government. So we have something around our neck, because that previous government released land that was unserviced. I do not know for what reason - I suspect why, but I cannot state that publicly. The problem is, here we have to spend $1m-odd to put in water, $1m to put in power, $1m to seal the roads.
This is a mistake we are never going to repeat again. That is the reason why we said, in the Finniss area, if someone wants to develop land, he has to cough up $10 000 per block to a trust account so we can use those funds to seal the roads and provide the necessary services.
My department is looking at different ways of actually providing the services to Dundee, and at the same time provide a system of rating. We will have discussions with Litchfield Shire Council and the Dundee Progress Association, or we can amend the existing legislation to rate the properties there. That is the only way we can go back now and get some money and provide some services to the people at Dundee. They deserve those services. I know they bought the blocks unserviced, but a lot of them have now sold the blocks, and we have a second generation of owners who demand the services because, when you live in Australia in 2002, you demand running water in your house, electricity, and sealed roads.
Budget 2002-03 – Comments by Minister for Health and Community Services
Mr DUNHAM to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
On the 18 June you claimed in this House: ‘I have been advised that the department’s budget will come in on target’. Given that your budget in the 27 November 2001 mini-budget was $481m, and at the end of the year in the budget the Chief Minister tabled this morning, is $499m - an $18m blow-out - can you inform this House whether your comments in June were accurate?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, yes, my comments in June were correct. I was advised of that, and I reported it to the House at that time. These are normal variations, movements that happen between years as a matter of course: carry forwards, transfers between agencies etcetera, plus the change in accounting from one financial year to another, from cash to accrual. This needs to be factored in.
Budget 2002-03 - Government Assistance for Northern Territory Business Growth
Mr KIELY to MINISTER for BUSINESS, INDUSTRY and RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
What is the government doing to assist Northern Territory business to grow and work with government?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Sanderson for his question. I am also very proud to stand here today and say: ‘This is a good budget for business in the Northern Territory’. Certainly, the initial feedback from the business community at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry lunch earlier this afternoon is very, very positive.
There are some major initiatives in my portfolio designed to cut red tape and assist government to work with business in partnership. First of all, we have funding of $250 000 being provided to establish a network of business case managers throughout government, to assist potential new business operators in the Northern Territory, or people looking to amend their business, to navigate the range of approvals through government and reduce red tape. This is an initiative that has been worked on with the Chamber of Commerce and Industry in putting this program together. It is going to be very well received and, hopefully, is going to cut red tape for business operators.
An additional $390 000 has been provided to fund short course business skills workshops across the Northern Territory to help lift the capacity of Northern Territory business. We are all aware of the large turnover rates in businesses, and businesses closing down after the first two years of operation because the business skills are not there. An investment of $390 000 will assist businesses to put business plans into place and is going to assist them over the years to come.
We have also introduced tax relief for business in this particular budget. Stamp duty has been reduced on franchises, something that was very well regarded, and declared long overdue at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry lunch. We have wound back a CLP tax that was introduced in 1992. It is going to assist hundreds of retail outlets and many thousands of franchise operators in the Northern Territory. It is great to be able to wind back that 1992 CLP tax. The budget reduces the duty from the conveyancing duty rate to the lower lease rate, and that will also help the franchise operators. Exemption for hiring duty for wet hires that the Chief Minister released a number of weeks ago is going to help business in the Northern Territory.
Payroll tax is being reduced from 6.5% to 6.3%, the system has been simplified for business and we will deliver on those. Again, well regarded by business. We have also introduced a stamp duty exemption for reconstruction of property within company groups, as companies try to bring all their business activities under one structure. So, we are spending more money on assisting business through the department. We are reducing taxes in a number of areas. The 29% additional cash we have put into the capital works budget is a major win for business in the Northern Territory. $330m cash in that budget this year, and increased stamp duty concessions are really going to assist the small business operators in the housing construction sector. This is a budget for business. It is responsible and responsive, and I look forward to some support from those members opposite.
Budget 2002-03 – Wharf Redevelopment
Ms CARTER to MINISTER for TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE
Last year, one of the key things which came out of the Chief Minister’s Economic Development Summit was the fast-tracking of the wharf redevelopment. I notice also earlier this year there was another promotion that that was going to be fast-tracked. Can you tell the House why it has disappeared from the budget?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it has not disappeared from the budget. Simply, we have not progressed enough to actually put it in the budget. We received 32 different submissions; some of them were very detailed. Some were from developers and interest groups. We actually study submissions, and we discuss the issues with every person who put in a submission. The reason we have not progressed with that one, is we are yet to resolve some of the service issues: issues with the Defence Forces that currently have use of the wharf, and of storage facility for fuel. Also, as stated before in parliament, we want to develop a concept plan for the wharf. Until we reach that stage, the wharf is not going to appear in any budget, because we are not just doing things the way the previous government used to do it: ‘Let us do it and we will think about the details later’.
No, we are starting from A to Z. We will not develop unserviced areas, we do not open this area until we find out what is going to happen there. We are going to have an orderly development, and until this happens it is not going to appear in any budget.
Budget 2002-03 – Teacher Housing
Ms LAWRIE to MINISTER for HOUSING
With the government’s commitment to delivering on the recommendations of the Learning Lessons report and the focus that needs to be directed on education in the bush, what does this budget do for teacher housing to make delivering education outcomes in the bush a reality?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Karama for her question. I am also very proud to stand with other ministers in our government and the budget that we have been able to deliver today. The luncheon was excellent. I sat back and watched and talked to people. I have been to a few budget luncheons that the CLP have delivered over the last six years.
Members interjecting.
Mr AH KIT: None of you people were there. But in opposition I did go to a few of these budget luncheons and listen up.
What I walked away with was the perception that this budget was a pleasant budget and it is going to be well received in the business community. In fact, there was one question only to the Chief Minister, as well as a statement about whether the railway should be Adelaide to Palmerston or Adelaide to Darwin, but that was from a tourism industry operator. But there was one question, so that in itself speaks volumes about how the budget was received really well in the business community. The rabblerousers opposite have caused me to digress.
In respect to the question from the member for Karama, you are all aware of the big issues of accommodation we face in recruiting staff to the Territory, particularly to posts in remote areas. The Government Employee Housing program is one of the three key programs provided by Territory Housing Services, and it is this program which we rely on to provide accommodation for teachers, doctors, nurses and other essential staff in the bush. In this year’s budget, I am pleased to be able to announce that we have $11m allocated for government employee housing. This will ensure the construction of 39 new houses and the replacement of 31 properties that need a complete overhaul.
The key focus, which the Martin Labor government has developed with this program, is on housing for teachers. Of the 70 houses that will be built this year, 47 will go to the Department of Employment, Education and Training; 18 of these will be new houses and 29 of them replacement properties. What this means is that 67% of the construction program will be focussed on teacher housing, which is an increase of 23% on that provided by the previous government. The 47 houses which will be provided for teacher housing in this one financial year is nearly equivalent to the number provided by the previous government in the last three financial years of their incumbency. This is in keeping with our commitment to address the recommendations of Learning Lessons, the independent review of indigenous education in the Northern Territory.
Currently, Territory Housing owns 892 properties which are leased to various agencies. It also head leases 206 private properties, adding to the stock of housing available to Territory public servants. Over half of the stock in remote areas is in the smaller Aboriginal communities.
This program also has another important function. Sometimes a department may change its staffing profile in a region and we may find one of the government employee houses vacant. In such an instance, the property then becomes available to local industry or the community sector for industry welfare housing. This gives the government the opportunity to support local business and community groups. The houses are leased on the understanding that if government requires them in the future, when the lease expires the property must return to departmental use.
The Government Employee Housing program is on track and supported by the Martin Labor government, and we will continue to move forward to implement those recommendations of Learning Lessons.
Budget 2002-03 – Health Allocation
Mr BURKE to TREASURER
Madam Speaker, I refer the Treasurer to Budget Paper No 2, page 80. Much has been said by yourself about the uniform presentation and format as a means to provide a basis for meaningful comparison of government’s financial results and projections. In that context, I am finding it difficult, firstly, to make a comparison with previous budgets - but I guess that will come out in the estimates process. With regard to figure 19 on page 80, can you advise this House why, under Health, as a meaningful comparison with the previous expenditure, that expenditure on Health has actually reduced by $5.376m from $432.696m to $427.320m? Does that reflect a blow-out in the departmental outcomes and the new figure is a reflection of the true budgetary allocation?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, certainly not. The figures that we provided this morning, with the increase of $20m going to Health and the estimates for the previous year, are absolutely accurate. What the Opposition Leader is not understanding is different accounting methods and, particularly in this budget, the difference between accrual and cash. The question from the member for Drysdale simply misunderstood that too. We are dealing with two accounting methods. There are different calculations involved and the totals are also different. The detail, referring to page …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: This is a serious issue. I am not saying it is easy. I am a Treasurer of one year and I have found coming to terms - and I would not pretend I have yet - with the difference between cash and accrual and the new presentation framework is difficult. Have no doubt about that, it is difficult.
Let me say, it is very important that we are moving to an accrual framework. It looks at our assets and our liabilities in a much more comprehensive way than simply a cash framework. Every other jurisdiction has moved this way, and it is important that we do. We know why the previous government was reluctant: they tried to avoid the fact that we had unfunded employee liabilities of $1.4bn - tried to avoid it and simply said: ‘We will not even consider it’. Under accrual accounting, it must be considered.
We are all going to have to learn to come to terms with it. Our agencies are doing so, and I am pleased to see that Treasury will have training for all of us to be able to come to terms with the difference between accrual and cash accounting. I want to commend Treasury, because these budget papers are the equivalent of doing two budgets. To do that in this time frame has been an extraordinary amount of work, and I congratulate Treasury for that.
If we go to page 19, the figure that the Leader of the Opposition is referring to …
Mr Burke: Page 80.
Ms MARTIN: Sorry, figure 19 on page 80 of Budget Paper No 2. The 2001-02 figure includes capital items for the fit-out of the Alice Springs Hospital. There you are: simple.
What we have done in this budget paper, and I take every one, while I am on my feet …
Mr Dunham: So it is less. Less fit-out money this year.
Ms MARTIN: It is an answer. Okay? It is an answer, and it explains it. But I say: compare this budget paper - this is now Budget Paper No 3, the agency budget papers. If you compare that with Budget Paper No 2 that we dealt with in the past, the major variations are explained, every time, against every agency. For this opposition: this book is explaining many of those variations, most of the ones with significant figures against them, and the detail in here is extraordinary. So this is budgeting Labor government style, it is budgeting fiscal integrity and transparency and style. I think you guys will be struggling, we have given you as much information as we can. We will give you the training programs, we will help you out on this. We will get you to learn to come to terms with cash and accrual, total government sector, public, non-financial, financial corporations, all those sectors will help you through it.
However, these figures, unlike the ones that we used to get from you, have been done by Treasury. Let me tell you, the bottom line is Treasury’s as well. Have confidence.
Mr STIRLING (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that further questions be placed on the Question Paper.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016