2003-05-27
Budget 2003-04 – Taxes and Charges
Mr BURKE to TREASURER
Treasurer, you said in your budget speech that there are no new taxes in this budget. I refer you to Budget Paper No 1, your budget speech, page 7, Revenue Measures, towards the bottom of the page:
- … from today the assessment of stamp duty on changes in the ownership of companies and trusts that hold land in the Territory will align the stamp duty consequences of indirect and direct acquisitions of interests in land.
Treasurer, is this not a land tax? Is this not a new tax? What are the consequences of your new land tax in the additional rates of duty that will apply?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. To suggest that this is a new tax would be to put a case that there is no stamp duty applying on transfer of property between people, which is an absolute nonsense. We come to this from a very clear question of equity. The question that confronted us, and myself as Treasurer, was: is it fair for Joe Punter, who purchases a property in the northern suburbs, or anywhere in the Northern Territory for that matter, for $250 000 to $300 000 depending on the value of the property, , and has to pay stamp duty for the transfer of that property of, perhaps, up to $9000. However, at the same time, we were aware of a situation where a company buys another company, and among the assets of that company bought is a hotel in Darwin valued at $15m. Because of the nature of the current arrangements, the stamp duty accrued to the Northern Territory as a result of the purchase of that $15m hotel in Darwin is $480.
The question I asked myself was: is it fair that a big company can buy another big company and, included in their assets is a $15m hotel in Darwin and they pay $480 stamp duty to the Northern Territory government while, at the same time, Joe Punter, buying a house in the northern suburbs, pays in the order of $5000 to $8000. ‘Is this equitable?’, I and Cabinet asked. We decided it was not.
We have a view that, wherever taxes apply in the Territory, they are under constant review, from the point of view of how much and where should government lessen the load over time. Clearly, it would be that, along with all other taxes, you look at every tax that you raise regarding equity and whether it can be reduced. If we are ever going to be in a position to be able to reduce the impost on Joe Punter buying a house anywhere in the Northern Territory, we have to look at how we would do that. It did not seem fair to us that big business - really big business, in this case, owning a $15m hotel - was able to get through the net, paying $480. If they were brought into the net, then there is a bigger revenue base and you may be in a better position in the future to look at reducing stamp duties across the board.
Budget 2003-04 – Economic Management
Ms LAWRIE to TREASURER
The Martin Labor government’s commitment to growing jobs and sound economic management is well established through successive Labor budgets. Treasurer, can you please inform the House how today’s budget sets out the framework for government to accomplish these goals?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Karama for her question. You do not have an opportunity, obviously, when you are delivering the budget to put it in the right context, but this gives me a chance. I felt proud of the honour when I delivered this budget on behalf of Territorians today because it is a great budget, despite what the opposition may have to say about it. It is a government that will deliver on jobs and safer communities. It delivers on tax cuts in a responsible and responsive fashion, and it supports Territory business. The budget contains no new taxes, despite what the Leader of the Opposition would have us believe from his question earlier.
At the same time, underpinning all of this, is the government’s continued commitment to fiscal responsibility in reducing deficit and heading towards that elusive balanced and beyond balanced budget - surplus budget - when we will, for the first time, be able to do something about that enormous debt burden left to us by our predecessors.
As well as meeting that commitment, I am very pleased with the way the government has tracked against its deficit reduction strategy. We estimated that the former government left us with a $139m deficit, and we returned a bottom line of $83m, an improvement of $56m - no mean feat. This financial year 2002-03, we projected a deficit of $94m. The reports now suggest that we will come in at around $31m - another saving on the bottom line of $63m that does not find its way through to debt, unlike our predecessors. The way we are tracking the future is very important but, at the same time as we have managed that, we have also managed to increase those key priority areas of the Martin Labor government: education, health and police. That is why that fiscal discipline and responsibility that we have maintained has been so important, because this allows us to do those things that Territorians expect governments to do.
In looking forward, 1300 construction jobs are not very far away when they start the LNG plant at Wickham Point later this year. We would expect to see increases in apprenticeships, and we have put extra money into vocational education and training for that. We are holding a total infrastructure program of $434m this financial year. That is only $5m below the record level of the total infrastructure program of $439m in 2002-03.
Regarding those reductions and tax cuts, payroll tax comes down from 6.3% to 6.2%, in line with our pre-election commitment that we would seek to reduce, over time, the payroll tax rate to those of the neighbouring states of South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland. I note that Western Australia has bounced theirs up in their budget.
Madam Speaker, we do care about the cost of living on families and we are maintaining a spend of around $127m this financial year 2003-04, to try to keep the cost of living down as far as possible. It is a budget that delivers on a broad range of fronts and, apart from the opposition, I have not had anyone in my ear complaining yet.
Budget 2003-04 - Duty on Sale of Small Business
Mr REED to TREASURER
I wish to pursue further the question the Leader of the Opposition asked. Will the Treasurer explain in more detail how the new arrangements that he alluded to will impact on, say, a small business, and the current rate that applies to the sale of a small business - say, something up to $1m? What is the current rate that has to be paid in duty and, under his new regime, what will the new rate be? What is he going to tell the Property Council tomorrow in relation to those new rates? Will he now stop holding back this information and come forth with the full details rather than the brief and vague description that he has given us thus far?
ANSWER
Well, I am not sure it is so vague. Madam Speaker, the principle I clearly explained was all about equity. The situation as it existed in relation to the big transfer of the purchase of the $15m hotel inside a series of acquisitions, of which that was just one is that, the way the scheme is structured at the moment, it would have attracted approximately a 0.6% rate in the land rich provision as they stand. The land value had to be more than 60% of the overall purchase of the transaction going through, so the 60% provision goes. How it is structured will clearly be explained in budget papers. It is a simple case: if it is over $500 000 it will attract stamp duty.
Budget 2003-04 –Reduction in Taxes
Mr BONSON to TREASURER
The Martin Labor government is committed to lightening the load of Territorians. Can the Treasurer please inform the House how the government has been able to achieve this outcome?
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, did you hear the question? Member for Millner, would you like to repeat that question.
Mr STIRLING: Yes, I was a bit distracted, I would like the question again. Thank you, Madam Speaker, for your indulgence.
Mr BONSON: The Martin Labor government is committed to lightning the load for Territorians. Can the Treasurer please inform the House how the government has been able to achieve this outcome?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Millner for his question, because this budget is very much a case of lightening the load for Territorians. We recognise that the past two years have been pretty tough. There has been a series of external events impacting on the Territory across the board, none of which have made things any easier for people. Anything we can do as a government to reduce the back pocket burden on Territorians, we are very keen to do.
In lightening the load, the $90 registration Temporary Budget Improvement Levy is to cease from 1 July 2003.
Mr Burke interjecting.
Mr STIRLING: It is instructive, because I have seen a press release from the Leader of the Opposition saying this was an unnecessary and vindictive tax. Let me go to why this burden was placed on Territorians in the first place.
When we were elected in August 2001 and sworn in 10 days later, one of our early meetings was with the then Under Treasurer, Ken Clarke. The budget had only been passed some weeks earlier by the then Treasurer, the member for Katherine, with a projected deficit of some $12m. The opening words of Mr Ken Clarke to the newly elected and sworn in Cabinet was that the budget was in an unsustainable position. I said: ‘Mr Under Treasurer, how can this be? This budget passed through this parliament some weeks ago with a $12m deficit’. He said: ‘I have to tell you it is over $100m and I do not know what that bottom line is’. At that stage, arrangements were made with one Professor Percy Allan. He worked very closely with Treasury over the succeeding weeks until we got a bottom line of about $139m deficit.
That is why that levy was put in place because, faced with the burden of debt that they had accumulated over many years of deficits, we could simply, as a government, never have been able to move forward on any of our initiatives.
Ninety thousand car owners in the Northern Territory welcome the removal of this levy; it was to be in place for three years, from November 2001 to November 2004. It is due to our fiscal responsibility that we have been able to take this levy off 18 months earlier than we expected to do. We have been able to deliver that dividend to Territorians because, unlike our predecessors, we keep an eye on the bottom line. The Northern Territory will now have the lowest registration cost for a small vehicle in Australia, and the second lowest for a standard six-cylinder family car.
I mentioned before that the payroll tax reductions are going down, in line with our commitment, from 6.4% to 6.3%, which will affect 1400 firms in the Northern Territory at a cost of $1.5m. So, if you add the $8.4m from the $90 registration Temporary Budget Improvement Levy on the one hand, to the $1.5m from the loss of revenue to the government from reducing the payroll tax rate, $10m is going back to the pockets of Territory families and businesses.
The introduction of a threshold for property leases and franchise will benefit around 450 Territory businesses, about half of the current total number of payees of that tax. The threshold of $30 000 means those small, locally-owned Territory businesses will benefit most, and it is a direct cut in the cost of doing business in the Territory. It is another, probably small, but burdensome and nuisance-like tax to small business that they will be glad to wave away. The increase in the stamp duty threshold for hiring business benefits a further 34 businesses in the Territory. We think that the business world, particularly small business, and indeed Territorians at large, will welcome each of those initiatives as good news for all Territorians.
Budget 2003-04 – Taxes and Charges
Mr REED to TREASURER
Madam Speaker, my question is again about the Treasurer’s new land tax. I will give him a specific example to which he can respond. If we have a …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! There is no new tax in the budget. The Treasurer has said so, and the member is being dishonest.
Madam SPEAKER: Resume your seat. There is no point of order. Good try.
Mr REED: This new tax is land tax, Madam Speaker. I will give the Treasurer a specific example of a mum and dad business worth $1m, and they bring in another partner who wants to invest in the Territory. If the business is worth $1m, currently, isn’t the duty payable 0.6%, equalling some $6000? 0.6% is as far as you got in your last answer, Treasurer.
Mr Stirling: No. That is not true. You have it wrong.
Mr REED: Under your new land tax, Treasurer, will it not be a fact that there will be two duties to be paid: one will be 0.6% on the $400 000 of the business of the $1m, of $2400, and another tax - your new land tax - will be 5.4% of the $600 000 value of the land owned by that business, which equals $30 000, which means that a new investor will have to find $30 000 to invest in the Territory? Is this friendly to business, Treasurer?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I will try to be patient. I will take the former Treasurer through this slowly, but it is a bit difficult if you start from the wrong premise, which he has, because he is jumping to conclusions and he does not quite understand. I will take him through it slowly.
What we are trying to do is to ensure that there is equity with direct asset purchases so that big business acquisitions are paid on the same basis as householders. At the moment, we have up to 5.4% duty on a normal direct transfer of land, but only 0.6% if it is indirectly transferred by way of sale of shares or units. The application of the current law is a little unclear, and I give this example: a large hotel purchased at a cost of $15m, raised $480 for the Territory government, whereas $810 000 would have been payable had it been a direct acquisition.
A home buyer pays $6800 on a $200 000 home. It is $3159 for the first home buyer, or $5300 for the principal place of residence. The land rich scheme changes under this 60% land rich test. The current land rich scheme is triggered where they acquire 50% or more - that is, a majority interest - of the shares in the company that is not quoted on the stock exchange, and the company owns land in the Territory valued at $500 000 or more, and all land owned by the company comprises 60% or more in value of its assets. This is the 60% land rich test. This land-holder proposal removes that 60% land rich test in the first place. The 60% threshold will still apply for pre—1 July 2003 acquisitions. There is no change intended retrospectively.
The land rich provisions may be triggered where a person acquires a majority interest - that is 50% or more - of the interest in a company. The duty payable on the same proportion of the value of the company’s land as the proportion of interest acquired - if they purchase 70% of the land holding company, duty will apply to 70% of the value of the land. Majority interests can be acquired through either a single acquisition straight out, or a series of acquisitions made over a period of three years. Additional acquisitions in the company by a person who already holds a majority interest will also be picked up.
Acquisitions of interest in companies or trusts that are quoted on a recognised financial market, such as the Australian Stock Exchange, will continue to be excluded from land rich stamp duty. Land rich stamp duty will apply to a subsequent acquisition of interest, where the entity is unquoted at the time of acquisition and a majority interest has been acquired or increased as a result of that acquisition. For example, if 80% of a company’s shares are acquired when it was quoted, and the remaining 20% is acquired when the company is unquoted, duty will apply to the 20% acquisition unquoted. The current legislation is unclear as to whether the full 100% is subject to duty or no duty is payable.
There is an exception to all of this, and that is the family farm. The Northern Territory has a family pastoral land exemption for direct transfers of pastoral land between family members. This exemption has a number of conditions to prevent abuse. The no consideration party applies to descendants, not ascendants, and includes siblings, de factos and step relations.
The current land rich provisions have exemptions for all primary property, so the exemption has been aligned such that the direct transfer rules apply to land rich transactions. That is the example I have before me, and it is on the record now for you to go back and study. It is a question of equity. Honestly, we do not see it fair that a major company can walk through the Territory and pick up a huge asset, such as a hotel worth $15m, and pay $480 in stamp duty to the Territory, where Joe Punter, when buying the family home is up for - as I said, depending on the purchase price - anywhere between $4000 and $8000. This is not equitable and we will address it.
Budget 2003-04 - Initiatives to Address Antisocial Behaviour
Mr KIELY to CHIEF MINISTER
The budget delivered this morning provided significant funding for the delivery of jobs and safer communities. I am somewhat disappointed that the member for Drysdale failed to grasp the significance of the first Stirling budget in regard to these issues. Can the Chief Minister please outline initiatives in the budget to address antisocial behaviour and deliver safer communities for all Territorians?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Sanderson. This is an important question. The budget delivered this morning had three headlines to it: jobs, safer communities and tax cuts. I will talk about one critical element of that: safer communities.
Mr Dunham interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: It is quite offensive that the member for Drysdale keeps prattling on, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: The issue of itinerancy and antisocial behaviour in the Territory goes to the heart of our community. We are aspiring to have safe communities, even though we are having the level of antisocial behaviour that has grown right across the Territory in the last 27 years and more, with nothing done under the previous government. If you went to our community and said: ‘What did the CLP do in government about antisocial behaviour, and the disruption and the concern it brought to our communities?’, they would probably think a little and say: ‘I can remember one Chief Minister who said the best thing to do is monster and stomp’. There were no funds allocated, there was lots of hot air and rhetoric, but nothing was done.
I am proud to stand here today and say that, in this budget, there is a significant allocation of $5.25m to complement funds that are already being spent, which were allocated in previous budgets. We have increased in this budget, our capacity to tackle what is a serious issue of community safety. This is not just about tackling it in Darwin and Palmerston, but about tackling the issue of antisocial behaviour right across the Territory - in Nhulunbuy, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine. It is a major issue for our communities, and affects ordinary members of the community, with a direct impact on our ability to do business.
These are not only short term measures, but longer term. We have seen some of them put in place already. They will range across issues of implementing our Summary Offences Act, which is a tough measure as well. There are tough measures and longer term measures. Have no doubt about it, when we start seeing more community patrols, we will start seeing more ability for those who have serious alcohol problems getting the rehabilitation they need. We are looking at the range of low-cost accommodation options we need. I commend the Top End Aboriginal leaders, who came to town a couple of weeks ago and went, camp by camp, around Darwin and Palmerston and said to people who had been living there for, who knows how long: ‘It is time to go home’. That return to home strategy is a very important component of what we are doing within this $5.25m allocated today, also matching the funds we have previously allocated.
There is no easy fix to this; no easy fix at all. However, for the first time we have seen significant allocation of dollars and a commitment from a government to tackle what is a serious issue right across the Territory. Just look at the difference: lots of hot air, rhetoric, and doing nothing from the previous government, and with this government, the hallmark is action.
Container Deposit Legislation
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for ENVIRONMENT and HERITAGE
My question is a non-budget question and may be of interest to you, Madam Speaker. Minister, could you please explain, firstly, why your government abandoned container deposit legislation earlier this year after a briefing was given to me by departmental officers which indicated such legislation was possible? Secondly, could you please report on the recent meeting you attended where, I believe, a national container deposit legislation proposal was on the agenda, detailing your government’s views at that meeting in respect of CDL in the Northern Territory and/or a national CDL scheme?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I welcome the question. Indeed, I did attend a meeting of state, territory and Commonwealth environment and heritage ministers in Melbourne last Friday. Certainly, CDL was on the agenda, along with the important issue of plastic bags, which had quite a focus as well.
There was a presentation given by the South Australian government on CDL, and I was very interested in that presentation and questions afterwards. The South Australian Minister for the Environment, John Hill, in response to a question, actually admitted to the assembled ministers that the South Australian model of CDL was, indeed, very vulnerable to challenge on taxation issues. In fact, he pointed to a previous case which had exposed that vulnerability. That indicated to me the importance of a national approach. That was the consensus of opinion of all the state and territory ministers around the table that, because taxation issues are implicit in CDL, without a national approach to CDL it just would not work. That only reinforces to me the importance and the necessity of a national approach to implement container deposit legislation.
Madam Speaker, I know that you, as the member for Braitling, have advocated a particular model of CDL which mirrors the South Australian model. You, as the member for Braitling, have put forward the argument that those taxation implications are non-existent in that particular model. Well, it became very evident to me that even the South Australian Minister for the Environment has laid on the table the taxation implications that are implicit in CDL.
In the next day or so, I expect to be making some announcements about a litter abatement strategy for the Northern Territory that I believe will be very effective. It address issues on a regional basis, and the also litter stream, because it became apparent, with the focus on the whole issue about plastic bags and the fact that beverage containers consist somewhere between 10% and 20% of the litter stream, that there is a wide issue in terms of litter and litter abatement. This government is committed to addressing those issues.
Madam SPEAKER: I know I do not have to remind the minister that he said he would allow me to give him a briefing this week.
Budget 2003-04 - Accommodation Support Services for Itinerants
Mr ELFERINK to CHIEF MINISTER
Madam Speaker, my question is on the tail end of the answer she just gave. The Chief Minister assured this House that $5.25m was going to be spent on accommodation support services for itinerants who come to our major centres. How do you expect to curtail the movement of itinerants towards the major centres when you make the major centres effectively more attractive to them? It is a coming into town strategy, not a going home strategy.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the member for Macdonnell always has curious questions. Very important issues need to be dealt with when we are tackling antisocial behaviour and the problem of itinerancy around the Territory.
One important point I would like to make very, very clearly is that Aboriginal people who live in remote areas of the Territory are very welcome to visit towns, for whatever reasons they have. They can visit for shopping, football, medical health, talking to friends, whatever, as any of us travel round the Territory and do those things. The fundamental issue, when you visit towns - and this is exactly what we are working with the Larrakia about for Darwin - is that there is specific behaviour for town. It is not sleeping in the streets, drinking, harassing or begging. This is the change that we are going to be putting in place, different to what was tolerated by the previous government. Let me make the point very clear; there are issues of how we grow jobs in remote parts of the community, which are critical, and certainly not dealt with by the previous government. The critical issues of growing those jobs, making our communities more sustainable, and building their capacity have been addressed in this budget today with funds there to really put some effort into doing that.
This is not just a one-faceted strategy. This is about saying: ‘When you visit our towns, there are behaviours’. Quite rightly pointed out by the member for Macdonnell, half of this $5.25m funding will be used in looking at low cost accommodation options, because if people are going to come to town, they need to be able to access appropriate accommodation. You would have to agree that, in somewhere like Darwin and Palmerston, that is simply not available right now. The funds are there for the tackling of antisocial behaviour, and the issues associated with that will be addressed. Hopefully, the money we put in this budget will not have to be replicated in the next as we will see that problem starting to be tackled. I make the point very clearly that Territorians, no matter where they live, are entitled to visit whatever towns they like.
Budget 2003-04 – Police Numbers
Ms SCRYMGOUR to MINISTER for POLICE, FIRE and EMERGENCY SERVICES
Our government is about providing safer communities which is a trademark of the budget. It is an issue vital to my electorate and all Territorians. Can the minister please outline how this budget is supporting Territory police to fight crime?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Arafura for her question. The budget, indeed, does deliver on our commitment to deliver safer communities, and on our pre-election commitment to increase the establishment of our Northern Territory Police Force by 50 additional police officers.
$1.4m of new money in this budget is going to increase our establishment of police officers this year by 10, well on the way to the total increase of 50 that we committed to at the last election. In the recruitment program that we have in place at the moment, the 2003 calendar year will see the largest intake of police officers that the Northern Territory has seen, going back for 10 years - probably the largest single increase in any one year for many, many years.
Twenty-eight new police officers graduated on 8 May 2003. I was very pleased and proud as police minister to welcome those new officers to our police force in the Territory. Currently, we have an additional 36 trainees as part of Squad 73/03 who commenced training in February 2003 and will graduate in June. Squad 74/03 will have 35 trainees, who will commence training on 10 June 2003. That is 99 new police recruits who will be added to our police service in this calendar year with more recruit squads to come.
We have 99 police officers coming on board this year, and additional funding of $1.4m to build that by an additional 10. Just running through the numbers to see how significant this is, in 1995 we recruited 64 officers, in 1997 - 76, in 1998 - 71, in 1999 - 25. We did not recruit too many in 1999. In 2000 - 54, in 2001 - 60, in 2002 - 55, and 99 this financial year. So, the money is there.
As well as increased money for front-line policing, we have additional money for capital works for police. I am sure our rural members will be pleased that the capital works program has $1.4m this year for police and fire services at Humpty Doo, as well as station upgrades at Ali Curung and four other bush stations to ensure that we comply with our requirements under the Black Deaths in Custody report.
One of the major issues facing the police operation - and it has taken a while to get to the bottom of this, like a lot of issues with the police budget, but they are starting to wash through now - is that there has been funding for the police online system, PROMIS. When that system was implemented a few years ago, all that was built into the budget was $300 000 for maintenance of that system. The real cost of maintaining that system is around $1.5m a year. We have funded that maintenance cost. What that means is that $1.2m a year is actually back available for operational police, because support for that system is now fully funded and will allow for further upgrades to the system.
We have also included a budget boost of $3m this year to fix an anomaly - and a pretty underhanded one at that - where the police operations budget was under-funded to the tune of $3m a year. This has been growing since 1998 when positions were civilianised …
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, they do not like to hear this. The previous police minister will know exactly where this is coming from because, every year as part of the budget bid, police commissioners have asked for this money and it has been knocked back. Since 1998, when the police civilianised a number of personnel, they had actually never received the funding for them, so the money had to be taken from the operational police budget. This has meant that the police, on an annual basis, have not been able to recruit up to establishment.
There is more to come on this. The further we dig into those files at Berrimah, the more on the hook the previous …
Mr Burke interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: … and I look forward to a fulsome debate about police numbers in the Northern Territory because those dusty files at Berrimah are very revealing about the police budget. There are some interesting debates to come.
As well as that, we have committed as a government in terms of the Jim O’Sullivan assessment of police resources that, if Mr O’Sullivan identifies that additional resources are needed for police personnel, then this government will meet that call.
There is money to fix some deficiencies that have been built into the base of the police budget for many, many years by the previous government. Significant funding of $3m in capital works will go back to the operational services for police to allow additional police officers on the street to tackle the crime problems. This government and I are committed to providing police with the resources they need to do a very difficult and important job in the Northern Territory.
Budget 2003-04 - Health and Community Services
Mr BURKE to TREASURER
Treasurer, in your budget, you make provision of 2.5% for inflation. In your Health and Community Services budget, you also forecast a generous increase of $14m in that budget, which is 2.5%. Therefore, your increase in that budget is only in line with the CPI, which is normal procedure for departments to maintain the normal increase in costs they have.
You have also announced in your budget a whole range of initiatives in Health and Community Services. Treasurer, given that your budget allocation only matches CPI, what programs will have to be cut to meet your new initiatives?
ANSWER
The simple answer, Madam Speaker, is: no programs. It does not surprise me that the Leader of the Opposition misreads the budget. I tell you why it does not surprise me. When he was sitting in the number one spot as Chief Minister, with the relationship that he had with budget matters, you would think he would have some responsibility overall for budget matters. However, I believe it was very distant. There was a big distance between whatever went on in budget-related matters and the Chief Minister. Either he distanced himself from it, did not understand it, was not interested or, if he did, he is quite as deceitful as his Treasurer.
Where he is misreading it is the level of increase that he is attributing this government to putting into health. The figure is over 4% in the own revenue that the Northern Territory government is putting in to help. That is not including the impact of the Australian Health Care Agreement with the Northern Territory, yet to be signed, being factored into the budget. However, in signing up to the Australian Health Care Agreement, the increase is around the 4% level, so that is way away from the 2.2% inflation, and it is on top of the $15m that was provided to the health budget earlier this year.
Budget 2003-04 – Economic Development
Mr McADAM to MINISTER for TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE
Economic development and jobs are important to the Territory. Minister, can you advise this government’s commitment to jobs and growth as outlined in budget 2003-04?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Barkly for his very good question. Last year, I was very proud to announce the highest ever capital works and infrastructure budget in the history of the Territory. We are very proud, once again, to announce the second-highest capital works and infrastructure budget in the Territory - $434m, my friends. This means a lot of work out there, a lot of vital infrastructure to be constructed for the Territory.
In the first two years of our government, we spent $900m - $102m more than the last two years of the Burke government. Let me tell you more of what they did. They made a lot of announcements. What they did not tell us was how big the revote was. They did not have any money to do any of their projects they promised, because the revote was so high there was no money left. In 2003, we had a $157m revote. That was still high, and we brought it down to $119m. That still is too high for me. It is going to go down next year to $102m. That will leave a lot of money to do the projects we promised today, and will be promising, because a lot of these projects have not been done for years and years in the Territory.
I will outline a few of the projects that we are going to do this year: $4m for the Parap Primary School Stage 2; $3m for remote schools upgrade; $2.5m for Traeger Park upgrade; $2m for Tanami Road; $2m for the road to Kings Canyon; $1m for the Stokes Hill Wharf Precinct; $3m for preliminary work on the Darwin Convention Centre; $2.2m for the Desert Knowledge Precinct headworks in Alice Springs; and $1.4m set aside for the Police, Fire and Emergency Service facility at Humpty Doo. Why were there projects not done in 26 years of your government? Why was the road to Tanami not sealed? Why was the road to Kings Canyon not sealed? Why did you not upgrade any of the schools in remote areas? Why did you not provide any houses for public servants in the bush? In my previous life, I had to issue condemnation notices under the Health Act for substandard public housing.
Mr Burke: You were in charge of clear water at Lake Bennett, weren’t you?
Mr VATSKALIS: Madam Speaker, that is a very interesting point that the Leader of the Opposition brings up. It was a project that was started by the CLP government and so badly done, that I had a member from the other side telling me that he is going to support me when I bring legislation in to sort it out.
The other thing about the clear water is that he refers to 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999 to May 2001. I recall very well that the CLP government was in power then. I am aware of the comments by the Ombudsman, and I am telling you now that the mess you left the department will be fixed, and will be fixed once and for all and that stuff-up, that fiasco of the CLP government, will never be repeated.
It is a wonderful budget. It is a budget that means jobs, and a lot of work, not only for Darwin, but also south of the Berrimah Line.
Budget 2003-04 - Closure of Commercial Fishing Locations
Mr MALEY to TREASURER
Your colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, gave an oral promise at the Amateur Fishermen’s Association of the Northern Territory AGM that the Labor government would close both the Adelaide River and Bynoe Harbour to commercial fishing. There was a reasonable expectation that that was going to occur fairly quickly. Treasurer, why have you not allocated any money in this budget to pay for that promise?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I understand that there is ongoing discussion regarding these closures. In answer to the question of whether there is funding available in this budget or not - there is always contingency reserves in Treasurer’s Advance, which this government keeps a very close eye on - between the Chief Minister and myself as Treasurer - to make sure that it does not get used up. Therefore, at any time that negotiations, discussions and consultation wind their way through to a satisfactory conclusion and there are resources to be called upon, this government has them in Treasurer’s Advance.
Budget 2003-04 – Initiatives for Tourism
Mr BONSON to MINISTER for TOURISM
All Territorians are aware that our tourism industry provides support for thousands of jobs throughout the Territory economy. The tourism industry has faced significant challenges with international downturn in tourism activity. Could the minister please inform the House of the government’s initiatives for tourism in the budget?
ANSWER
I thank the member for his question. Madam Speaker, we recognise the importance of tourism for the Northern Territory economy. Indeed, it employs 8000 people directly, and probably just as many people indirectly, and contributes somewhere around $2bn to the economy.
It has been hard times for tourism. Our record over the last three to four months, with an extra $1m into our domestic marketing campaign, $500 000 per annum in international marketing, and $600 000 for an Arafura Games rescue package, speak volumes about the way that we are flexible and responsive to our tourism industry. However, tourism relies on more than marketing. It relies on infrastructure and a whole range of things. I am very pleased in the way that capital works and other programs in this budget have tried to give support to the tourism industry and the issues that have been brought forward to me as Minister for Tourism.
It is true - it is common knowledge - that we did not have a lot of new money to spend. However, what we tried to do was to be very strategic, particularly in our capital works program. The member for Casuarina has outlined how large that capital works program is. We have been very targeted in what we have tried to do there. The member for Casuarina has already mentioned $3m preparatory work for the Darwin convention centre. Everyone in this room, and in the tourism industry and business in Darwin, recognises the importance of a convention centre for Darwin. This government is committed to building a convention centre. When I was in Melbourne for the conference I mentioned earlier, I went and had a look at Jeff’s Shed. It is a very grand structure. Ours will be built for the needs of the Territory and of Darwin, but it will be flexible to allow many events to be held at once. It will be a real attraction for Darwin, with $3m, I believe, well spent.
Another $1m is for site works as part of the Stokes Hill Wharf Precinct redevelopment, another important initiative based around the fact that we want more cruise ships coming to Darwin. There is $0.5m for a camp ground revitalisation project at Litchfield National Park, and another $0.5m for the redevelopment of the day use area at Wangi Falls. Litchfield Park is very important for day trips and for tourism out of Darwin.
Regarding aviation and transport, everyone is aware that, along with the Northern Territory Airports, we have jointly funded a position for an Aviation Development Director. I met with Mr Roberts yesterday and we are continuing to put the business case to airlines. I am quietly optimistic and hopeful of a fairly major and significant announcement regarding Central Australia, that I know the member for Araluen will welcome. I cannot really say much more about it right now …
Ms Carney interjecting.
Dr BURNS: Well, you can mock, member for Araluen, but there are some significant developments on the horizon. I am quietly hopeful about those, as they will benefit the Territory immensely.
The member for Casuarina has mentioned some of the initiatives to do with roads. Most significant, of course, is the $3m for the Mereenie Loop Road. That was the first thing, when I went to Alice Springs and met with CATIA, apart from Virgin Blue - which is being done, and I am looking forward to being on the first flight in there in a week or so - the $3m for the Mereenie Loop Road was a priority of CATIA. We are a government that listens to industry; which is responsive and delivers.
Regarding Owen Springs Station, there are a number of significant developments in management and further development. $235 000 will be spent to develop the Alice Springs Cultural Precinct. There are other initiatives, such as putting a senior heritage officer in Alice Springs to look after the wonderful heritage precinct area there.
I am proud to be a member of this government, a minister in this government, and of the budget that we have brought down today and the way it is benefiting the tourist industry. There is $200 000 for significant heritage assets, including the Adelaide River railway area. Here is one that the member for Macdonnell will like: $100 000 for an upgrade of the rim walk at Kings Canyon. For the member for Daly: $60 000 to upgrade the existing picnic area at Gregory National Park, a wonderful area that I visited over Easter.
I could go on about recreational fishing initiatives regarding infrastructure. I heard the question from the member for Goyder. He should remember that that was an election promise of ours to be fulfilled within the term of this government. Both the Chief Minister and I have given an undertaking on that particular election commitment regarding closure of the Adelaide River. There are issues to work through, but do not forget, we also closed the McArthur River. When we were there for community Cabinet we received very positive feedback about the closure of the McArthur River. We promised the closure of the McArthur River and the Adelaide River, within this term of government.
Lake Bennett – Issue of Water Licences
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for LANDS and PLANNING
My question refers to the matter he just raised. Minister, recently I also received a copy of the Ombudsman’s report which highlighted very serious matters in relation to both the issuing of water licences and the risk to public health at Lake Bennett.
As minister for the department responsible for water licences, is any action to be taken against anyone who did not enforce the legislation in relation to awarding of water licences, or anyone who did not supply information required to renew a water licence? Is it now clear whose responsibility it is to monitor water quality? Has a report been finalised, due in February 2003 on this matter, as mentioned in the recommendation to the Ombudsman?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. Certainly, I received a copy of the report myself. The report is investigating the failure by the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment to take action from early 1997 to 2002. I am not very happy about the report, particularly the period when we were in government. My department has accepted all the recommendations of the Ombudsman in his report. For your information, the department was the leading agency in this issue because the water licence issued by the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment and the Health Department had no role to play there, apart from actually receiving a copy of the report. The comment by the Leader of the Opposition about me being in charge of public health issues at Lake Bennett is totally untrue. It was the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, under the leadership of the member for Daly in the beginning, that actually did not follow through for the purpose of the investigation, the testing regime, or even prosecution.
However, we have accepted all those recommendations. I have found them to be strong and the inaction of the department unacceptable. My department has taken measures to rectify the situation immediately. This is not going to happen again, as long as I am the minister of this department.
Budget 2003-04 - Australian Health Care Agreement
Mr REED to TREASURER
In his budget speech today, the Treasurer said that he does not use optimistic revenue assumptions in his budget papers. I ask him, in that context, to explain to members why he has not used the minimum amount of $80m that would flow to the Territory under the Australian Health Care Agreement in compiling the Department of Health and Community Services budget but, rather, has chosen to use the maximum amount of $92m, which the health minister said is unlikely to be achieved because she does not agree with the draft agreement. Is not the reason for using the maximum amount of $92m that, if he had used the $80m, the budget for Health and Community Services would have been $12m under last year’s budget. He has fudged the figures by using the optimistic amount of $92m, in contravention of his own policy?
ANSWER
I thank the former Treasurer for his question. It shows his failure as a Treasurer of the Northern Territory. He is not really any more on top of the game as shadow Treasurer than ever he was while he was Treasurer. How this $12m could be manufactured to produce an increase, when we have already put in $15m in 2002-03, with the $14m increase in the budget before us.
There is a long way to go in discussion and negotiation on the Australian Health Care Agreement. I can say, and he would know, that no state or territory is satisfied with the offer on the table from the Commonwealth minister at this stage. These agreements do take time to work through. I am sure that at some stage in the next three to four months there will be an agreement. It may not be either the $80m or the $92m. You take your chances with these figures, and we do try …
Members interjecting.
Mr STIRLING: I tell you why: because you have volatility in your GST revenue grants in pools to the Northern Territory that these turkeys never had to put up with. They never had to put up with the volatility in the grants from the Commonwealth, particularly the GST revenue grants. They had certainty going forward, certainty that led to a $1.5m surplus you were going to produce in 2000-01. What did you finish with? A $275m deficit, and that was with certainty from the Commonwealth government.
We deal with uncertainty and that is why we are a bit careful about the figures. That is why we will watch closely the outcome of the Health Care Agreement. The other point about being careful is that we will have something up our sleeve if the need comes and we do not get the agreement and the outcome that we need into the future.
Budget 2003-04 - Health and Community Services
Ms LAWRIE to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
The Treasurer today repeated the Martin Labor government’s significant commitment to health and community services. Minister, can you please advise the House of the government’s record commitment to health and community services in this year’s budget?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Karama for her question. I know she is particularly interested in this and has had a strong interest in health for many years.
It is very exciting today to be able to announce that there is $561m going into the health budget. This is an absolute record budget for the Northern Territory in health and community services, an increase of around $14m. The Leader of the Opposition, in an earlier question, suggested that somehow this was not a real increase at all. He failed to take into account that, in fact, we had already put in $15m in February this year, so this is on top of that. We are looking at a very big increase in health and community services.
In fact, since coming to government we have contributed $98m, a very significant increase. I can say that health and community services is no longer suffering from chronic under-funding. We are now looking at a situation where we can prioritise the services in this department, follow the priorities that have been provided to us by the Bansemer Report and move ahead in a positive fashion.
This budget announces $1.57m for employing more nurses in our system. We are on track to employ those 75 nurses that we promised. It also has $900 000 for the first stage of a major upgrade of mental health services in the Northern Territory. This injection will provide a boost to clinical mental health services, and strengthen consumer and carer support provided in the non-government sector. This is the first real increase, particularly recurrent increase, in mental health services for a decade.
There is also additional funding of $400 000 as part of a four-year program to upgrade dental services. Some of this will be directed to increasing the number of dentists in the Territory. The dental services we inherited from the CLP government were nothing short of an embarrassment and a shameful situation for the Northern Territory. It appears that, in 1997, when the Commonwealth removed its funding for dental services throughout Australia, $1m was never returned to the budget of dental services in the Northern Territory. We are beginning to turn that around. This year, we have a commitment of $400 000, and over the next few years, we will be increasing that funding.
One of the most exciting parts of this budget is the commencement of community-based renal dialysis services, with funding of $350 000 in recurrent, and $900 000 in capital, for Palmerston, Galiwinku and Groote Eylandt. The Northern Territory has the highest rates of end-phase renal disease in Australia. It has been a very sad situation that this has occurred in the Northern Territory, and that there have been virtually no services available for these people. We are following the review of my department, and moving services closer to people in their homes. This is wonderful for people living in remote areas. What we are looking at is people in those areas being able to access services for which they would normally have to come into places like Darwin, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek. This is a very significant change for the delivery of renal services in the Northern Territory.
We have also put in additional ongoing funding of $500 000 for a Territory-wide after hours child protection service. Once again, this is a further increase and a commitment by this government to young people in the Northern Territory.
Regarding remote communities, we have put in $300 000 for the introduction of a pilot school breakfast program in remote areas. Too many of our children are suffering from significant malnutrition, and this is one way we can be working with those communities to get those children healthy again, and also back to school.
There is also a commitment of $290 000 to establish a health call centre to provide health advice and referral services. This will be particularly good, given the low numbers of GPs in the Northern Territory. It will be a further way in which we can make a commitment to the people of the Northern Territory that they can have after hours access to people who know something about health and community services in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, this is an excellent budget for health. There will be continued emphasis on ensuring that we come in on budget, and that there will be efficiencies throughout the department. One of the things we have learnt from the past from the CLP is that it is absolutely necessary to make sure that the management in the department and the financial systems are all there. This is all part of the Health and Community Services budget, and I am very proud to have been able to provide $561m for Territorians.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that further questions be placed on the Question Paper.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016