2004-03-30
Electricity Tariff – Commercial Customers
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
Despite PowerWater recording a $45m profit, your government has approved a 40% increase in the cost of power to Tranche 4 businesses. You have now back-flipped from your original decision to stagger this 40% increase over four years to now be increased up to 15 years. Does not this latest back-flip further reinforce that this 40% power increase was not necessary at all, and the costs should have been borne from the $20m dividend your government pocketed from PowerWater?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the charitable thing to say is that the Opposition Leader - and I assuming the entire opposition in all this - simply does not understand the power market and the current situation we face. We are in a competitive market. When the CLP government signed up in 1995 to move towards a competitive market, we all focussed on the fact that competition in our power market would be difficult. Yes, we know it is a difficult market in the Territory. It is not like having competition in a Sydney, Melbourne, or even a Perth market. It is very different. However, in many aspects across the Territory, competition will bring benefits and maybe in some cases we have to wait for the longer term.
It is all very well for the Opposition Leader to ask why we are doing this. You signed up in government because competition is going to work for the Territory. It is going to take management over time. We did have competition for a while in the power market, then NT Power left, so we have experienced some level of competition and we are looking for it again. We are looking for competition in the market and PowerWater will certainly welcome that.
Mr Dunham: Give consumers some relief.
Ms MARTIN: The member for Drysdale says, ‘Give consumers some relief’. The member for Drysdale used to be the Minister for Essential Services. He knows the amount of taxpayers’ dollars that go in to keeping the price of power down around the Territory. Currently, that sum is $42m, plus the $8.6m that goes to subsidising those in Tranche 4, and we will continue to do that for many years to come. The best part of $50m. every year, of taxpayers’ dollars, which we on this side of the House support, and I assume the Opposition supports this as well, goes towards keeping the cost of power down right across the Territory each year. Which member of the opposition, I ask - put your hand up - says we should not be paying that $50m?
Mr Mills: It is not the issue.
Ms MARTIN: It is the issue. It is at the heart of the issue. $50m, a lot of taxpayers’ dollars, going to a very good purpose: subsidising power across the Territory. Yet we have to create the circumstances for competition to come into the market. Those in Tranches 1, 2 and 3 are in that competition market. The CLP signed up to moving those in Tranche 4 to the competition market as well. Those circumstances are also coming into play. We are giving them a soft landing. That is why that subsidy will continue for a long time. We will be looking for competition into the market.
This is a difficult issue for any government. Yes, I say that: it is a difficult issue. We will continue to take those taxpayers’ dollars and make sure that power is affordable across the Territory. It was interesting that no member of the opposition put their hand up and said: ‘Take away the $50m subsidy’.
Mr Mills interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: That is what you are talking about – you want us to take away the $50m subsidy. Do you want to just keep adding to it? $50m is a substantial amount of money. That goes every year towards subsiding those in Tranches 4 and 5, the 5500 small businesses across the Territory. Also, every domestic consumer, every household across the Territory, receives a significant subsidy on power prices. Those power prices for our domestic consumers have been frozen for the last two and half years.
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, we are hearing a lot of lack of truth from the opposition. They know the circumstances of the market and are simply into rhetoric and misleading, which is very distressing to hear . This is responsible government. We are making sure that businesses can work across the Territory, those major subsidies are in place, and we will continue to do that.
Electricity Tariff – Commercial Customers
Mr BONSON to TREASURER
Can the Treasurer advise me what action the government is offering to support the call for business for competition in providing power. What assistance is the government undertaking to keep the price of power down for business?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Millner for his question. It certainly is topical and it gives me a chance to put on the record exactly what government’s response is to the range of representation that my office and, I imagine, other members of government have received, particularly from Tranche 4 customers. Cabinet has made a number of decisions in this area, all aimed at helping business with power prices, in particular, these customers inside Tranche 3.
First, we will be making an offer to the Chamber of Commerce to work with them, to support this business campaign to investigate issues, and the feasibility and practicability of getting competition in the electricity market into the Northern Territory. My office has spoken with the Chamber by phone - there will be a formal letter - asking that we be allowed to support that process and work very closely with them.
There are substantial hurdles to competition in the Northern Territory, and I would imagine members opposite would recognise those, including the cost itself of generating power, the size of the market, and the availability and supply of an energy source. We believe it is a strong signal that we do embrace the principles of competition, notwithstanding that at the time the Northern Territory government moved to it, we had many unanswered questions, and competition will realise benefits, but in the longer term. That is why we are moving, as we are, recognising that competition, at this stage of the Territory’s market size and state of development, does not realise those benefits that other jurisdictions might - although we might leave South Australia out of that, which copped a 25% increase late last year. The Chamber and other businesses have called for another competitor into the market. We are keen to support an analysis, do whatever is necessary, work with the Chamber, and fund that study.
Second, we will extend the time for the introduction of the cost reflectivity for Tranche 4 customers. We have decided that power prices would be staggered in their introduction for Tranche 4 customers. We have removed the annual increases that were proposed, and increases would now occur every two years. That allows certainty for businesses to plan, and to absorb and deal with these prices in their own pricing structure. That means there will be no price adjustment year after year, but one, obviously, on 1 April 2004, none in 2005, 1 April 2006, and so on. Over the next five years alone, that will cost the taxpayer around an extra $42m, or an average of $8.5m per year, to hold those prices down by way of a Community Service Obligation to the Power and Water Corporation.
Third, we will encourage an increased use of energy management programs. Government has an Energy Management Program, and we are looking to run that idea of energy management and energy audits through the Power and Water Corporation in conjunction and cooperation with those customers in Tranche 4. They sometimes reveal much better ways of using power, resulting in a saving on the bill. Sometimes a little extra capital works can go a long way in bringing down extra power savings over time.
These three things - the willingness and the capacity of government to go out there and make that offer, to say we are going to work with you to look for a competitor in the market, to reduce again the impact of the price increases on Tranche 4 customers. They do show that we are serious about our support for business, and I would expect business would be supportive of these moves.
Small business and domestic customers, that is Tranches 5 and 6, will not be open to contestability at this stage. I believe we have until about 2008 before that question is revisited. However, in the case of Tranche 4, the time frame that was provided to the National Competition Council early in the piece has been adhered to - and we saw what happened to Queensland. When Queensland suddenly decided that they did not like that time frame that was previously supplied and agreed to by the National Competition Council, it cost them $36.5m to change their mind and say: ‘We are not taking this group of customers through to market contestability’. We believe we have stepped through the process pretty well. We have heard the voice of business and the representation made to us over these increases, and we have acted again to take into account those concerns.
Electricity Tariff – Commercial Customers
Mr MILLS to TREASURER
Notwithstanding the answer to the previous question, Treasurer, will there be an increase of 40% to the cost of doing business for Tranche 4 users in the Northern Territory?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. There was never a suggestion that it was 40% across the board. Depending on the location, the size of the business, and the profile use of the power, I suppose, that was an estimate that the effect of going to cost-reflective pricing would fall anywhere between 20% up to a maximum of 40%. Originally, Cabinet said CPI plus 3% to move toward contestability, with the first increase on 1 April 2004. The original Cabinet decision called for a review of that, probably around November or later this year.
What we have done brings two things of benefit to business. The first is to reduce the impact by coming in every second year rather than every year, and also to provide that certainty which would not have been there with a Cabinet review of the impact, and the decision, yet to be made, in April 2005, not to be made until November this year, would have created and added further uncertainty for business. Therefore, we believe, and I am sure, they will welcome that added certainty that this decision gives them and the fact that we are moving to reduce the impact over time.
In relation to those areas that might make 40% - and I am not to know, as Treasurer, the identity and profile of the businesses and organisations in any of the Tranches; be they 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6. However, commonsense would tell you that there would be certain users, perhaps in more remote parts of the Territory, where the cost of getting power to that customer is incredibly high - much higher than Darwin - which means that cost reflectivity would show that they would be the ones that would be pushing that absolute limit of 40%.
It may be that no business or organisation in that upper end of the 40% would survive such a cost impact. It would not matter if you did it over four years or 10 years. The fact is, if you continued to drive that they had to get to cost reflectivity at some point, it might mean the end of that business. That is a separate question inside this whole Tranche 3 move. It is one thing where the upper limit might be 18% over eight, nine, 10 or 11 years that that is achievable by a business; 40% even over 10, 12 or 14 years, and another business in another part of the Territory may simply never get there. Therefore, they are questions for the future. The fact is, we have listened to the voice of business. We were concerned at the impact of these year-on-year increases and have acted accordingly.
Indigenous Land Use Agreement in Alice Springs
Mr KIELY to CHIEF MINISTER
Can the Chief Minister provide details of the recent decision by native title holders in Alice Springs to enter into an Indigenous Land Use Agreement with the Northern Territory government, and what this means for this release of residential land in the town?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Sanderson for this terrific question, Madam Speaker, because this is a time to celebrate. I am delighted to report that, earlier this month, on 19 March, in Alice Springs, native title holders …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Ms MARTIN: Not interested! The native title holders in Alice Springs instructed the Lhere Artepe Aboriginal Corporation to enter into an Indigenous Land Use Agreement with the Territory government. This is an historic agreement; it will enable blocks at Larapinta to be released for residential development in Alice Springs. The paper work has been completed and the details for formal signing and celebration are being worked through with Lhere Artepe.
Mr Maley interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Despite the churlishness - the member for Goyder really does not understand these issues anyway - this will be a cause for celebration in Alice Springs. The staged release of the 85 initial blocks at Larapinta will be the first significant release of land in the town for a decade; in fact, more than a decade. Alice Springs has been suffering from the land lock it was left in by the past government for years and years. This government made a commitment to getting land released by working with, instead of against, native title holders, and it has worked. We said we would enter into a process of consultation and negotiation, not confrontation. It is a principle and a process that members sitting opposite, and we can hear from their comments, have not grasped. After ten years of refusing to deal in any meaningful way with native title holders, their only answer to dealing with land issues …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: … is to cry out, and we hear their cries now, ‘Let us move to compulsory acquisition’. Let me tell you what a compulsory acquisition would mean. This ‘handful of glass beads’ approach that the opposition still sticks to, still …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: … confrontation, not working together. It would mean being tied up in the courts for years. The opposition are good at it; they did it for so long.
Mr Henderson: Feed the lawyers.
Ms MARTIN: Yes, the Leader of Government Business says, ‘Feed the lawyers’, and that is what the opposition did in government, and who knows what the legal fees might be. I am amazed that some members opposite still do not, in this whole issue, grasp what native title rights mean. These are rights that people have fought for, and for the native title holders in Alice Springs, it has been a difficult process, to negotiate, to extinguish their native title rights, and to give up those rights at the Larapinta subdivision.
I congratulate the native title holders and the Lhere Artepe for reaching this historic decision which will see native title holders play a stronger role in the future development of Alice Springs. They reached that decision in the face of what became relentless negativity and criticism. I will quote from an editorial last Friday in the Centralian Advocate; it was good to see a very astute assessment of what had been going on. It is a good editorial. It is headed ‘Land deal is victory for all’, and to quote from the third last paragraph:
The government’s commitment to a consultative approach - rather than confrontational - has delivered where years of CLP politicking could not.
We, on this side of the House, are truly delighted. We congratulate the Lhere Artepe, the native title holders. It will allow Alice Springs, for the first time in more than a decade, to have a significant land release. This is something the churlish members on the other side of the House should be celebrating.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: I am pleased, as the member for Braitling, to hear that bit of news.
ATSIC - Abolition
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
Do you believe that the peak indigenous body, ATSIC, should be abolished?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, this is a question that is very relevant today. The leader of the federal opposition, Mark Latham, has made a statement that Labor would abolish ATSIC and ATSIS, and has made a substantial contribution to indigenous policy. In terms of indigenous policy, and an organisation like the former ATSIC, and now ATSIS, and what will be done for the future, we need a direction …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, a substantial review of ATSIC was carried out over the last year, and a significant member of the three-person review was Bob Collins. Issues about the future of ATSIC have been substantially canvassed and that report is with the federal government and has been released publicly.
From the point of view of where we are in the Territory, we have been looking very strongly at how we better deliver services in remote areas to indigenous Territorians.
Mr Mills: So you support Latham?
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, if the Opposition Leader asks a question, you would think he would have a little courtesy in waiting for the answer.
Mr Baldwin: Yes or no?
Mr Mills: Question - answer.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I am answering the question. What I am saying is …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: If the opposition does not want an answer, I can sit.
Mr Mills: Well, we are not getting one.
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition members, fewer interjections, please.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, the issue of how we deliver services into remote communities is a key one for the Territory. At Wadeye over the last year, we have been looking at how we can better coordinate different service providers at different levels of government. We have seen a significant improvement in how government at all levels - federal, state, working with the local community and ATSIC - have been able to improve service delivery and coordination to the sixth largest community in the Territory.
From a Territory point of view, we would argue that to bring those services together, to have a whole-of-government approach, is the way forward. I support the federal Opposition Leader’s direction in what he is saying; that we must have a whole-of-government approach to the delivery of indigenous services in any part of Australia. That is the thrust of what he is saying.
We need to look at the detail of what he is saying, because you would have to say that how ATSIC was, was not working. There was no support for what …
Mr Dunham: That is the first time you have ‘fessed up to that.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Drysdale.
Ms MARTIN: It is interesting that the member for Drysdale just makes up things. He said: ‘That’s the first time you’ve ever said that’. How would you know what I have said, member for Drysdale?
Mr Dunham: Well, you say different things all the time.
Ms MARTIN: ATSIC was not working. That is why there was a review, which was supported at a federal level by both the government and the opposition. What we want is to be able to deliver services effectively to indigenous communities. I will be supporting any way we can do that effectively. To ask whether or not I support the abolition of ATSIC is an irrelevant question because it is gone. So much for your question.
Coastal Plains Horticulture Research Farm – Rambutan Industry
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for PRIMARY INDUSTRY and FISHERIES
Your government has spoken in this House about the importance of the horticulture industry to the economy of the Northern Territory. In fact, we now have a fledgling export industry with 30 to 40 tonnes of rambutans going to Japan each year. Why then is your government cutting back on research into exotic fruits? Why are you trying to cut costs by offering the rambutan site at Coastal Plains to the growers to do their own research? I note that the growers will have to pay rent, water, and provide labour and equipment hire. Does the government have a policy on horticultural research? Is the government intending to close down Coastal Plains Horticultural Research Station?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his question. We are not going to close down the Coastal Plains Horticultural Research Station. We are not going to give up research on rambutans. The rambutans at Coastal Plains Horticultural Research Station were part of a 10 year trial. This was old root stock and now these trials have been completed. We met with the Chairman of the Rambutan Association, Dr Kerry Eupene and discussed different solutions regarding what to do with the trees. I do not think it is appropriate to get a chainsaw out and cut the trees down. Instead, we are prepared to work with the association to provide a grower-managed demonstration site.
We are not going to abandon the Horticulture Association or research into the horticultural industry. If you have a look at our web page, you will find there a number of services and also research taking place. You only have to visit the web page of the Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development and you will find information about rambutans, mangoes, the horticultural industry and other initiatives.
I am aware that recently a caller to a radio station where the Chief Minister was doing a talkback show alleged that we are closing down the Coastal Plains research farm - that is not true. It is absolutely incorrect, and we will continue to support the rambutan industry all the way.
Katherine – Safe Community Strategy
Mr McADAM to MINISTER for JUCTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL
The Barkly Regional Safe Community strategy in Tennant Creek is doing a reasonable job in addressing crime and antisocial behaviour. Can you update the House on similar initiatives in Katherine?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the recent release of the December quarter crime statistics for the Northern Territory paints a mixed picture in Katherine. When you look at the two year series of property crime in Katherine it has been a relatively static picture: low levels of crime in actual numbers and therefore fairly volatile, but over the two years, 293 property offences in December 2001; 253 now. There has not been a dramatic change in property crime.
One area of concern, which I have already spoken about, is the increase in assaults in Katherine. We had 105 assaults in the December quarter - that is an increase of six from the previous quarter. To give a sense of scale, it translates to about one assault per day over that three monthly period.
A member: Oh, is that all!
Dr TOYNE: I am not saying that is acceptable, I am just saying that is what it means. Seven sexual assaults were recorded in the same three month period, an increase from six offences in the previous quarter. However, to be characterising this as a war zone, as the member for Katherine was running around doing, is not only totally misrepresenting the picture we are seeing in those figures, but it is also disparaging to the town. I am sure the tourist operators do not appreciate having the area described as a war zone.
Our government is very concerned about reported incidences of violent crime, and I believe we have now gone into a lot more detail on those 105 offences. What we found, in looking in detail at the PROMIS records, is that the majority of the assaults involve both indigenous victim and offender. Just over half of the offences involved a male offender/female victim. The offender was affected by alcohol in over two-thirds of cases, and over 60% of those assaults were in a domestic situation. This is not on the streets of Katherine; this is in a domestic context. What we have here is a domestic violence situation, predominantly, which has to be dealt with as that type of offending. What we are doing about it …
Ms Carney: Have you had a look at your Aboriginal Family Violence Strategy, you might like to have another look at that.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr TOYNE: There seems to be a bit of background noise at the moment. Five more police officers and an Aboriginal Community Police Officer have been stationed in Katherine, and they will be at the forefront of enforcement of these laws in that particular part of the Territory. Police operations are now being targetted, patrols are going to go to known hotspots, concentrating on the domestic context of many of these assaults. Any report of domestic violence will be rigorously investigated by the increased police presence there, and a Domestic Violence Liaison Officer at the Katherine Police Station will be working with victims to work through the results of these terrible offences.
This government is recognising and responding to the links between alcohol and antisocial behaviour and crime. Police foot patrols are targetting the main street, licensed premises and the shopping centre. Funding for alcohol and drug services in Katherine is seen in the operation of a sobering up shelter, supported by community-based night patrols and foot patrols. Both non-residential and residential services are providing counselling, therapy and detox.
The Katherine Regional Harmony Group, with $600 000 from this government - unprecedented resourcing of community crime prevention groups - is developing a whole-of-community approach in preventing crime through action in key areas - itinerants and antisocial behaviour, alcohol and substance abuse, young people and general crime prevention in the urban environment of Katherine. In partnership with the Katherine Town Council, this government has provided funding for a community foot patrol in the central business district to combat antisocial behaviour.
We are investigating and investing in real solutions. The Kalano Community Association has started a ‘Return to Home’ scheme. In February this year, some 30 people so far have been returned to their community. As members would be aware, the costs of these returns are repaid to the government through deductions in Centrelink. Surveys of itinerants in Katherine indicated that as many as 70% of itinerants would return home if they were assisted to do so.
Work is also happening in the communities of Katherine regions through Strong Families, Strong Communities, Strong Future projects, particularly in Wugularr, Barunga and Ngukurr. $300 000 each year goes to projects to assist communities to develop community responses to family violence, including the related issues of substance abuse, unemployment and youth boredom.
I invite the member for Katherine, instead of trying to score cheap political shots, to perhaps turn up at some of these meetings and start contributing some constructive ideas, rather than running down the town that she is supposed to represent.
Australian Defence Force – Return from Iraq
Mr BURKE to CHIEF MINISTER
What do you say to the families in my electorate who have loved ones serving in Iraq when they are being told by your Labor colleagues, including the member for Lingiari, Warren Snowdon, that their loved ones should never have gone to Iraq, that their loved ones should now abandon their pride in getting a job done and, instead, retreat home; and that their loved ones are placing the rest of us at risk of a terrorist attack by being in Iraq? Will the Chief Minister state unequivocally that they should not be withdrawn until their respective tasks have been completed, and that setting arbitrary times for their withdrawal is not in the best interests of those personnel or the people of Iraq and Australia?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, when the member for Brennan asks a question, he should get it accurate. This government supported our troops from around Australia and their involvement in Iraq. I was at their farewell and welcoming home our troops from the Territory – we wish them well. We, as government, said - and I am sure supported by the opposition - when they returned , what a fine job they had done. Implicit in the member for Brennan’s question was that we did not do that, and we certainly did. We supported our Territory and Australian Defence Forces.
The issue of when our Defence Forces will come home - and it is an important issue, because I am sure everyone here would like them home. I am aware that about a quarter of those forces will be coming home - broadly described as forces - by about June. The air traffic controllers will be coming home in June. Therefore, we will see a staged withdrawal of our troops after that, once the interim government gets set up in Iraq. I am sure they will do a fine job. I believe you have seen, from the words of the federal Opposition Leader, that he will respond to the needs of the community and of the new government of Iraq, in having those Defence Forces being able to contribute. I support that contribution, and would like to see those troops home though as soon as possible.
Incentives for Trade Apprenticeships
Mrs AAGAARD to MINISTER for EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION and TRAINING
When you announced the Jobs Plan earlier this year, you announced incentives of $7700 would be available to businesses to employ hard trade apprentices, and also that 40 positions would be available for each year of the Jobs Plan. Minister, can you please update the House on the progress in filling those 40 positions this year?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for her question. It gives me an opportunity to update all Territorians and members on progress against this particular aspect of the Jobs Plan; the $7700 incentive to employers taking on an additional apprentice in those traditional trades areas that, forever, have experienced skills shortages in the Northern Territory.
An initial 40 of these incentives were built into the Jobs Plan and made available from February this year over the first half of this year. I am very pleased to say that, in just over one month, that target was exceeded. It means that, in the first month of the Jobs Plans being put into effect, an extra 40 young Territorians have already begun apprenticeships in a range of those traditional trades areas.
Response from business has been overwhelmingly positive, and government is working to accommodate the demand as far as it possibly can. That is why we have already moved to increase the number of traditional trade incentives available from 40 to 60 for the first half of this year. The support coming from employers in the business community for these incentives proves absolutely that government was on the right track in this incentive scheme in supporting needs and supporting Territorians to gain the skills to meet the needs of local business.
For too long, we saw the effects of a labour market in the Northern Territory that suffered these skill shortages, and when major projects come along, of course, people come from interstate and across the border to fill those jobs. Often, at the end of that project, many of them have left, with Territory businesses, home grown businesses, finding it difficult along each step of the way to attract appropriately qualified workers themselves. We wanted to turn that situation around. We wanted to do it in this way particularly because we recognise young Territorians as a great product in themselves, and it is a natural fit. We train our own, they get jobs here and are more likely to stay here.
Under the Jobs Plan, small businesses are also able to access a $2200 incentive on taking on a new apprentice or trainee. There are still more than 200 of those small business employment incentives available this year. I urge small business to look into these incentives, and consider taking on an apprentice or trainee, or an additional apprentice or trainee if they can, and avail themselves of that $2200 incentive. It is a great opportunity for employers to build their work force. At the same time, young Territorians are given greater opportunity to develop the skills they need to build a career, and the Northern Territory gets a labour market that will serve it, just not now, but into the future.
Electricity Tariff – Commercial Customers
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
To justify your government’s 40% increase in the cost of power, your deputy told the business community that you were forced to do so in order to comply with National Competition Policy. However, the 2003 National Competition Policy assessment states: ‘The Northern Territory does not have obligations under the NCP electricity reform agreements’. Why was business lied to by your government?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, let me make this very clear, business was not lied to by this government. It is all very well for the Opposition Leader to come in here and misrepresent the situation. You expect better from a man who has a reputation - I suppose I should not really - he has come in here many times, led with his chin, and has been wrong, wrong, wrong.
The issue was dealt with, in a previous answer, by the Treasurer. I would have thought that the Opposition Leader would have been listening to that answer, because it was very comprehensive. We can take you back through the whole process from 1995, signing up to the principles of National Competition Policy, the threat from the ACCC that they would impose an access regime on the Territory. The CLP in government, moved to open up the market in power, to respond to that ACCC determination that they would establish a network, if we, the Territory, did not move.
That is what happened, Madam Speaker. If you listened to what the Treasurer said in his last answer, but it is a bit difficult isn’t it, for the Opposition Leader to actually listen to an answer - you ask a question but are not interested in the answer – that we committed and we submitted the opening up regime, the move from Tranche 1 through to Tranche 4, into contestability. We submitted that to the NCC. It was agreed to and we have followed through on that. We have followed through on the commitment made by Country Liberal Party when in government. We followed through on that commitment because we believe, and we join you in believing, though it is not necessarily an easy thing to achieve, that competition for businesses when it comes to their power suppliers will, in the long run, produce cheaper power. We believe that. We have signed up to those principles. Queensland walked away from their domestic users and they copped $36m in penalty, not as much as taxpayers in the Territory pay every year to subsidise power costs, which is $50m, but they copped $36m.
We have committed to something. We have a raft of documentation, and the CLP might recognise this: the Northern Territory Electricity Network Access Code. We have the conduct agreement with the Commonwealth, we have the Competition Policy Reform Bill of 1995, the Competition Principles Agreement. We have a raft of documentation, signed up to by the CLP. We are committed to it. Yes, it will be difficult, and yes, there are ultimately penalties if you walk away from it.
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Talk to Queensland!
Mr Dunham: No, you tell us.
Ms MARTIN: Talk to Queensland. We are acting responsibly. We believe that competition will serve well in the long term and we are committed to achieving it. That is the simple fact. If the opposition wants to continue to come in here and mislead Territorians, whip up a frenzy of concern, which they have tried to do by telling 5500 small businesses across the Territory: ‘Yes, you are scooped up in this 40%’. Truth is an important ingredient in being a politician. The Opposition Leader and his colleagues have failed on this very important issue.
Nurses in Central Australia
Mr McADAM to MINISTER for HEALTH
Through the Building Healthier Communities five year plan, the Martin government made a commitment to attracting, retaining and supporting health personnel at all levels. Can the minister advise the House of progress regarding the training of nurses in Central Australia?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is great to be asked a question on Central Australia, and on nursing, because it is really jumping down there at the moment in this area.
I would like to celebrate with the House a milestone we reached this month with Alice Springs Hospital employing its first registered nurse trained entirely in Alice Springs. I am speaking of Shelley Harkin. We have put out a very clear commitment to supporting and developing our work force within the Department of Health. There is no better place to start, if you are going to recruit quality people into our system who are going to be retained in our system, than to start with the locals.
I am sure the shadow minister for Health will be pleased about this: she was not from down south, she was from Alice Springs. The first student to complete the Batchelor of Nursing entirely in Central Australia is therefore extremely welcome. She is a Territory southerner, let us put it that way, and proud of it. She is bringing all of her invaluable local knowledge and expertise, the fact that she fully belongs to the community there and is likely to put in a very long stint working within our system.
Previously, Central Australian nurses had to complete their training in Darwin. The ability to train as a registered nurse in Alice Springs will also undoubtedly assist recruitment and retention of staff for the Centre. The Batchelor of Nursing course in Alice Springs is the result of a partnership between Charles Darwin University and the Department of Health and Community Services. It was made possible by the former Minister for Health and Community Services, in July 2002, with the opening of a new $100 000 Clinical Health Training Laboratory in Alice Springs Hospital. This development represents the culmination of a strategy to increase career options in Central Australia and to offer the best possible training for our staff. Practical and on the ground initiatives such as this one are what characterise our approach to the building up of our health system in the Northern Territory.
I was at the School of Remote Health several weeks ago and met with the undergraduate nursing trainees during some of their classes. They are a fantastic bunch. Many of them are people I know from Alice Springs and around Central Australia. Some of them are already based in remote communities. This is a fantastic way to build a core of stable nursing staff within our department. We intend to push fully behind these initiatives to see if we can get many more nurses into our service from the Top End and Central Australia to add to the quality nurses that we are recruiting from elsewhere.
Electricity Tariff – Commercial Customers
Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER
When your government’s deception over power increases was revealed, and your deputy was confronted with the truth, he then attempted to blame the price rise on the Commonwealth Grants Commission, a claim that was also proved to be untrue. Will you now admit that this is just another tax on Territory businesses to pay for your unfunded $80m election commitments?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is important to ask logical questions and questions that make sense. All through that mish-mash of a question, the Opposition Leader was trying to claim that the Treasurer said that the Commonwealth Grants Commission had some involvement here - simply not. What we have seen is the Opposition Leader, who has taken on what is a difficult shadow portfolio, and that is Treasury, has demonstrated very little understanding of the complexity of the Treasury portfolio. I urge him to seek more briefings to understand the process. He has some fanciful ideas about government, hiding cash places and having these extravagant grants from the Commonwealth Grants Commission that we are not expending on Territorians. It is a conflicting and absurd argument from the Opposition Leader and, again, he comes in here and he is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Signs Policy
Mr WOOD to MINISTER for TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE
I wrote to your predecessor in May 2002 regarding the lack of action by the department on developing a signs policy and was told that there was going to be a review of that policy. I then followed that up with a question last year on 20 August in the House, and the minister answered, ‘By the end of the year we will have a policy in place and that policy will be circulated for public comment’.
Bearing in mind that it is nearly two years since my first inquiry, and last year has finished, could you say how long it will take for your department to have a review and when will the review commence so that the community, businesses, including the tourism industry, and local government can have a say in this issue which is important to all these groups.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am aware that a review is ongoing. I undertake to follow up for the member and get a time line on it.
Coconut Grove Unit Development
Mr BONSON to MINISTER for LANDS and PLANNING
You and I recently received numerous representations relating to a four-storey block of flats that was proposed to be built immediately beside single dwelling blocks at the Ostermann/Martin Street intersection in Coconut Grove, a suburb in my electorate. This was something that residents felt would impact badly on their lifestyle. Can the minister advise of the outcome of his considerations on this issue?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his question. There is no doubt that residents in that particular area were particularly upset and alarmed by a proposed development on the corner of Ostermann Street and Dick Ward Drive, Coconut Grove. What they were concerned about included traffic, parking, privacy, noise, overshadowing or overlooking, and also the general effect on their lifestyle. Another aspect they were considerably concerned about was the effect on their property values by such a development, and that is something that has been lost by some commentators, and some comments that have been made by some members of the opposition in the media. We should never lose sight of the fact that people living in residential houses are also very jealous about their property values and the impact of developments on them.
As members would be aware, I tabled a petition with nearly 500 signatures this morning from a whole range of people who are very concerned about this particular issue, not only the residents in Coconut Grove, but a whole range of people throughout Darwin, including many people in the real estate, property and construction industry, with many well-known names amongst them. There was widespread concern about this. Basically, what was being proposed was the development of a four-storey block of units abutting R1, which is basically residential single-storey homes. I did try and broker some sort of agreement or dialogue between the proponents - the developer and the residents – however, unfortunately, that did not take place. I also became aware that this was not an isolated case. There are some 100 R3 blocks peppered throughout Darwin, where there is a potential to develop to four storeys and affect hundreds, if not thousands, of ordinary R1 residential blocks and, basically, affect the Territory lifestyle of people living in those particular areas.
The CLP realises too - I believe there were hotspots in Nightcliff some years ago - and they brought forward some interface guidelines to provide a gradation in development between R1 and R3. They were never actually adopted, so I realised that I had to take action on this particular issue, and I did. After taking substantial and significant legal advice and considering the issues, I issued an Interim Development Control Order. The effect of that control order is to limit the height that flats can go to in that particular situation - R3 abutting R1 - to three storeys. There are some other things in there as well: doubling the landscape …
Mr Dunham: So they do not overlook at three storeys? You cannot look in at three storeys?
Dr BURNS: The member for Drysdale …
Mr Dunham: Well, it was your big problem a little while ago – causing you pain 20 seconds ago.
Dr BURNS: He is the local member. We all remember the twin towers over at Bayview Haven - residents up in arms. The silence from the member for Drysdale was absolutely deafening. At least the member for Millner had the fortitude to stand up with the residents and put a very strong case to me, and I commend the member for Millner. I have nothing but contempt for the member for Drysdale. How dare he interject over this.
This Interim Development Control Order will be over approximately 100 blocks for a period of two years whilst amendments are brought into the plan. I have a very important point to make, which has sometimes been lost on members opposite and some people in the public media: in R3 it was always by consent to four storeys. It was never a right for someone to go to four storeys; it was always by consent. Therefore, some of this language that has been put about, about stripping people of their rights, is absolute bunkum because it is untrue. It was never a right; it was always by consent.
I have had numerous letters and telephone calls, and people stopping me in the street - in fact, I attended a barbecue in the Ostermann Street area …
Mr Dunham: A barbecue? Well!
Dr BURNS: Yes, all the residents are pleased with the outcome. They are very pleased with their local member, a local member who actually stood up for his constituents; not remaining silent about it. I commend the residents group there. I found them to be very professional and, even-handed. They are not against development, and they have made that plain all the way through. However, they are against this particular style of development.
This is a government that is interested in people’s lifestyle. This is a government that will stick up for residents, and this is what we have done. I was proud to sign my name to the IDCO, and I stand by it.
International Cricket in the Northern Territory
Ms LAWRIE to MINISTER for SPORT and RECREATION
After successfully hosting international cricket in Darwin last year, can you please inform the House of work that is under way to build upon the success of that event?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Karama for her question. It is a question that the sporting community in the Territory would no doubt want to hear the answer to, rather than the members opposite all about doom and gloom.
The Martin Labor government supports international cricket in the Northern Territory as it adds to our great Territory lifestyle. In 2003, two sight screens and a second portable scoreboard were required. Generously, these items were supplied by Cricket Australia, with the proviso that the NT supply our own from 2004 onwards. In particular, we are very grateful for the loan of the scoreboard from the MCG, and we continue to work closely with them on the preparation of the drop-in pitches. No doubt, we need to have them in place and up to scratch prior to the Chief Minister’s Cup at the end of June and the one Test we have against Sri Lanka.
Quite simply, sight screens are needed at each end of the field to provide an even background against which the batsmen can see the ball. A portable second scoreboard will ensure that all cricket patrons can see the score from just about any position around the Marrara Oval. As part of continuously improving the standard of facilities available at Marrara, a design for new sight screens was prepared with guidance from Cricket Australia. Earlier this month, tenders were called for the construction of the screens in readiness for the international fixtures, Australia versus Sri Lanka as mentioned, and the Chief Minister’s Cup in late June. In addition to the screens tenders we also called for a portable scoreboard.
In 2003, a scoreboard was set up on the fence to the north of the grandstand displaying the main match statistics. During the inaugural international cricket matches, the design and measurements of the MCG board were noted and a design has now been prepared based on the MCG design.
Tenders for these two contracts close tomorrow and they are estimated at approximately $90 000. These fantastic additions to Marrara Oval will ensure that 2004 international cricket in Darwin is a successful event that continues to value-add to our unique Territory lifestyle.
GST Revenue – Northern Territory Share
Mr MILLS to TREASURER
In a statement to the House this morning, you claimed that the increase in GST revenue for the Commonwealth for 2004-05 will increase by $16m from 2002-03. Minister, why do you not tell Territorians the full story? I have figures from Treasurer Costello’s office that I seek leave to table.
Leave granted.
Mr MILLS: They show clearly that during the term of your government, GST revenue to the Territory has increased every year, with increases totalling $439m to 2004-05. Despite this, under Labor, Territorians are now being taxed to the tune of $1816 for every man, woman and child, and will be forced to pay more with your power increases. How can you justify this to Territorians, and what do you say to our struggling Territory businesses?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I think I got enough of the question, as much as I needed anyway, to make sense of the misleading information and the drivel that comes from the Leader of the Opposition in relation to this. It has been a consistent trend over the last couple of years.
Let us be very clear. When the GST came in, all states were given, and told, in order to go along with the GST arrangements that they would be guaranteed a minimum amount of funding until the GST grew so they would not be disadvantaged under what they would have received under the current scheme. You have a current scheme, removing the GST, states and territories, we are going to guarantee you will not lose out. No one was going to make the guaranteed minimum amount in that first couple of years of the GST. So the Commonwealth said, we will give you budget balancing assistance until you reach the guaranteed minimum amount. In 2002-03, the Northern Territory was the first jurisdiction, along with Queensland, in Australia to pass the guaranteed minimum amount, which means we are in greenfield, we now have more money as a result …
Mr Burke: Yes, but how much did you get for 2001? That is the question, answer it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Brennan, let us hear the answer.
Mr STIRLING: We in the Northern Territory got more value out of the GST being placed in terms of revenue back from the Commonwealth than we would have had the GST never been brought in and everything had run according to previous principles. The amount above the guaranteed minimum amount to the Northern Territory in 2002-03 was $9m. That is how much we are ahead as a result of the GST. In 2003-04 ...
Mr Burke: What was the minimum amount above what we got the year before? Tell the truth! You mislead everyone. Tell the truth. What did we get the year before, in 2000-01?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan. Order!
Mr Burke: With respect, Madam Speaker, he has the floor and all he does is mislead Territorians.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The Treasurer has the floor.
Mr STIRLING: Madam Speaker, indications in 2003 were that, in terms of what the guaranteed minimum amount was and what we were receiving as GST was in the order of about $76m. Combined, we were $85m better off under GST than under the old scheme. That figure is more likely around $81m, I am advised by Treasury. So, all up, $81m, plus $9m, equals the result of the GST: $90m, not the $300m the Leader of the Opposition goes on about, or the $385m once put forward by the Darwin Business Council some time ago.
I offer the Leader of the Opposition and the spokesperson on Treasury matters a briefing on this, because it is important that he understand how these relativities run and the truth of the matter, the facts of what the GST meant …
Mr Burke: It is better to catch you out.
Mr STIRLING: We are not helped, Madam Speaker, when the member for Brennan stands in this Chamber this morning and says: ‘You get too much GST’. I hope Hansard did not pick it up because it ought to be expunged. What happens if someone draws that to the attention of the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello? He will be saying ‘One of your members says you get too much; go to hell with your $48m that you want back. One of your members of parliament says you get too much’. Not very helpful, Madam Speaker. It is something I doubt he would have said had he been the Leader of the Opposition. The same discipline that he applied to himself when he was the Leader of the Opposition, he ought to apply to himself now as the member for Brennan, because throwaway comments like that – well, the indication is that he is not prepared to stand and fight for Territorians like we are.
When I go to Canberra, my intention in going into that Treasurer’s Conference is to get every last cent out of the Commonwealth, out of the GST, that we can justify and that we earn, not to go back. If the member for Brennan was the Treasurer, he would be walking in the door saying: ‘Listen guys, we got too much; I have brought a couple of briefcases with me’. I tell you, Michael Egan from New South Wales and John Brumby from Victoria would love him. They would love him to death because he is prepared to give money and put it back on the table. Well, not us. We go there and fight for Territorians, as previous Treasurers of the Northern Territory did before me. I am proud to do that, and I am glad he was never Treasurer.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Written Question Paper.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016