Department of the Legislative Assembly, Northern Territory Government

2004-03-31

ATSIC – Chief Minister’s Position

Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER

Everyone agrees that ATSIC is dysfunctional and needs change to ensure improved delivery of services to Aboriginal people. Yesterday, you spent four minutes refusing to support your leader’s plan for the abolition of ATSIC and ATSIS. Your minister assisting you on Indigenous Affairs was muzzled, and your deputy was saying something quite different to you. In your rush to take your marching orders from your masters in Canberra, have you stopped to consider what your position means to existing agreements and those currently under negotiation between the Northern Territory government and ATSIC? What are you going to tell ATSIC Northern Zone Commissioner, Kim Hill, at the urgent meeting he has sought with you?
    ANSWER

    Madam Speaker, it is interesting that you get this question from the opposition, because we now have the Prime Minister this morning saying he thinks the abolition of ATSIC is a bad thing, but does not give an alternative to what he wants to do. It is interesting that the opposition comes in to ask, ‘What are you going to do with this? What are you going to do with that?’ Let me say very clearly that this is a national issue. This is a fact of life.

    Members interjecting.

    Ms MARTIN: Do not say, ‘Oh, frustrations!’ It is a federal decision about the future of ATSIC, and quite properly. This government has had a lot to say about that. We put a substantial submission into the ATSIC review when it was done. I have taken a position and argued it hard at COAG level. I have talked to other premiers about it; I have talked to the Prime Minister about it. So, let us be very clear about what the Territory is saying on a national level about what we think can happen regarding the very important issue of service delivery for Territorians, predominantly indigenous Territorians, who live remotely. It is a major issue. It is something that was inadequately addressed by the CLP when they were in government, and let me say, it is something that we are very keenly aware of, and we are trying to achieve better service delivery into our remote communities for some of the most disadvantaged Territorians.
      We have a clearly articulated message, not that the Opposition Leader chose to respond this morning during the report because he really does not know anything other than asking a few questions. He really does not understand the issues. He has no understanding of the issue at all. I am not sure, but I do not think he put a submission into the ATSIC review. Let me be corrected. A submission into the ATSIC review?

      A member: No.

      Ms MARTIN: No. We had some noise from your federal members but nothing substantial. All we have is carping at the edges and not providing solutions.

      I believe the way forward that was articulated by this government is one that will work for the Territory. It is not necessarily aligned with what the federal Opposition Leader said yesterday. I do not care. The way we want to have service delivery happening in the Territory, the way we want to work with indigenous organisations is one that will work for the Territory, and have no doubt about that. I am proud to stand here and say, and if I have to take on the federal leader in some elements of the policy, yes I will. That is why we will argue the case for the Territory, and I have argued the case for the Territory very specifically.

      This is not about playing politics. This is about indigenous Territorians who deserve to have services and programs delivered effectively without a duplication of services. I have talked a number of times about the success of the direction of what the COAG trial at Wadeye is achieving. It is about coordinating service delivery between different service providers at different levels of government – federal, Territory, local in terms of the Wadeye community - and we have to make sure it is working. That is why the COAG trials are happening, recognising that layer upon layer of service delivery is not achieving the outcomes we want and that we have to coordinate it. That is what my whole approach is about, that is what this government’s approach is about. I will stand up and argue it with anyone. If it is not the same model that is going to be proposed on a national level, I will continue to argue that we are the Territory, a third of Territorians are indigenous, and they are not getting the service delivery and programs that are going to make sure that they have jobs and safe communities in the future.
      We have to ensure this. I will ensure that by arguing the case, and over the next 12 months, I hope I will do that effectively. I say to the opposition: stop standing on the sidelines and get involved in the issue. We are tired of your carping and negativity.
      Aviation Capacity into the Northern Territory

      Ms LAWRIE to CHIEF MINISTER

      We are starting to see signs that the tourism industry is rebounding following the collapse of Ansett, SARS, 11 September and the Bali bombings. Could you tell the House about the increase in aviation activity and capacity into the Territory?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, it has been tough over the last 2 years. However, our aviation capacity, which means seats on aeroplanes into the Territory, is increasing in real terms. This is real success for Territorians and for tourism.

      It is looking good. Allow me to go through some of the areas. Domestic capacity into Darwin for March is 7% higher than at the same time last year. We are talking real terms. That capacity is set to grow with Virgin Blue, in April, commencing three services per week, direct Melbourne to Darwin, which means an additional 432 new seats to Darwin each week from Melbourne. It will expand the services of Virgin Blue into the Territory.

      Added to that new service from Virgin, next Monday, 5 April, Skywest will be coming into the Territory. This is a really significant innovation. Skywest will be commencing services from Perth to Darwin via Broome on Mondays and Wednesdays, and is set to expand to Fridays in May. That will mean 194 more seats from Perth into the Territory, and we welcome Skywest. That additional service in May will provide another 97 seats into the Territory.

      From Qantas’ point of view, Regional General Manager, Steve Farquer tells me that for the last six months in Darwin, Qantas has had 10% or higher growth each month compared to the same time the previous year. They are real increases. That is terrific. In terms of forward bookings, Qantas are very positive over the next six months. That is good news for Darwin.

      Now let us look at Alice Springs and Ayers Rock. Domestic capacity into Alice Springs is 20% higher than for the same time last year, which is great. That is largely due to Virgin Blue services, direct Sydney to Alice Springs, which started with quite a display in June last year. On a slight downside, the domestic capacity to Ayers Rock is 10% lower than the same time last year, but that should pick up in June this year with Qantas starting three flights per week direct service between Melbourne and the Rock. That is the first time that Qantas has flown direct from Melbourne into Yulara.

      Internationally, not only were we hit in September 2001 by the collapse of Ansett, but we were hit by international events, as we know. While it is important to have that direct capacity into Darwin, we also have to remember that 80% of international visitors to the Territory come through Sydney airport, so it is very important to have those good domestic connections. International capacity into Darwin is currently 7% higher than at the same time last year. This is a combination of the third weekly Royal Brunei service which started in October last year, and the extra Qantas service to Denpasar which started in April last year.

      The big one for us is Australian Airlines in May is to begin their twice-weekly service from Cairns through to Darwin and Singapore. They will be operating a Boeing 767-300, which means an extra 540 seats into Darwin each week. Importantly for us, this means we will be able to fly to Singapore five times a week. That is something that we have struggled with over the last couple of years. It is terrific that Australian Airlines starts that service in May.

      Overall for the Territory, we have a 6% increase in aviation capacity for March. It is great news, Madam Speaker.

      We add to that another sign of confidence in the pick-up that is happening in growth in tourism, through the Northern Territory Airports. They are currently halfway through an $11.5m refurbishment program at Darwin Airport. That includes landscaping, refurbishment of the Qantas Club lounge, and refurbishment of the upper level of the terminal. That is the first stage of a $50m approximately refurbishment of the airport. Over the next four financial years, some of the works include major runway works and redoing the frontage of the airport terminal. Northern Territory Airports will be undertaking a five year review of their master plan for the Darwin International Airport and that will be released for public comment in May. That is a real vote of confidence by Northern Territory Airports in our future, and that is great news for Territorians. It is great news for our businesses and for tourism.

      Members: Hear, hear!
      Drug Courts

      Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER

      Even the Supreme Court now agrees that your drug courts have failed Northern Territory people. In today’s NT News is a self-confessed low life crim, let out on bail three times, only to offend again, this time on 40 counts. Chief Minister, what can you say to families whose homes were violated by this serial offender, and do you now agree that your drug courts do not work?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question and the intensity in which it was asked by the Leader of the Opposition. However, in the detail of this question I would refer it, quite properly, to the Minister for Justice. It is actually a rule of this parliament.

      Members interjecting.

      Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I would like to defer, as per standing orders, quite properly, to the expertise of the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General, and that I will do.

      Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, his Honour, Justice Mildren, has expressed some frustration in his judgment on the matter of the breach of bail conditions of Tryston Darryl Ellis. Mr Ellis is a very hard case. He is a serial offender who has a serious drug problem. Mr Ellis has a long and complicated history of offending. Attempts have been made to assist this young man with very little success to date. He has been offending since he was 14 years of age, and was first bailed as a juvenile. He received a suspended sentence in February 2003 for offences committed since 1999. The conditions of that suspended sentence included a curfew. He breached the curfew, and that matter is still before the courts, so I will not comment on that any further. His subsequent bail orders did not allow him to be at large. He was bailed to take part in a residential treatment program of 12 weeks duration. The return dates for his court appearance were before the expiry of these programs, so he is not at any time without supervision. This young man has been assessed for his suitability for treatment programs by the court clinician, and met the criteria for release into a treatment program.

      The CREDIT NT program is based on similar models operating very successfully interstate. There are protocols surrounding the operation of the CREDIT model in the Northern Territory. For example, a participant must have an illicit substance use problem, must not have a criminal history related to violent behaviour, and cannot be subject to any other court order with a drug treatment program. A person is not accepted for the CREDIT NT program if he has had more than two previous admissions to CREDIT NT in the past 12 months.

      CREDIT NT has been operating since July 2003. Since then, 33 clients have been registered in Darwin and seven in Alice Springs. Ten clients have completed the program successfully. Unfortunately, Mr Ellis is not one of the successful cases. I have asked my department to carefully look into the circumstances of the treatment as regards the drug program, and we will be looking into the issues that Justice Mildren has raised.

      Madam SPEAKER: Before the member for Nightcliff asks her question, I advise members of the gallery that it is convention for the minister responsible for the portfolio to answer the questions. That is why the Chief Minister was able to refer the question to the Attorney-General.
      Abolition of Taxes – Promise by Opposition Leader

      Mrs AAGAARD to TREASURER

      Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition said he would abolish payroll tax, stamp duty and bank debits tax. Can the Treasurer advise the House of the cost to Territory taxpayers of these promises made by the Opposition Leader, and what effect the implementation of these policies would have on the Territory?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for her question. It truly is an important question for both members of this House and Territorians to understand. I can confirm that, yesterday on 8TopFM, the Leader of the Opposition did make the comment, raised by the member for Nightcliff in her question, that he would abolish taxes. In other words, he promised to remove from the Territory budget almost $200m worth of revenue: $96m for payroll tax, $97.1m in stamp duty, and $6.3m in debits tax.

      The question for Territorians is not how his government would operate without this almost $200m in revenue - the question is irrelevant - because government simply would not be able to operate. If you take it in context, out of $351m sourced in own revenue, the Leader of the Opposition and an incoming CLP government would simply remove $200m own-sourced revenue. That is not the question. The question becomes: what taxes and charges will the Leader of the Opposition levy to make up the revenue that he forgoes with the abolition of these taxes. Further, he also has to tell Territorians what jobs he will slash, what services he will reduce, what programs he will abolish, what agencies …

      Mr Dunham: Whether population will reduce, whether taxes – this sounds like you, Syd. Taxes have gone up under you, population has dropped under you.

      Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, you know the standing orders about referring to people not by their names but by their electorate. Your interjection was out of order. Treasurer, continue.

      Mr STIRLING: He also needs to tell Territorians what agencies he will abolish in their entirety, because that is the measure of what you would have to do in order to overcome this wipe-out of revenue. We have to lead, Madam Speaker. In a recent press release, the Leader of the Opposition was referring to a land tax that he wanted to review. I suspect that he will end the Territory’s resistance to new forms of taxes and he will do what other states have done: he will follow the Productivity Commission report into home ownership, which told states to up their land tax. That is what the Productivity Commission did. I suspect that was where he got the lead from. The fact is, we do not have a land tax, and a land tax would be a huge …

      Mr Mills: You like your taxes. We have a land rich tax that you introduced!

      Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition.

      Mr STIRLING: … impediment to development in the Territory …

      Mr Mills: Misrepresenting the

      Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, that is twice I have spoken to you.

      Mr STIRLING: It would impact far more broadly than payroll tax does, because payroll tax does not go anywhere near small business. This would impact on small business. In New South Wales, if you take a small business under 15 employees, the impact of that land tax on their operations is something like $12 600. In Victoria, it is something like $6500. That would be a tax that no small business has ever paid in the Northern Territory but, under an incoming CLP government, they would have to find that.

      He might look at a fire services levy - another one that all other jurisdictions outside the Northern Territory have. He might look to impose that to regain the revenue that he is giving up. Again, it would be a tax that goes far beyond medium and large business to every business - small as well - and that, in New South Wales and Victoria, to the effect of about $8500 per annum. The great irony in this is, of course, that small business does not pay payroll tax at all.

      The bank debit tax that he referred to is going, under this government, from 1 July 2005. Therefore, you have to say that, faced with those realities, small business in the Territory would be significantly worse off under a CLP government that would simply have to raise new taxes to replace the revenue that this promise would remove.

      Jobs would go because you simply would not have the revenue for government spending. Where would you go? The big agencies: Education and Health. They would be peeled back; they are the two biggest areas of government and that would be the first place that the government would have to look to. Would schools close? You would have to think highly likely. Would the extra police …

      Mr BURKE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question should have been out of order because it calls for an opinion from the minister. We have sat and listened to this hypothetical garbage for long enough. He is simply giving an opinion on something that has no substantive basis.

      Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, you know the rules regarding questions. There is no point of order.

      Mr STIRLING: Would schools close? Almost definitely.

      Madam SPEAKER: However, we would like shorter answers.

      Mr STIRLING: I will wrap up quickly. Would the program of extra police being funded through the extra $75m over the next three years be continued? Very, very unlikely. This would be a major attack on business, particularly small business. It is immune from payroll tax now. It would mean broader taxes, it would mean introduction of new and insidious taxes, and it would belt the hell out of small business.
      Anthony Barker – Home Invasion

      Mr MILLS to CHIEF MINISTER

      Violent crime has increased under your government. Autistic teenager, Anthony Barker, was just one of the many to suffer, forced to flee his Housing Commission unit after violent attacks. Following a previous incident, this young man had pleaded to be relocated from his Housing Commission unit to safer accommodation, but he was refused. Now Anthony is too traumatised to even continue his studies and lives in fear of another attack. What do you have to say to Anthony and his family, who themselves have now become a target of this gang?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I hope the Opposition Leader is not asking me for an opinion.

      Members interjecting.

      Ms MARTIN: What do I have to say? You have just had one of your members raise the issue. Can I just establish whether this in Justice, or is it the Housing Commission, or Police? Which area ...

      Members interjecting.

      Ms MARTIN: No, I am just making the point that we do have standing orders in this parliament, and I am very happy to answer this question. We do have standing orders that state that you ask ministers about areas of their portfolio responsibility. Clearly, the last question should have been directed to the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General. Maybe if the Opposition Leader does not understand the standing orders, he should actually refresh himself about what they are.

      Members interjecting.

      Ms MARTIN: It is an issue, and I believe that the Opposition Leader should be aware of the workings of this parliament.

      Members interjecting.

      Ms MARTIN: Now, I am saying …

      Madam SPEAKER: Cease, thank you. Enough of the interjections and carrying on. Let us get an answer to the question, Chief Minister, without telling the Opposition Leader what he should do and should not do. Could you just get on with the answer?

      Ms MARTIN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is not acceptable when any Territorian experiences the disruption to their lives as this young man has. When we look at the figures of crimes committed across the Territory, and how that impacts on Territorians then, certainly, it is why we have had a very strategic and concentrated approach to tackling all forms of crime across the Territory. We are having a great level of success dealing with property crime. We have seen an area like property crime being reduced in, for example, Darwin, by 40%. This really is, in building a safer community, a good outcome.

      We still have an unacceptable number of personal crimes. Even one is an unacceptable number. There are strategies in place, many of those were outlined by the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General yesterday, and that is why we have increased the funding to get more police in the streets. It is why we have increased the youth and community patrols, to work in conjunction with the police. It is also why we have put increased funding into our domestic violence and indigenous family violence strategies. Every time an incident happens, it is unacceptable. From everyone’s point of view in this House, we do not want it to happen. We look at strategies about how we prevent it happen again.

      Regarding the housing component of the question asked by the Opposition Leader, I will refer that to the appropriate minister, the Minister for Housing.

      Mr AH KIT (Housing): Madam Speaker, it does concern me quite a lot, and members of this side of the House, when we see claims against my Department of Housing in the media regarding public housing tenants being hard done by. I refer members to the article in the paper the other day: ‘Sons going off the rails’, and Mrs Teresa Grear goes on to say:

      I tried to transfer to get my kids away from gangs and stuff but Housing wouldn’t play the game … so I’m living in a shed now, but it’s what I had to do.

      I feel for her, but we have very hard working public servants in the Department of Housing. As I do when I see an article like this, I very quickly seek a briefing. I have a briefing which I am not going to read out verbatim, nor table in the House. We need to understand the facts of the matter.

      You know, you are very quick to jump into Housing and understand …

      Mr Mills interjecting.

      Mr AH KIT: Put your hands up on the other side if you believe every word the Northern Territory News prints. I cannot see any hands up.

      Members interjecting.

      Mr AH KIT: Well, listen up! You might learn something. Mrs Grear stated in the article that Territory Housing did not agree to transfer her. Let us listen to some of the facts. She said that the housing department did not agree to transfer her to an alternative dwelling out of the suburb of Moulden. She has further alleged that, as a result of this refusal, she and her sons are now living in a shed.

      The department said she first applied for housing on 2 March 2001 with her two sons and a daughter and, on 22 May 2001, Mrs Grear was allocated a three-bedroom dwelling at 4 Orchid Court, Moulden on a priority basis. She specifically requested to be allocated a house in the Moulden area. In May 2002, she applied to transfer under the Transfer Within Entitlement scheme and paid the required $150. When she lodged the transfer, she requested that she be permitted to transfer to her sister’s house at 10 Tamarind Road, Moulden, as this dwelling was shortly to become vacant. She subsequently transferred to that dwelling on 22 May 2002.

      Mr MILLS: A point of order, Madam Speaker.

      Mr AH KIT: Look, do you want to hear the details?

      Madam SPEAKER: Order, minister!

      Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, the thrust of the question was the issue of violent crime in the Northern Territory and the increasing levels therein under the Martin Labor government, not about this housing issue.

      Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, perhaps you should have phrased your question a little bit more specifically.

      Mr Mills: It was quite clear.

      Madam SPEAKER: You know the rules about answering questions. Minister, we would like shorter answers today, please.

      Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, she then went on and vacated the house after she moved in to the dwelling at Tamarind Road. She vacated on 16 December 2003. However, when she was moving out, she called at the Palmerston Housing office, on 29 October, to make inquiries about a transfer to Humpty Doo. She was advised that the department did not have three bedroom houses in those centres. She advised that she needed to get her sons out of the city area due to gang-related problems and some mental health issues.

      Members interjecting.

      Mr AH KIT: Some mental health issues. No, she wants to get away from the gangs. She wants a three bedroom house out in an area that does not have three bedroom houses. Madam Speaker …

      Members interjecting.

      Madam SPEAKER: Wind up, minister.

      Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, I think I have covered enough here.

      Members interjecting.

      Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, on second thoughts, I have not and I should go on for may be another 10 minutes if the opposition does not behave themselves, but I will not.

      Madam SPEAKER: Thank you for doing my job, minister.
      Opposition Policies – Impact on Small Business

      Mr KIELY to MINISTER for BUSINESS and INDUSTRY

      Madam Speaker, I will ask a direct question and show the Leader of the Opposition how it is done.

      Members interjecting.

      Mr KIELY: Can the minister advise the House on the impact of the opposition’s uncosted …

      Members interjecting.

      Madam SPEAKER: Order, order! I cannot hear your question with all that noise. Start again.

      Mr KIELY: Certainly, Madam Speaker. Can the minister advise the House on the impact the opposition’s uncosted $200m spending spree would have on Territory small business?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker …

      Members interjecting.

      Mr Dunham: If you are going to tell lies, tell a big one.

      Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Drysdale, withdraw that.

      Mr Dunham: I withdraw it.

      Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Sanderson for his question, because a $200m hit on small business in the Territory would be absolutely devastating. Anyone in small business listening to this broadcast is going to be aghast at the comments that the Leader of the Opposition made on 8TOPFM yesterday. I quote from a transcript of an interview with Trevor Scott. This really does nail the Leader of the Opposition firmly to his $200m taxation cut promise:
        But really behind the scenes is Peter Costello getting on to state Treasurers and say, for goodness sake, make your move on state taxes like payroll tax, stamp duty and BAD tax. You’ve got to do it otherwise the Treasurer is going to start having to act. They are in receipt of $400m additional, over and above of what the CLP would have had at this time of their time in office.

      We dispute the $400m, but here he is:
        … make your move on state taxes like payroll tax, stamp duty and BAD tax.

      The reporter:
        So the CLP is saying that they would drop these taxes immediately?

      Leader of the Opposition:
        Absolutely.

      Absolutely - unequivocal - $200m straight out hit on small business. There is no weaselling out of this commitment made to Territorians on 8TOPFM yesterday. The question was: ‘So the CLP is saying that they would drop these taxes immediately?’ ‘Absolutely’ is the answer, Madam Speaker. This is a $200m commitment. How are they going to make this up? As my colleague, the Treasurer, said, are they going to slash services, are they going to cut hundreds of jobs in the Northern Territory, close schools, or hit up small business?

      Mr MILLS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! If the honourable member is actually quoting from a transcript, he has got it quite incorrect.

      Madam SPEAKER: I am not sure what your point of order is.

      Mr MILLS: The point of order is, ‘… drop these taxes …’, he puts the word in ‘immediately’. That is not in the transcript at all.

      Madam SPEAKER: Perhaps we can have some clarification, minister.

      Members interjecting.

      Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is either back-pedalling as quickly as he can …

      Members interjecting.

      Mr HENDERSON: ‘A $200m commitment absolutely’, were the words, Madam Speaker. There has to be funding of this election commitment somehow. It is going to be done by cutting services and jobs, and increasing taxes on small business in the Northern Territory. Which taxes will they introduce? They have obviously had a look around, and looked around all the other states. All of the other states have a land tax, and they thought, oh well, we need one of those here. We have to make up this $200m that we promised Territorians we are going to cut by abolishing payroll tax, stamp duty and BAD tax. What else do they have in the other states that we do not have in the Northern Territory – the second lowest taxing jurisdiction on business in Australia - what other taxes do they have? They have a fire services levy, so we will have one of those as well.

      Let us look at how these taxes and charges are levied on small business interstate. The land tax is zero in the Northern Territory.

      Mr Mills: You have a land rich tax and you introduced it.

      Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, cease.

      Mr HENDERSON: This is on a typical small business with 15 employees, it pays a land tax in New South Wales of $12 680; Victoria $6200; Queensland $5700; Western Australia $2400; South Australia $1200; Tasmania $4400; ACT $7500; Northern Territory, zero. But this CLP opposition will have to introduce a land tax to fund their $200m promise.

      Let us look at the fire services levy - zero in the Northern Territory, in the same small business in Winnellie or in Alice Springs. There is a fire services levy in New South Wales of $8500; Victoria $8500; Queensland $1000; Western Australia $7000; South Australia $331 – pretty good in South Australia. All these taxes applied when conservative governments were in power in those states. It is zero in the Northern Territory. So which one, is it going to be $8500 or $7000? They have to do something.

      The Leader of the Opposition has to learn that he cannot just jump into the media and make wild promises of abolishing taxes without telling Territorians where the money is going to come from. The money is going to come from cutting services and jobs, and small business in the Territory will be quaking at the thought of the CLP ever returning to government.

      Mr Dunham interjecting.

      Madam SPEAKER: Before we do go on, I ask the member for Drysdale to cease so many interjections.

      Mr Dunham: He is being provocative, Madam Speaker.

      Madam SPEAKER: I know, but you can restrain yourself, I am sure.
      Cane Toad-Proof Fence

      Mr WOOD to MINISTER for PARKS and WILDLIFE

      In the Sessional Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development report dated 16 October 2003 entitled Issues associated with the progressive entry into the Northern Territory of cane toads, there was a recommendation under item 4.6(5):
        That the Northern Territory government take immediate steps to erect a cane toad-proof fence across the neck of the Cobourg Peninsula.

      Minister, could you tell me which one of these you would tick? (1) the government will build a fence this Dry Season; (2) the government does not support the recommendation and will not build a fence; or (3) it is all too hard, the government cannot make up its mind and will establish a new committee to look at the issue, by which time it will all be too late and we will not have to do anything and it was not our fault?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I can assure this House and the public of the Northern Territory that we are a government that takes cane toads very seriously. I have taken an interest in this issue since becoming Minister for Parks and Wildlife, and the activities of the department in combating the cane toad and giving advice to residents about what they can do with the invasion of cane toads coming towards Darwin and beyond.

      To answer specifically the member’s question, I am considering the response in relation to what you call the cane toad-proof fence. I have to be honest; I have severe doubts about a cane toad-proof fence. After all, the scientific name of the cane toad is Bufo marinus. The literal interpretation of that is a toad that swims in saltwater. One of the problems we have seen at Borroloola and beyond, when there is a lot of rainfall, when the rivers and creeks wash through, is that toads can go with that. They have been found quite far out to sea and have invaded some of the islands in the Borroloola area.

      I am also informed that to actually stop the toadlets from passing through such a fence, you would need to have something that almost resembles a mosquito net. I have taken that particular recommendation very seriously, I am considering it. There is a great cost impost involved in it, but the government’s response to this issue will be known soon.

      I should also point out to the member, and commend my predecessor, who managed to get it as an agenda item for consideration on the national resource minister’s ministerial conference coming up in Adelaide midway through next month. I also commend Dr Kemp, the federal minister, for agreeing that it be placed on the agenda for discussion, that the cane toad be considered as a threatening process under the Commonwealth biodiversity legislation. That could attract a lot of Commonwealth resources into this, and concerted and integrated actions across affected states and territories.

      I assure the member, I am working hard on the issue - I am considering the issue of the fence. I have probably laid a few cards on the table regarding what I think of the idea, but I have not closed the door completely on it yet.
      Customary Law – Application in Northern Territory

      Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for JUSTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL

      On 16 October 2002, when talking about customary law, you said in parliament:
        … the Northern Territory government affirms that the Northern Territory Criminal Code applies to all citizens of the Northern Territory without exception.

      In contrast, minister, I refer to your comments made on Stateline on 26 March about the Jeremy Anthony payback case and, in particular, your statement that you ‘rather hope that no action will be taken against the elders’. Obviously, your position has now changed and you believe that the criminal law should be applied to some but not others. Why do you encourage the police to pursue some perpetrators of violence but not others?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, it is not possible to bring this issue down to a black and white presentation as you have just done. Our statement is very clear on this matter; that assault causing grievous bodily harm is against our Criminal Code and, therefore, illegal in the Northern Territory. That statement remains and I have repeated that statement each time I have been interviewed on this matter. Equally, we are guided by a principle that our government does not believe, as a government, we should be going around actively prescribing people for following their customs. Those are two principles. They are totally opposed to each other. I have said repeatedly on this issue that it is one of those situations where there are two very opposing world views that are at work within our population. That is something I cannot do anything about. It is something that governments throughout the history of the Northern Territory, along with the government mechanisms such as the courts, the police, remote based nurses, have grappled with for the last 30, 40, 50 years. It is not going to get any easier because you have two extremely different views about what punishment and reconciliation involves in a community.

      The third principle, which does give some hope of resolving this over time, is that there are many processes going on in Aboriginal communities around the Territory regarding this issue. Many communities have already indicated that physical payback occasioning grievous bodily harm is not the way they want to carry out their affairs anymore, and they have suspended that practice. Other communities, I will give you a couple of examples from Groote Eylandt, Santa Teresa or Ltyentye Apurte, have made that decision very consciously because the practice is too problematic for them anymore, given that there are gaps in the family structures, and that it can be overlaid by substance abuse and basically get out of hand. Other communities, such as the Warlpiris, are very bound to the traditional practice and they have to continue to think through how that is going to place them within our community.

      It is an issue that you are damned if you do, damned if you don’t, because you are either oppressing a culture that has been here for tens of thousands of years with an active process of prescription, or you are diluting the Criminal Code that should apply quite rightly to every Territorian within our community. The only way we feel we can gain ground on this issue is to work locally with each of the communities to see if we can come up with alternatives to assaults occasioning grievous bodily harm. The Chief Justice has supported that position. He has indicated that there would be versions of physical punishment that would stand within the law and can be consented to by the offender.

      I am not going to stand here and say we have a great solution to this. It is a very complicated issue. It is beholden on all of us in this Chamber to treat it for what it is. It is a crucial issue within the relationships between our indigenous Territorians and the community at large. It has to be handled both sensitively and in a way that may have to be different around the community. I do not believe our police should be out there, as a general policy of government, and it is certainly not our policy that they should be hunting people throughout the Northern Territory to stamp out this practice. We have to work through negotiations.

      Katherine Hospital – Evaluation for Accreditation

      Mr McADAM to MINISTER for HEALTH

      Through the Building Healthier Communities five year plan, the Martin Labor government has made a commitment to building a better hospital system. Can the minister advice the House about progress being made in respect to the Katherine Hospital.

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, with the Building Healthier Communities Five Year Framework, we have expressed a very strong commitment to building better hospitals throughout the Territory. The important part of this commitment is working to ensure that all of our hospitals achieve accreditation so that our clients receive quality care and our staff work in a safe environment.

      On 21 November 2003, the Katherine Hospital successfully underwent a periodic review against the standards under the Australian Council of Health Care Standards Evaluation and Quality Improvement Program knows as EQuIP. EQuIP is a nationally recognised framework for evaluation of quality improvement in health care. Staff and patient safety and quality are assessed and evaluated against best practice standards. EQuIP seeks comprehensive ongoing improvement in the areas of leadership and management, continuum of care, information management, human resource management, safe practice and environment, and evaluation and improving performance.

      The surveyor from the Australian Council of Health Care Standards conducted a review as part of the hospital’s ongoing accreditation cycle. The review made 19 recommendations on issues to be addressed within two years, a significant improvement on the 52 recommendations made in 2001. The surveyor commended the hospital staff, management board, and executive team on the quality of care provided, and the range of services offered to the local community.

      Special mention was made of the obvious increase in hospital security since the first visit in November 2001. Continued and improving accreditation status demonstrates to our staff and community our commitment to safety and quality of care. It confirms the services we provide in our hospitals are as good as anywhere in Australia. I would ask the member for Katherine to abandon her negative line on her own community and join us in celebrating some very good work that has been done at the Katherine Hospital.
      Violent Crime

      Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for JUSTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL

      Your own figures show that violent crime has increased significantly under Labor. Assaults, and sexual assaults in particular, have increased across the Territory. How can you continue to perpetuate the myth that, under Labor, Territorians are safe? What words of comfort do you offer to the increasing number of victims of crime?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I am going to get the video for today; this is fantastic. I have had two questions in a row.

      Members: Three, three.

      Dr TOYNE: One referred. Let us go to the figures before we start accepting the assertions from over there. Looking at the Northern Territory as a whole, offences against a person - total offences in the December quarter two years ago were 1272 offences Territory-wide. In the December quarter this year, 1192. We are not claiming any win there, but what we are saying is that, over the two years that these figures in the publication run, total violent crime in the Territory has not increased. It has stayed at a stable and high level. Let us get that straight for a start. We are not looking at a deteriorating situation; we are looking at a serious but stable level of this type of offence.

      The second thing I wish to make clear here before we say what we are or are not doing is that these offences, on the additional details that we looked at in Katherine and Tennant Creek as a result of this last publication of figures, are largely domestic violence assaults, mainly in the indigenous community. That does not make it good nor acceptable, but the fact is that, in Katherine, for example, of 105 offences, over 60% were domestic violence assaults, male on female.

      Mr Dunham: Oh, so it is all right then. That is okay then.

      Dr TOYNE: Gee, you are a drip. 62% were domestic violence attacks, male on female, in a domestic situation. In over 40%, there was a weapon involved. In something like 60%-plus, the offender was affected by alcohol, and in 49%, the victim was affected by alcohol.

      We are building up a picture of what these crimes involve. This is not people being hunted on the streets of their town. These are domestic offences that have to be dealt with in their own terms. How do you deal with them? You deal with substance abuse, the breakdown in family constraints on the behaviour of the offenders, you support the victims and prevent them from being re-offended against, all of which we are rolling out in the initiatives that we have funded as part of the itinerant strategies, as part of crime prevention, as part of the accent in our magistrates court on bringing offenders in domestic violence cases to court as quickly as possible, and in the general patrolling patterns of police and the night patrols. We know where these offences are occurring. We are moving to address the offences in the pattern in which they are occurring. In some places we are making progress, including Alice Springs.
      Crocodiles – Proposed Safari Hunting

      Mr BONSON to MINISTER for PARKS and WILDLIFE

      The federal government has previously said that it does not support the Territory government’s proposal to introduce controlled safari hunting for mature saltwater crocodiles. Will the minister inform the House about the recent delegation that he led to Canberra to lobby the Commonwealth over the Territory’s proposal?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I will be brief on this question, although it is a very important one. The member for Millner is right. The Commonwealth government has initially rejected the draft Northern Territory Plan of Management for Saltwater Crocodiles, in which there is a request for limited safari hunting of 25 saltwater crocodiles over 4 metres in length. We were not looking to increase the quota per annum that can be harvested in the wild, which is 600. All we were asking for is that 25 of those 600 be allowed to be hunted by game hunters, thus producing a dividend to Aboriginal communities and to pastoral property owners who have a problem there.

      It was a well-rounded delegation. I was proud that the member for Arafura accompanied me in her guise as the local member as well as being minister for the environment. It was very good to have Professor Grahame Webb, a world-renowned crocodile expert over many years, with us. In addition, Mike Letnic from my department, and Tony Searle, vice president of the Cattlemen’s Association, were with us as well. In addition, there were two Djelk Rangers from the Maningrida community.

      I appreciated the opportunity to put our case to people in the federal Department of Environment and Heritage, and they asked us many questions. It was great to be able to meet with Dr Kemp, the federal minister with whom, I might add, I believe I have a very constructive and worthwhile relationship. Dr Kemp gave us a very good hearing. I believe he is coming here next week. I am optimistic that he may have a positive announcement for us, however, we will have to wait and see. The ball is in his court.

      I will close on this – I will not name the source of this information – it is someone who has been involved in crocodiles for many years. This person told me that, some years ago when Senator Hill was the federal Minister for the Environment, the Territory put forward a draft plan that included the very same proposal. It was knocked back, and there was not a whimper from the Territory government. I need to ascertain whether that is a fact. Maybe someone from the other side could clarify that, but that is the information I have received from a very reliable source. I place on the record that we are a government that stands up for Territorians, and the rights of Territorians to control what happens to their wildlife that will benefit the whole community.

      Members: Hear, hear!
      Indigenous People in the Justice System

      Ms CARNEY to MINISTER for JUSTICE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL

      In your ministerial statement on Indigenous People in the Justice System in October 2002, you said that your government was committed to tackling domestic violence and Aboriginal family violence, and ‘Violence will not be tolerated, and the lives and wellbeing of those most affected will be protected’. You said your solution was, ‘a coordinated, multi-faceted, whole-of-government and whole-of-community approach.’ Minister, this is Labor speak, which means nothing and has achieved nothing. In light of your failure to protect victims of Aboriginal family violence, will you now go back to the drawing board?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, the first thing I would say is, there are unprecedented numbers of people in our gaols who are in there because they did carry out an assault in a domestic situation. Not only are they in gaol, but the sentence lengths they are facing for their incarceration are significantly longer than when we first came to power. I do not believe you could possibly say, in the light of that information, that we are backing off on the enforcement of our laws. Assault means assault. We are very aware that, where victims are women within a domestic situation, it is a particularly abhorrent offence. I can give this undertaking to the House: that we will maintain the effort of enforcement of these crimes. We can only hope that, over time, if more and more people are going into gaol for longer and longer, that that message might finally get out from the point of view of transmitting it through enforcement to would-be offenders to say, let us change our behaviour; let us change our attitude to this type of offence.

      In regard to the other aspect of it, the community mobilisation, we are, indeed, working in many areas of the Northern Territory now to mobilise the community around these very serious offences. These offences exist in a community only because the community either has given up trying to curb the behaviour of the offenders, or feels disempowered to be able to do that. Whether you are talking about a remote community where, often, it comes down to: is there a Night Patrol that can be supported to go around; are there strong enough family structures to impact on the behaviour of these offenders; is anyone there to challenge, in many cases, a long history of violence being used to mediate affairs between people? All of those questions are being tested through Aboriginal law and justice arrangements, through regional crime prevention councils.

      I was at Ntaria last Friday meeting with Relekha and presenting them with a couple of grants that we have given them to work on these very matters. Relekha have had a significant - in fact, a dramatic - drop in assaults against women in their community; a community that I must say has had a very troubled history, simply by night patrols working the community; by dobbing in grog runners because they, quite rightly, have seen the relationship between alcohol abuse and the assaults that were occurring in their community. In talking to the police sergeant, his call-out overtime hours have gone down from something like 30 to about six or eight per work period. That is an example of where communities are mobilising. They are starting to do their part, alongside the police - the enforcement and the sentencing of offenders through our courts - in trying to reduce these terrible offences.

      We are on the job. I am prepared to accept that these are very deep-seated issues. They are behaviour patterns that are not new in the Territory; they have been around for many years. They are going to take a persistent effort to make inroads - much harder than property crime. That is the truth of it.
      Live Cattle Trade Report

      Mr McADAM to MINISTER for PRIMARY INDUSTRY and FISHERIES

      I understand that late yesterday the Commonwealth government released its response to the Keniry report into Australia’s livestock export trade. Given the importance of the live cattle export trade as Australia’s largest contributor to the Territory’s primary industry sector, what impact will the Commonwealth government’s response have on the Territory’s producers and exporters?

      ANSWER

      Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Barkly for his question. You will recall the incident last year of the Cormo Express, when 50 000 sheep were rejected by Saudi Arabia and the federal government had a lot of trouble trying to return them. They were finally donated as a food aid to Eritrea. Also, there was an incident in South Australia where feed for sheep was contaminated with pork. These sheep were actually to be exported to the Middle East. Of course, both issues attracted a lot of media attention. As a result, the Commonwealth Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry announced a review into the livestock export industry late in 2003.

      The report of the inquiry was released on 8 January 2004, and a number of recommendations about livestock export generally, and live sheep export in particular from South Australia, were made. Late yesterday, the Commonwealth government released its response to the inquiry as did the federal opposition spokesperson for Agriculture and Fisheries.

      Industry members generally support the majority of the Commonwealth government’s response to the review into live animal export. I have written to the federal opposition spokesperson for Agricultural and Fisheries. I will write to Hon Warren Truss to advise him how the industry has responded and how it is doing business in the Territory with regards to live cattle export. I will point out to both politicians that the Labor government unreservedly supports the continuation of the live export industry from the Territory. Producers and exporters already have achieved the animal welfare and handling standards that are required now by the Commonwealth government.

      Existing health and welfare practices means that overall mortality rates for cattle are extremely low. Less than one animal in 1500 animals on vessels that travel to South-East Asia die. Heytesbury Beef, the largest cattle producer and exporter in the Northern Territory, reports a mortality rate on export shipment of around 0.07%, while losses from pastoral properties from natural causes is around 3%. Live exports from the Territory are generally short haul to South-East Asia. The tropical animals fare very well in being transported from the Northern Territory to South-East Asia; due to the same climate they do not need to acclimatise. When an animal dies, somebody is about to lose $1000 because they are actually high value animals. The tropical cattle are quiet and well fed, and exported to tropical markets, and do not have to adapt to climatic changes. We have worked very well with the people in South-East Asia for a humane method of slaughter. We have participated in the design of abattoirs. We have been instrumental in encouraging Indonesian abattoirs to adopt the slaughter box approach where the animal is not traumatised. Animals are exported to South-East Asia because that is what the market wants. Markets in South-East Asia are not adapted to chill or frozen product. They bring animals in and they make them available to the wet market.

      The producers and exporters of the Territory have already achieved the outcomes sought by the Commonwealth government. Live exports continue to be our most important contributor to the Territory’s economy. Every year, they bring in about $160m directly and there is a flow-on effect of $0.5bn to the Territory economy. I look forward to working together with the producers and exporters. I have invited our colleagues from Canberra to visit the Territory to have a first-hand experience of how we handle and export cattle. Also, I have advise that I will be travelling to Sabah and the Philippines in the near future and will extend an invitation to our federal colleagues from the opposition and the government to link up with us to travel there to see the live cattle export to South-East Asia, how they are slaughtered and how they are available to the local markets.

      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