2001-11-28
Northern Territory Budget – Public Service Staffing Levels
Mr BURKE to TREASURER
Why was the column that identified departmental staffing levels in the May Budget Paper No 2 dropped from the presentation of yesterday’s mini-budget? Was it because providing such information would have revealed the true extent of the job cuts that will result from your public service restructure?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. It is interesting to listen to the comments of the member for Brennan about this important mini-budget. He wasted the best part of 40 minutes in here this morning simply by his denial of what this entire mini-budget process was about. The mini-budget was only needed because of the dishonest budget that was presented here in May. We have heard the Leader of the Opposition who demonstrates, increasingly, that he has very little grasp on budgetary matters, go on about first of all, we’re going to lose 500 public servants and then it grew to 1000 public servants ...
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: ... and this morning it grew to 1500 public servants. It demonstrates, only too clearly, that the Leader of the Opposition and his rabble who join him, do not understand what this mini-budget is about. The denial is very substantial. What we have is a mini-budget that tackles the problems that you left Territorians and you deny that you left Territorians. The staffing was in the May budget ...
Mr Burke: Why is the column on staffing missing, that is the question.
Ms MARTIN: Well, I think there should be some logic that this mob can apply, that we have just had a major change to our public sector agencies and these are still working through the system. If you listened to the speech I gave - and I hope you did yesterday and read your budget speeches - there are still aspects of this change to our agencies that are working through. Let me just put the bottom line of the question from the Leader of the Opposition. The bottom line is that you are trying to go into the Territory public sector and say: ‘Be scared, public sector employees, be scared’. You are just like Henny Penny with the skies falling in. It is the Henny Penny from Brennan with the skies falling in.
We have made it very, very clear there are savings to be made over the final consumption expenditure of government. In real terms, it grows 3.4% over the next four years. We are going to make savings because, let us be very real about this, who left the hole in the budget? Who left the hole in the budget? It was the dishonest former government who tried to tell Territorians that there was just a ...
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! She cannot use that word ‘dishonest’ in relation to the former government.
Madam SPEAKER: No, that is okay, we said you could. No, there is no point of order.
Ms MARTIN: There is no point of order. It was the dishonest former government that did not tell Territorians. And surprise, surprise, in the run up to an election when the CLP’s saying: ‘Don’t trust this other mob, they’re not responsible financial managers’, who were the irresponsible financial managers? It was the CLP with the contempt of nearly 27 years in government We have made it very clear to public servants and very clear to CEOs that there are no forced redundancies over this next three-year period that this budget covers. There is no program of voluntary redundancies, there are no job losses.
Mr Reed: There is a program of not filling vacancies.
Ms MARTIN: You cannot understand that because the CLP oversaw the very vicious Expenditure Review Committee process in the early 1990s - a very vicious process. That is the only kind of concept you have - vicious slash and burn. You cannot come to terms with the fact that this mini-budget is a careful management budget. This is about carefully managing the process over the next four years. Let me assure the opposition, whose Leader wasted his time this morning in the comments he made, that we will reach a surplus by 2004-05 and we will have the budget properly managed, in stark contrast to what has happened over the last few years and, particularly, the previous two-and-a-half years under the chief ministership of the member for Brennan.
Northern Territory Budget - Response from Community
Ms SCRYMGOUR to TREASURER
What has the reaction been to the mini-budget?
ANSWER
That is a terrific question and I thank the member for Arafura for a very pertinent and apt question …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, members of the opposition. The Chief Minister has the floor, give her a chance to answer.
Ms MARTIN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I think there has been, from across the Territory, a very positive feedback to this mini-budget. I am very heartened because Territorians clearly understand where the responsibility lies. They understand that the deficit that was left by the CLP, despite the continual denials we will hear. It is not surprising. When the previous administration could put in the previous budget papers such a dishonest number about the deficit for the present year, then it is not surprising the denials continue.
Let us look at some of the comments. From the Motor Traders Association: ‘an even-handed budget.’ Thank you, Motor Traders Association.
Mr Reed: Don’t forget the chap on the top of page 2 of the paper, what he said. It wasn’t very nice for you.
Ms MARTIN: Have you finished? Good. From the Territory Construction Association talking about QuickStart II: ‘A great initiative’, and very pleased with the QuickStart II initiative and the $15m into the construction budget to go to those road repairs and the minor new works categories, and to pick up the problems created by the previous administration about period contracts. ‘A great initiative’, says the TCA. The Chamber of Commerce says: ‘It gives the Territory direction and helps overcome the deficit’. So, from the Chamber of Commerce, a recognition that we have not had direction.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, cease. Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, you know you are not to have conversations across the Chamber. The Chief Minister has the floor and that is who we are trying to listen to.
Ms MARTIN: I repeat, Madam Speaker, ‘This budget’, says the Chamber of Commerce, ‘gives the Territory direction and helps overcome the deficit’. Other business people we talked to said it is the right thing to do, it is a well-rounded budget and that, even though there is pain within this budget - and I apologise to Territorians for that, but we know directly whose responsibility it is - the deficit that was left by the previous administration had to be tackled. It was the only reason for this mini-budget, to tackle that deficit. Otherwise, Labor’s promises could have been put into place quite simply, but we needed to have a mini-budget to tackle the deficit left by the previous administration.
I recognise the fact that there are tough measures in the budget, but when you listened to 40 minutes of the Opposition Leader this morning, what a waste of space, what a waste of time, nothing constructive to say - whingeing, whining the sky is falling in, minute after minute after minute. Worse still was the Opposition Leader’s total denial in accepting any responsibility for the black hole in the budget - a black hole of $107m-plus in the budget.
I am gratified that Territory businesses and the non-government sector in the community has demonstrated their willingness to work with this government. I think we saw that very clearly in the Economic Development Summit held in this Chamber. The positive response we gained yesterday from the budget again demonstrates that what this government is talking about is partnerships with the community, it is not talking about the arrogance of the past. We are talking about partnerships for the future, and that is something that will be the hallmark of this government. I thank all those who have been responsive to our mini-budget, who have recognised there were hard measures, but recognised it also gives a direction and a new culture for where the Territory is going.
Northern Territory Budget - Public Service Staffing Levels
Mr REED to TREASURER
In light of the fact that the mythical black hole is said to be $107m, that the budget improvement measures will amount to $120m and new taxes and charges will amount to $42m - a total of $162m which Territorians will be paying, far in excess, of course, of the mythical black hole - could the leader of government please explain to public servants listening to this broadcast - and many of them will be through their speakers - why in all former budget papers, every agency had listed the number of staff per operational area in their departments? That has been excluded by this open, honest and accountable government in yesterday’s papers for no other reason, I suspect, than to publish those figures of the staff arrangements or the new agencies …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Questions are supposed to be short and succinct, and I would urge the honourable member to get to the point. This is like a statement.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, please get to your question.
Mr REED: Thank you, Madam Speaker. For no other reason than the fact that if the new staffing arrangements were published in the budget papers released yesterday by the Treasurer, then it would expose what the real cuts are, as she said on ABC radio yesterday, 10%, and that equals 1500 jobs across the public service. If that figure is wrong, how many cuts will be put in place by your government? Territory public servants are listening to you and they want to know what the truth is, not what your burblings are.
ANSWER
I do not think the member for Katherine has quite got the point of asking questions yet. He still thinks he is on this side of the House, and can lecture to this government. Let us look at a couple of points here. This is a new budget format and I think that the former Treasurer has not quite got the hang of it yet. These are Treasury figures presented by Treasury …
Mr Reed: Oh, they are not yours?
Ms MARTIN: Oh, quite! ‘Oh, they are not yours’, says the former Treasurer. We know what you did in budgets. We know that you sat in your office up there, and said: ‘Oops, don’t like this deficit figure for this year, Under Treasurer, let us just change it’. Did not like the fact that it was well over a $100m - thought he would just change it. ‘I think $12m seems like a good figure for this year’, said the former Treasurer …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Just cease for a moment! I had a little discussion at lunch time and I knew you were going to be like this. I would like short questions and short answers.
Mr Dunham: What about different answers? Answers that answer the questions.
Madam SPEAKER: The member for Drysdale, if you continue to interrupt you may be having an early Christmas. Chief Minister, would you get on with the answer.
Ms MARTIN: I say to the member for Katherine, who really does not deserve to even have the entitlement to ask any questions about budgetary matters, that this is a responsible budget. There are no job losses, there are no forced redundancies, and I think the member should sit down.
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question is nothing to do with responsible budgets. For the second time, the Chief Minister is being asked what the staffing circumstances will be for her revised public servants. Public servants are listening and they want to know the answer. It has nothing to do with the rabbiting on that she has been continuing with.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. We know that the Chief Minister and ministers are entitled to answer the question the best way they can, but it would be best if we could get the answers to the questions, and have short answers and short questions. Let us get on with the job.
Ms MARTIN: I gave the answer to the previous question from the Leader of the Opposition, Madam Speaker.
Government’s View on Legislative Assembly Members’ Entitlements
Mr BONSON to CHIEF MINISTER
Madam Speaker, we have recently received the Remuneration Tribunal determination relating to entitlements for members of the Legislative Assembly. What is your government’s view about entitlements for members?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, my government’s view in relation to entitlements for members, generally, is that we must all share - all in this parliament - in the difficult financial circumstances we currently are in, in the Territory. We recognise those difficult financial circumstances in the mini-budget. It is important when we are dealing with the circumstances of the Territory, that parliamentarians are taking cognisance of that fact and are responding appropriately. That is why we needed a Temporary Budget Improvement Levy. It should really be called the CLP tax. A contributory liability payment is probably a better term for it, but we have called it a budget improvement levy and it is a temporary one.
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: No, it is the Burke and Reed tax, actually, if we are going to be serious about it. It is a levy and it applies on domestic motor vehicles, but also on all of us in here. So, you will all pay the $90; we will all pay this $90.
In relation to members’ entitlements, we have previously indicated very strongly that we do not think it is acceptable for members to be able to purchase their office equipment, as we saw happen so disgracefully. It is costing taxpayers an incredible amount of money …
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Chief Minister is reflecting on a committee of this parliament.
Madam SPEAKER: No, she isn’t. There is no point of order.
Mr Dunham: She is! Yes, she is.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, would you think before you jump to your feet again.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, we do not think it is acceptable that members should be able to purchase the entire contents - down to the last roll of toilet paper - of their offices when they leave. That is a disgrace and it should stop. We do not believe it is acceptable for members to purchase their vehicles.
In the current budgetary circumstances this government goes even further. We do not believe there should be any increases to the salaries of office holders. We do not believe there should be an increase in electorate allowances. We would also like to see changes to travel allowance provisions and tighter limits on overseas travel entitlements.
I have received the tribunal determination and I intend to table it this afternoon. We will debate it tomorrow. I can indicate to this House now that this government does not support the tribunal’s determinations and we will not be supporting them. We will not support it and we will be voting against it. We, as a new government of just three months, reject the pay increases recommended by the determination. We absolutely reject those pay increases. It will be tabled this afternoon and it will be debated in this House.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr BURKE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! You are best able to provide clarification and rule on this. I would have understood, given the conventions of this House, that the report of an independent Remuneration Tribunal should be privy to the chairman of that tribunal until it hits the floor of this House. I understand that the Chief Minister is indicating that she and her colleagues - gauging by the ‘hear, hear’ - have already discussed that tribunal report in their own caucus. That, to my mind, is a contravention of all of the conventions of this House.
Madam SPEAKER: My advice to the Chief Minister’s office was that she could speak to the RTD in general terms, not specifics nor quote from it. The report, as yet, has not been tabled to the House. I have not seen it and other members have not, so I keep …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: That was the advice …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Government members, you should be aware that you should not have seen the report either until it is tabled, that is convention. Bearing in mind what you said, Leader of the Opposition, and bearing in mind the advice I passed on to the Chief Minister’s office, I would suggest the Chief Minister keeps her remarks very general and not specific to anything in the report, until we have all had a chance to see it.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, just to continue, I believe my remarks were very general but they were to a very strong principle that while we are having …
Mr Burke: What about the ‘hear, hear’ from the rest?
Ms MARTIN: Because it is supported on this side of the House.
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Because in principle - look at the greedy little grubs on the other side of the House. What I am saying is we have tough circumstances and I will not accept - this government will not accept - increases in office holders’ salaries …
Mr BURKE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Perhaps you might seek clarification from the Clerk, but it seems to me that there has been a major contravention of the proceedings of this House. We have the government, by the ‘hear, hear’ of the members, clearly indicating to this House that they have discussed in detail a report from an independent tribunal. There is no authority by virtue of being government …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition, if you would …
Mr BURKE: If I may finish, Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: Well …
Mr BURKE: I am entitled to speak in this House.
Madam SPEAKER: I am going to take advice from the Clerk, so resume your seat until I take advice from the Clerk. I believe my remarks may have covered it all.
I am advised that my remarks were correct. In fact, because the report has not been tabled in the House, the Chief Minister’s remarks should be of a general nature only and not be specific to anything in the report. The Chief Minister is a member of the Executive Council and, as you know, the report does go to the Administrator who issues that notice to get the report done. So, the Chief Minister would have had knowledge of what was in the report. But I reiterate to the Chief Minister: because the report has not been tabled you cannot be specific in anything you say - not anything that was within that report.
Northern Territory Budget - Public Service Staffing Levels
Mr REED to TREASURER
Madam Speaker, I ask for the third time, given that she has determined the precise dollar amounts of savings that are going to accrue from changes to the public service; given that she has directed CEOs in relation to the staffing levels as regards their specific areas of responsibility; and given that there are public servants listening on their monitors to this parliamentary broadcast who are concerned about their future, will she - without believing that she is still behind an ABC microphone, that in fact is the Chief Minister behind the parliamentary microphone - please advise public servants what the cuts? If they are not 1500 - the 10% of the 15 000 public servants that she said on ABC radio yesterday, what precisely are they? Public servants deserve an answer and you are the only one who can give it.
Madam SPEAKER: Could we have your question quickly? Come on, let us stop the rambling of questions. Let us get them short, sharp and shiny, and answers.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, this question has been asked again, and we have a former Treasurer who does not seem to understand. Who does not understand that there are no staffing differences between the May budget and this one.
Mr Reed: Well, why did you not publish them?
Ms MARTIN: This is an amendment to your budget. It does not have all the things that you had in your budget. It is an amendment to your budget; it is in a different format. The salary costs are contained in the budget papers and there is no difference in that. We do have amalgamations.
Mr Reed: Where are the cuts coming from?
Ms MARTIN: You should be looking more carefully. The salary costs are contained and we have the Henny Penny mark II sitting next to the Henny Penny mark I, trying to do anything but actually grasp the fact that this is a very responsible and fair mini-budget; that because you consistently grew deficits year after year, irresponsibly, trying to pretend that there were no deficits and then at the end of the year saying: ‘Whoops, we have got to $91m. Whoops, we have got to $149m’, and as we see for this year: ‘Whoops, we have got to $139m’. Yes, we have to make savings across government agencies …
Mr Reed: How are you going to make them? What is the detail?
Ms MARTIN: What a shame we did not ask the former Treasurer to the workshops that were held to show how government can be more efficient. Government, yes, can be more efficient. You never tried very hard; we will. Government can be more efficient, government can be more effective …
Mr Reed: So they are inefficient? Public servants are inefficient? They’ll be pleased to hear that on their monitors.
Ms MARTIN: … but there are three principles about this which are being carefully outlined …
Mr Reed: Keep going, please!
Ms MARTIN: Settle down!
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine!
Ms MARTIN: … that have been carefully outlined to CEOs and to the public sector that improved services is what this government is all about. Staff morale and greater confidence of staff in their career developments, in their career opportunities, is of paramount concern, and that CEOs will live within their budgets. Not like the previous culture we had, where budget allocations to agencies were way below what their actuals were - way below - and so you had CEOs having to come back and say to the Treasurer: ‘Can I have some more money?’ We saw the way you fudged the figures, we saw the way you fudged it. You fudged it in health and you fudged it in education, and we are going to get to the bottom of how many times you fudged it, how many times you presented dishonest figures to Territorians. You will be outed, former Treasurer, you will be outed here.
Let me say again, to our Territory public servants: there are no forced redundancies, there is no program of voluntary redundancies, there are no job losses. We will manage this process carefully, we will manage this process with great integrity and that really will distinguish us, this new Labor government, from the previous CLP.
________________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Before we do go on with Question Time I would like to advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of participants in the Territory Tidy Towns forum. On behalf of all honourable members I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
________________________
Madam SPEAKER: Now perhaps we can have a little bit of decorum back in the Chamber.
Northern Territory Budget - Temporary Budget Improvement Levy
Mr WOOD to TREASURER
On page 8 of the budget statement under the heading ‘Temporary Budget Improvement Levy’, it states the following:
- Certain vehicles including heavy vehicles, trailers, caravans, tractors and mobile plant machinery are excluded from the levy to minimise the impact on business.
Also, in the proposed Motor Vehicle Amendment Bill 2001 under section 4(12)(1)(e), motorised golf buggies are excluded.
Bearing in mind the statement that the above vehicles are excluded from the levy to minimise the impact on business, isn’t the government being unfair by not exempting utes and vans which are commonly used by those self-employed - many of them rural - carpenters, couriers, electricians, plumbers, gardeners, smoko deliverers, labourers and others who rely on these vehicles for their business?
Does it recommend to these self-employed people that they should switch to a golf buggy as their means of transport and tow a caravan to carry their tools of trade? Would the government please consider reviewing section 4(12)(1)(e) before this act is presented to parliament?
Madam SPEAKER: That was a very long question. I hope, Chief Minister, you were able to get the gist of it. It was about golf buggies.
ANSWER
Thank you, Madam Speaker, it is about golf buggies. The Temporary Budget Improvement Levy is an unfortunate fact of the deficit left by the previous administration. We have been very clear about that. It is to raise the funds to be able to fix the deficit – be very clear about that. It is for three years and that will be enshrined in legislation. Its intent is to share the pain - and I am saying pain - to share the measures needed across the Territory because of the dishonesty - the very poor and dishonest financial management - of the previous administration. Now we all have to share this.
If you look at the response we have seen from many sectors of the community, they recognise that we have been very careful about making sure that the burden of this deficit, this unacceptable level of debt that the CLP has landed the Territory with, has to be shared as widely as possible. Every Territorian …
Mr Reed: Mythical black hole $107m, what you are raising is $162m. You are a thief.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine!
Ms MARTIN: Yes, I think that is an unnecessary word. I think it should be withdrawn.
Madam SPEAKER: I think that should be withdrawn.
Mr REED: I am happy to withdraw it, if they heard it in …
Ms MARTIN: The intent of this Temporary Budget Improvement Levy is that it will be shared across-the-board, and so all Territorians have to be able to take part in this. We have, as wide as possible, pensioner concessions which takes it to $45, so $90 once a year, $45 on a wide range of pensioner concessions. I say to Territorians, I am sorry about this measure, but if we are going to tackle an unsustainable deficit, an unsustainable financial situation that we inherited from the previous administration, then these types of measures have to be put in place. They have to be put in place and in three years time it will be gone and we will have tackled the worst of the deficit left by the Country Liberal Party.
Northern Territory Budget – Public Service Staffing Levels
Dr LIM to TREASURER
Madam Speaker, the Chief Minister has not really addressed the question about the public service despite all the questions we have asked. I will make it a little easier for her. What is the current size of the public service in terms of employees of all designations, and what do you anticipate the figure being in 12 months time under your changes to the public service?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Don’t start, Chief Minister, until there is a bit of quiet.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, we have seen a previous administration that did not value our public sector. We have seen a previous administration that, for example, kept many public servants or kept many Territorians on short-term contracts, rolling those short-term contracts over and over and over. I can say to the House today that we will end that. We will end that, because that is not fair employment practice. We will end that because we will not have short-term contracts. They will be properly employed in our public sector.
I have written to all public servants today assuring them that the opposition’s scaremongering, the ridiculous assertions they are attempting to make, the Henny Penny attitude, is simply false. It is simply their pathetic tactic in trying to avoid the fact that the mini-budget is all about their financial management, or lack of it, and their deceit on Territorians.
This government values our public sector. There will be no forced redundancies. In fact, if you look at the mini-budget – and you are probably still trying to comes to terms with it - there is growth in our public sector. There are more teachers, there are more police, there are more nurses. We are growing a new Office of Territory Development, a very exciting Office of Territory Development. There is a new Office of Indigenous Affairs in the Department of Chief Minister. In fact, we are growing the public sector from the number of about 14 400-ish at the moment …
Mr Dunham: So it will be bigger. Is that the answer? It will be bigger?
Ms MARTIN: I know that you have trouble grasping what the mini-budget is about, that you are in denial. Let me try and get you to focus on the fact that we are valuing public servants, we are looking for improved services, we are looking for more efficient government, and we are increasing numbers of public servants, in key areas for us, in key areas for Territorians - we have been very upfront about that. We will be proudly reporting back here over the next four years about how we have achieved those efficiencies.
Territory Tidy Towns Forum
Mr BONSON to MINISTER for COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
I understand that earlier today the minister opened the Territory Tidy Towns Forum, which is being held in the Chan Building over the next two days. Can the minister advise on the success of the Tidy Towns program, particularly in remote communities, and how will the proceedings of the forum contribute to further development to Tidy Towns programs? Also, can the minister provide details on how the government intends to support Tidy Towns activities in the future?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Millner for his question. As members of this Chamber are aware, the Territory Tidy Towns program has been in existence in the Territory over the last 30 years. The key aims of the program are to develop community pride, prestige, and a sense of worth in improving the living standards and health of communities, while providing those same communities with empowerment, education and training opportunities. It also recognises and acknowledges the efforts of individuals involved in improving their community health, environment and surroundings.
It has had a tremendous impact, not only on those whose lives are directly affected by better living conditions, but also on public expenditure where significant savings have been made in health care by what can be regarded as effective, preventative measures. For instance, I am aware of a community where the Territory Tidy Towns program is linked to a 70% reduction in Aerial Medical evacuations and this has led to a savings across the community and to government …
Mr Reed: I hope you never need an evacuation, they’ll need a Hercules.
Mr AH KIT: I beg your pardon?
Mr Reed: It is all right, keep going.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr AH KIT: It is the member for Katherine, obviously, with his doom and gloom. He has been taking a bit of a pelting over the last couple of sittings, so he cannot help himself in continuing to be rude and interjecting whilst I am talking about something that I thought all of this Chamber supported. Obviously, the people over in the B-grade section are opposed to the Territory Tidy Towns and what it is on about.
Madam Speaker, I digress …
Mr Reed: Are you going to fund them for a container deposit legislation?
Madam SPEAKER: The member for Katherine, order!
Mr AH KIT: If the member for Katherine listens he might learn something.
Mr Reed: Oh, get on with it!
Madam SPEAKER: I am sure the members in the gallery would like to hear the answer to this question. Could we get on with it?
Mr AH KIT: For instance, I repeat, I am aware of a community where the Territory Tidy Towns program is linked to a 70% reduction in Aerial Medical evacuations. This has led to a saving across the community, and to the government, in the order of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
We are talking here about a program that makes a significant contribution to the quality of people’s lives and that is going to be a fundamental driving force for my new department and, indeed, the government as a whole. That is what we are about.
It was a great pleasure for me to open the forum this morning. It will provide people with the opportunity to come together and express their ideas, and circulate information on ways in which they can improve their community living. It will also provide participants with a chance to exchange good news stories and ideas with other community members; gain fresh ideas for new and innovative projects; and create networks with other people who share the same aspirations and motivations to achieve cleaner, tidier, healthier communities.
The government is supporting this work through two avenues. Through the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs we provide currently a $160 000 grant for operational expenditure. For the Keep Australia Beautiful Council - and it is this council that conducts the Territory Tidy Towns program - we also provide a one-off grant of $5000 to assist with the holding of the forum, as well as the awards night, which will occur later this week.
Of course, now that we are in government, we will be looking at ways across-the-board to improve the quality of life for all Territorians, particularly those living in remote communities. Sadly, this has never rated with any importance with those opposite. It just was not on their agenda. Politics was their order of the day. We know they do not support, seriously, extra resources going into improving health, education and community development services in the Northern Territory. That is just one area that clearly distinguished us from them.
We will continue to support the activities of the Territory Tidy Towns program and we will focus on getting better outcomes for the health and quality of life for all Territorians. I look forward to joining with the Tidy Towns delegates later this week for the presentation of this year’s awards which I know have been very competitive. It is great that the efforts of individual towns and communities will be recognised in this manner.
In conclusion, the efforts of those associated with this program should also be recognised: The Executive Director, Lorna Woods, and her staff do a wonderful job, and all those people who help to make the program a success, including the judges and sponsors of the awards.
Northern Territory Budget – Public Service Staffing Levels
Mr BURKE to TREASURER
In her previous answer, the Chief Minister stated in this House that she has written to all public servants assuring them, I assume, that their jobs are safe. How does the Chief Minister reconcile with her previous statement that managing the budgets of departments and the responsibility for attrition in those departments rests with the CEOs of those departments? She said that often in this Chamber, and publicly. Where does the responsibility lie? Does it lie with the Chief Minister or does it lie with the CEOs of the departments? In either case, surely she can, therefore, give an answer in this House as to what the staffing levels of the departments are now, and what those staffing levels will be in 12 months time?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thought we were trying to have a variety of questions in this House and it has just been almost terminal. I do understand that after 26 years of being in government, the now opposition has not quite come to terms with what opposition and what Question Time is about. It has been day after day - very sadly, for the debate in the House - a woeful performance, an absolutely woeful performance.
I know that the previous administration did not grasp many things and budgetary management was not high on the list of things that they actually did do well. Do you understand that there is a new culture in the Territory? It is not the CLP culture; it is a culture of better management, of more effective management ...
Mr Reed: Did you write to public servants individually? That is the question.
Ms MARTIN: Yes.
Mr Reed: Right. Thank you. At least we got that out of you.
Ms MARTIN: I said I did.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Thank you, you have answered it. I like the shortness of your answer.
Northern Territory Budget - Period Road Maintenance Contracts
Mr McADAM to MINISTER for TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE
The Leader of the Opposition has been making allegations about work for period contractors. Can the minister advise the House of the real facts of the situation for period contracts?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Barkly for his question. Yes, it is true, the Leader of the Opposition has made all sorts of allegations about the Labor government cutting funds and period contractors suffering. I am aware that period contractors have been suffering for a long time. The reason I am aware is because I speak with these contractors, and the Leader of the Opposition is quite aware of it. He commented that I drink coffee in the Galleria with these people. I do not walk away at Charlies with mates, making deals. I talk with contractors every day and I know what they are going through.
I know very well that the real reason for cuts in period contracts is not with the Labor government; it was the previous administration. Yesterday, he tabled a document, and in this document there is significant reduction in period contracts in September. When a work order is issued, when the contractor does his work and he gets paid, you need at least a month to get paid –September. August 2001 - $62 000, September 2001 - $13 000. In addition, the department was well aware of the problem for period contracts as early as August - when they were still in government - because they prepared a brief for the new government on 13 August 2001, advising the new government - of course they did not know it was going to be a Labor government, they thought it would be the same government - telling them there was no money because they took the money from minor works and they spent it …
Members interjecting.
Mr VATSKALIS: Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Minister, cease for a moment. I think members on both sides are rather disgraceful this afternoon. Quiet, thank you.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale! I think I am going to start putting a few people on warnings. You are just being over the top and you know it. Leader of Government Business, it would help if you allowed your minister to speak in silence.
Mr VATSKALIS: I am very careful about my statements in parliament. I ask again - and point out the paper the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Brennan, tabled yesterday - if he lied yesterday. The other problem we have is with period contracts. The Leader of the Opposition, the member for Brennan, represented one of his constituents yesterday and quite so, I would have done exactly the same. The only problem is he did not tell him what really happened with the period contracts. He did not tell him he took the money to repair flood damaged roads and they did not replace the cash allocation in minor programs. So when we arrived here, when we became the new government - unexpectedly for them - we found out that past November we would not have $1 to pay these people. Nobody was prepared to order new work for these people to do, without having any money to pay them.
Mr Burke: Stop lying.
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, there is a point of order. Withdraw that.
Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I will retract if the minister retracts. He called me a liar earlier, and I will retract if he does.
Madam SPEAKER: I did not hear him call you a liar.
Mr STIRLING: If I could just speak to that. He said of the document, ‘if he lied’ meaning the Leader of the Opposition. He was inferring that he himself would have lied because he is taking the information from the member for Brennan.
Madam SPEAKER: My interpretation is that he did not call you a liar. Member for Brennan, I ask you to withdraw that comment.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I am happy to withdraw but I ask the minister to withdraw the fact that he said that I lied in that document. That document was provided by a contractor. I did nothing to that document at all.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: That is not how I interpreted his remarks at all. Sorry, I did not interpret them like that at all. I ask you to withdraw unreservedly without any further comment. Member for Brennan, withdraw.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I have great difficulty withdrawing until I understand what the context of the minister’s statements were with regards that the document I tabled.
Madam SPEAKER: I have just said that I did not interpret his comments as saying that you were a liar.
Mr BURKE: Well may I ask, Madam Speaker, how you interpreted those comments?
Madam SPEAKER: From what he said.
Mr BURKE: What did he say?
Madam SPEAKER: And that is what I am just saying. Look, I am not going to …
Mr BURKE: Well if you do not know, Madam Speaker, how can I withdraw?
Madam SPEAKER: … continue this debate with you. Member for Brennan, I ask you to withdraw, as I have said. Simple as that.
Mr BURKE: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Mr Stirling: Madam Speaker, I can clarify …
Madam SPEAKER: Resume your seat. No one has acknowledged you. I am getting a little fed up this afternoon with the behaviour of members. You do not speak in this House until you are acknowledged by the Chair, and you do not carry on with this charade any longer. Minister, would you finish your reply, otherwise I am going to walk out.
Mr VATSKALIS: Madam Speaker, I am aware of the problems period contractors face. Mr Ray Brown spoke to my officers this morning and, I believe, he has already spoken to the Department of Transport and Infrastructure this afternoon. We are very well aware of the problem they are facing. We have done everything possible to allocate money for minor repairs, and this money will flow on to the department and period contracts can be resumed as soon as practically possible.
Northern Territory Budget – HIH Insurance Levy
Mr BALDWIN to MINISTER for BUSINESS, INDUSTRY and RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Minister, you have stated publicly that all Territorians are likely to pay a levy to cover the $40m debt caused by the collapse of HIH Insurance. Further, you said and I will quote you from NT News, 20 November:
- I told the department to go back and look at options for a community-based levy.
The mini-budget, Minister, makes no mention of a further tax to cover the HIH liability so, in the interests of fiscal transparency, please tell us when you are going to reveal the details of this additional and secret Labor tax?
ANSWER
I thank the member for Daly for his question and for leading with his chin, Madam Speaker. The issue of the HIH levy - and if we are talking about openness and transparency, let us go back to the events of, I think it was March last year, when HIH went under.
The unfortunate collapse of HIH, a great corporate failure, saw the Northern Territory, by far, in proportion to population, the most affected of all the states in regards to workers compensation, with the estimated liability of around $50m and 600 Territorians who were affected at the time. who were receiving workers compensation payments through HIH. In response to that, the previous government, the previous Minister for Industries and Business and the previous Treasurer allocated $3m into the fund to support these people. The term they used at the time was: ‘We have kicked the money in. We have made an ex gracia payment.’ What they did not say at the time, was that they had loaned the money into the scheme and that loan …
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: I will get to the point. That loan would have to be repaid at a point of time to be determined, with interest.
This was not made public to the business community. Then the previous government came into this parliament and established the capability of levying the business community once the full liability had been determined. If you look at what I said at the time - and I am on the record in this parliament - was we would be looking at the issue, that we accepted the structure of putting the legislation in place, but imploring the previous government of the time to look at all options. I think my comments at the time were: ‘This buys us time’.
We have looked at that, and in this budget we have allocated an additional $6m by way of a grant - total $9m - which will take us up to the end of this financial year. The department is looking at all of the options. We have to make a decision, and we will make a decision as this government, once all of the options have been considered as to the best way forward in terms of meeting this liability and meeting the payments to injured Territory workers.
The previous government was going to slug the whole $50m on the business community. That was your position. That was the structure that you put in place, supported with qualification. We, as the government now, are looking at all options. We are looking at all options in terms of the levy. We have bought the time. We believe that it will see us through this financial year and we are looking at all options to recover and to meet this liability payment. The previous government, the supposed friends of the business community, were going to slug the business community the entire $50m. They went about it in a very secret, underhanded manner that the business community did not understand at the time.
Future of Tracy Aged Care Facility
Dr BURNS to MINISTER for HEALTH and COMMUNITY SERVICES
Minister, there has been some concern expressed over recent weeks about the future of Tracy Aged Care. Could you please advise this House what action has been taken to secure the future of this important service?
Mr Dunham: She said it had nothing to do with her, she said it was not her responsibility.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Johnston for his question. Good aged care facilities in the Northern Territory are very important to this government, and we will be assisting in any way that we can, even though it is - as the member for Drysdale has commented - largely a Commonwealth matter.
As many members would know, Tracy Aged Care is a 57-bed residential aged-care facility of which 15 beds are dementia specific. The service is under the auspices of the Darwin Pensioner and Senior Citizens’ Association. The funding and provision of aged care for this facility is costed by the Commonwealth for $1.4m per annum. My department funds Tracy Aged Care to an amount of $230 000 per annum, which basically meets the shortfall from the Commonwealth funding.
The Darwin Pensioner and Senior Citizens’ Association recently came to visit me to tell me that they were facing a very uncertain financial future, and a local financial consultant confirmed this view for all of us. In the interest of the long-term sustainability of Tracy Aged Care, the Darwin Pensioner and Senior Citizens’ Association has appointed Frontier Services to conduct a review of the operation and assist with the management of the service. As you would be aware, Frontier Services managers a number of facilities in Queensland, Northern Territory, and Western Australia, and also managers six of the ten residential aged-care facilities in the Northern Territory. This review, to be conducted over a three-month period, formally commenced on 19 November 2001.
Both the Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments have supported the appointment of Frontier Services, with the Northern Territory government providing $40 000 to implement the review. A new Board of Management for Tracy Aged Care will be elected at the December Annual General Meeting of the Darwin Pensioner and Citizens’ Association. In the interim, Frontier Services will assist with the care and management of the facility. Meetings have been held with the Commonwealth and my department, along with members of the current board, to seek a constructive solution to the financial issues. It is the opinion of my department that, with careful management, the facility will be able to trade its way out of the current difficulties. Officers of my department will be working with Tracy Aged Care and the Commonwealth to facilitate this.
Northern Territory Budget – HIH Insurance Levy
Mr REED to MINISTER for BUSINESS, INDUSTRY and RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
In relation to his remarks in relation to the honourable member for Daly’s question, he told us that the funding that the government has provided will take the HIH levy through the covering of it, until the end of this financial year. Yet, on 20 November, he told the NT News, which reports that:
- That …
That is, the amount of money that the government has put in,
- … would absorb the ongoing costs associated with the debt until some time before 30 June 2002.
That is, not until the end of this financial year. Will it take us through until the end of this financial year, as you have just told the House? Or, as you told the NT News, will it not take us through to the end of this financial year? Further, the Treasurer told us yesterday that this was a four-year mini-budget. How come then, in years 2002-03 out to 2004-05, the amounts for the HIH liabilities are zero, notwithstanding that you know the government’s exposure, and notwithstanding that you have given a different answer to the NT News and a different answer to this House? Get it right!
ANSWER
The former Treasurer - no wonder the books are in such bad shape, when he does not understand some very basic principles. What we have here is the fact that people are receiving payment as a result of a workplace injury and, people, in terms of assessment of the amount of time those people are going to need rehabilitation, need specific therapy or whatever, that moves from a day-to-day basis and there is an assessment made on a monthly basis as to the liability that we are exposed to.
Mr REED: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question had nothing to do with what the liabilities were or who is going to approve them in terms of pay-outs. It had everything to do with did he mislead the House? Did he tell the House that their funding would last until the end of the financial year, or did he, as was told to the NT News, say that it would not last to the end of this financial year?
Madam SPEAKER: I think we need to give the minister a chance to answer his question.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, the best assessment at this time is that the allocation of $6m will take us to the end of the financial year ...
Mr Reed: Well, why did you tell the NT News a fibber?
Mr HENDERSON: I would appreciate if the member for Katherine would button his lip and listen to the answer - if he was really interested in the answer instead of making mischief. We are looking at all the options to spread the liability as fairly as possible. You, the friend of business, a supposed friend of business, were going to slug the entire $50m cost, with interest of $3m, on the business community. This was the plan of the previous government.
We have said we will put in a maximum of $9m. That is why, in the budget papers, there is no allocation for the next three years out. Once we have considered all of the options I will be returning to this House and advising the House how we are going to recover this liability and pay this liability, given the fact that the previous government was going to tax the business community in the Northern Territory, at the time that they could least afford it. These guys, who are supposed to be the mates of the business community, were going to tax the business community the entire $50m, with interest of $3m.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016