Dr LIM - 1997-11-27
There are many advantages in using the government's electronic mailing system. I personally use it on a daily basis. Has the public service and the opposition picked up on the technology?
Page 34
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, this question is particularly timely given the rather holier-than-thou attitude of the opposition in a previous question relating to mail-outs. There is a story about a tactic used by Territory Labor which not only cost the Territory taxpayer about $3000, but also clogged up the computer network on the day before the election. There is only so much a self-respecting computer system can put up with from Labor before it shuts down.
I will inform honourable members exactly what I am talking about in a minute. This highlights the hypocrisy of Labor members standing in here and saying one thing and then doing the exact opposite. In fact, they can cost the taxpayer plenty. The system in the Northern Territory Public Service for transferring information and messages between individuals and government departments has led the country for many years. There are about 5 different computer languages in the system within the Northern Territory Public Service. We have come up with technology, similar to a black boX, that allows each individual to communicate with another person, whether within an agency or across agencies. It goes farther than that in that the technology can also be used to communicate by e-mail. People from anywhere in the world can access the Internet and hook into the system. We have won productivity awards for this ground-breaking technology.
However, the more one makes technology like this accessible, the more it is open to abuse. That is not a problem when the system is used by responsible and reasonable public servants. Unfortunately, some of the tactics used by our colleagues opposite can make it a problem. On the day before the election, Territory Labor decided to undertake a scattergun approach of sending 10 000 messages to public servants by means of our system. It cost taxpayers' money and clogged up the system so much ...
Members interjecting.
Mr ADAMSON: I will explain that. You are ignorant of how the charges work. I am more than happy to inform honourable members about that situation. That is only one problem. The other problem was that they clogged up the system to the extent that the department had to intervene and override much of the information that was coming through. The business of the Northern Territory was unable to be done. This tactic was mentioned on 8DDD on the day before the election. I quote Mr Smith who said:
We got the names from the electoral roll. We put them on the trailer, and we blasted out in the order of 10 000.
I would expect that we had a strike rate of 1 in 4. We probably successfully sent messages to about 2500 or
3000 Northern Territory public servants.
To pay for this technology, agencies are charged 30c per message which covers the infrastructure. Each agency that received a message like this had to fork out 30c. That is only $3000 or $4000, but the opposition abused what is a privilege. The opposition brought down the network. The network was clogged and the department had to intervene. The member for Wanguri shakes his head. The fact is the network was clogged and the system had to be shut down.
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr ADAMSON: If the member for Wanguri does not believe it, that is just too bad. As a result of that tactic by Territory Labor, we had to shut down the system. This scattergun approach cost the department and the agencies in excess of $3000. The opposition cannot deny it. Election to public office brings with it responsibility. Once again, this is a concrete example of how members opposite have ignored that responsibility.
Mr Bailey: Unlike you, we have not used the public service and lied about it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! I ask the member for Wanguri to withdraw.
Mr BAILEY: Madam Speaker, the comment was not directed at any individual. Standing orders refer to implications about a member. Whom was I talking about?
Madam SPEAKER: Withdraw the remark.
Mr BAILEY: I withdraw the remark.
Mr ADAMSON: Madam Speaker, I will conclude. I am sorry I had to go on for so long, but it is very difficult to talk over the top of the interjectors. The reality is simple. The opposition has been caught out in an action which cost agencies thousands of dollars and which clogged up the system. The action was unethical and a breach of responsibility. The member for Wanguri stands condemned for trying to defend the action.
Page 35
Page 34
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, this question is particularly timely given the rather holier-than-thou attitude of the opposition in a previous question relating to mail-outs. There is a story about a tactic used by Territory Labor which not only cost the Territory taxpayer about $3000, but also clogged up the computer network on the day before the election. There is only so much a self-respecting computer system can put up with from Labor before it shuts down.
I will inform honourable members exactly what I am talking about in a minute. This highlights the hypocrisy of Labor members standing in here and saying one thing and then doing the exact opposite. In fact, they can cost the taxpayer plenty. The system in the Northern Territory Public Service for transferring information and messages between individuals and government departments has led the country for many years. There are about 5 different computer languages in the system within the Northern Territory Public Service. We have come up with technology, similar to a black boX, that allows each individual to communicate with another person, whether within an agency or across agencies. It goes farther than that in that the technology can also be used to communicate by e-mail. People from anywhere in the world can access the Internet and hook into the system. We have won productivity awards for this ground-breaking technology.
However, the more one makes technology like this accessible, the more it is open to abuse. That is not a problem when the system is used by responsible and reasonable public servants. Unfortunately, some of the tactics used by our colleagues opposite can make it a problem. On the day before the election, Territory Labor decided to undertake a scattergun approach of sending 10 000 messages to public servants by means of our system. It cost taxpayers' money and clogged up the system so much ...
Members interjecting.
Mr ADAMSON: I will explain that. You are ignorant of how the charges work. I am more than happy to inform honourable members about that situation. That is only one problem. The other problem was that they clogged up the system to the extent that the department had to intervene and override much of the information that was coming through. The business of the Northern Territory was unable to be done. This tactic was mentioned on 8DDD on the day before the election. I quote Mr Smith who said:
We got the names from the electoral roll. We put them on the trailer, and we blasted out in the order of 10 000.
I would expect that we had a strike rate of 1 in 4. We probably successfully sent messages to about 2500 or
3000 Northern Territory public servants.
To pay for this technology, agencies are charged 30c per message which covers the infrastructure. Each agency that received a message like this had to fork out 30c. That is only $3000 or $4000, but the opposition abused what is a privilege. The opposition brought down the network. The network was clogged and the department had to intervene. The member for Wanguri shakes his head. The fact is the network was clogged and the system had to be shut down.
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr ADAMSON: If the member for Wanguri does not believe it, that is just too bad. As a result of that tactic by Territory Labor, we had to shut down the system. This scattergun approach cost the department and the agencies in excess of $3000. The opposition cannot deny it. Election to public office brings with it responsibility. Once again, this is a concrete example of how members opposite have ignored that responsibility.
Mr Bailey: Unlike you, we have not used the public service and lied about it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! I ask the member for Wanguri to withdraw.
Mr BAILEY: Madam Speaker, the comment was not directed at any individual. Standing orders refer to implications about a member. Whom was I talking about?
Madam SPEAKER: Withdraw the remark.
Mr BAILEY: I withdraw the remark.
Mr ADAMSON: Madam Speaker, I will conclude. I am sorry I had to go on for so long, but it is very difficult to talk over the top of the interjectors. The reality is simple. The opposition has been caught out in an action which cost agencies thousands of dollars and which clogged up the system. The action was unethical and a breach of responsibility. The member for Wanguri stands condemned for trying to defend the action.
Page 35
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016