2014-05-14
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 6 classes from Kormilda College, accompanied by Matthew Cavanagh, Nada Allen and Lisa Cadd. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time and visit here.
Continued from 13 May 2014.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I will respond to yesterday’s Northern Territory budget, which can be best described as an exercise in smoke and mirrors. Territorians hoped for a budget to deliver a better life and a future where we can go forward together. They deserve a government which has compassion in understanding their needs, and works hard to improve opportunities in the future.
Instead, Territorians received more of the mean-spirited, self-serving arrogant and lazy CLP at its worst. This is a disappointing budget full of missed opportunities.
The Northern Territory truly is our nation’s land of opportunity, and this budget could have built upon foundations laid on the bedrock of infrastructure and major projects delivered by Labor. Instead, it misses the mark.
Budget 2014 talks up northern development, but the CLP vision is $6m for a flash office for their mates in Darwin. It fails to deliver fundamental levers for growth across education, housing, health, agribusiness and resources, and opportunities for Territorians across our vast and beautiful country, from the dynamic Top End to the regional service centres. Tragically, this budget continues to entrench disadvantage in our remote communities, and sends the signal that you must move to town if you want a better education or services.
Increasing homelessness in our towns is ignored by the Giles government. There is no new funding for crisis accommodation or non-government support services for Territorians displaced by alcohol misuse, let alone the much promised tackling of domestic violence, which affects our women and children daily. Where is the vision that binds the fabric of our society to a greater harmony and improved wellbeing? Instead, division is deepening.
Chief Minister Giles talks up a big game on infrastructure, yet the CLP is spending less on building our Territory. Budget 2014 shows around a $10m reduction in infrastructure cash spending, and the revote out is larger than that coming in, which is a true admission of failure. Budget Paper No 4, the infrastructure book, reads like a list of broken promises, dominated by revoted works funded by Labor. Police, health and education facilities across the Territory, which the CLP has failed to deliver, are listed yet again.
Territorians are being hurt by this budget, the highest taxing in the Territory’s history; the CLP will rip an extra $84m in taxes out of the pockets of businesses and families. The young are being cut out of home ownership and our elderly are being means tested out of the Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme; perhaps ‘mean tested’ is a better way to say it. This is a direct attack on senior Territorians, who have built this place; we owe much of our current prosperity to them. The concession scheme exists to entice Territorians to stay here in their retirement, acknowledging we have a high cost of living. With changes to means testing in the federal budget last night, this will become even more difficult.
It is difficult to understand the motivation behind this budget. Why has the government altered the 2013-14 budget figures in this budget from the 2013-14 figures published and printed in the previous budget? What does it have to hide? Is nothing sacred, not even budget books? Is it not enough that you only printed 75 copies of the budget and failed to tell anyone they would not be receiving the usual budget books and it would have to be found online? Scrutiny is not your strong suit, is it? One of the litany of broken election commitments; what happened to being transparent and accountable?
You are so desperate to avoid scrutiny that we are being denied the chance to scrutinise Power and Water through the normal estimates process. It is little wonder, when you have hiked up power and water prices. Another 32% power network charge will hit in July and you cannot even keep the lights on.
But wait, there is good news for Territorians. Our economic growth is the second fastest in the nation with an average GSP growth of 5%. The Ichthys major project and the Marine Supply Base deliver for Territorians now, but we needed budget 2014 to be positioning for future prosperity, instead of hurting Territorians with a cost of living burden which drives them south.
The CLP inherited this strong economy and it is now doing its best to ruin it, with small- and medium-sized enterprises forgotten in the government’s mad dash to sell the farm to overseas investors without understanding that good planning around our natural resources, such as water, is crucial to a future which delivers a balance between economic growth and our magnificent environment.
The Oolloo aquifer is fully allocated as of today. You have literally given away our future water resources to your mates. There is no doubt we would be well positioned to ride the northern development wave of gas, tourism, agribusiness and international education, as identified in the latest Deloitte Building the Lucky Country report, but the carve up of our agribusiness resources without a plan and the failure to capitalise on marketing the Territory in Asia through the Arafura Games is putting obstacles in the way of success.
The CLP’s budget fails to understand that our human capital is precious. Territorians, our local heroes, should see the levers in this budget which enable them to reap the rewards of our Asian gateway position up and down the track. Sadly, this budget fails families in Malak as much as it fails those in Gillen or Lajamanu.
If you were looking for a spark of understanding from this government about issues affecting Territorians, it is extinguished. Today there are missed opportunities to build the bright future we are capable of achieving.
The cost of living has gone through the roof under this government. Utility prices are up about 30%, while at the same time the CLP is splitting Power and Water to run down its assets. It is happy to sacrifice reliability for profitability so the corporation can be sold to a southern company.
Not content with a plan to sell Power and Water, generation or retail, the CLP now has TIO, our insurer, squarely in its sights, while ignoring the needs of Territorians who rely on them for flood and cyclone coverage. All of these CLP asset sales plans exist without a mandate from Territorians. It is a deceit which, if delivered, will sound the political death bell at the next general election, because a government is the temporary custodian of the Crown and only fools will dismantle what the public has a passion to preserve. A cash grab now will leave Territorians to pay the price as tariffs rise in the future and we are burdened with a need for infrastructure and maintenance revenue.
The Treasurer has ensured housing prices will continue to soar by stripping away First Home Owner Grants from existing stock and ignoring Territorians looking to purchase their own home – a principal place of residence. Good people are packing up and leaving town because they cannot afford to live here anymore and, under the CLP, they have lost hope of that changing. In a strong housing market, with demand outstripping supply, the CLP has dropped the ball for two years, scrapped finance schemes that gave Territorians a much needed leg-up into home ownership in this strong market and, to heap insult onto injury, people are being ignored when it comes to concerns about inappropriate development.
The rural area wants to be rural; residents are not opposed to rural villages but are vehemently opposed to their community being carved up and sold off in ad hoc developments. Our harbour must remain pristine and should not be sold for high-end residential development with secretive Crown leases, as is the case with Nightcliff Island.
This is not a case of, ‘Not in my backyard’; this is our community which, through years of consultation, has defined how and where we expand for development, yet the CLP has come along and torn it up without listening to the people. This is a CLP failure to plan, which will be rejected.
Palmerston north is Holtze; it is unlikely to get off the drawing board with the member for Goyder raising concerns. Berrimah Farm is a laudable plan, announced by the previous Labor government, but it is years away once you have dealt with contamination, the prison and research farm issues, to name a few.
In Central Australia, the Labor suburb of Kilgariff received scant mention, with only 33 blocks released out of the 100 planned. There is still no sign of housing, and people are expected to believe in another Larapinta release without the required ILUA
There have been two budgets and no new housing subdivisions other than those delivered under Labor. This ineptitude will create a massive blowout in demand in the next two financial years, all of the CLP’s making because it scrapped the new city of Weddell.
The Territory’s strong economic growth is fuelled off the back of the major oil and gas projects delivered by Labor. Regional growth in resources exploration occurred under Labor, and we understood that opportunities bring a significant responsibility to balance our environment and cultural needs.
There have been no real growth initiatives in two years of CLP government; it has taken us backwards with its Nhulunbuy refinery curtailment. The extent is still unknown, but it could potentially wipe 2% of growth.
Your own actions, CLP, are decimating a town and region, and you have failed to deliver the much promised structural adjustment package in this budget. You seem happy to coast off the back of big Labor projects, from roads infrastructure to significant private projects, without delivering new stimulus for jobs and business growth.
Deloitte Access Economics predicts the Territory’s unemployment rate will average 4.6% over the next five years, making it the second lowest in the country. Our debt has risen to $4bn, with a net debt to revenue ratio of 67%. This is a near doubling of the $2.1bn debt inherited from Labor. It is still equivalent to a household with a combined income of $150 000 having a mortgage of $100 000. The Territory’s debt repayments are 6.5% of revenue; this would be less than $190 per week in a household budget. The CLP’s debt beat-up is exposed.
While the government should be driving the next phase of growth, it is instead driving up the cost of living, cutting essential government services and giving many Territorians no option but to head south.
Our inflation is the highest in the nation. Cost of living pain for Territorians continues to worsen, in stark contrast to the CLP’s promises during the last election campaign.
Your own budget papers refer to increases in utility prices and motor vehicle registration, as the key drivers of inflation
This budget continues to deny Territorians the benefit of the economic boom the CLP inherited from Labor. More than 2300 Territorians have lost their jobs under the CLP since the end of last year; that is 2300 Territorians and their families who have missed out. I refer you to labour force figures for that data.
This government has dropped the ball in education; we have seen hundreds of teachers sacked. The CLP has decided to put its politics before children. It is unprecedented for a government of any persuasion to take a knife to the education budget with such enthusiasm. It defies all logic.
The effects of these cuts will be felt throughout the Territory for decades to come. Instead of pursuing the regional economic opportunities of international education, that budget has been slashed by 10%. Incredibly, if you want an education, the CLP has said, ‘Move from remote communities to town’.
Budget 2014 abandons years of effort to improve remote service delivery, and instead widens the gap in Indigenous disadvantage. Billions in bush spending promises before the 2012 election are missing; you are running out of time to meet them. Housing maintenance in remote areas has not improved, and with increased power charges, power cards only work half as long as they used to. The promised work on airstrips, barge landings and road access to the Top End has been pushed back yet again, more broken dreams for the revote pile.
With increases to the cost of living, job cuts, new taxes, increased charges and reduced funding for health and education services, the priorities of this government are all wrong.
This budget misses the opportunity to position the Territory for the next phase of growth. We now find ourselves on the cusp of unprecedented prosperity, but it is up to the government to realise the opportunities ahead of us. The training budget, in real terms, has been cut by $2m. While the economy booms, the CLP government has turned its back on the opportunity to train young Territorians to share in this prosperity.
Under Labor the priority was to give people an opportunity for a better life, regardless of where they lived. We invested in education, housing, health, training and jobs. We invested in Charles Darwin University and the Marine Supply Base so we could capitalise on the oil and gas industry. We secured the INPEX Total Ichthys project and invested in roads, power, water and sewerage in our towns, regions and remote communities. Yet under the CLP, no matter how they spin it, this budget is not about what is good for Territorians when hundreds of public servants have been sacked and, with cuts across agencies, there are more job losses to come.
Inflation is nearly double the rate of wage growth. This means the average Territorian is taking a pay cut: teachers; nurses; doctors; police; ambos; firies; child protection workers; the list goes on.
The CLP has been brazen in breaking its core promise to lower the cost of living. Power has already gone up 25%; that is around $1700 per year for the average family to find, and we have another 5% minimum increase to come. The government now wants to hit us with that 32% network charge. If this is passed on to Territorians, large households will have to find about another $1000 a year.
Spending on Power and Water maintenance and infrastructure has been cut, and we are already seeing the effect of these cuts on service reliability. The catastrophic blackout in March was a worrying preview of things to come. Yesterday there was another blackout in the Darwin area. Power is an essential service and the CLP needs to treat it as such. Territorians deserve better than this. The service will only get worse, while Territorians must pay more for the privilege. A Labor government would index power prices to CPI, and we would continue to invest in Power and Water infrastructure.
The CLP promised it would lower the cost of housing, but has done nothing. Territorians who are renting or looking to buy in any market across the Territory are now struggling more than ever. The First Home Owner Grant increasing from $25 000 to $26 000 will now only be available for the purchase of new homes. Most homeowners cannot afford to buy into new housing stock, and an extra $1000 will not help them to get into the market. The price of housing continues to grow at 6.4% year on year. With wage growth at less than 2%, this means that with every passing day the dream of owning their own home becomes further out of reach for Territorians.
For those who are renting, the situation is bad, with 35.4% of a median income going towards rent. It is the worst figure of any jurisdiction in Australia. What did the CLP do? It scrapped Labor’s home finance schemes of My New Home and Home Start Extra, which gave Territorians a leg up into home ownership and kept housing construction workers in jobs.
The federal government increased fuel excise in last night’s budget. What is the CLP doing? What is the cost of that fuel excise increase, when in many parts of the Territory fuel is already in excess of $2 a litre? Is that not high enough for us already?
The education budget has been cut by nearly $15m. This government, unbelievably, has made a conscious decision to have fewer teachers and resources in our schools. This is an extraordinary move and one which all Territorians should be very worried about. At a time when we should look at how to help more Territory students achieve national reading, writing and numeracy standards, resources are being stripped from our schools. It is unforgiveable.
Labor values public education. We built Rosebery Primary and Middle Schools, upgraded all primary, middle and secondary schools in the Territory, and employed more than 400 extra teachers. We had plans to build a special school at Palmerston; the CLP delayed this and now touts it as a new initiative. What about the new school for Henbury? It is the responsibility of everyone in this Chamber to ensure young Territorians have the best start in life and that education resources are available to achieve this.
The budget allocation for tertiary education has fallen by nearly 10%. What on earth is the reason behind this decision? How do Territory businesses feel about this? With the economic boom, now is the time to be investing in tertiary education and giving Territorians a chance to get these jobs. We should be developing young Territorians to move into future growth areas, such as the oil and gas industries, mining, tourism, Asian relations, agribusiness and international education. We should be doing all we can to ensure Territorians position themselves to take advantage of growth.
Health services are another big loser in this year’s budget, with health cut by more than $5m. There is only $5m allocated for Palmerston hospital site works, and the people of Palmerston and the rural area will now be waiting until at least 2018 for a new hospital. It would be under construction right now if the CLP had not stopped work, changed sites and delayed construction. Labor would have delivered a new paediatric health facility at Royal Darwin Hospital – an entire children’s wing – but the CLP rejected that Commonwealth deal, and we have an $11.9m upgrade instead.
Adding further pressure to an under-resourced health system is the CLP’s decision to scrap the Banned Drinker Register, which has led to an increase in alcohol-related presentations and admissions to our Territory hospitals. Alcohol-related presentations and admissions across the Territory in April 2012 totalled 226, and had more than doubled by April 2013 to an unprecedented 514. The under-utilised medi-hotel is being used for the alcohol mandatory treatment program and is not available to be used by patients travelling to Darwin for medical treatment. This has put the Royal Darwin Hospital under even more pressure, and the bush has missed out on healthcare again.
Health care facilities in Papunya, Canteen Creek, Elliott, Ngukurr, Galiwinku, Milikapiti and Minjilang, among many others, are again on the revote list. When will these be built?
Budget 2014 takes an axe to police resources. With violent crime up, the CLP has ripped more than $12m from frontline police resources. It fails to provide much needed funding in Central Australia that was ripped out of youth services, and has created increasing rates of youth-related crime and antisocial behaviour.
Northern Territory taxation revenue measures - how much has been taken from Territory families in taxes and charges. The budget shows the CLP has increased this amount by nearly $84m, up to $569m being taxed out of Territorians. Forty-five million dollars comes from payroll taxes, a direct attack on Territory business’ ability to get on with business, while revenue raising with motor vehicle fees takes an additional $7m from the pockets of Territorians.
This budget hurts Territory families’ budgets in every way possible. The CLP has done nothing to help Territory businesses in this budget. Power prices are through the roof and all rates and charges are up.
In this budget there is no mention of the environment, climate change, land management or national parks. This is a budget which fails to protect the environment. We see investment to market the Territory as a tourist destination, but no investment to protect the natural environment which lures so many visitors here. These are some of our greatest assets, and nature tourism will be a huge growth industry over the coming decades, but only if we work hard to protect our environment now.
Among the doom and gloom I have a positive message for Territorians. The ALP stands ready to govern; to rebuild the Territory as a progressive, prosperous place to live, across our cities, towns and remote communities; to end the cronyism and restore transparency to government; to ease the burden on households; to restore confidence to Territory businesses; and the ALP stands united and intends to bring the worst government the Territory has ever seen to an end in about two years’ time. It is a shame it cannot be sooner.
The budget brought down by the Treasurer yesterday is the wrong one for our times. It is wrong for families, school children, small business and Indigenous Territorians. Yesterday, Treasurer, you had an opportunity to right some of the wrongs of the first 20 months of this very poor government. You could have heard the voice of the people in the Wanguri and Blain by-elections. There were 12% and 10% swings against the CLP. People have said they are hurting.
Approaching the halfway point of this parliamentary term it is reasonable to have a report card on the performance of the Giles government, and it makes for very sad reading. The Chief Minister started his time in the job with 16 members; he is now down to 13.
He effectively lost the confidence of three of his members. He became Chief Minister by stabbing his predecessor in the back while he was on an overseas trade mission. The reward for that silence is a taxpayer-funded job in Jakarta.
Our policy alternatives are clear; we would employ more teachers, not sack them. We would continue to build and improve health facilities, build the Palmerston hospital and the RDH children’s wing, stop Power and Water price hikes and take its assets off the market. We would ensure education and training programs are strengthened so Territorians can benefit from our bright future. We would chase the next major project off the back of our credibility in delivering certainty for the oil and gas industry. We would focus on infrastructure delivery to open the regions for economic development, rather than glossy brochures, adverts and flash offices. The CLP spins, whereas Labor has substance.
This is a budget of missed opportunities, with the CLP ignoring Territorians’ need for affordable and public housing, improved education and health services and support for our most disadvantaged. It taxes business and fails to build the right leaders for economic growth.
Debate adjourned.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, during Question Time today the member for Nelson asked a question about a letter he alleged was sent to me by the Top End Women’s Legal Service about a lady living at Knuckey Lagoon who was asking for assistance through the Northern Territory Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme.
I put on the record that I have never received a letter about this matter. The letter I am looking at is from the member for Nelson; it was written to him on 27 November and it mentions that they also wrote to me in relation to the issue. No such letter was received by my office, but I welcome the Top End Women’s Legal Service if it would like to write to me, and I will respond to the matter as soon as possible.
Continued from 19 March 2014.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House, and I understand it repeals and replaces the Northern Territory’s Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act. In short, we will call the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act ‘WELS’. The WELS Act commenced in 2005 as part of a national commitment to the introduction of the water efficiency labelling and standards scheme.
The scheme places obligations on manufacturers and retailers to provide advice about the water efficiency of different products. The original Northern Territory WELS Act took the form of mirror legislation. Since 2005, the Commonwealth has made a number of amendments to the Commonwealth WELS Act, resulting in inconsistencies between the two acts of the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory.
I understand this bill adopts the Commonwealth WELS Act as an act of the Northern Territory. Amendments to the Commonwealth WELS Act will automatically apply in the Northern Territory, unless the Northern Territory takes action to prevent amendments applying.
An independent review of the WELS scheme in June 2010 – I have read a copy, and as you can see by the logo on the cover it is all about the rating scheme on products; the more stars it has, the more water efficient a product is. The scheme operates along the same lines as electrical items that also require an energy rating system. This is so people, when purchasing products, can make well informed decisions about products which are water-efficient and will save money. They can also avoid excessive consumption of water, which is a good thing for our environment. The independent review found, not surprisingly, that the scheme is good public policy. Its objective of conserving water by reducing consumption through the greater use of water-efficient products is appropriate given the increasing scarcity of water, as is its use of market instruments to provide information to assist consumers making decisions about the purchase of water-using products and to set efficient and effective standards.
A study of cost effectiveness, undertaken in 2008 by the Institute for Sustainable Futures for the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, found the scheme has generated water savings at a cost of 0.08c to 0.21c per kL.
This compares favourably with other demand management and supply augmentation measures. For instance, desalination can cost $1.19 to $2.55 per kilolitre. The study projected that over the period 2005-06 to 2020-21 WELS will reduce national water consumption by a total of 800 GL, which is almost double the annual water consumption of greater Sydney. Main savings were estimated to come from shower heads, with around 290 GL, and washing machines with 280 GL. It would be useful to know, when the minister wraps this debate, what calculations have been made about savings to date in the Northern Territory.
In October last year the government released Living Water Smart as a five-year program aimed at helping the Darwin region reduce water use by 10 000 ML per year, or about a quarter of the current Darwin region water demand. However, with the incredible hikes in water tariffs, perhaps that is an incentive for people to save water. It is interesting coming from the government which, pre-election, committed to driving down the cost of living, but has done the opposite.
I also ask the minister to tell us what consideration of savings from WELS was made in developing the Living Water Smart program, and what progress has been made to date in achieving the 10 000 ML. Given this result to date, Power and Water’s own documents indicate it is considering new water supply options, including:
1. a new instream dam on the upper Adelaide River
2. an offstream storage in the Marrakai region, filled with water harvested from flood flows in the Adelaide River
3. augmentation of Manton Dam’s storage
4. the potential use of desalination.
I would again be interested if the minister could respond as to the current status of the proposed Marrakai and upper Adelaide River dams. What is the status of exploration licences over the proposed inundation zones for the dams? We know Alice Water Smart is a project helping Alice Springs reduce its water use. It is an incredibly important body of work, given it sits in desert country in Central Australia where water is incredibly precious. Water is precious everywhere, but especially so in the desert region in Alice Springs.
The most recent progress update in August 2013 found over 1600 ML of savings to date. That is the equivalent of 640 Olympic swimming pools of water savings which have been made or identified through projects to date. Seventy-two parks and ovals are now watered using smart irrigation technology, 1000 homes and 50 businesses have had water efficiency consultations and 330 million litres, which is the equivalent of 132 Olympic swimming pools, have been saved through leak detection and remediation.
Minister, could you also address current information you have on the progress of the scheme and long-term plans for Alice Water Smart? As the shadow minister for Environment, groups from Alice Springs contact me from time to time, wanting to raise these issues. How would you like to see the Alice Water Smart program develop into the future? Perhaps you can update us, as I am not sure the budget handed down yesterday goes to nitty gritty details. What is happening with funding for Alice Water Smart? I am sure you would agree that it is an incredibly important program which deserves continued support from government.
Perhaps the minister might enlighten us as to what is happening with the water catchment advisory committees. I understand from a public notice that there is a new water catchment committee, but we do not know, at this stage, who is on it or exactly what its brief is. In October last year the Minister for Land Resource Management announced the replacement of the Daly River and Darwin Harbour Management Advisory Committees, and that they would be replaced by a community-based catchment advisory committee. We understand that it has been formed, but we have not had the heads up as to who is on it or exactly what it is doing.
The recent advertisement that I spotted for the NT water forum on Friday 16 May 2014 — it was a Saturday when I saw this notice — said that feedback from participants at the forum will directly inform the work of the newly formed Northern Territory Catchments Advisory Committee. I understand it does not sit entirely within your purview as minister for the Environment, but I like to think that you are across what is happening in that area with this new committee and the forum in Katherine on Friday.
Not only I, but stakeholders and Territorians from a wide range of interests groups are keen to know who is on this committee and exactly what its functions are. It is curious there has not been more information available to date in public about this new committee, but perhaps I should not be surprised. Transparency is not something high on the agenda of the CLP. We know that water allocation plans are under development for Berry Springs, Howard East, the Great Artesian Basin water control district, Mataranka, the Tindall Limestone Aquifer and the Oolloo aquifer. In fact there is a half-page advertisement in the NT News classifieds, providing notification of intention to grant water licence allocations to a number of companies and individuals associated with the Oolloo aquifer. I understand it would see the entire allocation of the aquifer. The development …
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. We are digressing from the subject. This is about water labelling, not Oolloo aquifers and everything else to do with water.
Ms WALKER: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, in these kinds of debates, yes, there is a bill before the House, but there is always latitude to talk about and raise issues that are important in relation to this. It is about preserving water, so I take this opportunity to put these comments on the record. I will be finished in a couple of minutes.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, just keep an eye on it.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
We know these water allocation plans are under way. Development of the Oolloo aquifer water allocation plan commenced in April 2008; the purpose of it is to provide the Northern Territory government and the Katherine and Daly River communities with a transparent set of rules to assist in the sustainable management and equitable allocation of water within that area. What is the status of this plan? I guess the status has been published in the NT News today, and that is all we have to go on.
The draft Mataranka-Tindall Limestone Aquifer water allocation plan was issued in November 2011, and was developed with the understanding there is a possibility of future demand on the resource. What is the status of this plan?
The Territory government continues to issue licences in some of these areas without a water allocation plan, or if there is a plan it is not widely available to Territorians, only to the CLP and, presumably, its mates. How can this latest raft of allocations, 2320.40 ML from Katherine, be based on solid science when a community consultation has not occurred, as the NT Water Forum is set down for 16 May? This is no doubt strategic, as it is immediately after parliamentary sittings.
At the time of the original bill’s passage the Labor government was implementing a rebate for those purchasing water safety devices in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, and a doubling of funding for Cool Communities to $100 000 to encourage water conservation. Central Australia Waterwise rebates provide up to $25 for low-flow shower roses, up to $100 on four-and-a-half star WELS rated washing machines, WaterMark approved swimming pool covers and up to $150 for four-star dual-star toilets. Will the minister, in his response, confirm the government will be maintaining rebates for these WELS products?
In the debate on the original bill, the then CLP shadow minister, Fay Miller, now retired and Mayor of Katherine, supported the bill, but made some interesting points. She said:
It is interesting that a dam on the Elizabeth River was an issue in the recent Blain by-election. One of the CLP’s leaflets in that campaign said the subsidy paid to Power and Water would be enough to pay for a new dam. The CLP government needs to explain what it is doing on water efficiency, apart from any secret plans which might be afoot for new dams.
Turning to specific questions about the bill, clause 2(2)(a) says:
What process will be undertaken by the Territory government to determine whether a modification by Commonwealth water efficiency laws should not take effect in the Territory, and what consultation will be undertaken to gauge the views of stakeholders in industry and other groups to inform any such decision? Also, clause 10(2)(g) allows for:
This is sensible legislation; it streamlines administrative processes between the Commonwealth and the Territory and, on the strength of that, the opposition supports the bill. The opposition supports measures that will reduce water consumption in the Territory, where it is precious and costly, thanks to the CLP government. I have raised some questions around the broader use of water in the Northern Territory, and whilst it may not sit within the minister’s purview, given he is the Environment minister, I would like him to address these.
I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, this bill is, in some ways, similar to one brought forward by the previous government about six or seven years ago. I understand this bill tries to make it easier to make changes; it is Commonwealth legislation, so aligning it makes sure we do not need to have it go through this House as well, and that makes sense.
It is good that we have water saving devices. As a person who washes, and travels occasionally, there is a range of showerheads which you can operate. Some are equivalent to sandblasting and some only just get you wet, which is more in my case because I use gravity feed.
I proudly live in the rural area. I have a bore, I pump it into a tank and I feed it by gravity into my house …
Mr Chandler: Is that east of Palmerston?
Mr WOOD: Yes, although it is not East Palmerston. Palmerston will receive a new name, probably ‘Howard Springs West’. I live in the rural area, and there are many people not connected to the mains. There are also people living out bush who use water from rivers or bores which have a high calcium content, especially on some of the stations.
The minister may not believe this, but I once lived at Daly River, where I had hair; I used to wash my hair in water from the Daly River, and after that I did not need to comb it for a week because it sat in the same place, through wind and sun. Calcium is a problem with some of these water saving devices, which are ideal for people in Darwin or Melbourne with city-quality water, but they are not always suitable for places out bush, because small holes in a showerhead block up in no time.
Whilst the idea is good and there is nothing nicer than government saying, ‘We have uniform legislation on water saving devices’, standards are set. There must be some common sense around this; I do not want to find that people out bush cannot buy a shower rose anymore because they are not allowed to be sold at a hardware or plumbing shop because they do not fit Australian standards, yet they may not be suitable for someone on a cattle station or in a community where the water quality is such that you would need holes in a shower head which do not clog after a few months.
I know this happens because a long time ago, before solar technology or being able to afford hot water appliances, you would have a little ceramic showerhead with a string attached to it. When you turned it on, you heated the hot water as it came out of the pipe. Those shower heads had very tiny pores in them and would be blocked in no time.
I do not know whether people are able to overcome that by other means, but when you bring in national standards you must ensure that governments realise not all water is the same throughout Australia or the Territory. I am giving you what I regard as a practical problem. Even with boiling a jug – most people probably do not have an old fashioned jug – they used to become clogged with calcium and it was a problem.
In my area, for instance, I get iron …
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, please pause. May I remind the person in the gallery with the camera that they are not to take photos of people in the Chamber. Thank you.
Mr WOOD: It was my best side anyway.
Even in the rural area many people do not have calcium, but they have algae caused by a problem with iron in the water, so there are issues there. I hope whoever makes these standards does not say, ‘Well, that is all you can sell in Australia, and some of those old fashioned appliances cannot be sold because they do not fit within our standard’.
Some people need those appliances. In my case I do not have much pressure; I would be pushing to have 10psi in my house from a gravity-fed tank. If the holes are too small it would be hard to get any water out of them. As I am on a low pressure system I need something to allow that.
I will give you another example. A couple of years ago I had a plumber work on my kitchen benches; he decided he would put in the latest mixer taps. They are great as you can swing this way or that way to get hot, cold or in between water. They do not work on low pressure after it has gone through my hot water system. It is fine, they look beautiful, but if we want hot water in a hurry we must go to the laundry. Mixer taps are not designed for low pressure; they are designed for town, where pressure is around 200psi – sorry, 30. At 200 it would blow the pipes apart, but they are designed for a higher pressure than I have.
There are areas the government should look at. I was also interested in whether this scheme will still operate. I have not checked the budget, as I have not had the time to look, but has the Commonwealth cut this scheme? It is a water saving, conservation scheme. Was it ARENA, the solar authority, which was pushing for renewable energy? I think that has been scrapped, so has this scheme ended up in the same bundle? We introduced this legislation before the Commonwealth budget came down. I am interested to know whether we are talking about something that will be put into the rubbish bin.
We are talking about water savings. For a long time I have been concerned, even when I worked in Aboriginal communities, about the metering of taps in houses. A long time ago we decided to bring in metering for electricity, which was good, but why did we not bring it in for houses? Most of those communities rely on bores. It is a very expensive business, pumping town water into a community tank. You then find it is being wasted because there are dripping taps everywhere, people cannot be bothered turning them off, the toilet is leaking or the shower is still dripping. One way to reduce that is to tell people they will receive a water bill. Out bush, things are not that good from the point of view of people having many financial pressures; however, I would be interested to know how far the scheme has gone. I know some water meters have been applied, usually to government or teachers’ houses. If we are fair dinkum about saving water, I would expect the government to be making sure we are not only talking about nice little shower heads and taps with springs on them which you find in toilets so people do not waste water, but how we are doing it overall. That is what this scheme is about.
The government spends a lot of money on water for parks and gardens, and I have no problem with that. I know we always say the Northern Territory uses the most water, and we might, but nobody says, ‘For six months of the year we are dry as a bone’. Tell me about a state which does not get some water through the year – maybe Perth because it has had a change in climate. Look at all the graphs and you will see the amount of rainfall in the Perth area has decreased. We have a city which is basically dry for six months, with high evaporation, and it is easy to compare that with Melbourne, which has fairly low rainfall but low evaporation. At some times of the year, such as summer, it has high water consumption. I have just come back from places like Ireland; they are cold and overcast with drizzly rain. The place stays green permanently, but in the Territory you are green in the Wet Season, and if you want to maintain things like our football ovals and sporting facilities, we need to be able to use water.
There are ways the government and other people can reduce the amount of water they use. We used to have advertisements on television. They were mainly advertisements in Alice Springs about using drip irrigation. It was also about planting natives.
I am trying to think of a person’s name from a long time ago; he is a gardener in Alice Springs, and I do not have any Alice Springs people here to remind me of his name. I think he still writes a column for the Centralian. If you travel into Alice Springs from the north you will know there is a median strip full of native plants. I understand that the department, when it was looking at landscaping the Stuart Highway north, was going to put exotics in there. Why I cannot remember this gentleman’s name, I do not know, but he is a long-time gardener. He has been on the Greening Australia committee and he knows a lot about Central Australian native plants. What do you see along the main street of Alice Springs if you travel in on the highway? You see native plants. Some people knock native plants and I ask why. They are supposed to be part of our culture. I am not against exotics, but we can get plants which survive and have survived for thousands of years in our own area. We ignore them sometimes, and they do not use any water.
I have a little plantation past the corner of Howard Springs and Whitewood Road where there are two signs, arches where people advertise. I am planting trees again, because this is the third time the plantation has been destroyed by government changes to the road or pipelines there. The plants there are planted in the Wet Season and they survive an entire Wet Season in fairly gravelly country with mulch, no water, and they are happy as Larry.
You will also notice along the new Howard Springs Road median strip, where the government was going to put concrete in — I know that is a water saving device, putting concrete along median strips, but I am not one of those who supports it. The method was used in Melbourne by some of our new immigrants; they thought green concrete was a lawn and a water-saving device as well, but we have gone beyond green concrete. Thankfully, Greening Australia has worked on the plantation in the middle of Howard Springs Road, from Whitewood Road to the Stuart Highway. That plantation is mulched and has no irrigation on it.
Again, I am not trying to deviate too much from this legislation, but it is about saving water. Governments have a role to consider their policies of what they plant on roads and around parks. There is a place for watering gardens but there is also a place for what I call a commonsense approach. The middle of a road is difficult to water in the first place, so why not use the native plants?
I support what the minister is doing with this legislation. It is good, but one do not forget those people who are not in towns and do not operate within a nice city, where the water quality is A1, and the pressure is as it should be and two do not forget there is a lot of wastage, especially where people are not metered for water and there is no incentive for them to turn taps off because it does not cost them any money. It is free, so who cares? Thirdly, governments should promote, not only within their own departments but in the broader scale of landscaping, using native plants and mulching to reduce the amount of water used.
This is not to say you cannot still have ovals and some green areas. I would hate to see it all without that. Lawns are very nice, and they also bring a bit of a cooling effect, but it is about trying to find a balance where needed.
Thank you, minister, I support the legislation.
Debate suspended.
The CLERK: Honourable members, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform members that a response to Petition No 36 has been received and circulated to honourable members.
The text of the response will be included in the Hansard and placed on the Legislative Assembly website. A copy of the response will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to petitioners.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr CHANDLER (Lands, Planning and the Environment): Madam Speaker, I thought the member for Nelson was digressing, as happened before lunch.
Mr Wood: I did talk about drains.
Mr Westra van Holthe: We are allowed a bit of latitude in the Chamber.
Mr CHANDLER: We are allowed a bit of latitude. I thank members for their contributions towards the debate of the Water Efficiency Labelling Standards (National Uniform Legislation) Bill. The bill upholds the Northern Territory’s commitment to a national scheme for water efficiency labelling and standards. I thank all people who stepped up to the challenge of reducing our water consumption by developing and implementing the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards scheme, known as the WELS scheme.
I note that while this new legislation does not represent a change in government policy, the Northern Territory has been committed to the WELS scheme since 2005 and remains so. Once this bill has passed, the Northern Territory will again have legislation consistent with other WELS legislation in Australia.
There are a few questions the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson asked which I will answer, and I will go through them slowly. I also want to explore a couple of key features of the bill before moving to passage. It is important because of the digression by the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson.
We should do all we can to preserve water in the Northern Territory. This is Northern Territory legislation covering all of the Territory, but we live in an environment with a dramatic Wet Season each year in the Top End, which I think leads people to believe water is not a finite resource. With the capacity of our dams and our water usage, we need to be careful how we use water. Most people would be horrified to learn we use about three times the amount of water per capita as people in south east Queensland or Victoria. I find it funny when tourists, family and friends come from interstate and see us washing the car in the driveway; they are horrified because it is not something they do down south. They grab a bucket of water and will only use what is required to do the job.
Ms Walker: Do you not park the car on the lawn?
Mr CHANDLER: Yes, you can park it on the grass, wash the boat and give the grass a bit of water at the same time.
To use three times more than southerners is amazing. We can all improve how we use water. On a couple of occasions when I visited mum and dad in Melbourne, I used their shower, and they have a little timer. It is funny, as you get in very quickly, soap yourself up and get out of the shower just to beat the damn timer. It comes in handy if you have children.
The member for Nhulunbuy also raised a few issues, moving to the side of minister Westra van Holthe’s area of natural resources. We will have to build a new dam at some stage. The member for Nhulunbuy asked a couple of questions about government’s future ideas in that area, and I have had running battles with people such as Stuart Blanch from the Environment Centre NT about that. I have told him that today we live in a house or a unit where you can turn a tap on and potable water comes out. In 50 or 100 years from now, people living in the Northern Territory will have an expectation that you turn the tap on and water will flow.
What will it take? It will take investment; we will need, at some stage, a new dam in the greater Darwin area. We will have to be careful with how we use water in Alice Springs. The water table in the aquifer there drops every year, and it is more expensive every year to draw water out. In Central Australia, the aquifers do not refill anywhere near the capacity of refill charges in the northern part of the Northern Territory, but there are smart technologies we can use.
I have just come from a meeting with Geoff; we were talking about solar pump hot water systems and how efficient they are compared to some other forms of water, especially electricity-driven water heaters. We discussed what we could do from the lands and planning side of things to ensure that in blocks of 100 or 150 units, instead of having little hot water systems in each unit, why could we not have a single heat pump to run the entire building? You would provide ongoing savings for those residents for years to come.
I have seen where those hot water systems have been used. Because one of the derivatives of them is cool air, it is channelled into areas like hotel foyers or kitchens, where they no longer have to use specific air-conditioning units because they have the by-product of their hot water system.
There are some amazing things you can do with technology today, but we also need to have a commonsense approach to how we use water in the Northern Territory. The member for Nhulunbuy asked about Alice Water Smart. As I said, with smart technology in the future, this government can see, particularly with planning, how we could utilise grey water better and introduce underground tanks for homes. I have just had a report from the EPA handed to me about the storm water management plan it is working on. For the first time we have some ideas on how we could manage some of the storm water in the Top End.
With water, there is real opportunity, but both the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson digressed into the world of politics and moved well away from efficiency labelling. However, this is the world of politics.
Mr Wood: Where was the politics in my speech?
Mr CHANDLER: There was a bit of politics, but you did talk about showerheads, member for Nelson. I could probably recommend CLR as a product to be used for decalcifying some of the showerheads, but you are right. It reminds me of a story where John Farnham …
Mr Wood: Do not digress.
Mr CHANDLER: I am digressing. John Farnham tells a story of travelling around the country and performing concerts. He travelled with his own shower rose, because in every motel he stayed in he hated the shower roses. He had a particular one. If memory serves me, John Farnham was a plumber at some time in his life and carried a particular showerhead. He used to replace the ones in the hotels and motels he stayed in so he could have a decent shower.
I will not digress there either because that will …
Mr Wood: Please do.
Mr CHANDLER: Would you like me to digress? I will give you one more showerhead story. Many years ago, while working with the ABS, I often stayed at a particular hotel in Canberra, and they constructed a brand new wing. One night I arrived in Canberra, it was extremely cold, and one of the nice things you like to do when travelling is jump into a hot shower. I hopped into this brand new room, in the new wing of the hotel, which was lovely, and into the shower. However, I worked out it had a design fault, because one of the first things I do in the shower is wash my face with a flanneI; I hope others do this. I dropped the flannel and enjoyed the shower. This beautiful hot water was – I was going to say pulsating over me, but that is too much information.
Mr Higgins: Cascading.
Mr CHANDLER: Cascading is a good word.
The flannel landed on the floor of the shower. I did everything else you do in a shower. Ten or 15 minutes had gone past in this beautiful hot shower, and I did not realise the drain in the shower was the only one in this brand new bathroom area of the hotel. Because the flannel had covered the drain, the water kept flowing out into the rest of the bathroom and then onto the brand new carpet in the room. This was to the point I was getting knocks on the door because there was water leaking down to the next level. The next day I was called in by the manager to explain the water damage to the hotel room.
The next time I was in that hotel they put me in a disabled room. I wondered if there was a message there. Bugger me, I hop in the shower and they have one of these lovely shower roses. When I turned the water on, it blew off the side of the wall and water went everywhere. I said, ‘What is it with water and this hotel?’ I was making a mess wherever I went. However, these were good quality products that would have fitted within this legislation because they were star-rated products. It did not stop water going everywhere, across the walls, the ceiling, so you need to be careful with these things.
Member for Nelson, you mentioned that you will often get calcium build-up – iron is another – which will build up slime and so forth in these showerheads. I am positive this legislation will not prevent anybody from being able to get hold of decent showerheads, wherever you live in the Northern Territory. I can still remember drilling out a few when they were clogged up from time to time.
You also mentioned a few things where we had digressed, and I want to to cover the last couple of things before I move to the second and third readings. Member for Nhulunbuy, you asked about clause 2(2)(a), the Northern Territory process to determine not to accept proposed Commonwealth amendments. All proposed amendments are subject to a national consultation model, firstly with the states and territories in accordance with the WELS inter-government agreement and then publicly as appropriate with stakeholders, manufacturers, etcetera.
The other clause you talked about was 10(2)(g), ‘consultation’. The list of those consulted in putting this bill together includes the Department of Attorney-General and Justice; the Department of the Chief Minister; the Department of Treasury and Finance; the Department of Business, which spoke to a number of businesses involved; and the Power and Water Corporation, because it does affect what it does. I think they were the only questions.
In summary, these are the key features of this bill. The bill creates a new act; it repeals the existing Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act. Principally, the bill applies the Commonwealth’s Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act 2005, as enforced, from time to time, as a law of the Northern Territory. In 2005, the Northern Territory signed the WELS inter-governmental agreement with the Commonwealth and enacted the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act 2005. In 2006, the Northern Territory passed the WELS Act. The act replicates the Commonwealth act; previously, each time the Commonwealth amended its legislation, this Assembly was required to amend the Northern Territory act as well.
In 2010 the Commonwealth undertook a review of the WELS scheme. That review resulted in a number of recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the scheme. Public consultation on the WELS scheme and amendments to the Commonwealth act were undertaken between 2010 and 2012. Territory businesses were consulted as part of this process. No other specific consultation has been undertaken with businesses in the Northern Territory. As I said, comments were sought from the number of agencies I mentioned before.
The member for Nhulunbuy also asked when this legislation will commence operation. Once passed, the act will commence on the day it is given assent by the Administrator.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr CHANDLER (Lands, Planning and the Environment)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that Government Business Order of the Day No 20, Appropriation (2014-2015) Bill (Serial 79), be called on forthwith.
Continued from 13 May 2014.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, the Northern Territory government’s 2014 budget is good news for Territorians whose livelihood comes from the land, the water and our natural resources. The Country Liberals government has significant plans to develop northern Australia, and this is reflected positively in this budget. We are getting on with governing, and this budget is an action list of priorities we have to ensure the future positive economic development and growth of the Northern Territory.
Today I will provide the budget reply for my portfolio responsibilities of Mines and Energy, Primary Industry and Fisheries, and Land Resource Management. Before I turn to each portfolio, I will outline some of the major initiatives the Country Liberals are implementing across my areas of responsibility. We are spending $2.5m to upgrade two critical barrages on the Mary River near Shady Camp to halt saltwater intrusion onto the wetlands and valuable pastoral land.
Additional funding of $1.3m will be used to accelerate land and water suitability assessments to determine new agriculture precincts throughout the Northern Territory. There is additional funding of $3.95m over four years for a total of $15.8m to continue and expand the CORE initiative, as well as additional funding of $2m for a program that will assess the Territory’s shale gas potential and resources.
We are establishing the Food Industry Development Group with $513 000 of new money that will reshape and drive economic agricultural development and activities, including market analysis, new market development and the facilitation of land investment packages.
This budget also contains a $2.25m package to support Indigenous development opportunities and provide permit-free fishing access to intertidal waters overlying Aboriginal land.
I turn specifically to my Department of Mines and Energy. The mining and energy sector continues to be the Territory’s largest industry and major driver of our economy. The Territory needs a strong minerals and onshore petroleum exploration sector to discover new resources to maintain and grow the industry into the future. However, the Territory is competing in a highly competitive globalised marketplace for exploration investment.
In June last year I launched the Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, or CORE, initiative, which was designed to attract minerals and petroleum exploration investment through acquiring new pre-competitive geoscience information to make the Territory a more attractive place to explore, a scheme of industry grants for high-risk exploration and programs to attract international investment into resources projects at the exploration stage.
I am pleased to announce this government is committing a further four years of funding to the CORE initiative at its existing $3.95m level per annum. In addition, we will also be investing an additional $2m per annum for the next four years in an accelerated collaborative program to assess the Territory’s shale gas potential and resources. A better understanding of the Territory’s shale gas potential will accelerate exploration for onshore gas and oil, promote the Territory’s potential to the global industry and underpin government planning on energy security and associated infrastructure and regional development. This is not a cheap exercise, but has the potential to bring forward development of an industry potentially worth billions of dollars in investment and royalties.
The renewal of the CORE initiative, along with the additional $2m per year on shale gas assessments, means the government will be investing $5.95m per year for the next four years on programs to grow the exploration industry. Key components of this funding will include $3.25m per year in new pre-competitive geoscience acquisition, particularly focused in strategic development zones in the gulf, East Arnhem and Central Australian regions. This will include the $2m dedicated to assessing shale gas resources and the potential of the Territory’s prospective basins. We will have a strong focus on collaboration with the Commonwealth and industry to maximise outcomes for the Territory. An amount of $750 000 per year will be used for collaborative industry grants and to co-fund drilling and geophysical programs in underexplored greenfield areas.
There is also $300 000 for ongoing efforts to attract international investment into exploration projects and promote the Territory’s geological potential to the domestic and global industries. There is $1.65m for improved management and delivery of geoscience and exploration data to industry, especially through online systems. This initiative will be undertaken and coordinated by the Northern Territory Geological Survey within my department. This is the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government, and it demonstrates our ‘open for business’ approach to minerals and energy exploration and development.
CORE differs from previous exploration initiatives in having the Territory’s first major geoscience programs targeted at growing the onshore petroleum sector with a focus on the Territory’s unconventional gas potential.
There is also a much stronger emphasis on the importance of a collaborative approach, in order to bring resources and expertise into the Territory. The geoscience programs will focus on two defined strategic development zones, where there will be a coordinated approach by my department to stimulate minerals and energy development.
The first is the Gulf/East Arnhem region, where the vast McArthur Basin has the potential to emerge as a globally significant shale gas province. The second is in Central Australia, which is being increasingly recognised for its minerals and energy potential.
The initiative will also allow significant work to be undertaken to acquire new geoscience information in East Arnhem Land as a stimulus to exploration in the region following the closure of the Gove refinery.
East Arnhem Land is believed to be highly prospective but has little past exploration or geoscience information. This initiative will also allow the department to continue its highly successful efforts in assisting local explorers to attract international investment, particularly from key markets in East Asia.
This new exploration initiative is a major investment in the future of the Territory’s economy and regional economic development, and will link closely with the government’s strategies on north Australian development, Asian engagement, trade and investment, and economic development.
The establishment of an energy directorate last year within the Department of Mines and Energy was essential to the strategic, timely development of the Northern Territory’s considerable natural gas resources to meet the market demands of the mid-term future. This will ensure Territorians benefit from the flow-on effects to the Territory economy.
The energy team is working towards the development and implementation of a whole-of-government energy policy. This will focus on sustained industry growth and prosperity for the Northern Territory over the next 20 years.
In developing policy, the focus is on delivering secure, affordable, reliable and relatively clean energy in the form of gas and solar. The Northern Territory has abundant and renewable energy resources, and those resources will play a critical and increasing role in meeting our future energy needs.
Gas and solar energy will play a key role in driving economic development, including investment in regions and employment. A major focus is on facilitating investment in gas infrastructure, including identifying local, interstate and overseas gas markets; giving consideration to encouraging shared infrastructure and related co-investment; and the development of Alice Springs as an iconic and internationally recognised centre of solar excellence, building on the demonstration value that has already been created by research, development and deployment of solar in and around Alice Springs.
The Centre for Renewable Energy is funded for 2014. While its programs are under review to determine future approaches, I am pleased to say that some of the major projects and research initiatives under way will facilitate infrastructure development for emerging and changing transport needs, such as electric vehicles, and address issues of energy demand and efficiency.
My department’s legacy mines unit is now fully resourced and at operational strength. This unit has already commenced fieldwork, with automated open-pit water level monitoring equipment and a weather station installed at two Top End legacy sites. This provides the unit with the ability to monitor pit levels remotely.
At the Redbank mine, near the Queensland border, a major field program is under way which includes an electromagnetic survey to inform locations of groundwater investigation bores, the installation of groundwater investigation bores and solar groundwater recovery pumps.
The legacy mines unit has also been assisting the department’s technical support unit with ongoing investigations and studies at Mount Todd. A large scale reconnaissance program is planned for later in the Dry Season to begin cataloguing legacy sites, prior to undertaking a risk assessment program for all sites.
My Department of Mines and Energy recently commissioned an external consultant to review and scope an IT business system. This system will provide a one-stop shop for explorers, miners, producers and investors for energy and minerals. It will allow online lodgements and payments for minerals and energy tenure, and operations, improve the availability of up-to-date data to industry and increase accountability and transparency in end-to-end processes undertaken by the department.
I will now talk about my Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries. Recreational fishing is an integral part of the Territory lifestyle, and expenditure across our recreational and fishing tour sectors is estimated to be over $80m annually. For a long time the Territory has been a celebrated fishing destination in Australia, thanks mainly to our remote, uncrowded and wild rivers. Over the past decade the growing Territory population, coupled with incredible advances in fishing technology, has seen the crowds build and our fisheries come under increasing pressure.
All of this makes the task of balancing how we manage and use our fisheries much more difficult than it used to be, but it is important for us to continue to stay at the front of the pack when it comes to fishing and fisheries management. Balancing these competing uses and differing views on the best use of our fish stocks can be a difficult task.
This government’s election commitment to develop a resource-sharing framework to enable evidence-based analysis to be applied to resolve access and resource attribution issues is well under way. It will provide industry with the certainty it needs to invest with confidence. I acknowledge the efforts of the stakeholder-based working group I established. I am currently considering its findings before finalising a new framework under which to consider resource sharing issues.
One of the most important issues for fishing is access, and this government is working hard to achieve win/win outcomes for traditional owners and fishers throughout the Blue Mud Bay negotiation process. The reality of the situation is that the High Court of Australia has made a decision that must be honoured. Negotiating with the many community leaders across our coastline, in a respectful and solutions focused way, is an enormous commitment we will continue to pursue in a way that prioritises permit-free access to as much of the Territory’s coastline as possible.
This budget contains a $2.25m package for the department to support Indigenous development opportunities and provide permit-free fishing access to intertidal waters overlying Aboriginal land. A key part of this package is the government’s commitment to enhance marine ranger programs across the Territory. This includes providing stronger powers for marine rangers so they can undertake compliance and enforcement on our many waterways. This will ensure rangers can work in partnership with government agencies to monitor our vast coastline, rivers and waterways.
Elements of the package include the training of marine rangers in scientific and technical skills in fisheries research, a fish mentoring program to provide training and skill development in commercial fishing to allow more Indigenous Territorians to participate in the seafood industry and better consultation with Aboriginal communities over fishing and marine management.
In addition, a further $466 000 has been allocated to water police to conduct on-country fishery patrols and training with marine ranger groups across the Territory.
The overall package will deliver a number of key outcomes, including improved fisheries compliance in remote areas, more skilled and trained Indigenous Territorians undertaking fisheries research and compliance activities, more skilled and trained Indigenous Territorians participating in the seafood industry and the increased involvement of Indigenous Territorians in fisheries management, research and aquatic resource conservation.
This new package builds upon the existing $1.5m in Indigenous programs already undertaken by the Fisheries Division to build the capacity of Indigenous marine rangers and work in partnership with Aboriginal communities across the Territory. These programs are acclaimed nationally.
This government is also committed to commercial fisheries development. My Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries is reviewing commercial fisheries with the objectives of minimising red tape, increasing investment certainty and realising the potential of the commercial sector as a food producer. A review of potential alternative management frameworks for the barramundi fishery is under way. This review will aim to identify and target strategic development opportunities which lead to improved performance for the barramundi fishery.
Other commercial fisheries undergoing reviews to improve their viability and performance include the offshore net and line fishery in shark and trepang, and the mud crab fishery. It is hoped these reviews can mirror successes seen in the transformation of offshore snapper fisheries in recent years.
In recognition of the importance of managing our fisheries now and into the future, $2.5m has been allocated for the sustainable management of the Territory’s aquatic resource. A key focus of this research will be monitoring the status of our at-risk coastal reef fish around the Darwin area. I am considering a new management package for reef fish to ensure our children can enjoy the benefits of healthy fish stocks into the future.
An allocation of $560 000 for the sustainable management of recreational fishing will see the ongoing implementation of the recreational fishing development plan. This includes a dedicated recreational fishing survey program to properly understand recreational fishing patterns in the Territory so we can manage our resources most effectively.
This is an addition to the broader research team that works to monitor and evaluate the health of our stocks and ecosystems. Recognising the importance of recreational fishing to our social and cultural wellbeing, we have also established a recreational fishing advisory committee to provide frank and independent advice on all major issues at the centre of recreational fishing in the Territory.
The mango industry in the Northern Territory, valued at around $80m, now provides over 50% of all Australian product, and because of our stable climatic conditions this industry is expanding. I would also like to throw in the fact that the Katherine region produces more than 50% of the Territory’s mangoes.
Mr Higgins: The best come out of the Daly.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: The member for Daly tells me that the best mangoes come from the Daly, but I may have to agree to disagree with him on that.
However, the challenges facing the security of this industry are market access constraints regarding exporting and providing high-quality fruit into the domestic market. This budget contains $1.24m, which includes $350 000 of Commonwealth funding, to evaluate alternative market access protocols to allow the export of mangoes from Australia without post-harvest disinfestation treatment. This will open the opportunity for mango exports directly out of the port of Darwin into countries such as China and the Middle East. Linked to this export strategy is the need to improve mango export access to overseas markets and undertake initiatives to lengthen the mango production period through improved crop management and alternative mango genetics.
The past two seasons have seen an increase in poor quality fruit out of the Darwin region. In collaboration with industry, greater detailed trials will be conducted to identify the problems and implement strategies to increase the reputation of Darwin’s fruit.
The Territory’s next largest horticultural industry is melons, valued at $45m. To secure the profitability of the watermelon industry, the department is working closely with commercial seed companies to resolve problems associated with soil borne pathogens which have recently caused this industry to suffer significant losses. We are investing $200 000 into this project.
As well as this, $300 000, including $100 000 of Commonwealth funding, will be used to investigate practices to maximise economic efficiency of nitrogen use on melon, vegetable and hay farms, while minimising the impact of greenhouse gases on the environment and storing carbon in the soil.
In collaboration with the Australian Banana Growers Council, new banana varieties from germplasm improvement programs from around the world will be evaluated at the Coastal Plains research station for resistance against Tropical race 4 Panama disease to increase banana production in the Territory.
Again this year $400 000 has been allocated to continue the Ord Stage 3 pre-development work by the Ord Development Unit. Priority work in 2014-15 will focus on native title negotiations and cross border issues, such as water supply and infrastructure.
The Northern Territory’s pastoral industry contributes well over $330m to the economy every year. With the recent upturn in live export figures to Southeast Asian destinations, namely Indonesia and Vietnam, all indications show that this figure is likely to rise substantially over coming years. The Country Liberals government is a proud supporter of the Northern Territory’s pastoralists, and we have worked hard to help restore and rebuild this iconic industry.
Recent live export sales of cattle and buffalo to Vietnam indicate the real possibility of a new long-term, robust live export market. The new Vietnamese market, in conjunction with the recently increased live cattle quotas from the Indonesian government, is providing confidence and encouragement for the industry’s recovery. The Country Liberals government has developed a collaborative strategy, in conjunction with industry partners, to restore and increase our live export industry.
To create diversity and greater opportunity for Territory pastoralists and to increase focus on emerging markets, funding of $300 000 was used to establish a Live Animals Export Market Development Unit within the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries. The department is also investigating methods to increase the areas of land suitable for grazing cattle. The Indigenous Pastoral Program, which is supported through the department, aims to increase cattle numbers and land in production on Aboriginal land, and to increase Indigenous participation in the Northern Territory’s pastoral industry. Indeed, it was heartening to hear recently that the Indigenous Land Corporation has plans to double the number of cattle run on Aboriginal land across northern Australia in coming years. This will benefit the economies of northern Australia and provide direct benefit for Indigenous people. Future priorities for the Northern Territory’s live export and pastoral industries include maintaining efforts in Indonesia, building on emerging markets for cattle and buffalo, including Vietnam, and identifying and developing new live export trade opportunities in the Asian region.
In this budget, the Territory’s primary industry sector will be strengthened through the establishment of a Food Industry Development Group to drive economic agricultural development. Budget 2014-15 provides $1m over two years to progress this very important initiative.
I turn to my Department of Land Resource Management. This department works in partnership with landowners to manage precious land and water resources, and will receive $49.5m in Budget 2014-15, including $4.9m for new initiatives. Access to good land and water resources will underpin northern Australia’s development. My department will continue playing a critical role in supporting and facilitating economic development across the Northern Territory. Already, the potential of the Daly, Mataranka and Katherine agriculture precincts are being realised with growers gaining access to precious water. However, much more work needs to be done to identify new areas where land and water resources are suitable for economic expansion in job-creating industries such as agriculture and tourism.
The Northern Territory government wants to remove the guesswork and take a considered, science-based approach to the ecological sustainable development of our north. That is why, as the member for Katherine and Minister for Land Resource Management, I welcome the Treasurer’s 2014-15 budget, which boosts investment in our land and water resources. New budget initiatives include $2.4m of funding for expanding the land and water assessment program to find new agricultural precincts throughout the Territory. This is in addition to the $1.8m for land and water suitability assessments for agricultural developments taking place on the Tiwi Islands.
Assessment of available water resources is critical in determining the land suitability of an area. Land and water assessments will provide high-quality land and water suitability information and mapping essentials for underpinning successful agricultural developments. The availability of this data is key to accelerating and attracting private investment, which will also reduce the risk to investors, potential business failures and mitigate potential land, water, flora and fauna degradation. A continual $1.35m will be used to increase the activities of the rangeland monitoring program and provide ongoing support to the Pastoral Land Board.
This government is determined to increase opportunities available for landowners, primary producers and those whose businesses depend on land and water. Changes introduced in January this year to the Pastoral Land Act enable pastoralists to diversify land use and develop new income streams without having to change the tenure of their pastoral lease. Non-pastoral operations could focus on activities such as tourism, horticulture, extensive agricultural developments, aquaculture and forestry, which co-exist with the pastoral enterprise. When coupled with this government’s commitment to using the Northern Territory’s water resources to drive economic development in a way that is sustainable and underpinned by quality science and sensible policy, pastoral lease holders have a unique opportunity to diversify their income streams and contribute further to the economic growth of the Northern Territory.
The Country Liberals government recognises the solid work of my department staff, who work tirelessly to get through a backlog of water licence applications left to sit idle by the former Labor government, and then get on and process new applications.
During the last 18 months, the water controller has issued 82 licences which will support economic development and job creation in the key industries of agriculture and tourism. But, this is only the beginning; there is an abundance of land across the Top End. The development of the north depends on access to water that is reliable and ecologically sustainable.
The Northern Territory government stands proud of its commitment to economic development across the whole of the Northern Territory, especially in our regions. These licences, the ones currently being issued, are not without their conditions or restrictions, meaning that in dry years there will be less water allocated so the environment and all stakeholders are protected. It is called adaptive management.
Opponents of water licences, whether it be in this Chamber or other stakeholder groups shackled by misdirected ideology, need to understand and accept that you cannot develop land without water.
Part of the $2.4m announced in budget 2014 will go into assessing water resources needed to develop the north for all Territorians. A range of water administration fees will be introduced by my department for services such as bore construction permits, water extraction licences and drilling licences to cover administration and transaction costs.
Obtaining a water extraction licence is no different to obtaining a development permit and, as such, applicants should pay fees for these permits.
We want our regions to grow and prosper, and the issuing of water licences through a science-based approach supports environmentally sustainable economic development with strong policy that provides certainty for investors.
I want to pick up on some of the things the Opposition Leader said during her budget reply this morning, talking about water.
I need to assure Territorians that, first of all, we take our responsibilities as the custodians of water for all Territorians very seriously. What I heard today from the Opposition Leader clearly indicated that she has a palpable misunderstanding of water resources and allocations in the Northern Territory. I propose that she receive a briefing to better understand the way water resources are allocated across the Territory.
Her scaremongering tactics this morning – no doubt we will hear plenty more of those this afternoon from the member for Nhulunbuy when she presents her motion – do nothing to inspire confidence in the way the Territory government is approaching water.
Ms FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member for Katherine to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: We are not issuing water licences willy-nilly to our mates across the Northern Territory. We are not allocating all available water in an entire aquifer. We are sticking with the science; it tells us how much water we can allocate from an aquifer and, at this point, the notional amount of water which can be allocated, based on annual recharge, is 20%.
The opposition would have people believe that we will stick a straw into an aquifer and suck it dry. That is incredibly misleading. I cannot use the word ‘lie’ in this House, but that is what it is. I am getting to the point where I am sick of hearing that sort of vitriol and diatribe from those opposite, who clearly do not understand water allocations in the Territory. We are about the responsible use of our water resources. We do want to see economic development, and we are working very hard to get that balance right. No doubt the member for Nhulunbuy will have plenty of vitriol in her debate this afternoon.
I am pleased to advise of funding of $500 000 to continue weed management extension services across regional areas of the Territory to assist pastoralists in controlling weed incursions and infestations, particularly around Tennant Creek and Katherine. Invasive weed species are a threat to productivity, the environmental viability of the land and, in particular, the pastoral industry. Weed spread can also have an impact on the tourism industry, affecting waterways and fishing accessibility and activity.
The department is combating saltwater intrusion at the Mary River through developing a capital works program of an unprecedented $2.5m. This is for major works near Shady Camp to upgrade two critical barrages. We recognise the need to get engineering and construction methods right on those barrages to create long-term barriers suitable for preventing the intrusion of saltwater. That work will commence this year.
Mr Wood: That would be good work for Corrections.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It would be good work for Corrections, perhaps.
The floodplain contains some of the most productive area for biodiversity in Australia, and has wetland conservation values of international standards. It is recognised as a site of biodiversity conservation significance, and has important cultural values.
New engineering designs of the barrages, as I mentioned, will assist in the short term to reduce the speed of saltwater intrusion in the lower Mary River floodplains, upstream of the main Shady Camp barrage. New designs will see rock armoured barrages with low rock-line spillways constructed to the same height as surrounding floodplains. This will allow for better interconnectivity between the river and the floodplains, which will facilitate fish migration in the system and allow a more cost-effective utilisation of the annual repair and maintenance program.
Delivery of this capital works program may improve the short-term management of the risk of saltwater intrusion and assist in protecting significant breeding sites for vast populations of waterbirds in the Northern Territory, including magpie geese, protecting our major breeding areas for fish species and freshwater pastures for cattle stock.
I take this opportunity to recognise the wonderful job the dedicated Bushfires NT and 23 volunteer bushfire brigades do, and their important work across the Northern Territory protecting landscapes, homes and infrastructure from wildfires. A review of the Bushfires Act is under way, with submissions closing on Friday 23 May this year. The modernisation of the legislation allows the act to recognise collaborations and mechanisms for providing a bushfire management service to over 90% of the Northern Territory’s land mass. A continued $1m of funding will be used for wildfire suppression activities to protect communities at risk during the coming fire season, and to deploy aerial assets to assist with aerial firefighting to combat wildfires. My department continues to work with Indigenous elders and communities to preserve and utilise Indigenous biocultural knowledge for the conservation of the Territory’s flora and fauna. The results of this have led to several publications about unique plants and animals found in the Territory.
The combination of traditional knowledge with modern science is also being demonstrated through our partnership with the northern environmental research program that focuses, in part, on feral cat management on Indigenous land. Across Australia, it is estimated that feral cats kill up to 75 million native mammals, insects and reptiles every night. A large portion of this destruction is happening right here in our back yard, with our national parks, such as Kakadu, a key area of concern.
My department is working closely with scientists and rangers from the NT and the Australian government, along with Indigenous traditional owners to quantify the role of feral cats in the Top End and determine a suitable response which will not jeopardise native populations any further. To continue this important work combating the devastation and destruction caused by feral cats and to reverse small mammal decline over the long term, Budget 2014-15 invests a further $400 000 towards feral cat management, in collaboration with Indigenous landowners. We are very much at the information gathering stage and the work that has already been done and will continue to be done through this budget boost will lay the foundation for future direction in this area.
As well as maintaining a formal list of threatened species protected under the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, the flora and fauna division of my department is involved in a suite of management, monitoring and research programs for threatened species, recovering about 35 species in recent years. I am pleased to announce that Budget 2014-15 provides $500 000 for the assessment and monitoring of threatened and significant wildlife. Sound information about threatened species is important for managing and protecting our wildlife for the future.
This is how my Departments of Primary Industry and Fisheries, Mines and Energy, and Land Resource Management will spend their funding in the coming 12 months. Before I sit down, seeing as I have another four minutes to go, I might quickly touch on some of the initiatives this budget brings for my electorate of Katherine. I will not go too much into the macro figures because the Treasurer has adequately articulated those to the community at large.
It is wonderful to see money coming into my electorate for the rebuilding and repairs and maintenance of roads. A couple of years ago, when I was in opposition, I wrote to the former Minister for Transport, the member for Barkly, asking him to consider putting a bridge over Leight Creek on Emungalan Road. The response was, basically, a curt no. I am delighted to announce that $2.75m has been allocated by this government for Katherine rural roads. That sum will include enough money to collaborate with the Alice Springs Town Council and provide better flood immunity for the 30 or so residents who live on the other side of Leight Creek on Emungalan Road.
That money will then be spent on other roads which will benefit the economy of Katherine – Beasley Road, Florina Road and Edith Farms Road – because we recognise there are businesses there which very much rely on transport to get their product to market. Improving road infrastructure will assist those businesses.
It is also a pleasure to be able to talk about the alcohol mandatory treatment centre which will be built in Katherine, and the additional capacity which will be provided at the Katherine Hospital for assessment services for alcohol mandatory treatment.
There is money which has finally been made available to progress work on an alternate route for heavy vehicles. While we are certainly not looking at a second high-level bridge at this stage, we are looking at strengthening the road and improving intersections on what we consider to be the most likely alternate route a future heavy vehicle bypass might take and that is on Bicentennial Road.
That, in addition to many of the other initiatives for Katherine, bodes very well for the relationship between this government and my community of Katherine. I commend the Treasurer on Budget 2014-15. As I said last night in Katherine, not only is this a good budget for families, it is a fantastic budget for the economy, because it starts to apply appropriate resources to the areas that will help to build, strengthen and support the economic base of the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Katherine; you have the most interesting portfolio in the business.
I might not agree with everything, but I agree with pretty well most of it. Thank you also for raising the issue of biodiversity, which does not get enough publicity in this House. It is possibly because you have other fairly major considerations to look at, and biodiversity ends up on the last page of your speech. It is a very important part of the Northern Territory. Even though you keep saying we are open for business, and I do not have a problem with the idea of making sure we develop the Northern Territory, we have to be careful we do not wreck it in the process of being open for business. It was good to hear about biodiversity. I started dreaming of camping by a creek along the Bullita Stock Route in the Gregory National Park when you spoke about the wildlife we want to protect.
I will give my two bobs’ worth on water allocations later, but it might be different to what people are saying today.
There are good things in the budget. I might come to that later, otherwise I will miss the important reason I am here, and that is to speak about my own electorate, the rural area. In that area I cannot give the Northern Territory government any ticks. You might say that is negative, but it is not my fault. I am reading the budget papers for my area and there is pretty well nothing. I know the member for Goyder looked at it too, as did the member for Daly. I am not sure what his opinion is, but we have two infrastructure items: a drain and some infrastructure at Humpty Doo. That is it for an area of 20 000 people.
If you think I am being negative, it is not my fault. What do I have to be proud of? There is a drain and some infrastructure at Humpty Doo to develop private land. I would like to know whose private land the government is building infrastructure for. There is Crown land in Humpty Doo which needs to be developed, and a parcel of land was approved by the government outside the district centre which is private land and not attached to any infrastructure except electricity and water. I hope this is not about sewerage infrastructure to a development that should have to fund its own way when it is not part of the district centre. I am waiting on clarification of that.
Minister, you spoke about many things, and I would love to have a debate. It is a pity some of the stuff you talked about cannot come up more often. We have had two speakers on cattle, and that is it. You had great things about horticulture, new agriculture and horticulture precincts, fishing, and you have shale gas, which we should be discussing.
You only mentioned gas and solar. I went to Europe, and one of the reasons for that was to look at how we could develop hydrogen. Hydrogen, fuel cells and batteries were part of a big exhibition I visited in Hannover. There is potential in the Northern Territory for communities to produce their own hydrogen. I saw a huge tidal turbine south of Belfast. We need to be looking at those sorts of possibilities. I also looked at geothermal, the development of energy from solar heat. There is a range of possibilities we should be looking at besides gas. When I visited AREVA, the big French energy company, two of its scientists were talking about small-scale nuclear plants. At the moment we talk about huge nuclear plants which are probably not feasible even if people supported them in the Northern Territory, because we have a small population. However, they are looking at the possibility of small-scale nuclear plants.
People might close their mind to nuclear energy, but they should perhaps go to Europe and France to look at the recycling program they have for nuclear waste. Look at the safeguards they have in France, and bear in mind that with the politics of the world today when some companies have gas and some do not, if you are not self-sufficient in energy you are susceptible to some countries putting pressure on you to do what they want, if you are not careful. Sometimes it is not only about the environment; there are also political issues involved in energy sustainability and independence.
I raise that because the minister covered the issue. The issue of energy – as we have an energy committee – is not only about solar and gas. We should be looking at all forms of energy, even ones we might not agree with. That is why we must keep our minds open.
I have digressed there, so I will go back to my local area. There are two pieces of infrastructure: a drain and some infrastructure at Humpty Doo. Freds Pass is probably the biggest sporting and recreation area outside of what the government has put into Marrara, Traeger and maybe Palmerston. The majority of Freds Pass has been built by voluntary workers and funding from the local council. It has government input from time to time, but it receives nothing like the amount of money which is poured into places like Palmerston, Darwin and Alice Springs.
You only have to look at the huge amount of money poured into Palmerston in the last few years. Look at the first-class soccer fields at Freds Pass. There are three soccer fields there, but what do they have? They have a tin shed for their barbecue and change rooms, but that is it. If you go to Palmerston you will see a huge stand, all the works and jerks and a lovely caf; it is fantastic. With AFL at Freds Pass, Southern Districts, the longstanding football club, has approximately 12 teams playing this year. It has a small grandstand and that is about it.
In Palmerston there is a beautiful grandstand. There is nothing wrong with that, I umpire there and it is fantastic, but there are very similar populations in the two areas. Which one receives a few dollars? It is not Freds Pass.
If the government is fair dinkum about sport – it has nearly tripled the value of its sport vouchers, and that is not a good idea. I am not against the Sport Voucher Scheme being expanded, but the value being at $75 was a good thing to help people. I do not think it is meant to pay for everything people need. I wonder if it is a bit of a sweetener at the moment, rather than common sense.
Government has money to spend, yet there are facilities for people at Freds Pass which need upgrading. With the rugby union facilities, most of the work has been done voluntarily, with some funding from the government. They are building two new fields there which will be first class. With the polocrosse there will be national championships there. Most of its work has been done by volunteers, with people giving machinery and spending their time there.
There has been some money from government from time to time, a grant here and there, but most of it has either been donated or wascouncil money. It is disappointing there is nothing in this budget for Freds Pass.
We are desperate for a new high school; there is no doubt Taminmin high school is full. I told the previous government to start building one where Weddell will be. You do not have to have a city there to build a school. There are plenty of people who live in the southern parts of Litchfield Shire, Batchelor, Adelaide River and Dundee, so another school there could be planned straight away, but it seemed to put Weddell into the too-hard basket and, unfortunately, children are now finding they have to go to other schools because our local high school is full.
In relation to things like the cycle path, we now have a new-beaut suburb called Coolalinga. Believe it or not, ministers, we allow for some development in the rural area, and the perfect thing would be to connect people to the bicycle path which already runs down the railway line, by extending it another four or five kilometres.
It would be ideal for the member for Drysdale to get on her bike, go all the way to Coolalinga and have Maccas. I think she would love that.
Ms Finocchiaro: It is close to my house.
Mr WOOD: That is right. At the moment, I can at least go back to Palmerston, although …
Ms Finocchiaro: That is why we do not have a bike path, so you cannot come this way.
Mr WOOD: How about we find a compromise, and we both go each way?
It also preserves the heritage of an important part of our Territory, which is the original railway line. Even though there is a bridge missing down there, which someone pinched a few years ago, it is something that should eventually – I will probably be dead and buried – become a mountain bike trail or a rail trail, as they are called, all the way to Adelaide River. Trevor Horman, who is a great fan of the heritage of Adelaide River and the railway, would love the rail corridor to be somehow preserved and used as a recreational path.
How many times have I asked for a retirement village? There is land at Humpty Doo, nice trees grow - I love nice native trees - but the land is set aside for residential development, and one government, about 15 years ago, allowed some buildings there. The Labor government built one duplex in all its time in office. The new government does not seem interested either, yet we are screaming out for places where rural people would like to stay in their retirement without leaving the rural area. Humpty Doo is ideal. The government owns the land, and there is water, sewerage and electricity. There are chemists, doctors, a pub – you must have all three prioritised – a supermarket and a hairdresser. You have everything you need next door to where a retirement village could go, but we do not seem to have a government which cares about what rural people want. It cares about what Palmerston and Darwin people want, it even cares about what Alice Springs and the bush people want, but for some reason there is an area called no man’s land, which is the rural area south of Darwin. It seems to be left out.
How much rural land will the government open up? It owns a lot of rural land, but it has not considered opening up one block. We have land that would currently cost between $400 000 and $500 000 for a 1 ha block with water, because private developers strangle the market. They drip feed a few blocks of land out every now and then, and no young family can afford to buy land where they were brought up, unless they want to live with their mum and dad in a granny flat next door.
We have nothing in this budget to say, ‘We recognise rural living as a legitimate way of living in the Northern Territory, and we will open up some of our land for rural living’. There is not one block of land. The government has just said, ‘We will put umpteen thousand blocks in your back yard’. Has it held any discussions with locals? No. Has it had any discussions with the local member? No. Has it asked local people if they think their area name should be changed to Palmerston north? No. I have told the government it is arrogant a number of times; it might have some fine ideas, but is not bringing people with it. It is making statements in this parliament as if it knows best. It does not care what people think.
The government is open for business, and as long as it keeps its mates in big business happy, that is all it cares about. If that is the way it treats people, it should not expect to be in government next time around. People have already said to me, ‘What is this? Suburbs all the way down Howard Springs Road? We were never told about that, we have never been asked.’ The government might think it is only out there, but rural people are very proud of living in the rural area. If you treat them with contempt or ignore them, you do so at your own peril. As I have said to the minister, I am happy to work with you and perhaps there is some compromise here. However, there was no chance to find that compromise.
The decisions were made without consulting me and without any local meetings. It was just done. What really sets it off is when government says, ‘It will be called Palmerston north’. Give me a break! You might think it is a joke sometimes. Believe it or not, if I walked into Palmerston and said, ‘Rosebery and Durack, you will be called St Petersburg because I have friends in Russia’, and you said, ‘Terrific, and we do not care what you think, we are just going to do it’, I am sure people in Palmerston would be up in arms
You might say it is only a name. It came about because Madam Speaker’s mother asked for it – I was on the council when it happened – to be retained. The road in that area is called Wallaby Holtze Road, and Wallaby Holtze was the first botanical garden director, from memory …
Madam SPEAKER: He was related to the first botanical garden director.
Mr WOOD: He was related, so it has a Territory history. It goes back to the 19th century, and was declared by the place names committee as the area there. It is not all of the area we are talking about, as some of it is Howard Springs, not Holtze. It might be an unusual name for people; it might be hidden by signs on the highway that the Department of Transport has allowed to block the name. If you travel through Pinelands on the right hand side you will see a Holtze sign which has a tyre company sign in front of it. I called the department years ago and asked it to move it, but you will see it still sitting there. The name has been there for many years, but the government has said, ‘No, we will call it Palmerston north’. That shows a lack of consideration for Territorians. Regardless of whose electorate they are in, that is not the way to treat them.
I have mentioned education before. Pensioners are concerned that they may lose their concessions. Having worked all their life, the government promised them that once every two years they would receive a return airfare and some concessions. I was speaking to a lady in a restaurant yesterday about this, and she could not understand why they might take those away. I heard the minister on television last night saying the cost of this is going up and up. It is going up and up, but theoretically you should be receiving more and more taxes, so it is not a big cost.
What concerned this person was that those people who have relations down south might say it is all too hard. The original reason for some of these concessions was to hold people in the Northern Territory. If you start to take them away from people who have worked hard in the Northern Territory, and who possibly do not receive a pension or will not receive a pension, they are more than likely to go down south and stay with their grandchildren, instead of visiting them once every so often. The original reason for some of those concessions will now not be there for them to stay in the Territory, and that is a shame.
Berrimah Farm has always been an interesting one, and the government needs to be very careful before it starts putting houses there. I made a suggestion that perhaps you should move the Fannie Bay racetrack there, or the Winnellie greyhounds, and maybe even set up a trotting track as well. You could then open up the land in Fannie Bay, because the racetrack there is squashed in.
People recently e-mailed me when the stables were expanded to say they did not want them near their houses because, as you know, stables smell. There are some fairly expensive buildings there, but that has never seemed to worry governments when they want to pull them down, like Sports House. I do not know why you could not redevelop that for housing and have a racetrack near the main highway on the flat, which you could develop as a first-class racing facility. You could even perhaps use the centre part as a football ground, as they do now for touch football.
That is one idea. The other concern I have is that there is a company called Ostojic transport on Tivendale Road. It not only has trucks, but it moves gravel and extractive mining materials around, and has a sieve or crushing operation at the bottom end of Tivendale Road which creates a lot of dust that I imagine could be poisonous and that floats around that industrial area. The owner told me he built in that area because there was a guarantee there would be no residential land around him. Has the government spoken to some of the people who work in that area? I do not know.
It is an attractive area to put housing. The Labor government looked at it and said it was not bad. You could perhaps use some of that land for a better purpose and maybe develop land, for example, at Fannie Bay, and still create adequate housing.
The other problem you have is noise, as at the far end there is the Hidden Valley racetrack. Hidden Valley racetrack is where it is today because of the noise it created when it was situated on Bagot Road. Those who lived in that area would know that if you went there on Saturday night you could hardly see Bagot Road for the dust, and the noise was horrendous. The government made a decision to stick all motorsports at Hidden Valley. If you are anywhere near the drags on a Saturday night, you might be asking why there is so much noise. The drags make a lot of noise, and when the V8s are there you can hear the noise from Kormilda College. I have played cricket there when there has been motorbike racing at Hidden Valley. You will see a huge mound, because of the noise, near the old HMAS Coonawarra land, where houses are relatively close to Hidden Valley. The government should think carefully about putting houses there.
There are other issues. There are sand flies, it is close to Tiger Brennan Drive, if you are building down that end, and both sides have light to heavy industry in that area. The government might be able to work ways around that; it will be an isolated community, so you would have to ensure there are plenty of public facilities in the area. There might be some advantages. The Knuckey Lagoon community on my side could do with sewerage if that was part of the development, and that might help them. However, before you go down the path of doing this, make sure you look at all possible options. Once again, perhaps it is a good place for the Fannie Bay racetrack.
I mentioned alternative energy and the Sport Voucher Scheme. Whilst on one hand the government is saying it is broke and in debt - the $75 voucher was adequate. It gives me the impression, when you nearly triple that rate, that it is a sweetener or the polls are down a bit. I am all for the minister saying this budget is for families, but we must be realistic.
It reminded me of one of the good things in the Health minister’s budget, which was money for palliative care. I have been in this parliament for a while, and it is great the palliative care facility has been given more funding. It is an important part of the Territory, and I wonder if the minister could tell us about the mobile palliative care units helping in communities in this very important area that are receiving extra funding.
In case people get the wrong idea, during the debate the Chief Minister said – this is about housing in the Holtze area – that the local mayor supports it. I am not here to knock the local mayor, but he was speaking for himself. I checked with the council and asked if it had a policy on suburban housing in that area. It said, ‘No, we have no policy. The only negotiations we have had were with the Northern Territory Planning Commission, which are the same negotiations everybody else has had. Here is an A4 sheet of paper; this is what we are thinking of doing. What are your comments?’ Please do not quote somebody as if the council supports it. The council, as far as I know, does not have a policy on this issue.
The Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment, when making his statement yesterday, gave the impression that I do not support rural development. It is annoying when you hear people say that, because he was referring to Howard Springs. I supported Coolalinga. If anyone goes to Coolalinga, they will see blocks of flats, duplexes and single dwellings being built. You will see Maccas, many industrial sheds going up, and you will see space for a huge shopping centre. I support that; I supported it when it went to planning, and I support the development of Howard Springs. It should be moderate development because there are issues with traffic, and it is surrounded by five-acre blocks, so the intensity of development must be moderate.
The issue I referred to was about a development there. I am not opposed to that block being subdivided, because it has been zoned in such a way; however, the minister has just approved 20 sewage treatment plants on that block and I am trying to find out why. I do not think the department of environmental health would have approved that. My concern about the way the sewage is treated is twisted and turned around to say I am opposed to development. I am not opposed to the 20 blocks to be developed there, because they are permitted; I am not arguing that case. I am arguing that the way the sewage is treated should be done carefully, because I and many other people around that area drink out of the aquifer. It gives me the proverbial when people say, ‘You are against development’.
It is a funny way that we debate issues here; if you can see a political edge, grab it, even if it is not true. I place on the record that I do not like being told that I do not support development. I support development in Howard Springs, as long as it is moderate to suit that area. It is only a small area which can be developed, because that is the only land available.
In the context of what we are talking about today with the budget, the government has emphasised housing development, which is one of its keys, and said we need to bring down the price of land.
I support affordable housing, but you will not create affordable housing if you do not have affordable land. What this government has done, and the previous government did, is not think outside the square.
The government owns Crown land. You should develop Weddell, so let us argue about that as it is Crown land. The government could employ a developer to develop the land, but retain ownership of it. If it retained ownership of the land, you remove the profit that the person they sold it to has to recover, and the profit would then reduce the price of land.
People scream, ‘We bought our land at this price’. Somewhere along the line, we have to bring land prices down to what people can afford, and we are not even attempting to do that. The alternative for the government selling the land is to lease it, as happens in the ACT. It happens in other parts of the world where you can lease land on a 99-year basis; people pay a lease for the land, but they also pay for the house. Generally speaking, a house and land package is about 50/50 – maybe a bit more for the house – but if you take out half of the amount that you do not have to include in a mortgage, look at the instant mortgage relief you have.
If the land side is removed from a $600 000 land and house package, as you will only lease it over a period of time, you take away some of the burden of a high mortgage and allow younger people to come in.
The other option is to release a portion of the land at a set price so the government can recover its costs and put covenants on the blocks. You say to first home owners that they can have this block at this price, as long as they build within two years and stay in the house for the next six to seven years. You cannot sell it for seven or eight years, and you cannot rent it. That is an alternative way, so you move people onto their land, but we do not have that. We hear, ‘Let us sell it to a big developer, who will try to squeeze every block of land they can out of that parcel of land’. You might say, ‘Well, that is business’. Go to Radford Road, where people were promised 1 ha blocks at one stage to buffer them from the Palmerston subdivision. I think it is down to 4000 m2 now, because the developer said, ‘I cannot afford to do it’. In that case, they should have left it as bush, and many people would have been much happier.
The government has ways and means of developing land at an affordable price, but it tends to be stuck in the groove of giving it to a developer and letting the market take control, which is why many people cannot afford to buy their own house today.
The government has a role to play in making land affordable; however, this government does not seem to want to go down that path, and the previous government did not want to go down that path either.
I do not accept what the minister said about Weddell. I was involved in some of the Weddell development; there was a lot of work undertaken in workshops, but there was also a lot of work performed afterwards. Much of the work which had to be done was about environment, waterlogging, the availability of water and where infrastructure would go. You must have that basis before you can develop Weddell. Instead of worrying about Holtze, put the money into developing Weddell, which is close to Darwin River dam, Weddell power stations, Palmerston, the road into town, and you could build a light railway if you made the effort to do it. Use some vision, develop Weddell, it is your plan.
There is nothing in the budget for the rural area. There are some good things overall, but pensioners and local rural people have a drain and a bit of pipe in Humpty Doo.
Mr HIGGINS (Daly): Madam Speaker, ministers in this House have a big advantage over backbenchers and opposition in having access to budget information long before we do. However, I will put some comments on the record.
I went to the ministers’ lunch yesterday and a breakfast this morning, and the impression I got is that this budget has been accepted across the business sector. I had a quick look through it, especially in those areas which affect me, and there are some good points in there for the bush, especially in my electorate. While whatever is being spent is never enough, I was happy to hear the Minister for Transport say this morning that we will seal the Port Keats Road. I do not think there is enough money in this year’s budget to do that; I think he meant we will start sealing the Port Keats Road.
Mr Wood: And a bit of the Litchfield road too.
Mr HIGGINS: Yes, but there is never enough money in the budget wherever it is allocated.
There are some important points. One of the reasons the CLP was elected was because of the issue of local government. I was glad to see we have $25.5m in the budget for local councils and their grant subsidies. One shire specifically which will split into a new council from 1 July, is the Victoria Daly. It will now have the West Daly council, and in the budget there is $1.5m for this year and $1.5m next year to help support that split. I am very happy with that because these people have wanted to set up a separate council for a long time for some autonomy and to have their voice back. They need a lot of help, and the government needs to recognise that it is not automatically there. They need a lot of support, help with governance and many other areas. They will also have to deal with the other half of the shire that will split away, and that half is a lot more savvy in this area.
I am happy with the money allocated in the budget for the Northern Australia Development Office. When developing northern Australia was first suggested, and the government was writing its paper, I wrote some letters to the minister and the Chief Minister about some of the things I thought we should include our submission. I am happy that we have set up an office here; I could not attend the opening of the office on the Esplanade the other day, but I know the NT Farmers Association also has an office there, which it is happy with. It was a good idea to establish the Northern Australia Development Office; there is an allocation of $3.6m for that to happen, and it will be money well spent.
I have an interest in horticulture, and there are many people involved in the industry in my electorate. There are many Vietnamese people there, and there is a lot of potential for horticulture in the more remote areas towards Wadeye. I was also glad to see that we have established a Food Industry Development Group, following on from one started by private industry. It is a food futures group, which I have had a few meetings with. The minister is involved, and it will hold a seminar later this year. One of the things that group recognised is that you must identify your markets and transport before you grow new fruit.
You can grow virtually anything in the Territory, as you only need water, fertiliser and a bit of hard work. The problem is the timing of when you take these things to the market, how far away your market is and who will buy and sell it. The combination of that food futures conference and the Food Industry Development Group has great potential for horticulture in the Territory. Tied in with that is $4m set aside for mango productivity and marketing, etcetera, which I presume is linked with that as well; that is relevant. The Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries mentioned the problem which existed last year in the mango industry, referred to as resin canal. That disorder – I will not say disease because it is accepted that it is not a disease — has the potential to cut well into the $80m that mangoes bring to the Territory. It also gives many of our agents interstate an excuse to downgrade the quality of our fruit, and therefore we will not receive as high a return.
It is very good that we keep investing in the mango industry. Many people think it has grown very large and that all producers are very rich. I can assure you that we are not. It is a very big industry, but you must be more and more competitive nowadays. The return price of mangoes at the moment is probably the same as it was about 10 years ago, whereas costs have increased. You must introduce your own efficiencies.
I was also happy to see that we are continuing our support of Douglas Daly and Beatrice Hill, with $1.2m. I am concerned, along with the member for Nelson and probably the member for Goyder, about the planned splitting of Berrimah Farm. The initial concern I have is with all of the laboratories and crops we are trialling there, herds of cattle we do trials with and other issues. What will happen in those areas?
I remember when the previous government stopped soil sampling in that area. That upset me in that we did not provide that service anymore, but the government used the excuse that it was costing too much money. However, the industry was willing to pay for that service. The problem you now hit in losing that soil sampling is that everyone in the horticultural industry sends their soil samples away each year to see what fertiliser they will use; they all go to different places around the country and no one centrally locates what is happening with our soils. Is there leeching, or a chemical build up? If soil had been tested centrally, through the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, passed out to a group like the NT Horticultural Association or farmers, we may have been able to control that process.
I do not want this government to make the same mistake as the last one by getting rid of many of these laboratories, specifically for water testing. At the moment you pay to have your water sample tested, and I would hate to see that palmed off to private industry without trying to control it.
The other thing I pick up on is about the key pastime in the Territory, which is fishing; many people might think it is drinking. We have allocated $0.36m to continue permit-free fishing and economic development related to the Blue Bud May decision. Many settlements at Blue Mud Bay have been taken as an opportunity for rangers to become more involved, and I see this as having a lot of potential with, for example, water monitoring on the Daly River. I know we have some money for surface water monitoring, and rangers can do that. They can be eyes and ears for the police, and I also see the potential for the ranger programs to take on, if they can — there are some legal problems at the moment — some passive policing roles.
On the Daly there is a problem with a number of cherubin traps which have been set. Cherubin traps should have a name on them, and they must be of a certain size and shape. Police spend a lot of time pulling out these traps, looking at them and collecting those which do not have names on them. I call that passive policing; there are some legal issues around that, but in the longer term there is a lot of potential for rangers to do that work, and it is something we should look at.
There is mention of a strong society; there are many wonderful words like that used, and I try to find what they mean. I think it refers to law and order. I still refer to transport and works, so I would call this law and order. I notice that we also have around $500 000 for Wadeye and Daly courts administration, which I am very grateful for. Being able to attend court at Daly or Wadeye is much better than having to come into town.
I would love to give people at Wadeye some outside protection. If people go to Wadeye, they will see that court hearings are held at the police station; they do not even have any shade. This is an area which we need to do a bit more with. Daly is not as bad, as they have air conditioned offices for a bit of comfort. Whether that is meant to be a deterrent to people at Wadeye, I am not too sure, but it is something we should look at.
There is $410 000 to continue funding community-based corrections at Wadeye. While that only refers to Wadeye, the community corrections function covers from Wadeye to Daly. I know the person in the department of Corrections who is involved with that program. He is based at Wadeye, and is a conscientious and hard-working fellow who spends a lot of time driving from Wadeye to Daly. It is definitely money well spent.
There is $200 000 for an alcohol management plan for Belyuen. Alcohol management plans need to be developed for many communities, and the Belyuen and Wagait area, since the closure of the Mandorah pub, has had increased problems. They have attempted to address them in certain ways, and I have been involved of some of that. I am glad to see they are now trying to create a plan for Belyuen. Many people there come from areas west of the Daly.
Yesterday the member for Nelson talked about family and how they are spread everywhere. While I lived at the Daly for 16 years and knew people in the community, I never built the link between who was related to who. When I ran for this seat, I thought that was an important thing to learn, but I gave up and now use local people who tell me who is related to who when I visit a community. The complexity of family connection in these places is very complicated.
Water quality has always been an issue for me at the Daly for multiple reasons. One reason is because we produce mangoes there or have done in the past. I have not been able to do anything this year, and it is not looking good for me being able to do some work; I am not talking about the mangoes.
The quality of water for fishing is a concern. People are aware of my view on the Strategic Indigenous Reserve, so I will not raise that again. I was happy to see we have $1.07m put aside to monitor surface water quality. I presume some of that is related to the Mount Todd mine and monitoring there, which is important. It is a concern for both sides of this House, a legacy mine where something must be done and it will not be cheap. In the meantime we must continue monitoring in that area.
The concern I have always had at the Daly, for which I have not found anything in the budget, is in regard to floods and flood monitoring. There is never enough money to spend on setting up many flood monitoring and warning systems. I would like us to look at that to see if we can progress that somewhat.
The other interesting part of the budget, which I have not had time to ask the minister about, is the $140 000 allocated for documenting Indigenous ecological knowledge. Indigenous people carry much knowledge in their heads, and every opportunity we have to document some of that is important. I am not worried that Indigenous people will not pass it on to each other. They will, as they have done for hundreds of years. It is also important that we, as fellow Australians, understand some of these things. It is amazing what you can learn from these people if you talk to them on their land, ask them questions and do not presume they do not know what they are talking about. I am continually fascinated about what information they have and how they remember it all. It is unbelievable and I very much admire them for that.
There is $725 000 for remote mobile breast screening. Anything to help health outcomes for our Indigenous people and people living in remote areas has to be good. We never spend enough money doing that, but as I said, if the piggy bank is empty there is not much else you can do. It is a very important initiative, and I am sure the Minister for Health will talk a bit more about that.
Another area which is sometimes brushed over is the Community Benefit Fund, for which $2.2m was allocated. This is a fund which many people across the rural area draw on. I spend a lot of time encouraging them to put in applications, and my electorate office helps people to do that. There are many grants, up to $5000, which can be given to help such organisations as the local fire brigade. I am always glad, when I look at who has received some of this money, that my electorate comes high on the hit rate. It is good to see there is so much money available, and I encourage people to keep working on that.
In regard to infrastructure, the first thing that hit me was the amount of money we are spending on new community houses under the national partnership, which is $57.2m. This is money for new houses is in remote communities, and $57m, by my quick calculations, would only give us 100 houses, perhaps not even that; however, any money we spend to alleviate the housing problem has to be a plus.
The Homelands Extra Allowance scheme has been a boon for my area. I think communities in the electorate of Nhulunbuy have picked up a fair bit, and I hope that continues into next year.
The other infrastructure issue is Fog Bay Road. When the Daly River bridge was being built, the money for that, I understand, was taken from Fog Bay Road, where two bridges were to be built over the Charlotte River and Leviathan Creek. Many people there were annoyed that money was taken from that part of the electorate and moved to fund the Daly bridge. I will not criticise the previous member for doing that, because I am at the Daly, not Dundee, so it helped us. However, it then meant this government had to find the money to fund the bridges at the Charlotte River and Leviathan Creek. We announced that we would be starting the Charlotte River bridge this year, and I think the tender comes out very shortly, if is not already out. I was very pleased to see we have approval for the Leviathan crossing and the final sealing of Fog Bay Road, where I think there is around 0.5 km left at the end. I could never work out why there was only 0.5 km left; we surely could have found the money to do it.
That will leave Rocky Creek on Fog Bay Road, which comes up and down very quickly, so it does not stop people for hours, but the Charlotte River and Leviathan Creek do. I am very pleased that money for those projects is in this year’s budget. I looked at when the Leviathan crossing would be built. It will not be done this Dry Season, as the timing, if they are doing the Charlotte, would not suit, but it will be worked on in the last quarter next year.
As the minister pointed out, $20m was announced for work on two sections of the Port Keats Road. He said we are sealing the whole of Port Keats Road, so I will have to show him the Hansard.
The $20m is for two sections between Peppimenarti and Palumpa, and those people who know that road would know that section between Peppimenarti and Palumpa is the worst part.
The member for Namatjira was with us in a car one day, and we came to a point around 100 yards long where she wanted to get out of the vehicle. She was not going to drive through that. When we came back, she did not come by car; she caught a plane, and if people know her they will know she hates flying. There is also $30m in the budget for strategic and economic development roads, and I argue very strongly that one of those roads should be the road to Wadeye.
Wadeye is the fifth largest town in the Northern Territory, and for this government not to recognise the potential of that area would be remiss. While I would like to take all of that money, I will have a fight on my hands with other members on this side of the House, as well as ones on that side. I am willing to settle for half of that money, and that is all I need to fix a section of the road referred to as Yellow Creek.
To give you an idea about Yellow Creek, the bridge over the Daly is built at 15 m. Anyone who has driven out there during the last two Wet Seasons will know that when you drive across the Daly it is terrific, and you think, ‘I have this fantastic bridge. We have gotten out here, the river is at 10 m, and I can cross to the other side.’ You then come around the bend and bang! There is water as far as you can see. That is Yellow Creek, which means anything above 6 m is a road to nowhere. I cannot get home, you cannot get to Lizzy Downs or anywhere else. Until we address the issue with Yellow Creek and a place called Saddle Rail, we will not reap the benefit of that bridge.
Yellow Creek is also the place where, a couple of years ago, a police vehicle was washed away, so we are familiar with the height and danger of it. Prices on fixing that are around $14m, so I would be pushing to take that from the $30m allocation.
The other area which needs money spent on it is Saddle Rail, where the road goes through a large billabong. That would cost around another $7m; this is giving people some idea about the cost of the road out there. Once those sections are finished, that road would be accessible all the way along to every one of those communities for anything bar two or three weeks of the year.
That is something we need to aim at as the first step. There are many culverts which need to be installed in little creeks along the way, and many of those can be done through minor new works and repairs and maintenance. There is a lot of money to be spent this year on flood repair.
We have also committed to finishing the Litchfield road. This year there is $475 000 allocated to bituminise more of that road. This is a key road for tourism, as it builds a loop where you can go out on the Cox Peninsula Road, cut through on the Litchfield road down across the Finniss and come in at the top of Litchfield. You can then come back out through Batchelor, so tourists have a complete circle to drive in.
The next step would be to link that from Batchelor to the Daly River. At this point, sealing of that Batchelor Road in my electorate is a key issue for tourism, and I am very happy they are doing that. If we are undertaking northern Australia development, tourism is one of those areas in which we need to spend more money.
There is $6m allocated for local roads. I hope this money will be spent in some communities. I did read in the budget papers that there is money to fix some of the internal roads in communities. If you visit Nguiu it is not too bad, but when you get to Peppimenarti and Palumpa it is. At Palumpa there is probably only a third of the bitumen left on roads in the community itself, and while you do not have a lot of traffic or much speed, you do have a long Dry Season and a lot of dust and this causes health problems. Most of these communities do not have footpaths, so if you have young women with prams it becomes very dangerous, so I am glad to see that funding is there
There is also $10m available for grants for economic infrastructure in remote areas, so I will be chasing up how we can receive these grants. It is not a lot of money, but every bit counts, and as local members we should be pushing to receive as much funding as we can.
In other areas of my electorate we have Litchfield National Park; I spoke about the road. In the parks budget, I also saw that there is $290 000 allocated to finish the Buley Rockhole toilet facility. That is a plus, especially for many of the people in Darwin who go there for Easter or long weekends. Anyone who visits Buley and sees the number of people there knows there are never enough toilets.
Batchelor Outdoor Education Centre: I spoke to the principal of the Batchelor Area School last year, and he told me he was having problems with the outdoor education area, the lack of maintenance which has been carried out on it over the years and how it was in desperate need of an upgrade. I am happy to see $1.2m has been allocated for that this year, and I am sure he will be happy as well. That is also an item which not only benefits people in Batchelor, but all people who visit the centre as well.
In regard to housing in my area, I will be chasing the Minister for Housing to talk to him about the $6.8m allocated for teachers houses. I do not think it is for housing at Wadeye, as it has a Catholic school, but I am interested to see where those houses are and whether the regional area they talk about is Top End rural. There could be some overlap with other electorates, but there is $6.8m available. There is also $9.3m of the housing budget for additional community houses and $1.1m for upgrades.
There are, I think, five houses being built at Palumpa this year. The tender has closed — it was given to a company called Murray River North — and there was also one at Peppimenarti. There were some concerns that these houses were steel frame and they are used to block ones up here. There are steel frame ones used in Central Australia, and there are some up here as well.
I went out earlier this week to look at these houses, and I think communities there will be very happy with them. A lot of thought has gone into the houses, and these people have been building houses in Western Australia for years. From memory, they said to us they had built 50 of them through Central Australia. In Western Australia they are up to around 1000. The designs they are using now - while the layout may be very similar to what people have had before, some of the innovations they have put in place are impressive.
I looked at every stage of the building process. They had some where the cement slab was still being laid. They are portable houses. They are built in Darwin, and the minister for Corrections has some of his Sentenced to a Job people working on a house for Bulman; the fellow who was on the return to work comes from Bulman, so he was keen to work on these houses. If we are to continue with these types of houses, that is a good program they can work on to see how they are put together.
I saw every stage of the house; they had six different ones being built, so you could see all of the work being done on each of them. I want to let the minister know that I was very happy with that.
Also in the budget, I was impressed with the continuing support for the Sport Voucher Scheme, the Back to School Payment Scheme and the increase in the First Home Owner Grant. I commend the Treasurer for such a good budget, and I thank the rest of the ministers for the effort they have put in as well. At this point I am happy with it. Thank you.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Madam Speaker, in reply to the 2014-15 budget statement from the Treasurer, I will talk about my electorate of Arafura.
I want to place on the record that there is some financial assistance for the Tiwi Islands in the budget, but very little for the rest of the Arafura electorate.
Most of the money being spent in my electorate comes from the Commonwealth under National Partnership Agreements. It is not Northern Territory money coming from the Northern Territory budget. The proportion of Northern Territory money is very small, and it is clear that without Commonwealth money it would be hard to see the Northern Territory government’s contribution to my electorate, whether in schooling, educational matters, remote Indigenous housing, health initiatives or major infrastructure development. Any major financial contribution in my electorate mainly comes from the Commonwealth.
Budget 2014-15 will not help to alleviate poverty or lift the standard of living for my constituents in any substantial way. There are no major roads or associated infrastructure funded in this budget. The needs of the bush are different in communities within my electorate. Coastal and inland communities have different needs or requirements to help with the cost of living, which affects people on a daily basis. If we were to establish an economy in Arafura that will grow a sustained (inaudible) in my electorate, it would require much planning and financial commitment from the Northern Territory government.
There appears to be no strategic planning for economic development to take place, but I am grateful for the small amount of money which has come by way of the 2014-15 budget. However, it will by no means register as a major impact to provide much needed change.
I welcome the $4m in economic development initiatives across the Territory, including the Tiwi Islands. However, this is an extremely small amount for the whole of the Territory. I assume the Tiwi Islands proportion will be $1.8m and, if so, will this be used to pay the debts the Tiwi people have to forestry plantation owners? If this is the case, Territory taxpayers are being asked to pay this back, and this will mean no economic development money freed up under this budget which could be utilised in new initiatives.
The prosperous economy of the Northern Territory does not include my electorate. It is clear from budget papers that there is no overall employment strategy, comprising of monies currently being expended under National Partnership Agreements and various programs. The 2014-15 budget outlook will not have any impact on the lifestyle of my constituents. This is further evidence that the Northern Territory government has no short-, medium- or long-term strategy regarding how my electorate and its constituents will be integrated into a prosperous economy.
With no expected growth in the areas of employment and economic development, it can be assumed that intergenerational poverty will grow even further, due to the marginalisation of the bush in this budget. In fact, there is nothing significant in the budget papers to demonstrate the big picture with any clarity about how it takes us and the Northern Territory forward. An example of this in my electorate is last year’s expenditure for Stronger Futures – Commonwealth funds – and the budget for this year.
Whilst there has been significant consultation, the development of plans and expenditure in this area - I understand that no alcohol management plans for Arafura have been signed off by the Commonwealth minister. Communities’ expectations were built by way of consultation, planning and development, but plans have not been implemented on the Tiwi Islands, in Maningrida or Gunbalanya.
It is an exercise in openness and the building of hope for our communities, while they work and develop plans for real and inclusive changes. They then wait, and the hope fades again. Can the minister explain why none of these plans in my electorate have been signed off for implementation by the Commonwealth government? Have any plans across the Northern Territory been signed off?
I appreciate the funds which have been budgeted for alcohol management planning, and I look forward to these funds reaping benefits.
The Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments need to come together to deal with our future. Funding arrangements with respect to Aboriginal affairs will need to take place, and this is especially true as the ten-year national partnership program, which commenced in 2012-13, will more than likely cease in many areas after this ten-year period. How will future Northern Territory governments meet funding shortfalls that will happen, as expected, at the end of this program? This will cause major financial problems if the two governments do not come together to demonstrate how this situation will be dealt with. Due to reliance on Commonwealth funds, even the gradual withdrawal of this money would have a devastating effect on the bush.
The impact of this has major ramifications for the integration of the bush into the prosperous economy of the Northern Territory. This parliament needs to step through the stages of how the prosperous economy concept and development of the Northern Territory will take place. I assume the Northern Territory is a significant part of the federal government’s plan to develop northern Australia. Arafura lies at the centre of this plan. (inaudible) the human resource capital of the constituency, will need to be included in this plan. Aboriginal people, after all, are the owners of all land and coastal areas, including islands. Traditional owners of this land are covered under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and the Native Title Act, both of which are acts of the Commonwealth parliament. Why is it that the Northern Territory government, with its latest budget, continues to neglect and marginalise the people of Arafura?
These are serious matters of concern, as this budget perpetuates generalisations and poverty, and has no sensible connection to the Commonwealth’s aims or objectives for the development of the Northern Territory.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Mr Deputy Speaker, the 2014-15 Northern Territory budget is mean- spirited and neglectful of the bush.
I will talk about my constituency of Arnhem in particular, as I want to highlight the amount of money allocated for the area. Looking through the budget, it is clear that most of the money being spent is from the Commonwealth government under the National Partnership Agreement program. Commonwealth National Partnership Agreements are the mainstay of financing remote housing, upgrades of infrastructure, the roads program and other infrastructure such as water storage. It is hard to see where Northern Territory money is being spent in any meaningful way in Arnhem.
Most of the money, as I have stated, is in Commonwealth-funded programs, with Territory money being sprinkled around, like the grants mentioned before by the member for Daly in an attempt to demonstrate that this government is spending money in the bush.
These levels of funding are so small that they border on being insufficient in their application, and there are no initiatives to start economic development. The $2m set aside by this government to establish a regional economic development fund as part of the transitional support package for the East Arnhem region is an insufficient amount of money to kick-start any meaningful business development and programs associated with economic development.
We all know the closure of the mining project at Nhulunbuy will have a significant economic impact across the Arnhem region, as people in my electorate struggle to establish businesses to make up the shortfall of income. This government, which talks about a prosperous economy, cannot be taken seriously.
The financial shortfalls in the Arnhem Land economy will have a detrimental effect on families and the wellbeing of children. This government wants us to believe it is serious about families and children, yet it has no plans for economic growth and employment to take place.
The entire East Arnhem region needs an injection of money that will have a practical and real impact. This requires planning by government, but it appears there is no big-picture plan. The bush is being financially marginalised, including through the provision of services that will prolong intergenerational poverty.
While I am looking at my notes about poverty, I will quote from Pearl S Buck. She says:
There are many more quotes I could read. If you look at a community setting, these quotes very much relate to people who live there. They live the life these quotes describe, and most of the people in here have never seen the effects in communities. They have never seen community life, and have never lived, breathed or smelled it. That is not like us, born and raised in communities, and we know the impact of all of this. That is the only reason we were elected, because they knew we would come here and do our job regardless of which party we were in.
People in the bush will have no doubt as to what is happening around them, and will realise that once again, after many years of struggle, the Northern Territory government does not govern for all. If you live outside major urban centres, the message is, simply, that you will continue to miss out. The Territory government’s financial pie is not for them. Not too long ago, we had an intervention in the Northern Territory by the Commonwealth government; it concerned the plight of Aboriginal people in the bush on the fringe of our major urban centres and towns. Their shared neglect, via the Territory parliament, came into focus before the Australian nation.
As a consequence, Commonwealth National Partnership Agreements were entered into. As I have already stated, the overwhelming amount of spending in the bush is Commonwealth money, not the Territory’s. The Stronger Futures program in the Northern Territory is a National Partnership Agreement signed by the Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments in August 2012.
It is a ten-year funding package which commenced in 2012-13, totalling $3.49bn, aimed at improving Indigenous outcomes through programs in the areas of health, schooling, community safety and justice, tackling alcohol abuse, and child, youth, family and community wellbeing.
I will elaborate on the promotion of education and health. Aboriginal health workers should be promoting education and going to schools to talk about sexual health and emotional and social wellbeing. The government cannot save the day, but if you put your money where your mouth is, the community will save themselves and that is what we all want to see. Investment could go towards housing, municipal and essential services, with a view to enhanced remote engagement and coordination and, above all, the creation of jobs.
The Northern Territory government wants to commence negotiations with the Commonwealth later this year to vary a number of implementation plans under the agreement, with clear objectives to amend performance benchmarks and reduce the reporting regime. This is code for watering down its responsibilities and clouding reporting outcomes on how money is spent. In other words, the Territory government will be looking to redirect these funds and lessen its responsibility in measuring practical outcomes on the ground in the bush. It is in the budget books.
As the National Partnership Agreements expire, the Northern Territory government will not be making any further financial investment to continue these arrangements. In fact, in the budget papers it clearly states that when Commonwealth funding ceases in various areas, the financial demands placed on Territory finances may not accord with spending priorities. That is scary, and is a potentially catastrophic storm for Aboriginal people in the bush. They do not see this coming, but I do through the budget papers, and I will tell them what will happen.
In ten years, what will happen to people in the bush? The Northern Territory government needs to place on record what it intends to do about this potential tsunami. Will the Treasurer put on record what the government is doing in regard to a financial shortfall that will take place when these National Partnership Agreements cease? The immediate impact of this budget for 2014-15 will be seen through a drip feed mode of delivery which will barely keep things ticking over. It does not take into account population growth and the need for a comprehensive employment strategy to engage the adult population in a meaningful way in order for them to participate in the Northern Territory workplace.
What about kids who are now finishing school or the ones who dropped out? They do not have any future in the community. The minister for Sport said that kids in Ramingining receive five sessions of swimming and gymnastics. Where is the pool in Ramingining? That is the reality. Will he pay for them to come to Darwin for these gymnastics and swimming sessions? Or will he truck out a portable swimming pool? If you do not know Ramingining, do not go throwing these things around. They play basketball, football and netball. They do not take part in gymnastics and there is no pool to swim in. If he wants to take them to the ocean, by all means, but how many deaths have there been in remote areas from crocodiles attacking kids? That is something else you must come to grips with.
What he is proposing to give to kids there does not make sense. He is not in touch with Aboriginal communities, and a fine example of that is the budget. The bush economy has once again received no support from this government. The government talks about a prosperous economy for the whole of the Northern Territory. It wants people of working age to participate in employment. What jobs are in communities? There is hardly anything.
Human resource capital in the bush is not being utilised. While this is happening there is a debate among government ministers about ways to make it harder for people who are not employed to access their Centrelink benefits. This comes on top of the measures introduced by the Northern Territory intervention. The BasicsCard system — if you do not have a BasicsCard, perhaps you should apply for one so you can understand what I am saying – already quarantines a large proportion of a cardholder’s money for food and other essential items to sustain the family, including children. A person has a little green card, and 70% of their money goes onto it, so their income is already quarantined, yet we want to quarantine 100%. Giving that authority to local boards to do will have people fighting against each other, and that is not a great idea. People will not take a bite from the cake; you can throw them peanuts, but they will not take that.
My constituents in Arnhem, like other bush electorates, have special demographic requirements. For instance, there are coastal and island communities – all of the islands in the Northern Territory are 100% owned by Aboriginal people, by the way – which have particular issues and matters pertaining to those areas. Inadequate transportation and associated infrastructure drives up the cost of living. The cost of living will go up with fuel. It is $3.80 a litre now, and may reach $5. With housing, one person per house in a four-bedroom house already pays $400 a fortnight through a Centrelink payment, of which 70% is quarantined. How do you think a single mother can survive and look after her four kids? There is no reality at all.
Add the cost of electricity to inadequate transportation and associated infrastructure, and it becomes clear that people will not be able to pay for the practical running of their homes. Most people already use power on an ad hoc basis. There are already some communities where people only have $5 left on a card. A $50 power card now only lasts two-and-a-half days. These parents must make sacrifices by sleeping outside with their children, before using the $5 credit at 6 am, enough to have hot water running through the house to shower their kids and send them to school, and we are not making life any easier. If you think it is hard in Darwin or Katherine, how hard do you think it is there? The transportation of food is bad, and they do not even receive fresh food. Families are now buying a lot of tinned food; we talk about about nutritional outcomes for our kids, their wellbeing and everything that goes with that, but we are not supporting it. The government is going backwards and there is no care in the world for people in communities.
Most people already use power cards, but cannot, on a daily basis, afford to run fans, air conditioning units, fridges and stoves in their homes. They go without, as do their babies.
Fuel costs in the remote bush area are outrageously high to the point people are paying well over $2 a litre, and, in some places it is closer to $3 a litre, which will now increase, making transport unaffordable. There are not even workshops out there. If there are, they are only there to service shire vehicles.
The message the Northern Territory government is sending to the bush is extremely negative and perpetuates poverty. There are no job creation programs, and no business development strategies means bush communities and people of working age cannot take themselves out of the poverty they find themselves in.
Budget 2014-15 goes to the heart of why self-government must surely be investigated regarding the unequal distribution of financial power which continues to exclude bush people in remote areas.
Listening to my parents stories, they told me that they were better off before self-government. Many of my elders are still alive to tell stories of their history. They were educated on the benchmark and they attended universities. Now, I do not hear of or see any Indigenous students from remote communities going to university, which is a sad truth. In here, it is all about spin, not realising how policies we put in place will affect the poorest people in the bush.
We see poverty outside Parliament House. An old fellow is always sitting outside, and I am aware he has a mental illness. I was involved with health for a very long time, but sometimes it breaks my heart to see him there, every day, on the same seat. Regardless of whether I have three kids and my own bills, I try and help him out, maybe with $10 to buy a drink and a sandwich. I will give him the food he needs and a drink of water, because I see that every day in my community.
It is not something you can put your foot over; there should be a national outcry. Indigenous communities are so far behind that it is not funny anymore, and this budget does not make it any easier. You try to untie funds and move money elsewhere. You can probably fool the people in communities, because they have had two generations of uneducated people in the bush who cannot read this budget book, but I can. I will not lie to the people I will be burying in the next five to ten years; it breaks my heart.
In 2012, when everybody was elected, we were with the CLP, but it breaks my heart that in those 18 months, regardless of our differences, we tried to back up our stories with why it needs to be done, and why we had to work together to find a more suitable way. There were cowboys on that side who knew better than us, the people who were born and raised there, who have an education and who can relate. That is the most disturbing part.
I would like every child to have the opportunities Alison, Francis and I have had. I am the first person from my community and region to be elected to parliament. There could have been more in the past, as the seat of Arnhem has existed for 35 years ago. Very few people from the region have stood for election to the seat. It is a great honour to represent my people, because I was born and raised there. They know me, and I speak their language. I know my law, and I will never break that, but here the law is always broken because money is being moved from one area to benefit another, and it is taken from the poorest people.
You will never come to that reality, because it is not in your heart to do the right thing. For us, it is a cry and fire we have in our stomachs to represent those people.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, yesterday’s budget, which should have promised so much, ultimately delivered so little. We must be better than this in this House and as part of the governance process of the Northern Territory.
This is a time for the Territory to flourish, but people are being crushed with the huge cost of living. Cost of living increases have now been compounded by nasty federal government agendas which hit the poorest in our society. We in the Territory have been caught in a pincer movement of two governments hell-bent on inflicting pain.
We continually hear from those opposite that they have a plan. The question is simple: where is it? Almost two years into its term, words are cheap. Where are the results and where is the plan? On this side of the House we have great concern that there is no plan, and that is not good enough.
This is the second budget of the Country Liberal party government in the Northern Territory. The first budget was essentially a roadmap backwards because it scrapped many of the infrastructure projects and initiatives set in place by the public sector. It looked at massive cuts in jobs and at high-taxing regimes.
It did nothing to progress the new government’s plan. It was no plan and economically it added $1.1bn to the debt. It commenced the Country Liberal Party debt trajectory, which will be over four years. It was a time of excesses and extremes.
The Chief Minister, during Question Time today, tried to defend the use of a private charter jet costing in excess of $87 000. That is the salary of a Northern Territory teacher for one year, and I defy the Chief Minister to ever justify what would employ a teacher or health worker for one year in the price of a flight on a private jet.
Mr Gunner: For a selfie with the Prime Minister.
Mr McCARTHY: Absolutely. This was the excess and chaos which led into the second budget. A budget should be a framework for a government’s future direction. However, this one is a series of re-announcements and, ironically, the continuing of Labor programs and commitments in a territory where the economy is buttressed by major projects commenced under the previous Labor government and a series of Labor governments. Where is the next major project coming from?
What will become of our economy when the present round of construction in the oil and gas sector with the Marine Supply Base and the new Correctional Services precinct in Holtze starts to wind down? On this side of the House we are concerned there is no plan and no next major project, and all the while this budget is littered with the usual series of cuts we have come to expect from the economic rationalists, the Country Liberal Party.
With crime out of control in the Territory we see a $17m cut to police on the beat. The Country Liberal Party government went to the election in 2012 promising 120 more police officers. This budget will result in fewer police, and I invite those opposite to come to Tennant Creek to look firsthand at what fewer police on the beat will deliver and incur. I have gone out of my way to remind the Chief Minister that I would like a debrief, and I would like it in Tennant Creek. He is most welcome there anytime.
The Country Liberal Party government is big on law and order talk, but this budget shows it is very light on results. It is a government big on punishing, but not so good at preventing. Crime against the person is through the roof, and across the Northern Territory assaults and domestic violence are up. This budget says the government is okay with that, and is not prepared to do anything about it, except start to spin statistics in this House. It is not okay; it is a broken promise, and I encourage any members opposite to come into the regions, move across the remote communities and look at the challenges we have. It is not only police; there are more than 200 fewer full-time positions in education. How many of those will be teachers?
The County Liberal Party calls it a budget to secure our children’s future, and that is one of the classic ironies of the 2014-15 budget. If it is a budget to restore our children’s future, you should have been restoring the jobs of the 130 teachers you cut last time, rather than announcing further reductions in education spending. How are our kids better off with larger class sizes and fewer teachers? It is wrong.
There is then the cost of living. Your federal mates, the Liberal-National coalition, have decided to increase the cost of our petrol twice a year. Already in parts of the Territory petrol is more than $2 a litre; it will continue to rise as far as the eye can see and the silence on that side of the House has been deafening.
Has the Chief Minister communicated our concerns to Joe Hockey and Tony Abbott, putting the case that Territorians cannot afford these increases? The answer is no. Has the Treasurer communicated Territorians concerns? The answer is no.
We need the Liberal rhetoric in northern Australia to stand up for Territorians, not the spin. We need the rhetoric of ‘us and our mates in Canberra’ to be something pragmatic taken to Canberra to seriously expose this issue as a deficit for developing northern Australia. I encourage the Chief Minister and the Treasurer to also link arms with their National Party colleagues because the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Warren Truss, would be a valuable ally, standing up for the rest of Australia who live in regional and remote areas across the country. We hope there will be some movement from our government and our leadership in that case.
The federal government is also ready to rip $80bn from states for the running of schools and hospitals over the next decade. The plan has been announced to pull back on $80bn worth of investment into health and education over the next 10 years from the federal government, and yet we have heard nothing from the other side of the House, not a whimper. This is in stark contrast to other conservative state leaders around the country. I remind the Chief Minister and the Treasurer that New South Wales Premier Mike Baird says the federal government is shifting its problems to the states and territories. Victorian Liberal Premier Denis Napthine said he was shocked and surprised at the federal budget, and Queensland Premier Campbell Newman has gone further, demanding an urgent meeting of state and territory leaders, such is the magnitude of this problem. Where are the voices of the Northern Territory Chief Minister and the Treasurer? By their silence they are giving tacit approval to the federal government’s budget of new taxes, cuts to families and cost-shifting. All of this is on top of the cost of living burden you have placed on Territorians with massive power prices rises and a cost of housing more akin to New York than the Northern Territory.
How does the CLP government respond to this? It makes it more difficult for young homeowners to get into the market. By restricting first homeowners assistance to new homes, the government is doing three things. Firstly, the CLP is saying to young first home owners, ‘Good luck, you may never be able to afford a home’, by forcing them to construct a new residence in Rosebery, Bellamack or Palmerston, where the cost could be upward of $600 000 or $700 000. You are breaking their hearts and more promises. How does a young couple with small savings purchase land and build a house for almost $750 000? The government is reactive, does not like hearing from the opposition and plays politics to try to silence us. I remind the Treasurer that this second point came from a constituent at the Property Council of Australia breakfast this morning.
The CLP, in scrapping the first homebuyer scheme enabling young families and single income families to join the existing home market, is risking the urban decay of older housing stock, which young families will no longer be able to use the First Home Owner Grant to buy. The aesthetic appearance of our cities and towns is important. When young families move into these premises, they look after, love and cherish them and these older houses are a vital part of the look of our city. Are you ready for these places being derelict? This was an important point which came from a constituent at the Property Council budget breakfast this morning, articulating that point directly to the Treasurer.
Thirdly, the government is undermining the market of established housing stock. Investors who own these properties have just lost a significant part of the market cohort which may have purchased those properties. This is a bizarre move from a government which is supposed to be all about the free market.
I see that the budget, in a macro sense, has reduced the building blocks of an economy, but more so an economy for a community and our society when enormous pressures have been put on families; there is reduced infrastructure spending, enormous cost of living implications and we have seen very little regarding the environment. These represent important Labor policy areas of education and health, essential services and training to employment.
It is alarming to see a government that does not understand and value the building blocks of a community and that very special relationship to economic policy.
I will talk about the regions of the Northern Territory. It is interesting listening to some of the other contributors to debate, because when you assess this second Country Liberal Party budget, it is, in a macro sense, a 75% spend on the Northern Territory’s infrastructure in the major towns and cities. Once again, it promotes neglect where the Country Liberal Party seems to miss acknowledging the bush. Essentially, 15% of total infrastructure funding for the next 12 months will go to the bush. This is a Country Liberal Party which continually reminds me and this side of the House that it was elected by the bush. The Treasurer likes to remind me that I need to accept it; the bush changed and put the Liberals in, yet in the second budget we see, once again, a total neglect of the bush. This should be challenged, especially by the two members who live in regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory and represent members of the Country Liberal Party government.
The CLP budget is a missed opportunity to invest in and develop the economic and social future of the regional Northern Territory. An obvious example of the city-centric nature of this government is the appropriation of $5.9m for an office in Darwin to conduct the bureaucratic processes around the development of northern Australia, while at the same time there is an appropriation of only $400 000 towards the expansion of the Ord River scheme in the Northern Territory.
Talking in a rural context today, I was told that $400 000 buys a mob of suits. I said, ‘Well, $5.9m must buy a mob of very expensive suits’. However, there is an alternative put forward by the opposition.
If $5.9m is appropriated for an office in Darwin to conduct the bureaucratic processes around the development of northern Australia, yet there is only $400 000 to continue the Ord River scheme expansion, about which the minister has been silent over the past 12 months – he was very energetic and articulate when the Country Liberal Party took office, but he has been silent over the last 12 months, with only a one-liner in a budget reply today.
Let us look at an alternative, because the hollow rhetoric of this government about northern Australia should be countered with tangible infrastructure announcements. The alternative could have been major investment in infrastructure by the federal government at the port of Darwin, which is a Nation Building project, but we have seen nothing. We see the majority of the money spent on the east coast on roads projects servicing 85% of the Australian population, but we do not see any complementary National Building projects articulated for northern Australia, a gift to the Northern Territory Country Liberal Party government.
This imbalance must be addressed, and the question for the minister is: why have you been silent about the Ord River scheme, and did you not challenge the budget Cabinet process to address a discrepancy of $5m into office functions, compared to a vital piece of the Territory’s agribusiness?
I want to hear from you on that, minister. You seem to have a lot to say, so let us hear what you have to say about that issue.
Budget 2014-15 fails to invest in projects which will build the regional economy and provide some relief for families suffering under the high cost of living. There is nothing in the budget to assist regional business to leverage off the new developments in oil and gas in the regions, which is an important point I hope the Treasurer takes on board. We must look at investment for regional businesses to leverage off the new developments in the oil and gas sector in the regions.
There is nothing to help boost tourism access to Alice Springs, with operators left high and dry by the forthcoming withdrawal of Tigerair services. Once again, it is a macroeconomic comment, but we do not hear or see anything, and I presume the minister for tourism, in his reply, still has the opportunity to address that issue.
There is nothing to boost tourism in regions like the Barkly, which rely so heavily on the self-drive market, and which will be hit hard by the increase in petrol prices, thanks to the Country Liberal Party’s federal mates. We can spend a lot of money on advertising the Northern Territory, and we can take that message loud and clear across the nation, but when we have a deficit policy, such as the indexation in petrol price excise, working against attracting eastern and southern Australia to the Northern Territory, we see an uncoordinated and chaotic policy. It is a policy which reflects having no plan and, once again, this side of the House demands that our leadership in government immediately contact the Prime Minister and federal Treasurer to address this issue.
Spending on health services has been cut, in real terms, down by more than $9m since 2012, and there is no new investment in expanding critical health facilities such as renal dialysis in town or out bush. This is another important point about the building blocks of the Northern Territory. What is more important than the health of Territorians? What is more important than stabilising child growth and development periods by stabilising the family health status with continued improvements in housing infrastructure and essential services to ensure the people of the Northern Territory benefit from the incredible opportunities sitting on our near horizon? However, we see a Country Liberal Party government which is, once again, cutting the health budget.
There is little for jobs and economic development across the regions in this budget. We see, for a start, changes in how to deliver housing infrastructure in regional and remote areas, and the impact that it is having on losing local jobs. There is only a one-year commitment to local government jobs, in terms of an investment package. We have seen a budget line item, but our question is about the one-year commitment to local government jobs and a jobs package. What happens after that?
Cuts to remote housing: we see figures of around $12m from repairs and maintenance expenditure. There has been $12m taken from regional and remote housing. That is catastrophic and once again reflects a chaotic approach with no plan. We know, in the bush, that strong investment in that sector, which has been accorded previously, delivers not only community safety, family security and that important living space, but also jobs.
We have seen the new approach to tearing down secondary education in the bush. It is ironic, because I worked in education for over 30 years. I lived and worked through a policy where there was no secondary education provided to the bush. We now have a very aggressive government hell-bent on going back to the future, taking the Territory back after so many communities have embarked on the journey to continue supporting the education of their children, and many of those children will choose to stay at home.
This budget discloses that the CLP has failed to renegotiate Commonwealth support for the remote service National Partnership Agreement, which ends in June this year. This should be very alarming to all Territorians, especially those who live in regional and remote areas. How many millions of dollars in support has the CLP lost to Territory bush towns because of its failure to negotiate a new deal? The silence is deafening. The CLP has failed to deliver any significant new investments to keep delivering services and jobs in the bush, build the future of our communities, and it has neglected to negotiate these very important service level agreements under a national partnership.
There is a double whammy effect for people living in the bush, from both the Territory and federal governments; I have already mentioned the hike in fuel prices. With this disproportionate impact, people living and working in our regions, because they drive greater distances and already have to pay some of the highest fuel prices in the country, will be hit twice. This is a very important issue, and one that needs to be argued on the platform of developing northern Australia.
The $500m cut to Indigenous programs in the federal budget will also heavily impact out bush, where people rely on these programs to build economies and deliver services. The freeze in the indexation of federal assistance grants to local governments will hit regional authorities hard. The cost of delivering services is much more expensive in the bush, as Territorians are aware, and prices keep going up. The freeze to federal assistance grants will have a real impact on roads funding. For example, there will be fewer kilometres of road works delivered for the dollar, as prices for plant, equipment and fuel go up.
I have begun to suspect that the federal and Territory governments have entered a partnership to drive Territorians from the bush back into our towns. They are making it too hard for people to live and raise their families on country.
The difference between the Territory opposition and the Country Liberal Party is simple. The Country Liberal Party thinks you live in an economy, whereas we know we live in a community. It is a community shouldering a heavy burden, and with this budget it has just gotten heavier. I share great concerns for Territorians who will be hurt and will suffer more pain under these economic outcomes.
We believe it is not a good budget. It is delivered by a government which remains in chaos, and which has come off the back of its first budget making some fundamental mistakes. It is a budget which is a reactionary exercise, and which will add more pain to the cost of living. It risks further damaging consumer confidence, which will impact on business confidence and there will be a downward spiral to an increase in the Territory’s debt position, the fiscal trajectory already established under the Country Liberal Party government and its first budget in 2012-13.
Job losses across the Northern Territory are at the forefront of families minds, and we are uncertain about how many more job losses will occur under the efficiency dividends demanded by this government. Job losses reduce wellbeing, the energy factor, a bright future approach from families, and they crush consumer confidence. In regional areas, these losses impact greatly, from the private sector right through to the public sector and important service delivery.
We are unsure what the budget will produce, but we will be watching very closely, and we will also be revisiting those Country Liberal Party promises across the Territory, promises to the bush, and we will be reminding Territorians of what needs to be delivered.
I have kept this to a general comment, because I am looking forward to estimates. I put ministers on notice that the opposition is looking forward to drilling down into these numbers and this fiscal approach to ensure all questions are answered for the public record, and that Territorians, on an individual basis, start to see the devil in the detail. What I have seen so far is macro-spin, and when the estimates process starts to unearth the facts the Territory will be able to take an accountable and transparent look at its government. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will speak on the Appropriation Bill in both my role as Speaker and as the member for Goyder. It is a small Assembly, and it is not unusual to want to speak in both capacities.
In my role as Speaker, I represent the broad interests of the Legislative Assembly on behalf of all members, thus all voters.
This year, the Department of the Legislative Assembly experienced a modest increase in its overall budget because of a Remuneration Tribunal Determination - the body which sets entitlements for all members – regarding members’ entitlements.
Consistent with other agencies, the department had to find savings, and whole-of-government savings on multifunction devices have been required. The agency also experienced a decrease in repairs and maintenance, offset by an increase of $350 000 relating to members and electoral offices.
The bottom line is a modest overall increase of approximately $100 000 on last year’s departmental budget. We are a small jurisdiction, and do not have a separate appropriation for the Legislative Assembly. This is understandable in the management of the overall Territory budget, but it requires vigilance to ensure Territory officials understand the budget for the Assembly is the budget for constituents and democracy.
While the Department of the Legislative Assembly is a department in the true sense of the word, it only exists to serve members and the parliament as a whole. In other words, most of what we do is not optional. The department does what is required and has little ability to perform discretionary activities.
In other jurisdictions, parliaments have a separate appropriation. This may be a matter worth considering for the Northern Territory as we mature and work towards further constitutional development and eventual statehood.
As a consequence of the Department of the Legislative Assembly being administered like any other government agency, the department is asked to find efficiencies and savings, as are all departments, and this is how it should be.
There is no need or excuse for waste in any public area of expenditure, and the Department of the Legislative Assembly is no exception. Over the last 12 months, the department and all staff have worked assiduously to minimise waste and make savings. Some of these have included a reduction in the overall number of stand-alone printers in the department, requiring users to print to existing multifunctional devices. There has been a freeze on the acquisition of new MFDs when existing MFDs can be used.
The Renewal Management Board approved the cancellation of members dinners, saving $21 000 per annum. RTD entitlements cannot be cancelled by anyone apart from the RTD. Dinners provided to all members of this Chamber were a courtesy, not an entitlement.
There was an annual saving of $64 000 by cancelling the Territory FM broadcast of Question Time as also approved by the Renewal Management Board in 2012, and various subscriptions to journals have been cancelled.
There has been a reduction in security costs by $47 000 per annum, having only one guard at Parliament House on weekends instead of two, leaving the rear gate of this precinct unpatrolled. There has also been the automatic switch off of all the Department of Legislative Assembly office air conditioning at 4.30 pm each evening.
Inefficient lighting has been removed, replaced with energy efficient globes, and there has been a reduction in the number of globes in the building, leaving some fittings empty. Specifically, lights in the Main Hall remain switched off permanently, as some of you may have noticed. Lights in this Chamber are now switched off between sittings; previously, they were always on for public gallery viewing of the Chamber, but it turned out to be quite an expensive exercise when not many people visited during sittings.
Government sponsored functions now require 400 guests, rather than 300, for the hire of an additional security guard. Guests, therefore, must wait longer to enter the building.
Members fixed telephone lines located in the reception area in Parliament House – offices on the fifth floor – were disconnected after a request I sent to them. Only two members said they wished to keep their phones. This measure provided a saving of some $9500.
Stand-alone printers in members electoral offices were unsubscribed in 2013, resulting in a saving of $26 700, and Parliament House external display lights now turn off each evening at 9 pm, instead of the previous 12 am, providing energy and cost savings for government. These are some of the savings made over the last 12 months.
By connecting all electorate offices to the WAN, the Legislative Assembly and DCIS have saved the government $271 000 in 2013-14, based on previous data costs.
These savings, of which there are more – 38 in total – come to at least $689 000 in an average year, and not so easily quantifiable savings such as energy savings, reduced travel and printing efficiencies will vastly increase these savings over time.
Savings can only be realised when there is capacity. The Department of the Legislative Assembly’s budget capacity is constrained by the fact a large proportion of it pays for things like leases on electorate offices, three part-time regional offices, the administration and maintenance of Parliament House and the precinct, which is Liberty Square, the old Supreme Court gardens and the forecourt, salaries for electoral staff and electorate officers’ assistants serving constituents needs and members’ salaries, which are prescribed by legislation.
The Chief Minister is the minister responsible for the Department of the Legislative Assembly under the administrative arrangements, as well as at the Cabinet table. He is also in charge of the department, yet it is the Speaker who has day-to-day operational responsibility for the direction of the agency and reporting from the Clerk, who is also the agency chief executive. It is the Speaker who appears before the Estimates Committee year in, year out. As Speaker, I can advise that, like any other year, I made my case when I met with the Treasurer and Chief Minister to ensure a fair and reasonable outcome, not only for the interests of members and their entitlements, but also for the parliament’s integrity and its future.
I hope I am forceful in protecting the integrity of the institution of this parliament and the seat of government in the Northern Territory. This building is not the government, it is not part of government; it is the parliament of the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory is one of two parliaments in Australia where the executive arm of government resides in the building as a tenant, the other being Queensland. It is my responsibility to continually remind officials and colleagues that this building belongs to all members of the Assembly and the people of the Northern Territory, rather than being a government building.
As such, we work at ensuring that when outside people utilise rooms or this facility, they pay appropriate fees. If government members and crossbenchers use rooms in the pursuit of political gain, they also pay fees. It is the Assembly, through the Legislative Assembly (Powers and Privileges) Act, which gives the Speaker responsibility for the administration of the parliament and its precinct, which includes Liberty Square, the old Supreme Court gardens and the forecourt, something that should never be compromised by budgetary considerations, no matter which party is in government.
It is the remuneration tribunal which, according to legislation, specifies entitlements available for members to serve their constituents. These entitlements are reviewed annually by the tribunal Chair. Democracy in the Northern Territory dictates that these are necessities, not luxuries. I am glad the government, in this budget, appears to have recognised this need. While politicians will never win a popularity contest, I see it as my role to ensure I resist any overzealous moves which might in any way erode the seat of Territory democracy.
I have some brief comments in regard to my role as the member for Goyder. The budget is good and sound, and will build for our future. It is a conservative budget with a focus on infrastructure. I accept it is difficult to balance priorities, and I am pleased money has gone into roads, health, education, police, fire and emergency services. There must still be some commitment to lifestyle and future lifestyle, particularly for people in the rural area who I represent in my electorate.
I too was disappointed there was no reference to Freds Pass Reserve and the 24 user groups which utilise that reserve on a weekly basis. It is a hub of the rural area, and some 3000 to 4000 people utilise those reserve facilities per week. It is a home to key community events as well, such as the Freds Pass Show coming up this weekend, and it is in dire need of upgrading and expansion. Whether it be ablution facilities, clubhouse, fencing, top soil or extra ovals, there is a need across the reserve. This year, the national polocrosse titles are being held at Freds Pass Reserve, but we could have many other national competitions there if time, dedication and extra resources were planned for the future. Having national events at the facility would mean an enormous flow-on effect into the economy.
If government is planning further growth for the rural area and pushing from urban areas into the rural, as has been outlined in the Palmerston north-come-Berrimah development, planning needs to be undertaken now as to where residents and families will be playing their sport, undertaking recreational activities and generally enjoying facilities such as the Freds Pass Reserve. I have written to the government and have sent substantial submissions on the need for a rural pool and equestrian centre. I am still waiting for formal replies from government regarding these proposals. Both are needed for the future growth, if not enjoyment, of the rural area and not only rural people, but others as well. If not in this budget – clearly it is not – I expect some consideration in next year’s budget, if not beforehand.
There has been substantial commitment to roads, but one that does not get a lot of attention is the Arnhem Highway. There has been some work undertaken on it recently, however, more planning and work is required, given the massive workload of the highway, used by extractive industries, as well as the tourism and general construction industries.
In regard to Berrimah Farm, we opposed this in opposition. I have spoken about it a lot, primarily because some of the area is inappropriate for urban development for a variety of reasons, not least its location to industrial and extractive areas, the pet crematorium and major highways. One of the proposals we had in opposition, and I have no issue with it, was that it could perhaps be considered more for light industrial development, rather than urban. Given the location and issues with the area and the number of people who may live there, the need for open spaces and other facilities, buses and emergency vehicles access, where people will be going and where they will send their children to school.
What other parcels of land were looked at regarding land release? There is all of the land in the greater Palmerston area, but apart from Berrimah Farm and this land in Holtze, I ask what else was looked at. I agree that land release is important, and it must be done in a timely manner, but it is also important to meet the challenges of growth. This must be balanced with maintaining the integrity of existing land occupiers.
The member for Nelson briefly commented on what has been dubbed Palmerston North, which I have said before in the House – and I will say it again – is not north of Palmerston, it is east. The sooner we get rid of the term ‘Palmerston North’, the better. It is in Holtze, within Litchfield Council boundaries. If the Mayor of Palmerston thinks he will get his hands on a part of land which is in the Litchfield Council area, he is sadly mistaken. I say to the Mayor of Palmerston: you stay on your side of the highway, and we will stay on ours. If you want to meet in the middle, we have activities and interests which probably outweigh the interests and activities of the people of Palmerston. They make loud noises and go bang!
The location is not right. I also ask the government and the Planning minister what has happened to the Litchfield land use objectives, a current, real and live document. That document has all of that land tagged as rural living, one acre or one hectare blocks. What is the point of having planning documents and documents agreed to by the community and government if some time in the near future you change them and put something else there? It gives no certainty or clarity to not only existing land users and occupiers, but anyone coming in who would like to plan to go there.
It might be amusing to some, with the use of loose language about Palmerston north and where it is located, but it is a very serious position for the people who work or plan to occupy in and around that area. If it is tagged as rural development, that would be acceptable to many people. I think the minister said in his speech that there is documentation and there will be consultation. That is fine, but there should have been some consultation prior to dumping it on the people of that part of the rural area to say this is what will happen. There needs to be much more consultation on both of those areas and parcels of land. Once changes are made and the dirt starts being excavated we can never go back. I do not want to see that happen to our great Territory in the Top End. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, this, and every budget, goes to the Territory we live in and the Territory we want to live in. Every budget contains critical decisions. It is the annual centrepiece where you determine where money goes to underpin your policies and principles as a government.
On our side, we often feel a greater sense of responsibility and obligation to Territorians than the conservatives on the other side. It can sometimes be dismissed as big government versus small government, but it goes to a sense of obligation and responsibility. The environment people live in is important. We believe in a Territory where there is an equality of care, education and opportunity, because the social circumstances and environment in which people live are critical. To that point, I will initially touch on something on which the member for Port Darwin and I agree. The member for Port Darwin, as he is wont to do, philosophically mused during his budget contribution yesterday about Corrections. He said:
I agree with the member for Port Darwin, and that is why we support Sentenced to a Job, which picks up on an agenda we had in government to move people into employment. When you see a statistic like that, one of your first thoughts of responsibility is about how to stop repeat offending, so we agree with the work the government is doing in that space around education, training people and moving them into a job while they are in gaol. However, the other sense of obligation we would feel as a party is how can we go back to that original circumstance. What obligation do we have, as a government for Territorians, to try to minimise the number of unemployed people? What can we do to affect the environment and social circumstances people live in? In yesterday’s budgets, both in the Territory and federally, we saw conservative parties pull out from those spaces, and that is a mistake.
Look at the federal budget, where there were massive cuts to health and education across Australia. If you are young and unemployed, you will not be able to access benefits for six months. We saw Medicare co-payments introduced and a range of things which put incredible stress and pressure on people, particularly at the low end, those who are possibly in subsistence living and difficult circumstances. As a government, you have a permanent obligation and responsibility to Territorians to try to do everything you can to make sure people are not in those circumstances. The environment you live in is important, and it is being made worse by decisions of the Territory and federal governments, which will create future social problems.
The CLP went to the last election with a clear, simple promise to cut the cost of living, and that is something all Territorians would like. People who voted for the CLP wanted to see that in place. Instead, we saw an impost on Territorians made immediately after the last election, with an average of $2000 added to household utilities bill, by the government’s own figures. That is a huge impost which puts people in difficult circumstances. In the federal budget, we saw a range of decisions made which will put pressure on people’s living circumstances. For the federal Treasurer, that might mean skipping the second bottle of Mot, but for many people it means skipping dinner. It is a difficult situation which people have been put into. A $7 Medicare co-payment is a difficult impost on people; it is something people should not have to worry about when they see their doctor. You have a right to an equality of healthcare in Australia and the Territory. Your personal wealth should not determine your personal health.
A series of decisions has been made by conservative parties which will affect people doing it tough; they will have a massive impact on people in that difficult area, and the environment people live in has a massive impact on what they do. I agree with the member for Port Darwin about looking at unemployed people in the prison population. We agree with decisions made on Sentenced to a Job, and these follow on from a body of work Labor was undertaking. We must do everything we can to stop the prison population re-offending. What can we do to stop them being there in the first place? That is the responsibility and obligation we feel as parliamentarians, and it is what shapes much debate in this Chamber, where we may disagree on policy terms with the government because we see them pulling away from that.
Individuals must take some responsibility. If you do something wrong, you serve your time and go to gaol. However, what can government do to control the environment people live in? It goes to another promise the CLP made at the last election about the Banned Drinker Register, where it promised to scrap it. That was the CLP’s promise, and it did it. What it failed to do was supply measures in place after that. This goes to the environment people live in. There were no controls around the supply of alcohol to problem drunks, and that will always lead to problems. We saw the most violent year in the Territory history in 2013, and the CLP’s response to that in 2014 has been to cut the police budget. We find it extraordinary that crime goes up and the police budget goes down. The decision the CLP made not to put supply measures in place around problem alcohol was a mistake, and we can see it is a mistake by comparing Nhulunbuy to Tennant Creek, both with 2% of the Territory population, yet Nhulunbuy, which has supply provisions around alcohol, has seven times less violent crime than Tennant Creek. In Tennant Creek, you are seven times more likely to be assaulted than you are in Nhulunbuy, which has those supply mechanisms.
The CLP said that was, essentially, interventionist; it was an imposition on the broader population, therefore it should not happen. However, as Territorians and parliamentarians on this side of the Chamber, we feel we have an obligation to Territorians.
One way we exercised that was through the Banned Drinker Register to try to tackle a specific problem. We felt that impost on someone’s time in presenting their ID was small and had a positive impact. You can see the continuation of that positive impact in Nhulunbuy and the consequence of that decision in Tennant Creek.
It is extraordinary that the CLP’s reaction has been to place temporary beat locations outside bottle shops in Alice Springs. This goes to controlling the supply of alcohol, but in a much more intensive and interventionist way. This is a temporary solution to what has become a broader problem under the CLP because of its refusal to tackle the supply of alcohol to problem drunks.
That feeds into the mandatory detention regime, which does not work and costs taxpayers a fortune. We saw only 300 people go through that system in the last financial year. The minister spoke to a case study during Question Time today. There were case studies through rehabilitation during our time in government. We want people to be rehabilitated, and there will occasionally be good news stories from case studies, but the evidence does not support mandatory detention in a rehabilitation regime. It is not only in the Territory where evidence does not support that. Prior to the system coming into place, experts said, ‘We know this will not work’.
One of the significant reasons why it will not work is that after people have spent three months drying out in mandatory detention for rehabilitation, they will go back to the environment from which they came, where people are drinking and where they are encouraged to drink, the same living circumstances which saw them become a problem drunk and placed into the mandatory detention rehabilitation scheme in the first place. That is why this is a bad, expensive decision which is costing Territory taxpayers a fortune. It goes back to the principles that divide this Chamber, where we feel an obligation and responsibility sits with government, and where the current government denies that responsibility and obligation. We, essentially, have an incredibly expensive spin-dryer model from the current government on mandatory detention and rehabilitation.
The minister, in her contribution, did not touch on the decision to close the Nhulunbuy rehabilitation facility, but the Attorney-General did. He said:
NAAJA has commented on the decision to close down that rehabilitation centre. It said:
Mr Elferink: And passive welfare.
Mr GUNNER: And passive welfare, as the member for Port Darwin interjected.
We believe governments have an obligation to a much broader range of things than the CLP government does. The CLP is looking at a prison-based solution, and only in Nhulunbuy at the moment. The work being done at the camp is excellent, but they have closed the rehabilitation centre in Nhulunbuy, so unless you have been imprisoned, you cannot access rehabilitation services there. That is a mistake; if people are looking to be rehabilitated before they offend and go to gaol, that is a good thing, but we now have a prison-only solution in Nhulunbuy.
We support the CLP’s work there, but it has much too narrow a focus on tackling the problems we face in the Territory, specifically with problem drinking. In Nhulunbuy, the CLP has gone for a prison-based solution and closed the rehabilitation service which had been there since 2007. We should be trying everything we can to stop crime occurring in the first place.
There are other good things around rehabilitation, health and personal family circumstances, but one of the outcomes can be offending. Closing the rehabilitation service is a mistake.
NAAJA has said it is a mistake and is disappointing to see. Everything continues to go back to this principle of what you are responsible for as a government. We believe the Territory government has a greater responsibility than it is prepared to accept.
Mr Elferink: How much would you spend?
Mr GUNNER: We put that in place in 2007, member for Port Darwin. We spent the money which needed to be spent to have it established. The member for Port Darwin is part of the government that chose to close the service. We budgeted for it and made the difficult decisions we had to make in 2007 to make it happen, because we accepted we had a responsibility to try to do something about a very significant issue in the Northern Territory. As we said, everything keeps coming back to the environment you live in.
The other thing the CLP has decided to do, after the most violent year in Territory history, is cut the police budget, which includes the broken promise of 120 extra police officers. The 120 police officers were meant to be above and beyond, but the CLP continues to try to claim Commonwealth police, which the federal government is paying for because of the detention centres in the Northern Territory.
Those are police officers the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, negotiated for and received, yet the CLP is trying to claim them as part of its 120. Those police numbers were known before the last election. Ninety-four were known before the last election; everyone had the expectation that the 120 police officers the CLP was to deliver would be above and beyond those 94, yet it chose to break that promise. This is in addition to all of the other broken promises, including the cost of living and cutting crime by 10% every year. They now throw another promise on there, as a result of a decision not to employ 120 extra police officers, and instead try to fudge the figures and claim credit for the 94 extra police officers Paul Henderson originally negotiated for.
You must admire the cheek of the government, but as the police association said, it is a breach of faith with NT police and Territorians; it is a broken promise. You promised 120 extra police officers, and that was a Territory Labor deal delivered. Instead, we have a CLP government trying to claim credit that its promise has been delivered by the ALP employing 94 extra cops. It is a complete cop out – literally.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Changes to the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975
Ms LAWRIE (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, this motion is a reflection of deeply-held concerns in our community about the position taken by the federal Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, to change the federal anti-discrimination act, in which racial vilification is described. I will go into some of the detail of that.
There has been public commentary around this, and this motion was led last week, so the government has had some time to consider it. I note that today the Leader of Government Business, on behalf of government, indicated it would be proposing an amendment to this motion. There have been discussions between me and the Leader of Government Business on the proposed amendment. I have not seen the final amendment, but I presume it is as we have discussed, and I will talk to that.
I have been genuine in seeking bipartisan support for this motion, as well as legislation to amend the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. I like to think some issues are above politics and are about our identity as Territorians. As lawmakers in the Territory, we are hopefully truly reflective of our community. The Northern Territory is, by and large, a harmonious community. It is a multicultural community, and we proudly, staunchly and strongly have a significant Indigenous community.
With some of that, sadly, comes concerns of racism in our community. I listened intently to advice from the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Commissioner to a multicultural meeting held in my electorate at Malak, at the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory, some weeks ago. I attended with our shadow minister for Multicultural Affairs, the member for Wanguri. Also at that meeting was the Minister for Multicultural Affairs, the member for Sanderson. He did not express a view at that meeting, where I had hoped we would hear, at some stage, a view from the government. I am sure this motion and debate will give the government the opportunity to put its views on the record, and we welcome that. We have brought the motion to parliament to discover the views of the Northern Territory government on issues surrounding changes to legislation covering racial vilification by the Commonwealth.
Why is it such an issue for us? We are the only jurisdiction that does not have similar legislation, in terms of public vilification protections. All other jurisdictions in our nation have legislation. In the Northern Territory we have in the past looked at whether or not we have needed it. My recollection, as a former Attorney-General, is that there was strong Commonwealth legislation. It had been in place and followed for 20 years, so we did not need to introduce our own. There seems to be a move to change the Commonwealth legislation and from the view of opposition, water it down significantly, removing rights and protections which have existed for 20 years. That has led me to focus on the need for changes to the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. This will ensure protections which exist today under Commonwealth law will exist as protections under Northern Territory law in the future.
That being said, the point of the motion is to bring to parliament an opportunity to debate the proposed changes to section 18C of the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975. It was to urge all of us to identify that there is no place for bigotry in our society, and we should combat it at every opportunity. The motion is to reject Commonwealth plans to remove existing vilification protections, and goes on to note the work I have done on a discussion paper which has been given to all members of parliament, our broader community and stakeholders, including those across Indigenous, multicultural and legal sectors. I am also sending it to constituents, with a view to seeking comment and feedback on a proposed private member’s bill that I will seek to bring before parliament in August this year.
The point of the motion is to bring forward debate and gain an understanding as to whether or not we would receive bipartisan support for the 18C protections which exist, and I look forward to hearing from the government on this matter. It was moved last week, and the government has had time to look at that. My office was contacted today by the Leader of Government Business’s office, and they proposed an amendment. There were some words in the amendment which I could not accept, and these have now been amended, literally, to the word ‘changed’. If I take the amendments in good faith they show bipartisan support for a view that there is no place for bigotry and racial vilification in our society, that we do need protection from offensive behaviour based on race, colour, national or ethnic origin, and that those protections, while they currently sit within Commonwealth jurisdiction, must be considered for the Northern Territory realm if the federal Attorney-General proceeds with this move to amend Commonwealth legislation.
Bipartisan support is crucial on this matter. It is something that affects us all. The Australian Human Rights Commission describes racial discrimination as:
I come from a minority religious background. It is well known in this Chamber that I am Jewish. I also practise Buddhism and I have done for many years. In the US, I believe we are described as JuBus - that is Jews who are fundamentally Jewish – I call myself culturally Jewish because you cannot shake a lifetime of characteristics and learning – who then go on to adopt and practice the Buddhist faith. That is me; I am a complex individual, but I do know and I have felt throughout my life the sting of taunts for being different. I hope that, in some measure, the laws of the Territory will provide some comfort and protections going forward to people who ought not be singled out and discriminated against because they happen to have a different faith to the predominant faith of our nation. I receive great support from other minority faiths; I have an enduring and tremendous friendship, for example, with the Northern Territory Muslim community because we understand, at times, what each of us goes through with discrimination.
I hope there is a broad mind to the suggestions I am making to pick up the Tasmanian legislation, which includes religion, because people of all faiths, or indeed people without a faith, should be accepted as equal Territorians, and not discriminated against because of their religion. I want to draw that distinction and draw that to people’s attention in the parliament, because I have sent you a discussion paper. Whilst I have made it clear in the discussion paper that I am proposing the Tasmanian legislation, I want to make it doubly clear that there is a distinctive difference between the Tasmanian legislation and the Commonwealth’s section 18C legislation, this being that the Tasmanian legislation includes religion.
The commission describes racial vilification, sometimes referred to as racial hatred, as doing something in public, and this is an important distinction. This is about public discrimination and vilification. When I was questioned in the media about why I was bringing this forward – and I know that the CLP government has thrown this slur at me – I was asked about whether or not I was doing this because of the allegations of racism which had been raised publicly between members of the CLP during a party wing meeting, etcetera. I made it very clear to the media that was not at all why I was pursuing the proposed private member’s bill, and if allegations like that are aired, they concern private conversations. This goes to public vilification.
Whilst I recognise the CLP will think I always do things with ill intent, or that I am seeking political gamesmanship, you are wrong in that perception in this matter. This matter goes far deeper for me than what might be the momentary prevails of the CLP. I am the child of the Northern Territory’s first Anti-Discrimination Commissioner and Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Regional Director, Dawn Lawrie. I was raised to pursue the rights of Territorians to be treated without discrimination, and I come from a minority religious background in our nation.
This is not about party politics or private conversations which may or may not have occurred within the CLP. You have it wrong if you think it is. Racial hatred can be based on the race, colour, national or ethnic origin of a person or group of people which – this is the crucial bit – is likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate. Examples of racial hatred may include: racially offensive material on the Internet including e-forums; blogs; social networking sites and video sharing sites; racially offensive comments or images in a newspaper, magazine or other publication such as a leaflet or flyer; racially offensive speeches at a public rally; racially abusive comments in a public place such as a shop, workplace, park, on public transport or at school; and racially abusive comments at sporting events by players, spectators, coaches or officials
It would be reasonable to expect all in this parliament would reject those actions outright. There is no place in our society for racism, racial discrimination or racial vilification. Our Territory community, like the rest of Australia, has come a long way in the journey of opposing racism. Our cities, towns and communities in the Northern Territory are home to people from more than 100 ethnic backgrounds. Our diversity is dynamic, vibrant and active, and we live mostly in a harmonious multicultural community, proudly and strongly Indigenous.
In the Territory we are so lucky to live in this wonderfully cultural landscape full of rich history and meaning. The depth of that cultural Indigenous history is incredible, and we are so lucky to call this country of ours home. I call myself a saltwater person, born and raised in Darwin, but then there is the rock country of West Arnhem, open woodlands across the Big Rivers, the open plains of the Barkly and the desert of Central Australia. We are all witness to Indigenous Territorians who can claim, quite rightly and proudly, to have the oldest continuous living culture on our planet.
Our Territory is home to the descendants of the first settlers when we were part of the colony of South Australia. In 1869, George Goyder, the Surveyor-General of South Australia, established a small settlement of 135 people at Port Darwin and named it Palmerston. In 1870, the first poles for the Overland Telegraph were erected in Darwin to eventually open the Territory and Australia to the rest of the world.
Our Territory has been home to people from across the continents and nations of our world who have decided to settle here since then. For example, the Chinese population at one time outnumbered the European population in the Top End. Many were recruited to the government of the day, and by 1878 the Chinese were the largest non-Indigenous group in the Northern Territory. According to the Government Residents Report of 1909, there were 6122 Chinese in the NT by 1888, contracted to work in the goldfields and later build the railway line from Palmerston to Pine Creek.
Over 100 years ago, in the late 1890s, Chinatown in Cavenagh Street had become a hive of Chinese activity and commerce. It had a bootmaker, tailor, baker, hairdresser, several washerwomen and many gardeners. There were many restaurants and a seed and plant shop. There was then a wave of Filipino migrants, which commenced in 1895 when the divers and pearl shell processers were employed in the pearling industry. It was not until the demise of the White Australia policy that the next wave of Filipino migrants arrived in Darwin, linked to the declaration of martial law in the Philippines in 1972. Today, Filipinos bring skills to a range of jobs, from mechanics to civil engineers, as part of the solution to our skills shortage in the Territory.
The Census of 1921 showed seven Cypriots living in Darwin; they were employed by Vestey’s meatworks and the Pine Creek railway. Following political instability after World War II, some Cypriots headed to Australia, so that by 1952 Greek-Cypriots were the largest group of Greek-Australians in Darwin. Following Cyclone Tracy, I saw us welcome many people from Greece to our city, and by 1982 Darwin City Council had signed a sister city agreement with Kalymnos, in recognition of the growing links between our two communities. A wave of Portuguese-Timorese refugees arrived in the Territory in 1975, following Indonesia’s annexation of Timor-Leste, and again in 1999, following the referendum for independence and the ensuing violence we witnessed. We housed our Timorese refugees in large numbers at Marrara.
We all celebrate our great lifestyle; it is what makes the Territory what it is, and is why we call our multicultural dynamic home. This was why Darwin was named one of the best cities to visit in 2012 by the Lonely Planet. We were described as being multicultural, young and energetic. It is a great selling point for tourism. Tourism Top End describes Darwin as:
It is the rightful duty of this parliament to ensure the harmony of our melting pot of people and cultures into the future, because it is the right thing to do and because of the opportunities for economic development and tourism.
Born and raised here, I have benefited from the diversity of the kids I went to school with, the Greeks, the Chinese, the Indigenous families, who all embraced me, taught me their cultures and cooked for me, bless them. Mum was never a good cook; I often survived on the fantastic cooking from these very generous, warm and open families.
I have travelled throughout the world and what I have found, more than anywhere, is that the Territory is embracing of multicultural diversity. What I am so proud of is that in our nation we are most proud of our Indigenous heritage and culture, and it is strong here.
This motion was triggered by activity at the federal level, with Senator George Brandis’ decision to release the exposure draft bill proposing amendments to the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act. Those changes to section 18C would remove unlawful conduct in relation to offending, insulting, humiliating or intimidating people. It will make it a civil prohibition, and does not create an offence or a crime; no one could be charged or prosecuted, and no criminal punishments could be imposed on those who breach it. Lawsuits under section 18C could only be brought privately by victims, not by the government. Section 18C would apply an objective test and the court would have to consider whether the relevant conduct was likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate an ordinary and reasonable member of a racial group.
It is not enough, given a person subjectively feels offended, for the government to say hurt feelings are not enough. It is an outrageous step for the government to propose removing ‘offend, insult and humiliate’, narrowing the definition from ‘intimidate’ to ‘fear of physical harm’. Does it have to go that far, where it is considered to be simply a fear of physical harm, instead of the hurtful words that, as we know, can be life changing for many people? Interestingly, at the multicultural meeting you literally heard the depth of feeling people had around the hurtful words that occur, and the reason why this sort of legislation should never be watered down or changed to simply ‘fear of physical harm’.
A further issue that struck me in discussions about the changes was the ordinary person test, rather than the test of the person who feels vilified in their racial group. We all have different perspectives. An ordinary person will not have the perspective of someone who has been discriminated against in Indigenous, Greek or Jewish groups. The removal of the test that currently exists to an ‘ordinary person’ is an insidious shift, and it should not occur.
The Australian Council of Human Rights Authorities, of which the NT’s Anti-Discrimination Commission is a member, has said that:
This is in reference to the proposed changes to the Commonwealth law. The council has found that:
That is extraordinary. It goes on to say:
There are campaigns around closing the gap. The Close the Gap campaign’s steering committee has said:
I will read an excerpt from an open letter signed by 155 organisations which say Australia must retain strong and effective protections against racial vilification. The organisations include national bodies, as well as Territory organisations such as the Larrakia Nation. It includes corporations and non-government organisations, faith groups, legal services and many other groups. The open letter says:
Conciliation allows victims of racism to work with their perpetrators to resolve their dispute in a mutually agreeable manner. It is confidential and need not involve lawyers. A conciliator does not decide anything per se; the parties are guided toward resolution of the issue themselves. The outcomes can include an apology, a change of policy or compensation, as worked out by the parties. The conciliation process has stood us in good stead in the nation and in the Northern Territory.
I believe that six Territory cases of racial vilification under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 were considered by the Australian Human Rights Commission in 2012-13. If the Commonwealth provisions were repealed, Territory complainants would have no avenue for their cases to be considered. We have good anti-discrimination legislation in the Northern Territory, and I am so incredibly proud that it was my own mother, Dawn Lawrie, the former member for Nightcliff, who was instrumental in ensuring the Territory had its own anti-discrimination laws. She worked with the former CLP government and former CLP Chief Minister Shane Stone to put those laws in place. As I said, she became the Northern Territory’s first Anti-Discrimination Commissioner when the office was established in 1993.
I have seen the workings of the commission firsthand. When I returned to the Territory and was pregnant with my first child, I would pop in there for a bit of free air conditioning and catch up with my mother for lunch. It was a great office to visit to see the work people were doing to mediate and conciliate, but also to raise education and awareness across the Northern Territory. I have enormous faith in the commission and the functions the commissioner has, due to successive commissioners have handled complaints which have come before them. I have no hesitation whatsoever in saying that it is appropriate for us to introduce amendments to our own act to ensure we have provisions in the Northern Territory, given the proposed changes to section 18C.
Bipartisan support is surely not so difficult on this one, and I thank the Leader of Government Business for going to the effort of looking at an amendment to satisfy any concerns they may have from their side of politics and to recognise the very real and deep concerns we have from where we sit.
I look forward to hearing the government’s response. Just as equally, I look forward to hearing the contributions of members of the minority Palmer United Party and the Independent member for Nelson. I hope we can all find a bipartisan position on this matter today.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I speak in the spirit in which the Leader of the Opposition says she has brought this motion to the House. I also acknowledge we have had behind-the-scenes conversations about this motion. We have comfortably and quickly come to common ground on this, and the Northern Territory government is not opposed to the philosophy behind what the Leader of the Opposition has brought forward.
However, I want to place this conversation into context, and draw into relief some of the history which has motivated Senator Brandis. Because I can describe and understand what has motivated Senator Brandis, it does not automatically follow that the government concurs. The government, in the early days of this public debate, has yet to determine if it supports Senator Brandis’s position.
It is too early to be too excited about what the federal government is doing. Because of the amount of public pushback in this, it is not inconceivable that this matter may never find its way into the federal parliament; therefore, the protections the Leader of the Opposition seeks will remain intact. As she said at the outset, when she was Attorney-General of the Northern Territory, she considered the existing provisions of the federal act fit for purpose and satisfactory for the people of the Northern Territory.
I will move the amendment to the motion which has been agreed on so I can have it circulated and members can read it. Mind you, I suspect they already have copies of it. I move that all words after ‘this Assembly:’ be omitted and substituted with the following:
understands the importance of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the Northern Territory’s Anti-Discrimination Act
recognises that whilst section 18C of the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975 provides some protection to individuals from offensive behaviour because of race, colour, national or ethnic origin, the Commonwealth Attorney-General has released a discussion paper to elicit community views
recognises the harmonious and respectful multicultural makeup of the Northern Territory, which is robust and unique in Australia
I emphasise the word ‘change’ to make sure there is no confusion over the earlier draft which was circulated.
That is now the amended motion which stands before us. I think all members – I also took it to the members for Nelson and Namatjira – have indicated their support for this rewording. I acknowledge the Leader of the Opposition’s flexibility in relation to taking this amendment on.
I understand where the Leader of the Opposition is coming from, but I also come from families who have been subjected to wars. My mother, as many members of this House know, spent four years in a Japanese concentration camp, and my father was arrested for forced labour during World War II by the Nazis.
Part of what the Nazis did was book burning. If they did not like an idea they would set fire to the book of the person who wrote the idea. Anything written which did not accord with the Nazi world view was then cast upon the pyre of Nazi rallies all through Germany, as Germany disintegrated into a totalitarian dictatorship with warlike intent.
Underlying the offence of book burning is the idea of trying to kill another person’s ideas. This is the heart of freedom of speech, and is essentially where Senator Brandis goes in relation to his opinion on this matter. I understand Senator Brandis has been somewhat motivated by the decision in the Bolt case. Mr Bolt is a former Territorian; I remember knocking about with him when I was a kid, when he still lived on Rapid Creek Road in Darwin with his parents. He has long since moved down south, and he continues to write strident articles which are published nationally. I understand he also hosts a television show, which I think I have watched about 10 minutes of, collectively, over the years. Having made those observations, I turn my attention to the matters raised by Senator Brandis.
Senator Brandis has settled on a number of words in the Racial Discrimination Act, orbiting around the operation of section 18C. He has focused on the words ‘offend’, ‘insult’ and ‘humiliate’, which occur in (1)(a). It has become the focus of Senator Brandis’s world view. The subsection reads as follows:
I will stop there, because I will quote Senator Brandis so the context of his comments can be understood by all members in this House.
The federal senator was addressing the press gallery when making these comments
The senator went on to say:
I have the text of that press conference if members would like to read the whole thing. I am happy to make it available to any member who asks, but that places Senator Brandis’s comments into a contextual environment. It is the question that will rage around this debate between now and when, should the time ever come, the federal government chooses to move on this topic. From the Territory’s perspective, it is a case of hurry up and wait. It is correct, and I do acknowledge comments by the Leader of the Opposition about the ethos surrounding this. I do note that she seeks to include religious vilification within the proposed amendment that she intends to bring into this House, should she feel it necessary.
I agree with the Leader of the Opposition that this town, city and jurisdiction has long stood out from the rest of this country in a number of very important ways. Harry Hen Fook Chan, whose bust appears in the hall outside as you come through the door, was a former member of the Legislative Assembly, but also mayor of this town. He was elected while this country still had a White Australia policy. In the Darwin community we were long turning a blind eye to matters of race when the federal government’s policy was still to keep the ‘Yellow Peril’ from our door. We will always remember comments from southern ministers, not least of whom was Arthur Calwell. Curiously, he was a Labor minister, whose contribution to the migration debate in this country was that:
The Territory has been outside of that domain for a very long time. It is impossible, and always has been, to move within Territory social circles and to exclude yourself from the dynamism of our community; football, sports and social clubs all have a presence of people from diverse racial backgrounds. My father was a Rotarian, and there were any number of Rotarians, even back in the 1970s, from diverse racial backgrounds; one could say Darwin, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, was built largely on the sweat of Italian and Greek migrants.
Ms Finocchiaro: Mostly Italian.
Mr ELFERINK: Mostly Italian. I am the son of a migrant, running away from post-World War II Europe, because my father and mother were sick to death of the post-World War II environment and the legacy which resonated through Europe for 20 years after that period. It was a dark place, and if you want an impression of that pick up Heinrich Bll’s book, The Clown, written by a German author around 1958, and you will realise what a dark place Europe had become, particularly in Germany after World War II.
All those sporting clubs have always had large numbers of Aboriginal people involved with them, simply because Aboriginal people, no matter whether they were of mixed or original descent, have been involved in our sporting clubs for as long as I recall. It is also interesting to note that we have a mosque on Vanderlin Drive next to a Christian church. The fence which separates them is about four feet high, and whilst there is also a street between them, I do not think there are many places in the world where you would see that. When you say that to people who live in Darwin, their response is not, ‘Yes, we are very proud of our multicultural society’. It is one you hope for. ‘I have never noticed. Oh, really? Yes, I suppose. I never thought about it.’
That is the sort of society I love and grew up in. I never noticed there was a mosque next to a Christian church. How many communities anywhere in the world would that pass by utterly unnoticed? Yet that is what happens in Darwin. It is a society which I was proud to grow up in.
From time to time, racism has reared its ugly head in the Northern Territory, and I recall when I was a kid in the late 1970s, if memory serves me, that a local police officer had decided to set up a local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan, and that found its way into the newspapers. Do you remember that?
Mr Styles: I do not remember that.
Mr ELFERINK: I cannot remember what that moron’s name was, but it made such a hoo-hah in the community. People were stridently against this moron, and it was not too long before he was unemployed. He was very quickly sidelined by the police force, because it understood the sort of community we lived in and that a local branch of the Ku Klux Klan fitted about as well as a besser block in a tumble dryer.
This is the sort of community we live in, and I will make this observation: whilst we do make legislation, and I understand that the Leader of the Opposition describes this legislation as being as much symbolic as enforcing, it is symbolic of an existing attitude which percolates throughout our community.
The community polices itself particularly well in the Northern Territory when it comes to things of this nature. The community has historically done it and yes, you will occasionally hear racist comments from time to time. Over the years, where I have heard somebody being truly vitriolic with racist comments in public places and houses in particular, I have noticed many people quickly step up and shut it down in the way the community does. I hope that if such an instrument was introduced into the Northern Territory, that it would not be used. I take some heart from the fact the federal legislation has been used so rarely up until now in the Northern Territory. I am also grateful that the Leader of the Opposition understands another nuance which plays beneath the surface in a debate of this nature and acknowledges the overt steps she has taken to make certain that debate does not play out.
It is very easy with this sort of debate to run to the bottom of the barrel. It takes dignified community leadership to make sure when you are trying to address an issue of this nature we do not run to the bottom of the barrel. I note the Leader of the Opposition has been specific in articulating her motives and to separate herself from any such allegations of this. Consequently, I will not make any such allegations, in the spirit of which the opposition and government have come together on this issue.
I anticipate that the Independent members who speak on this will also be cautious to make certain we do not go down that path, because it is an easy place to go to. It is an extremely difficult place from which to extract yourself, and I would be cautious to make sure we move forward cautiously with this debate.
I also note there is a Freedom of Speech (Repeal of S.18C) Bill 2014 in circulation. I note, in accordance with the public comments made by Senator Brandis, that the words he suggested should be removed, ‘offend’, ‘insult’ and ‘humiliate’, have been removed from the proposed amendment that is the exposure draft. In its place it introduces the word ‘vilify’ for the first time in the legislation and retains the word ‘intimidate’. I also note that it is a public place offence.
I make one observation which I think many people have overlooked, particularly at the state level. Federal governments do not tend to have summary offence type legislation, but states do. Racist language would be considered by a court to be an objectionable word or the use of those words could be considered offensive conduct.
Under the Summary Offences Act of the Northern Territory, using the ‘N’ word when talking about an Aboriginal person would invite a breach of that act and a fine. I think it is a $1000 maximum penalty. Within Territory legislation, there are already provisions which exist to deal with racially offensive language, and prosecutions, if brought under that legislation, would likely be successful. However, like any instance, you would have to judge each case on its merits, and a court would have to make that determination, based on the attitude of the reasonable person, the man on the Clapham omnibus or the Bondi tram, as has been absorbed into Australian common law, as well as the context of when the word was used.
To a degree, we have legislation in the Northern Territory which deals with offensive language. If a person was to make a complaint to the police that they had been called the ‘N’ word in a public place, which is a completely different system, as identified by the Racial Discrimination Act, it is very likely the police would proceed with a complaint and that matter could be dealt with under summary legislation of the Northern Territory.
Further, the Criminal Code Act of the Northern Territory prohibits certain types of threatening behaviour, which casts a much wider net than merely threatening behaviour based on race. One is capable of engaging in threatening behaviour without it having to be reduced to a matter of race, faith or sexual orientation. Threatening behaviour is threatening behaviour, so it can be suggested that the Territory’s legislation, to a substantial degree, already covers the field, whilst it does not do so within the operation of the Anti-Discrimination Act. Nevertheless, I understand what the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting in her processes and I understand the symbolic nature of what she brings to this House. I further observe that you cannot offend against section 18C if you have satisfied the operation of section 18D, which means you cannot be in breach of the Racial Discrimination Act if you do it:
That means an action brought under section 18C would be severely limited by the operation of section 18D. I suspect that is one of the reasons why so few matters end up being prosecuted by people who are offended; many matters end up being conciliated because the successful pursuit of prosecutions is rare, the Bolt case being one of them. I note that under the exposure draft circulated by Senator Brandis, subsection 4 says:
That is a similarly broad list of exemptions, and I am not entirely sure that it leaves a great deal of space to operate in.
I understand the motivation and rationale the Leader of the Opposition has for bringing this matter forward. I note that Territory legislation has, in other places, ways of dealing with offensive and objectionable words, as well as threatening behaviour or incitement to commit criminal offences, which is also an offence under the Territory’s Criminal Code Act. It is yet to be determined as to where the federal government will go with this exposure draft. They may, given the stridency of some of the objections in this matter, determine that it is not worth pursuing and simply slide it under the table and turn their attention to what people consider more important things. For that reason we circulated the amendment which has been accepted by members opposite.
I am not ungrateful that the Leader of the Opposition has brought this into this House, but it is the case that this House, or at least the government, will hurry up and wait to see what the federal government offers to the people of Australia, as well as the people of the Northern Territory, in how they move forward.
I again place on the record my acknowledgement of the sober fashion in which the Leader of the Opposition has proceeded, and I suggest and expect the same temperance will be maintained for the remainder of the debate. I move the amendment as circulated and look forward to listening to the rest of the debate.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the amended motion. Even though this is an issue that has raised a bit of heat in our society, it is a very important one to raise. The basis of this is a balance between freedom of expression and the right to freedom from racial discrimination and vilification. I have done as much work as possible on this motion. I am using some information from the Human Rights Law Centre, which I found extremely useful in understanding the changes the federal government wishes to put forward.
From my point of view, if there is one thing the member for Karama and I agree on, because we both agree on the same set of laws, it would be the 10 commandments. One of those 10 commandments is to love your neighbour. If we all loved our neighbours, as I know the member for Fong Lim loves me …
Mr Styles: That is true, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: That is right, and the member for Sanderson. If we did as we were supposed to, we would not need this kind of law. Unfortunately, we do have people in our society who are racists and bigots, and one good reason for having this law is not so much about whether someone can be punished, but it sets the appropriate standards of our society. Our Commonwealth government, which represents us all, says we need to draw a line as to what is an acceptable standard and what is not. It is important we do that, and whether it is symbolic or has any teeth does not matter. We must say, ‘This is the bottom line’.
It has been interesting carrying out my research because I have always been of the view that the article by Andrew Bolt is supposed to be the one that caused the federal government to look at changes to this act.
I read some of that article, and I am in a position where some of what he said is, at times, discussed in my circles. I am married to an Aboriginal woman, a lovely lady who has somehow put up with me for the last 40 years. I am not sure how. With a mixed marriage, children can lose their skin colour, and my grandchildren would look, to any person, white. My grandson was at the Casuarina shopping centre recently, and kids from St Johns were niggling him. They said, ‘You are not Aboriginal’, and he told them he was. Anyway, Nana Rosemary went past, as she happened to be at the shopping centre as well. She said ‘Ah, Jimmy’, and the kids immediately realised it is not as simple as that. In my distant past, I may have thought that myself, but it is not necessarily your skin colour that makes you who you are.
If I was to put my grandchildren next to my wife, many people would be surprised that, in two generations, the colour has gone, but not the Aboriginality. They do not understand that. Last night I talked about the wonders of an Aboriginal family. I have seen photographs from when my father-in-law died and they buried him at Bulgul. There was an enormous number of people there, about 100 at least, all relations of some sort and of all different shades across the spectrum. When I look at that, I feel proud I belong to that family; it is a wonderful thing.
Bigotry can also come from a lack of education and knowledge, the way you were brought up and the way you could be brought up in an insular society. I have just come back from Northern Ireland, and until you go there, you perhaps do not realise it is not simple. People are sometimes ingrained with certain beliefs. When I was there, I felt the lot of them should come to Australia, where there is fresh air, and I do not care whether you are a Protestant, Jew or Catholic. That is your right, but in other places, that is a division caused in a society. Education is a part of what we must deal with here, not only law. It is about telling people we are all equals, regardless of our religion and colour, and that is important.
I will read this statement, also related to Andrew Bolt’s case. I would like to read it because he went to court under section 18D; he claimed he had the right, I presume, to write his article in the paper.
It was not so much about writing, as I have said to people before. I hope you excuse the English here, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I can call someone a bastard, and I am insulting them. I can call someone a good bastard, and there is a poem which has all of the different meanings of that word. You can discuss something which might have some racial connotations, but you should be able to do it in a way that does not offend. When I went to Daly River – people call themselves blackfellas and you go past Blackfella Creek. They call me a white something sometimes. We all laughed about it; we did not take it as an insult, because of the manner in which it was said. Some people would use it today as an insulting word, and some can take it as an insulting word.
Each case must be taken on its merits. In the case of Mr Bolt, it was not so much a case of saying whether certain people were entitled to assistance, it was what he said. I will read the section of what the case was about. It is from the Human Rights Law Centre and it says why Andrew Bolt was unable to rely on the free speech exemptions.
People are able to speak about these matters. It is how and why you say it that is important. It is what is in your heart or what you are trying to do that is relative to this argument. I have not seen anything, after reading this, which says we should change anything. Is freedom of speech under threat in Australia? As the member for Port Darwin says, ‘By geez, you can get a bit cranky in here at times’. I am not here to support people insulting one another, but I do not mind a vigorous debate about what a person has said; there is a clear distinction and that is hopefully what a good debate is about. You should be able to love your neighbour and have a difference of opinion, and we must keep that in mind.
I would rather people ask what is wrong with the existing law. Change and the debate about this is good, but I struggle with what is really going on here. There has also been discussion that as long as it does not cause physical violence, it is okay.
This article from the Human Rights Law Centre talks about a court case – it does not state which one, and I will not use the language, as it is definitely inappropriate – which the member for Karama would be interested in, as it shows a breach of section 18C. The article talks about:
For someone to say it is only about intimidation which could cause physical harm, they do not understand that it is not as simple as that. There will be people who find being racially abused – some of this is very bad language, and there are also racial taunts which could cause people mental anguish and to commit suicide.
We should not be obsessed with that. I am not saying it is not important, but we should try to educate people. We should be saying, ‘This is not the appropriate standard for our society’. We need to say we are all equal, and if it is corny for some people – it is about love your neighbour, a fundamental tenant of our society because we base our laws on the Judeo-Christian principle, though not every law. I have some differences of opinion about some things in our society, but the fundamental is to love your neighbour.
The important reason for keeping this law and supporting this motion is to ensure those appropriate standards of our society remain. That is what makes this country special.
The member for Karama said she may introduce the matter of religion in any legislation she introduces. She also mentioned that being a minority religion can mean you come into some hard times. Being a majority religion, you can also come in for hard times, and I am probably used to it, but if you are Catholic and do not fall in line with what is so-called popular in our society you are vilified. I would be called a right-wing conservative if I held a different view to what is popular. I hold different views to what is popular.
If I made a statement on abortion, other people might not agree with me, but why would it be a case of me being a Catholic? Have you noticed that people pick on Tony Abbott – you might not agree with him – because of his religion? Do they pick the member for Fong Lim as a Mason? Do they say, ‘the Mason in the Legislative Assembly, Dave Tollner’? People do not. Do they pick up on other members religions, such as ‘the atheist over there, the member for Woop Woop’? No, but I guarantee if you are a Catholic and make a statement which does not fit with the ABC or popular media, your religion will be identified. That is unfortunate. I am old enough to work out some of these issues based on what I believe, not my religious background.
That is not necessarily vilification, but sometimes you are picked on because of your religious background, which is not fair. I do not always agree with everything people in my religion say, but that does not make me an old fuddy-duddy, conservative, right-wing you-know-what. In the paper recently it said a certain person you might know who runs an accounting service wrote a letter saying I was extremely left wing. Coming from a DLP family I thought that was very strange; people who know the background of the Democratic Labour Party would understand.
The issue about religious vilification is important, from a personal point of view. I have lived with my views not quite matching with popular views for a long time, so it probably does not matter. I become concerned if, for some reason, you are a Catholic and you are picked out at times because you have a different point of view. That is not saying Catholics should not be criticised; priests and bishops are being criticised a lot lately. Those sad matters in the Catholic Church should be criticised, but that is different from picking on a person because of their religion; that is fair comment.
It is the same when we discuss Andrew Bolt. If he wants to discuss, for the right reasons and for the matter to be debated, whether people of fairer skin should be entitled to certain benefits, that is his right, as long as he does not do it with the intent to racially vilify people. You should be able to discuss those matters, and do it in a proper manner. Unfortunately, he wrote a story which spreads the wrong message.
I will give another example of where you should be able to have a discussion; I have never been a fan of Abstudy and Austudy. I have always believed you should receive a benefit from the government based on your needs, regardless of skin colour. If you are on a low income, trying to get your child to school, that should be the basis on which you do it. You should be able to have the discussion without any problem, as long as you do it for the right reason. However, I have heard discussions about this, and it is not done for the right reason. You hear the comments on the side, with people biased to some extent.
Again, I put it to you that we have the right to freedom of speech, but we do not have the right to insult people or pick on their race or religion. There is a great commandment, which I imagine most of us fail to follow sometimes, but it is the basis upon which we love our neighbour; if we could, we would perhaps not have problems in the Ukraine, Ireland or Uganda. Unfortunately, that does not happen and is why we have this legislation.
This legislation marks a line in the sand, and shows that our society says these are appropriate standards of behaviour and conduct, and this is the way we should behave with one another. We should leave the legislation alone.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak not to support the motion the Opposition Leader has brought to the House, but to thank her.
As Territorians, we are a multicultural society; everybody has said this so far, including the Leader of Government Business. We are the first Australians, from the oldest culture; we have welcomed every nationality to a very young Territory and we want to live in a harmonious way. I thank the Leader of Government Business for accepting the amendment the Opposition Leader has put forward, because it makes us look good in this Chamber, that as people governing on behalf of the Northern Territory we are not always arguing about things and not accepting each other’s motions or legislation put forward, but we can rise above our political differences.
It is very important, as the Independent member, Gerry Wood and the Opposition Leader said, that it is about ethics and making sure we have standards, and that we teach our children that this is not what we want in society. We teach our children, from birth to adulthood, about how to be good people in society, how to grow up, behave at home, school and in the street. We must set that high standard, because we are a very young jurisdiction. We are a multicultural society, and we now encourage lots of other people, apart from ourselves, to come to the Northern Territory and enjoy the economic opportunities and safety of this beautiful place. It is well within our bounds to make sure we work to show our younger generation that we can work together, set standards and that we will not dress up racism.
We must allow comments like that to not be dressed up and we must confront the issues. We can confront them on the basis of the multicultural society we have accepted in the Northern Territory. There are vulnerable people in the Northern Territory, like Aboriginal people, who need protection. This motion comes from goodwill, and it is a show of goodwill on behalf of the Leader of Government Business to accept the changes. It shows our constituents that we can rise above our political differences to ensure we are talking about the one issue, which concerns no racial vilification. We will not accept it as leaders and as people who work and govern for the people of the Northern Territory, no matter where they come from. As I said, racism and bad language should not be accepted. We should always address it and ensure that when someone uses language like that, we call them out.
That is the education strategy we need. We must talk about vilification in schools and educate future generations of Territorians that it is not acceptable. When the Opposition Leader travelled to places like Alice Springs, Katherine and Darwin, she did not say, ‘Are you a Greek or Aboriginal friend of mine?’ Children will not ask what nationality their friends are. They get on like children and play, share and eat together. I always refer to the saying someone used with me: ‘what monkey sees, monkey do.’ Most of this ugliness and racism is seen, heard and bred in the home. We must go to the core of that ugliness and address it. Our children are future leaders, doctors, road workers and people who will work in hotels. They will be the next teachers, and will be inside this House. We must ensure they cannot see a race difference, and cannot see an Aboriginal person from a Greek, Italian or Chinese person.
That is a good way for any kind of jurisdiction to be. We welcome so many people who have been harmed and vilified in their countries. They come to a place like Australia, especially the Northern Territory, because they can see we live in a multicultural way and are a multicultural society. They want that freedom; it is protection for those people as well. It is very important that the Leader of Government Business and the government have accepted the changes to this motion put forward by the Opposition Leader. We are setting the standard of non-acceptance for the Northern Territory, and asking the federal government to make sure there are no drastic changes, or any changes at all, to section 18C.
People will go beyond and test the boundaries. It is like having an envelope and stepping over it; they will always try that. We must, as leaders of the Northern Territory and Australia, ensure we keep people within the boundaries of that envelope, making sure people feel safe and that they can walk down the street not being exposed to vilification and being sworn at.
That is the kind of thing we must change, because kids learn from us. Kids hear these things every day, the fact that we do it to each other and they hear it on the television and the radio, and they think it is not the way they want to be. We must rise above that and set ourselves a very high standard of non-acceptance for this kind of ugliness in the Northern Territory; we do not want that ugliness tearing up future generations of Territorians who need to get on and live a life of social and economic engagement here. I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing this motion forward, and the government for its support.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this very important motion to the House. I also thank the Leader of Government Business for looking at the motion and coming together with the Independents, the Palmer United Party members and the opposition to agree to the amendment. It is a very important debate we must have in the Northern Territory. As members of this parliament, it is very important we all place our thoughts, feelings and beliefs on the record about where we stand on racism.
In some ways, I am alarmed we are debating this motion, with the Abbott government and Senator Brandis having released this exposure draft with proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act. If these proposed amendments were to pass, it would open the floodgates to increased racism in Australian society.
I am very proud to be a born and bred Territorian. I am proud of the upbringing I had, because I feel so fortunate that as someone who spent most of their childhood in Darwin I was able to make the most wonderful friends for life, and access the diversity and beauty on offer in the Territory.
We have our thriving Indigenous population, the first peoples of this nation. To grow up with many wonderful Indigenous friends, as well as Greek, Filipino and Chinese kids, who were the great-grandchildren of some of the first Chinese people to come to the Territory, is a wonderful thing. There is a long and proud history of multiculturalism in the Territory. I have had the opportunity to live down south on a few occasions, and each time I have spent time there I do not have the same feeling as I do in the Northern Territory. We have something incredibly special here, a society which values and believes in multiculturalism, and it would be an awful shame if the Abbott government was to go down the path of amending the Racial Discrimination Act in line with the changes proposed in this exposure draft.
It would be a huge shame for this nation and the Northern Territory, and I am pleased that we are saying racism is unacceptable. Freedom of speech is important; however, with freedom of speech comes a responsibility and it is not okay to incite hatred based on somebody’s race. That is outrageous, and if the proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act pass, it will lower the bar on the standards we set in this nation around racism, and that we think it is okay to have racist debate in public forums. What type of example are we setting for the children of today if we do that? What type of example are we setting for the world? It would be a shame.
The Racial Discrimination Act has been in place since 1975. In 1995, almost 20 years ago, we saw sections 18B, 18C, 18D and 18E inserted into the act, following reports produced by the Australian Law Reform Commission into multiculturalism and the law; a report by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission entitled Racist Violence – Report of National Inquiry into Racist Violence in Australia; and a Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. That work found gaps in the Racial Discrimination Act which needed to be amended, and that is what the inserted clauses did.
Most of the issues and complaints across this nation, as we heard from the Leader of the Opposition, are conciliated. We recently saw a presentation by the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner of the Northern Territory, held by the Multicultural Council of the NT. She said about 3% of cases end up in court, which is a fairly good strike rate. People can work through the issue and conciliation is working well. We also heard that the Racial Discrimination Act, as it stands, is working effectively in this nation. It is doing the job we want it to if you want to stand firmly against racism.
The proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act would repeal sections 18C, B, D and E, with what could only be described as significantly weakened words, definitions and harder tests in place around racism. This is bad because you are effectively lowering the bar on racism in this nation. You are encouraging racist debate in public forums, offering less protection to people around racism, and, as we have seen, a raft of forums are opening here, particularly through social media. We should be looking at what protections we can put in place to protect people from vilification and hatred based on race.
The consequences of racism can be traumatic for an individual, particularly around their emotional state. It can have an impact on a person, and the last thing we want to see is somebody attacked in a racist way and things becoming physical.
It was interesting to attend the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory’s meeting last month, and I thank the group for holding it. It was a good move to have everybody in a room together looking at the exposure draft and the proposed amendments, and asking people from different multicultural groups in Darwin and Palmerston what they thought.
The Anti-Discrimination Commissioner gave a thorough briefing on the issue and a straight definition of the changes. I was pleased to be sitting with the Leader of the Opposition, who could speak to the meeting and provide a firm view on Labor’s position to say we do not think these amendments are on, and if the federal government makes these amendments we will be firmly against them. Also, we would move to strengthen our Anti-Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory, because as it stands we have weaknesses around this issue and in the past we have had a fair bit of coverage under federal laws. However, if they are to change, it will weaken the position in the Northern Territory and something must be done.
I welcome the discussion paper the Leader of the Opposition has put together to look at this matter. If we must go down this path, it is great to see there is a thorough document which has been broadly distributed to multicultural communities around the Northern Territory, but it is open for all to look at and have their say on the issue. What do they think would need to be in legislation, if we were to put it through in the Northern Territory to strengthen our laws against racial vilification? We are undergoing a strong consultation process, and it also sends a clear message to the federal government that members of this parliament do not want to see the bar lowered when it comes to racism. We do not want to see the floodgates opened, in that it is easier to get away with inciting hatred and vilifying someone in society based on their race. That is not on, it is not the country we want to be and is not what the Northern Territory is about.
It has been heartening to hear that the government has amended the motion the Leader of the Opposition brought to the House; it looks like we are all travelling together in a bipartisan way, looking at this very important issue which goes to the fabric of the Northern Territory. We will wait and see what comes out of the Abbott government’s exposure draft and the proposed changes. I hope the federal government listens to the loud voices across this nation which have said these changes are not on. This is not the nation we want to be, and in the Territory we do not want to see the bar lowered when it comes to racism.
Mr STYLES (Transport): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the amended motion, and would like to talk about a number of issues which have already been discussed in this House, that is, our personal experiences.
I grew up in suburban Perth. My father was a builder and my mother was a retail manager, but when I was born my mum was a housewife and my dad was a builder. When I was a young fellow, my mother, showing country hospitality, decided it would be a good idea to support what was then the Colombo Plan for students from Southeast Asia coming to Australia to study. As a young fellow, people came into our home, where my mum would look after them on behalf of parents who were many thousands of kilometres away in Asia.
Children do not discriminate; you are not born to discriminate against people and to be racially prejudiced. If you are a child and you are racially prejudiced, someone has taught you to be that way. Most families in our community teach their children tolerance and to be understanding of people who are different. Not everyone is good at following that sort of education, but I pick up on what the member for Nelson said; it is about education. It is about educating our kids and ensuring they know that all of these things are acceptable.
Even in my childhood, when we were recovering from the White Australia policy, no one taught me to be racially prejudiced; in fact, I was taught to be accepting. I grew up, through to my teenage years, with my mother hosting and looking after students from Asia. I thought they were great, because they put up with me. All kids can be a pain, and I was probably one of those getting around the place. These people were taught tolerance by their parents, and they tolerated me, as a child some years younger than them, in my teenage years; I was not so much younger than they were, because they were often only 17 or 18 themselves, having completed their education in secondary school in Asia before coming to Western Australia to study a host of things. It was good, and I was never treated in a racial manner, other than the fact I was the son of a wonderful woman looking after them, giving them a place to stay and a safe environment to live and study in.
However, I experienced discrimination quite often as a child, probably every day. As is said, kids can be cruel. I am one of the 4 % of people in this country who have red hair, and it was a lot redder some years ago.
Mr Elferink: That is a challenging proposition.
Mr STYLES: It is, but I have photographs, proof that it was quite red. In fact, I was known as ‘copper top’, and it was a good red colour. In New Zealand, only 2.5% of people have red hair, but we seem to do a bit better than the Kiwis in a lot of things. That is no disrespect to Kiwis, only a bit of good rivalry. Being short, round and having red hair, the discrimination against me and my suffering were pm display every day. Some people grow to ignore it, but, sadly, some do not. It is not a good thing, but when kids are cruel, tease you about things, discriminate against you and will not let you play with them because you are different – I understand a bit about being different.
My mum, being a good farm girl, fed me well. When I was 14 or 15, I grew 20 cm over the next couple of years. Not only did I grow 20 cm, I grew out in the shoulders about 20 to 30 cm, and I suddenly went from being short, round with red hair, to very tall, built like the proverbial toilet, and the teasing and discrimination stopped. People suddenly wanted to know you because you were much bigger than them, and it led me to something I saw on the USS Enterprise many years ago when I toured on the boat. Its motto is: ‘In strength there is peace’. I could relate to that, because when you become strong there is peace.
I support this motion because I agree with many of these ideas. There are a few areas where we must wait to see what happens with the federal legislation, because we might be jumping the gun otherwise. If this legislation gives people strength and our community strengthens, that is a good thing. I support the sentiments that have come from the other side; we should ensure our community and people are strong, and if we need legislation to back that, then so be it. We will look at what we can do to strengthen that.
However, I return to what the member for Nelson said about the need to educate people. I also note the member for Port Darwin’s remarks, when he said that no legislation in the world is better than a judging community and what community standards are. That goes back to what we need to do as families, communities and organisations. That is, to ensure young people learn about tolerance and that you embrace differences.
When I first travelled to the Northern Territory as a young man in the late 1970s – I first came here in about 1979 – I came to a place I found fascinating. I was on a business trip at that time, and we travelled around, went to the old Don Hotel for a drink and met many people. We found this to be one of the most fascinating places we had ever been to. We had been around Australia, visiting a range of places on this business trip, and Darwin was the best.
When I met my wife in Carnarvon, Western Australia, she said the same thing. She was a country girl from Victoria, a nurse, who travelled around Australia working in many different places. It was on her recommendation that we came to the Northern Territory. It was for all the reasons I came here in the first place; it was so vibrant, and I remember looking at the Chung Wah temple in particular.
As a young teenager, I travelled with my parents to Singapore and Malaysia; it was one of those trips where you are exposed to many different cultures and experiences, such as the Arab culture, Indian and Chinese influences in Singapore, as well as the Malay culture. There is a melting pot of people living in Singapore, who make up a beautiful, harmonious community, all working together for a common goal.
After moving to Darwin you start to experience what a wonderful place this is; if I walk down my street, I have, within 100 m of my house, probably five or six different nationalities. That is just within two or three houses either side.
You have people from different European backgrounds, Asians, and those from the subcontinent, so it is a melting pot. However, there are not enclaves in Darwin, unless you call the northern suburbs an enclave, but generally there are not. There is no suburb or group of streets where there is a particular group.
Mr Elferink: There is no Lakemba
Mr STYLES: That is right. If you visit Springwood in Victoria, unless you can read Mandarin you are in the wrong place. There are no English signs. We are fortunate that we do not have that. We have people side by side in shopping centres with a range of shops. We are fortunate in the Territory that we have a strong community. I have friends from my role as the Minister for Multicultural Affairs and before that as the shadow minister, and as a member of the community, and I am interested in what is going on. Why did we used to go to different functions every Saturday night? Because we loved it, and it is what Darwin is about. Over the years, if we added up the number of multicultural events I have been to, I could probably match everyone else in the room put together. My wife Linda and I have been doing it for years and enjoy it because we experience the very best of what Darwin and the Northern Territory has to offer.
There are magnificent cultural events, with music, food, dancing and the people themselves and the stories they tell. Some years ago, I was sitting on my verandah with a number of people, some from Southeast Asia, some from India, Sri Lanka, and northern India; these are people who come from countries where, over the years, they have shot at each other. The discussion came up about multiculturalism, people abusing other people and vilification, for want of a better word to describe what was happening.
Interestingly, one of the people at that dinner said he could not understand why he, people of his ilk and others in Sri Lanka and at the bottom of India are at war with one another. He said they should share a bottle of red, as we were doing, talk about life and look at all the good things we have. You hope people do that, but with other countries being the way they are, it is very difficult. We are very lucky in this country; we have been through some times when racial vilification and discrimination was part of the norm, and we have come a long way. We have free speech in this country, but you should not be able to outright abuse people. You should be able to express things, and I agree with these amendments and certain things Senator Brandis wants to do. He has released an amended version for comment and I have a copy of it.
The amended exposure draft is released to have people talking about the proposal and to hear people’s views. From my information there have been thousands of submissions on this, which closed on 30 April 2014. The federal government now has thousands of submissions to go through so it can inform itself of pushback or if there is support. That is yet to be determined.
We should wait before rushing in and changing things here. Free speech is exactly that, and governments must be very careful when tampering with it. We have seen other countries limit free speech, and you only have to look at the results after they have made a range of things illegal. We should look at what is in the amended version and acknowledge that we probably need to look at what is coming out federally.
Whilst people are free to say whatever they want, it is also people’s right to ignore them. As a child I ignored those people and said, ‘I do not have the problem, you do’. That all forms part of what your parents teach you about tolerance. It also reminds you of what parents teach their kids about the ugly duckling, that wonderful nursery rhyme my mother told me about time and time again. I considered myself as having a problem and being the ugly duckling, and I am grateful to my mother for persisting with that story. You grow up and understand you are who you are. If other people have a problem, then I feel sorry for them, and I feel sorry for the people who teased me. They probably still have a problem, although you would hope when that they grow up they realise the community will not tolerate it.
I return to what the member for Port Darwin said about no legislation in the world being better than community judgment.
On 27 April 2014, Barack Obama said:
We are seeing a small minority of people who think they can say whatever they like. I am with my colleagues on this side, the member for Nelson and the opposition. We may have a few areas to discuss, but, generally, we are all on the same page when it comes to racially vilifying people.
I will talk about some of the other points in the amended motion. I agree with the first dot point about understanding the importance of the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. When I travel, I do not see much evidence of racial vilification; we are mature. I heard people, especially when I was a police officer, racially vilify Aboriginal people. I heard people talk about Italians and Greeks, and they are a small-minded minority. It is not fair to do that.
I will tell the story of an Aboriginal man who had a go at me for being racially prejudiced when talking to him many years ago on Knuckey Street. I was working with a fantastic guy, but sadly he is not a police officer anymore, as he left to fly aeroplanes. He is a full blood Thursday Islander and a great bloke. His name was Rob Mills, and this guy did not see that he was standing behind him as he got into me, racially abusing me like you would not believe.
He said, ‘You are only picking on me because of my colour’, so I said to him, ‘You are probably talking to the wrong guy. You need to talk to my partner.’
Mr Elferink: He was about 20kg heavier than anybody else.
Mr STYLES: He was a big man. Rob saw the humour in this, and the bloke turned around, saw this giant man from the Torres Strait Islands, and saw the humour in what he had been trying to do to me. I said, ‘Mate, I am not talking to you anymore, go and talk to Rob’. Rob took it in his stride, as we all did, and the bloke said, ‘Okay, I give up’, and jumped in the back of the van. We took him away and had to, sadly, charge him with a couple of offences. That was 30 years ago in Darwin, and Darwin was a bit like that then, in that it did not happen often. Some on the other side seem to think that if you do this in the Northern Territory, people will read this legislation and things will suddenly change.
I am grateful I live in the Northern Territory, and I am grateful my children and grandchildren live here. Apart from the coming economic tsunami, it is a great, tolerant place to be. I cannot believe my luck that we made a decision to move and raise our children here. Here we are, 33 years later, I am a member of parliament and a minister and my children and grandchildren all have very bright futures. It is a special place. We should maintain that and monitor what is happening, as this amendment says.
I return to a previous part of this contribution, the motto of the US Sixth Fleet, ‘In strength there is peace’. If we make our community strong and keep it strong, we can teach our kids and grandkids about tolerance, that we are all the same, but different, and legislation like this will not be required in the future. Sadly, there will be the odd person for who this legislation is needed.
Ms LAWRIE (Leader of the Opposition): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the members for Port Darwin, Nelson, Namatjira, Wanguri and Sanderson for contributing to this debate in the spirit in which it was brought on, to seek a bipartisan approach to sending a clear signal in the Northern Territory that racism of any sort is never to be tolerated in the Northern Territory and we will be united in our actions to do whatever we can, as the legislators of the Territory, to send a clear signal to our broader community. If required, we will introduce laws which say, very clearly, that racism is not tolerated and it is not okay to be a bigot and vilify and discriminate against people because of racial, ethnic or religious backgrounds.
The story was told in this debate, as I expected it would be, of people’s experiences in the Territory and boundaries beyond. I am pleased that we are able to achieve a consensus on an amendment to the motion and are able to give some comfort to the government on the issues it raised in debate around not yet being convinced that Commonwealth laws will be changed because of the exposure draft legislation and that a final view has not been announced by the federal government.
That was a part of what the member for Port Darwin indicated, and I pick up on the member for Sanderson, who was not too convinced of the view around the legislation being watered down. There is further information you could probably draw upon and reconsider. It has been clearly stated across a range of contributions today that, from a human rights perspective, it is recognised that Senator Brandis’s proposed changes would significantly reduce people’s rights.
I note the issues of freedom of speech which were raised, and I fully concur with the member for Nelson in his summing up of that, in that freedom of speech comes with responsibilities. Freedom of speech is not an excuse to vilify people on racist grounds, and he went into detail around the Bolt decision, which has been singled out by many commentators as a reason for the proposed changes to the Commonwealth law. He also quoted some of the cases I too am acquainted with which have gone through court, and people have been found guilty of vilification.
I will touch on the court again. I am comforted by the actions of our Anti-Discrimination Commission in the Northern Territory, its ability to conciliate matters and, if required, to arbitrate. That is why, regardless of what occurs in the Commonwealth domain, it is timely to deal with this once and for all. Never could I have imagined that after a debate which occurred some 20 years ago in our nation, as the member for Fannie Bay and I were just discussing – it was done and dusted, locked away and we were comforted, as Australians, that there was a clear view around these laws and standards in our nation. Sadly, to some of us the unimaginable has occurred. There is a view being proposed, albeit not yet introduced, that weakens a standard we have enjoyed for some 20 years. That being said, I am keen to ensure there is a Territory law to ensure we have protections for the future. If in the event anyone in the future decides to amend the Commonwealth legislation, can we be masters of our own destiny if we choose to? I believe we can. I never want this debate to reoccur in some years’ time. Let us deal with it with maturity now in the Northern Territory, given the concerns that have been raised and heard by us as legislators.
I look forward to the ensuing weeks, where I will receive feedback on the discussion paper, and I am happy if the government wants to lead its own version of the legislation. You have the time to do that as well. I am not playing politics with this, as I have said before. If the government wants its own legislation that meets what I see as best practice, and what I have heard as best practice in terms of the Tasmanian legislation, that would be an even more ideal outcome. I am not about grandstanding and pursuing a private member’s bill if the government is of a mind to introduce legislation. It is normal for governments to legislate, but it is not normal for oppositions to achieve legislation. I am not seeking to breach norms or conventions here. I am seeking to ensure Territorians have the protections that, as a jurisdiction, we are mature enough to give them. We are the masters of our own destiny.
As we have seen in the debate today, that destiny can sometimes mean, on some matters, rare albeit, we are united. This is in our strength as Territorians, in our experiences and deeply held beliefs about what makes us uniquely Territorian, and in holding a very proud and strong place in this great nation of Australia. We are very proudly multicultural, with a strong and proud Indigenous heritage. There is an opportunity, which I have thrown out to the government to consider. That is why I have always suggested time lines, and have been open about a process.
I stand willing and able to work with the government on any proposed changes to the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. I go into it with a mind of not bringing down the denominator in legislation, but genuinely looking at what is considered to be contemporary best practice and strength in law, which I am reliably informed is the Tasmanian legislation.
Thank you to all contributors to the debate and my colleagues in the Labor Caucus, who have been very strong in their support of the work I have been doing with the member for Wanguri, as our shadow minister for Multicultural Affairs. Thank you to the Attorney-General for his support with an amendment which satisfied the government today, which means the motion can be dealt with in a bipartisan manner. Thank you to the Independent member for Nelson and the Palmer United Party for their support as well. I put the amended motion to the House.
Amendment agreed to.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that this House:
recognises that the sustainable use of water resources is fundamental to the economic, social and cultural development of the Northern Territory
acknowledges the potential impact of water allocations on the Territory’s unique environment, biodiversity and cultural values
reaffirms that water allocations under the Water Act should be based on sound scientific analysis, following proper consultation with all water users and stakeholders
As we know, water, particularly on this continent, is a precious resource. It sustains ecosystems, supports agriculture, primary production, tourism, recreation and traditional culture, to the point we had part of this discussion with a bill before the House this morning, passing legislation associated with the WELS Act, which is all about water-saving devices on products. The Territory’s surface water, ground water, aquifers and rivers sustain unique systems of biodiversity. Water, as we know, has been vital to Indigenous life and culture on this continent for more than 40 000 years. There is no doubt water is essential; it is critical to our survival as a species on this planet, and so it is the reasonable expectation of Territorians that decisions made by the government on the utilisation of our precious water resources should and must be based on good science and transparent processes which are free from political influence.
The government has grand plans to develop the north. Territorians have seen white papers, ministerial statements, glossy brochures and expensive advertisements on television, but little action.
Mr Giles: They do not support northern Australia.
Ms WALKER: We know the catch phrase is ‘Let’s talk about tomorrow’s Territory today’. On this side, we have been talking about tomorrow’s Territory for months, since the change of government and before.
The best the CLP can do is produce glossy brochures, no doubt expensive ads on TV, and, with it, in little action, because this government is more talk than action.
In spite of the Chief Minister’s interjections a few moments ago, let us put it on the record that we support the sustainable development of the north, because it will create opportunities for social, economic and cultural development, essential to the wellbeing and standard of living for generations of Territorians to come.
Mr Giles: No, you do not, you are behind the game.
Ms WALKER: I know, Mr Deputy Speaker, you would support the sustainable development of the north.
Mr Giles: That is because he is not Labor.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 51: the state of the House, in terms of interjections and noise from the Chief Minister.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Could we keep the interjections to a minimum and not interrupt the person speaking? Thank you.
Ms WALKER: The Chief Minister is uptight at the moment. He has lost three of his bush members, and he knows he lost them, amongst many reasons, because they objected to his government’s approach to SIRs and the denying of a SIRs policy.
There is one proviso for those of us on this side of the House in our commitment to developing the north. The sustainable development of the Territory must be inclusive and all stakeholders must be given the opportunity to participate, whoever they are, wherever they live, whether they are in Central Australia in desert country, in the Top End in saltwater country or everywhere in between
The inclusive participation of all Territorians in our future opportunities for development is a hurdle the CLP cannot jump. That is why the government will not support a system of water reservation for Indigenous Territorians. What a great shame it is that it insists on taking that position. This is a direct consequence of political considerations driving water allocations, as opposed to sustainable utilisation based on good science which is, by virtue of being good science backed up by evidence and rigorous data, and is communicated openly and transparently. I will return to this theme later.
A system of reserving water for the use of Indigenous Territorians for future economic development and cultural activities on their land is essential to developing the north. A strategic Indigenous reserve allocates an amount of water from a consumptive pool for Indigenous commercial development. Indigenous Territorians want to participate in development of the north for the future of their peoples and communities. Many Indigenous groups are not ready to use water for commercial purposes, but it is important to ensure they can access it for enterprise development in the future before all water is allocated.
The CLP does not support this approach, but it is out of step with many stakeholders who have a legitimate interest in the sustainable utilisation of water in the Territory. SIRs are supported by diverse groups such as primary producers, horticulturalists, AFANT, miners, pastoralists, traditional owners, Indigenous communities, land councils, the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance, and the Environment Centre NT. That is not an exhaustive list, but I can tell you who is not on it: the CLP government.
There are, however, some expectations to the CLP’s pervasive antipathy to recognising Indigenous rights to water. I refer to the member for Stuart and you, Mr Deputy Speaker, as the member for Daly, both hard-working members of this House and of the constituencies you represent; you both represent rural and remote areas.
I will read a media article onto the record to support this assertion about CLP members who are prepared to state a view that opposes some others within their ranks. This is an online article that appeared on the ABC website on Thursday 13 June. The title is Indigenous Water Rights Stir Ripples in Ranks, and the article says:
The article goes on to say:
That is the end of that article.
Many Indigenous Territorians and other stakeholders share the views of the members for Stuart and Daly, and have demanded they be consulted about water use on their lands. Once again, I will quote at length from an online ABC article; these are extracts from a 7.30 NT report, which was aired on Friday 22 November 2013 under the title Water Politics:
I quote Alyssa Betts, the presenter:
I next quote from Marjorie Hall, Mangarrayi traditional owner, who said:
This is very powerful stuff in making clear what the views of stakeholders are in this area.
I again quote from Jane Bardon, from the 7:30 NT report.
I next quote Joe Morrison from the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance.
Further on, Kevin Rogers, a Wandaran elder, said:
I have a final quote to close the story. It is from Marjorie Hall, Mangarrayi traditional owner:
The views of traditional owners and the strong men and women, particularly amongst TOs supported by the policy approach to SIRs adopted by the National Water Commission, are incredibly important. The National Water Commission has stated:
On ABC radio in October last year, the Minister for Land Resource Management said:
Who did the minister consult with in arriving at that decision? It was clearly not with traditional owners, nor other stakeholders like land councils, NAILSMA, AFANT or a number of those involved in horticulture, agricultural and pastoral sectors as well. Why is it that we have had this change of heart? The answer is obvious; a policy on SIRs was simply not compatible with the government’s decision to allocate a water extraction licence for 5800 ML to CLP candidate, Tina McFarlane, from the Tindall Limestone Aquifer.
The simple political calculus did not permit this huge allocation of water to a political mate together with a strategic Indigenous reserve from this aquifer. Calculations on sustainable yields were remodelled to accommodate the licence, and the fact that this government can continue to stand by the granting of that licence and get a good night’s sleep beggars belief, not only for those of us on this side, but for the many stakeholders who take objection to the granting of that licence at the same time as putting strategic Indigenous reserves on hold. The concerns of scientists about the impact of the allocation on water flows in the Elsey National Park and adjacent areas were ignored, along with potential adverse impacts on the Ngukurr water supply. We know scientists and TOs continue to voice their concerns about the risks of over-allocation, but the political mate came first, at the cost of the legitimate rights of Indigenous Territorians to reserve water for future economic development for the benefit of themselves, their communities and the future benefit of their families. It is not exclusively for them; it is about participating in the Territory economy, being a contributor and participant, and being a part of developing the north, as the CLP likes to talk about.
This decision to issue a licence to Tina MacFarlane has started an unprecedented rush for water licences from our aquifers. About two weeks ago we saw a public notice advising of a number of licences, nine in total, a mix of new licences and licences to increase water extraction from the Katherine River. We want to know what sort of consultation there was around that, and I also saw, ahead of the public notice advising of these new licences, that a water forum had been advertised for Katherine for this Friday, 16 May 2014. I do not have the notice in front of me inviting people to attend, but it does advise that if you come to the water forum you will learn more about the work of the water catchments committee. We still do not know who is on it, exactly what they are doing, what their terms of reference and priorities are and what their relationship is with this raft of licences now being granted. As I said, we are not anti-development, but must be assured and want to see what the science is. Above all, we want to have confidence that we are not risking water resources by over-allocating, in the absence of a strategic Indigenous reserve.
In this environment, Territorians have little or no confidence that water licences will be allocated without political interference. The CLP prefers to go its own way, with flexibility to make speculative side deals for land development as opportunities arise. There is no commitment to a scientifically-based strategic approach to progressing Indigenous development opportunities. In this parliament the Treasurer called strategic Indigenous reserves:
What an appalling comment from our Treasurer to slam strategic Indigenous reserves in the way he has. However, it is not uncharacteristic for the Treasurer, the Deputy Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, to put his foot in his mouth.
The Oolloo aquifer has now been captured in the CLP’s water rush. A public notice appeared in today’s paper about the issue of further licences, 11 in total, seven of which are new and three are to increase water extraction licences, the three that already exist and an application to increase. NAILSMA has expressed a number of concerns about the large volume of water approved for allocation from the Oolloo aquifer. The water allocation plan for the Oolloo aquifer is not yet finalised, and a moratorium on water extraction licences should be held until the plan is in place.
What assurance do we have, in the issuing of these licences, that we are not at risk of over-allocation? A moratorium is not hard, to allow proper investigation and consultation, and an outcome supported by scientific research, ideally at arm’s length, independent of government evidence.
Serious equity issues have arisen with the granting of large licences like those recently approved in the Katherine River and the Oolloo aquifer. The views of traditional owners, who are both residents and substantial landowners, have not been listened to or have been rejected outright. We are not only talking about TOs; we are talking about others who have voiced objections. When the public notice goes into the paper advising of the decision of the water controller around water extraction licences, there is a website mentioned where any member of the public can go online and look at the water extraction licence decision. The public notice says who or which company the licence has been granted to, but you can delve deeper into the website and pull up the water controller’s licence.
I will put some comments from the Controller of Water Resources onto the record, regarding his decision dated 12 May 2014:
As the member for Daly, Mr Deputy Speaker, you represent a very popular part of the Territory, with the Daly being a home to recreational fishing. It is one of the big draw cards; perhaps you share the view of AFANT.
I return to the comments of the Controller for Water Resources:
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
I am not reading the entire decision, but they are the concerns raised by some key stakeholders and each of them, amongst their concerns put forward about these water extraction licence decisions, raised the issue of strategic Indigenous reserves.
The Controller of Water Resources follows up with a comment:
The government is clearly not interested in strategic Indigenous reserves, or at least looking at those until the three-year period elapses in 2015. That is not acceptable; it is not acceptable to traditional owners, AFANT and, in this case, ECNT, NAILSMA and the NLC.
The huge volume of water requested in these applications and the potential long-term impact is a significant risk to the rights of traditional owners. There has been no recognition of Indigenous rights or cultural and economic aspirations. The decision to grant licences for huge water volumes has been made outside any considered policy or planning processes, such as those set out in the national water initiative under a water plan I quoted from a little while ago.
The Treasurer recently affirmed the government’s contempt for Indigenous rights to water when he said:
As with too many things the Treasurer says, it is offensive. It is offensive in ignoring the right of Indigenous Territorians to water and recognising that it is not only essential to the development of the north, but to their lives, livelihoods and the contribution Indigenous Territorians make to the Territory and our economy. On that note, I commend the motion to the House.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I advise that I will be moving to amend this motion on water licensing brought by the member for Nhulunbuy. The decision by this government to not support strategic Indigenous reserves, or SIRs as I will refer to them from now on, recognises that water resources are the property of the Territory and are to be managed in accordance with government priorities for the benefit of all Territorians.
There is not any legislative recognition in any Australian jurisdiction of Indigenous rights to use water for commercial purposes, nor is there a requirement under the national water initiative to recognise Indigenous rights to use water for commercial purposes.
Let us put that on the table; what the national water initiative recognises is that water can and should be available for Indigenous cultural purposes. Some 50% of the Northern Territory is held under the Aboriginal land tenure and, consequently, the majority of Aboriginal landholders already hold exclusive access rights for economic development of water resources on their land.
The provision of strategic Indigenous reserves, that is, the reservation of a large quantity of water from the consumptive pool for exclusive use by Indigenous groups in water allocation plans, was reviewed by this government in March 2013. After 11 years of a Labor government in the Northern Territory there was no policy or introduced legislation to enshrine strategic Indigenous reserves into law.
SIRs were simply an ad hoc notion, administrated by a government department in the absence of any clear government policy from Labor, which was not uniform throughout the Northern Territory. Some SIRs were large amounts, as well as some small amounts. There was no science or logic applied to their creation.
The CLP government made the decision to remove allocations of water within water allocation plans for SIRs on the basis that all Territorians should have equal access to water, to pursue economic development opportunities. It is our view that SIRs were divisive and separatist. It is our view that all Territorians should have equal access to water and that preventing large amounts of water being used for agricultural development was not in the best interests of Territorians or economic development.
The use of water and agriculture go hand in hand. Agriculture is a key driver for economic development in the bush, and in order to drive that, access to water is needed. Water licences in the Northern Territory are allocated by the Controller of Water Resources, based on sound hydrological science. A notional 80/20 rule is used, where 80%, based on annual recharge, is conserved for the environment, and 20% is allocated for use in a consumptive pool for agricultural purposes.
There have been arguments and statements made by many members of this parliament that this government is doing nothing for the bush. Nothing could be further from the truth. The removal of SIRs has increased the amount of water available in the consumptive pool for use in general economic development initiatives.
This act alone is an immense driver to encourage Territorians to engage in economic activity. Get up, get moving, get started, get working, do not sit back and whinge about lost opportunities. If you snooze, you lose.
The motion, as originally presented by the member for Nhulunbuy, is hypocritical. It is lazy and smacks of dog whistling to Indigenous people and those who pretend to have their best interests at heart. During 11 years of Labor government in the Northern Territory the notion of SIRs, to my knowledge, never formally went to Cabinet. It was never legislated, and there was no formal policy developed around SIRs by Labor. For Labor to now complain about the so-called removal of SIRs from water allocation plans is too little, too late. That ship has sailed.
The notion of holding back a large quantity of water from consumptive pools in case an Indigenous group might one day decide on an economic venture that required water was a dodgy idea cooked up in Labor backrooms by people who had no authority. The notion of SIRs, when coupled with the Labor government’s refusal to issue water licences, served only to stifle economic development. The noise and feigned indignation now being heard from those opposite is either a sham to score cheap political points or is complete ignorance, which is much worse.
By removing SIRs, this government is providing an incentive and impetus for Indigenous people who might become farmers to be engaged with the process. We are encouraging people to get off welfare and find alternatives. Under Labor’s malaise there was the warehousing of water with no impetus for Aboriginal people to develop economically. This government is using the water allocation planning and licensing framework to underpin the sustainable use of the Territory’s water resources. We are freeing up our water resources by unclogging the backlog of water licensing applications, as well as processing new applications, and we are making sensible policy decisions to support development and protect our precious ecosystems.
To this end, I move the following amendment to the water licensing motion, and that is to remove all words after the word ‘development’ in the fourth dot point, and to replace those words with the words ‘through the strategic and appropriate allocation of the Territory’s water resources’.
I have a piece of paper here that outlines that which can be distributed. The amended motion now reads that this Assembly:
recognises that the sustainable use of water resource is fundamental to the economic, social and cultural development of the Northern Territory
I can live with that.
acknowledges the potential impact of water allocations on the Territory’s unique environment, biodiversity and cultural values
I can also agree with that.
reaffirms that water allocations under the Water Act should be based on sound scientific analysis following proper consultation with all water uses and stakeholders
supports Indigenous economic development through the strategic and appropriate allocation of the Territory’s water resources.
In this amended form, I am in full support of this motion on water licensing, once we have removed that reference to strategic Indigenous reserves.
I will now speak to each point of the amended motion. The motion calls to recognise that the sustainable use of water resources is fundamental to the economic, social and cultural development of the Northern Territory.
That is a well-written paragraph, member for Nhulunbuy, and one the government can support.
This government has a vision on how to grow the Northern Territory and how to move all Territorians forward. This is not a separatist government which looks at one group of people in isolation and grows that one group or deprives it. The Country Liberals government wants to use the Northern Territory’s water resources to drive development; it is the most critical natural resource for our economy.
In the Territory, ground water accounts for around 90% of all water resources. As I stated in my ministerial statement of October last year, it was estimated at that time that the annual use of ground water in the Northern Territory was about 150 GL. The Territory’s main industries of pastoralism, tourism, horticulture and mining rely mostly on ground water. Water is essential to the existence of life; we use it to drink, irrigate our crops and use it in our mines, on our farms, in our industries and in our homes. Some statistics I spoke of in October 2013 about water use in the Northern Territory included that irrigated agriculture and horticulture uses about 47 GL a year; our pastoral industry uses about 23.5 GL a year; our mines use about 17 GL a year; around 48 GL a year of ground water is used for urban and industrial use; and in rural areas where domestic production bores are the main source of water, approximately 8.5 GL per year is used. The right to use, manage and control all water in the Territory is vested in the Territory and exercisable by the minister, who also appoints the Controller of Water Resources for the purpose of administration and regulation under the Water Act, which includes the granting or refusal of water extraction licences.
This government’s approach to the management of the Territory’s water resources will guide us towards achieving our vision of wise use of our land and water resources for the economic development and wellbeing of all Territorians. This approach embraces the Northern Territory government’s vision of establishing a prosperous economy and achieving a balanced environment for the benefit of all Territorians.
As I outlined in the statement on water I delivered to this House in October last year, this approach has four central components:
1. a sound legislative base
2. an overarching water policy for the Territory
3. an appropriate water allocation and water licensing framework
4. scientific monitoring and research to provide the evidence base for adaptive water management.
The amended motion also calls for the Assembly to acknowledge the potential impact of water allocations on the Territory’s unique environment, biodiversity and cultural values.
On 1 July 2013, the establishment of a new, broad representative committee to provide strategic advice on the responsible use of the Territory’s land and water assets, principally through the development of Northern Territory water policy, was approved. The Northern Territory Catchments Advisory Committee, or NTCAC, is expected to address land and water issues across river catchments throughout the Territory. It will enable community input into water policy development, as well as provide the opportunity for focused attention on emerging issues in specific catchments. The new committee will provide an opportunity to have an advisory body with diverse representation and engagement with the community, without government over-representation.
The committee will provide strategic issue advice on key issues relating to the development of the NT economy, particularly where the use of water includes mining, agriculture and pastoral industries. The NTCAC will have a range of subcommittees, which will allow for both a strategic view and the ability to engage at local catchment level. Membership of this committee includes Territorians with recognised experience and knowledge in water policy, planning, land use planning, regional development, Indigenous affairs, agriculture, mining, tourism, environmental protection, irrigated agriculture, horticulture, water engineering and water management.
The motion also calls for the Assembly to reaffirm that water allocation under the Water Act should be based on sound scientific analysis, following proper consultation with all water users and stakeholders. The most important component of the water story for those interested in developing our Territory is water extraction licensing. That is the actual allocation of access entitlements for our water resources.
The Department of Land Resource Management considers the best information, data, records and modelling available from reliable and reputable sources before providing advice to the Controller of Water Resources, who then makes an informed decision about a licence application. This process ensures that, as minister, I am not involved in the decision-making process. However, it is important to note that at the end of each Wet Season the Controller of Water Resources decides, based on rainfall and the model and recharge data, how much water will be allocated to each licence holder. This means that in wetter years more water is able to be allocated to licence entitlements, and in drier years less water is allocated. It is called adaptive management, something new to water policy in the Northern Territory. In this way, the Controller of Water Resources is using this adaptive management approach to ensure maximum water is provided for consumers while protecting the resource for future generations.
The department also has a policy of, in the Top End, allocating a maximum of 20% of water for use and leaving 80% for the environment. In my ministerial statement, entitled Water Resources Driving Development, delivered on 9 October 2013, I outlined that to sustainably manage the Territory’s water resources, the Country Liberals government will develop an overarching water policy for the Territory. In this statement, I also outlined, amongst other things, that a dedicated water directorate would be established to oversee the development of the water policy, the development of the water policy would include widespread consultation with all Territorians and that an NT Catchments Advisory Committee would be established to enable community input to water policy development.
Since October 2013, the Country Liberals government has continued to advance the development of the first Northern Territory water policy, which did not exist under the former government. The water directorate was established in February 2014. A discussion paper intended to inform the water policy is being developed and the NT Catchments Advisory Committee was formed in May. It will be announced in the next couple of days.
This government values the contribution of all Territorians to developing NT water policy. Public release of a discussion paper on water policy will call for written submissions and feedback from stakeholder forums during the consultation period, and the water directorate has commenced targeted consultation with NT government agencies.
It is hoped that this consultative process will elicit a range of comments and appropriately inform a sound NT water policy. Our approach is to use the best science, computer modelling and consideration of community input to inform decisions about extraction licences, irrespective of water allocation plan formulation.
The Country Liberals government is adamant that development using our natural resources is sustainable and underpinned by quality science and sensible policy. The Territory has outdated legislation to underpin water resource management. A legislative review of the Water Act will follow the development of the Northern Territory water policy, underpinning its direction.
In the past, decisions on the provision of water, including strategic planning, timing and the construction of new support infrastructure had been taken in a policy vacuum. Similarly, decisions on the management, allocation and use of water resources were taken without clear, strategic policy guidelines. This lack of clear policy approach has led to inconsistency in the approach to water management. What has been missing to guide the development and management of our water resources is an overarching Territory water policy.
NTCAC will address land and water issues across river catchments throughout the Territory. It will enable community input into water policy development, as well as provide the opportunity for focused attention on emerging issues in specific catchments.
The amended motion also calls the Assembly to support Indigenous economic development through the strategic and appropriate allocation of Territory water resources. The Country Liberals government fully supports the use of available water resources to kick-start the regional economy with, according to the best contemporary science available, no long-term detrimental effects.
This government is using the water allocation planning and licensing framework to underpin sustainable use of the Territory’s water resources. We are freeing up our water resources by unclogging the water licensing system and making sensible policy decisions to support development, as well as to protect those precious ecosystems I have referred to during this speech.
As I have said previously, 75 unprocessed water applications were inherited by the new government and the Department of Land Resource Management. That is disgraceful. Those applications were made by legitimate business people seeking surety about their basic access to water in order to grow their businesses. They were following the rules and, in good faith, seeking a licence, only to find that it may take years to gain such a licence. That is unacceptable. Under this government there has been a change of approach, and the Territory and its water resources are open for business. The Country Liberals government will actively and proudly promote agricultural development through the timely, pragmatic and balanced allocation of available water resources.
The government’s approach is to use the best science, computer modelling and consideration of community input to inform decisions about extraction licences, irrespective of water allocation plan formulation. Recently issued licences – this sounds a repetitive, but I will say this over and over again – are subject to an annual announced allocation each year, derived from modelling following each Wet Season. In this way, we will adaptively manage the resource. This is an approach taken only by this government. It is in contrast to the approach taken by the former government, where it simply took its hands off the tiller and let water resources steer themselves
It is imperative that we have a sound base for making these important decisions about the use of our water resources, and systems in place to detect any impacts on our natural systems.
The management of the Territory’s water resources must balance the needs of the community, industry and the environment. This is an extremely difficult, often fraught public policy challenge. Under the previous government some water allocation plans were being prepared with water allocated towards SIRs. This occurred without any policy being in place to impose SIRs, or any defined formula against which to allocate such a reserve, such as land tenure area or population. This is an example of where poor decisions were made in the absence of a clear, strategic policy governing the Territory’s water resources. This approach has been reviewed by this government, with SIRs currently not included in water allocation plans.
It is this government’s view that due to the relatively low level of water resources – I think I am repeating the quote the member for Nhulunbuy used earlier – and the right of all Territorians, including Aboriginal people to seek water licences, it is appropriate that SIRs are not currently considered in water allocation plans. However, in pursuance of maintaining an open dialogue on this topic, the policy around SIRs will undergo a consultation and review process to determine if this matter should be reconsidered. Native title rights do not extend to the extraction of water resources for commercial uses. All Territorians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, are welcome to apply and receive equal consideration for water extraction licences to support commercial development.
The future of the Territory and our children relies on the wise use of our land and water resources for the economic development and wellbeing of all Territorians. To substantially maintain our water resources, this Country Liberals government is establishing a sound legislative base. We are developing an overarching water policy for the Territory, implementing an appropriate water allocation and licensing framework, and we are ensuring scientific monitoring and research is there to provide an evidence base for adaptive water management. Using this approach, the Country Liberals government is opening up the Territory for development and ensuring our water is used to support our natural ecosystems, livelihoods and stimulating our economic development in the bush.
I support the amended motion on water licences, as I have put to the House.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, I also support this motion brought before the House by the member for Nhulunbuy. Some time ago in the House, I talked about SIRs and discussions I have had with all remote communities I am a member of, especially Ngukurr. Ever since I talked about this and went to Ngukurr to brief residents, there has been very strong support from that area.
When the previous government was in power, consultations were held between NAILSMA and the Northern Land Council to inform traditional owners of the region to let them know what was happening. These were Jawoyn, Mangarrayi, Rittarangu, Rembarrnga traditional owners, all involved with the Tindal and Mataranka aquifers areas, as well as the Oolloo aquifer, which the Daly region comes under.
Aboriginal people recognise water resources in the Northern Territory as fundamental for them to move forward with economic development and in other areas they want to be a part of. They want to engage and work towards that, but their ideas are not coming into this House. There have been no consultations; I have visited communities in my electorate hundreds of times. No one has gone to Ngukurr to explain to them what is happening with water from the Roper or Wilton Rivers, and what the Western Desert mine is pulling out. No one has talked to the community in Ngukurr.
Ever since the Indigenous strategic reserve was scrapped, there have been no consultations with held with communities, and they are disappointed about that. I would like to know what the CLP government has planned for the people.
We understand that under the Land Rights Act and the Native Title Act we do not have any rights over minerals and water resources underground, but we have rights on the land, and we recognise anything other than that; I had to explain a bit more of that as well. However, they want to be a part of economic development and drive in the Northern Territory.
When I was in the CLP, four Indigenous groups came forward that wanted to be involved in economic development, with water, agriculture and other projects in their communities. Where are the business plans for those four applications? I have never seen them. I want to know whether they have moved forward or not, or whether they have been dismissed. The people need to know. Indigenous people need to be a part of the Northern Territory if we are to move northern Australia forward. That is the biggest argument they have in communities.
They have been left behind and taken for a ride for long enough; they only want to be a part. There is enthusiasm for Indigenous people. They want to work and create jobs, but how can they when they are continually told it is not good enough, their plans are not good enough and it is not up to scratch, or plans do not meet criteria? They want to move forward and tender for roadworks in their communities; they want to give jobs back to local people, especially the blokes, of which there are many. However, they cannot move forward if the government does not recognise them trying to meet halfway. They want an opportunity like everybody else.
When we were on that side of the House, we tried to explain that, especially when it came to the tendering process. They want to engage, work with the Northern Territory and federal governments, but they will not be dragged along. They are beyond that point; they have lived in that era for 35 years since self-government. Indigenous people want to be a part of this too.
The strategic Indigenous reserve was one part of moving them forward. It was educating them because – you must remember it is only bush land out there – our culture is stronger than English. Our own education of law and culture is stronger than education at school for us. Yes, it benefits the kids to learn English as a second language, but they already know five languages, something the majority of people in this House do not have. If they are not as educated, there must be some education and greatness in those kids if they can speak five languages, but they need to feel welcome in Northern Territory society.
Considering the minister relies on modelling for removal of surface water from Northern Territory rivers, is the formula conclusive? Visiting Ngukurr before the Wet Season and now afterwards, people in the community are complaining that the water level in the river is starting to drop. It has been confirmed; they can see it, they live there and they know the water.
In Katherine alone the water has dropped under the bridge. When I was a kid I would never see the sandbank in the middle of the river, and now you can see it. I was born in Katherine in 1985 and I am still there in 2014. It might come down with rainwater every year, but to see a sandbank you can walk towards – we would never walk across the Katherine River, it was too dangerous and deep, but you can now walk across the Katherine River during the Dry Season. That is telling you something. Every year, rainfall puts water into the underground water table, but how much is being taken out is something we must look at.
Is the replacement enough? There are scientific and other investigations, but the springs will not last forever; some are now starting to dry out. I have lived in a remote community all of my life, I know where the springs are and they are starting to dry out. There are some areas where we are fortunate, because we are an Aboriginal community and there is always water, especially in Barunga, where I come from, but Ngukurr is starting to see the effects. There have been no consultations with people in Ngukurr, and that is disappointing, because I was a member on the other side of the House and regardless of what I said it did not get through to anybody.
Like any other local member, I am here to speak for my constituents, but my electorate is 90% Indigenous and I speak four different languages. Unfortunately, English is my fifth one, and I have a mother and father from both sides of Arnhem Land.
How many licences for removal of surface water have been granted in that time? Have any been granted to an Aboriginal organisation or any Indigenous group? How many licences for the removal of underground water have been granted? How many, if any, water licences have been set aside for Aboriginal organisations or corporations?
Indigenous people, especially me and my two colleagues, support strategic Indigenous reserves being incorporated into the Water Act because we need to move forward, and that is the only way we can do so. If we keep denying Aboriginal people the right – we are beyond that. We say, ‘It is not recognised under the National Water Initiative’. I have a piece of paper in front of me which states that in 2011 there was a meeting and the National Water Commission – the NT government by that time had developed its own implication plan. We are in 2014 now, with two years left, so what will we do? Will we move forward to bring Indigenous people on board or will we make sure we fill it up as much as we can?
The minister said Indigenous people must get up and get moving. They are trying to move, but how can they when the minister cannot even go to Ngukurr and talk to them? He sends the department there, but is it bringing the information back? How many times has the department been there?
If that is not cheap political point scoring, I do not know what is. Indigenous people own over 50% of the land in the Northern Territory and have a call on the other 48%. We own all of the islands of the Northern Territory and about 68% of all tidal water zones, so why are Indigenous people not being considered?
There has been scientific analysis of the size of the consumptive pool in relation to total water above and under, but how many licences are there in the consumptive pool? From what I remember, the minister was unsure about the quantity of the pool and the volume of water in it. What is left for Indigenous people if they want to move forward? We must tell them. Between the three of us, we hold a large land mass and there are many Aboriginal people in our electorates. As I said, mine is 90%. I cannot say to them, ‘You are better off talking to the minister, because we cannot get the information’. I will tell them what I already know, and it will not help the government nor the people there. We, Ngukurr and many Aboriginal corporations and bodies want to work towards this.
NAILSMA is not being considered by the government, especially the minister. Has there been any discussion with the NLC and CLC? These are traditional owners represented, but also appointed to executive roles within the NLC and CLC. They are landowners in these regions, so why are they not being consulted? They are the first point of contact to take that information back, and they are the ones who will be driving this force. You talked about the community input of the Katherine region; are there any Indigenous people involved in that? Where is the community input from traditional owners? They want to know what is happening and be a part of driving this in northern Australia.
You cannot only have one-sided community input; you must involve Indigenous people, first of all, as they are the landowners, either under the Land Rights Act or native title, where pastoral leases have been taken on top of native title. They are still leasing land from people. There is freehold land in some places. With the Larrakia mob in Darwin, that has not been granted yet, but it can be land trust. If you think the three of us have had it up to here, how do you think the people out there have had it? They are the ones advising us they want to be a part of this move. The people who vote for me come before any party line, because I am like everybody else.
I have to go back and bury them. When they are born, I have to send them gifts, and I kiss them with their little snotty noses and cuddle them when they are sick. These are the kids I watch grow up, and get into drugs and alcohol; they lose their hope and there is nothing there for them. If we start working towards this aim of coming together, building northern Australia and giving them the opportunities to shine, we might have a chance of saving the generations after me and my kids. That is my dream, and I want to see that happen. There is no education, development or infrastructure out there to bring them forward. There are no role models, and few local businesses. There are local Aboriginal organisations, but these can only do so much, and only employ so many. What about the rest of the community? It may be only 10 people out of 800. There are 15 000 kids running around, and they do not know what is in front of them. They need that chance, like everybody here.
We are fortunate to have made it, but we believed in the same thing they believe in. We needed a change, and it is what we will fight for. I will speak for change for the rest of my days. It is what my colleagues will fight for as well, because we know firsthand what is needed. We know their cries, but we need that support from everybody to get across that table. They are not asking for much. They are not saying the water is theirs, they understand that, but they want to be a part of that and to be consulted. They want to be stakeholders. It is a journey for all of us, and we should embrace that.
The budget has already thrown everything out of the door for Aboriginal people in the bush. What more can the government throw at them? There is no hope; that is the reason the CLP is in government, because there was no hope left for those people. You were given that opportunity, but it is about to go out the window because they cannot see any difference between what the CLP was then and what it is now. They want a strategic Indigenous reserve, and the clock is ticking. There are many people who understand, and who have seen that perception is not what it is painted to be.
The intermarriages: there are many families who have had to move out of communities so their kids could benefit with a better future. They knew there was nothing there for them; my father was one who lived in Katherine, while my mother still lived in the community. We had to go back and forth at weekends. They wanted us to see both sides of the world, but not every child receives that opportunity.
The one thing that will always take me home is that when I am dead and gone, that is where I will be. I will be with the rest of them, but while my heart is ticking I will fight for the freedom of those people and their rights, just like everybody else. If that means we must rally in Darwin to prove that Indigenous people are being left out by the CLP government, then so be it. Do you not think one Aboriginal organisation disagrees with those things? We would love to move forward.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member be granted an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LEE: That is all they need, but they will come out sooner or later. They are sick and tired of being kicked in the guts. We are only getting smarter. Indigenous people are becoming involved; we watch television, especially the ABC. The ABC has a good partnership with Aboriginal people. Journalists have talked to the people, but when it comes to consulting from a government point of view, I have not seen anyone out there in my time, even when I was on that side of the House. I have never been told of any department visiting there. If there was, we were never advised. What brings us to this point is hearing the minister say, ‘Aboriginal people, get up, stand up, get your little rights’. They are trying to stand up, but how can they when you are not even looking at them?
It is insulting; we know that because they have been trying, and that is the reason we are here. What more can the people do? They have screamed to the point they have tonsillitis, and sooner or later they will develop laryngitis.
It makes you wonder if anybody cares about Indigenous affairs, because that ministry was scrapped …
Mr Elferink interjecting.
Ms LEE: … and everything that came after it - the Attorney-General just made a bubble sound. Indigenous affairs are obviously not important in this House. In the newspaper, he said he wants to give authority to local boards to administer Centrelink payments, when 70% of their payments are already administered through a BasicsCard. What hope do Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory have with such policies, and everything being put on them like they are dysfunctional? We do not wake up in the morning, rubbing our eyes, screaming our head off with everybody being dysfunctional.
I used to get up and go to work in the morning and my kids used to go to school. Some families slept in; there are no jobs out there, so what can they do? It might be a joke to some people, but for us it is reality; we had to live like that, knowing that some families could not – there were no jobs for them. Even when there were jobs, when CDEP was in place, that was scrapped.
It is a crying shame that we live in the 21st century and the atmosphere keeps putting Indigenous people further back. It is sometimes hurtful to stand here. Where there is poverty, there is misery, and that is in almost every community, regardless of whether they have been consulted to death; they are over being consulted. They want to see action, they want the ball rolling and us to hit the ground running. Give them the opportunities; everybody will fall while they learn how to run. Everybody walks before they run when they are a baby, or crawls before they walk. They want that opportunity too. Everybody else has that opportunity, so why can’t Indigenous people? That is right, they are supposed to get it right the first time. History says they have messed up too many times, but there is always an answer to why they messed up.
Why are no water rights forums being held? Some months ago the Indigenous strategic reserve was a very big issue.
Debate adjourned.
Madam SPEAKER: I lay on the table the report of the NT general election, held on 25 August 2012, and the report of the Wanguri by-election of 16 February 2013. I also table the first quarterly fuel transaction report, following the Auditor-General’s report and recommendation regarding members’ fuel card use, provided on 19 December 2013. I advise members that they will receive their monthly fuel reports from the Clerk’s office. They have been sent to members, and a fuel consumption record for all members who receive fuel is now a tabled document.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
A lady by the name of Christine Nathanael recently passed from this life to the next, and I would like to pay homage to Christine, or Chris as I knew her. I knew her for many years indeed, and often referred to her as mum. Whilst I was never that close to her, I nevertheless felt a strong bond towards her, because my memories of her go back to my childhood and her sons, Stuart and Tony, who I have known since a very early age. We knocked around together when I was a volunteer cadet in the mid-1970s for eight or nine years, and she was there in my life. I understand she was introduced to St John through a mutual friend of the family, a fellow by the name of Frank Simmons.
She served in St John for many years, and she continued to work on behalf of the people of the Northern Territory in St John, despite the fact she was a single mum. She was a passionate believer in the Northern Territory. She was closely involved in politics, particularly with the Country Liberals, and I pay my respects to her.
Stuart and Tony Oxford, her two boys, also worked very heavily within the St John Ambulance Service, and Tony continues to work with ambulance services in Victoria. I have always had enormous regard for Chris, and I am sad that I was unable to reach her funeral because I was trapped here. Sometimes this House denies us the opportunity to pay our respects because of the way it operates. Nevertheless, I would like to pass on my condolences to Tony, Stuart and Chris, her husband, who was also the light of her life. There was another son, Mark, who passed away in 1974. Her original marriage did not withstand that event, which is why she ended up as a single mum.
In later life she met Chris Nathanael and they were very happy together. I saw them often together, and whenever they were in the same place Christine would light up around Chris; they had a loving and close relationship. Unfortunately, she had the onset of dementia in her later years, and started to go downhill. Nevertheless, she continued to enjoy her relationship with her husband until the very end.
I have since passed on my personal condolences to Chris Nathanael, her husband, and I also pass my condolences to the rest of the family. It is important in this House, from time to time, that we place on the record the Northern Territory’s gratitude to citizens who have made such a substantial contribution to the community in which we live. The Northern Territory is a lesser place for the passing of Christine, and I feel very saddened at her loss. She had been around since I was a kid, and the passing of Christine reminds us that we are all getting older. She was laid to rest in the Anglican Church of the Good Shepherd on 27 March 2014. This was the church where Stuart gave her hand in marriage to Chris Nathanael, and it was the church that saw her go to her next life.
I will table the service booklet so future Territorians will be able to find her on the permanent record of the Northern Territory, particularly family members. So often these service booklets are lost shortly after the funeral; by tabling this booklet, I will be tabling her memory onto the permanent record of the Northern Territory.
Chris was born in Adelaide on 9 April 1943. She went to school in Alice Springs and married Graham Oxford in 1962. Between them they had four children, Sheryl, Anthony, Mark and Stuart. Mark, who I referred to earlier, has passed away.
I will read from the memorial booklet, which I think captures Christine completely:
I will miss mum, and while she was not my actual mum, l had a great affection for her. I will miss her very much, but not nearly as much as Sheryl, Tony and Stuart. Vale Chris, my condolences to the family, and my thoughts remain with Chris Nathanael at the loss of his beloved wife.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I also pass on my condolences to the Nathanael family. I was able to sneak in some time at the funeral. I have known the Nathanael family for many years; we did not always agree on politics, but that was part of the cut and thrust of living in the rural area, and I had a lot of respect for Christine. With two people called Chris, you sometimes had to be careful who you were calling, but I have known them for a long time. They were stalwarts of the rural area, the Country Liberal Party and the Church of the Good Shepherd. They were very much part of that church, and it was packed for the funeral, not only with many local people and parishioners, but also members of the CLP and others whose lives Christine had touched through the horticultural business Chris continues to run.
I will also speak about someone who passed away recently, a well-known person if you have lived in Darwin for a long period of time. His name was Reg Lowry, and you will still see his name on Lowry & Associates in Winnellie. He was born on 5 April 1933 – my birthday, but not my year – and died on 17 April 2014. This eulogy was from Leah Crockford, who presented it at the mass last Saturday week at Our Lady Help of Christians church in Palmerston.
That is quick!
That is the way it should be done.
He did not have a bore. He had a pipeline, which went from his house all the way to the hardware store – where I worked for a long time – to connect to the water main. That piece of pipe must have been cheap, because it always had holes in it.
He would always be at the hardware store. If you have a small hole, you can put what you call a tapping saddle over it; you do not have to cut it and you can close it off. We nearly gave him the Golden Tapping Saddle of the Year Award, because he put about 100 tapping saddles on that pipe. Eventually, he decided to spend some money on a bore, but every weekend you would see him digging a hole, trying to repair a leak in the pipe.
People might not understand the number of things he was involved in. Besides running a company called Reg Lowry & Associates he was a senior taxation investigator with the ATO, a member of the board of trustees of the Darwin casino and a board member of the Royal Darwin Hospital, the Darwin Port Authority, the NT Land Corporation and the NT Development Corporation.
He also sat on the Liquidators and Auditors board. He was Treasurer of Rotary 2000-01, Chair of the Rotary Youth Exchange program 1994-2000, Chair of Youth Services for Zone 1 District Association (Rotary) 1996-98, and a member since 1981. He was also a member of the Australian board of the National Heart Foundation from 1999 and the 1990 National Financial board. He was the Northern Territory President of the National Auditor’s Committee from 1999 and vice-president and treasurer from 1987 to 1999, having joined the board in 1987.
He was a member of the national board of the YMCA since 1995, life member from 1991, a member of the Darwin board of the group from 1970 and a nine-time former president. He became a life member of NT Little Athletics in 1984 and was president from 1979-85.
He was also a Life Governor of the Royal Women’s Hospital; President of the Younger Set fundraising committee; a former Treasurer of the Arts Council of Australia, as well as the Down Syndrome Association; a member of the Financial Advisors Board CentraCare from 1997; a board member of the Diocesan Development Fund (Catholic Bank) from 1987; an advisor to the Catholic bishop NT from 1987; and a member of the board of St John’s College advisory council 1996-98.
He built the Catholic church of St Francis of Assisi Humpty Doo 1985-86, he was Commissioner of Oaths 1975, Darwin’s Citizen of the Year – which people might have forgotten – awarded by the National Australia Day Council 1998, and he received the Paul Harris Fellowship in 1990, a very important one if you are a Rotarian.
He was also a member of the Darwin Golf Club, the Humpty Doo Golf Club, the Society of Accountants Fellowship and the Taxation Institute. That is a full life, and talking about a hard-working member of the Northern Territory, who also did a lot of voluntary work, is appropriate. Not only was he a good family man who strongly believed in God – I attended his funeral, and the choir purposely sang with all gusto, because Reg always went to mass at Our Lady Help of Christians church later in his life and did this. He had a warble in his voice and you could always recognise when he was singing. We ensured he was suitably sent off as someone who enjoyed singing in church. Thank you, Reg Lowry, for the work you did, not only for your family, but for the community as well.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Deputy Speaker, I pay tribute to one of the finest medical professionals in the Northern Territory’s history. After 34 years of service Dr Nadarajah Rajabalendran, or Dr Raja, is well known amongst residents in Alice Springs.
When notified of Dr Raja’s retirement I immediately wrote to him to express my personal thanks for his long contribution to the Department of Health, and particularly to the patients of the Alice Springs Hospital. Dr Raja is renowned for his selfless dedication to all patients in his care. I am told there have been many occasions when services were only able to continue at the Alice Springs Hospital due to Dr Raja’s tireless contribution. After completing his degree in Sri Lanka Dr Raja started working in the medical unit at the Alice Springs Hospital in 1975. He then furthered his studies between 1978 and 1982, before returning to Alice Springs. Since then he has also gained specialist qualifications in America and the UK, and in 2000 he was awarded a fellowship by the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine.
During Dr Raja’s early time at the Alice Springs Hospital there were periods of severe staff shortage. After the retirement of another doctor in 1986 he was the only doctor on duty for the entire hospital for the following year. He received some help from visiting locum doctors, but remembers some very long days and nights when he carried the entire caseload. Through his dedication he managed to ensure all hospital services kept running. He remembers an occasion when four interstate visitors to Central Australia presented after suffering heart attacks and, somehow, he and some hard-working nurses managed to produce the best outcomes for the patients.
He was pleased to see more physicians arrive in Alice Springs and, in turn, watch available services in the town grow. He has also seen some interesting changes in medicine during his service. These include the development of an intensive care unit and the significant reduction in leprosy and gastroenteritis in Central Australia.
Until five years ago he was the only trained gastroenterologist, but with the arrival of more specialists the hospital has been able to better treat and manage patients with infectious diseases. He has also been committed to teaching and nurturing hundreds of young doctors throughout his career. He has undertaken this through his role at Alice Springs Hospital, more formally through his academic role with Flinders University and through his long-time support of the Northern Territory medical school.
On Friday I will join with doctors and nurses to celebrate Doctor Raja’s long service in Alice Springs and give him a fond farewell for all of his hard work. I look forward to celebrating a doctor who has shown such commitment and service and who helped to teach and inspire the next generation of doctors in Central Australia, who we hope will follow in his footsteps.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, I pay tribute to a young man who, sadly, took his own life, through trauma and upheaval in his world. I pay tribute not only to him, but also to his mother and, to a lesser extent, his grandmother, who I also know. I would like to place on the record the life of this amazing young man who, tragically, is no longer with us.
Taylor Thomas Luck was born on 22 August 1997, and died on 23 March 2014. He was born at Darwin Private Hospital on Dr Mounsey’s – who many people know and remember – 65th birthday. Being an old-fashioned doctor, Dr Mounsey did not usually allow children to be present for a birth, but turned a blind eye to Natasha, 15 years old and Trent, 13 years old, being present for the birth of their younger brother. His father, Guy, was also there.
Taylor was affectionately known as Tails by family and friends. He was inquisitive and into everything from an early age. With a ton of energy, he was on the go from the moment he woke in the morning until going to sleep at night.
One morning Tails woke early, so the story goes, unlocked the deadlock on the front door, the normal lock and then the security door. He took his little sister, who was walking out with him, and then re-locked the door. He put his sister into the back seat of his mum’s car, sat in the driver’s seat, started the car and reversed out of the driveway, across and up the road and the footpath, with a tree stopping the vehicle. He was standing in the driver’s seat holding the steering wheel thinking he was king pin. Not only did mum and dad have to find keys to get out of the house, dad had to go back inside to find the spare car key, because Tails had locked it. The car engine was still running.
On another day mum walked out the back door carrying a bucket of washing to hang, and a water bucket fell from the roof beside her. Tails, only two years old, was on the roof having a lovely time. One day Tails escaped from the university childcare centre after climbing a pool fence. People were called to search the water around Charles Darwin University at Casuarina, but he was located 1.5 km away heading in the direction of home. When asked where he was going he said, ‘Mum’.
At only four years and five months he wrote his name on the computer, speaking each letter as he went. In January 2002 Taylor went to live in Malaysia with his family, because of his dad’s work, for three months. Whilst in Malaysia he gave his parents the fright of their lives when, again, they woke at 7.40 am to find the front door of their apartment wide open and Taylor nowhere in sight. That was one of the few times he did not drag his little sister along with him. He was located on the top floor playing with two other little girls.
Always full of confidence, Taylor believed he could do anything. In April 2002, back in Darwin, after chasing a large flock of geese around on an oval until they eventually took flight, Taylor ran back saying, ‘I can’t be a bird, I can’t fly’. He was devastated, as he thought he could do almost anything in life.
On 15 May 2002 the family arrived in Wellington, New Zealand, after his dad was located there with his engineering firm. They had to live in a hotel for the first two weeks until moving into their home. They had been in the room for all of 10 minutes when three fire engines arrived below them. Taylor had been outside the door, and went back into the room when a loud noise began. The glass was missing from the emergency button, which Tails had pushed. Hotel staff most likely thought, ‘They are here for two weeks?’ Tails loved starting school at the Brooklyn school in Wellington. Each school holiday his mum had to drive him there to show him no one was there and she was not punishing him by keeping him at home. Taylor always thought everyone liked him and he knew everyone. He had no fear and could never fathom that people could be mean in life.
On many occasions he left after school care, and one day staff found him in a local corner store. He had walked to the shopping district and was arguing with the Indian owner, telling him the play money he had taken from after school care was, in fact, real money, and he was wondering why he could not buy lollies with it.
At only six years of age, back in Darwin, mum was cooking in the kitchen, thinking Taylor was in the back yard playing with Harry. A knock at the front door saw two police officers with a naked Taylor in tow and Harry on a lead. Mum received a long lecture not only about letting her six-year-old roam the streets, but also allowing him to be naked. They had found him next door, which happened to be the Stuart Highway.
Tails started playing basketball in 2004 and, in typical Taylor style, he did not trust his team members to get the ball to the goal. He had to take the ball himself, the full length of the court and score. When he was 13 he played under 14s and would also play in the under 16s on the same day. It was a long day at Marrara basketball stadium for the family. He did not only play basketball; he showed natural talent in all sport he played. He was playing rugby for Uni Pirates, and one day he rode his pushbike home, telling mum that she had to hurry to get to Nakara oval, as a man was waiting with forms for him to play soccer. Mum went to see the coach and asked what night training was on. Training for soccer was at the same time as training for rugby, so mum explained that he could not be in two places at the same time, and that if he did not go to training he would not play. The coach said, ‘I really want Taylor on my team, because he has natural talent and if he continues to train with the women, that will be his training’, so that is what happened.
Mum drove him around six days a week to play different sports. He also played tennis and, in all of this, he would fit in tap and breakdancing. Clearly he was a very talented and natural athlete. He played basketball the longest, with Ansett, but he gave up after breaking his arm in three places, causing him to perform a backflip at his uncle Sean when at the celebration of his sister Natasha and brother Trent being accepted into the Northern Territory Police Force.
Taylor learned to play the recorder, saxophone and ukulele. He had a beautiful voice and loved to sing and entertain people. Over the years he had many pets; his most loved and cherished were his goat, Jack; NT carpet python, King Tails, and his dog, Harry, which he got in 2004.
Taylor was a whiz on the computer and he was making webpages for himself and his sister at only nine years old. He tried to set his sister up in a business selling homemade cards. At 11 he was programming virus scanners to use on the computer at home. He could shut down and lock you out of your computer across the world. It was a waste of time anyone in the house having a password, as he could crack it and change it to his own.
At 12 he was programming games; he would sit on the computer whilst someone across the world told him what they wanted in the game and he would program it. They would deposit $30 into his eBay account, and he would transfer the game to them. He was a bright fellow in many ways, not only a gifted athlete.
Taylor would fall asleep each and every time his big sister Natasha cut his hair, from the first time to the last; she was obviously very gentle if he fell asleep. Tails could not wait for his independence, and was so proud when he received his L plates for his motorbike and the car. No matter what, he had to have a motorbike. The deal was that once he received his P plates his parents would buy him a car and he would get rid of the bike.
Three years before he died, Taylor started running a YouTube account uploading gaming tutorials – ‘Taylor Taylz and Taylor Tayls’. You can find one of his songs at http://youtubeb3q40ymsvmcy. He sounds like a clever and gifted child and it is a tragic story.
In his phone, he never kept names under his contacts, because he remembered who owned which phone number. That is how he found them.
Taylor Thomas Luck will be remembered by his mother, as well as the main members of his family, including Shay Luck, Trent Lee, Tony Lee, Josh and Malina
Taylor’s mother is Vanessa Lowe, who is a teacher at Humpty Doo Primary School. Vanessa’s mother is Heidi Lowe, who I know from my childhood because she and Judy Schuler were the most important people in Darwin, prior to Cyclone Tracy, in relation to pedigree and the showing of cats. Together they organised the first championship cat show on the lawns of Spillett House on Smith Street. Without these two women working hard to bring showing and pedigree cats together, we would not have the cat showing activities we now have in Darwin.
Heidi was a very quiet, ladylike person, and had an outstanding knowledge of cats, the breeds and showing them. She was also an exceptional accountant. She lived in Ludmilla, and had many connections with Darwin business people in Smith Street. Her daughter, Vanessa, is someone I recently met in the job. She was one of the first teachers I met at Humpty Doo Primary School, and she has been a teacher in the Northern Territory for over nine years. She commenced work at Humpty Doo Primary School as a class teacher in the special centre in 2007, and in 2012 she won the senior teacher position to oversee and guide the teaching and expansion of the special centre.
Vanessa’s knowledge and expertise on current and emerging issues surrounding special education is impeccable and respected by all in the teaching profession. She has always demonstrated a love for teaching and children in her role as a special educator for children with severe and multiple disabilities. This love of teaching and children underpins the educational programs she plans, implements, oversees and evaluates for each and every student. Every student is special and she treats them accordingly.
Vanessa is very focused on outcome-based curriculum, and melds this to meet the special developmental needs of students on educational adjustment, individual behaviour management and healthcare plans. She is highly organised and a good manager and teacher who sets high standards for herself, her fellow staff and students. She works tirelessly on behalf of children in her care, and demonstrates the excellent delivery of special education programs for students with severe or multiple disabilities. Vanessa has a positive relationship with students and has created an encouraging and happy learning environment in the special education centre. It is one nurtured by honesty, empathy, respect, trust and warmth. When I would regularly visit Humpty Doo Primary School before the loss of her son, I would see Vanessa with the students and you could tell there was a special bond.
Working with a diverse clientele with highly specialised needs, Vanessa consistently focuses on the welfare and wellbeing of each of the students in her care. Her duty of care for children with special educational needs is carried to the nth degree; every child is very special to her and she wants the best for them.
She demonstrates highly effective communication skills, working with students, parents, staff, school support and therapy services personnel, the community health paediatric team, Carpentaria Disability Services, family and children’s services, paediatricians and allied health professionals. Her interpersonal skills have proved invaluable during case conferences for children with severe and multiple disabilities. Sadly, in our community there are children such as this, some of them being at Humpty Doo Primary School. She successfully liaises with a variety of support personnel, colleagues and parents from diverse cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds in meeting the needs of the students in her care.
Vanessa’s approachable and open manner enhances the Humpty Doo Primary School community as a place where a sense of belonging is experienced by all members of that community, especially the families of students in her care. She enacts and endorses inclusivity throughout the school, and this is evident in the way in which students with special educational needs are openly valued and accepted as part of the school community. Again, I see that when I attend assemblies, where these children from the special education unit are part of it and no one thinks any differently.
Vanessa is a strong advocate for students with special educational needs and their families. She maintains an active profile and is continually negotiating for the best services for her students from sources outside of the school. She networks and supports special educators and support personnel throughout the Palmerston and rural cluster group. Her knowledge of departmental policies and procedures pertaining to special education is outstanding, not only for Humpty Doo Primary School, but in a supportive manner to other special educators and coordinators in Palmerston and the rural regions. She is seen as one of the leading lights in special education.
The educators and support staff in the special education centre at Humpty Doo are evidence of Vanessa’s ability to build and maintain teams. All staff are provided with professional development opportunities, intensive training and demonstration lessons from Vanessa in order to implement – I am not sure what these are – EAPs, IBMPs and ACPs. I am sure the teaching world know what they mean!
Vanessa is a dedicated teacher, mentor, manager and leader who always has the dignity of the child foremost in her pastoral care of students with special educational needs. She is a committed and loyal team player and an exceptional teacher, who has achieved many times over what every teacher aspires to in making a difference with students.
I pay tribute to this family. They have suffered greatly with the loss of their brother, son, and grandchild. I say to Vanessa Lowe, her mother Heidi, and the brothers and sisters of the family: he may have gone, but he will not be forgotten.
The last part of the booklet says:
I am sure Taylor Thomas Luck, or Tails as he was lovingly called, will always be in their hearts.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Goyder for that touching speech on a very sad story and sad ending for a talented young man. I have also heard of the very good work Vanessa does with special education, especially people I know in the rural area.
I will speak on an important matter to many people in and around my electorate and Darwin more generally, especially amongst the Larrakia community. Many Territorians more generally are also concerned about this matter, because it goes to the way the CLP government does business, a return to the bad old days. I am referring to decisions made by the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment in relation to land opposite the corner of Totem Road and Dick Ward Drive, Darwin.
Darwin residents awoke on the morning of 4 May 2014 to read an NT News report of the clearing of this land and Larrakia action to protect that work. It was the clearing of land long regarded as having been set aside for conservation. Clearing of the land was denied in 2010 by the minister, my colleague the member for Barkly, because of the status of the land as a conservation zone, as well as storm surge constraints on land development. It was the clearing of land known to include the burial of Larrakia and other Aboriginal people, potentially hundreds of burials on this site.
Is this another case of the developer jumping the gun ahead of the land development approval process? Is this another example of a naive and passive minister opening these opportunities?
The history of this site is well known to old time Darwin families and is worth recounting. The land in question is held by the Gwalwa Daraniki Association, a local Aboriginal group representing residents of Kulaluk and Minmarama Park.
It is important that people remember this land grant, by a lease in perpetuity, was intended as a land grant to the Larrakia in recognition of the long-standing traditional ownership and occupation of land and sea in the Darwin region. The grant of land was a response to a grassroots land claim by the Larrakia around the same time of the government response to the Woodward land rights commission. It was agreed by government that the Larrakia claim for land should be recognised, but the Land Rights Act being considered at the time did not envisage the grant of land, under that act, in areas like Darwin.
A government decision was made in 1979 to make arrangement for a land grant via a lease in perpetuity for special community development.
After self-government, that arrangement was formalised under a Crown lease in perpetuity with the Gwalwa Daraniki Association, on behalf of the Larrakia as a whole for purposes consistent with the zoning of the land. Much later the constitution of the Gwalwa Daraniki Association was changed, so it now only represents the residents of that area, not the wider Larrakia.
Moving forward in time, members might recall a recent application for the subdivision of the larger part of the Gwalwa Daraniki land between Bagot Road and Dick Ward Drive, for sequential consequential commercial development. On 7 March this year, that application was rejected by the Development Consent Authority on the basis that a required master plan for the whole site had not been completed or endorsed by the consent authority.
Curiously, on the same day, the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment signed a separate application to amend the Planning Act to change the status of the land now being cleared from a conservation zone to a specific use zone LI, light industry.
The change enables the use of this land for development of a light industrial park, like others in nearby Coconut Grove. On behalf of concerned Territorians, particularly the Larrakia people, I ask:
will the minister release the advice he was given by his department relating to the planning and heritage constraints on the use of that land for commercial development?
did his department recommend that further work should occur to properly consider the heritage values of the site? For example, the use of ground penetrating radar to identify burial sites outside part of that land already known to be a burial place.
why was the wider Larrakia community not able to make its views known on their attachment to that site, before your change in land use and the clearing commenced?
why did the minister write to Dr Bill Day on 1 May to say any future use will be subject to a period of public exhibition, where the public will be invited to make a submission in respect of that proposal? Is this the way the CLP does business, allowing land clearing prior to a period of public exhibition and public comment on development proposals?
The actions of the minister have caused great distress to many Larrakia people. It has led to an application to the Federal Court for an injunction to stop work, and for mediation recommended by the court. Why did it come to this? Why can the minister not take the time to understand the history of this place and that land, and ensure proper consideration of its heritage values to the Larrakia people? It is special to all Territorians and very special to Larrakia people.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 6 classes from Kormilda College, accompanied by Matthew Cavanagh, Nada Allen and Lisa Cadd. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time and visit here.
APPROPRIATION (2014–2015) BILL
(Serial 79)
(Serial 79)
Continued from 13 May 2014.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I will respond to yesterday’s Northern Territory budget, which can be best described as an exercise in smoke and mirrors. Territorians hoped for a budget to deliver a better life and a future where we can go forward together. They deserve a government which has compassion in understanding their needs, and works hard to improve opportunities in the future.
Instead, Territorians received more of the mean-spirited, self-serving arrogant and lazy CLP at its worst. This is a disappointing budget full of missed opportunities.
The Northern Territory truly is our nation’s land of opportunity, and this budget could have built upon foundations laid on the bedrock of infrastructure and major projects delivered by Labor. Instead, it misses the mark.
Budget 2014 talks up northern development, but the CLP vision is $6m for a flash office for their mates in Darwin. It fails to deliver fundamental levers for growth across education, housing, health, agribusiness and resources, and opportunities for Territorians across our vast and beautiful country, from the dynamic Top End to the regional service centres. Tragically, this budget continues to entrench disadvantage in our remote communities, and sends the signal that you must move to town if you want a better education or services.
Increasing homelessness in our towns is ignored by the Giles government. There is no new funding for crisis accommodation or non-government support services for Territorians displaced by alcohol misuse, let alone the much promised tackling of domestic violence, which affects our women and children daily. Where is the vision that binds the fabric of our society to a greater harmony and improved wellbeing? Instead, division is deepening.
Chief Minister Giles talks up a big game on infrastructure, yet the CLP is spending less on building our Territory. Budget 2014 shows around a $10m reduction in infrastructure cash spending, and the revote out is larger than that coming in, which is a true admission of failure. Budget Paper No 4, the infrastructure book, reads like a list of broken promises, dominated by revoted works funded by Labor. Police, health and education facilities across the Territory, which the CLP has failed to deliver, are listed yet again.
Territorians are being hurt by this budget, the highest taxing in the Territory’s history; the CLP will rip an extra $84m in taxes out of the pockets of businesses and families. The young are being cut out of home ownership and our elderly are being means tested out of the Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme; perhaps ‘mean tested’ is a better way to say it. This is a direct attack on senior Territorians, who have built this place; we owe much of our current prosperity to them. The concession scheme exists to entice Territorians to stay here in their retirement, acknowledging we have a high cost of living. With changes to means testing in the federal budget last night, this will become even more difficult.
It is difficult to understand the motivation behind this budget. Why has the government altered the 2013-14 budget figures in this budget from the 2013-14 figures published and printed in the previous budget? What does it have to hide? Is nothing sacred, not even budget books? Is it not enough that you only printed 75 copies of the budget and failed to tell anyone they would not be receiving the usual budget books and it would have to be found online? Scrutiny is not your strong suit, is it? One of the litany of broken election commitments; what happened to being transparent and accountable?
You are so desperate to avoid scrutiny that we are being denied the chance to scrutinise Power and Water through the normal estimates process. It is little wonder, when you have hiked up power and water prices. Another 32% power network charge will hit in July and you cannot even keep the lights on.
But wait, there is good news for Territorians. Our economic growth is the second fastest in the nation with an average GSP growth of 5%. The Ichthys major project and the Marine Supply Base deliver for Territorians now, but we needed budget 2014 to be positioning for future prosperity, instead of hurting Territorians with a cost of living burden which drives them south.
The CLP inherited this strong economy and it is now doing its best to ruin it, with small- and medium-sized enterprises forgotten in the government’s mad dash to sell the farm to overseas investors without understanding that good planning around our natural resources, such as water, is crucial to a future which delivers a balance between economic growth and our magnificent environment.
The Oolloo aquifer is fully allocated as of today. You have literally given away our future water resources to your mates. There is no doubt we would be well positioned to ride the northern development wave of gas, tourism, agribusiness and international education, as identified in the latest Deloitte Building the Lucky Country report, but the carve up of our agribusiness resources without a plan and the failure to capitalise on marketing the Territory in Asia through the Arafura Games is putting obstacles in the way of success.
The CLP’s budget fails to understand that our human capital is precious. Territorians, our local heroes, should see the levers in this budget which enable them to reap the rewards of our Asian gateway position up and down the track. Sadly, this budget fails families in Malak as much as it fails those in Gillen or Lajamanu.
If you were looking for a spark of understanding from this government about issues affecting Territorians, it is extinguished. Today there are missed opportunities to build the bright future we are capable of achieving.
The cost of living has gone through the roof under this government. Utility prices are up about 30%, while at the same time the CLP is splitting Power and Water to run down its assets. It is happy to sacrifice reliability for profitability so the corporation can be sold to a southern company.
Not content with a plan to sell Power and Water, generation or retail, the CLP now has TIO, our insurer, squarely in its sights, while ignoring the needs of Territorians who rely on them for flood and cyclone coverage. All of these CLP asset sales plans exist without a mandate from Territorians. It is a deceit which, if delivered, will sound the political death bell at the next general election, because a government is the temporary custodian of the Crown and only fools will dismantle what the public has a passion to preserve. A cash grab now will leave Territorians to pay the price as tariffs rise in the future and we are burdened with a need for infrastructure and maintenance revenue.
The Treasurer has ensured housing prices will continue to soar by stripping away First Home Owner Grants from existing stock and ignoring Territorians looking to purchase their own home – a principal place of residence. Good people are packing up and leaving town because they cannot afford to live here anymore and, under the CLP, they have lost hope of that changing. In a strong housing market, with demand outstripping supply, the CLP has dropped the ball for two years, scrapped finance schemes that gave Territorians a much needed leg-up into home ownership in this strong market and, to heap insult onto injury, people are being ignored when it comes to concerns about inappropriate development.
The rural area wants to be rural; residents are not opposed to rural villages but are vehemently opposed to their community being carved up and sold off in ad hoc developments. Our harbour must remain pristine and should not be sold for high-end residential development with secretive Crown leases, as is the case with Nightcliff Island.
This is not a case of, ‘Not in my backyard’; this is our community which, through years of consultation, has defined how and where we expand for development, yet the CLP has come along and torn it up without listening to the people. This is a CLP failure to plan, which will be rejected.
Palmerston north is Holtze; it is unlikely to get off the drawing board with the member for Goyder raising concerns. Berrimah Farm is a laudable plan, announced by the previous Labor government, but it is years away once you have dealt with contamination, the prison and research farm issues, to name a few.
In Central Australia, the Labor suburb of Kilgariff received scant mention, with only 33 blocks released out of the 100 planned. There is still no sign of housing, and people are expected to believe in another Larapinta release without the required ILUA
There have been two budgets and no new housing subdivisions other than those delivered under Labor. This ineptitude will create a massive blowout in demand in the next two financial years, all of the CLP’s making because it scrapped the new city of Weddell.
The Territory’s strong economic growth is fuelled off the back of the major oil and gas projects delivered by Labor. Regional growth in resources exploration occurred under Labor, and we understood that opportunities bring a significant responsibility to balance our environment and cultural needs.
There have been no real growth initiatives in two years of CLP government; it has taken us backwards with its Nhulunbuy refinery curtailment. The extent is still unknown, but it could potentially wipe 2% of growth.
Your own actions, CLP, are decimating a town and region, and you have failed to deliver the much promised structural adjustment package in this budget. You seem happy to coast off the back of big Labor projects, from roads infrastructure to significant private projects, without delivering new stimulus for jobs and business growth.
Deloitte Access Economics predicts the Territory’s unemployment rate will average 4.6% over the next five years, making it the second lowest in the country. Our debt has risen to $4bn, with a net debt to revenue ratio of 67%. This is a near doubling of the $2.1bn debt inherited from Labor. It is still equivalent to a household with a combined income of $150 000 having a mortgage of $100 000. The Territory’s debt repayments are 6.5% of revenue; this would be less than $190 per week in a household budget. The CLP’s debt beat-up is exposed.
While the government should be driving the next phase of growth, it is instead driving up the cost of living, cutting essential government services and giving many Territorians no option but to head south.
Our inflation is the highest in the nation. Cost of living pain for Territorians continues to worsen, in stark contrast to the CLP’s promises during the last election campaign.
Your own budget papers refer to increases in utility prices and motor vehicle registration, as the key drivers of inflation
This budget continues to deny Territorians the benefit of the economic boom the CLP inherited from Labor. More than 2300 Territorians have lost their jobs under the CLP since the end of last year; that is 2300 Territorians and their families who have missed out. I refer you to labour force figures for that data.
This government has dropped the ball in education; we have seen hundreds of teachers sacked. The CLP has decided to put its politics before children. It is unprecedented for a government of any persuasion to take a knife to the education budget with such enthusiasm. It defies all logic.
The effects of these cuts will be felt throughout the Territory for decades to come. Instead of pursuing the regional economic opportunities of international education, that budget has been slashed by 10%. Incredibly, if you want an education, the CLP has said, ‘Move from remote communities to town’.
Budget 2014 abandons years of effort to improve remote service delivery, and instead widens the gap in Indigenous disadvantage. Billions in bush spending promises before the 2012 election are missing; you are running out of time to meet them. Housing maintenance in remote areas has not improved, and with increased power charges, power cards only work half as long as they used to. The promised work on airstrips, barge landings and road access to the Top End has been pushed back yet again, more broken dreams for the revote pile.
With increases to the cost of living, job cuts, new taxes, increased charges and reduced funding for health and education services, the priorities of this government are all wrong.
This budget misses the opportunity to position the Territory for the next phase of growth. We now find ourselves on the cusp of unprecedented prosperity, but it is up to the government to realise the opportunities ahead of us. The training budget, in real terms, has been cut by $2m. While the economy booms, the CLP government has turned its back on the opportunity to train young Territorians to share in this prosperity.
Under Labor the priority was to give people an opportunity for a better life, regardless of where they lived. We invested in education, housing, health, training and jobs. We invested in Charles Darwin University and the Marine Supply Base so we could capitalise on the oil and gas industry. We secured the INPEX Total Ichthys project and invested in roads, power, water and sewerage in our towns, regions and remote communities. Yet under the CLP, no matter how they spin it, this budget is not about what is good for Territorians when hundreds of public servants have been sacked and, with cuts across agencies, there are more job losses to come.
Inflation is nearly double the rate of wage growth. This means the average Territorian is taking a pay cut: teachers; nurses; doctors; police; ambos; firies; child protection workers; the list goes on.
The CLP has been brazen in breaking its core promise to lower the cost of living. Power has already gone up 25%; that is around $1700 per year for the average family to find, and we have another 5% minimum increase to come. The government now wants to hit us with that 32% network charge. If this is passed on to Territorians, large households will have to find about another $1000 a year.
Spending on Power and Water maintenance and infrastructure has been cut, and we are already seeing the effect of these cuts on service reliability. The catastrophic blackout in March was a worrying preview of things to come. Yesterday there was another blackout in the Darwin area. Power is an essential service and the CLP needs to treat it as such. Territorians deserve better than this. The service will only get worse, while Territorians must pay more for the privilege. A Labor government would index power prices to CPI, and we would continue to invest in Power and Water infrastructure.
The CLP promised it would lower the cost of housing, but has done nothing. Territorians who are renting or looking to buy in any market across the Territory are now struggling more than ever. The First Home Owner Grant increasing from $25 000 to $26 000 will now only be available for the purchase of new homes. Most homeowners cannot afford to buy into new housing stock, and an extra $1000 will not help them to get into the market. The price of housing continues to grow at 6.4% year on year. With wage growth at less than 2%, this means that with every passing day the dream of owning their own home becomes further out of reach for Territorians.
For those who are renting, the situation is bad, with 35.4% of a median income going towards rent. It is the worst figure of any jurisdiction in Australia. What did the CLP do? It scrapped Labor’s home finance schemes of My New Home and Home Start Extra, which gave Territorians a leg up into home ownership and kept housing construction workers in jobs.
The federal government increased fuel excise in last night’s budget. What is the CLP doing? What is the cost of that fuel excise increase, when in many parts of the Territory fuel is already in excess of $2 a litre? Is that not high enough for us already?
The education budget has been cut by nearly $15m. This government, unbelievably, has made a conscious decision to have fewer teachers and resources in our schools. This is an extraordinary move and one which all Territorians should be very worried about. At a time when we should look at how to help more Territory students achieve national reading, writing and numeracy standards, resources are being stripped from our schools. It is unforgiveable.
Labor values public education. We built Rosebery Primary and Middle Schools, upgraded all primary, middle and secondary schools in the Territory, and employed more than 400 extra teachers. We had plans to build a special school at Palmerston; the CLP delayed this and now touts it as a new initiative. What about the new school for Henbury? It is the responsibility of everyone in this Chamber to ensure young Territorians have the best start in life and that education resources are available to achieve this.
The budget allocation for tertiary education has fallen by nearly 10%. What on earth is the reason behind this decision? How do Territory businesses feel about this? With the economic boom, now is the time to be investing in tertiary education and giving Territorians a chance to get these jobs. We should be developing young Territorians to move into future growth areas, such as the oil and gas industries, mining, tourism, Asian relations, agribusiness and international education. We should be doing all we can to ensure Territorians position themselves to take advantage of growth.
Health services are another big loser in this year’s budget, with health cut by more than $5m. There is only $5m allocated for Palmerston hospital site works, and the people of Palmerston and the rural area will now be waiting until at least 2018 for a new hospital. It would be under construction right now if the CLP had not stopped work, changed sites and delayed construction. Labor would have delivered a new paediatric health facility at Royal Darwin Hospital – an entire children’s wing – but the CLP rejected that Commonwealth deal, and we have an $11.9m upgrade instead.
Adding further pressure to an under-resourced health system is the CLP’s decision to scrap the Banned Drinker Register, which has led to an increase in alcohol-related presentations and admissions to our Territory hospitals. Alcohol-related presentations and admissions across the Territory in April 2012 totalled 226, and had more than doubled by April 2013 to an unprecedented 514. The under-utilised medi-hotel is being used for the alcohol mandatory treatment program and is not available to be used by patients travelling to Darwin for medical treatment. This has put the Royal Darwin Hospital under even more pressure, and the bush has missed out on healthcare again.
Health care facilities in Papunya, Canteen Creek, Elliott, Ngukurr, Galiwinku, Milikapiti and Minjilang, among many others, are again on the revote list. When will these be built?
Budget 2014 takes an axe to police resources. With violent crime up, the CLP has ripped more than $12m from frontline police resources. It fails to provide much needed funding in Central Australia that was ripped out of youth services, and has created increasing rates of youth-related crime and antisocial behaviour.
Northern Territory taxation revenue measures - how much has been taken from Territory families in taxes and charges. The budget shows the CLP has increased this amount by nearly $84m, up to $569m being taxed out of Territorians. Forty-five million dollars comes from payroll taxes, a direct attack on Territory business’ ability to get on with business, while revenue raising with motor vehicle fees takes an additional $7m from the pockets of Territorians.
This budget hurts Territory families’ budgets in every way possible. The CLP has done nothing to help Territory businesses in this budget. Power prices are through the roof and all rates and charges are up.
In this budget there is no mention of the environment, climate change, land management or national parks. This is a budget which fails to protect the environment. We see investment to market the Territory as a tourist destination, but no investment to protect the natural environment which lures so many visitors here. These are some of our greatest assets, and nature tourism will be a huge growth industry over the coming decades, but only if we work hard to protect our environment now.
Among the doom and gloom I have a positive message for Territorians. The ALP stands ready to govern; to rebuild the Territory as a progressive, prosperous place to live, across our cities, towns and remote communities; to end the cronyism and restore transparency to government; to ease the burden on households; to restore confidence to Territory businesses; and the ALP stands united and intends to bring the worst government the Territory has ever seen to an end in about two years’ time. It is a shame it cannot be sooner.
The budget brought down by the Treasurer yesterday is the wrong one for our times. It is wrong for families, school children, small business and Indigenous Territorians. Yesterday, Treasurer, you had an opportunity to right some of the wrongs of the first 20 months of this very poor government. You could have heard the voice of the people in the Wanguri and Blain by-elections. There were 12% and 10% swings against the CLP. People have said they are hurting.
Approaching the halfway point of this parliamentary term it is reasonable to have a report card on the performance of the Giles government, and it makes for very sad reading. The Chief Minister started his time in the job with 16 members; he is now down to 13.
He effectively lost the confidence of three of his members. He became Chief Minister by stabbing his predecessor in the back while he was on an overseas trade mission. The reward for that silence is a taxpayer-funded job in Jakarta.
Our policy alternatives are clear; we would employ more teachers, not sack them. We would continue to build and improve health facilities, build the Palmerston hospital and the RDH children’s wing, stop Power and Water price hikes and take its assets off the market. We would ensure education and training programs are strengthened so Territorians can benefit from our bright future. We would chase the next major project off the back of our credibility in delivering certainty for the oil and gas industry. We would focus on infrastructure delivery to open the regions for economic development, rather than glossy brochures, adverts and flash offices. The CLP spins, whereas Labor has substance.
This is a budget of missed opportunities, with the CLP ignoring Territorians’ need for affordable and public housing, improved education and health services and support for our most disadvantaged. It taxes business and fails to build the right leaders for economic growth.
Debate adjourned.
ANSWER TO QUESTION
Knuckey Lagoon Utilities
Knuckey Lagoon Utilities
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, during Question Time today the member for Nelson asked a question about a letter he alleged was sent to me by the Top End Women’s Legal Service about a lady living at Knuckey Lagoon who was asking for assistance through the Northern Territory Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme.
I put on the record that I have never received a letter about this matter. The letter I am looking at is from the member for Nelson; it was written to him on 27 November and it mentions that they also wrote to me in relation to the issue. No such letter was received by my office, but I welcome the Top End Women’s Legal Service if it would like to write to me, and I will respond to the matter as soon as possible.
WATER EFFICIENCY LABELLING STANDARDS (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) BILL
(Serial 70)
(Serial 70)
Continued from 19 March 2014.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House, and I understand it repeals and replaces the Northern Territory’s Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act. In short, we will call the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act ‘WELS’. The WELS Act commenced in 2005 as part of a national commitment to the introduction of the water efficiency labelling and standards scheme.
The scheme places obligations on manufacturers and retailers to provide advice about the water efficiency of different products. The original Northern Territory WELS Act took the form of mirror legislation. Since 2005, the Commonwealth has made a number of amendments to the Commonwealth WELS Act, resulting in inconsistencies between the two acts of the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory.
I understand this bill adopts the Commonwealth WELS Act as an act of the Northern Territory. Amendments to the Commonwealth WELS Act will automatically apply in the Northern Territory, unless the Northern Territory takes action to prevent amendments applying.
An independent review of the WELS scheme in June 2010 – I have read a copy, and as you can see by the logo on the cover it is all about the rating scheme on products; the more stars it has, the more water efficient a product is. The scheme operates along the same lines as electrical items that also require an energy rating system. This is so people, when purchasing products, can make well informed decisions about products which are water-efficient and will save money. They can also avoid excessive consumption of water, which is a good thing for our environment. The independent review found, not surprisingly, that the scheme is good public policy. Its objective of conserving water by reducing consumption through the greater use of water-efficient products is appropriate given the increasing scarcity of water, as is its use of market instruments to provide information to assist consumers making decisions about the purchase of water-using products and to set efficient and effective standards.
A study of cost effectiveness, undertaken in 2008 by the Institute for Sustainable Futures for the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, found the scheme has generated water savings at a cost of 0.08c to 0.21c per kL.
This compares favourably with other demand management and supply augmentation measures. For instance, desalination can cost $1.19 to $2.55 per kilolitre. The study projected that over the period 2005-06 to 2020-21 WELS will reduce national water consumption by a total of 800 GL, which is almost double the annual water consumption of greater Sydney. Main savings were estimated to come from shower heads, with around 290 GL, and washing machines with 280 GL. It would be useful to know, when the minister wraps this debate, what calculations have been made about savings to date in the Northern Territory.
In October last year the government released Living Water Smart as a five-year program aimed at helping the Darwin region reduce water use by 10 000 ML per year, or about a quarter of the current Darwin region water demand. However, with the incredible hikes in water tariffs, perhaps that is an incentive for people to save water. It is interesting coming from the government which, pre-election, committed to driving down the cost of living, but has done the opposite.
I also ask the minister to tell us what consideration of savings from WELS was made in developing the Living Water Smart program, and what progress has been made to date in achieving the 10 000 ML. Given this result to date, Power and Water’s own documents indicate it is considering new water supply options, including:
1. a new instream dam on the upper Adelaide River
2. an offstream storage in the Marrakai region, filled with water harvested from flood flows in the Adelaide River
3. augmentation of Manton Dam’s storage
4. the potential use of desalination.
I would again be interested if the minister could respond as to the current status of the proposed Marrakai and upper Adelaide River dams. What is the status of exploration licences over the proposed inundation zones for the dams? We know Alice Water Smart is a project helping Alice Springs reduce its water use. It is an incredibly important body of work, given it sits in desert country in Central Australia where water is incredibly precious. Water is precious everywhere, but especially so in the desert region in Alice Springs.
The most recent progress update in August 2013 found over 1600 ML of savings to date. That is the equivalent of 640 Olympic swimming pools of water savings which have been made or identified through projects to date. Seventy-two parks and ovals are now watered using smart irrigation technology, 1000 homes and 50 businesses have had water efficiency consultations and 330 million litres, which is the equivalent of 132 Olympic swimming pools, have been saved through leak detection and remediation.
Minister, could you also address current information you have on the progress of the scheme and long-term plans for Alice Water Smart? As the shadow minister for Environment, groups from Alice Springs contact me from time to time, wanting to raise these issues. How would you like to see the Alice Water Smart program develop into the future? Perhaps you can update us, as I am not sure the budget handed down yesterday goes to nitty gritty details. What is happening with funding for Alice Water Smart? I am sure you would agree that it is an incredibly important program which deserves continued support from government.
Perhaps the minister might enlighten us as to what is happening with the water catchment advisory committees. I understand from a public notice that there is a new water catchment committee, but we do not know, at this stage, who is on it or exactly what its brief is. In October last year the Minister for Land Resource Management announced the replacement of the Daly River and Darwin Harbour Management Advisory Committees, and that they would be replaced by a community-based catchment advisory committee. We understand that it has been formed, but we have not had the heads up as to who is on it or exactly what it is doing.
The recent advertisement that I spotted for the NT water forum on Friday 16 May 2014 — it was a Saturday when I saw this notice — said that feedback from participants at the forum will directly inform the work of the newly formed Northern Territory Catchments Advisory Committee. I understand it does not sit entirely within your purview as minister for the Environment, but I like to think that you are across what is happening in that area with this new committee and the forum in Katherine on Friday.
Not only I, but stakeholders and Territorians from a wide range of interests groups are keen to know who is on this committee and exactly what its functions are. It is curious there has not been more information available to date in public about this new committee, but perhaps I should not be surprised. Transparency is not something high on the agenda of the CLP. We know that water allocation plans are under development for Berry Springs, Howard East, the Great Artesian Basin water control district, Mataranka, the Tindall Limestone Aquifer and the Oolloo aquifer. In fact there is a half-page advertisement in the NT News classifieds, providing notification of intention to grant water licence allocations to a number of companies and individuals associated with the Oolloo aquifer. I understand it would see the entire allocation of the aquifer. The development …
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. We are digressing from the subject. This is about water labelling, not Oolloo aquifers and everything else to do with water.
Ms WALKER: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, in these kinds of debates, yes, there is a bill before the House, but there is always latitude to talk about and raise issues that are important in relation to this. It is about preserving water, so I take this opportunity to put these comments on the record. I will be finished in a couple of minutes.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, just keep an eye on it.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
We know these water allocation plans are under way. Development of the Oolloo aquifer water allocation plan commenced in April 2008; the purpose of it is to provide the Northern Territory government and the Katherine and Daly River communities with a transparent set of rules to assist in the sustainable management and equitable allocation of water within that area. What is the status of this plan? I guess the status has been published in the NT News today, and that is all we have to go on.
The draft Mataranka-Tindall Limestone Aquifer water allocation plan was issued in November 2011, and was developed with the understanding there is a possibility of future demand on the resource. What is the status of this plan?
The Territory government continues to issue licences in some of these areas without a water allocation plan, or if there is a plan it is not widely available to Territorians, only to the CLP and, presumably, its mates. How can this latest raft of allocations, 2320.40 ML from Katherine, be based on solid science when a community consultation has not occurred, as the NT Water Forum is set down for 16 May? This is no doubt strategic, as it is immediately after parliamentary sittings.
At the time of the original bill’s passage the Labor government was implementing a rebate for those purchasing water safety devices in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, and a doubling of funding for Cool Communities to $100 000 to encourage water conservation. Central Australia Waterwise rebates provide up to $25 for low-flow shower roses, up to $100 on four-and-a-half star WELS rated washing machines, WaterMark approved swimming pool covers and up to $150 for four-star dual-star toilets. Will the minister, in his response, confirm the government will be maintaining rebates for these WELS products?
In the debate on the original bill, the then CLP shadow minister, Fay Miller, now retired and Mayor of Katherine, supported the bill, but made some interesting points. She said:
- Considering the development in the Top End of the Northern Territory, and the additional demands on water resources, I suggest to the minister that she talks to her colleagues about a new dam to supply water to the Top End.
It is interesting that a dam on the Elizabeth River was an issue in the recent Blain by-election. One of the CLP’s leaflets in that campaign said the subsidy paid to Power and Water would be enough to pay for a new dam. The CLP government needs to explain what it is doing on water efficiency, apart from any secret plans which might be afoot for new dams.
Turning to specific questions about the bill, clause 2(2)(a) says:
- applies the Commonwealth efficiency laws as a law of the Territory …
What process will be undertaken by the Territory government to determine whether a modification by Commonwealth water efficiency laws should not take effect in the Territory, and what consultation will be undertaken to gauge the views of stakeholders in industry and other groups to inform any such decision? Also, clause 10(2)(g) allows for:
- infringement notices in connection with offences …
This is sensible legislation; it streamlines administrative processes between the Commonwealth and the Territory and, on the strength of that, the opposition supports the bill. The opposition supports measures that will reduce water consumption in the Territory, where it is precious and costly, thanks to the CLP government. I have raised some questions around the broader use of water in the Northern Territory, and whilst it may not sit within the minister’s purview, given he is the Environment minister, I would like him to address these.
I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, this bill is, in some ways, similar to one brought forward by the previous government about six or seven years ago. I understand this bill tries to make it easier to make changes; it is Commonwealth legislation, so aligning it makes sure we do not need to have it go through this House as well, and that makes sense.
It is good that we have water saving devices. As a person who washes, and travels occasionally, there is a range of showerheads which you can operate. Some are equivalent to sandblasting and some only just get you wet, which is more in my case because I use gravity feed.
I proudly live in the rural area. I have a bore, I pump it into a tank and I feed it by gravity into my house …
Mr Chandler: Is that east of Palmerston?
Mr WOOD: Yes, although it is not East Palmerston. Palmerston will receive a new name, probably ‘Howard Springs West’. I live in the rural area, and there are many people not connected to the mains. There are also people living out bush who use water from rivers or bores which have a high calcium content, especially on some of the stations.
The minister may not believe this, but I once lived at Daly River, where I had hair; I used to wash my hair in water from the Daly River, and after that I did not need to comb it for a week because it sat in the same place, through wind and sun. Calcium is a problem with some of these water saving devices, which are ideal for people in Darwin or Melbourne with city-quality water, but they are not always suitable for places out bush, because small holes in a showerhead block up in no time.
Whilst the idea is good and there is nothing nicer than government saying, ‘We have uniform legislation on water saving devices’, standards are set. There must be some common sense around this; I do not want to find that people out bush cannot buy a shower rose anymore because they are not allowed to be sold at a hardware or plumbing shop because they do not fit Australian standards, yet they may not be suitable for someone on a cattle station or in a community where the water quality is such that you would need holes in a shower head which do not clog after a few months.
I know this happens because a long time ago, before solar technology or being able to afford hot water appliances, you would have a little ceramic showerhead with a string attached to it. When you turned it on, you heated the hot water as it came out of the pipe. Those shower heads had very tiny pores in them and would be blocked in no time.
I do not know whether people are able to overcome that by other means, but when you bring in national standards you must ensure that governments realise not all water is the same throughout Australia or the Territory. I am giving you what I regard as a practical problem. Even with boiling a jug – most people probably do not have an old fashioned jug – they used to become clogged with calcium and it was a problem.
In my area, for instance, I get iron …
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, please pause. May I remind the person in the gallery with the camera that they are not to take photos of people in the Chamber. Thank you.
Mr WOOD: It was my best side anyway.
Even in the rural area many people do not have calcium, but they have algae caused by a problem with iron in the water, so there are issues there. I hope whoever makes these standards does not say, ‘Well, that is all you can sell in Australia, and some of those old fashioned appliances cannot be sold because they do not fit within our standard’.
Some people need those appliances. In my case I do not have much pressure; I would be pushing to have 10psi in my house from a gravity-fed tank. If the holes are too small it would be hard to get any water out of them. As I am on a low pressure system I need something to allow that.
I will give you another example. A couple of years ago I had a plumber work on my kitchen benches; he decided he would put in the latest mixer taps. They are great as you can swing this way or that way to get hot, cold or in between water. They do not work on low pressure after it has gone through my hot water system. It is fine, they look beautiful, but if we want hot water in a hurry we must go to the laundry. Mixer taps are not designed for low pressure; they are designed for town, where pressure is around 200psi – sorry, 30. At 200 it would blow the pipes apart, but they are designed for a higher pressure than I have.
There are areas the government should look at. I was also interested in whether this scheme will still operate. I have not checked the budget, as I have not had the time to look, but has the Commonwealth cut this scheme? It is a water saving, conservation scheme. Was it ARENA, the solar authority, which was pushing for renewable energy? I think that has been scrapped, so has this scheme ended up in the same bundle? We introduced this legislation before the Commonwealth budget came down. I am interested to know whether we are talking about something that will be put into the rubbish bin.
We are talking about water savings. For a long time I have been concerned, even when I worked in Aboriginal communities, about the metering of taps in houses. A long time ago we decided to bring in metering for electricity, which was good, but why did we not bring it in for houses? Most of those communities rely on bores. It is a very expensive business, pumping town water into a community tank. You then find it is being wasted because there are dripping taps everywhere, people cannot be bothered turning them off, the toilet is leaking or the shower is still dripping. One way to reduce that is to tell people they will receive a water bill. Out bush, things are not that good from the point of view of people having many financial pressures; however, I would be interested to know how far the scheme has gone. I know some water meters have been applied, usually to government or teachers’ houses. If we are fair dinkum about saving water, I would expect the government to be making sure we are not only talking about nice little shower heads and taps with springs on them which you find in toilets so people do not waste water, but how we are doing it overall. That is what this scheme is about.
The government spends a lot of money on water for parks and gardens, and I have no problem with that. I know we always say the Northern Territory uses the most water, and we might, but nobody says, ‘For six months of the year we are dry as a bone’. Tell me about a state which does not get some water through the year – maybe Perth because it has had a change in climate. Look at all the graphs and you will see the amount of rainfall in the Perth area has decreased. We have a city which is basically dry for six months, with high evaporation, and it is easy to compare that with Melbourne, which has fairly low rainfall but low evaporation. At some times of the year, such as summer, it has high water consumption. I have just come back from places like Ireland; they are cold and overcast with drizzly rain. The place stays green permanently, but in the Territory you are green in the Wet Season, and if you want to maintain things like our football ovals and sporting facilities, we need to be able to use water.
There are ways the government and other people can reduce the amount of water they use. We used to have advertisements on television. They were mainly advertisements in Alice Springs about using drip irrigation. It was also about planting natives.
I am trying to think of a person’s name from a long time ago; he is a gardener in Alice Springs, and I do not have any Alice Springs people here to remind me of his name. I think he still writes a column for the Centralian. If you travel into Alice Springs from the north you will know there is a median strip full of native plants. I understand that the department, when it was looking at landscaping the Stuart Highway north, was going to put exotics in there. Why I cannot remember this gentleman’s name, I do not know, but he is a long-time gardener. He has been on the Greening Australia committee and he knows a lot about Central Australian native plants. What do you see along the main street of Alice Springs if you travel in on the highway? You see native plants. Some people knock native plants and I ask why. They are supposed to be part of our culture. I am not against exotics, but we can get plants which survive and have survived for thousands of years in our own area. We ignore them sometimes, and they do not use any water.
I have a little plantation past the corner of Howard Springs and Whitewood Road where there are two signs, arches where people advertise. I am planting trees again, because this is the third time the plantation has been destroyed by government changes to the road or pipelines there. The plants there are planted in the Wet Season and they survive an entire Wet Season in fairly gravelly country with mulch, no water, and they are happy as Larry.
You will also notice along the new Howard Springs Road median strip, where the government was going to put concrete in — I know that is a water saving device, putting concrete along median strips, but I am not one of those who supports it. The method was used in Melbourne by some of our new immigrants; they thought green concrete was a lawn and a water-saving device as well, but we have gone beyond green concrete. Thankfully, Greening Australia has worked on the plantation in the middle of Howard Springs Road, from Whitewood Road to the Stuart Highway. That plantation is mulched and has no irrigation on it.
Again, I am not trying to deviate too much from this legislation, but it is about saving water. Governments have a role to consider their policies of what they plant on roads and around parks. There is a place for watering gardens but there is also a place for what I call a commonsense approach. The middle of a road is difficult to water in the first place, so why not use the native plants?
I support what the minister is doing with this legislation. It is good, but one do not forget those people who are not in towns and do not operate within a nice city, where the water quality is A1, and the pressure is as it should be and two do not forget there is a lot of wastage, especially where people are not metered for water and there is no incentive for them to turn taps off because it does not cost them any money. It is free, so who cares? Thirdly, governments should promote, not only within their own departments but in the broader scale of landscaping, using native plants and mulching to reduce the amount of water used.
This is not to say you cannot still have ovals and some green areas. I would hate to see it all without that. Lawns are very nice, and they also bring a bit of a cooling effect, but it is about trying to find a balance where needed.
Thank you, minister, I support the legislation.
Debate suspended.
RESPONSE TO PETITION
Petition No 36
Petition No 36
The CLERK: Honourable members, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform members that a response to Petition No 36 has been received and circulated to honourable members.
The text of the response will be included in the Hansard and placed on the Legislative Assembly website. A copy of the response will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to petitioners.
- Petition No. 36
Support the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Fire-Fighters) Bill 2013
Date presented: 27 March 2013
Presented by: Mr Gunner
Referred to: Minister for Business
Date response due: 27 August 2014
Date response received: 14 May 2014
Date response presented: 14 May 2014
Response:
The Northern Territory government acknowledges that our firefighters may be exposed, in their working life, to a range of toxins, fumes and chemicals, and that there is evidence firefighters may be exposed to increased risk in contracting certain cancers due to extended exposure.
Our firefighters unselfishly put themselves at personal risk in order to save lives and property, and through this display of commitment and, at times, bravery, our firefighters are held in the highest regard by the people of the Northern Territory.
For many years prior to this government, our firefighters have had to battle to gain compensation when they have contracted cancers that may be linked to some of the toxins they have been exposed to in their working lives. This will change.
The Northern Territory government is committed to providing firefighters with faster access to compensation by introducing presumptive legislation that will provide a rebuttable presumption that certain specified cancers are deemed to be contracted in the course of employment.
The current review into our workers compensation is well advanced, and it is government’s intention to include presumptive legislation as part of that review.
WATER EFFICIENCY LABELLING STANDARDS (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) BILL
(Serial 70)
(Serial 70)
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr CHANDLER (Lands, Planning and the Environment): Madam Speaker, I thought the member for Nelson was digressing, as happened before lunch.
Mr Wood: I did talk about drains.
Mr Westra van Holthe: We are allowed a bit of latitude in the Chamber.
Mr CHANDLER: We are allowed a bit of latitude. I thank members for their contributions towards the debate of the Water Efficiency Labelling Standards (National Uniform Legislation) Bill. The bill upholds the Northern Territory’s commitment to a national scheme for water efficiency labelling and standards. I thank all people who stepped up to the challenge of reducing our water consumption by developing and implementing the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards scheme, known as the WELS scheme.
I note that while this new legislation does not represent a change in government policy, the Northern Territory has been committed to the WELS scheme since 2005 and remains so. Once this bill has passed, the Northern Territory will again have legislation consistent with other WELS legislation in Australia.
There are a few questions the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson asked which I will answer, and I will go through them slowly. I also want to explore a couple of key features of the bill before moving to passage. It is important because of the digression by the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson.
We should do all we can to preserve water in the Northern Territory. This is Northern Territory legislation covering all of the Territory, but we live in an environment with a dramatic Wet Season each year in the Top End, which I think leads people to believe water is not a finite resource. With the capacity of our dams and our water usage, we need to be careful how we use water. Most people would be horrified to learn we use about three times the amount of water per capita as people in south east Queensland or Victoria. I find it funny when tourists, family and friends come from interstate and see us washing the car in the driveway; they are horrified because it is not something they do down south. They grab a bucket of water and will only use what is required to do the job.
Ms Walker: Do you not park the car on the lawn?
Mr CHANDLER: Yes, you can park it on the grass, wash the boat and give the grass a bit of water at the same time.
To use three times more than southerners is amazing. We can all improve how we use water. On a couple of occasions when I visited mum and dad in Melbourne, I used their shower, and they have a little timer. It is funny, as you get in very quickly, soap yourself up and get out of the shower just to beat the damn timer. It comes in handy if you have children.
The member for Nhulunbuy also raised a few issues, moving to the side of minister Westra van Holthe’s area of natural resources. We will have to build a new dam at some stage. The member for Nhulunbuy asked a couple of questions about government’s future ideas in that area, and I have had running battles with people such as Stuart Blanch from the Environment Centre NT about that. I have told him that today we live in a house or a unit where you can turn a tap on and potable water comes out. In 50 or 100 years from now, people living in the Northern Territory will have an expectation that you turn the tap on and water will flow.
What will it take? It will take investment; we will need, at some stage, a new dam in the greater Darwin area. We will have to be careful with how we use water in Alice Springs. The water table in the aquifer there drops every year, and it is more expensive every year to draw water out. In Central Australia, the aquifers do not refill anywhere near the capacity of refill charges in the northern part of the Northern Territory, but there are smart technologies we can use.
I have just come from a meeting with Geoff; we were talking about solar pump hot water systems and how efficient they are compared to some other forms of water, especially electricity-driven water heaters. We discussed what we could do from the lands and planning side of things to ensure that in blocks of 100 or 150 units, instead of having little hot water systems in each unit, why could we not have a single heat pump to run the entire building? You would provide ongoing savings for those residents for years to come.
I have seen where those hot water systems have been used. Because one of the derivatives of them is cool air, it is channelled into areas like hotel foyers or kitchens, where they no longer have to use specific air-conditioning units because they have the by-product of their hot water system.
There are some amazing things you can do with technology today, but we also need to have a commonsense approach to how we use water in the Northern Territory. The member for Nhulunbuy asked about Alice Water Smart. As I said, with smart technology in the future, this government can see, particularly with planning, how we could utilise grey water better and introduce underground tanks for homes. I have just had a report from the EPA handed to me about the storm water management plan it is working on. For the first time we have some ideas on how we could manage some of the storm water in the Top End.
With water, there is real opportunity, but both the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson digressed into the world of politics and moved well away from efficiency labelling. However, this is the world of politics.
Mr Wood: Where was the politics in my speech?
Mr CHANDLER: There was a bit of politics, but you did talk about showerheads, member for Nelson. I could probably recommend CLR as a product to be used for decalcifying some of the showerheads, but you are right. It reminds me of a story where John Farnham …
Mr Wood: Do not digress.
Mr CHANDLER: I am digressing. John Farnham tells a story of travelling around the country and performing concerts. He travelled with his own shower rose, because in every motel he stayed in he hated the shower roses. He had a particular one. If memory serves me, John Farnham was a plumber at some time in his life and carried a particular showerhead. He used to replace the ones in the hotels and motels he stayed in so he could have a decent shower.
I will not digress there either because that will …
Mr Wood: Please do.
Mr CHANDLER: Would you like me to digress? I will give you one more showerhead story. Many years ago, while working with the ABS, I often stayed at a particular hotel in Canberra, and they constructed a brand new wing. One night I arrived in Canberra, it was extremely cold, and one of the nice things you like to do when travelling is jump into a hot shower. I hopped into this brand new room, in the new wing of the hotel, which was lovely, and into the shower. However, I worked out it had a design fault, because one of the first things I do in the shower is wash my face with a flanneI; I hope others do this. I dropped the flannel and enjoyed the shower. This beautiful hot water was – I was going to say pulsating over me, but that is too much information.
Mr Higgins: Cascading.
Mr CHANDLER: Cascading is a good word.
The flannel landed on the floor of the shower. I did everything else you do in a shower. Ten or 15 minutes had gone past in this beautiful hot shower, and I did not realise the drain in the shower was the only one in this brand new bathroom area of the hotel. Because the flannel had covered the drain, the water kept flowing out into the rest of the bathroom and then onto the brand new carpet in the room. This was to the point I was getting knocks on the door because there was water leaking down to the next level. The next day I was called in by the manager to explain the water damage to the hotel room.
The next time I was in that hotel they put me in a disabled room. I wondered if there was a message there. Bugger me, I hop in the shower and they have one of these lovely shower roses. When I turned the water on, it blew off the side of the wall and water went everywhere. I said, ‘What is it with water and this hotel?’ I was making a mess wherever I went. However, these were good quality products that would have fitted within this legislation because they were star-rated products. It did not stop water going everywhere, across the walls, the ceiling, so you need to be careful with these things.
Member for Nelson, you mentioned that you will often get calcium build-up – iron is another – which will build up slime and so forth in these showerheads. I am positive this legislation will not prevent anybody from being able to get hold of decent showerheads, wherever you live in the Northern Territory. I can still remember drilling out a few when they were clogged up from time to time.
You also mentioned a few things where we had digressed, and I want to to cover the last couple of things before I move to the second and third readings. Member for Nhulunbuy, you asked about clause 2(2)(a), the Northern Territory process to determine not to accept proposed Commonwealth amendments. All proposed amendments are subject to a national consultation model, firstly with the states and territories in accordance with the WELS inter-government agreement and then publicly as appropriate with stakeholders, manufacturers, etcetera.
The other clause you talked about was 10(2)(g), ‘consultation’. The list of those consulted in putting this bill together includes the Department of Attorney-General and Justice; the Department of the Chief Minister; the Department of Treasury and Finance; the Department of Business, which spoke to a number of businesses involved; and the Power and Water Corporation, because it does affect what it does. I think they were the only questions.
In summary, these are the key features of this bill. The bill creates a new act; it repeals the existing Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act. Principally, the bill applies the Commonwealth’s Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act 2005, as enforced, from time to time, as a law of the Northern Territory. In 2005, the Northern Territory signed the WELS inter-governmental agreement with the Commonwealth and enacted the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act 2005. In 2006, the Northern Territory passed the WELS Act. The act replicates the Commonwealth act; previously, each time the Commonwealth amended its legislation, this Assembly was required to amend the Northern Territory act as well.
In 2010 the Commonwealth undertook a review of the WELS scheme. That review resulted in a number of recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the scheme. Public consultation on the WELS scheme and amendments to the Commonwealth act were undertaken between 2010 and 2012. Territory businesses were consulted as part of this process. No other specific consultation has been undertaken with businesses in the Northern Territory. As I said, comments were sought from the number of agencies I mentioned before.
The member for Nhulunbuy also asked when this legislation will commence operation. Once passed, the act will commence on the day it is given assent by the Administrator.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr CHANDLER (Lands, Planning and the Environment)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
REORDER OF BUSINESS
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that Government Business Order of the Day No 20, Appropriation (2014-2015) Bill (Serial 79), be called on forthwith.
APPROPRIATION (2014–2015) BILL
(Serial 79)
(Serial 79)
Continued from 13 May 2014.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, the Northern Territory government’s 2014 budget is good news for Territorians whose livelihood comes from the land, the water and our natural resources. The Country Liberals government has significant plans to develop northern Australia, and this is reflected positively in this budget. We are getting on with governing, and this budget is an action list of priorities we have to ensure the future positive economic development and growth of the Northern Territory.
Today I will provide the budget reply for my portfolio responsibilities of Mines and Energy, Primary Industry and Fisheries, and Land Resource Management. Before I turn to each portfolio, I will outline some of the major initiatives the Country Liberals are implementing across my areas of responsibility. We are spending $2.5m to upgrade two critical barrages on the Mary River near Shady Camp to halt saltwater intrusion onto the wetlands and valuable pastoral land.
Additional funding of $1.3m will be used to accelerate land and water suitability assessments to determine new agriculture precincts throughout the Northern Territory. There is additional funding of $3.95m over four years for a total of $15.8m to continue and expand the CORE initiative, as well as additional funding of $2m for a program that will assess the Territory’s shale gas potential and resources.
We are establishing the Food Industry Development Group with $513 000 of new money that will reshape and drive economic agricultural development and activities, including market analysis, new market development and the facilitation of land investment packages.
This budget also contains a $2.25m package to support Indigenous development opportunities and provide permit-free fishing access to intertidal waters overlying Aboriginal land.
I turn specifically to my Department of Mines and Energy. The mining and energy sector continues to be the Territory’s largest industry and major driver of our economy. The Territory needs a strong minerals and onshore petroleum exploration sector to discover new resources to maintain and grow the industry into the future. However, the Territory is competing in a highly competitive globalised marketplace for exploration investment.
In June last year I launched the Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, or CORE, initiative, which was designed to attract minerals and petroleum exploration investment through acquiring new pre-competitive geoscience information to make the Territory a more attractive place to explore, a scheme of industry grants for high-risk exploration and programs to attract international investment into resources projects at the exploration stage.
I am pleased to announce this government is committing a further four years of funding to the CORE initiative at its existing $3.95m level per annum. In addition, we will also be investing an additional $2m per annum for the next four years in an accelerated collaborative program to assess the Territory’s shale gas potential and resources. A better understanding of the Territory’s shale gas potential will accelerate exploration for onshore gas and oil, promote the Territory’s potential to the global industry and underpin government planning on energy security and associated infrastructure and regional development. This is not a cheap exercise, but has the potential to bring forward development of an industry potentially worth billions of dollars in investment and royalties.
The renewal of the CORE initiative, along with the additional $2m per year on shale gas assessments, means the government will be investing $5.95m per year for the next four years on programs to grow the exploration industry. Key components of this funding will include $3.25m per year in new pre-competitive geoscience acquisition, particularly focused in strategic development zones in the gulf, East Arnhem and Central Australian regions. This will include the $2m dedicated to assessing shale gas resources and the potential of the Territory’s prospective basins. We will have a strong focus on collaboration with the Commonwealth and industry to maximise outcomes for the Territory. An amount of $750 000 per year will be used for collaborative industry grants and to co-fund drilling and geophysical programs in underexplored greenfield areas.
There is also $300 000 for ongoing efforts to attract international investment into exploration projects and promote the Territory’s geological potential to the domestic and global industries. There is $1.65m for improved management and delivery of geoscience and exploration data to industry, especially through online systems. This initiative will be undertaken and coordinated by the Northern Territory Geological Survey within my department. This is the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government, and it demonstrates our ‘open for business’ approach to minerals and energy exploration and development.
CORE differs from previous exploration initiatives in having the Territory’s first major geoscience programs targeted at growing the onshore petroleum sector with a focus on the Territory’s unconventional gas potential.
There is also a much stronger emphasis on the importance of a collaborative approach, in order to bring resources and expertise into the Territory. The geoscience programs will focus on two defined strategic development zones, where there will be a coordinated approach by my department to stimulate minerals and energy development.
The first is the Gulf/East Arnhem region, where the vast McArthur Basin has the potential to emerge as a globally significant shale gas province. The second is in Central Australia, which is being increasingly recognised for its minerals and energy potential.
The initiative will also allow significant work to be undertaken to acquire new geoscience information in East Arnhem Land as a stimulus to exploration in the region following the closure of the Gove refinery.
East Arnhem Land is believed to be highly prospective but has little past exploration or geoscience information. This initiative will also allow the department to continue its highly successful efforts in assisting local explorers to attract international investment, particularly from key markets in East Asia.
This new exploration initiative is a major investment in the future of the Territory’s economy and regional economic development, and will link closely with the government’s strategies on north Australian development, Asian engagement, trade and investment, and economic development.
The establishment of an energy directorate last year within the Department of Mines and Energy was essential to the strategic, timely development of the Northern Territory’s considerable natural gas resources to meet the market demands of the mid-term future. This will ensure Territorians benefit from the flow-on effects to the Territory economy.
The energy team is working towards the development and implementation of a whole-of-government energy policy. This will focus on sustained industry growth and prosperity for the Northern Territory over the next 20 years.
In developing policy, the focus is on delivering secure, affordable, reliable and relatively clean energy in the form of gas and solar. The Northern Territory has abundant and renewable energy resources, and those resources will play a critical and increasing role in meeting our future energy needs.
Gas and solar energy will play a key role in driving economic development, including investment in regions and employment. A major focus is on facilitating investment in gas infrastructure, including identifying local, interstate and overseas gas markets; giving consideration to encouraging shared infrastructure and related co-investment; and the development of Alice Springs as an iconic and internationally recognised centre of solar excellence, building on the demonstration value that has already been created by research, development and deployment of solar in and around Alice Springs.
The Centre for Renewable Energy is funded for 2014. While its programs are under review to determine future approaches, I am pleased to say that some of the major projects and research initiatives under way will facilitate infrastructure development for emerging and changing transport needs, such as electric vehicles, and address issues of energy demand and efficiency.
My department’s legacy mines unit is now fully resourced and at operational strength. This unit has already commenced fieldwork, with automated open-pit water level monitoring equipment and a weather station installed at two Top End legacy sites. This provides the unit with the ability to monitor pit levels remotely.
At the Redbank mine, near the Queensland border, a major field program is under way which includes an electromagnetic survey to inform locations of groundwater investigation bores, the installation of groundwater investigation bores and solar groundwater recovery pumps.
The legacy mines unit has also been assisting the department’s technical support unit with ongoing investigations and studies at Mount Todd. A large scale reconnaissance program is planned for later in the Dry Season to begin cataloguing legacy sites, prior to undertaking a risk assessment program for all sites.
My Department of Mines and Energy recently commissioned an external consultant to review and scope an IT business system. This system will provide a one-stop shop for explorers, miners, producers and investors for energy and minerals. It will allow online lodgements and payments for minerals and energy tenure, and operations, improve the availability of up-to-date data to industry and increase accountability and transparency in end-to-end processes undertaken by the department.
I will now talk about my Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries. Recreational fishing is an integral part of the Territory lifestyle, and expenditure across our recreational and fishing tour sectors is estimated to be over $80m annually. For a long time the Territory has been a celebrated fishing destination in Australia, thanks mainly to our remote, uncrowded and wild rivers. Over the past decade the growing Territory population, coupled with incredible advances in fishing technology, has seen the crowds build and our fisheries come under increasing pressure.
All of this makes the task of balancing how we manage and use our fisheries much more difficult than it used to be, but it is important for us to continue to stay at the front of the pack when it comes to fishing and fisheries management. Balancing these competing uses and differing views on the best use of our fish stocks can be a difficult task.
This government’s election commitment to develop a resource-sharing framework to enable evidence-based analysis to be applied to resolve access and resource attribution issues is well under way. It will provide industry with the certainty it needs to invest with confidence. I acknowledge the efforts of the stakeholder-based working group I established. I am currently considering its findings before finalising a new framework under which to consider resource sharing issues.
One of the most important issues for fishing is access, and this government is working hard to achieve win/win outcomes for traditional owners and fishers throughout the Blue Mud Bay negotiation process. The reality of the situation is that the High Court of Australia has made a decision that must be honoured. Negotiating with the many community leaders across our coastline, in a respectful and solutions focused way, is an enormous commitment we will continue to pursue in a way that prioritises permit-free access to as much of the Territory’s coastline as possible.
This budget contains a $2.25m package for the department to support Indigenous development opportunities and provide permit-free fishing access to intertidal waters overlying Aboriginal land. A key part of this package is the government’s commitment to enhance marine ranger programs across the Territory. This includes providing stronger powers for marine rangers so they can undertake compliance and enforcement on our many waterways. This will ensure rangers can work in partnership with government agencies to monitor our vast coastline, rivers and waterways.
Elements of the package include the training of marine rangers in scientific and technical skills in fisheries research, a fish mentoring program to provide training and skill development in commercial fishing to allow more Indigenous Territorians to participate in the seafood industry and better consultation with Aboriginal communities over fishing and marine management.
In addition, a further $466 000 has been allocated to water police to conduct on-country fishery patrols and training with marine ranger groups across the Territory.
The overall package will deliver a number of key outcomes, including improved fisheries compliance in remote areas, more skilled and trained Indigenous Territorians undertaking fisheries research and compliance activities, more skilled and trained Indigenous Territorians participating in the seafood industry and the increased involvement of Indigenous Territorians in fisheries management, research and aquatic resource conservation.
This new package builds upon the existing $1.5m in Indigenous programs already undertaken by the Fisheries Division to build the capacity of Indigenous marine rangers and work in partnership with Aboriginal communities across the Territory. These programs are acclaimed nationally.
This government is also committed to commercial fisheries development. My Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries is reviewing commercial fisheries with the objectives of minimising red tape, increasing investment certainty and realising the potential of the commercial sector as a food producer. A review of potential alternative management frameworks for the barramundi fishery is under way. This review will aim to identify and target strategic development opportunities which lead to improved performance for the barramundi fishery.
Other commercial fisheries undergoing reviews to improve their viability and performance include the offshore net and line fishery in shark and trepang, and the mud crab fishery. It is hoped these reviews can mirror successes seen in the transformation of offshore snapper fisheries in recent years.
In recognition of the importance of managing our fisheries now and into the future, $2.5m has been allocated for the sustainable management of the Territory’s aquatic resource. A key focus of this research will be monitoring the status of our at-risk coastal reef fish around the Darwin area. I am considering a new management package for reef fish to ensure our children can enjoy the benefits of healthy fish stocks into the future.
An allocation of $560 000 for the sustainable management of recreational fishing will see the ongoing implementation of the recreational fishing development plan. This includes a dedicated recreational fishing survey program to properly understand recreational fishing patterns in the Territory so we can manage our resources most effectively.
This is an addition to the broader research team that works to monitor and evaluate the health of our stocks and ecosystems. Recognising the importance of recreational fishing to our social and cultural wellbeing, we have also established a recreational fishing advisory committee to provide frank and independent advice on all major issues at the centre of recreational fishing in the Territory.
The mango industry in the Northern Territory, valued at around $80m, now provides over 50% of all Australian product, and because of our stable climatic conditions this industry is expanding. I would also like to throw in the fact that the Katherine region produces more than 50% of the Territory’s mangoes.
Mr Higgins: The best come out of the Daly.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: The member for Daly tells me that the best mangoes come from the Daly, but I may have to agree to disagree with him on that.
However, the challenges facing the security of this industry are market access constraints regarding exporting and providing high-quality fruit into the domestic market. This budget contains $1.24m, which includes $350 000 of Commonwealth funding, to evaluate alternative market access protocols to allow the export of mangoes from Australia without post-harvest disinfestation treatment. This will open the opportunity for mango exports directly out of the port of Darwin into countries such as China and the Middle East. Linked to this export strategy is the need to improve mango export access to overseas markets and undertake initiatives to lengthen the mango production period through improved crop management and alternative mango genetics.
The past two seasons have seen an increase in poor quality fruit out of the Darwin region. In collaboration with industry, greater detailed trials will be conducted to identify the problems and implement strategies to increase the reputation of Darwin’s fruit.
The Territory’s next largest horticultural industry is melons, valued at $45m. To secure the profitability of the watermelon industry, the department is working closely with commercial seed companies to resolve problems associated with soil borne pathogens which have recently caused this industry to suffer significant losses. We are investing $200 000 into this project.
As well as this, $300 000, including $100 000 of Commonwealth funding, will be used to investigate practices to maximise economic efficiency of nitrogen use on melon, vegetable and hay farms, while minimising the impact of greenhouse gases on the environment and storing carbon in the soil.
In collaboration with the Australian Banana Growers Council, new banana varieties from germplasm improvement programs from around the world will be evaluated at the Coastal Plains research station for resistance against Tropical race 4 Panama disease to increase banana production in the Territory.
Again this year $400 000 has been allocated to continue the Ord Stage 3 pre-development work by the Ord Development Unit. Priority work in 2014-15 will focus on native title negotiations and cross border issues, such as water supply and infrastructure.
The Northern Territory’s pastoral industry contributes well over $330m to the economy every year. With the recent upturn in live export figures to Southeast Asian destinations, namely Indonesia and Vietnam, all indications show that this figure is likely to rise substantially over coming years. The Country Liberals government is a proud supporter of the Northern Territory’s pastoralists, and we have worked hard to help restore and rebuild this iconic industry.
Recent live export sales of cattle and buffalo to Vietnam indicate the real possibility of a new long-term, robust live export market. The new Vietnamese market, in conjunction with the recently increased live cattle quotas from the Indonesian government, is providing confidence and encouragement for the industry’s recovery. The Country Liberals government has developed a collaborative strategy, in conjunction with industry partners, to restore and increase our live export industry.
To create diversity and greater opportunity for Territory pastoralists and to increase focus on emerging markets, funding of $300 000 was used to establish a Live Animals Export Market Development Unit within the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries. The department is also investigating methods to increase the areas of land suitable for grazing cattle. The Indigenous Pastoral Program, which is supported through the department, aims to increase cattle numbers and land in production on Aboriginal land, and to increase Indigenous participation in the Northern Territory’s pastoral industry. Indeed, it was heartening to hear recently that the Indigenous Land Corporation has plans to double the number of cattle run on Aboriginal land across northern Australia in coming years. This will benefit the economies of northern Australia and provide direct benefit for Indigenous people. Future priorities for the Northern Territory’s live export and pastoral industries include maintaining efforts in Indonesia, building on emerging markets for cattle and buffalo, including Vietnam, and identifying and developing new live export trade opportunities in the Asian region.
In this budget, the Territory’s primary industry sector will be strengthened through the establishment of a Food Industry Development Group to drive economic agricultural development. Budget 2014-15 provides $1m over two years to progress this very important initiative.
I turn to my Department of Land Resource Management. This department works in partnership with landowners to manage precious land and water resources, and will receive $49.5m in Budget 2014-15, including $4.9m for new initiatives. Access to good land and water resources will underpin northern Australia’s development. My department will continue playing a critical role in supporting and facilitating economic development across the Northern Territory. Already, the potential of the Daly, Mataranka and Katherine agriculture precincts are being realised with growers gaining access to precious water. However, much more work needs to be done to identify new areas where land and water resources are suitable for economic expansion in job-creating industries such as agriculture and tourism.
The Northern Territory government wants to remove the guesswork and take a considered, science-based approach to the ecological sustainable development of our north. That is why, as the member for Katherine and Minister for Land Resource Management, I welcome the Treasurer’s 2014-15 budget, which boosts investment in our land and water resources. New budget initiatives include $2.4m of funding for expanding the land and water assessment program to find new agricultural precincts throughout the Territory. This is in addition to the $1.8m for land and water suitability assessments for agricultural developments taking place on the Tiwi Islands.
Assessment of available water resources is critical in determining the land suitability of an area. Land and water assessments will provide high-quality land and water suitability information and mapping essentials for underpinning successful agricultural developments. The availability of this data is key to accelerating and attracting private investment, which will also reduce the risk to investors, potential business failures and mitigate potential land, water, flora and fauna degradation. A continual $1.35m will be used to increase the activities of the rangeland monitoring program and provide ongoing support to the Pastoral Land Board.
This government is determined to increase opportunities available for landowners, primary producers and those whose businesses depend on land and water. Changes introduced in January this year to the Pastoral Land Act enable pastoralists to diversify land use and develop new income streams without having to change the tenure of their pastoral lease. Non-pastoral operations could focus on activities such as tourism, horticulture, extensive agricultural developments, aquaculture and forestry, which co-exist with the pastoral enterprise. When coupled with this government’s commitment to using the Northern Territory’s water resources to drive economic development in a way that is sustainable and underpinned by quality science and sensible policy, pastoral lease holders have a unique opportunity to diversify their income streams and contribute further to the economic growth of the Northern Territory.
The Country Liberals government recognises the solid work of my department staff, who work tirelessly to get through a backlog of water licence applications left to sit idle by the former Labor government, and then get on and process new applications.
During the last 18 months, the water controller has issued 82 licences which will support economic development and job creation in the key industries of agriculture and tourism. But, this is only the beginning; there is an abundance of land across the Top End. The development of the north depends on access to water that is reliable and ecologically sustainable.
The Northern Territory government stands proud of its commitment to economic development across the whole of the Northern Territory, especially in our regions. These licences, the ones currently being issued, are not without their conditions or restrictions, meaning that in dry years there will be less water allocated so the environment and all stakeholders are protected. It is called adaptive management.
Opponents of water licences, whether it be in this Chamber or other stakeholder groups shackled by misdirected ideology, need to understand and accept that you cannot develop land without water.
Part of the $2.4m announced in budget 2014 will go into assessing water resources needed to develop the north for all Territorians. A range of water administration fees will be introduced by my department for services such as bore construction permits, water extraction licences and drilling licences to cover administration and transaction costs.
Obtaining a water extraction licence is no different to obtaining a development permit and, as such, applicants should pay fees for these permits.
We want our regions to grow and prosper, and the issuing of water licences through a science-based approach supports environmentally sustainable economic development with strong policy that provides certainty for investors.
I want to pick up on some of the things the Opposition Leader said during her budget reply this morning, talking about water.
I need to assure Territorians that, first of all, we take our responsibilities as the custodians of water for all Territorians very seriously. What I heard today from the Opposition Leader clearly indicated that she has a palpable misunderstanding of water resources and allocations in the Northern Territory. I propose that she receive a briefing to better understand the way water resources are allocated across the Territory.
Her scaremongering tactics this morning – no doubt we will hear plenty more of those this afternoon from the member for Nhulunbuy when she presents her motion – do nothing to inspire confidence in the way the Territory government is approaching water.
Ms FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member for Katherine to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: We are not issuing water licences willy-nilly to our mates across the Northern Territory. We are not allocating all available water in an entire aquifer. We are sticking with the science; it tells us how much water we can allocate from an aquifer and, at this point, the notional amount of water which can be allocated, based on annual recharge, is 20%.
The opposition would have people believe that we will stick a straw into an aquifer and suck it dry. That is incredibly misleading. I cannot use the word ‘lie’ in this House, but that is what it is. I am getting to the point where I am sick of hearing that sort of vitriol and diatribe from those opposite, who clearly do not understand water allocations in the Territory. We are about the responsible use of our water resources. We do want to see economic development, and we are working very hard to get that balance right. No doubt the member for Nhulunbuy will have plenty of vitriol in her debate this afternoon.
I am pleased to advise of funding of $500 000 to continue weed management extension services across regional areas of the Territory to assist pastoralists in controlling weed incursions and infestations, particularly around Tennant Creek and Katherine. Invasive weed species are a threat to productivity, the environmental viability of the land and, in particular, the pastoral industry. Weed spread can also have an impact on the tourism industry, affecting waterways and fishing accessibility and activity.
The department is combating saltwater intrusion at the Mary River through developing a capital works program of an unprecedented $2.5m. This is for major works near Shady Camp to upgrade two critical barrages. We recognise the need to get engineering and construction methods right on those barrages to create long-term barriers suitable for preventing the intrusion of saltwater. That work will commence this year.
Mr Wood: That would be good work for Corrections.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It would be good work for Corrections, perhaps.
The floodplain contains some of the most productive area for biodiversity in Australia, and has wetland conservation values of international standards. It is recognised as a site of biodiversity conservation significance, and has important cultural values.
New engineering designs of the barrages, as I mentioned, will assist in the short term to reduce the speed of saltwater intrusion in the lower Mary River floodplains, upstream of the main Shady Camp barrage. New designs will see rock armoured barrages with low rock-line spillways constructed to the same height as surrounding floodplains. This will allow for better interconnectivity between the river and the floodplains, which will facilitate fish migration in the system and allow a more cost-effective utilisation of the annual repair and maintenance program.
Delivery of this capital works program may improve the short-term management of the risk of saltwater intrusion and assist in protecting significant breeding sites for vast populations of waterbirds in the Northern Territory, including magpie geese, protecting our major breeding areas for fish species and freshwater pastures for cattle stock.
I take this opportunity to recognise the wonderful job the dedicated Bushfires NT and 23 volunteer bushfire brigades do, and their important work across the Northern Territory protecting landscapes, homes and infrastructure from wildfires. A review of the Bushfires Act is under way, with submissions closing on Friday 23 May this year. The modernisation of the legislation allows the act to recognise collaborations and mechanisms for providing a bushfire management service to over 90% of the Northern Territory’s land mass. A continued $1m of funding will be used for wildfire suppression activities to protect communities at risk during the coming fire season, and to deploy aerial assets to assist with aerial firefighting to combat wildfires. My department continues to work with Indigenous elders and communities to preserve and utilise Indigenous biocultural knowledge for the conservation of the Territory’s flora and fauna. The results of this have led to several publications about unique plants and animals found in the Territory.
The combination of traditional knowledge with modern science is also being demonstrated through our partnership with the northern environmental research program that focuses, in part, on feral cat management on Indigenous land. Across Australia, it is estimated that feral cats kill up to 75 million native mammals, insects and reptiles every night. A large portion of this destruction is happening right here in our back yard, with our national parks, such as Kakadu, a key area of concern.
My department is working closely with scientists and rangers from the NT and the Australian government, along with Indigenous traditional owners to quantify the role of feral cats in the Top End and determine a suitable response which will not jeopardise native populations any further. To continue this important work combating the devastation and destruction caused by feral cats and to reverse small mammal decline over the long term, Budget 2014-15 invests a further $400 000 towards feral cat management, in collaboration with Indigenous landowners. We are very much at the information gathering stage and the work that has already been done and will continue to be done through this budget boost will lay the foundation for future direction in this area.
As well as maintaining a formal list of threatened species protected under the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, the flora and fauna division of my department is involved in a suite of management, monitoring and research programs for threatened species, recovering about 35 species in recent years. I am pleased to announce that Budget 2014-15 provides $500 000 for the assessment and monitoring of threatened and significant wildlife. Sound information about threatened species is important for managing and protecting our wildlife for the future.
This is how my Departments of Primary Industry and Fisheries, Mines and Energy, and Land Resource Management will spend their funding in the coming 12 months. Before I sit down, seeing as I have another four minutes to go, I might quickly touch on some of the initiatives this budget brings for my electorate of Katherine. I will not go too much into the macro figures because the Treasurer has adequately articulated those to the community at large.
It is wonderful to see money coming into my electorate for the rebuilding and repairs and maintenance of roads. A couple of years ago, when I was in opposition, I wrote to the former Minister for Transport, the member for Barkly, asking him to consider putting a bridge over Leight Creek on Emungalan Road. The response was, basically, a curt no. I am delighted to announce that $2.75m has been allocated by this government for Katherine rural roads. That sum will include enough money to collaborate with the Alice Springs Town Council and provide better flood immunity for the 30 or so residents who live on the other side of Leight Creek on Emungalan Road.
That money will then be spent on other roads which will benefit the economy of Katherine – Beasley Road, Florina Road and Edith Farms Road – because we recognise there are businesses there which very much rely on transport to get their product to market. Improving road infrastructure will assist those businesses.
It is also a pleasure to be able to talk about the alcohol mandatory treatment centre which will be built in Katherine, and the additional capacity which will be provided at the Katherine Hospital for assessment services for alcohol mandatory treatment.
There is money which has finally been made available to progress work on an alternate route for heavy vehicles. While we are certainly not looking at a second high-level bridge at this stage, we are looking at strengthening the road and improving intersections on what we consider to be the most likely alternate route a future heavy vehicle bypass might take and that is on Bicentennial Road.
That, in addition to many of the other initiatives for Katherine, bodes very well for the relationship between this government and my community of Katherine. I commend the Treasurer on Budget 2014-15. As I said last night in Katherine, not only is this a good budget for families, it is a fantastic budget for the economy, because it starts to apply appropriate resources to the areas that will help to build, strengthen and support the economic base of the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Katherine; you have the most interesting portfolio in the business.
I might not agree with everything, but I agree with pretty well most of it. Thank you also for raising the issue of biodiversity, which does not get enough publicity in this House. It is possibly because you have other fairly major considerations to look at, and biodiversity ends up on the last page of your speech. It is a very important part of the Northern Territory. Even though you keep saying we are open for business, and I do not have a problem with the idea of making sure we develop the Northern Territory, we have to be careful we do not wreck it in the process of being open for business. It was good to hear about biodiversity. I started dreaming of camping by a creek along the Bullita Stock Route in the Gregory National Park when you spoke about the wildlife we want to protect.
I will give my two bobs’ worth on water allocations later, but it might be different to what people are saying today.
There are good things in the budget. I might come to that later, otherwise I will miss the important reason I am here, and that is to speak about my own electorate, the rural area. In that area I cannot give the Northern Territory government any ticks. You might say that is negative, but it is not my fault. I am reading the budget papers for my area and there is pretty well nothing. I know the member for Goyder looked at it too, as did the member for Daly. I am not sure what his opinion is, but we have two infrastructure items: a drain and some infrastructure at Humpty Doo. That is it for an area of 20 000 people.
If you think I am being negative, it is not my fault. What do I have to be proud of? There is a drain and some infrastructure at Humpty Doo to develop private land. I would like to know whose private land the government is building infrastructure for. There is Crown land in Humpty Doo which needs to be developed, and a parcel of land was approved by the government outside the district centre which is private land and not attached to any infrastructure except electricity and water. I hope this is not about sewerage infrastructure to a development that should have to fund its own way when it is not part of the district centre. I am waiting on clarification of that.
Minister, you spoke about many things, and I would love to have a debate. It is a pity some of the stuff you talked about cannot come up more often. We have had two speakers on cattle, and that is it. You had great things about horticulture, new agriculture and horticulture precincts, fishing, and you have shale gas, which we should be discussing.
You only mentioned gas and solar. I went to Europe, and one of the reasons for that was to look at how we could develop hydrogen. Hydrogen, fuel cells and batteries were part of a big exhibition I visited in Hannover. There is potential in the Northern Territory for communities to produce their own hydrogen. I saw a huge tidal turbine south of Belfast. We need to be looking at those sorts of possibilities. I also looked at geothermal, the development of energy from solar heat. There is a range of possibilities we should be looking at besides gas. When I visited AREVA, the big French energy company, two of its scientists were talking about small-scale nuclear plants. At the moment we talk about huge nuclear plants which are probably not feasible even if people supported them in the Northern Territory, because we have a small population. However, they are looking at the possibility of small-scale nuclear plants.
People might close their mind to nuclear energy, but they should perhaps go to Europe and France to look at the recycling program they have for nuclear waste. Look at the safeguards they have in France, and bear in mind that with the politics of the world today when some companies have gas and some do not, if you are not self-sufficient in energy you are susceptible to some countries putting pressure on you to do what they want, if you are not careful. Sometimes it is not only about the environment; there are also political issues involved in energy sustainability and independence.
I raise that because the minister covered the issue. The issue of energy – as we have an energy committee – is not only about solar and gas. We should be looking at all forms of energy, even ones we might not agree with. That is why we must keep our minds open.
I have digressed there, so I will go back to my local area. There are two pieces of infrastructure: a drain and some infrastructure at Humpty Doo. Freds Pass is probably the biggest sporting and recreation area outside of what the government has put into Marrara, Traeger and maybe Palmerston. The majority of Freds Pass has been built by voluntary workers and funding from the local council. It has government input from time to time, but it receives nothing like the amount of money which is poured into places like Palmerston, Darwin and Alice Springs.
You only have to look at the huge amount of money poured into Palmerston in the last few years. Look at the first-class soccer fields at Freds Pass. There are three soccer fields there, but what do they have? They have a tin shed for their barbecue and change rooms, but that is it. If you go to Palmerston you will see a huge stand, all the works and jerks and a lovely caf; it is fantastic. With AFL at Freds Pass, Southern Districts, the longstanding football club, has approximately 12 teams playing this year. It has a small grandstand and that is about it.
In Palmerston there is a beautiful grandstand. There is nothing wrong with that, I umpire there and it is fantastic, but there are very similar populations in the two areas. Which one receives a few dollars? It is not Freds Pass.
If the government is fair dinkum about sport – it has nearly tripled the value of its sport vouchers, and that is not a good idea. I am not against the Sport Voucher Scheme being expanded, but the value being at $75 was a good thing to help people. I do not think it is meant to pay for everything people need. I wonder if it is a bit of a sweetener at the moment, rather than common sense.
Government has money to spend, yet there are facilities for people at Freds Pass which need upgrading. With the rugby union facilities, most of the work has been done voluntarily, with some funding from the government. They are building two new fields there which will be first class. With the polocrosse there will be national championships there. Most of its work has been done by volunteers, with people giving machinery and spending their time there.
There has been some money from government from time to time, a grant here and there, but most of it has either been donated or wascouncil money. It is disappointing there is nothing in this budget for Freds Pass.
We are desperate for a new high school; there is no doubt Taminmin high school is full. I told the previous government to start building one where Weddell will be. You do not have to have a city there to build a school. There are plenty of people who live in the southern parts of Litchfield Shire, Batchelor, Adelaide River and Dundee, so another school there could be planned straight away, but it seemed to put Weddell into the too-hard basket and, unfortunately, children are now finding they have to go to other schools because our local high school is full.
In relation to things like the cycle path, we now have a new-beaut suburb called Coolalinga. Believe it or not, ministers, we allow for some development in the rural area, and the perfect thing would be to connect people to the bicycle path which already runs down the railway line, by extending it another four or five kilometres.
It would be ideal for the member for Drysdale to get on her bike, go all the way to Coolalinga and have Maccas. I think she would love that.
Ms Finocchiaro: It is close to my house.
Mr WOOD: That is right. At the moment, I can at least go back to Palmerston, although …
Ms Finocchiaro: That is why we do not have a bike path, so you cannot come this way.
Mr WOOD: How about we find a compromise, and we both go each way?
It also preserves the heritage of an important part of our Territory, which is the original railway line. Even though there is a bridge missing down there, which someone pinched a few years ago, it is something that should eventually – I will probably be dead and buried – become a mountain bike trail or a rail trail, as they are called, all the way to Adelaide River. Trevor Horman, who is a great fan of the heritage of Adelaide River and the railway, would love the rail corridor to be somehow preserved and used as a recreational path.
How many times have I asked for a retirement village? There is land at Humpty Doo, nice trees grow - I love nice native trees - but the land is set aside for residential development, and one government, about 15 years ago, allowed some buildings there. The Labor government built one duplex in all its time in office. The new government does not seem interested either, yet we are screaming out for places where rural people would like to stay in their retirement without leaving the rural area. Humpty Doo is ideal. The government owns the land, and there is water, sewerage and electricity. There are chemists, doctors, a pub – you must have all three prioritised – a supermarket and a hairdresser. You have everything you need next door to where a retirement village could go, but we do not seem to have a government which cares about what rural people want. It cares about what Palmerston and Darwin people want, it even cares about what Alice Springs and the bush people want, but for some reason there is an area called no man’s land, which is the rural area south of Darwin. It seems to be left out.
How much rural land will the government open up? It owns a lot of rural land, but it has not considered opening up one block. We have land that would currently cost between $400 000 and $500 000 for a 1 ha block with water, because private developers strangle the market. They drip feed a few blocks of land out every now and then, and no young family can afford to buy land where they were brought up, unless they want to live with their mum and dad in a granny flat next door.
We have nothing in this budget to say, ‘We recognise rural living as a legitimate way of living in the Northern Territory, and we will open up some of our land for rural living’. There is not one block of land. The government has just said, ‘We will put umpteen thousand blocks in your back yard’. Has it held any discussions with locals? No. Has it had any discussions with the local member? No. Has it asked local people if they think their area name should be changed to Palmerston north? No. I have told the government it is arrogant a number of times; it might have some fine ideas, but is not bringing people with it. It is making statements in this parliament as if it knows best. It does not care what people think.
The government is open for business, and as long as it keeps its mates in big business happy, that is all it cares about. If that is the way it treats people, it should not expect to be in government next time around. People have already said to me, ‘What is this? Suburbs all the way down Howard Springs Road? We were never told about that, we have never been asked.’ The government might think it is only out there, but rural people are very proud of living in the rural area. If you treat them with contempt or ignore them, you do so at your own peril. As I have said to the minister, I am happy to work with you and perhaps there is some compromise here. However, there was no chance to find that compromise.
The decisions were made without consulting me and without any local meetings. It was just done. What really sets it off is when government says, ‘It will be called Palmerston north’. Give me a break! You might think it is a joke sometimes. Believe it or not, if I walked into Palmerston and said, ‘Rosebery and Durack, you will be called St Petersburg because I have friends in Russia’, and you said, ‘Terrific, and we do not care what you think, we are just going to do it’, I am sure people in Palmerston would be up in arms
You might say it is only a name. It came about because Madam Speaker’s mother asked for it – I was on the council when it happened – to be retained. The road in that area is called Wallaby Holtze Road, and Wallaby Holtze was the first botanical garden director, from memory …
Madam SPEAKER: He was related to the first botanical garden director.
Mr WOOD: He was related, so it has a Territory history. It goes back to the 19th century, and was declared by the place names committee as the area there. It is not all of the area we are talking about, as some of it is Howard Springs, not Holtze. It might be an unusual name for people; it might be hidden by signs on the highway that the Department of Transport has allowed to block the name. If you travel through Pinelands on the right hand side you will see a Holtze sign which has a tyre company sign in front of it. I called the department years ago and asked it to move it, but you will see it still sitting there. The name has been there for many years, but the government has said, ‘No, we will call it Palmerston north’. That shows a lack of consideration for Territorians. Regardless of whose electorate they are in, that is not the way to treat them.
I have mentioned education before. Pensioners are concerned that they may lose their concessions. Having worked all their life, the government promised them that once every two years they would receive a return airfare and some concessions. I was speaking to a lady in a restaurant yesterday about this, and she could not understand why they might take those away. I heard the minister on television last night saying the cost of this is going up and up. It is going up and up, but theoretically you should be receiving more and more taxes, so it is not a big cost.
What concerned this person was that those people who have relations down south might say it is all too hard. The original reason for some of these concessions was to hold people in the Northern Territory. If you start to take them away from people who have worked hard in the Northern Territory, and who possibly do not receive a pension or will not receive a pension, they are more than likely to go down south and stay with their grandchildren, instead of visiting them once every so often. The original reason for some of those concessions will now not be there for them to stay in the Territory, and that is a shame.
Berrimah Farm has always been an interesting one, and the government needs to be very careful before it starts putting houses there. I made a suggestion that perhaps you should move the Fannie Bay racetrack there, or the Winnellie greyhounds, and maybe even set up a trotting track as well. You could then open up the land in Fannie Bay, because the racetrack there is squashed in.
People recently e-mailed me when the stables were expanded to say they did not want them near their houses because, as you know, stables smell. There are some fairly expensive buildings there, but that has never seemed to worry governments when they want to pull them down, like Sports House. I do not know why you could not redevelop that for housing and have a racetrack near the main highway on the flat, which you could develop as a first-class racing facility. You could even perhaps use the centre part as a football ground, as they do now for touch football.
That is one idea. The other concern I have is that there is a company called Ostojic transport on Tivendale Road. It not only has trucks, but it moves gravel and extractive mining materials around, and has a sieve or crushing operation at the bottom end of Tivendale Road which creates a lot of dust that I imagine could be poisonous and that floats around that industrial area. The owner told me he built in that area because there was a guarantee there would be no residential land around him. Has the government spoken to some of the people who work in that area? I do not know.
It is an attractive area to put housing. The Labor government looked at it and said it was not bad. You could perhaps use some of that land for a better purpose and maybe develop land, for example, at Fannie Bay, and still create adequate housing.
The other problem you have is noise, as at the far end there is the Hidden Valley racetrack. Hidden Valley racetrack is where it is today because of the noise it created when it was situated on Bagot Road. Those who lived in that area would know that if you went there on Saturday night you could hardly see Bagot Road for the dust, and the noise was horrendous. The government made a decision to stick all motorsports at Hidden Valley. If you are anywhere near the drags on a Saturday night, you might be asking why there is so much noise. The drags make a lot of noise, and when the V8s are there you can hear the noise from Kormilda College. I have played cricket there when there has been motorbike racing at Hidden Valley. You will see a huge mound, because of the noise, near the old HMAS Coonawarra land, where houses are relatively close to Hidden Valley. The government should think carefully about putting houses there.
There are other issues. There are sand flies, it is close to Tiger Brennan Drive, if you are building down that end, and both sides have light to heavy industry in that area. The government might be able to work ways around that; it will be an isolated community, so you would have to ensure there are plenty of public facilities in the area. There might be some advantages. The Knuckey Lagoon community on my side could do with sewerage if that was part of the development, and that might help them. However, before you go down the path of doing this, make sure you look at all possible options. Once again, perhaps it is a good place for the Fannie Bay racetrack.
I mentioned alternative energy and the Sport Voucher Scheme. Whilst on one hand the government is saying it is broke and in debt - the $75 voucher was adequate. It gives me the impression, when you nearly triple that rate, that it is a sweetener or the polls are down a bit. I am all for the minister saying this budget is for families, but we must be realistic.
It reminded me of one of the good things in the Health minister’s budget, which was money for palliative care. I have been in this parliament for a while, and it is great the palliative care facility has been given more funding. It is an important part of the Territory, and I wonder if the minister could tell us about the mobile palliative care units helping in communities in this very important area that are receiving extra funding.
In case people get the wrong idea, during the debate the Chief Minister said – this is about housing in the Holtze area – that the local mayor supports it. I am not here to knock the local mayor, but he was speaking for himself. I checked with the council and asked if it had a policy on suburban housing in that area. It said, ‘No, we have no policy. The only negotiations we have had were with the Northern Territory Planning Commission, which are the same negotiations everybody else has had. Here is an A4 sheet of paper; this is what we are thinking of doing. What are your comments?’ Please do not quote somebody as if the council supports it. The council, as far as I know, does not have a policy on this issue.
The Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment, when making his statement yesterday, gave the impression that I do not support rural development. It is annoying when you hear people say that, because he was referring to Howard Springs. I supported Coolalinga. If anyone goes to Coolalinga, they will see blocks of flats, duplexes and single dwellings being built. You will see Maccas, many industrial sheds going up, and you will see space for a huge shopping centre. I support that; I supported it when it went to planning, and I support the development of Howard Springs. It should be moderate development because there are issues with traffic, and it is surrounded by five-acre blocks, so the intensity of development must be moderate.
The issue I referred to was about a development there. I am not opposed to that block being subdivided, because it has been zoned in such a way; however, the minister has just approved 20 sewage treatment plants on that block and I am trying to find out why. I do not think the department of environmental health would have approved that. My concern about the way the sewage is treated is twisted and turned around to say I am opposed to development. I am not opposed to the 20 blocks to be developed there, because they are permitted; I am not arguing that case. I am arguing that the way the sewage is treated should be done carefully, because I and many other people around that area drink out of the aquifer. It gives me the proverbial when people say, ‘You are against development’.
It is a funny way that we debate issues here; if you can see a political edge, grab it, even if it is not true. I place on the record that I do not like being told that I do not support development. I support development in Howard Springs, as long as it is moderate to suit that area. It is only a small area which can be developed, because that is the only land available.
In the context of what we are talking about today with the budget, the government has emphasised housing development, which is one of its keys, and said we need to bring down the price of land.
I support affordable housing, but you will not create affordable housing if you do not have affordable land. What this government has done, and the previous government did, is not think outside the square.
The government owns Crown land. You should develop Weddell, so let us argue about that as it is Crown land. The government could employ a developer to develop the land, but retain ownership of it. If it retained ownership of the land, you remove the profit that the person they sold it to has to recover, and the profit would then reduce the price of land.
People scream, ‘We bought our land at this price’. Somewhere along the line, we have to bring land prices down to what people can afford, and we are not even attempting to do that. The alternative for the government selling the land is to lease it, as happens in the ACT. It happens in other parts of the world where you can lease land on a 99-year basis; people pay a lease for the land, but they also pay for the house. Generally speaking, a house and land package is about 50/50 – maybe a bit more for the house – but if you take out half of the amount that you do not have to include in a mortgage, look at the instant mortgage relief you have.
If the land side is removed from a $600 000 land and house package, as you will only lease it over a period of time, you take away some of the burden of a high mortgage and allow younger people to come in.
The other option is to release a portion of the land at a set price so the government can recover its costs and put covenants on the blocks. You say to first home owners that they can have this block at this price, as long as they build within two years and stay in the house for the next six to seven years. You cannot sell it for seven or eight years, and you cannot rent it. That is an alternative way, so you move people onto their land, but we do not have that. We hear, ‘Let us sell it to a big developer, who will try to squeeze every block of land they can out of that parcel of land’. You might say, ‘Well, that is business’. Go to Radford Road, where people were promised 1 ha blocks at one stage to buffer them from the Palmerston subdivision. I think it is down to 4000 m2 now, because the developer said, ‘I cannot afford to do it’. In that case, they should have left it as bush, and many people would have been much happier.
The government has ways and means of developing land at an affordable price, but it tends to be stuck in the groove of giving it to a developer and letting the market take control, which is why many people cannot afford to buy their own house today.
The government has a role to play in making land affordable; however, this government does not seem to want to go down that path, and the previous government did not want to go down that path either.
I do not accept what the minister said about Weddell. I was involved in some of the Weddell development; there was a lot of work undertaken in workshops, but there was also a lot of work performed afterwards. Much of the work which had to be done was about environment, waterlogging, the availability of water and where infrastructure would go. You must have that basis before you can develop Weddell. Instead of worrying about Holtze, put the money into developing Weddell, which is close to Darwin River dam, Weddell power stations, Palmerston, the road into town, and you could build a light railway if you made the effort to do it. Use some vision, develop Weddell, it is your plan.
There is nothing in the budget for the rural area. There are some good things overall, but pensioners and local rural people have a drain and a bit of pipe in Humpty Doo.
Mr HIGGINS (Daly): Madam Speaker, ministers in this House have a big advantage over backbenchers and opposition in having access to budget information long before we do. However, I will put some comments on the record.
I went to the ministers’ lunch yesterday and a breakfast this morning, and the impression I got is that this budget has been accepted across the business sector. I had a quick look through it, especially in those areas which affect me, and there are some good points in there for the bush, especially in my electorate. While whatever is being spent is never enough, I was happy to hear the Minister for Transport say this morning that we will seal the Port Keats Road. I do not think there is enough money in this year’s budget to do that; I think he meant we will start sealing the Port Keats Road.
Mr Wood: And a bit of the Litchfield road too.
Mr HIGGINS: Yes, but there is never enough money in the budget wherever it is allocated.
There are some important points. One of the reasons the CLP was elected was because of the issue of local government. I was glad to see we have $25.5m in the budget for local councils and their grant subsidies. One shire specifically which will split into a new council from 1 July, is the Victoria Daly. It will now have the West Daly council, and in the budget there is $1.5m for this year and $1.5m next year to help support that split. I am very happy with that because these people have wanted to set up a separate council for a long time for some autonomy and to have their voice back. They need a lot of help, and the government needs to recognise that it is not automatically there. They need a lot of support, help with governance and many other areas. They will also have to deal with the other half of the shire that will split away, and that half is a lot more savvy in this area.
I am happy with the money allocated in the budget for the Northern Australia Development Office. When developing northern Australia was first suggested, and the government was writing its paper, I wrote some letters to the minister and the Chief Minister about some of the things I thought we should include our submission. I am happy that we have set up an office here; I could not attend the opening of the office on the Esplanade the other day, but I know the NT Farmers Association also has an office there, which it is happy with. It was a good idea to establish the Northern Australia Development Office; there is an allocation of $3.6m for that to happen, and it will be money well spent.
I have an interest in horticulture, and there are many people involved in the industry in my electorate. There are many Vietnamese people there, and there is a lot of potential for horticulture in the more remote areas towards Wadeye. I was also glad to see that we have established a Food Industry Development Group, following on from one started by private industry. It is a food futures group, which I have had a few meetings with. The minister is involved, and it will hold a seminar later this year. One of the things that group recognised is that you must identify your markets and transport before you grow new fruit.
You can grow virtually anything in the Territory, as you only need water, fertiliser and a bit of hard work. The problem is the timing of when you take these things to the market, how far away your market is and who will buy and sell it. The combination of that food futures conference and the Food Industry Development Group has great potential for horticulture in the Territory. Tied in with that is $4m set aside for mango productivity and marketing, etcetera, which I presume is linked with that as well; that is relevant. The Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries mentioned the problem which existed last year in the mango industry, referred to as resin canal. That disorder – I will not say disease because it is accepted that it is not a disease — has the potential to cut well into the $80m that mangoes bring to the Territory. It also gives many of our agents interstate an excuse to downgrade the quality of our fruit, and therefore we will not receive as high a return.
It is very good that we keep investing in the mango industry. Many people think it has grown very large and that all producers are very rich. I can assure you that we are not. It is a very big industry, but you must be more and more competitive nowadays. The return price of mangoes at the moment is probably the same as it was about 10 years ago, whereas costs have increased. You must introduce your own efficiencies.
I was also happy to see that we are continuing our support of Douglas Daly and Beatrice Hill, with $1.2m. I am concerned, along with the member for Nelson and probably the member for Goyder, about the planned splitting of Berrimah Farm. The initial concern I have is with all of the laboratories and crops we are trialling there, herds of cattle we do trials with and other issues. What will happen in those areas?
I remember when the previous government stopped soil sampling in that area. That upset me in that we did not provide that service anymore, but the government used the excuse that it was costing too much money. However, the industry was willing to pay for that service. The problem you now hit in losing that soil sampling is that everyone in the horticultural industry sends their soil samples away each year to see what fertiliser they will use; they all go to different places around the country and no one centrally locates what is happening with our soils. Is there leeching, or a chemical build up? If soil had been tested centrally, through the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, passed out to a group like the NT Horticultural Association or farmers, we may have been able to control that process.
I do not want this government to make the same mistake as the last one by getting rid of many of these laboratories, specifically for water testing. At the moment you pay to have your water sample tested, and I would hate to see that palmed off to private industry without trying to control it.
The other thing I pick up on is about the key pastime in the Territory, which is fishing; many people might think it is drinking. We have allocated $0.36m to continue permit-free fishing and economic development related to the Blue Bud May decision. Many settlements at Blue Mud Bay have been taken as an opportunity for rangers to become more involved, and I see this as having a lot of potential with, for example, water monitoring on the Daly River. I know we have some money for surface water monitoring, and rangers can do that. They can be eyes and ears for the police, and I also see the potential for the ranger programs to take on, if they can — there are some legal problems at the moment — some passive policing roles.
On the Daly there is a problem with a number of cherubin traps which have been set. Cherubin traps should have a name on them, and they must be of a certain size and shape. Police spend a lot of time pulling out these traps, looking at them and collecting those which do not have names on them. I call that passive policing; there are some legal issues around that, but in the longer term there is a lot of potential for rangers to do that work, and it is something we should look at.
There is mention of a strong society; there are many wonderful words like that used, and I try to find what they mean. I think it refers to law and order. I still refer to transport and works, so I would call this law and order. I notice that we also have around $500 000 for Wadeye and Daly courts administration, which I am very grateful for. Being able to attend court at Daly or Wadeye is much better than having to come into town.
I would love to give people at Wadeye some outside protection. If people go to Wadeye, they will see that court hearings are held at the police station; they do not even have any shade. This is an area which we need to do a bit more with. Daly is not as bad, as they have air conditioned offices for a bit of comfort. Whether that is meant to be a deterrent to people at Wadeye, I am not too sure, but it is something we should look at.
There is $410 000 to continue funding community-based corrections at Wadeye. While that only refers to Wadeye, the community corrections function covers from Wadeye to Daly. I know the person in the department of Corrections who is involved with that program. He is based at Wadeye, and is a conscientious and hard-working fellow who spends a lot of time driving from Wadeye to Daly. It is definitely money well spent.
There is $200 000 for an alcohol management plan for Belyuen. Alcohol management plans need to be developed for many communities, and the Belyuen and Wagait area, since the closure of the Mandorah pub, has had increased problems. They have attempted to address them in certain ways, and I have been involved of some of that. I am glad to see they are now trying to create a plan for Belyuen. Many people there come from areas west of the Daly.
Yesterday the member for Nelson talked about family and how they are spread everywhere. While I lived at the Daly for 16 years and knew people in the community, I never built the link between who was related to who. When I ran for this seat, I thought that was an important thing to learn, but I gave up and now use local people who tell me who is related to who when I visit a community. The complexity of family connection in these places is very complicated.
Water quality has always been an issue for me at the Daly for multiple reasons. One reason is because we produce mangoes there or have done in the past. I have not been able to do anything this year, and it is not looking good for me being able to do some work; I am not talking about the mangoes.
The quality of water for fishing is a concern. People are aware of my view on the Strategic Indigenous Reserve, so I will not raise that again. I was happy to see we have $1.07m put aside to monitor surface water quality. I presume some of that is related to the Mount Todd mine and monitoring there, which is important. It is a concern for both sides of this House, a legacy mine where something must be done and it will not be cheap. In the meantime we must continue monitoring in that area.
The concern I have always had at the Daly, for which I have not found anything in the budget, is in regard to floods and flood monitoring. There is never enough money to spend on setting up many flood monitoring and warning systems. I would like us to look at that to see if we can progress that somewhat.
The other interesting part of the budget, which I have not had time to ask the minister about, is the $140 000 allocated for documenting Indigenous ecological knowledge. Indigenous people carry much knowledge in their heads, and every opportunity we have to document some of that is important. I am not worried that Indigenous people will not pass it on to each other. They will, as they have done for hundreds of years. It is also important that we, as fellow Australians, understand some of these things. It is amazing what you can learn from these people if you talk to them on their land, ask them questions and do not presume they do not know what they are talking about. I am continually fascinated about what information they have and how they remember it all. It is unbelievable and I very much admire them for that.
There is $725 000 for remote mobile breast screening. Anything to help health outcomes for our Indigenous people and people living in remote areas has to be good. We never spend enough money doing that, but as I said, if the piggy bank is empty there is not much else you can do. It is a very important initiative, and I am sure the Minister for Health will talk a bit more about that.
Another area which is sometimes brushed over is the Community Benefit Fund, for which $2.2m was allocated. This is a fund which many people across the rural area draw on. I spend a lot of time encouraging them to put in applications, and my electorate office helps people to do that. There are many grants, up to $5000, which can be given to help such organisations as the local fire brigade. I am always glad, when I look at who has received some of this money, that my electorate comes high on the hit rate. It is good to see there is so much money available, and I encourage people to keep working on that.
In regard to infrastructure, the first thing that hit me was the amount of money we are spending on new community houses under the national partnership, which is $57.2m. This is money for new houses is in remote communities, and $57m, by my quick calculations, would only give us 100 houses, perhaps not even that; however, any money we spend to alleviate the housing problem has to be a plus.
The Homelands Extra Allowance scheme has been a boon for my area. I think communities in the electorate of Nhulunbuy have picked up a fair bit, and I hope that continues into next year.
The other infrastructure issue is Fog Bay Road. When the Daly River bridge was being built, the money for that, I understand, was taken from Fog Bay Road, where two bridges were to be built over the Charlotte River and Leviathan Creek. Many people there were annoyed that money was taken from that part of the electorate and moved to fund the Daly bridge. I will not criticise the previous member for doing that, because I am at the Daly, not Dundee, so it helped us. However, it then meant this government had to find the money to fund the bridges at the Charlotte River and Leviathan Creek. We announced that we would be starting the Charlotte River bridge this year, and I think the tender comes out very shortly, if is not already out. I was very pleased to see we have approval for the Leviathan crossing and the final sealing of Fog Bay Road, where I think there is around 0.5 km left at the end. I could never work out why there was only 0.5 km left; we surely could have found the money to do it.
That will leave Rocky Creek on Fog Bay Road, which comes up and down very quickly, so it does not stop people for hours, but the Charlotte River and Leviathan Creek do. I am very pleased that money for those projects is in this year’s budget. I looked at when the Leviathan crossing would be built. It will not be done this Dry Season, as the timing, if they are doing the Charlotte, would not suit, but it will be worked on in the last quarter next year.
As the minister pointed out, $20m was announced for work on two sections of the Port Keats Road. He said we are sealing the whole of Port Keats Road, so I will have to show him the Hansard.
The $20m is for two sections between Peppimenarti and Palumpa, and those people who know that road would know that section between Peppimenarti and Palumpa is the worst part.
The member for Namatjira was with us in a car one day, and we came to a point around 100 yards long where she wanted to get out of the vehicle. She was not going to drive through that. When we came back, she did not come by car; she caught a plane, and if people know her they will know she hates flying. There is also $30m in the budget for strategic and economic development roads, and I argue very strongly that one of those roads should be the road to Wadeye.
Wadeye is the fifth largest town in the Northern Territory, and for this government not to recognise the potential of that area would be remiss. While I would like to take all of that money, I will have a fight on my hands with other members on this side of the House, as well as ones on that side. I am willing to settle for half of that money, and that is all I need to fix a section of the road referred to as Yellow Creek.
To give you an idea about Yellow Creek, the bridge over the Daly is built at 15 m. Anyone who has driven out there during the last two Wet Seasons will know that when you drive across the Daly it is terrific, and you think, ‘I have this fantastic bridge. We have gotten out here, the river is at 10 m, and I can cross to the other side.’ You then come around the bend and bang! There is water as far as you can see. That is Yellow Creek, which means anything above 6 m is a road to nowhere. I cannot get home, you cannot get to Lizzy Downs or anywhere else. Until we address the issue with Yellow Creek and a place called Saddle Rail, we will not reap the benefit of that bridge.
Yellow Creek is also the place where, a couple of years ago, a police vehicle was washed away, so we are familiar with the height and danger of it. Prices on fixing that are around $14m, so I would be pushing to take that from the $30m allocation.
The other area which needs money spent on it is Saddle Rail, where the road goes through a large billabong. That would cost around another $7m; this is giving people some idea about the cost of the road out there. Once those sections are finished, that road would be accessible all the way along to every one of those communities for anything bar two or three weeks of the year.
That is something we need to aim at as the first step. There are many culverts which need to be installed in little creeks along the way, and many of those can be done through minor new works and repairs and maintenance. There is a lot of money to be spent this year on flood repair.
We have also committed to finishing the Litchfield road. This year there is $475 000 allocated to bituminise more of that road. This is a key road for tourism, as it builds a loop where you can go out on the Cox Peninsula Road, cut through on the Litchfield road down across the Finniss and come in at the top of Litchfield. You can then come back out through Batchelor, so tourists have a complete circle to drive in.
The next step would be to link that from Batchelor to the Daly River. At this point, sealing of that Batchelor Road in my electorate is a key issue for tourism, and I am very happy they are doing that. If we are undertaking northern Australia development, tourism is one of those areas in which we need to spend more money.
There is $6m allocated for local roads. I hope this money will be spent in some communities. I did read in the budget papers that there is money to fix some of the internal roads in communities. If you visit Nguiu it is not too bad, but when you get to Peppimenarti and Palumpa it is. At Palumpa there is probably only a third of the bitumen left on roads in the community itself, and while you do not have a lot of traffic or much speed, you do have a long Dry Season and a lot of dust and this causes health problems. Most of these communities do not have footpaths, so if you have young women with prams it becomes very dangerous, so I am glad to see that funding is there
There is also $10m available for grants for economic infrastructure in remote areas, so I will be chasing up how we can receive these grants. It is not a lot of money, but every bit counts, and as local members we should be pushing to receive as much funding as we can.
In other areas of my electorate we have Litchfield National Park; I spoke about the road. In the parks budget, I also saw that there is $290 000 allocated to finish the Buley Rockhole toilet facility. That is a plus, especially for many of the people in Darwin who go there for Easter or long weekends. Anyone who visits Buley and sees the number of people there knows there are never enough toilets.
Batchelor Outdoor Education Centre: I spoke to the principal of the Batchelor Area School last year, and he told me he was having problems with the outdoor education area, the lack of maintenance which has been carried out on it over the years and how it was in desperate need of an upgrade. I am happy to see $1.2m has been allocated for that this year, and I am sure he will be happy as well. That is also an item which not only benefits people in Batchelor, but all people who visit the centre as well.
In regard to housing in my area, I will be chasing the Minister for Housing to talk to him about the $6.8m allocated for teachers houses. I do not think it is for housing at Wadeye, as it has a Catholic school, but I am interested to see where those houses are and whether the regional area they talk about is Top End rural. There could be some overlap with other electorates, but there is $6.8m available. There is also $9.3m of the housing budget for additional community houses and $1.1m for upgrades.
There are, I think, five houses being built at Palumpa this year. The tender has closed — it was given to a company called Murray River North — and there was also one at Peppimenarti. There were some concerns that these houses were steel frame and they are used to block ones up here. There are steel frame ones used in Central Australia, and there are some up here as well.
I went out earlier this week to look at these houses, and I think communities there will be very happy with them. A lot of thought has gone into the houses, and these people have been building houses in Western Australia for years. From memory, they said to us they had built 50 of them through Central Australia. In Western Australia they are up to around 1000. The designs they are using now - while the layout may be very similar to what people have had before, some of the innovations they have put in place are impressive.
I looked at every stage of the building process. They had some where the cement slab was still being laid. They are portable houses. They are built in Darwin, and the minister for Corrections has some of his Sentenced to a Job people working on a house for Bulman; the fellow who was on the return to work comes from Bulman, so he was keen to work on these houses. If we are to continue with these types of houses, that is a good program they can work on to see how they are put together.
I saw every stage of the house; they had six different ones being built, so you could see all of the work being done on each of them. I want to let the minister know that I was very happy with that.
Also in the budget, I was impressed with the continuing support for the Sport Voucher Scheme, the Back to School Payment Scheme and the increase in the First Home Owner Grant. I commend the Treasurer for such a good budget, and I thank the rest of the ministers for the effort they have put in as well. At this point I am happy with it. Thank you.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Madam Speaker, in reply to the 2014-15 budget statement from the Treasurer, I will talk about my electorate of Arafura.
I want to place on the record that there is some financial assistance for the Tiwi Islands in the budget, but very little for the rest of the Arafura electorate.
Most of the money being spent in my electorate comes from the Commonwealth under National Partnership Agreements. It is not Northern Territory money coming from the Northern Territory budget. The proportion of Northern Territory money is very small, and it is clear that without Commonwealth money it would be hard to see the Northern Territory government’s contribution to my electorate, whether in schooling, educational matters, remote Indigenous housing, health initiatives or major infrastructure development. Any major financial contribution in my electorate mainly comes from the Commonwealth.
Budget 2014-15 will not help to alleviate poverty or lift the standard of living for my constituents in any substantial way. There are no major roads or associated infrastructure funded in this budget. The needs of the bush are different in communities within my electorate. Coastal and inland communities have different needs or requirements to help with the cost of living, which affects people on a daily basis. If we were to establish an economy in Arafura that will grow a sustained (inaudible) in my electorate, it would require much planning and financial commitment from the Northern Territory government.
There appears to be no strategic planning for economic development to take place, but I am grateful for the small amount of money which has come by way of the 2014-15 budget. However, it will by no means register as a major impact to provide much needed change.
I welcome the $4m in economic development initiatives across the Territory, including the Tiwi Islands. However, this is an extremely small amount for the whole of the Territory. I assume the Tiwi Islands proportion will be $1.8m and, if so, will this be used to pay the debts the Tiwi people have to forestry plantation owners? If this is the case, Territory taxpayers are being asked to pay this back, and this will mean no economic development money freed up under this budget which could be utilised in new initiatives.
The prosperous economy of the Northern Territory does not include my electorate. It is clear from budget papers that there is no overall employment strategy, comprising of monies currently being expended under National Partnership Agreements and various programs. The 2014-15 budget outlook will not have any impact on the lifestyle of my constituents. This is further evidence that the Northern Territory government has no short-, medium- or long-term strategy regarding how my electorate and its constituents will be integrated into a prosperous economy.
With no expected growth in the areas of employment and economic development, it can be assumed that intergenerational poverty will grow even further, due to the marginalisation of the bush in this budget. In fact, there is nothing significant in the budget papers to demonstrate the big picture with any clarity about how it takes us and the Northern Territory forward. An example of this in my electorate is last year’s expenditure for Stronger Futures – Commonwealth funds – and the budget for this year.
Whilst there has been significant consultation, the development of plans and expenditure in this area - I understand that no alcohol management plans for Arafura have been signed off by the Commonwealth minister. Communities’ expectations were built by way of consultation, planning and development, but plans have not been implemented on the Tiwi Islands, in Maningrida or Gunbalanya.
It is an exercise in openness and the building of hope for our communities, while they work and develop plans for real and inclusive changes. They then wait, and the hope fades again. Can the minister explain why none of these plans in my electorate have been signed off for implementation by the Commonwealth government? Have any plans across the Northern Territory been signed off?
I appreciate the funds which have been budgeted for alcohol management planning, and I look forward to these funds reaping benefits.
The Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments need to come together to deal with our future. Funding arrangements with respect to Aboriginal affairs will need to take place, and this is especially true as the ten-year national partnership program, which commenced in 2012-13, will more than likely cease in many areas after this ten-year period. How will future Northern Territory governments meet funding shortfalls that will happen, as expected, at the end of this program? This will cause major financial problems if the two governments do not come together to demonstrate how this situation will be dealt with. Due to reliance on Commonwealth funds, even the gradual withdrawal of this money would have a devastating effect on the bush.
The impact of this has major ramifications for the integration of the bush into the prosperous economy of the Northern Territory. This parliament needs to step through the stages of how the prosperous economy concept and development of the Northern Territory will take place. I assume the Northern Territory is a significant part of the federal government’s plan to develop northern Australia. Arafura lies at the centre of this plan. (inaudible) the human resource capital of the constituency, will need to be included in this plan. Aboriginal people, after all, are the owners of all land and coastal areas, including islands. Traditional owners of this land are covered under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and the Native Title Act, both of which are acts of the Commonwealth parliament. Why is it that the Northern Territory government, with its latest budget, continues to neglect and marginalise the people of Arafura?
These are serious matters of concern, as this budget perpetuates generalisations and poverty, and has no sensible connection to the Commonwealth’s aims or objectives for the development of the Northern Territory.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Mr Deputy Speaker, the 2014-15 Northern Territory budget is mean- spirited and neglectful of the bush.
I will talk about my constituency of Arnhem in particular, as I want to highlight the amount of money allocated for the area. Looking through the budget, it is clear that most of the money being spent is from the Commonwealth government under the National Partnership Agreement program. Commonwealth National Partnership Agreements are the mainstay of financing remote housing, upgrades of infrastructure, the roads program and other infrastructure such as water storage. It is hard to see where Northern Territory money is being spent in any meaningful way in Arnhem.
Most of the money, as I have stated, is in Commonwealth-funded programs, with Territory money being sprinkled around, like the grants mentioned before by the member for Daly in an attempt to demonstrate that this government is spending money in the bush.
These levels of funding are so small that they border on being insufficient in their application, and there are no initiatives to start economic development. The $2m set aside by this government to establish a regional economic development fund as part of the transitional support package for the East Arnhem region is an insufficient amount of money to kick-start any meaningful business development and programs associated with economic development.
We all know the closure of the mining project at Nhulunbuy will have a significant economic impact across the Arnhem region, as people in my electorate struggle to establish businesses to make up the shortfall of income. This government, which talks about a prosperous economy, cannot be taken seriously.
The financial shortfalls in the Arnhem Land economy will have a detrimental effect on families and the wellbeing of children. This government wants us to believe it is serious about families and children, yet it has no plans for economic growth and employment to take place.
The entire East Arnhem region needs an injection of money that will have a practical and real impact. This requires planning by government, but it appears there is no big-picture plan. The bush is being financially marginalised, including through the provision of services that will prolong intergenerational poverty.
While I am looking at my notes about poverty, I will quote from Pearl S Buck. She says:
- Hunger makes a thief of any man.
There are many more quotes I could read. If you look at a community setting, these quotes very much relate to people who live there. They live the life these quotes describe, and most of the people in here have never seen the effects in communities. They have never seen community life, and have never lived, breathed or smelled it. That is not like us, born and raised in communities, and we know the impact of all of this. That is the only reason we were elected, because they knew we would come here and do our job regardless of which party we were in.
People in the bush will have no doubt as to what is happening around them, and will realise that once again, after many years of struggle, the Northern Territory government does not govern for all. If you live outside major urban centres, the message is, simply, that you will continue to miss out. The Territory government’s financial pie is not for them. Not too long ago, we had an intervention in the Northern Territory by the Commonwealth government; it concerned the plight of Aboriginal people in the bush on the fringe of our major urban centres and towns. Their shared neglect, via the Territory parliament, came into focus before the Australian nation.
As a consequence, Commonwealth National Partnership Agreements were entered into. As I have already stated, the overwhelming amount of spending in the bush is Commonwealth money, not the Territory’s. The Stronger Futures program in the Northern Territory is a National Partnership Agreement signed by the Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments in August 2012.
It is a ten-year funding package which commenced in 2012-13, totalling $3.49bn, aimed at improving Indigenous outcomes through programs in the areas of health, schooling, community safety and justice, tackling alcohol abuse, and child, youth, family and community wellbeing.
I will elaborate on the promotion of education and health. Aboriginal health workers should be promoting education and going to schools to talk about sexual health and emotional and social wellbeing. The government cannot save the day, but if you put your money where your mouth is, the community will save themselves and that is what we all want to see. Investment could go towards housing, municipal and essential services, with a view to enhanced remote engagement and coordination and, above all, the creation of jobs.
The Northern Territory government wants to commence negotiations with the Commonwealth later this year to vary a number of implementation plans under the agreement, with clear objectives to amend performance benchmarks and reduce the reporting regime. This is code for watering down its responsibilities and clouding reporting outcomes on how money is spent. In other words, the Territory government will be looking to redirect these funds and lessen its responsibility in measuring practical outcomes on the ground in the bush. It is in the budget books.
As the National Partnership Agreements expire, the Northern Territory government will not be making any further financial investment to continue these arrangements. In fact, in the budget papers it clearly states that when Commonwealth funding ceases in various areas, the financial demands placed on Territory finances may not accord with spending priorities. That is scary, and is a potentially catastrophic storm for Aboriginal people in the bush. They do not see this coming, but I do through the budget papers, and I will tell them what will happen.
In ten years, what will happen to people in the bush? The Northern Territory government needs to place on record what it intends to do about this potential tsunami. Will the Treasurer put on record what the government is doing in regard to a financial shortfall that will take place when these National Partnership Agreements cease? The immediate impact of this budget for 2014-15 will be seen through a drip feed mode of delivery which will barely keep things ticking over. It does not take into account population growth and the need for a comprehensive employment strategy to engage the adult population in a meaningful way in order for them to participate in the Northern Territory workplace.
What about kids who are now finishing school or the ones who dropped out? They do not have any future in the community. The minister for Sport said that kids in Ramingining receive five sessions of swimming and gymnastics. Where is the pool in Ramingining? That is the reality. Will he pay for them to come to Darwin for these gymnastics and swimming sessions? Or will he truck out a portable swimming pool? If you do not know Ramingining, do not go throwing these things around. They play basketball, football and netball. They do not take part in gymnastics and there is no pool to swim in. If he wants to take them to the ocean, by all means, but how many deaths have there been in remote areas from crocodiles attacking kids? That is something else you must come to grips with.
What he is proposing to give to kids there does not make sense. He is not in touch with Aboriginal communities, and a fine example of that is the budget. The bush economy has once again received no support from this government. The government talks about a prosperous economy for the whole of the Northern Territory. It wants people of working age to participate in employment. What jobs are in communities? There is hardly anything.
Human resource capital in the bush is not being utilised. While this is happening there is a debate among government ministers about ways to make it harder for people who are not employed to access their Centrelink benefits. This comes on top of the measures introduced by the Northern Territory intervention. The BasicsCard system — if you do not have a BasicsCard, perhaps you should apply for one so you can understand what I am saying – already quarantines a large proportion of a cardholder’s money for food and other essential items to sustain the family, including children. A person has a little green card, and 70% of their money goes onto it, so their income is already quarantined, yet we want to quarantine 100%. Giving that authority to local boards to do will have people fighting against each other, and that is not a great idea. People will not take a bite from the cake; you can throw them peanuts, but they will not take that.
My constituents in Arnhem, like other bush electorates, have special demographic requirements. For instance, there are coastal and island communities – all of the islands in the Northern Territory are 100% owned by Aboriginal people, by the way – which have particular issues and matters pertaining to those areas. Inadequate transportation and associated infrastructure drives up the cost of living. The cost of living will go up with fuel. It is $3.80 a litre now, and may reach $5. With housing, one person per house in a four-bedroom house already pays $400 a fortnight through a Centrelink payment, of which 70% is quarantined. How do you think a single mother can survive and look after her four kids? There is no reality at all.
Add the cost of electricity to inadequate transportation and associated infrastructure, and it becomes clear that people will not be able to pay for the practical running of their homes. Most people already use power on an ad hoc basis. There are already some communities where people only have $5 left on a card. A $50 power card now only lasts two-and-a-half days. These parents must make sacrifices by sleeping outside with their children, before using the $5 credit at 6 am, enough to have hot water running through the house to shower their kids and send them to school, and we are not making life any easier. If you think it is hard in Darwin or Katherine, how hard do you think it is there? The transportation of food is bad, and they do not even receive fresh food. Families are now buying a lot of tinned food; we talk about about nutritional outcomes for our kids, their wellbeing and everything that goes with that, but we are not supporting it. The government is going backwards and there is no care in the world for people in communities.
Most people already use power cards, but cannot, on a daily basis, afford to run fans, air conditioning units, fridges and stoves in their homes. They go without, as do their babies.
Fuel costs in the remote bush area are outrageously high to the point people are paying well over $2 a litre, and, in some places it is closer to $3 a litre, which will now increase, making transport unaffordable. There are not even workshops out there. If there are, they are only there to service shire vehicles.
The message the Northern Territory government is sending to the bush is extremely negative and perpetuates poverty. There are no job creation programs, and no business development strategies means bush communities and people of working age cannot take themselves out of the poverty they find themselves in.
Budget 2014-15 goes to the heart of why self-government must surely be investigated regarding the unequal distribution of financial power which continues to exclude bush people in remote areas.
Listening to my parents stories, they told me that they were better off before self-government. Many of my elders are still alive to tell stories of their history. They were educated on the benchmark and they attended universities. Now, I do not hear of or see any Indigenous students from remote communities going to university, which is a sad truth. In here, it is all about spin, not realising how policies we put in place will affect the poorest people in the bush.
We see poverty outside Parliament House. An old fellow is always sitting outside, and I am aware he has a mental illness. I was involved with health for a very long time, but sometimes it breaks my heart to see him there, every day, on the same seat. Regardless of whether I have three kids and my own bills, I try and help him out, maybe with $10 to buy a drink and a sandwich. I will give him the food he needs and a drink of water, because I see that every day in my community.
It is not something you can put your foot over; there should be a national outcry. Indigenous communities are so far behind that it is not funny anymore, and this budget does not make it any easier. You try to untie funds and move money elsewhere. You can probably fool the people in communities, because they have had two generations of uneducated people in the bush who cannot read this budget book, but I can. I will not lie to the people I will be burying in the next five to ten years; it breaks my heart.
In 2012, when everybody was elected, we were with the CLP, but it breaks my heart that in those 18 months, regardless of our differences, we tried to back up our stories with why it needs to be done, and why we had to work together to find a more suitable way. There were cowboys on that side who knew better than us, the people who were born and raised there, who have an education and who can relate. That is the most disturbing part.
I would like every child to have the opportunities Alison, Francis and I have had. I am the first person from my community and region to be elected to parliament. There could have been more in the past, as the seat of Arnhem has existed for 35 years ago. Very few people from the region have stood for election to the seat. It is a great honour to represent my people, because I was born and raised there. They know me, and I speak their language. I know my law, and I will never break that, but here the law is always broken because money is being moved from one area to benefit another, and it is taken from the poorest people.
You will never come to that reality, because it is not in your heart to do the right thing. For us, it is a cry and fire we have in our stomachs to represent those people.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, yesterday’s budget, which should have promised so much, ultimately delivered so little. We must be better than this in this House and as part of the governance process of the Northern Territory.
This is a time for the Territory to flourish, but people are being crushed with the huge cost of living. Cost of living increases have now been compounded by nasty federal government agendas which hit the poorest in our society. We in the Territory have been caught in a pincer movement of two governments hell-bent on inflicting pain.
We continually hear from those opposite that they have a plan. The question is simple: where is it? Almost two years into its term, words are cheap. Where are the results and where is the plan? On this side of the House we have great concern that there is no plan, and that is not good enough.
This is the second budget of the Country Liberal party government in the Northern Territory. The first budget was essentially a roadmap backwards because it scrapped many of the infrastructure projects and initiatives set in place by the public sector. It looked at massive cuts in jobs and at high-taxing regimes.
It did nothing to progress the new government’s plan. It was no plan and economically it added $1.1bn to the debt. It commenced the Country Liberal Party debt trajectory, which will be over four years. It was a time of excesses and extremes.
The Chief Minister, during Question Time today, tried to defend the use of a private charter jet costing in excess of $87 000. That is the salary of a Northern Territory teacher for one year, and I defy the Chief Minister to ever justify what would employ a teacher or health worker for one year in the price of a flight on a private jet.
Mr Gunner: For a selfie with the Prime Minister.
Mr McCARTHY: Absolutely. This was the excess and chaos which led into the second budget. A budget should be a framework for a government’s future direction. However, this one is a series of re-announcements and, ironically, the continuing of Labor programs and commitments in a territory where the economy is buttressed by major projects commenced under the previous Labor government and a series of Labor governments. Where is the next major project coming from?
What will become of our economy when the present round of construction in the oil and gas sector with the Marine Supply Base and the new Correctional Services precinct in Holtze starts to wind down? On this side of the House we are concerned there is no plan and no next major project, and all the while this budget is littered with the usual series of cuts we have come to expect from the economic rationalists, the Country Liberal Party.
With crime out of control in the Territory we see a $17m cut to police on the beat. The Country Liberal Party government went to the election in 2012 promising 120 more police officers. This budget will result in fewer police, and I invite those opposite to come to Tennant Creek to look firsthand at what fewer police on the beat will deliver and incur. I have gone out of my way to remind the Chief Minister that I would like a debrief, and I would like it in Tennant Creek. He is most welcome there anytime.
The Country Liberal Party government is big on law and order talk, but this budget shows it is very light on results. It is a government big on punishing, but not so good at preventing. Crime against the person is through the roof, and across the Northern Territory assaults and domestic violence are up. This budget says the government is okay with that, and is not prepared to do anything about it, except start to spin statistics in this House. It is not okay; it is a broken promise, and I encourage any members opposite to come into the regions, move across the remote communities and look at the challenges we have. It is not only police; there are more than 200 fewer full-time positions in education. How many of those will be teachers?
The County Liberal Party calls it a budget to secure our children’s future, and that is one of the classic ironies of the 2014-15 budget. If it is a budget to restore our children’s future, you should have been restoring the jobs of the 130 teachers you cut last time, rather than announcing further reductions in education spending. How are our kids better off with larger class sizes and fewer teachers? It is wrong.
There is then the cost of living. Your federal mates, the Liberal-National coalition, have decided to increase the cost of our petrol twice a year. Already in parts of the Territory petrol is more than $2 a litre; it will continue to rise as far as the eye can see and the silence on that side of the House has been deafening.
Has the Chief Minister communicated our concerns to Joe Hockey and Tony Abbott, putting the case that Territorians cannot afford these increases? The answer is no. Has the Treasurer communicated Territorians concerns? The answer is no.
We need the Liberal rhetoric in northern Australia to stand up for Territorians, not the spin. We need the rhetoric of ‘us and our mates in Canberra’ to be something pragmatic taken to Canberra to seriously expose this issue as a deficit for developing northern Australia. I encourage the Chief Minister and the Treasurer to also link arms with their National Party colleagues because the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Warren Truss, would be a valuable ally, standing up for the rest of Australia who live in regional and remote areas across the country. We hope there will be some movement from our government and our leadership in that case.
The federal government is also ready to rip $80bn from states for the running of schools and hospitals over the next decade. The plan has been announced to pull back on $80bn worth of investment into health and education over the next 10 years from the federal government, and yet we have heard nothing from the other side of the House, not a whimper. This is in stark contrast to other conservative state leaders around the country. I remind the Chief Minister and the Treasurer that New South Wales Premier Mike Baird says the federal government is shifting its problems to the states and territories. Victorian Liberal Premier Denis Napthine said he was shocked and surprised at the federal budget, and Queensland Premier Campbell Newman has gone further, demanding an urgent meeting of state and territory leaders, such is the magnitude of this problem. Where are the voices of the Northern Territory Chief Minister and the Treasurer? By their silence they are giving tacit approval to the federal government’s budget of new taxes, cuts to families and cost-shifting. All of this is on top of the cost of living burden you have placed on Territorians with massive power prices rises and a cost of housing more akin to New York than the Northern Territory.
How does the CLP government respond to this? It makes it more difficult for young homeowners to get into the market. By restricting first homeowners assistance to new homes, the government is doing three things. Firstly, the CLP is saying to young first home owners, ‘Good luck, you may never be able to afford a home’, by forcing them to construct a new residence in Rosebery, Bellamack or Palmerston, where the cost could be upward of $600 000 or $700 000. You are breaking their hearts and more promises. How does a young couple with small savings purchase land and build a house for almost $750 000? The government is reactive, does not like hearing from the opposition and plays politics to try to silence us. I remind the Treasurer that this second point came from a constituent at the Property Council of Australia breakfast this morning.
The CLP, in scrapping the first homebuyer scheme enabling young families and single income families to join the existing home market, is risking the urban decay of older housing stock, which young families will no longer be able to use the First Home Owner Grant to buy. The aesthetic appearance of our cities and towns is important. When young families move into these premises, they look after, love and cherish them and these older houses are a vital part of the look of our city. Are you ready for these places being derelict? This was an important point which came from a constituent at the Property Council budget breakfast this morning, articulating that point directly to the Treasurer.
Thirdly, the government is undermining the market of established housing stock. Investors who own these properties have just lost a significant part of the market cohort which may have purchased those properties. This is a bizarre move from a government which is supposed to be all about the free market.
I see that the budget, in a macro sense, has reduced the building blocks of an economy, but more so an economy for a community and our society when enormous pressures have been put on families; there is reduced infrastructure spending, enormous cost of living implications and we have seen very little regarding the environment. These represent important Labor policy areas of education and health, essential services and training to employment.
It is alarming to see a government that does not understand and value the building blocks of a community and that very special relationship to economic policy.
I will talk about the regions of the Northern Territory. It is interesting listening to some of the other contributors to debate, because when you assess this second Country Liberal Party budget, it is, in a macro sense, a 75% spend on the Northern Territory’s infrastructure in the major towns and cities. Once again, it promotes neglect where the Country Liberal Party seems to miss acknowledging the bush. Essentially, 15% of total infrastructure funding for the next 12 months will go to the bush. This is a Country Liberal Party which continually reminds me and this side of the House that it was elected by the bush. The Treasurer likes to remind me that I need to accept it; the bush changed and put the Liberals in, yet in the second budget we see, once again, a total neglect of the bush. This should be challenged, especially by the two members who live in regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory and represent members of the Country Liberal Party government.
The CLP budget is a missed opportunity to invest in and develop the economic and social future of the regional Northern Territory. An obvious example of the city-centric nature of this government is the appropriation of $5.9m for an office in Darwin to conduct the bureaucratic processes around the development of northern Australia, while at the same time there is an appropriation of only $400 000 towards the expansion of the Ord River scheme in the Northern Territory.
Talking in a rural context today, I was told that $400 000 buys a mob of suits. I said, ‘Well, $5.9m must buy a mob of very expensive suits’. However, there is an alternative put forward by the opposition.
If $5.9m is appropriated for an office in Darwin to conduct the bureaucratic processes around the development of northern Australia, yet there is only $400 000 to continue the Ord River scheme expansion, about which the minister has been silent over the past 12 months – he was very energetic and articulate when the Country Liberal Party took office, but he has been silent over the last 12 months, with only a one-liner in a budget reply today.
Let us look at an alternative, because the hollow rhetoric of this government about northern Australia should be countered with tangible infrastructure announcements. The alternative could have been major investment in infrastructure by the federal government at the port of Darwin, which is a Nation Building project, but we have seen nothing. We see the majority of the money spent on the east coast on roads projects servicing 85% of the Australian population, but we do not see any complementary National Building projects articulated for northern Australia, a gift to the Northern Territory Country Liberal Party government.
This imbalance must be addressed, and the question for the minister is: why have you been silent about the Ord River scheme, and did you not challenge the budget Cabinet process to address a discrepancy of $5m into office functions, compared to a vital piece of the Territory’s agribusiness?
I want to hear from you on that, minister. You seem to have a lot to say, so let us hear what you have to say about that issue.
Budget 2014-15 fails to invest in projects which will build the regional economy and provide some relief for families suffering under the high cost of living. There is nothing in the budget to assist regional business to leverage off the new developments in oil and gas in the regions, which is an important point I hope the Treasurer takes on board. We must look at investment for regional businesses to leverage off the new developments in the oil and gas sector in the regions.
There is nothing to help boost tourism access to Alice Springs, with operators left high and dry by the forthcoming withdrawal of Tigerair services. Once again, it is a macroeconomic comment, but we do not hear or see anything, and I presume the minister for tourism, in his reply, still has the opportunity to address that issue.
There is nothing to boost tourism in regions like the Barkly, which rely so heavily on the self-drive market, and which will be hit hard by the increase in petrol prices, thanks to the Country Liberal Party’s federal mates. We can spend a lot of money on advertising the Northern Territory, and we can take that message loud and clear across the nation, but when we have a deficit policy, such as the indexation in petrol price excise, working against attracting eastern and southern Australia to the Northern Territory, we see an uncoordinated and chaotic policy. It is a policy which reflects having no plan and, once again, this side of the House demands that our leadership in government immediately contact the Prime Minister and federal Treasurer to address this issue.
Spending on health services has been cut, in real terms, down by more than $9m since 2012, and there is no new investment in expanding critical health facilities such as renal dialysis in town or out bush. This is another important point about the building blocks of the Northern Territory. What is more important than the health of Territorians? What is more important than stabilising child growth and development periods by stabilising the family health status with continued improvements in housing infrastructure and essential services to ensure the people of the Northern Territory benefit from the incredible opportunities sitting on our near horizon? However, we see a Country Liberal Party government which is, once again, cutting the health budget.
There is little for jobs and economic development across the regions in this budget. We see, for a start, changes in how to deliver housing infrastructure in regional and remote areas, and the impact that it is having on losing local jobs. There is only a one-year commitment to local government jobs, in terms of an investment package. We have seen a budget line item, but our question is about the one-year commitment to local government jobs and a jobs package. What happens after that?
Cuts to remote housing: we see figures of around $12m from repairs and maintenance expenditure. There has been $12m taken from regional and remote housing. That is catastrophic and once again reflects a chaotic approach with no plan. We know, in the bush, that strong investment in that sector, which has been accorded previously, delivers not only community safety, family security and that important living space, but also jobs.
We have seen the new approach to tearing down secondary education in the bush. It is ironic, because I worked in education for over 30 years. I lived and worked through a policy where there was no secondary education provided to the bush. We now have a very aggressive government hell-bent on going back to the future, taking the Territory back after so many communities have embarked on the journey to continue supporting the education of their children, and many of those children will choose to stay at home.
This budget discloses that the CLP has failed to renegotiate Commonwealth support for the remote service National Partnership Agreement, which ends in June this year. This should be very alarming to all Territorians, especially those who live in regional and remote areas. How many millions of dollars in support has the CLP lost to Territory bush towns because of its failure to negotiate a new deal? The silence is deafening. The CLP has failed to deliver any significant new investments to keep delivering services and jobs in the bush, build the future of our communities, and it has neglected to negotiate these very important service level agreements under a national partnership.
There is a double whammy effect for people living in the bush, from both the Territory and federal governments; I have already mentioned the hike in fuel prices. With this disproportionate impact, people living and working in our regions, because they drive greater distances and already have to pay some of the highest fuel prices in the country, will be hit twice. This is a very important issue, and one that needs to be argued on the platform of developing northern Australia.
The $500m cut to Indigenous programs in the federal budget will also heavily impact out bush, where people rely on these programs to build economies and deliver services. The freeze in the indexation of federal assistance grants to local governments will hit regional authorities hard. The cost of delivering services is much more expensive in the bush, as Territorians are aware, and prices keep going up. The freeze to federal assistance grants will have a real impact on roads funding. For example, there will be fewer kilometres of road works delivered for the dollar, as prices for plant, equipment and fuel go up.
I have begun to suspect that the federal and Territory governments have entered a partnership to drive Territorians from the bush back into our towns. They are making it too hard for people to live and raise their families on country.
The difference between the Territory opposition and the Country Liberal Party is simple. The Country Liberal Party thinks you live in an economy, whereas we know we live in a community. It is a community shouldering a heavy burden, and with this budget it has just gotten heavier. I share great concerns for Territorians who will be hurt and will suffer more pain under these economic outcomes.
We believe it is not a good budget. It is delivered by a government which remains in chaos, and which has come off the back of its first budget making some fundamental mistakes. It is a budget which is a reactionary exercise, and which will add more pain to the cost of living. It risks further damaging consumer confidence, which will impact on business confidence and there will be a downward spiral to an increase in the Territory’s debt position, the fiscal trajectory already established under the Country Liberal Party government and its first budget in 2012-13.
Job losses across the Northern Territory are at the forefront of families minds, and we are uncertain about how many more job losses will occur under the efficiency dividends demanded by this government. Job losses reduce wellbeing, the energy factor, a bright future approach from families, and they crush consumer confidence. In regional areas, these losses impact greatly, from the private sector right through to the public sector and important service delivery.
We are unsure what the budget will produce, but we will be watching very closely, and we will also be revisiting those Country Liberal Party promises across the Territory, promises to the bush, and we will be reminding Territorians of what needs to be delivered.
I have kept this to a general comment, because I am looking forward to estimates. I put ministers on notice that the opposition is looking forward to drilling down into these numbers and this fiscal approach to ensure all questions are answered for the public record, and that Territorians, on an individual basis, start to see the devil in the detail. What I have seen so far is macro-spin, and when the estimates process starts to unearth the facts the Territory will be able to take an accountable and transparent look at its government. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will speak on the Appropriation Bill in both my role as Speaker and as the member for Goyder. It is a small Assembly, and it is not unusual to want to speak in both capacities.
In my role as Speaker, I represent the broad interests of the Legislative Assembly on behalf of all members, thus all voters.
This year, the Department of the Legislative Assembly experienced a modest increase in its overall budget because of a Remuneration Tribunal Determination - the body which sets entitlements for all members – regarding members’ entitlements.
Consistent with other agencies, the department had to find savings, and whole-of-government savings on multifunction devices have been required. The agency also experienced a decrease in repairs and maintenance, offset by an increase of $350 000 relating to members and electoral offices.
The bottom line is a modest overall increase of approximately $100 000 on last year’s departmental budget. We are a small jurisdiction, and do not have a separate appropriation for the Legislative Assembly. This is understandable in the management of the overall Territory budget, but it requires vigilance to ensure Territory officials understand the budget for the Assembly is the budget for constituents and democracy.
While the Department of the Legislative Assembly is a department in the true sense of the word, it only exists to serve members and the parliament as a whole. In other words, most of what we do is not optional. The department does what is required and has little ability to perform discretionary activities.
In other jurisdictions, parliaments have a separate appropriation. This may be a matter worth considering for the Northern Territory as we mature and work towards further constitutional development and eventual statehood.
As a consequence of the Department of the Legislative Assembly being administered like any other government agency, the department is asked to find efficiencies and savings, as are all departments, and this is how it should be.
There is no need or excuse for waste in any public area of expenditure, and the Department of the Legislative Assembly is no exception. Over the last 12 months, the department and all staff have worked assiduously to minimise waste and make savings. Some of these have included a reduction in the overall number of stand-alone printers in the department, requiring users to print to existing multifunctional devices. There has been a freeze on the acquisition of new MFDs when existing MFDs can be used.
The Renewal Management Board approved the cancellation of members dinners, saving $21 000 per annum. RTD entitlements cannot be cancelled by anyone apart from the RTD. Dinners provided to all members of this Chamber were a courtesy, not an entitlement.
There was an annual saving of $64 000 by cancelling the Territory FM broadcast of Question Time as also approved by the Renewal Management Board in 2012, and various subscriptions to journals have been cancelled.
There has been a reduction in security costs by $47 000 per annum, having only one guard at Parliament House on weekends instead of two, leaving the rear gate of this precinct unpatrolled. There has also been the automatic switch off of all the Department of Legislative Assembly office air conditioning at 4.30 pm each evening.
Inefficient lighting has been removed, replaced with energy efficient globes, and there has been a reduction in the number of globes in the building, leaving some fittings empty. Specifically, lights in the Main Hall remain switched off permanently, as some of you may have noticed. Lights in this Chamber are now switched off between sittings; previously, they were always on for public gallery viewing of the Chamber, but it turned out to be quite an expensive exercise when not many people visited during sittings.
Government sponsored functions now require 400 guests, rather than 300, for the hire of an additional security guard. Guests, therefore, must wait longer to enter the building.
Members fixed telephone lines located in the reception area in Parliament House – offices on the fifth floor – were disconnected after a request I sent to them. Only two members said they wished to keep their phones. This measure provided a saving of some $9500.
Stand-alone printers in members electoral offices were unsubscribed in 2013, resulting in a saving of $26 700, and Parliament House external display lights now turn off each evening at 9 pm, instead of the previous 12 am, providing energy and cost savings for government. These are some of the savings made over the last 12 months.
By connecting all electorate offices to the WAN, the Legislative Assembly and DCIS have saved the government $271 000 in 2013-14, based on previous data costs.
These savings, of which there are more – 38 in total – come to at least $689 000 in an average year, and not so easily quantifiable savings such as energy savings, reduced travel and printing efficiencies will vastly increase these savings over time.
Savings can only be realised when there is capacity. The Department of the Legislative Assembly’s budget capacity is constrained by the fact a large proportion of it pays for things like leases on electorate offices, three part-time regional offices, the administration and maintenance of Parliament House and the precinct, which is Liberty Square, the old Supreme Court gardens and the forecourt, salaries for electoral staff and electorate officers’ assistants serving constituents needs and members’ salaries, which are prescribed by legislation.
The Chief Minister is the minister responsible for the Department of the Legislative Assembly under the administrative arrangements, as well as at the Cabinet table. He is also in charge of the department, yet it is the Speaker who has day-to-day operational responsibility for the direction of the agency and reporting from the Clerk, who is also the agency chief executive. It is the Speaker who appears before the Estimates Committee year in, year out. As Speaker, I can advise that, like any other year, I made my case when I met with the Treasurer and Chief Minister to ensure a fair and reasonable outcome, not only for the interests of members and their entitlements, but also for the parliament’s integrity and its future.
I hope I am forceful in protecting the integrity of the institution of this parliament and the seat of government in the Northern Territory. This building is not the government, it is not part of government; it is the parliament of the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory is one of two parliaments in Australia where the executive arm of government resides in the building as a tenant, the other being Queensland. It is my responsibility to continually remind officials and colleagues that this building belongs to all members of the Assembly and the people of the Northern Territory, rather than being a government building.
As such, we work at ensuring that when outside people utilise rooms or this facility, they pay appropriate fees. If government members and crossbenchers use rooms in the pursuit of political gain, they also pay fees. It is the Assembly, through the Legislative Assembly (Powers and Privileges) Act, which gives the Speaker responsibility for the administration of the parliament and its precinct, which includes Liberty Square, the old Supreme Court gardens and the forecourt, something that should never be compromised by budgetary considerations, no matter which party is in government.
It is the remuneration tribunal which, according to legislation, specifies entitlements available for members to serve their constituents. These entitlements are reviewed annually by the tribunal Chair. Democracy in the Northern Territory dictates that these are necessities, not luxuries. I am glad the government, in this budget, appears to have recognised this need. While politicians will never win a popularity contest, I see it as my role to ensure I resist any overzealous moves which might in any way erode the seat of Territory democracy.
I have some brief comments in regard to my role as the member for Goyder. The budget is good and sound, and will build for our future. It is a conservative budget with a focus on infrastructure. I accept it is difficult to balance priorities, and I am pleased money has gone into roads, health, education, police, fire and emergency services. There must still be some commitment to lifestyle and future lifestyle, particularly for people in the rural area who I represent in my electorate.
I too was disappointed there was no reference to Freds Pass Reserve and the 24 user groups which utilise that reserve on a weekly basis. It is a hub of the rural area, and some 3000 to 4000 people utilise those reserve facilities per week. It is a home to key community events as well, such as the Freds Pass Show coming up this weekend, and it is in dire need of upgrading and expansion. Whether it be ablution facilities, clubhouse, fencing, top soil or extra ovals, there is a need across the reserve. This year, the national polocrosse titles are being held at Freds Pass Reserve, but we could have many other national competitions there if time, dedication and extra resources were planned for the future. Having national events at the facility would mean an enormous flow-on effect into the economy.
If government is planning further growth for the rural area and pushing from urban areas into the rural, as has been outlined in the Palmerston north-come-Berrimah development, planning needs to be undertaken now as to where residents and families will be playing their sport, undertaking recreational activities and generally enjoying facilities such as the Freds Pass Reserve. I have written to the government and have sent substantial submissions on the need for a rural pool and equestrian centre. I am still waiting for formal replies from government regarding these proposals. Both are needed for the future growth, if not enjoyment, of the rural area and not only rural people, but others as well. If not in this budget – clearly it is not – I expect some consideration in next year’s budget, if not beforehand.
There has been substantial commitment to roads, but one that does not get a lot of attention is the Arnhem Highway. There has been some work undertaken on it recently, however, more planning and work is required, given the massive workload of the highway, used by extractive industries, as well as the tourism and general construction industries.
In regard to Berrimah Farm, we opposed this in opposition. I have spoken about it a lot, primarily because some of the area is inappropriate for urban development for a variety of reasons, not least its location to industrial and extractive areas, the pet crematorium and major highways. One of the proposals we had in opposition, and I have no issue with it, was that it could perhaps be considered more for light industrial development, rather than urban. Given the location and issues with the area and the number of people who may live there, the need for open spaces and other facilities, buses and emergency vehicles access, where people will be going and where they will send their children to school.
What other parcels of land were looked at regarding land release? There is all of the land in the greater Palmerston area, but apart from Berrimah Farm and this land in Holtze, I ask what else was looked at. I agree that land release is important, and it must be done in a timely manner, but it is also important to meet the challenges of growth. This must be balanced with maintaining the integrity of existing land occupiers.
The member for Nelson briefly commented on what has been dubbed Palmerston North, which I have said before in the House – and I will say it again – is not north of Palmerston, it is east. The sooner we get rid of the term ‘Palmerston North’, the better. It is in Holtze, within Litchfield Council boundaries. If the Mayor of Palmerston thinks he will get his hands on a part of land which is in the Litchfield Council area, he is sadly mistaken. I say to the Mayor of Palmerston: you stay on your side of the highway, and we will stay on ours. If you want to meet in the middle, we have activities and interests which probably outweigh the interests and activities of the people of Palmerston. They make loud noises and go bang!
The location is not right. I also ask the government and the Planning minister what has happened to the Litchfield land use objectives, a current, real and live document. That document has all of that land tagged as rural living, one acre or one hectare blocks. What is the point of having planning documents and documents agreed to by the community and government if some time in the near future you change them and put something else there? It gives no certainty or clarity to not only existing land users and occupiers, but anyone coming in who would like to plan to go there.
It might be amusing to some, with the use of loose language about Palmerston north and where it is located, but it is a very serious position for the people who work or plan to occupy in and around that area. If it is tagged as rural development, that would be acceptable to many people. I think the minister said in his speech that there is documentation and there will be consultation. That is fine, but there should have been some consultation prior to dumping it on the people of that part of the rural area to say this is what will happen. There needs to be much more consultation on both of those areas and parcels of land. Once changes are made and the dirt starts being excavated we can never go back. I do not want to see that happen to our great Territory in the Top End. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, this, and every budget, goes to the Territory we live in and the Territory we want to live in. Every budget contains critical decisions. It is the annual centrepiece where you determine where money goes to underpin your policies and principles as a government.
On our side, we often feel a greater sense of responsibility and obligation to Territorians than the conservatives on the other side. It can sometimes be dismissed as big government versus small government, but it goes to a sense of obligation and responsibility. The environment people live in is important. We believe in a Territory where there is an equality of care, education and opportunity, because the social circumstances and environment in which people live are critical. To that point, I will initially touch on something on which the member for Port Darwin and I agree. The member for Port Darwin, as he is wont to do, philosophically mused during his budget contribution yesterday about Corrections. He said:
- I am regularly asked how many Aboriginal people I have in custody. The answer to that question is in the order of 84% or 85%, depending on when you ask the question. I am unconvinced that is necessarily the best correlation to draw between offending and a correlative filter, because I cannot imagine what the colour of a person’s skin or their racial background has to do with offending behaviour per se, because what happens inside a person’s brain and heart is fundamentally what drives criminal behaviour, not their racial profile. There is a better question to ask in my opinion.
The question is how many people in prison were unemployed at the time of their offending? I suspect the number is much higher than 85%. You would be getting close to 100%.
I agree with the member for Port Darwin, and that is why we support Sentenced to a Job, which picks up on an agenda we had in government to move people into employment. When you see a statistic like that, one of your first thoughts of responsibility is about how to stop repeat offending, so we agree with the work the government is doing in that space around education, training people and moving them into a job while they are in gaol. However, the other sense of obligation we would feel as a party is how can we go back to that original circumstance. What obligation do we have, as a government for Territorians, to try to minimise the number of unemployed people? What can we do to affect the environment and social circumstances people live in? In yesterday’s budgets, both in the Territory and federally, we saw conservative parties pull out from those spaces, and that is a mistake.
Look at the federal budget, where there were massive cuts to health and education across Australia. If you are young and unemployed, you will not be able to access benefits for six months. We saw Medicare co-payments introduced and a range of things which put incredible stress and pressure on people, particularly at the low end, those who are possibly in subsistence living and difficult circumstances. As a government, you have a permanent obligation and responsibility to Territorians to try to do everything you can to make sure people are not in those circumstances. The environment you live in is important, and it is being made worse by decisions of the Territory and federal governments, which will create future social problems.
The CLP went to the last election with a clear, simple promise to cut the cost of living, and that is something all Territorians would like. People who voted for the CLP wanted to see that in place. Instead, we saw an impost on Territorians made immediately after the last election, with an average of $2000 added to household utilities bill, by the government’s own figures. That is a huge impost which puts people in difficult circumstances. In the federal budget, we saw a range of decisions made which will put pressure on people’s living circumstances. For the federal Treasurer, that might mean skipping the second bottle of Mot, but for many people it means skipping dinner. It is a difficult situation which people have been put into. A $7 Medicare co-payment is a difficult impost on people; it is something people should not have to worry about when they see their doctor. You have a right to an equality of healthcare in Australia and the Territory. Your personal wealth should not determine your personal health.
A series of decisions has been made by conservative parties which will affect people doing it tough; they will have a massive impact on people in that difficult area, and the environment people live in has a massive impact on what they do. I agree with the member for Port Darwin about looking at unemployed people in the prison population. We agree with decisions made on Sentenced to a Job, and these follow on from a body of work Labor was undertaking. We must do everything we can to stop the prison population re-offending. What can we do to stop them being there in the first place? That is the responsibility and obligation we feel as parliamentarians, and it is what shapes much debate in this Chamber, where we may disagree on policy terms with the government because we see them pulling away from that.
Individuals must take some responsibility. If you do something wrong, you serve your time and go to gaol. However, what can government do to control the environment people live in? It goes to another promise the CLP made at the last election about the Banned Drinker Register, where it promised to scrap it. That was the CLP’s promise, and it did it. What it failed to do was supply measures in place after that. This goes to the environment people live in. There were no controls around the supply of alcohol to problem drunks, and that will always lead to problems. We saw the most violent year in the Territory history in 2013, and the CLP’s response to that in 2014 has been to cut the police budget. We find it extraordinary that crime goes up and the police budget goes down. The decision the CLP made not to put supply measures in place around problem alcohol was a mistake, and we can see it is a mistake by comparing Nhulunbuy to Tennant Creek, both with 2% of the Territory population, yet Nhulunbuy, which has supply provisions around alcohol, has seven times less violent crime than Tennant Creek. In Tennant Creek, you are seven times more likely to be assaulted than you are in Nhulunbuy, which has those supply mechanisms.
The CLP said that was, essentially, interventionist; it was an imposition on the broader population, therefore it should not happen. However, as Territorians and parliamentarians on this side of the Chamber, we feel we have an obligation to Territorians.
One way we exercised that was through the Banned Drinker Register to try to tackle a specific problem. We felt that impost on someone’s time in presenting their ID was small and had a positive impact. You can see the continuation of that positive impact in Nhulunbuy and the consequence of that decision in Tennant Creek.
It is extraordinary that the CLP’s reaction has been to place temporary beat locations outside bottle shops in Alice Springs. This goes to controlling the supply of alcohol, but in a much more intensive and interventionist way. This is a temporary solution to what has become a broader problem under the CLP because of its refusal to tackle the supply of alcohol to problem drunks.
That feeds into the mandatory detention regime, which does not work and costs taxpayers a fortune. We saw only 300 people go through that system in the last financial year. The minister spoke to a case study during Question Time today. There were case studies through rehabilitation during our time in government. We want people to be rehabilitated, and there will occasionally be good news stories from case studies, but the evidence does not support mandatory detention in a rehabilitation regime. It is not only in the Territory where evidence does not support that. Prior to the system coming into place, experts said, ‘We know this will not work’.
One of the significant reasons why it will not work is that after people have spent three months drying out in mandatory detention for rehabilitation, they will go back to the environment from which they came, where people are drinking and where they are encouraged to drink, the same living circumstances which saw them become a problem drunk and placed into the mandatory detention rehabilitation scheme in the first place. That is why this is a bad, expensive decision which is costing Territory taxpayers a fortune. It goes back to the principles that divide this Chamber, where we feel an obligation and responsibility sits with government, and where the current government denies that responsibility and obligation. We, essentially, have an incredibly expensive spin-dryer model from the current government on mandatory detention and rehabilitation.
The minister, in her contribution, did not touch on the decision to close the Nhulunbuy rehabilitation facility, but the Attorney-General did. He said:
- Consequently, the Minister for Health and I had some conversations and found a better use for this facility was to see Yolngu people serving their sentences on their own country, as well as some other prisoners, and serving the community of Nhulunbuy far more effectively than the alcohol treatment centre that is there now.
We are looking forward to offering those positions as far as we possibly can – I think we can cover all of them – to the people working in that environment now. That means an increasing capacity to place people in the Nhulunbuy work camp and for organisations in the community, like Gumatj …
NAAJA has commented on the decision to close down that rehabilitation centre. It said:
- The NT Government’s announcement of a permanent prisoner work camp at Nhulunbuy coincides with the Government’s decision to close the Nhulunbuy alcohol rehabilitation centre.
‘Employment is only one of the issues that people in the justice system face’, said Priscilla Collins, CEO of the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency.
The closure of the Nhulunbuy alcohol rehabilitation centre is a huge step backwards. The centre was set up in 2007 so that people from the East Arnhem region could undertake rehabilitation close to home and family.
‘The evidence is clear that rehabilitation is much more effective when people are able to maintain connections with partners, their kids, family and home. People should not have to come all the way to Darwin to go to rehab’, Ms Collins said.
NAAJA is also concerned that the NT Government sees prison as the answer to all problems. If the Government is genuinely concerned about community safety, they need to listen to the experts on ‘what works’ and it needs to address the underlying causes of offending such as alcohol and drug addiction.
Mr Elferink: And passive welfare.
Mr GUNNER: And passive welfare, as the member for Port Darwin interjected.
We believe governments have an obligation to a much broader range of things than the CLP government does. The CLP is looking at a prison-based solution, and only in Nhulunbuy at the moment. The work being done at the camp is excellent, but they have closed the rehabilitation centre in Nhulunbuy, so unless you have been imprisoned, you cannot access rehabilitation services there. That is a mistake; if people are looking to be rehabilitated before they offend and go to gaol, that is a good thing, but we now have a prison-only solution in Nhulunbuy.
We support the CLP’s work there, but it has much too narrow a focus on tackling the problems we face in the Territory, specifically with problem drinking. In Nhulunbuy, the CLP has gone for a prison-based solution and closed the rehabilitation service which had been there since 2007. We should be trying everything we can to stop crime occurring in the first place.
There are other good things around rehabilitation, health and personal family circumstances, but one of the outcomes can be offending. Closing the rehabilitation service is a mistake.
NAAJA has said it is a mistake and is disappointing to see. Everything continues to go back to this principle of what you are responsible for as a government. We believe the Territory government has a greater responsibility than it is prepared to accept.
Mr Elferink: How much would you spend?
Mr GUNNER: We put that in place in 2007, member for Port Darwin. We spent the money which needed to be spent to have it established. The member for Port Darwin is part of the government that chose to close the service. We budgeted for it and made the difficult decisions we had to make in 2007 to make it happen, because we accepted we had a responsibility to try to do something about a very significant issue in the Northern Territory. As we said, everything keeps coming back to the environment you live in.
The other thing the CLP has decided to do, after the most violent year in Territory history, is cut the police budget, which includes the broken promise of 120 extra police officers. The 120 police officers were meant to be above and beyond, but the CLP continues to try to claim Commonwealth police, which the federal government is paying for because of the detention centres in the Northern Territory.
Those are police officers the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, negotiated for and received, yet the CLP is trying to claim them as part of its 120. Those police numbers were known before the last election. Ninety-four were known before the last election; everyone had the expectation that the 120 police officers the CLP was to deliver would be above and beyond those 94, yet it chose to break that promise. This is in addition to all of the other broken promises, including the cost of living and cutting crime by 10% every year. They now throw another promise on there, as a result of a decision not to employ 120 extra police officers, and instead try to fudge the figures and claim credit for the 94 extra police officers Paul Henderson originally negotiated for.
You must admire the cheek of the government, but as the police association said, it is a breach of faith with NT police and Territorians; it is a broken promise. You promised 120 extra police officers, and that was a Territory Labor deal delivered. Instead, we have a CLP government trying to claim credit that its promise has been delivered by the ALP employing 94 extra cops. It is a complete cop out – literally.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Changes to the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975
Ms LAWRIE (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, this motion is a reflection of deeply-held concerns in our community about the position taken by the federal Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, to change the federal anti-discrimination act, in which racial vilification is described. I will go into some of the detail of that.
There has been public commentary around this, and this motion was led last week, so the government has had some time to consider it. I note that today the Leader of Government Business, on behalf of government, indicated it would be proposing an amendment to this motion. There have been discussions between me and the Leader of Government Business on the proposed amendment. I have not seen the final amendment, but I presume it is as we have discussed, and I will talk to that.
I have been genuine in seeking bipartisan support for this motion, as well as legislation to amend the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. I like to think some issues are above politics and are about our identity as Territorians. As lawmakers in the Territory, we are hopefully truly reflective of our community. The Northern Territory is, by and large, a harmonious community. It is a multicultural community, and we proudly, staunchly and strongly have a significant Indigenous community.
With some of that, sadly, comes concerns of racism in our community. I listened intently to advice from the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Commissioner to a multicultural meeting held in my electorate at Malak, at the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory, some weeks ago. I attended with our shadow minister for Multicultural Affairs, the member for Wanguri. Also at that meeting was the Minister for Multicultural Affairs, the member for Sanderson. He did not express a view at that meeting, where I had hoped we would hear, at some stage, a view from the government. I am sure this motion and debate will give the government the opportunity to put its views on the record, and we welcome that. We have brought the motion to parliament to discover the views of the Northern Territory government on issues surrounding changes to legislation covering racial vilification by the Commonwealth.
Why is it such an issue for us? We are the only jurisdiction that does not have similar legislation, in terms of public vilification protections. All other jurisdictions in our nation have legislation. In the Northern Territory we have in the past looked at whether or not we have needed it. My recollection, as a former Attorney-General, is that there was strong Commonwealth legislation. It had been in place and followed for 20 years, so we did not need to introduce our own. There seems to be a move to change the Commonwealth legislation and from the view of opposition, water it down significantly, removing rights and protections which have existed for 20 years. That has led me to focus on the need for changes to the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. This will ensure protections which exist today under Commonwealth law will exist as protections under Northern Territory law in the future.
That being said, the point of the motion is to bring to parliament an opportunity to debate the proposed changes to section 18C of the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975. It was to urge all of us to identify that there is no place for bigotry in our society, and we should combat it at every opportunity. The motion is to reject Commonwealth plans to remove existing vilification protections, and goes on to note the work I have done on a discussion paper which has been given to all members of parliament, our broader community and stakeholders, including those across Indigenous, multicultural and legal sectors. I am also sending it to constituents, with a view to seeking comment and feedback on a proposed private member’s bill that I will seek to bring before parliament in August this year.
The point of the motion is to bring forward debate and gain an understanding as to whether or not we would receive bipartisan support for the 18C protections which exist, and I look forward to hearing from the government on this matter. It was moved last week, and the government has had time to look at that. My office was contacted today by the Leader of Government Business’s office, and they proposed an amendment. There were some words in the amendment which I could not accept, and these have now been amended, literally, to the word ‘changed’. If I take the amendments in good faith they show bipartisan support for a view that there is no place for bigotry and racial vilification in our society, that we do need protection from offensive behaviour based on race, colour, national or ethnic origin, and that those protections, while they currently sit within Commonwealth jurisdiction, must be considered for the Northern Territory realm if the federal Attorney-General proceeds with this move to amend Commonwealth legislation.
Bipartisan support is crucial on this matter. It is something that affects us all. The Australian Human Rights Commission describes racial discrimination as:
- … when a person is treated less favourably than another person in a similar situation because of their race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin or immigrant status.
I come from a minority religious background. It is well known in this Chamber that I am Jewish. I also practise Buddhism and I have done for many years. In the US, I believe we are described as JuBus - that is Jews who are fundamentally Jewish – I call myself culturally Jewish because you cannot shake a lifetime of characteristics and learning – who then go on to adopt and practice the Buddhist faith. That is me; I am a complex individual, but I do know and I have felt throughout my life the sting of taunts for being different. I hope that, in some measure, the laws of the Territory will provide some comfort and protections going forward to people who ought not be singled out and discriminated against because they happen to have a different faith to the predominant faith of our nation. I receive great support from other minority faiths; I have an enduring and tremendous friendship, for example, with the Northern Territory Muslim community because we understand, at times, what each of us goes through with discrimination.
I hope there is a broad mind to the suggestions I am making to pick up the Tasmanian legislation, which includes religion, because people of all faiths, or indeed people without a faith, should be accepted as equal Territorians, and not discriminated against because of their religion. I want to draw that distinction and draw that to people’s attention in the parliament, because I have sent you a discussion paper. Whilst I have made it clear in the discussion paper that I am proposing the Tasmanian legislation, I want to make it doubly clear that there is a distinctive difference between the Tasmanian legislation and the Commonwealth’s section 18C legislation, this being that the Tasmanian legislation includes religion.
The commission describes racial vilification, sometimes referred to as racial hatred, as doing something in public, and this is an important distinction. This is about public discrimination and vilification. When I was questioned in the media about why I was bringing this forward – and I know that the CLP government has thrown this slur at me – I was asked about whether or not I was doing this because of the allegations of racism which had been raised publicly between members of the CLP during a party wing meeting, etcetera. I made it very clear to the media that was not at all why I was pursuing the proposed private member’s bill, and if allegations like that are aired, they concern private conversations. This goes to public vilification.
Whilst I recognise the CLP will think I always do things with ill intent, or that I am seeking political gamesmanship, you are wrong in that perception in this matter. This matter goes far deeper for me than what might be the momentary prevails of the CLP. I am the child of the Northern Territory’s first Anti-Discrimination Commissioner and Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Regional Director, Dawn Lawrie. I was raised to pursue the rights of Territorians to be treated without discrimination, and I come from a minority religious background in our nation.
This is not about party politics or private conversations which may or may not have occurred within the CLP. You have it wrong if you think it is. Racial hatred can be based on the race, colour, national or ethnic origin of a person or group of people which – this is the crucial bit – is likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate. Examples of racial hatred may include: racially offensive material on the Internet including e-forums; blogs; social networking sites and video sharing sites; racially offensive comments or images in a newspaper, magazine or other publication such as a leaflet or flyer; racially offensive speeches at a public rally; racially abusive comments in a public place such as a shop, workplace, park, on public transport or at school; and racially abusive comments at sporting events by players, spectators, coaches or officials
It would be reasonable to expect all in this parliament would reject those actions outright. There is no place in our society for racism, racial discrimination or racial vilification. Our Territory community, like the rest of Australia, has come a long way in the journey of opposing racism. Our cities, towns and communities in the Northern Territory are home to people from more than 100 ethnic backgrounds. Our diversity is dynamic, vibrant and active, and we live mostly in a harmonious multicultural community, proudly and strongly Indigenous.
In the Territory we are so lucky to live in this wonderfully cultural landscape full of rich history and meaning. The depth of that cultural Indigenous history is incredible, and we are so lucky to call this country of ours home. I call myself a saltwater person, born and raised in Darwin, but then there is the rock country of West Arnhem, open woodlands across the Big Rivers, the open plains of the Barkly and the desert of Central Australia. We are all witness to Indigenous Territorians who can claim, quite rightly and proudly, to have the oldest continuous living culture on our planet.
Our Territory is home to the descendants of the first settlers when we were part of the colony of South Australia. In 1869, George Goyder, the Surveyor-General of South Australia, established a small settlement of 135 people at Port Darwin and named it Palmerston. In 1870, the first poles for the Overland Telegraph were erected in Darwin to eventually open the Territory and Australia to the rest of the world.
Our Territory has been home to people from across the continents and nations of our world who have decided to settle here since then. For example, the Chinese population at one time outnumbered the European population in the Top End. Many were recruited to the government of the day, and by 1878 the Chinese were the largest non-Indigenous group in the Northern Territory. According to the Government Residents Report of 1909, there were 6122 Chinese in the NT by 1888, contracted to work in the goldfields and later build the railway line from Palmerston to Pine Creek.
Over 100 years ago, in the late 1890s, Chinatown in Cavenagh Street had become a hive of Chinese activity and commerce. It had a bootmaker, tailor, baker, hairdresser, several washerwomen and many gardeners. There were many restaurants and a seed and plant shop. There was then a wave of Filipino migrants, which commenced in 1895 when the divers and pearl shell processers were employed in the pearling industry. It was not until the demise of the White Australia policy that the next wave of Filipino migrants arrived in Darwin, linked to the declaration of martial law in the Philippines in 1972. Today, Filipinos bring skills to a range of jobs, from mechanics to civil engineers, as part of the solution to our skills shortage in the Territory.
The Census of 1921 showed seven Cypriots living in Darwin; they were employed by Vestey’s meatworks and the Pine Creek railway. Following political instability after World War II, some Cypriots headed to Australia, so that by 1952 Greek-Cypriots were the largest group of Greek-Australians in Darwin. Following Cyclone Tracy, I saw us welcome many people from Greece to our city, and by 1982 Darwin City Council had signed a sister city agreement with Kalymnos, in recognition of the growing links between our two communities. A wave of Portuguese-Timorese refugees arrived in the Territory in 1975, following Indonesia’s annexation of Timor-Leste, and again in 1999, following the referendum for independence and the ensuing violence we witnessed. We housed our Timorese refugees in large numbers at Marrara.
We all celebrate our great lifestyle; it is what makes the Territory what it is, and is why we call our multicultural dynamic home. This was why Darwin was named one of the best cities to visit in 2012 by the Lonely Planet. We were described as being multicultural, young and energetic. It is a great selling point for tourism. Tourism Top End describes Darwin as:
- … a melting pot of people and cultures that prides itself in its unique and friendly laidback lifestyle.
It is the rightful duty of this parliament to ensure the harmony of our melting pot of people and cultures into the future, because it is the right thing to do and because of the opportunities for economic development and tourism.
Born and raised here, I have benefited from the diversity of the kids I went to school with, the Greeks, the Chinese, the Indigenous families, who all embraced me, taught me their cultures and cooked for me, bless them. Mum was never a good cook; I often survived on the fantastic cooking from these very generous, warm and open families.
I have travelled throughout the world and what I have found, more than anywhere, is that the Territory is embracing of multicultural diversity. What I am so proud of is that in our nation we are most proud of our Indigenous heritage and culture, and it is strong here.
This motion was triggered by activity at the federal level, with Senator George Brandis’ decision to release the exposure draft bill proposing amendments to the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act. Those changes to section 18C would remove unlawful conduct in relation to offending, insulting, humiliating or intimidating people. It will make it a civil prohibition, and does not create an offence or a crime; no one could be charged or prosecuted, and no criminal punishments could be imposed on those who breach it. Lawsuits under section 18C could only be brought privately by victims, not by the government. Section 18C would apply an objective test and the court would have to consider whether the relevant conduct was likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate an ordinary and reasonable member of a racial group.
It is not enough, given a person subjectively feels offended, for the government to say hurt feelings are not enough. It is an outrageous step for the government to propose removing ‘offend, insult and humiliate’, narrowing the definition from ‘intimidate’ to ‘fear of physical harm’. Does it have to go that far, where it is considered to be simply a fear of physical harm, instead of the hurtful words that, as we know, can be life changing for many people? Interestingly, at the multicultural meeting you literally heard the depth of feeling people had around the hurtful words that occur, and the reason why this sort of legislation should never be watered down or changed to simply ‘fear of physical harm’.
A further issue that struck me in discussions about the changes was the ordinary person test, rather than the test of the person who feels vilified in their racial group. We all have different perspectives. An ordinary person will not have the perspective of someone who has been discriminated against in Indigenous, Greek or Jewish groups. The removal of the test that currently exists to an ‘ordinary person’ is an insidious shift, and it should not occur.
The Australian Council of Human Rights Authorities, of which the NT’s Anti-Discrimination Commission is a member, has said that:
2.6 It is our view that the draft Bill should not proceed in its current form.
This is in reference to the proposed changes to the Commonwealth law. The council has found that:
- The proposed changes to the RDA will:
remove the existing protections available to a person or group of persons who are offended, insulted or humiliated on the basis of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin;
narrow the interpretation of ‘intimidation’ to that which causes a fear of physical harm;
- restrict actions that could amount to racial vilification to actions that incite hatred towards a person or group of persons because of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin;
remove the requirement to establish the impact of the actions against the standard of a reasonable representative of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the complainant and substitute that with the requirement to establish the impact of the action from the perspective of an ordinary, reasonable member of the Australian community;
That is extraordinary. It goes on to say:
- remove the responsibility of employers or agents who may have vicarious liability for the action under consideration; and
- …to include a wider range of activities, and remove the requirement that actions falling within the range of available exceptions be exercised cautiously and in the least discriminatory manner possible.
- 2.5 Taken as a whole, ACHRA considers that the changes will considerably lessen the protections available to people in Australia against racism, and particularly those who are most vulnerable to the impact of discrimination and racial hatred.
There are campaigns around closing the gap. The Close the Gap campaign’s steering committee has said:
- If we are to close the unacceptable health and life expectancy gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and other Australians, racism must be addressed. The RDA in its current form has a critical role to play …
I will read an excerpt from an open letter signed by 155 organisations which say Australia must retain strong and effective protections against racial vilification. The organisations include national bodies, as well as Territory organisations such as the Larrakia Nation. It includes corporations and non-government organisations, faith groups, legal services and many other groups. The open letter says:
Racial hatred causes serious harm to individuals and diminishes us all as a community. It increases the likelihood of racial discrimination and racist violence. Unfortunately, racism remains widespread in our Australian community. Racial vilification complaints to the Australian Human Rights Commission increased 59 per cent last year.
According to the Challenging Racism Project, approximately 20 per cent of Australians have experienced forms of race hate…
The Australian Government should demonstrate its commitment to the diverse cultural, ethnic and religious communities that make up the rich fabric of our multicultural nation by ruling out any repeal of the racial vilification provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act.
Conciliation allows victims of racism to work with their perpetrators to resolve their dispute in a mutually agreeable manner. It is confidential and need not involve lawyers. A conciliator does not decide anything per se; the parties are guided toward resolution of the issue themselves. The outcomes can include an apology, a change of policy or compensation, as worked out by the parties. The conciliation process has stood us in good stead in the nation and in the Northern Territory.
I believe that six Territory cases of racial vilification under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 were considered by the Australian Human Rights Commission in 2012-13. If the Commonwealth provisions were repealed, Territory complainants would have no avenue for their cases to be considered. We have good anti-discrimination legislation in the Northern Territory, and I am so incredibly proud that it was my own mother, Dawn Lawrie, the former member for Nightcliff, who was instrumental in ensuring the Territory had its own anti-discrimination laws. She worked with the former CLP government and former CLP Chief Minister Shane Stone to put those laws in place. As I said, she became the Northern Territory’s first Anti-Discrimination Commissioner when the office was established in 1993.
I have seen the workings of the commission firsthand. When I returned to the Territory and was pregnant with my first child, I would pop in there for a bit of free air conditioning and catch up with my mother for lunch. It was a great office to visit to see the work people were doing to mediate and conciliate, but also to raise education and awareness across the Northern Territory. I have enormous faith in the commission and the functions the commissioner has, due to successive commissioners have handled complaints which have come before them. I have no hesitation whatsoever in saying that it is appropriate for us to introduce amendments to our own act to ensure we have provisions in the Northern Territory, given the proposed changes to section 18C.
Bipartisan support is surely not so difficult on this one, and I thank the Leader of Government Business for going to the effort of looking at an amendment to satisfy any concerns they may have from their side of politics and to recognise the very real and deep concerns we have from where we sit.
I look forward to hearing the government’s response. Just as equally, I look forward to hearing the contributions of members of the minority Palmer United Party and the Independent member for Nelson. I hope we can all find a bipartisan position on this matter today.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I speak in the spirit in which the Leader of the Opposition says she has brought this motion to the House. I also acknowledge we have had behind-the-scenes conversations about this motion. We have comfortably and quickly come to common ground on this, and the Northern Territory government is not opposed to the philosophy behind what the Leader of the Opposition has brought forward.
However, I want to place this conversation into context, and draw into relief some of the history which has motivated Senator Brandis. Because I can describe and understand what has motivated Senator Brandis, it does not automatically follow that the government concurs. The government, in the early days of this public debate, has yet to determine if it supports Senator Brandis’s position.
It is too early to be too excited about what the federal government is doing. Because of the amount of public pushback in this, it is not inconceivable that this matter may never find its way into the federal parliament; therefore, the protections the Leader of the Opposition seeks will remain intact. As she said at the outset, when she was Attorney-General of the Northern Territory, she considered the existing provisions of the federal act fit for purpose and satisfactory for the people of the Northern Territory.
I will move the amendment to the motion which has been agreed on so I can have it circulated and members can read it. Mind you, I suspect they already have copies of it. I move that all words after ‘this Assembly:’ be omitted and substituted with the following:
understands the importance of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the Northern Territory’s Anti-Discrimination Act
recognises that whilst section 18C of the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975 provides some protection to individuals from offensive behaviour because of race, colour, national or ethnic origin, the Commonwealth Attorney-General has released a discussion paper to elicit community views
recognises the harmonious and respectful multicultural makeup of the Northern Territory, which is robust and unique in Australia
I emphasise the word ‘change’ to make sure there is no confusion over the earlier draft which was circulated.
- … with interest, and reserves its right to augment Northern Territory legislation in the event that it is necessary to cover any legislative shortfall, and
That is now the amended motion which stands before us. I think all members – I also took it to the members for Nelson and Namatjira – have indicated their support for this rewording. I acknowledge the Leader of the Opposition’s flexibility in relation to taking this amendment on.
I understand where the Leader of the Opposition is coming from, but I also come from families who have been subjected to wars. My mother, as many members of this House know, spent four years in a Japanese concentration camp, and my father was arrested for forced labour during World War II by the Nazis.
Part of what the Nazis did was book burning. If they did not like an idea they would set fire to the book of the person who wrote the idea. Anything written which did not accord with the Nazi world view was then cast upon the pyre of Nazi rallies all through Germany, as Germany disintegrated into a totalitarian dictatorship with warlike intent.
Underlying the offence of book burning is the idea of trying to kill another person’s ideas. This is the heart of freedom of speech, and is essentially where Senator Brandis goes in relation to his opinion on this matter. I understand Senator Brandis has been somewhat motivated by the decision in the Bolt case. Mr Bolt is a former Territorian; I remember knocking about with him when I was a kid, when he still lived on Rapid Creek Road in Darwin with his parents. He has long since moved down south, and he continues to write strident articles which are published nationally. I understand he also hosts a television show, which I think I have watched about 10 minutes of, collectively, over the years. Having made those observations, I turn my attention to the matters raised by Senator Brandis.
Senator Brandis has settled on a number of words in the Racial Discrimination Act, orbiting around the operation of section 18C. He has focused on the words ‘offend’, ‘insult’ and ‘humiliate’, which occur in (1)(a). It has become the focus of Senator Brandis’s world view. The subsection reads as follows:
- (a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people …
I will stop there, because I will quote Senator Brandis so the context of his comments can be understood by all members in this House.
- But there is a second reason why it is the view of the Government that Section 18C and related sections should be removed from the act and replaced, and that is because they do not effectively or competently address the very vice they’re meant to address, and that is racial vilification. It is one of the misconceptions in this debate that the Racial Discrimination Act prohibits racial vilification. It does not. The term is not used in the Act and Section 18C does not prohibit the incitement to racial hatred which is the most commonly accepted meaning of the term racial vilification.
- I have said all along, and Mr Abbott has said all along, that a properly worded section can achieve both objectives of protecting legitimate freedom of speech and freedom of public discussion about matters of race, while at the same time containing protections against racial vilification and other unacceptable racist conduct.
This proposed amendment does both. These are the strongest protections against racism that have ever appeared in any Commonwealth act, but they are more effective because they don’t adopt the method that the pre-existing …
- … Section 18C adopted of effectively political censorship. They target the particular mischief concern that is racial vilification and prohibit it.
- First of all, the words offend, insult and humiliate are gone. You can’t have a public discussion of an issue, particularly an issue about which people feel very strongly, I might say, without offending or insulting a person who has a strong contrary view. In parliament, the principal debating chamber of this nation, we offend and I dare say we insult each other every day. That is part of the robustness of the discussion of public issues.
The inclusion in Section 18C in 1995 of those words, against which the then Coalition in Opposition warned at the time, has had a dangerous effect on stifling and, in fact, censoring public discussion of important social issues, as we saw with the Bolt case, the most infamous example.
The word humiliate is also gone, because it’s not possible to have a public discussion about a difficult issue about which different people feel strongly without running the risk that somebody who takes a strong contrary point of view might feel that their view is being mocked. Mockery is a legitimate part of public discussion and commentary.
You, ladies and gentlemen of the press …
The federal senator was addressing the press gallery when making these comments
- … mock politicians every day of the week and so you should. It is part of the robustness of democratic exchange. So humiliate is gone as well.
Those three words – offend, insult and humiliate – describe what has sometimes been called hurt feelings. It is not in the Government’s view the role of the state to ban conduct merely because it might hurt the feelings of others. Our democracy should be robust enough for that.
Intimidate, however, stays, because intimidate is not about hurting peoples’ feelings. To intimidate a person is to cause them to be fearful. That is an entirely different state of mind …
The senator went on to say:
- Vilification, as I said in my opening remarks, is added to the section. To vilify somebody is to incite hatred of them. The absence of a prohibition against vilification has been a gaping hole in Section 18C in its current form.
I have the text of that press conference if members would like to read the whole thing. I am happy to make it available to any member who asks, but that places Senator Brandis’s comments into a contextual environment. It is the question that will rage around this debate between now and when, should the time ever come, the federal government chooses to move on this topic. From the Territory’s perspective, it is a case of hurry up and wait. It is correct, and I do acknowledge comments by the Leader of the Opposition about the ethos surrounding this. I do note that she seeks to include religious vilification within the proposed amendment that she intends to bring into this House, should she feel it necessary.
I agree with the Leader of the Opposition that this town, city and jurisdiction has long stood out from the rest of this country in a number of very important ways. Harry Hen Fook Chan, whose bust appears in the hall outside as you come through the door, was a former member of the Legislative Assembly, but also mayor of this town. He was elected while this country still had a White Australia policy. In the Darwin community we were long turning a blind eye to matters of race when the federal government’s policy was still to keep the ‘Yellow Peril’ from our door. We will always remember comments from southern ministers, not least of whom was Arthur Calwell. Curiously, he was a Labor minister, whose contribution to the migration debate in this country was that:
- Two Wongs don’t make a white.
The Territory has been outside of that domain for a very long time. It is impossible, and always has been, to move within Territory social circles and to exclude yourself from the dynamism of our community; football, sports and social clubs all have a presence of people from diverse racial backgrounds. My father was a Rotarian, and there were any number of Rotarians, even back in the 1970s, from diverse racial backgrounds; one could say Darwin, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, was built largely on the sweat of Italian and Greek migrants.
Ms Finocchiaro: Mostly Italian.
Mr ELFERINK: Mostly Italian. I am the son of a migrant, running away from post-World War II Europe, because my father and mother were sick to death of the post-World War II environment and the legacy which resonated through Europe for 20 years after that period. It was a dark place, and if you want an impression of that pick up Heinrich Bll’s book, The Clown, written by a German author around 1958, and you will realise what a dark place Europe had become, particularly in Germany after World War II.
All those sporting clubs have always had large numbers of Aboriginal people involved with them, simply because Aboriginal people, no matter whether they were of mixed or original descent, have been involved in our sporting clubs for as long as I recall. It is also interesting to note that we have a mosque on Vanderlin Drive next to a Christian church. The fence which separates them is about four feet high, and whilst there is also a street between them, I do not think there are many places in the world where you would see that. When you say that to people who live in Darwin, their response is not, ‘Yes, we are very proud of our multicultural society’. It is one you hope for. ‘I have never noticed. Oh, really? Yes, I suppose. I never thought about it.’
That is the sort of society I love and grew up in. I never noticed there was a mosque next to a Christian church. How many communities anywhere in the world would that pass by utterly unnoticed? Yet that is what happens in Darwin. It is a society which I was proud to grow up in.
From time to time, racism has reared its ugly head in the Northern Territory, and I recall when I was a kid in the late 1970s, if memory serves me, that a local police officer had decided to set up a local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan, and that found its way into the newspapers. Do you remember that?
Mr Styles: I do not remember that.
Mr ELFERINK: I cannot remember what that moron’s name was, but it made such a hoo-hah in the community. People were stridently against this moron, and it was not too long before he was unemployed. He was very quickly sidelined by the police force, because it understood the sort of community we lived in and that a local branch of the Ku Klux Klan fitted about as well as a besser block in a tumble dryer.
This is the sort of community we live in, and I will make this observation: whilst we do make legislation, and I understand that the Leader of the Opposition describes this legislation as being as much symbolic as enforcing, it is symbolic of an existing attitude which percolates throughout our community.
The community polices itself particularly well in the Northern Territory when it comes to things of this nature. The community has historically done it and yes, you will occasionally hear racist comments from time to time. Over the years, where I have heard somebody being truly vitriolic with racist comments in public places and houses in particular, I have noticed many people quickly step up and shut it down in the way the community does. I hope that if such an instrument was introduced into the Northern Territory, that it would not be used. I take some heart from the fact the federal legislation has been used so rarely up until now in the Northern Territory. I am also grateful that the Leader of the Opposition understands another nuance which plays beneath the surface in a debate of this nature and acknowledges the overt steps she has taken to make certain that debate does not play out.
It is very easy with this sort of debate to run to the bottom of the barrel. It takes dignified community leadership to make sure when you are trying to address an issue of this nature we do not run to the bottom of the barrel. I note the Leader of the Opposition has been specific in articulating her motives and to separate herself from any such allegations of this. Consequently, I will not make any such allegations, in the spirit of which the opposition and government have come together on this issue.
I anticipate that the Independent members who speak on this will also be cautious to make certain we do not go down that path, because it is an easy place to go to. It is an extremely difficult place from which to extract yourself, and I would be cautious to make sure we move forward cautiously with this debate.
I also note there is a Freedom of Speech (Repeal of S.18C) Bill 2014 in circulation. I note, in accordance with the public comments made by Senator Brandis, that the words he suggested should be removed, ‘offend’, ‘insult’ and ‘humiliate’, have been removed from the proposed amendment that is the exposure draft. In its place it introduces the word ‘vilify’ for the first time in the legislation and retains the word ‘intimidate’. I also note that it is a public place offence.
I make one observation which I think many people have overlooked, particularly at the state level. Federal governments do not tend to have summary offence type legislation, but states do. Racist language would be considered by a court to be an objectionable word or the use of those words could be considered offensive conduct.
Under the Summary Offences Act of the Northern Territory, using the ‘N’ word when talking about an Aboriginal person would invite a breach of that act and a fine. I think it is a $1000 maximum penalty. Within Territory legislation, there are already provisions which exist to deal with racially offensive language, and prosecutions, if brought under that legislation, would likely be successful. However, like any instance, you would have to judge each case on its merits, and a court would have to make that determination, based on the attitude of the reasonable person, the man on the Clapham omnibus or the Bondi tram, as has been absorbed into Australian common law, as well as the context of when the word was used.
To a degree, we have legislation in the Northern Territory which deals with offensive language. If a person was to make a complaint to the police that they had been called the ‘N’ word in a public place, which is a completely different system, as identified by the Racial Discrimination Act, it is very likely the police would proceed with a complaint and that matter could be dealt with under summary legislation of the Northern Territory.
Further, the Criminal Code Act of the Northern Territory prohibits certain types of threatening behaviour, which casts a much wider net than merely threatening behaviour based on race. One is capable of engaging in threatening behaviour without it having to be reduced to a matter of race, faith or sexual orientation. Threatening behaviour is threatening behaviour, so it can be suggested that the Territory’s legislation, to a substantial degree, already covers the field, whilst it does not do so within the operation of the Anti-Discrimination Act. Nevertheless, I understand what the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting in her processes and I understand the symbolic nature of what she brings to this House. I further observe that you cannot offend against section 18C if you have satisfied the operation of section 18D, which means you cannot be in breach of the Racial Discrimination Act if you do it:
- (a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or
(b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or
(c) in making or publishing:
- (i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or
(ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.
That means an action brought under section 18C would be severely limited by the operation of section 18D. I suspect that is one of the reasons why so few matters end up being prosecuted by people who are offended; many matters end up being conciliated because the successful pursuit of prosecutions is rare, the Bolt case being one of them. I note that under the exposure draft circulated by Senator Brandis, subsection 4 says:
- This section does not apply to words, sounds, images or writing spoken, broadcast, published or otherwise communicated in the course of participating in the public discussion of any political, social, cultural, religious, artistic, academic or scientific matter.
That is a similarly broad list of exemptions, and I am not entirely sure that it leaves a great deal of space to operate in.
I understand the motivation and rationale the Leader of the Opposition has for bringing this matter forward. I note that Territory legislation has, in other places, ways of dealing with offensive and objectionable words, as well as threatening behaviour or incitement to commit criminal offences, which is also an offence under the Territory’s Criminal Code Act. It is yet to be determined as to where the federal government will go with this exposure draft. They may, given the stridency of some of the objections in this matter, determine that it is not worth pursuing and simply slide it under the table and turn their attention to what people consider more important things. For that reason we circulated the amendment which has been accepted by members opposite.
I am not ungrateful that the Leader of the Opposition has brought this into this House, but it is the case that this House, or at least the government, will hurry up and wait to see what the federal government offers to the people of Australia, as well as the people of the Northern Territory, in how they move forward.
I again place on the record my acknowledgement of the sober fashion in which the Leader of the Opposition has proceeded, and I suggest and expect the same temperance will be maintained for the remainder of the debate. I move the amendment as circulated and look forward to listening to the rest of the debate.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the amended motion. Even though this is an issue that has raised a bit of heat in our society, it is a very important one to raise. The basis of this is a balance between freedom of expression and the right to freedom from racial discrimination and vilification. I have done as much work as possible on this motion. I am using some information from the Human Rights Law Centre, which I found extremely useful in understanding the changes the federal government wishes to put forward.
From my point of view, if there is one thing the member for Karama and I agree on, because we both agree on the same set of laws, it would be the 10 commandments. One of those 10 commandments is to love your neighbour. If we all loved our neighbours, as I know the member for Fong Lim loves me …
Mr Styles: That is true, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: That is right, and the member for Sanderson. If we did as we were supposed to, we would not need this kind of law. Unfortunately, we do have people in our society who are racists and bigots, and one good reason for having this law is not so much about whether someone can be punished, but it sets the appropriate standards of our society. Our Commonwealth government, which represents us all, says we need to draw a line as to what is an acceptable standard and what is not. It is important we do that, and whether it is symbolic or has any teeth does not matter. We must say, ‘This is the bottom line’.
It has been interesting carrying out my research because I have always been of the view that the article by Andrew Bolt is supposed to be the one that caused the federal government to look at changes to this act.
I read some of that article, and I am in a position where some of what he said is, at times, discussed in my circles. I am married to an Aboriginal woman, a lovely lady who has somehow put up with me for the last 40 years. I am not sure how. With a mixed marriage, children can lose their skin colour, and my grandchildren would look, to any person, white. My grandson was at the Casuarina shopping centre recently, and kids from St Johns were niggling him. They said, ‘You are not Aboriginal’, and he told them he was. Anyway, Nana Rosemary went past, as she happened to be at the shopping centre as well. She said ‘Ah, Jimmy’, and the kids immediately realised it is not as simple as that. In my distant past, I may have thought that myself, but it is not necessarily your skin colour that makes you who you are.
If I was to put my grandchildren next to my wife, many people would be surprised that, in two generations, the colour has gone, but not the Aboriginality. They do not understand that. Last night I talked about the wonders of an Aboriginal family. I have seen photographs from when my father-in-law died and they buried him at Bulgul. There was an enormous number of people there, about 100 at least, all relations of some sort and of all different shades across the spectrum. When I look at that, I feel proud I belong to that family; it is a wonderful thing.
Bigotry can also come from a lack of education and knowledge, the way you were brought up and the way you could be brought up in an insular society. I have just come back from Northern Ireland, and until you go there, you perhaps do not realise it is not simple. People are sometimes ingrained with certain beliefs. When I was there, I felt the lot of them should come to Australia, where there is fresh air, and I do not care whether you are a Protestant, Jew or Catholic. That is your right, but in other places, that is a division caused in a society. Education is a part of what we must deal with here, not only law. It is about telling people we are all equals, regardless of our religion and colour, and that is important.
I will read this statement, also related to Andrew Bolt’s case. I would like to read it because he went to court under section 18D; he claimed he had the right, I presume, to write his article in the paper.
It was not so much about writing, as I have said to people before. I hope you excuse the English here, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I can call someone a bastard, and I am insulting them. I can call someone a good bastard, and there is a poem which has all of the different meanings of that word. You can discuss something which might have some racial connotations, but you should be able to do it in a way that does not offend. When I went to Daly River – people call themselves blackfellas and you go past Blackfella Creek. They call me a white something sometimes. We all laughed about it; we did not take it as an insult, because of the manner in which it was said. Some people would use it today as an insulting word, and some can take it as an insulting word.
Each case must be taken on its merits. In the case of Mr Bolt, it was not so much a case of saying whether certain people were entitled to assistance, it was what he said. I will read the section of what the case was about. It is from the Human Rights Law Centre and it says why Andrew Bolt was unable to rely on the free speech exemptions.
- Andrew Bolt was unable to rely on the section 18D free speech exemptions because the court found he didn’t act reasonably or in good faith. The court found his articles contained multiple errors of material fact, distortions of the truth and inflammatory and provocative language.
The following extract from the court’s decision provides one example:
‘Mr Bolt said of Wayne and Graham Atkinson that they were “Aboriginal because their Indian great-grandfather married a part-Aboriginal woman” … In the second article Mr Bolt wrote of Graham Atkinson that “his right to call himself Aboriginal rests on little more than the fact that his Indian great-grandfather married a part-Aboriginal woman” …
The facts given by Mr Bolt and the comment made upon them are grossly incorrect. The Atkinsons’ parents are both Aboriginal as are all four of their grandparents and all of their great grandparents other than one who is the Indian great grandfather that Mr Bolt referred to in the article’.
The court in the Bolt case made it very clear that it’s not unlawful to publish articles that deal with racial identity or challenge the genuineness of someone’s racial identity. If Mr Bolt had been accurate in writing about the light-skinned Aboriginals he discussed in his articles, or even if he had taken reasonable steps to be accurate about them (such as contacting them), it is far more likely that his articles would have been protected by the section 18D free speech exemptions.
People are able to speak about these matters. It is how and why you say it that is important. It is what is in your heart or what you are trying to do that is relative to this argument. I have not seen anything, after reading this, which says we should change anything. Is freedom of speech under threat in Australia? As the member for Port Darwin says, ‘By geez, you can get a bit cranky in here at times’. I am not here to support people insulting one another, but I do not mind a vigorous debate about what a person has said; there is a clear distinction and that is hopefully what a good debate is about. You should be able to love your neighbour and have a difference of opinion, and we must keep that in mind.
I would rather people ask what is wrong with the existing law. Change and the debate about this is good, but I struggle with what is really going on here. There has also been discussion that as long as it does not cause physical violence, it is okay.
This article from the Human Rights Law Centre talks about a court case – it does not state which one, and I will not use the language, as it is definitely inappropriate – which the member for Karama would be interested in, as it shows a breach of section 18C. The article talks about:
- a website that was deliberately provocative and inflammatory and that doubted the Holocaust and stated that some Jewish people, for improper purposes, including financial gain, have exaggerated the number of Jews killed during World War II, using references which were contrived to smear Jews;
- A worker who racially abused another worker from Uganda, including by calling him a …
- … to the point where the man became suicidal and had to be hospitalised …
For someone to say it is only about intimidation which could cause physical harm, they do not understand that it is not as simple as that. There will be people who find being racially abused – some of this is very bad language, and there are also racial taunts which could cause people mental anguish and to commit suicide.
We should not be obsessed with that. I am not saying it is not important, but we should try to educate people. We should be saying, ‘This is not the appropriate standard for our society’. We need to say we are all equal, and if it is corny for some people – it is about love your neighbour, a fundamental tenant of our society because we base our laws on the Judeo-Christian principle, though not every law. I have some differences of opinion about some things in our society, but the fundamental is to love your neighbour.
The important reason for keeping this law and supporting this motion is to ensure those appropriate standards of our society remain. That is what makes this country special.
The member for Karama said she may introduce the matter of religion in any legislation she introduces. She also mentioned that being a minority religion can mean you come into some hard times. Being a majority religion, you can also come in for hard times, and I am probably used to it, but if you are Catholic and do not fall in line with what is so-called popular in our society you are vilified. I would be called a right-wing conservative if I held a different view to what is popular. I hold different views to what is popular.
If I made a statement on abortion, other people might not agree with me, but why would it be a case of me being a Catholic? Have you noticed that people pick on Tony Abbott – you might not agree with him – because of his religion? Do they pick the member for Fong Lim as a Mason? Do they say, ‘the Mason in the Legislative Assembly, Dave Tollner’? People do not. Do they pick up on other members religions, such as ‘the atheist over there, the member for Woop Woop’? No, but I guarantee if you are a Catholic and make a statement which does not fit with the ABC or popular media, your religion will be identified. That is unfortunate. I am old enough to work out some of these issues based on what I believe, not my religious background.
That is not necessarily vilification, but sometimes you are picked on because of your religious background, which is not fair. I do not always agree with everything people in my religion say, but that does not make me an old fuddy-duddy, conservative, right-wing you-know-what. In the paper recently it said a certain person you might know who runs an accounting service wrote a letter saying I was extremely left wing. Coming from a DLP family I thought that was very strange; people who know the background of the Democratic Labour Party would understand.
The issue about religious vilification is important, from a personal point of view. I have lived with my views not quite matching with popular views for a long time, so it probably does not matter. I become concerned if, for some reason, you are a Catholic and you are picked out at times because you have a different point of view. That is not saying Catholics should not be criticised; priests and bishops are being criticised a lot lately. Those sad matters in the Catholic Church should be criticised, but that is different from picking on a person because of their religion; that is fair comment.
It is the same when we discuss Andrew Bolt. If he wants to discuss, for the right reasons and for the matter to be debated, whether people of fairer skin should be entitled to certain benefits, that is his right, as long as he does not do it with the intent to racially vilify people. You should be able to discuss those matters, and do it in a proper manner. Unfortunately, he wrote a story which spreads the wrong message.
I will give another example of where you should be able to have a discussion; I have never been a fan of Abstudy and Austudy. I have always believed you should receive a benefit from the government based on your needs, regardless of skin colour. If you are on a low income, trying to get your child to school, that should be the basis on which you do it. You should be able to have the discussion without any problem, as long as you do it for the right reason. However, I have heard discussions about this, and it is not done for the right reason. You hear the comments on the side, with people biased to some extent.
Again, I put it to you that we have the right to freedom of speech, but we do not have the right to insult people or pick on their race or religion. There is a great commandment, which I imagine most of us fail to follow sometimes, but it is the basis upon which we love our neighbour; if we could, we would perhaps not have problems in the Ukraine, Ireland or Uganda. Unfortunately, that does not happen and is why we have this legislation.
This legislation marks a line in the sand, and shows that our society says these are appropriate standards of behaviour and conduct, and this is the way we should behave with one another. We should leave the legislation alone.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak not to support the motion the Opposition Leader has brought to the House, but to thank her.
As Territorians, we are a multicultural society; everybody has said this so far, including the Leader of Government Business. We are the first Australians, from the oldest culture; we have welcomed every nationality to a very young Territory and we want to live in a harmonious way. I thank the Leader of Government Business for accepting the amendment the Opposition Leader has put forward, because it makes us look good in this Chamber, that as people governing on behalf of the Northern Territory we are not always arguing about things and not accepting each other’s motions or legislation put forward, but we can rise above our political differences.
It is very important, as the Independent member, Gerry Wood and the Opposition Leader said, that it is about ethics and making sure we have standards, and that we teach our children that this is not what we want in society. We teach our children, from birth to adulthood, about how to be good people in society, how to grow up, behave at home, school and in the street. We must set that high standard, because we are a very young jurisdiction. We are a multicultural society, and we now encourage lots of other people, apart from ourselves, to come to the Northern Territory and enjoy the economic opportunities and safety of this beautiful place. It is well within our bounds to make sure we work to show our younger generation that we can work together, set standards and that we will not dress up racism.
We must allow comments like that to not be dressed up and we must confront the issues. We can confront them on the basis of the multicultural society we have accepted in the Northern Territory. There are vulnerable people in the Northern Territory, like Aboriginal people, who need protection. This motion comes from goodwill, and it is a show of goodwill on behalf of the Leader of Government Business to accept the changes. It shows our constituents that we can rise above our political differences to ensure we are talking about the one issue, which concerns no racial vilification. We will not accept it as leaders and as people who work and govern for the people of the Northern Territory, no matter where they come from. As I said, racism and bad language should not be accepted. We should always address it and ensure that when someone uses language like that, we call them out.
That is the education strategy we need. We must talk about vilification in schools and educate future generations of Territorians that it is not acceptable. When the Opposition Leader travelled to places like Alice Springs, Katherine and Darwin, she did not say, ‘Are you a Greek or Aboriginal friend of mine?’ Children will not ask what nationality their friends are. They get on like children and play, share and eat together. I always refer to the saying someone used with me: ‘what monkey sees, monkey do.’ Most of this ugliness and racism is seen, heard and bred in the home. We must go to the core of that ugliness and address it. Our children are future leaders, doctors, road workers and people who will work in hotels. They will be the next teachers, and will be inside this House. We must ensure they cannot see a race difference, and cannot see an Aboriginal person from a Greek, Italian or Chinese person.
That is a good way for any kind of jurisdiction to be. We welcome so many people who have been harmed and vilified in their countries. They come to a place like Australia, especially the Northern Territory, because they can see we live in a multicultural way and are a multicultural society. They want that freedom; it is protection for those people as well. It is very important that the Leader of Government Business and the government have accepted the changes to this motion put forward by the Opposition Leader. We are setting the standard of non-acceptance for the Northern Territory, and asking the federal government to make sure there are no drastic changes, or any changes at all, to section 18C.
People will go beyond and test the boundaries. It is like having an envelope and stepping over it; they will always try that. We must, as leaders of the Northern Territory and Australia, ensure we keep people within the boundaries of that envelope, making sure people feel safe and that they can walk down the street not being exposed to vilification and being sworn at.
That is the kind of thing we must change, because kids learn from us. Kids hear these things every day, the fact that we do it to each other and they hear it on the television and the radio, and they think it is not the way they want to be. We must rise above that and set ourselves a very high standard of non-acceptance for this kind of ugliness in the Northern Territory; we do not want that ugliness tearing up future generations of Territorians who need to get on and live a life of social and economic engagement here. I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing this motion forward, and the government for its support.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this very important motion to the House. I also thank the Leader of Government Business for looking at the motion and coming together with the Independents, the Palmer United Party members and the opposition to agree to the amendment. It is a very important debate we must have in the Northern Territory. As members of this parliament, it is very important we all place our thoughts, feelings and beliefs on the record about where we stand on racism.
In some ways, I am alarmed we are debating this motion, with the Abbott government and Senator Brandis having released this exposure draft with proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act. If these proposed amendments were to pass, it would open the floodgates to increased racism in Australian society.
I am very proud to be a born and bred Territorian. I am proud of the upbringing I had, because I feel so fortunate that as someone who spent most of their childhood in Darwin I was able to make the most wonderful friends for life, and access the diversity and beauty on offer in the Territory.
We have our thriving Indigenous population, the first peoples of this nation. To grow up with many wonderful Indigenous friends, as well as Greek, Filipino and Chinese kids, who were the great-grandchildren of some of the first Chinese people to come to the Territory, is a wonderful thing. There is a long and proud history of multiculturalism in the Territory. I have had the opportunity to live down south on a few occasions, and each time I have spent time there I do not have the same feeling as I do in the Northern Territory. We have something incredibly special here, a society which values and believes in multiculturalism, and it would be an awful shame if the Abbott government was to go down the path of amending the Racial Discrimination Act in line with the changes proposed in this exposure draft.
It would be a huge shame for this nation and the Northern Territory, and I am pleased that we are saying racism is unacceptable. Freedom of speech is important; however, with freedom of speech comes a responsibility and it is not okay to incite hatred based on somebody’s race. That is outrageous, and if the proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act pass, it will lower the bar on the standards we set in this nation around racism, and that we think it is okay to have racist debate in public forums. What type of example are we setting for the children of today if we do that? What type of example are we setting for the world? It would be a shame.
The Racial Discrimination Act has been in place since 1975. In 1995, almost 20 years ago, we saw sections 18B, 18C, 18D and 18E inserted into the act, following reports produced by the Australian Law Reform Commission into multiculturalism and the law; a report by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission entitled Racist Violence – Report of National Inquiry into Racist Violence in Australia; and a Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. That work found gaps in the Racial Discrimination Act which needed to be amended, and that is what the inserted clauses did.
Most of the issues and complaints across this nation, as we heard from the Leader of the Opposition, are conciliated. We recently saw a presentation by the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner of the Northern Territory, held by the Multicultural Council of the NT. She said about 3% of cases end up in court, which is a fairly good strike rate. People can work through the issue and conciliation is working well. We also heard that the Racial Discrimination Act, as it stands, is working effectively in this nation. It is doing the job we want it to if you want to stand firmly against racism.
The proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act would repeal sections 18C, B, D and E, with what could only be described as significantly weakened words, definitions and harder tests in place around racism. This is bad because you are effectively lowering the bar on racism in this nation. You are encouraging racist debate in public forums, offering less protection to people around racism, and, as we have seen, a raft of forums are opening here, particularly through social media. We should be looking at what protections we can put in place to protect people from vilification and hatred based on race.
The consequences of racism can be traumatic for an individual, particularly around their emotional state. It can have an impact on a person, and the last thing we want to see is somebody attacked in a racist way and things becoming physical.
It was interesting to attend the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory’s meeting last month, and I thank the group for holding it. It was a good move to have everybody in a room together looking at the exposure draft and the proposed amendments, and asking people from different multicultural groups in Darwin and Palmerston what they thought.
The Anti-Discrimination Commissioner gave a thorough briefing on the issue and a straight definition of the changes. I was pleased to be sitting with the Leader of the Opposition, who could speak to the meeting and provide a firm view on Labor’s position to say we do not think these amendments are on, and if the federal government makes these amendments we will be firmly against them. Also, we would move to strengthen our Anti-Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory, because as it stands we have weaknesses around this issue and in the past we have had a fair bit of coverage under federal laws. However, if they are to change, it will weaken the position in the Northern Territory and something must be done.
I welcome the discussion paper the Leader of the Opposition has put together to look at this matter. If we must go down this path, it is great to see there is a thorough document which has been broadly distributed to multicultural communities around the Northern Territory, but it is open for all to look at and have their say on the issue. What do they think would need to be in legislation, if we were to put it through in the Northern Territory to strengthen our laws against racial vilification? We are undergoing a strong consultation process, and it also sends a clear message to the federal government that members of this parliament do not want to see the bar lowered when it comes to racism. We do not want to see the floodgates opened, in that it is easier to get away with inciting hatred and vilifying someone in society based on their race. That is not on, it is not the country we want to be and is not what the Northern Territory is about.
It has been heartening to hear that the government has amended the motion the Leader of the Opposition brought to the House; it looks like we are all travelling together in a bipartisan way, looking at this very important issue which goes to the fabric of the Northern Territory. We will wait and see what comes out of the Abbott government’s exposure draft and the proposed changes. I hope the federal government listens to the loud voices across this nation which have said these changes are not on. This is not the nation we want to be, and in the Territory we do not want to see the bar lowered when it comes to racism.
Mr STYLES (Transport): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the amended motion, and would like to talk about a number of issues which have already been discussed in this House, that is, our personal experiences.
I grew up in suburban Perth. My father was a builder and my mother was a retail manager, but when I was born my mum was a housewife and my dad was a builder. When I was a young fellow, my mother, showing country hospitality, decided it would be a good idea to support what was then the Colombo Plan for students from Southeast Asia coming to Australia to study. As a young fellow, people came into our home, where my mum would look after them on behalf of parents who were many thousands of kilometres away in Asia.
Children do not discriminate; you are not born to discriminate against people and to be racially prejudiced. If you are a child and you are racially prejudiced, someone has taught you to be that way. Most families in our community teach their children tolerance and to be understanding of people who are different. Not everyone is good at following that sort of education, but I pick up on what the member for Nelson said; it is about education. It is about educating our kids and ensuring they know that all of these things are acceptable.
Even in my childhood, when we were recovering from the White Australia policy, no one taught me to be racially prejudiced; in fact, I was taught to be accepting. I grew up, through to my teenage years, with my mother hosting and looking after students from Asia. I thought they were great, because they put up with me. All kids can be a pain, and I was probably one of those getting around the place. These people were taught tolerance by their parents, and they tolerated me, as a child some years younger than them, in my teenage years; I was not so much younger than they were, because they were often only 17 or 18 themselves, having completed their education in secondary school in Asia before coming to Western Australia to study a host of things. It was good, and I was never treated in a racial manner, other than the fact I was the son of a wonderful woman looking after them, giving them a place to stay and a safe environment to live and study in.
However, I experienced discrimination quite often as a child, probably every day. As is said, kids can be cruel. I am one of the 4 % of people in this country who have red hair, and it was a lot redder some years ago.
Mr Elferink: That is a challenging proposition.
Mr STYLES: It is, but I have photographs, proof that it was quite red. In fact, I was known as ‘copper top’, and it was a good red colour. In New Zealand, only 2.5% of people have red hair, but we seem to do a bit better than the Kiwis in a lot of things. That is no disrespect to Kiwis, only a bit of good rivalry. Being short, round and having red hair, the discrimination against me and my suffering were pm display every day. Some people grow to ignore it, but, sadly, some do not. It is not a good thing, but when kids are cruel, tease you about things, discriminate against you and will not let you play with them because you are different – I understand a bit about being different.
My mum, being a good farm girl, fed me well. When I was 14 or 15, I grew 20 cm over the next couple of years. Not only did I grow 20 cm, I grew out in the shoulders about 20 to 30 cm, and I suddenly went from being short, round with red hair, to very tall, built like the proverbial toilet, and the teasing and discrimination stopped. People suddenly wanted to know you because you were much bigger than them, and it led me to something I saw on the USS Enterprise many years ago when I toured on the boat. Its motto is: ‘In strength there is peace’. I could relate to that, because when you become strong there is peace.
I support this motion because I agree with many of these ideas. There are a few areas where we must wait to see what happens with the federal legislation, because we might be jumping the gun otherwise. If this legislation gives people strength and our community strengthens, that is a good thing. I support the sentiments that have come from the other side; we should ensure our community and people are strong, and if we need legislation to back that, then so be it. We will look at what we can do to strengthen that.
However, I return to what the member for Nelson said about the need to educate people. I also note the member for Port Darwin’s remarks, when he said that no legislation in the world is better than a judging community and what community standards are. That goes back to what we need to do as families, communities and organisations. That is, to ensure young people learn about tolerance and that you embrace differences.
When I first travelled to the Northern Territory as a young man in the late 1970s – I first came here in about 1979 – I came to a place I found fascinating. I was on a business trip at that time, and we travelled around, went to the old Don Hotel for a drink and met many people. We found this to be one of the most fascinating places we had ever been to. We had been around Australia, visiting a range of places on this business trip, and Darwin was the best.
When I met my wife in Carnarvon, Western Australia, she said the same thing. She was a country girl from Victoria, a nurse, who travelled around Australia working in many different places. It was on her recommendation that we came to the Northern Territory. It was for all the reasons I came here in the first place; it was so vibrant, and I remember looking at the Chung Wah temple in particular.
As a young teenager, I travelled with my parents to Singapore and Malaysia; it was one of those trips where you are exposed to many different cultures and experiences, such as the Arab culture, Indian and Chinese influences in Singapore, as well as the Malay culture. There is a melting pot of people living in Singapore, who make up a beautiful, harmonious community, all working together for a common goal.
After moving to Darwin you start to experience what a wonderful place this is; if I walk down my street, I have, within 100 m of my house, probably five or six different nationalities. That is just within two or three houses either side.
You have people from different European backgrounds, Asians, and those from the subcontinent, so it is a melting pot. However, there are not enclaves in Darwin, unless you call the northern suburbs an enclave, but generally there are not. There is no suburb or group of streets where there is a particular group.
Mr Elferink: There is no Lakemba
Mr STYLES: That is right. If you visit Springwood in Victoria, unless you can read Mandarin you are in the wrong place. There are no English signs. We are fortunate that we do not have that. We have people side by side in shopping centres with a range of shops. We are fortunate in the Territory that we have a strong community. I have friends from my role as the Minister for Multicultural Affairs and before that as the shadow minister, and as a member of the community, and I am interested in what is going on. Why did we used to go to different functions every Saturday night? Because we loved it, and it is what Darwin is about. Over the years, if we added up the number of multicultural events I have been to, I could probably match everyone else in the room put together. My wife Linda and I have been doing it for years and enjoy it because we experience the very best of what Darwin and the Northern Territory has to offer.
There are magnificent cultural events, with music, food, dancing and the people themselves and the stories they tell. Some years ago, I was sitting on my verandah with a number of people, some from Southeast Asia, some from India, Sri Lanka, and northern India; these are people who come from countries where, over the years, they have shot at each other. The discussion came up about multiculturalism, people abusing other people and vilification, for want of a better word to describe what was happening.
Interestingly, one of the people at that dinner said he could not understand why he, people of his ilk and others in Sri Lanka and at the bottom of India are at war with one another. He said they should share a bottle of red, as we were doing, talk about life and look at all the good things we have. You hope people do that, but with other countries being the way they are, it is very difficult. We are very lucky in this country; we have been through some times when racial vilification and discrimination was part of the norm, and we have come a long way. We have free speech in this country, but you should not be able to outright abuse people. You should be able to express things, and I agree with these amendments and certain things Senator Brandis wants to do. He has released an amended version for comment and I have a copy of it.
The amended exposure draft is released to have people talking about the proposal and to hear people’s views. From my information there have been thousands of submissions on this, which closed on 30 April 2014. The federal government now has thousands of submissions to go through so it can inform itself of pushback or if there is support. That is yet to be determined.
We should wait before rushing in and changing things here. Free speech is exactly that, and governments must be very careful when tampering with it. We have seen other countries limit free speech, and you only have to look at the results after they have made a range of things illegal. We should look at what is in the amended version and acknowledge that we probably need to look at what is coming out federally.
Whilst people are free to say whatever they want, it is also people’s right to ignore them. As a child I ignored those people and said, ‘I do not have the problem, you do’. That all forms part of what your parents teach you about tolerance. It also reminds you of what parents teach their kids about the ugly duckling, that wonderful nursery rhyme my mother told me about time and time again. I considered myself as having a problem and being the ugly duckling, and I am grateful to my mother for persisting with that story. You grow up and understand you are who you are. If other people have a problem, then I feel sorry for them, and I feel sorry for the people who teased me. They probably still have a problem, although you would hope when that they grow up they realise the community will not tolerate it.
I return to what the member for Port Darwin said about no legislation in the world being better than community judgment.
On 27 April 2014, Barack Obama said:
- When ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, you don’t really have to do anything, you just let them talk.
We are seeing a small minority of people who think they can say whatever they like. I am with my colleagues on this side, the member for Nelson and the opposition. We may have a few areas to discuss, but, generally, we are all on the same page when it comes to racially vilifying people.
I will talk about some of the other points in the amended motion. I agree with the first dot point about understanding the importance of the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. When I travel, I do not see much evidence of racial vilification; we are mature. I heard people, especially when I was a police officer, racially vilify Aboriginal people. I heard people talk about Italians and Greeks, and they are a small-minded minority. It is not fair to do that.
I will tell the story of an Aboriginal man who had a go at me for being racially prejudiced when talking to him many years ago on Knuckey Street. I was working with a fantastic guy, but sadly he is not a police officer anymore, as he left to fly aeroplanes. He is a full blood Thursday Islander and a great bloke. His name was Rob Mills, and this guy did not see that he was standing behind him as he got into me, racially abusing me like you would not believe.
He said, ‘You are only picking on me because of my colour’, so I said to him, ‘You are probably talking to the wrong guy. You need to talk to my partner.’
Mr Elferink: He was about 20kg heavier than anybody else.
Mr STYLES: He was a big man. Rob saw the humour in this, and the bloke turned around, saw this giant man from the Torres Strait Islands, and saw the humour in what he had been trying to do to me. I said, ‘Mate, I am not talking to you anymore, go and talk to Rob’. Rob took it in his stride, as we all did, and the bloke said, ‘Okay, I give up’, and jumped in the back of the van. We took him away and had to, sadly, charge him with a couple of offences. That was 30 years ago in Darwin, and Darwin was a bit like that then, in that it did not happen often. Some on the other side seem to think that if you do this in the Northern Territory, people will read this legislation and things will suddenly change.
I am grateful I live in the Northern Territory, and I am grateful my children and grandchildren live here. Apart from the coming economic tsunami, it is a great, tolerant place to be. I cannot believe my luck that we made a decision to move and raise our children here. Here we are, 33 years later, I am a member of parliament and a minister and my children and grandchildren all have very bright futures. It is a special place. We should maintain that and monitor what is happening, as this amendment says.
I return to a previous part of this contribution, the motto of the US Sixth Fleet, ‘In strength there is peace’. If we make our community strong and keep it strong, we can teach our kids and grandkids about tolerance, that we are all the same, but different, and legislation like this will not be required in the future. Sadly, there will be the odd person for who this legislation is needed.
Ms LAWRIE (Leader of the Opposition): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the members for Port Darwin, Nelson, Namatjira, Wanguri and Sanderson for contributing to this debate in the spirit in which it was brought on, to seek a bipartisan approach to sending a clear signal in the Northern Territory that racism of any sort is never to be tolerated in the Northern Territory and we will be united in our actions to do whatever we can, as the legislators of the Territory, to send a clear signal to our broader community. If required, we will introduce laws which say, very clearly, that racism is not tolerated and it is not okay to be a bigot and vilify and discriminate against people because of racial, ethnic or religious backgrounds.
The story was told in this debate, as I expected it would be, of people’s experiences in the Territory and boundaries beyond. I am pleased that we are able to achieve a consensus on an amendment to the motion and are able to give some comfort to the government on the issues it raised in debate around not yet being convinced that Commonwealth laws will be changed because of the exposure draft legislation and that a final view has not been announced by the federal government.
That was a part of what the member for Port Darwin indicated, and I pick up on the member for Sanderson, who was not too convinced of the view around the legislation being watered down. There is further information you could probably draw upon and reconsider. It has been clearly stated across a range of contributions today that, from a human rights perspective, it is recognised that Senator Brandis’s proposed changes would significantly reduce people’s rights.
I note the issues of freedom of speech which were raised, and I fully concur with the member for Nelson in his summing up of that, in that freedom of speech comes with responsibilities. Freedom of speech is not an excuse to vilify people on racist grounds, and he went into detail around the Bolt decision, which has been singled out by many commentators as a reason for the proposed changes to the Commonwealth law. He also quoted some of the cases I too am acquainted with which have gone through court, and people have been found guilty of vilification.
I will touch on the court again. I am comforted by the actions of our Anti-Discrimination Commission in the Northern Territory, its ability to conciliate matters and, if required, to arbitrate. That is why, regardless of what occurs in the Commonwealth domain, it is timely to deal with this once and for all. Never could I have imagined that after a debate which occurred some 20 years ago in our nation, as the member for Fannie Bay and I were just discussing – it was done and dusted, locked away and we were comforted, as Australians, that there was a clear view around these laws and standards in our nation. Sadly, to some of us the unimaginable has occurred. There is a view being proposed, albeit not yet introduced, that weakens a standard we have enjoyed for some 20 years. That being said, I am keen to ensure there is a Territory law to ensure we have protections for the future. If in the event anyone in the future decides to amend the Commonwealth legislation, can we be masters of our own destiny if we choose to? I believe we can. I never want this debate to reoccur in some years’ time. Let us deal with it with maturity now in the Northern Territory, given the concerns that have been raised and heard by us as legislators.
I look forward to the ensuing weeks, where I will receive feedback on the discussion paper, and I am happy if the government wants to lead its own version of the legislation. You have the time to do that as well. I am not playing politics with this, as I have said before. If the government wants its own legislation that meets what I see as best practice, and what I have heard as best practice in terms of the Tasmanian legislation, that would be an even more ideal outcome. I am not about grandstanding and pursuing a private member’s bill if the government is of a mind to introduce legislation. It is normal for governments to legislate, but it is not normal for oppositions to achieve legislation. I am not seeking to breach norms or conventions here. I am seeking to ensure Territorians have the protections that, as a jurisdiction, we are mature enough to give them. We are the masters of our own destiny.
As we have seen in the debate today, that destiny can sometimes mean, on some matters, rare albeit, we are united. This is in our strength as Territorians, in our experiences and deeply held beliefs about what makes us uniquely Territorian, and in holding a very proud and strong place in this great nation of Australia. We are very proudly multicultural, with a strong and proud Indigenous heritage. There is an opportunity, which I have thrown out to the government to consider. That is why I have always suggested time lines, and have been open about a process.
I stand willing and able to work with the government on any proposed changes to the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Act. I go into it with a mind of not bringing down the denominator in legislation, but genuinely looking at what is considered to be contemporary best practice and strength in law, which I am reliably informed is the Tasmanian legislation.
Thank you to all contributors to the debate and my colleagues in the Labor Caucus, who have been very strong in their support of the work I have been doing with the member for Wanguri, as our shadow minister for Multicultural Affairs. Thank you to the Attorney-General for his support with an amendment which satisfied the government today, which means the motion can be dealt with in a bipartisan manner. Thank you to the Independent member for Nelson and the Palmer United Party for their support as well. I put the amended motion to the House.
Amendment agreed to.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
MOTION
Sustainable Water Resources
Sustainable Water Resources
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that this House:
recognises that the sustainable use of water resources is fundamental to the economic, social and cultural development of the Northern Territory
acknowledges the potential impact of water allocations on the Territory’s unique environment, biodiversity and cultural values
reaffirms that water allocations under the Water Act should be based on sound scientific analysis, following proper consultation with all water users and stakeholders
As we know, water, particularly on this continent, is a precious resource. It sustains ecosystems, supports agriculture, primary production, tourism, recreation and traditional culture, to the point we had part of this discussion with a bill before the House this morning, passing legislation associated with the WELS Act, which is all about water-saving devices on products. The Territory’s surface water, ground water, aquifers and rivers sustain unique systems of biodiversity. Water, as we know, has been vital to Indigenous life and culture on this continent for more than 40 000 years. There is no doubt water is essential; it is critical to our survival as a species on this planet, and so it is the reasonable expectation of Territorians that decisions made by the government on the utilisation of our precious water resources should and must be based on good science and transparent processes which are free from political influence.
The government has grand plans to develop the north. Territorians have seen white papers, ministerial statements, glossy brochures and expensive advertisements on television, but little action.
Mr Giles: They do not support northern Australia.
Ms WALKER: We know the catch phrase is ‘Let’s talk about tomorrow’s Territory today’. On this side, we have been talking about tomorrow’s Territory for months, since the change of government and before.
The best the CLP can do is produce glossy brochures, no doubt expensive ads on TV, and, with it, in little action, because this government is more talk than action.
In spite of the Chief Minister’s interjections a few moments ago, let us put it on the record that we support the sustainable development of the north, because it will create opportunities for social, economic and cultural development, essential to the wellbeing and standard of living for generations of Territorians to come.
Mr Giles: No, you do not, you are behind the game.
Ms WALKER: I know, Mr Deputy Speaker, you would support the sustainable development of the north.
Mr Giles: That is because he is not Labor.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 51: the state of the House, in terms of interjections and noise from the Chief Minister.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Could we keep the interjections to a minimum and not interrupt the person speaking? Thank you.
Ms WALKER: The Chief Minister is uptight at the moment. He has lost three of his bush members, and he knows he lost them, amongst many reasons, because they objected to his government’s approach to SIRs and the denying of a SIRs policy.
There is one proviso for those of us on this side of the House in our commitment to developing the north. The sustainable development of the Territory must be inclusive and all stakeholders must be given the opportunity to participate, whoever they are, wherever they live, whether they are in Central Australia in desert country, in the Top End in saltwater country or everywhere in between
The inclusive participation of all Territorians in our future opportunities for development is a hurdle the CLP cannot jump. That is why the government will not support a system of water reservation for Indigenous Territorians. What a great shame it is that it insists on taking that position. This is a direct consequence of political considerations driving water allocations, as opposed to sustainable utilisation based on good science which is, by virtue of being good science backed up by evidence and rigorous data, and is communicated openly and transparently. I will return to this theme later.
A system of reserving water for the use of Indigenous Territorians for future economic development and cultural activities on their land is essential to developing the north. A strategic Indigenous reserve allocates an amount of water from a consumptive pool for Indigenous commercial development. Indigenous Territorians want to participate in development of the north for the future of their peoples and communities. Many Indigenous groups are not ready to use water for commercial purposes, but it is important to ensure they can access it for enterprise development in the future before all water is allocated.
The CLP does not support this approach, but it is out of step with many stakeholders who have a legitimate interest in the sustainable utilisation of water in the Territory. SIRs are supported by diverse groups such as primary producers, horticulturalists, AFANT, miners, pastoralists, traditional owners, Indigenous communities, land councils, the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance, and the Environment Centre NT. That is not an exhaustive list, but I can tell you who is not on it: the CLP government.
There are, however, some expectations to the CLP’s pervasive antipathy to recognising Indigenous rights to water. I refer to the member for Stuart and you, Mr Deputy Speaker, as the member for Daly, both hard-working members of this House and of the constituencies you represent; you both represent rural and remote areas.
I will read a media article onto the record to support this assertion about CLP members who are prepared to state a view that opposes some others within their ranks. This is an online article that appeared on the ABC website on Thursday 13 June. The title is Indigenous Water Rights Stir Ripples in Ranks, and the article says:
- A second Country Liberals MLA has questioned the Northern Territory government’s stand on strategic Indigenous water reserves.
Traditional owners had hoped the Government would set aside water reserves for the future economic development of Aboriginal communities.
The government has deferred any decision on such a scheme for at least three years. Member for Stuart, Bess Price, says she supports the push for a different approach by the Member for Daly, Gary Higgins.
‘He believes that Aboriginal people should be able to own their water and be able to sell it if they need to, especially [to] the mining companies that have to use a lot of water,’ she said.
- ‘This is an income for Aboriginal people.’
The article goes on to say:
Ms Price has called for more talks on the issue and says three years is too long for Indigenous communities to wait.
- ‘I think there should be talks with the traditional owners and our Government and the minister to be able to get things moving quicker,’ she said.
- That’s what our Government is about; making sure there is economic development.
That is the end of that article.
Many Indigenous Territorians and other stakeholders share the views of the members for Stuart and Daly, and have demanded they be consulted about water use on their lands. Once again, I will quote at length from an online ABC article; these are extracts from a 7.30 NT report, which was aired on Friday 22 November 2013 under the title Water Politics:
- The Northern Territory government is polarising rural and remote communities with its approach to water licensing.
I quote Alyssa Betts, the presenter:
The Northern Territory Government is polarising rural and remote communities with its approach to water licensing. There’s been a rush of applications for water across the Territory, since the Government allocated a massive water licence to its party candidate Tina MacFarlane in March. The Water Controller, Rod Applegate, declined to be interviewed for this story but provided a statement.
I next quote from Marjorie Hall, Mangarrayi traditional owner, who said:
- Animals need water, we need water to use water in a proper way, because the water has its own spirit, its own cultural awareness.
- JANE BARDON, REPORTER: At the Jilkminggan Aboriginal community outside the Top End town of Mataranka, springs from the Tindal Aquifer feed rivers and creeks. Sheila Conway is a Mangarrayi traditional owner. Her creation song tells the story of a kangaroo – who’s formed as he travels along the waterways between sacred sites. She’s watched more water in the area being allocated for mining and farming.
SHEILA CONWAY, MANGARRAYI TRADITIONAL OWNER: The water’s been here all the time underground. How come? How come they’re starting to take it off?
- JANE BARDON: At Federal Court sittings in Mataranka and Minyerri, traditional owners have gained more rights over their land. Indigenous people own about 65% per cent of the land in the Mataranka area. Mangarrayi, Jawoyn and Wubalawun traditional owners have been negotiating for water to go with their land.
- MARJORIE HALL, MANGARRAYI TRADITIONAL OWNER: As traditional owners we believe that we entitlement is 65 per cent of that water.
- JANE BARDON: The women made a submission to the Northern Territory Government’s draft Mataranka Water Allocation plan. The then Labor Government decided to reserve a quarter of the water, available for allocation, for Indigenous economic development. But the Country Liberals Government viewed disagreement over the size of the reserve as ‘a barrier to finalising the plan’ and so it scrapped the Indigenous reserve in Mataranka and all other water planning regions.
MARJORIE HALL, MANGARRAYI TRADITIONAL OWNER: Government should wait, you know I know the changes of government but when we put in a report, like they’re putting us down – when we give our stories to the government, they don’t want to recognise it.
This is very powerful stuff in making clear what the views of stakeholders are in this area.
I again quote from Jane Bardon, from the 7:30 NT report.
- The Amateur Fishermen’s Association has watched the Government’s invitation result in a flood of requests for large licences across the Territory.
- CRAIG INGRAM, AMATEUR FISHERMEN’S ASSOCIATION NT CEO: It’s become just an unmitigated disaster – it’s just a free for all there. Everyone’s just scrambling over the top of themselves for a, you know, for a gold rush in getting their share of the water.
We will go back through that dry cycle. In those dry cycles, if you’ve allocated too much water out of those systems everyone will suffer – the farmers will suffer because they won’t get the allocations they believe they’ve got and the environment will suffer because you’ll have more years when there is very minimal flow in those rivers
- JANE BARDON: In Mataranka, two neighbours have applied for double the water allocated to Tina MacFarlane. If all outstanding applications are granted, the full 20 per cent of available water will be almost completely allocated. Then the Government could allow water trading, under which those who need water will have to buy it from licence holders.
- You’ve got to have that water usage. You know it overflows to the Roper. You can’t have no more over flows if everyone using that one water.
JANE BARDON: Before the new rainfall modelling, a Government water planner warned the MacFarlane licence could jeopardise Ngukurr’s water supply. The Government Power and Water Corporation also objected – worried salt could intrude up the tidal river. In August last year, Ngukurr’s town water pumps were turned off because of salinity.
I next quote Joe Morrison from the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance.
- That’s a pretty scary proposition where you’ve got communities where 1200 people reside having to sort of have their water switched off, you know, and there’s not proper planning, whole of catchment planning backed up by good public policy to allow these communities to flourish
Further on, Kevin Rogers, a Wandaran elder, said:
- That lady getting, MacFarlane lady, she’s getting more. You know that shouldn’t be, it should be limited too, like everybody should have a fair share of this water
- In Mataranka, the fragile consensus reached under the draft water plan has been ditched. The Government’s policy here and across the Territory, has opened up this valuable community owned resource to a frantic first come, first served, competition.
I have a final quote to close the story. It is from Marjorie Hall, Mangarrayi traditional owner:
- The Minister for Water should sit down with us and talk to us, because we've all got to apply for that water you know, but in a good manner and good sense and decision making.
The views of traditional owners and the strong men and women, particularly amongst TOs supported by the policy approach to SIRs adopted by the National Water Commission, are incredibly important. The National Water Commission has stated:
- … Allocation of water entitlements to Indigenous Australians to facilitate economic development should be explicitly considered as a strategy for contributing to the Australian Government’s Closing The Gap agenda.
Access to commercial water entitlements can create opportunities for Indigenous Australians in diverse areas such as aquaculture, nature-based tourism, or intensive horticulture. Water entitlements can improve prosperity, create jobs and business opportunities, improve health outcomes, and help achieve financial security and independence.
All governments should implement approaches to provide water for Indigenous economic development, so that mechanisms exist to support Indigenous enterprises and related business opportunities. Mechanisms may need to vary depending on the extent of development in a water system. The Commission suggests that in water systems that are fully allocated the creation of a fund to acquire appropriate water rights should be considered. In systems not fully allocated, alternative approaches such as Strategic Indigenous Reserves could be set aside in water planning processes.
On ABC radio in October last year, the Minister for Land Resource Management said:
- It is this Government’s view, that due to the relatively low level of use of water resources and the right that all Territorians, including Aboriginal Territorians …to seek water licences it is appropriate that strategic Indigenous reserves will no longer be considered in water allocation plans …
Who did the minister consult with in arriving at that decision? It was clearly not with traditional owners, nor other stakeholders like land councils, NAILSMA, AFANT or a number of those involved in horticulture, agricultural and pastoral sectors as well. Why is it that we have had this change of heart? The answer is obvious; a policy on SIRs was simply not compatible with the government’s decision to allocate a water extraction licence for 5800 ML to CLP candidate, Tina McFarlane, from the Tindall Limestone Aquifer.
The simple political calculus did not permit this huge allocation of water to a political mate together with a strategic Indigenous reserve from this aquifer. Calculations on sustainable yields were remodelled to accommodate the licence, and the fact that this government can continue to stand by the granting of that licence and get a good night’s sleep beggars belief, not only for those of us on this side, but for the many stakeholders who take objection to the granting of that licence at the same time as putting strategic Indigenous reserves on hold. The concerns of scientists about the impact of the allocation on water flows in the Elsey National Park and adjacent areas were ignored, along with potential adverse impacts on the Ngukurr water supply. We know scientists and TOs continue to voice their concerns about the risks of over-allocation, but the political mate came first, at the cost of the legitimate rights of Indigenous Territorians to reserve water for future economic development for the benefit of themselves, their communities and the future benefit of their families. It is not exclusively for them; it is about participating in the Territory economy, being a contributor and participant, and being a part of developing the north, as the CLP likes to talk about.
This decision to issue a licence to Tina MacFarlane has started an unprecedented rush for water licences from our aquifers. About two weeks ago we saw a public notice advising of a number of licences, nine in total, a mix of new licences and licences to increase water extraction from the Katherine River. We want to know what sort of consultation there was around that, and I also saw, ahead of the public notice advising of these new licences, that a water forum had been advertised for Katherine for this Friday, 16 May 2014. I do not have the notice in front of me inviting people to attend, but it does advise that if you come to the water forum you will learn more about the work of the water catchments committee. We still do not know who is on it, exactly what they are doing, what their terms of reference and priorities are and what their relationship is with this raft of licences now being granted. As I said, we are not anti-development, but must be assured and want to see what the science is. Above all, we want to have confidence that we are not risking water resources by over-allocating, in the absence of a strategic Indigenous reserve.
In this environment, Territorians have little or no confidence that water licences will be allocated without political interference. The CLP prefers to go its own way, with flexibility to make speculative side deals for land development as opportunities arise. There is no commitment to a scientifically-based strategic approach to progressing Indigenous development opportunities. In this parliament the Treasurer called strategic Indigenous reserves:
- … anti-business, anti-development, anti-jobs, anti-everything.
What an appalling comment from our Treasurer to slam strategic Indigenous reserves in the way he has. However, it is not uncharacteristic for the Treasurer, the Deputy Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, to put his foot in his mouth.
The Oolloo aquifer has now been captured in the CLP’s water rush. A public notice appeared in today’s paper about the issue of further licences, 11 in total, seven of which are new and three are to increase water extraction licences, the three that already exist and an application to increase. NAILSMA has expressed a number of concerns about the large volume of water approved for allocation from the Oolloo aquifer. The water allocation plan for the Oolloo aquifer is not yet finalised, and a moratorium on water extraction licences should be held until the plan is in place.
What assurance do we have, in the issuing of these licences, that we are not at risk of over-allocation? A moratorium is not hard, to allow proper investigation and consultation, and an outcome supported by scientific research, ideally at arm’s length, independent of government evidence.
Serious equity issues have arisen with the granting of large licences like those recently approved in the Katherine River and the Oolloo aquifer. The views of traditional owners, who are both residents and substantial landowners, have not been listened to or have been rejected outright. We are not only talking about TOs; we are talking about others who have voiced objections. When the public notice goes into the paper advising of the decision of the water controller around water extraction licences, there is a website mentioned where any member of the public can go online and look at the water extraction licence decision. The public notice says who or which company the licence has been granted to, but you can delve deeper into the website and pull up the water controller’s licence.
I will put some comments from the Controller of Water Resources onto the record, regarding his decision dated 12 May 2014:
- Three respondents did not support the granting of applications and expressed a range of concerns as summarised in the following.
The Amateur Fishermen’s Association of the Northern Territory (AFANT) made written submissions … AFANT did not support the granting of these applications and expressed the concerns that the water allocation plan had not been completed; that water allocation should not be made outside an approved plan; that water allocation decisions were based on climate records of insufficient length; that water allocations were being made without consideration of the Strategic Indigenous Reserve; that the cumulative effects of water allocations from the aquifer will affect end of dry season river flows and spring flows; and with the likely impact on fish and recreational fishing.
As the member for Daly, Mr Deputy Speaker, you represent a very popular part of the Territory, with the Daly being a home to recreational fishing. It is one of the big draw cards; perhaps you share the view of AFANT.
I return to the comments of the Controller for Water Resources:
- The Environment Centre Northern Territory (ECNT) made written submissions in regard to the notices for applications … ECNT did not support the granting of these licences …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
- … and expressed concerns with the cumulative impact of extractions, the substantial size of some applications, the increases in estimated average annual recharge and consumptive pool and the significant impact of reducing dry season flows on cultural sites. ECNT also expressed concerns that the Oolloo Dolostone Aquifer Water Allocation Plan is yet to be finalised and with the equity issues with the granting of large licences and the likelihood that no water will be available in the future for a Strategic Indigenous Reserve.
- NAILSMA and NLC did not support the granting of these licences and expressed concerns with the cumulative impact of extractions, the substantial size of the applications, the impacts of reducing dry season flows on cultural sites. NAILSMA and NLC also expressed concerns that the Oolloo Dolostone Aquifer Water Allocation Plan is yet to be finalised and with serious equity issues with the granting of large licences; and that the right to free, prior and informed consent was not adequately provided for in the licence application notification processes.
I am not reading the entire decision, but they are the concerns raised by some key stakeholders and each of them, amongst their concerns put forward about these water extraction licence decisions, raised the issue of strategic Indigenous reserves.
The Controller of Water Resources follows up with a comment:
Account was also taken of the decision made by Government in December 2012, that water allocation plans should not provide Strategic Indigenous Reserves and that this decision is to be reviewed in 2015.
The government is clearly not interested in strategic Indigenous reserves, or at least looking at those until the three-year period elapses in 2015. That is not acceptable; it is not acceptable to traditional owners, AFANT and, in this case, ECNT, NAILSMA and the NLC.
The huge volume of water requested in these applications and the potential long-term impact is a significant risk to the rights of traditional owners. There has been no recognition of Indigenous rights or cultural and economic aspirations. The decision to grant licences for huge water volumes has been made outside any considered policy or planning processes, such as those set out in the national water initiative under a water plan I quoted from a little while ago.
The Treasurer recently affirmed the government’s contempt for Indigenous rights to water when he said:
- We do not want an Indigenous water allocation that Indigenous people never use. One of the great furphies is that governments have allocated water to Indigenous people, because they have not. It never happened. The whole idea was to create an Indigenous water allocation to ensure people never used that water.
As with too many things the Treasurer says, it is offensive. It is offensive in ignoring the right of Indigenous Territorians to water and recognising that it is not only essential to the development of the north, but to their lives, livelihoods and the contribution Indigenous Territorians make to the Territory and our economy. On that note, I commend the motion to the House.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I advise that I will be moving to amend this motion on water licensing brought by the member for Nhulunbuy. The decision by this government to not support strategic Indigenous reserves, or SIRs as I will refer to them from now on, recognises that water resources are the property of the Territory and are to be managed in accordance with government priorities for the benefit of all Territorians.
There is not any legislative recognition in any Australian jurisdiction of Indigenous rights to use water for commercial purposes, nor is there a requirement under the national water initiative to recognise Indigenous rights to use water for commercial purposes.
Let us put that on the table; what the national water initiative recognises is that water can and should be available for Indigenous cultural purposes. Some 50% of the Northern Territory is held under the Aboriginal land tenure and, consequently, the majority of Aboriginal landholders already hold exclusive access rights for economic development of water resources on their land.
The provision of strategic Indigenous reserves, that is, the reservation of a large quantity of water from the consumptive pool for exclusive use by Indigenous groups in water allocation plans, was reviewed by this government in March 2013. After 11 years of a Labor government in the Northern Territory there was no policy or introduced legislation to enshrine strategic Indigenous reserves into law.
SIRs were simply an ad hoc notion, administrated by a government department in the absence of any clear government policy from Labor, which was not uniform throughout the Northern Territory. Some SIRs were large amounts, as well as some small amounts. There was no science or logic applied to their creation.
The CLP government made the decision to remove allocations of water within water allocation plans for SIRs on the basis that all Territorians should have equal access to water, to pursue economic development opportunities. It is our view that SIRs were divisive and separatist. It is our view that all Territorians should have equal access to water and that preventing large amounts of water being used for agricultural development was not in the best interests of Territorians or economic development.
The use of water and agriculture go hand in hand. Agriculture is a key driver for economic development in the bush, and in order to drive that, access to water is needed. Water licences in the Northern Territory are allocated by the Controller of Water Resources, based on sound hydrological science. A notional 80/20 rule is used, where 80%, based on annual recharge, is conserved for the environment, and 20% is allocated for use in a consumptive pool for agricultural purposes.
There have been arguments and statements made by many members of this parliament that this government is doing nothing for the bush. Nothing could be further from the truth. The removal of SIRs has increased the amount of water available in the consumptive pool for use in general economic development initiatives.
This act alone is an immense driver to encourage Territorians to engage in economic activity. Get up, get moving, get started, get working, do not sit back and whinge about lost opportunities. If you snooze, you lose.
The motion, as originally presented by the member for Nhulunbuy, is hypocritical. It is lazy and smacks of dog whistling to Indigenous people and those who pretend to have their best interests at heart. During 11 years of Labor government in the Northern Territory the notion of SIRs, to my knowledge, never formally went to Cabinet. It was never legislated, and there was no formal policy developed around SIRs by Labor. For Labor to now complain about the so-called removal of SIRs from water allocation plans is too little, too late. That ship has sailed.
The notion of holding back a large quantity of water from consumptive pools in case an Indigenous group might one day decide on an economic venture that required water was a dodgy idea cooked up in Labor backrooms by people who had no authority. The notion of SIRs, when coupled with the Labor government’s refusal to issue water licences, served only to stifle economic development. The noise and feigned indignation now being heard from those opposite is either a sham to score cheap political points or is complete ignorance, which is much worse.
By removing SIRs, this government is providing an incentive and impetus for Indigenous people who might become farmers to be engaged with the process. We are encouraging people to get off welfare and find alternatives. Under Labor’s malaise there was the warehousing of water with no impetus for Aboriginal people to develop economically. This government is using the water allocation planning and licensing framework to underpin the sustainable use of the Territory’s water resources. We are freeing up our water resources by unclogging the backlog of water licensing applications, as well as processing new applications, and we are making sensible policy decisions to support development and protect our precious ecosystems.
To this end, I move the following amendment to the water licensing motion, and that is to remove all words after the word ‘development’ in the fourth dot point, and to replace those words with the words ‘through the strategic and appropriate allocation of the Territory’s water resources’.
I have a piece of paper here that outlines that which can be distributed. The amended motion now reads that this Assembly:
recognises that the sustainable use of water resource is fundamental to the economic, social and cultural development of the Northern Territory
I can live with that.
acknowledges the potential impact of water allocations on the Territory’s unique environment, biodiversity and cultural values
I can also agree with that.
reaffirms that water allocations under the Water Act should be based on sound scientific analysis following proper consultation with all water uses and stakeholders
supports Indigenous economic development through the strategic and appropriate allocation of the Territory’s water resources.
In this amended form, I am in full support of this motion on water licensing, once we have removed that reference to strategic Indigenous reserves.
I will now speak to each point of the amended motion. The motion calls to recognise that the sustainable use of water resources is fundamental to the economic, social and cultural development of the Northern Territory.
That is a well-written paragraph, member for Nhulunbuy, and one the government can support.
This government has a vision on how to grow the Northern Territory and how to move all Territorians forward. This is not a separatist government which looks at one group of people in isolation and grows that one group or deprives it. The Country Liberals government wants to use the Northern Territory’s water resources to drive development; it is the most critical natural resource for our economy.
In the Territory, ground water accounts for around 90% of all water resources. As I stated in my ministerial statement of October last year, it was estimated at that time that the annual use of ground water in the Northern Territory was about 150 GL. The Territory’s main industries of pastoralism, tourism, horticulture and mining rely mostly on ground water. Water is essential to the existence of life; we use it to drink, irrigate our crops and use it in our mines, on our farms, in our industries and in our homes. Some statistics I spoke of in October 2013 about water use in the Northern Territory included that irrigated agriculture and horticulture uses about 47 GL a year; our pastoral industry uses about 23.5 GL a year; our mines use about 17 GL a year; around 48 GL a year of ground water is used for urban and industrial use; and in rural areas where domestic production bores are the main source of water, approximately 8.5 GL per year is used. The right to use, manage and control all water in the Territory is vested in the Territory and exercisable by the minister, who also appoints the Controller of Water Resources for the purpose of administration and regulation under the Water Act, which includes the granting or refusal of water extraction licences.
This government’s approach to the management of the Territory’s water resources will guide us towards achieving our vision of wise use of our land and water resources for the economic development and wellbeing of all Territorians. This approach embraces the Northern Territory government’s vision of establishing a prosperous economy and achieving a balanced environment for the benefit of all Territorians.
As I outlined in the statement on water I delivered to this House in October last year, this approach has four central components:
1. a sound legislative base
2. an overarching water policy for the Territory
3. an appropriate water allocation and water licensing framework
4. scientific monitoring and research to provide the evidence base for adaptive water management.
The amended motion also calls for the Assembly to acknowledge the potential impact of water allocations on the Territory’s unique environment, biodiversity and cultural values.
On 1 July 2013, the establishment of a new, broad representative committee to provide strategic advice on the responsible use of the Territory’s land and water assets, principally through the development of Northern Territory water policy, was approved. The Northern Territory Catchments Advisory Committee, or NTCAC, is expected to address land and water issues across river catchments throughout the Territory. It will enable community input into water policy development, as well as provide the opportunity for focused attention on emerging issues in specific catchments. The new committee will provide an opportunity to have an advisory body with diverse representation and engagement with the community, without government over-representation.
The committee will provide strategic issue advice on key issues relating to the development of the NT economy, particularly where the use of water includes mining, agriculture and pastoral industries. The NTCAC will have a range of subcommittees, which will allow for both a strategic view and the ability to engage at local catchment level. Membership of this committee includes Territorians with recognised experience and knowledge in water policy, planning, land use planning, regional development, Indigenous affairs, agriculture, mining, tourism, environmental protection, irrigated agriculture, horticulture, water engineering and water management.
The motion also calls for the Assembly to reaffirm that water allocation under the Water Act should be based on sound scientific analysis, following proper consultation with all water users and stakeholders. The most important component of the water story for those interested in developing our Territory is water extraction licensing. That is the actual allocation of access entitlements for our water resources.
The Department of Land Resource Management considers the best information, data, records and modelling available from reliable and reputable sources before providing advice to the Controller of Water Resources, who then makes an informed decision about a licence application. This process ensures that, as minister, I am not involved in the decision-making process. However, it is important to note that at the end of each Wet Season the Controller of Water Resources decides, based on rainfall and the model and recharge data, how much water will be allocated to each licence holder. This means that in wetter years more water is able to be allocated to licence entitlements, and in drier years less water is allocated. It is called adaptive management, something new to water policy in the Northern Territory. In this way, the Controller of Water Resources is using this adaptive management approach to ensure maximum water is provided for consumers while protecting the resource for future generations.
The department also has a policy of, in the Top End, allocating a maximum of 20% of water for use and leaving 80% for the environment. In my ministerial statement, entitled Water Resources Driving Development, delivered on 9 October 2013, I outlined that to sustainably manage the Territory’s water resources, the Country Liberals government will develop an overarching water policy for the Territory. In this statement, I also outlined, amongst other things, that a dedicated water directorate would be established to oversee the development of the water policy, the development of the water policy would include widespread consultation with all Territorians and that an NT Catchments Advisory Committee would be established to enable community input to water policy development.
Since October 2013, the Country Liberals government has continued to advance the development of the first Northern Territory water policy, which did not exist under the former government. The water directorate was established in February 2014. A discussion paper intended to inform the water policy is being developed and the NT Catchments Advisory Committee was formed in May. It will be announced in the next couple of days.
This government values the contribution of all Territorians to developing NT water policy. Public release of a discussion paper on water policy will call for written submissions and feedback from stakeholder forums during the consultation period, and the water directorate has commenced targeted consultation with NT government agencies.
It is hoped that this consultative process will elicit a range of comments and appropriately inform a sound NT water policy. Our approach is to use the best science, computer modelling and consideration of community input to inform decisions about extraction licences, irrespective of water allocation plan formulation.
The Country Liberals government is adamant that development using our natural resources is sustainable and underpinned by quality science and sensible policy. The Territory has outdated legislation to underpin water resource management. A legislative review of the Water Act will follow the development of the Northern Territory water policy, underpinning its direction.
In the past, decisions on the provision of water, including strategic planning, timing and the construction of new support infrastructure had been taken in a policy vacuum. Similarly, decisions on the management, allocation and use of water resources were taken without clear, strategic policy guidelines. This lack of clear policy approach has led to inconsistency in the approach to water management. What has been missing to guide the development and management of our water resources is an overarching Territory water policy.
NTCAC will address land and water issues across river catchments throughout the Territory. It will enable community input into water policy development, as well as provide the opportunity for focused attention on emerging issues in specific catchments.
The amended motion also calls the Assembly to support Indigenous economic development through the strategic and appropriate allocation of Territory water resources. The Country Liberals government fully supports the use of available water resources to kick-start the regional economy with, according to the best contemporary science available, no long-term detrimental effects.
This government is using the water allocation planning and licensing framework to underpin sustainable use of the Territory’s water resources. We are freeing up our water resources by unclogging the water licensing system and making sensible policy decisions to support development, as well as to protect those precious ecosystems I have referred to during this speech.
As I have said previously, 75 unprocessed water applications were inherited by the new government and the Department of Land Resource Management. That is disgraceful. Those applications were made by legitimate business people seeking surety about their basic access to water in order to grow their businesses. They were following the rules and, in good faith, seeking a licence, only to find that it may take years to gain such a licence. That is unacceptable. Under this government there has been a change of approach, and the Territory and its water resources are open for business. The Country Liberals government will actively and proudly promote agricultural development through the timely, pragmatic and balanced allocation of available water resources.
The government’s approach is to use the best science, computer modelling and consideration of community input to inform decisions about extraction licences, irrespective of water allocation plan formulation. Recently issued licences – this sounds a repetitive, but I will say this over and over again – are subject to an annual announced allocation each year, derived from modelling following each Wet Season. In this way, we will adaptively manage the resource. This is an approach taken only by this government. It is in contrast to the approach taken by the former government, where it simply took its hands off the tiller and let water resources steer themselves
It is imperative that we have a sound base for making these important decisions about the use of our water resources, and systems in place to detect any impacts on our natural systems.
The management of the Territory’s water resources must balance the needs of the community, industry and the environment. This is an extremely difficult, often fraught public policy challenge. Under the previous government some water allocation plans were being prepared with water allocated towards SIRs. This occurred without any policy being in place to impose SIRs, or any defined formula against which to allocate such a reserve, such as land tenure area or population. This is an example of where poor decisions were made in the absence of a clear, strategic policy governing the Territory’s water resources. This approach has been reviewed by this government, with SIRs currently not included in water allocation plans.
It is this government’s view that due to the relatively low level of water resources – I think I am repeating the quote the member for Nhulunbuy used earlier – and the right of all Territorians, including Aboriginal people to seek water licences, it is appropriate that SIRs are not currently considered in water allocation plans. However, in pursuance of maintaining an open dialogue on this topic, the policy around SIRs will undergo a consultation and review process to determine if this matter should be reconsidered. Native title rights do not extend to the extraction of water resources for commercial uses. All Territorians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, are welcome to apply and receive equal consideration for water extraction licences to support commercial development.
The future of the Territory and our children relies on the wise use of our land and water resources for the economic development and wellbeing of all Territorians. To substantially maintain our water resources, this Country Liberals government is establishing a sound legislative base. We are developing an overarching water policy for the Territory, implementing an appropriate water allocation and licensing framework, and we are ensuring scientific monitoring and research is there to provide an evidence base for adaptive water management. Using this approach, the Country Liberals government is opening up the Territory for development and ensuring our water is used to support our natural ecosystems, livelihoods and stimulating our economic development in the bush.
I support the amended motion on water licences, as I have put to the House.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, I also support this motion brought before the House by the member for Nhulunbuy. Some time ago in the House, I talked about SIRs and discussions I have had with all remote communities I am a member of, especially Ngukurr. Ever since I talked about this and went to Ngukurr to brief residents, there has been very strong support from that area.
When the previous government was in power, consultations were held between NAILSMA and the Northern Land Council to inform traditional owners of the region to let them know what was happening. These were Jawoyn, Mangarrayi, Rittarangu, Rembarrnga traditional owners, all involved with the Tindal and Mataranka aquifers areas, as well as the Oolloo aquifer, which the Daly region comes under.
Aboriginal people recognise water resources in the Northern Territory as fundamental for them to move forward with economic development and in other areas they want to be a part of. They want to engage and work towards that, but their ideas are not coming into this House. There have been no consultations; I have visited communities in my electorate hundreds of times. No one has gone to Ngukurr to explain to them what is happening with water from the Roper or Wilton Rivers, and what the Western Desert mine is pulling out. No one has talked to the community in Ngukurr.
Ever since the Indigenous strategic reserve was scrapped, there have been no consultations with held with communities, and they are disappointed about that. I would like to know what the CLP government has planned for the people.
We understand that under the Land Rights Act and the Native Title Act we do not have any rights over minerals and water resources underground, but we have rights on the land, and we recognise anything other than that; I had to explain a bit more of that as well. However, they want to be a part of economic development and drive in the Northern Territory.
When I was in the CLP, four Indigenous groups came forward that wanted to be involved in economic development, with water, agriculture and other projects in their communities. Where are the business plans for those four applications? I have never seen them. I want to know whether they have moved forward or not, or whether they have been dismissed. The people need to know. Indigenous people need to be a part of the Northern Territory if we are to move northern Australia forward. That is the biggest argument they have in communities.
They have been left behind and taken for a ride for long enough; they only want to be a part. There is enthusiasm for Indigenous people. They want to work and create jobs, but how can they when they are continually told it is not good enough, their plans are not good enough and it is not up to scratch, or plans do not meet criteria? They want to move forward and tender for roadworks in their communities; they want to give jobs back to local people, especially the blokes, of which there are many. However, they cannot move forward if the government does not recognise them trying to meet halfway. They want an opportunity like everybody else.
When we were on that side of the House, we tried to explain that, especially when it came to the tendering process. They want to engage, work with the Northern Territory and federal governments, but they will not be dragged along. They are beyond that point; they have lived in that era for 35 years since self-government. Indigenous people want to be a part of this too.
The strategic Indigenous reserve was one part of moving them forward. It was educating them because – you must remember it is only bush land out there – our culture is stronger than English. Our own education of law and culture is stronger than education at school for us. Yes, it benefits the kids to learn English as a second language, but they already know five languages, something the majority of people in this House do not have. If they are not as educated, there must be some education and greatness in those kids if they can speak five languages, but they need to feel welcome in Northern Territory society.
Considering the minister relies on modelling for removal of surface water from Northern Territory rivers, is the formula conclusive? Visiting Ngukurr before the Wet Season and now afterwards, people in the community are complaining that the water level in the river is starting to drop. It has been confirmed; they can see it, they live there and they know the water.
In Katherine alone the water has dropped under the bridge. When I was a kid I would never see the sandbank in the middle of the river, and now you can see it. I was born in Katherine in 1985 and I am still there in 2014. It might come down with rainwater every year, but to see a sandbank you can walk towards – we would never walk across the Katherine River, it was too dangerous and deep, but you can now walk across the Katherine River during the Dry Season. That is telling you something. Every year, rainfall puts water into the underground water table, but how much is being taken out is something we must look at.
Is the replacement enough? There are scientific and other investigations, but the springs will not last forever; some are now starting to dry out. I have lived in a remote community all of my life, I know where the springs are and they are starting to dry out. There are some areas where we are fortunate, because we are an Aboriginal community and there is always water, especially in Barunga, where I come from, but Ngukurr is starting to see the effects. There have been no consultations with people in Ngukurr, and that is disappointing, because I was a member on the other side of the House and regardless of what I said it did not get through to anybody.
Like any other local member, I am here to speak for my constituents, but my electorate is 90% Indigenous and I speak four different languages. Unfortunately, English is my fifth one, and I have a mother and father from both sides of Arnhem Land.
How many licences for removal of surface water have been granted in that time? Have any been granted to an Aboriginal organisation or any Indigenous group? How many licences for the removal of underground water have been granted? How many, if any, water licences have been set aside for Aboriginal organisations or corporations?
Indigenous people, especially me and my two colleagues, support strategic Indigenous reserves being incorporated into the Water Act because we need to move forward, and that is the only way we can do so. If we keep denying Aboriginal people the right – we are beyond that. We say, ‘It is not recognised under the National Water Initiative’. I have a piece of paper in front of me which states that in 2011 there was a meeting and the National Water Commission – the NT government by that time had developed its own implication plan. We are in 2014 now, with two years left, so what will we do? Will we move forward to bring Indigenous people on board or will we make sure we fill it up as much as we can?
The minister said Indigenous people must get up and get moving. They are trying to move, but how can they when the minister cannot even go to Ngukurr and talk to them? He sends the department there, but is it bringing the information back? How many times has the department been there?
If that is not cheap political point scoring, I do not know what is. Indigenous people own over 50% of the land in the Northern Territory and have a call on the other 48%. We own all of the islands of the Northern Territory and about 68% of all tidal water zones, so why are Indigenous people not being considered?
There has been scientific analysis of the size of the consumptive pool in relation to total water above and under, but how many licences are there in the consumptive pool? From what I remember, the minister was unsure about the quantity of the pool and the volume of water in it. What is left for Indigenous people if they want to move forward? We must tell them. Between the three of us, we hold a large land mass and there are many Aboriginal people in our electorates. As I said, mine is 90%. I cannot say to them, ‘You are better off talking to the minister, because we cannot get the information’. I will tell them what I already know, and it will not help the government nor the people there. We, Ngukurr and many Aboriginal corporations and bodies want to work towards this.
NAILSMA is not being considered by the government, especially the minister. Has there been any discussion with the NLC and CLC? These are traditional owners represented, but also appointed to executive roles within the NLC and CLC. They are landowners in these regions, so why are they not being consulted? They are the first point of contact to take that information back, and they are the ones who will be driving this force. You talked about the community input of the Katherine region; are there any Indigenous people involved in that? Where is the community input from traditional owners? They want to know what is happening and be a part of driving this in northern Australia.
You cannot only have one-sided community input; you must involve Indigenous people, first of all, as they are the landowners, either under the Land Rights Act or native title, where pastoral leases have been taken on top of native title. They are still leasing land from people. There is freehold land in some places. With the Larrakia mob in Darwin, that has not been granted yet, but it can be land trust. If you think the three of us have had it up to here, how do you think the people out there have had it? They are the ones advising us they want to be a part of this move. The people who vote for me come before any party line, because I am like everybody else.
I have to go back and bury them. When they are born, I have to send them gifts, and I kiss them with their little snotty noses and cuddle them when they are sick. These are the kids I watch grow up, and get into drugs and alcohol; they lose their hope and there is nothing there for them. If we start working towards this aim of coming together, building northern Australia and giving them the opportunities to shine, we might have a chance of saving the generations after me and my kids. That is my dream, and I want to see that happen. There is no education, development or infrastructure out there to bring them forward. There are no role models, and few local businesses. There are local Aboriginal organisations, but these can only do so much, and only employ so many. What about the rest of the community? It may be only 10 people out of 800. There are 15 000 kids running around, and they do not know what is in front of them. They need that chance, like everybody here.
We are fortunate to have made it, but we believed in the same thing they believe in. We needed a change, and it is what we will fight for. I will speak for change for the rest of my days. It is what my colleagues will fight for as well, because we know firsthand what is needed. We know their cries, but we need that support from everybody to get across that table. They are not asking for much. They are not saying the water is theirs, they understand that, but they want to be a part of that and to be consulted. They want to be stakeholders. It is a journey for all of us, and we should embrace that.
The budget has already thrown everything out of the door for Aboriginal people in the bush. What more can the government throw at them? There is no hope; that is the reason the CLP is in government, because there was no hope left for those people. You were given that opportunity, but it is about to go out the window because they cannot see any difference between what the CLP was then and what it is now. They want a strategic Indigenous reserve, and the clock is ticking. There are many people who understand, and who have seen that perception is not what it is painted to be.
The intermarriages: there are many families who have had to move out of communities so their kids could benefit with a better future. They knew there was nothing there for them; my father was one who lived in Katherine, while my mother still lived in the community. We had to go back and forth at weekends. They wanted us to see both sides of the world, but not every child receives that opportunity.
The one thing that will always take me home is that when I am dead and gone, that is where I will be. I will be with the rest of them, but while my heart is ticking I will fight for the freedom of those people and their rights, just like everybody else. If that means we must rally in Darwin to prove that Indigenous people are being left out by the CLP government, then so be it. Do you not think one Aboriginal organisation disagrees with those things? We would love to move forward.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member be granted an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LEE: That is all they need, but they will come out sooner or later. They are sick and tired of being kicked in the guts. We are only getting smarter. Indigenous people are becoming involved; we watch television, especially the ABC. The ABC has a good partnership with Aboriginal people. Journalists have talked to the people, but when it comes to consulting from a government point of view, I have not seen anyone out there in my time, even when I was on that side of the House. I have never been told of any department visiting there. If there was, we were never advised. What brings us to this point is hearing the minister say, ‘Aboriginal people, get up, stand up, get your little rights’. They are trying to stand up, but how can they when you are not even looking at them?
It is insulting; we know that because they have been trying, and that is the reason we are here. What more can the people do? They have screamed to the point they have tonsillitis, and sooner or later they will develop laryngitis.
It makes you wonder if anybody cares about Indigenous affairs, because that ministry was scrapped …
Mr Elferink interjecting.
Ms LEE: … and everything that came after it - the Attorney-General just made a bubble sound. Indigenous affairs are obviously not important in this House. In the newspaper, he said he wants to give authority to local boards to administer Centrelink payments, when 70% of their payments are already administered through a BasicsCard. What hope do Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory have with such policies, and everything being put on them like they are dysfunctional? We do not wake up in the morning, rubbing our eyes, screaming our head off with everybody being dysfunctional.
I used to get up and go to work in the morning and my kids used to go to school. Some families slept in; there are no jobs out there, so what can they do? It might be a joke to some people, but for us it is reality; we had to live like that, knowing that some families could not – there were no jobs for them. Even when there were jobs, when CDEP was in place, that was scrapped.
It is a crying shame that we live in the 21st century and the atmosphere keeps putting Indigenous people further back. It is sometimes hurtful to stand here. Where there is poverty, there is misery, and that is in almost every community, regardless of whether they have been consulted to death; they are over being consulted. They want to see action, they want the ball rolling and us to hit the ground running. Give them the opportunities; everybody will fall while they learn how to run. Everybody walks before they run when they are a baby, or crawls before they walk. They want that opportunity too. Everybody else has that opportunity, so why can’t Indigenous people? That is right, they are supposed to get it right the first time. History says they have messed up too many times, but there is always an answer to why they messed up.
Why are no water rights forums being held? Some months ago the Indigenous strategic reserve was a very big issue.
Debate adjourned.
TABLED PAPERS
NT Election Report
Wanguri By-Election Report
First Quarterly Fuel Transaction Report
NT Election Report
Wanguri By-Election Report
First Quarterly Fuel Transaction Report
Madam SPEAKER: I lay on the table the report of the NT general election, held on 25 August 2012, and the report of the Wanguri by-election of 16 February 2013. I also table the first quarterly fuel transaction report, following the Auditor-General’s report and recommendation regarding members’ fuel card use, provided on 19 December 2013. I advise members that they will receive their monthly fuel reports from the Clerk’s office. They have been sent to members, and a fuel consumption record for all members who receive fuel is now a tabled document.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
A lady by the name of Christine Nathanael recently passed from this life to the next, and I would like to pay homage to Christine, or Chris as I knew her. I knew her for many years indeed, and often referred to her as mum. Whilst I was never that close to her, I nevertheless felt a strong bond towards her, because my memories of her go back to my childhood and her sons, Stuart and Tony, who I have known since a very early age. We knocked around together when I was a volunteer cadet in the mid-1970s for eight or nine years, and she was there in my life. I understand she was introduced to St John through a mutual friend of the family, a fellow by the name of Frank Simmons.
She served in St John for many years, and she continued to work on behalf of the people of the Northern Territory in St John, despite the fact she was a single mum. She was a passionate believer in the Northern Territory. She was closely involved in politics, particularly with the Country Liberals, and I pay my respects to her.
Stuart and Tony Oxford, her two boys, also worked very heavily within the St John Ambulance Service, and Tony continues to work with ambulance services in Victoria. I have always had enormous regard for Chris, and I am sad that I was unable to reach her funeral because I was trapped here. Sometimes this House denies us the opportunity to pay our respects because of the way it operates. Nevertheless, I would like to pass on my condolences to Tony, Stuart and Chris, her husband, who was also the light of her life. There was another son, Mark, who passed away in 1974. Her original marriage did not withstand that event, which is why she ended up as a single mum.
In later life she met Chris Nathanael and they were very happy together. I saw them often together, and whenever they were in the same place Christine would light up around Chris; they had a loving and close relationship. Unfortunately, she had the onset of dementia in her later years, and started to go downhill. Nevertheless, she continued to enjoy her relationship with her husband until the very end.
I have since passed on my personal condolences to Chris Nathanael, her husband, and I also pass my condolences to the rest of the family. It is important in this House, from time to time, that we place on the record the Northern Territory’s gratitude to citizens who have made such a substantial contribution to the community in which we live. The Northern Territory is a lesser place for the passing of Christine, and I feel very saddened at her loss. She had been around since I was a kid, and the passing of Christine reminds us that we are all getting older. She was laid to rest in the Anglican Church of the Good Shepherd on 27 March 2014. This was the church where Stuart gave her hand in marriage to Chris Nathanael, and it was the church that saw her go to her next life.
I will table the service booklet so future Territorians will be able to find her on the permanent record of the Northern Territory, particularly family members. So often these service booklets are lost shortly after the funeral; by tabling this booklet, I will be tabling her memory onto the permanent record of the Northern Territory.
Chris was born in Adelaide on 9 April 1943. She went to school in Alice Springs and married Graham Oxford in 1962. Between them they had four children, Sheryl, Anthony, Mark and Stuart. Mark, who I referred to earlier, has passed away.
I will read from the memorial booklet, which I think captures Christine completely:
- Christine was a faithful, energetic and involved member of the Church of the Good Shepherd here at Freds Pass, and from its early days in the car port of the rectory the stoles that Ian and Margaret were wearing were made by Christine and presented to them at their ordinations. Christine is survived by her husband Christopher, sister, Helen, children and grandchildren, and great-great-grandchildren.
I will miss mum, and while she was not my actual mum, l had a great affection for her. I will miss her very much, but not nearly as much as Sheryl, Tony and Stuart. Vale Chris, my condolences to the family, and my thoughts remain with Chris Nathanael at the loss of his beloved wife.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I also pass on my condolences to the Nathanael family. I was able to sneak in some time at the funeral. I have known the Nathanael family for many years; we did not always agree on politics, but that was part of the cut and thrust of living in the rural area, and I had a lot of respect for Christine. With two people called Chris, you sometimes had to be careful who you were calling, but I have known them for a long time. They were stalwarts of the rural area, the Country Liberal Party and the Church of the Good Shepherd. They were very much part of that church, and it was packed for the funeral, not only with many local people and parishioners, but also members of the CLP and others whose lives Christine had touched through the horticultural business Chris continues to run.
I will also speak about someone who passed away recently, a well-known person if you have lived in Darwin for a long period of time. His name was Reg Lowry, and you will still see his name on Lowry & Associates in Winnellie. He was born on 5 April 1933 – my birthday, but not my year – and died on 17 April 2014. This eulogy was from Leah Crockford, who presented it at the mass last Saturday week at Our Lady Help of Christians church in Palmerston.
- Reg celebrated his 81st birthday days before he died. Born in South Australia on 5 April 1933, the eldest of 6 children, he grew up in an era pre and post-World War II, selling papers in the wartime both morning and night. As a twelve year old he learnt the craft of farming, finding his first job at 14 in a bakery earning 25 shillings for 54 hours a week. Taking a promotion in the Eudunda Farmers for a pound a week and only having to work 48 hours was a relief, delivering groceries from an open horse and cart. If you are getting the sense that Reg has always worked hard you are on track.
Later Reg went back to school, studied his matriculation and gained a degree as a chartered accountant. His experiences ranged from playing football, serving five out of six months in the air force in 1952 in Japan (National Service) – he was based at Mallala, South Australia – to becoming a Life Governor of the Royal Melbourne Women’s Hospital in his early 30s for raising 160 000 pounds by having collection points on busy intersections on Mother’s Day over three years. It’s probably not by chance that this celebration of his life precedes Mother’s Day some 48 years later, not denying the almost unending list of work achievements and voluntary roles in numerous community groups over his life, all published in Who’s Who in Australia 2003.
Reg met his wife Anne in the later part of 1965. He was advised on her birthday, 8 May 1966, that he had won a position in Darwin as a Senior Investigative Officer with the ATO. They became engaged on 18 May, married on 19 May …
That is quick!
- … and left for Darwin on 23 May, all in 1966.
That is the way it should be done.
- A true businessman, Reg opened an accountants practice in 1970. Surviving Cyclone Tracy he reopened his practice on 5 January 1975 from 10.00 am to 3.00 pm – displayed on an old bit of twisted iron. His first client wanted to know if his tax return had been prepared. With only a door to the practice I suppose there is any wonder that this was the most natural question one could ask. If you didn’t hear right: ‘has my tax return been prepared?’ even if there was only part of the roof, and rain still falling inside the office. After all, despite what the naked eye could see, the client was a ringer. He’d been out bush and may not have heard the news by now. What was it that just happened 12 days prior? Oh, that’s right, a cyclone!
Work was a driving force for Reg and he served on many boards throughout his life…read Who’s Who in Australia.
- All of this, though, cannot outshine his greatest reality, even if there were times where his presence at home was surely missed. There was never any doubt who was the love of his life – Anne Lowry.
Like his parents, Reg and Anne also had six children together. While the children were young they lived in town and moved to the rural area in 1976. He was pivotal in ensuring that a Catholic Church was built in the rural area. Approaching the Bishop for a $100 000 loan, he cleared the block, hired an architect and a builder. Consequently, in 1987, St Francis of Assisi Church was opened.
Anne and their children Stephen, Gavin, Justin, Emma and Bridgette have a life filled with memories that they will continue to cherish, long after today, of the husband and father they knew and loved so well. So, for the Lowry family, including Reg’s original family of brothers and sisters, he is sure to be looking down praying for you to be given consolation and be at peace with each other.
- Reg also had the joy of seeing his family grow through to the next generation of granddaughters and grandsons, some of whom are here, while others possibly too young to know what may have come to pass. But, be sure he is praying for you to.
If Reg were in a position to express how he feels today about his family, it would be that of great joy, love and pride. He was a man, who in front of all his achievements, trials and difficulties found reason to simply put a smile on his face and comfort those around him with optimism.
If I were to hazard a guess he may have gone by the following philosophy: ‘Money might not make you happy, but there’s some consolation in a string of pearls. If you have to be depressed, you might as well be depressed on a yacht, right?’
The point is, Reg always found a way to continue looking at the events that came to him in life with an air of optimism and humour.
Beyond philosophy and humour he was a man who simply had faith. He loved the church and found consolation through his belief in God as his saviour and the one who had power over his life and the lives of his family. Anyone wishing to add to Reg’s eulogy is most welcome …
It is fitting that I acknowledge the love and friendship my mother Terri McCubbin has had with Reg and Anne over the past 45 years. She passes on her sincere apology for not being here. May you be blessed with special graces, especially through this difficult time.
Farewell, Reg, we know you will be carried into the internal life.
He did not have a bore. He had a pipeline, which went from his house all the way to the hardware store – where I worked for a long time – to connect to the water main. That piece of pipe must have been cheap, because it always had holes in it.
He would always be at the hardware store. If you have a small hole, you can put what you call a tapping saddle over it; you do not have to cut it and you can close it off. We nearly gave him the Golden Tapping Saddle of the Year Award, because he put about 100 tapping saddles on that pipe. Eventually, he decided to spend some money on a bore, but every weekend you would see him digging a hole, trying to repair a leak in the pipe.
People might not understand the number of things he was involved in. Besides running a company called Reg Lowry & Associates he was a senior taxation investigator with the ATO, a member of the board of trustees of the Darwin casino and a board member of the Royal Darwin Hospital, the Darwin Port Authority, the NT Land Corporation and the NT Development Corporation.
He also sat on the Liquidators and Auditors board. He was Treasurer of Rotary 2000-01, Chair of the Rotary Youth Exchange program 1994-2000, Chair of Youth Services for Zone 1 District Association (Rotary) 1996-98, and a member since 1981. He was also a member of the Australian board of the National Heart Foundation from 1999 and the 1990 National Financial board. He was the Northern Territory President of the National Auditor’s Committee from 1999 and vice-president and treasurer from 1987 to 1999, having joined the board in 1987.
He was a member of the national board of the YMCA since 1995, life member from 1991, a member of the Darwin board of the group from 1970 and a nine-time former president. He became a life member of NT Little Athletics in 1984 and was president from 1979-85.
He was also a Life Governor of the Royal Women’s Hospital; President of the Younger Set fundraising committee; a former Treasurer of the Arts Council of Australia, as well as the Down Syndrome Association; a member of the Financial Advisors Board CentraCare from 1997; a board member of the Diocesan Development Fund (Catholic Bank) from 1987; an advisor to the Catholic bishop NT from 1987; and a member of the board of St John’s College advisory council 1996-98.
He built the Catholic church of St Francis of Assisi Humpty Doo 1985-86, he was Commissioner of Oaths 1975, Darwin’s Citizen of the Year – which people might have forgotten – awarded by the National Australia Day Council 1998, and he received the Paul Harris Fellowship in 1990, a very important one if you are a Rotarian.
He was also a member of the Darwin Golf Club, the Humpty Doo Golf Club, the Society of Accountants Fellowship and the Taxation Institute. That is a full life, and talking about a hard-working member of the Northern Territory, who also did a lot of voluntary work, is appropriate. Not only was he a good family man who strongly believed in God – I attended his funeral, and the choir purposely sang with all gusto, because Reg always went to mass at Our Lady Help of Christians church later in his life and did this. He had a warble in his voice and you could always recognise when he was singing. We ensured he was suitably sent off as someone who enjoyed singing in church. Thank you, Reg Lowry, for the work you did, not only for your family, but for the community as well.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Deputy Speaker, I pay tribute to one of the finest medical professionals in the Northern Territory’s history. After 34 years of service Dr Nadarajah Rajabalendran, or Dr Raja, is well known amongst residents in Alice Springs.
When notified of Dr Raja’s retirement I immediately wrote to him to express my personal thanks for his long contribution to the Department of Health, and particularly to the patients of the Alice Springs Hospital. Dr Raja is renowned for his selfless dedication to all patients in his care. I am told there have been many occasions when services were only able to continue at the Alice Springs Hospital due to Dr Raja’s tireless contribution. After completing his degree in Sri Lanka Dr Raja started working in the medical unit at the Alice Springs Hospital in 1975. He then furthered his studies between 1978 and 1982, before returning to Alice Springs. Since then he has also gained specialist qualifications in America and the UK, and in 2000 he was awarded a fellowship by the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine.
During Dr Raja’s early time at the Alice Springs Hospital there were periods of severe staff shortage. After the retirement of another doctor in 1986 he was the only doctor on duty for the entire hospital for the following year. He received some help from visiting locum doctors, but remembers some very long days and nights when he carried the entire caseload. Through his dedication he managed to ensure all hospital services kept running. He remembers an occasion when four interstate visitors to Central Australia presented after suffering heart attacks and, somehow, he and some hard-working nurses managed to produce the best outcomes for the patients.
He was pleased to see more physicians arrive in Alice Springs and, in turn, watch available services in the town grow. He has also seen some interesting changes in medicine during his service. These include the development of an intensive care unit and the significant reduction in leprosy and gastroenteritis in Central Australia.
Until five years ago he was the only trained gastroenterologist, but with the arrival of more specialists the hospital has been able to better treat and manage patients with infectious diseases. He has also been committed to teaching and nurturing hundreds of young doctors throughout his career. He has undertaken this through his role at Alice Springs Hospital, more formally through his academic role with Flinders University and through his long-time support of the Northern Territory medical school.
On Friday I will join with doctors and nurses to celebrate Doctor Raja’s long service in Alice Springs and give him a fond farewell for all of his hard work. I look forward to celebrating a doctor who has shown such commitment and service and who helped to teach and inspire the next generation of doctors in Central Australia, who we hope will follow in his footsteps.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, I pay tribute to a young man who, sadly, took his own life, through trauma and upheaval in his world. I pay tribute not only to him, but also to his mother and, to a lesser extent, his grandmother, who I also know. I would like to place on the record the life of this amazing young man who, tragically, is no longer with us.
Taylor Thomas Luck was born on 22 August 1997, and died on 23 March 2014. He was born at Darwin Private Hospital on Dr Mounsey’s – who many people know and remember – 65th birthday. Being an old-fashioned doctor, Dr Mounsey did not usually allow children to be present for a birth, but turned a blind eye to Natasha, 15 years old and Trent, 13 years old, being present for the birth of their younger brother. His father, Guy, was also there.
Taylor was affectionately known as Tails by family and friends. He was inquisitive and into everything from an early age. With a ton of energy, he was on the go from the moment he woke in the morning until going to sleep at night.
One morning Tails woke early, so the story goes, unlocked the deadlock on the front door, the normal lock and then the security door. He took his little sister, who was walking out with him, and then re-locked the door. He put his sister into the back seat of his mum’s car, sat in the driver’s seat, started the car and reversed out of the driveway, across and up the road and the footpath, with a tree stopping the vehicle. He was standing in the driver’s seat holding the steering wheel thinking he was king pin. Not only did mum and dad have to find keys to get out of the house, dad had to go back inside to find the spare car key, because Tails had locked it. The car engine was still running.
On another day mum walked out the back door carrying a bucket of washing to hang, and a water bucket fell from the roof beside her. Tails, only two years old, was on the roof having a lovely time. One day Tails escaped from the university childcare centre after climbing a pool fence. People were called to search the water around Charles Darwin University at Casuarina, but he was located 1.5 km away heading in the direction of home. When asked where he was going he said, ‘Mum’.
At only four years and five months he wrote his name on the computer, speaking each letter as he went. In January 2002 Taylor went to live in Malaysia with his family, because of his dad’s work, for three months. Whilst in Malaysia he gave his parents the fright of their lives when, again, they woke at 7.40 am to find the front door of their apartment wide open and Taylor nowhere in sight. That was one of the few times he did not drag his little sister along with him. He was located on the top floor playing with two other little girls.
Always full of confidence, Taylor believed he could do anything. In April 2002, back in Darwin, after chasing a large flock of geese around on an oval until they eventually took flight, Taylor ran back saying, ‘I can’t be a bird, I can’t fly’. He was devastated, as he thought he could do almost anything in life.
On 15 May 2002 the family arrived in Wellington, New Zealand, after his dad was located there with his engineering firm. They had to live in a hotel for the first two weeks until moving into their home. They had been in the room for all of 10 minutes when three fire engines arrived below them. Taylor had been outside the door, and went back into the room when a loud noise began. The glass was missing from the emergency button, which Tails had pushed. Hotel staff most likely thought, ‘They are here for two weeks?’ Tails loved starting school at the Brooklyn school in Wellington. Each school holiday his mum had to drive him there to show him no one was there and she was not punishing him by keeping him at home. Taylor always thought everyone liked him and he knew everyone. He had no fear and could never fathom that people could be mean in life.
On many occasions he left after school care, and one day staff found him in a local corner store. He had walked to the shopping district and was arguing with the Indian owner, telling him the play money he had taken from after school care was, in fact, real money, and he was wondering why he could not buy lollies with it.
At only six years of age, back in Darwin, mum was cooking in the kitchen, thinking Taylor was in the back yard playing with Harry. A knock at the front door saw two police officers with a naked Taylor in tow and Harry on a lead. Mum received a long lecture not only about letting her six-year-old roam the streets, but also allowing him to be naked. They had found him next door, which happened to be the Stuart Highway.
Tails started playing basketball in 2004 and, in typical Taylor style, he did not trust his team members to get the ball to the goal. He had to take the ball himself, the full length of the court and score. When he was 13 he played under 14s and would also play in the under 16s on the same day. It was a long day at Marrara basketball stadium for the family. He did not only play basketball; he showed natural talent in all sport he played. He was playing rugby for Uni Pirates, and one day he rode his pushbike home, telling mum that she had to hurry to get to Nakara oval, as a man was waiting with forms for him to play soccer. Mum went to see the coach and asked what night training was on. Training for soccer was at the same time as training for rugby, so mum explained that he could not be in two places at the same time, and that if he did not go to training he would not play. The coach said, ‘I really want Taylor on my team, because he has natural talent and if he continues to train with the women, that will be his training’, so that is what happened.
Mum drove him around six days a week to play different sports. He also played tennis and, in all of this, he would fit in tap and breakdancing. Clearly he was a very talented and natural athlete. He played basketball the longest, with Ansett, but he gave up after breaking his arm in three places, causing him to perform a backflip at his uncle Sean when at the celebration of his sister Natasha and brother Trent being accepted into the Northern Territory Police Force.
Taylor learned to play the recorder, saxophone and ukulele. He had a beautiful voice and loved to sing and entertain people. Over the years he had many pets; his most loved and cherished were his goat, Jack; NT carpet python, King Tails, and his dog, Harry, which he got in 2004.
Taylor was a whiz on the computer and he was making webpages for himself and his sister at only nine years old. He tried to set his sister up in a business selling homemade cards. At 11 he was programming virus scanners to use on the computer at home. He could shut down and lock you out of your computer across the world. It was a waste of time anyone in the house having a password, as he could crack it and change it to his own.
At 12 he was programming games; he would sit on the computer whilst someone across the world told him what they wanted in the game and he would program it. They would deposit $30 into his eBay account, and he would transfer the game to them. He was a bright fellow in many ways, not only a gifted athlete.
Taylor would fall asleep each and every time his big sister Natasha cut his hair, from the first time to the last; she was obviously very gentle if he fell asleep. Tails could not wait for his independence, and was so proud when he received his L plates for his motorbike and the car. No matter what, he had to have a motorbike. The deal was that once he received his P plates his parents would buy him a car and he would get rid of the bike.
Three years before he died, Taylor started running a YouTube account uploading gaming tutorials – ‘Taylor Taylz and Taylor Tayls’. You can find one of his songs at http://youtubeb3q40ymsvmcy. He sounds like a clever and gifted child and it is a tragic story.
In his phone, he never kept names under his contacts, because he remembered who owned which phone number. That is how he found them.
Taylor Thomas Luck will be remembered by his mother, as well as the main members of his family, including Shay Luck, Trent Lee, Tony Lee, Josh and Malina
Taylor’s mother is Vanessa Lowe, who is a teacher at Humpty Doo Primary School. Vanessa’s mother is Heidi Lowe, who I know from my childhood because she and Judy Schuler were the most important people in Darwin, prior to Cyclone Tracy, in relation to pedigree and the showing of cats. Together they organised the first championship cat show on the lawns of Spillett House on Smith Street. Without these two women working hard to bring showing and pedigree cats together, we would not have the cat showing activities we now have in Darwin.
Heidi was a very quiet, ladylike person, and had an outstanding knowledge of cats, the breeds and showing them. She was also an exceptional accountant. She lived in Ludmilla, and had many connections with Darwin business people in Smith Street. Her daughter, Vanessa, is someone I recently met in the job. She was one of the first teachers I met at Humpty Doo Primary School, and she has been a teacher in the Northern Territory for over nine years. She commenced work at Humpty Doo Primary School as a class teacher in the special centre in 2007, and in 2012 she won the senior teacher position to oversee and guide the teaching and expansion of the special centre.
Vanessa’s knowledge and expertise on current and emerging issues surrounding special education is impeccable and respected by all in the teaching profession. She has always demonstrated a love for teaching and children in her role as a special educator for children with severe and multiple disabilities. This love of teaching and children underpins the educational programs she plans, implements, oversees and evaluates for each and every student. Every student is special and she treats them accordingly.
Vanessa is very focused on outcome-based curriculum, and melds this to meet the special developmental needs of students on educational adjustment, individual behaviour management and healthcare plans. She is highly organised and a good manager and teacher who sets high standards for herself, her fellow staff and students. She works tirelessly on behalf of children in her care, and demonstrates the excellent delivery of special education programs for students with severe or multiple disabilities. Vanessa has a positive relationship with students and has created an encouraging and happy learning environment in the special education centre. It is one nurtured by honesty, empathy, respect, trust and warmth. When I would regularly visit Humpty Doo Primary School before the loss of her son, I would see Vanessa with the students and you could tell there was a special bond.
Working with a diverse clientele with highly specialised needs, Vanessa consistently focuses on the welfare and wellbeing of each of the students in her care. Her duty of care for children with special educational needs is carried to the nth degree; every child is very special to her and she wants the best for them.
She demonstrates highly effective communication skills, working with students, parents, staff, school support and therapy services personnel, the community health paediatric team, Carpentaria Disability Services, family and children’s services, paediatricians and allied health professionals. Her interpersonal skills have proved invaluable during case conferences for children with severe and multiple disabilities. Sadly, in our community there are children such as this, some of them being at Humpty Doo Primary School. She successfully liaises with a variety of support personnel, colleagues and parents from diverse cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds in meeting the needs of the students in her care.
Vanessa’s approachable and open manner enhances the Humpty Doo Primary School community as a place where a sense of belonging is experienced by all members of that community, especially the families of students in her care. She enacts and endorses inclusivity throughout the school, and this is evident in the way in which students with special educational needs are openly valued and accepted as part of the school community. Again, I see that when I attend assemblies, where these children from the special education unit are part of it and no one thinks any differently.
Vanessa is a strong advocate for students with special educational needs and their families. She maintains an active profile and is continually negotiating for the best services for her students from sources outside of the school. She networks and supports special educators and support personnel throughout the Palmerston and rural cluster group. Her knowledge of departmental policies and procedures pertaining to special education is outstanding, not only for Humpty Doo Primary School, but in a supportive manner to other special educators and coordinators in Palmerston and the rural regions. She is seen as one of the leading lights in special education.
The educators and support staff in the special education centre at Humpty Doo are evidence of Vanessa’s ability to build and maintain teams. All staff are provided with professional development opportunities, intensive training and demonstration lessons from Vanessa in order to implement – I am not sure what these are – EAPs, IBMPs and ACPs. I am sure the teaching world know what they mean!
Vanessa is a dedicated teacher, mentor, manager and leader who always has the dignity of the child foremost in her pastoral care of students with special educational needs. She is a committed and loyal team player and an exceptional teacher, who has achieved many times over what every teacher aspires to in making a difference with students.
I pay tribute to this family. They have suffered greatly with the loss of their brother, son, and grandchild. I say to Vanessa Lowe, her mother Heidi, and the brothers and sisters of the family: he may have gone, but he will not be forgotten.
The last part of the booklet says:
- Sadly missed along life’s way, lovingly remembered every day. No longer in our life to share, but in our hearts you will always be there.
I am sure Taylor Thomas Luck, or Tails as he was lovingly called, will always be in their hearts.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Goyder for that touching speech on a very sad story and sad ending for a talented young man. I have also heard of the very good work Vanessa does with special education, especially people I know in the rural area.
I will speak on an important matter to many people in and around my electorate and Darwin more generally, especially amongst the Larrakia community. Many Territorians more generally are also concerned about this matter, because it goes to the way the CLP government does business, a return to the bad old days. I am referring to decisions made by the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment in relation to land opposite the corner of Totem Road and Dick Ward Drive, Darwin.
Darwin residents awoke on the morning of 4 May 2014 to read an NT News report of the clearing of this land and Larrakia action to protect that work. It was the clearing of land long regarded as having been set aside for conservation. Clearing of the land was denied in 2010 by the minister, my colleague the member for Barkly, because of the status of the land as a conservation zone, as well as storm surge constraints on land development. It was the clearing of land known to include the burial of Larrakia and other Aboriginal people, potentially hundreds of burials on this site.
Is this another case of the developer jumping the gun ahead of the land development approval process? Is this another example of a naive and passive minister opening these opportunities?
The history of this site is well known to old time Darwin families and is worth recounting. The land in question is held by the Gwalwa Daraniki Association, a local Aboriginal group representing residents of Kulaluk and Minmarama Park.
It is important that people remember this land grant, by a lease in perpetuity, was intended as a land grant to the Larrakia in recognition of the long-standing traditional ownership and occupation of land and sea in the Darwin region. The grant of land was a response to a grassroots land claim by the Larrakia around the same time of the government response to the Woodward land rights commission. It was agreed by government that the Larrakia claim for land should be recognised, but the Land Rights Act being considered at the time did not envisage the grant of land, under that act, in areas like Darwin.
A government decision was made in 1979 to make arrangement for a land grant via a lease in perpetuity for special community development.
After self-government, that arrangement was formalised under a Crown lease in perpetuity with the Gwalwa Daraniki Association, on behalf of the Larrakia as a whole for purposes consistent with the zoning of the land. Much later the constitution of the Gwalwa Daraniki Association was changed, so it now only represents the residents of that area, not the wider Larrakia.
Moving forward in time, members might recall a recent application for the subdivision of the larger part of the Gwalwa Daraniki land between Bagot Road and Dick Ward Drive, for sequential consequential commercial development. On 7 March this year, that application was rejected by the Development Consent Authority on the basis that a required master plan for the whole site had not been completed or endorsed by the consent authority.
Curiously, on the same day, the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment signed a separate application to amend the Planning Act to change the status of the land now being cleared from a conservation zone to a specific use zone LI, light industry.
The change enables the use of this land for development of a light industrial park, like others in nearby Coconut Grove. On behalf of concerned Territorians, particularly the Larrakia people, I ask:
will the minister release the advice he was given by his department relating to the planning and heritage constraints on the use of that land for commercial development?
did his department recommend that further work should occur to properly consider the heritage values of the site? For example, the use of ground penetrating radar to identify burial sites outside part of that land already known to be a burial place.
why was the wider Larrakia community not able to make its views known on their attachment to that site, before your change in land use and the clearing commenced?
why did the minister write to Dr Bill Day on 1 May to say any future use will be subject to a period of public exhibition, where the public will be invited to make a submission in respect of that proposal? Is this the way the CLP does business, allowing land clearing prior to a period of public exhibition and public comment on development proposals?
The actions of the minister have caused great distress to many Larrakia people. It has led to an application to the Federal Court for an injunction to stop work, and for mediation recommended by the court. Why did it come to this? Why can the minister not take the time to understand the history of this place and that land, and ensure proper consideration of its heritage values to the Larrakia people? It is special to all Territorians and very special to Larrakia people.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016