2014-08-26
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I table a copy of the Administrative Arrangements Order published in the Northern Territory Gazette No S71 dated 24 August 2014. I advise the Assembly that on 24 August 2014 Her Honour the Administrator made additional appointments to the Chief Minister.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I seek that leave of absence be granted to the member for Arafura for today on compassionate grounds.
Leave granted.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 9 students from Sanderson Middle School accompanied by Miriam Melis and Mark Conden. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your visit.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also welcome electorate officers from the opposition and the cross benches. I hope you enjoy your seminar.
Members: Hear, hear!
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The primary purpose of this bill is to support the protection of children from the harms of second-hand smoke when in private motor vehicles.
In bringing this legislation forward, the Country Liberals government is applying a pragmatic approach to reducing the harm caused from smoking within our community. We maintain that the primary responsibility for reducing the harm caused by smoking in our community is, and must, reside with the individual and is personal responsibility.
There is a swathe of support services available for smokers to assist them quitting, and I encourage all smokers who are considering quitting to access these services.
It is entirely appropriate that children are protected from second-hand smoke in vehicles under the control of adults who are making the decision to smoke. The Northern Territory currently has the highest rates of smoking in the country. This has a significant impact on the health and wellbeing of Territorians who choose to smoke. It also reflects a significant and largely preventable cost burden on the Northern Territory public health system. The impact of smoking is not only on the people who choose to smoke but also those around them. There is well-documented evidence which indicates passive smoking or exposure to second-hand smoke can cause asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia and, over the long term, cardiovascular disease and cancers. The poor air quality caused by second-hand smoke in cars is more hazardous than that found in smoky bars and restaurants.
Current evidence shows that children are particularly susceptible to the harmful effects of smoking, due to their smaller lung capacity, body weight and underdeveloped immune system. For children, the confined space of a motor vehicle further increases the harmful effect of second-hand smoke. Research specific to the effects that second-hand smoke has on children has indicated increased rates of respiratory illness, middle ear infections, asthma and sudden infant death syndrome. It is a significant and avoidable health hazard.
It is vital that the Northern Territory government takes all steps necessary to protect children who are unable to make informed decisions to leave the confines of a motor vehicle if they are exposed to the harm of people smoking around them.
The bill inserts a new offence into the Tobacco Control Act for people who smoke in a motor vehicle in the presence of a child under 16 years of age. This bill is consistent with other Australian jurisdictions that have already prohibited smoking in cars where children are present.
In another first, this legislation now also requires wholesalers to provide information about the quantity of tobacco products supplied to retailers.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of participants from Operation Flinders Boot Camp. Welcome to Parliament House and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mrs LAMBLEY: Section 53 of the act already requires wholesalers to provide information about who wholesalers are supplying tobacco to and their location. The additional information being sought on the quantity of tobacco product is important for supporting the Department of Health to better understand patterns of tobacco consumption across the Northern Territory, and to better tailor tobacco control initiatives to improve the health of all Territorians.
This bill also takes the opportunity to update existing provisions in the act in accordance with the whole-of-government push for legislation to be consistent with Part IIAA of the Criminal Code Act. Put simply, the previous provision in the act that prohibited or allowed certain activities to occur have had the relevant section standardised and, where there is an offence, the penalty units are clearly outlined. For example, clause 17 of the bill proposes to replace the existing section 17 of the act relating to the prohibition on advertising that offers price discounts on tobacco products. The intent of both the clause and the section are the same, it is the information is to be presented in a way that is consistent with the Criminal Code Act and all other legislation.
I note that section 17 of the existing act prescribed an offence where the penalty for an individual was 20 penalty units and 100 penalty units for a body corporate. The new clause 17 only defines the penalty as 20 penalty units. Members should read this bill in conjunction with section 38DB(3) of the Interpretation Act where it states:
So in removing the reference to body corporate fines in the Tobacco Control Act and consistent with the principles of Part IIAA of the Criminal Code Act, corporate entities face the same penalties as they currently do in the existing Tobacco Control Act.
The example provided above is equally true for many clauses contained in the bill. I reiterate that the two new policy initiatives contained in the bill relate to protecting children from second-hand smoking in cars, and a power to collect information relating to wholesale quantities for tobacco sold in the Territory.
Many steps have been taken, and will continue to be taken, to decrease the harmful effects of smoking in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Continued from 19 June 2014.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I will start with a quote from the Chief Minister:
That was Adam Giles on 20 October 2010. Adam Giles has now instructed his Corrections minister to implement his get-in-the-hole policy, because that is what this bill is. We will oppose this bill for many reasons which I will outline in detail, but the primary reason is this bill ignores rehabilitation, and that will increase crime in the Northern Territory. Under the CLP, Territorians are living with the highest levels of violent crime in our history.
This new corrections legislation will be yet another failed CLP law and order policy. I will get into the details of this bill soon, but first it is important to understand where this bill came from and why. We know this bill comes from the Chief Minister, not only because he flagged it four years ago, but because of the approach to this legislation by the minister.
If we know one thing about this minister, it is that he is good at talking and he loves to talk. I am confident that not even the minister would disagree with that. One of the things he loves talking about most is legislation he is bringing forward to this House. He thrives on it, and he is never happier than when he has legislation to talk about. I would not be surprised if the minister read exposure drafts to his children at bedtime. The minister loves legislation. He loves interacting with the legal profession and other stakeholders and talking legislation with them. It is an admirable quality. However, he will not talk much about this big legislation.
This legislation repeals the old act and replaces it. This bill will form the legislative basis for the operation of prisons and corrections in the Northern Territory, but he will not talk about it. I am not surprised, considering the feedback from the Law Society, which said:
Let us compare the approach of the minister to this bill with the Advance Personal Planning Bill last year, an important bill, but not as important as a bill which underpins the entire operation of a core government service. Before that bill was even introduced, he had issued four media releases. He held forums up and down the Territory. He talked about consulting widely and he did. He talked about how consulting widely had helped and how proud he was he had taken on people’s concerns.
A media release entitled Extensive Consultation on Advance Personal Planning, from October last year, before the bill was introduced in parliament, said:
That was his approach then. He was proud of his legislation and extensive consultation. That bill had 90 sections, this bill has over 200. He has not been holding consultation sessions up and down the track. He has not taken on board the multitude of sensible suggestions and has completely ignored submissions made by a variety of legal organisations. He has not been issuing media release after media release.
He has not been crowing about extensive consultation, and we know why. It is because this is not his legislation. He knows he is not allowed to change it. I suspect he knows the views of the legal community are valid, but he will have to ignore them, so he is ignoring them completely. He has completely ignored comprehensive submissions from a variety of legal bodies, including the Law Society. There are dozens and dozens of recommendations that have come forward from the experts – all ignored. These are the same bodies he normally loves talking to. The talk of the legal community is about just how bad this bill is. This is a bill the Attorney-General should be ashamed of.
Rather than doing his job, he is off spending taxpayers’ money on expensive courses to help improve his CV. Many people in the Department of Justice, in the DPP, are upset that they have been denied opportunities for professional development. Some have even paid for professional courses out of their own pockets. So they are particularly upset that the Attorney-General is using the money for himself when he should be doing his day job. This bill is part of the Attorney-General’s day job. It clearly needs serious attention. Serious concerns have been raised about this bill from within the legal ranks.
This is legislation the minister has been told he has to implement: the get-in-the-hole bill the Chief Minister demands. The legislation has nothing to do with rehabilitation or with reducing reoffending and cutting crime. It is all about vindictiveness and the badly considered desire of the Chief Minister to lock away all problems and increase incarceration, and not work through the problems we have in the Territory. It will not prevent repeat offending and, in particular, will increase Indigenous incarceration.
I am sure if anyone criticises this bill we will see a juvenile and immature debate about being tough on prisoners and on crime, even though this bill, by refusing to acknowledge rehabilitation, will increase crime. We share the belief with the legal community and, I have no doubt, the public at large, that by ignoring rehabilitation this bill is a bad bill. It is one of the fundamental concerns of the Law Society which advised government this bill does not provide for:
I will repeat that last line:
Ignoring rehabilitation will lead to more crime. The Chief Minister has outlined his desire to operate corrections in breach of the United Nations conventions, and this bill delivers on that intention. This bill is blatantly in breach of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. This bill also ignores the Standard Guidelines for Corrections in Australia, which are evidence-based and proven to reduce reoffending, and to which the Northern Territory is a signatory. This bill is also in complete breach of the findings of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.
However, all these breaches are clearly by design because of the direction the Chief Minister has given his Corrections minister. The Chief Minister wanted a bill that breaches all these guidelines. He wanted a vindictive bill. He made that clear in 2010. He did not want a bill that involved rehabilitation; he wanted a get-in-the-hole bill. It is also not surprising that the Chief Minister did not trust the minister to set his own policy with this bill.
In just under two years, the member for Port Darwin has overseen an extraordinary number of policy failures. He was originally given responsibility for alcohol rehabilitation, bungled it, and it was taken from him. His law and order policies resulted in the most violence we have ever seen in the Northern Territory. Five times he has promised a domestic violence strategy, but still has not delivered it.
He has slashed funding to victims of crime and has completely eroded the legal profession’s confidence through his approach to the appointment and conduct of Magistrate Maley. We have seen Magistrate Maley do the right thing and resign, but we have not seen the Attorney-General, who oversaw the whole shambles, do the right thing and resign.
Out of this litany of failure though, corrections is perhaps his greatest policy failure. Recently the minister announced his grand ambition for corrections, ‘I will still be the first Corrections minister in the history of this country since Federation to be seriously talking about closing prison beds.’
That is what he said on 19 July. That dream lasted just three weeks before he announced, on 5 August, he was opening more prison beds in a new juvenile prison because the existing facility did not have enough beds. He is, perhaps, the first Corrections minister in the history of this country since Federation to perform such a stunning backflip. His grand history-making ambition lasted three weeks.
I could go on forever about the policy failure of the CLP government, but let us get to the bill itself – the Chief Minister’s bill. The bill has 224 provisions, of which only two mention rehabilitation, one of which is in relation to the rehabilitation of injured Corrections’ dogs – extraordinary. It is unbelievable. You could not make this stuff up if you tried. When it was first pointed out to me I could not believe it. I had to do a ctrl/F on the bill. Check it out for yourself. If you do a word search for ‘rehabilitation’ you find it in two clauses. I will read clause 167, Approval of rehabilitation programs and work:
That is one mention of rehabilitation. The second mention is in clause 193(4), Harming correctional services dog:
There are two mentions of rehabilitation in this bill. One allows the commissioner to define something as a rehabilitation program and the other goes to rehabilitation of a dog.
This bill dedicates as much attention to the treatment of injured corrections dogs as it does to prisoners. We love our dogs, but this is a Correctional Services bill and we know it has to be focused on rehabilitation. That has to be the focus of a modern corrections system. This government can forget talking about rehabilitation anymore.
It gets even worse. In the original version of this bill there was a clause called ‘Objects of act’ and one of the intentions was to rehabilitate prisoners. I will read from the original bill distributed by the minister. It reads, ‘To provide for the rehabilitation of offenders with a view to their reintegration into the general community’.
An admirable object. However, it was pointed out by the Law Society and others that the bill did not implement the object. The provisions of the bill simply did not mention or deal with the object of the act at all.
Extraordinarily, rather than try to amend the bill to meet its stated object, the minister just took out the object. It is not in this version of the bill – a clear concession from the government that rehabilitation is not the object.
This is childish. You do not deal with the issue; you just try to move the goalposts. It reminds me of the government’s election promise to cut crime by 10% each year. When the government realised the promise would fail and violent crime was at record levels, rather than listening to police and others about what they could do to cut crime, it first tried to change the goalposts. It said it would cut crime by 10% in its term which, of course, no one bought. You cannot just change the goalposts.
I will run through a few more serious concerns we have with this bill. However, I make it clear these concerns are not in relation to the potential conduct of prison officers and corrections staff. It is not what prison officers do, but what this bill allows them to do that concerns me. That is what this debate is about. We are not debating the conduct of prison officers or how prison officers may or may not implement this legislation, we are debating what the provisions of this legislation provide.
When we were debating the government’s Alcohol Protection Orders we raised numerous concerns with the government which it just batted away by saying, ‘Do not worry, the police will not do that’. Now we have seen the courts have tested that legislation and it has failed, due in many parts because recommendations were ignored. Bad legislation should not be covered up by saying, ‘Do not worry, we will not use it that way’.
This bill allows a prison officer – the general manager – to overrule the directions of a medical practitioner in relation to a prisoner’s healthcare requirements. This is wrong. I am not suggesting the general manager will ever deliberately prevent a prisoner from receiving the medical attention they require, but why allow for it? Why provide legal protection for medical attention to be ignored or denied? Why allow the recommendations of a medical practitioner to be ignored? It is clause 85(2), Recommendations of health practitioner:
This is a change from the current act where, rather than give reasonable consideration, the general manager is required to comply with the recommendation of the health practitioner. This is very concerning to us. You need medical attention to determine the extent of what is happening. If the medical practitioner says you need medical attention you should be getting medical attention. This bill has the capacity to place the general manager in trouble they do not deserve.
This legislation is, in many ways, saying, ‘We do not trust doctors’. We would like to know what consultation the minister undertook with the medical profession on that. If the medical practitioner gives a direction, the general manager should follow that direction. The Law Society shares our concern. It said:
This provision should be removed.
Provisions contained in the current act in relation to food, clothing and exercise have all been removed. Again, I am not suggesting when this act comes into effect they will stop serving food at the prison. However, what is wrong with the provisions in the current act? Why are they going? I understand section 149 of the Criminal Code Act imposes a duty on those in charge of prisoners to provide them with the necessities of life, and there is plenty of civil case law establishing a duty of care in relation to prisoners. But why remove it from this bill when it is in the previous act? What is so wrong with having provisions in relation to food, clothing and exercise? Again, I quote from the Law Society:
The current act provides that the director must provide a prisoner with food and water of sufficient quality and quantity to maintain the good health of the prisoner, and that the director must allow a prisoner to exercise. The society reiterated its concerns that the bill does not articulate that food, clothing or exercise will be provided. This is in stark contrast to other Australia jurisdictions. The society submitted that these provisions should be re-enacted into the bill.
That is from two separate submissions from the Law Society to the minister. The Law Society is becoming frustrated by the minister’s refusal to listen.
The bill has unreasonable restrictions on legal representatives’ access and screening to the prison, and communication with prisoners. Prison officers have new powers to refuse visits from lawyers and it can even intercept legally privileged mail, against all legal principles. The minister would not be surprised that the legal fraternity is concerned about the government making it harder for prisoners to be represented. In their first submission, it said:
Their second submission said:
Interfering with legal professional privilege is extremely problematic. Whereas there may be a case for some limitations on the right in Sydney or Melbourne, our crime in the Territory is more disorganised than organised, so we question the need for such extreme powers. The other prime reason for not interfering with legal professional privilege is that the government could be providing a ‘get out of gaol free card’ for criminals. If there is not a high degree of transparency and integrity in the process by which the authorities get permission to access a prisoner’s communications with their lawyer – and that does not appear to be the case here – then the prisoner could seek a stay of proceedings on the basis he or she cannot get a fair trial. We can envisage cases where a court could find it would be unfair to continue with a criminal trial because a prisoner’s legal professional privilege has been improperly breached. That means the case has to be stopped and the prisoner would walk free. That is not something we can support.
Provisions relating to visits, repatriation and separate youth detention are all in breach of guidelines and not consistent with other jurisdictions. This is a bad bill. I will quote from the Law Society because it is concerned:
The bill also has no provisions for injured or incapable workers. As the minister knows, we support the Sentenced to a Job policy; it picks up on very good work done by our former minister, the member for Barkly. These provisions go beyond what is required to make the Sentenced to a Job policy work. The policy is in place now, and it works. There have been very serious concerns expressed about what powers this bill allows.
I repeat what the Law Society and others have said to me. They trust the current commissioner to exercise his powers responsibly, but they are concerned about what this bill will allow future commissioners to do. There is nothing in this bill which says rehabilitation is a priority. Any future commissioner who picks up this bill and reads it to work out what their priorities as a commissioner are will find nothing about rehabilitation. We are relying on the goodwill of future commissioners and governments.
This bill should enshrine the importance of rehabilitation. It should be a requirement at law, not a commitment in a glossy pamphlet. The Law Society had a very sensible suggestion, which was to add the principle to the bill that all work a prisoner is asked to do is done with the rehabilitation of that prisoner in mind. That is a very sensible suggestion. The minister, however, has ruled out this amendment and said all amendments suggested to date are not sensible. He made comment to that effect in his second reading speech when he asked for sensible amendments to come forward. Clearly in the minister’s opinion all amendments to date – there have been many mentioned and given to him – have been deemed by him to not be sensible. We cannot be surprised when it is clear, through this bill, that rehabilitation is not a priority.
The Chief Minister, as I outlined at the start, asked for a get-in-the-hole bill which breaches all United Nations conventions. The Law Society believes the Sentenced to a Job policy is at risk with this bill:
By clearly stating ‘rehabilitation’ in the object of the bill, these concerns may be addressed. However, as we know, the minister has not put the object back into this bill. There are even more concerns with the detail of this bill than I have expressed here, and many pages of thorough, detailed recommendations to significantly improve it.
I was advised during one briefing that if the minister was to simply reintroduce the old act it would be an improvement on where we are at today. We agree with the legal community that the objects of the initial draft be reincorporated into this bill. I will read those objects:
There is nothing wrong with these objects. These are good objects and the bill should be drafted to reflect them. That is what needs to be done by this minister. Instead, he has been given directions by the Chief Minister, whose original quote I will read again:
The object to rehabilitate the people we have in our prison system is a good object. It should be the central principle of this legislation. We should be aiming to ensure people do not reoffend. That has to be the intention and focus of our prison system. If this bill is the rule book, then one of the rules should be rehabilitation and it should be clear. Any commissioner who picks up this act will know what their driving force and priority is; it has to be rehabilitation. That has to be the priority of a modern corrections system.
Mr Deputy Speaker, for that reason, above all others, we cannot support this bill. We oppose this bill.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I listened carefully to the member for Fannie Bay’s contribution to this debate. I am somewhat surprised he or the opposition is not supporting this bill, because it is a good and necessary bill and does many things which the minister for Corrections has already articulated very well in his second reading speech.
I pick up on some of the comments the member for Fannie Bay made about rehabilitation. Just because it is not enshrined in this bill does not mean this government or this minister is not committed to rehabilitation for prisoners. It is a ridiculous argument to mount. Taking such a shallow, cavalier and poorly considered position on this bill diminishes, in my view, his role in this parliament.
I support the Attorney-General’s Correctional Services Bill. As the Attorney-General said when he presented this bill in conjunction with the Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill:
In the two years the Country Liberals have been in government we have implemented a swag of legislative changes which have driven down crime and rates of recidivism. These legislative changes have resulted in offenders learning how to work and contributing to society in a meaningful way.
Two years ago, this government set an ambitious target for crime reduction. Now, halfway through this government’s first term, the latest statistics show property crime has plummeted to levels that go way back to the years of the former CLP government. Alcohol-related violence is also trending down.
It is obvious our new policies are delivering results for the people and the community of the Northern Territory. These policies have seen the NT Police pursuing recidivist property offenders through targeted operations. The suite of measures in place to reduce alcohol abuse, including alcohol mandatory treatment, Alcohol Protection Orders, and intensive temporary beat locations, has seen dramatic reductions in personal crime. You can see that on display in Alice Springs and Katherine.
For the past two years, this government has put in place major legislative and policy reforms. We have taken the time to get this right, and the results are promising. The results show some real change.
History has shown that breaking welfare dependency will prevent reoffending and keep offenders away from the justice system. This government’s Sentenced to a Job program seeks to do just that, with prisoners taking part in full-time or part-time work. Prisoners participating in Sentenced to a Job earn award wages, pay tax, pay board for their accommodation, and contribute 5% of their pay to a victims assistance fund. Sentenced to a Job has seen prisoners completing jobs including being a cashier, painter, baker or metal worker in various communities and major towns across the Territory. These prisoners are paying their debt to society not by languishing in a cell costing taxpayers, but through working, paying taxes, and contributing to society. That sounds pretty normal to me.
The community gets a double benefit from these prisoners gaining valuable work-based skills that will help them gain meaningful employment on their release from prison. Indeed, it is heartening to hear that prisoners are also now working to help pensioners with gardening and minor maintenance jobs.
The Northern Territory government’s working prisons policy is providing inmates with the skills and training they need to gain and retain a job once they are released from prison. Prisoners who participate in the program are expected to take on increased responsibilities to assist with their return to society. This includes building a work ethic and developing relationships with hard-working positive role models.
However, there is always more we, as a society, can do, such as early intervention, working with youth and making sure we spend the time with young people before they get into trouble. I acknowledge in the gallery behind me members of the Katherine YMCA. They are sitting with some special people I will mention briefly, and who I am sure the Attorney-General and Minister for Correctional Services will cover in more detail in a moment.
In the context of some of the work with youth and the early intervention work that needs to occur across our community, the Katherine YMCA is a shining light. On Friday nights, for example, they have a drop-in night, often receiving up to several hundred young people from across Katherine and the close regions for a period of three hours – say, from 7 pm until 10 pm. Letting those kids get out in a social environment and enjoy themselves in a supervised way keeps them off the streets, out of trouble, and shows them there are better things to do with their time than causing trouble and offending. The work they are doing in this area in Katherine is lauded.
I got its Facebook page up on my iPad and it said on the Friday just gone, ‘Drop-in is back on tonight, 7 till 10. Reminder, under 10s must be supervised by someone 18 years or older’. So you cannot just use it as a dumping ground or babysitting service for little kids. ‘Drop offs will start at 9 pm because we are only running one bus.’ It even runs a bus to get kids home safely at the end of the drop-in night and is doing a stellar job. ‘Parents are encouraged to pick up their children if possible. Thank you.’ The community recognises the great work the YMCA is doing in this area. It is well known and I applaud the work going on.
That is not the only thing the YMCA is doing in Katherine. It is also involved in youth diversion programs. It has a free teen gym so teenagers can get into the gymnasium and make themselves a bit healthier, fitter and stronger. That improves something I talked about the other day when I was in Katherine opening an art exhibition of all things: self-esteem. If you improve someone’s self-esteem, chances are they will go on to lead a more productive life.
The YMCA representatives, Tammy and Craig Frean and Stan Law, have with them a number of youths who have completed a boot camp. They were on a trial boot camp, something that was implemented by the Northern Territory government. These guys are going great guns. It is a pleasure to see you guys to have an opportunity to see how parliament operates. This is about teaching these kids some things they do not normally have access to, or might not have been interested in some time ago. It is about changing the mindset. I applaud them.
I mention that because all the things this government is doing, supported by organisations like the YMCA in Katherine, represent a suite of measures we introduced to prevent crime from rising and to prevent and reduce recidivism in the Northern Territory.
I move back to the bill at hand. While it is clear all Territorians will benefit from changes made to this legislation, there are also clear benefits for Correctional Services staff and offenders. Once this legislation takes effect, Correctional Services staff will have clear, contemporary provisions that better reflect their operational duties.
Offenders will benefit from new provisions that are clear as to the role the commissioner and other key statutory officers have. There are also new enshrined requirements for the use of force on inmates to reflect modern practices. The new scheme of administrative home detention will allow for early release of eligible inmates to reduce the burden of growing inmate numbers. That is something the Minister for Correctional Services often talks about. He is very happy to show an interesting graph about the trend for inmate numbers across the Northern Territory. The projections for inmate numbers were the scariest thing, had the Labor Party stayed in power after the 2012 election.
The opening of the Darwin Correctional Precinct will signal a new chapter in Correctional Services, albeit with a Labor-imposed price tag of $1.8bn. It is what it is as a result of Labor’s poor financial decision-making.
The modern facilities at the new Darwin Correctional Precinct will assist in the rehabilitation of offenders and create increased opportunities for reintegration programs, including learning, training and employment. Specifically, training and work programs will provide offenders will skills, direction and the opportunity to receive qualifications while in detention.
We have seen these initiatives increasingly lead to a job and career on release, not recidivism and a drain on welfare benefits. This government will not condone offenders sitting idly by in their cells. They will give back to society and contribute in a meaningful way. In short, they will learn and work. They will be prepared for the outside world on their release from detention.
Offenders must face the consequences of the law, however, they must also be provided with the opportunities to turn their lives around, which is what this new legislation will achieve.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Correctional Services Bill as brought in by the Minister for Correctional Services.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I announce that the Menzies School of Health Life Lab is in the main hall from now until 2 pm. After this morning’s Question Time, some people might want to visit them. You can write your own health report card, measure your blood pressure, check your metabolic age, check your grip strength, check your percentage of fat and check if you are anaemic or not.
This is a mobile science outreach, and 600 Territorians visited this Menzies Life Lab last week. If you get a chance, those watching on the internal screen might like to get a few of those things checked.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, the member for Fannie Bay was very plain in his response to the government’s Correctional Services Bill 2014. I join him, along with my colleagues on this side of the House, in opposing this bill. We do not oppose simply for the sake of opposing, but on the grounds that it fails miserably in bringing forward contemporary legislation, and it fails the expectations of the community.
I utterly refute the comments of the member for Katherine, dismissing the views of the member for Fannie Bay. That is what he does, refute and oppose for the sake of it.
Somehow I doubt very much the member for Katherine had acquainted himself with not one, but two submissions by the NT Law Society. I doubt very much he acquainted himself with a very detailed submission to the minister from NAAJA and CAALAS, such is the world of the member for Katherine and members on that side of the House. However, I will give him credit. It is rare there are second speakers from the government to these bills, but, lo and behold, on this occasion we have the member for Katherine making a contribution.
I enjoyed listening to what he had to say about YMCA of Katherine and the good job it does. However, I can only suspect, given the latitude the minister had in his contribution to the debate, they are stuck to fill the business of this House for the rest of this week. We know there is very little legislation coming before the House, and what a curious thing that is. They do not want to elect a Deputy Chief Minister this week and shine the light internally on the divisions within their members because they have said – it must have been one of their spin doctors on the fifth floor who came up with it – they are focusing on legislation. I hope when I have completed my contribution there will be members on the other side of the House speaking and reading the notes their minders have prepared for them.
I have spent some time as the shadow minister for Corrections, so I take a particular interest in this bill. I concur with the member for Fannie Bay that this bill falls short. In fact, it falls way short, not only on community expectation, but also because, yet again, it falls short of the expectations of the representative bodies of the legal fraternity in the Northern Territory.
This government, and the minister in particular, like to blow their trumpet about having mandates, listening to Territorians and representing the welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. That is rubbish! It is disingenuous and dishonest for the CLP and the minister to say they are interested in what Territorians think, they listen and consult, or they govern, as we say in prayers every morning we sit in this Chamber:
I know this to be true as an elected representative of people in northeast Arnhem Land. As a community, we have had a prison thrust upon us, less than 800 m from the centre of Nhulunbuy, with no consultation prior to this decision on the critical question about where this facility for low-level offenders should go, and at the cost of closing down an Alcohol and Other Drugs residential rehab centre. In a few months we will see the closure of the region’s only sobering-up shelter or, at best, perhaps a relocation, to house further prisoners. I will return to that sorry saga later in my contribution to this debate about the abject failure of the government to consult with people, including those in Nhulunbuy, on such an important project as the location of a prison.
As the member for Fannie Bay outlined succinctly, the minister talked up and beat his chest about consultation, but the reality is far from that. In fact, he is delusional and, worse, he is dismissive of expert legal advice from the likes of those in a position to provide it, such as the Northern Territory Law Society, the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency, and the Central Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service.
Dismissing expert and professional advice which cumulatively tallies into hundreds of years of collective expertise is a hallmark of the CLP’s approach to governing the Territory. It is why even their Liberal counterparts interstate cringe at them because they are so embarrassing and arrogant. I will concede that the minister for Corrections is at least much more polite, genteel and articulate than the Chief Minister who, in June last year, very publicly dismissed expert advice and warnings from medical, legal aid and other experts about the many shortcomings of the Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Bill. Let us throw social justice experts into that mix as well.
In a speech to the CLP Central Council in June 2013, the Chief Minister attacked his critics as:
We are talking about experts from the Australian Medical Association, the Indigenous People’s Organisation NT and the Australian Council of Social Service, along with prominent individuals such as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Mick Gooda, who all warned that the CLP’s plans for alcohol mandatory treatment were not based on evidence and not likely to be effective. As we know, they were right on both fronts.
Bad language, not mincing one’s words, a head-in -the-sand approach to governing the Territory, and telling Territorians and the nation how it is, is ashamedly how the CLP approaches its responsibility as a government. Goodness gracious me – as the Corrections minister might say – we saw a shocking and cringe-worthy case of that last week with the now ex-Deputy Chief Minister guilty of behaviour unbecoming a person in high office with a homophobic slur against a public servant.
Even though I know the Corrections minister to be a notch or three above the Chief Minister, and he would be a much better deputy than the member for Fong Lim, his dismissal of the expert legal advice offered to him by the likes of the Northern Territory Law Society, NAAJA and CAALAS on this bill is the equivalent of the Chief Minister telling the legal and medical experts, and social and justice advocates, where they could go with their criticisms of the CLP’s Alcohol mandatory treatment legislation.
It is simple: they do not care. They love to give all the appearances of caring and being interested in the views and expert advice of Territorians, but at the end of the day they will do as they darn well please. And in the world according to the Chief Minister, if you do not like it, you can just p… off.
The member for Fannie Bay is right; the Attorney-General, the Corrections minister is indeed delivering the get-in-the-hole policy, and God forbid anyone who dares to challenge it, criticise it or offer an alternative view. There has been a number of well-considered submissions put to the minister for Corrections on this bill, but he has not taken on board the advice – the minister who claims to always have his door open and be ready to consult.
If I think back to the community consultations which were advertised across the Territory at the end of 2013 for a number of bills and reforms that were coming before the parliament, I should say when they talk about ‘across the Territory’ they mean everywhere except Nhulunbuy. When I challenged the minister as to why it was that Nhulunbuy was not included on that list of consultations, he said it was because, ‘You are not on the Stuart Highway’. Believe it or not, that is what he said. Shamed into it, he eventually, belatedly, sent over a couple of officers and poorly advertised a community meeting. I did my best to circulate e-mails. It must have come back through my e-mail account three or four times as I put it out across people’s networks. So at the end of the day I guess the minister could say, ‘We did consult in Nhulunbuy’. Consulting in Nhulunbuy is a very rare thing, let me tell you.
In this instance of the Correctional Services Bill 2014, was there consultation? No. The Attorney-General, the Corrections minister, is not interested in taking advice on board. Submissions – which are public – raised plainly the many concerns about this bill before the House. The member for Fannie Bay referred to some of those submissions. I also wish to quote from the submissions which were presented. I quote from the NT Law Society:
In the next paragraph, NTLS stated:
Over the page in relation to food, clothing, exercise and rehabilitation, the NT Law Society stated:
The NT Law Society submitted a supplementary submission to the minister and said:
Debate suspended.
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, prior to the lunchtime suspension I was talking about the submissions that had been made to the minister on the Correctional Services Bill. I will talk about the very detailed submission from NAAJA and CAALAS, and note in the opening to their submission they said
I am pleased the Correctional Services minister finds this hilarious. I do not think NAAJA and CAALAS are laughing about it, nor the Northern Territory Law Society ...
Mr Elferink: You have been debating the wrong bill for the whole morning and just figured it out.
Ms WALKER: There are a number of significant concerns ...
Mr Elferink: Somebody pulled you aside at lunch and said, ‘By the way …
Ms WALKER: Madam Speaker, might I have the floor without the interruption of the rather churlish and childish minister?
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, order! Member for Nhulunbuy, you have the call.
Ms WALKER: Madam Speaker, they are children!
Amongst the series of significant concerns raised, I highlight a couple:
I hope other members of the House will address this issue and share these concerns.
Another point raised in the NAAJA/CAALAS submission:
In the report they also noted:
Before I close, I place on the record concerns of people in Nhulunbuy and northeast Arnhem Land about the minister’s approach to consultation and the establishment of a work camp in my electorate. At the outset, nobody has issues with a corrections facility – a prison – for low-level offenders. The new era of corrections was under the stewardship of my colleague, the member for Barkly. Under his watch, we saw the opening of the Barkly Work Camp some 7 km outside Tennant Creek. I visited that facility, as I have the Berrimah Corrections Facility and the Alice Springs Correction Facility, at the time I held the shadow responsibility for Corrections.
People are most upset about the abject failure of any consultation with the people of the region about the establishment of this work camp. We all knew there was a mobile work camp at the Garma site, known as Gulkula, which had been established as a mobile work camp every Garma Festival for a number of years.
Last year, however, there was a decision for that work camp to stay on and nobody had any objections to that. Nobody knew. Whilst I am sure there were negotiations around what would be a suitable location for something more permanent, there was no consultation involving the community stakeholders of where it might be. We found out eventually that what came about was a result of the closure of the region’s only residential Alcohol and Other Drugs rehabilitation facility, which was only opened in 2007 and has been an incredibly successful facility in supporting not only the people of the region, but referrals through the justice system from magistrates who would refer people into Nhulunbuy.
On that front, shame on the Health minister that there was no consultation or independent at-arm’s-length assessment, or otherwise, of the success of the centre or how its service might be examined to better operate. No, the decision was simply that they were to close it down on 30 June. They did not even tell half of the employees who were working there. People found out they were losing their jobs because they heard an interview with me on ABC radio. It is an appalling way for someone to find out they have lost their job. Had the Health minister been on the ball, it would not have been like that.
To close a residential rehab facility and reopen the doors as a corrections facility is not what people were expecting or what they wanted. The President of the East Arnhem Shire, Mr Banambi Wunungmurra, who was one of the stakeholders, chaired the Harmony Group Committee for a few years. The reforms introduced in Nhulunbuy and the region came about through the hard work of that group to lobby, and it had bipartisan support across the region. The first Mr Wunungmurra heard about the closure of the rehab centre and the fact that prisoners would be moving in there was when I phoned him to ask him if he was aware of it.
I do not know when the government was planning to advise the community of its plans to locate prisoners into our rehab facility just under 500 m or so from the Walkabout Hotel, a little further into the centre of town. People are upset there was no consultation. That was highlighted when the member for Fannie Bay gave me his seat at the Estimates Committee to ask the minister, during the estimates process, about the consultations he had undertaken. It was one of the more bizarre performances in estimates. We know the minister says and does some very strange things, but his idea of consultation – during the 15 minutes or so we had in estimates – was bizarre.
I asked him a couple of very basic questions. I asked, ‘Can you please provide a full list of community consultation meetings, including dates and times of meetings in and around Nhulunbuy, regarding the establishment of a 50-bed corrections facility, announced on only 14 May, to be located in the soon-to-close AOD rehabilitation centre, less than 1 km from the centre of Nhulunbuy?’
It is not worth going through the Hansard transcript. There are pages of the minister avoiding the question and saying, bizarrely, ‘I spoke to you’. I have been back through my diary. I have no meetings in my calendar. I am not a forgetful person, I am rather careful about these things.
I had two approaches from the minister. One was across the floor of the House when he came to see me to let me know he had been in Nhulunbuy the day before talking about the work camp. I said that was good and nobody had any objections to a work camp; it was all about its location and the fact it was kicking people out of a health facility and closing it. The next time the minister spoke to me was in the foyer area of Parliament House. I had just been outside talking to media about the news of this prison moving into a rehabilitation centre that was being closed down. As I walked past, he grabbed me and said, ‘You know it was not working’. I said I was sorry and would talk to him later. That was the extent of the consultation with the minister.
Then, bizarrely, he told me during estimates that in future, he would communicate with me ‘only by correspondence’. So, minister, next time you approach me on this side of the House or anywhere, you will have my hand in your face saying, ‘Only by correspondence’, because you and the way you work are bizarre.
Thanks to your efforts you have upset a community. More than 500 people have signed a petition to object not to a prison – the wording is very tempered in this petition – but rather calling on the government to negotiate, consult and allow the community to have both facilities: a corrections facility for low-level offenders in a location to be agreed to by the community, as well as a residential rehabilitation centre.
Not only have we lost our residential rehabilitation centre, by the end of the year we will have lost our sobering-up shelter as well. We may be lucky, but I am not holding my breath that there might be an alternate facility found for the sobering-up shelter. However, come the end of the year, the corrections facility is planning to take over the entire complex – the rehabilitation centre as well as the sobering-up shelter.
The minister missed a critical step in the process, in that they did not put an application through to the Nhulunbuy Corporation, which is the entity equivalent to our local government – oops, he forgot that step, that process to go through – and provide a plan and seek formal approval for the change of use of the facility.
It took up the front page of the Arafura Times in Nhulunbuy for about four weeks in a row. The first story was a positive one in the week beginning 14 May when the story had leaked about a new prison work camp for the region. The only thing missing in that story was a location. There was no talk of exactly where the location would be. It all went downhill from there, and all front pages which came after that called on government to do the right thing, consult with people and find an alternative location.
I still do not believe there is not alternative real estate which might house this facility. It has gone very quiet, minister. We have heard nothing further or formal, although I understand Cabinet is due in Nhulunbuy for the week beginning 8 September. My guess is it will, perhaps, be later in the week because you have the opening of the new corrections facility on 9 September. Yes, my pick is around the 10th 11th or 12th that you guys will be there. I trust you will be talking with the community. That is, if we have a Deputy Chief Minister and all your internal woes settled. But maybe not.
Given it was announced on 14 May, the publicly advised communication process did not happen until 1 July. I was asked to circulate a notice, which I was happy to do on community consultation on correctional services and Alcohol and Other Drug services. The notice said:
Initial consultations with the community? Are you serious? There was one day where people were invited, but you had to RSVP to participate in a session in the community support centre.
I pinned that notice up in my office, minister, with nice red writing at the bottom letting people know they were very welcome to sign the petition in my office calling on the Northern Territory government to retain both the residential rehab and the prison, and to consult with the community about the best location for a prison. A bit of consultation was not too much to ask, I thought.
I remember when in opposition the CLP members, led by the member for Katherine, were up in arms about the prospect of a renal facility being located in Katherine at a certain place where people were saying ‘not in my back yard’. Thankfully, that facility has proceeded. It is not that people in Nhulunbuy are saying ‘not in my back yard’. People in Nhulunbuy are saying, ‘We welcome a corrections facility, we want to keep our rehab centre, and we want to be consultative’. However, the people in Nhulunbuy are pretty accustomed to this government not working with us but doing things to the community, and basically treating the community as if we should be thankful for anything that comes our way. Because it is not a CLP-held seat, we just have to suck it up.
There are concerns, minister, about the use of prisoners employment-wise. We have lost 1200 jobs in the community. We have had a couple of businesses close; our IGA Supermarket and Mitre 10 store closed a couple of weeks ago. People generally want to know about these prisoners, employment opportunities for them and competing with other locals for jobs. I acknowledge the good work the prisoners do in a community sense. They have been great in providing support to set up community events such as our beach volleyball and big cricket tournament. They are a terrific labour force to have on hand when we have these community events. As the minister knows, I even wrote to him via e-mail on one occasion asking who I directed people to when the community not-for-profit group was asking for support. There were no issues with that, but there is with this issue of consultation and a willingness to work with the community.
There has been no formal advice as to what Nhulunbuy Corporation’s position is on allowing the corrections facility to proceed with its relocation to what has been a very successful health facility. I have a feeling, as a fait accompli, that will be proceeding. I guess 500 or more people – amongst them many Indigenous people, many local Yolngu – are unhappy about this. It is not that people object to this facility, it is about the location, the lack of consultation, and for it to proceed, we have seen the closure of a very important health facility.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House and reiterate that we, on this side in the Territory Labor team, oppose this bill. It falls way short. It is not just us who say that, there are a number of eminent legal bodies representing hundreds of lawyers in the Northern Territory which also raise very serious concerns.
Mr CONLAN (Central Australia): Madam Speaker, let it be known that the Labor Party does not support a reduction in crime. That is exactly what they are saying today by not supporting this groundbreaking legislation and initiative by the Giles Country Liberals government, which is the Sentenced to a Job regime. Of course the Labor Party has never been very good at dealing with crime across the Northern Territory. It has been downright appalling. Its record and its decade of denial – in fact, it was more than a decade, it was 11 long years of denial by the previous government – has led us to this place where we are today introducing legislation to correct that appalling record which has been left for Territorians.
Let us look at some of its record. I do not have front page headlines. Tragically I was going through my office upstairs and I threw some out. But it does not matter; we do not need props to look at some of the facts. During the decade of denial by the previous government, violent assaults rose by 80%. In the financial year of 2009-10, there were 7296 crimes against the person in the Territory compared with 6226 the previous financial year, an 8.5% increase in just 12 months. On average, there were 18 crimes against the person in the Territory every day.
No jurisdiction felt the brunt of Labor’s decade of denial more than Alice Springs. In Alice Springs, Labor’s law and order policy was simply woeful and it failed. In 2004-05, robbery increased under the previous government by 450%, assaults by 87%, sexual assaults by 97%, house break-ins by 64%, commercial break-ins by 185%, motor vehicle theft by 97% and property damage by 71%.
It is little wonder and no surprise the Labor Party will not support a bill that goes to the heart of addressing law and order issues in the Northern Territory. We knew it; we have known it for a long time. We have been on the other side of this Chamber and watched you fail year after year for 11 long years.
Today, we have a groundbreaking bill supporting groundbreaking initiatives to get people into work and address the law and order issues across the Northern Territory. It is pretty simple and we are having some remarkable results. Look at some of the results. Already the latest crime statistics for Alice Springs show total property offence, house break-ins, theft and property damage at their lowest levels in the Northern Territory for 14 years. After two years we are able to point to the lowest in 14 years.
The Country Liberals government is tackling crime head on with tools such as this legislation targeting repeat property offenders. Police have been given the tools to prevent, detect and investigate crime. I also pick up on what the member for Nhulunbuy said – how we have turned our backs on electorates which are not held by the CLP.
There is one jurisdiction in all of the Northern Territory that is unrecognisable under the Country Liberals, and that is the community of Tennant Creek in the jurisdiction of the Barkly. There is not a hair out of place; it is spotless and things are improving under a Country Liberals government. It took the Giles Country Liberals government, with groundbreaking legislation such as this, to turn that jurisdiction around. You sat on your hands for five long years and did nothing. After two years we have turned that place around. Tennant Creek is much better off under a Country Liberals government than it ever was under a Labor government.
Interestingly, the Department of Infrastructure spend is the highest under the Country Liberals government than it ever has been in the history of the Northern Territory ...
Mr Styles: What area has the highest?
Mr CONLAN: That would be the Barkly.
Unlawful entries are at a four-year low in Central Australia. Together with measures to tackle alcohol-related abuse in the community, we are winning the battle on crime. We have turned off the grog tap with Alcohol Protection Orders, alcohol mandatory treatment and temporary beat locations, and are seeing real results from these initiatives and policies.
The Country Liberals government is driving down crime, and alcohol consumption is at its lowest level since records began. That is an achievement. Even Congress has supported the temporary beat locations, a milestone if there ever was one; Congress in Central Australia has supported the temporary beat locations and said it is working and is a success. Of course, it would like things to move a little more, they want a little more but, nevertheless, we will take it. It is a win and great recognition of the work by this Country Liberals government. The temporary beat locations have worked, continue to work, and the initiative is a remarkable tool. Unlike Labor which ran away from the problem, the Country Liberals government is tackling it head on.
I support this bill; it is a vital and critical tool to continue the war on crime. The purpose of the bill, as outlined by the Attorney-General, is to repeal and replace the Prisons (Correctional Services) Act with a contemporary legislative model for managing Correctional Services into the future. It is another way the Country Liberals government is implementing new innovative reforms to combat crime in the Northern Territory. Our approach to reducing crime is about correcting behaviour. We have always stood by that. It is about addressing the behaviour of someone and breaking the cycle of repeat offending.
Let us look at some of the recidivism rates under the previous government to 2011. The Henderson government’s failure to provide adequate rehabilitation services contributed to rising recidivism rates across the Northern Territory. Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that under the Labor Territory government, the Territory consistently had the highest reoffending rates of any jurisdiction in Australia. These rates have been well above the national average of 54.6%.
In addition, 10 years after release, 48% of prisoners in the Northern Territory are reimprisoned compared with the national average of just 39%. That is a startling statistic.
Despite the revolving door of prisoners across the Northern Territory, Labor continued to neglect rehabilitation programs for prisoners. ‘Lock them up, that is the answer.’
Only 51 prisoners participated in alcohol treatment programs between 2009 and 2010, compared to 111 the previous year. Alcohol treatment programs scheduled in Darwin goal for that year had only 12 places available.
Sex offender treatment programs were also inadequate, with only 42 prisoners completing programs in the Northern Territory as of May 2010. Out of 171 sexual offenders in the Territory, only 42 were completing programs. Only three such programs were planned in 2010 for Darwin and Alice Springs. In Alice Springs, the program ceased the previous year.
You can see the track record which is what this government inherited. It was a government that was paralysed when it came to law and order. How did they implement law and order policies which met the expectation of the community? You did not do it. It was the single biggest failure of the Martin and Henderson governments, and the architect is sitting over there, as the Opposition Leader these days, with her head in the sand.
It is staggering to think that all of a sudden you have discovered law and order. I find that extraordinary. After 11 long years you finally recognise there is a law and order issue in the Northern Territory. It is remarkable.
The Sentenced to a Job program is one of the single biggest achievements of the Department of Correctional Services, and a personal victory and milestone for the Attorney-General. He has dealt with this with extreme passion. I am very proud to serve in a government with an Attorney-General like the member for Port Darwin who has brought such a groundbreaking, innovative scheme to the table.
We immediately saw the results of this. The work these guys are undertaking is rehabilitative, productive in the community, and the communities are reaping the benefits. Sentenced to a Job provides prisoners in Central Australia with skills which are useful and transferable to a wide range of work settings in the external environment. We said, year after year in opposition, that it was not just about locking people up – yes, if they committed a crime – but also equipping them with the skills to emerge from that incarceration with the ability to make a meaningful contribution to the rest of their life and the community. This is what is happening now under Sentenced to a Job.
The program connects prisoners to a network which is focused on the same outcome of successful transition of prisoners to mainstream living experience, equipping them with those skills.
The Northern Territory Department of Correctional Services has been working with the employers to align prisoners with the required skills in the private sector. Indigenous prisoners on release from a correctional centre face a number of challenges reintegrating into the community, which we are all very well aware of. These challenges are often exacerbated by low levels of literacy and numeracy, limited living skills and the lack of employment options in remote communities. Again, it is about economic development in the regions, equipping Indigenous people to own their own homes. Indigenous people in the Northern Territory have never been in a better place to own their own home, thanks to the policy of the Giles Country Liberals government, providing access to home ownership for Indigenous Territorians. It has been a great success thus far. There have been 11 applications already since the policy began on 1 July this year.
Again, low literacy and numeracy is a problem. We have been active in this space all through opposition, and have acted in government. This is exactly what this is.
Employers in the Northern Territory struggle to recruit reliable local staff. One of the advantages for employers who participate in the Sentenced to a Job program is that prisoners are reliable, are drug and alcohol free and are motivated to work, which is very important. In Alice Springs today, eight prisoners are being paid for work and 13 prisoners are working in a volunteer capacity. In the Barkly, 12 prisoners are being paid for work and 12 are working in a volunteer capacity. That is pretty good.
Through the Sentenced to a Job initiative today we have prisoners in Alice Springs working at Blatherskite Park, the Alice Springs waste management facility, the Institute for Aboriginal Development and the MacDonnell Range Holiday Park. Volunteer workers are contributing at the Salvation Army, the Alice Springs Desert Park, Olive Pink Botanical Gardens, the Doubletree by Hilton, the Road Transport Hall of Fame, the Alice Springs High School and the Department of Primary Industry. They are all over the place, working and paying their debt back to society in a meaningful and constructive manner.
In the Barkly, prisoners are working at the Food Barn, the BP Prospect Service Station, Remote Concrete, Outback Caravan Park, Handy Hands Employment, the Tennant Creek Memorial Club, and the Eldorado Motor Inn. Volunteers are also contributing at the Top of Town Caf, the Barkly Shire, Battery Hill and the Food Barn, and are doing an extraordinary job.
These examples for Central Australia are replicated across the Northern Territory and are shining examples of the Giles Country Liberals government’s efforts to improve people’s lives. That is exactly what this bill does; it will directly improve other people’s lives.
Another key feature of the bill is it will assist with breaking the cycle of repeat offending. I take some context from the bill, which is a new type of inmate release called administrative home detention. This is based on a similar scheme operating in South Australia and allows the minister, on recommendation from the commissioner, to release an eligible inmate subject to conditions. Eligible inmates are those who do not have a fixed non-parole period as part of their sentence of imprisonment. For example, this will generally cover low-level offences with less than 12 months imprisonment. Offenders with less than 12 months to run on a sentence must have served 50% of their imprisonment term. It is intended that most inmates released on administrative home detention will be released on the condition they wear an electronic monitoring device.
The electronic monitoring device is a key strategy of the government’s Pillars of Justice reforms. Electronic monitoring provides a viable alternative to a full custodial sentence, thereby enabling new approaches to offender management and rehabilitation. In other words, you wear a bracelet, you do not clog up the prison system, and you contribute in a meaningful way to society.
The key feature of the bill is another way the Country Liberals government is leading the way with these reforms. As I said, we do not only talk about it, we do it. We spoke about it for many years in opposition. We were there for 11 long years. I was in opposition for five of those 11 years, and sat opposite and spoke about this ad nauseam, highlighting what was happening across the board in the Northern Territory to the point it became ridiculous.
It was abundantly clear to everyone, except the government, there was a problem with prisoner incarceration rates, reoffending, crime on the streets, alcohol rehabilitation and alcohol consumption – the whole kit and caboodle. There was a problem and, in two short years – it is not even two years. Yesterday was the anniversary of the election, but the first ministry was not sworn in until early September, so we are just shy of two years. We have made the efforts.
I hope you are happy with the efforts we have made in your community, member for Barkly. I hope you drive down the street, look and say, ‘Wow! Look at this place.’ Do you? Are you impressed? Are you mildly impressed with what has happened in the community of Tennant Creek? Is there anything there when you drive down the street and see how clean and tidy it is? You do not see people spewing out of the pub, or as many at least. You see people working. Does that inspire or impress you, or make you even the slightest bit pleased to be a Territorian? Does it? I do not think so. You are conspicuous by your silence. You are very hard to please. It is sad it has taken a Country Liberals government to transform your home town. We have done it, and you did not. You failed and we succeeded. We have succeeded in all corners of the Northern Territory, and we will continue to succeed.
This is a great bill and a great initiative. It is a fantastic innovative program that is seeing results on the ground. The results speak for themselves. I am not making up the crime statistics, how many people are working or what the amenity of Alice Springs and Tennant Creek looks like. That is what it looks like. It is clean and tidy, and people are feeling good about themselves. They are skipping and whistling down the streets for the first time in 11 long years. This government has put some pride back into the Northern Territory and into these communities that were suffering under the previous Labor government. People feel good about themselves, their community, their family, their environment – the works – for the first time after 11 long years under the previous Labor government which turned its back when it came to making tough decisions on law and order.
I congratulate the Attorney-General and the Chief Minister. I am proud to serve in a Cabinet and a parliamentary wing, and be part of a government that is taking this type of issue seriously. If there is one core element, one key feature, that any government has to provide, it is a safe and secure environment for its residents. That is first and foremost. Without a safe and secure environment, nothing else really matters. We have to feel safe and secure in our own environment – in our homes, our cities, our towns and our communities. If we do not, then we cannot take that next step to whatever it might be. Forget tourism, health outcomes, mining outcomes – forget it all. If you do not have any personal or community safety, you can forget the rest.
You guys dropped the ball big time. This government stepped in and, as I said, in two very short years we have just about turned this Queen Mary around. It has taken a while; it does take a while. There was a big hole – a big mess to clean up. This government stepped in. We had an Attorney-General and Chief Minister – in fact, we had two Chief Ministers – and a Cabinet with the intestinal fortitude to back these reforms. We have done it and the community is thankful for it. At least, it is my humble opinion the community is thankful for it. In your opinion the community probably is not very thankful for it.
Why you would not support a bill like this is beyond me. Why would you not even bring in some amendments to this bill, or your own version of this bill? You say, ‘No, we do not like it, it is no good, it is not working’, but you do not even offer anything. In fact, you have never offered anything when it comes to law and order. A failed Banned Drinker Register was about it and Alcohol Courts – this whole mess you guys created.
It was about 2005, I think, when you started to think you had better try to create some illusion that you were taking law and order seriously …
Mr Elferink: Mandatory sentencing that did not.
Mr CONLAN: That is right, the mandatory sentencing that was not mandatory. It was a litany of – failures I was going to say, but it became calamitous, clunky and awkward. What is this bill – another oops bill, as the former member for Araluen used to call them?
Nevertheless, it is okay. We know where we are in this space and, deep down, you guys know it too. You know this is working. You live in the Northern Territory.
Despite everything, you still live in Barkly, member for Barkly, and you see the amenity of that town and the success of this and many other regimes which have been implemented across the Northern Territory with regard to health, mining, primary industry and tourism, particularly in the Barkly. For the first time in a decade-and-a-half, Barkly is on the tourism radar, and they are very pleased with what is happening. We will get the Battery Hill Mining Centre going again and Tennant Creek will become a destination in itself. Deep down, you all know the success of this. In opposition there is the denial or the refusal to accept. That is fine. I have been there, I know what it is like. That is your job in opposition and that is okay. It is great to be in government and recognise that, but it is also great to support such groundbreaking legislation.
I thank the member for Port Darwin, the Attorney-General and Leader of Government Business, who has done this. Hats off to his department, his office and the Department of Correctional Services. Well done to all the team there, you should be very proud of this. Governments come and go, and in a decade or two we will be replaced by a bunch of other poor unsuspecting souls, but this legacy will remain.
The bill may not remain, but I am sure the legacy will. We will look back and say, ‘For that short period of time we really had a grip on this stuff. We really started to make some headway.’ Then what happened? A Labor government repealed the bill and put its philosophy on things. Nevertheless, we can look back and recognise this as one of the great moments in Territory politics. Territorians are much better off and better served for a bill of this nature, Madam Speaker.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I place on the public record that when the childish member for Greatorex was trying to goad me across this House, my silence was on behalf of an ex-student who was killed in brutal and tragic circumstances outside the Wauchope Hotel in April. My silence was in respect for a long-term family friendship and a young man who lost his life in brutal and tragic circumstances in a Tennant Creek community living area just over a week ago. My thoughts and respect were with those deceased – some ex-students and families I have worked with for over 30 years.
I refuse to be goaded into childish interjecting across this Chamber by a minister of the Crown hell-bent on a radio program for 20 minutes trying to spin the benefits of a bill he has no real knowledge of.
He has no knowledge of the chronology of Tennant Creek. It is ludicrous to try to spin anything when you have not done your research or homework and you know nothing except the sensational wannabe-John-Laws approach as you lean in to a lonely microphone. I will continue to remind you, minister.
I stand with an opposition, a spokesperson for Correctional Services and with a team which has researched this bill, has contacted stakeholders, discussed this through Caucus processes, phoned each other and achieved a consensus on behalf of Northern Territorians – representing the people of the Northern Territory, holding the government to account with a fair assessment and debate, with no need for ridicule, but with a sense of justice.
That is what is under the skin of the government members. The utter contempt relates to its failure as a team. They are jealous, they have no team. They have been dysfunctional in opposition and are more dysfunctional in government. This breeds contempt, jealousy and these continued attacks devoid of any comprehension of debate. But, put it on the public record. Continue to put it on the public record because I have a great interest in history and this record will be revisited and assessed, and you will be judged not only in history, but in the electoral process in 2016.
I stand here with the Territory opposition because this bill needs to be opposed; it needs more work. It is major legislation repealing the old act; it replaces it. It is a bill for critical legislation relating to the operations of prisons and Correctional Services in the Northern Territory.
The first point of debate was a serious lack of consultation. My colleagues have pointed out the Law Society submission alone – one of many stakeholder groups that have been communicated with – said:
That rings some alarm bells.
I go back to the minister for Sport and Recreation, the member for Greatorex, who coined the term ‘groundbreaking’. He used it a number of times in his contribution to debate. Let me quote from Hon Adam Giles on 20 October 2010:
I believe that was what the minister was referring to when he used the word ‘groundbreaking’. Groundbreaking, indeed!
I stand here in a united opposition team opposed to this bill. It brought back some interesting memories of the new era in corrections, when the Country Liberal Party was in opposition. The now Attorney-General aggressively opposed the new era initiatives, the community custody orders, the Community Work Orders, and the new driver training centre at the Alice Springs prison. This government scrapped not only innovative Correctional Services work focused on outcomes specifically related to education, training and rehabilitation to address offending behaviour, but the stimulus project for Alice Springs, a major construction project that was not only going to address people who were behind the wire, but also those members of the community on community corrections orders.
I have fond memories of that debate which was a lengthy, intense debate. You and your colleagues aggressively opposed this new era in corrections pathway. You have picked up on a few things with the new era, but I have struggled as I have read, done my research, debated with my colleagues and tried to get a bead on what your objective is with this major legislation. Is this major change in legislation regarding the operational procedure of our prisons and corrections the work of the Chief Minister or the Attorney-General? That was one question I struggled with.
On both counts, both of these elected members to the Northern Territory run down the new Darwin Correctional Services Precinct. Many members of the Justice department are not impressed with that political rhetoric and spin in the attempt to gain some political points. If you want to get a sense of reality, extensive consultation – especially with prison officers and their families, the legal fraternity, the justice agencies, the department of Corrections, the community, the prisoners’ families and advocacy groups – will show they all agreed we needed to have a new Correctional Services Precinct in relation to the new era in corrections.
The cages of Berrimah were long overdue for change. The prison was built for 250 inmates in 1979. It has been a conglomeration of cages to try to address a modern challenge of Correctional Services. For the occupational health and safety of staff, prisoners, their families, the visitors, members of the justice agencies, the charitable organisations and the volunteers who frequent it, everybody agreed with government that we must have a purpose-built facility. Corrections was able to add to that debate by saying, ‘Government, if you go down this road we will prove to you that new, innovative purpose-built infrastructure will support your outcomes’. The cages of Berrimah are inefficient and dangerous and deliver additional costs in operational procedures. It was simple; it became very clear. However, we have senior ministers – and juniors – who continually talk down the new Correctional Services Precinct. Not only did it support 1000 jobs and represent another major economic stimulus to keep jobs in the Territory as a result of the global financial crisis challenges, it is delivering a precinct. The way you talk about this singular place as a prison Mahal is misleading. The public will start to understand the conglomerate of infrastructure that will support improved outcomes.
The other story which is neglected in the political rhetoric is the public private partnership. These one-liner numbers you like to throw around – the member for Sanderson is probably the best at trying to justify anything with these throwaway lines.
Regarding the Correctional Services Precinct, nobody wants to talk about a public private partnership, a consortium that has ownership of the asset, which will run repairs and maintenance programs within that asset for 30 years. Does anybody want to consider a repairs and maintenance budget on the Darwin Correctional Precinct over 30 years? Does anybody want to talk about that on the other side? No, they try to isolate and say this is a one-line story, a scare tactic, another piece of cheap hype to try to gain political points. Anybody who is interested in the facility and the enormous challenges of maintaining that over the next 30 years can see where public private partnerships deliver value for governments over long periods of time. These are major projects, not the small stuff.
I am a bit tired of that rhetoric, so I spread the word as much as I can, encouraging people to do their homework, look at it for what it is and judge a cheap politician accordingly – anybody who wants to spin half the story, be selective with their semantics, twist and turn the tale and create fear in the community but, sadly, talk down a project which has the support of a conglomerate of judicial organisations and the community to go forward and deliver better outcomes.
It is being spoken about. It has come to my attention and I feel a bit sad those on the other side are still being led down this garden path when they have no knowledge and have done no research. You can understand, looking at the events of the last week, that there is not a lot of opportunity for good governance and research because there is so much internal division, infighting and dysfunctional chaos that it looks like Big Brother. It is all individual survivors. Who will emerge at the end of the television program?
I am pleased to say the public private partnership model represents a good outcome but, essentially, the new era in corrections, with real outcomes to try to turn this unacceptable recidivism around. We have a new era and we now have a new government. Unfortunately, through the research we have done as the opposition, we hold great concern that the bill is devoid of rehabilitation initiatives for addressing offending behaviour, the core value of Correctional Services.
The new era in corrections brought a spotlight on the Northern Territory on a national and international front. The spotlight was about not only doing business in Correctional Services, but the world. The global corrections sector was interested in how to do the business of Indigenous offenders – unacceptable Indigenous rates of imprisonment and recidivism. In the country and internationally they were looking at the Northern Territory and were agreeing with the new era changes.
I am wondering why, in this process, the Attorney-General has not been flooding the market with media releases about this new bill? I cannot understand why the Attorney-General, who is a great performer and a hard worker, has not ridden on the wave of this global interest and research in Correctional Services with this new bill. Essentially, the Attorney-General and the CLP government is changing the whole operational front. It is major change, but there has been no acknowledgement, promotion or spin. I ask myself why. Would this not be front-footed – a very articulate Attorney-General well versed in the judicial system, well connected? We have heard nothing.
The Law Society and other judicial agencies have said the same thing, ‘We have heard nothing’. There has been no consultation and I am wondering why. Why would this not be a huge story? The member for Greatorex gave us 20 minutes of spin into a microphone on a subject he clearly has not researched and knows nothing about. Somebody wrote it for him, but he is ad-libbing, of course, the sensational material we all have to bear. Why is this not on the front foot? The question then re-emerges: is this the Chief Minister’s or the Attorney-General’s legislation?
I cannot really believe this legislation, as it has been put to this House in an inappropriate time frame about changing the operations of the correctional system, is what it is. I believe it is a way to deliver savings. The Attorney-General has now hit the wall in the Cabinet process and is being forced to deliver efficiency dividends. My assumption is there are probably efficiency dividends to the tune of up to 20% being driven into the Correctional Services department, and this bill represents an opportunity to pull back on investment, education, training and rehabilitation. Consequently there is very little articulation of those elements of best practice in Correctional Services.
This bill talks about opportunities to drive efficiencies. Efficiencies in what? I could not really find that answer; therefore, I am not going to support this bill. I have suspicions now. I am concerned there is another agenda altogether. I cannot believe the Attorney-General has been rolled in the Cabinet process. But I believe the Chief Minister has grasped control.
When I was the minister for Corrections and started the pathway of the new era in corrections, the Labor government provided me the exemption for efficiency dividends because it was assessed as front line, a real opportunity to change, an area we had to do an enormous amount of work in, and of course we had to be in the space of new infrastructure. I was costing the government a lot of money, because Labor values said we had to turn around the unacceptable recidivism rates, imprisonment of Indigenous people in Australia and offending behaviour. The balance with the new era was those challenging orders where people who were low-level offenders were going to serve out their time and were to be mandated into education, training and rehabilitation within the community. The global judicial system acknowledges that as best practice in Correctional Services for these low-level recidivists, many with offences relating to misuse of alcohol and traffic. We were going down that road and it was aggressively opposed by the CLP in opposition.
I am concerned. The minister, no doubt, in his wrap, will assure me this is not about savings or efficiency dividends. ‘I was not rolled in Cabinet; this has nothing to do with the Chief Minister. This is about changing the Correctional Services operational procedures in the Northern Territory because …’ – and I will put dot, dot, dot because I am waiting to hear. This bill does not explain it, and this is major legislation. It goes back to the ‘just trust me’ factor. I am afraid, with this government’s record after two years in office, you cannot be trusted.
What is it about, minister? I look forward to what you will inform us about the passage of this legislation through the House.
The new era in corrections recognised and acknowledged the major reform by national and international agencies, and premised itself on instilling pride and self-esteem, changing the lives of the most disadvantaged Territorians. It was a policy which was truly unique in the Northern Territory’s history. Many members talked about the Barkly Work Camp. I acknowledge the member for Greatorex spoke about the Barkly Work Camp, but then he spun it into a whole area of mistruths and had to talk about how bad it was under Labor and how good it is under the Country Liberal Party.
The minister came to an open day at the Barkly Work Camp recently and saw the community of Tennant Creek which had turned up. He spoke about the Barkly Work Camp and a two-year time frame. Minister, I was a little embarrassed at the number of people who came up to me after you left and wanted to discuss that element of your speech. I do not know whether you believe me or not, but I did not run you down. I just reinforced that these guys have to say things like that, it is in their DNA. I gave a psychological analysis of why a person would reconstruct the truth like that – maybe insecurity, failing in government, or all the other issues that are going on within a very dysfunctional, uncoordinated and disjointed group of members.
Essentially, what the people wanted to talk about was the initiative. It is good to hear about the new era in corrections, the first regional work camp. By the way, they were planned to roll-out regionally across the Northern Territory. No one wants to talk about the economic benefits and the economic plan, or about servicing the Barkly Work Camp. Does anyone really want to consider, as an economic driver, what that institution does for the economy of Tennant Creek and the Barkly? I have never heard anyone talk about that. The Chief Minister likes one-liners that it was a clean slate and all that rubbish to gain cheap political points.
Does anyone want to factor in infrastructure programs such as the new police station, doubling the capacity of the sobering-up shelter and the renal dialysis unit, the new emergency ward at Tennant Creek Hospital, the Barkly Work Camp, and a pathway to addressing social justice issues and the issues of a town and community, and preparing that place for the economic future which will be minerals, resources and energy, real jobs in real industry?
The member for Greatorex is right; we have a great deal of work to do in our community. It was embarked upon a number of years ago, not just the last two years under the CLP.
I go back to a previous member, Elliot McAdam, and starving for 10 years in opposition with Maggie Hickey as the member for Barkly. At one stage the capital works program had to be sidelined and disappear because, from memory, the locals said it was about four pages. That was under the Country Liberal Party. You had a 10-year setback, then a 10-year movement, and now you have had two years under the CLP. Let us put all that together. Let us talk about Tennant Creek and the Barkly.
The Barkly Work Camp is an initiative that is proving to deliver the outcomes we all desire, and those models need to be rolled out further. Central Australia needs one. Northeast Arnhem Land needs a real one – not a rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul one – an investment. In alcohol rehabilitation, as the member for Greatorex said, in Tennant Creek we have a beautiful benchmark of $5.5m to establish infrastructure to support 74 beds. That drives the economy of Tennant Creek with services, jobs, local recruits and prison officers who have embarked on careers, some of them my ex-students. There is a benchmark.
However, instead of coming to Tennant Creek and building a purpose-built alcohol rehabilitation centre on land outside Tennant Creek – either on traditional Indigenous land or on freehold land – for the price tag of $5.5m to deliver 74 beds, this government came in and took over our sobering-up shelter. The same as in Nhulunbuy, they robbed Peter to pay Paul. You cannot crow about economic development. You had the idea, but you went for the cheap option. You bought the Belmont, not the Premier. You did that why? You can answer that question.
Why did you not look at the pragmatic investment of $5.5m in Tennant Creek for an alcohol rehabilitation centre supporting 74 beds outside of town, in a budget of $5.5bn? I do not understand why you did not take that opportunity. But the Chief Minister has a blank whiteboard and the finger to point blame. There was a golden opportunity which still exists. Give us back our sobering-up shelter. Do not kick them out, give it back and invest $5.5m. That way we can seriously start to address alcohol-related crime in Tennant Creek and the Barkly. As a matter of fact, we would welcome people from all over Central Australia to be rehabilitated in a purpose-built facility.
I will ask for your guidance and support in the visiting elders program, because at the Barkly Work Camp open day recently there were many people who wanted to ask you how come the program stalled and there is nothing happening. It was a major initiative in the new era in corrections that related to important cultural healing. It related to getting the visiting elders into the Correctional Services Precinct to work, dialogue and liaise with prisoners and relate to their offending behaviour in a cultural sense, so when the state has finished its work and the prisoner is to be repatriated back into their community, much of that cultural healing has already been done, dialogue has taken place, the resolutions have been achieved, so the prisoner does not go back into a remote or regional community or within a family with all this cultural business unresolved.
I did not see any mention of it in the bill. Because the judicial stakeholders have raised so many concerns that this bill could possibly see the removal of education, training and rehabilitation, I have to ask you: what is the future of the visiting elders program? You need to get back to Tennant Creek and talk to the community about that, because we have many supportive elders who want to be involved in this, who were involved in this under Labor and are no longer involved. I look forward to hearing that in your summing up.
Interpreters are also mentioned by the Law Society. Interpreters are so important. I quote, once again, from the new Correctional Services Bill submission to minister Elferink from the Law Society on interpreters:
Real concerns have been raised about the number of women being imprisoned in Northern Territory prisons and across the country. I am very concerned about those statistics. I am interested to hear if you have anything to say in this debate or in what you will bring to this House.
There is also some very concerned debate happening about moving juveniles into the Berrimah prison. That is a retrograde step. Once again, the opportunity of delivering improved outcomes for juveniles means purpose-built infrastructure. If you cannot achieve it at the moment, surely you have a plan for it ...
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request the member for Barkly be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague.
It is important to conclude on this point. The situation with juveniles in the last couple of weeks has been totally inappropriate, any Territorian would agree. During Question Time, in blaming the previous minister for Corrections, the minister was a bit cheap, and that is uncharacteristic. Our Attorney-General is under enormous pressure. There is something happening that is not right because that direct, cheap blame is uncharacteristic, ‘It is all your fault, you left the iron bars lying around’. What a load of rubbish! There are serious issues with juveniles, and I do not agree with moving them into the Berrimah Prison. I will suggest there are other reasons at play. Staff and the juveniles need support. The minister, no doubt, will bring plans to this House regarding how this will be addressed in the future.
I stand with the Territory opposition as part of a team, and I oppose this bill. We do not believe this has the real agenda. We believe other agendas are operating, which are to improve the outcomes of Correctional Services, reduce recidivism rates, address offending behaviour and reintegrate offenders back into the community. This is evident because of the lack of consultation, promotion and media. There has not been that front foot for what should be – dare I say it, member for Greatorex? – groundbreaking legislation.
That is of concern because the CLP is a well-drilled spin machine. We have seen the Chief Minister appropriate additional new resources into his department to produce very sophisticated media outcomes. I cannot understand why the Attorney-General has not been the recipient of some of that support, because if you look at Correctional Services and juvenile justice, you can see the economic dividends of keeping people out of gaol and in the workforce and the community. It equates to billions of dollars in returns, so I am a bit surprised we have not been hearing about it.
I put on the record my suspicion, which is a major change to this act to deliver increased efficiency dividends and savings. I honestly believe that is the agenda running here and why this has not been spoken about and promoted across the length and breadth of the Northern Territory, like the new era in corrections was.
Madam Speaker, it is good to speak in debate and throw out challenges. If you oppose something it is good to put your argument as to why. At the end of the day, we will see what this legislation and its passage through the parliament has in store. Most importantly, we will judge the outcomes of this legislation.
Mr STYLES (Transport): Madam Speaker, it is very interesting listening to members opposite speak. I put on the record that – a bit like the words of the member for Barkly – I stand with the government and a great team over here. We stand as a team which has driven down crime and pushed the economy up, a couple of basic things you people do not seem to get. When I was on the other side, crime was going up and the economy was going down. I am with the team that has reversed it, which is very good.
I heard the anger in some of the statements from people on the other side and the comments that we are jealous of them. I repeat that. The member for Barkly said we on this side are, supposedly, jealous of them and are a divided team. We all know it is four-four over there and someone is just waiting to see what happens. That is well known. I struggle with the concept that the member for Barkly thinks we are jealous of what is going on over there. I stand with a team that looks after Territorians and makes a safer place of the Territory. I suggest some people over there are living in a fantasy world. I quote from the Oxford Dictionary the definition of ‘a fantasy world’. It is:
Let us look at some of the statements, and facts and figures. The member for Nhulunbuy said we abandoned all the non-CLP electorates. There you go, so they can have a look. This graph shows the green stuff. You might not be able to read the writing, but you can see the green stuff. Well, fancy that! That is Tennant Creek, which has the biggest spend per capita in the Northern Territory. Well, hallelujah! Let us look at this Department of Infrastructure regional spend per capita. We go back some time when …
Mr Giles: Will talk about that later.
Mr STYLES: Absolutely! This is for Tennant Creek and the Barkly region – a fantastic spend. Let us look at when the ALP was in government. We had this big spend over here: Tennant Creek, $6.5m, the total per capita here. They were going down in their term of government.
Let us look at the non-financial public sector net debt graph. Let us see what was happening there. In 2008-09 it was not too bad, the GST truck turned up, and we had a big spend of $6.5m per capita. Then look at what was happening. It went down the next year, debt was going up. We get to the last full year of the ALP government, and the 2011-12 total Department of Infrastructure spend per capita was $2.125m. There is a figure.
Let us look at the debt and where it was going. In 2013-14, the debt was rising rapidly like a pyramid – up we are going climbing up the pyramid. Look at what we spent – the Country Liberal Party. The corresponding figure is a far greater spend on infrastructure than you did in your last year of government. We inherited your $5.5bn projected debt, yet we still managed to spend more in the bush and in ALP electorates than we have in our own. This makes a mockery of some of the things the member for Nhulunbuy was talking about, and the member for Barkly’s statements in relation to what we do or do not spend.
I feel for them. I am a compassionate guy and I can understand how they feel over there, as I would feel if I was on that team with the economy going down and debt going up. If they are responsible for all the disastrous stuff, and we fix it, I probably would be feeling a bit sad. In fact, I would probably want to hide under the desk and not be seen as part of that great team on the other side, according to the member for Barkly.
We have rising debt but we are still managing to spend on infrastructure. Why? Because this team believes wealth-generating transport infrastructure is the key to lifting economic development, and economic development is the key to jobs.
The member for Barkly mentioned things called great services in Tennant Creek, ‘We doubled the size of the sobering-up shelter’. That is great. What we are about is trying to half the size of the sobering-up shelter by putting in temporary Police Beats and Alcohol Protection Orders to replace the Banned Drinker Register which was a failure, and getting people to be responsible for their drinking habits. That is changing.
I saw the change when I was in Tennant Creek recently. The member for Greatorex spoke about some of the wonderful things happening in Barkly and Tennant Creek. Some of the damage done to various institutions and buildings in Tennant Creek has been turned around because of the policies of this government. I have spoken to many people in the Tennant Creek area and they have seen a change.
I will move on to some of the issues raised by the member for Nhulunbuy. She talked about – I cannot let these go – the NT Law Society and what it has said about these bills. She mentioned the Law Society said this and that. I did not write down exact quotes, but she said the Minister for Correctional Services was delusional and dismissive. Delusional? He is part of a team which has people out to work and done a range of things I will talk about. From what I have read, heard and spoken to the Minister for Correctional Services about and what I have heard in Cabinet, he has the department and staff research best practice in the world, and is implementing world’s best practice.
I do not know where the shadow minister for Correctional Services got his research. He said from his research many great things were happening, but I do not know where he has been if he is not looking at world’s best practice. Maybe he was talking to the NT Law Society and has been given one view. I am not saying that view is right or wrong, but it is one view. When you see what the Minister for Correctional Services has put together as a result of lengthy research – not only by his staff but by the department and information gathered from around the world – we have a change for the better.
I appreciate that the member for Nhulunbuy and her team have a different philosophical belief than the team on this side of the Chamber, but this side of the Chamber is having the success and positive results across all areas. I feel a little compassion for those opposite; if you were part of a failed system you have to come up with something to justify what you did for 11 years. On this side we believe in giving a hand up, not a hand down. Our policies reflect helping people, building people’s self-esteem and capacity so they can get a job.
Some prisoners cannot be released for a host of reasons. From my time as a detective and ex-police officer, I understand some of those people, unfortunately, will not be released. However, that is the system we operate in and those people need to be kept behind bars.
We have successfully transformed many corrections issues. One of the reasons why we do some things is we stand not behind our police force or Correctional Services people, but we stand next to them. We are part of a team that goes forward to change the environment in which Territorians live and where Territorians do their time. There is an old saying, ‘If you do not like doing the the time, do not do the crime’.
Looking at what has happened previously, I recall mandatory rehabilitation. The mandatory rehabilitation the opposition had, along with the Banned Drinker Register, was optional. I have said in the House before, I could not understand how you put those two words in one sentence: that mandatory sentencing becomes optional. You did not have to go to it. How do you justify it? Maybe I should get out the Oxford Dictionary and look up what mandatory means, as opposed to maybe having to go, maybe not having to go and, if you do not go, you stay on the Banned Drinker Register. That was a really good policy and it did not work because it did not give the teeth needed to the people whose job it is to enforce good policy.
I will move on to a number of things the member for Fannie Bay said. He was a bit all over the shop. The first thing I wrote down was ‘professional development’. He had a go at the Minister for Correctional Services, who was doing some professional development. Frankly, when I look around this place, I think everyone could do with some professional development. When I hear what some members opposite say, professional development could be a great thing.
People in this House knock the fact that other people in this House are trying to improve – that is what we are trying to do across the public service and our Correctional Services system – and increase their capacity so they can do a better job. If that is a problem for those opposite, I feel for them. I am a compassionate guy. If they believe you should not have professional development or team-building exercises – it is what we are saying to the public service and private enterprise: people should. Do you want the best possible results out of a team? Help to improve the capacity of the team. That is what we do on this side.
It is also in relation to travel. I can remember when I was in opposition with my team. We were over there – the other team then – and people were having a go at travel. I recall when CLP ministers travelled, the Australian Labor Party bagged out the government and said, ‘How dare you travel?’ I have a look around at what did not happen when Labor was in government; they did not like to travel. I remember when they were talking about travel and tourism. They closed all the overseas offices, so what did we see with international tourism? We saw it decrease.
The member for Fannie Bay wants to have a go and say, ‘It is all very terrible, you should not do this and you should not do that’, but I recall in opposition saying to the then government, ‘I believe you should be travelling more’. From what I was getting back in reports and what I was hearing and reading in the media, I do not believe they travelled enough. They did not develop the tourism industry and our live cattle export dropped off. How terrible were their federal counterparts when we they imposed the live cattle export ban?
I suggest the member for Fannie Bay might like to look at what we achieved as a Territory when politicians travelled and drove the agenda of policy and economic development, because that is what we are doing on this side. The Minister for Tourism goes to various conferences and drives the development of tourism. The Minister for Mines and Energy is driving mining and energy, primary industry and live exports. We are seeing the results of all of that. What a wonderful thing it is for the Territory to see economic development.
What the other side does not seem to understand is, if you do not have economic development, you do not have tax. Governments do not make money. Private industry makes money and generates wealth and, when they are generating wealth, they pay tax. Tax is a great thing because governments spend tax dollars. Some governments spend it wisely, we do on this side. We spend it wisely and we guard the taxpayers’ dollars, unlike others who rack the bill up like pyramids and put an antenna on top of it.
It is a bit irresponsible when you consider that all of our kids – not only their kids, but mine and all our grandchildren and those who will come after us – have to pay back the largesse of the previous ALP government.
If you do not have or continue to have economic development, our tax dollars shrink, therefore, the inability to pay off Labor debt and the inability to go out …
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 67: digression from subject. I understand there is a certain degree of latitude in these debates, but we have before the House the Correctional Services Bill 2014. I wonder if we might come back to the subject.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, there is a certain amount of latitude but, minister, if you could try to focus your comments on the bill.
Mr STYLES: I am simply talking about comments made by the member for Fannie Bay about various things. People listening to this get the message that the member for Fannie Bay was talking about professional and economic development in the Northern Territory.
I have already quoted the definition of a fantasy world. Some of the things the member for Fannie Bay was saying came from a fantasy world. He said violent crime is at record levels. We have heard from numerous speakers during this debate how this government has driven crime down, and we have seen reductions in violent crime. I do not know where he is getting his figures from. Maybe the fantasy world.
He quoted The Shawshank Redemption and mentioned a cheap labour force. He said we are using cheap labour and competing with private industry. Page four of the second reading speech says:
I do not know what we are saying here. Are we forcing people into labour? I would like to go back to the Oxford Dictionary and check the meaning of ‘if they consent to do so’. My understanding of that general sentence is if those people do not want to do that, they simply do not have to. I continue with the quote:
He also spoke about the riot in the Don Dale centre – the term he used was riot. I do not know whether the member for Fannie Bay has ever been in a similar situation, but what I heard from him were many statements I hear from people who have never worked in the system and do not understand. I do not blame him, as he has never worked in the Correctional Services arena. I do not think he has worked with prisoners or with many people who live on that side of the fence of life. I certainly do not believe he understands how the police force works.
When you are in those environments and vocations you are dealing with a totally different type of person. Sometimes, they are not rational or reasonable, they are angry people – that describes some people around here sometimes – and it is a difficult situation to be in. I did not hear the member for Fannie Bay talk about this, but he made statements about how terrible that situation was, how this happens and that happens. I heard other members opposite interject to say we tear gas children, etcetera.
There are rules and regulations as to how prison and police officers conduct themselves. There are things called general orders. Police officers are required to know those general orders, which is like a Bible for them. When officers in charge of various situations and police stations or units are required to act, there are rules and regulations. There is a procedure of escalating particular actions. You only go to using those actions when it is required. It is not something where someone says, ‘Let us have some fun and throw some tear gas around’, or ‘Let us have some fun and do this’.
Police are very professional people. Having worked with them for 27 years here, I can attest to that professionalism. The training I had to do every six and 12 months to keep current, with the test they give you on the paper work, the procedures, was all in accordance with what is reasonable for the average police officer or Correctional Services Officer, in this current day, to abide by.
I find it amazing that someone who has not been in the system – and I heard the member for Barkly ask where we were doing our research, ‘You have not done your research, you have not done this, you have not done that’, and accuse us of not doing it. I suggest the member for Fannie Bay, or whoever wrote his speech, did not fully understand what they were talking about. I have been in that situation which has escalated to a degree. It is why we have tasers, pepper spray and firearms. If other people in our society wish to escalate a situation to an extremely dangerous level, either to themselves or to others, then it is in the interests of the public, and the safety of those sent to quell whatever the problem is, that they are protected from whatever action some person has taken to escalate it to whatever level they chose. Therefore, we must ensure our people have the ability to escalate – and, of course, because that is also part of the training – to de-escalate a situation.
Correctional Services Officers, as they are now going to be called, are trained in escalation and de-escalation. De-escalation is a very important part of the training so when you get to a point where you can de-escalate, then you de-escalate rapidly. What I see in this legislation is the ability to have those things in place. They are in place now. Many things are put in place so that can occur.
The other thing I wrote down when the member for Fannie Bay was commenting on this bill was in relation to statistics. We have a fairly rapidly increasing population, so when we compare statistics from a number of years ago, we can see we have had an increase in population. This government and the team on this side has been able to reduce those statistics, even with an increasing population.
I will come back to that in a moment after I comment on what the Minister for Correctional Services said. I suspect there are some really good things are occurring in this bill. Having read through it, there are new provisions allowing the commissioner to request health information. If you have someone who has a mental health issue, or a …
Mr Elferink: What about tuberculosis?
Mr STYLES: Or tuberculosis or other communicable diseases. In this bill, there are some good provisions about the general wellbeing and the health, both physical and mental, of those who are incarcerated in our new $1.8bn prison. I want to come back to that before I run out of time, at some stage, because it is important.
There are provisions in the bill for the Territory to recover costs if an offender destroys or damages monitoring devices or any other device or equipment, like ripping out old bars and trying to use them against those who are in charge of restraining these people in whatever institution they are in.
In the law currently, there is the ability for people to receive restitution for the damage people do. It is about anger management. Anyone who has an anger management problem should seek some help. We want to recover the costs. As a former police officer, we used to have people who would like to kick out the back of police vans and damage them to such an extent they had to be demobilised and sent in for repairs. Again, people with anger management problems need to get that under control.
I will again talk about Tennant Creek and recovery of costs for a moment. The people running the motel in Tennant Creek – I have heard they have done a great job – have taken one wing of an accommodation facility and turned it into housing for Aboriginal families. It now has a nice fence around it, is a dry area because it is on private property, and they rent rooms to local people
I recall talking to the owner of the establishment when I was in Tennant Creek quite some time ago. I asked him how it was going and he said, ‘Let me tell you a story. In the first week I had broken windows, broken doors and a range of things’. He said to the people, ‘You need to pay for that otherwise you do not live here anymore’. They soon got the message they had to pay for it, and they did. They then started to control what they did and then controlled the young people who lived with them – not to smash things.
That was something my mother did. If I smashed things my pocket money had to pay for them. I soon learnt I could not do whatever I wanted and get upset over anything I wanted to get upset over. I had to learn control. That is how we all learn control.
If you smash things where you live you have to pay for them. If you are in prison and you smash things you have to pay for them. That should be a deterrent to most reasonable people in this world; you have to control yourself. This is a great thing.
I will move on to another fantastic initiative in Correctional Services, something that gives the police and Correctional Services people a fantastic tool. That is the addition to the leave permit scheme in the current act – because it is happening now – and the new type of prisoner leave permit called an Administrative Home Detention Permit. The Administrative Home Detention Permit is adapted from a similar leave scheme operating in South Australia.
The comments by the Minister for Correctional Services in his second reading speech made it quite clear that the commissioner can release qualifying prisoners on a permit, however, as usual, subject to conditions. It has provided prisoners with an opportunity to reintegrate into the general community in a supervised, structured and supported manner.
This team has looked at bracelets and things like that to give people the ability to go back into the community and reintegrate in a structured way. Sadly, I have come across many of these people, and some need a little structure in their lives. If they do not have it, someone needs to put it into their lives.
When I was very young, like many others I needed some structure in my life, and my mother provided it. If I did not toe the line, I was reprimanded. I am very grateful to my mother for doing that. However, maybe not everyone had a mother like mine, God bless her soul. It is important that someone puts some structure into people’s life and gives them support so when they come out of Correctional Services they can do things.
When we talk about Sentenced to a Job …
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move an extension of time for the member for Sanderson, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you to the member for Brennan.
We talked of bracelets and being able to reintegrate along with support. If you have been in a Correctional Services centre and participated in the Sentenced to a Job program – and I recall the member for Barkly said many people are in there for minor criminal matters, traffic matters and alcohol-related matters – one of the best things which can be done for you is give you a job. We talk about self-esteem, capacity and that type of thing. Sentenced to a Job gives people back their self-esteem. It gives people a sense of purpose, capacity and capacity building, and money in the bank.
Some people are participating. My colleague, the Minister for Correctional Services, tells me they leave goal with around $20 000 in the bank. It means they can buy a ute of their own, they can get some tools …
Mr Elferink: It is outstanding.
Mr STYLES: It is an outstanding achievement. All members on this side congratulate the Minister for Correctional Services on a fantastic initiative and a great job he has been doing in implementing that initiative. Congratulations. I join the member for Greatorex in congratulating the Correctional Services staff, all of those people – the staff in your office and you – for driving this with a very obvious passion.
We see all these people getting jobs and participating. I visited some business premises recently. You drive down Tivendale Road past the gaol and they have a parking problem. What a fantastic parking problem it is. In the evening I went to the business premises for a presentation, and the car park was full of work utes and commercial vehicles. People who are Sentenced to a Job are able to take those vehicles back to the prison and do a range of things overnight – learn a bit more, go to classes, and improve their capacity. What a great thing for the Territory. That is why prison numbers were dropping for a while; we do not have people coming back into prison. They go out and have a few dollars in their pocket. We are assisting them not only in the traditional ways of helping them with accommodation and support, etcetera, but with a job. Instead of going to the pub on Monday, they are going back to work on Monday to earn some dollars, which they can then use for whatever they like.
The home detention issue this bill covers is another great achievement. Administrative Home Detention Permits with the bracelets prevents people from getting involved in traffic offences, alcohol-driven offences, or even criminal offences. What you see with these Administrative Home Detention Permits is it assists with behavioural changes. People have to be aware that they are responsible for their actions. Blaming other people for your actions will not wash. It did not wash with my mother and I do not think it will wash with anyone else. These people need to learn. If they need the structure the community has put in place to assist these people – fantastic. It also provides a cost-effective community-based management of offenders as an alternative to imprisonment.
I agree with the Minister for Correctional Services. I would love to see us having to shut down beds in Correctional Services – what a great outcome, having extra beds in the prison Mahal. That would be great. I am looking forward to the day when our prison population starts to drop because of the policies of this team in government on this side of the House.
It will also extend to the Department of Correctional Services’ capability to implement the philosophy of through care, by providing further options for a prisoner’s case plan. Many people need a hand; at some stage in life we all need a hand. When we were all little, most of the people in this House were given that sort of direction and that sort of help but, sadly, others were not.
It will also provide offenders the opportunity to improve family cohesion and function. If you have been in for alcohol-related offences and you want to go off down to the pub on Monday night, if you are on home detention you have to stay home. If they discover some of the family values and the fact they have to stay home, sit around sober and look at what they have around them, many of these people may, hopefully, realise they have a wonderful family around them and can enjoy some of the joys family life can bring. I am sure most people in this House, and on all side of politics, would agree. It is also an incentive for prisoners in Correctional Services centres to say, ‘I would rather be outside than inside, even if I have a lot of restraints on me where I cannot go and do whatever I please’.
The ability to drug and alcohol test employees is in line with many of the best practices in the country where insurance companies and people who look after workers compensation insurance want to ensure all people within an environment are drug free, which is a great initiative.
Time does not permit me to go into some of the other subjects I would like to, but I will finish talking about some of the issues raised by the member for Barkly in relation to the new prison. He spoke about what a great investment it was and how it created jobs, etcetera. I recall the interjection from the Minister for Correctional Services about the $60m we have to pay every three months, which is a lot of money. The bottom line for any business is return on investment. In everything everyone does in business they must look at that formula – return on investment. It is the bottom line in everything, because if you do not get a return on investment or it is costing you money to do it, the wise advice is to not do it.
I am reliably informed that in certain projects, as a government we can borrow money at 3.5%. If you go to any company in this country at this point of time and say, ‘We would like you to take all of this risk, and we would like you to do it for 3.5%’, I doubt very much whether you would receive any answer from them. It is more like an 8% to 10% return on investment, and that depends on the risk assessment. The higher the risk assessment the higher the return on investment has to be.
I showed this graph before, where you had debt going up and were desperate for some investment. ‘Let us not put it on our balance sheet, let us put it on private enterprise’s balance sheet and, then, lease it back to them’. I do not know where the argument stacks up from the other side that it is a good deal for the taxpayer. We could probably have built it more cheaply. We can always have other people take a maintenance contract over 30 years.
On the issue of generating the jobs, etcetera, Correctional Services does not generate wealth and long-term economic activity. It can, if you use it for training and rehabilitating people as we are doing. However, the general response to those statements is it does not generate wealth.
I heard the other side continually comment and have a go at us over all the things we are not doing. If you spent some of that money on a range of other services the opposition wants provided, we might be able to do that. But we are now committed to that $1.8bn and we struggle a bit. We would like to do this and that. When you have a projected $5.5bn debt you inherited, it makes it hard to do all the things we would love to do.
As I have said to other people, not in this House, politicians love spending money. They go out with cheques, present them to people and say, ‘We are wonderful’. The problem is when one side of politics spends money, gives cheques out and racks the debt up, someone has to pay it back. Sadly, we do.
Madam Speaker, the commitment my team in government on this side of the House makes to the people of the Northern Territory is we will generate the economic development, think outside the square, create jobs for their children, build capacity, rehabilitate prisoners, and make it so that prisoners can have an opportunity to capacity build, regenerate and rebuild their lives, and we can do it all whilst paying back $5.5bn of projected Labor debt.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, I know it is my last week and usually people sit quietly and do not say much, waiting for the next two days to go. However, I believe it is my duty to make some comments about this bill.
I do not support this bill. While I agree with the intent of the minister in that he wants to see people coming out of prison and not going back in the future, this bill will not guarantee that, because it is not focused on rehabilitation. I will say why. We all know the old saying, ‘If you build a school, you close a prison’. If you want to rehabilitate people you have to go back to the basics needs of life in order for them not to commit offences.
We have to remember that people are in prison because when they commit an offence they believe they will not be caught. It happens all the time, they are caught and they finish up in prison.
There is not much reference about rehabilitation here. I cannot see any structured rehabilitation in this bill. He talked about Sentenced to a Job. My understanding is nobody can be sentenced to hard labour in Australia; it is only the court that sentences somebody with a penalty. It is not the role of the corrective services to do so. My concern with Sentenced to a Job is how it will work, and will it really rehabilitate people? Let us face it, slashing the grass or cutting the trees at a pensioner’s house is not going to give you skills you will need when you go out to get a real job to make money.
We all assume this person will stay away from the bad company he had before, is not going to drink and drive, and will not commit an offence because he will get a job. What kind of job is uncertain, because with these provisions there is no structure of the rehabilitation. Supposedly he will make money and will think twice before he commits an offence. However, it does not work like that. That is an ideal world. The reality is people come out of prison, do not have many skills, they fall into the same bad habits and the same old company, and they commit offences again.
The other thing that concerns me is with regard to the prisoners sentenced to work. I agree with you, they get a job and probably get some skills. However, what is the situation, minister – and I am really concerned about it – with people enticed to get a job? What happens if somebody does not want to get a job? What happens to that person? Will that person be penalised one way or another, physically or in a different way? Does a person who works have his sentence reduced because of his work? That creates two categories of people. Both people have been given the same sentence for the same offence. One says, ‘I want to go and slash grass out there’, and that guy goes out early. The other says, ‘No, I do not want to do that’, and he stays in prison. If a person who works has benefits and advantages other prisoners who have been sentenced for the same offence and the same term of imprisonment do not have, that creates two tiers of people who are exactly the same in every aspect of the law but, because one chooses to work has benefits the other does not. That is a concern, minister. I would like you to brief us about it.
What happens with workers compensation? Are these people considered to be workers? There is a clear definition of what a worker is. There has been a court case that defined what a worker is. We know a prisoner is a prisoner. A prisoner does not have any contractual agreement with the authorities or the prison. He has been imprisoned by a decision of the court. What is the situation there? What happens if somebody loses a hand because somebody mishandles a chainsaw? Who is responsible? What kind of compensation is this person going to get? Is that person entitled to compensation because, under the law, is he or she a worker or not?
In case of negligence, who is responsible, minister? Is it the CEO of Corrective Services or the minister? I know you have provisions, minister, where you say the general manager has the discretion to overrule a medical practitioner. What happens if that happens and a prisoner dies? We have had cases where a prisoner has suffered an ailment which was not detected early by the authorities, and the prisoner died. Now the CEO of the prison – or whatever you call him – can overrule a medical practitioner and say, ‘No, you cannot go to the hospital, go to the doctor, or be seen by a nurse because you have an ailment’. Who is responsible? Does the responsibility lie with you, minister, as the one responsible for the legislation, or with the person who is in charge of the prison?
The other thing, minister, is the provisions in the act in relation to food, clothing and exercise. The state has a duty of care. That prisoner, ultimately, is under your care. Why are these provisions not in the act? I know you say, ‘Of course, we will look after the prisoners. Of course, we are going to clothe them and dress them and everything else.’ However, that is not explicit in the act. You might be a good minister, have a good CEO of the prison and make all these provisions. Others might decide to cut corners and not provide all the services and the duty of care to the prisoners.
Another issue I have is the restrictions on legal representative access and the screening of communication with prisoners. This is a well-known and established privilege. This is a civil right of any person in Australia, including prisoners. Why is this happening? How will you defend a case? One will come to the High Court that you contradict the national standards or the United Nations’ standards?
Minister, this is my concern. I will not expand because other people mentioned a lot of issues, but my concerns are the civic rights of prisoners, the classification of a worker, and how you can have prisoners with certain benefits and others without when they are both sentenced for the same offence with the same sentence. I tried to find out if any other jurisdiction in the world has these provisions and most are very conservative, very authoritarian jurisdictions.
I was impressed, minister, when I looked at the criminal law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. I hunted through their criminal law and, unfortunately, our law is not as good as theirs because Article 30 of the criminal law of North Korea states:
Sentenced to work:
Article 31 of the penal code of North Korea states clearly for short-term labour, the civil rights of an offender are guaranteed during that short-term labour. North Korea guarantees the civil rights of its prisoners, your legislation does not.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Madam Speaker, the purpose of these bills is to repeal and replace the existing Prisons (Correctional Services) Act with a contemporary model for managing Correctional Services into the future.
There are two pieces to today’s reform. First, the Correctional Services Bill contains a bulk of the reform. The Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill amends a number of other acts and regulations to ensure the terminology is consistent with the new act and operational aspects of the bill are mirrored in other acts, and in regulations where appropriate.
I congratulate the Minister for Correctional Services for this contemporary package which, yet again, sees the Northern Territory leading Australia.
Besides updating the language and terminology of the old act, major provisions of the new framework package are the new statutory roles and responsibilities for a Commissioner of Correctional Services, general manager, regional managers, professional officers, and probation and parole officers. These modern titles reflect more appropriately the roles in our Correctional Services, replacing the roles of director, superintendents, prison officers, parole officers and surveillance officers.
Police prisons in the old act are replaced by new concepts of correctional centres, police custody centres and court custody centres. The move from prisons to correctional centres underpins a commitment to the Pillars of Justice framework. This world-leading framework takes a big-picture view of the supply chain cycle of crime rather than looking at just some aspects independently. It delivers real results for Territorians through strengthening our police, justice and correctional systems, ensuring we have a coordinated approach to driving down crime. The pillars are police, courts, youth justice, Correctional Services and victims.
Looking at pillar one, police, we are giving the police the tools they need to perform effectively, respond to incidents, investigate matters and keep crime down in the community. Police need effective tools to undertake their duties. This government believes the majority of people should not be punished for the poor behaviour of the minority. That is why we got rid of the terrible Banned Drinker Register, which should have been renamed the drinkers register because it did not stop banned drinkers in any way and treated law-abiding Territorians as if they were in the wrong.
We have introduced Alcohol Protection Orders, which are issued to those who commit a serious crime while under the influence of grog, banning them from buying, consuming or possessing alcohol or attending licenced premises. We have also put in place temporary beat locations, stationing police officers outside bottle shops to target problem drinkers who buy takeaway grog with the intent of consuming it in restricted areas. We have rolled out more CCTV cameras across the Northern Territory. This expanded network is monitored 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to catch people in the act of committing a crime.
Once we have caught them, then our next pillar kicks in, which is pillar two, courts. We are streamlining the court system to create a more efficient and effective process. This side of the House has introduced some 92 bills into the House, the majority of which are about bolstering our legal system to provide for a law and order framework Territorians expect. We have strengthened mandatory and minimum sentencing, with serious violent offenders now facing a three-month mandatory minimum gaol sentence for the first offence, or 12 months for repeat offenders.
We have also taken action toward those who do not do the right thing and will not pay their fines. Community Work Orders have been implemented for serial fine defaulters who owe in excess of $10 000 and do not enter into payment arrangements with the Fines Recovery Unit. They could be sentenced to community work to repay the fine. The people who do not take the advantage of the extra chance given to them, and fail to comply with a Community Work Order, will now be sent to correctional centres.
We are also improving court facilities. The Attorney-General and my Alice Springs-based colleagues are excited about the construction of a new state-of-the-art Supreme Court facility in Alice Springs, which begins shortly.
However, we do not stop there. Our third pillar focuses on a youth justice system. We are committed to changing the offending behaviour of youth in the community. Young people who are at risk of entering into the correctional system can be sent to boot camps designed to address juvenile crime and change their concerning behaviour. Our focus is on the whole supply chain cycle and not just bolting down bright new shiny things, like Labor does, and expecting miracle results. This government makes no apologies for revitalising all strategies.
A comprehensive strategy is being developed to tackle youth offending and address the youths who are likely to enter into the justice system. Our intent is to keep them out of the supply chain and continue their lives as productive, contributing members of society. But for those who do not want help, or want to continue their unacceptable behaviours, we will take action to protect our community. They can expect a stint in one of our correctional centres.
Correctional Services is pillar four of our justice framework. This is where this bill fits in. This government is committed to changing the offending behaviour of prisoners through training, education and employment, to proactively reduce the Northern Territory’s high reoffending rate. Technology is now used to locate and track an offender’s movements and quickly alert agencies when the person is in an unauthorised location. Prisoners are also expected to work or learn when they are inside the correctional system. Education and employment are keys to driving down repeat offending once a person is released.
Talking about working, offenders are to give back to the community they offended against by undertaking works with community groups and organisations that would otherwise not have been completed due to a lack of time or funds. This is an important step in getting offenders to recognise their behaviour was wrong and caused harm to a victim or victims. Taking responsibility for one’s actions is an important step in rehabilitation.
I move on to pillar five, which focuses on victims. We are ensuring victims are protected and supported. One of the ways we are doing this is through our domestic and family violence reduction strategy, a comprehensive strategy to address, reduce and prevent the unacceptably high level of domestic violence in the Northern Territory. Members know of my determination to lower the incidence of domestic and family violence in our community. I realise the statistics for domestic and family violence are not good, and this is partly due to the fact that we now treat it as a crime. When police are called to an incident involving domestic violence, they now make sure action is taken against persons committing violence through assault charges and other action.
The member for Fannie Bay has criticised my colleague, the Attorney-General and minister for Corrections, for promising a strategy and not delivering. I defend my colleague, the Attorney-General, as the strategy we will deliver is comprehensive and, in my opinion, life changing. It will make a difference to the hurt and abused across the Territory, from Fannie Bay to Yuendumu to Kintore. However, member for Fannie Bay, that takes time. There are 11 government departments involved in the domestic and family violence chain, and for a strategy to be effective it must be comprehensively addressed by all parts, unlike the Labor tradition of policy by glossy brochure and media stunts.
What did those opposite do for 11 years, overseeing unfettered domestic violence? To their shame, they did nothing. They presided over communities crying for their help and they ignored them. They told them via media releases that everything was fine. It was not. Aboriginal women were still being flogged to death and kids were still being abused and not going to school, nor being fed. Yet the great Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party did nothing.
I am not happy with the current statistics, but I realise an increase in statistics will always come when police focus on certain unlawful activity. Our policy of making domestic and family violence a crime has caused those statistics to rise.
But that is not the end. I am honoured and excited to be part of the development of this strategy and look forward to launching it very soon with my colleague. This strategy will make life-changing differences, and I look forward to seeing those results and being able to tell women across the Territory how this government worked hard to give them a safe life and home.
Talking about safe homes, this government has also taken strong action against serious sex offenders who pose a high risk to the community. They are able to be locked up or monitored indefinitely. That is how this government is creating a correctional system through our Pillars of Justice framework.
Turning back to the other major changes of the act, the term ‘correctional centre’ clearly demonstrates this government’s commitment to not only being tough on and reducing crime, but rehabilitating those involved in crime so when they are released they return as productive members of the community. It highlights the strong focus on law and order by this side. I intend to ensure that people who have been appropriately punished through our legal system become contributing members of society upon their release.
That is true with what the minister for Corrections and Attorney-General is doing with reforms to law and order in the Northern Territory. The major reforms this government has implemented, which are seeing amazing results, have taken a broad supply chain approach to law and order. We, on this side of the House, realise one of the key inputs into our legal system – I know this will come as a major surprise to those opposite – is prisoners. What if we can change and reduce that input that drives down the impacts of crime, the cost associated with prevention and detection, and correction?
We on this side know if we make substantial changes to those inputs, then the Territory taxpayer would not have to pay over $1bn for the new correctional centre. Rehabilitating prisoners is already a key priority for this government, one of the key planks being our Sentenced to a Job program. This program provides prisoners with skills that are useful and transferrable to a wide range of work settings in the external environment. The program connects prisoners to a network which is focused on the same outcome of successful transition of prisoners to a mainstream living experience. Corrections has been working with employers to align prisoners with the required skills for jobs in the private sector.
Indigenous prisoners, on release from a correctional centre, face a number of challenges reintegrating into the community, in particular, finding employment and accommodation. These challenges are often exacerbated by low levels of literacy and numeracy, limited living skills and a lack of employment options in remote communities.
Prisoners performing paid work under the program contribute 5% of their income to support Victims of Crime NT, as well as paying board and lodgings, and tax. Employers in the Northern Territory struggle to recruit reliable local staff. One of the advantages for employers participating in the Sentenced to a Job program is that prisoners are reliable, drug and alcohol free, and motivated to work.
As of 30 June 2014, there were 87 prisoners in paid employment, and a further 46 prisoners undertaking volunteer employment opportunities. The current results indicate that prison employment figures are trending upward, and the Department of Correctional Services is on track to reach the government’s stated target of 200 prisoners in paid employment by December 2014. That is a fantastic result, and my colleague should be proud of his efforts.
Jobs mean that people do not want to go back, and that breaks the supply chain cycle. Breaking the cycle is critical, and we are already doing that. Madam Speaker, may I bring this graph out which shows in blue what we are doing? This arrow shows we are doing well with the prisoners; their numbers are going down. This is the government which is doing it.
It is better than what happened before – 11 years of neglect. This graph shows that the Pillars of Justice are working; numbers have dropped and continue to drop. In fact, current numbers are also 200 prisoners below Labor’s lowest project, and some 400 prisoners below Labor’s highest projection. That is the difference between this side and the other: contrast hype and glossy brochure stunts against action, facts and commitment. This side is committed to breaking the cycle.
Moving on, some of the other key parts of the bill include clarification regarding the circumstances in which someone is considered to be in lawful custody. The bill ensures situations where persons are moving between centres or in some form of authorised release, such as our excellent Sentenced to a Job program, are now covered.
The bill has two clear parts to allow for the different management of prisoners and non-custodial offenders. The commissioner has broad powers to manage all persons – prisoners and non-prisoners – in correctional centres, and non-custodial offenders. The concept of a commissioner’s direction has been introduced in the bill to provide a formal mechanism for issuing operational policy and procedures. The concept of a leave of absence has been reframed to clarify certain purposes.
There is a new type of prisoner release called Administrative Home Detention. This is based on a similar scheme currently operating in South Australia and allows the minister, on recommendation of the commissioner, to release an eligible prisoner subject to conditions. It is designed to cater for a longer, continuous period of leave at the end of the prisoner’s sentence. Eligible prisoners are those who do not have a fixed non-parole period as part of their sentence of imprisonment. This will generally cover low-level offenders with less than 12 months imprisonment or under, and they must have served 50% of their imprisonment term.
It is intended that most prisoners released on Administrative Home Detention will be released on the condition they wear an electronic monitoring device and will be subject to the compliance requirements in the bill with respect to monitoring orders.
Consistent with the government’s Sentenced to a Job policy, the bill makes clear that the commissioner can direct prisoners sentenced to a term of imprisonment to work. Prisoners on remand will also be allowed to work if they consent to do so, which is a great initiative.
There is a new provision to allow the commissioner to charge for non-essential services and programs delivered for prisoners that may not be part of a sentence but is offered as a service for them. This is important as it allows the commissioner to also develop services and programs that do not further charge the taxpayer whilst getting prisoners to become productive members of society again.
The health of our prisoners is also important. The commissioner will now be allowed to request health information about a prisoner from the Chief Executive of the Department of Health to ensure their conditions and treatment can be managed appropriately. This is important, not only for the prisoner concerned but other prisoners.
Lastly the bill provides for new legislative protections around the use of force to ensure it is the last resort, and the least restrictive intervention available must be used. No one wants to see people unnecessarily injured, but Correctional Services Officers and their families and friends also deserve protection for the hard job they do. If prisoners choose violence there needs to be clear guidelines for how officers should respond. There is a requirement on the commissioner to issue directions about circumstances for its use and the nature of force used. I am interested to see those guidelines also take into account any cultural and/or language issues present in correctional centres. Attorney-General, if you could provide me some advice about that I would be most grateful.
This is a modern piece of law that moves our corrections system into a position of providing for the future. As I said before, our reforms are working. The latest crime statistics show this to be true, not froth and bubble like those opposite who kept the real figures from Territorians. House break-ins are down 26% over the past two years and 16% Territory-wide over the year to June 2014. That is 300 fewer houses broken into. Assaults are down 14% Territory-wide, and alcohol-related assaults are down 18% across the Territory in the past six months compared to the same period last year. There were 428 fewer alcohol-related assaults in the first half of this year compared to the first half of last year. Alcohol-related assaults were down 3% in Darwin in the first half of this year compared to the first half of last year. Data also shows that during the time Alcohol Protection Orders and Darwin Safe have been operating, Mitchell Street has seen assaults drop by 24% compared to the same period last year. Alcohol-related assaults are down 27% in Alice Springs, down 15% in Katherine, and down a staggering 47% in Tennant Creek in the first six months of the year compared to the same period last year.
Per capita alcohol consumption is now falling across the Territory to the lowest levels since before 2001-02 when the Country Liberals were last in government. In 2012-13 it was down 4% on 2011-12, and down 16% on 2004-05. Those Labor members opposite had 11 years in power and, under their watch, crime was on a steady upward climb. In two years, this Country Liberals government has started to arrest and dramatically reverse Labor’s upward trend. The Pillars of Justice are working across the criminal supply chain. The statistics prove we are making the Territory a safer place to live, work and play.
Madam Speaker, I commend the Attorney-General, the minister for Corrections, for this contemporary piece of law, and look forward to working with him to deliver a modern, responsive and appropriate Correctional Services system for the Northern Territory.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Madam Speaker, I support my colleague, the Minister for Correctional Services and his bills, the Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014 (Serial 83) and the Correctional Services Bill (Serial 82).
My colleagues have covered most of the detail of the bill in their speeches, so I want to make a few general comments about this bill and the context in which it has been presented. Coming to government two years ago, it floored me, and all of my colleagues, how little work the former Labor government did in updating and reforming Northern Territory legislation. That is not just pertaining to Correctional Services, but right across the board. Within my portfolio responsibilities, Health was left to languish legislatively. It has been my task, over the last 18 months since I have been Health minister, to work on updating quite a bit of the legislation within the portfolio areas I have. Other ministers have struck the same situation – antiquated, outdated legislation that Labor just sat on. They were impotent, ineffective and lazy.
The Correctional Services Bill is a perfect example of what we were left with and what we have done over the last two years to create contemporary legislation which will benefit everyone.
In this case, these bills we are debating will effectively benefit the whole community because, whether you like it or not, Correctional Services affects each and every one of us. There are many people employed in the Correctional Services industry. We have too many prisoners, their families and all sorts of people who service the correctional industry, not to mention the members of the public. We all are affected in one way or another, and for the most part in a positive way, by the hard work of Correctional Services, not necessarily the deeds of the prisoners, but the hard work of Correctional Services in contributing to the community.
I listened with great intent to the member for Nhulunbuy, who has been expressing great angst about the introduction of a workers’ camp into Gove. I feel compelled to respond to the member for Nhulunbuy, because her fear and anxiety around this new facility is unjustified. I can understand why she might be feeling a bit hesitant, because it is something new.
However, speaking from the experience of when the Alice Springs – I should not say workers’ camp, because it was always a part of the prison – Correctional Services worker groups which do many things around the community, first commenced, there was some angst expressed by the Alice Springs community, which was unfounded.
It turned out the correctional workers – the gangs – that go out almost on a daily basis have transformed the Alice Springs community over the last 10 to 15 years. I cannot give you the exact year it started. They commenced by doing work around vandalised parts of the community. Dealing with graffiti was a big part of their job in the early days, but over the last decade or so their contribution to maintaining and cleaning their community in and around Alice Springs has been outstanding and invaluable. What we would do as a community without the worker gangs from the correctional facility is not worth thinking about.
An example – this goes back quite a long time – is they worked tirelessly – and I understand they still do – maintaining Blatherskite Park. A good friend of mine, Barry Bohning, used to be the President of the Alice Springs Show Society. Barry has since passed away, but in the early days of the correctional work gangs coming along, he had them doing all the work – painting, maintaining fences, slashing, mowing, building things – which took an enormous load off the Blatherskite Park team and the Alice Springs Show Society.
In response to the member for Nhulunbuy’s concerns around the negative aspects of having a workers’ camp and those people contributing to the Gove community, she needs to be reassured it will not be a negative experience, it will be a positive experience. I also remember, like the member for Nhulunbuy, it was raised in Alice Springs that the prisoners would be taking the jobs of local people. I know Gove is under a lot of pressure socially with people leaving town through the closure of the Rio Tinto refinery, but I believe the prisoners will still be able to slot into that community and provide services everyone will value.
A similar situation occurred in the Barkly area. A friend of mine is a senior officer at the Barkly Work Camp based in Tennant Creek, and they contribute enormously to the Tennant Creek community. They clear up the streets and do all sorts of things that only enhance the Tennant Creek community. Regarding the member for Nhulunbuy’s concerns, she can rest assured it will be a very positive experience if it is anything similar to what we have seen in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek.
After 11 years of the reform of the Correctional Services Bill languishing, the Minister for Correctional Services is undertaking what he describes as a wholesale review of the Correctional Services Bill, which is well overdue. He stated the original bill was written in 1980, 34 years ago. That is old legislation. Indeed, although there have been numerous amendments made to that bill, the bones of it are very old. I commend the member for Port Darwin, the Minister for Correctional Services, for his hard work in updating this legislation.
There has been much discussion in the Chamber this afternoon about some of the complementary initiatives which have been introduced in and around the reform of the Correctional Services industry undertaken by this Country Liberals government.
I almost laugh when the topic of the temporary beat locations is introduced into parliament by the Labor opposition because they need to be reminded they created them. During the 2012 election, I would be sitting outside the front of Piggly Wiggly’s on Gap Road with my sign and my EH with my campaigning paraphernalia all over it, and virtually sitting next to me would be a police officer instructed to be there by the former Labor government.
When we hear the now Labor opposition complaining about how terrible the TBLs are, just remind yourself that they introduced them. We are very happy to continue with them, particularly in Alice Springs where they have been enormously effective. I know they have upset some sections of the community which do not have a designated place to drink alcohol. That is a real challenge. Every responsible adult person over the age of 18 should have a place to consume alcohol in a responsible manner. There are sections of the community in Alice Springs that simply do not have that space – for example, people who live on town camps. Town camps do not allow people to consume alcohol within them. That is a separate issue we need to look at very seriously. Of course, they are able to go into licensed premises and drink, but they are not allowed to take takeaway liquor on to town camps. The temporary beat locations have changed the whole landscape of drinking in Alice Springs.
In addition to that, we have introduced Alcohol Protection Orders which have stopped people from purchasing alcohol. The member for Stuart talked about how effective they have been in Central Australia.
The third component of our suite of initiatives to address antisocial behaviour, crime and alcoholism in Alice Springs is the introduction of alcohol mandatory treatment which is, of course, under my realm of responsibilities as the Minister for Alcohol Rehabilitation. In Alice Springs, that has also been a very successful program. We have seen dozens and dozens of people go through rehabilitation in Alice Springs with some very encouraging results.
We have, as the member for Stuart graphically described, a reduction in the consumption of alcohol, not just in Alice Springs, but across the Northern Territory; in alcohol-related presentations to the emergency departments of our hospitals, particularly in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs; and in alcohol-related crime. That is fantastic news. News like this seems to get lost in the hurly-burly of politics.
There are some fantastic stories out there, such as the success of this government in not just policing, but how our Correctional Services and our justice system are working in a very functional and integrated manner. For that, we are extremely proud. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why the Labor opposition members are opposed to this contemporary legislation. Obviously they like to live in the past, to wade around in old-fashioned, antiquated legislation which obviously makes them feel a sense of security.
However, we are a modern, active government, and our actions speak louder than our words in the work we undertake. I am very proud to say we all work very hard within this Cabinet, this wing and this government. This is a prime example of the work we are producing from this side of the House.
I acknowledge briefly, because of my own personal interest, the work of the official visitors of our correctional facilities. Years ago I was enticed to become an official visitor. I did not do it for very long because I was drawn into politics. My career as an official visitor of our Correctional Services was short-lived. I was enticed to become an official visitor by a very good friend of mine, June Noble. June turned 80 in June this year. June, I believe, is the longest-serving official visitor within the Northern Territory Correctional Services system. She is an incredible woman, and I love her to bits. She religiously goes to the prison and performs her very important role as an official visitor. I experienced the red carpet treatment when I first went with June on my inaugural visit as an official visitor. She was treated like the Queen, as she should be, and we all were acting in that capacity. I note the bills we are discussing tonight include some improvements and slight changes to the role of official visitors.
Madam Speaker, this bill will revolutionise the way we go about doing the business of Correctional Services in the Northern Territory, and I certainly commend the bill to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I have been listening intently to most of the debate. Some of it was relevant to the bill, some was not, and some was a bit of time filling.
I will not vote on this bill and will give you my reasons. It is not because I do not want to, in fact, I support this bill more than not. However, I was in the process of getting some independent legal advice on this bill because I have some concerns – concerns have been raised about parts of the bill – which I was working through. Unfortunately, I have been e-mailing today, as the person went overseas. I wanted to have clear in my mind that the issues I raised and had been covered by the department in a briefing were either a concern or not.
I say that because I had two briefings, one from NAAJA on 7 August and one from the department on 7 August. One of the issues which clouds this debate is that I am fairly sure NAAJA was using version 19, and the department was responding to version 22. I was using the bill as a means of asking the questions. I was using the new bill which I sent to an independent lawyer to give me some advice. It is more a case of me not feeling comfortable with saying yes until I receive that advice, which has not come to date.
However, I will mention some of my concerns and also raise some good things about the bill. I thank the department for the briefing. They went well and truly over time. They probably all wanted to go home, but we were waffling on at 5.30 pm at Old Admiralty House. It was an excellent briefing ...
Mr Elferink: It seems we are in pursuit of the same outcome here.
Mr WOOD: Okay.
This bill is ideal for a committee. So many people are making statements about this bill from NAAJA to CAALAS to a range of lawyers. This is the perfect bill for a committee’s hearing where these issues could be aired in the public arena. You could have brought in people who represented the Department of Correctional Services – prison officers who deal with this from day to day – and members of the public. This is the perfect bill for a committee. However, it did not happen.
The bill is about twice as big as the old bill. There are about 240 clauses in the new bill and about half that in the old bill.
I only received the regulations yesterday, which was unfortunate. That was one of the concerns I had, but I went through them yesterday.
I have two major concerns and they are not the end of the world, which is probably why I am not opposing it; however, I have other reasons to feel slightly uncomfortable. I would have liked a set of objectives. I know not all states have objectives; South Australia and Western Australia do not seem to have objectives, but the Queensland legislation has a purpose which says:
When I raised the issue of having the word ‘rehabilitation’ in an objective or purpose I was told the word ‘correction’ means the same thing. If you do not rehabilitate people, are you in breach of your own act? I am not so sure that is the case, because it is written in the Queensland act. I am sure they were fairly knowledgeable people. It is also written in the New South Wales act. The Queensland act says:
The ACT legislation has a much longer preamble. It mentions the Human Rights Act 2004. I presume that is their act, because it does not have Australia written next to it. It mentions promoting the rehabilitation of imprisoned offenders and their reintegration into society.
I will read out the New South Wales’ Objects of Act:
Victoria has a very short version and Tasmania has guiding principles.
This is one of the downsides of this legislation. I was hoping the government might have changed its mind, because I understand there were objectives in one of the many versions and, for some reason, they were dropped. My understanding is they might have been dropped because of a misunderstanding between some of the CAALAS/NAAJA people and the department. I might be wrong but that is the feeling. There might have been some misunderstanding over some criticism of that objective.
I will not do it this sittings, as I want to hear what the minister has to say, but I am interested in bringing it up as an amendment to this legislation at another time because it is important.
I congratulate the government on this document. I read it before. The reason I did not have it here is I sent it to my lawyer friend to have a look at it as well. This is the Strategic Intent 2013-16 from the Department of Correctional Services. If, as in the Queensland legislation, you had included, ‘the purpose of corrective services is community safety and crime prevention through the humane containment, supervision and rehabilitation of offenders’, in line with the strategic intent of the department, that would have been great. You could include this in your legislation – you did not put the date on it because it could change. That would have made this document a lot better and it probably would have had a lot less criticism.
I will read some of this, because it is important people know what is in here:
I will read some of the strategic themes:
It talks about supportive people culture, strong community partnerships, and integrated and accountable organisations. It might be worth reading the values. This is important if people believe in, as the bottom line of this document says, delivering justice and changing attitudes. These are the values of the Department of Correctional Services:
There you have the government’s policy in relation to how we deal with offenders and the workers subject to the Correctional Services Act, our Correctional Services officers. The two, obviously, must work together. I raise that as an important part of the debate which has not been raised yet.
The other area of concern was the removal from the old act of section 88 – this should be in the main part of the bill – under Part 23, Food and exercise:
It was in the act, then when I looked at …
Mr Elferink: It is Regulation 23 now, mate.
Mr WOOD: I know, I will get to that. Regulation 23, Prisoner welfare, is a regulation which comes under Miscellaneous Matters:
By the way, that section on exercise is related to section 89 of the original act:
Part of this debate, unfortunately, has been around some of the confusion created by the 22 versions. I would love to know what the other versions were. I only became involved in the 22nd version, so I would love to know what the debates were like on the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, etcetera. There must have been some interesting debates. That highlights why it should have gone to a committee. If there were that many versions and there was that much debate around it, a good, open debate through a committee process would have been ideal for this.
As I explained clearly, this is not a case of me not being brave enough to vote on it, I do not feel comfortable without that advice that would sway me one way or the other. As I said, I am more supportive of the bill than against it. You have only heard two of my objections. I might bring them forward to see whether I can put them in an amendment to the bill at some stage, especially as having a purpose or an object to the bill would make it much better.
When I raised this issue at the briefing – and I hope the advisers do not tell me I am wrong – I understood someone said this is a set of rules. Even if it was a set of rules, you need to have a reason why you have a set of rules, not just a set of rules for the sake of a set of rules. It is a set of rules because those rules relate to the objectives. These rules are designed to do what the objectives state at the beginning of the bill. That is missing. I know you have a heading to the bill. As I have said before about another bill, all the other states have the objectives or the purpose in the main body of the bill, not at the front page where it does not really mean a great deal, but in the bill – either clause 2 or clause 3 so it is part of the guts of the bill.
In relation to a few other things that have been mentioned today – and the minister knows – I support Sentenced to a Job. I hate the politics here sometimes. The reality is the member for Barkly did get the work camp going in Tennant Creek. That was an initiative, if he had been in power for another term, he would have continued. To be fair, the government promised it would have a prison farm at Katherine and a work camp, and it has gone off the books ...
Mr Elferink: No, it has not.
Mr WOOD: It has from the recent budget …
Mr Elferink: No, no. I can fill you in on some details from recent effects.
Mr WOOD: I know I am criticised about the prison. I do not mind that criticism, but I get annoyed that sometimes people do not understand my perspective on the prison.
I am no great fan of the big prison, I can tell you now. However, I was given figures that showed the prison was going to be busting if we did not do something about it. The figures were 1000. I could have either been an idiot and just said, ‘No, I am going to dig my heels in and I am not going to support it’, or I had to deal with the reality that came from the advice which was given to me by people who are much more knowledgeable in this area than I was. At the same time, if anyone had been in those discussions, they would have known I wanted the Katherine farm to be built, along with a work camp, which would have reduced the numbers in the big prison by about 250 people.
I would rather see the big prison practically empty and most people working out bush or closer to their communities, or whatever. That might not be practical, but it is one of those things we should aim for.
I went out a number of years ago to the Wyndham Work Camp and reported back to this parliament that this was where I thought we should be going. As far as I know, the Wyndham Work Camp is still there, and we have one here. We have one at Nhulunbuy. There is a point of dispute between the member for Nhulunbuy and the minister over the siting of that. I have also mentioned I have concerns about mandatory rehabilitation taking over certain places such as the one in Tennant Creek. I do not think it is the right place in an industrial area in Katherine for it either. That is a side issue.
In relation to the prison costing a lot of money, yes, it will cost a lot of money. But it will cost a lot of money over a long period of time. It resonates with the community if you say the prison will cost umpteen billion dollars. I always ask how much this piece of architecture we sit in cost. We sit here for 33 days on a very valuable piece of real estate. I am sure if you redesigned it we could have had this on the bottom floor and put a 20-storey hotel on top of it. It probably would have been a lot more practical. However, we did not and it costs an awful lot of money to maintain. If you add it up over the next 50 years, it probably will cost about $1bn to maintain.
You can do a lot of things with figures. When I hear statistics quoted in this place, I shudder. I would like to have a Statistician General who can look at those statistics from a non-political point of view, all the trends, all the outside influences that might have occurred, and come up with some independent statistical analysis which would allow us all to get a good feeling about whether many of the claims made are accurate. But that is another day.
I have summed up all I intended to raise. I thank NAAJA. I have here their long list of issues. I believe they raised very good issues, otherwise you would not have version 22. The bit that concerns me, I have version 22, and I wanted to make sure it was also okay. I sent a couple of e-mails today and made phone calls, although I have not been able to contact the person unfortunately, so if I did not get any serious concerns back from that person, except for the two I have spoken about, then I would support the bill.
I thank the minister. It has been a lot of work obviously, putting this bill together. Also, for a change, I enjoyed this bill. I do not know whether it is because they are bored, because not so many people on that side speak on these bills, which is great, because I usually get so annoyed. Parliament is a house of debate and, sometimes there are just one, two or three speakers and that is it. On these issues, sometimes there is a lot of political ramble, but it would be nice to have a bit more debate with legislation. After all, that is the main reason we are here: to pass laws and to ensure those laws are scrutinised properly. That is the job on this side.
Madam Speaker, I have said what I had to say, and I will leave it at that.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I was conscious that the member for Namatjira wanted to say something. Perhaps she might take advantage of the third reading. Nevertheless, I will start with this:
It is the intent of this government to remove every second line from that quote, because that quote struck me when I read it and continues to resonate with me to this day. As a police officer in this jurisdiction, I would have had cause to lock up perhaps 1000 people. Of that 1000 people, five maybe six were what I would have called ‘broom closet villains’. For the rest of them, there was a chance, given an opportunity, they would muster up in an environment where they were caused by circumstance to be compliant prisoners.
When I became the minister for Corrections, I determined there was a problem in the way we approach corrections in the Northern Territory. That problem is reflected in the question I am most often asked about my Corrections environment, ‘How many Aboriginal people do you have in custody?’ The answer, depending on the day of the week, is somewhere between 80% and 85%. That is not a good result. But in my opinion there is a much better question to ask: how many people were welfare dependent and unemployed at the time of their offending? When you speak to judges, police officers, legal aid lawyers and other people who are invested in some fashion or another in this whole system, the answer is close to 100%.
I am not interested in the eugenic exercise of identifying people by their racial background. I am not a great fan of racial profiling, that stands to reason, I am a libertarian after all. What I am a great believer in is that a person, given the opportunity to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and guided into that environment by both coercive and encouraging forces, will step up given the opportunity. Hence the attention to Sentenced to a Job.
I am increasingly convinced that whilst buildings are necessary in any custodial environment, the building itself should not be the issue we focus upon when we are creating a corrections philosophy. It is what you do inside those buildings that matters more than the buildings themselves. I do not for one moment suggest any person convicted of a crime and sentenced to imprisonment should not be punished for that crime by a court that issues the sentence of imprisonment. I genuinely believe a person, once convicted of a crime, should bear the responsibility of their misdeeds, and bear the burden of that responsibility without complaint.
Nevertheless, so many of those people who find themselves in the custodial environment of this government should be asked to measure up in a way they have never been asked to measure up before, and that is what we do.
As consequence of that process, we have a Sentenced to a Job program that has seen more people becoming attached to work and trying to get themselves qualified to be entered into the program than ever before. Perhaps I can demonstrate by way of example. When I became the minister for Corrections, there were about 50 open-rated prisoners across the corrections system in the Northern Territory. There were many more prisoners who were of a low-security rating, but low-security rated prisoners are not allowed into the Sentenced to a Job environment.
Today, there are well over 300 – I think the figure is closer to 400 – open-rated prisoners in our corrections system. That is demonstrative of a cultural change inside the minds of those people. That brings us to what we are reflecting upon here today.
The issue that has been raised by the members opposite is the issue of rehabilitation and the fact it has not found its way into the objects of the bill, because the objects are no longer there. This is true. There has been much noise from the members opposite, and I support the members opposite in their opposition to the Corrections bill they have been talking about. The problem is the Corrections bill they have been talking about is not the Corrections bill that is before this House. This was picked up during the luncheon adjournment, evidenced by the fancy footwork of the member for Nhulunbuy, who came back in here and started trying to side step her way around the issue, returning only to the three points of difference that exist between the Northern Territory government and those people who had input.
Much was made about the lack of consultation. However, the fact that we have a 22nd version of the bill was the direct result of consultation with the legal fraternity and others.
The problem is the members of the opposition appear, to a large extent, to have gone off half-cocked, which is why I encourage members opposite to seek a briefing on the bills that come before this House. They were, I suspect, prepared for a debate in June, during which time there were criticisms from certain parties in relation to the speed of which this is going through, which is why it did not pass in June. Many of the things, however, that had been raised had already found their way into the June version of the bill, because that is what we are debating today. Unfortunately, nobody on the other side of the House seemed to notice the bill addressed many of the issues they were complaining about when they were speaking today. It is clumsy, not necessary and, frankly, does not serve the people of the Northern Territory well when people come into these debates as ill-prepared as that.
Returning to the debate itself, the matter of rehabilitation was discussed. I do not have the quote, but I have a document in front of me – it is obviously a lengthy tome because the photocopied page is ‘Rehabilitation Theory page 831’. I will table the document. I am afraid I cannot place the journal or book this is from, nevertheless, it is instructive. The history of rehabilitation theory:
Mr Wood: Is that an amendment to the bill?
Mr ELFERINK: No.
Mr Wood: Thank heavens for that!
Mr ELFERINK: Are you disappointed, member for Nelson?
Mr Wood: No, I do not want to go back to those days.
Mr ELFERINK: This bears out something that remains unchanged from the time that was written and, indeed, from much earlier works, to today. Rehabilitation is an ethereal concept. If one could imagine trying to nail mercury to a wall, you would get to the place where you would understand the nature of rehabilitation. What exactly does it mean? The harder I think about it, the less certain I am because of the broadness of the word. Whilst we have a general concept of the intent, when you try to put a border around it, it is extremely difficult to give it any structure.
I head people mention the film The Shawshank Redemption. I was going to say we are running a real corrections system, not a fictional story – it is a fine movie nevertheless – about an escape down a sewer pipe. However, somebody handed me details – I am grateful to my staff member for doing so – of that film. There is an interesting piece of script writing worth revisiting.
I ask members to think of the scene where, finally, a changed Morgan Freeman as the character, Red, sits in front of the parole board, glistening in his indifference to the scrutiny he was being subjected to. The script reads like this:
The parole man:
The script goes on a little further, but his indifference becomes increasingly pronounced. But because of the way he presents himself to the Parole Board, his parole is approved – clearly, a changed, perhaps even broken, human being.
I do not want to break people in my Corrections system, I want to lift them up. I want them to be more than they possibly ever believed they could be. Thinking back to the words of Judge Dennis Challeen, I want to see people walk out of our Corrections system feeling about themselves thoughts they never thought they would be capable of feeling about themselves, feelings they never understood existed. Feelings of self-worth and dignity cannot be taught, they can only be earned and can only be learned through earning. It is for that reason I want to pursue the concept of work in our Corrections system. For pursuing that belief, for believing that a person can lift themselves up, I am told I run a Corrections system which is worse than North Korea’s. Really? There, 150 000 to 200 000 people are incarcerated, and most without trial, with executions on a daily basis, and we run a Corrections system that is worse than North Korea’s? Oh, please! The overreach of that argument is not only pathetic, it is stupid and dangerous. Frankly, I suggest that most Labor Party members who heard that speech probably cringed because of the failure of it to demonstrate anything other than being a flippant dismissal, and a means by which the member opposite could pass some critical thought.
What I appreciate through this whole process is we have so many organisations, including private employers, legal aid authorities and NGOs, which look at Sentenced to a Job and every other thing we are trying to achieve in the Corrections system, and they are saying this is a good thing. We will increasingly work with NGOs over the passage of time so we can produce better results for those people who are in our Corrections system. But they must get to a point where they change their mind that the course of action they want to take in their live is one of correction.
That is what this bill is intending to achieve. To hear it dismissed in such a cavalier fashion is irritating. However, I will allow it to go through to the keeper because it is more about what we are trying to do than my emotional response to any criticism of what we are trying to do.
I listened to the member for Nelson, and I thank him for being alive to the fact that the bill we are discussing here today was not version 19, but it was version 22. It was version 22 by virtue of the fact that we had consulted. I heard his concerns about the removal of the objects, but I tend, as a general principle, to be a bit of a black-letter lawyer when it comes to legislation because, frankly, a set of words in legislation that have no legislative input are not particularly useful. The long title of a bill, as a general principle, will tell you what the bill is about. I know the member for Nelson will disagree with that and would prefer to see objects placed into the bill. I am afraid we will have to agree to disagree. The bill will not be diminished in any fashion in its operation, or its objects for that matter, by the absence of some italicised words which are not available for any form of meaningful interpretation.
I also thank the member for Nelson for taking the time to look at the Statement of Strategic Intent 2013-16. I take the time out to acknowledge the member for Nelson’s reading of that document, because it is one of the ones we truly agonised over for quite some time. It was not a document that was merely thrown together for the sake of flippancy. It was designed to charter a path forward for the corrections system that would ultimately lead to a corrections system that achieved all of the objects in that statement of intent, part of which was the creation of the legislative instrument that sits before this House today.
To read that document into the record is to acknowledge the importance of the document, and I am grateful personally and on behalf of the department for the intelligence shown by the member for Nelson for picking up on the importance we have placed on that document. It is plastered everywhere in the department and people understand that the minister has personal buy-in in this document, because it is part of our way forward.
I wrote down one quote from the member for Barkly which I found astonishing. He was proudly boasting in this place, ‘I was costing the government a lot of money’. He made the mistake then, and continues to make the mistake now, in believing the measure of success is how much money you spend. I disagree. All that will measure is the amount of money you are spending.
I draw honourable members’ attention to the graph that justified the building of the new prison. It has been circulated; it is a public document now. It has three lines on it: a purple line, a red line and a green line. It was drafted in June 2010 and projected out into the future – leading to December 2016 – the present projections of the Northern Territory corrections system.
Bear in mind as I say this that we are still not yet in the new correctional precinct. Everything we have done has been done within the environment of the prison system inherited by this government from the former government.
The red line, which ends up in 2016 of having projected prison numbers of 2126, was the most probable growth in prisoner numbers. Indeed, that definitely justified the building of a new 1000-bed prison.
Overlaid over those lines is a blue dotted line, and they are the actual results. We see at the end of the first quarter of 2013 about four or five months after the CLP came to government, a sharp decline in prisoner numbers – a decline which came up to the best possible case scenario in mid-2013 and has remained below the best possible case scenario pushed out to June 2014. I think the next blue dot will be up slightly. This places us with as many prisoners in custody as when we came to government, way below the projections of the former government.
This then draws me to making an observation about what I said when I started to wrap up here today. Yes, a prison is a building. Yes, it is a necessary building. But, bearing in mind we are continuing to use exactly the same facilities which were bequeathed to us – we still have not moved into the new prison – through running programs that augment and assist local business, without competing with them, pursuing the Sentenced to a Job program and a number of other very important policy approaches outside of the corrections system, we have 250 fewer prisoners in our custodial environment.
If you take the difference between where we were predicted to be today and where we are actually today and extrapolate that for one year’s expenditure, that is $17m this government does not have to spend because we do not have 250 people in prison the former government said we would have. We have done it within the existing resources bequeathed to us because we have changed the things we do inside those buildings.
Madam Speaker, for that, I am enormously proud of what the Giles government has achieved and will continue to achieve. This legislative instrument is designed, constructed and aimed at creating an environment in which people choose to make a mental, emotional and spiritual change to themselves, so when they walk out of a correctional facility and out the control of the corrections environment in the Northern Territory, they leave with something they never had when they came in – that is, something to lose. Imagine a corrections system that produced a better person.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Correctional Services Bill (Serial 82):
Clauses 1 to 140, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 141:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move amendment 22.1 to omit the word ‘offender’ and insert the word ‘prisoner’.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 141, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 142 to 155, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 156:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move amendment 22.2 to omit from clause 156(2) the word ‘may’ and insert the word ‘must’. Essentially, the amendment is necessary to ensure the minister appoints a legal practitioner as the nominated examiner for a purported legal item. That creates a compulsion upon the minister.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 156, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill (Serial 83):
Clause 1 to Schedule 5, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Schedule 6:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move amendment 24, as circulated, which deals with the wording of Schedule 6 of the bill under the heading Cross-border Justice Act, in that the section 7(1) definition be amended to remove the wording ‘juvenile justice order’ and insert the wording ‘juvenile justice officer’. The amendment is necessary to rectify a typo and to ensure the correct definition is accordingly amended.
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule 6, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, very briefly, there are no amendments to note at all. It was remiss of me not to acknowledge the work of departmental staff who have been sitting here and in the advisers’ room very patiently throughout this long debate. They have done a Trojan’s work. I am very grateful to them and wish to place on the record my thanks to the staff.
Bills reported; report adopted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move the bills be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bills read a third time.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, today I provide the Assembly with the results and benefits that have flowed from the Northern Territory government’s international investment strategy that is designed to develop and support mining and exploration projects in Northern Territory.
Since the 2007 global financial crisis, exploration companies have found it extremely difficult to raise capital through the Australian Stock Exchange. The major stumbling block or hurdle in developing mining projects in the Northern Territory is the difficulty associated with raising finance. In fact, the availability of financing alone directly translates into reduced exploration, in particular, greenfield exploration.
Given that growing the minerals and energy sectors in order to increase royalties is one of the most promising avenues for the Territory government to grow its financial independence, it is imperative this government helps junior exploration companies seek alternative finance opportunities from as many sources as possible.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of members of the Sikh Association Northern Territory. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors and hope you enjoy your visit to Parliament House.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Increased exploration and mining projects in the Northern Territory not only mean increased royalties for government, but these projects create new economic opportunities and jobs for regional Territorians. 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, local companies must compete in a highly competitive, globalised marketplace for exploration investment.
To best attract international investment into exploration projects and promote the Territory’s geological potential to the domestic and global industry, the Country Liberals government has implemented the Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, or CORE, initiative. CORE is designed to attract minerals and petroleum exploration investments 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 importantly, programs to attract international investment into resource projects at the exploration stage. These minerals investment attraction strategies assist explorers in the Northern Territory to access potential investors and ultimately drive exploration and mining in the Territory.
This government recently committed a further four years of funding for a CORE initiative at its existing level of funding of $3.95m per annum. This is the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government, and demonstrates our ‘open for business’ approach to minerals and energy exploration and development.
Specifically, CORE will allow my Department of Mines and Energy to continue its highly successful efforts in assisting local explorers attract international investment, particularly from key markets in east Asia. By joining delegations led by me, as the Northern Territory Minster for Mines and Energy, local exploration companies can access top-level decision-makers in an affordable way through dozens of investment meetings and opportunities to promote their projects.
It is foreign investment that is the lifeblood for minerals and energy exploration projects, which advance our economy and create wealth and jobs for Territorians.
The delegations attend seminars and business meetings, and receive direct introductions to significant international investment companies and trading houses.
While I acknowledge the previous ALP government did some good work in continuing the original CLP scheme to attract overseas investment, it was under this government that the overseas investment strategy was expanded exponentially to remove what was virtually a sole focus on China.
Since 2006 there have been 36 investment deals in Territory mining and exploration projects, worth $775m, involving Chinese companies. Of these announced deals, 18 were successful as defined by the promised investment being confirmed as received, with a total value of $270m. My Department of Mines and Energy was directly involved in attracting 10 of these 18 deals, with a total value of $233m.
Since the department’s market promotions to Japan began in 2008, four investment deals in Territory exploration projects worth $10.35m involving Japanese companies have been announced. Of these, the department was directly involved in attracting two of the four deals with a total value of $4.75m.
The investment achieved since August 2012, when the Country Liberals came to government, has seen seven new Chinese and two new Korean deals announced. One such success story, within days of my delegations departure from Korea – it says October here but I think it was November 2013 – an agreement was announced between Northern Territory company TNG and leading Korean conglomerate POSCO Engineering and Construction, for construction and delivery of the Mount Peak vanadium titanium iron project which is located around 235 km from Alice Springs. TNG presented to POSCO during my previous investment delegation to Seoul in October 2013. This announcement marked the third agreement to be signed by a South Korean company regarding investment in a Northern Territory minerals project since the department’s international investment attraction program started work with Korea in 2010.
While the Territory remains fundamentally underexplored, with 91% of the Territory either unexplored or having had limited exploration, we have over 40 known but not yet developed mineral deposits. Despite the difficulties minerals and energy companies have experienced raising funds through the Australian stock market since the global financial crisis, foreign investment has proven resilient.
Some of the key functions that foreign investment can bring to companies looking to develop opportunities in the Northern Territory include: supporting exploration expenditure in the Territory; increasing the chances of new minerals and energy discoveries; and enabling minerals and energy projects in the Northern Territory to progress, which otherwise may have stagnated. This has helped to maintain the Northern Territory’s economic strength, business activity and low unemployment.
Foreign investment brings many benefits. It supports existing jobs and creates new jobs, encourages innovation, introduces new technologies and skills, brings access to overseas markets and promotes competition among our industries.
As I said previously, mining and exploration creates jobs, helps build our regions, grows wealth for Territorians and contributes to improving our essential infrastructure such as transport corridors. In short, mining and exploration delivers long-term benefits to the Northern Territory’s economy. We are fortunate the Northern Territory has a wealth of mineral and energy opportunities.
The Territory remains fundamentally underexplored and only sustained greenfield exploration can unlock the vast mineral potential we have. All great mining provinces start with greenfield exploration, which is the foundation of the mining sector.
Our continuing efforts in Asian investment and engagement will build on previous good work in this area and will mostly focus on enabling increased investment in the exploration sector. We are building on the past successes of Country Liberal governments to deliver for the next generation of Territorians.
Even though we have world-class mines with production estimated at $3.5bn per year, most currently mined resources will be exhausted by the year 2030. This is a frightening prospect. Exploration is needed to maintain and expand the role of mining in the Territory’s economy. An exploration cannot occur without foreign investment.
In 2012, my Department of Mines and Energy’s Investment Attraction Division undertook detailed market research which revealed that China, Japan and South Korea are the highest potential target markets for the minerals the NT has to offer.
From the research, two key economic factors helped to explain what has recently made, and will continue to make, the Territory’s mineral wealth attractive to Chinese investors. The first is China’s high GDP growth rates, the second is the desire for Chinese policymakers to raise the standard of living for all citizens, with GDP per capita a representation of standard of living. China’s GDP per capita is predicted to continue to rise to 2040 and beyond, increasing domestic consumption that will create greater demand for new products. As the material standard of living grows, mineral and metal demand also expands. This pattern has been followed by all developing countries throughout history.
In response to its growing need for minerals and metals, China has put security of high supply on its political agenda. It is spending large and increasing amounts on exploration for minerals inside China, and is also reaching out to participate in the world’s mining and metals industry.
Responding to China’s ‘go global’ policy in 2000 and financial incentives by government-owned banks, China’s outbound global direct investment has been dominated by Chinese state-owned enterprises responding to the policy drive to secure energy and raw materials. Indeed, China’s demand for mineral commodities is being driven by forces that will last for many decades.
Development in China will generate new investment leads for the NT, with the Chinese government planning to increase its outbound foreign investment, and has set targets for securing minerals and energy assets in foreign countries. The growing role and influence of the private sector in China may also provide a new wave of potential investors for NT exploration projects.
Japan, on the other hand, is resource poor, so the Japanese must rely on overseas sources for raw materials for all its processing industries. Increasingly concerned about global supply shortages, Japan has stockpiled what are called rare metals since 1983. The stockpiling target corresponds to 60 days domestic consumption or imports. Rare metals are indispensable for the manufacturing of automobiles and IT products, so it is extremely important to ensure stable supplies of such metals from a standpoint of maintaining and strengthening the competitiveness of Japan’s manufacturing industry.
Like Japan, South Korea relies on imports for almost all its mineral needs and, like Japan, the South Korean government intends to use overseas investments and stockpiling to secure resources. South Korea plans to produce 43% of its demand for six strategic minerals, including uranium, coal and iron ore from overseas mines by 2020. Its budget for investment in 2012 was over $500m. Clearly South Korea has the economic capacity to invest in minerals and energy projects, and its determination to maintain its exporting competitiveness will increase its drive to secure minerals and energy resources.
The Northern Territory is an attractive destination for international investors for many reasons. To start with, our prospective mineral and energy commodities are those of a very high interest to China, Japan and South Korea.
Bipartisan support for attracting Asian investment to the Northern Territory and political stability are strong and verifiable selling products for the NT government’s investment attraction program. The Port of Darwin offers the fastest shipping time of any of Australia’s bulk export ports, helping to make projects more profitable for investors. Our success to date in attracting foreign investment is a strong selling point for potential new investors.
The Department of Mines and Energy has deep existing relationships with key organisations and investors in China, Japan and South Korea. The depth of my department’s relationships with these organisations is a key advantage for the Northern Territory over other states in Australia which do not take a strong partner-led or relationship-based approach to investment attraction.
The Northern Territory government’s investment attraction efforts benefit from my department’s NT Geological Survey’s involvement with the Commonwealth Minerals Australia initiative, and from having the investment attraction strategy integrated with this unit.
We may have many high-potential projects and unexplored areas which can attract investor interest, and our regulatory regime is internationally competitive. Indeed, the Northern Territory has a strong, growing economy that boosts investor confidence in long-term stability. As well, Australia’s high quality of life and positive image are strengths investors will consider when choosing a destination to send staff and establish offices.
Under Framing the Future, this government’s blueprint for the development of the Northern Territory, our prosperous economy vision includes the aim to land new international investment. Objective one for a prosperous economy is an economy that uses our place in the world and our strong relationships to build international trade, culture and tourism links, and leverages new investment from the Northern Territory’s track record in improving food, energy and resource security for our partners. This includes an intention to strengthen the Territory’s role as a gateway between Australia and Asia by promoting the Northern Territory as an investment location and a supplier of quality goods and services.
This government aims to achieve a prosperous economy that is supported by a modern, pro-investment environment. Northern Australia is rich with energy, agriculture, business and scientific industries, and vibrant and growing communities, yet it remains underutilised relative to the rest of the country, despite its natural, geographic and strategic assets. The Northern Territory government understands we need bold, innovative action now to build tomorrow’s Territory.
The Northern Territory government is committed to economic prosperity and accelerating development across northern Australia. Since coming to government in 2012, the Country Liberals have worked hard to build on the Northern Territory’s reputation as a world-class place in which to invest, live and do business. To this end, as the Minister for Mines and Energy, I have worked closely with the mining industry and exploration companies to find out what we, as a government, can to do to help them do business better. I have instructed that research be conducted in order that this government can get the best results for local companies wanting to do business better. I have acted on the advice of local mining and exploration experts – many of whom I am proud to say work in the Department of Mines and Energy – to target destinations identified as the best source of investment for local companies.
Face-to-face relationship building is crucial to doing business in Asia. Only a small number of potential investors visit the Northern Territory or elsewhere in Australia each year. Because of this, it is vital that we travel to our target markets regularly in order to maintain relationships and build the profile of the NT among investors there. Regular face-to-face contact motivates commitment and builds lasting relationships. Regular travel to these markets demonstrates that the NT is serious about its long-term commitment to being a stable supplier and investment partner to these countries.
Having ministers participate in industry delegations in China, Japan and South Korea is an exceptional advantage for the Northern Territory. Ministerial leadership of a delegation signals the importance of the market and the activity to the NT government, raises the profile of the entire delegation, opens doors for meetings that exploration companies may not otherwise secure, attracts audiences to seminars, conferences and dinners, and enables the minister to hear about challenges and investment barriers directly from senior officials in those countries.
To this end, since becoming the Minister for Mines and Energy I have led a number of delegations which have successfully attracted investment dollars into exploration projects in the Northern Territory. One significant event achievement occurred in May 2013 when I signed a memorandum of understanding with the China Development Bank. This MOU represented a significant escalation of the relationship between the Northern Territory government and the China Development Bank. Previously, Western Australia was the only Australian jurisdiction to achieve this relationship status with the CDB. This bank is a development finance institution under the direct supervision of the Central People’s Government of China. With almost $1tn in assets, this bank is responsible for financing the majority of Chinese investment in Australia and overseas.
To overcome the challenge of not having a permanent presence overseas, the Department of Mines and Energy has successfully built strong relationships with companies and investment houses located in east Asia. The endorsement and support shown to the Northern Territory by these government-backed organisations has given investors the confidence to sign agreements investing millions in Territory exploration projects, knowing they will have access to finance and approvals from their relevant governments.
Another significant achievement occurred in late 2013 when I led an investment delegation to South Korea, Japan and China. As this was the first time a Northern Territory Minister for Mines and Energy had visited either South Korea or Japan, it was highly regarded and very well received.
Our message to potential investors is simple: the Northern Territory welcomes foreign investment into its minerals and energy sectors, and the government is determined to provide a responsible, investment-friendly regulatory regime for companies.
Reflecting their long-term interest in investing in Australia, a growing number of Chinese, Japanese and South Korean companies have established representative offices in Australia. The growth in the number of representative offices presents new opportunities to maintain and develop investment relationships with target investment prospects.
Asian investors seeking to secure mineral commodities may have many international locations to choose from, including other Australian states and developing countries in Africa, South America and Asia. The NT government has a big role to play in attracting that investment into the Territory.
Studies by Austrade, Invest Australia and others have found that the external investment flows are primarily driven by the policy advocacy work of government agencies. In practice, once the investor has chosen Australia as its preferred investment location, the support services provided by agencies become primary considerations in weighing up shortlisted locations.
The Investment Attraction Division within the Northern Territory Geological Survey assists Territory minerals and exploration projects to attract international investment. The division’s clients are junior exploration companies from across Australia which have projects in the Territory and are seeking investment. The quality of the division’s facilitation services is crucial to securing investment into the NT’s minerals and energy sectors. While the international investment attraction program is a relatively low-cost and low-key element of the CORE initiative, it has a strong track record of securing new investment into the minerals and energy sectors.
The department measures the Northern Territory’s competitiveness using the Fraser Institute Annual Survey of Mining Companies. The latest results issued in March 2014 rank the Northern Territory 17th out of 112 places worldwide, and second in Australia for attractiveness as a place to invest, and 19th out of 112 places worldwide and third in Australia for regulatory certainty.
Although the Northern Territory government is small, we are a dynamic government that openly welcomes foreign investment with a very pro-business development attitude.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the statement be noted.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement to the House. It is a particularly good statement which gives credit where credit is due, and reflects a good cross-section of the Northern Territory, particularly including industry and the department.
It is also good to see the acknowledgement of the global financial crisis. Finally we have some real acknowledgement of those extreme challenges that were put on this country nationally but, more importantly for us, on the Northern Territory. So much of this debate has been in denial of any global financial crisis. The minister acting in the industry of minerals, resources and energy acknowledges that, and I give him credit for that.
A local story on that: I remember entering parliament in 2008 and taking a breath while thinking, ‘This is too good to be true’. Sure enough it was, because 70 m of the Barkly Highway washed out completely, the global financial crisis pulled all the drill rigs off the fields and parked them in the middle of Tennant Creek, and the federal government was dumping a nuclear waste dump in my lap. So, it was get on with the job. I, for one, acknowledge the global financial crisis and the amazing effect it had across the minerals resource and energy sector, where those drill rigs we had not seen around the Barkly for decades, which were out exploring for new projects, were suddenly parked on vacant lots around Stanley Street and Brown Street in Tennant Creek.
It was good to see that within the next 12 months those rigs were back in the bush. It is a delight to acknowledge those explorers such as Emerson Resources and West Gold Excalibur that kept driving that exploration back into all those old tenements around Tennant Creek and looking at new greenfield sites.
The minister talked a lot in the statement about travelling around the world and leading delegations. It is good to know the development of our mining sector continues to build on the strong foundations established and nurtured by the previous Labor government. It is good to hear the minister tells Territorians about his overseas trips and participation in industry conferences and, of course, those important connections with attracting investors.
Mining certainly is thirsty work. It was revealed in estimates that minister Westra van Holthe’s office is one of the biggest spenders on entertainment and hospitality on the fifth floor when he comes home, coming in third after the Chief Minister and the member for Fong Lim. It testifies that the mining business is thirsty work, and there is a lot to be shared when the minister arrives home from those extensive overseas trips.
It is good to get back on track of what this is offering Territorians, because mining has always been a very important sector for the Territory. I can comment now, as a resident of, and being associated with, Tennant Creek for over 34 years, on the power and might of mining and the returns it brings, but also the challenges if mining packs up and leaves.
In the Northern Territory mining contributes 14.3% of our gross state product compared with 8% for the Australian national economy, so it is a big part of our economy and future. Mining employs 4% of the Territory workforce, a significant number.
It is good to see the government continuing to build on the work of Territory Labor whilst in government. However, we need to ensure we keep the focus clearly on building the industry, growing regional economies and supporting community development, and not just focus on royalty revenue-raising for government. Sometimes we risk that being the preoccupation of government. It is important we keep the bigger picture in play, which is the outcomes for the community and the constituency of the Northern Territory.
The 2014-15 budget flagged an expectation of $164m in mining royalties, 22% of own-source revenue, noting proudly that this is $41.5m more than the forecast in the 2013-14 budget – significant income streams and projected increases. But this should not be the main performance indicator for government work in the development of our mining sector.
This year’s budget paper notes a likely increase in iron ore production, particularly new mining in the Roper region, but that the actual value of production may be volatile due to movements in iron ore prices. That is a reality now when we reflect on the challenges the Sherwin Iron and Western Desert projects are facing. It is regrettable that we see the collapse of the Sherwin Iron project operation at the moment and the suspension of iron ore mining activity at Frances Creek. It will be interesting to see the revised forecast of mining-related revenue in the Treasurer’s Mid-Year Report later this year – when we get a Treasurer.
The iron ore price in June 2014 was $US92 a tonne, in early 2014 it was trading at $US135 a tonne. ANZ is forecasting a return to $US100 a tonne later in the year, but we are unlikely to see the higher price in the mid-term.
That is a comment on the volatility of prices on the projects which have commenced, some of which are now facing some real challenges on return to shareholders. For the moment, the government seems to be relying on increased production in the Groote Eylandt and McArthur River projects to provide that air of prosperity and growth. They are only two projects. We need to factor in any debate around mining, energy and resources, and this volatility and associated vulnerability.
The real story, which was highlighted in debate on the minister’s last ministerial statement on mining in October last year, will be that, currently, mined resources in the Northern Territory are predicted or projected to be exhausted by 2030. The minister highlighted that in a previous report, and it needs to be reflected in continued debate. A 2030 time line is not a long way out and the work within government should be very focused on the finite nature of the resources and projects – a time marker not very far away. We did not hear anything in this statement, but I am sure the minister is very focused on this as the longer-term thinking now with the government is developing its north Australia strategy.
The potential investors are talked about in the statement, which is good, regarding support for new mining ventures in the Northern Territory. There has to be a comprehensive strategy. It should not be about messaging fast-tracking approval processes. It needs to be increasing community awareness, acknowledging environmental factors, and cognisant of financial risks to Territorians. Those elements of a comprehensive mining statement should be discussed in this place. There is a question about the exact nature of what is happening. The minister talked about investment, which is good, and we, the opposition, applaud that. However, I want to hear what the government is doing in supporting junior exploration companies and greenfield developments in the Northern Territory. I want to hear some examples, and it would be good to be offered briefings. That is a good area for debate: some specifics around some of the junior players.
There seems to be a preoccupation with reducing the checks and balances that apply to mine site developments. It is not only me saying this; this is what the community is starting to articulate. If this is the case, if there are minimising environmental standards, it presents real risks which translate to real financial risks to government and to Territorians. When we are in the business of attracting junior explorers, we often face the risk that they have limited capital to back them up, and if things go wrong, taxpayers are left with the environmental issues and associated cleanup bills.
We are all in this together, so we cannot afford, environmentally or financially, any more Mount Todds or Redbank mines. They are legacy mines, but – I thank the minister for the information provided at estimates – there are hundreds of legacy mines across the Territory from days gone by, and we do not need any more. Any of this rhetoric about fast-tracking is being watched and discussed by the community at length, and there will be certain standards to maintain.
The minister talked about the CORE initiative. As the Territory opposition, we acknowledge that as an important program and that it builds on the previous government’s $14.4m initiative called Bringing Forward Discovery. It is good to see these things mesh into a new government and the new government’s operations. It is nice to have a rest from the political rhetoric, the slaps and all the other rot with some of these ministerial statements. It is nice to look at that fusion and acknowledge how it is moving forward for the Territory and all our future. It is an initiative that, on the previous Labor government’s watch, grew to a total of $28.5m in investment in resource documentation, which was a good result.
As opposition members, we have a small staff, a great team, and we communicate with stakeholders. The mining sector is increasingly speaking about the government having gas-blinkers, focusing on the oil and gas sector. Of course, we acknowledge the opportunities in this sector. Coming from the Barkly, where we have the Beetaloo Basin, the McArthur Basin and the Georgina Basin, how could I not appreciate the potential in that oil and gas sector? However, industry is saying, ‘Do not forget the bread-and-butter mining projects that have historically underpinned real regional development in the Northern Territory’. It is very important to keep that balance, liaison and support in all of the sectors. Our grassroots miners and many of the stakeholders have made the comment about the hard rock miners who need that continued support as well.
The minister talked about the Fraser Institute. It is telling that the Fraser Institute’s annual and international survey of mining companies in 2011-12 ranked the NT as 11th internationally, the highest in Australia, in perception, as a jurisdiction with positive policies in relation to mining. In 2012-13, after the change of government, that slumped to No 22, about the same as Victoria and well behind Australia’s highest scorer, Western Australia, at No 12 on the list.
There is an example, if you want to massage statistics. I accept the minister’s statistics, as the government should accept the opposition’s statistics from the same source, the Fraser Institute. There are, no doubt, things to celebrate, but there are also challenges we must acknowledge.
The government often talks about the three-hub economy, an economy built on mining and energy. It is interesting, I cannot see any evidence of a significant mining industry representative participating on the industry panel in the northern Australia discussions. That has come to my attention. I hope the government can correct that, but it is a very important point. In this new policy of developing the north we definitely need those mining industry representatives on those panels and included in those discussions across the Territory. It is not all about the potential of oil and gas; we have to acknowledge the traditional base, the hard rock and grassroots miners.
We have to also challenge the government in this statement and previous statements. What I see generally coming from the government is in relation to assisting local communities managing the transition from a booming mining economy into the future or, in some cases, an uncertain future. Gove is an example. We need that articulated clearly. The opposition has taken that debate fair and square to the government. Nhulunbuy is a good example of that. It is important, as we go forward and hear more statements from ministers and departments about this capacity building, that it is broken down into strategies that assist local communities manage transitions into booms or, unfortunately, out of booms.
I can tell many stories about Tennant Creek, the former powerhouse of the Northern Territory, and what we endured in that relationship with government policies of the day. We also need to clearly focus on key issues that come with booms. We have established that minerals, resources and energy are the key foundation stones to the Territory’s future booming economy. What are we doing about the management of these booms, and housing rental prices and their impacts on Territorians? Hopefully we will start to see some pragmatic examples instead of just the talk. If we are talking 2000 rentals, then we accept and acknowledge that. However, if we are talking 263 deliveries after two years, then that needs to be debated because that is falling well short of the target.
Regarding the impact of mining activity on existing infrastructure, there was no more important example than the Roper Highway with the test sample from Sherwin Iron. That was approved for 200 tonnes and that created havoc. I spent a bit of time on the Roper to experience that, talking to local communities – pastoral, agricultural and Aboriginal. Everybody was extremely concerned. Then, from the estimates process, I had to take the message back, ‘They have done 200 and there is another 200 000 tonnes coming’, and people were extremely concerned. That was a direct relationship between approving a project without the infrastructure to support it. Unfortunately that project now is facing some serious challenges, and we are waiting to see how that will re-emerge. The lessons learnt is that its re-emergence will not be able to depend on that public highway because it is infrastructure that will not support heavy vehicle movements of that intensity and capacity. We have to start to talk about industry and how industry contributes to regional infrastructure. That is the way of the future. No doubt the government has that firmly on its agenda.
Another challenge is the fly-in, fly-out workers. The ABS employment data for 2011 showed there were 5200 people working in the NT with a usual place of residence interstate, many of those working in the mining sector. We know labour costs are a big part of operational costs, and there is a big push on from the big end of town to reduce employee costs and make Australia and the Territory more competitive on the world stage. But let us not trade away our health and safety standards, our environmental standards, or our employee wages and conditions, while quietly increasing the employment of 457 skilled migration visas and other overseas workers willing to work for lower wages than those hard fought for over the years.
You guys who do business with the big end of town are on the front line. You talk to people like Gina Rinehart. Fair and squarely, we have to seriously ensure there is a healthy balance in the labour market and in relation to the returns to Australian citizens and any other workers who enter our industries on Australian shores.
The question is: what is the Territory government doing to grow our own? That is a really important question. I am particularly interested to hear more from the member for Stuart because she gave a very interesting response in a previous debate. We represent similar electorates, as we have large areas of regional remote communities. We have to ask ourselves the question now the boom and the growth are here and are on the way up: how are we going to get the locals involved?
The reality is that official employment figures for the Territory appear buoyant. The real social dilemma, however, is in relation to the regional and remote unemployment figures, because very high figures of Indigenous unemployment are masked by employment programs such as the former CDEP program, now the RJCP program. Those logistics are even amplified further when – I know in the electorate of Barkly, and reckon it is the same in the electorate of Stuart – there are many young people who are not even registered in these programs. They just exist within kinship systems and live off the family’s benefits and resources. These numbers are considerable. They do not add to statistics; they are unknown and, potentially, they reflect a resource that needs investment.
The statement is talking about wooing investors to the Territory, and we acknowledge that. However, we would really like to start hearing more from government about partnerships, training programs, and how you are doing business with Batchelor Institute, for instance, and supporting entry of more Indigenous women into the mining workforce.
This government still seems to be operating on a high-level rhetoric approach. Let us face it, the Chief Minister, when newly arrived to the Northern Territory – I remember his early days in the Northern Territory when he was a classic Centrelink-trained bureaucrat who came out of Canberra. I was always impressed with how he could spin language out to audiences who were listening. He is a great exponent of that high-level bureaucratic, Centrelink-type jargon around training programs, employment and statistics. As a Chief Minister, he has certainly refined that product. It comes across this Chamber and it goes through the media at a rate of knots. But, as a mere member for Barkly, the grassroots local member from the biggest electorate in the Territory, I challenge the Chief Minister and the government to start translating that into what works.
A good example would be OM Manganese at Bootu Creek. When I was elected into this job, I debated with everybody who would listen that we had to start focusing on the 16- and 17-year-old young people. We have to go back down that supply chain and start to develop these young people before they are totally smothered with all these other social challenges that can provide the distractions from the positive outcome.
OM Manganese in Bootu Creek has picked up on that and developed the relationship with Tennant Creek High School where they are really looking at that student cohort, dialoguing with the Community Careers Counsellor, setting up systems around work placement, work experience and school-based apprenticeships, and starting to grow at a grassroots level. I would like to hear more about that.
There are so many opportunities, and government has the responsibility to lead that. So let us have a little less of the Canberra rhetoric and a bit more advice on what is happening in those partnerships being developed. Chief Minister, with your Canberra background – very recent, you have not been in the Territory for long – you must be still well connected in that sector and be able to provide real leadership in that field.
There is also a concern – and it came out in Question Time today – about the sale of Northern Territory public assets. The Port of Darwin is on the chat line; people are talking about it. It is amazing that people I do not know recognise me and come up to me in Darwin, this fair city. Recently I had a couple of conversations where people said, ‘Your duty is to make sure this government does not sell off public assets’. They all start with the Power and Water Corporation, then they go to TIO, closely followed by the port.
We know industry is advising government not to do that. The Chief Minister refuses to rule it out because there is some serious cash-register mentality going on within the government. There are still big election promises to fulfil. However, the people, as well as industry, are saying this. Industry is saying it is important in a fledgling Northern Territory, in a fledgling supply chain, that the government keeps control of the port, because it directly relates to other supply chain logistics, like the railway, for instance. If we see an escalation in transport-related charges then we will see investors drift off, and players in industry looking at alternatives. We do not want to add those potential disadvantages to the resources sector; we want to keep this on growth trajectory.
I will now talk about a couple of concerns within the electorate. The first one relates to the Western Desert Resources stockpile at Bing Bong and the bulk loading of the iron ore vessels there. The locals are starting to become concerned, and we want to maintain their confidence and support. It is important for me to stay mobile in the Barkly and talk to communities about the potential of jobs, prosperity, real work, self-esteem, and all those good characteristics and outcomes we talk about. But the local people from Borroloola and that gulf area have become concerned about the load-out facility, and things like the colour of the environment changing. Having had experience with ports and construction with a privileged position as a minister, I understand how these changes occur. Local people need to be informed, and Western Desert Resources needs to work closely with them ...
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I ask for an extension of time for the member for Barkly.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: It is important we keep the community on track. When you look at that load-out facility, the colour is changing, and this is directly related to the product which is high-grade iron ore. I asked the community, ‘What is your solution?’ It is refreshing to hear a pragmatic approach, ‘There needs to be a cover over the conveyer bulk loader and better water management of dust suppression on the stockpiles’. That comes from local community and government, and Western Desert Resources should definitely celebrate it, because that is a community working together with a company and government to minimise any issues into the future.
The McArthur River mine has some concerns at the moment and is trying to address those concerns in relation to the fires on the stockpile. It has a couple of other environmental issues it is managing regarding the tailings dams and the impacts of acid mine drainage. Because the mine has expanded and is so visible now, many more people are able to see these issues. You can drive past those stockpiles and see the fires and the work McArthur River has done in improvements to the tailings dams. However, we have to continue to work together, because if traditional owners, local people and tourists visiting Australia start to lose confidence, we can suffer some serious challenges. It is best to stay one jump ahead of any of these issues.
At the moment, they are the two issues being spoken about and debated, and there is always the opportunity for the facts to become very clouded. I encourage the minister and the department to stay on those issues. I also encourage those companies to be part of that, because it has been a healthy development to this phase.
I was Principal of Borroloola School through the construction and initial production of the McArthur River mine. As a local member, I watched very closely the development of Western Desert Resources with the previous Minister for Mines and Energy, who initiated and was a steward for that project. I am a stakeholder in this for constituents who could share in the benefits of these projects, and I urge that we continue to work together.
The uncertainty about environment standards and the regulation of the ageing Ranger mine site is also high on the list of discourse within the Northern Territory community. The minister is aware of these issues. This is a very important issue for Territorians. We have to be cognisant and work together with government, industry and the community.
It is a concern that the minister will not reveal the level of environmental bonds so Territorians can see for themselves there are sufficient funds held to correct inevitable environmental management issues arising from mining activity, including unforeseen issues. You know the political business: if there is any secrecy people then make up their own stories. Bonds are important. Territorians want assurance there are significant bonds that can address issues, should and when they emerge.
There is no doubt the work from government in remediating legacy mines is acknowledged. We are all in this together. However, it is of concern –and I appreciate the government’s honesty – that initial analysis has said that remediating existing legacy mines across the Northern Territory will cost in the order of $1bn to $1.5bn. That shows Territorians the extent of those challenges.
The opposition is concerned about any mooted changes to the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority and any watering down of the protection of sacred sites, with likely direct government selection and appointment of members of the AAPA board or any dilution of the independence of that AAPA board. We take that straight to the minister. The member for Stuart is in the saddle now, and we lobby for and demand your support in this area for constituents across the Northern Territory.
I have run out of time, so I will not be able to go through the other projects, particularly the Tennant Creek story. I will conclude with something that came from the Australian Mining Magazine, which posed this question in May 2012:
Another quote:
I will leave the minister with that good advice. I am sure the minister will follow that advice.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank him for bringing this statement to the House and for the constructive debate it has ensured.
Mr CHANDLER (Lands, Planning and the Environment): Mr Deputy Speaker, I have a few notes I will add tonight. I will not be long. I support my colleague, the Minister for Mines and Energy, who told us about the results and benefits that have flowed from the Northern Territory government’s international investment strategy. Well done, minister.
Given I am the Environment minister, I will touch on just how our two departments have been working together to ensure we get the best outcomes which help the Territory economy and, of course, protect our pristine environment.
The mining industry is one of the largest employers of Territorians and, quite simply, mining and exploration activities equate to jobs and, often, new infrastructure for our regional areas. As a government, we are not ashamed to support the mining industry.
Many have spoken about the economic benefits of the Territory’s mining sector of which, of course, there are many. I will address the areas where we are working to ensure these great benefits do not come at a cost to our environment.
The Territory also has a unique and pristine environment which is so important for our own identity. The Country Liberals recognise this and that is why we, upon taking government, moved quickly to establish the Northern Territory Environmental Protection Authority, a fully independent agency, and a first for the Northern Territory. Sometimes it pales beyond belief what kind of reputation we seem to get for protecting our environment, yet we have done more than any previous government has ever done in this space.
This means functions such as environmental approvals, waste management, licences and administration of the Container Deposit Scheme are now being handled independently away from government hands. The Northern Territory Environmental Protection Authority also provides expert technical advice to government on waste and pollution management issues. Through the Northern Territory EPA, we are getting better outcomes sooner through improved processes. Those processes have all been made far more rigorous than they were before. Our environmental impact statements and licence agreements ensure that safe and sustainable mining practices continue into the future.
It is important that we think not only about the short-term, but also the medium- and the long-term effects of mining and how we can better manage them. Legacy mines have been a huge issue and something the previous government either failed to do anything about or just turned a blind eye to. These are mines that have been abandoned and not rehabilitated, and can cause harm to the environment, not just now but for many years to come.
Nowadays there are rehabilitation bonds held over all current mining operations to ensure the funds are available to rehabilitate a site should a company suddenly stop operating. In an effort to clean up these legacy mines, the Country Liberals government established the rehabilitation levy. This is a 1% annual levy on the rehabilitation bond which is 100% dedicated to the rehabilitation of legacy mines. That was a tough call to introduce a new levy on an industry we are keen to promote, but it shows we take the environment very seriously, and the industry is more than willing to join us on this journey. Again, this was an initiative this Country Liberals government introduced to ensure the ongoing protection not only of our environment today, but to also try to clean up some of the mess created in the past.
Oil and gas are seen as the next frontier of mining in the Northern Territory. Resources Week was dominated by talk of the Territory’s onshore and offshore gas potential, with Santos making some very encouraging announcements over the weekend about a discovery in the Browse Basin.
With this push comes the potential for more unconventional gas mining methods such as hydraulic fracturing – or fracking as most people refer to it today. The Chief Minister referred to it as horizontal stimulation at one point in the last week or so.
This method has caused some concern amongst groups in our community, so I called on the Chief Minister to establish an inquiry into hydraulic fracturing. The Chief Minister knows how important it is to have all the facts, especially when it comes to the environment, so he accepted my recommendation and established the inquiry under the Inquiries Act. The Northern Territory EPA and the Northern Territory government worked together to develop some robust terms of reference and have appointed Alan Hawke AC to carry out the inquiry. Mr Hawke has taken over 120 written submissions and has held public meetings. As expected, the debate has been robust, and at times heated, but we are keen to cut through all of that and get the facts so we can establish best practices going forward. It is another very solid example of the environmental credentials this government has shown in the first two years of operation in the Northern Territory.
The truth is the future of oil and gas, both onshore and offshore, creates and provides immense potential for the Northern Territory. We recognise that and will do all we can to promote that. However, it is important that we do it in a sustainable way. That is why we have set up the independent EPA. That is why we have legislation in place that puts a levy on miners to ensure we have sufficient funds in future to clean up and do something about our legacy mines. Again, it is why we called to have an inquiry on fracking, because there is a lot of misinformation out there. There are many people peddling things ...
Mr Wood: You do not have a moratorium.
Mr CHANDLER: Member for Nelson, these are just three things the previous government could have done but did not do in the time it was in government. I put it to you that we have environmental credentials and we have supported the environment. I can recall having to go back to Cabinet to get $4m to keep the cash for cans system going. That is $4m that was not first budgeted for in protecting our environment, but it was something we, on this side, provided to fix the mess of the previous government and its legislation. That was another $4m that was put into environmental processes to ensure, foremost, we are doing things right for the environment.
If everyone calms down and looks at what this government has achieved and introduced in the last two years to protect our environment, they might be very surprised. Sometimes there is a lot of rhetoric and loud noise from certain parts of the community on a number of issues, but when you rip apart all of that rhetoric and start to look at what we are trying to do – systematically changing the processes in the Northern Territory to ensure we know, understand and appreciate the mining sector will provide long-term opportunities for the Northern Territory, but it must be done in a sustainable way. Every bit of my focus, since becoming the minister for the Environment, is to ensure that whatever we do, we do it to the best of our ability. Yes, we promote mining because we understand the benefits the Northern Territory can take from the mining sector. But at the same time, we also recognise our environment needs to be protected.
For us, the inquiry into fracking was a double-edged sword, because until you get the results of an inquiry, you never know where it will go. We are doing this because we want to ensure we have the most robust, rigorous processes in place and put to bed some of the myths so we have some real facts to work with before future decisions are made.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the Minister for Mines and Energy for his statement. I thought I would raise a few points of view from the environmental side. I can assure Territorians our focus is on sustainability, and while we recognise the importance of the mining sector, we also recognise the importance of our environment.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not going to say too much either, but the minister for Lands and Planning got me going.
I thank the minister for his statement. You have to realise the head of the statement is ‘Investment Attraction for Northern Territory Mining Projects’. Most big mining projects will need outside investment because of the amount of money required to start them. Especially big projects generally have to have some foreign capital to commence.
I was listening to the member for Barkly and I agree we have some issues in relation to mining in the Northern Territory. Whilst we want to attract more people to develop the Northern Territory, it is beholden on us to ensure many of the mistakes of the past do not reoccur, such as Mount Todd and Redbank. Even some of the issues in the existing mines like McArthur River, with its leakages from the tailings dam and fires occurring on the rock piles, are of concern. You would hope we do not go down that path again.
The member for Barkly mentioned issues in regard to the mines on the Roper Highway I visited last year – the ilmenite and iron ore mining. One of the big concerns there was the amount of traffic on that road. Even though the mining company did its best to maintain that road, those roads were not specifically made for that type of haulage, bearing in mind their age. They are quite old roads that I think were cattle roads which were built many years ago. With this development needs to come an equal investment into infrastructure and making sure any of these mines do not leave us issues we will regard as a cost to future generations – in other words, the development of these mines is sustainable.
The minister for Lands mentioned fracking. I thought it was a very interesting discussion. I am not against the development of gas in the Northern Territory but, of late, the issue of fracking excites people in the Northern Territory. The minister mentioned we have an inquiry into fracking, and it is still taking some late submissions. Many people find it difficult to understand how the government can have an inquiry into fracking but, at the same time, allow fracking to occur.
In some places, like Victoria, France and England, they had a moratorium on fracking. They had their inquiry and worked out from their inquiry whether it should go ahead. At least you would have some basis for your decision, if you were to go down that path. I keep an open mind on fracking. I am on the Sessional Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future, which has to look at these issues, bearing in mind we are waiting on the report from the inquiry. It would be silly for me to make any profound statement about fracking until I have seen the results of that inquiry, otherwise it will not be based on anything except what someone else says. I need to make sure any decision I make in this area is based on the science. I am very interested to see the outcome of that inquiry.
When the minister talked about mining, he talked about big mines. However, most of the activity you see happening around Darwin at the moment is due to mines occurring in the Howard Springs area, or the rural area in general. Nearly all sand and gravel comes from local facilities and that in itself – even though it is representative of a fairly buoyant economy, especially in the building industry – has created problems of its own.
Sometimes governments announce how wonderful the world is, when the little person is affected and their voice is not heard. The classic example is the number of trucks which travel up and down Gunn Point Road. Quite a number of people who live on Gunn Point Road contacted me. For those of you who do not know, Gunn Point Road starts as Howard Springs Road – or if you want to go to Palmerston, off Lambrick Avenue – and after the bend on Howard Springs Road is then Gunn Point Road, which goes to Gunn Point. Part of it goes through the older subdivisions around Melaleuca Road, Callistemon Road and Bronzewing Avenue, which is part of Whitewood Park, and quite a number of people live on that road.
The amount of heavy truck traffic is now starting to cause some major concern for people. People do not mind traffic during the day, but when trucks are going past before 4 am, they start to say, ‘Enough is enough’.
I sat out there on the road one night – I must admit that I nearly fell asleep – and I went home for a few hours and came back. The first truck I saw on the road that night when I was collecting statistics about what was travelling up and down the road was at about 3.50 am. It was a double. There were more trucks between that time and 7 am, and the number increased after 7 am.
The reason we have more trucks is there is more development, especially locally. We have a sand mine there which has a batching plant. People would know Coolalinga is developing at a fast rate and much of the development in that area gets its cement from Howard River. We have a booming extractive mining industry but, on the downside of it, we have disruption to people’s lives.
Thankfully, a good person is the CEO of the Extractive Mining Association, Mr Tom Harris Jnr. He has been to a meeting of people living in the area, and we are trying to resolve the issues in relation to noise to see if we can have trucks travelling up and down that road at an hour which will not disturb the people in that area. I thank Tom for that. We have not come up with a solution yet. Hopefully when parliament is finished I will get word that we may have another meeting which can produce an outcome. Because everybody who attended the meeting – before the mosquitoes forced us to go home – told him of the issues, he is fully aware of most of the problems that occur there. I thank him for that.
The other issue with extractive mining is the damage to the environment. I am concerned with, in the big rush for development, how stringent the department is when it deals with the rehabilitation of mining sites. I have not been up in the air for a while to have a look, but many new mines are opening in the Gunn Point area and the Sunday Creek area south of Goode Road in Humpty Doo, which is sometimes called Wack Wack these days.
That land is being used primarily for extractive mining. I understand we need gravel and sand, but I expect the department would ensure the environment rehabilitation in those areas is carried out. As much as we have legacy mines in other parts of the Territory, we also have legacy extractive mines, where land was not repaired and cleaned up. The response by the government should be to ensure, although there is much construction activity, we do not forget there is a responsibility, when removing that material, for some rehabilitation.
Some of those sand areas are very important for some of the more endangered species. There was a field day recently looking at plants in that area. Part of the reason for that field day was to educate people on the importance of those sand areas so they are not all mined, and those important areas for specialist plants not normally found in many other places in the Territory are protected, or at least some areas set aside that will not be dug up.
I welcome the ministerial statement. I also make the point that the government puts a lot of effort into talking about gas. That is fine because we require gas to operate much of our energy needs. However, gas is a dirty product. If you think it is not, then you are off with the fairies. It is not as dirty as diesel or oil, but it is still a dirty product. That is why ConocoPhillips shoves heaps of carbon dioxide into the air and we have a burning-off agreement with people in Arnhem Land. The reality is Japan gets clean gas, we get the carbon dioxide. When people talk about gas they need to understand it is a dirty product.
If we are serious about trying to reduce carbon emissions in the world, then in a place like the Northern Territory we should be placing just as much emphasis on renewable energy, especially for remote communities. There are issues regarding storage. There is no doubt that storage is still an issue that will take some years of development before it is reliable enough to withstand, say, three weeks of monsoonal weather when there is no sun out, or when night comes there is no solar. It is an opportunity for the government to be a leader in small-scale renewable energy.
There are many communities along the coast which have the opportunity to use solar and wind. There are some places on the Tiwi Islands that are close to strong tidal currents which may have the opportunity to use tidal power. There was some work done about 15 or 20 years ago in the Apsley Strait looking at the potential to provide power in that area. Technology has moved on since then, and it would be worth revisiting.
We know that in the Alpurrurulam/Lake Nash area there are wind turbines because the Barkly is a pretty good source of a breeze or two. I have tried to make a cup of tea for my wife while travelling across the Tablelands Highway. That was a fairly difficult thing to do, to try to keep the flame from blowing out, because the winds are very strong in that area.
We do not want to lose sight of other opportunities. We will mine for gas, but I do not think we should lose sight of the fact we have opportunities to showcase how we can provide power for small communities. It may not be total power from renewables. We have a number of communities using renewable energy already, like Bulman, which has a large solar bank and a diesel generator. If we can invest more into reducing our reliance on diesel or gas, then that would be good for the Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his statement. I am sure there are plenty of other things we could discuss when it comes to mining. I thought I would add that to the statement tonight.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Resources for bringing this statement to the Chamber this evening because it has been a significant statement in the bipartisan manner in which I read the intent of the statement. It talks about the importance of bipartisan support for the resources sector. The foreign investment strategy that underpins a key focus of the Northern Territory government is a strategy that has been delivered under Labor, and continued under the current CLP government. I congratulate them for seeing the wisdom of that foreign investment strategy focusing on those key Asian markets.
Also, we went to great extent to increase the investment in the resources sector. As the statement acknowledged quite early, it was one of those key sectors hit by the impact of the global financial crises. The Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration is a program that has been running, which I acknowledge the current government is continuing.
We have heard contributions in the Chamber on the importance of the resources sector, and I doubt there is anyone here who would hold a contrary view. We have heard contributions on what alternative renewable energy sources there are in the Territory. That is an unsung hero of opportunity in the Northern Territory. I have seen the investment by the federal government in the Bushlight Program in the homelands and outstations where entire communities which used to operate on diesel are now operating on solar. There was the King’s Canyon investment in our time. It is a missed opportunity for Alice Springs to no longer have solar city status. I urge the government to reconsider that regarding renewable opportunities.
That being said, we have geothermal potential in the Barkly. At different times there has been consideration of tidal opportunities in the Top End. That is probably on the trickier end of the scale, but Territorians have proven their worth in research and development. I acknowledge the work that has been done at Charles Darwin University, particularly on solar research.
I am confident Territorians would applaud any government that invests R&D funding, and pilot or significant projects in renewables. Many funding opportunities exist in and around the work we do with the major resource companies. The savannah burning funding we received from ConocoPhillips has taught us much about the management of land and country, and employed Indigenous Territorians on land. It has been a huge success story. Similar investments from INPEX regarding understanding the habitat in Darwin Harbour in a better way have been a very worthy investment.
I thank the minister for what I see as an intent for a bipartisan statement. It was not the normal Labor bashing we see in most statements from the government. That shows a level of maturity in understanding how vital the resources sector is to the Northern Territory economy, and how much opportunity there is, as recognised in the statement. We are relatively under-developed. However, geoscience is strengthening and improving. Geospatial is something we have been making some leaps and bounds in. Providing the data on exploration opportunities has been one of the great strengths of the work completed by the staff in the Department of Mines and Energy’s resources department. I congratulate them for the tireless and dedicated years of service they provided to successive governments.
Industry welcomes the bipartisan approach to the resources sector. I have paid particular attention to maintaining a strong bipartisan approach to onshore resources and of course our offshore industry, particularly when it comes to oil and gas development in the Territory. I acknowledge the effort of the previous Labor governments that partnered in delivering these projects in providing a stable and focused government. I acknowledge the importance of supporting infrastructure. It is something I will touch on in more detail, but the $100m investment Labor undertook in the Marine Supply Base positions us extremely well to be the service and supply centre for that offshore industry.
Industry players are increasing communication with each other. We saw that in Resources Week and SEAAOC last week in the Northern Territory. Darwin is very much becoming the place that can deliver certainty to industry, particularly when it comes to oil and gas and those lucrative offshore fields, because we are providing what I describe as brownfield sites. I do not think the days of greenfield are still with us, to be honest, given the price of production out of the US. We have to be realistic about that and say our competitive advantage is in providing for brownfield sites. All our brownfield sites are currently at the DLNG and the site under construction at Blaydin Point for the Ichthys project. They provide significant additional trains and will literally fuel oil and gas industry through decades. It is a pretty exciting opportunity Darwin has that we can, in a bipartisan way, seize upon.
There is no doubt the gas task force I sat on as the Treasurer and Minister for Business and Training was a very worthy exercise. I encourage government to engage at that level with industry, but also with the training and peak employer bodies, because the more you have people around the table engaging with each other and understanding how to drill these benefits of the major projects down to local Territorians, the better. It is inspiring to see that when information is shared around the table in such a forum, you generally get a focus on local training and job opportunities.
I see the regional migration agreement is being pursued by the federal and Territory governments. That has been a significant concern for the major companies regarding workforce issues. One of the opportunities we have, as the INPEX Blaydin Point site gets to production – let us say 2016-17 – is that the big projects in Queensland will be coming off. There is a very positive timing opportunity in the Australian workforce coming to the Territory to support any additional train at LNG, which has an advantage in the field at the moment. With the talks I have seen going on between Santos and ConocoPhillips, and the potential of not just the backfill to Bayu-Undan, but bringing in play both Lasseter and Poseidon, we really are talking of the next major project and the next train.
I go out of my way to ensure I engage at a very senior level with the major companies. I travel south on a regular basis, and I had some very fruitful discussions recently in Perth with the industry. In meetings I have held with INPEX, I have heard they have reached the halfway point in that all-important Ichthys project. The quiet, lesser-known partner, Total, is making a fantastic effort on the project. I acknowledge the work of INPEX and Total in getting that to the halfway mark. It is an incredibly exciting opportunity to prove to the global industry how projects can be delivered on time and on budget in the Northern Territory, especially in Darwin.
In regard to the North Australian Centre for Oil and Gas at Charles Darwin University, that was a passion of the former Chief Minister Paul Henderson. The conversation started under former Chief Minister Clare Martin, and continued with the passion and drive under former Chief Minister Paul Henderson, to ensure we created that all-important training hub in Charles Darwin University. It is great to see the North Australian Centre for Oil and Gas at Charles Darwin University leading industry development in the Northern Territory and providing a real opportunity for our young Territorians to go into highly-skilled, highly-paid jobs in their home town.
The Larrakia Trade Training Centre was established to provide training to upskill and support Indigenous Territorians into jobs on this project. I acknowledge that there has been a real focus and effort to ensure that not only the big end of town benefits, but locals get opportunities in jobs. The focus of economic growth and engineering construction through a Labor lens is around securing job opportunities for locals, and the trade training centre plays a pivotal role in that.
The $33bn project is expected to reach its peak construction phase next year, literally seeing thousands of workers here on the ground. A project of that sheer scale requires the fly-in, fly-out workforce, but I never lose sight of the locals who have been able to secure jobs either directly on the project, or through the contractors, subcontractors and different tiers of contractors who supply that project.
When constructed, it will be one of the world’s largest LNG facilities. Gas and condensate reserves in the Browse Basin have a 40-year expectant life span. The first gas from Blaydin Point is expected to be produced in 2016-17 with 8.4 million tonnes of LNG under production each year. This project underpins the Territory’s economy right now, and will do so through the next couple of years.
It is very pleasing that there will soon be very strong participation in October, with the visit from the Japan Australia Business Council. That relationship, of course, was fostered previously under the Labor government. Former Chief Minister Henderson lobbied significantly for the Japan Australia Business Council to meet in Darwin. It is exciting to see that will be happening in October.
The Ichthys project includes the offshore project with subsea facilities, two large floating platforms, a central processing facility, and the floating production storage and offloading facility. Alongside that, with the onshore LNG plant in Darwin, there is also an 889 km gas pipeline connecting Darwin to the Browse Basin. Here is where we have proven you can chase the big vision and deliver locally.
The Marine Supply Base fundamentally establishes us as the oil and gas hub for service and supply. It was criticised at the time it was announced, but I am very confident of that Marine Supply Base underpinning economic growth across the service and supply industry. It has such a multiplier effect. As we did in those days, we modelled it on Aberdeen. There was a lot of wisdom in reaching out and pursuing that major project for us. ASCO will operate the base for up to 20 years, and has contracted local company Macmahon to build it. We saw the official opening of it last week.
Darwin will provide about $150m a year in services and supplies to support the gas industry. With the help of the new base, it is expected this will increase to $420m over the next 20 years. It is a significant step up in economic opportunities. Industry confirmed the base will support further investment in Darwin, and it is looking forward to accessing the new infrastructure. It helps our capacity to support the offshore oil and gas development and improve efficiency, importantly, at East Arm port. With the exploration across the Arafura and Timor Seas and into the Browse Basin, there is immense opportunity for the Territory service and supply industry to grow. The facility will have the capacity to service in excess of 1000 vessels per annum with a 12-hour turnaround. That is exactly what industry needs.
The industry is calling on the government to be very savvy about the needs of the industry. I note that in submissions going to government on north Australia development, industry is very clear. Industry wants the Darwin port to remain a public asset, it does not want it to be privatised. I ask the government to heed that call.
One of the projects – a spin-off from the relationship with ConocoPhillips and the opportunities as a result of the onshore project at Wadeye – is the creation of a gas-fired power station. That project sits at around $17.8m. I note it has been delayed until 2015. I am looking forward to construction of that gas-fired plant at Wadeye, as a cleaner and greener fuel source – an obvious one, compared to diesel currently being burnt to supply the all-important township of Wadeye.
Eni’s prospects at Evans Shoal look very promising. They are sitting there as options for backfill or, as I said, you could also look at Lasseter and Poseidon underpinning a second train. The company is in discussions with its partner, Shell. Eni has had to defer exploration at the Penguin Deep well as a result of the gas to Gove project not proceeding, but it is watching the feasibility study being undertaken by APA of the gas pipeline project, and views both options as having merit. The investment would make the Petrel field viable with the pipeline to Blacktip, then onshore through existing infrastructure. Eni is one of the companies that has come out publicly calling for the government to not sell the East Arm port. It has concerns around the Wadeye airstrip. In a submission on north Australia development, it has said it does not want to see the Wadeye airstrip privatised. They are further questions to the government and considerations for the Resources minister to turn his attention to in critical areas of infrastructure for industry that you want to keep in public hands.
When we talk about critical infrastructure for industry, the port is crucial. I cannot stress enough that the industry needs to be consulted about your current investment strategies around the port, because it is very concerned about potential increased costs across all users. At the end of the day, it is Territorians, as we know, who would bear the brunt of significant increased costs. We do not want to make ourselves less competitive in a highly competitive global market, and our port, at the moment, is competitive infrastructure. Commercialisation of that port, to the extent that could occur if you were to hive off to investors, would create some significant issues for industry.
Regarding ConocoPhillips, there is no doubt the Greater Poseidon is its most promising field. Backfill for Darwin LNG runs out in 2022. While the Browse Basin is very close to Western Australia, there are potential options being considered, whether that is a floating LNG platform, an offshore processing, a tie into the existing Bayu-Undan pipeline, or an offshore processing and expansion of Darwin LNG with another train. The project, combined with other Browse Basin gas, could support another train at Blaydin Point, in addition to, obviously, expanding Darwin LNG.
Darwin provides those brownfield economics, reducing capital costs through tying into existing infrastructure, existing construction and operator relationships, and provides a very attractive picture when it comes to financial viability. The Territory is extremely well placed to benefit from this exploration.
I acknowledge we are moving into a significant maintenance shutdown with ConocoPhillips at DLNG. The company has a very strong track record of trying to work collaboratively with our community and business sector in shutdown of projects. We will see some 800 staff accommodated on a floating hotel, and one-third of the workforce, I am advised by ConocoPhillips, will be local, representing something in the vicinity of a $50m boost to our economy.
Santos is also exploring the Lasseter field in the Browse Basin. Santos expects to invest in exploration at the Barossa field at the end of this year and into next year. It, too, is very interested in the feasibilities occurring around the APA pipeline. It will not necessarily be the only player in the pipeline market, I note that. But to see a company make a board decision to proceed with feasibility has been very encouraging.
Like ConocoPhillips, INPEX, Eni and Santos see the benefits of a second train in Darwin, of bringing more gas onshore to Darwin, and they recognise the value in working together.
I was pleased to see this statement was in a bipartisan manner, and reflected the difficulties the industry experienced as a result of the global financial crisis. I look forward to working constructively to continue to send a bipartisan support message, very clearly and strongly, to industry. I encourage the government to work constructively with industry. It has many good suggestions, and the more you heed them, the more we are sending a ‘can do’ message to industry. I am talking of the onshore resource prospects, as well as, obviously, the offshore oil and gas I have mainly focused on this evening. There is a lot to say in this area.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement to the House.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, I am happy to speak about this issue tonight. The work that is happening in this department is fantastic, particularly the work the minister is doing around getting businesses to work together with government to attract overseas investment.
Coming from a background of finance, it is interesting to note how these companies start, seek capital, and put capital into train. Many of these smaller companies that come to work in the Northern Territory often start looking for enough money just to drill one hole, whether that be a mining or oil base. They often do not have a whole lot of capital and rely on information the government provides so they can assess work done in previous years in these areas – the geology, aerial survey and those sorts of things. Small companies seeking capital need to do various fundraising exercises and show the potential of the projects they are proposing so investors will put funds in.
Often times, this comes down to how good the information is that is coming from government. It is fantastic to see minister Westra van Holthe’s department is putting out brilliant information so people can access it effectively and start doing what they need to.
Once a hole has been drilled, and positive results are gained, the next step for these companies is to prove up resources. That requires a lot more money, drilling and work in delivering information to the markets to attract more dollars. This is the part where you will start seeing some mid- to long-term investors entering that market, throwing some money at capital raising and these type of things.
As they prove up these resources, we often see farming projects or buy-outs happen with the data collected. Collecting that data can be very expensive. Attracting investment from overseas is always very important, particularly when we are on the shores of some very resource hungry nations in Southeast Asia and China.
One of the reasons companies in Asia and overseas like working in Australia is because they know the regulatory and legal frameworks are set up. I remember speaking to investors from overseas when I was in finance who said the thing they liked most about working in Australia is, because the legal system works effectively, whatever they do contractually will have to be met and abided by.
It is really important when we think about all these sorts of things that are happening in the Northern Territory. It is a place where people want to be able to invest because we have fantastic resources available as we are fundamentally underexplored, and there is a lot of scope for companies, whether it be gold, silver, base metals, copper or the oil and gas sector, both onshore or offshore. All of these companies like to do business in countries where they know what the regulatory framework is and the rules are before they go into the game. That is really important to know.
We see our government working effectively with governments of other nations, encouraging them and even providing the ability for companies and investors to meet. It shows its explicit support for these companies in creating an environment where they, particularly Asian investors, feel safe investing in Australia, knowing they are not putting their money in something that is likely to blow up in their face.
Some of the things that become important after the commissioning operations take place are incredibly expensive. I remember being in finance and looking at around a $300m mark to get a mine from the stage of a proved-up resource to actually becoming operational. We have seen that happen in the Northern Territory. That sort of money is very hard to come up with for many Australian companies, and we see attracting investment from overseas becomes integral in making these projects a reality.
Sorting out the contracts with companies based overseas that will be the buyers of these products is important. It is fantastic to see the work the department and the minister are doing in attracting that investment to the Northern Territory.
The CORE initiative was put in place, putting $3.95m per annum into these projects, creating an environment where people can safely, under a known framework, invest in the Northern Territory.
The additional $2m a year over the next four years is also going into assessing the Territory shale gas potential. This is very exciting because, working this through logically, we see this can be a mainstay in the diversifier of the Northern Territory economy. Mining has always been a mainstay of the Northern Territory economy, but it is important to note, in the volatile world we live in regarding commodity prices, we often see the gas market will stay reasonably stable. We know there will always be demand, because demand is growing at such a high rate. Even where we see a material slowdown in the Asian nations, we see that oil and gas will go up as energy-hungry Asian nations start growing their middle class and those people become more energy-hungry with the various things they have in homes etcetera.
This CORE initiative the Department of Mines and Energy put together helps local explorers attract that international investment. I cannot understate the importance of that, because those funds are integral to the Northern Territory staying in front of the game and of what we are supposed to be doing, which is diversifying the income streams of the Northern Territory.
We see the other potentials around this area. We have seen success with 36 investment deals in Territory mining and exploration projects involving China, and many others coming through. We know the Department of Mines and Energy was directly involved in at least 10 of these projects. They bring a stability to people’s lives in the Northern Territory, because they bring jobs.
If we look at the train of what happens, there are jobs in construction, mining or extraction, transport, and in stevedoring. It was interesting to hear the Opposition Leader speak on the port and the efficiency necessary in that port. I have worked there and know firsthand how hard that wharf is worked and how much product gets passed through it, both on to and off.
Through that construction phase we see many tricky jobs to do, and vessels and project work coming in which employs many people, and they are good, solid, stable jobs. We see the whole mining industry and the jobs that can create in regional areas. We see the opportunities for Indigenous employment in this area. We see the entire transport system with Genesee Wyoming operating the rail and working out contracts with our minerals companies for transport all the way through to the port. That transport mechanism is integral and provides a good source of income for many Territorians, particularly those who might not like to live in Darwin and have a lifestyle of moving around a lot.
The government assistance lowers risks of offshore investors and, to me, this is the most important thing. Often when we look at these issues, we have to look at them from a measure of risk. When investors look to invest, they will always look at the investment from the measure of risk: how does this risk relate, can I quantify this risk, and what does my payoff need to be in my return in order to justify taking this risk? It is encouraging to see the work the government does in assisting. This gives peace of mind to many of these overseas companies that look to put capital into the Northern Territory. I encourage the government and the minister to continue to work very hard on that. There is much potential in the Northern Territory for diversifying commodities we are extracting, including rare earth, vanadium, potash and other things we have spoken about a lot, such as gold, base metals, iron ore and gas.
I cannot understate the importance of diversification in this and of allowing these mining exploration companies to have good access, not just to information about the land and the previous exploration, but to capital markets. While the stock exchanges of Australia and other nations are the vehicle of that, oftentimes it is the work and things behind the scenes the government does which facilitate a lot of that happening, especially when we are talking about very small companies.
Madam Speaker, I encourage the minister and the department, who are doing fantastic work, to keep attracting investment from overseas, because it is integral as a main driver of the Northern Territory economy.
Mrs PRICE (Community Services): Madam Speaker, today we heard from the Minister for Mines and Energy, who told us about the results and benefits that have flowed from the Northern Territory government’s international investment strategy. In recent times, exploration companies have found it extremely difficult to raise capital through the Australian Stock Exchange. The major stumbling block in developing mining projects in the Northern Territory is the difficulty associated with raising finance. Given that growing the minerals and energy sectors in order to increase royalties is one of the most promising avenues for the Territory government to grow its financial independence, it is vital this government helps junior exploration companies seek alternative finance opportunities from as many sources as possible.
The mining industry is one of the largest employers of Territorians, and mining and exploration activities mean jobs in the bush. Education, training and infrastructure are critical ways of future-proofing our communities and homelands, and getting people into jobs – jobs with equal choices and opportunity to grow wealth in communities. Financial independence opens up doors for people to make strong, healthy lifestyle choices to support their families.
I am glad to hear the member for Barkly asking about training programs for youth in remote communities. The benefits of royalties from mining are far-reaching and help set up trust funds to help future generations of Indigenous Territorians. One example of this is the Warlpiri Education and Training Trust, which is responsible for funding projects such as a youth media project and a learning centre. An early childhood care and development project has been going on for four years now.
The youth media project was set up in 2007 and developed after a request from the Kurra Aboriginal Corporation that the Mount Theo program provide youth services with a focus on media training and employment across the Warlpiri region. It aims to support Warlpiri youth and to develop their sense of self, family and culture and to stay strong and healthy. The project-based media workshops give youth in the bush something to do and skills that open up employment opportunities.
The Wirliyajarrayi Learning Centre opened last year in the community of Willowra, 330 km northwest of Alice Springs. The centre was a seven-year project for the Willowra community and was built using Warlpiri people’s royalty money through the Warlpiri Education Trust Fund. I attended the opening. I was so proud we, as Warlpiri people, were able to work in partnership with the mining company which has a mine at The Granites, as the traditional owners, to help other Warlpiri people who, in turn, are helping their young people gain employment and a better, healthy lifestyle.
It was great to be at the opening of the centre because Maisie Kitson, who fought for the centre, is one of the committee members of the WETT Corporation. She had a vision to use mining royalties to set up a learning centre for young people, and this is what happens.
We have had a good relationship with the mining companies we have dealt with. The Granites gold mine has been going since the 1980s. I am proud to say the Warlpiri people have built a good relationship and have a strong connection with the company. The old people who have been dealing with different mining companies that have taken over from previous owners still respect any mining company that comes on to their country. It also opens up country for our people. They put tracks and seismic lines in and that, in a way, opens up country for old people to go back to their country, which they have not seen since they were little. It gives them that opportunity and makes them feel good that they can work with a mining company that will help them get back on to country. That has been going on now since the 1980s. I say on behalf of Warlpiri people that we are grateful we have good relationships with the mining companies.
I know of many other communities such as the Mirrar and the Gumatj, which have benefitted from mine sites, and have gone on to build boarding accommodation, as the Mirrar have in Jabiru for their kids so they can be based at home and go to school and be looked after.
For some of us traditional landowning people, it is important because it opens up all sorts of benefits for all of us. The Warlpiri Education and Training Trust is driven by local Warlpiri people who have had experience in Warlpiri for years. This is an example of how royalty money can create opportunities for the future leaders of the Territory.
As the Minister for Mines and Energy mentioned, the Territory remains underexplored. However, it is exciting to know the recent exploration boom discovered the potential for a range of commodities, including rare earth and potash.
Mining and exploration helps build our regions and grow wealth and opportunities for remote Territorians. The mining industry opens our most remote regions through the creation of roads and infrastructure. A flow-on effect of building roads means greater connectivity for our remote communities and better access to services, which then drives more development in northern Australia.
This government is looking after our children’s future by making decisions now that will make the opportunities of the future reality. Under Framing the Future, this government’s blueprint for the development of the Northern Territory, prosperous economy visions include the establishment of an economy that lands new local, national and international investment.
The first objective for the prosperous economy is one that uses our location and relationships to build international trade, culture and tourism links, and leverage new investment from the Northern Territory’s track record in improving food, energy and resource security for our partners. This includes an intention to strengthen the Territory’s role as the gateway between Australia and Asia by promoting the Northern Territory as an investment location and a supplier of quality goods and services. This government aims to achieve a prosperous economy that is supported by a modern pro-investment environment.
It is good to hear the minister talk about the Country Liberals government implementing the Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, or CORE, initiative. CORE is designed to attract minerals and petroleum exploration investment through acquiring new, precompetitive geoscience information to make the Territory a more attractive place to explore, a scheme of industry grants for high-risk exploration and, importantly, programs to attract international investment into resource projects at the exploration stage. These minerals investment attraction studies help explorers in the Northern Territory to find and access potential investors and drive exploration and mining in the Territory.
CORE has been given unprecedented funding of $23.8m over four years. This is the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government, and shows our ‘open for business’ approach.
With funding from CORE, the Department of Mines and Energy will continue to send trade delegations to Asia to attract investment opportunities. Since 2006 there have been 36 investment deals in Territory mining and exploration projects, worth almost $800m, involving Chinese companies. It is concerning, though, despite the fact we have world-class mines, most currently mined resources will be exhausted in the next 16 years. We need exploration to maintain and expand the role of mining in the Territory.
The Northern Territory is an attractive destination for international investors for many reasons. We have mineral and energy commodities that are of high interest to China, Japan and South Korea. Face-to-face relationship building is crucial to doing business in Asia. Having ministers working hard for the Territory by taking part in industry delegations in China, Japan and South Korea is an exceptional advantage for the Northern Territory. This leadership is a demonstration of the importance of the market to this government and is another example of how we are working hard for the Territory.
Madam Speaker, strong mining and energy industries mean new roads, a better standard of living, and jobs for those Territorians who need them most.
Mr HIGGINS (Daly): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for making the statement. I note there is probably more bipartisan cooperation on this statement than I have seen for a long time, other than the one I did on the gas pipelines. I am glad to see some people are taking leaves out of my book.
I would like to talk about it from a slightly different angle. The way I saw this statement and what the minister has been trying to do to attract development or funds into Australia is the opposite of the basis for north Australian development, if I can link it to that. If we want to develop north Australia, we need to have products to sell, and those products will be minerals that every Territorian owns; we have to remember that. The minister is trying to encourage people to invest in Australia and the Northern Territory and, therefore, sell these products. It is the sale of these products and that investment that then gives government funding to support all of those things people complain about – the lack of funds available for health, education, roads, the whole lot. Something people need to bear in mind is this is the opposite to north Australian development.
Energy Futures is a committee I sit on, and the member for Nelson raised this. I have found that group very interesting in helping me get an understanding of how the gas industry works and the sale of gas around the world. I can honestly say it has been a real eye-opener in how the gas industry does business worldwide. This push by the minister to try to get overseas investment into the gas industry is very important because it is a very big industry worldwide. While we might think we just have to find markets for our own gas, there is the whole exchange of gas and everything that goes on. The amount of money that will be invested in the Territory in this area is minuscule compared to what they invest overseas.
The other thing I note regarding the mining, extractive and other such industries in the Territory is they are industries that are not seen that much. Much of this occurs out of the sight of people in Darwin. Quite often you will talk to people and they will say, ‘There is not much going on’. I think, ‘Get out there and really have a look’.
Other than seeing the cars driving around and reversing with their beep, beep, beep all the time, not many people would really know what is happening at INPEX. They have never been there to have a look. It is phenomenal how long it takes me to get there from our accommodation in Bellamack. I come out onto the road – I do not know the name – at Elizabeth River. If you are to come out there at 7 am, it will often take you 20 minutes to get on to that road with the number of buses.
People have to realise there are a hell of a lot of people going out there to do a hell of a lot of work, and this is all related to this mining industry. Many people need to realise that most of this work, the wells that are being dug, and all the rest, is occurring out of sight. There is an enormous amount of development being done in this area.
I also noted the member for Nelson raised the issue of noise and the cars …
Mr Wood: Trucks.
Mr HIGGINS: Trucks, I am sorry. … and how the industry impacts on people. I point out to him that I have had a major problem with boats on the river, and this is exactly the same. They start at 3 am, so it is not just development in the mining industry we have to be considerate of, it is also the development in our tourism industries and so forth.
The extractive industry has been around a long time. In regard to the impact on the environment, everyone needs to realise that industry has been around for many years.
I was born in Griffith, outback New South Wales, and the first time I had anything to do with this sort of thing was a quarry up the hill. I used to think to myself all the time, ‘How did that ever happen? How did that big hole ever get there and not be filled in?’ It is something we have to keep in mind.
When we talk about fracking, I always try to point out to people – they always do a comparison to what happens in Queensland or New South Wales – there is a big difference between coal seam and shale. Many people need to ask the question, ‘What is the difference between coal seam fracking and shale?’ There is a big difference. Quite often, the problems we see with coal seam are portrayed as what we will have in the Territory, and they are two completely different facets. I am not saying that shale is safe – we are still doing our study into it, so I will leave that open – but they are two completely different things.
There is a lot in here about CORE and so forth, and many people have been over it, and everyone here agrees. However, I wanted to mention those links.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement in. I thank everyone else for being so supportive of the statement, of which I do not think you have had many criticisms.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I thank all of the members in the House who have contributed to this debate.
The mining sector is an important one for the Northern Territory, and it would be foolhardy and would send a terrible signal to the mining sector domestically, nationally and internationally if there were to be some disagreements in this House, on different sides of politics, about the importance of the mining industry to the Northern Territory.
That said, there will always be some one-upmanship going on in the House, a bit of ‘we are doing it better than you’ and ‘we are doing more than you did’ – that sort of thing. I do not think that is unhealthy. We all want to have acknowledged the great work we have done on respective sides of the House in the mining sector, promoting the Northern Territory as an investment destination for mining and oil and gas.
The statement was about the investment attraction strategy for the Northern Territory and what has been done locally, through the CORE initiative, and internationally to attract investment. I specifically kept this ministerial statement confined to the mining sector and did not talk much about the oil and gas sector for a reason. As the members for Barkly and Nelson pointed out, there is a heck of a lot of discussion going on in the Northern Territory about the oil and gas sector, and rightly so.
I will not diminish the importance of oil and gas to the Northern Territory. The gas industry has played a big part in the Northern Territory already through the Mereenie field, and the gas that has flowed north through the Amadeus gas pipeline, which has powered the Power and Water generators in Darwin in the past to run the Katherine to Darwin grid, and has powered Alice Springs.
The gas has turned around now. There is gas coming from offshore through Eni’s plant near Wadeye which is powering generators in Darwin. That is the past and the present. But in the future, there is no doubt in my mind the gas industry will be the most important and significant economic driver for the Territory. The gas potential in the Northern Territory is huge. I did not want to diminish the gas industry and the importance of it by focusing only on mining. However, I am cognisant of the fact that, sometimes, the mining industry can feel like the poor second cousin if not mentioned specifically in this type of forum. That is why I focused particularly on the mining sector.
I will cover off on a few things raised during the debate, not in any great detail. The member for Barkly raised a few things which I will talk a little about. As he was speaking, I made a few notes. He spoke a little about royalties, and the context of his comments was around making sure the quest for royalties is not the overriding factor in approving mining projects. I can assure the member for Barkly and other people listening to this debate that is never the overriding factor government considers in approving projects.
The most significant factor we look at is one founded in our philosophy and the CLP’s DNA – developing the economy and providing an environment where people in remote and regional parts of the Territory, particularly, have access to real jobs. Royalties, however, are also a fantastic benefit to the Territory and sit alongside other benefits to the Territory coming from the mining industry. We are often accused – not this government particularly, but governments generally – of cash grabs around royalties and filling government coffers with royalty money, etcetera.
I point out regarding royalties that this is money that goes, in the case of the Territory, towards our independence from Canberra. Every dollar we raise as own-source revenue frays the apron strings on which we are tied to Canberra. They become less over time, and that is something we want to achieve. We want to have a greater degree of financial independence from Canberra.
The other important thing about royalties is they are spent in the Territory. This is where funding comes for things like schools, teachers, police officers, nurses and doctors, and it builds infrastructure. This is good money. It is not about government being greedy – goodness me! Government does not hoard this money away, and when it dies passes it onto its kids or anything silly like that. This is money that comes to the Territory. It is revenue spent in the Territory on services the people of the Northern Territory need. There is nothing wrong with that. Royalties are something we should not use as the overriding consideration in establishing a mining industry, but should be considered to be of great benefit.
The 2030 time frame as the end date of most of our major mining projects was something I mentioned in the statement. The member for Barkly raised it as well, and that provides us with a pressing time frame. We need to work very hard now to establish what will, hopefully, be the world-class mines of the future in the Northern Territory. That is very important; in fact, it is critically important that we do that. The work being done now must be considered a long-term investment. The $23m or so invested into the CORE initiative over the next four years may not necessarily reap the results of a new mine opening within those four years. This is a long-term investment, a long-term vision this government has for developing new mines on either greenfield or brownfield sites.
In fast-tracking approvals and environmental concerns, the Country Liberals government is very proud of the fact we are streamlining approval processes. We have always maintained – and I am sure the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment will back me up on this – that we do these faster approvals, but not at the expense of the environment. In fact, this government takes its environmental responsibilities extremely seriously.
I did not mention it in my statement because it sits in another area, but the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment talked about the mining levy. A 1% levy on the amount of bond the department holds for mining activities goes towards the remediation of mines. I am delighted to say that some of that work has started. The Redbank mine is being worked on with money that has been raised through the mining levy. Drilling has commenced around the site to examine the geology directly underneath the pit and areas affected by that terrible environmental legacy, so we get a better understanding of whether we are dealing with paleochannels underneath, or some other form of geological structure. That will help us to inform decisions about how we can manage the site. That work has started. It is something we had the courage to do.
I go to something the member for Barkly mentioned about the Fraser Institute and changes in the rankings the Northern Territory had from, effectively, what was the last year of the Labor government to the first year or so of the CLP government. Yes, there was a drop away in one or two of those indicators which was around government regulation. The reason for that was we introduced, at that time, the mining rehabilitation levy. Naturally, industry did not like it. I understand that. I had many representations over that period of time by the industry and individual companies objecting to that sort of thing. That is why our ranking went down, I suspect – simply because of that. However, the government is not afraid of making tough decisions and will continue to do that, even if it sometimes upsets what would normally be considered our traditional supporters and the people to whom we would provide traditional support, being the mining industry. We are not afraid of tough decisions.
I pretty well covered most of the things I wanted to cover in the closing debate. There will be some further information which I am happy to provide. In fact, what I might do before I sit down is talk a little about one issue that was raised regarding what help we are giving to smaller companies. I think it was the member for Barkly who raised it. If it was not him, it was the member for Nelson. What are we doing to support juniors? I will talk in the context of what we are doing around the CORE initiative right now.
Contained within the CORE initiative is a collaborative program which means, effectively, that junior companies – explorers – can come to the department with an application for joint funding of some of their exploration program. That means if they are successful with their applications the department will jointly fund that work. The payback, of course, is the information that is gathered from that drilling program or that type of exploration they are carrying out comes back to the department to help inform the Northern Territory Geological Survey on the geology of that area and the findings which have been obtained from the work that was done. After a period of time – I think it is 12 months – the information becomes publically available so other explorers and mining companies can take it and use it to better inform themselves of the overall geology of that area.
I am very pleased to announce the successful applicants for 2014-15 have been announced by the Department of Mines and Energy. There were 33 applications received from 23 companies, which is more than double the applications received in the previous year. So the message from this government is getting out. Of these, 13 projects from 12 companies have been granted funding, totalling $847 000 inclusive of GST.
The successful companies include: Imperial Oil & Gas; Alligator Energy; TNG Limited; Spectrum Rare Earths; AREVA Resources Australia; Gunson Resources Limited; Castille Resources; OKA Resources; ABM Resources; G-tek Australia Pty Limited; and Clancy Exploration Limited.
The projects include 10 drilling and three geophysical projects targeting a diverse range of commodities, including oil, gas, gold, zinc, copper, uranium, nickel and rare earth. A number of these programs are now under way with results expected over coming months. That answers the question raised by the member for Barkly about what we are doing to help those juniors. There is some tangible evidence and very strong indicators that we are really putting rubber on the road with this stuff. We are encouraging these explorers to come in and are providing that collaborative funding.
Madam Speaker, I thank those who have contributed. This is critically important sector to the Northern Territory. I am pleased the statement has been well received by members opposite and the Independent members, and I commend the statement to the House.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a travel report from the member for Brennan, pursuant to clause 4.1 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter from the member for Nelson:
It is signed by the member for Nelson.
Is this proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I raise this matter of public importance in the hope that before the government embarks too far on spending a large amount of taxpayers’ money on this new public facility, we check the project has been well considered and thoroughly scrutinised so money is not wasted and people know the final result will be the best outcome for the patients from the region who will use this hospital. I am also aware there is an old saying, ‘Trust me, I am from the government’.
However, there is a more important reason why I debate this matter. I quote regarding the High Court case of Egan v Willis & Cahill 1998:
That is what I am hoping to do tonight. I hope the minister, even if she disagrees with me, understands I raise this matter because there are some issues that need addressing.
The government last consulted with the public about the hospital in November 2013. I attended those meetings, which were very well attended. But there was not much after that.
On 20 February, the minister said in parliament:
Further on the minister said:
There was a flyer, Palmerston Regional Hospital, a Centre for Clinical Excellence, which deals with information sheets for industry – not necessarily the public, but for industry. It is a fairly broad-brush document.
The minister said in parliament on 16 May this year:
Did the scoping study look at the siting of the hospital, or was the site picked close to Palmerston CBD as part of a political agenda? If the minister said we have to get the site right, then where are the discussions about the right site? Were there any other options? For instance, the present option will cost a substantial amount of money for a completely new intersection with Temple Terrace and the Stuart Highway. If it had been built on the corner of Howard Springs Road, across the road from Lambrick Avenue, Palmerston, there would not have been the need to spend millions on a new intersection. That intersection has been upgraded and is substantial. If the budget is tight, as the government says, why spend that money when you do not need to? Invest that money into the hospital.
The public has not seen any plans or optional plans. All they know is the minister announced, in April 2014, a survey for roadworks under way, with no community consultation and no plans shown to the public. The difference is, when the government upgraded the highway at Coolalinga, it put out plans to show people what was happening. When the Girraween Road intersection was upgraded, there was consultation in the form of maps in shopfronts for people to look at. When the government upgraded the Lambrick Avenue/Howard Springs Road/Stuart Highway intersection, those plans were issued for discussion – people could see them. There has been nothing in relation to what the plans are for that Temple Terrace/the road to Gunn Point/Stuart Highway intersection.
The minister said on 25 March this year in response to Ms Lee:
Except for that statement, how did people know there was a concept design? The minister made no mention in a media release, nor was there anything in the paper. I dug it out of a webpage for a company called dwp/suters. Did anyone know about this? Who gave you the positive feedback as mentioned in the response to the question? Here it is, and I only knew about it because it was in the NT News the other day in relation to the minister looking at the new site. That is all I know. It looks like a nice building, but who had input into it and where was the consultation?
What I find strange is when I held a public meeting for Wallaby Holtze Road residents about six weeks ago, which was attended by representatives from the Health department – I thank the minister for that. I thank her especially, because the minister for Lands and the Minister for Transport could not be bothered sending anyone out for that meeting ...
Mr Chandler: Not ‘could not be bothered’.
Mr WOOD: Well, no one came. When a resident asked what the hospital would look like, he was told it would be about two storeys high and spread out. They did not have any plans to show the residents, even though their minister announced a concept design on 25 March, a long time beforehand. How come the residents did not see that picture? I do not know. It is very strange.
The Chief Minister visited Litchfield Council about two weeks ago, and said it would be a multistorey building, designed to train overseas students. The NT News then published a tiny picture, as I said, of the proposed hospital. What is going on? Where in the scoping study is there any mention of a training hospital, and where did the multistorey building come from? Confusion reigns supreme and, as usual, nobody is either informed or consulted, they are just told. However, in this case, it looks like the government does not know what is going on either. Was the Chief Minister correct? Will this hospital be a training hospital? How many storeys high will it be? Is there enough room for it to be on the considered land?
Let us go back to April 2014, when the minister announced an environmental assessment had been completed. It is an assessment I have not been able to find on the Department of Health website. This raises more questions. Where is that environmental assessment and is it available for public comment? What exactly was it meant to assess? Where are the plans? Was there any consultation with locals? Was there any community consultation with motorists who already know the bottlenecks at the Temple Terrace/Stuart Highway intersection? How much will the road cost?
As I said before, if the hospital was further up the road there would be no need to build the intersection, and you can save money and put it into the hospital. That may not be the ideal site. I am not saying it is the spot, but the minister said we must get the right site. I hoped there was some discussion about the right site, but I have not heard any. I know the government wanted to move it out of Palmerston because it said that site was too small. It said, ‘This looks like a good site’. That is nice, but when you are going to spend $150m, we need to ensure that decision is the right one.
Site and traffic works were supposed to commence in June 2014, but nothing has happened, except the minister holding a publicity day out there. There are still no plans released for the traffic works or details of cost. As I said, compare that with the publicity related to the Howard Springs intersection, where people could comment. People might have seen the original plans for Howard Springs Road; there were only two lanes at the intersection, which was turned into three lanes because of the amount of traffic travelling through Lambrick Avenue.
We are holding discussions before any planning processes have been approved. Under the Northern Territory Planning Scheme, a hospital is prohibited on land zoned rural residential, so the zone must be changed. There has to be a development plan but, as yet, we do not have one. There should also be an environmental impact statement, which I imagine would have to happen for such a major project.
One of the most important issues raised with me recently was about the design of the patient care model. How does our model of patient care compare with the new Royal Adelaide Hospital? Has this hospital been designed on what is best for the government – for how many votes are in it for those members who reside in Palmerston – or what is best for the patient? Is the budget sufficient to provide the best patient care? Patient care does not seem to be mentioned in the scoping study. What input have you had from people who know about patient care, especially in this diverse, cultural and tropical environment? This is the most important part of the hospital, but it does not seem to show up high on the radar of government, or in any documents I have seen and read.
I want to see the Palmerston regional hospital built, but I see very little consultation with the public. I see a scoping study that does not include the suitability of the site or real public consultation, and a concept design hidden from view. Why was that? I do not see any plans for the road. I saw public consultation late last year, then nothing. I want to know if the top priority of the design of the hospital is patient care.
I quote from Dr Patricia Montanaro, President of the South Australian AMA, who commented recently about the new Royal Adelaide Hospital.
That worries me. There seems very little scrutiny. If there was, why was only one television channel told about the opening of the demountable, the bulldozer knocking down the trees, and the helicopter flying above? Why was it not for all media outlets? Whey were local residents not told? Why did the government not have the manners to include even the local member in some of these discussions? You can say, ‘You are not in government, so too bad’. The one thing I have noticed most of the time is I have not been involved in any of this …
Mr Barrett: Oh, you are not in government.
Mr WOOD: I am the local member. I am not saying that because I want to be big time. I am happy to work with the government, but I am also happy to …
Mr Barrett interjecting.
Mr WOOD: Well, I am! I am happy to work with the government, but I am also happy to criticise the government if I think that can help get a better outcome. That is why I am raising this today. I am happy to work with the three Palmerston members, but do I get a request to comment on something? No, no. If you are not in the government, it seems you are not alive. I …
Mr Barrett: We should have lunch, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: I am happy to have lunch with you. Oh, we have had lunch, haven’t we? We had lunch with the member for Blain, do not worry.
Mr Barrett: A couple of Vegemite sangers, mate, you and me.
Mr WOOD: Yes, right, down at the uni.
Many people in the rural area will welcome the new hospital, but it is my job to make sure it is a good hospital that serves the needs of the residents who will use it, not a political hospital that serves the needs of politicians who need it started before the next election.
I raised this matter today as a matter that is important to the public – one which started off well last year with a public consultation process, but has faded away since then. This MPI has highlighted problems I see, and I hope the government will see this as constructive criticism aimed at making sure the public is not left behind in the development of this important facility for Palmerston, rural and regional residents.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to see a good hospital there. It is important that not only Palmerston and Litchfield, but the region has a top-class facility there. As the previous Health minister, the member for Greatorex, said during the election:
I support that. All I am saying is if you are going to spend $150m, it would make me feel much better if I knew that $150m was wisely spent and was based on – as often used in this House – the science rather than the politics. We want to ensure it is the best value for money, it is put on the best site, and achieves what it is intended to do – that is, serve the people well who will be the patients of that hospital.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I speak to this matter of public importance regarding the future of the Palmerston hospital, which is needed in the Top End and will be hugely welcomed by the people living in Palmerston and the rural area.
The member for Nelson has raised this issue of his concerns regarding public consultation into the design and associated infrastructure. There are important questions and, at present, there appears to be few answers. As we know, here we are in August 2014, now over the halfway point of two years into the CLP government. What we have seen so far with Palmerston hospital is a few public meetings, a sign erected on the site, and an independent candidate for Blain digging a few holes on that site. This was followed recently by a media event where we saw a few trees bulldozed.
Today in the paper, again we have seen more observations on the government’s performance around the management of the Palmerston hospital. It has been pointed out that the media has more faith that a $300m shopping centre will be built years before the hospital.
The very earliest we will see the Palmerston hospital opened will be late 2018, and that is over four years away. We submitted some written questions to government with regard to demand for health services in Palmerston and, in data we received recently about the Palmerston GP Super Clinic, we saw comparisons of presentations in September/October 2012-13 to the same period for 2013-14 go from 5829 to 14 079. In November/December 2012-13 there were 7882, compared to the same period for 2013-14 of 16 176. We have more figures from other periods, but it clearly demonstrates people are seeking health services there, and have a real desire for local health services to be provided.
Under the CLP we have already lost two years with regard to the Palmerston hospital project. It appears there will be even more slippage in the planning, procurement and design time frames, which will only blow out the construction and commissioning time lines. In the meantime, as the people of Palmerston and the rural area wait for their hospital, the Royal Darwin Hospital continues to be under immense pressure.
I have heard one senior health advocate in the community state that RDH is in a situation of ongoing crisis, due to bed block and pressure in the ED, and it is now accepted it is an ongoing crisis, and people have to get on working in that type of condition and space every day.
We are seeing more suburbs completed in Palmerston East, with the land releases there. We are seeing more population come online in the northern suburbs. In my own electorate in Muirhead we are seeing a huge number of houses coming out of the ground, and we know Lyons is finished. In the Darwin CBD there are unit blocks left, right and centre, and we also have major projects under way, as well as some significant workers’ villages to support those projects. The need for hospital services is growing as our population does.
A media release from the Chief Minister on 23 August 2013 stated:
Instead, what we have seen under the CLP in its two years of government and management of the Palmerston hospital, quite frankly, is not a great deal. I remind you all of the time line so far.
In August 2012 we had a change of government, with the CLP coming back to power. The money was there for the hospital. Federal government money had been secured and it was ready to go at that stage. There was $110m for the project, despite the change in government in the Territory.
In October 2012 then Health minister Dave Tollner started casting doubt over the future of Palmerston hospital. He started raising questions about funding, the site, cyclone standards of the proposed building, etcetera.
On 22 August 2013 then federal Health minister Tanya Plibersek announced an increase of Labor’s commitment to the Palmerston hospital from $70m to $110m, with the NTG component bringing the total to $150m.
On 23 August 2103 the CLP announced it would match the $150m Labor commitment and move Palmerston hospital to a new, unserviced site. This is one of the key commitments of the federal election campaign the CLP government and the federal member for Solomon went to the public with. The Chief Minister’s media release on the day said:
That was one year and three days ago. People expected something a bit more progressed than a media event to bulldoze some trees.
The media release also stated:
Under Labor’s plans, we were going to deliver the Palmerston hospital with a fully equipped, 24/7 ED, with 10 bays plus eight paediatric short-stay unit beds, 60 inpatient beds across two wards, including general surgical and maternity, two birthing suites, two operating theatres plus a procedure room, outpatient clinic rooms, 24/7 medical imaging facilities, a pharmacy and pathology units.
The latest Palmerston hospital model released to the public said the government intends to include the ED, general medical and specialty services, such as cardiology, diabetes and infectious diseases, surgical services, outpatient cancer and support services integrated with the Alan Walker Cancer Care Centre, and maternal and health services, including antenatal and postnatal care, but birthing services will not be part of this first stage.
Going to November 2013, two community consultation sessions were held.
In February 2014 we saw a request for probity services tender for the Palmerston hospital, with an emphasis on attracting private services. We also saw the stage one scope of services released.
In the May 2014 we saw all the budget had this year for the Palmerston hospital – reminding the government they had a commitment to start work on the site within a year – was $5m for a hospital scoping study and master plan for the greater Darwin region, Palmerston and regional hospital.
That was it – $5m for another study and a master plan, which brings me to the question: does this include funding for roads, power, water and sewerage services? If not, why was there a media event recently to start work bulldozing trees if no design work or tenders have been awarded?
On 7 July we saw an article in the NT News on further delays to the Palmerston hospital around procurement which was, according to the NT News, a leak from the fifth floor.
We know the government wants a PPP for this hospital, and it raises questions of whether it will be a full public hospital, or is the government attempting to privatise some of these services?
Late in July we saw an advert for a market sounding process in the NT News, which raised more questions about delays.
Then, on 11 August, there was a media event held to bulldoze some trees to mark progress on the site. We also saw some scenes of local residents complaining about the lack of public consultation with regard to that. But it was clear the event was held to give a perception of progress and work started on the site, even though there appeared to be no contracts in place or design works done to support knocking down those trees.
At present, online on the Department of Health’s website, we see that slippage on the time lines is continuing. When you go to the website, you will see it states that in June 2014 site and traffic works commenced, and in July 2014 EOI processes commenced.
As per the commitment made by the CLP and the member for Solomon that works would start within a year, no designs have been released and trees have been knocked down, but that was not exactly what people expected within that first year of construction. They expected to see some real works happening on the hospital.
Mid-2016 is apparently when we can see some detailed planning and design, and civil works commence, while, in late 2016 the main building works commence.
I note that on the latest news page of this website, there is no news. The Palmerston hospital time lines keep slipping and people are losing faith that what has been promised will be delivered. They also worry, as the member for Nelson raised, about consulting with residents who live around the area affected by the project. When you embark on major construction projects – a major project that has the potential to become a wonderful part of the Palmerston community, having their own hospital – it is important you consult with residents.
Clearly we do not want to see any further delays, but I believe you can properly plan something, consult properly, and move forward on a project at the same time. We are looking forward to seeing some greater efforts in that space.
There have been some major issues and concerns raised with regard to the progress of the Palmerston hospital, as well as delays, because we have seen so many in the last two years. It also raises the question of cost blowouts. The cost estimate has gone up to as far as $10m for servicing that land. We have heard mixed messages from the government as well. At the public consultation we were told the $10m would not be from the $150m pot of money. At estimates we were told the $10m was from the $150m pot of money, so that is effectively $10m less for hospital services or infrastructure of the building itself.
Cost escalation is also something I am concerned about, regarding having a certain amount of money right now, and what you will get for that same amount of money in four years’ time. It will not be the same.
We know the government has expressed a real desire to test the market to see what private investment it can get. But people continually want to be assured they are getting a full public hospital with full access to public services, which was always part of that commitment.
I cannot stress enough that delays are the issue. It is a huge project and will be one that stands to benefit the community immensely. Everybody wants to see it, and it will be well and truly welcomed when delivered. However, with all the delays, it seems to be back-peddling, going back over the same space, ground and territory again. It raises questions and makes people sceptical about the time lines government is looking to meet.
People want to see sound consultation, as the member for Nelson has raised, but they also thoroughly believe progress can be made at the same time, and work can get a move on.
It will be a very interesting time in 2016. This has been a big commitment by the Territory government and the local federal member. We are going into an election year federally, so I expect that will help get a bit of a move on, because people want to see action as soon as possible to get the job done and this hospital open.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I will leave my comments there. I thank the member for Nelson for bringing forward this matter of public importance so we can hold further discussion about the Palmerston hospital and hopefully see more progress as soon as possible.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for bringing on this matter of public importance. It is very important that we talk about the Palmerston Regional Hospital. I will start by responding to what has already been said this evening on this matter of public importance, in that we are building the Palmerston Regional Hospital. Labor did not ever get around to it.
Who in the Chamber has ever built a hospital before? The answer to that question is no one. This is totally new ground. It is something that has not happened in the Northern Territory for many decades. Labor could not do it, as it was too hard. They had 11 years in government and put together a two-volume plan of what they were going to do, should have done, could have done, planned to do, but never got around to it.
When you listen to the comments from the member for Nelson and, definitely, the member for Wanguri, you have to keep that in mind. The member for Nelson was the kingmaker. He was the vote that got the former Labor government over the line, and he is as responsible as anyone for the fact there was never a Palmerston regional hospital built ...
Mr Wood: Oh, give me a break!
Mrs LAMBLEY: You have to take responsibility for that – nothing happened. To sit back and criticise us for getting on with the job of what is probably the most complex of all tasks this government is undertaking is pretty rich.
I will respond to the comments made because perception in politics is everything. If the members for Nelson and Wanguri feel there has been a lack of consultation, then I am very happy to address that issue. I say at the outset that neither of you have come in for what I would consider a range of briefings on what we are doing. Have you availed yourself of the precise detail of what we are doing? The answer to that, from my perspective, is no. You come into this room and do not fully understand what we are doing and how we are getting on with the job.
I will use this opportunity to address some of the concerns raised today. In consultation, we have done a range of things. We have issued dozens of media releases in the last 12 months, had consultations, issued flyers and written letters. Many of those media releases have ended up as stories in publications such as the NT News, on TV, and in the media. That is what, I guess, as politicians, as government, we rely on to a great extent.
A scoping study is not about the public’s opinion, it is about a clinical story of not what people think is required, but of what is scientifically analysed as the requirements of a new hospital. It is an academic process in which clinicians are interviewed and, as I said, from a very scientific perspective, a picture of what is required for the new hospital is drawn. I quote a paragraph from this Palmerston Regional Hospital scoping study:
There was a question you raised, member for Nelson, about whether or not we intended to build a hospital that was based on patient care. Indeed! Why would you build a hospital that was not primarily based on patient care? I could take offence to it, but I will treat you as someone who is walking into this very complex field of building a hospital – I will give you the respect of appreciating that you do not know a lot. When I first started this voyage I did not know a lot either.
Hospitals must be clinically driven, and new hospitals especially so. Things change in the medical arena; you must have clinical input of a contemporary nature to frame and create the picture for what is required into the future. So our scoping study, our hospital service capability framework, was based on clinical input. I make no excuses for that. It is really not the time in the process where you ask people like me, my neighbours and colleagues, and people in the community who do not come from a health professional background, what they think. It is about what is needed and an understanding of medicine.
That is what we have been working on – a huge piece of work. This document goes through what is needed. The end product of the document is then seen through a political framework of the community’s expectations. We have learnt from the two volumes of work the former Labor government put together. We have used that document. We have not thrown it out and deemed it useless. It was, to some extent, research, and we have used that to understand what the expectations are of the local community – for example, expectations of the emergency department. The people of the Palmerston and greater Darwin area expect there to be emergency department services. They want outpatient services. There is an expectation of paediatric services, and maternal and child health services – very similar to what the member for Wanguri described as their hospital was going to be, should have been, but did not get around to actually being anything.
We have undertaken a number of very highly academic and professional exercises to work out what is needed. That work has never been done before to this extent anywhere in the Northern Territory for many years if, indeed, it was in the first place. I am not sure, I cannot account for what happened 40 years ago when we built the last hospital.
I make no excuse for the fact that work had to be done and that we have put it out for consultation. We had physical consultations with members of Palmerston community in November, which has been mentioned, and we talked through what this scope of services would look like, and what some of the indications were at that stage.
We received some feedback. There was a level of satisfaction. Some people were disappointed there would not be, for example, aged-care services. Some people talked about the fact that car parking would be an issue. From what I heard, people mainly wanted to talk about their own personal experiences of what they needed a hospital to be. But, by and large, people walked out of those two community consultations feeling as if they had been informed and been listened to, to some extent.
We are at the point now where we have started to look at some civil works. This is what has fired up the member for Nelson and, to some extent, the member for Wanguri. We staged a media conference a few weeks ago and I took the opportunity to go up in a helicopter and look at the 45 ha site, which I had never done before. There was physically not enough room for more than one media group. I could have spent more than $948 and hired an army helicopter with 30 seats, and had the whole tribe in there, but I thought I would be reasonably frugal and just ask Channel 9 to come along with me. Once again, I make no excuses.
The commencement of civil works was around an access road. For some reason, the member for Nelson and various other people in the community – and I take the point we did not letter drop or telephone them that morning to notify them, but they had been told through other means that civil works would definitely happen. I have a flyer that was distributed widely, announcing that civil works would begin around this time. However, I take the point we did not actually give them 24 hours or a couple of days notice. There seems to be some objection to the fact we are going to upgrade that intersection. We absolutely have to, and we require an access road to do that.
Where are we up to in discussion and consultation about the intersection? We have an engineering company finishing a design for a new intersection. A new big hospital with a 1.5 km frontage to the Stuart Highway will require a substantial intersection which allows traffic to flow freely to and from the heart of Darwin, and off to the Palmerston CBD area, as well as the hospital. It makes sense; I do not see any point in saving money or scrimping when it comes to the construction of a decent, highly functional and efficient intersection at that point.
The consultation the member for Nelson says we require around that is questionable. I can talk to my team at the Department of Health about what that will do but, after flying over it in the helicopter, it makes sense we spend whatever it takes to build something that is first and foremost functional and does not disrupt traffic, now and into the future.
The site is 45 ha with a 1.5 km frontage to the Stuart Highway. We looked at that tiny site in the midst of an urban development, virtually across the road, and thought, ‘Goodness me, we have to get something bigger with a greater vision and greater prospects into the future’. The choice was limited and, for us, it was a no-brainer. It is a 45 ha block of Crown land with the frontage and access, in the middle of – I know you do not want to hear this, member for Nelson – what will become the centre of a sprawling urban development in the next 20 to 30 years’ time. I know that is wicked for any rural resident to hear – I put on the public record I am a rural resident – but that is the reality. That hospital will be in the thick of it in years to come. It is perfectly located when you look at it on the map; we looked at it today. It is in the centre of development as it is in Darwin today.
If you drew a line from Parliament House through to the greater Darwin area, along where your office is, member for Nelson, that hospital site is right in the middle. It is perfectly located with regard to access and, ironically, you are the only one – or there is a handful of people at the most – complaining about that site.
I am very proud of the work we are doing. I do not have time to tell you about what we are doing and exactly how we are doing it, but I invite you all on the other side of the Chamber to get briefings, come in as often as you want, and be informed about what we are doing. It is complex and technical, but we are on schedule and we are building a regional hospital in Palmerston.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am happy to talk about this. As someone who lives in Palmerston and has been living there for nearly 20 years, I point out I have not been a particularly political person over the vast majority of my time there, so I have not been a part of all of the hoo-hah that goes on around the normal political issues. However, I have wanted a hospital in Palmerston for a long time, and so has everybody in my street, and the next street, and the suburb. We heard a lot about a hospital. When we saw a little fence right next to the clinic, do you think the first thing that came to our mind was, ‘Wow, we will have a fantastic hospital’? No, the first thing that came into our mind was, ‘Oh, another clinic, but we do not want a clinic, we want a hospital’. How many times do the people in Palmerston need to say this whole area of Palmerston is growing, how hard is it to build a hospital?
Now I am in government, I realise how hard it is to build a hospital, especially when you have racked up so much debt, thanks to the opposition, that you have no money to build a darn thing. You are flat out making hay while the sun is shining because you have nothing and it is hard, with a debt to GDP ratio that would make Spain blush, to try to spend more than $1bn building a hospital.
Have we been consulted about this? Yes. We, the Palmerston community, have been consulted about this as long as I can remember over the last 10 years. I look at this scenario and think, ‘Man! You are damned if you do and you are damned if you do not.’ This government – and thank you, this government – has said, ‘We are going to build a real hospital. Here is this massive 45 ha site. Let us put it in a really good position so you can access it easily from the rural area, from Palmerston and Darwin. We can start building something that will work for the Northern Territory for the future.’
We have heard about it and, finally, I am so proud to be part of the Palmerston team working with the Minister for Health to make this happen. I cannot tell you how proud I was walking around getting dirt all over my feet, thinking how fantastic this will be. I then thought, ‘Gee, I am getting my pants dirty, I am watching a D10 knock stuff down, I wish I had brought my own hat’. I was stoked about it. I can tell you, member for – I have no idea where you are from because I am new at this game. I was very happy for the member for Araluen – is that right? Yes. The member for Araluen invited me. I was chuffed; I even brought my EO and made her walk around in the dirt. She was not happy because she got dirt on her toes and it was all sweaty, etcetera.
During my election campaign, I heard so much about hospitals, it was out of control. Every other conversation I had when I doorknocked the entire electorate was about a hospital, ‘When are you building this hospital?’ I am so happy to tell you we are building a hospital. I love the fact I have started doorknocking my electorate again, and I can say to them, ‘Guess what? We are building a hospital’.
Then I came into this room and my excitement was squashed because the conversation coming from the other side made me feel blerky, which is not even a word. That is what porridge is when it is a bit cold, and does not taste good; it is just blerky. You sit here and think something is very wrong when everybody in Palmerston is excited about this – I am excited about this – and what we get is, ‘You did not phone everyone in the street that day, you are all terrible people. How dare you build a hospital! How dare you, Giles government, build a hospital when we have been meaning to do that for years!’
I could rant about this all night, as I am excited about this hospital. I am excited about what the member for Araluen is doing. I am excited about my team in Palmerston. I am excited my electorate will have a hospital. I am excited about having lunch with the member for Nelson and talking all about a hospital over a couple of vegemite sangers and enjoying it. I want to spread that excitement. Hopefully, some of it will spread over the other side of that little bar which shuts there, and everyone in this room can be excited. Why? Because it is for the benefit of the people of the Northern Territory.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I now feel like I am a guest singer walking into the middle of a concert. I am not warmed up.
I thought, when we came into government, after 11 years and seeing Labor build a fence – it was only a portable fence …
Mr Barrett: A temporary fence.
Mr CHANDLER: A temporary fence used to put up political propaganda all the way around it. I thought, ‘It has taken 11 years and we get a fence’. One of the first discussions I remember being involved in was whether the site was suitable to build a hospital. There had been much consultation held with the previous government about a hospital for Palmerston – no doubt about that – but I honestly thought what we needed was a government to pay attention to what people from Palmerston were saying and what they actually needed.
For years the Super Clinic that was constructed in Palmerston was very much oversold. The expectation in Palmerston was we would get a Super Clinic. When it was finally delivered, people were not sure what the services were and still complained about the services being delivered. The previous government was very good at selling a message, but Palmerston expectations were up here and, unfortunately, what was delivered was way down here.
I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to look over the Adelaide hospital site. By the time it is finished, with the research labs, it will be about $2.2bn worth of construction with 45 theatres in the place. I think 16 effective theatres are in the emergency section alone. I had the privilege of being there at a time just before the plaster was about to go up on the internal walls, so I got to see the cabling, the pipework, everything you would not see in a normal hospital. When people walk into a building like a hospital, they have no appreciation of what goes on behind the scenes, and the planning behind something like that. I can tell exactly. It took them seven years from the day a decision was made to build a hospital in Adelaide before the first sod was turned over.
Okay, the previous Labor government had 11 years and we got a fence. We have been in government two years and, realistically, we are further down the track in the construction of this hospital, based on the needs of the community.
I have a lot of notes here, but I have not used them yet, so I apologise to the person who has written them. I will read some of them.
The fact is what needed to happen was an exercise where we had to seriously look at what services were delivered in the Northern Territory and then, how that could be complemented in Palmerston. The truth is you were not going to duplicate Royal Darwin Hospital overnight. Once this government and the Minister for Health had done the work behind the scenes to see what the needs were and how we were going to meet those needs within our budgetary requirements – and that is true too because hospitals are not cheap to operate – the first thing we realised was the block of land which had been identified before was problematic on a number of fronts.
If you live in Palmerston, you will know how busy that stretch of road is. It would have taken millions to upgrade that section. I heard the argument tonight that we have to build a new intersection and a new road into Holtze. The reality is much more would have been spent, and I do think they would have been able to solve the problem so easily with that old hospital site.
Second, the site was too constrained to allow a hospital to grow into the future and meet the needs for the next 30, 40 or 50 years.
The other obvious thing to consider was where was the growth, the human capital, within the suburb of Palmerston? Do you know what? It is not just Palmerston.
This MPI has surprised me because I thought the last very last person who would have complained about a hospital in his own electorate was the member for Nelson ...
Mr Wood: I am not complaining about the hospital in my electorate. That is not right!
Mr CHANDLER: But you talked about the site being inappropriate, member for Nelson …
Mr Wood: It is still in the same area! Gee! What a pathetic …
Mr CHANDLER: It is actually closer to the rural residents. If you allow a city to develop like Darwin, Palmerston, the rural areas – well, there will not be much development in the ...
Mr Wood: If you want to misinterpret what I say, you are welcome.
Mr CHANDLER: Well, I will read the MPI:
Blah, blah:
Mr CHANDLER: The infrastructure, the planning that has been going on, and the consultation – when this government took over, I can guarantee you the Minister for Health did not just chuck out all the consultation that had been done in the past by the previous Labor government. Why would you do that? It was good consultation; there was a lot of information that had already been gathered. There had been consultation.
As far as the design and scrutiny and all of those things – for goodness sake, we have a government, we have a public service. There are tens of thousands of workers within the public service and part of their job is to do the work of government. So after the consultations have been done, after we worked out what the needs of the community were, and after choosing a site we all thought would have universal recognition and acceptance that it was a better place to put a hospital, because it covers off on a number of areas – (1) it will allow the hospital to grow into the future, as it will need to, and (2) more importantly perhaps, it will be closer to a larger number of people, not just from Palmerston.
I have heard the member for Nelson before criticise that we are building in Palmerston, and everybody was talking about the Palmerston hospital. I even remember hearing when I was in opposition, ‘The Palmerston hospital, the Palmerston hospital. It should be at Coolalinga. It should be somewhere in the rural area.’ Well heaven forbid, we came into government, pushed the hospital into the rural area, into Holtze …
Mr Wood: But you did not recognise it as that, you called it Palmerston north
Mr CHANDLER: To pick up on the interjection, it has been a long time since I have called it Palmerston north. In fact, all of the paraphernalia lately that refers to it as Palmerston north is coming from the member for Nelson. You know why? Because it stirs a few people up; it stirs people to the soul. People in the rural area do not like it. Which is exactly why I issued an instruction to my department, ‘Let us stop referring to it as Palmerston north, because it is upsetting people’. People who live in Holtze and the rural area have passion for their area. I understand that.
However, there is a long way to go and there will still be more consultation. I am sure, Minister for Health, there is still a lot of consultation to be done. But the initial work has been done. The second layer of work to do is to come up with concepts and plans, develop all that, then go to the public and say, ‘This is what we have been working on …
Mr Wood: Building the road.
Mr CHANDLER: … so what do you think?’ Well you need to have a road, picking up on interjection again, Mr Deputy Speaker. You need a road to get there to be able to do the work and so forth. This will be a big job. As as the Health Minister rightly pointed out earlier, no one for many years has built a hospital in the Top End – in fact, in the entire Northern Territory. I can guarantee you this hospital will not have snow blinds …
A member interjecting.
Mr CHANDLER: Oh you do not think? Hell will freeze over. There might be someone out there who wants snow blinds, but I am really hoping not.
It is critical we get this right. With the work this government has been doing, in particular, the Minister for Health has been working her – I was going to say ‘butt off’, but I should just say working really hard behind the scenes with this government to make sure one of the biggest infrastructure jobs this government will ever work on – do not talk just about the initial hospital, but about the next 10, 15, 20, 30 years from now as this hospital develops into a world-class hospital and meets the needs of a growing Territory. This will be the biggest infrastructure job this government will ever deal with. It has to be done right. I commend the Minister for Health for the work she has done, driving us as a government, driving Cabinet, to ensure we deliver.
It has been mentioned before that you guys are welcome to briefings. The members for Drysdale, Blain and I get monthly updates ...
Mr Wood: It is not just me, it is the people.
Mr CHANDLER: Do you know what, member for Nelson? We had to do one thing. It was the member for Drysdale who did it, which was to keep asking for briefings and updates on where we are at and what we are doing. Living in Palmerston, it is essential we have the most up-to-date information we can to report back to our constituents. So when we talk to people, are on their doorsteps, or writing our newsletters, we have the most up-to-date information. I guarantee you the Minister for Health would only be too happy to provide the same service for either the Labor Party or you, member for Nelson, and give you the most up-to-date information we have, as a government, to ensure we get the community consultation right.
In regard to the Lands and Planning around the hospital, I put on the record my vision for that area. It would, perhaps, have 1 ha lots around the border of that block of land, then you densify as you get closer to the hospital site. I would like to see the hospital site have provision for nurses’ houses, doctors’ housing, and other subsidiary health needs. It could be physiotherapists, dentists and doctors’ surgeries, all on the hospital site. But it will be a hospital precinct surrounded by a community. Why would you not want to build a community around a hospital? It will be valuable real estate from the point of view that people will want to live close to it. I would like to see a seniors village in the area, close to the hospital.
The reality is the work this government and this Health minister have been doing should be commended. There will be continued consultation because, as a government, we want to get this right. However, we do not want to wait 11 years, put up a fence, and say we are building a hospital. We want to progressively get closer to the hospital. The work that will be done on the roads and the infrastructure is the starting point. The planning is going on behind the scenes. We want to do this like a design and construct process, rather than wait 10 or 11 years, then start.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the minister and this government for the work they are doing to deliver a premium hospital for the people who live in Palmerston and the rural area.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, it is my pleasure to inform the House that the grandson of the Territory’s Victoria Cross recipient will help re-enact the war hero’s historic journey to enlist as part of next year’s Anzac Centenary commemorations. Richard Borella has agreed to retrace the footsteps of his grandfather, Albert Borella, in a recreation of his historic ride from Tennant Creek to Darwin to enlist in the Armed Forces. It was a great pleasure to meet him today, along with his parents, Rowan and Mary, and reminisce about the amazing life of their war hero relative.
Albert Borella was a remarkable Territorian who undertook an inspiring journey to combat in World War I in 1915. He walked, swam through flooded rivers, rode horses, and eventually travelled on a mail coach and a train to Darwin. Unable to sign on there, he was taken by ship to Queensland and then went on to Western Australia for training. He served at Gallipoli and was then transferred to the action on the Western Front.
Albert Borella was mentioned in despatches, and received the Military Medal for his services in action. Wounded, he was commissioned in the field, and in 1918 received the highest honour for bravery, the Victoria Cross, for most conspicuous bravery in attack, displaying great courage and leadership fighting against the Germans. At 36 years of age he became the oldest recipient of the Victoria Cross within the first Australian Imperial Force. World War I dramatisations often depict how easy it was to sign up at the time; many just walked into their local recruiting hall. But Albert Borella had to fight just to put his signature on the right form. He was a man so tough he fought a battle just to join the combat of World War I.
Richard Borella never really knew his famous grandfather, but he has been aware of his reputation since he was a youngster. He said he wants to try to understand what he went through and why he would have done it. Was it a sense of duty to serve his country? He expects he will be reflecting on that ride up the track.
We are thrilled that Richard has agreed to take part in this re-creation of his grandfather’s journey, because he can share the story with a new generation of Territorians and ensure it is never forgotten.
The father of four has had motorbikes and horses in the past, and his two daughters still ride today. Those skills will be essential next year when the Borella Ride travels up the Stuart Highway.
The ride will be held in February and March, giving roadside spectators, tourists, schools and communities an insight into Albert Borella’s journey. Richard Borella and companions will travel over 1000 km and stop in Tennant Creek, Renner Springs, Elliott, Dunmarra, Daly Waters, Larrimah, Mataranka, Katherine, Pine Creek and Darwin.
A range of activities is planned at each destination, including historical activities, community breakfast, barbecues, campfire talks and educational activities. A travelling exhibition will accompany the riders to explain the event and its history.
The 100th anniversary of World War I is an opportunity to remember some of our great Australian military history and pay tribute to those who have served their country over the past century. More than 61 000 Australians were killed in World War I, with 72 Territorians among them. It was Australia’s most costly campaign and nearly every Australian’s life was touched by the toll.
The Borella Ride will be the Northern Territory’s flagship centenary activity. It will be supported by a wider program of events, including a one-off community grants program to help community groups commemorate the Anzac centenary and the centenary of service. Darwin is a garrison city and we want to make sure the centenary of the Great War is given the recognition it deserves. The centenary starts from August this year and runs until November 2018.
We also want to ensure the next generation learns about the sacrifice made by Australians a century ago, so a group of lucky students from Years 9, 10 and 11 will join the Chief Minister’s Anzac Spirit study tour to Gallipoli next year. It will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for students to honour a critical part of Australia’s history.
Territorians are a tough bunch, but few people personify that toughness like Albert Borella. His journey to enlist in World War I is the stuff of legend. We will honour Albert Borella in the best way possible by re-creating his epic journey. The fact that his family has agreed to join in that re-creation only adds to the significance of this historic occasion.
Mr Deputy Speaker, my thanks go to the Borella family for helping to make this an occasion for all Territorians.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, I update the House on the exciting work being done at Palmerston Senior College in relation to their Vocational Education and Training program.
Schools are vital in preparing our young people for tomorrow. Along with the important academic program schools offer, it is imperative they are able to train and develop students to leave school and take up the technical or specialist jobs we are creating for our economy.
To support young people in their academic and technical pursuits, VET qualifications can go towards helping students attain their Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training. This gives school leavers certainty around their academic and technical achievements.
The Territory needs skilled workers to help support the growth our government is working hard to deliver. We want to support and grow our own, so Territorians get the best opportunity to live and remain in the Northern Territory.
Major projects across the Northern Territory will help fuel economic growth for years, but these great projects do not happen by themselves. The young people of today who want to make this wonderful place their home and raise a family will be the driving force of tomorrow.
VET programs in secondary schools offer students a way to build vital skills for their future and gain valuable practical workplace experiences. I am extremely pleased to report on some of the qualifications already gained by Palmerston Senior College students. Last year, 85 Palmerston Senior College students completed a VET qualification, ranging from Certificate I through to Certificate III. This is 85 students now trained in a variety of fields, making them more employable and giving them the confidence to pursue their dreams, get a good job, and build their life here.
In 2013, I attended a graduation for students finishing a certificate in Conservation and Land Management. You could see how proud these young people were with working hard for something and getting the result of a qualification that stays with them after school.
The following is the complete list of courses completed last year by Palmerston Senior College students. I am outlining the entire list to highlight the breadth of the VET agenda available to students there. The 2013 courses included: Conservation and Land Management; Engineering and Hospitality – Kitchen Operations; Automotive; Business; Community Studies; Engineering; Hairdressing; Information Technology; Sport and Recreation, as well as Fitness; Children’s Services; Dental Health Assistant; and Tourism.
As well as these courses, 10 students completed an internationally recognised qualification, the Cisco Information Technology qualification.
This year, some courses have changed from last year, and I do not have the final number of students yet. The list of courses for 2014 is extensive. These courses include: Warehousing and Logistics; Financial Services; Automotive, as well as other mechanical trades; Information Technology; Sport and Recreation and Fitness; Hairdressing and Beauty Services; Business; Aquaculture; Sustainable Energy; Conservation and Land Management; Early Childhood Studies; Tourism; Health Services; Carpentry; Engineering; Plumbing; and Electro-Technology. Palmerston Senior College students are also completing the Cisco Information Technology qualification this year.
As you can see, Palmerston Senior College is kicking goals in the field of Vocational Education and Training. Whether students decide to work straight after school, or build upon their qualification with more training, I am confident these qualifications will hold these students in good stead and help them to build a bright future for themselves and for our Territory.
Well done to the entire staff at Palmerston Senior College for their dedication to their work, their students, and our community. I particularly thank the Principal of Palmerston Senior College, Sue Healy, who is an inspiration to me, her fellow teachers and her students. I wish her all the best as they transition through global school budgeting.
If I can make a shameless plug, I very much hope Palmerston Senior College makes its way on to the independent public schools list. It is something the school is committed to. It can see the intense value for the school community. The school council is well and truly on board. They have put their hat in the ring, Minister for Education …
Mr Chandler: Absolutely!
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: If you see that application come across your desk, I would be eternally grateful if you could tick that one off, minister, thank you.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I talk about a group of students at Taminmin College who are doing very good things in regard to not only their own professional development, but also inspiring others how to go forward in life.
Before I talk on that, I was listening to the member for Blain, and I found his speech very inspiring and enthusiastic. However, I point out to the member for Blain that I am one of those residents who is nearby to that site that was cleared. The road is called Wallaby Holtze Road. There are about 30 properties on that road, with families with children, adults, old people, animals and pets, and they all know about the bulldozing activity. I know the Chief Minister and the Minister for Health have received a letter from a resident of that road. I invite the member for Blain to come to my property on that road so he can understand how people who live nearby to a major construction site may be affected. However, I will leave that for now.
This evening, I want to talk about a group of students from Taminmin College who are participating in a program called IMPACT, which is supporting young Indigenous leaders. As an introduction to that program, they are part of another – call it program or research institute – called the Foundation for Young Australians, which is unleashing the brilliance of young Australians. It is a national, not-for-profit organisation dedicated solely to young people. It is relentless and optimistic about all young people and their ability to be entrepreneurial. It believes they have the courage, imagination and will to create the change they want to see for themselves in the world.
This foundation has a strong track record of research, innovative programs delivery, and the ability to find and back inspiring, effective, young change makers, which makes it unique. The Foundation for Young Australians has been around for a long time. I was quite surprised to see how long it has been around, which is quite a few decades. It has many components to its package. It has a unit called WOW – what it takes to succeed in life and work; it takes a village to raise a child; and making sure doing good is the best thing you ever did, as examples.
The one I will reference is supporting young Indigenous leaders, called IMPACT. It is designed to build a community of young Indigenous students and strengthen leadership, community contribution and future pathways. IMPACT is delivered in partnership with the Northern Territory Department of Education and Training. The Minister for Education would be aware of this program.
It is designed to build a community of young Indigenous students, regardless of where they live, and strengthen leadership, community contribution and future pathways. It brings together Year 10 to 12 students over three years of intensive and inspiring camps, workshops, meetings and appointments that inspire self-confidence and offer support for education and training. The students become more confident, more self-aware and resilient, and gain the skills to contribute in positive ways to their communities. Clearly, in the case of the Taminmin students, it is the Taminmin and rural community, and the greater Darwin and Territory community.
It has developed a partnership with the Northern Territory Department of Education and Training. This IMPACT program is throughout the Northern Territory and has participants from Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine and Alice Springs. In that package are Taminmin students. Before starting this program, many students did not know or interact with any other young people from outside their own home towns. However, this has made the students come together and meet other students and other people from across the Territory, which is very good and inspiring.
A group of five students from the Foundation for Young Australians wrote to me and asked whether I would like to meet with them because the Taminmin students were involved in the program. I agreed because I thought it sounded interesting, although I did not know much about it.
The students came to my electorate office at Coolalinga with Penny Kellaway, who is the mother of one of the students. We had a chat and some morning tea for about an hour-and-a-half, and it was very interesting. I will name the students because they were interested in finding out what the job of a local politician is all about. I was also interested in understanding what they wanted to do with their lives; what kind of a profession, employment, or trade they wanted to go into; whether they wanted to travel; how they wanted to get involved with their community to make it a better place; and what they saw as being young people’s issues?
We had a very interesting chat about the use of social media because, of course, being Year 10, 11 and 12 students, they are conversant with the use of social media, more so than any of us in this Chamber. Their views on social media and how it needs to be better managed and controlled by families and people generally were interesting.
I compliment the students and say thank you to Penny Kellaway, and to Michelle Pipino who is the program manager of IMPACT. Congratulations and well done to Letitia Ahnfeldt who is in Year 10; Tahmika Johnson, Year 10; Tamika McLeod, Year 10; Emma Kellaway, Year 12, who I think is also a school council representative and one of the leaders in the Taminmin College student community; and finally, Danika Williams of Year 12. Congratulations for being part of this program, for taking the time and making the effort, and for thinking of and wanting to give back to your community, which, at a young age, I find extraordinary. When I was in Years 10, 11 and 12, I was not thinking of that kind of activity, being at boarding school.
Mr Deputy Speaker, it was inspiring and very enjoyable to have these students come and chat with me in my office with Penny and the others who were there. I wish you the best with the program and I hope you achieve great things, not only for yourselves and your families but, of course, for your local communities.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I congratulate all the amazing young people in the Northern Territory who are excelling at school level and beyond. Young Territorians are encouraged to participate in programs that enable them to experience new and exciting ways of learning. Through these new learning ventures, our youth are engaged with the wider community to develop new skills, make positive choices, and enhance their lives in and out of the school yard.
It behoves us as a community, let alone a government, that we encourage parents to send their kids to a raft of activities in the community that can help them to improve their capacity, confidence and, generally, their wellbeing. It is through these programs the community benefits in a wide variety of ways. It does not matter whether it is academic, sports or the arts, provided young people have direction and the ability to go, then that can only be a great result for us as a community. They are evidently hitting the right notes in music or arts, reaching new heights on the sporting field, and delivering academically.
Recently I was at the festival across the road in the Civic Centre Park. It was wonderful to see so many young people participating in a range of activities and hanging out with their friends, admiring some of the talent that was on display at so many different events.
I was also very fortunate to go to the presentation of Wunderkammer by a group of fantastic young people. It was encouraging to see families taking so many young people to see such a fine group of athletes perform in a very interesting and unusual way.
I draw your attention to a few schools close to my heart which have developed programs for young people that will enrich their lives through learning. I start with Sanderson Middle School students who visited me at Parliament House today. What a great bunch of young people. They were enthusiastic to come to Parliament House; many of them had not been here before. They looked at some of the portraits, endeavoured to understand the Remonstrance, and saw the library. I was fortunate to spare a few minutes to take them up to the office and out to the balcony so they could enjoy the view from the fifth floor. It was great to have them here. Many members in this Chamber have the ability to take students from their own schools to the balcony where most of them do not normally go. That was fantastic.
I congratulate the following students. Cindy Um has been selected as a school student entrant in the Anzac Spirit study tour. What a fantastic opportunity. We have just heard the Chief Minister talk about the Borella Ride and the commitment of those people. It is fantastic that young people are able to visit and enjoy learning about the history, what it was like, and to be part of it. As someone who has been to Anzac Cove and Gallipoli on Anzac Day, it does not matter whether you are a school student, a pensioner, a senior, or an ex-soldier, there is not a dry eye anywhere on the Gallipoli Peninsula on Anzac Day. It is a very moving experience and I hope Cindy has similar experience next year celebrating the centenary of Anzac, where she will be in awe of the commitment those young people made all those years ago.
The following students at Sanderson have received Good Standing Awards. These students have earned credit from teachers for things like positive student achievement, improvement in their work, and excellent effort in demonstrating behaviours of Sanderson School values. Recently, these students were congratulated and received recognition of that great work. They are: Jeanne Alpe; Sajad Alzarghazani; Jardel Fernandes; Jason Lawrence; Amy Le Dam; Ler Pwe Htoo Lin; Zeleah McCann; Yasmen Roe; Trinh Thi Quynh Tra; and Shaun Juwanmandadige.
Sanderson Middle School recently had a visit from Darwin-born singer and songwriter Vassy. Students were very excited. I remember when I met Vassy. I know her mother and her family quite well, but I had never met Vassy. She wanted to meet me because her mother thought I was a terrific bloke, so we had lunch with Vassy. She said to me, ‘Do you know David Guetta?’ I said, ‘Who is he?’ If you are young, you know David Guetta is one of the famous people in the music industry. Vassy currently has the number one Billboard hit around the world called Bad. I arranged for her to go out to two of my schools – Sanderson and Wagaman. It was an amazing sight, because these kids were so excited; they know all the words to the song. Having someone standing in front of them who is an international performer was such a buzz. I had a great sense of pride and a great feeling of being able to take this wonderful young lady to some of my schools and have her sing along with these kids. It was a wonderful experience. She is very popular amongst Territory youth. She won the coveted Unearthed contest on Australian radio station Triple J. Her song We are Young reached the top of the Billboard’s Hot Dance Club songs, and she has since established herself as a famous singer and songwriter around the world.
Vassy was born in Darwin. Her parents were both Greek immigrants and she features in a song that has reached number one on international charts, Bad. Students at Sanderson Middle School relished in the opportunity to speak with Vassy. She was able to talk to them about her worldly travels, her experience in the music industry, and the choices she is faced with while in the music business.
Since her visit, students have taken on a new challenge, breaking into a subject they had limited experience in. We now have Year 5 and 6 students penning their own rap song with an anti-bullying theme at Wagaman Primary School. It was fantastic that she sang along with them and gave them a lot of tips about how to improve and structure the type of song with the message they are trying to deliver. Vassy ran some mini-workshops in classes for students at the school and has offered to help record tracks when they are ready. It was great to see that.
Getting on with your teachers or mentors in the community can make or break a young child’s learning experience in the early years. I am happy to see teachers taking a leap to step outside their comfort zones in order to benefit students. I am extremely pleased to say Casey Nicholson, a teacher at Sanderson Middle School, has participated in a professional learning workshop with 18 other teachers. What a great initiative! The workshop was designed to enhance his song-writing skills, ultimately better his communication with students, and enhance student communications with their peers. Communicating with the youth of the Territory through music will be stronger because of workshops like these and, therefore, will pass on to children at Northern Territory schools.
Similar development workshops are to follow in October, specifically designed for students who will take it to their school and pass it on to their classmates. We have the support of the Music Council of Australia, Musical Futures Australia, and the Northern Territory Music School to run more programs like these to benefit young Territorians. I look forward to seeing some of the names of young musicians in the Territory up in lights, knowing their knowledge and skills have been enriched by this unique program.
Education is a very rewarding and enriching experience for those who teach. Once hurdles are crossed and learning barriers are broken down, the possibilities are endless. As minister for youth, it is rewarding to see the schools developing students with the knowledge they will take those expanded learning skills to other areas.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to deal with a particular issue. I would like to make a correction to the Hansard in regard to mining company workers registering interstate vehicles in the Northern Territory. During the estimates hearing this year, the figure of 1500 vehicles per month was given in relation to how many cars are being registered. The correct figure is actually 1100 per month.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I place on the public record a number of the great things that happen in my electorate. I will start with the Yirrkala Baby Show. It has been held, I believe, for the past three years, and this year was held to coincide with National Families Week. There were over 40 beautiful babies and little ones entered in the competition, and each child received a prize for a category which was decided by a group of senior school girls. It might have been for the longest eyelashes, the curliest hair, the biggest smile, the chubbiest cheeks – it made sure every child entered was eligible for some kind of prize. It was wonderful to watch.
The event aims for local families to come together as a community, and for the community to pride itself in its healthy kids. The event was organised by the baby show committee, made up of a group of professionals and community members. The committee was chaired by the wonderful Jo Carroll. Other members included Abi White, a wonderful teacher who runs the Families as First Teachers program at Yirrkala; her partner, Scott Beverstock; Cynthia Anderson; and the men from the Miwatj Strong Fathers program. School principal Merrki Ganambarr Stubbs was the emcee for the day. Other organisations that contributed to the day included the Department of Children and Families, Miwatj Aboriginal Health, East Arnhem Regional Council, the Arnhem Club, the Yirrkala Mulka Project, Anglicare, the Nhulunbuy Amcal Pharmacy, and me as the local member.
The One Disease at a Time Foundation was set up on the day to answer questions and support the event. The clothing producer, Cotton On, was also a major sponsor of this event.
The Arnhem Club donated its chef’s time and its kitchen to community volunteers including Scott Beverstock; Rrawen; Nalkuma; Burrkitj, or Buggi as he is better known; Dhamarrarr; and Lapulang, who prepared, set up, and individually served a really healthy lunch which was enjoyed by over 250 people on the day at Rika Park in Yirrkala.
The annual Hogshed Toy Run has raised funds and donated to the special education departments at Yirrkala Community Education Centre, Nhulunbuy High School, and Nhulunbuy Primary School. These funds are raised annually with their Christmas toy run. I am probably a little late reporting the news, but better late than never.
A phenomenal amount of money is raised through this event, and $3000 was donated to each of these three local schools towards support for their special education students. I know Nhulunbuy High School has already put its $3000 contribution to good use by purchasing a Smartboard for their annexe.
There are way too many motorcycle riders involved in the toy run to name them all, but the main individuals credited with bringing the event together include Bob Bishell, Rick Hutchinson, Mary Sinclair, Shane Guiney and Nick Walker. Sadly, Nick Walker and his wife, Sara, and children are leaving our community – as people are at the moment. I daresay the likes of Bobby Bishell – or Bob the Builder as he is better known – along with those who are remaining behind, will make sure this year’s Hogshed Toy Run is bigger and better than ever.
Next I talk about the Keep Australian Beautiful Awards and the fact that Dhimurru Aboriginal Corporation was recently recognised for its enormous efforts in land conservation in Arnhem Land, with Nhulunbuy being named as the winner of the 2014 Keep Australia Beautiful Clean Beaches Award. Dhimurru was also named as the recipient of the Dame Phyllis Frost Littler Prevention Award. The judge’s report for these awards highly commended the efforts of Dhimurru, and also reflected positively on the wider East Arnhem region.
Dhimurru manages a huge Indigenous protected area, which includes approximately 100 000 ha of land and 450 000 ha of sea country, and collected an average of one tonne of marine debris and ghost net retrieval per kilometre of beach in 2013. That is a phenomenal amount of debris they are collecting whilst, ultimately, also aiming to free any sea turtles which regularly become trapped in these nets. The debris usually originates from overseas countries. The rangers work hard to educate students and other young people about having respect for land and sea country.
Dhimurru is a Yolngu organisation that employs 21 staff members, 15 of whom are Yolngu traditional owners and custodians. The 13 traditional owner groups or clans of the East Arnhem area are represented in the organisation. Fiona Marika, or Yupunu Marika, and Grace Wununggmurra, travelled to Currumbin on the Gold Coast for the awards ceremony and represented the organisation with considerable pride.
Each Dhimurru staff member deserves a mention for the vital roles they play in conservation of the land of East Arnhem Land. I acknowledge Managing Director, Djami Marika; Senior Cultural Adviser, Djalinda Yunupingu; and Executive Officer, Steve Roeger. Currently, the standing in Executive Officer is Greg Wearne, as Steve Roeger is on long service leave, noting that Greg Wearne had an instrumental and pivotal role in the start-up of Dhimurru more than 20 years ago. Executive Support Officer is Thomas Amagula; Learning on Country Coordinator is Jonathan Wearne; Facilitators include Vanessa Drysdale, Lisa Roeger and Paul Auguston; Senior Rangers are Daryl Lacey, Fiona Yupunu Marika, and Gathapura Mununggurr;and Rangers are Banula Marika, Grace Wununggmurra, Milika Marika, Anthony Crafter, Tyson Wangurra and Eddie Marika; and, of course, NT Parks and Wildlife Ranger, John (better known as Stretch) Papple who, regrettably, is now no longer based full-time with Dhimurru, but does travel back from time to time. I also acknowledge Senior Administration Officer, Libby Rayner; and Business Support Officer Juliet Perry.
I seek leave to table a copy of the judge’s report into the C.L.E.A.N Awards, along with a beautiful photograph of Yupunu Marika and Grace Wununggmurra collecting the prize.
Leave granted.
Ms WALKER: Thank you very much. Speaking of Yupunu, or Fiona Marika, she is a finalist in the Northern Territory Training Awards this year. A Dhimurru Senior Ranger, Yupunu Fiona Marika has been nominated in this section for Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Student of the Year. Yupunu, or Fiona, commenced training in 2012 for her Certificate II in Conservation and Land Management, and managed to balance training sessions with being a busy mother of four children, working full-time as a ranger with Dhimurru, and being a lead ranger in the Learning on Country Program, which is a very specifically tailored education program for children on country in communities and homelands.
The awards will be judged after a training weekend, an interview, and presentation by each finalist. The winner will represent the NT at the Australian Training Awards. Being chosen as finalist for these awards is a great achievement for any individual. I say the very best of luck to Fiona for the next step in Darwin for the gala event on Saturday 13 September. She is a fantastic young woman. She is passionate about her job and about caring for country and her family. On that note, I acknowledge her beautiful children, who are Abby, Danielle, Whitney, and the oldest of her four children is Winston.
I will also talk about Tour de ArnhemLand, which is a bike ride that takes place through remote Arnhem Land. We have had perhaps three Tour de ArnhemLands over the years. This year’s participants travelled from Nhulunbuy to Jabiru, a distance of approximately 740 km. That is a long way on a mountain bike. They undertook this race late in July. It was the day after the Darwin Show Day.
The ride is a fundraiser for Arnhem Land Health Services, with approximately $9500 being raised this year. The goal this year was to raise money to support Malabam Health to produce a suicide prevention DVD. Previously the tour has raised as much as $40 000, which saw the donation of a vehicle to St John Ambulance in Nhulunbuy, which is used to support the volunteers program.
This year, eight riders, two support crew, and one volunteer from St John Ambulance made up the team. The riders were Steven Piper; Sarah Bentley; Tony Kirby; Colin Smith; Cameron Stiff, who is just 14 years old; Rod Neil; and Ali Thorn, though, unfortunately, Ali joined the tour just for one day due to spraining her ankle. The support team was made up of Ed Verdell who was cook on the trip, Brendan Marchesi who was there for maintenance, and Mandy Paradise, a paramedic who was formally our OIC in Nhulunbuy with St John, and now in Katherine.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the main sponsors for the event were Rio Tinto, St John Ambulance, YBE and, as local member, I was also pleased to provide a modest contribution towards their fundraising efforts. I also place on the record the support of the Northern Land Council which negotiated access and special passage for the group on what we call the Top Track between Ramingining through to Maningrida and Gunbalanya, and the good grace of the TOs who welcomed these visitors on their country.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Mr Deputy Speaker, in 2012 the Country Liberals went to the election with a promise to establish an expert panel on literacy and numeracy to undertake a review into these vital areas of education. I will provide an update for the Assembly tonight on that panel. As it is also Literacy and Numeracy Week, it is timely that this report is released.
This important week, Literacy and Numeracy Week, is to raise community awareness of the importance of literacy and numeracy skills for all Australian students, something this government is very focused on. The formation of this expert panel was part of this government’s renewed focus on teaching and assessing the core competencies of reading, writing and mathematics – back to basics, if you like.
I was very pleased to receive the literacy and numeracy expert panel’s report and recommendations – a fantastic report that has been the product of over 18 months of work. What is special about this is the members of the panel were all volunteers – experts who are deeply passionate about education and improving literacy and numeracy. I thank them for their hard work and commitment. It was lovely to meet them all last week in Parliament House.
The report identifies five key areas of focus: fundamental expectations for teaching literacy and numeracy; growing teacher capacity; leadership and school improvement; data analysis and interrogation; and partnerships. Within those areas, eight recommendations had been made, and I have agreed to act on all of them.
This government is 100% committed to improving outcomes in our schools, be it through our focus on the early years, our reforms to Indigenous education, or even how we are looking at changing school holidays to help students cope with the school year better. We are looking at every possible way to help Territory kids to be the best they can be and play a vital part in the future of the Northern Territory.
The people who were on the literacy and numeracy panel were: Ken Davies and Susan Bowden from the Department of Education; Professor Peter Sullivan from Monash University; Dr Kathryn Glasswell from Griffith University; Vicki Baylis from the Department of Education; Anita Jonsberg, who is from English Teachers Association NT; Shelley Worthington from the Mathematics Teacher Association NT; Pam Adam, Australian Literacy Educators Association; Deb Gleeson, Early Childhood Association; Jarvis Ryan, President of the Australian Education Union NT – and before Jarvis, Matthew Cranitch was there and a big thank you to Matthew – Sue Shore, Charles Darwin University; Gail Barker, Association Independent Schools NT; David Cummins from the Department of the Chief Minister Central Australia; Helen Chatto, Northern Territory Department of Education; Jill Hazeldine from the Northern Territory Department of Education; and Jan McCarthy from the Northern Territory Department of Education.
A big thank you to those volunteers, who did some vital work over 18 months to provide this government with far more information than I expected to get out of that. It was fantastic.
This government has been accused, from time to time, of not doing enough to bring down the cost of living in the Northern Territory. I want to put on the record a couple of things we have been doing lately, and we are starting to see signs that the hard work we have been doing is starting to make a difference.
The Country Liberals government is complementing the successful Real Housing for Growth program of the Minister for Housing by fast-tracking new and existing land release sites. Since coming to government, over 3500 dwellings have been constructed; that is in two years. On top of that, there are around 1000 units currently under construction in the Darwin CBD. This work is putting serious pressure on the cost of living and going a long way to make housing more affordable. We are expecting to see these numbers grow further in the near future as our land release program, the biggest in the Territory’s history, is rolled out.
Sales of Zuccoli Stage 2 are about to begin and a developer is expected to be announced next month for Stages 3 and 4. When completed, these stages will yield around 1350 lots. These lots will average around $160 000 and $180 000 each, very affordable compared to surrounding land releases. More releases are on the horizon. Stage 1 of Holtze, around the Palmerston Regional Hospital, will yield around 1500 dwellings and Berrimah Farm will yield around 2750 dwellings.
Labor members sat on their hands refusing to release land and keep up with the economy they had partially created. The reality is INPEX – and organisations like it – coming to the Top End put pressure on the cost of living, because there was not enough land being released.
We are now releasing land at record rates and, according to Real Estate Institute of the NT, Quentin Kilian, rents are beginning to ease. We have seen a number of unit developments completed around the same time. There is a larger amount of availability. Rent prices have eased, which is also good. ‘It has been a struggle for quite some time for renters’, are the words of Quentin Kilian.
Our push to promote development is paying dividends and rents are easing. People were struggling under Labor, but our efforts to reduce the cost of living and make housing more affordable are starting to take effect. We have the biggest land release program in the Territory’s history.
Mr Deputy Speaker, with that, I bid you a good night, but not good bye, because there is so much more to do. The reality is we have to keep this land release up across the Northern Territory at a pace that will keep up with the growth and ensure that land prices do not get out of the reach of the average person.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not going to say anything, but I decided after debate today I would say a couple of things. One is I do not oppose a hospital for Palmerston and the rural area. The debate was about whether that site had been looked at.
Regardless of that, I am also concerned – and I have said this before in regard to the government – that they are arrogant, which we saw today when we asked some simple questions about the development of the hospital. The member for Blain, who could not care two hoots about the people in Wallaby Holtze Road, said he would love to be there with the bulldozer, knocking over a few trees. The Health minister said, ‘Get over it, we are going to develop all your land into a suburban development’.
That is the type of arrogance people are sick of, and it will put this government out of office if it continues in that way. It needs to have some respect for the people who live in that area and in the rural area, otherwise it will not be around after the next election.
As I said, I support the hospital. The reason for the questions today was simply to find out whether the government had been consulting and whether adequate work had been done on looking into alternative sites. However, it appears in asking those questions, all you get are political answers that do not answer the points you are trying to get at.
I am going to raise a very sensitive issue tonight about abortion. As I said, it is sensitive, but I raise it because yesterday I was asked to meet a group of women from the Top End Women’s Legal Service. I gather they are pushing a proposal to the Northern Territory government which would increase the accessibility of abortions in the Northern Territory. What concerned me in the discussion was the way the unborn were referred to. I am not going to repeat that terminology, but I found it quite upsetting because, for me, life starts at conception and human life should be respected and protected, especially when that life is at its most vulnerable – inside its mum.
I am saying on the record that I will not be supporting the legislation they are trying to put forward. For me, human life is wonderful, special, and God’s gift, which can be seen no more than when a baby is born. It is a miracle, not just a bunch of cells. It is a human life, no less than those lives who are born. It is time it is treated in that way. Let us love life, not destroy it.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I imagine this issue will come up another time in more detail, but I wanted to put it on the record because I was quite upset. I was happy to speak to those women, but I felt there was disrespect for human life which I could not stomach. I needed to say something tonight to put it on the record that we need to treat human life with a lot more respect than we do today.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Administrative Arrangements Order
Administrative Arrangements Order
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I table a copy of the Administrative Arrangements Order published in the Northern Territory Gazette No S71 dated 24 August 2014. I advise the Assembly that on 24 August 2014 Her Honour the Administrator made additional appointments to the Chief Minister.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Member of Arafura
Member of Arafura
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I seek that leave of absence be granted to the member for Arafura for today on compassionate grounds.
Leave granted.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 9 students from Sanderson Middle School accompanied by Miriam Melis and Mark Conden. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your visit.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also welcome electorate officers from the opposition and the cross benches. I hope you enjoy your seminar.
Members: Hear, hear!
TOBACCO CONTROL LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 88)
(Serial 88)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The primary purpose of this bill is to support the protection of children from the harms of second-hand smoke when in private motor vehicles.
In bringing this legislation forward, the Country Liberals government is applying a pragmatic approach to reducing the harm caused from smoking within our community. We maintain that the primary responsibility for reducing the harm caused by smoking in our community is, and must, reside with the individual and is personal responsibility.
There is a swathe of support services available for smokers to assist them quitting, and I encourage all smokers who are considering quitting to access these services.
It is entirely appropriate that children are protected from second-hand smoke in vehicles under the control of adults who are making the decision to smoke. The Northern Territory currently has the highest rates of smoking in the country. This has a significant impact on the health and wellbeing of Territorians who choose to smoke. It also reflects a significant and largely preventable cost burden on the Northern Territory public health system. The impact of smoking is not only on the people who choose to smoke but also those around them. There is well-documented evidence which indicates passive smoking or exposure to second-hand smoke can cause asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia and, over the long term, cardiovascular disease and cancers. The poor air quality caused by second-hand smoke in cars is more hazardous than that found in smoky bars and restaurants.
Current evidence shows that children are particularly susceptible to the harmful effects of smoking, due to their smaller lung capacity, body weight and underdeveloped immune system. For children, the confined space of a motor vehicle further increases the harmful effect of second-hand smoke. Research specific to the effects that second-hand smoke has on children has indicated increased rates of respiratory illness, middle ear infections, asthma and sudden infant death syndrome. It is a significant and avoidable health hazard.
It is vital that the Northern Territory government takes all steps necessary to protect children who are unable to make informed decisions to leave the confines of a motor vehicle if they are exposed to the harm of people smoking around them.
The bill inserts a new offence into the Tobacco Control Act for people who smoke in a motor vehicle in the presence of a child under 16 years of age. This bill is consistent with other Australian jurisdictions that have already prohibited smoking in cars where children are present.
In another first, this legislation now also requires wholesalers to provide information about the quantity of tobacco products supplied to retailers.
__________________________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of participants from Operation Flinders Boot Camp. Welcome to Parliament House and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
__________________________
Mrs LAMBLEY: Section 53 of the act already requires wholesalers to provide information about who wholesalers are supplying tobacco to and their location. The additional information being sought on the quantity of tobacco product is important for supporting the Department of Health to better understand patterns of tobacco consumption across the Northern Territory, and to better tailor tobacco control initiatives to improve the health of all Territorians.
This bill also takes the opportunity to update existing provisions in the act in accordance with the whole-of-government push for legislation to be consistent with Part IIAA of the Criminal Code Act. Put simply, the previous provision in the act that prohibited or allowed certain activities to occur have had the relevant section standardised and, where there is an offence, the penalty units are clearly outlined. For example, clause 17 of the bill proposes to replace the existing section 17 of the act relating to the prohibition on advertising that offers price discounts on tobacco products. The intent of both the clause and the section are the same, it is the information is to be presented in a way that is consistent with the Criminal Code Act and all other legislation.
I note that section 17 of the existing act prescribed an offence where the penalty for an individual was 20 penalty units and 100 penalty units for a body corporate. The new clause 17 only defines the penalty as 20 penalty units. Members should read this bill in conjunction with section 38DB(3) of the Interpretation Act where it states:
- If a body corporate is found guilty of the offence, the court may impose a fine of an amount equal to 5 times the fine for an individual.
So in removing the reference to body corporate fines in the Tobacco Control Act and consistent with the principles of Part IIAA of the Criminal Code Act, corporate entities face the same penalties as they currently do in the existing Tobacco Control Act.
The example provided above is equally true for many clauses contained in the bill. I reiterate that the two new policy initiatives contained in the bill relate to protecting children from second-hand smoking in cars, and a power to collect information relating to wholesale quantities for tobacco sold in the Territory.
Many steps have been taken, and will continue to be taken, to decrease the harmful effects of smoking in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES BILL
(Serial 82)
and
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RELATED AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 83)
(Serial 82)
and
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RELATED AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 83)
Continued from 19 June 2014.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I will start with a quote from the Chief Minister:
- I would love to be the Corrections minister. It is not the portfolio I really aspire to but, if I was the prisons minister, I would build a big concrete hole and put all the bad criminals in there. ‘Right, you are in the hole, you are not coming out. Start learning about it’. I might break every United Nations’ convention on the right of the prisoner but, ‘Get in the hole’.
That was Adam Giles on 20 October 2010. Adam Giles has now instructed his Corrections minister to implement his get-in-the-hole policy, because that is what this bill is. We will oppose this bill for many reasons which I will outline in detail, but the primary reason is this bill ignores rehabilitation, and that will increase crime in the Northern Territory. Under the CLP, Territorians are living with the highest levels of violent crime in our history.
This new corrections legislation will be yet another failed CLP law and order policy. I will get into the details of this bill soon, but first it is important to understand where this bill came from and why. We know this bill comes from the Chief Minister, not only because he flagged it four years ago, but because of the approach to this legislation by the minister.
If we know one thing about this minister, it is that he is good at talking and he loves to talk. I am confident that not even the minister would disagree with that. One of the things he loves talking about most is legislation he is bringing forward to this House. He thrives on it, and he is never happier than when he has legislation to talk about. I would not be surprised if the minister read exposure drafts to his children at bedtime. The minister loves legislation. He loves interacting with the legal profession and other stakeholders and talking legislation with them. It is an admirable quality. However, he will not talk much about this big legislation.
This legislation repeals the old act and replaces it. This bill will form the legislative basis for the operation of prisons and corrections in the Northern Territory, but he will not talk about it. I am not surprised, considering the feedback from the Law Society, which said:
- The bill also purports to unreasonably interfere with legal professional privilege without any reason basis and to the detriment of the rule of the law.
- … the Society is concerned about the unreasonably short time frame for response and the lack of prior consultation. … The Society notes that the current Act has been in force for over 30 years and that the draft Bill provides less protection than currently exists.
Let us compare the approach of the minister to this bill with the Advance Personal Planning Bill last year, an important bill, but not as important as a bill which underpins the entire operation of a core government service. Before that bill was even introduced, he had issued four media releases. He held forums up and down the Territory. He talked about consulting widely and he did. He talked about how consulting widely had helped and how proud he was he had taken on people’s concerns.
A media release entitled Extensive Consultation on Advance Personal Planning, from October last year, before the bill was introduced in parliament, said:
- Attorney-General John Elferink said a high level of feedback was received through the many consultation sessions held across the Territory and online.
‘Members of the public attended consultation sessions at locations including Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Alice Springs, and were able to field questions and raise their concerns.
‘These opinions have been taken on board and as a result, the proposed legislation has been amended to accommodate valid suggestions.
That was his approach then. He was proud of his legislation and extensive consultation. That bill had 90 sections, this bill has over 200. He has not been holding consultation sessions up and down the track. He has not taken on board the multitude of sensible suggestions and has completely ignored submissions made by a variety of legal organisations. He has not been issuing media release after media release.
He has not been crowing about extensive consultation, and we know why. It is because this is not his legislation. He knows he is not allowed to change it. I suspect he knows the views of the legal community are valid, but he will have to ignore them, so he is ignoring them completely. He has completely ignored comprehensive submissions from a variety of legal bodies, including the Law Society. There are dozens and dozens of recommendations that have come forward from the experts – all ignored. These are the same bodies he normally loves talking to. The talk of the legal community is about just how bad this bill is. This is a bill the Attorney-General should be ashamed of.
Rather than doing his job, he is off spending taxpayers’ money on expensive courses to help improve his CV. Many people in the Department of Justice, in the DPP, are upset that they have been denied opportunities for professional development. Some have even paid for professional courses out of their own pockets. So they are particularly upset that the Attorney-General is using the money for himself when he should be doing his day job. This bill is part of the Attorney-General’s day job. It clearly needs serious attention. Serious concerns have been raised about this bill from within the legal ranks.
This is legislation the minister has been told he has to implement: the get-in-the-hole bill the Chief Minister demands. The legislation has nothing to do with rehabilitation or with reducing reoffending and cutting crime. It is all about vindictiveness and the badly considered desire of the Chief Minister to lock away all problems and increase incarceration, and not work through the problems we have in the Territory. It will not prevent repeat offending and, in particular, will increase Indigenous incarceration.
I am sure if anyone criticises this bill we will see a juvenile and immature debate about being tough on prisoners and on crime, even though this bill, by refusing to acknowledge rehabilitation, will increase crime. We share the belief with the legal community and, I have no doubt, the public at large, that by ignoring rehabilitation this bill is a bad bill. It is one of the fundamental concerns of the Law Society which advised government this bill does not provide for:
- ‘various degrees of confinement are safe (for the offender and staff), secure, humane and transparent manner, and to provide programs that give offenders the opportunity to reform and successfully reintegrate into society.’
I will repeat that last line:
- … to provide programs that give offenders the opportunity to reform and successfully reintegrate into society.
Ignoring rehabilitation will lead to more crime. The Chief Minister has outlined his desire to operate corrections in breach of the United Nations conventions, and this bill delivers on that intention. This bill is blatantly in breach of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. This bill also ignores the Standard Guidelines for Corrections in Australia, which are evidence-based and proven to reduce reoffending, and to which the Northern Territory is a signatory. This bill is also in complete breach of the findings of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.
However, all these breaches are clearly by design because of the direction the Chief Minister has given his Corrections minister. The Chief Minister wanted a bill that breaches all these guidelines. He wanted a vindictive bill. He made that clear in 2010. He did not want a bill that involved rehabilitation; he wanted a get-in-the-hole bill. It is also not surprising that the Chief Minister did not trust the minister to set his own policy with this bill.
In just under two years, the member for Port Darwin has overseen an extraordinary number of policy failures. He was originally given responsibility for alcohol rehabilitation, bungled it, and it was taken from him. His law and order policies resulted in the most violence we have ever seen in the Northern Territory. Five times he has promised a domestic violence strategy, but still has not delivered it.
He has slashed funding to victims of crime and has completely eroded the legal profession’s confidence through his approach to the appointment and conduct of Magistrate Maley. We have seen Magistrate Maley do the right thing and resign, but we have not seen the Attorney-General, who oversaw the whole shambles, do the right thing and resign.
Out of this litany of failure though, corrections is perhaps his greatest policy failure. Recently the minister announced his grand ambition for corrections, ‘I will still be the first Corrections minister in the history of this country since Federation to be seriously talking about closing prison beds.’
That is what he said on 19 July. That dream lasted just three weeks before he announced, on 5 August, he was opening more prison beds in a new juvenile prison because the existing facility did not have enough beds. He is, perhaps, the first Corrections minister in the history of this country since Federation to perform such a stunning backflip. His grand history-making ambition lasted three weeks.
I could go on forever about the policy failure of the CLP government, but let us get to the bill itself – the Chief Minister’s bill. The bill has 224 provisions, of which only two mention rehabilitation, one of which is in relation to the rehabilitation of injured Corrections’ dogs – extraordinary. It is unbelievable. You could not make this stuff up if you tried. When it was first pointed out to me I could not believe it. I had to do a ctrl/F on the bill. Check it out for yourself. If you do a word search for ‘rehabilitation’ you find it in two clauses. I will read clause 167, Approval of rehabilitation programs and work:
- For the definition of approved project in section 3 of the Sentencing Act, the Commissioner may approve a rehabilitation program or work or both as an approved project.
That is one mention of rehabilitation. The second mention is in clause 193(4), Harming correctional services dog:
- The amount the person may be ordered to pay is the reasonable cost of either or both of the following:
- (a) the treatment, care, rehabilitation and retraining of the dog;
There are two mentions of rehabilitation in this bill. One allows the commissioner to define something as a rehabilitation program and the other goes to rehabilitation of a dog.
This bill dedicates as much attention to the treatment of injured corrections dogs as it does to prisoners. We love our dogs, but this is a Correctional Services bill and we know it has to be focused on rehabilitation. That has to be the focus of a modern corrections system. This government can forget talking about rehabilitation anymore.
It gets even worse. In the original version of this bill there was a clause called ‘Objects of act’ and one of the intentions was to rehabilitate prisoners. I will read from the original bill distributed by the minister. It reads, ‘To provide for the rehabilitation of offenders with a view to their reintegration into the general community’.
An admirable object. However, it was pointed out by the Law Society and others that the bill did not implement the object. The provisions of the bill simply did not mention or deal with the object of the act at all.
Extraordinarily, rather than try to amend the bill to meet its stated object, the minister just took out the object. It is not in this version of the bill – a clear concession from the government that rehabilitation is not the object.
This is childish. You do not deal with the issue; you just try to move the goalposts. It reminds me of the government’s election promise to cut crime by 10% each year. When the government realised the promise would fail and violent crime was at record levels, rather than listening to police and others about what they could do to cut crime, it first tried to change the goalposts. It said it would cut crime by 10% in its term which, of course, no one bought. You cannot just change the goalposts.
I will run through a few more serious concerns we have with this bill. However, I make it clear these concerns are not in relation to the potential conduct of prison officers and corrections staff. It is not what prison officers do, but what this bill allows them to do that concerns me. That is what this debate is about. We are not debating the conduct of prison officers or how prison officers may or may not implement this legislation, we are debating what the provisions of this legislation provide.
When we were debating the government’s Alcohol Protection Orders we raised numerous concerns with the government which it just batted away by saying, ‘Do not worry, the police will not do that’. Now we have seen the courts have tested that legislation and it has failed, due in many parts because recommendations were ignored. Bad legislation should not be covered up by saying, ‘Do not worry, we will not use it that way’.
This bill allows a prison officer – the general manager – to overrule the directions of a medical practitioner in relation to a prisoner’s healthcare requirements. This is wrong. I am not suggesting the general manager will ever deliberately prevent a prisoner from receiving the medical attention they require, but why allow for it? Why provide legal protection for medical attention to be ignored or denied? Why allow the recommendations of a medical practitioner to be ignored? It is clause 85(2), Recommendations of health practitioner:
- The General Manager must give reasonable consideration to implementing the recommendation.
This is a change from the current act where, rather than give reasonable consideration, the general manager is required to comply with the recommendation of the health practitioner. This is very concerning to us. You need medical attention to determine the extent of what is happening. If the medical practitioner says you need medical attention you should be getting medical attention. This bill has the capacity to place the general manager in trouble they do not deserve.
This legislation is, in many ways, saying, ‘We do not trust doctors’. We would like to know what consultation the minister undertook with the medical profession on that. If the medical practitioner gives a direction, the general manager should follow that direction. The Law Society shares our concern. It said:
- The Society is concerned regarding provisions where the General Manager is able to override the recommendations of health professionals in the provision of health care. Whilst the Society acknowledges that the General Manager must at all times balance issues of safety and security with the health needs of inmates, the General Manager is not in a position to ‘second guess’ what health care is required. The Society is concerned that unless the General Manager is medically qualified it would expose inmates to unreasonable risks of harm.
This provision should be removed.
Provisions contained in the current act in relation to food, clothing and exercise have all been removed. Again, I am not suggesting when this act comes into effect they will stop serving food at the prison. However, what is wrong with the provisions in the current act? Why are they going? I understand section 149 of the Criminal Code Act imposes a duty on those in charge of prisoners to provide them with the necessities of life, and there is plenty of civil case law establishing a duty of care in relation to prisoners. But why remove it from this bill when it is in the previous act? What is so wrong with having provisions in relation to food, clothing and exercise? Again, I quote from the Law Society:
- The Society is also concerned the Bill does not articulate that food, clothing and exercise will be provided. This is in stark contrast to the current Act and other Australian jurisdictions.
The current act provides that the director must provide a prisoner with food and water of sufficient quality and quantity to maintain the good health of the prisoner, and that the director must allow a prisoner to exercise. The society reiterated its concerns that the bill does not articulate that food, clothing or exercise will be provided. This is in stark contrast to other Australia jurisdictions. The society submitted that these provisions should be re-enacted into the bill.
That is from two separate submissions from the Law Society to the minister. The Law Society is becoming frustrated by the minister’s refusal to listen.
The bill has unreasonable restrictions on legal representatives’ access and screening to the prison, and communication with prisoners. Prison officers have new powers to refuse visits from lawyers and it can even intercept legally privileged mail, against all legal principles. The minister would not be surprised that the legal fraternity is concerned about the government making it harder for prisoners to be represented. In their first submission, it said:
- The Society wholeheartedly rejects the proposal that a General Manager may intercept privileged mail in the fashion proposed. As noted above the Society has not been furnished with any rationale that would warrant the proposal contained in the Bill and thus submits that the current provisions satisfactorily balance the safety and security of the prison against the confidentiality communications with one’s legal representative, a cornerstone of our justice system.
Their second submission said:
- The current version of the Bill while appearing to be similar to the current legislative provisions still allows the General Manager to override the opinion of the nominated examiner and inspect mail that was found to be a legal item if the General Manager reasonably believes that the legal item is a prohibited item ...
The Society recommends that s.51(3) of the current Act be included in the Bill. S. 51(3) allows for a complaint of misconduct against a legal practitioner to be made to the Attorney-General or the Law Society. The Society has not received any such complaint since the introduction of the provisions in 2000.
The Society wholeheartedly rejects the proposal that a General Manager may intercept privilege mail in the fashion proposed. The Society submits that the current provisions satisfactorily balance the safety and security of the prison against the confidentiality communications with one’s legal representative, a cornerstone of our justice system. No evidence or rationale has been put forward that would warrant the proposal contained in the Bill.
The Society also suggests that where a prisoner is in receipt of priority mail and a search of a prisoner’s cell is to be undertaken, that it be undertaken in the presence of that prisoner. This is to ensure legal profession privilege is not inadvertently breached.
Interfering with legal professional privilege is extremely problematic. Whereas there may be a case for some limitations on the right in Sydney or Melbourne, our crime in the Territory is more disorganised than organised, so we question the need for such extreme powers. The other prime reason for not interfering with legal professional privilege is that the government could be providing a ‘get out of gaol free card’ for criminals. If there is not a high degree of transparency and integrity in the process by which the authorities get permission to access a prisoner’s communications with their lawyer – and that does not appear to be the case here – then the prisoner could seek a stay of proceedings on the basis he or she cannot get a fair trial. We can envisage cases where a court could find it would be unfair to continue with a criminal trial because a prisoner’s legal professional privilege has been improperly breached. That means the case has to be stopped and the prisoner would walk free. That is not something we can support.
Provisions relating to visits, repatriation and separate youth detention are all in breach of guidelines and not consistent with other jurisdictions. This is a bad bill. I will quote from the Law Society because it is concerned:
- … about the proposal that the General Manager of a prison has access to inmates’ health records. That is not to say that an appropriate and thorough health assessment ought not be undertaken and the Society notes that this is not provided for in the Bill. The Society would consider that a report by a health professional with access to the health record would provide adequate information to ensure the safe and secure incarceration. At the very least an inmate ought to be invited to consent to the sharing of health information and only where a health practitioner determines there is an issue of safety or security should the practitioner be permitted to disclose confidential health information.
The bill also has no provisions for injured or incapable workers. As the minister knows, we support the Sentenced to a Job policy; it picks up on very good work done by our former minister, the member for Barkly. These provisions go beyond what is required to make the Sentenced to a Job policy work. The policy is in place now, and it works. There have been very serious concerns expressed about what powers this bill allows.
I repeat what the Law Society and others have said to me. They trust the current commissioner to exercise his powers responsibly, but they are concerned about what this bill will allow future commissioners to do. There is nothing in this bill which says rehabilitation is a priority. Any future commissioner who picks up this bill and reads it to work out what their priorities as a commissioner are will find nothing about rehabilitation. We are relying on the goodwill of future commissioners and governments.
This bill should enshrine the importance of rehabilitation. It should be a requirement at law, not a commitment in a glossy pamphlet. The Law Society had a very sensible suggestion, which was to add the principle to the bill that all work a prisoner is asked to do is done with the rehabilitation of that prisoner in mind. That is a very sensible suggestion. The minister, however, has ruled out this amendment and said all amendments suggested to date are not sensible. He made comment to that effect in his second reading speech when he asked for sensible amendments to come forward. Clearly in the minister’s opinion all amendments to date – there have been many mentioned and given to him – have been deemed by him to not be sensible. We cannot be surprised when it is clear, through this bill, that rehabilitation is not a priority.
The Chief Minister, as I outlined at the start, asked for a get-in-the-hole bill which breaches all United Nations conventions. The Law Society believes the Sentenced to a Job policy is at risk with this bill:
- The Society submits that policies such as ‘Sentenced to a Job’ may be undermined by the failure to include rehabilitation in the Bill. Australia’s international obligation under the ILO Convention No 29, ratified by Australia in 1960, may be breached where prisoners undertake involuntary, low paid labour within prisons or work in joint ventures of private enterprise unless the work has genuine rehabilitative value.
By clearly stating ‘rehabilitation’ in the object of the bill, these concerns may be addressed. However, as we know, the minister has not put the object back into this bill. There are even more concerns with the detail of this bill than I have expressed here, and many pages of thorough, detailed recommendations to significantly improve it.
I was advised during one briefing that if the minister was to simply reintroduce the old act it would be an improvement on where we are at today. We agree with the legal community that the objects of the initial draft be reincorporated into this bill. I will read those objects:
- people who are ordered to be held in custody to be removed from the general community and placed in a safe, secure and humane environment;
people who are not required to be held in custody but who are required to be kept under supervision are supervised in a safe, secure and humane manner;
the safety and security of people who are the custodians or supervisors of those in custody or under supervision;
rehabilitation of people in custody or under supervision with a view to their reintegration into the general community; and
consideration of the rights and interests of victims.
There is nothing wrong with these objects. These are good objects and the bill should be drafted to reflect them. That is what needs to be done by this minister. Instead, he has been given directions by the Chief Minister, whose original quote I will read again:
- I would love to be the Corrections minister. It is not the portfolio I really aspire to but, if I was the prisons minister, I would build a big concrete hole and put all the bad criminals in there. ‘Right, you are in the hole, you are not coming out. Start learning about it’. I might break every United Nations’ convention on the right of the prisoner but, ‘Get in the hole’.
The object to rehabilitate the people we have in our prison system is a good object. It should be the central principle of this legislation. We should be aiming to ensure people do not reoffend. That has to be the intention and focus of our prison system. If this bill is the rule book, then one of the rules should be rehabilitation and it should be clear. Any commissioner who picks up this act will know what their driving force and priority is; it has to be rehabilitation. That has to be the priority of a modern corrections system.
Mr Deputy Speaker, for that reason, above all others, we cannot support this bill. We oppose this bill.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I listened carefully to the member for Fannie Bay’s contribution to this debate. I am somewhat surprised he or the opposition is not supporting this bill, because it is a good and necessary bill and does many things which the minister for Corrections has already articulated very well in his second reading speech.
I pick up on some of the comments the member for Fannie Bay made about rehabilitation. Just because it is not enshrined in this bill does not mean this government or this minister is not committed to rehabilitation for prisoners. It is a ridiculous argument to mount. Taking such a shallow, cavalier and poorly considered position on this bill diminishes, in my view, his role in this parliament.
I support the Attorney-General’s Correctional Services Bill. As the Attorney-General said when he presented this bill in conjunction with the Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill:
- These bills deliver on the government’s commitment to provide an improved and robust foundation for the administration of sentences and the management of offenders in the Northern Territory.
In the two years the Country Liberals have been in government we have implemented a swag of legislative changes which have driven down crime and rates of recidivism. These legislative changes have resulted in offenders learning how to work and contributing to society in a meaningful way.
Two years ago, this government set an ambitious target for crime reduction. Now, halfway through this government’s first term, the latest statistics show property crime has plummeted to levels that go way back to the years of the former CLP government. Alcohol-related violence is also trending down.
It is obvious our new policies are delivering results for the people and the community of the Northern Territory. These policies have seen the NT Police pursuing recidivist property offenders through targeted operations. The suite of measures in place to reduce alcohol abuse, including alcohol mandatory treatment, Alcohol Protection Orders, and intensive temporary beat locations, has seen dramatic reductions in personal crime. You can see that on display in Alice Springs and Katherine.
For the past two years, this government has put in place major legislative and policy reforms. We have taken the time to get this right, and the results are promising. The results show some real change.
History has shown that breaking welfare dependency will prevent reoffending and keep offenders away from the justice system. This government’s Sentenced to a Job program seeks to do just that, with prisoners taking part in full-time or part-time work. Prisoners participating in Sentenced to a Job earn award wages, pay tax, pay board for their accommodation, and contribute 5% of their pay to a victims assistance fund. Sentenced to a Job has seen prisoners completing jobs including being a cashier, painter, baker or metal worker in various communities and major towns across the Territory. These prisoners are paying their debt to society not by languishing in a cell costing taxpayers, but through working, paying taxes, and contributing to society. That sounds pretty normal to me.
The community gets a double benefit from these prisoners gaining valuable work-based skills that will help them gain meaningful employment on their release from prison. Indeed, it is heartening to hear that prisoners are also now working to help pensioners with gardening and minor maintenance jobs.
The Northern Territory government’s working prisons policy is providing inmates with the skills and training they need to gain and retain a job once they are released from prison. Prisoners who participate in the program are expected to take on increased responsibilities to assist with their return to society. This includes building a work ethic and developing relationships with hard-working positive role models.
However, there is always more we, as a society, can do, such as early intervention, working with youth and making sure we spend the time with young people before they get into trouble. I acknowledge in the gallery behind me members of the Katherine YMCA. They are sitting with some special people I will mention briefly, and who I am sure the Attorney-General and Minister for Correctional Services will cover in more detail in a moment.
In the context of some of the work with youth and the early intervention work that needs to occur across our community, the Katherine YMCA is a shining light. On Friday nights, for example, they have a drop-in night, often receiving up to several hundred young people from across Katherine and the close regions for a period of three hours – say, from 7 pm until 10 pm. Letting those kids get out in a social environment and enjoy themselves in a supervised way keeps them off the streets, out of trouble, and shows them there are better things to do with their time than causing trouble and offending. The work they are doing in this area in Katherine is lauded.
I got its Facebook page up on my iPad and it said on the Friday just gone, ‘Drop-in is back on tonight, 7 till 10. Reminder, under 10s must be supervised by someone 18 years or older’. So you cannot just use it as a dumping ground or babysitting service for little kids. ‘Drop offs will start at 9 pm because we are only running one bus.’ It even runs a bus to get kids home safely at the end of the drop-in night and is doing a stellar job. ‘Parents are encouraged to pick up their children if possible. Thank you.’ The community recognises the great work the YMCA is doing in this area. It is well known and I applaud the work going on.
That is not the only thing the YMCA is doing in Katherine. It is also involved in youth diversion programs. It has a free teen gym so teenagers can get into the gymnasium and make themselves a bit healthier, fitter and stronger. That improves something I talked about the other day when I was in Katherine opening an art exhibition of all things: self-esteem. If you improve someone’s self-esteem, chances are they will go on to lead a more productive life.
The YMCA representatives, Tammy and Craig Frean and Stan Law, have with them a number of youths who have completed a boot camp. They were on a trial boot camp, something that was implemented by the Northern Territory government. These guys are going great guns. It is a pleasure to see you guys to have an opportunity to see how parliament operates. This is about teaching these kids some things they do not normally have access to, or might not have been interested in some time ago. It is about changing the mindset. I applaud them.
I mention that because all the things this government is doing, supported by organisations like the YMCA in Katherine, represent a suite of measures we introduced to prevent crime from rising and to prevent and reduce recidivism in the Northern Territory.
I move back to the bill at hand. While it is clear all Territorians will benefit from changes made to this legislation, there are also clear benefits for Correctional Services staff and offenders. Once this legislation takes effect, Correctional Services staff will have clear, contemporary provisions that better reflect their operational duties.
Offenders will benefit from new provisions that are clear as to the role the commissioner and other key statutory officers have. There are also new enshrined requirements for the use of force on inmates to reflect modern practices. The new scheme of administrative home detention will allow for early release of eligible inmates to reduce the burden of growing inmate numbers. That is something the Minister for Correctional Services often talks about. He is very happy to show an interesting graph about the trend for inmate numbers across the Northern Territory. The projections for inmate numbers were the scariest thing, had the Labor Party stayed in power after the 2012 election.
The opening of the Darwin Correctional Precinct will signal a new chapter in Correctional Services, albeit with a Labor-imposed price tag of $1.8bn. It is what it is as a result of Labor’s poor financial decision-making.
The modern facilities at the new Darwin Correctional Precinct will assist in the rehabilitation of offenders and create increased opportunities for reintegration programs, including learning, training and employment. Specifically, training and work programs will provide offenders will skills, direction and the opportunity to receive qualifications while in detention.
We have seen these initiatives increasingly lead to a job and career on release, not recidivism and a drain on welfare benefits. This government will not condone offenders sitting idly by in their cells. They will give back to society and contribute in a meaningful way. In short, they will learn and work. They will be prepared for the outside world on their release from detention.
Offenders must face the consequences of the law, however, they must also be provided with the opportunities to turn their lives around, which is what this new legislation will achieve.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Correctional Services Bill as brought in by the Minister for Correctional Services.
___________________________
Statement by Speaker
Menzies School of Health Life Lab
Statement by Speaker
Menzies School of Health Life Lab
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I announce that the Menzies School of Health Life Lab is in the main hall from now until 2 pm. After this morning’s Question Time, some people might want to visit them. You can write your own health report card, measure your blood pressure, check your metabolic age, check your grip strength, check your percentage of fat and check if you are anaemic or not.
This is a mobile science outreach, and 600 Territorians visited this Menzies Life Lab last week. If you get a chance, those watching on the internal screen might like to get a few of those things checked.
__________________________
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, the member for Fannie Bay was very plain in his response to the government’s Correctional Services Bill 2014. I join him, along with my colleagues on this side of the House, in opposing this bill. We do not oppose simply for the sake of opposing, but on the grounds that it fails miserably in bringing forward contemporary legislation, and it fails the expectations of the community.
I utterly refute the comments of the member for Katherine, dismissing the views of the member for Fannie Bay. That is what he does, refute and oppose for the sake of it.
Somehow I doubt very much the member for Katherine had acquainted himself with not one, but two submissions by the NT Law Society. I doubt very much he acquainted himself with a very detailed submission to the minister from NAAJA and CAALAS, such is the world of the member for Katherine and members on that side of the House. However, I will give him credit. It is rare there are second speakers from the government to these bills, but, lo and behold, on this occasion we have the member for Katherine making a contribution.
I enjoyed listening to what he had to say about YMCA of Katherine and the good job it does. However, I can only suspect, given the latitude the minister had in his contribution to the debate, they are stuck to fill the business of this House for the rest of this week. We know there is very little legislation coming before the House, and what a curious thing that is. They do not want to elect a Deputy Chief Minister this week and shine the light internally on the divisions within their members because they have said – it must have been one of their spin doctors on the fifth floor who came up with it – they are focusing on legislation. I hope when I have completed my contribution there will be members on the other side of the House speaking and reading the notes their minders have prepared for them.
I have spent some time as the shadow minister for Corrections, so I take a particular interest in this bill. I concur with the member for Fannie Bay that this bill falls short. In fact, it falls way short, not only on community expectation, but also because, yet again, it falls short of the expectations of the representative bodies of the legal fraternity in the Northern Territory.
This government, and the minister in particular, like to blow their trumpet about having mandates, listening to Territorians and representing the welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. That is rubbish! It is disingenuous and dishonest for the CLP and the minister to say they are interested in what Territorians think, they listen and consult, or they govern, as we say in prayers every morning we sit in this Chamber:
- … for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
I know this to be true as an elected representative of people in northeast Arnhem Land. As a community, we have had a prison thrust upon us, less than 800 m from the centre of Nhulunbuy, with no consultation prior to this decision on the critical question about where this facility for low-level offenders should go, and at the cost of closing down an Alcohol and Other Drugs residential rehab centre. In a few months we will see the closure of the region’s only sobering-up shelter or, at best, perhaps a relocation, to house further prisoners. I will return to that sorry saga later in my contribution to this debate about the abject failure of the government to consult with people, including those in Nhulunbuy, on such an important project as the location of a prison.
As the member for Fannie Bay outlined succinctly, the minister talked up and beat his chest about consultation, but the reality is far from that. In fact, he is delusional and, worse, he is dismissive of expert legal advice from the likes of those in a position to provide it, such as the Northern Territory Law Society, the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency, and the Central Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service.
Dismissing expert and professional advice which cumulatively tallies into hundreds of years of collective expertise is a hallmark of the CLP’s approach to governing the Territory. It is why even their Liberal counterparts interstate cringe at them because they are so embarrassing and arrogant. I will concede that the minister for Corrections is at least much more polite, genteel and articulate than the Chief Minister who, in June last year, very publicly dismissed expert advice and warnings from medical, legal aid and other experts about the many shortcomings of the Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Bill. Let us throw social justice experts into that mix as well.
In a speech to the CLP Central Council in June 2013, the Chief Minister attacked his critics as:
- … lefty welfare oriented people who rely on the misery and the poverty to sustain their own personal economy ...
- … get out of the way, p… off.
We are talking about experts from the Australian Medical Association, the Indigenous People’s Organisation NT and the Australian Council of Social Service, along with prominent individuals such as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Mick Gooda, who all warned that the CLP’s plans for alcohol mandatory treatment were not based on evidence and not likely to be effective. As we know, they were right on both fronts.
Bad language, not mincing one’s words, a head-in -the-sand approach to governing the Territory, and telling Territorians and the nation how it is, is ashamedly how the CLP approaches its responsibility as a government. Goodness gracious me – as the Corrections minister might say – we saw a shocking and cringe-worthy case of that last week with the now ex-Deputy Chief Minister guilty of behaviour unbecoming a person in high office with a homophobic slur against a public servant.
Even though I know the Corrections minister to be a notch or three above the Chief Minister, and he would be a much better deputy than the member for Fong Lim, his dismissal of the expert legal advice offered to him by the likes of the Northern Territory Law Society, NAAJA and CAALAS on this bill is the equivalent of the Chief Minister telling the legal and medical experts, and social and justice advocates, where they could go with their criticisms of the CLP’s Alcohol mandatory treatment legislation.
It is simple: they do not care. They love to give all the appearances of caring and being interested in the views and expert advice of Territorians, but at the end of the day they will do as they darn well please. And in the world according to the Chief Minister, if you do not like it, you can just p… off.
The member for Fannie Bay is right; the Attorney-General, the Corrections minister is indeed delivering the get-in-the-hole policy, and God forbid anyone who dares to challenge it, criticise it or offer an alternative view. There has been a number of well-considered submissions put to the minister for Corrections on this bill, but he has not taken on board the advice – the minister who claims to always have his door open and be ready to consult.
If I think back to the community consultations which were advertised across the Territory at the end of 2013 for a number of bills and reforms that were coming before the parliament, I should say when they talk about ‘across the Territory’ they mean everywhere except Nhulunbuy. When I challenged the minister as to why it was that Nhulunbuy was not included on that list of consultations, he said it was because, ‘You are not on the Stuart Highway’. Believe it or not, that is what he said. Shamed into it, he eventually, belatedly, sent over a couple of officers and poorly advertised a community meeting. I did my best to circulate e-mails. It must have come back through my e-mail account three or four times as I put it out across people’s networks. So at the end of the day I guess the minister could say, ‘We did consult in Nhulunbuy’. Consulting in Nhulunbuy is a very rare thing, let me tell you.
In this instance of the Correctional Services Bill 2014, was there consultation? No. The Attorney-General, the Corrections minister, is not interested in taking advice on board. Submissions – which are public – raised plainly the many concerns about this bill before the House. The member for Fannie Bay referred to some of those submissions. I also wish to quote from the submissions which were presented. I quote from the NT Law Society:
- Whilst the Society thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Bill the Society is concerned about the unreasonably short time frame for response and the lack of prior consultation.
In the next paragraph, NTLS stated:
- The Society is concerned that the Bill establishes a corrections system that does not meet the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners that guide detention in Australia. In stark contrast to other Australian jurisdictions and the minimum standards the Bill does not provide for:
Access to legal representation
Medical care
Food, clothing, exercise
Rehabilitation
Visits and Repatriation
Separate youth detention.
Over the page in relation to food, clothing, exercise and rehabilitation, the NT Law Society stated:
- The Society is concerned that the Bill does not provide for rehabilitation. As rehabilitation is a primary purpose of a modern corrections system the Bill should require it to be provided and its omission is alarming. The failure to require the Commissioner to provide rehabilitation casts a long shadow over the Bill.
- The Society is concerned because the power to appropriate inmates’ money is without limit. There is potential to create a two tier system for those inmates capable of earing and those that are not. The limitless nature of those provisions allows for the creation of an indentured labour force. The Society urges clear articulation and limit on what can be taken from inmates’ income and how that will be accounted for with adequate measures to prevent abuse and strike the correct balance.
The NT Law Society submitted a supplementary submission to the minister and said:
- Most of the concerns raised remain. … The Bill as currently drafted fails to give adequate expression to the intent of the Legislature and positions corrections outside or above the system of justice of which it is an important part. The Bill does not adequately provide for the management and operation of a modern corrections facility nor does it provide adequate guidance or properly balance those management needs with other duties and obligations.
Debate suspended.
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES BILL
(Serial 82)
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RELATED AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 83)
(Serial 82)
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RELATED AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 83)
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, prior to the lunchtime suspension I was talking about the submissions that had been made to the minister on the Correctional Services Bill. I will talk about the very detailed submission from NAAJA and CAALAS, and note in the opening to their submission they said
- … pleased with a number of improvements made to version 19 of the Correctional Services Bill … as compared to earlier versions.
- Notwithstanding this, we raise significant concerns with the proposed bill …
I am pleased the Correctional Services minister finds this hilarious. I do not think NAAJA and CAALAS are laughing about it, nor the Northern Territory Law Society ...
Mr Elferink: You have been debating the wrong bill for the whole morning and just figured it out.
Ms WALKER: There are a number of significant concerns ...
Mr Elferink: Somebody pulled you aside at lunch and said, ‘By the way …
Ms WALKER: Madam Speaker, might I have the floor without the interruption of the rather churlish and childish minister?
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, order! Member for Nhulunbuy, you have the call.
Ms WALKER: Madam Speaker, they are children!
Amongst the series of significant concerns raised, I highlight a couple:
- Changes to the current repatriation system that will likely see a large number of Aboriginal adults and juveniles stranded in Darwin and Alice Springs after their release from custody (whilst this change may be more directed to operational changes, the bill and an absence of guidance around repatriations is a concern)
I hope other members of the House will address this issue and share these concerns.
Another point raised in the NAAJA/CAALAS submission:
- Power given to the commissioner to direct an inmate to work. This is too broad, and potentially establishes a system of forced labour.
- The abilities to provide healthcare and administer medication without consent are hugely concerning and abhorrent to modern understandings of human rights; these sections require alteration and greater qualification.
In the report they also noted:
- … disappointment in relation to the rushed and poorly planned consultation process undertaken by the government in relation to this significant legislation.
Before I close, I place on the record concerns of people in Nhulunbuy and northeast Arnhem Land about the minister’s approach to consultation and the establishment of a work camp in my electorate. At the outset, nobody has issues with a corrections facility – a prison – for low-level offenders. The new era of corrections was under the stewardship of my colleague, the member for Barkly. Under his watch, we saw the opening of the Barkly Work Camp some 7 km outside Tennant Creek. I visited that facility, as I have the Berrimah Corrections Facility and the Alice Springs Correction Facility, at the time I held the shadow responsibility for Corrections.
People are most upset about the abject failure of any consultation with the people of the region about the establishment of this work camp. We all knew there was a mobile work camp at the Garma site, known as Gulkula, which had been established as a mobile work camp every Garma Festival for a number of years.
Last year, however, there was a decision for that work camp to stay on and nobody had any objections to that. Nobody knew. Whilst I am sure there were negotiations around what would be a suitable location for something more permanent, there was no consultation involving the community stakeholders of where it might be. We found out eventually that what came about was a result of the closure of the region’s only residential Alcohol and Other Drugs rehabilitation facility, which was only opened in 2007 and has been an incredibly successful facility in supporting not only the people of the region, but referrals through the justice system from magistrates who would refer people into Nhulunbuy.
On that front, shame on the Health minister that there was no consultation or independent at-arm’s-length assessment, or otherwise, of the success of the centre or how its service might be examined to better operate. No, the decision was simply that they were to close it down on 30 June. They did not even tell half of the employees who were working there. People found out they were losing their jobs because they heard an interview with me on ABC radio. It is an appalling way for someone to find out they have lost their job. Had the Health minister been on the ball, it would not have been like that.
To close a residential rehab facility and reopen the doors as a corrections facility is not what people were expecting or what they wanted. The President of the East Arnhem Shire, Mr Banambi Wunungmurra, who was one of the stakeholders, chaired the Harmony Group Committee for a few years. The reforms introduced in Nhulunbuy and the region came about through the hard work of that group to lobby, and it had bipartisan support across the region. The first Mr Wunungmurra heard about the closure of the rehab centre and the fact that prisoners would be moving in there was when I phoned him to ask him if he was aware of it.
I do not know when the government was planning to advise the community of its plans to locate prisoners into our rehab facility just under 500 m or so from the Walkabout Hotel, a little further into the centre of town. People are upset there was no consultation. That was highlighted when the member for Fannie Bay gave me his seat at the Estimates Committee to ask the minister, during the estimates process, about the consultations he had undertaken. It was one of the more bizarre performances in estimates. We know the minister says and does some very strange things, but his idea of consultation – during the 15 minutes or so we had in estimates – was bizarre.
I asked him a couple of very basic questions. I asked, ‘Can you please provide a full list of community consultation meetings, including dates and times of meetings in and around Nhulunbuy, regarding the establishment of a 50-bed corrections facility, announced on only 14 May, to be located in the soon-to-close AOD rehabilitation centre, less than 1 km from the centre of Nhulunbuy?’
It is not worth going through the Hansard transcript. There are pages of the minister avoiding the question and saying, bizarrely, ‘I spoke to you’. I have been back through my diary. I have no meetings in my calendar. I am not a forgetful person, I am rather careful about these things.
I had two approaches from the minister. One was across the floor of the House when he came to see me to let me know he had been in Nhulunbuy the day before talking about the work camp. I said that was good and nobody had any objections to a work camp; it was all about its location and the fact it was kicking people out of a health facility and closing it. The next time the minister spoke to me was in the foyer area of Parliament House. I had just been outside talking to media about the news of this prison moving into a rehabilitation centre that was being closed down. As I walked past, he grabbed me and said, ‘You know it was not working’. I said I was sorry and would talk to him later. That was the extent of the consultation with the minister.
Then, bizarrely, he told me during estimates that in future, he would communicate with me ‘only by correspondence’. So, minister, next time you approach me on this side of the House or anywhere, you will have my hand in your face saying, ‘Only by correspondence’, because you and the way you work are bizarre.
Thanks to your efforts you have upset a community. More than 500 people have signed a petition to object not to a prison – the wording is very tempered in this petition – but rather calling on the government to negotiate, consult and allow the community to have both facilities: a corrections facility for low-level offenders in a location to be agreed to by the community, as well as a residential rehabilitation centre.
Not only have we lost our residential rehabilitation centre, by the end of the year we will have lost our sobering-up shelter as well. We may be lucky, but I am not holding my breath that there might be an alternate facility found for the sobering-up shelter. However, come the end of the year, the corrections facility is planning to take over the entire complex – the rehabilitation centre as well as the sobering-up shelter.
The minister missed a critical step in the process, in that they did not put an application through to the Nhulunbuy Corporation, which is the entity equivalent to our local government – oops, he forgot that step, that process to go through – and provide a plan and seek formal approval for the change of use of the facility.
It took up the front page of the Arafura Times in Nhulunbuy for about four weeks in a row. The first story was a positive one in the week beginning 14 May when the story had leaked about a new prison work camp for the region. The only thing missing in that story was a location. There was no talk of exactly where the location would be. It all went downhill from there, and all front pages which came after that called on government to do the right thing, consult with people and find an alternative location.
I still do not believe there is not alternative real estate which might house this facility. It has gone very quiet, minister. We have heard nothing further or formal, although I understand Cabinet is due in Nhulunbuy for the week beginning 8 September. My guess is it will, perhaps, be later in the week because you have the opening of the new corrections facility on 9 September. Yes, my pick is around the 10th 11th or 12th that you guys will be there. I trust you will be talking with the community. That is, if we have a Deputy Chief Minister and all your internal woes settled. But maybe not.
Given it was announced on 14 May, the publicly advised communication process did not happen until 1 July. I was asked to circulate a notice, which I was happy to do on community consultation on correctional services and Alcohol and Other Drug services. The notice said:
- On 1 July senior officials from the department, from both Corrections and Health, will be on the Gove Peninsula to conduct initial consultations with the community ...
Initial consultations with the community? Are you serious? There was one day where people were invited, but you had to RSVP to participate in a session in the community support centre.
I pinned that notice up in my office, minister, with nice red writing at the bottom letting people know they were very welcome to sign the petition in my office calling on the Northern Territory government to retain both the residential rehab and the prison, and to consult with the community about the best location for a prison. A bit of consultation was not too much to ask, I thought.
I remember when in opposition the CLP members, led by the member for Katherine, were up in arms about the prospect of a renal facility being located in Katherine at a certain place where people were saying ‘not in my back yard’. Thankfully, that facility has proceeded. It is not that people in Nhulunbuy are saying ‘not in my back yard’. People in Nhulunbuy are saying, ‘We welcome a corrections facility, we want to keep our rehab centre, and we want to be consultative’. However, the people in Nhulunbuy are pretty accustomed to this government not working with us but doing things to the community, and basically treating the community as if we should be thankful for anything that comes our way. Because it is not a CLP-held seat, we just have to suck it up.
There are concerns, minister, about the use of prisoners employment-wise. We have lost 1200 jobs in the community. We have had a couple of businesses close; our IGA Supermarket and Mitre 10 store closed a couple of weeks ago. People generally want to know about these prisoners, employment opportunities for them and competing with other locals for jobs. I acknowledge the good work the prisoners do in a community sense. They have been great in providing support to set up community events such as our beach volleyball and big cricket tournament. They are a terrific labour force to have on hand when we have these community events. As the minister knows, I even wrote to him via e-mail on one occasion asking who I directed people to when the community not-for-profit group was asking for support. There were no issues with that, but there is with this issue of consultation and a willingness to work with the community.
There has been no formal advice as to what Nhulunbuy Corporation’s position is on allowing the corrections facility to proceed with its relocation to what has been a very successful health facility. I have a feeling, as a fait accompli, that will be proceeding. I guess 500 or more people – amongst them many Indigenous people, many local Yolngu – are unhappy about this. It is not that people object to this facility, it is about the location, the lack of consultation, and for it to proceed, we have seen the closure of a very important health facility.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House and reiterate that we, on this side in the Territory Labor team, oppose this bill. It falls way short. It is not just us who say that, there are a number of eminent legal bodies representing hundreds of lawyers in the Northern Territory which also raise very serious concerns.
Mr CONLAN (Central Australia): Madam Speaker, let it be known that the Labor Party does not support a reduction in crime. That is exactly what they are saying today by not supporting this groundbreaking legislation and initiative by the Giles Country Liberals government, which is the Sentenced to a Job regime. Of course the Labor Party has never been very good at dealing with crime across the Northern Territory. It has been downright appalling. Its record and its decade of denial – in fact, it was more than a decade, it was 11 long years of denial by the previous government – has led us to this place where we are today introducing legislation to correct that appalling record which has been left for Territorians.
Let us look at some of its record. I do not have front page headlines. Tragically I was going through my office upstairs and I threw some out. But it does not matter; we do not need props to look at some of the facts. During the decade of denial by the previous government, violent assaults rose by 80%. In the financial year of 2009-10, there were 7296 crimes against the person in the Territory compared with 6226 the previous financial year, an 8.5% increase in just 12 months. On average, there were 18 crimes against the person in the Territory every day.
No jurisdiction felt the brunt of Labor’s decade of denial more than Alice Springs. In Alice Springs, Labor’s law and order policy was simply woeful and it failed. In 2004-05, robbery increased under the previous government by 450%, assaults by 87%, sexual assaults by 97%, house break-ins by 64%, commercial break-ins by 185%, motor vehicle theft by 97% and property damage by 71%.
It is little wonder and no surprise the Labor Party will not support a bill that goes to the heart of addressing law and order issues in the Northern Territory. We knew it; we have known it for a long time. We have been on the other side of this Chamber and watched you fail year after year for 11 long years.
Today, we have a groundbreaking bill supporting groundbreaking initiatives to get people into work and address the law and order issues across the Northern Territory. It is pretty simple and we are having some remarkable results. Look at some of the results. Already the latest crime statistics for Alice Springs show total property offence, house break-ins, theft and property damage at their lowest levels in the Northern Territory for 14 years. After two years we are able to point to the lowest in 14 years.
The Country Liberals government is tackling crime head on with tools such as this legislation targeting repeat property offenders. Police have been given the tools to prevent, detect and investigate crime. I also pick up on what the member for Nhulunbuy said – how we have turned our backs on electorates which are not held by the CLP.
There is one jurisdiction in all of the Northern Territory that is unrecognisable under the Country Liberals, and that is the community of Tennant Creek in the jurisdiction of the Barkly. There is not a hair out of place; it is spotless and things are improving under a Country Liberals government. It took the Giles Country Liberals government, with groundbreaking legislation such as this, to turn that jurisdiction around. You sat on your hands for five long years and did nothing. After two years we have turned that place around. Tennant Creek is much better off under a Country Liberals government than it ever was under a Labor government.
Interestingly, the Department of Infrastructure spend is the highest under the Country Liberals government than it ever has been in the history of the Northern Territory ...
Mr Styles: What area has the highest?
Mr CONLAN: That would be the Barkly.
Unlawful entries are at a four-year low in Central Australia. Together with measures to tackle alcohol-related abuse in the community, we are winning the battle on crime. We have turned off the grog tap with Alcohol Protection Orders, alcohol mandatory treatment and temporary beat locations, and are seeing real results from these initiatives and policies.
The Country Liberals government is driving down crime, and alcohol consumption is at its lowest level since records began. That is an achievement. Even Congress has supported the temporary beat locations, a milestone if there ever was one; Congress in Central Australia has supported the temporary beat locations and said it is working and is a success. Of course, it would like things to move a little more, they want a little more but, nevertheless, we will take it. It is a win and great recognition of the work by this Country Liberals government. The temporary beat locations have worked, continue to work, and the initiative is a remarkable tool. Unlike Labor which ran away from the problem, the Country Liberals government is tackling it head on.
I support this bill; it is a vital and critical tool to continue the war on crime. The purpose of the bill, as outlined by the Attorney-General, is to repeal and replace the Prisons (Correctional Services) Act with a contemporary legislative model for managing Correctional Services into the future. It is another way the Country Liberals government is implementing new innovative reforms to combat crime in the Northern Territory. Our approach to reducing crime is about correcting behaviour. We have always stood by that. It is about addressing the behaviour of someone and breaking the cycle of repeat offending.
Let us look at some of the recidivism rates under the previous government to 2011. The Henderson government’s failure to provide adequate rehabilitation services contributed to rising recidivism rates across the Northern Territory. Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that under the Labor Territory government, the Territory consistently had the highest reoffending rates of any jurisdiction in Australia. These rates have been well above the national average of 54.6%.
In addition, 10 years after release, 48% of prisoners in the Northern Territory are reimprisoned compared with the national average of just 39%. That is a startling statistic.
Despite the revolving door of prisoners across the Northern Territory, Labor continued to neglect rehabilitation programs for prisoners. ‘Lock them up, that is the answer.’
Only 51 prisoners participated in alcohol treatment programs between 2009 and 2010, compared to 111 the previous year. Alcohol treatment programs scheduled in Darwin goal for that year had only 12 places available.
Sex offender treatment programs were also inadequate, with only 42 prisoners completing programs in the Northern Territory as of May 2010. Out of 171 sexual offenders in the Territory, only 42 were completing programs. Only three such programs were planned in 2010 for Darwin and Alice Springs. In Alice Springs, the program ceased the previous year.
You can see the track record which is what this government inherited. It was a government that was paralysed when it came to law and order. How did they implement law and order policies which met the expectation of the community? You did not do it. It was the single biggest failure of the Martin and Henderson governments, and the architect is sitting over there, as the Opposition Leader these days, with her head in the sand.
It is staggering to think that all of a sudden you have discovered law and order. I find that extraordinary. After 11 long years you finally recognise there is a law and order issue in the Northern Territory. It is remarkable.
The Sentenced to a Job program is one of the single biggest achievements of the Department of Correctional Services, and a personal victory and milestone for the Attorney-General. He has dealt with this with extreme passion. I am very proud to serve in a government with an Attorney-General like the member for Port Darwin who has brought such a groundbreaking, innovative scheme to the table.
We immediately saw the results of this. The work these guys are undertaking is rehabilitative, productive in the community, and the communities are reaping the benefits. Sentenced to a Job provides prisoners in Central Australia with skills which are useful and transferable to a wide range of work settings in the external environment. We said, year after year in opposition, that it was not just about locking people up – yes, if they committed a crime – but also equipping them with the skills to emerge from that incarceration with the ability to make a meaningful contribution to the rest of their life and the community. This is what is happening now under Sentenced to a Job.
The program connects prisoners to a network which is focused on the same outcome of successful transition of prisoners to mainstream living experience, equipping them with those skills.
The Northern Territory Department of Correctional Services has been working with the employers to align prisoners with the required skills in the private sector. Indigenous prisoners on release from a correctional centre face a number of challenges reintegrating into the community, which we are all very well aware of. These challenges are often exacerbated by low levels of literacy and numeracy, limited living skills and the lack of employment options in remote communities. Again, it is about economic development in the regions, equipping Indigenous people to own their own homes. Indigenous people in the Northern Territory have never been in a better place to own their own home, thanks to the policy of the Giles Country Liberals government, providing access to home ownership for Indigenous Territorians. It has been a great success thus far. There have been 11 applications already since the policy began on 1 July this year.
Again, low literacy and numeracy is a problem. We have been active in this space all through opposition, and have acted in government. This is exactly what this is.
Employers in the Northern Territory struggle to recruit reliable local staff. One of the advantages for employers who participate in the Sentenced to a Job program is that prisoners are reliable, are drug and alcohol free and are motivated to work, which is very important. In Alice Springs today, eight prisoners are being paid for work and 13 prisoners are working in a volunteer capacity. In the Barkly, 12 prisoners are being paid for work and 12 are working in a volunteer capacity. That is pretty good.
Through the Sentenced to a Job initiative today we have prisoners in Alice Springs working at Blatherskite Park, the Alice Springs waste management facility, the Institute for Aboriginal Development and the MacDonnell Range Holiday Park. Volunteer workers are contributing at the Salvation Army, the Alice Springs Desert Park, Olive Pink Botanical Gardens, the Doubletree by Hilton, the Road Transport Hall of Fame, the Alice Springs High School and the Department of Primary Industry. They are all over the place, working and paying their debt back to society in a meaningful and constructive manner.
In the Barkly, prisoners are working at the Food Barn, the BP Prospect Service Station, Remote Concrete, Outback Caravan Park, Handy Hands Employment, the Tennant Creek Memorial Club, and the Eldorado Motor Inn. Volunteers are also contributing at the Top of Town Caf, the Barkly Shire, Battery Hill and the Food Barn, and are doing an extraordinary job.
These examples for Central Australia are replicated across the Northern Territory and are shining examples of the Giles Country Liberals government’s efforts to improve people’s lives. That is exactly what this bill does; it will directly improve other people’s lives.
Another key feature of the bill is it will assist with breaking the cycle of repeat offending. I take some context from the bill, which is a new type of inmate release called administrative home detention. This is based on a similar scheme operating in South Australia and allows the minister, on recommendation from the commissioner, to release an eligible inmate subject to conditions. Eligible inmates are those who do not have a fixed non-parole period as part of their sentence of imprisonment. For example, this will generally cover low-level offences with less than 12 months imprisonment. Offenders with less than 12 months to run on a sentence must have served 50% of their imprisonment term. It is intended that most inmates released on administrative home detention will be released on the condition they wear an electronic monitoring device.
The electronic monitoring device is a key strategy of the government’s Pillars of Justice reforms. Electronic monitoring provides a viable alternative to a full custodial sentence, thereby enabling new approaches to offender management and rehabilitation. In other words, you wear a bracelet, you do not clog up the prison system, and you contribute in a meaningful way to society.
The key feature of the bill is another way the Country Liberals government is leading the way with these reforms. As I said, we do not only talk about it, we do it. We spoke about it for many years in opposition. We were there for 11 long years. I was in opposition for five of those 11 years, and sat opposite and spoke about this ad nauseam, highlighting what was happening across the board in the Northern Territory to the point it became ridiculous.
It was abundantly clear to everyone, except the government, there was a problem with prisoner incarceration rates, reoffending, crime on the streets, alcohol rehabilitation and alcohol consumption – the whole kit and caboodle. There was a problem and, in two short years – it is not even two years. Yesterday was the anniversary of the election, but the first ministry was not sworn in until early September, so we are just shy of two years. We have made the efforts.
I hope you are happy with the efforts we have made in your community, member for Barkly. I hope you drive down the street, look and say, ‘Wow! Look at this place.’ Do you? Are you impressed? Are you mildly impressed with what has happened in the community of Tennant Creek? Is there anything there when you drive down the street and see how clean and tidy it is? You do not see people spewing out of the pub, or as many at least. You see people working. Does that inspire or impress you, or make you even the slightest bit pleased to be a Territorian? Does it? I do not think so. You are conspicuous by your silence. You are very hard to please. It is sad it has taken a Country Liberals government to transform your home town. We have done it, and you did not. You failed and we succeeded. We have succeeded in all corners of the Northern Territory, and we will continue to succeed.
This is a great bill and a great initiative. It is a fantastic innovative program that is seeing results on the ground. The results speak for themselves. I am not making up the crime statistics, how many people are working or what the amenity of Alice Springs and Tennant Creek looks like. That is what it looks like. It is clean and tidy, and people are feeling good about themselves. They are skipping and whistling down the streets for the first time in 11 long years. This government has put some pride back into the Northern Territory and into these communities that were suffering under the previous Labor government. People feel good about themselves, their community, their family, their environment – the works – for the first time after 11 long years under the previous Labor government which turned its back when it came to making tough decisions on law and order.
I congratulate the Attorney-General and the Chief Minister. I am proud to serve in a Cabinet and a parliamentary wing, and be part of a government that is taking this type of issue seriously. If there is one core element, one key feature, that any government has to provide, it is a safe and secure environment for its residents. That is first and foremost. Without a safe and secure environment, nothing else really matters. We have to feel safe and secure in our own environment – in our homes, our cities, our towns and our communities. If we do not, then we cannot take that next step to whatever it might be. Forget tourism, health outcomes, mining outcomes – forget it all. If you do not have any personal or community safety, you can forget the rest.
You guys dropped the ball big time. This government stepped in and, as I said, in two very short years we have just about turned this Queen Mary around. It has taken a while; it does take a while. There was a big hole – a big mess to clean up. This government stepped in. We had an Attorney-General and Chief Minister – in fact, we had two Chief Ministers – and a Cabinet with the intestinal fortitude to back these reforms. We have done it and the community is thankful for it. At least, it is my humble opinion the community is thankful for it. In your opinion the community probably is not very thankful for it.
Why you would not support a bill like this is beyond me. Why would you not even bring in some amendments to this bill, or your own version of this bill? You say, ‘No, we do not like it, it is no good, it is not working’, but you do not even offer anything. In fact, you have never offered anything when it comes to law and order. A failed Banned Drinker Register was about it and Alcohol Courts – this whole mess you guys created.
It was about 2005, I think, when you started to think you had better try to create some illusion that you were taking law and order seriously …
Mr Elferink: Mandatory sentencing that did not.
Mr CONLAN: That is right, the mandatory sentencing that was not mandatory. It was a litany of – failures I was going to say, but it became calamitous, clunky and awkward. What is this bill – another oops bill, as the former member for Araluen used to call them?
Nevertheless, it is okay. We know where we are in this space and, deep down, you guys know it too. You know this is working. You live in the Northern Territory.
Despite everything, you still live in Barkly, member for Barkly, and you see the amenity of that town and the success of this and many other regimes which have been implemented across the Northern Territory with regard to health, mining, primary industry and tourism, particularly in the Barkly. For the first time in a decade-and-a-half, Barkly is on the tourism radar, and they are very pleased with what is happening. We will get the Battery Hill Mining Centre going again and Tennant Creek will become a destination in itself. Deep down, you all know the success of this. In opposition there is the denial or the refusal to accept. That is fine. I have been there, I know what it is like. That is your job in opposition and that is okay. It is great to be in government and recognise that, but it is also great to support such groundbreaking legislation.
I thank the member for Port Darwin, the Attorney-General and Leader of Government Business, who has done this. Hats off to his department, his office and the Department of Correctional Services. Well done to all the team there, you should be very proud of this. Governments come and go, and in a decade or two we will be replaced by a bunch of other poor unsuspecting souls, but this legacy will remain.
The bill may not remain, but I am sure the legacy will. We will look back and say, ‘For that short period of time we really had a grip on this stuff. We really started to make some headway.’ Then what happened? A Labor government repealed the bill and put its philosophy on things. Nevertheless, we can look back and recognise this as one of the great moments in Territory politics. Territorians are much better off and better served for a bill of this nature, Madam Speaker.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I place on the public record that when the childish member for Greatorex was trying to goad me across this House, my silence was on behalf of an ex-student who was killed in brutal and tragic circumstances outside the Wauchope Hotel in April. My silence was in respect for a long-term family friendship and a young man who lost his life in brutal and tragic circumstances in a Tennant Creek community living area just over a week ago. My thoughts and respect were with those deceased – some ex-students and families I have worked with for over 30 years.
I refuse to be goaded into childish interjecting across this Chamber by a minister of the Crown hell-bent on a radio program for 20 minutes trying to spin the benefits of a bill he has no real knowledge of.
He has no knowledge of the chronology of Tennant Creek. It is ludicrous to try to spin anything when you have not done your research or homework and you know nothing except the sensational wannabe-John-Laws approach as you lean in to a lonely microphone. I will continue to remind you, minister.
I stand with an opposition, a spokesperson for Correctional Services and with a team which has researched this bill, has contacted stakeholders, discussed this through Caucus processes, phoned each other and achieved a consensus on behalf of Northern Territorians – representing the people of the Northern Territory, holding the government to account with a fair assessment and debate, with no need for ridicule, but with a sense of justice.
That is what is under the skin of the government members. The utter contempt relates to its failure as a team. They are jealous, they have no team. They have been dysfunctional in opposition and are more dysfunctional in government. This breeds contempt, jealousy and these continued attacks devoid of any comprehension of debate. But, put it on the public record. Continue to put it on the public record because I have a great interest in history and this record will be revisited and assessed, and you will be judged not only in history, but in the electoral process in 2016.
I stand here with the Territory opposition because this bill needs to be opposed; it needs more work. It is major legislation repealing the old act; it replaces it. It is a bill for critical legislation relating to the operations of prisons and Correctional Services in the Northern Territory.
The first point of debate was a serious lack of consultation. My colleagues have pointed out the Law Society submission alone – one of many stakeholder groups that have been communicated with – said:
- We refer to correspondence dated 27 March 2014 which provided us with a copy of the draft Correctional Services Bill seeking our comments by 11 April 2014.
Whilst the Society thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Bill the Society is concerned about the unreasonably short time frame for response and the lack of prior consultation.
That rings some alarm bells.
I go back to the minister for Sport and Recreation, the member for Greatorex, who coined the term ‘groundbreaking’. He used it a number of times in his contribution to debate. Let me quote from Hon Adam Giles on 20 October 2010:
- I would love to be the Corrections minister. It is not the portfolio I really aspire to but, if I was the prisons minister, I would build a big concrete hole and put all the bad criminals in there. ‘Right, you are in the hole, you are not coming out. Start learning about it’. I might break every United Nations’ convention on the right of the prisoner but, ‘Get in the hole’.
I believe that was what the minister was referring to when he used the word ‘groundbreaking’. Groundbreaking, indeed!
I stand here in a united opposition team opposed to this bill. It brought back some interesting memories of the new era in corrections, when the Country Liberal Party was in opposition. The now Attorney-General aggressively opposed the new era initiatives, the community custody orders, the Community Work Orders, and the new driver training centre at the Alice Springs prison. This government scrapped not only innovative Correctional Services work focused on outcomes specifically related to education, training and rehabilitation to address offending behaviour, but the stimulus project for Alice Springs, a major construction project that was not only going to address people who were behind the wire, but also those members of the community on community corrections orders.
I have fond memories of that debate which was a lengthy, intense debate. You and your colleagues aggressively opposed this new era in corrections pathway. You have picked up on a few things with the new era, but I have struggled as I have read, done my research, debated with my colleagues and tried to get a bead on what your objective is with this major legislation. Is this major change in legislation regarding the operational procedure of our prisons and corrections the work of the Chief Minister or the Attorney-General? That was one question I struggled with.
On both counts, both of these elected members to the Northern Territory run down the new Darwin Correctional Services Precinct. Many members of the Justice department are not impressed with that political rhetoric and spin in the attempt to gain some political points. If you want to get a sense of reality, extensive consultation – especially with prison officers and their families, the legal fraternity, the justice agencies, the department of Corrections, the community, the prisoners’ families and advocacy groups – will show they all agreed we needed to have a new Correctional Services Precinct in relation to the new era in corrections.
The cages of Berrimah were long overdue for change. The prison was built for 250 inmates in 1979. It has been a conglomeration of cages to try to address a modern challenge of Correctional Services. For the occupational health and safety of staff, prisoners, their families, the visitors, members of the justice agencies, the charitable organisations and the volunteers who frequent it, everybody agreed with government that we must have a purpose-built facility. Corrections was able to add to that debate by saying, ‘Government, if you go down this road we will prove to you that new, innovative purpose-built infrastructure will support your outcomes’. The cages of Berrimah are inefficient and dangerous and deliver additional costs in operational procedures. It was simple; it became very clear. However, we have senior ministers – and juniors – who continually talk down the new Correctional Services Precinct. Not only did it support 1000 jobs and represent another major economic stimulus to keep jobs in the Territory as a result of the global financial crisis challenges, it is delivering a precinct. The way you talk about this singular place as a prison Mahal is misleading. The public will start to understand the conglomerate of infrastructure that will support improved outcomes.
The other story which is neglected in the political rhetoric is the public private partnership. These one-liner numbers you like to throw around – the member for Sanderson is probably the best at trying to justify anything with these throwaway lines.
Regarding the Correctional Services Precinct, nobody wants to talk about a public private partnership, a consortium that has ownership of the asset, which will run repairs and maintenance programs within that asset for 30 years. Does anybody want to consider a repairs and maintenance budget on the Darwin Correctional Precinct over 30 years? Does anybody want to talk about that on the other side? No, they try to isolate and say this is a one-line story, a scare tactic, another piece of cheap hype to try to gain political points. Anybody who is interested in the facility and the enormous challenges of maintaining that over the next 30 years can see where public private partnerships deliver value for governments over long periods of time. These are major projects, not the small stuff.
I am a bit tired of that rhetoric, so I spread the word as much as I can, encouraging people to do their homework, look at it for what it is and judge a cheap politician accordingly – anybody who wants to spin half the story, be selective with their semantics, twist and turn the tale and create fear in the community but, sadly, talk down a project which has the support of a conglomerate of judicial organisations and the community to go forward and deliver better outcomes.
It is being spoken about. It has come to my attention and I feel a bit sad those on the other side are still being led down this garden path when they have no knowledge and have done no research. You can understand, looking at the events of the last week, that there is not a lot of opportunity for good governance and research because there is so much internal division, infighting and dysfunctional chaos that it looks like Big Brother. It is all individual survivors. Who will emerge at the end of the television program?
I am pleased to say the public private partnership model represents a good outcome but, essentially, the new era in corrections, with real outcomes to try to turn this unacceptable recidivism around. We have a new era and we now have a new government. Unfortunately, through the research we have done as the opposition, we hold great concern that the bill is devoid of rehabilitation initiatives for addressing offending behaviour, the core value of Correctional Services.
The new era in corrections brought a spotlight on the Northern Territory on a national and international front. The spotlight was about not only doing business in Correctional Services, but the world. The global corrections sector was interested in how to do the business of Indigenous offenders – unacceptable Indigenous rates of imprisonment and recidivism. In the country and internationally they were looking at the Northern Territory and were agreeing with the new era changes.
I am wondering why, in this process, the Attorney-General has not been flooding the market with media releases about this new bill? I cannot understand why the Attorney-General, who is a great performer and a hard worker, has not ridden on the wave of this global interest and research in Correctional Services with this new bill. Essentially, the Attorney-General and the CLP government is changing the whole operational front. It is major change, but there has been no acknowledgement, promotion or spin. I ask myself why. Would this not be front-footed – a very articulate Attorney-General well versed in the judicial system, well connected? We have heard nothing.
The Law Society and other judicial agencies have said the same thing, ‘We have heard nothing’. There has been no consultation and I am wondering why. Why would this not be a huge story? The member for Greatorex gave us 20 minutes of spin into a microphone on a subject he clearly has not researched and knows nothing about. Somebody wrote it for him, but he is ad-libbing, of course, the sensational material we all have to bear. Why is this not on the front foot? The question then re-emerges: is this the Chief Minister’s or the Attorney-General’s legislation?
I cannot really believe this legislation, as it has been put to this House in an inappropriate time frame about changing the operations of the correctional system, is what it is. I believe it is a way to deliver savings. The Attorney-General has now hit the wall in the Cabinet process and is being forced to deliver efficiency dividends. My assumption is there are probably efficiency dividends to the tune of up to 20% being driven into the Correctional Services department, and this bill represents an opportunity to pull back on investment, education, training and rehabilitation. Consequently there is very little articulation of those elements of best practice in Correctional Services.
This bill talks about opportunities to drive efficiencies. Efficiencies in what? I could not really find that answer; therefore, I am not going to support this bill. I have suspicions now. I am concerned there is another agenda altogether. I cannot believe the Attorney-General has been rolled in the Cabinet process. But I believe the Chief Minister has grasped control.
When I was the minister for Corrections and started the pathway of the new era in corrections, the Labor government provided me the exemption for efficiency dividends because it was assessed as front line, a real opportunity to change, an area we had to do an enormous amount of work in, and of course we had to be in the space of new infrastructure. I was costing the government a lot of money, because Labor values said we had to turn around the unacceptable recidivism rates, imprisonment of Indigenous people in Australia and offending behaviour. The balance with the new era was those challenging orders where people who were low-level offenders were going to serve out their time and were to be mandated into education, training and rehabilitation within the community. The global judicial system acknowledges that as best practice in Correctional Services for these low-level recidivists, many with offences relating to misuse of alcohol and traffic. We were going down that road and it was aggressively opposed by the CLP in opposition.
I am concerned. The minister, no doubt, in his wrap, will assure me this is not about savings or efficiency dividends. ‘I was not rolled in Cabinet; this has nothing to do with the Chief Minister. This is about changing the Correctional Services operational procedures in the Northern Territory because …’ – and I will put dot, dot, dot because I am waiting to hear. This bill does not explain it, and this is major legislation. It goes back to the ‘just trust me’ factor. I am afraid, with this government’s record after two years in office, you cannot be trusted.
What is it about, minister? I look forward to what you will inform us about the passage of this legislation through the House.
The new era in corrections recognised and acknowledged the major reform by national and international agencies, and premised itself on instilling pride and self-esteem, changing the lives of the most disadvantaged Territorians. It was a policy which was truly unique in the Northern Territory’s history. Many members talked about the Barkly Work Camp. I acknowledge the member for Greatorex spoke about the Barkly Work Camp, but then he spun it into a whole area of mistruths and had to talk about how bad it was under Labor and how good it is under the Country Liberal Party.
The minister came to an open day at the Barkly Work Camp recently and saw the community of Tennant Creek which had turned up. He spoke about the Barkly Work Camp and a two-year time frame. Minister, I was a little embarrassed at the number of people who came up to me after you left and wanted to discuss that element of your speech. I do not know whether you believe me or not, but I did not run you down. I just reinforced that these guys have to say things like that, it is in their DNA. I gave a psychological analysis of why a person would reconstruct the truth like that – maybe insecurity, failing in government, or all the other issues that are going on within a very dysfunctional, uncoordinated and disjointed group of members.
Essentially, what the people wanted to talk about was the initiative. It is good to hear about the new era in corrections, the first regional work camp. By the way, they were planned to roll-out regionally across the Northern Territory. No one wants to talk about the economic benefits and the economic plan, or about servicing the Barkly Work Camp. Does anyone really want to consider, as an economic driver, what that institution does for the economy of Tennant Creek and the Barkly? I have never heard anyone talk about that. The Chief Minister likes one-liners that it was a clean slate and all that rubbish to gain cheap political points.
Does anyone want to factor in infrastructure programs such as the new police station, doubling the capacity of the sobering-up shelter and the renal dialysis unit, the new emergency ward at Tennant Creek Hospital, the Barkly Work Camp, and a pathway to addressing social justice issues and the issues of a town and community, and preparing that place for the economic future which will be minerals, resources and energy, real jobs in real industry?
The member for Greatorex is right; we have a great deal of work to do in our community. It was embarked upon a number of years ago, not just the last two years under the CLP.
I go back to a previous member, Elliot McAdam, and starving for 10 years in opposition with Maggie Hickey as the member for Barkly. At one stage the capital works program had to be sidelined and disappear because, from memory, the locals said it was about four pages. That was under the Country Liberal Party. You had a 10-year setback, then a 10-year movement, and now you have had two years under the CLP. Let us put all that together. Let us talk about Tennant Creek and the Barkly.
The Barkly Work Camp is an initiative that is proving to deliver the outcomes we all desire, and those models need to be rolled out further. Central Australia needs one. Northeast Arnhem Land needs a real one – not a rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul one – an investment. In alcohol rehabilitation, as the member for Greatorex said, in Tennant Creek we have a beautiful benchmark of $5.5m to establish infrastructure to support 74 beds. That drives the economy of Tennant Creek with services, jobs, local recruits and prison officers who have embarked on careers, some of them my ex-students. There is a benchmark.
However, instead of coming to Tennant Creek and building a purpose-built alcohol rehabilitation centre on land outside Tennant Creek – either on traditional Indigenous land or on freehold land – for the price tag of $5.5m to deliver 74 beds, this government came in and took over our sobering-up shelter. The same as in Nhulunbuy, they robbed Peter to pay Paul. You cannot crow about economic development. You had the idea, but you went for the cheap option. You bought the Belmont, not the Premier. You did that why? You can answer that question.
Why did you not look at the pragmatic investment of $5.5m in Tennant Creek for an alcohol rehabilitation centre supporting 74 beds outside of town, in a budget of $5.5bn? I do not understand why you did not take that opportunity. But the Chief Minister has a blank whiteboard and the finger to point blame. There was a golden opportunity which still exists. Give us back our sobering-up shelter. Do not kick them out, give it back and invest $5.5m. That way we can seriously start to address alcohol-related crime in Tennant Creek and the Barkly. As a matter of fact, we would welcome people from all over Central Australia to be rehabilitated in a purpose-built facility.
I will ask for your guidance and support in the visiting elders program, because at the Barkly Work Camp open day recently there were many people who wanted to ask you how come the program stalled and there is nothing happening. It was a major initiative in the new era in corrections that related to important cultural healing. It related to getting the visiting elders into the Correctional Services Precinct to work, dialogue and liaise with prisoners and relate to their offending behaviour in a cultural sense, so when the state has finished its work and the prisoner is to be repatriated back into their community, much of that cultural healing has already been done, dialogue has taken place, the resolutions have been achieved, so the prisoner does not go back into a remote or regional community or within a family with all this cultural business unresolved.
I did not see any mention of it in the bill. Because the judicial stakeholders have raised so many concerns that this bill could possibly see the removal of education, training and rehabilitation, I have to ask you: what is the future of the visiting elders program? You need to get back to Tennant Creek and talk to the community about that, because we have many supportive elders who want to be involved in this, who were involved in this under Labor and are no longer involved. I look forward to hearing that in your summing up.
Interpreters are also mentioned by the Law Society. Interpreters are so important. I quote, once again, from the new Correctional Services Bill submission to minister Elferink from the Law Society on interpreters:
- The Society is strongly of the view that any modern corrections regime should mandate the use of trained or qualified interpreters
Real concerns have been raised about the number of women being imprisoned in Northern Territory prisons and across the country. I am very concerned about those statistics. I am interested to hear if you have anything to say in this debate or in what you will bring to this House.
There is also some very concerned debate happening about moving juveniles into the Berrimah prison. That is a retrograde step. Once again, the opportunity of delivering improved outcomes for juveniles means purpose-built infrastructure. If you cannot achieve it at the moment, surely you have a plan for it ...
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request the member for Barkly be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague.
It is important to conclude on this point. The situation with juveniles in the last couple of weeks has been totally inappropriate, any Territorian would agree. During Question Time, in blaming the previous minister for Corrections, the minister was a bit cheap, and that is uncharacteristic. Our Attorney-General is under enormous pressure. There is something happening that is not right because that direct, cheap blame is uncharacteristic, ‘It is all your fault, you left the iron bars lying around’. What a load of rubbish! There are serious issues with juveniles, and I do not agree with moving them into the Berrimah Prison. I will suggest there are other reasons at play. Staff and the juveniles need support. The minister, no doubt, will bring plans to this House regarding how this will be addressed in the future.
I stand with the Territory opposition as part of a team, and I oppose this bill. We do not believe this has the real agenda. We believe other agendas are operating, which are to improve the outcomes of Correctional Services, reduce recidivism rates, address offending behaviour and reintegrate offenders back into the community. This is evident because of the lack of consultation, promotion and media. There has not been that front foot for what should be – dare I say it, member for Greatorex? – groundbreaking legislation.
That is of concern because the CLP is a well-drilled spin machine. We have seen the Chief Minister appropriate additional new resources into his department to produce very sophisticated media outcomes. I cannot understand why the Attorney-General has not been the recipient of some of that support, because if you look at Correctional Services and juvenile justice, you can see the economic dividends of keeping people out of gaol and in the workforce and the community. It equates to billions of dollars in returns, so I am a bit surprised we have not been hearing about it.
I put on the record my suspicion, which is a major change to this act to deliver increased efficiency dividends and savings. I honestly believe that is the agenda running here and why this has not been spoken about and promoted across the length and breadth of the Northern Territory, like the new era in corrections was.
Madam Speaker, it is good to speak in debate and throw out challenges. If you oppose something it is good to put your argument as to why. At the end of the day, we will see what this legislation and its passage through the parliament has in store. Most importantly, we will judge the outcomes of this legislation.
Mr STYLES (Transport): Madam Speaker, it is very interesting listening to members opposite speak. I put on the record that – a bit like the words of the member for Barkly – I stand with the government and a great team over here. We stand as a team which has driven down crime and pushed the economy up, a couple of basic things you people do not seem to get. When I was on the other side, crime was going up and the economy was going down. I am with the team that has reversed it, which is very good.
I heard the anger in some of the statements from people on the other side and the comments that we are jealous of them. I repeat that. The member for Barkly said we on this side are, supposedly, jealous of them and are a divided team. We all know it is four-four over there and someone is just waiting to see what happens. That is well known. I struggle with the concept that the member for Barkly thinks we are jealous of what is going on over there. I stand with a team that looks after Territorians and makes a safer place of the Territory. I suggest some people over there are living in a fantasy world. I quote from the Oxford Dictionary the definition of ‘a fantasy world’. It is:
- A fanciful mental image, typically one on which a person often dwells, and which reflects their conscious or unconscious wishes; a genre of imaginative fiction involving magic and adventure, especially in a setting other than the real world.
Let us look at some of the statements, and facts and figures. The member for Nhulunbuy said we abandoned all the non-CLP electorates. There you go, so they can have a look. This graph shows the green stuff. You might not be able to read the writing, but you can see the green stuff. Well, fancy that! That is Tennant Creek, which has the biggest spend per capita in the Northern Territory. Well, hallelujah! Let us look at this Department of Infrastructure regional spend per capita. We go back some time when …
Mr Giles: Will talk about that later.
Mr STYLES: Absolutely! This is for Tennant Creek and the Barkly region – a fantastic spend. Let us look at when the ALP was in government. We had this big spend over here: Tennant Creek, $6.5m, the total per capita here. They were going down in their term of government.
Let us look at the non-financial public sector net debt graph. Let us see what was happening there. In 2008-09 it was not too bad, the GST truck turned up, and we had a big spend of $6.5m per capita. Then look at what was happening. It went down the next year, debt was going up. We get to the last full year of the ALP government, and the 2011-12 total Department of Infrastructure spend per capita was $2.125m. There is a figure.
Let us look at the debt and where it was going. In 2013-14, the debt was rising rapidly like a pyramid – up we are going climbing up the pyramid. Look at what we spent – the Country Liberal Party. The corresponding figure is a far greater spend on infrastructure than you did in your last year of government. We inherited your $5.5bn projected debt, yet we still managed to spend more in the bush and in ALP electorates than we have in our own. This makes a mockery of some of the things the member for Nhulunbuy was talking about, and the member for Barkly’s statements in relation to what we do or do not spend.
I feel for them. I am a compassionate guy and I can understand how they feel over there, as I would feel if I was on that team with the economy going down and debt going up. If they are responsible for all the disastrous stuff, and we fix it, I probably would be feeling a bit sad. In fact, I would probably want to hide under the desk and not be seen as part of that great team on the other side, according to the member for Barkly.
We have rising debt but we are still managing to spend on infrastructure. Why? Because this team believes wealth-generating transport infrastructure is the key to lifting economic development, and economic development is the key to jobs.
The member for Barkly mentioned things called great services in Tennant Creek, ‘We doubled the size of the sobering-up shelter’. That is great. What we are about is trying to half the size of the sobering-up shelter by putting in temporary Police Beats and Alcohol Protection Orders to replace the Banned Drinker Register which was a failure, and getting people to be responsible for their drinking habits. That is changing.
I saw the change when I was in Tennant Creek recently. The member for Greatorex spoke about some of the wonderful things happening in Barkly and Tennant Creek. Some of the damage done to various institutions and buildings in Tennant Creek has been turned around because of the policies of this government. I have spoken to many people in the Tennant Creek area and they have seen a change.
I will move on to some of the issues raised by the member for Nhulunbuy. She talked about – I cannot let these go – the NT Law Society and what it has said about these bills. She mentioned the Law Society said this and that. I did not write down exact quotes, but she said the Minister for Correctional Services was delusional and dismissive. Delusional? He is part of a team which has people out to work and done a range of things I will talk about. From what I have read, heard and spoken to the Minister for Correctional Services about and what I have heard in Cabinet, he has the department and staff research best practice in the world, and is implementing world’s best practice.
I do not know where the shadow minister for Correctional Services got his research. He said from his research many great things were happening, but I do not know where he has been if he is not looking at world’s best practice. Maybe he was talking to the NT Law Society and has been given one view. I am not saying that view is right or wrong, but it is one view. When you see what the Minister for Correctional Services has put together as a result of lengthy research – not only by his staff but by the department and information gathered from around the world – we have a change for the better.
I appreciate that the member for Nhulunbuy and her team have a different philosophical belief than the team on this side of the Chamber, but this side of the Chamber is having the success and positive results across all areas. I feel a little compassion for those opposite; if you were part of a failed system you have to come up with something to justify what you did for 11 years. On this side we believe in giving a hand up, not a hand down. Our policies reflect helping people, building people’s self-esteem and capacity so they can get a job.
Some prisoners cannot be released for a host of reasons. From my time as a detective and ex-police officer, I understand some of those people, unfortunately, will not be released. However, that is the system we operate in and those people need to be kept behind bars.
We have successfully transformed many corrections issues. One of the reasons why we do some things is we stand not behind our police force or Correctional Services people, but we stand next to them. We are part of a team that goes forward to change the environment in which Territorians live and where Territorians do their time. There is an old saying, ‘If you do not like doing the the time, do not do the crime’.
Looking at what has happened previously, I recall mandatory rehabilitation. The mandatory rehabilitation the opposition had, along with the Banned Drinker Register, was optional. I have said in the House before, I could not understand how you put those two words in one sentence: that mandatory sentencing becomes optional. You did not have to go to it. How do you justify it? Maybe I should get out the Oxford Dictionary and look up what mandatory means, as opposed to maybe having to go, maybe not having to go and, if you do not go, you stay on the Banned Drinker Register. That was a really good policy and it did not work because it did not give the teeth needed to the people whose job it is to enforce good policy.
I will move on to a number of things the member for Fannie Bay said. He was a bit all over the shop. The first thing I wrote down was ‘professional development’. He had a go at the Minister for Correctional Services, who was doing some professional development. Frankly, when I look around this place, I think everyone could do with some professional development. When I hear what some members opposite say, professional development could be a great thing.
People in this House knock the fact that other people in this House are trying to improve – that is what we are trying to do across the public service and our Correctional Services system – and increase their capacity so they can do a better job. If that is a problem for those opposite, I feel for them. I am a compassionate guy. If they believe you should not have professional development or team-building exercises – it is what we are saying to the public service and private enterprise: people should. Do you want the best possible results out of a team? Help to improve the capacity of the team. That is what we do on this side.
It is also in relation to travel. I can remember when I was in opposition with my team. We were over there – the other team then – and people were having a go at travel. I recall when CLP ministers travelled, the Australian Labor Party bagged out the government and said, ‘How dare you travel?’ I have a look around at what did not happen when Labor was in government; they did not like to travel. I remember when they were talking about travel and tourism. They closed all the overseas offices, so what did we see with international tourism? We saw it decrease.
The member for Fannie Bay wants to have a go and say, ‘It is all very terrible, you should not do this and you should not do that’, but I recall in opposition saying to the then government, ‘I believe you should be travelling more’. From what I was getting back in reports and what I was hearing and reading in the media, I do not believe they travelled enough. They did not develop the tourism industry and our live cattle export dropped off. How terrible were their federal counterparts when we they imposed the live cattle export ban?
I suggest the member for Fannie Bay might like to look at what we achieved as a Territory when politicians travelled and drove the agenda of policy and economic development, because that is what we are doing on this side. The Minister for Tourism goes to various conferences and drives the development of tourism. The Minister for Mines and Energy is driving mining and energy, primary industry and live exports. We are seeing the results of all of that. What a wonderful thing it is for the Territory to see economic development.
What the other side does not seem to understand is, if you do not have economic development, you do not have tax. Governments do not make money. Private industry makes money and generates wealth and, when they are generating wealth, they pay tax. Tax is a great thing because governments spend tax dollars. Some governments spend it wisely, we do on this side. We spend it wisely and we guard the taxpayers’ dollars, unlike others who rack the bill up like pyramids and put an antenna on top of it.
It is a bit irresponsible when you consider that all of our kids – not only their kids, but mine and all our grandchildren and those who will come after us – have to pay back the largesse of the previous ALP government.
If you do not have or continue to have economic development, our tax dollars shrink, therefore, the inability to pay off Labor debt and the inability to go out …
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 67: digression from subject. I understand there is a certain degree of latitude in these debates, but we have before the House the Correctional Services Bill 2014. I wonder if we might come back to the subject.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, there is a certain amount of latitude but, minister, if you could try to focus your comments on the bill.
Mr STYLES: I am simply talking about comments made by the member for Fannie Bay about various things. People listening to this get the message that the member for Fannie Bay was talking about professional and economic development in the Northern Territory.
I have already quoted the definition of a fantasy world. Some of the things the member for Fannie Bay was saying came from a fantasy world. He said violent crime is at record levels. We have heard from numerous speakers during this debate how this government has driven crime down, and we have seen reductions in violent crime. I do not know where he is getting his figures from. Maybe the fantasy world.
He quoted The Shawshank Redemption and mentioned a cheap labour force. He said we are using cheap labour and competing with private industry. Page four of the second reading speech says:
- Consistent with the government’s Sentenced to a Job policy, the bill makes it clear that the commissioner can direct sentence prisoners to work. Prisoners on remand are able to work, if they consent to do so.
I do not know what we are saying here. Are we forcing people into labour? I would like to go back to the Oxford Dictionary and check the meaning of ‘if they consent to do so’. My understanding of that general sentence is if those people do not want to do that, they simply do not have to. I continue with the quote:
- There is a new provision that gives the commissioner the discretion to charge for all or part of a particular service or program delivered to a prisoner. The intention … is to give the commissioner the ability to charge for a service or program that may not be part of the ‘core’ sentence or correctional services programs.
He also spoke about the riot in the Don Dale centre – the term he used was riot. I do not know whether the member for Fannie Bay has ever been in a similar situation, but what I heard from him were many statements I hear from people who have never worked in the system and do not understand. I do not blame him, as he has never worked in the Correctional Services arena. I do not think he has worked with prisoners or with many people who live on that side of the fence of life. I certainly do not believe he understands how the police force works.
When you are in those environments and vocations you are dealing with a totally different type of person. Sometimes, they are not rational or reasonable, they are angry people – that describes some people around here sometimes – and it is a difficult situation to be in. I did not hear the member for Fannie Bay talk about this, but he made statements about how terrible that situation was, how this happens and that happens. I heard other members opposite interject to say we tear gas children, etcetera.
There are rules and regulations as to how prison and police officers conduct themselves. There are things called general orders. Police officers are required to know those general orders, which is like a Bible for them. When officers in charge of various situations and police stations or units are required to act, there are rules and regulations. There is a procedure of escalating particular actions. You only go to using those actions when it is required. It is not something where someone says, ‘Let us have some fun and throw some tear gas around’, or ‘Let us have some fun and do this’.
Police are very professional people. Having worked with them for 27 years here, I can attest to that professionalism. The training I had to do every six and 12 months to keep current, with the test they give you on the paper work, the procedures, was all in accordance with what is reasonable for the average police officer or Correctional Services Officer, in this current day, to abide by.
I find it amazing that someone who has not been in the system – and I heard the member for Barkly ask where we were doing our research, ‘You have not done your research, you have not done this, you have not done that’, and accuse us of not doing it. I suggest the member for Fannie Bay, or whoever wrote his speech, did not fully understand what they were talking about. I have been in that situation which has escalated to a degree. It is why we have tasers, pepper spray and firearms. If other people in our society wish to escalate a situation to an extremely dangerous level, either to themselves or to others, then it is in the interests of the public, and the safety of those sent to quell whatever the problem is, that they are protected from whatever action some person has taken to escalate it to whatever level they chose. Therefore, we must ensure our people have the ability to escalate – and, of course, because that is also part of the training – to de-escalate a situation.
Correctional Services Officers, as they are now going to be called, are trained in escalation and de-escalation. De-escalation is a very important part of the training so when you get to a point where you can de-escalate, then you de-escalate rapidly. What I see in this legislation is the ability to have those things in place. They are in place now. Many things are put in place so that can occur.
The other thing I wrote down when the member for Fannie Bay was commenting on this bill was in relation to statistics. We have a fairly rapidly increasing population, so when we compare statistics from a number of years ago, we can see we have had an increase in population. This government and the team on this side has been able to reduce those statistics, even with an increasing population.
I will come back to that in a moment after I comment on what the Minister for Correctional Services said. I suspect there are some really good things are occurring in this bill. Having read through it, there are new provisions allowing the commissioner to request health information. If you have someone who has a mental health issue, or a …
Mr Elferink: What about tuberculosis?
Mr STYLES: Or tuberculosis or other communicable diseases. In this bill, there are some good provisions about the general wellbeing and the health, both physical and mental, of those who are incarcerated in our new $1.8bn prison. I want to come back to that before I run out of time, at some stage, because it is important.
There are provisions in the bill for the Territory to recover costs if an offender destroys or damages monitoring devices or any other device or equipment, like ripping out old bars and trying to use them against those who are in charge of restraining these people in whatever institution they are in.
In the law currently, there is the ability for people to receive restitution for the damage people do. It is about anger management. Anyone who has an anger management problem should seek some help. We want to recover the costs. As a former police officer, we used to have people who would like to kick out the back of police vans and damage them to such an extent they had to be demobilised and sent in for repairs. Again, people with anger management problems need to get that under control.
I will again talk about Tennant Creek and recovery of costs for a moment. The people running the motel in Tennant Creek – I have heard they have done a great job – have taken one wing of an accommodation facility and turned it into housing for Aboriginal families. It now has a nice fence around it, is a dry area because it is on private property, and they rent rooms to local people
I recall talking to the owner of the establishment when I was in Tennant Creek quite some time ago. I asked him how it was going and he said, ‘Let me tell you a story. In the first week I had broken windows, broken doors and a range of things’. He said to the people, ‘You need to pay for that otherwise you do not live here anymore’. They soon got the message they had to pay for it, and they did. They then started to control what they did and then controlled the young people who lived with them – not to smash things.
That was something my mother did. If I smashed things my pocket money had to pay for them. I soon learnt I could not do whatever I wanted and get upset over anything I wanted to get upset over. I had to learn control. That is how we all learn control.
If you smash things where you live you have to pay for them. If you are in prison and you smash things you have to pay for them. That should be a deterrent to most reasonable people in this world; you have to control yourself. This is a great thing.
I will move on to another fantastic initiative in Correctional Services, something that gives the police and Correctional Services people a fantastic tool. That is the addition to the leave permit scheme in the current act – because it is happening now – and the new type of prisoner leave permit called an Administrative Home Detention Permit. The Administrative Home Detention Permit is adapted from a similar leave scheme operating in South Australia.
The comments by the Minister for Correctional Services in his second reading speech made it quite clear that the commissioner can release qualifying prisoners on a permit, however, as usual, subject to conditions. It has provided prisoners with an opportunity to reintegrate into the general community in a supervised, structured and supported manner.
This team has looked at bracelets and things like that to give people the ability to go back into the community and reintegrate in a structured way. Sadly, I have come across many of these people, and some need a little structure in their lives. If they do not have it, someone needs to put it into their lives.
When I was very young, like many others I needed some structure in my life, and my mother provided it. If I did not toe the line, I was reprimanded. I am very grateful to my mother for doing that. However, maybe not everyone had a mother like mine, God bless her soul. It is important that someone puts some structure into people’s life and gives them support so when they come out of Correctional Services they can do things.
When we talk about Sentenced to a Job …
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move an extension of time for the member for Sanderson, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you to the member for Brennan.
We talked of bracelets and being able to reintegrate along with support. If you have been in a Correctional Services centre and participated in the Sentenced to a Job program – and I recall the member for Barkly said many people are in there for minor criminal matters, traffic matters and alcohol-related matters – one of the best things which can be done for you is give you a job. We talk about self-esteem, capacity and that type of thing. Sentenced to a Job gives people back their self-esteem. It gives people a sense of purpose, capacity and capacity building, and money in the bank.
Some people are participating. My colleague, the Minister for Correctional Services, tells me they leave goal with around $20 000 in the bank. It means they can buy a ute of their own, they can get some tools …
Mr Elferink: It is outstanding.
Mr STYLES: It is an outstanding achievement. All members on this side congratulate the Minister for Correctional Services on a fantastic initiative and a great job he has been doing in implementing that initiative. Congratulations. I join the member for Greatorex in congratulating the Correctional Services staff, all of those people – the staff in your office and you – for driving this with a very obvious passion.
We see all these people getting jobs and participating. I visited some business premises recently. You drive down Tivendale Road past the gaol and they have a parking problem. What a fantastic parking problem it is. In the evening I went to the business premises for a presentation, and the car park was full of work utes and commercial vehicles. People who are Sentenced to a Job are able to take those vehicles back to the prison and do a range of things overnight – learn a bit more, go to classes, and improve their capacity. What a great thing for the Territory. That is why prison numbers were dropping for a while; we do not have people coming back into prison. They go out and have a few dollars in their pocket. We are assisting them not only in the traditional ways of helping them with accommodation and support, etcetera, but with a job. Instead of going to the pub on Monday, they are going back to work on Monday to earn some dollars, which they can then use for whatever they like.
The home detention issue this bill covers is another great achievement. Administrative Home Detention Permits with the bracelets prevents people from getting involved in traffic offences, alcohol-driven offences, or even criminal offences. What you see with these Administrative Home Detention Permits is it assists with behavioural changes. People have to be aware that they are responsible for their actions. Blaming other people for your actions will not wash. It did not wash with my mother and I do not think it will wash with anyone else. These people need to learn. If they need the structure the community has put in place to assist these people – fantastic. It also provides a cost-effective community-based management of offenders as an alternative to imprisonment.
I agree with the Minister for Correctional Services. I would love to see us having to shut down beds in Correctional Services – what a great outcome, having extra beds in the prison Mahal. That would be great. I am looking forward to the day when our prison population starts to drop because of the policies of this team in government on this side of the House.
It will also extend to the Department of Correctional Services’ capability to implement the philosophy of through care, by providing further options for a prisoner’s case plan. Many people need a hand; at some stage in life we all need a hand. When we were all little, most of the people in this House were given that sort of direction and that sort of help but, sadly, others were not.
It will also provide offenders the opportunity to improve family cohesion and function. If you have been in for alcohol-related offences and you want to go off down to the pub on Monday night, if you are on home detention you have to stay home. If they discover some of the family values and the fact they have to stay home, sit around sober and look at what they have around them, many of these people may, hopefully, realise they have a wonderful family around them and can enjoy some of the joys family life can bring. I am sure most people in this House, and on all side of politics, would agree. It is also an incentive for prisoners in Correctional Services centres to say, ‘I would rather be outside than inside, even if I have a lot of restraints on me where I cannot go and do whatever I please’.
The ability to drug and alcohol test employees is in line with many of the best practices in the country where insurance companies and people who look after workers compensation insurance want to ensure all people within an environment are drug free, which is a great initiative.
Time does not permit me to go into some of the other subjects I would like to, but I will finish talking about some of the issues raised by the member for Barkly in relation to the new prison. He spoke about what a great investment it was and how it created jobs, etcetera. I recall the interjection from the Minister for Correctional Services about the $60m we have to pay every three months, which is a lot of money. The bottom line for any business is return on investment. In everything everyone does in business they must look at that formula – return on investment. It is the bottom line in everything, because if you do not get a return on investment or it is costing you money to do it, the wise advice is to not do it.
I am reliably informed that in certain projects, as a government we can borrow money at 3.5%. If you go to any company in this country at this point of time and say, ‘We would like you to take all of this risk, and we would like you to do it for 3.5%’, I doubt very much whether you would receive any answer from them. It is more like an 8% to 10% return on investment, and that depends on the risk assessment. The higher the risk assessment the higher the return on investment has to be.
I showed this graph before, where you had debt going up and were desperate for some investment. ‘Let us not put it on our balance sheet, let us put it on private enterprise’s balance sheet and, then, lease it back to them’. I do not know where the argument stacks up from the other side that it is a good deal for the taxpayer. We could probably have built it more cheaply. We can always have other people take a maintenance contract over 30 years.
On the issue of generating the jobs, etcetera, Correctional Services does not generate wealth and long-term economic activity. It can, if you use it for training and rehabilitating people as we are doing. However, the general response to those statements is it does not generate wealth.
I heard the other side continually comment and have a go at us over all the things we are not doing. If you spent some of that money on a range of other services the opposition wants provided, we might be able to do that. But we are now committed to that $1.8bn and we struggle a bit. We would like to do this and that. When you have a projected $5.5bn debt you inherited, it makes it hard to do all the things we would love to do.
As I have said to other people, not in this House, politicians love spending money. They go out with cheques, present them to people and say, ‘We are wonderful’. The problem is when one side of politics spends money, gives cheques out and racks the debt up, someone has to pay it back. Sadly, we do.
Madam Speaker, the commitment my team in government on this side of the House makes to the people of the Northern Territory is we will generate the economic development, think outside the square, create jobs for their children, build capacity, rehabilitate prisoners, and make it so that prisoners can have an opportunity to capacity build, regenerate and rebuild their lives, and we can do it all whilst paying back $5.5bn of projected Labor debt.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, I know it is my last week and usually people sit quietly and do not say much, waiting for the next two days to go. However, I believe it is my duty to make some comments about this bill.
I do not support this bill. While I agree with the intent of the minister in that he wants to see people coming out of prison and not going back in the future, this bill will not guarantee that, because it is not focused on rehabilitation. I will say why. We all know the old saying, ‘If you build a school, you close a prison’. If you want to rehabilitate people you have to go back to the basics needs of life in order for them not to commit offences.
We have to remember that people are in prison because when they commit an offence they believe they will not be caught. It happens all the time, they are caught and they finish up in prison.
There is not much reference about rehabilitation here. I cannot see any structured rehabilitation in this bill. He talked about Sentenced to a Job. My understanding is nobody can be sentenced to hard labour in Australia; it is only the court that sentences somebody with a penalty. It is not the role of the corrective services to do so. My concern with Sentenced to a Job is how it will work, and will it really rehabilitate people? Let us face it, slashing the grass or cutting the trees at a pensioner’s house is not going to give you skills you will need when you go out to get a real job to make money.
We all assume this person will stay away from the bad company he had before, is not going to drink and drive, and will not commit an offence because he will get a job. What kind of job is uncertain, because with these provisions there is no structure of the rehabilitation. Supposedly he will make money and will think twice before he commits an offence. However, it does not work like that. That is an ideal world. The reality is people come out of prison, do not have many skills, they fall into the same bad habits and the same old company, and they commit offences again.
The other thing that concerns me is with regard to the prisoners sentenced to work. I agree with you, they get a job and probably get some skills. However, what is the situation, minister – and I am really concerned about it – with people enticed to get a job? What happens if somebody does not want to get a job? What happens to that person? Will that person be penalised one way or another, physically or in a different way? Does a person who works have his sentence reduced because of his work? That creates two categories of people. Both people have been given the same sentence for the same offence. One says, ‘I want to go and slash grass out there’, and that guy goes out early. The other says, ‘No, I do not want to do that’, and he stays in prison. If a person who works has benefits and advantages other prisoners who have been sentenced for the same offence and the same term of imprisonment do not have, that creates two tiers of people who are exactly the same in every aspect of the law but, because one chooses to work has benefits the other does not. That is a concern, minister. I would like you to brief us about it.
What happens with workers compensation? Are these people considered to be workers? There is a clear definition of what a worker is. There has been a court case that defined what a worker is. We know a prisoner is a prisoner. A prisoner does not have any contractual agreement with the authorities or the prison. He has been imprisoned by a decision of the court. What is the situation there? What happens if somebody loses a hand because somebody mishandles a chainsaw? Who is responsible? What kind of compensation is this person going to get? Is that person entitled to compensation because, under the law, is he or she a worker or not?
In case of negligence, who is responsible, minister? Is it the CEO of Corrective Services or the minister? I know you have provisions, minister, where you say the general manager has the discretion to overrule a medical practitioner. What happens if that happens and a prisoner dies? We have had cases where a prisoner has suffered an ailment which was not detected early by the authorities, and the prisoner died. Now the CEO of the prison – or whatever you call him – can overrule a medical practitioner and say, ‘No, you cannot go to the hospital, go to the doctor, or be seen by a nurse because you have an ailment’. Who is responsible? Does the responsibility lie with you, minister, as the one responsible for the legislation, or with the person who is in charge of the prison?
The other thing, minister, is the provisions in the act in relation to food, clothing and exercise. The state has a duty of care. That prisoner, ultimately, is under your care. Why are these provisions not in the act? I know you say, ‘Of course, we will look after the prisoners. Of course, we are going to clothe them and dress them and everything else.’ However, that is not explicit in the act. You might be a good minister, have a good CEO of the prison and make all these provisions. Others might decide to cut corners and not provide all the services and the duty of care to the prisoners.
Another issue I have is the restrictions on legal representative access and the screening of communication with prisoners. This is a well-known and established privilege. This is a civil right of any person in Australia, including prisoners. Why is this happening? How will you defend a case? One will come to the High Court that you contradict the national standards or the United Nations’ standards?
Minister, this is my concern. I will not expand because other people mentioned a lot of issues, but my concerns are the civic rights of prisoners, the classification of a worker, and how you can have prisoners with certain benefits and others without when they are both sentenced for the same offence with the same sentence. I tried to find out if any other jurisdiction in the world has these provisions and most are very conservative, very authoritarian jurisdictions.
I was impressed, minister, when I looked at the criminal law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. I hunted through their criminal law and, unfortunately, our law is not as good as theirs because Article 30 of the criminal law of North Korea states:
- Life-time and limited term of reform through labour shall be executed by sending an offender to a long-term prison labour camp where he or she will engage in labour.
Sentenced to work:
- During the period of life-time and limited term of labour reform, an offender’s civic rights are partially suspended …
Article 31 of the penal code of North Korea states clearly for short-term labour, the civil rights of an offender are guaranteed during that short-term labour. North Korea guarantees the civil rights of its prisoners, your legislation does not.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Madam Speaker, the purpose of these bills is to repeal and replace the existing Prisons (Correctional Services) Act with a contemporary model for managing Correctional Services into the future.
There are two pieces to today’s reform. First, the Correctional Services Bill contains a bulk of the reform. The Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill amends a number of other acts and regulations to ensure the terminology is consistent with the new act and operational aspects of the bill are mirrored in other acts, and in regulations where appropriate.
I congratulate the Minister for Correctional Services for this contemporary package which, yet again, sees the Northern Territory leading Australia.
Besides updating the language and terminology of the old act, major provisions of the new framework package are the new statutory roles and responsibilities for a Commissioner of Correctional Services, general manager, regional managers, professional officers, and probation and parole officers. These modern titles reflect more appropriately the roles in our Correctional Services, replacing the roles of director, superintendents, prison officers, parole officers and surveillance officers.
Police prisons in the old act are replaced by new concepts of correctional centres, police custody centres and court custody centres. The move from prisons to correctional centres underpins a commitment to the Pillars of Justice framework. This world-leading framework takes a big-picture view of the supply chain cycle of crime rather than looking at just some aspects independently. It delivers real results for Territorians through strengthening our police, justice and correctional systems, ensuring we have a coordinated approach to driving down crime. The pillars are police, courts, youth justice, Correctional Services and victims.
Looking at pillar one, police, we are giving the police the tools they need to perform effectively, respond to incidents, investigate matters and keep crime down in the community. Police need effective tools to undertake their duties. This government believes the majority of people should not be punished for the poor behaviour of the minority. That is why we got rid of the terrible Banned Drinker Register, which should have been renamed the drinkers register because it did not stop banned drinkers in any way and treated law-abiding Territorians as if they were in the wrong.
We have introduced Alcohol Protection Orders, which are issued to those who commit a serious crime while under the influence of grog, banning them from buying, consuming or possessing alcohol or attending licenced premises. We have also put in place temporary beat locations, stationing police officers outside bottle shops to target problem drinkers who buy takeaway grog with the intent of consuming it in restricted areas. We have rolled out more CCTV cameras across the Northern Territory. This expanded network is monitored 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to catch people in the act of committing a crime.
Once we have caught them, then our next pillar kicks in, which is pillar two, courts. We are streamlining the court system to create a more efficient and effective process. This side of the House has introduced some 92 bills into the House, the majority of which are about bolstering our legal system to provide for a law and order framework Territorians expect. We have strengthened mandatory and minimum sentencing, with serious violent offenders now facing a three-month mandatory minimum gaol sentence for the first offence, or 12 months for repeat offenders.
We have also taken action toward those who do not do the right thing and will not pay their fines. Community Work Orders have been implemented for serial fine defaulters who owe in excess of $10 000 and do not enter into payment arrangements with the Fines Recovery Unit. They could be sentenced to community work to repay the fine. The people who do not take the advantage of the extra chance given to them, and fail to comply with a Community Work Order, will now be sent to correctional centres.
We are also improving court facilities. The Attorney-General and my Alice Springs-based colleagues are excited about the construction of a new state-of-the-art Supreme Court facility in Alice Springs, which begins shortly.
However, we do not stop there. Our third pillar focuses on a youth justice system. We are committed to changing the offending behaviour of youth in the community. Young people who are at risk of entering into the correctional system can be sent to boot camps designed to address juvenile crime and change their concerning behaviour. Our focus is on the whole supply chain cycle and not just bolting down bright new shiny things, like Labor does, and expecting miracle results. This government makes no apologies for revitalising all strategies.
A comprehensive strategy is being developed to tackle youth offending and address the youths who are likely to enter into the justice system. Our intent is to keep them out of the supply chain and continue their lives as productive, contributing members of society. But for those who do not want help, or want to continue their unacceptable behaviours, we will take action to protect our community. They can expect a stint in one of our correctional centres.
Correctional Services is pillar four of our justice framework. This is where this bill fits in. This government is committed to changing the offending behaviour of prisoners through training, education and employment, to proactively reduce the Northern Territory’s high reoffending rate. Technology is now used to locate and track an offender’s movements and quickly alert agencies when the person is in an unauthorised location. Prisoners are also expected to work or learn when they are inside the correctional system. Education and employment are keys to driving down repeat offending once a person is released.
Talking about working, offenders are to give back to the community they offended against by undertaking works with community groups and organisations that would otherwise not have been completed due to a lack of time or funds. This is an important step in getting offenders to recognise their behaviour was wrong and caused harm to a victim or victims. Taking responsibility for one’s actions is an important step in rehabilitation.
I move on to pillar five, which focuses on victims. We are ensuring victims are protected and supported. One of the ways we are doing this is through our domestic and family violence reduction strategy, a comprehensive strategy to address, reduce and prevent the unacceptably high level of domestic violence in the Northern Territory. Members know of my determination to lower the incidence of domestic and family violence in our community. I realise the statistics for domestic and family violence are not good, and this is partly due to the fact that we now treat it as a crime. When police are called to an incident involving domestic violence, they now make sure action is taken against persons committing violence through assault charges and other action.
The member for Fannie Bay has criticised my colleague, the Attorney-General and minister for Corrections, for promising a strategy and not delivering. I defend my colleague, the Attorney-General, as the strategy we will deliver is comprehensive and, in my opinion, life changing. It will make a difference to the hurt and abused across the Territory, from Fannie Bay to Yuendumu to Kintore. However, member for Fannie Bay, that takes time. There are 11 government departments involved in the domestic and family violence chain, and for a strategy to be effective it must be comprehensively addressed by all parts, unlike the Labor tradition of policy by glossy brochure and media stunts.
What did those opposite do for 11 years, overseeing unfettered domestic violence? To their shame, they did nothing. They presided over communities crying for their help and they ignored them. They told them via media releases that everything was fine. It was not. Aboriginal women were still being flogged to death and kids were still being abused and not going to school, nor being fed. Yet the great Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party did nothing.
I am not happy with the current statistics, but I realise an increase in statistics will always come when police focus on certain unlawful activity. Our policy of making domestic and family violence a crime has caused those statistics to rise.
But that is not the end. I am honoured and excited to be part of the development of this strategy and look forward to launching it very soon with my colleague. This strategy will make life-changing differences, and I look forward to seeing those results and being able to tell women across the Territory how this government worked hard to give them a safe life and home.
Talking about safe homes, this government has also taken strong action against serious sex offenders who pose a high risk to the community. They are able to be locked up or monitored indefinitely. That is how this government is creating a correctional system through our Pillars of Justice framework.
Turning back to the other major changes of the act, the term ‘correctional centre’ clearly demonstrates this government’s commitment to not only being tough on and reducing crime, but rehabilitating those involved in crime so when they are released they return as productive members of the community. It highlights the strong focus on law and order by this side. I intend to ensure that people who have been appropriately punished through our legal system become contributing members of society upon their release.
That is true with what the minister for Corrections and Attorney-General is doing with reforms to law and order in the Northern Territory. The major reforms this government has implemented, which are seeing amazing results, have taken a broad supply chain approach to law and order. We, on this side of the House, realise one of the key inputs into our legal system – I know this will come as a major surprise to those opposite – is prisoners. What if we can change and reduce that input that drives down the impacts of crime, the cost associated with prevention and detection, and correction?
We on this side know if we make substantial changes to those inputs, then the Territory taxpayer would not have to pay over $1bn for the new correctional centre. Rehabilitating prisoners is already a key priority for this government, one of the key planks being our Sentenced to a Job program. This program provides prisoners with skills that are useful and transferrable to a wide range of work settings in the external environment. The program connects prisoners to a network which is focused on the same outcome of successful transition of prisoners to a mainstream living experience. Corrections has been working with employers to align prisoners with the required skills for jobs in the private sector.
Indigenous prisoners, on release from a correctional centre, face a number of challenges reintegrating into the community, in particular, finding employment and accommodation. These challenges are often exacerbated by low levels of literacy and numeracy, limited living skills and a lack of employment options in remote communities.
Prisoners performing paid work under the program contribute 5% of their income to support Victims of Crime NT, as well as paying board and lodgings, and tax. Employers in the Northern Territory struggle to recruit reliable local staff. One of the advantages for employers participating in the Sentenced to a Job program is that prisoners are reliable, drug and alcohol free, and motivated to work.
As of 30 June 2014, there were 87 prisoners in paid employment, and a further 46 prisoners undertaking volunteer employment opportunities. The current results indicate that prison employment figures are trending upward, and the Department of Correctional Services is on track to reach the government’s stated target of 200 prisoners in paid employment by December 2014. That is a fantastic result, and my colleague should be proud of his efforts.
Jobs mean that people do not want to go back, and that breaks the supply chain cycle. Breaking the cycle is critical, and we are already doing that. Madam Speaker, may I bring this graph out which shows in blue what we are doing? This arrow shows we are doing well with the prisoners; their numbers are going down. This is the government which is doing it.
It is better than what happened before – 11 years of neglect. This graph shows that the Pillars of Justice are working; numbers have dropped and continue to drop. In fact, current numbers are also 200 prisoners below Labor’s lowest project, and some 400 prisoners below Labor’s highest projection. That is the difference between this side and the other: contrast hype and glossy brochure stunts against action, facts and commitment. This side is committed to breaking the cycle.
Moving on, some of the other key parts of the bill include clarification regarding the circumstances in which someone is considered to be in lawful custody. The bill ensures situations where persons are moving between centres or in some form of authorised release, such as our excellent Sentenced to a Job program, are now covered.
The bill has two clear parts to allow for the different management of prisoners and non-custodial offenders. The commissioner has broad powers to manage all persons – prisoners and non-prisoners – in correctional centres, and non-custodial offenders. The concept of a commissioner’s direction has been introduced in the bill to provide a formal mechanism for issuing operational policy and procedures. The concept of a leave of absence has been reframed to clarify certain purposes.
There is a new type of prisoner release called Administrative Home Detention. This is based on a similar scheme currently operating in South Australia and allows the minister, on recommendation of the commissioner, to release an eligible prisoner subject to conditions. It is designed to cater for a longer, continuous period of leave at the end of the prisoner’s sentence. Eligible prisoners are those who do not have a fixed non-parole period as part of their sentence of imprisonment. This will generally cover low-level offenders with less than 12 months imprisonment or under, and they must have served 50% of their imprisonment term.
It is intended that most prisoners released on Administrative Home Detention will be released on the condition they wear an electronic monitoring device and will be subject to the compliance requirements in the bill with respect to monitoring orders.
Consistent with the government’s Sentenced to a Job policy, the bill makes clear that the commissioner can direct prisoners sentenced to a term of imprisonment to work. Prisoners on remand will also be allowed to work if they consent to do so, which is a great initiative.
There is a new provision to allow the commissioner to charge for non-essential services and programs delivered for prisoners that may not be part of a sentence but is offered as a service for them. This is important as it allows the commissioner to also develop services and programs that do not further charge the taxpayer whilst getting prisoners to become productive members of society again.
The health of our prisoners is also important. The commissioner will now be allowed to request health information about a prisoner from the Chief Executive of the Department of Health to ensure their conditions and treatment can be managed appropriately. This is important, not only for the prisoner concerned but other prisoners.
Lastly the bill provides for new legislative protections around the use of force to ensure it is the last resort, and the least restrictive intervention available must be used. No one wants to see people unnecessarily injured, but Correctional Services Officers and their families and friends also deserve protection for the hard job they do. If prisoners choose violence there needs to be clear guidelines for how officers should respond. There is a requirement on the commissioner to issue directions about circumstances for its use and the nature of force used. I am interested to see those guidelines also take into account any cultural and/or language issues present in correctional centres. Attorney-General, if you could provide me some advice about that I would be most grateful.
This is a modern piece of law that moves our corrections system into a position of providing for the future. As I said before, our reforms are working. The latest crime statistics show this to be true, not froth and bubble like those opposite who kept the real figures from Territorians. House break-ins are down 26% over the past two years and 16% Territory-wide over the year to June 2014. That is 300 fewer houses broken into. Assaults are down 14% Territory-wide, and alcohol-related assaults are down 18% across the Territory in the past six months compared to the same period last year. There were 428 fewer alcohol-related assaults in the first half of this year compared to the first half of last year. Alcohol-related assaults were down 3% in Darwin in the first half of this year compared to the first half of last year. Data also shows that during the time Alcohol Protection Orders and Darwin Safe have been operating, Mitchell Street has seen assaults drop by 24% compared to the same period last year. Alcohol-related assaults are down 27% in Alice Springs, down 15% in Katherine, and down a staggering 47% in Tennant Creek in the first six months of the year compared to the same period last year.
Per capita alcohol consumption is now falling across the Territory to the lowest levels since before 2001-02 when the Country Liberals were last in government. In 2012-13 it was down 4% on 2011-12, and down 16% on 2004-05. Those Labor members opposite had 11 years in power and, under their watch, crime was on a steady upward climb. In two years, this Country Liberals government has started to arrest and dramatically reverse Labor’s upward trend. The Pillars of Justice are working across the criminal supply chain. The statistics prove we are making the Territory a safer place to live, work and play.
Madam Speaker, I commend the Attorney-General, the minister for Corrections, for this contemporary piece of law, and look forward to working with him to deliver a modern, responsive and appropriate Correctional Services system for the Northern Territory.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Madam Speaker, I support my colleague, the Minister for Correctional Services and his bills, the Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014 (Serial 83) and the Correctional Services Bill (Serial 82).
My colleagues have covered most of the detail of the bill in their speeches, so I want to make a few general comments about this bill and the context in which it has been presented. Coming to government two years ago, it floored me, and all of my colleagues, how little work the former Labor government did in updating and reforming Northern Territory legislation. That is not just pertaining to Correctional Services, but right across the board. Within my portfolio responsibilities, Health was left to languish legislatively. It has been my task, over the last 18 months since I have been Health minister, to work on updating quite a bit of the legislation within the portfolio areas I have. Other ministers have struck the same situation – antiquated, outdated legislation that Labor just sat on. They were impotent, ineffective and lazy.
The Correctional Services Bill is a perfect example of what we were left with and what we have done over the last two years to create contemporary legislation which will benefit everyone.
In this case, these bills we are debating will effectively benefit the whole community because, whether you like it or not, Correctional Services affects each and every one of us. There are many people employed in the Correctional Services industry. We have too many prisoners, their families and all sorts of people who service the correctional industry, not to mention the members of the public. We all are affected in one way or another, and for the most part in a positive way, by the hard work of Correctional Services, not necessarily the deeds of the prisoners, but the hard work of Correctional Services in contributing to the community.
I listened with great intent to the member for Nhulunbuy, who has been expressing great angst about the introduction of a workers’ camp into Gove. I feel compelled to respond to the member for Nhulunbuy, because her fear and anxiety around this new facility is unjustified. I can understand why she might be feeling a bit hesitant, because it is something new.
However, speaking from the experience of when the Alice Springs – I should not say workers’ camp, because it was always a part of the prison – Correctional Services worker groups which do many things around the community, first commenced, there was some angst expressed by the Alice Springs community, which was unfounded.
It turned out the correctional workers – the gangs – that go out almost on a daily basis have transformed the Alice Springs community over the last 10 to 15 years. I cannot give you the exact year it started. They commenced by doing work around vandalised parts of the community. Dealing with graffiti was a big part of their job in the early days, but over the last decade or so their contribution to maintaining and cleaning their community in and around Alice Springs has been outstanding and invaluable. What we would do as a community without the worker gangs from the correctional facility is not worth thinking about.
An example – this goes back quite a long time – is they worked tirelessly – and I understand they still do – maintaining Blatherskite Park. A good friend of mine, Barry Bohning, used to be the President of the Alice Springs Show Society. Barry has since passed away, but in the early days of the correctional work gangs coming along, he had them doing all the work – painting, maintaining fences, slashing, mowing, building things – which took an enormous load off the Blatherskite Park team and the Alice Springs Show Society.
In response to the member for Nhulunbuy’s concerns around the negative aspects of having a workers’ camp and those people contributing to the Gove community, she needs to be reassured it will not be a negative experience, it will be a positive experience. I also remember, like the member for Nhulunbuy, it was raised in Alice Springs that the prisoners would be taking the jobs of local people. I know Gove is under a lot of pressure socially with people leaving town through the closure of the Rio Tinto refinery, but I believe the prisoners will still be able to slot into that community and provide services everyone will value.
A similar situation occurred in the Barkly area. A friend of mine is a senior officer at the Barkly Work Camp based in Tennant Creek, and they contribute enormously to the Tennant Creek community. They clear up the streets and do all sorts of things that only enhance the Tennant Creek community. Regarding the member for Nhulunbuy’s concerns, she can rest assured it will be a very positive experience if it is anything similar to what we have seen in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek.
After 11 years of the reform of the Correctional Services Bill languishing, the Minister for Correctional Services is undertaking what he describes as a wholesale review of the Correctional Services Bill, which is well overdue. He stated the original bill was written in 1980, 34 years ago. That is old legislation. Indeed, although there have been numerous amendments made to that bill, the bones of it are very old. I commend the member for Port Darwin, the Minister for Correctional Services, for his hard work in updating this legislation.
There has been much discussion in the Chamber this afternoon about some of the complementary initiatives which have been introduced in and around the reform of the Correctional Services industry undertaken by this Country Liberals government.
I almost laugh when the topic of the temporary beat locations is introduced into parliament by the Labor opposition because they need to be reminded they created them. During the 2012 election, I would be sitting outside the front of Piggly Wiggly’s on Gap Road with my sign and my EH with my campaigning paraphernalia all over it, and virtually sitting next to me would be a police officer instructed to be there by the former Labor government.
When we hear the now Labor opposition complaining about how terrible the TBLs are, just remind yourself that they introduced them. We are very happy to continue with them, particularly in Alice Springs where they have been enormously effective. I know they have upset some sections of the community which do not have a designated place to drink alcohol. That is a real challenge. Every responsible adult person over the age of 18 should have a place to consume alcohol in a responsible manner. There are sections of the community in Alice Springs that simply do not have that space – for example, people who live on town camps. Town camps do not allow people to consume alcohol within them. That is a separate issue we need to look at very seriously. Of course, they are able to go into licensed premises and drink, but they are not allowed to take takeaway liquor on to town camps. The temporary beat locations have changed the whole landscape of drinking in Alice Springs.
In addition to that, we have introduced Alcohol Protection Orders which have stopped people from purchasing alcohol. The member for Stuart talked about how effective they have been in Central Australia.
The third component of our suite of initiatives to address antisocial behaviour, crime and alcoholism in Alice Springs is the introduction of alcohol mandatory treatment which is, of course, under my realm of responsibilities as the Minister for Alcohol Rehabilitation. In Alice Springs, that has also been a very successful program. We have seen dozens and dozens of people go through rehabilitation in Alice Springs with some very encouraging results.
We have, as the member for Stuart graphically described, a reduction in the consumption of alcohol, not just in Alice Springs, but across the Northern Territory; in alcohol-related presentations to the emergency departments of our hospitals, particularly in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs; and in alcohol-related crime. That is fantastic news. News like this seems to get lost in the hurly-burly of politics.
There are some fantastic stories out there, such as the success of this government in not just policing, but how our Correctional Services and our justice system are working in a very functional and integrated manner. For that, we are extremely proud. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why the Labor opposition members are opposed to this contemporary legislation. Obviously they like to live in the past, to wade around in old-fashioned, antiquated legislation which obviously makes them feel a sense of security.
However, we are a modern, active government, and our actions speak louder than our words in the work we undertake. I am very proud to say we all work very hard within this Cabinet, this wing and this government. This is a prime example of the work we are producing from this side of the House.
I acknowledge briefly, because of my own personal interest, the work of the official visitors of our correctional facilities. Years ago I was enticed to become an official visitor. I did not do it for very long because I was drawn into politics. My career as an official visitor of our Correctional Services was short-lived. I was enticed to become an official visitor by a very good friend of mine, June Noble. June turned 80 in June this year. June, I believe, is the longest-serving official visitor within the Northern Territory Correctional Services system. She is an incredible woman, and I love her to bits. She religiously goes to the prison and performs her very important role as an official visitor. I experienced the red carpet treatment when I first went with June on my inaugural visit as an official visitor. She was treated like the Queen, as she should be, and we all were acting in that capacity. I note the bills we are discussing tonight include some improvements and slight changes to the role of official visitors.
Madam Speaker, this bill will revolutionise the way we go about doing the business of Correctional Services in the Northern Territory, and I certainly commend the bill to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I have been listening intently to most of the debate. Some of it was relevant to the bill, some was not, and some was a bit of time filling.
I will not vote on this bill and will give you my reasons. It is not because I do not want to, in fact, I support this bill more than not. However, I was in the process of getting some independent legal advice on this bill because I have some concerns – concerns have been raised about parts of the bill – which I was working through. Unfortunately, I have been e-mailing today, as the person went overseas. I wanted to have clear in my mind that the issues I raised and had been covered by the department in a briefing were either a concern or not.
I say that because I had two briefings, one from NAAJA on 7 August and one from the department on 7 August. One of the issues which clouds this debate is that I am fairly sure NAAJA was using version 19, and the department was responding to version 22. I was using the bill as a means of asking the questions. I was using the new bill which I sent to an independent lawyer to give me some advice. It is more a case of me not feeling comfortable with saying yes until I receive that advice, which has not come to date.
However, I will mention some of my concerns and also raise some good things about the bill. I thank the department for the briefing. They went well and truly over time. They probably all wanted to go home, but we were waffling on at 5.30 pm at Old Admiralty House. It was an excellent briefing ...
Mr Elferink: It seems we are in pursuit of the same outcome here.
Mr WOOD: Okay.
This bill is ideal for a committee. So many people are making statements about this bill from NAAJA to CAALAS to a range of lawyers. This is the perfect bill for a committee’s hearing where these issues could be aired in the public arena. You could have brought in people who represented the Department of Correctional Services – prison officers who deal with this from day to day – and members of the public. This is the perfect bill for a committee. However, it did not happen.
The bill is about twice as big as the old bill. There are about 240 clauses in the new bill and about half that in the old bill.
I only received the regulations yesterday, which was unfortunate. That was one of the concerns I had, but I went through them yesterday.
I have two major concerns and they are not the end of the world, which is probably why I am not opposing it; however, I have other reasons to feel slightly uncomfortable. I would have liked a set of objectives. I know not all states have objectives; South Australia and Western Australia do not seem to have objectives, but the Queensland legislation has a purpose which says:
- 1. The purpose of corrective services is community safety and crime prevention through the humane containment, supervision and rehabilitation of offenders.
When I raised the issue of having the word ‘rehabilitation’ in an objective or purpose I was told the word ‘correction’ means the same thing. If you do not rehabilitate people, are you in breach of your own act? I am not so sure that is the case, because it is written in the Queensland act. I am sure they were fairly knowledgeable people. It is also written in the New South Wales act. The Queensland act says:
- 1. The purpose of corrective services is community safety and crime prevention through the humane containment, supervision and rehabilitation of offenders.
2. This Act recognises that every member of society has certain basic human entitlements, and that, for this reason, an offender’s entitlements, other than those that are necessarily diminished because of imprisonment or another court sentence, should be safeguarded.
- (a) the need to respect an offenders dignity; and
(b) the special needs of some offenders by taking into account -
(ii) any disability an offender has.
The ACT legislation has a much longer preamble. It mentions the Human Rights Act 2004. I presume that is their act, because it does not have Australia written next to it. It mentions promoting the rehabilitation of imprisoned offenders and their reintegration into society.
I will read out the New South Wales’ Objects of Act:
- 2A Objects of Act
- (1) This Act has the following objects:
- (a) to ensure that those offenders who are required to be held in custody are removed from the general community and placed in a safe, secure and humane environment,
(b) to ensure that other offenders are kept under supervision in a safe, secure and humane manner,
(c) to ensure that the safety of persons having the custody or supervision of offenders is not endangered,
(d) to provide for the rehabilitation of offenders with a view to their reintegration into the general community.
(3) Nothing in this section gives rise to any civil cause of action or can be taken into account in any civil proceedings.
Victoria has a very short version and Tasmania has guiding principles.
This is one of the downsides of this legislation. I was hoping the government might have changed its mind, because I understand there were objectives in one of the many versions and, for some reason, they were dropped. My understanding is they might have been dropped because of a misunderstanding between some of the CAALAS/NAAJA people and the department. I might be wrong but that is the feeling. There might have been some misunderstanding over some criticism of that objective.
I will not do it this sittings, as I want to hear what the minister has to say, but I am interested in bringing it up as an amendment to this legislation at another time because it is important.
I congratulate the government on this document. I read it before. The reason I did not have it here is I sent it to my lawyer friend to have a look at it as well. This is the Strategic Intent 2013-16 from the Department of Correctional Services. If, as in the Queensland legislation, you had included, ‘the purpose of corrective services is community safety and crime prevention through the humane containment, supervision and rehabilitation of offenders’, in line with the strategic intent of the department, that would have been great. You could include this in your legislation – you did not put the date on it because it could change. That would have made this document a lot better and it probably would have had a lot less criticism.
I will read some of this, because it is important people know what is in here:
- The Strategic Intent 2013-16 represents how we will meet our commitment to government and the people of the Northern Territory, by achieving a community valued correctional services that makes a positive difference in people’s lives.
Key focus areas for the department, as we deliver and reform our services and programs, will include:
prisoner work readiness
Indigenous outcomes
rising prisoner numbers
youth justice reform
safe workplaces
Our Purpose: To contribute to community safety by reducing re-offending.
I will read some of the strategic themes:
- Reduce re-offending through employment education and programs
Provide safe and well-ordered establishments in which we treat people in our care humanely, decently and lawfully
Ensure that the youth justice system delivers improved outcomes on the rehabilitation and safeguards of young people who offend and who are at risk of offending
Introduce an enhanced sentence management approach which promotes an integrated model of offender throughcare
Provide enhanced repatriation options to improve offender reintegration to community
Improve client employment opportunities, education and skills development which support employability
Enhance prison industry and deliver correctional services transformation through the new Darwin Correctional Precinct
It talks about supportive people culture, strong community partnerships, and integrated and accountable organisations. It might be worth reading the values. This is important if people believe in, as the bottom line of this document says, delivering justice and changing attitudes. These are the values of the Department of Correctional Services:
- Integrity
Act openly, honestly, fairly and with accountability
Provide robust advice that is frank, honest, timely and evidence-based
Be openly accountable to the Northern Territory community within the framework of Ministerial responsibility
Respect
Listen to and value different perspectives and contributions
Represent positively the department and the Northern Territory government
Commitment
Strive to achieve the department’s business and strategic intent
There you have the government’s policy in relation to how we deal with offenders and the workers subject to the Correctional Services Act, our Correctional Services officers. The two, obviously, must work together. I raise that as an important part of the debate which has not been raised yet.
The other area of concern was the removal from the old act of section 88 – this should be in the main part of the bill – under Part 23, Food and exercise:
- Prisoners to be provided with food
- The Director must provide a prisoner with food of a sufficient quality and quantity to maintain the good health of the prisoner.
It was in the act, then when I looked at …
Mr Elferink: It is Regulation 23 now, mate.
Mr WOOD: I know, I will get to that. Regulation 23, Prisoner welfare, is a regulation which comes under Miscellaneous Matters:
Prisoner welfare
The Commissioner must ensure that a prisoner is provided with:
(a) food of sufficient quantity and quality to maintain the prisoner in good health; and
By the way, that section on exercise is related to section 89 of the original act:
- (c) sufficient clothing of a kind that is:
- (i) suitable for the climate; and
- (ii) if the prisoner is required to carry out work – suitable for carrying out that work.
Part of this debate, unfortunately, has been around some of the confusion created by the 22 versions. I would love to know what the other versions were. I only became involved in the 22nd version, so I would love to know what the debates were like on the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, etcetera. There must have been some interesting debates. That highlights why it should have gone to a committee. If there were that many versions and there was that much debate around it, a good, open debate through a committee process would have been ideal for this.
As I explained clearly, this is not a case of me not being brave enough to vote on it, I do not feel comfortable without that advice that would sway me one way or the other. As I said, I am more supportive of the bill than against it. You have only heard two of my objections. I might bring them forward to see whether I can put them in an amendment to the bill at some stage, especially as having a purpose or an object to the bill would make it much better.
When I raised this issue at the briefing – and I hope the advisers do not tell me I am wrong – I understood someone said this is a set of rules. Even if it was a set of rules, you need to have a reason why you have a set of rules, not just a set of rules for the sake of a set of rules. It is a set of rules because those rules relate to the objectives. These rules are designed to do what the objectives state at the beginning of the bill. That is missing. I know you have a heading to the bill. As I have said before about another bill, all the other states have the objectives or the purpose in the main body of the bill, not at the front page where it does not really mean a great deal, but in the bill – either clause 2 or clause 3 so it is part of the guts of the bill.
In relation to a few other things that have been mentioned today – and the minister knows – I support Sentenced to a Job. I hate the politics here sometimes. The reality is the member for Barkly did get the work camp going in Tennant Creek. That was an initiative, if he had been in power for another term, he would have continued. To be fair, the government promised it would have a prison farm at Katherine and a work camp, and it has gone off the books ...
Mr Elferink: No, it has not.
Mr WOOD: It has from the recent budget …
Mr Elferink: No, no. I can fill you in on some details from recent effects.
Mr WOOD: I know I am criticised about the prison. I do not mind that criticism, but I get annoyed that sometimes people do not understand my perspective on the prison.
I am no great fan of the big prison, I can tell you now. However, I was given figures that showed the prison was going to be busting if we did not do something about it. The figures were 1000. I could have either been an idiot and just said, ‘No, I am going to dig my heels in and I am not going to support it’, or I had to deal with the reality that came from the advice which was given to me by people who are much more knowledgeable in this area than I was. At the same time, if anyone had been in those discussions, they would have known I wanted the Katherine farm to be built, along with a work camp, which would have reduced the numbers in the big prison by about 250 people.
I would rather see the big prison practically empty and most people working out bush or closer to their communities, or whatever. That might not be practical, but it is one of those things we should aim for.
I went out a number of years ago to the Wyndham Work Camp and reported back to this parliament that this was where I thought we should be going. As far as I know, the Wyndham Work Camp is still there, and we have one here. We have one at Nhulunbuy. There is a point of dispute between the member for Nhulunbuy and the minister over the siting of that. I have also mentioned I have concerns about mandatory rehabilitation taking over certain places such as the one in Tennant Creek. I do not think it is the right place in an industrial area in Katherine for it either. That is a side issue.
In relation to the prison costing a lot of money, yes, it will cost a lot of money. But it will cost a lot of money over a long period of time. It resonates with the community if you say the prison will cost umpteen billion dollars. I always ask how much this piece of architecture we sit in cost. We sit here for 33 days on a very valuable piece of real estate. I am sure if you redesigned it we could have had this on the bottom floor and put a 20-storey hotel on top of it. It probably would have been a lot more practical. However, we did not and it costs an awful lot of money to maintain. If you add it up over the next 50 years, it probably will cost about $1bn to maintain.
You can do a lot of things with figures. When I hear statistics quoted in this place, I shudder. I would like to have a Statistician General who can look at those statistics from a non-political point of view, all the trends, all the outside influences that might have occurred, and come up with some independent statistical analysis which would allow us all to get a good feeling about whether many of the claims made are accurate. But that is another day.
I have summed up all I intended to raise. I thank NAAJA. I have here their long list of issues. I believe they raised very good issues, otherwise you would not have version 22. The bit that concerns me, I have version 22, and I wanted to make sure it was also okay. I sent a couple of e-mails today and made phone calls, although I have not been able to contact the person unfortunately, so if I did not get any serious concerns back from that person, except for the two I have spoken about, then I would support the bill.
I thank the minister. It has been a lot of work obviously, putting this bill together. Also, for a change, I enjoyed this bill. I do not know whether it is because they are bored, because not so many people on that side speak on these bills, which is great, because I usually get so annoyed. Parliament is a house of debate and, sometimes there are just one, two or three speakers and that is it. On these issues, sometimes there is a lot of political ramble, but it would be nice to have a bit more debate with legislation. After all, that is the main reason we are here: to pass laws and to ensure those laws are scrutinised properly. That is the job on this side.
Madam Speaker, I have said what I had to say, and I will leave it at that.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I was conscious that the member for Namatjira wanted to say something. Perhaps she might take advantage of the third reading. Nevertheless, I will start with this:
- We want prisoners to be responsible.
So we take away all their responsibilities.
We want them to be part of our communities.
So we isolate them from our communities.
We want them to be positive and constructive.
So we degrade them and make them useless.
We want them to be trustworthy.
So we put them where there is no trust.
We want them to be non-violent.
So we put them where there is violence all around them.
We want them to be kind and loving people. So we subject them to hatred and cruelty.
We want them to quit being tough guys.
So we put them where the tough guy is respected.
We want them to stop hanging around losers.
So we put all the losers in the state under one roof.
We want them to quit exploiting us.
So we put them where they exploit us.
We want them to take control of their lives, their own problems and quit being a parasite.
So we make totally dependent upon us.
It is the intent of this government to remove every second line from that quote, because that quote struck me when I read it and continues to resonate with me to this day. As a police officer in this jurisdiction, I would have had cause to lock up perhaps 1000 people. Of that 1000 people, five maybe six were what I would have called ‘broom closet villains’. For the rest of them, there was a chance, given an opportunity, they would muster up in an environment where they were caused by circumstance to be compliant prisoners.
When I became the minister for Corrections, I determined there was a problem in the way we approach corrections in the Northern Territory. That problem is reflected in the question I am most often asked about my Corrections environment, ‘How many Aboriginal people do you have in custody?’ The answer, depending on the day of the week, is somewhere between 80% and 85%. That is not a good result. But in my opinion there is a much better question to ask: how many people were welfare dependent and unemployed at the time of their offending? When you speak to judges, police officers, legal aid lawyers and other people who are invested in some fashion or another in this whole system, the answer is close to 100%.
I am not interested in the eugenic exercise of identifying people by their racial background. I am not a great fan of racial profiling, that stands to reason, I am a libertarian after all. What I am a great believer in is that a person, given the opportunity to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and guided into that environment by both coercive and encouraging forces, will step up given the opportunity. Hence the attention to Sentenced to a Job.
I am increasingly convinced that whilst buildings are necessary in any custodial environment, the building itself should not be the issue we focus upon when we are creating a corrections philosophy. It is what you do inside those buildings that matters more than the buildings themselves. I do not for one moment suggest any person convicted of a crime and sentenced to imprisonment should not be punished for that crime by a court that issues the sentence of imprisonment. I genuinely believe a person, once convicted of a crime, should bear the responsibility of their misdeeds, and bear the burden of that responsibility without complaint.
Nevertheless, so many of those people who find themselves in the custodial environment of this government should be asked to measure up in a way they have never been asked to measure up before, and that is what we do.
As consequence of that process, we have a Sentenced to a Job program that has seen more people becoming attached to work and trying to get themselves qualified to be entered into the program than ever before. Perhaps I can demonstrate by way of example. When I became the minister for Corrections, there were about 50 open-rated prisoners across the corrections system in the Northern Territory. There were many more prisoners who were of a low-security rating, but low-security rated prisoners are not allowed into the Sentenced to a Job environment.
Today, there are well over 300 – I think the figure is closer to 400 – open-rated prisoners in our corrections system. That is demonstrative of a cultural change inside the minds of those people. That brings us to what we are reflecting upon here today.
The issue that has been raised by the members opposite is the issue of rehabilitation and the fact it has not found its way into the objects of the bill, because the objects are no longer there. This is true. There has been much noise from the members opposite, and I support the members opposite in their opposition to the Corrections bill they have been talking about. The problem is the Corrections bill they have been talking about is not the Corrections bill that is before this House. This was picked up during the luncheon adjournment, evidenced by the fancy footwork of the member for Nhulunbuy, who came back in here and started trying to side step her way around the issue, returning only to the three points of difference that exist between the Northern Territory government and those people who had input.
Much was made about the lack of consultation. However, the fact that we have a 22nd version of the bill was the direct result of consultation with the legal fraternity and others.
The problem is the members of the opposition appear, to a large extent, to have gone off half-cocked, which is why I encourage members opposite to seek a briefing on the bills that come before this House. They were, I suspect, prepared for a debate in June, during which time there were criticisms from certain parties in relation to the speed of which this is going through, which is why it did not pass in June. Many of the things, however, that had been raised had already found their way into the June version of the bill, because that is what we are debating today. Unfortunately, nobody on the other side of the House seemed to notice the bill addressed many of the issues they were complaining about when they were speaking today. It is clumsy, not necessary and, frankly, does not serve the people of the Northern Territory well when people come into these debates as ill-prepared as that.
Returning to the debate itself, the matter of rehabilitation was discussed. I do not have the quote, but I have a document in front of me – it is obviously a lengthy tome because the photocopied page is ‘Rehabilitation Theory page 831’. I will table the document. I am afraid I cannot place the journal or book this is from, nevertheless, it is instructive. The history of rehabilitation theory:
- Ideas of rehabilitation through punishment were first embroidered in the penitentiaries, built during the Jacksonian era of the late 19th century. Reformers hoped that felons would be ‘kept in solitude, reflecting penitently on their sins in order that they might cleanse and transform themselves’. … Initially, under the Pennsylvania system, it was believed that solitary confinement, accompanied by silent contemplation and Bible study, was a means to redemption. This approach was later transformed in the Auburn system into one of discipline and labour, also performed in silence. Through hard work and a strict disciplinary regime, prisoners were meant to meditate over why they chose a criminal path in order to amend their ways. Disciplinary infractions were met with corporal punishments. At this time, prisoners were responsible for their own rehabilitation, since the causes of crime were thought to result from individuals’ inability to lead orderly and God-fearing lives ...
Mr Wood: Is that an amendment to the bill?
Mr ELFERINK: No.
Mr Wood: Thank heavens for that!
Mr ELFERINK: Are you disappointed, member for Nelson?
Mr Wood: No, I do not want to go back to those days.
Mr ELFERINK: This bears out something that remains unchanged from the time that was written and, indeed, from much earlier works, to today. Rehabilitation is an ethereal concept. If one could imagine trying to nail mercury to a wall, you would get to the place where you would understand the nature of rehabilitation. What exactly does it mean? The harder I think about it, the less certain I am because of the broadness of the word. Whilst we have a general concept of the intent, when you try to put a border around it, it is extremely difficult to give it any structure.
I head people mention the film The Shawshank Redemption. I was going to say we are running a real corrections system, not a fictional story – it is a fine movie nevertheless – about an escape down a sewer pipe. However, somebody handed me details – I am grateful to my staff member for doing so – of that film. There is an interesting piece of script writing worth revisiting.
I ask members to think of the scene where, finally, a changed Morgan Freeman as the character, Red, sits in front of the parole board, glistening in his indifference to the scrutiny he was being subjected to. The script reads like this:
- ‘Ellis Boyd Redding, your files say that you have served 40 years of a life sentence. Do you feel that you have been rehabilitated?’
- ‘Rehabilitated? Well, now, let me see. You know, I don’t have any idea what that means.’
The parole man:
- ‘Well, it means that you are ready to rejoin society.’
- ‘I know what you think it means, sonny. To me it is just a made up word, a politician’s word, so young fellows like yourself can wear a suit, a tie, and have a job. What do you really want to know? Am I sorry for what I did?’
‘Well, are you?’
‘Well, there is not a day goes by that I do not feel regret, not because I am in here, because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then – a young, stupid kid who committed a terrible crime. I want to talk to him. I want to try to talk some sense to him, tell him the way things are. But I cannot. That kid is long gone and this old man is all that is left, and I have got to live with that.’
The script goes on a little further, but his indifference becomes increasingly pronounced. But because of the way he presents himself to the Parole Board, his parole is approved – clearly, a changed, perhaps even broken, human being.
I do not want to break people in my Corrections system, I want to lift them up. I want them to be more than they possibly ever believed they could be. Thinking back to the words of Judge Dennis Challeen, I want to see people walk out of our Corrections system feeling about themselves thoughts they never thought they would be capable of feeling about themselves, feelings they never understood existed. Feelings of self-worth and dignity cannot be taught, they can only be earned and can only be learned through earning. It is for that reason I want to pursue the concept of work in our Corrections system. For pursuing that belief, for believing that a person can lift themselves up, I am told I run a Corrections system which is worse than North Korea’s. Really? There, 150 000 to 200 000 people are incarcerated, and most without trial, with executions on a daily basis, and we run a Corrections system that is worse than North Korea’s? Oh, please! The overreach of that argument is not only pathetic, it is stupid and dangerous. Frankly, I suggest that most Labor Party members who heard that speech probably cringed because of the failure of it to demonstrate anything other than being a flippant dismissal, and a means by which the member opposite could pass some critical thought.
What I appreciate through this whole process is we have so many organisations, including private employers, legal aid authorities and NGOs, which look at Sentenced to a Job and every other thing we are trying to achieve in the Corrections system, and they are saying this is a good thing. We will increasingly work with NGOs over the passage of time so we can produce better results for those people who are in our Corrections system. But they must get to a point where they change their mind that the course of action they want to take in their live is one of correction.
That is what this bill is intending to achieve. To hear it dismissed in such a cavalier fashion is irritating. However, I will allow it to go through to the keeper because it is more about what we are trying to do than my emotional response to any criticism of what we are trying to do.
I listened to the member for Nelson, and I thank him for being alive to the fact that the bill we are discussing here today was not version 19, but it was version 22. It was version 22 by virtue of the fact that we had consulted. I heard his concerns about the removal of the objects, but I tend, as a general principle, to be a bit of a black-letter lawyer when it comes to legislation because, frankly, a set of words in legislation that have no legislative input are not particularly useful. The long title of a bill, as a general principle, will tell you what the bill is about. I know the member for Nelson will disagree with that and would prefer to see objects placed into the bill. I am afraid we will have to agree to disagree. The bill will not be diminished in any fashion in its operation, or its objects for that matter, by the absence of some italicised words which are not available for any form of meaningful interpretation.
I also thank the member for Nelson for taking the time to look at the Statement of Strategic Intent 2013-16. I take the time out to acknowledge the member for Nelson’s reading of that document, because it is one of the ones we truly agonised over for quite some time. It was not a document that was merely thrown together for the sake of flippancy. It was designed to charter a path forward for the corrections system that would ultimately lead to a corrections system that achieved all of the objects in that statement of intent, part of which was the creation of the legislative instrument that sits before this House today.
To read that document into the record is to acknowledge the importance of the document, and I am grateful personally and on behalf of the department for the intelligence shown by the member for Nelson for picking up on the importance we have placed on that document. It is plastered everywhere in the department and people understand that the minister has personal buy-in in this document, because it is part of our way forward.
I wrote down one quote from the member for Barkly which I found astonishing. He was proudly boasting in this place, ‘I was costing the government a lot of money’. He made the mistake then, and continues to make the mistake now, in believing the measure of success is how much money you spend. I disagree. All that will measure is the amount of money you are spending.
I draw honourable members’ attention to the graph that justified the building of the new prison. It has been circulated; it is a public document now. It has three lines on it: a purple line, a red line and a green line. It was drafted in June 2010 and projected out into the future – leading to December 2016 – the present projections of the Northern Territory corrections system.
Bear in mind as I say this that we are still not yet in the new correctional precinct. Everything we have done has been done within the environment of the prison system inherited by this government from the former government.
The red line, which ends up in 2016 of having projected prison numbers of 2126, was the most probable growth in prisoner numbers. Indeed, that definitely justified the building of a new 1000-bed prison.
Overlaid over those lines is a blue dotted line, and they are the actual results. We see at the end of the first quarter of 2013 about four or five months after the CLP came to government, a sharp decline in prisoner numbers – a decline which came up to the best possible case scenario in mid-2013 and has remained below the best possible case scenario pushed out to June 2014. I think the next blue dot will be up slightly. This places us with as many prisoners in custody as when we came to government, way below the projections of the former government.
This then draws me to making an observation about what I said when I started to wrap up here today. Yes, a prison is a building. Yes, it is a necessary building. But, bearing in mind we are continuing to use exactly the same facilities which were bequeathed to us – we still have not moved into the new prison – through running programs that augment and assist local business, without competing with them, pursuing the Sentenced to a Job program and a number of other very important policy approaches outside of the corrections system, we have 250 fewer prisoners in our custodial environment.
If you take the difference between where we were predicted to be today and where we are actually today and extrapolate that for one year’s expenditure, that is $17m this government does not have to spend because we do not have 250 people in prison the former government said we would have. We have done it within the existing resources bequeathed to us because we have changed the things we do inside those buildings.
Madam Speaker, for that, I am enormously proud of what the Giles government has achieved and will continue to achieve. This legislative instrument is designed, constructed and aimed at creating an environment in which people choose to make a mental, emotional and spiritual change to themselves, so when they walk out of a correctional facility and out the control of the corrections environment in the Northern Territory, they leave with something they never had when they came in – that is, something to lose. Imagine a corrections system that produced a better person.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Correctional Services Bill (Serial 82):
Clauses 1 to 140, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 141:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move amendment 22.1 to omit the word ‘offender’ and insert the word ‘prisoner’.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 141, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 142 to 155, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 156:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move amendment 22.2 to omit from clause 156(2) the word ‘may’ and insert the word ‘must’. Essentially, the amendment is necessary to ensure the minister appoints a legal practitioner as the nominated examiner for a purported legal item. That creates a compulsion upon the minister.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 156, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Correctional Services (Related and Consequential Amendments) Bill (Serial 83):
Clause 1 to Schedule 5, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Schedule 6:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move amendment 24, as circulated, which deals with the wording of Schedule 6 of the bill under the heading Cross-border Justice Act, in that the section 7(1) definition be amended to remove the wording ‘juvenile justice order’ and insert the wording ‘juvenile justice officer’. The amendment is necessary to rectify a typo and to ensure the correct definition is accordingly amended.
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule 6, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, very briefly, there are no amendments to note at all. It was remiss of me not to acknowledge the work of departmental staff who have been sitting here and in the advisers’ room very patiently throughout this long debate. They have done a Trojan’s work. I am very grateful to them and wish to place on the record my thanks to the staff.
Bills reported; report adopted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move the bills be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bills read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Investment Attraction for Northern Territory Mining Projects
Investment Attraction for Northern Territory Mining Projects
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, today I provide the Assembly with the results and benefits that have flowed from the Northern Territory government’s international investment strategy that is designed to develop and support mining and exploration projects in Northern Territory.
Since the 2007 global financial crisis, exploration companies have found it extremely difficult to raise capital through the Australian Stock Exchange. The major stumbling block or hurdle in developing mining projects in the Northern Territory is the difficulty associated with raising finance. In fact, the availability of financing alone directly translates into reduced exploration, in particular, greenfield exploration.
Given that growing the minerals and energy sectors in order to increase royalties is one of the most promising avenues for the Territory government to grow its financial independence, it is imperative this government helps junior exploration companies seek alternative finance opportunities from as many sources as possible.
___________________________
Visitors
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of members of the Sikh Association Northern Territory. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors and hope you enjoy your visit to Parliament House.
Members: Hear, hear!
___________________________
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Increased exploration and mining projects in the Northern Territory not only mean increased royalties for government, but these projects create new economic opportunities and jobs for regional Territorians. 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, local companies must compete in a highly competitive, globalised marketplace for exploration investment.
To best attract international investment into exploration projects and promote the Territory’s geological potential to the domestic and global industry, the Country Liberals government has implemented the Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, or CORE, initiative. CORE is designed to attract minerals and petroleum exploration investments 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 importantly, programs to attract international investment into resource projects at the exploration stage. These minerals investment attraction strategies assist explorers in the Northern Territory to access potential investors and ultimately drive exploration and mining in the Territory.
This government recently committed a further four years of funding for a CORE initiative at its existing level of funding of $3.95m per annum. This is the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government, and demonstrates our ‘open for business’ approach to minerals and energy exploration and development.
Specifically, CORE will allow my Department of Mines and Energy to continue its highly successful efforts in assisting local explorers attract international investment, particularly from key markets in east Asia. By joining delegations led by me, as the Northern Territory Minster for Mines and Energy, local exploration companies can access top-level decision-makers in an affordable way through dozens of investment meetings and opportunities to promote their projects.
It is foreign investment that is the lifeblood for minerals and energy exploration projects, which advance our economy and create wealth and jobs for Territorians.
The delegations attend seminars and business meetings, and receive direct introductions to significant international investment companies and trading houses.
While I acknowledge the previous ALP government did some good work in continuing the original CLP scheme to attract overseas investment, it was under this government that the overseas investment strategy was expanded exponentially to remove what was virtually a sole focus on China.
Since 2006 there have been 36 investment deals in Territory mining and exploration projects, worth $775m, involving Chinese companies. Of these announced deals, 18 were successful as defined by the promised investment being confirmed as received, with a total value of $270m. My Department of Mines and Energy was directly involved in attracting 10 of these 18 deals, with a total value of $233m.
Since the department’s market promotions to Japan began in 2008, four investment deals in Territory exploration projects worth $10.35m involving Japanese companies have been announced. Of these, the department was directly involved in attracting two of the four deals with a total value of $4.75m.
The investment achieved since August 2012, when the Country Liberals came to government, has seen seven new Chinese and two new Korean deals announced. One such success story, within days of my delegations departure from Korea – it says October here but I think it was November 2013 – an agreement was announced between Northern Territory company TNG and leading Korean conglomerate POSCO Engineering and Construction, for construction and delivery of the Mount Peak vanadium titanium iron project which is located around 235 km from Alice Springs. TNG presented to POSCO during my previous investment delegation to Seoul in October 2013. This announcement marked the third agreement to be signed by a South Korean company regarding investment in a Northern Territory minerals project since the department’s international investment attraction program started work with Korea in 2010.
While the Territory remains fundamentally underexplored, with 91% of the Territory either unexplored or having had limited exploration, we have over 40 known but not yet developed mineral deposits. Despite the difficulties minerals and energy companies have experienced raising funds through the Australian stock market since the global financial crisis, foreign investment has proven resilient.
Some of the key functions that foreign investment can bring to companies looking to develop opportunities in the Northern Territory include: supporting exploration expenditure in the Territory; increasing the chances of new minerals and energy discoveries; and enabling minerals and energy projects in the Northern Territory to progress, which otherwise may have stagnated. This has helped to maintain the Northern Territory’s economic strength, business activity and low unemployment.
Foreign investment brings many benefits. It supports existing jobs and creates new jobs, encourages innovation, introduces new technologies and skills, brings access to overseas markets and promotes competition among our industries.
As I said previously, mining and exploration creates jobs, helps build our regions, grows wealth for Territorians and contributes to improving our essential infrastructure such as transport corridors. In short, mining and exploration delivers long-term benefits to the Northern Territory’s economy. We are fortunate the Northern Territory has a wealth of mineral and energy opportunities.
The Territory remains fundamentally underexplored and only sustained greenfield exploration can unlock the vast mineral potential we have. All great mining provinces start with greenfield exploration, which is the foundation of the mining sector.
Our continuing efforts in Asian investment and engagement will build on previous good work in this area and will mostly focus on enabling increased investment in the exploration sector. We are building on the past successes of Country Liberal governments to deliver for the next generation of Territorians.
Even though we have world-class mines with production estimated at $3.5bn per year, most currently mined resources will be exhausted by the year 2030. This is a frightening prospect. Exploration is needed to maintain and expand the role of mining in the Territory’s economy. An exploration cannot occur without foreign investment.
In 2012, my Department of Mines and Energy’s Investment Attraction Division undertook detailed market research which revealed that China, Japan and South Korea are the highest potential target markets for the minerals the NT has to offer.
From the research, two key economic factors helped to explain what has recently made, and will continue to make, the Territory’s mineral wealth attractive to Chinese investors. The first is China’s high GDP growth rates, the second is the desire for Chinese policymakers to raise the standard of living for all citizens, with GDP per capita a representation of standard of living. China’s GDP per capita is predicted to continue to rise to 2040 and beyond, increasing domestic consumption that will create greater demand for new products. As the material standard of living grows, mineral and metal demand also expands. This pattern has been followed by all developing countries throughout history.
In response to its growing need for minerals and metals, China has put security of high supply on its political agenda. It is spending large and increasing amounts on exploration for minerals inside China, and is also reaching out to participate in the world’s mining and metals industry.
Responding to China’s ‘go global’ policy in 2000 and financial incentives by government-owned banks, China’s outbound global direct investment has been dominated by Chinese state-owned enterprises responding to the policy drive to secure energy and raw materials. Indeed, China’s demand for mineral commodities is being driven by forces that will last for many decades.
Development in China will generate new investment leads for the NT, with the Chinese government planning to increase its outbound foreign investment, and has set targets for securing minerals and energy assets in foreign countries. The growing role and influence of the private sector in China may also provide a new wave of potential investors for NT exploration projects.
Japan, on the other hand, is resource poor, so the Japanese must rely on overseas sources for raw materials for all its processing industries. Increasingly concerned about global supply shortages, Japan has stockpiled what are called rare metals since 1983. The stockpiling target corresponds to 60 days domestic consumption or imports. Rare metals are indispensable for the manufacturing of automobiles and IT products, so it is extremely important to ensure stable supplies of such metals from a standpoint of maintaining and strengthening the competitiveness of Japan’s manufacturing industry.
Like Japan, South Korea relies on imports for almost all its mineral needs and, like Japan, the South Korean government intends to use overseas investments and stockpiling to secure resources. South Korea plans to produce 43% of its demand for six strategic minerals, including uranium, coal and iron ore from overseas mines by 2020. Its budget for investment in 2012 was over $500m. Clearly South Korea has the economic capacity to invest in minerals and energy projects, and its determination to maintain its exporting competitiveness will increase its drive to secure minerals and energy resources.
The Northern Territory is an attractive destination for international investors for many reasons. To start with, our prospective mineral and energy commodities are those of a very high interest to China, Japan and South Korea.
Bipartisan support for attracting Asian investment to the Northern Territory and political stability are strong and verifiable selling products for the NT government’s investment attraction program. The Port of Darwin offers the fastest shipping time of any of Australia’s bulk export ports, helping to make projects more profitable for investors. Our success to date in attracting foreign investment is a strong selling point for potential new investors.
The Department of Mines and Energy has deep existing relationships with key organisations and investors in China, Japan and South Korea. The depth of my department’s relationships with these organisations is a key advantage for the Northern Territory over other states in Australia which do not take a strong partner-led or relationship-based approach to investment attraction.
The Northern Territory government’s investment attraction efforts benefit from my department’s NT Geological Survey’s involvement with the Commonwealth Minerals Australia initiative, and from having the investment attraction strategy integrated with this unit.
We may have many high-potential projects and unexplored areas which can attract investor interest, and our regulatory regime is internationally competitive. Indeed, the Northern Territory has a strong, growing economy that boosts investor confidence in long-term stability. As well, Australia’s high quality of life and positive image are strengths investors will consider when choosing a destination to send staff and establish offices.
Under Framing the Future, this government’s blueprint for the development of the Northern Territory, our prosperous economy vision includes the aim to land new international investment. Objective one for a prosperous economy is an economy that uses our place in the world and our strong relationships to build international trade, culture and tourism links, and leverages new investment from the Northern Territory’s track record in improving food, energy and resource security for our partners. This includes an intention to strengthen the Territory’s role as a gateway between Australia and Asia by promoting the Northern Territory as an investment location and a supplier of quality goods and services.
This government aims to achieve a prosperous economy that is supported by a modern, pro-investment environment. Northern Australia is rich with energy, agriculture, business and scientific industries, and vibrant and growing communities, yet it remains underutilised relative to the rest of the country, despite its natural, geographic and strategic assets. The Northern Territory government understands we need bold, innovative action now to build tomorrow’s Territory.
The Northern Territory government is committed to economic prosperity and accelerating development across northern Australia. Since coming to government in 2012, the Country Liberals have worked hard to build on the Northern Territory’s reputation as a world-class place in which to invest, live and do business. To this end, as the Minister for Mines and Energy, I have worked closely with the mining industry and exploration companies to find out what we, as a government, can to do to help them do business better. I have instructed that research be conducted in order that this government can get the best results for local companies wanting to do business better. I have acted on the advice of local mining and exploration experts – many of whom I am proud to say work in the Department of Mines and Energy – to target destinations identified as the best source of investment for local companies.
Face-to-face relationship building is crucial to doing business in Asia. Only a small number of potential investors visit the Northern Territory or elsewhere in Australia each year. Because of this, it is vital that we travel to our target markets regularly in order to maintain relationships and build the profile of the NT among investors there. Regular face-to-face contact motivates commitment and builds lasting relationships. Regular travel to these markets demonstrates that the NT is serious about its long-term commitment to being a stable supplier and investment partner to these countries.
Having ministers participate in industry delegations in China, Japan and South Korea is an exceptional advantage for the Northern Territory. Ministerial leadership of a delegation signals the importance of the market and the activity to the NT government, raises the profile of the entire delegation, opens doors for meetings that exploration companies may not otherwise secure, attracts audiences to seminars, conferences and dinners, and enables the minister to hear about challenges and investment barriers directly from senior officials in those countries.
To this end, since becoming the Minister for Mines and Energy I have led a number of delegations which have successfully attracted investment dollars into exploration projects in the Northern Territory. One significant event achievement occurred in May 2013 when I signed a memorandum of understanding with the China Development Bank. This MOU represented a significant escalation of the relationship between the Northern Territory government and the China Development Bank. Previously, Western Australia was the only Australian jurisdiction to achieve this relationship status with the CDB. This bank is a development finance institution under the direct supervision of the Central People’s Government of China. With almost $1tn in assets, this bank is responsible for financing the majority of Chinese investment in Australia and overseas.
To overcome the challenge of not having a permanent presence overseas, the Department of Mines and Energy has successfully built strong relationships with companies and investment houses located in east Asia. The endorsement and support shown to the Northern Territory by these government-backed organisations has given investors the confidence to sign agreements investing millions in Territory exploration projects, knowing they will have access to finance and approvals from their relevant governments.
Another significant achievement occurred in late 2013 when I led an investment delegation to South Korea, Japan and China. As this was the first time a Northern Territory Minister for Mines and Energy had visited either South Korea or Japan, it was highly regarded and very well received.
Our message to potential investors is simple: the Northern Territory welcomes foreign investment into its minerals and energy sectors, and the government is determined to provide a responsible, investment-friendly regulatory regime for companies.
Reflecting their long-term interest in investing in Australia, a growing number of Chinese, Japanese and South Korean companies have established representative offices in Australia. The growth in the number of representative offices presents new opportunities to maintain and develop investment relationships with target investment prospects.
Asian investors seeking to secure mineral commodities may have many international locations to choose from, including other Australian states and developing countries in Africa, South America and Asia. The NT government has a big role to play in attracting that investment into the Territory.
Studies by Austrade, Invest Australia and others have found that the external investment flows are primarily driven by the policy advocacy work of government agencies. In practice, once the investor has chosen Australia as its preferred investment location, the support services provided by agencies become primary considerations in weighing up shortlisted locations.
The Investment Attraction Division within the Northern Territory Geological Survey assists Territory minerals and exploration projects to attract international investment. The division’s clients are junior exploration companies from across Australia which have projects in the Territory and are seeking investment. The quality of the division’s facilitation services is crucial to securing investment into the NT’s minerals and energy sectors. While the international investment attraction program is a relatively low-cost and low-key element of the CORE initiative, it has a strong track record of securing new investment into the minerals and energy sectors.
The department measures the Northern Territory’s competitiveness using the Fraser Institute Annual Survey of Mining Companies. The latest results issued in March 2014 rank the Northern Territory 17th out of 112 places worldwide, and second in Australia for attractiveness as a place to invest, and 19th out of 112 places worldwide and third in Australia for regulatory certainty.
Although the Northern Territory government is small, we are a dynamic government that openly welcomes foreign investment with a very pro-business development attitude.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the statement be noted.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement to the House. It is a particularly good statement which gives credit where credit is due, and reflects a good cross-section of the Northern Territory, particularly including industry and the department.
It is also good to see the acknowledgement of the global financial crisis. Finally we have some real acknowledgement of those extreme challenges that were put on this country nationally but, more importantly for us, on the Northern Territory. So much of this debate has been in denial of any global financial crisis. The minister acting in the industry of minerals, resources and energy acknowledges that, and I give him credit for that.
A local story on that: I remember entering parliament in 2008 and taking a breath while thinking, ‘This is too good to be true’. Sure enough it was, because 70 m of the Barkly Highway washed out completely, the global financial crisis pulled all the drill rigs off the fields and parked them in the middle of Tennant Creek, and the federal government was dumping a nuclear waste dump in my lap. So, it was get on with the job. I, for one, acknowledge the global financial crisis and the amazing effect it had across the minerals resource and energy sector, where those drill rigs we had not seen around the Barkly for decades, which were out exploring for new projects, were suddenly parked on vacant lots around Stanley Street and Brown Street in Tennant Creek.
It was good to see that within the next 12 months those rigs were back in the bush. It is a delight to acknowledge those explorers such as Emerson Resources and West Gold Excalibur that kept driving that exploration back into all those old tenements around Tennant Creek and looking at new greenfield sites.
The minister talked a lot in the statement about travelling around the world and leading delegations. It is good to know the development of our mining sector continues to build on the strong foundations established and nurtured by the previous Labor government. It is good to hear the minister tells Territorians about his overseas trips and participation in industry conferences and, of course, those important connections with attracting investors.
Mining certainly is thirsty work. It was revealed in estimates that minister Westra van Holthe’s office is one of the biggest spenders on entertainment and hospitality on the fifth floor when he comes home, coming in third after the Chief Minister and the member for Fong Lim. It testifies that the mining business is thirsty work, and there is a lot to be shared when the minister arrives home from those extensive overseas trips.
It is good to get back on track of what this is offering Territorians, because mining has always been a very important sector for the Territory. I can comment now, as a resident of, and being associated with, Tennant Creek for over 34 years, on the power and might of mining and the returns it brings, but also the challenges if mining packs up and leaves.
In the Northern Territory mining contributes 14.3% of our gross state product compared with 8% for the Australian national economy, so it is a big part of our economy and future. Mining employs 4% of the Territory workforce, a significant number.
It is good to see the government continuing to build on the work of Territory Labor whilst in government. However, we need to ensure we keep the focus clearly on building the industry, growing regional economies and supporting community development, and not just focus on royalty revenue-raising for government. Sometimes we risk that being the preoccupation of government. It is important we keep the bigger picture in play, which is the outcomes for the community and the constituency of the Northern Territory.
The 2014-15 budget flagged an expectation of $164m in mining royalties, 22% of own-source revenue, noting proudly that this is $41.5m more than the forecast in the 2013-14 budget – significant income streams and projected increases. But this should not be the main performance indicator for government work in the development of our mining sector.
This year’s budget paper notes a likely increase in iron ore production, particularly new mining in the Roper region, but that the actual value of production may be volatile due to movements in iron ore prices. That is a reality now when we reflect on the challenges the Sherwin Iron and Western Desert projects are facing. It is regrettable that we see the collapse of the Sherwin Iron project operation at the moment and the suspension of iron ore mining activity at Frances Creek. It will be interesting to see the revised forecast of mining-related revenue in the Treasurer’s Mid-Year Report later this year – when we get a Treasurer.
The iron ore price in June 2014 was $US92 a tonne, in early 2014 it was trading at $US135 a tonne. ANZ is forecasting a return to $US100 a tonne later in the year, but we are unlikely to see the higher price in the mid-term.
That is a comment on the volatility of prices on the projects which have commenced, some of which are now facing some real challenges on return to shareholders. For the moment, the government seems to be relying on increased production in the Groote Eylandt and McArthur River projects to provide that air of prosperity and growth. They are only two projects. We need to factor in any debate around mining, energy and resources, and this volatility and associated vulnerability.
The real story, which was highlighted in debate on the minister’s last ministerial statement on mining in October last year, will be that, currently, mined resources in the Northern Territory are predicted or projected to be exhausted by 2030. The minister highlighted that in a previous report, and it needs to be reflected in continued debate. A 2030 time line is not a long way out and the work within government should be very focused on the finite nature of the resources and projects – a time marker not very far away. We did not hear anything in this statement, but I am sure the minister is very focused on this as the longer-term thinking now with the government is developing its north Australia strategy.
The potential investors are talked about in the statement, which is good, regarding support for new mining ventures in the Northern Territory. There has to be a comprehensive strategy. It should not be about messaging fast-tracking approval processes. It needs to be increasing community awareness, acknowledging environmental factors, and cognisant of financial risks to Territorians. Those elements of a comprehensive mining statement should be discussed in this place. There is a question about the exact nature of what is happening. The minister talked about investment, which is good, and we, the opposition, applaud that. However, I want to hear what the government is doing in supporting junior exploration companies and greenfield developments in the Northern Territory. I want to hear some examples, and it would be good to be offered briefings. That is a good area for debate: some specifics around some of the junior players.
There seems to be a preoccupation with reducing the checks and balances that apply to mine site developments. It is not only me saying this; this is what the community is starting to articulate. If this is the case, if there are minimising environmental standards, it presents real risks which translate to real financial risks to government and to Territorians. When we are in the business of attracting junior explorers, we often face the risk that they have limited capital to back them up, and if things go wrong, taxpayers are left with the environmental issues and associated cleanup bills.
We are all in this together, so we cannot afford, environmentally or financially, any more Mount Todds or Redbank mines. They are legacy mines, but – I thank the minister for the information provided at estimates – there are hundreds of legacy mines across the Territory from days gone by, and we do not need any more. Any of this rhetoric about fast-tracking is being watched and discussed by the community at length, and there will be certain standards to maintain.
The minister talked about the CORE initiative. As the Territory opposition, we acknowledge that as an important program and that it builds on the previous government’s $14.4m initiative called Bringing Forward Discovery. It is good to see these things mesh into a new government and the new government’s operations. It is nice to have a rest from the political rhetoric, the slaps and all the other rot with some of these ministerial statements. It is nice to look at that fusion and acknowledge how it is moving forward for the Territory and all our future. It is an initiative that, on the previous Labor government’s watch, grew to a total of $28.5m in investment in resource documentation, which was a good result.
As opposition members, we have a small staff, a great team, and we communicate with stakeholders. The mining sector is increasingly speaking about the government having gas-blinkers, focusing on the oil and gas sector. Of course, we acknowledge the opportunities in this sector. Coming from the Barkly, where we have the Beetaloo Basin, the McArthur Basin and the Georgina Basin, how could I not appreciate the potential in that oil and gas sector? However, industry is saying, ‘Do not forget the bread-and-butter mining projects that have historically underpinned real regional development in the Northern Territory’. It is very important to keep that balance, liaison and support in all of the sectors. Our grassroots miners and many of the stakeholders have made the comment about the hard rock miners who need that continued support as well.
The minister talked about the Fraser Institute. It is telling that the Fraser Institute’s annual and international survey of mining companies in 2011-12 ranked the NT as 11th internationally, the highest in Australia, in perception, as a jurisdiction with positive policies in relation to mining. In 2012-13, after the change of government, that slumped to No 22, about the same as Victoria and well behind Australia’s highest scorer, Western Australia, at No 12 on the list.
There is an example, if you want to massage statistics. I accept the minister’s statistics, as the government should accept the opposition’s statistics from the same source, the Fraser Institute. There are, no doubt, things to celebrate, but there are also challenges we must acknowledge.
The government often talks about the three-hub economy, an economy built on mining and energy. It is interesting, I cannot see any evidence of a significant mining industry representative participating on the industry panel in the northern Australia discussions. That has come to my attention. I hope the government can correct that, but it is a very important point. In this new policy of developing the north we definitely need those mining industry representatives on those panels and included in those discussions across the Territory. It is not all about the potential of oil and gas; we have to acknowledge the traditional base, the hard rock and grassroots miners.
We have to also challenge the government in this statement and previous statements. What I see generally coming from the government is in relation to assisting local communities managing the transition from a booming mining economy into the future or, in some cases, an uncertain future. Gove is an example. We need that articulated clearly. The opposition has taken that debate fair and square to the government. Nhulunbuy is a good example of that. It is important, as we go forward and hear more statements from ministers and departments about this capacity building, that it is broken down into strategies that assist local communities manage transitions into booms or, unfortunately, out of booms.
I can tell many stories about Tennant Creek, the former powerhouse of the Northern Territory, and what we endured in that relationship with government policies of the day. We also need to clearly focus on key issues that come with booms. We have established that minerals, resources and energy are the key foundation stones to the Territory’s future booming economy. What are we doing about the management of these booms, and housing rental prices and their impacts on Territorians? Hopefully we will start to see some pragmatic examples instead of just the talk. If we are talking 2000 rentals, then we accept and acknowledge that. However, if we are talking 263 deliveries after two years, then that needs to be debated because that is falling well short of the target.
Regarding the impact of mining activity on existing infrastructure, there was no more important example than the Roper Highway with the test sample from Sherwin Iron. That was approved for 200 tonnes and that created havoc. I spent a bit of time on the Roper to experience that, talking to local communities – pastoral, agricultural and Aboriginal. Everybody was extremely concerned. Then, from the estimates process, I had to take the message back, ‘They have done 200 and there is another 200 000 tonnes coming’, and people were extremely concerned. That was a direct relationship between approving a project without the infrastructure to support it. Unfortunately that project now is facing some serious challenges, and we are waiting to see how that will re-emerge. The lessons learnt is that its re-emergence will not be able to depend on that public highway because it is infrastructure that will not support heavy vehicle movements of that intensity and capacity. We have to start to talk about industry and how industry contributes to regional infrastructure. That is the way of the future. No doubt the government has that firmly on its agenda.
Another challenge is the fly-in, fly-out workers. The ABS employment data for 2011 showed there were 5200 people working in the NT with a usual place of residence interstate, many of those working in the mining sector. We know labour costs are a big part of operational costs, and there is a big push on from the big end of town to reduce employee costs and make Australia and the Territory more competitive on the world stage. But let us not trade away our health and safety standards, our environmental standards, or our employee wages and conditions, while quietly increasing the employment of 457 skilled migration visas and other overseas workers willing to work for lower wages than those hard fought for over the years.
You guys who do business with the big end of town are on the front line. You talk to people like Gina Rinehart. Fair and squarely, we have to seriously ensure there is a healthy balance in the labour market and in relation to the returns to Australian citizens and any other workers who enter our industries on Australian shores.
The question is: what is the Territory government doing to grow our own? That is a really important question. I am particularly interested to hear more from the member for Stuart because she gave a very interesting response in a previous debate. We represent similar electorates, as we have large areas of regional remote communities. We have to ask ourselves the question now the boom and the growth are here and are on the way up: how are we going to get the locals involved?
The reality is that official employment figures for the Territory appear buoyant. The real social dilemma, however, is in relation to the regional and remote unemployment figures, because very high figures of Indigenous unemployment are masked by employment programs such as the former CDEP program, now the RJCP program. Those logistics are even amplified further when – I know in the electorate of Barkly, and reckon it is the same in the electorate of Stuart – there are many young people who are not even registered in these programs. They just exist within kinship systems and live off the family’s benefits and resources. These numbers are considerable. They do not add to statistics; they are unknown and, potentially, they reflect a resource that needs investment.
The statement is talking about wooing investors to the Territory, and we acknowledge that. However, we would really like to start hearing more from government about partnerships, training programs, and how you are doing business with Batchelor Institute, for instance, and supporting entry of more Indigenous women into the mining workforce.
This government still seems to be operating on a high-level rhetoric approach. Let us face it, the Chief Minister, when newly arrived to the Northern Territory – I remember his early days in the Northern Territory when he was a classic Centrelink-trained bureaucrat who came out of Canberra. I was always impressed with how he could spin language out to audiences who were listening. He is a great exponent of that high-level bureaucratic, Centrelink-type jargon around training programs, employment and statistics. As a Chief Minister, he has certainly refined that product. It comes across this Chamber and it goes through the media at a rate of knots. But, as a mere member for Barkly, the grassroots local member from the biggest electorate in the Territory, I challenge the Chief Minister and the government to start translating that into what works.
A good example would be OM Manganese at Bootu Creek. When I was elected into this job, I debated with everybody who would listen that we had to start focusing on the 16- and 17-year-old young people. We have to go back down that supply chain and start to develop these young people before they are totally smothered with all these other social challenges that can provide the distractions from the positive outcome.
OM Manganese in Bootu Creek has picked up on that and developed the relationship with Tennant Creek High School where they are really looking at that student cohort, dialoguing with the Community Careers Counsellor, setting up systems around work placement, work experience and school-based apprenticeships, and starting to grow at a grassroots level. I would like to hear more about that.
There are so many opportunities, and government has the responsibility to lead that. So let us have a little less of the Canberra rhetoric and a bit more advice on what is happening in those partnerships being developed. Chief Minister, with your Canberra background – very recent, you have not been in the Territory for long – you must be still well connected in that sector and be able to provide real leadership in that field.
There is also a concern – and it came out in Question Time today – about the sale of Northern Territory public assets. The Port of Darwin is on the chat line; people are talking about it. It is amazing that people I do not know recognise me and come up to me in Darwin, this fair city. Recently I had a couple of conversations where people said, ‘Your duty is to make sure this government does not sell off public assets’. They all start with the Power and Water Corporation, then they go to TIO, closely followed by the port.
We know industry is advising government not to do that. The Chief Minister refuses to rule it out because there is some serious cash-register mentality going on within the government. There are still big election promises to fulfil. However, the people, as well as industry, are saying this. Industry is saying it is important in a fledgling Northern Territory, in a fledgling supply chain, that the government keeps control of the port, because it directly relates to other supply chain logistics, like the railway, for instance. If we see an escalation in transport-related charges then we will see investors drift off, and players in industry looking at alternatives. We do not want to add those potential disadvantages to the resources sector; we want to keep this on growth trajectory.
I will now talk about a couple of concerns within the electorate. The first one relates to the Western Desert Resources stockpile at Bing Bong and the bulk loading of the iron ore vessels there. The locals are starting to become concerned, and we want to maintain their confidence and support. It is important for me to stay mobile in the Barkly and talk to communities about the potential of jobs, prosperity, real work, self-esteem, and all those good characteristics and outcomes we talk about. But the local people from Borroloola and that gulf area have become concerned about the load-out facility, and things like the colour of the environment changing. Having had experience with ports and construction with a privileged position as a minister, I understand how these changes occur. Local people need to be informed, and Western Desert Resources needs to work closely with them ...
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I ask for an extension of time for the member for Barkly.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: It is important we keep the community on track. When you look at that load-out facility, the colour is changing, and this is directly related to the product which is high-grade iron ore. I asked the community, ‘What is your solution?’ It is refreshing to hear a pragmatic approach, ‘There needs to be a cover over the conveyer bulk loader and better water management of dust suppression on the stockpiles’. That comes from local community and government, and Western Desert Resources should definitely celebrate it, because that is a community working together with a company and government to minimise any issues into the future.
The McArthur River mine has some concerns at the moment and is trying to address those concerns in relation to the fires on the stockpile. It has a couple of other environmental issues it is managing regarding the tailings dams and the impacts of acid mine drainage. Because the mine has expanded and is so visible now, many more people are able to see these issues. You can drive past those stockpiles and see the fires and the work McArthur River has done in improvements to the tailings dams. However, we have to continue to work together, because if traditional owners, local people and tourists visiting Australia start to lose confidence, we can suffer some serious challenges. It is best to stay one jump ahead of any of these issues.
At the moment, they are the two issues being spoken about and debated, and there is always the opportunity for the facts to become very clouded. I encourage the minister and the department to stay on those issues. I also encourage those companies to be part of that, because it has been a healthy development to this phase.
I was Principal of Borroloola School through the construction and initial production of the McArthur River mine. As a local member, I watched very closely the development of Western Desert Resources with the previous Minister for Mines and Energy, who initiated and was a steward for that project. I am a stakeholder in this for constituents who could share in the benefits of these projects, and I urge that we continue to work together.
The uncertainty about environment standards and the regulation of the ageing Ranger mine site is also high on the list of discourse within the Northern Territory community. The minister is aware of these issues. This is a very important issue for Territorians. We have to be cognisant and work together with government, industry and the community.
It is a concern that the minister will not reveal the level of environmental bonds so Territorians can see for themselves there are sufficient funds held to correct inevitable environmental management issues arising from mining activity, including unforeseen issues. You know the political business: if there is any secrecy people then make up their own stories. Bonds are important. Territorians want assurance there are significant bonds that can address issues, should and when they emerge.
There is no doubt the work from government in remediating legacy mines is acknowledged. We are all in this together. However, it is of concern –and I appreciate the government’s honesty – that initial analysis has said that remediating existing legacy mines across the Northern Territory will cost in the order of $1bn to $1.5bn. That shows Territorians the extent of those challenges.
The opposition is concerned about any mooted changes to the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority and any watering down of the protection of sacred sites, with likely direct government selection and appointment of members of the AAPA board or any dilution of the independence of that AAPA board. We take that straight to the minister. The member for Stuart is in the saddle now, and we lobby for and demand your support in this area for constituents across the Northern Territory.
I have run out of time, so I will not be able to go through the other projects, particularly the Tennant Creek story. I will conclude with something that came from the Australian Mining Magazine, which posed this question in May 2012:
- So what has made the Northern Territory suddenly so attractive for miners …?
The key is the …
… approach to mining and resources rather than actual mineral prospectiveness.
Another quote:
- The Northern Territory could act as a lesson for some of the eastern states in how to grow your mining industry …
I will leave the minister with that good advice. I am sure the minister will follow that advice.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank him for bringing this statement to the House and for the constructive debate it has ensured.
Mr CHANDLER (Lands, Planning and the Environment): Mr Deputy Speaker, I have a few notes I will add tonight. I will not be long. I support my colleague, the Minister for Mines and Energy, who told us about the results and benefits that have flowed from the Northern Territory government’s international investment strategy. Well done, minister.
Given I am the Environment minister, I will touch on just how our two departments have been working together to ensure we get the best outcomes which help the Territory economy and, of course, protect our pristine environment.
The mining industry is one of the largest employers of Territorians and, quite simply, mining and exploration activities equate to jobs and, often, new infrastructure for our regional areas. As a government, we are not ashamed to support the mining industry.
Many have spoken about the economic benefits of the Territory’s mining sector of which, of course, there are many. I will address the areas where we are working to ensure these great benefits do not come at a cost to our environment.
The Territory also has a unique and pristine environment which is so important for our own identity. The Country Liberals recognise this and that is why we, upon taking government, moved quickly to establish the Northern Territory Environmental Protection Authority, a fully independent agency, and a first for the Northern Territory. Sometimes it pales beyond belief what kind of reputation we seem to get for protecting our environment, yet we have done more than any previous government has ever done in this space.
This means functions such as environmental approvals, waste management, licences and administration of the Container Deposit Scheme are now being handled independently away from government hands. The Northern Territory Environmental Protection Authority also provides expert technical advice to government on waste and pollution management issues. Through the Northern Territory EPA, we are getting better outcomes sooner through improved processes. Those processes have all been made far more rigorous than they were before. Our environmental impact statements and licence agreements ensure that safe and sustainable mining practices continue into the future.
It is important that we think not only about the short-term, but also the medium- and the long-term effects of mining and how we can better manage them. Legacy mines have been a huge issue and something the previous government either failed to do anything about or just turned a blind eye to. These are mines that have been abandoned and not rehabilitated, and can cause harm to the environment, not just now but for many years to come.
Nowadays there are rehabilitation bonds held over all current mining operations to ensure the funds are available to rehabilitate a site should a company suddenly stop operating. In an effort to clean up these legacy mines, the Country Liberals government established the rehabilitation levy. This is a 1% annual levy on the rehabilitation bond which is 100% dedicated to the rehabilitation of legacy mines. That was a tough call to introduce a new levy on an industry we are keen to promote, but it shows we take the environment very seriously, and the industry is more than willing to join us on this journey. Again, this was an initiative this Country Liberals government introduced to ensure the ongoing protection not only of our environment today, but to also try to clean up some of the mess created in the past.
Oil and gas are seen as the next frontier of mining in the Northern Territory. Resources Week was dominated by talk of the Territory’s onshore and offshore gas potential, with Santos making some very encouraging announcements over the weekend about a discovery in the Browse Basin.
With this push comes the potential for more unconventional gas mining methods such as hydraulic fracturing – or fracking as most people refer to it today. The Chief Minister referred to it as horizontal stimulation at one point in the last week or so.
This method has caused some concern amongst groups in our community, so I called on the Chief Minister to establish an inquiry into hydraulic fracturing. The Chief Minister knows how important it is to have all the facts, especially when it comes to the environment, so he accepted my recommendation and established the inquiry under the Inquiries Act. The Northern Territory EPA and the Northern Territory government worked together to develop some robust terms of reference and have appointed Alan Hawke AC to carry out the inquiry. Mr Hawke has taken over 120 written submissions and has held public meetings. As expected, the debate has been robust, and at times heated, but we are keen to cut through all of that and get the facts so we can establish best practices going forward. It is another very solid example of the environmental credentials this government has shown in the first two years of operation in the Northern Territory.
The truth is the future of oil and gas, both onshore and offshore, creates and provides immense potential for the Northern Territory. We recognise that and will do all we can to promote that. However, it is important that we do it in a sustainable way. That is why we have set up the independent EPA. That is why we have legislation in place that puts a levy on miners to ensure we have sufficient funds in future to clean up and do something about our legacy mines. Again, it is why we called to have an inquiry on fracking, because there is a lot of misinformation out there. There are many people peddling things ...
Mr Wood: You do not have a moratorium.
Mr CHANDLER: Member for Nelson, these are just three things the previous government could have done but did not do in the time it was in government. I put it to you that we have environmental credentials and we have supported the environment. I can recall having to go back to Cabinet to get $4m to keep the cash for cans system going. That is $4m that was not first budgeted for in protecting our environment, but it was something we, on this side, provided to fix the mess of the previous government and its legislation. That was another $4m that was put into environmental processes to ensure, foremost, we are doing things right for the environment.
If everyone calms down and looks at what this government has achieved and introduced in the last two years to protect our environment, they might be very surprised. Sometimes there is a lot of rhetoric and loud noise from certain parts of the community on a number of issues, but when you rip apart all of that rhetoric and start to look at what we are trying to do – systematically changing the processes in the Northern Territory to ensure we know, understand and appreciate the mining sector will provide long-term opportunities for the Northern Territory, but it must be done in a sustainable way. Every bit of my focus, since becoming the minister for the Environment, is to ensure that whatever we do, we do it to the best of our ability. Yes, we promote mining because we understand the benefits the Northern Territory can take from the mining sector. But at the same time, we also recognise our environment needs to be protected.
For us, the inquiry into fracking was a double-edged sword, because until you get the results of an inquiry, you never know where it will go. We are doing this because we want to ensure we have the most robust, rigorous processes in place and put to bed some of the myths so we have some real facts to work with before future decisions are made.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the Minister for Mines and Energy for his statement. I thought I would raise a few points of view from the environmental side. I can assure Territorians our focus is on sustainability, and while we recognise the importance of the mining sector, we also recognise the importance of our environment.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not going to say too much either, but the minister for Lands and Planning got me going.
I thank the minister for his statement. You have to realise the head of the statement is ‘Investment Attraction for Northern Territory Mining Projects’. Most big mining projects will need outside investment because of the amount of money required to start them. Especially big projects generally have to have some foreign capital to commence.
I was listening to the member for Barkly and I agree we have some issues in relation to mining in the Northern Territory. Whilst we want to attract more people to develop the Northern Territory, it is beholden on us to ensure many of the mistakes of the past do not reoccur, such as Mount Todd and Redbank. Even some of the issues in the existing mines like McArthur River, with its leakages from the tailings dam and fires occurring on the rock piles, are of concern. You would hope we do not go down that path again.
The member for Barkly mentioned issues in regard to the mines on the Roper Highway I visited last year – the ilmenite and iron ore mining. One of the big concerns there was the amount of traffic on that road. Even though the mining company did its best to maintain that road, those roads were not specifically made for that type of haulage, bearing in mind their age. They are quite old roads that I think were cattle roads which were built many years ago. With this development needs to come an equal investment into infrastructure and making sure any of these mines do not leave us issues we will regard as a cost to future generations – in other words, the development of these mines is sustainable.
The minister for Lands mentioned fracking. I thought it was a very interesting discussion. I am not against the development of gas in the Northern Territory but, of late, the issue of fracking excites people in the Northern Territory. The minister mentioned we have an inquiry into fracking, and it is still taking some late submissions. Many people find it difficult to understand how the government can have an inquiry into fracking but, at the same time, allow fracking to occur.
In some places, like Victoria, France and England, they had a moratorium on fracking. They had their inquiry and worked out from their inquiry whether it should go ahead. At least you would have some basis for your decision, if you were to go down that path. I keep an open mind on fracking. I am on the Sessional Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future, which has to look at these issues, bearing in mind we are waiting on the report from the inquiry. It would be silly for me to make any profound statement about fracking until I have seen the results of that inquiry, otherwise it will not be based on anything except what someone else says. I need to make sure any decision I make in this area is based on the science. I am very interested to see the outcome of that inquiry.
When the minister talked about mining, he talked about big mines. However, most of the activity you see happening around Darwin at the moment is due to mines occurring in the Howard Springs area, or the rural area in general. Nearly all sand and gravel comes from local facilities and that in itself – even though it is representative of a fairly buoyant economy, especially in the building industry – has created problems of its own.
Sometimes governments announce how wonderful the world is, when the little person is affected and their voice is not heard. The classic example is the number of trucks which travel up and down Gunn Point Road. Quite a number of people who live on Gunn Point Road contacted me. For those of you who do not know, Gunn Point Road starts as Howard Springs Road – or if you want to go to Palmerston, off Lambrick Avenue – and after the bend on Howard Springs Road is then Gunn Point Road, which goes to Gunn Point. Part of it goes through the older subdivisions around Melaleuca Road, Callistemon Road and Bronzewing Avenue, which is part of Whitewood Park, and quite a number of people live on that road.
The amount of heavy truck traffic is now starting to cause some major concern for people. People do not mind traffic during the day, but when trucks are going past before 4 am, they start to say, ‘Enough is enough’.
I sat out there on the road one night – I must admit that I nearly fell asleep – and I went home for a few hours and came back. The first truck I saw on the road that night when I was collecting statistics about what was travelling up and down the road was at about 3.50 am. It was a double. There were more trucks between that time and 7 am, and the number increased after 7 am.
The reason we have more trucks is there is more development, especially locally. We have a sand mine there which has a batching plant. People would know Coolalinga is developing at a fast rate and much of the development in that area gets its cement from Howard River. We have a booming extractive mining industry but, on the downside of it, we have disruption to people’s lives.
Thankfully, a good person is the CEO of the Extractive Mining Association, Mr Tom Harris Jnr. He has been to a meeting of people living in the area, and we are trying to resolve the issues in relation to noise to see if we can have trucks travelling up and down that road at an hour which will not disturb the people in that area. I thank Tom for that. We have not come up with a solution yet. Hopefully when parliament is finished I will get word that we may have another meeting which can produce an outcome. Because everybody who attended the meeting – before the mosquitoes forced us to go home – told him of the issues, he is fully aware of most of the problems that occur there. I thank him for that.
The other issue with extractive mining is the damage to the environment. I am concerned with, in the big rush for development, how stringent the department is when it deals with the rehabilitation of mining sites. I have not been up in the air for a while to have a look, but many new mines are opening in the Gunn Point area and the Sunday Creek area south of Goode Road in Humpty Doo, which is sometimes called Wack Wack these days.
That land is being used primarily for extractive mining. I understand we need gravel and sand, but I expect the department would ensure the environment rehabilitation in those areas is carried out. As much as we have legacy mines in other parts of the Territory, we also have legacy extractive mines, where land was not repaired and cleaned up. The response by the government should be to ensure, although there is much construction activity, we do not forget there is a responsibility, when removing that material, for some rehabilitation.
Some of those sand areas are very important for some of the more endangered species. There was a field day recently looking at plants in that area. Part of the reason for that field day was to educate people on the importance of those sand areas so they are not all mined, and those important areas for specialist plants not normally found in many other places in the Territory are protected, or at least some areas set aside that will not be dug up.
I welcome the ministerial statement. I also make the point that the government puts a lot of effort into talking about gas. That is fine because we require gas to operate much of our energy needs. However, gas is a dirty product. If you think it is not, then you are off with the fairies. It is not as dirty as diesel or oil, but it is still a dirty product. That is why ConocoPhillips shoves heaps of carbon dioxide into the air and we have a burning-off agreement with people in Arnhem Land. The reality is Japan gets clean gas, we get the carbon dioxide. When people talk about gas they need to understand it is a dirty product.
If we are serious about trying to reduce carbon emissions in the world, then in a place like the Northern Territory we should be placing just as much emphasis on renewable energy, especially for remote communities. There are issues regarding storage. There is no doubt that storage is still an issue that will take some years of development before it is reliable enough to withstand, say, three weeks of monsoonal weather when there is no sun out, or when night comes there is no solar. It is an opportunity for the government to be a leader in small-scale renewable energy.
There are many communities along the coast which have the opportunity to use solar and wind. There are some places on the Tiwi Islands that are close to strong tidal currents which may have the opportunity to use tidal power. There was some work done about 15 or 20 years ago in the Apsley Strait looking at the potential to provide power in that area. Technology has moved on since then, and it would be worth revisiting.
We know that in the Alpurrurulam/Lake Nash area there are wind turbines because the Barkly is a pretty good source of a breeze or two. I have tried to make a cup of tea for my wife while travelling across the Tablelands Highway. That was a fairly difficult thing to do, to try to keep the flame from blowing out, because the winds are very strong in that area.
We do not want to lose sight of other opportunities. We will mine for gas, but I do not think we should lose sight of the fact we have opportunities to showcase how we can provide power for small communities. It may not be total power from renewables. We have a number of communities using renewable energy already, like Bulman, which has a large solar bank and a diesel generator. If we can invest more into reducing our reliance on diesel or gas, then that would be good for the Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his statement. I am sure there are plenty of other things we could discuss when it comes to mining. I thought I would add that to the statement tonight.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Resources for bringing this statement to the Chamber this evening because it has been a significant statement in the bipartisan manner in which I read the intent of the statement. It talks about the importance of bipartisan support for the resources sector. The foreign investment strategy that underpins a key focus of the Northern Territory government is a strategy that has been delivered under Labor, and continued under the current CLP government. I congratulate them for seeing the wisdom of that foreign investment strategy focusing on those key Asian markets.
Also, we went to great extent to increase the investment in the resources sector. As the statement acknowledged quite early, it was one of those key sectors hit by the impact of the global financial crises. The Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration is a program that has been running, which I acknowledge the current government is continuing.
We have heard contributions in the Chamber on the importance of the resources sector, and I doubt there is anyone here who would hold a contrary view. We have heard contributions on what alternative renewable energy sources there are in the Territory. That is an unsung hero of opportunity in the Northern Territory. I have seen the investment by the federal government in the Bushlight Program in the homelands and outstations where entire communities which used to operate on diesel are now operating on solar. There was the King’s Canyon investment in our time. It is a missed opportunity for Alice Springs to no longer have solar city status. I urge the government to reconsider that regarding renewable opportunities.
That being said, we have geothermal potential in the Barkly. At different times there has been consideration of tidal opportunities in the Top End. That is probably on the trickier end of the scale, but Territorians have proven their worth in research and development. I acknowledge the work that has been done at Charles Darwin University, particularly on solar research.
I am confident Territorians would applaud any government that invests R&D funding, and pilot or significant projects in renewables. Many funding opportunities exist in and around the work we do with the major resource companies. The savannah burning funding we received from ConocoPhillips has taught us much about the management of land and country, and employed Indigenous Territorians on land. It has been a huge success story. Similar investments from INPEX regarding understanding the habitat in Darwin Harbour in a better way have been a very worthy investment.
I thank the minister for what I see as an intent for a bipartisan statement. It was not the normal Labor bashing we see in most statements from the government. That shows a level of maturity in understanding how vital the resources sector is to the Northern Territory economy, and how much opportunity there is, as recognised in the statement. We are relatively under-developed. However, geoscience is strengthening and improving. Geospatial is something we have been making some leaps and bounds in. Providing the data on exploration opportunities has been one of the great strengths of the work completed by the staff in the Department of Mines and Energy’s resources department. I congratulate them for the tireless and dedicated years of service they provided to successive governments.
Industry welcomes the bipartisan approach to the resources sector. I have paid particular attention to maintaining a strong bipartisan approach to onshore resources and of course our offshore industry, particularly when it comes to oil and gas development in the Territory. I acknowledge the effort of the previous Labor governments that partnered in delivering these projects in providing a stable and focused government. I acknowledge the importance of supporting infrastructure. It is something I will touch on in more detail, but the $100m investment Labor undertook in the Marine Supply Base positions us extremely well to be the service and supply centre for that offshore industry.
Industry players are increasing communication with each other. We saw that in Resources Week and SEAAOC last week in the Northern Territory. Darwin is very much becoming the place that can deliver certainty to industry, particularly when it comes to oil and gas and those lucrative offshore fields, because we are providing what I describe as brownfield sites. I do not think the days of greenfield are still with us, to be honest, given the price of production out of the US. We have to be realistic about that and say our competitive advantage is in providing for brownfield sites. All our brownfield sites are currently at the DLNG and the site under construction at Blaydin Point for the Ichthys project. They provide significant additional trains and will literally fuel oil and gas industry through decades. It is a pretty exciting opportunity Darwin has that we can, in a bipartisan way, seize upon.
There is no doubt the gas task force I sat on as the Treasurer and Minister for Business and Training was a very worthy exercise. I encourage government to engage at that level with industry, but also with the training and peak employer bodies, because the more you have people around the table engaging with each other and understanding how to drill these benefits of the major projects down to local Territorians, the better. It is inspiring to see that when information is shared around the table in such a forum, you generally get a focus on local training and job opportunities.
I see the regional migration agreement is being pursued by the federal and Territory governments. That has been a significant concern for the major companies regarding workforce issues. One of the opportunities we have, as the INPEX Blaydin Point site gets to production – let us say 2016-17 – is that the big projects in Queensland will be coming off. There is a very positive timing opportunity in the Australian workforce coming to the Territory to support any additional train at LNG, which has an advantage in the field at the moment. With the talks I have seen going on between Santos and ConocoPhillips, and the potential of not just the backfill to Bayu-Undan, but bringing in play both Lasseter and Poseidon, we really are talking of the next major project and the next train.
I go out of my way to ensure I engage at a very senior level with the major companies. I travel south on a regular basis, and I had some very fruitful discussions recently in Perth with the industry. In meetings I have held with INPEX, I have heard they have reached the halfway point in that all-important Ichthys project. The quiet, lesser-known partner, Total, is making a fantastic effort on the project. I acknowledge the work of INPEX and Total in getting that to the halfway mark. It is an incredibly exciting opportunity to prove to the global industry how projects can be delivered on time and on budget in the Northern Territory, especially in Darwin.
In regard to the North Australian Centre for Oil and Gas at Charles Darwin University, that was a passion of the former Chief Minister Paul Henderson. The conversation started under former Chief Minister Clare Martin, and continued with the passion and drive under former Chief Minister Paul Henderson, to ensure we created that all-important training hub in Charles Darwin University. It is great to see the North Australian Centre for Oil and Gas at Charles Darwin University leading industry development in the Northern Territory and providing a real opportunity for our young Territorians to go into highly-skilled, highly-paid jobs in their home town.
The Larrakia Trade Training Centre was established to provide training to upskill and support Indigenous Territorians into jobs on this project. I acknowledge that there has been a real focus and effort to ensure that not only the big end of town benefits, but locals get opportunities in jobs. The focus of economic growth and engineering construction through a Labor lens is around securing job opportunities for locals, and the trade training centre plays a pivotal role in that.
The $33bn project is expected to reach its peak construction phase next year, literally seeing thousands of workers here on the ground. A project of that sheer scale requires the fly-in, fly-out workforce, but I never lose sight of the locals who have been able to secure jobs either directly on the project, or through the contractors, subcontractors and different tiers of contractors who supply that project.
When constructed, it will be one of the world’s largest LNG facilities. Gas and condensate reserves in the Browse Basin have a 40-year expectant life span. The first gas from Blaydin Point is expected to be produced in 2016-17 with 8.4 million tonnes of LNG under production each year. This project underpins the Territory’s economy right now, and will do so through the next couple of years.
It is very pleasing that there will soon be very strong participation in October, with the visit from the Japan Australia Business Council. That relationship, of course, was fostered previously under the Labor government. Former Chief Minister Henderson lobbied significantly for the Japan Australia Business Council to meet in Darwin. It is exciting to see that will be happening in October.
The Ichthys project includes the offshore project with subsea facilities, two large floating platforms, a central processing facility, and the floating production storage and offloading facility. Alongside that, with the onshore LNG plant in Darwin, there is also an 889 km gas pipeline connecting Darwin to the Browse Basin. Here is where we have proven you can chase the big vision and deliver locally.
The Marine Supply Base fundamentally establishes us as the oil and gas hub for service and supply. It was criticised at the time it was announced, but I am very confident of that Marine Supply Base underpinning economic growth across the service and supply industry. It has such a multiplier effect. As we did in those days, we modelled it on Aberdeen. There was a lot of wisdom in reaching out and pursuing that major project for us. ASCO will operate the base for up to 20 years, and has contracted local company Macmahon to build it. We saw the official opening of it last week.
Darwin will provide about $150m a year in services and supplies to support the gas industry. With the help of the new base, it is expected this will increase to $420m over the next 20 years. It is a significant step up in economic opportunities. Industry confirmed the base will support further investment in Darwin, and it is looking forward to accessing the new infrastructure. It helps our capacity to support the offshore oil and gas development and improve efficiency, importantly, at East Arm port. With the exploration across the Arafura and Timor Seas and into the Browse Basin, there is immense opportunity for the Territory service and supply industry to grow. The facility will have the capacity to service in excess of 1000 vessels per annum with a 12-hour turnaround. That is exactly what industry needs.
The industry is calling on the government to be very savvy about the needs of the industry. I note that in submissions going to government on north Australia development, industry is very clear. Industry wants the Darwin port to remain a public asset, it does not want it to be privatised. I ask the government to heed that call.
One of the projects – a spin-off from the relationship with ConocoPhillips and the opportunities as a result of the onshore project at Wadeye – is the creation of a gas-fired power station. That project sits at around $17.8m. I note it has been delayed until 2015. I am looking forward to construction of that gas-fired plant at Wadeye, as a cleaner and greener fuel source – an obvious one, compared to diesel currently being burnt to supply the all-important township of Wadeye.
Eni’s prospects at Evans Shoal look very promising. They are sitting there as options for backfill or, as I said, you could also look at Lasseter and Poseidon underpinning a second train. The company is in discussions with its partner, Shell. Eni has had to defer exploration at the Penguin Deep well as a result of the gas to Gove project not proceeding, but it is watching the feasibility study being undertaken by APA of the gas pipeline project, and views both options as having merit. The investment would make the Petrel field viable with the pipeline to Blacktip, then onshore through existing infrastructure. Eni is one of the companies that has come out publicly calling for the government to not sell the East Arm port. It has concerns around the Wadeye airstrip. In a submission on north Australia development, it has said it does not want to see the Wadeye airstrip privatised. They are further questions to the government and considerations for the Resources minister to turn his attention to in critical areas of infrastructure for industry that you want to keep in public hands.
When we talk about critical infrastructure for industry, the port is crucial. I cannot stress enough that the industry needs to be consulted about your current investment strategies around the port, because it is very concerned about potential increased costs across all users. At the end of the day, it is Territorians, as we know, who would bear the brunt of significant increased costs. We do not want to make ourselves less competitive in a highly competitive global market, and our port, at the moment, is competitive infrastructure. Commercialisation of that port, to the extent that could occur if you were to hive off to investors, would create some significant issues for industry.
Regarding ConocoPhillips, there is no doubt the Greater Poseidon is its most promising field. Backfill for Darwin LNG runs out in 2022. While the Browse Basin is very close to Western Australia, there are potential options being considered, whether that is a floating LNG platform, an offshore processing, a tie into the existing Bayu-Undan pipeline, or an offshore processing and expansion of Darwin LNG with another train. The project, combined with other Browse Basin gas, could support another train at Blaydin Point, in addition to, obviously, expanding Darwin LNG.
Darwin provides those brownfield economics, reducing capital costs through tying into existing infrastructure, existing construction and operator relationships, and provides a very attractive picture when it comes to financial viability. The Territory is extremely well placed to benefit from this exploration.
I acknowledge we are moving into a significant maintenance shutdown with ConocoPhillips at DLNG. The company has a very strong track record of trying to work collaboratively with our community and business sector in shutdown of projects. We will see some 800 staff accommodated on a floating hotel, and one-third of the workforce, I am advised by ConocoPhillips, will be local, representing something in the vicinity of a $50m boost to our economy.
Santos is also exploring the Lasseter field in the Browse Basin. Santos expects to invest in exploration at the Barossa field at the end of this year and into next year. It, too, is very interested in the feasibilities occurring around the APA pipeline. It will not necessarily be the only player in the pipeline market, I note that. But to see a company make a board decision to proceed with feasibility has been very encouraging.
Like ConocoPhillips, INPEX, Eni and Santos see the benefits of a second train in Darwin, of bringing more gas onshore to Darwin, and they recognise the value in working together.
I was pleased to see this statement was in a bipartisan manner, and reflected the difficulties the industry experienced as a result of the global financial crisis. I look forward to working constructively to continue to send a bipartisan support message, very clearly and strongly, to industry. I encourage the government to work constructively with industry. It has many good suggestions, and the more you heed them, the more we are sending a ‘can do’ message to industry. I am talking of the onshore resource prospects, as well as, obviously, the offshore oil and gas I have mainly focused on this evening. There is a lot to say in this area.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement to the House.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, I am happy to speak about this issue tonight. The work that is happening in this department is fantastic, particularly the work the minister is doing around getting businesses to work together with government to attract overseas investment.
Coming from a background of finance, it is interesting to note how these companies start, seek capital, and put capital into train. Many of these smaller companies that come to work in the Northern Territory often start looking for enough money just to drill one hole, whether that be a mining or oil base. They often do not have a whole lot of capital and rely on information the government provides so they can assess work done in previous years in these areas – the geology, aerial survey and those sorts of things. Small companies seeking capital need to do various fundraising exercises and show the potential of the projects they are proposing so investors will put funds in.
Often times, this comes down to how good the information is that is coming from government. It is fantastic to see minister Westra van Holthe’s department is putting out brilliant information so people can access it effectively and start doing what they need to.
Once a hole has been drilled, and positive results are gained, the next step for these companies is to prove up resources. That requires a lot more money, drilling and work in delivering information to the markets to attract more dollars. This is the part where you will start seeing some mid- to long-term investors entering that market, throwing some money at capital raising and these type of things.
As they prove up these resources, we often see farming projects or buy-outs happen with the data collected. Collecting that data can be very expensive. Attracting investment from overseas is always very important, particularly when we are on the shores of some very resource hungry nations in Southeast Asia and China.
One of the reasons companies in Asia and overseas like working in Australia is because they know the regulatory and legal frameworks are set up. I remember speaking to investors from overseas when I was in finance who said the thing they liked most about working in Australia is, because the legal system works effectively, whatever they do contractually will have to be met and abided by.
It is really important when we think about all these sorts of things that are happening in the Northern Territory. It is a place where people want to be able to invest because we have fantastic resources available as we are fundamentally underexplored, and there is a lot of scope for companies, whether it be gold, silver, base metals, copper or the oil and gas sector, both onshore or offshore. All of these companies like to do business in countries where they know what the regulatory framework is and the rules are before they go into the game. That is really important to know.
We see our government working effectively with governments of other nations, encouraging them and even providing the ability for companies and investors to meet. It shows its explicit support for these companies in creating an environment where they, particularly Asian investors, feel safe investing in Australia, knowing they are not putting their money in something that is likely to blow up in their face.
Some of the things that become important after the commissioning operations take place are incredibly expensive. I remember being in finance and looking at around a $300m mark to get a mine from the stage of a proved-up resource to actually becoming operational. We have seen that happen in the Northern Territory. That sort of money is very hard to come up with for many Australian companies, and we see attracting investment from overseas becomes integral in making these projects a reality.
Sorting out the contracts with companies based overseas that will be the buyers of these products is important. It is fantastic to see the work the department and the minister are doing in attracting that investment to the Northern Territory.
The CORE initiative was put in place, putting $3.95m per annum into these projects, creating an environment where people can safely, under a known framework, invest in the Northern Territory.
The additional $2m a year over the next four years is also going into assessing the Territory shale gas potential. This is very exciting because, working this through logically, we see this can be a mainstay in the diversifier of the Northern Territory economy. Mining has always been a mainstay of the Northern Territory economy, but it is important to note, in the volatile world we live in regarding commodity prices, we often see the gas market will stay reasonably stable. We know there will always be demand, because demand is growing at such a high rate. Even where we see a material slowdown in the Asian nations, we see that oil and gas will go up as energy-hungry Asian nations start growing their middle class and those people become more energy-hungry with the various things they have in homes etcetera.
This CORE initiative the Department of Mines and Energy put together helps local explorers attract that international investment. I cannot understate the importance of that, because those funds are integral to the Northern Territory staying in front of the game and of what we are supposed to be doing, which is diversifying the income streams of the Northern Territory.
We see the other potentials around this area. We have seen success with 36 investment deals in Territory mining and exploration projects involving China, and many others coming through. We know the Department of Mines and Energy was directly involved in at least 10 of these projects. They bring a stability to people’s lives in the Northern Territory, because they bring jobs.
If we look at the train of what happens, there are jobs in construction, mining or extraction, transport, and in stevedoring. It was interesting to hear the Opposition Leader speak on the port and the efficiency necessary in that port. I have worked there and know firsthand how hard that wharf is worked and how much product gets passed through it, both on to and off.
Through that construction phase we see many tricky jobs to do, and vessels and project work coming in which employs many people, and they are good, solid, stable jobs. We see the whole mining industry and the jobs that can create in regional areas. We see the opportunities for Indigenous employment in this area. We see the entire transport system with Genesee Wyoming operating the rail and working out contracts with our minerals companies for transport all the way through to the port. That transport mechanism is integral and provides a good source of income for many Territorians, particularly those who might not like to live in Darwin and have a lifestyle of moving around a lot.
The government assistance lowers risks of offshore investors and, to me, this is the most important thing. Often when we look at these issues, we have to look at them from a measure of risk. When investors look to invest, they will always look at the investment from the measure of risk: how does this risk relate, can I quantify this risk, and what does my payoff need to be in my return in order to justify taking this risk? It is encouraging to see the work the government does in assisting. This gives peace of mind to many of these overseas companies that look to put capital into the Northern Territory. I encourage the government and the minister to continue to work very hard on that. There is much potential in the Northern Territory for diversifying commodities we are extracting, including rare earth, vanadium, potash and other things we have spoken about a lot, such as gold, base metals, iron ore and gas.
I cannot understate the importance of diversification in this and of allowing these mining exploration companies to have good access, not just to information about the land and the previous exploration, but to capital markets. While the stock exchanges of Australia and other nations are the vehicle of that, oftentimes it is the work and things behind the scenes the government does which facilitate a lot of that happening, especially when we are talking about very small companies.
Madam Speaker, I encourage the minister and the department, who are doing fantastic work, to keep attracting investment from overseas, because it is integral as a main driver of the Northern Territory economy.
Mrs PRICE (Community Services): Madam Speaker, today we heard from the Minister for Mines and Energy, who told us about the results and benefits that have flowed from the Northern Territory government’s international investment strategy. In recent times, exploration companies have found it extremely difficult to raise capital through the Australian Stock Exchange. The major stumbling block in developing mining projects in the Northern Territory is the difficulty associated with raising finance. Given that growing the minerals and energy sectors in order to increase royalties is one of the most promising avenues for the Territory government to grow its financial independence, it is vital this government helps junior exploration companies seek alternative finance opportunities from as many sources as possible.
The mining industry is one of the largest employers of Territorians, and mining and exploration activities mean jobs in the bush. Education, training and infrastructure are critical ways of future-proofing our communities and homelands, and getting people into jobs – jobs with equal choices and opportunity to grow wealth in communities. Financial independence opens up doors for people to make strong, healthy lifestyle choices to support their families.
I am glad to hear the member for Barkly asking about training programs for youth in remote communities. The benefits of royalties from mining are far-reaching and help set up trust funds to help future generations of Indigenous Territorians. One example of this is the Warlpiri Education and Training Trust, which is responsible for funding projects such as a youth media project and a learning centre. An early childhood care and development project has been going on for four years now.
The youth media project was set up in 2007 and developed after a request from the Kurra Aboriginal Corporation that the Mount Theo program provide youth services with a focus on media training and employment across the Warlpiri region. It aims to support Warlpiri youth and to develop their sense of self, family and culture and to stay strong and healthy. The project-based media workshops give youth in the bush something to do and skills that open up employment opportunities.
The Wirliyajarrayi Learning Centre opened last year in the community of Willowra, 330 km northwest of Alice Springs. The centre was a seven-year project for the Willowra community and was built using Warlpiri people’s royalty money through the Warlpiri Education Trust Fund. I attended the opening. I was so proud we, as Warlpiri people, were able to work in partnership with the mining company which has a mine at The Granites, as the traditional owners, to help other Warlpiri people who, in turn, are helping their young people gain employment and a better, healthy lifestyle.
It was great to be at the opening of the centre because Maisie Kitson, who fought for the centre, is one of the committee members of the WETT Corporation. She had a vision to use mining royalties to set up a learning centre for young people, and this is what happens.
We have had a good relationship with the mining companies we have dealt with. The Granites gold mine has been going since the 1980s. I am proud to say the Warlpiri people have built a good relationship and have a strong connection with the company. The old people who have been dealing with different mining companies that have taken over from previous owners still respect any mining company that comes on to their country. It also opens up country for our people. They put tracks and seismic lines in and that, in a way, opens up country for old people to go back to their country, which they have not seen since they were little. It gives them that opportunity and makes them feel good that they can work with a mining company that will help them get back on to country. That has been going on now since the 1980s. I say on behalf of Warlpiri people that we are grateful we have good relationships with the mining companies.
I know of many other communities such as the Mirrar and the Gumatj, which have benefitted from mine sites, and have gone on to build boarding accommodation, as the Mirrar have in Jabiru for their kids so they can be based at home and go to school and be looked after.
For some of us traditional landowning people, it is important because it opens up all sorts of benefits for all of us. The Warlpiri Education and Training Trust is driven by local Warlpiri people who have had experience in Warlpiri for years. This is an example of how royalty money can create opportunities for the future leaders of the Territory.
As the Minister for Mines and Energy mentioned, the Territory remains underexplored. However, it is exciting to know the recent exploration boom discovered the potential for a range of commodities, including rare earth and potash.
Mining and exploration helps build our regions and grow wealth and opportunities for remote Territorians. The mining industry opens our most remote regions through the creation of roads and infrastructure. A flow-on effect of building roads means greater connectivity for our remote communities and better access to services, which then drives more development in northern Australia.
This government is looking after our children’s future by making decisions now that will make the opportunities of the future reality. Under Framing the Future, this government’s blueprint for the development of the Northern Territory, prosperous economy visions include the establishment of an economy that lands new local, national and international investment.
The first objective for the prosperous economy is one that uses our location and relationships to build international trade, culture and tourism links, and leverage new investment from the Northern Territory’s track record in improving food, energy and resource security for our partners. This includes an intention to strengthen the Territory’s role as the gateway between Australia and Asia by promoting the Northern Territory as an investment location and a supplier of quality goods and services. This government aims to achieve a prosperous economy that is supported by a modern pro-investment environment.
It is good to hear the minister talk about the Country Liberals government implementing the Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, or CORE, initiative. CORE is designed to attract minerals and petroleum exploration investment through acquiring new, precompetitive geoscience information to make the Territory a more attractive place to explore, a scheme of industry grants for high-risk exploration and, importantly, programs to attract international investment into resource projects at the exploration stage. These minerals investment attraction studies help explorers in the Northern Territory to find and access potential investors and drive exploration and mining in the Territory.
CORE has been given unprecedented funding of $23.8m over four years. This is the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government, and shows our ‘open for business’ approach.
With funding from CORE, the Department of Mines and Energy will continue to send trade delegations to Asia to attract investment opportunities. Since 2006 there have been 36 investment deals in Territory mining and exploration projects, worth almost $800m, involving Chinese companies. It is concerning, though, despite the fact we have world-class mines, most currently mined resources will be exhausted in the next 16 years. We need exploration to maintain and expand the role of mining in the Territory.
The Northern Territory is an attractive destination for international investors for many reasons. We have mineral and energy commodities that are of high interest to China, Japan and South Korea. Face-to-face relationship building is crucial to doing business in Asia. Having ministers working hard for the Territory by taking part in industry delegations in China, Japan and South Korea is an exceptional advantage for the Northern Territory. This leadership is a demonstration of the importance of the market to this government and is another example of how we are working hard for the Territory.
Madam Speaker, strong mining and energy industries mean new roads, a better standard of living, and jobs for those Territorians who need them most.
Mr HIGGINS (Daly): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for making the statement. I note there is probably more bipartisan cooperation on this statement than I have seen for a long time, other than the one I did on the gas pipelines. I am glad to see some people are taking leaves out of my book.
I would like to talk about it from a slightly different angle. The way I saw this statement and what the minister has been trying to do to attract development or funds into Australia is the opposite of the basis for north Australian development, if I can link it to that. If we want to develop north Australia, we need to have products to sell, and those products will be minerals that every Territorian owns; we have to remember that. The minister is trying to encourage people to invest in Australia and the Northern Territory and, therefore, sell these products. It is the sale of these products and that investment that then gives government funding to support all of those things people complain about – the lack of funds available for health, education, roads, the whole lot. Something people need to bear in mind is this is the opposite to north Australian development.
Energy Futures is a committee I sit on, and the member for Nelson raised this. I have found that group very interesting in helping me get an understanding of how the gas industry works and the sale of gas around the world. I can honestly say it has been a real eye-opener in how the gas industry does business worldwide. This push by the minister to try to get overseas investment into the gas industry is very important because it is a very big industry worldwide. While we might think we just have to find markets for our own gas, there is the whole exchange of gas and everything that goes on. The amount of money that will be invested in the Territory in this area is minuscule compared to what they invest overseas.
The other thing I note regarding the mining, extractive and other such industries in the Territory is they are industries that are not seen that much. Much of this occurs out of the sight of people in Darwin. Quite often you will talk to people and they will say, ‘There is not much going on’. I think, ‘Get out there and really have a look’.
Other than seeing the cars driving around and reversing with their beep, beep, beep all the time, not many people would really know what is happening at INPEX. They have never been there to have a look. It is phenomenal how long it takes me to get there from our accommodation in Bellamack. I come out onto the road – I do not know the name – at Elizabeth River. If you are to come out there at 7 am, it will often take you 20 minutes to get on to that road with the number of buses.
People have to realise there are a hell of a lot of people going out there to do a hell of a lot of work, and this is all related to this mining industry. Many people need to realise that most of this work, the wells that are being dug, and all the rest, is occurring out of sight. There is an enormous amount of development being done in this area.
I also noted the member for Nelson raised the issue of noise and the cars …
Mr Wood: Trucks.
Mr HIGGINS: Trucks, I am sorry. … and how the industry impacts on people. I point out to him that I have had a major problem with boats on the river, and this is exactly the same. They start at 3 am, so it is not just development in the mining industry we have to be considerate of, it is also the development in our tourism industries and so forth.
The extractive industry has been around a long time. In regard to the impact on the environment, everyone needs to realise that industry has been around for many years.
I was born in Griffith, outback New South Wales, and the first time I had anything to do with this sort of thing was a quarry up the hill. I used to think to myself all the time, ‘How did that ever happen? How did that big hole ever get there and not be filled in?’ It is something we have to keep in mind.
When we talk about fracking, I always try to point out to people – they always do a comparison to what happens in Queensland or New South Wales – there is a big difference between coal seam and shale. Many people need to ask the question, ‘What is the difference between coal seam fracking and shale?’ There is a big difference. Quite often, the problems we see with coal seam are portrayed as what we will have in the Territory, and they are two completely different facets. I am not saying that shale is safe – we are still doing our study into it, so I will leave that open – but they are two completely different things.
There is a lot in here about CORE and so forth, and many people have been over it, and everyone here agrees. However, I wanted to mention those links.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement in. I thank everyone else for being so supportive of the statement, of which I do not think you have had many criticisms.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I thank all of the members in the House who have contributed to this debate.
The mining sector is an important one for the Northern Territory, and it would be foolhardy and would send a terrible signal to the mining sector domestically, nationally and internationally if there were to be some disagreements in this House, on different sides of politics, about the importance of the mining industry to the Northern Territory.
That said, there will always be some one-upmanship going on in the House, a bit of ‘we are doing it better than you’ and ‘we are doing more than you did’ – that sort of thing. I do not think that is unhealthy. We all want to have acknowledged the great work we have done on respective sides of the House in the mining sector, promoting the Northern Territory as an investment destination for mining and oil and gas.
The statement was about the investment attraction strategy for the Northern Territory and what has been done locally, through the CORE initiative, and internationally to attract investment. I specifically kept this ministerial statement confined to the mining sector and did not talk much about the oil and gas sector for a reason. As the members for Barkly and Nelson pointed out, there is a heck of a lot of discussion going on in the Northern Territory about the oil and gas sector, and rightly so.
I will not diminish the importance of oil and gas to the Northern Territory. The gas industry has played a big part in the Northern Territory already through the Mereenie field, and the gas that has flowed north through the Amadeus gas pipeline, which has powered the Power and Water generators in Darwin in the past to run the Katherine to Darwin grid, and has powered Alice Springs.
The gas has turned around now. There is gas coming from offshore through Eni’s plant near Wadeye which is powering generators in Darwin. That is the past and the present. But in the future, there is no doubt in my mind the gas industry will be the most important and significant economic driver for the Territory. The gas potential in the Northern Territory is huge. I did not want to diminish the gas industry and the importance of it by focusing only on mining. However, I am cognisant of the fact that, sometimes, the mining industry can feel like the poor second cousin if not mentioned specifically in this type of forum. That is why I focused particularly on the mining sector.
I will cover off on a few things raised during the debate, not in any great detail. The member for Barkly raised a few things which I will talk a little about. As he was speaking, I made a few notes. He spoke a little about royalties, and the context of his comments was around making sure the quest for royalties is not the overriding factor in approving mining projects. I can assure the member for Barkly and other people listening to this debate that is never the overriding factor government considers in approving projects.
The most significant factor we look at is one founded in our philosophy and the CLP’s DNA – developing the economy and providing an environment where people in remote and regional parts of the Territory, particularly, have access to real jobs. Royalties, however, are also a fantastic benefit to the Territory and sit alongside other benefits to the Territory coming from the mining industry. We are often accused – not this government particularly, but governments generally – of cash grabs around royalties and filling government coffers with royalty money, etcetera.
I point out regarding royalties that this is money that goes, in the case of the Territory, towards our independence from Canberra. Every dollar we raise as own-source revenue frays the apron strings on which we are tied to Canberra. They become less over time, and that is something we want to achieve. We want to have a greater degree of financial independence from Canberra.
The other important thing about royalties is they are spent in the Territory. This is where funding comes for things like schools, teachers, police officers, nurses and doctors, and it builds infrastructure. This is good money. It is not about government being greedy – goodness me! Government does not hoard this money away, and when it dies passes it onto its kids or anything silly like that. This is money that comes to the Territory. It is revenue spent in the Territory on services the people of the Northern Territory need. There is nothing wrong with that. Royalties are something we should not use as the overriding consideration in establishing a mining industry, but should be considered to be of great benefit.
The 2030 time frame as the end date of most of our major mining projects was something I mentioned in the statement. The member for Barkly raised it as well, and that provides us with a pressing time frame. We need to work very hard now to establish what will, hopefully, be the world-class mines of the future in the Northern Territory. That is very important; in fact, it is critically important that we do that. The work being done now must be considered a long-term investment. The $23m or so invested into the CORE initiative over the next four years may not necessarily reap the results of a new mine opening within those four years. This is a long-term investment, a long-term vision this government has for developing new mines on either greenfield or brownfield sites.
In fast-tracking approvals and environmental concerns, the Country Liberals government is very proud of the fact we are streamlining approval processes. We have always maintained – and I am sure the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment will back me up on this – that we do these faster approvals, but not at the expense of the environment. In fact, this government takes its environmental responsibilities extremely seriously.
I did not mention it in my statement because it sits in another area, but the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment talked about the mining levy. A 1% levy on the amount of bond the department holds for mining activities goes towards the remediation of mines. I am delighted to say that some of that work has started. The Redbank mine is being worked on with money that has been raised through the mining levy. Drilling has commenced around the site to examine the geology directly underneath the pit and areas affected by that terrible environmental legacy, so we get a better understanding of whether we are dealing with paleochannels underneath, or some other form of geological structure. That will help us to inform decisions about how we can manage the site. That work has started. It is something we had the courage to do.
I go to something the member for Barkly mentioned about the Fraser Institute and changes in the rankings the Northern Territory had from, effectively, what was the last year of the Labor government to the first year or so of the CLP government. Yes, there was a drop away in one or two of those indicators which was around government regulation. The reason for that was we introduced, at that time, the mining rehabilitation levy. Naturally, industry did not like it. I understand that. I had many representations over that period of time by the industry and individual companies objecting to that sort of thing. That is why our ranking went down, I suspect – simply because of that. However, the government is not afraid of making tough decisions and will continue to do that, even if it sometimes upsets what would normally be considered our traditional supporters and the people to whom we would provide traditional support, being the mining industry. We are not afraid of tough decisions.
I pretty well covered most of the things I wanted to cover in the closing debate. There will be some further information which I am happy to provide. In fact, what I might do before I sit down is talk a little about one issue that was raised regarding what help we are giving to smaller companies. I think it was the member for Barkly who raised it. If it was not him, it was the member for Nelson. What are we doing to support juniors? I will talk in the context of what we are doing around the CORE initiative right now.
Contained within the CORE initiative is a collaborative program which means, effectively, that junior companies – explorers – can come to the department with an application for joint funding of some of their exploration program. That means if they are successful with their applications the department will jointly fund that work. The payback, of course, is the information that is gathered from that drilling program or that type of exploration they are carrying out comes back to the department to help inform the Northern Territory Geological Survey on the geology of that area and the findings which have been obtained from the work that was done. After a period of time – I think it is 12 months – the information becomes publically available so other explorers and mining companies can take it and use it to better inform themselves of the overall geology of that area.
I am very pleased to announce the successful applicants for 2014-15 have been announced by the Department of Mines and Energy. There were 33 applications received from 23 companies, which is more than double the applications received in the previous year. So the message from this government is getting out. Of these, 13 projects from 12 companies have been granted funding, totalling $847 000 inclusive of GST.
The successful companies include: Imperial Oil & Gas; Alligator Energy; TNG Limited; Spectrum Rare Earths; AREVA Resources Australia; Gunson Resources Limited; Castille Resources; OKA Resources; ABM Resources; G-tek Australia Pty Limited; and Clancy Exploration Limited.
The projects include 10 drilling and three geophysical projects targeting a diverse range of commodities, including oil, gas, gold, zinc, copper, uranium, nickel and rare earth. A number of these programs are now under way with results expected over coming months. That answers the question raised by the member for Barkly about what we are doing to help those juniors. There is some tangible evidence and very strong indicators that we are really putting rubber on the road with this stuff. We are encouraging these explorers to come in and are providing that collaborative funding.
Madam Speaker, I thank those who have contributed. This is critically important sector to the Northern Territory. I am pleased the statement has been well received by members opposite and the Independent members, and I commend the statement to the House.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Report – Member for Brennan
Travel Report – Member for Brennan
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a travel report from the member for Brennan, pursuant to clause 4.1 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Palmerston Regional Hospital Public Consultation and Scrutiny
Palmerston Regional Hospital Public Consultation and Scrutiny
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter from the member for Nelson:
- Dear Madam Speaker,
In accordance with Standing Order No 94, I wish to raise a Matter of Public Importance. The subject is the lack of public consultation and scrutiny into the design of the Palmerston and Regional Hospital and associated infrastructure.
It is signed by the member for Nelson.
Is this proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I raise this matter of public importance in the hope that before the government embarks too far on spending a large amount of taxpayers’ money on this new public facility, we check the project has been well considered and thoroughly scrutinised so money is not wasted and people know the final result will be the best outcome for the patients from the region who will use this hospital. I am also aware there is an old saying, ‘Trust me, I am from the government’.
However, there is a more important reason why I debate this matter. I quote regarding the High Court case of Egan v Willis & Cahill 1998:
- The point was made by Mill, writing in 1861, who spoke of the task as a legislator ‘to watch and control the government: to throw the light of publicity on its acts’. It has been said of the contemporary position in Australia that, whilst ‘the primary role of parliament is to pass laws, it also has important functions to question and criticise government on behalf of the people’ and that ‘to secure accountability of government activity is the very essence of responsible government’.
That is what I am hoping to do tonight. I hope the minister, even if she disagrees with me, understands I raise this matter because there are some issues that need addressing.
The government last consulted with the public about the hospital in November 2013. I attended those meetings, which were very well attended. But there was not much after that.
On 20 February, the minister said in parliament:
- The Stage 1 scoping study is now complete …
We are very happy to announce it will be available to the public this afternoon.
Further on the minister said:
- We have a vision, we are on track, and we are planning. We are undertaking this planning process with a great deal of detail. We will not fall into the trap of variations costing the taxpayers an extraordinary amount of money. It will be undertaken with great competence and scrutiny.
There was a flyer, Palmerston Regional Hospital, a Centre for Clinical Excellence, which deals with information sheets for industry – not necessarily the public, but for industry. It is a fairly broad-brush document.
The minister said in parliament on 16 May this year:
- We have to get this right. If we are going to put a large amount of money into making Palmerston hospital suit the needs the greater Darwin area, we have to get the site right, the scope right, and ensure that it is absolutely right.
Did the scoping study look at the siting of the hospital, or was the site picked close to Palmerston CBD as part of a political agenda? If the minister said we have to get the site right, then where are the discussions about the right site? Were there any other options? For instance, the present option will cost a substantial amount of money for a completely new intersection with Temple Terrace and the Stuart Highway. If it had been built on the corner of Howard Springs Road, across the road from Lambrick Avenue, Palmerston, there would not have been the need to spend millions on a new intersection. That intersection has been upgraded and is substantial. If the budget is tight, as the government says, why spend that money when you do not need to? Invest that money into the hospital.
The public has not seen any plans or optional plans. All they know is the minister announced, in April 2014, a survey for roadworks under way, with no community consultation and no plans shown to the public. The difference is, when the government upgraded the highway at Coolalinga, it put out plans to show people what was happening. When the Girraween Road intersection was upgraded, there was consultation in the form of maps in shopfronts for people to look at. When the government upgraded the Lambrick Avenue/Howard Springs Road/Stuart Highway intersection, those plans were issued for discussion – people could see them. There has been nothing in relation to what the plans are for that Temple Terrace/the road to Gunn Point/Stuart Highway intersection.
The minister said on 25 March this year in response to Ms Lee:
- What we also launched last week was a concept design, a flyer, and we have had positive feedback on what this new hospital may look like. It will be a modern facility and it will include all the features of what you find interstate in any modern health facility.
Except for that statement, how did people know there was a concept design? The minister made no mention in a media release, nor was there anything in the paper. I dug it out of a webpage for a company called dwp/suters. Did anyone know about this? Who gave you the positive feedback as mentioned in the response to the question? Here it is, and I only knew about it because it was in the NT News the other day in relation to the minister looking at the new site. That is all I know. It looks like a nice building, but who had input into it and where was the consultation?
What I find strange is when I held a public meeting for Wallaby Holtze Road residents about six weeks ago, which was attended by representatives from the Health department – I thank the minister for that. I thank her especially, because the minister for Lands and the Minister for Transport could not be bothered sending anyone out for that meeting ...
Mr Chandler: Not ‘could not be bothered’.
Mr WOOD: Well, no one came. When a resident asked what the hospital would look like, he was told it would be about two storeys high and spread out. They did not have any plans to show the residents, even though their minister announced a concept design on 25 March, a long time beforehand. How come the residents did not see that picture? I do not know. It is very strange.
The Chief Minister visited Litchfield Council about two weeks ago, and said it would be a multistorey building, designed to train overseas students. The NT News then published a tiny picture, as I said, of the proposed hospital. What is going on? Where in the scoping study is there any mention of a training hospital, and where did the multistorey building come from? Confusion reigns supreme and, as usual, nobody is either informed or consulted, they are just told. However, in this case, it looks like the government does not know what is going on either. Was the Chief Minister correct? Will this hospital be a training hospital? How many storeys high will it be? Is there enough room for it to be on the considered land?
Let us go back to April 2014, when the minister announced an environmental assessment had been completed. It is an assessment I have not been able to find on the Department of Health website. This raises more questions. Where is that environmental assessment and is it available for public comment? What exactly was it meant to assess? Where are the plans? Was there any consultation with locals? Was there any community consultation with motorists who already know the bottlenecks at the Temple Terrace/Stuart Highway intersection? How much will the road cost?
As I said before, if the hospital was further up the road there would be no need to build the intersection, and you can save money and put it into the hospital. That may not be the ideal site. I am not saying it is the spot, but the minister said we must get the right site. I hoped there was some discussion about the right site, but I have not heard any. I know the government wanted to move it out of Palmerston because it said that site was too small. It said, ‘This looks like a good site’. That is nice, but when you are going to spend $150m, we need to ensure that decision is the right one.
Site and traffic works were supposed to commence in June 2014, but nothing has happened, except the minister holding a publicity day out there. There are still no plans released for the traffic works or details of cost. As I said, compare that with the publicity related to the Howard Springs intersection, where people could comment. People might have seen the original plans for Howard Springs Road; there were only two lanes at the intersection, which was turned into three lanes because of the amount of traffic travelling through Lambrick Avenue.
We are holding discussions before any planning processes have been approved. Under the Northern Territory Planning Scheme, a hospital is prohibited on land zoned rural residential, so the zone must be changed. There has to be a development plan but, as yet, we do not have one. There should also be an environmental impact statement, which I imagine would have to happen for such a major project.
One of the most important issues raised with me recently was about the design of the patient care model. How does our model of patient care compare with the new Royal Adelaide Hospital? Has this hospital been designed on what is best for the government – for how many votes are in it for those members who reside in Palmerston – or what is best for the patient? Is the budget sufficient to provide the best patient care? Patient care does not seem to be mentioned in the scoping study. What input have you had from people who know about patient care, especially in this diverse, cultural and tropical environment? This is the most important part of the hospital, but it does not seem to show up high on the radar of government, or in any documents I have seen and read.
I want to see the Palmerston regional hospital built, but I see very little consultation with the public. I see a scoping study that does not include the suitability of the site or real public consultation, and a concept design hidden from view. Why was that? I do not see any plans for the road. I saw public consultation late last year, then nothing. I want to know if the top priority of the design of the hospital is patient care.
I quote from Dr Patricia Montanaro, President of the South Australian AMA, who commented recently about the new Royal Adelaide Hospital.
- One thing is certain. We need to have all the right plans in place, and the right arguments, if need be, in a transparent way. There has been too little clinical input into what are essentially clinical issues.
Everyone wants the new RAH to thrive. Let’s make sure that it will. The RAH conversation must be a top and urgent priority. This is a big investment: let’s make sure we get it right.
- We are building a health precinct which will meet the demands of the greater Darwin area into the future. We have a vision, we are on track, and we are planning. We are undertaking this planning process with a great deal of detail. We will not fall into the trap of variations costing taxpayers an extraordinary amount of money. It will be undertaken with great competence and scrutiny.
That worries me. There seems very little scrutiny. If there was, why was only one television channel told about the opening of the demountable, the bulldozer knocking down the trees, and the helicopter flying above? Why was it not for all media outlets? Whey were local residents not told? Why did the government not have the manners to include even the local member in some of these discussions? You can say, ‘You are not in government, so too bad’. The one thing I have noticed most of the time is I have not been involved in any of this …
Mr Barrett: Oh, you are not in government.
Mr WOOD: I am the local member. I am not saying that because I want to be big time. I am happy to work with the government, but I am also happy to …
Mr Barrett interjecting.
Mr WOOD: Well, I am! I am happy to work with the government, but I am also happy to criticise the government if I think that can help get a better outcome. That is why I am raising this today. I am happy to work with the three Palmerston members, but do I get a request to comment on something? No, no. If you are not in the government, it seems you are not alive. I …
Mr Barrett: We should have lunch, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: I am happy to have lunch with you. Oh, we have had lunch, haven’t we? We had lunch with the member for Blain, do not worry.
Mr Barrett: A couple of Vegemite sangers, mate, you and me.
Mr WOOD: Yes, right, down at the uni.
Many people in the rural area will welcome the new hospital, but it is my job to make sure it is a good hospital that serves the needs of the residents who will use it, not a political hospital that serves the needs of politicians who need it started before the next election.
I raised this matter today as a matter that is important to the public – one which started off well last year with a public consultation process, but has faded away since then. This MPI has highlighted problems I see, and I hope the government will see this as constructive criticism aimed at making sure the public is not left behind in the development of this important facility for Palmerston, rural and regional residents.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to see a good hospital there. It is important that not only Palmerston and Litchfield, but the region has a top-class facility there. As the previous Health minister, the member for Greatorex, said during the election:
- The government is going to build a real, top-quality hospital at Palmerston.
I support that. All I am saying is if you are going to spend $150m, it would make me feel much better if I knew that $150m was wisely spent and was based on – as often used in this House – the science rather than the politics. We want to ensure it is the best value for money, it is put on the best site, and achieves what it is intended to do – that is, serve the people well who will be the patients of that hospital.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I speak to this matter of public importance regarding the future of the Palmerston hospital, which is needed in the Top End and will be hugely welcomed by the people living in Palmerston and the rural area.
The member for Nelson has raised this issue of his concerns regarding public consultation into the design and associated infrastructure. There are important questions and, at present, there appears to be few answers. As we know, here we are in August 2014, now over the halfway point of two years into the CLP government. What we have seen so far with Palmerston hospital is a few public meetings, a sign erected on the site, and an independent candidate for Blain digging a few holes on that site. This was followed recently by a media event where we saw a few trees bulldozed.
Today in the paper, again we have seen more observations on the government’s performance around the management of the Palmerston hospital. It has been pointed out that the media has more faith that a $300m shopping centre will be built years before the hospital.
The very earliest we will see the Palmerston hospital opened will be late 2018, and that is over four years away. We submitted some written questions to government with regard to demand for health services in Palmerston and, in data we received recently about the Palmerston GP Super Clinic, we saw comparisons of presentations in September/October 2012-13 to the same period for 2013-14 go from 5829 to 14 079. In November/December 2012-13 there were 7882, compared to the same period for 2013-14 of 16 176. We have more figures from other periods, but it clearly demonstrates people are seeking health services there, and have a real desire for local health services to be provided.
Under the CLP we have already lost two years with regard to the Palmerston hospital project. It appears there will be even more slippage in the planning, procurement and design time frames, which will only blow out the construction and commissioning time lines. In the meantime, as the people of Palmerston and the rural area wait for their hospital, the Royal Darwin Hospital continues to be under immense pressure.
I have heard one senior health advocate in the community state that RDH is in a situation of ongoing crisis, due to bed block and pressure in the ED, and it is now accepted it is an ongoing crisis, and people have to get on working in that type of condition and space every day.
We are seeing more suburbs completed in Palmerston East, with the land releases there. We are seeing more population come online in the northern suburbs. In my own electorate in Muirhead we are seeing a huge number of houses coming out of the ground, and we know Lyons is finished. In the Darwin CBD there are unit blocks left, right and centre, and we also have major projects under way, as well as some significant workers’ villages to support those projects. The need for hospital services is growing as our population does.
A media release from the Chief Minister on 23 August 2013 stated:
- Based on current modelling, the greater Darwin region will require an additional 114 overnight beds and 123 same day beds by 2015-16.
Instead, what we have seen under the CLP in its two years of government and management of the Palmerston hospital, quite frankly, is not a great deal. I remind you all of the time line so far.
In August 2012 we had a change of government, with the CLP coming back to power. The money was there for the hospital. Federal government money had been secured and it was ready to go at that stage. There was $110m for the project, despite the change in government in the Territory.
In October 2012 then Health minister Dave Tollner started casting doubt over the future of Palmerston hospital. He started raising questions about funding, the site, cyclone standards of the proposed building, etcetera.
On 22 August 2013 then federal Health minister Tanya Plibersek announced an increase of Labor’s commitment to the Palmerston hospital from $70m to $110m, with the NTG component bringing the total to $150m.
On 23 August 2103 the CLP announced it would match the $150m Labor commitment and move Palmerston hospital to a new, unserviced site. This is one of the key commitments of the federal election campaign the CLP government and the federal member for Solomon went to the public with. The Chief Minister’s media release on the day said:
- ‘Today we are confirming our commitment to start working on the new Palmerston Hospital site within a year, with $110m in funding from the Federal Coalition and $40m from the NT Government.
That was one year and three days ago. People expected something a bit more progressed than a media event to bulldoze some trees.
The media release also stated:
- Unlike Labor’s proposal, the Country Liberals and Federal Coalition’s bigger and better Palmerston Hospital will deliver:
A full emergency department, including emergency specialists
Under Labor’s plans, we were going to deliver the Palmerston hospital with a fully equipped, 24/7 ED, with 10 bays plus eight paediatric short-stay unit beds, 60 inpatient beds across two wards, including general surgical and maternity, two birthing suites, two operating theatres plus a procedure room, outpatient clinic rooms, 24/7 medical imaging facilities, a pharmacy and pathology units.
The latest Palmerston hospital model released to the public said the government intends to include the ED, general medical and specialty services, such as cardiology, diabetes and infectious diseases, surgical services, outpatient cancer and support services integrated with the Alan Walker Cancer Care Centre, and maternal and health services, including antenatal and postnatal care, but birthing services will not be part of this first stage.
Going to November 2013, two community consultation sessions were held.
In February 2014 we saw a request for probity services tender for the Palmerston hospital, with an emphasis on attracting private services. We also saw the stage one scope of services released.
In the May 2014 we saw all the budget had this year for the Palmerston hospital – reminding the government they had a commitment to start work on the site within a year – was $5m for a hospital scoping study and master plan for the greater Darwin region, Palmerston and regional hospital.
That was it – $5m for another study and a master plan, which brings me to the question: does this include funding for roads, power, water and sewerage services? If not, why was there a media event recently to start work bulldozing trees if no design work or tenders have been awarded?
On 7 July we saw an article in the NT News on further delays to the Palmerston hospital around procurement which was, according to the NT News, a leak from the fifth floor.
We know the government wants a PPP for this hospital, and it raises questions of whether it will be a full public hospital, or is the government attempting to privatise some of these services?
Late in July we saw an advert for a market sounding process in the NT News, which raised more questions about delays.
Then, on 11 August, there was a media event held to bulldoze some trees to mark progress on the site. We also saw some scenes of local residents complaining about the lack of public consultation with regard to that. But it was clear the event was held to give a perception of progress and work started on the site, even though there appeared to be no contracts in place or design works done to support knocking down those trees.
At present, online on the Department of Health’s website, we see that slippage on the time lines is continuing. When you go to the website, you will see it states that in June 2014 site and traffic works commenced, and in July 2014 EOI processes commenced.
As per the commitment made by the CLP and the member for Solomon that works would start within a year, no designs have been released and trees have been knocked down, but that was not exactly what people expected within that first year of construction. They expected to see some real works happening on the hospital.
Mid-2016 is apparently when we can see some detailed planning and design, and civil works commence, while, in late 2016 the main building works commence.
I note that on the latest news page of this website, there is no news. The Palmerston hospital time lines keep slipping and people are losing faith that what has been promised will be delivered. They also worry, as the member for Nelson raised, about consulting with residents who live around the area affected by the project. When you embark on major construction projects – a major project that has the potential to become a wonderful part of the Palmerston community, having their own hospital – it is important you consult with residents.
Clearly we do not want to see any further delays, but I believe you can properly plan something, consult properly, and move forward on a project at the same time. We are looking forward to seeing some greater efforts in that space.
There have been some major issues and concerns raised with regard to the progress of the Palmerston hospital, as well as delays, because we have seen so many in the last two years. It also raises the question of cost blowouts. The cost estimate has gone up to as far as $10m for servicing that land. We have heard mixed messages from the government as well. At the public consultation we were told the $10m would not be from the $150m pot of money. At estimates we were told the $10m was from the $150m pot of money, so that is effectively $10m less for hospital services or infrastructure of the building itself.
Cost escalation is also something I am concerned about, regarding having a certain amount of money right now, and what you will get for that same amount of money in four years’ time. It will not be the same.
We know the government has expressed a real desire to test the market to see what private investment it can get. But people continually want to be assured they are getting a full public hospital with full access to public services, which was always part of that commitment.
I cannot stress enough that delays are the issue. It is a huge project and will be one that stands to benefit the community immensely. Everybody wants to see it, and it will be well and truly welcomed when delivered. However, with all the delays, it seems to be back-peddling, going back over the same space, ground and territory again. It raises questions and makes people sceptical about the time lines government is looking to meet.
People want to see sound consultation, as the member for Nelson has raised, but they also thoroughly believe progress can be made at the same time, and work can get a move on.
It will be a very interesting time in 2016. This has been a big commitment by the Territory government and the local federal member. We are going into an election year federally, so I expect that will help get a bit of a move on, because people want to see action as soon as possible to get the job done and this hospital open.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I will leave my comments there. I thank the member for Nelson for bringing forward this matter of public importance so we can hold further discussion about the Palmerston hospital and hopefully see more progress as soon as possible.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for bringing on this matter of public importance. It is very important that we talk about the Palmerston Regional Hospital. I will start by responding to what has already been said this evening on this matter of public importance, in that we are building the Palmerston Regional Hospital. Labor did not ever get around to it.
Who in the Chamber has ever built a hospital before? The answer to that question is no one. This is totally new ground. It is something that has not happened in the Northern Territory for many decades. Labor could not do it, as it was too hard. They had 11 years in government and put together a two-volume plan of what they were going to do, should have done, could have done, planned to do, but never got around to it.
When you listen to the comments from the member for Nelson and, definitely, the member for Wanguri, you have to keep that in mind. The member for Nelson was the kingmaker. He was the vote that got the former Labor government over the line, and he is as responsible as anyone for the fact there was never a Palmerston regional hospital built ...
Mr Wood: Oh, give me a break!
Mrs LAMBLEY: You have to take responsibility for that – nothing happened. To sit back and criticise us for getting on with the job of what is probably the most complex of all tasks this government is undertaking is pretty rich.
I will respond to the comments made because perception in politics is everything. If the members for Nelson and Wanguri feel there has been a lack of consultation, then I am very happy to address that issue. I say at the outset that neither of you have come in for what I would consider a range of briefings on what we are doing. Have you availed yourself of the precise detail of what we are doing? The answer to that, from my perspective, is no. You come into this room and do not fully understand what we are doing and how we are getting on with the job.
I will use this opportunity to address some of the concerns raised today. In consultation, we have done a range of things. We have issued dozens of media releases in the last 12 months, had consultations, issued flyers and written letters. Many of those media releases have ended up as stories in publications such as the NT News, on TV, and in the media. That is what, I guess, as politicians, as government, we rely on to a great extent.
A scoping study is not about the public’s opinion, it is about a clinical story of not what people think is required, but of what is scientifically analysed as the requirements of a new hospital. It is an academic process in which clinicians are interviewed and, as I said, from a very scientific perspective, a picture of what is required for the new hospital is drawn. I quote a paragraph from this Palmerston Regional Hospital scoping study:
- Planning a new hospital is a complex and technical process. In establishing the scope of services to be provided at PRH, a Hospital Services Capability Framework …
- … was developed. The HSCF is a significant planning tool that identifies and documents the minimum services, staffing, safety standards, and other requirements essential to ensure Top End health facilities provide safe, high quality and appropriately supported clinical services.
There was a question you raised, member for Nelson, about whether or not we intended to build a hospital that was based on patient care. Indeed! Why would you build a hospital that was not primarily based on patient care? I could take offence to it, but I will treat you as someone who is walking into this very complex field of building a hospital – I will give you the respect of appreciating that you do not know a lot. When I first started this voyage I did not know a lot either.
Hospitals must be clinically driven, and new hospitals especially so. Things change in the medical arena; you must have clinical input of a contemporary nature to frame and create the picture for what is required into the future. So our scoping study, our hospital service capability framework, was based on clinical input. I make no excuses for that. It is really not the time in the process where you ask people like me, my neighbours and colleagues, and people in the community who do not come from a health professional background, what they think. It is about what is needed and an understanding of medicine.
That is what we have been working on – a huge piece of work. This document goes through what is needed. The end product of the document is then seen through a political framework of the community’s expectations. We have learnt from the two volumes of work the former Labor government put together. We have used that document. We have not thrown it out and deemed it useless. It was, to some extent, research, and we have used that to understand what the expectations are of the local community – for example, expectations of the emergency department. The people of the Palmerston and greater Darwin area expect there to be emergency department services. They want outpatient services. There is an expectation of paediatric services, and maternal and child health services – very similar to what the member for Wanguri described as their hospital was going to be, should have been, but did not get around to actually being anything.
We have undertaken a number of very highly academic and professional exercises to work out what is needed. That work has never been done before to this extent anywhere in the Northern Territory for many years if, indeed, it was in the first place. I am not sure, I cannot account for what happened 40 years ago when we built the last hospital.
I make no excuse for the fact that work had to be done and that we have put it out for consultation. We had physical consultations with members of Palmerston community in November, which has been mentioned, and we talked through what this scope of services would look like, and what some of the indications were at that stage.
We received some feedback. There was a level of satisfaction. Some people were disappointed there would not be, for example, aged-care services. Some people talked about the fact that car parking would be an issue. From what I heard, people mainly wanted to talk about their own personal experiences of what they needed a hospital to be. But, by and large, people walked out of those two community consultations feeling as if they had been informed and been listened to, to some extent.
We are at the point now where we have started to look at some civil works. This is what has fired up the member for Nelson and, to some extent, the member for Wanguri. We staged a media conference a few weeks ago and I took the opportunity to go up in a helicopter and look at the 45 ha site, which I had never done before. There was physically not enough room for more than one media group. I could have spent more than $948 and hired an army helicopter with 30 seats, and had the whole tribe in there, but I thought I would be reasonably frugal and just ask Channel 9 to come along with me. Once again, I make no excuses.
The commencement of civil works was around an access road. For some reason, the member for Nelson and various other people in the community – and I take the point we did not letter drop or telephone them that morning to notify them, but they had been told through other means that civil works would definitely happen. I have a flyer that was distributed widely, announcing that civil works would begin around this time. However, I take the point we did not actually give them 24 hours or a couple of days notice. There seems to be some objection to the fact we are going to upgrade that intersection. We absolutely have to, and we require an access road to do that.
Where are we up to in discussion and consultation about the intersection? We have an engineering company finishing a design for a new intersection. A new big hospital with a 1.5 km frontage to the Stuart Highway will require a substantial intersection which allows traffic to flow freely to and from the heart of Darwin, and off to the Palmerston CBD area, as well as the hospital. It makes sense; I do not see any point in saving money or scrimping when it comes to the construction of a decent, highly functional and efficient intersection at that point.
The consultation the member for Nelson says we require around that is questionable. I can talk to my team at the Department of Health about what that will do but, after flying over it in the helicopter, it makes sense we spend whatever it takes to build something that is first and foremost functional and does not disrupt traffic, now and into the future.
The site is 45 ha with a 1.5 km frontage to the Stuart Highway. We looked at that tiny site in the midst of an urban development, virtually across the road, and thought, ‘Goodness me, we have to get something bigger with a greater vision and greater prospects into the future’. The choice was limited and, for us, it was a no-brainer. It is a 45 ha block of Crown land with the frontage and access, in the middle of – I know you do not want to hear this, member for Nelson – what will become the centre of a sprawling urban development in the next 20 to 30 years’ time. I know that is wicked for any rural resident to hear – I put on the public record I am a rural resident – but that is the reality. That hospital will be in the thick of it in years to come. It is perfectly located when you look at it on the map; we looked at it today. It is in the centre of development as it is in Darwin today.
If you drew a line from Parliament House through to the greater Darwin area, along where your office is, member for Nelson, that hospital site is right in the middle. It is perfectly located with regard to access and, ironically, you are the only one – or there is a handful of people at the most – complaining about that site.
I am very proud of the work we are doing. I do not have time to tell you about what we are doing and exactly how we are doing it, but I invite you all on the other side of the Chamber to get briefings, come in as often as you want, and be informed about what we are doing. It is complex and technical, but we are on schedule and we are building a regional hospital in Palmerston.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am happy to talk about this. As someone who lives in Palmerston and has been living there for nearly 20 years, I point out I have not been a particularly political person over the vast majority of my time there, so I have not been a part of all of the hoo-hah that goes on around the normal political issues. However, I have wanted a hospital in Palmerston for a long time, and so has everybody in my street, and the next street, and the suburb. We heard a lot about a hospital. When we saw a little fence right next to the clinic, do you think the first thing that came to our mind was, ‘Wow, we will have a fantastic hospital’? No, the first thing that came into our mind was, ‘Oh, another clinic, but we do not want a clinic, we want a hospital’. How many times do the people in Palmerston need to say this whole area of Palmerston is growing, how hard is it to build a hospital?
Now I am in government, I realise how hard it is to build a hospital, especially when you have racked up so much debt, thanks to the opposition, that you have no money to build a darn thing. You are flat out making hay while the sun is shining because you have nothing and it is hard, with a debt to GDP ratio that would make Spain blush, to try to spend more than $1bn building a hospital.
Have we been consulted about this? Yes. We, the Palmerston community, have been consulted about this as long as I can remember over the last 10 years. I look at this scenario and think, ‘Man! You are damned if you do and you are damned if you do not.’ This government – and thank you, this government – has said, ‘We are going to build a real hospital. Here is this massive 45 ha site. Let us put it in a really good position so you can access it easily from the rural area, from Palmerston and Darwin. We can start building something that will work for the Northern Territory for the future.’
We have heard about it and, finally, I am so proud to be part of the Palmerston team working with the Minister for Health to make this happen. I cannot tell you how proud I was walking around getting dirt all over my feet, thinking how fantastic this will be. I then thought, ‘Gee, I am getting my pants dirty, I am watching a D10 knock stuff down, I wish I had brought my own hat’. I was stoked about it. I can tell you, member for – I have no idea where you are from because I am new at this game. I was very happy for the member for Araluen – is that right? Yes. The member for Araluen invited me. I was chuffed; I even brought my EO and made her walk around in the dirt. She was not happy because she got dirt on her toes and it was all sweaty, etcetera.
During my election campaign, I heard so much about hospitals, it was out of control. Every other conversation I had when I doorknocked the entire electorate was about a hospital, ‘When are you building this hospital?’ I am so happy to tell you we are building a hospital. I love the fact I have started doorknocking my electorate again, and I can say to them, ‘Guess what? We are building a hospital’.
Then I came into this room and my excitement was squashed because the conversation coming from the other side made me feel blerky, which is not even a word. That is what porridge is when it is a bit cold, and does not taste good; it is just blerky. You sit here and think something is very wrong when everybody in Palmerston is excited about this – I am excited about this – and what we get is, ‘You did not phone everyone in the street that day, you are all terrible people. How dare you build a hospital! How dare you, Giles government, build a hospital when we have been meaning to do that for years!’
I could rant about this all night, as I am excited about this hospital. I am excited about what the member for Araluen is doing. I am excited about my team in Palmerston. I am excited my electorate will have a hospital. I am excited about having lunch with the member for Nelson and talking all about a hospital over a couple of vegemite sangers and enjoying it. I want to spread that excitement. Hopefully, some of it will spread over the other side of that little bar which shuts there, and everyone in this room can be excited. Why? Because it is for the benefit of the people of the Northern Territory.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I now feel like I am a guest singer walking into the middle of a concert. I am not warmed up.
I thought, when we came into government, after 11 years and seeing Labor build a fence – it was only a portable fence …
Mr Barrett: A temporary fence.
Mr CHANDLER: A temporary fence used to put up political propaganda all the way around it. I thought, ‘It has taken 11 years and we get a fence’. One of the first discussions I remember being involved in was whether the site was suitable to build a hospital. There had been much consultation held with the previous government about a hospital for Palmerston – no doubt about that – but I honestly thought what we needed was a government to pay attention to what people from Palmerston were saying and what they actually needed.
For years the Super Clinic that was constructed in Palmerston was very much oversold. The expectation in Palmerston was we would get a Super Clinic. When it was finally delivered, people were not sure what the services were and still complained about the services being delivered. The previous government was very good at selling a message, but Palmerston expectations were up here and, unfortunately, what was delivered was way down here.
I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to look over the Adelaide hospital site. By the time it is finished, with the research labs, it will be about $2.2bn worth of construction with 45 theatres in the place. I think 16 effective theatres are in the emergency section alone. I had the privilege of being there at a time just before the plaster was about to go up on the internal walls, so I got to see the cabling, the pipework, everything you would not see in a normal hospital. When people walk into a building like a hospital, they have no appreciation of what goes on behind the scenes, and the planning behind something like that. I can tell exactly. It took them seven years from the day a decision was made to build a hospital in Adelaide before the first sod was turned over.
Okay, the previous Labor government had 11 years and we got a fence. We have been in government two years and, realistically, we are further down the track in the construction of this hospital, based on the needs of the community.
I have a lot of notes here, but I have not used them yet, so I apologise to the person who has written them. I will read some of them.
The fact is what needed to happen was an exercise where we had to seriously look at what services were delivered in the Northern Territory and then, how that could be complemented in Palmerston. The truth is you were not going to duplicate Royal Darwin Hospital overnight. Once this government and the Minister for Health had done the work behind the scenes to see what the needs were and how we were going to meet those needs within our budgetary requirements – and that is true too because hospitals are not cheap to operate – the first thing we realised was the block of land which had been identified before was problematic on a number of fronts.
If you live in Palmerston, you will know how busy that stretch of road is. It would have taken millions to upgrade that section. I heard the argument tonight that we have to build a new intersection and a new road into Holtze. The reality is much more would have been spent, and I do think they would have been able to solve the problem so easily with that old hospital site.
Second, the site was too constrained to allow a hospital to grow into the future and meet the needs for the next 30, 40 or 50 years.
The other obvious thing to consider was where was the growth, the human capital, within the suburb of Palmerston? Do you know what? It is not just Palmerston.
This MPI has surprised me because I thought the last very last person who would have complained about a hospital in his own electorate was the member for Nelson ...
Mr Wood: I am not complaining about the hospital in my electorate. That is not right!
Mr CHANDLER: But you talked about the site being inappropriate, member for Nelson …
Mr Wood: It is still in the same area! Gee! What a pathetic …
Mr CHANDLER: It is actually closer to the rural residents. If you allow a city to develop like Darwin, Palmerston, the rural areas – well, there will not be much development in the ...
Mr Wood: If you want to misinterpret what I say, you are welcome.
Mr CHANDLER: Well, I will read the MPI:
- Mr Speaker, in accordance with standing orders …
Blah, blah:
- … the lack of public consultation and scrutiny into the design of Palmerston and regional hospital and associated infrastructure.
Mr CHANDLER: The infrastructure, the planning that has been going on, and the consultation – when this government took over, I can guarantee you the Minister for Health did not just chuck out all the consultation that had been done in the past by the previous Labor government. Why would you do that? It was good consultation; there was a lot of information that had already been gathered. There had been consultation.
As far as the design and scrutiny and all of those things – for goodness sake, we have a government, we have a public service. There are tens of thousands of workers within the public service and part of their job is to do the work of government. So after the consultations have been done, after we worked out what the needs of the community were, and after choosing a site we all thought would have universal recognition and acceptance that it was a better place to put a hospital, because it covers off on a number of areas – (1) it will allow the hospital to grow into the future, as it will need to, and (2) more importantly perhaps, it will be closer to a larger number of people, not just from Palmerston.
I have heard the member for Nelson before criticise that we are building in Palmerston, and everybody was talking about the Palmerston hospital. I even remember hearing when I was in opposition, ‘The Palmerston hospital, the Palmerston hospital. It should be at Coolalinga. It should be somewhere in the rural area.’ Well heaven forbid, we came into government, pushed the hospital into the rural area, into Holtze …
Mr Wood: But you did not recognise it as that, you called it Palmerston north
Mr CHANDLER: To pick up on the interjection, it has been a long time since I have called it Palmerston north. In fact, all of the paraphernalia lately that refers to it as Palmerston north is coming from the member for Nelson. You know why? Because it stirs a few people up; it stirs people to the soul. People in the rural area do not like it. Which is exactly why I issued an instruction to my department, ‘Let us stop referring to it as Palmerston north, because it is upsetting people’. People who live in Holtze and the rural area have passion for their area. I understand that.
However, there is a long way to go and there will still be more consultation. I am sure, Minister for Health, there is still a lot of consultation to be done. But the initial work has been done. The second layer of work to do is to come up with concepts and plans, develop all that, then go to the public and say, ‘This is what we have been working on …
Mr Wood: Building the road.
Mr CHANDLER: … so what do you think?’ Well you need to have a road, picking up on interjection again, Mr Deputy Speaker. You need a road to get there to be able to do the work and so forth. This will be a big job. As as the Health Minister rightly pointed out earlier, no one for many years has built a hospital in the Top End – in fact, in the entire Northern Territory. I can guarantee you this hospital will not have snow blinds …
A member interjecting.
Mr CHANDLER: Oh you do not think? Hell will freeze over. There might be someone out there who wants snow blinds, but I am really hoping not.
It is critical we get this right. With the work this government has been doing, in particular, the Minister for Health has been working her – I was going to say ‘butt off’, but I should just say working really hard behind the scenes with this government to make sure one of the biggest infrastructure jobs this government will ever work on – do not talk just about the initial hospital, but about the next 10, 15, 20, 30 years from now as this hospital develops into a world-class hospital and meets the needs of a growing Territory. This will be the biggest infrastructure job this government will ever deal with. It has to be done right. I commend the Minister for Health for the work she has done, driving us as a government, driving Cabinet, to ensure we deliver.
It has been mentioned before that you guys are welcome to briefings. The members for Drysdale, Blain and I get monthly updates ...
Mr Wood: It is not just me, it is the people.
Mr CHANDLER: Do you know what, member for Nelson? We had to do one thing. It was the member for Drysdale who did it, which was to keep asking for briefings and updates on where we are at and what we are doing. Living in Palmerston, it is essential we have the most up-to-date information we can to report back to our constituents. So when we talk to people, are on their doorsteps, or writing our newsletters, we have the most up-to-date information. I guarantee you the Minister for Health would only be too happy to provide the same service for either the Labor Party or you, member for Nelson, and give you the most up-to-date information we have, as a government, to ensure we get the community consultation right.
In regard to the Lands and Planning around the hospital, I put on the record my vision for that area. It would, perhaps, have 1 ha lots around the border of that block of land, then you densify as you get closer to the hospital site. I would like to see the hospital site have provision for nurses’ houses, doctors’ housing, and other subsidiary health needs. It could be physiotherapists, dentists and doctors’ surgeries, all on the hospital site. But it will be a hospital precinct surrounded by a community. Why would you not want to build a community around a hospital? It will be valuable real estate from the point of view that people will want to live close to it. I would like to see a seniors village in the area, close to the hospital.
The reality is the work this government and this Health minister have been doing should be commended. There will be continued consultation because, as a government, we want to get this right. However, we do not want to wait 11 years, put up a fence, and say we are building a hospital. We want to progressively get closer to the hospital. The work that will be done on the roads and the infrastructure is the starting point. The planning is going on behind the scenes. We want to do this like a design and construct process, rather than wait 10 or 11 years, then start.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the minister and this government for the work they are doing to deliver a premium hospital for the people who live in Palmerston and the rural area.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, it is my pleasure to inform the House that the grandson of the Territory’s Victoria Cross recipient will help re-enact the war hero’s historic journey to enlist as part of next year’s Anzac Centenary commemorations. Richard Borella has agreed to retrace the footsteps of his grandfather, Albert Borella, in a recreation of his historic ride from Tennant Creek to Darwin to enlist in the Armed Forces. It was a great pleasure to meet him today, along with his parents, Rowan and Mary, and reminisce about the amazing life of their war hero relative.
Albert Borella was a remarkable Territorian who undertook an inspiring journey to combat in World War I in 1915. He walked, swam through flooded rivers, rode horses, and eventually travelled on a mail coach and a train to Darwin. Unable to sign on there, he was taken by ship to Queensland and then went on to Western Australia for training. He served at Gallipoli and was then transferred to the action on the Western Front.
Albert Borella was mentioned in despatches, and received the Military Medal for his services in action. Wounded, he was commissioned in the field, and in 1918 received the highest honour for bravery, the Victoria Cross, for most conspicuous bravery in attack, displaying great courage and leadership fighting against the Germans. At 36 years of age he became the oldest recipient of the Victoria Cross within the first Australian Imperial Force. World War I dramatisations often depict how easy it was to sign up at the time; many just walked into their local recruiting hall. But Albert Borella had to fight just to put his signature on the right form. He was a man so tough he fought a battle just to join the combat of World War I.
Richard Borella never really knew his famous grandfather, but he has been aware of his reputation since he was a youngster. He said he wants to try to understand what he went through and why he would have done it. Was it a sense of duty to serve his country? He expects he will be reflecting on that ride up the track.
We are thrilled that Richard has agreed to take part in this re-creation of his grandfather’s journey, because he can share the story with a new generation of Territorians and ensure it is never forgotten.
The father of four has had motorbikes and horses in the past, and his two daughters still ride today. Those skills will be essential next year when the Borella Ride travels up the Stuart Highway.
The ride will be held in February and March, giving roadside spectators, tourists, schools and communities an insight into Albert Borella’s journey. Richard Borella and companions will travel over 1000 km and stop in Tennant Creek, Renner Springs, Elliott, Dunmarra, Daly Waters, Larrimah, Mataranka, Katherine, Pine Creek and Darwin.
A range of activities is planned at each destination, including historical activities, community breakfast, barbecues, campfire talks and educational activities. A travelling exhibition will accompany the riders to explain the event and its history.
The 100th anniversary of World War I is an opportunity to remember some of our great Australian military history and pay tribute to those who have served their country over the past century. More than 61 000 Australians were killed in World War I, with 72 Territorians among them. It was Australia’s most costly campaign and nearly every Australian’s life was touched by the toll.
The Borella Ride will be the Northern Territory’s flagship centenary activity. It will be supported by a wider program of events, including a one-off community grants program to help community groups commemorate the Anzac centenary and the centenary of service. Darwin is a garrison city and we want to make sure the centenary of the Great War is given the recognition it deserves. The centenary starts from August this year and runs until November 2018.
We also want to ensure the next generation learns about the sacrifice made by Australians a century ago, so a group of lucky students from Years 9, 10 and 11 will join the Chief Minister’s Anzac Spirit study tour to Gallipoli next year. It will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for students to honour a critical part of Australia’s history.
Territorians are a tough bunch, but few people personify that toughness like Albert Borella. His journey to enlist in World War I is the stuff of legend. We will honour Albert Borella in the best way possible by re-creating his epic journey. The fact that his family has agreed to join in that re-creation only adds to the significance of this historic occasion.
Mr Deputy Speaker, my thanks go to the Borella family for helping to make this an occasion for all Territorians.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, I update the House on the exciting work being done at Palmerston Senior College in relation to their Vocational Education and Training program.
Schools are vital in preparing our young people for tomorrow. Along with the important academic program schools offer, it is imperative they are able to train and develop students to leave school and take up the technical or specialist jobs we are creating for our economy.
To support young people in their academic and technical pursuits, VET qualifications can go towards helping students attain their Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training. This gives school leavers certainty around their academic and technical achievements.
The Territory needs skilled workers to help support the growth our government is working hard to deliver. We want to support and grow our own, so Territorians get the best opportunity to live and remain in the Northern Territory.
Major projects across the Northern Territory will help fuel economic growth for years, but these great projects do not happen by themselves. The young people of today who want to make this wonderful place their home and raise a family will be the driving force of tomorrow.
VET programs in secondary schools offer students a way to build vital skills for their future and gain valuable practical workplace experiences. I am extremely pleased to report on some of the qualifications already gained by Palmerston Senior College students. Last year, 85 Palmerston Senior College students completed a VET qualification, ranging from Certificate I through to Certificate III. This is 85 students now trained in a variety of fields, making them more employable and giving them the confidence to pursue their dreams, get a good job, and build their life here.
In 2013, I attended a graduation for students finishing a certificate in Conservation and Land Management. You could see how proud these young people were with working hard for something and getting the result of a qualification that stays with them after school.
The following is the complete list of courses completed last year by Palmerston Senior College students. I am outlining the entire list to highlight the breadth of the VET agenda available to students there. The 2013 courses included: Conservation and Land Management; Engineering and Hospitality – Kitchen Operations; Automotive; Business; Community Studies; Engineering; Hairdressing; Information Technology; Sport and Recreation, as well as Fitness; Children’s Services; Dental Health Assistant; and Tourism.
As well as these courses, 10 students completed an internationally recognised qualification, the Cisco Information Technology qualification.
This year, some courses have changed from last year, and I do not have the final number of students yet. The list of courses for 2014 is extensive. These courses include: Warehousing and Logistics; Financial Services; Automotive, as well as other mechanical trades; Information Technology; Sport and Recreation and Fitness; Hairdressing and Beauty Services; Business; Aquaculture; Sustainable Energy; Conservation and Land Management; Early Childhood Studies; Tourism; Health Services; Carpentry; Engineering; Plumbing; and Electro-Technology. Palmerston Senior College students are also completing the Cisco Information Technology qualification this year.
As you can see, Palmerston Senior College is kicking goals in the field of Vocational Education and Training. Whether students decide to work straight after school, or build upon their qualification with more training, I am confident these qualifications will hold these students in good stead and help them to build a bright future for themselves and for our Territory.
Well done to the entire staff at Palmerston Senior College for their dedication to their work, their students, and our community. I particularly thank the Principal of Palmerston Senior College, Sue Healy, who is an inspiration to me, her fellow teachers and her students. I wish her all the best as they transition through global school budgeting.
If I can make a shameless plug, I very much hope Palmerston Senior College makes its way on to the independent public schools list. It is something the school is committed to. It can see the intense value for the school community. The school council is well and truly on board. They have put their hat in the ring, Minister for Education …
Mr Chandler: Absolutely!
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: If you see that application come across your desk, I would be eternally grateful if you could tick that one off, minister, thank you.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I talk about a group of students at Taminmin College who are doing very good things in regard to not only their own professional development, but also inspiring others how to go forward in life.
Before I talk on that, I was listening to the member for Blain, and I found his speech very inspiring and enthusiastic. However, I point out to the member for Blain that I am one of those residents who is nearby to that site that was cleared. The road is called Wallaby Holtze Road. There are about 30 properties on that road, with families with children, adults, old people, animals and pets, and they all know about the bulldozing activity. I know the Chief Minister and the Minister for Health have received a letter from a resident of that road. I invite the member for Blain to come to my property on that road so he can understand how people who live nearby to a major construction site may be affected. However, I will leave that for now.
This evening, I want to talk about a group of students from Taminmin College who are participating in a program called IMPACT, which is supporting young Indigenous leaders. As an introduction to that program, they are part of another – call it program or research institute – called the Foundation for Young Australians, which is unleashing the brilliance of young Australians. It is a national, not-for-profit organisation dedicated solely to young people. It is relentless and optimistic about all young people and their ability to be entrepreneurial. It believes they have the courage, imagination and will to create the change they want to see for themselves in the world.
This foundation has a strong track record of research, innovative programs delivery, and the ability to find and back inspiring, effective, young change makers, which makes it unique. The Foundation for Young Australians has been around for a long time. I was quite surprised to see how long it has been around, which is quite a few decades. It has many components to its package. It has a unit called WOW – what it takes to succeed in life and work; it takes a village to raise a child; and making sure doing good is the best thing you ever did, as examples.
The one I will reference is supporting young Indigenous leaders, called IMPACT. It is designed to build a community of young Indigenous students and strengthen leadership, community contribution and future pathways. IMPACT is delivered in partnership with the Northern Territory Department of Education and Training. The Minister for Education would be aware of this program.
It is designed to build a community of young Indigenous students, regardless of where they live, and strengthen leadership, community contribution and future pathways. It brings together Year 10 to 12 students over three years of intensive and inspiring camps, workshops, meetings and appointments that inspire self-confidence and offer support for education and training. The students become more confident, more self-aware and resilient, and gain the skills to contribute in positive ways to their communities. Clearly, in the case of the Taminmin students, it is the Taminmin and rural community, and the greater Darwin and Territory community.
It has developed a partnership with the Northern Territory Department of Education and Training. This IMPACT program is throughout the Northern Territory and has participants from Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine and Alice Springs. In that package are Taminmin students. Before starting this program, many students did not know or interact with any other young people from outside their own home towns. However, this has made the students come together and meet other students and other people from across the Territory, which is very good and inspiring.
A group of five students from the Foundation for Young Australians wrote to me and asked whether I would like to meet with them because the Taminmin students were involved in the program. I agreed because I thought it sounded interesting, although I did not know much about it.
The students came to my electorate office at Coolalinga with Penny Kellaway, who is the mother of one of the students. We had a chat and some morning tea for about an hour-and-a-half, and it was very interesting. I will name the students because they were interested in finding out what the job of a local politician is all about. I was also interested in understanding what they wanted to do with their lives; what kind of a profession, employment, or trade they wanted to go into; whether they wanted to travel; how they wanted to get involved with their community to make it a better place; and what they saw as being young people’s issues?
We had a very interesting chat about the use of social media because, of course, being Year 10, 11 and 12 students, they are conversant with the use of social media, more so than any of us in this Chamber. Their views on social media and how it needs to be better managed and controlled by families and people generally were interesting.
I compliment the students and say thank you to Penny Kellaway, and to Michelle Pipino who is the program manager of IMPACT. Congratulations and well done to Letitia Ahnfeldt who is in Year 10; Tahmika Johnson, Year 10; Tamika McLeod, Year 10; Emma Kellaway, Year 12, who I think is also a school council representative and one of the leaders in the Taminmin College student community; and finally, Danika Williams of Year 12. Congratulations for being part of this program, for taking the time and making the effort, and for thinking of and wanting to give back to your community, which, at a young age, I find extraordinary. When I was in Years 10, 11 and 12, I was not thinking of that kind of activity, being at boarding school.
Mr Deputy Speaker, it was inspiring and very enjoyable to have these students come and chat with me in my office with Penny and the others who were there. I wish you the best with the program and I hope you achieve great things, not only for yourselves and your families but, of course, for your local communities.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I congratulate all the amazing young people in the Northern Territory who are excelling at school level and beyond. Young Territorians are encouraged to participate in programs that enable them to experience new and exciting ways of learning. Through these new learning ventures, our youth are engaged with the wider community to develop new skills, make positive choices, and enhance their lives in and out of the school yard.
It behoves us as a community, let alone a government, that we encourage parents to send their kids to a raft of activities in the community that can help them to improve their capacity, confidence and, generally, their wellbeing. It is through these programs the community benefits in a wide variety of ways. It does not matter whether it is academic, sports or the arts, provided young people have direction and the ability to go, then that can only be a great result for us as a community. They are evidently hitting the right notes in music or arts, reaching new heights on the sporting field, and delivering academically.
Recently I was at the festival across the road in the Civic Centre Park. It was wonderful to see so many young people participating in a range of activities and hanging out with their friends, admiring some of the talent that was on display at so many different events.
I was also very fortunate to go to the presentation of Wunderkammer by a group of fantastic young people. It was encouraging to see families taking so many young people to see such a fine group of athletes perform in a very interesting and unusual way.
I draw your attention to a few schools close to my heart which have developed programs for young people that will enrich their lives through learning. I start with Sanderson Middle School students who visited me at Parliament House today. What a great bunch of young people. They were enthusiastic to come to Parliament House; many of them had not been here before. They looked at some of the portraits, endeavoured to understand the Remonstrance, and saw the library. I was fortunate to spare a few minutes to take them up to the office and out to the balcony so they could enjoy the view from the fifth floor. It was great to have them here. Many members in this Chamber have the ability to take students from their own schools to the balcony where most of them do not normally go. That was fantastic.
I congratulate the following students. Cindy Um has been selected as a school student entrant in the Anzac Spirit study tour. What a fantastic opportunity. We have just heard the Chief Minister talk about the Borella Ride and the commitment of those people. It is fantastic that young people are able to visit and enjoy learning about the history, what it was like, and to be part of it. As someone who has been to Anzac Cove and Gallipoli on Anzac Day, it does not matter whether you are a school student, a pensioner, a senior, or an ex-soldier, there is not a dry eye anywhere on the Gallipoli Peninsula on Anzac Day. It is a very moving experience and I hope Cindy has similar experience next year celebrating the centenary of Anzac, where she will be in awe of the commitment those young people made all those years ago.
The following students at Sanderson have received Good Standing Awards. These students have earned credit from teachers for things like positive student achievement, improvement in their work, and excellent effort in demonstrating behaviours of Sanderson School values. Recently, these students were congratulated and received recognition of that great work. They are: Jeanne Alpe; Sajad Alzarghazani; Jardel Fernandes; Jason Lawrence; Amy Le Dam; Ler Pwe Htoo Lin; Zeleah McCann; Yasmen Roe; Trinh Thi Quynh Tra; and Shaun Juwanmandadige.
Sanderson Middle School recently had a visit from Darwin-born singer and songwriter Vassy. Students were very excited. I remember when I met Vassy. I know her mother and her family quite well, but I had never met Vassy. She wanted to meet me because her mother thought I was a terrific bloke, so we had lunch with Vassy. She said to me, ‘Do you know David Guetta?’ I said, ‘Who is he?’ If you are young, you know David Guetta is one of the famous people in the music industry. Vassy currently has the number one Billboard hit around the world called Bad. I arranged for her to go out to two of my schools – Sanderson and Wagaman. It was an amazing sight, because these kids were so excited; they know all the words to the song. Having someone standing in front of them who is an international performer was such a buzz. I had a great sense of pride and a great feeling of being able to take this wonderful young lady to some of my schools and have her sing along with these kids. It was a wonderful experience. She is very popular amongst Territory youth. She won the coveted Unearthed contest on Australian radio station Triple J. Her song We are Young reached the top of the Billboard’s Hot Dance Club songs, and she has since established herself as a famous singer and songwriter around the world.
Vassy was born in Darwin. Her parents were both Greek immigrants and she features in a song that has reached number one on international charts, Bad. Students at Sanderson Middle School relished in the opportunity to speak with Vassy. She was able to talk to them about her worldly travels, her experience in the music industry, and the choices she is faced with while in the music business.
Since her visit, students have taken on a new challenge, breaking into a subject they had limited experience in. We now have Year 5 and 6 students penning their own rap song with an anti-bullying theme at Wagaman Primary School. It was fantastic that she sang along with them and gave them a lot of tips about how to improve and structure the type of song with the message they are trying to deliver. Vassy ran some mini-workshops in classes for students at the school and has offered to help record tracks when they are ready. It was great to see that.
Getting on with your teachers or mentors in the community can make or break a young child’s learning experience in the early years. I am happy to see teachers taking a leap to step outside their comfort zones in order to benefit students. I am extremely pleased to say Casey Nicholson, a teacher at Sanderson Middle School, has participated in a professional learning workshop with 18 other teachers. What a great initiative! The workshop was designed to enhance his song-writing skills, ultimately better his communication with students, and enhance student communications with their peers. Communicating with the youth of the Territory through music will be stronger because of workshops like these and, therefore, will pass on to children at Northern Territory schools.
Similar development workshops are to follow in October, specifically designed for students who will take it to their school and pass it on to their classmates. We have the support of the Music Council of Australia, Musical Futures Australia, and the Northern Territory Music School to run more programs like these to benefit young Territorians. I look forward to seeing some of the names of young musicians in the Territory up in lights, knowing their knowledge and skills have been enriched by this unique program.
Education is a very rewarding and enriching experience for those who teach. Once hurdles are crossed and learning barriers are broken down, the possibilities are endless. As minister for youth, it is rewarding to see the schools developing students with the knowledge they will take those expanded learning skills to other areas.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to deal with a particular issue. I would like to make a correction to the Hansard in regard to mining company workers registering interstate vehicles in the Northern Territory. During the estimates hearing this year, the figure of 1500 vehicles per month was given in relation to how many cars are being registered. The correct figure is actually 1100 per month.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I place on the public record a number of the great things that happen in my electorate. I will start with the Yirrkala Baby Show. It has been held, I believe, for the past three years, and this year was held to coincide with National Families Week. There were over 40 beautiful babies and little ones entered in the competition, and each child received a prize for a category which was decided by a group of senior school girls. It might have been for the longest eyelashes, the curliest hair, the biggest smile, the chubbiest cheeks – it made sure every child entered was eligible for some kind of prize. It was wonderful to watch.
The event aims for local families to come together as a community, and for the community to pride itself in its healthy kids. The event was organised by the baby show committee, made up of a group of professionals and community members. The committee was chaired by the wonderful Jo Carroll. Other members included Abi White, a wonderful teacher who runs the Families as First Teachers program at Yirrkala; her partner, Scott Beverstock; Cynthia Anderson; and the men from the Miwatj Strong Fathers program. School principal Merrki Ganambarr Stubbs was the emcee for the day. Other organisations that contributed to the day included the Department of Children and Families, Miwatj Aboriginal Health, East Arnhem Regional Council, the Arnhem Club, the Yirrkala Mulka Project, Anglicare, the Nhulunbuy Amcal Pharmacy, and me as the local member.
The One Disease at a Time Foundation was set up on the day to answer questions and support the event. The clothing producer, Cotton On, was also a major sponsor of this event.
The Arnhem Club donated its chef’s time and its kitchen to community volunteers including Scott Beverstock; Rrawen; Nalkuma; Burrkitj, or Buggi as he is better known; Dhamarrarr; and Lapulang, who prepared, set up, and individually served a really healthy lunch which was enjoyed by over 250 people on the day at Rika Park in Yirrkala.
The annual Hogshed Toy Run has raised funds and donated to the special education departments at Yirrkala Community Education Centre, Nhulunbuy High School, and Nhulunbuy Primary School. These funds are raised annually with their Christmas toy run. I am probably a little late reporting the news, but better late than never.
A phenomenal amount of money is raised through this event, and $3000 was donated to each of these three local schools towards support for their special education students. I know Nhulunbuy High School has already put its $3000 contribution to good use by purchasing a Smartboard for their annexe.
There are way too many motorcycle riders involved in the toy run to name them all, but the main individuals credited with bringing the event together include Bob Bishell, Rick Hutchinson, Mary Sinclair, Shane Guiney and Nick Walker. Sadly, Nick Walker and his wife, Sara, and children are leaving our community – as people are at the moment. I daresay the likes of Bobby Bishell – or Bob the Builder as he is better known – along with those who are remaining behind, will make sure this year’s Hogshed Toy Run is bigger and better than ever.
Next I talk about the Keep Australian Beautiful Awards and the fact that Dhimurru Aboriginal Corporation was recently recognised for its enormous efforts in land conservation in Arnhem Land, with Nhulunbuy being named as the winner of the 2014 Keep Australia Beautiful Clean Beaches Award. Dhimurru was also named as the recipient of the Dame Phyllis Frost Littler Prevention Award. The judge’s report for these awards highly commended the efforts of Dhimurru, and also reflected positively on the wider East Arnhem region.
Dhimurru manages a huge Indigenous protected area, which includes approximately 100 000 ha of land and 450 000 ha of sea country, and collected an average of one tonne of marine debris and ghost net retrieval per kilometre of beach in 2013. That is a phenomenal amount of debris they are collecting whilst, ultimately, also aiming to free any sea turtles which regularly become trapped in these nets. The debris usually originates from overseas countries. The rangers work hard to educate students and other young people about having respect for land and sea country.
Dhimurru is a Yolngu organisation that employs 21 staff members, 15 of whom are Yolngu traditional owners and custodians. The 13 traditional owner groups or clans of the East Arnhem area are represented in the organisation. Fiona Marika, or Yupunu Marika, and Grace Wununggmurra, travelled to Currumbin on the Gold Coast for the awards ceremony and represented the organisation with considerable pride.
Each Dhimurru staff member deserves a mention for the vital roles they play in conservation of the land of East Arnhem Land. I acknowledge Managing Director, Djami Marika; Senior Cultural Adviser, Djalinda Yunupingu; and Executive Officer, Steve Roeger. Currently, the standing in Executive Officer is Greg Wearne, as Steve Roeger is on long service leave, noting that Greg Wearne had an instrumental and pivotal role in the start-up of Dhimurru more than 20 years ago. Executive Support Officer is Thomas Amagula; Learning on Country Coordinator is Jonathan Wearne; Facilitators include Vanessa Drysdale, Lisa Roeger and Paul Auguston; Senior Rangers are Daryl Lacey, Fiona Yupunu Marika, and Gathapura Mununggurr;and Rangers are Banula Marika, Grace Wununggmurra, Milika Marika, Anthony Crafter, Tyson Wangurra and Eddie Marika; and, of course, NT Parks and Wildlife Ranger, John (better known as Stretch) Papple who, regrettably, is now no longer based full-time with Dhimurru, but does travel back from time to time. I also acknowledge Senior Administration Officer, Libby Rayner; and Business Support Officer Juliet Perry.
I seek leave to table a copy of the judge’s report into the C.L.E.A.N Awards, along with a beautiful photograph of Yupunu Marika and Grace Wununggmurra collecting the prize.
Leave granted.
Ms WALKER: Thank you very much. Speaking of Yupunu, or Fiona Marika, she is a finalist in the Northern Territory Training Awards this year. A Dhimurru Senior Ranger, Yupunu Fiona Marika has been nominated in this section for Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Student of the Year. Yupunu, or Fiona, commenced training in 2012 for her Certificate II in Conservation and Land Management, and managed to balance training sessions with being a busy mother of four children, working full-time as a ranger with Dhimurru, and being a lead ranger in the Learning on Country Program, which is a very specifically tailored education program for children on country in communities and homelands.
The awards will be judged after a training weekend, an interview, and presentation by each finalist. The winner will represent the NT at the Australian Training Awards. Being chosen as finalist for these awards is a great achievement for any individual. I say the very best of luck to Fiona for the next step in Darwin for the gala event on Saturday 13 September. She is a fantastic young woman. She is passionate about her job and about caring for country and her family. On that note, I acknowledge her beautiful children, who are Abby, Danielle, Whitney, and the oldest of her four children is Winston.
I will also talk about Tour de ArnhemLand, which is a bike ride that takes place through remote Arnhem Land. We have had perhaps three Tour de ArnhemLands over the years. This year’s participants travelled from Nhulunbuy to Jabiru, a distance of approximately 740 km. That is a long way on a mountain bike. They undertook this race late in July. It was the day after the Darwin Show Day.
The ride is a fundraiser for Arnhem Land Health Services, with approximately $9500 being raised this year. The goal this year was to raise money to support Malabam Health to produce a suicide prevention DVD. Previously the tour has raised as much as $40 000, which saw the donation of a vehicle to St John Ambulance in Nhulunbuy, which is used to support the volunteers program.
This year, eight riders, two support crew, and one volunteer from St John Ambulance made up the team. The riders were Steven Piper; Sarah Bentley; Tony Kirby; Colin Smith; Cameron Stiff, who is just 14 years old; Rod Neil; and Ali Thorn, though, unfortunately, Ali joined the tour just for one day due to spraining her ankle. The support team was made up of Ed Verdell who was cook on the trip, Brendan Marchesi who was there for maintenance, and Mandy Paradise, a paramedic who was formally our OIC in Nhulunbuy with St John, and now in Katherine.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the main sponsors for the event were Rio Tinto, St John Ambulance, YBE and, as local member, I was also pleased to provide a modest contribution towards their fundraising efforts. I also place on the record the support of the Northern Land Council which negotiated access and special passage for the group on what we call the Top Track between Ramingining through to Maningrida and Gunbalanya, and the good grace of the TOs who welcomed these visitors on their country.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Mr Deputy Speaker, in 2012 the Country Liberals went to the election with a promise to establish an expert panel on literacy and numeracy to undertake a review into these vital areas of education. I will provide an update for the Assembly tonight on that panel. As it is also Literacy and Numeracy Week, it is timely that this report is released.
This important week, Literacy and Numeracy Week, is to raise community awareness of the importance of literacy and numeracy skills for all Australian students, something this government is very focused on. The formation of this expert panel was part of this government’s renewed focus on teaching and assessing the core competencies of reading, writing and mathematics – back to basics, if you like.
I was very pleased to receive the literacy and numeracy expert panel’s report and recommendations – a fantastic report that has been the product of over 18 months of work. What is special about this is the members of the panel were all volunteers – experts who are deeply passionate about education and improving literacy and numeracy. I thank them for their hard work and commitment. It was lovely to meet them all last week in Parliament House.
The report identifies five key areas of focus: fundamental expectations for teaching literacy and numeracy; growing teacher capacity; leadership and school improvement; data analysis and interrogation; and partnerships. Within those areas, eight recommendations had been made, and I have agreed to act on all of them.
This government is 100% committed to improving outcomes in our schools, be it through our focus on the early years, our reforms to Indigenous education, or even how we are looking at changing school holidays to help students cope with the school year better. We are looking at every possible way to help Territory kids to be the best they can be and play a vital part in the future of the Northern Territory.
The people who were on the literacy and numeracy panel were: Ken Davies and Susan Bowden from the Department of Education; Professor Peter Sullivan from Monash University; Dr Kathryn Glasswell from Griffith University; Vicki Baylis from the Department of Education; Anita Jonsberg, who is from English Teachers Association NT; Shelley Worthington from the Mathematics Teacher Association NT; Pam Adam, Australian Literacy Educators Association; Deb Gleeson, Early Childhood Association; Jarvis Ryan, President of the Australian Education Union NT – and before Jarvis, Matthew Cranitch was there and a big thank you to Matthew – Sue Shore, Charles Darwin University; Gail Barker, Association Independent Schools NT; David Cummins from the Department of the Chief Minister Central Australia; Helen Chatto, Northern Territory Department of Education; Jill Hazeldine from the Northern Territory Department of Education; and Jan McCarthy from the Northern Territory Department of Education.
A big thank you to those volunteers, who did some vital work over 18 months to provide this government with far more information than I expected to get out of that. It was fantastic.
This government has been accused, from time to time, of not doing enough to bring down the cost of living in the Northern Territory. I want to put on the record a couple of things we have been doing lately, and we are starting to see signs that the hard work we have been doing is starting to make a difference.
The Country Liberals government is complementing the successful Real Housing for Growth program of the Minister for Housing by fast-tracking new and existing land release sites. Since coming to government, over 3500 dwellings have been constructed; that is in two years. On top of that, there are around 1000 units currently under construction in the Darwin CBD. This work is putting serious pressure on the cost of living and going a long way to make housing more affordable. We are expecting to see these numbers grow further in the near future as our land release program, the biggest in the Territory’s history, is rolled out.
Sales of Zuccoli Stage 2 are about to begin and a developer is expected to be announced next month for Stages 3 and 4. When completed, these stages will yield around 1350 lots. These lots will average around $160 000 and $180 000 each, very affordable compared to surrounding land releases. More releases are on the horizon. Stage 1 of Holtze, around the Palmerston Regional Hospital, will yield around 1500 dwellings and Berrimah Farm will yield around 2750 dwellings.
Labor members sat on their hands refusing to release land and keep up with the economy they had partially created. The reality is INPEX – and organisations like it – coming to the Top End put pressure on the cost of living, because there was not enough land being released.
We are now releasing land at record rates and, according to Real Estate Institute of the NT, Quentin Kilian, rents are beginning to ease. We have seen a number of unit developments completed around the same time. There is a larger amount of availability. Rent prices have eased, which is also good. ‘It has been a struggle for quite some time for renters’, are the words of Quentin Kilian.
Our push to promote development is paying dividends and rents are easing. People were struggling under Labor, but our efforts to reduce the cost of living and make housing more affordable are starting to take effect. We have the biggest land release program in the Territory’s history.
Mr Deputy Speaker, with that, I bid you a good night, but not good bye, because there is so much more to do. The reality is we have to keep this land release up across the Northern Territory at a pace that will keep up with the growth and ensure that land prices do not get out of the reach of the average person.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not going to say anything, but I decided after debate today I would say a couple of things. One is I do not oppose a hospital for Palmerston and the rural area. The debate was about whether that site had been looked at.
Regardless of that, I am also concerned – and I have said this before in regard to the government – that they are arrogant, which we saw today when we asked some simple questions about the development of the hospital. The member for Blain, who could not care two hoots about the people in Wallaby Holtze Road, said he would love to be there with the bulldozer, knocking over a few trees. The Health minister said, ‘Get over it, we are going to develop all your land into a suburban development’.
That is the type of arrogance people are sick of, and it will put this government out of office if it continues in that way. It needs to have some respect for the people who live in that area and in the rural area, otherwise it will not be around after the next election.
As I said, I support the hospital. The reason for the questions today was simply to find out whether the government had been consulting and whether adequate work had been done on looking into alternative sites. However, it appears in asking those questions, all you get are political answers that do not answer the points you are trying to get at.
I am going to raise a very sensitive issue tonight about abortion. As I said, it is sensitive, but I raise it because yesterday I was asked to meet a group of women from the Top End Women’s Legal Service. I gather they are pushing a proposal to the Northern Territory government which would increase the accessibility of abortions in the Northern Territory. What concerned me in the discussion was the way the unborn were referred to. I am not going to repeat that terminology, but I found it quite upsetting because, for me, life starts at conception and human life should be respected and protected, especially when that life is at its most vulnerable – inside its mum.
I am saying on the record that I will not be supporting the legislation they are trying to put forward. For me, human life is wonderful, special, and God’s gift, which can be seen no more than when a baby is born. It is a miracle, not just a bunch of cells. It is a human life, no less than those lives who are born. It is time it is treated in that way. Let us love life, not destroy it.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I imagine this issue will come up another time in more detail, but I wanted to put it on the record because I was quite upset. I was happy to speak to those women, but I felt there was disrespect for human life which I could not stomach. I needed to say something tonight to put it on the record that we need to treat human life with a lot more respect than we do today.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016