2016-04-20
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of two Year 5/6 classes from Millner Primary School, accompanied by Sheree Arratta. Welcome to Parliament House, and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the Guardianship of Adults Bill (Serial 160) and the Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill (Serial 161) be considered together for the purposes of the second and third reading debates but separately for any required consideration in detail.
Cognate bills of this nature are not a surprise to the House. In the past this has been done as a matter of mechanics, but I can assure honourable members that the relationship between the two bills is so intimate and intertwined that to deal with them separately would be less efficient and less sensible than dealing with them together. That will become clear during the second reading speech, hopefully in a few minutes’ time.
Motion agreed to.
Bills presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 establishes a contemporary framework for adult guardianship in the Northern Territory and replaces the Adult Guardianship Act 1988. The Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill 2016 makes complementary amendments to the Advance Personal Planning Act to ensure that the adult decision-making and adult guardianship frameworks are aligned.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 provides a new guardianship model that includes comprehensive guardianship principles, creates an independent office of the Public Guardian, allows for guardianship orders to be made for a person from the age of 17 years of age, and transfers jurisdiction of all adult guardianship matters from the Local Court to the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal, hereinafter called the tribunal.
The Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill 2016 amends the Advance Personal Planning Act to transfer jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal, and repeals the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill and the Advance Personal Planning Act both provide for the making of decisions after a person has lost decision-making capacity. The Guardianship of Adults Bill has been drafted to complement the Advance Personal Planning Act, and has resulted in some consequential amendments. These amendments are provided in the Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill and are today being introduced cognate with the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
First I will discuss in detail the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, which retains the primary purpose of ensuring that there is a legal mechanism for decisions to be made on behalf of adults whose capacity to make decisions for themselves is impaired.
Impaired decision-making capacity can affect an individual at any point in their life. It may be due to a pre-existing disability, an accident, illness or an age-related condition. This provides confidence to Territorians who may have impaired decision-making capacity now or into the future that their fundamental rights to continue to participate in everyday life and their own decision-making processes will be protected through the provisions of the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
I note that it is also possible for a person to gain and lose capacity on several occasions during the passage of their life.
The guardianship reform in the Northern Territory is long overdue and welcomed by all stakeholders in the community. The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 has been informed by guardianship review recommendations, notably the WestWood Spice review undertaken in 2005. The recommendations of the review were for significant and wide-ranging reform and required the drafting of new legislation to bring the Northern Territory more closely into line with the national approach and contemporary best practice.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill being introduced today achieves these recommendations and also incorporates feedback from past and more recent consultations. Consultation on the draft Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 occurred in February this year. Community briefings were held in Darwin, Katherine, Gove, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. A further 23 briefings were held with key stakeholders including medical professionals, legal professionals and peak bodies. The response from stakeholders and the community was overwhelmingly supportive of the proposed reforms.
The availability of detailed information explaining the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, combined with the multiple avenues to provide feedback, allowed for a broad cross-section of the community and gave key stakeholders the opportunity to be engaged in the reform process and in the finalisation of this legislation. Personal experiences and suggestions for improvement were shared by guardians and professionals, which will assist in the future development of required policies and procedures upon the commencement of the legislation.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 seeks to recognise the overall wellbeing, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with impaired decision-making capacity and align with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
It is a contemporary piece of legislation drafted to maximise the participation of adults with impaired decision-making capacity in decisions affecting them, and also in everyday life, and to provide guardians with more guidance and certainty about their role.
The current act is underpinned by the concept of adult guardianship being for adults under an intellectual disability. The bill has broadened the user group for guardianship legislation to be any adult with an impaired decision-making capacity, which has been clearly defined.
The bill also defines that an adult does not have impaired decision-making capacity only because the adult has a disability, illness or other medical condition, engages in unconventional behaviour or chooses a living environment or lifestyle with which other people do not agree. Additionally, an adult’s decision-making capacity may be impaired even if the impairment is episodic, or the impairment is subject and time specific.
Importantly, the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 states that a person is presumed to have a decision-making capacity until the contrary is shown and the cause of any impairment is immaterial.
This legislation has been drafted to ensure guardianship orders are only made for matters in which an adult with impaired decision-making capacity needs assistance for some or all personal financial matters and is in need of a guardian for some or all of those matters.
Before making a guardianship order it must be considered whether the adult’s needs could be adequately provided for in a way that is less restrictive of the adult’s freedoms of decision and action rather than appointed a guardian.
The bill includes a new provision to allow the tribunal to make an order in which a guardian or other specified person is authorised to take specific measures or actions to ensure a represented adult complies with a guardian’s decision. For example, this will allow for a represented person to be removed from a setting where they may be subject to abuse, exploitation or neglect but refuse to be removed.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 includes comprehensive guardianship principles to guide any person and the tribunal in the exercise of their authority, and to ensure consistency and accountability in undertaking the important role of guardian. The guardianship principles include acting in the adult’s best interests, taking into account the adult’s wishes and views as far as practicable, and taking into account a number of relevant considerations defined in the bill. Relevant considerations include the views and wishes of the adult and any interested persons for the adult.
The decision-maker’s authority must be exercised in a way that is least restrictive of the adult’s freedom of decision and action as is practicable.
The guardianship principles aim to ensure maximum participation in decision-making and everyday life by adults with impaired decision-making capacity. They apply to any person exercising authority under the bill, including any member of the tribunal, the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 creates an independent statutory officer as the Public Guardian which gives rise to the creation of the independent office of the Public Guardian. This is an essential element of the new legislation, and aligns the Northern Territory with guardianship models used in other jurisdictions and, frankly, relieves me of the duty of being the Public Guardian.
The creation of the independent Public Guardian will remove the current conflict of interest whereby the Minister for Health is responsible for the overall guardianship, health and disability policy directions and, as the Public Guardian, is also required to make decisions in the best interest of individual clients.
The independence of the Public Guardian is prescribed by the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016. Importantly, however, if the Public Guardian is a guardian for an adult this officer is subject to the supervision and direction of the tribunal to the same extent as any other guardian.
Staff of the independent office will perform the functions of the Public Guardian, which are much broader under this bill. Specific functions of the Public Guardian include but are not limited to:
act as a guardian for an adult when appointed by the tribunal
promote access to services for adults with impaired decision-making capacity, their guardians and families
advocate for adults with impaired decision-making capacity by promoting understanding and awareness of relevant issues
provide support and advice to guardians and persons making or proposing to apply for a guardianship order; they undertake research
provide and encourage the provision of education about the relevant issues.
The term ‘relevant issues’ is defined by the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 and means any issue relating to adults with impaired decision-making capacity. This may include the rights and interests of this group, supported services or the law relating to adults with impaired decision-making capacity and the role of guardians, the Public Guardian or the Public Trustee.
The advocacy and guardian support functions of the Public Guardian are not possible under the current model of guardianship in the Northern Territory. They are included in the bill so that individuals choosing to fulfil the important role of the guardian may feel confident and supported in the role.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 gives the Public Guardian a general power to do all things necessary to be done for the performance of the public guardian’s functions. Specific powers of the Public Guardian include an information-gathering power which enables the Public Guardian to require a document or information to be given to the Public Guardian or an information holder to answer questions asked by the Public Guardian, and the power to request an adult to obtain a health assessment report and provide it to the Public Guardian.
Including these specific powers in the legislation leaves no doubt as to the Public Guardian’s authority, and also assures other parties that they are not in breach of any legal or professional duties by honouring the Public Guardian’s requests.
The Public Guardian will be appointed by the Administrator on the recommendation of the minister. This recommendation will be made on the basis that the person has qualifications or experience relating to the Public Guardian’s functions, and is committed to advancing the interests of persons with impaired decision-making capacity and promoting the guardianship principles.
To ensure accountability and transparency the Public Guardian must prepare an annual report detailing the performance of the Public Guardian’s functions during the previous financial year. The report must be given to the Minister for Health by 31 October each year.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 also deals with other essential administrative matters relating to the position of the Public Guardian, including the term and conditions of appointment and delegation of the Public Guardian’s functions and powers.
All adult guardianship matters’ transfer of jurisdiction to the tribunal will allow guardianship proceedings to be determined more quickly and straightforwardly than through the court system. It is anticipated that this approach will reduce delays in hearing and determining guardianship applications. Many procedural matters related to guardianship will be determined be the provisions already in the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act.
The tribunal has a flexible approach to determining applications. The tribunal may determine its own procedures subject to the provisions of the bill and may inform itself in any way it considers appropriated. The use of a tribunal for guardianship matters is consistent with other states and territories.
The current act creates a nexus between personal and financial matters which prevents orders being made for only financial matters. This is not appropriate as decision-making impairment may be decision specific, and while the adult may need a guardian with authority for financial matters they may not need a guardian for personal matters. This nexus is broken by the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016.
The provisions of the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 accommodate different levels of decision-making capacity and the tribunal has increased flexibility to make individualised guardianship orders. The terms of any guardianship order will specify the personal or financial matters, or both matters, for which the guardian has authority.
Under the current act a guardian with authority for healthcare cannot provide consent for major medical procedures, which include procedures relating to contraception and procedures requiring general anaesthetic. These procedures require an application to the Local Court for a consent decision, which can result in treatment delays.
Healthcare has been widely defined in the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 and, subject to the specific terms of the guardianship order, guardians will have greater authority for healthcare matters and be able to consent to a broader spectrum of healthcare actions. The authority of guardians for healthcare actions will also be subject to the relevant provisions of the Advance Personal Planning Act.
Importantly, restrictions will apply to guardians providing consent for healthcare action that is defined as restricted healthcare under the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016. This includes sterilisation of the represented adult, termination of a pregnancy of an adult, removal from the adult of non-regenerative tissue for transplantation to another person and healthcare provided for medical research purposes. Consent for these matters is governed by Part 4 of the Advance Personal Planning Act.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 includes a new provision to allow the tribunal to make a guardianship order for a young person who has attained the age of 17 years, with the order coming into effect when the person turns 18. The tribunal must be satisfied that it is reasonably likely that when the young person turns 18, the person will have impaired decision-making capacity. This provision overcomes any gap in decision-making authority for persons turning 18 and thereby ensures a smooth transition of decision-making authority from childhood to adulthood.
Guardianship orders are not presumed to be permanent or ongoing, and all orders under the new Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 must specify a reassessment date. The term ‘reassessment’ replaces the term ‘review’ which is used in the current act. Reassessments are an important inclusion in the Guardianship of Adults Bill as an impaired decision-making capacity may be temporary, episodic or limited only to certain matters. A reassessment allows the tribunal to consider all of the circumstances relevant to the represented adult and decide if there should be any variations of the guardianship order or if the order should be revoked.
A new provision in the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 allows the tribunal to make an interim guardianship order pending the determination of the application. The tribunal must reasonably believe the adult has impaired decision-making capacity and is in urgent need of a guardian for some or all personal financial matters. An interim order remains in force until it is revoked, it expires or the tribunal decides the application for a guardianship order. In any event the interim order expires 90 days after the order is made.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 introduces registration of interstate guardianship orders by the tribunal. This is legislation that will align the Northern Territory with other jurisdictions and minimise the administrative processes for people affected by adult guardianship legislation who may move between jurisdictions.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 creates specific offences in relation to a guardian’s conduct and the use of information under the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, and confirms the penalty attached to each offence. The inclusion of offences recognises the need for guardians to act in the best interests of the adult to whom the guardianship order relates and in accordance with the provisions of the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
There will continue to be interaction between the new guardianship legislation and the Advance Personal Planning Act. These two items of legislation complement each other so that even if a person is found to have impaired decision-making capacity, any decision they made or directions they gave prior to their impairment will be appropriately recognised.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill provides that if an adult has an advance personal plan and an application is made for a guardianship order, the tribunal must take the existence and terms of the plan, including any appointment of a decision-maker, into account when deciding whether the person needs a guardian and, if so, who to appoint as a guardian and the terms of the guardianship order.
The tribunal cannot make a guardianship order that gives a guardian authority for a matter for which a decision-maker already has authority under the Advance Personal Planning Act, unless specific conditions exist which are defined by the legislation.
To ensure that relevant provisions of the Advance Personal Planning Act are consistent with provisions in the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, there will be some consequential amendments to the Advance Personal Planning Act with the commencement of the Guardianship of Adults Bill in 2016. A specific consequential amendment to the Advance Personal Planning Act is the insertion of proposed section 39A into the act. This provision provides that if a healthcare provider proposes to provide healthcare for an adult and there is a guardian with decision-making authority for healthcare matters, then this is prima facie evidence for the purposes of Part 4 of the Advance Personal Planning Act that the person has impaired decision-making capacity and may be relied upon by the healthcare provider.
The Advance Personal Planning Act commenced on 1 March 2014 to provide Territorians with modern legislation for the making of advance consent decisions, advance care statements and the appointment of decision-makers. Part 5 of the Advance Personal Planning Act gives the Local Court jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising in relation to the act.
As mentioned earlier, the Guardianship of Adults Bill transfers jurisdiction of all adult guardianship matters from the Local Court to the tribunal. The Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill amends the Advance Personal Planning Act to transfer jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal. The simultaneous transfer of jurisdiction to the tribunal is necessary to ensure that decisions in relation to health consent matters and responsibilities of decision-makers appointed under both the Advance Personal Planning Act and the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 are dealt with by the same body. For example, under the Advance Personal Planning Act an adult may, in an advance personal plan, jointly appoint decision-makers which could include both the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee. Decision-makers may also be appointed in relation to care or welfare and/or property or financial matters.
If there is a disagreement between decision-makers in the making of a decision, an application may be made to the tribunal as the body to hear and determine all those matters together. Matters coming before the tribunal under the Advance Personal Planning Act are new decisions; therefore the jurisdiction given to the tribunal to deal with matters comes within the tribunal’s original jurisdiction. Accordingly, section 56 of the Advance Personal Planning Act has been amended to give the tribunal jurisdiction and specifies that it falls within their original jurisdiction functions.
Currently the Advance Personal Planning Act relies on procedure of the Local Court, except for some specific requirements set out in Division 2 of Part 4 which relate to parties to proceedings, closed proceedings and the reporting of proceedings. Similarly, when jurisdiction is transferred to the tribunal the procedure of the tribunal will also be relied upon. However, there will be no requirement for the tribunal to give reasons for decisions as the majority of decisions and orders sought will be straightforward. However, if a person would like to obtain reasons they can apply for them within 28 days after the hearing of a proceeding of application. The same provision has been included in the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
I now turn to the the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act, which has become redundant because of the Guardianship of Adults Bill. The Guardianship of Adults Bill provides for the power to appoint guardians with powers to deal with a represented adult’s financial affairs. This includes appointing the Public Trustee as the sole guardian if decision-making is limited to financial matters. The majority of other provisions in the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act are also out of date or no longer used by the Office of the Public Trustee. Any provisions still used have been transferred to the Guardianship of Adults Bill. For example, section 23 of the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act, which deems a guardianship order dealing with financial matters to be an instrument under the Land Title Act, has been transferred to proposed section 35A of the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
Transitional provisions are also provided to protect any existing protection orders made under the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act when the Guardianship of Adults Bill commences. On commencement existing protection orders are taken to become a guardianship order, existing protected persons are taken to be a represented guardian, and an existing manager a guardian under the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
Madam Speaker, after that long explanation, I commend these bills to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statements.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The main purpose of this bill is to repeal the Records of Depositions Act in relation to how court records are kept.
Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act 2015, which comes into operation on 1 May 2016 – hallelujah! – will regulate the administration of court records in the Northern Territory’s lower courts. This bill is part of the government’s commitment to rationalising and modernising the courts and court procedures of the Northern Territory.
The Records of Depositions Act commenced operation in 1970. Prior to the introduction of this act the evidence of witnesses in a court was largely taken down in writing. This was done on a typewriter or written by shorthand as witnesses’ evidence was given. Introduction of the Records of Depositions Act in 1970 was aimed at keeping up with technological developments of that time by making provision for the sound recording of evidence in the Magistrates Court. Where a courtroom was not yet equipped with what was then termed ‘sound and recording apparatus’, the Records of Depositions Act continued to make provision for evidence to be recorded in writing.
Technology has come a long way since 1970. ‘Depositions’ is not a word in common usage anymore. The recording of evidence is no longer done by means of sound recording on tape, but is digitally audio recorded. It has been a very long time indeed since anyone has had cause to use shorthand in a courtroom for the purposes of preparing the official court transcript.
The government’s consultation on the Records of Depositions Act formed part of a Territory-wide community consultation on the draft Local Court Bill in 2014. My department released a report on this consultation on 22 September 2014, and the report confirms that the Records of Depositions Act is overly prescriptive and will cease to be of practical relevance with the implementation of the new Local Court Act 2015 and its subordinate legislation.
Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act, which deals with the administration of court records, will cover the majority of the substantive provisions under the Records of Depositions Act. In recognition of this the bill repeals the Records of Depositions Act and makes provisions for the remaining aspects of the act which are still relevant today and are not already included in the Local Court Act.
I now outline the repeals and amendments.
Sections 1 and 2 of the Records of Depositions Act are formal clauses describing the short title and commencement of the act. Section 3 contains definitions, and section 4 describes the application of the act. These sections will no longer be necessary and can be repealed.
Sections 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17 and 20 are substantive provisions which will be covered by Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act. Sections 7, 18 and 19 of the Records of Depositions Act are no longer applicable in light of the current technology.
Sections 11 and 16 of the Records of Depositions Act deal with the evidentiary status and certification elements of court records, which are covered by sections 178(5) and 157 of the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act.
Amendments to the Local Court Act 2015 are required to make provision for sections 12, 14 and 15 of the Records of Depositions Act, which deal with the mandatory transcription of evidence in certain cases. These sections are not currently covered by the Local Court Act or any other legislation.
Under these provisions the court must always provide a transcription where a person lodges an appeal to the Supreme Court, is committed for trial or sentence for an indictable offence, or where the court reserves a question of law for the consideration of the Supreme Court. The bill amends the Local Court Act to require the principal registrar to arrange for the transcription in these cases.
The Records of Depositions Act also covers the administration of court records for the Coroner, the Youth Justice Court and the Work Health Court. These courts do not form part of the Local Court reforms under the Local Court Act. However, the proper administration of records is equally important to these courts. For this reason the bill makes consequential amendments to the Coroners Act, Youth Justice Act and the Work Health Administration Act so that these courts will have the same requirements in relation to the administration of records as the Local Court. The consequential amendments provide that Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act 2015 will also apply to the Coroner, the Youth Justice Court and the Work Health Court.
This reform is important to the harmonisation of the lower courts of the Northern Territory and indicative of this government’s commitment to the orderly administration of justice, something I have taken very seriously as the Attorney-General over the last four years. People who have paid attention have noted the substantial reform to our court system, not necessarily politically sexy but it establishes a court system that is ready to embrace the growth of the Northern Territory over the next 50 years.
I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to amend the existing legislation to reframe the composition of the board of Menzies School of Health Research. The new board will be an independent, influential and skills-based board with a governance framework which is consistent with other high-level medical research institutes within Australia to foster growth and development of northern Australia in health research, education and capacity development.
The main amendments to this bill seek to strengthen the current board structure and expand the skills and expertise of the board of the Menzies School of Health Research. The expansion of the skills and expertise of board members will significantly increase the board’s capacity to enhance commercial opportunities across the Northern Territory, Australia and the Asia-Pacific region. It will also address performance, risk management, marketing, and philanthropic and global engagement to further its objectives through sustainable health and equity improvements.
Section 11 of the act has been amended and reframed to reflect the current best practice and board structure whereby community and business sector representatives will act swiftly in the best interest of the organisation in response to change.
I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HIGGINS (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
I am pleased to present the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 to honourable members. It is no secret that fishing is of great importance to the Northern Territory, be it commercial fishing that allows people to buy high-quality local fish, prawns and crabs, or Territorians and visitors wanting to catch a fresh feed for their family.
Fishing is and will remain an integral part of the lifestyle for many Territorians, whether traditionally spearing a fish or mud crab along our nearly 11 000 km of coastline, fishing one of our iconic rivers or travelling offshore for a spot of reef fishing. Let us also not forget the economic boost the Territory gets each year from thousands of recreational anglers who visit to enjoy the thrill of our world-class sports fishing. Some might say there are now even more than a million good reasons as to why they will keep coming.
To ensure the Territory’s aquatic resources are both sustainable and optimally utilised, there is a need to make certain that the underpinning regulatory framework for our fisheries remains contemporary and effective. There is also a need to be mindful of those operating in the industry and, where possible, remove or reduce unnecessary red tape. This bill seeks to achieve these outcomes by making some long-needed amendments to the current Fisheries Act, which was enacted in 1988, some 28 years ago.
As part of this government’s wider reform agenda, relevant agencies were tasked with undertaking audits of industry-based legislation to ensure it remains contemporary, promotes best practice and is workable. I am pleased to say that the results of this important work are before us today in highly anticipated amendments to the Fisheries Act. The amending bill builds on a strong platform provided by the current act and, if passed by this House, will deliver an improved management framework for the future of our fisheries and aquatic resources.
With respect to the broader management of our fisheries, I am pleased to say that this government, via the Fisheries Resource Sharing Framework which was released last year, is the first in the Territory’s history to articulate a fair and transparent policy around the sharing of our valuable aquatic resource. This principle is to be enshrined in an amended section 2A of the act, which sets out the objectives to be followed. The updated objectives will now capture:
maintaining a stewardship of aquatic resources that promotes fairness, equity and access to aquatic resources by all stakeholder groups, including:
Our fisheries legislation sets out a number of principles that need to be weighed up when making decisions under the legislation. This includes the requirement to explicitly allocate access to fish and aquatic resources between stakeholders and to provide for optimal utilisation and equitable distribution of these resources.
Optimal use of our aquatic resources is very important for continued economic growth and development of the Territory and value adding of existing resources is to be encouraged under this legislation.
In general terms, this is an important bill for the Assembly to consider as it:
fulfils commitments made under the settlement agreements for access to waters affected by the Blue Mud Bay decision
provides essential biosecurity powers to deal with the increased risks of pest and disease incursions
removes red tape and administrative burden to increase business flexibility and facilitate industry development
provides for more efficient and effective compliance through the use of electronic vessel monitoring systems, the use of fishery infringement notices for minor offences, and more contemporary penalties that are commensurate with the offence
reduces the cost of fisheries compliance through the use of modern technology
ensures fisheries legislation is consistent with Northern Territory Criminal Code and privacy legislation and other Australian fisheries legislation.
I now concentrate on the key amendments with respect to each of these matters.
Meeting Blue Mud Bay commitments – the amending bill fulfils the government’s legal obligation to deliver on the Blue Mud Bay commitments, specifically:
the ability to issue fisheries enforcement powers to Aboriginal marine rangers commensurate with their skills, knowledge and experience
the power to deal with recidivist offenders by suspending or revoking fishing entitlements for offences committed under the act or other relevant legislation, for example, fishing in a sacred site
Recidivist offenders and the application of a ‘fit and proper’ test for people in charge of fishing operations has been dealt with by the creation of a new fishing activity authorisation, an ‘approved operator’ under new section 17A of the act.
Under section 17A every person in charge of fishing operations will first have to apply to the Director of Fisheries for approved operator status. Applicants will need to pass a national criminal check and not have been convicted of serious fishing offences, or offences under other relevant acts, in the previous five years. Successful applicants will be issued with an approved operator card which can be valid for up to five years. Approved operator status can be revoked by the Director of Fisheries if he/she considers that the person is no longer a fit and proper person, for example, subsequently convicted of an offence.
Under section 17E of the amended act a commercial fishing licensee must appoint an approved operator to undertake fishing operations.
A list of approved operators will be published by the director and licensees can appoint anyone from this list without further approval from the director. This will reduce red tape and make it easier for licence owners to appoint someone to operate their licence. The existing licensing framework is administratively onerous and cumbersome on licence owners and the department. Under the current act, each time a licence owner employs a person to work a licence on their behalf the Director of Fisheries is required to approve this action. This amended approach will provide industry with improved certainty and clarity while ensuring the enabling legislation is in place to fulfil the commitments made under the Blue Mud Bay agreements to deter repeat offending.
The fit and proper person policy will be developed in the form of ministerial guidelines, in consultation with key stakeholders once the act is amended. These ministerial guidelines will provide industry with clarity over the requirements for a person to be in charge of fishing operations.
Increased protection of the Territory’s environment through essential biosecurity powers – aquatic noxious species pose significant risk to the continued ecologically sustainable development of the Territory’s aquatic resources. These species may be plants or animals which have been transported from one location to another, for example, state or country, either accidently or deliberately, and released into local waterways.
In their natural environment these species have evolved with the diseases, predators and controls that act to restrict their growth and maintain the natural balance of the ecosystem. When introduced to a new area noxious species are no longer restricted by the natural controls of their native environment and may consequently overrun their new habitat.
Introduced noxious species can have adverse economic impacts on aquaculture, commercial and recreational fisheries, port industries, tourism and marine infrastructure. As such, aquatic pests and noxious species present a significant risk to the future economic viability of these important industries and assets.
This bill provides new powers to deal with the illegal introduction, sale, purchase and possession of noxious species. The sought amendments contained in clauses 11, 15 and 33C of the bill will provide the necessary powers to further detect, deter and respond to threats to the aquatic environment from noxious fish and aquatic life or from diseased or contaminated fish.
The amendments also include penalties of up to 500 penalty units or two years’ imprisonment for intentionally bringing in, or causing to bring in, and/or releasing pests or disease.
Other measures in the bill will allow for the provision of appropriate powers of entry, inspection and detainment for fisheries officers, and the ability for the Director of Fisheries to issue instructions or orders to respond to biosecurity threats. Commensurate with this, the penalties for aquatic biosecurity offences have been increased to reflect the seriousness of the offence.
Clear, simple licensing framework – the nature of fisheries management in Australia has progressed significantly in the last 20 years. Fisheries management has become more complex to cover the management of entire ecosystems and cumulative impacts as well as catering to the need for increased operational flexibility and security for licensees.
Amendments in the presented bill will remove the unnecessary complexity and ambiguity in the current licensing framework. Under revised section 15 of the act, industry will be provided with greater certainty by increasing licence tenure to 10 years from the current five. There will also be increased clarity around responsibility of licence holders and more flexibility for their business operations.
A number of proposed amendments under an updated Division 2, licences and permits, will allow for a more efficient licensing framework as well as removing unnecessary red tape. These changes will better support the use of contemporary fisheries management techniques, such as resource allocation between sectors and quota management.
Amendments for contemporary management – the current act sets out a comprehensive process for developing and approving fishery management plans while ensuring involvement from all key stakeholders in the preparation of these plans. A key feature of fishery management plans is the requirement to include provisions relating to the allocation of access to aquatic resources and mechanisms for adjusting that access between sectors into the future.
Changes put forward in the new bill will ensure that our fisheries legislation is more consistent with Commonwealth and other state fisheries legislation. This will allow for improved collaborative management of shared fish stocks across northern Australia under the Offshore Constitutional Settlement. Further, it will also protect the privacy of licensees in a manner consistent with the Privacy Act.
A number of sought amendments in the bill will allow for the use of modern technology to deliver more efficient remote monitoring of fishing activities. For example, under a revised section 14 of the act, the director will have the explicit power to require licensees or permit holders to install a vessel monitoring system, or VMS.
Experience elsewhere shows that the use of electronic monitoring devices aboard fishing vessels, and tenders, is an effective tool to deter illegal fishing in waters where fishing is prohibited or restricted by hours of operation. Adopting vessel monitoring systems will lessen the need for fisheries officers to be on the water to check the location of vessels, thus reducing compliance costs.
Responsibilities of licence owner – as mentioned earlier, it is common practice in the Territory’s fishing industry for licensees to engage in leasing arrangements with another person to operate their licence. Upon entering such an agreement the current act deems that the engaged person becomes the holder of the licence or permit for all purposes of the act, except renewing or transferring the licence.
These current deeming provisions exempt the owner of the licence from the responsibility of ensuring that fishing is done so lawfully. Consequently, there is little or no recourse on the licence owner for illegal fishing by a person they have engaged to fish on their behalf.
Clause 17J of the amending bill addresses the situation by requiring the owner of a licence or permit to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure that activities carried out under his or her licence or permit are conducted in a manner which is lawful.
At industry’s request ministerial guidelines will be developed as to what constitutes ‘reasonable and practical’ measures, in consultation with key stakeholders, once the act is amended.
Offences and penalties – this bill has been reviewed by the Solicitor for the Northern Territory to ensure all penalties are commensurate with the nature of the offence. As a consequence, some penalties for breaches of the fisheries legislation have increased.
Over the last 28 years there have been increases in the value of our major fish species. In turn, this increases the incentive of some to try to operate illegally. This bill assists to address the previous imbalance between the level of penalties and the potential impact of illegal activities, both in terms of damage to the fish stock, but also impact on the economic potential of the industry.
To reflect the seriousness of illegal fisheries activity most of the offences in the bill are summary offences and have a maximum penalty of between 100 and 200 penalty units and/or two years imprisonment. The new penalties are considered adequate to deter repeat offending. Penalties in the bill before us are consistent with Part IIAA of the Northern Territory’s Criminal Code Act.
Compliance tools for minor offences – sought amendments in the bill under proposed section 46 allow for increased use of fishery infringement notices for minor offences. Limitations in the current act result in some minor fisheries offences being dealt with by the courts rather than via the issuing of an infringement notice. This outcome is time consuming and costly to the offender, the court, government and the Northern Territory community as a whole.
The sought changes contained in the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 have been developed over a 10-year period of proactive consultation with industry groups, representative Aboriginal organisations and those in the wider community. In this regard, I thank the peak stakeholder groups, which include the Northern Territory Seafood Council, the Northern Territory Guided Fishing Industry Association, the Aboriginal land councils, the Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee and the Amateur Fishermen’s Association of the Northern Territory for their ongoing commitment, support and input to this process.
I also commend staff in the department, as well as those from the Solicitor for the Northern Territory’s Legal Policy Unit and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel for their concerted efforts in the development and finalisation of the bill.
If passed, the significant changes contained in this bill will enhance the management and sustainable development of the Northern Territory’s aquatic resources for the benefit of all Territorians now and into the future.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Building a First-Class Education System
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Madam Speaker, I move that through the government’s reform agenda we have laid the foundations for a first-class education system that meets the Northern Territory’s growing needs.
Today it gives me great pleasure to update the House on the progress of major reforms to shape and build a first-class education system in the Northern Territory. As we all know, accessing quality education is the key to ensuring Territorians can actively and positively participate in our community. It improves the social and economic circumstances of people, and plays a key role in building a strong society with a robust economy and prosperous outlook, which is a fundamental part of the Country Liberal government’s Framing the Future strategy.
Education is at the heart of advancing the development of northern Australia and securing the Northern Territory social and economic future. My department has been implementing an extensive reform agenda and has consulted broadly across the community. We have considered the research, listened to principals and the teaching profession and looked at what the best countries around the world are doing. This has provided us with a deeper understanding of the opportunities and challenges facing education in the Northern Territory and helped identify what is needed to improve student outcomes.
This government knows that significant improvement is required, particularly for Indigenous students. To achieve the change needed we have set ourselves an ambitious reform agenda for government education in the Northern Territory. We have reformed the Education Act, increased school autonomy, invested in schools, developed a long-term plan for Indigenous education and established productive partnerships into Asia.
I take this opportunity to clear up the debate about funding for Territory schools. Although the Northern Territory did not sign up to the Gonski funding offer, the amount of Students First funding provided by the federal Coalition government to the Northern Territory for 2014-17 matches the amount offered under the Gonski agreement. The Northern Territory will receive $505.9m Students First funding for 2014-17. This includes $272m more for Northern Territory government schools than under any previous funding arrangement.
At this stage we are in negotiations with the federal government. Territorians need to be assured the agreement with the former minister, Christopher Pyne, was a four-year funding agreement and we received every cent we would have if we had signed up to Gonski, but with no strings attached. That money covers us through 2016 and 2017.
The funding agreement currently being speculated is for 2018 and beyond. We are in high level discussions with the federal government about this and will continue to advocate for what is best for Territorians. The federal Senate inquiry asked if reductions were made in the Territory what the impact would be. I am confident we can get through this and make sure the Territory gets the best from funding agreements with the federal government.
The federal government should have absolute faith in the Northern Territory government, particularly regarding education. The department is different and has a different system to what we inherited three-and-a-half years ago. It is a mean, lean, fighting machine and we are kicking goals. The results continue to improve and we have better attendance than ever. Our results are the best they have ever been.
More kids are sitting for their NTCET than ever before. The system has had a major reform, the act has changed and we have had Indigenous education reviews. We have done the hard work and now we need the resources to fertilise it. So much work has been done by teachers, our school leaders and the department. All stakeholders should be congratulated for dealing with what some people described as a decade’s worth of reform undertaken in three-and-a-half years. I have every confidence that the system is now so robust all we need is to fertilise it to take education to the next level.
In today’s Northern Territory News Letters to the Editor Simon Birmingham, the current federal Minister for Education and Training, said:
Foundation for quality education systems – the government’s reform agenda has laid the foundations for a first-class system which meets the Territory’s growing needs. The Department of Education is working hard to implement comprehensive evidence-based reforms to achieve sustainable improvements in educational outcomes for all children and young people in the Territory.
To build a first-class education system this government has introduced new legislation that supports the delivery of high-quality contemporary education to develop each student’s potential, maximise their educational achievement and open up opportunities for their future. The new Education Act commenced on 1 January 2016. It recognises the importance parents and the community play in ensuring the good governance of schools by providing a more flexible model for schools’ representative bodies.
We have also changed the membership model of the Northern Territory Board of Studies to provide more expert and balanced views in education from across the community. We have demonstrated our commitment to ensuring every Territory student can, and does, access a quality education through provisions which assert that education is free for all Australian citizens or permanent residents living in the Northern Territory who are enrolled in a government school.
The act allows more direct access to support for parents and schools with students with disabilities and learning needs, and reflects current practice. The act fosters the principle that schools are positive and safe environments for students and staff through the introduction of criminal history checks for young adult students returning to schooling who have not been previously enrolled.
The act also includes new provisions for non-government schools with the creation of the statutory position reporting directly to me, with responsibility for administering the registration and compliance regime for non-government schools under the act.
The act allows for the establishment of school boards for independent public schools, supporting an environment of greater autonomy and accountability for the service being delivered at those schools. The act also provides greater flexibility in the formation of school boards in independent public schools, enabling schools to engage with members of the community with specific knowledge and skills needed to support the direction of the school.
Quality facilities – this government is building the structure needed to support a first-class education system by implementing a future-looking infrastructure program of renewal and improvement to cater for the growing demand for enrolment places in government and non-government schools. We are continuing to construct and refurbish teacher housing in remote communities to ensure teachers are provided with safe and comfortable living conditions and are inclined to stay and work longer in remote areas. This is an important aspect of reducing staff turnover so that positive long-term relationships can be built with students to support their learning.
The Northern Territory government has made a significant investment in schools with the construction of new purpose-built facilities and updating of existing facilities. In 2015 nearly $10m worth of refurbishments, new classrooms and school facilities were constructed in Darwin, Maningrida, Galiwinku, Batchelor, Borroloola, Palmerston and Ntaria to meet the growing needs of schools and support the delivery of quality education.
This government has made a substantial investment in distance education in the Northern Territory with construction of the $12.4m Northern Territory Open Education Centre, supported by a contribution of $3.3m from the INPEX Ichthys LNG project. The facility will provide state-of-the-art premises and technology to meet the educational needs of senior secondary students in Years 10 to 12 accessing distance education. The facility is being built on the grounds of Darwin High School and will be completed in Semester 2 this year. It will provide flexible distance study options to over 600 senior secondary students across the Territory.
This government has made a significant and important investment into special needs education to meet the growing educational demands of students with high support and additional needs in Darwin. Construction of the new $31.5m Henbury School is well under way and on track to be completed and fully operation in August 2016. This leading-edge facility will cater for 120 middle and senior years students with special needs. The new school will be co-located with Dripstone Middle School and will include eight general learning areas, as well as purpose-built facilities for science and horticulture, a modern multipurpose hall and a pool for therapy, along with safe and secure car parking and drop-off facilities.
Construction is also under way for the new $21.35m special school in Bellamack, with the project on track to be completed in Semester 2 this year. The state-of-the-art school will provide 84 preschool and primary school places for special needs, high-support children to maximise learning opportunities and provide a teaching environment tailored to the safety and amenity of students.
The Australian government has been supporting our efforts to improve childcare and trade skills facilities by investing $2.35m in the construction of a childcare centre at Ntaria, and investing a further $5.7m in the construction of trade training centres at Borroloola, Maningrida, Ntaria and Galiwinku. These facilities help support families and young people to engage in employment and further study and enable the care and early development of young children.
In addition, $9.2m in minor new works was carried out over 2015-16 to address improvements and upgrades to school buildings, as well as extending existing facilities at schools to provide additional student enrolment capacity.
As part of the $100m Boosting our Economy package announced by this government, an additional $68.5m will be invested in growing and renewing government and non-government school facilities across the Territory. This is responding to school infrastructure needs while providing employment opportunities and stimulating the local economy, particularly for small to medium businesses in the Northern Territory.
This government has made innovative changes to the way our schools operate by increasing school autonomy, a key priority of the Australian and Northern Territory governments. We have increased school autonomy through the establishment of global school budgets and introduction of the independent public schools model.
Global school budgets were implemented in all Northern Territory schools in 2015, informed by a needs-based funding model based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status, stage of schooling, Indigineity and remoteness. Schools now have total visibility over their budgets, including workforce costs.
Historical differences in how funding and staffing was allocated led to complex and varied arrangements for schools. The new funding model ensures budgets are distributed transparently under a one-line budget, giving schools the independence and flexibility to allocate resources as required to deliver the educational services tailored to the local school community’s needs.
In 2015 schools benefited from $428m, and this year we have provided $447m in direct funding for schools, including $388m in global school budgets and $59m for expenses paid centrally on behalf of schools. This also includes a total of $40m over four years to assist schools to transition from current levels of funding to the student needs based funding model.
Schools can apply to become independent public schools which operate with greater autonomy, particularly in relation to staff selection, financial management, governance, and the teaching and learning program. Independent public schools remain in the Northern Territory government schools system but benefit from increased flexibility and responsibility to shape the ethos, priorities and direction of the school.
Not every school will become an independent public school. Through a rigorous selection process schools must demonstrate they have the support of their staff and their school community. They must demonstrate they have a vision, innovation and are a high-performing school. The first six independent public schools commenced in 2015, with a further seven commencing from the start of 2016. This includes primary schools in Darwin, Katherine, Palmerston and Alice Springs, all secondary schools in Darwin, Palmerston and Gunbalanya, which was our first remote Territory school to become an independent public school.
These schools and many others are continuing to lift the bar to improve student outcomes and increase confidence in our government schools. In 2014, 15 of the top 20 who completed a Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training were from government schools. In 2015, 13 were from government schools. Increasing school autonomy is creating new opportunities for students, greater networks and participation by the community and delivering quality government educators.
A first-class education system relies on high-quality staff, an essential element of student success. Teacher quality is a national priority that government is committed to supporting. The Department of Education is ensuring we have the right people in the right place by recruiting, developing and retaining high-quality staff and getting more Indigenous people into early childhood and education positions across the Northern Territory. To do this a strategic workforce plan is being implemented in the government education sector outlining the strategies to ensure we have high quality staff leadership support.
Attracting and retaining high quality staff is pivotal in improving educational outcomes for students. This begins with promoting and marketing careers in education to Northern Territory school students, the local community and across Australia to attract the best staff.
Our continued partnerships with universities are also integral to workforce planning to ensure teaching graduates are equipped with the skills and experience required to succeed in the education sector and meet the needs of Territory students. In 2015, 51 Charles Darwin University graduates were recruited into our schools from the 2014 cohort. This included 13 of the top graduates who were offered ongoing employment from 2015, and three scholarship holders under the More Indigenous Teachers initiative.
The capability of educators continues to be strengthened through the Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers certification program in partnership with the Teacher Registration Board. This year the certification program attracted 48 registrations from teachers within the government school sector, and a further two from the non-government school sector. This will double the total number of highly accomplished and lead teachers across the Territory, which will have a positive impact on schools and student outcomes. These teachers are collaborating at a national level to improve the teaching profession, and a conference will be held later in the year for NT teachers to better utilise their skills and knowledge to foster a strong and collaborative learning culture in schools.
Through the enterprise bargaining process with the Australian Education Union, in 2015 a new policy providing for the permanent appointment of teachers to government schools through an open advertising and merit selection process, as with other public sector positions, was implemented. This forms parts of the Department of Education’s employment strategy to get the right people for the job, moving away from the old way of providing permanency on the basis of longevity and seniority. That did not necessarily lead to getting the best candidate for the job.
The Department of Education has appointed 85 teachers under this new system, which will continue to build on the quality educators already working in government schools, ensuring students’ educational outcomes are enhanced by investing in high quality teachers.
In addition, as part of the department’s Indigenous employment and workforce strategy, special measures are being applied to all assistant teacher positions in remote and very remote schools, and a number of other positions across the department where it is important to have Indigenous employees providing services and advice. These special measures mean only Indigenous people can undertake these roles.
The Department of Education also plans to implement special measures for all other positions to prioritise applicants identified as Indigenous. This will provide better representation of Indigenous people in the education sector, and help support government’s target to increase the number of Indigenous employees in the Northern Territory Public Sector. The Department of Education’s target is 23% Indigenous employees by 2020.
Improving educational outcomes for remote students requires quality leadership and staff. However, we know the difficulty in attracting and retaining quality leaders and staff in remote locations where staff may face complex challenges not found in urban schools. The Department of Education’s strategic workforce plan provides clear direction and outlines strategies to attract, recruit and retain the right people for remote schools with a focus on attracting and developing Indigenous staff in these locations.
A thorough induction program is in place to provide teachers new to government schools with specific information about teaching in a remote environment. The leadership of principals in remote schools is also being enhanced by the development of a mentoring program to strengthen principal skills for working in the unique environment of remote schools.
This government has a vision for the future with a clear long-term plan to lead a world-class education system and improve learning outcomes for children and young people. We cannot do this on our own, so it is important that we continue to work in partnership with families, the community, the Australian government and organisations to improve outcomes for children and young people, especially Indigenous people, by investing in evidence-based strategies and programs.
We continue to work collaboratively with the Australian government to secure long-term funding arrangements to support Territory children and young people. The Northern Territory has secured approximately $120m in funding over three years to support implementation of the Northern Territory’s A share in the future Indigenous Education Strategy 2015-24. The 10-year Indigenous Education Strategy has been operating for nearly 12 months with key projects now well under way, including expansion of the Families as First Teachers program in 22 communities, and a further three this year; annual health checks for students in remote and very remote communities; mandated literacy and numeracy programs; provision of secondary pathway options for remote and very remote students and families with assistance and support from the Transition Support Unit; and construction of a residential facility in Nhulunbuy for remote secondary students.
We know that many Territory children face additional challenges. The Australian Early Development Census measures the development of Australian children in their first year of full-time school, and is reported under five developmental domains. The five domains of physical health and wellbeing, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive skills and communication skills and general knowledge are closely linked to predictors of good adult health, education and social outcomes.
Between 2009 and 2015 the census data showed improvement in the development of Territory children. This improvement aligns with the establishment of early childhood initiatives such as the Families as First Teachers program, which incorporates evidence-based approaches to early learning of literacy and numeracy. However, despite these reported improvements, groups of Territory children continue to experience significant disadvantage.
The 2015 census reported higher levels of vulnerability in the Northern Territory than the Australian average, with 37.2% of children in the Territory developmentally vulnerable on one or more domains compared to 22% across Australia. Non-Indigenous children in the Northern Territory are generally on a par with the Australian average and report lower levels of vulnerability than the Australian average on two of five domains: physical health and communication. However, the proportion of Indigenous children developmentally vulnerable on one or more domains in 2015 was 42% nationally and 63% in the Northern Territory.
Children are the future of the Territory, and a great start for children means a great future for the Northern Territory. This government understands the importance of investing in early childhood services including early childhood education, maternal and child health, family support and the early childhood intervention services.
The implementation of the Great Start, Great Future Northern Territory early years strategic plan 2016-20 will be a key focus of the Northern Territory’s effort to improve early childhood development and provide the best possible outcome for Territory children from birth to eight years old. The plan relies on strong partnerships with families, communities and non-government organisations delivering services supporting the development of children. A coordinated effort will be required to ensure more young children across the Northern Territory are healthy and thriving, living in supportive, resilient families and actively participating in quality learning.
The plan focuses on developing integrated service models, strengthening the quality of child and family-centred education, increasing the capacity of services to identify and respond to children and families affected by trauma and family violence, and delivering quality services through suitable infrastructure and a skilled workforce. The plan builds on the current strengths of the early childhood services system and will make the Territory an even better place for families to live and raise their children.
The Families as First Teachers program, currently operating at 22 remote sites across the Territory, is strengthening parent engagement and provides disadvantaged and vulnerable children with the skills and attributes required to succeed in their education before they enter primary school. The program has continued to operate successfully in remote Indigenous communities and further work is being done to guide the individual learning requirements of young children under the Indigenous Education Strategy. There are plans to expand the program to 32 sites by the end of 2017.
Early childhood educators play a crucial role in shaping children’s development. Through our early years strategic plan and Indigenous Education Strategy we aim to make a positive impact on our children’s development.
One of the barriers to young people attending school can be their health, whether it is through a chronic ear infection, respiratory infection, anaemia or other illness. Government schools and local health clinics are now working together to improve the health and education outcomes for Indigenous students in remote and very remote locations. To date over 2000 children and students have had their health assessed across 30 communities. Regular school attendance is a key component of school learning and improving educational outcomes in the Northern Territory.
Indigenous students in remote and very remote areas have some of the lowest rates of school attendance and achieve the poorest educational outcomes. Effective partnerships between schools, students, families and the community are central to ensuring students attend schools regularly and are supported in their education by their families, which strengthens learning outcomes for students.
Lifting attendance rates in mobile remote communities is one of the greatest challenges and impediments to advancing outcomes for young Indigenous Territorians. School attendance is impacted by experiences in early childhood, health and wellbeing, housing and employment, community governance and leadership, community safety, and domestic and family violence. Therefore, multiple approaches with shared responsibility between students, parents, schools and Northern Territory government agencies are required. Government is working to strengthen efforts to ensure young people attend school regularly and are engaged in learning so educational outcomes of all students across the Territory are improved.
In 2015 only 36% of Indigenous students attended school four or more days per week compared with a target of 42%, whereas the proportion of non-Indigenous students attending school four or more days per week was 87% against a target of 88%. Government’s long-term target is that the proportion of Indigenous students attending four or more days per week is consistent with the Territory’s non-Indigenous students by 2024. Improving school attendance will require effort from all sectors of the community.
Once students are at school different approaches are required to ensure students are successful in their learning and engaged in school throughout their educational journey. Quality teaching and learning programs are crucial in building a first-class education system. That is why all government schools across the Northern Territory are now implementing Visible Learning to create the conditions necessary to bring about ongoing and sustainable improvement in learning achievements.
Visible Learning focuses on using technological strategies that have the greatest impact on student learning and building teacher capacity to analyse data and evaluate their own performance. We are continuing to provide professional development to staff across the Territory to ensure the learning success of our students.
A key initiative under the Indigenous Education Strategy is the implementation of mandated literacy and numeracy programs in remote schools. The two mandated literacy and numeracy approaches being delivered across remote and very remote schools in the Northern Territory are Direct Instruction and Explicit Instruction.
Direct Instruction is a model for teaching that emphasises well developed and carefully planned lessons designed around small learning increments and clearly defined and prescribed teaching tasks. The Direct Instruction program offers students curriculum continuity and stability, which is important in remote schools where there is high student mobility. Fifteen very remote schools are actively engaged in delivering Direct Instruction, and early indicators of success of the program have seen students who attend regularly achieve measurable improvement in their learning.
In remote and very remote schools that are too small for Direct Instruction to be delivered, Explicit Instruction approaches have been developed to provide site-specific curriculum structure.
The Department of Education is also delivering quality and evidence-based programs and support for students in the middle and senior years of schooling, and employment pathways programs to enhance the personal and social development, and education and employment outcomes of students.
Full-time and part-time senior secondary schooling options are provided for students in government schools from Year 10 to Year 12, along with access to vocational education and training in schools. In March this year Work Like the Best, the middle years teaching and learning strategy 2016-18, was launched. The strategy is guided by key recommendations from independent educational consultant Vic Zbar, following the review of middle years education in the Northern Territory. Through this strategy we will ensure middle years education throughout the Northern Territory is best practice …
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I request an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr CHANDLER: … through the delivery of quality programs, quality teaching and strong engagement with the school community.
Quality secondary education is important for students to access employment, training and further education. A key initiative under the government’s Indigenous Education Strategy is the establishment of the Transition Support Unit to support remote Indigenous students to transition to secondary schooling away from home.
Over the past six months Transition Support Unit staff have been working with 42 remote schools and over 250 students and their families from across the Northern Territory who have sought enrolment or re-engagement with boarding facilities. Transition Support Unit staff have also engaged with and assisted students in transit at airports as they travel from remote communities to boarding schools or regional centres.
An employment pathways program based on vocational learning skills development and vocational education and training has also been developed to provide a consistent model of secondary education delivery for remote Indigenous students, which spans very remote, regional and urban centres. Resources developed to support this program include teacher support materials for Explicit Instruction approaches in literacy and numeracy; culture, country and careers-integrated learning; and Leadership Certificate I materials and workbooks delivery. It will be available to remote schools for secondary students who do not elect to transition to regional or urban boarding facilities. Trialling of the program will commence in Term 2 this year.
Government has invested in the construction of a new $20m residential facility in Nhulunbuy, including $9.1m funding from the Australian government. Territory company Norbuilt has commenced construction, creating local job opportunities and employment for local people. The facility will cater for 40 students with scope to expand in future years if required, ensuring remote students across the region have access to a quality secondary education and are well supported in accommodation away from home.
Implementing engagement programs for Indigenous boys and girls has been a priority of this government. The Clontarf program for Indigenous boys is now operating in 13 schools, and, on average, nearly 900 students attended these programs per day in 2015. Six girls’ programs were operational in 2015, with approximately 290 Indigenous girls attending, on average, per day. The Stars Foundation girls’ program commenced in six sites in 2015, and will expand to 13 sites in 2016. These programs provide wellbeing and mentoring support to assist students to complete Year 12.
The performance of the Territory in the 2015 National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy, NAPLAN, shows improvement, with four government schools being above the national average. In 32 Northern Territory government schools achievement was as good as or better than similar school groups nationally, and seven schools were identified as achieving substantially above average national gains.
The matched Years 3 to 5 student gains – the same students tested in 2013 and 2015 – 64% of Northern Territory government schools for numeracy, 62% for writing and 58% for reading were higher than similar schools nationally. The matched Years 7 to 9 student gains – the same students tested in 2013 to 2015 – 79% of Northern Territory government schools for numeracy, 21% for writing and 68% for reading were higher than for similar schools nationally.
For both the Years 3 to 7 and Years 5 to 9 student cohorts, gains from 2011 to 2015 have been larger in the Northern Territory than nationally. In each test domain, except for writing, the Years 3 to 9 cohort gains from 2009 to 2015 were also higher in the Territory compared to nationally for comparable test domains. In 2015 results for Indigenous students for Years 5, 7 and 9 numeracy and Years 5 and 7 reading met or exceeded the Department of Education’s 2015 performance targets. Non-Indigenous students across all levels in numeracy and Years 5, 7 and 9 reading met or exceeded our 2015 performance targets.
The 2015 results show that it takes time for positive system reforms to translate into significant achievement gains. We will continue to work hard to implement initiatives to improve student achievements.
To support the measurement of student progress and inform the development of appropriate benchmarks for reading and mathematics, a Territory-wide assessment program is being implemented. Since Term 1 2015, all Northern Territory government schools have implemented the Australian Council for Educational Research progressive achievement tests in reading and mathematics. The online tests, conducted twice a year, are for students in Years 1 to 10 and are designed to provide objective and standardised information to teachers about their students’ skills and understanding in reading, comprehension and mathematics. The results help teachers and schools understand schools’ current strengths and weaknesses and inform teaching and learning. Territory-wide collection of this data will make it possible to measure student growth in reading and mathematics at a system, school, class and student level, which will help education to focus efforts where most needed.
There has been positive feedback from principals. The test is seen as a valuable resource and tool for schools. There was high participation by students last year, and schools will now be supported to integrate these results further to inform policy and practice.
In 2015, 1338 students across government and non-government schools gained a Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training, the NTCET. That is an increase of 21 completers on 2014, and the greatest number of certificate completions since its inception. Of these NTCET completions 187 were Indigenous, the largest cohort to date. Thirteen of the top 20 students across the Northern Territory were from government schools, with the top students from Darwin High School obtaining an outstanding Australian Tertiary Admission Rank, ATAR, of 99.9. Of 35 students who also received an A+ merit award achievement, 18 were from government schools.
Many students find undertaking vocational education and training options supports their pathways into employment. In 2015, 894 students completed a range of vocational qualifications. Of the 1338 NTCET completions, 926 included a VET component. There were 500 students participating in 784 structured work placements in 2015 to support their industry learning. These programs provide learning opportunities in emergency services, the automotive industry, transport logistics and the pastoral industry. Schools are working hard to support students to achieve educational goals through the culmination of 13 years of schooling and setting their path for life outcomes, including job prospects, growing a family and earning potential.
Vocational education and training programs are being expanded into maritime, fisheries and construction industries to ensure young people have the skills needed to support their future and the Northern Territory’s economy. Government has been implementing a significant reform agenda, but we have a long way to go to ensure there is a sustained improvement in the learning development of children and young people across the Territory.
Regarding the non-government sector, although I have spoken in great depth about the government education sector, our partnerships with non-government schools and the international education sectors are an important part of the government’s vision of building a first-class education system. The non-government education sector plays an essential role in the education landscape across the Territory, providing education choices for Northern Territory families and students.
Although the Australian government is the primary funder of non-government schools in the Territory, the Northern Territory government provides additional support through per capita funding, payments under the capital subsidy scheme and in-kind support, including information technology and curriculum support.
The Northern Territory government has provided $32.6m in 2015-16 in per capita funding to non-government schools and $1.5m in capital subsidy payments so far. The government is also investing $10m in non-government schools across the Territory as part of the Boosting our Economy package. This funding will see upgrades to facilities and repairs and maintenance while ensuring the widest possible community benefit from the investment. It will allow non-government schools in the Territory to cater for future growth in student numbers and will provide students with revitalised and high-quality learning environments.
Increasing market opportunities through the export of educational services into Asia is a key platform of this government. Since the release of our 10-year International Education and Training Strategy 2014-2024 the Northern Territory has grown the number of international student enrolments in schools by 38% in two years. The establishment of the international education and training hub, StudyNT, in partnership with key stakeholders, has laid the foundations for future growth across the international education and training sectors.
In 2013 international education and training was the Northern Territory’s eleventh-largest industry, contributing $49m to the Northern Territory economy. By having a clear plan to increase our efforts in this sector, we are aiming for the sector to be among the top five export earners in the Northern Territory by 2024. We are already seeing growth, with our latest data showing education and training has advanced to the ninth-largest export industry and in 2014-15 it contributed $55m.
The government has transformed the Northern Territory’s education system with a new contemporary Education Act, greater school autonomy that is well supported, and a strong eye to measuring and monitoring student achievement and system performance to enable …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Education for this motion. We agree on the importance of education in the Territory and always welcome debate on the subject. It is vital for the future of the Territory and it is important parliament debates education. Every member has an interest in education because we all have schools in our electorates and are all passionate about education and a better future for the NT. Education will help drive that.
That was a thorough 40-minute contribution from the Minister for Education. It sounded similar to a ministerial statement. There has been some toing and froing between the opposition, the Independents and the government during this term of parliament over processes for ministerial statements. We used to review them the night before, which would allow the opposition and the Independents to look at what the government was placing on the record. It would ensure more work was done rather than just responding to the statement. You could ring people and check figures and stats to ensure you have the right data. It was a good process. The government then changed the process and we were handed ministerial statements while they were being delivered by the minister. You then had to respond on your feet. This then changed back to the old system of ensuring ministerial statements were delivered the night before, generally before 5 pm, to allow for proper debate and good process. We should have good, strong, thorough debate on education.
The minister put nothing controversial on the record. He wanted to, in the second last sittings of this parliament, place on the record his legacy issues and the work he has done …
Mr Chandler: That sounds like I am leaving.
Ms MANISON: For this term of government is what I mean. I am not making any assumptions, minister. I did not mean to put it that way, but we are coming to the end of four years of this Assembly.
There are some questions about moving a motion. I do not understand why the government did not make it a ministerial statement. Anyway, I will get to the point and contribute to the debate.
We have some fantastic schools and see some amazing student achievements every year. When you attend the Northern Territory Board of Studies presentation at the start of the year you see the best of the best of our school students receive acknowledgement and awards for their performance in the previous school year. Most of them head to university. It is an exciting time because these young people have their lives ahead of them and have had a fantastic experience in the Northern Territory education system. They have received a great education and achieved wonderful things.
Every year students do that. We should be proud of their achievements and all the work put in by teachers, support staff, principals, the school council and those tireless volunteering parents who put a lot of time and effort into doing what they can to build a better education system in the Northern Territory.
Each year we hear some good stories, but we have to be realistic about the fact we have big challenges in education. We have the highest percentage of students attending school who do not meet national minimum standards. We have the highest percentage of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and, in many cases, extreme disadvantage. We see that every day.
School attendance, particularly in very remote schools, is still nowhere near the mark. I will go into that further, but for a student to perform well they have to attend at least 80% of the time. I believe we would like to see them there 100% of the time. We want to set the bar high and keep pursuing it, but we are still a long way behind. Let us be realistic, we know we have the biggest challenges.
I find it alarming that with the work this government has put in to address those challenges over the last three-and-a-half years the CLP has driven cuts in education. We can see those cuts in the annual reports and the budget books. We all attend school council meetings and hear about the cuts. You also hear about the cuts and how they impact schools when doorknocking, attending barbecues or speaking to constituents. You hear what schools have had to do, and at the moment I am hearing from schools that are hurting.
It has been a very tough three-and-a-half years under this CLP government. Jobs have gone from education, and programs and resources cut where we need more support than ever before. I do not buy the theory often peddled when governments cut money and resources that they feel you can do much more with much less. That logic does not stack up.
It is the same as having a crime spree and putting fewer police on the streets, or a hospital emergency department overflowing and having fewer doctors and nurses. It does not stack up ...
Mr Elferink: Show us where the results are failing.
Ms MANISON: We know the results are very lumpy and there have been extreme cuts in the last three-and-a-half years.
Prior to the 2012 election the CLP government was thorough in its commitment to public servants. They said to public servants, ‘Your job is safe’. I highlight this again because people need to remember what public servants were told and what was on huge corflutes leading into election booths. It said, ‘Your job is safe’ and was directly targeted at public servants.
A letter that was handed to people at the time said:
That was not the case. There have been huge cuts in education under this government. Looking at the annual reports and the raw data on full-time equivalent staff in the Department of Education to 30 June 2012, there were 4647 FTEs. The Department of Education’s 2014-15 annual report shows 4145 full-time equivalent staff, a cut of 502.
The same departmental annual report shows in 2011-12 there were 3843 FTE school-based employees. In the 2014-15 annual report that number was reduced to 3544, a reduction of 299 full-time staff.
When talking about frontline staff, you do not get more front line than a classroom teacher. They are there every day teaching kids, and they are crucial. A good teacher will make a difference to thousands of lives. The 2011-12 annual report shows there were 2044 full-time equivalent classroom teachers in the Northern Territory. The 2014-15 annual report shows that figure had dropped to 1880 full-time classroom teachers – school-based employees – in the Territory. That is a cut in teacher numbers of 164. Five hundred staff have gone from the Department of Education under the CLP government cuts, and 300 of those staff were based at schools. We know 164 were classroom teachers doing an important job.
It is important for a teacher to have the right support to do the job to the best of their ability. That means you need the right administrative support at schools so frontline teachers can do their job. Sadly, a lot of those positions have gone.
Figures show from 2011-12 to 2014-15, 47 Administrative Officer 2 positions have gone, 35 AO4 have gone, 97 Senior Teacher 1 positions have gone – 421 down to 324. There have been huge cuts across the Department of Education and our schools. This is not made up or hysteria; these are real figures in the Department of Education’s report for everyone to see and it has hurt schools. Schools have had a tough time and it was shocking to see those cuts.
The government has pushed through a heavy reform agenda. If they feel these reforms are required then, by all means, they are the government and they can make them. However, people expect appropriate delivery of the reforms. When it came to global school budgets, one concern was that it was rolled out to schools in a short period of time without an appropriate level of testing to ensure the government had it right.
During that roll-out we heard stories of schools having to do more with less. You still hear stories at school council meetings about having to eat into savings for things they cannot get funding for. If they want to keep assistant teachers, school councils have to fund them from savings.
The government had an agenda to do it; however, the implementation could have been so much better. Doing it all in one hit was not good. It created huge issues and we are still hearing about them.
Numerous issues have been raised with me about exceptional circumstances and the policy that applies to schools. If a school, in circumstances out of its control, has a staff member who goes on extended leave – perhaps someone becomes ill – it has to apply to the department to have the exceptional circumstances recognised so they can be compensated by the department. Schools are having great issues with that. If the minister is listening – the Department of Education would be – we are getting loud and clear feedback on that.
At one school in my electorate I said, ‘I left a briefing with the department last year feeling reassured about the exceptional circumstances policy, and that these situations would be taken into account and schools would be compensated for that money’. That is not the feedback we are getting. I hope the department looks at how it can ensure that schools, when staff members go on extended leave for situations over which they have no control – it is important. Our feedback says it is not happening.
In the last three-and-a-half years we have seen budget cuts to government education by the Northern Territory government. We are coming into the budget now and I hope we see a stop to the trend of the last three-and-a-half years of budget cuts to government education and schools. I hope the member for Fong Lim will put serious money on the table for education. I hope the Minister for Education, who I believe is passionate about education and advocates for it, has had some success in Budget Cabinet this time round. The figures in budget books from the last few years have not been good, particularly in government education. The funding contribution from the Northern Territory government has gone down. It is in plain numbers for everyone to see.
In the meantime, Commonwealth funding has increased. Thank goodness that contribution has increased because without it those cuts would be so much deeper. The budget paper outputs for government education show that in the last CLP budget government education was $663m. In the last Labor budget government education sat at $685m. That is a significant cut of over $20m and does not factor in indexation over time.
Going from one budget to the other, the 2014-15 budget was $676m and the 2015-16 budget was $663m. It is a continuation of cuts to education driven by the CLP government.
If we target the critical developmental areas from day one, Term 1, Year 1 of school – the sooner children are engaged in education and on an equal footing the better they will do at school. One in five Territory students is not meeting the developmental benchmarks in two or more categories, and a third is not meeting one of those categories. The 2012-13 budget was $18m, and it went down in the 2015-16 budget to $16.5m. Preschool education in the 2012-13 budget was $47.8m, and it went down to $37.7m in the 2015-16 budget. Senior years education went from $127.3m in the 2012-13 budget to $109m in the 2015-16 budget. The budget papers show huge cuts which are clear for everybody to see.
In the context of the Commonwealth funding contribution, Labor was committed to the Gonski reforms. The previous federal Labor government put education on the agenda with the work done by Gonski to ensure needs-based education funding was looked at. Needs-based funding is critical in the Northern Territory, where we have students with the greatest needs.
At the time the CLP government did not sign up to the Gonski reforms but signed up to another package with minister Pyne. It secured critical funding for the Northern Territory, which is good to see. For example, we have seen a funding commitment from 2013-14 since the reforms.
Debate suspended.
The Assembly suspended.
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 123, I inform honourable members that responses to Petitions Nos 56 and 58 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website. Copies of the responses will be provided to the members who tabled the petitions for distribution to petitioners.
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, we were talking about budget papers and the successive government cuts to education under the CLP government, and also the Commonwealth contribution. The government did not sign up to the Labor Gonski proposal and eventually cut a deal with the federal government. It was positive because we saw significant additional dollars coming to the Territory from the Commonwealth. Whilst that happened, the Territory government started to cut funding to education.
There is a lot more federal debate about education funding, and it will be an important issue in the upcoming federal election. Territorians want funding certainty. I will read from the minister’s submission to the Senate Select Committee on School Funding Investment. It goes to the heart of what the government said about important Commonwealth funding coming to the Territory.
Page three of the submission says:
Further along on page four the submission says:
In the meantime, the CLP has continually cut the education budget. On one hand the government says, ‘No problem, there’s nothing to see here. With fewer teachers and less money in the budget what is the problem?’
The government told the Commonwealth government that every dollar is critical in future education funding for the Northern Territory. It is clear that every dollar counts. It must make for an interesting argument when you speak to your Commonwealth colleagues and say we need to secure every additional dollar to make a difference to the education budget, yet you cut the Territory budget. In Budget Cabinet you look at the budget for public education in the Territory – under the CLP we have seen continued cuts to the education budget.
This means a reduction in teacher numbers. We have 164 fewer classroom teachers, 300 fewer school-based staff and 500 fewer staff in the Department of Education. Look at the effort being put into attendance statistics. The most recent information I could get from the government website was for Term 4, 2015. I cannot use Term 1 statistics because I do not have them. We have not seen the movement we wanted to.
I understand the 2012 methodology was different to the 2013 onwards one. Under this government attendance statistics for provincial schools in 2012 were about 88.6%, and in 2013 about 87.9%. In 2014 they were 87.8% and 88% – they pretty much have no effect. In remote areas in 2012 they were 84%; in 2013 they were 82.2%; in 2014, 82.9%; and in 2015, 82%. In very remote areas in 2012 they were 61%, in 2013 they were 58%, in 2014 they were 61.2%, and in 2015 they were 59.9%.
Looking back on Term 2 2015, in provincial, remote and very remote areas year-on-year statistics show no movement. I commend efforts being made in the area of attendance because it is critical, but we are not seeing the results we need because some students are so far behind that we need to catch up at a faster rate than the rest of Australia. We need to surpass the rate of growth and achievement in the rest of Australia …
Ms WALKER: Mr Deputy Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 43, I request an extension of time for my colleague.
Motion agreed to.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, the Chief Minister has been to COAG and spoken to the Prime Minister and other state and territory leaders, yet education was not on the agenda. At the same time, the Minister for Education presented a thorough submission to a Senate committee on schools funding, saying that every dollar counts. In the Northern Territory we need every single dollar of funding. We are in a budget cycle at the moment and about to see the big budget numbers roll out. My goodness, this government has sold TIO and the port, cashed in some other agreements and got money up front rather than over a 10-year period, so the money is there. Let us see what commitment this government gives in its budget to education funding, particularly government schools because that is where there have been continual cuts.
It would also be good to hear about the government’s submission to the federal government, which it was silent on during COAG. What representations have been made to the member for Solomon or Senator Nigel Scullion to ensure there is funding going forward? That is critical. Both the federal and Northern Territory budgets are close, and people want to see a commitment to education funding.
After Question Time today I am not sure that NT education funds will be on the up. That was assured, but I will cross my fingers and hope for the best.
It is clear that the CLP government realises every single dollar counts in education funding. It has told the Commonwealth that we need continued support at the same levels and that certainty for the coming years. Yet this government has cut funding to Northern Territory schools. This has impacted on urban, remote and bush schools. Everybody has been subjected to these cuts.
On a more positive note, where credit is due you give it. I am happy with the commitment to Henbury School and the work happening there. I look forward to the new secondary school. I commend the CLP government for that, and for following on the Henderson government’s special schools infrastructure program and the delivery of Bellamack special school.
There is need for special education, and there have been huge advances in technology and the delivery of education to special needs students. It is great to see a continued sustained investment in special education infrastructure. That is something you can be proud of, and I applaud you for it. I am heartened to know consideration is being given to the current Henbury School site. I hope we see development of post-school options for young Territorians with special needs so their learning does not end when they leave school.
There are concerns in the community about access to special schools and bus service collections. I and my colleagues have heard of various issues regarding collection points. We do not have time to go over that in the contribution today.
Non-government schools play a critical role in the delivery of education in the Northern Territory. It is important that parents have choice when it comes to education. Ensuring there is a good, strong relationship with independent schools and Catholic schools to ensure they do their job to the best of their ability – they serve a lot of students in the Territory and the government plays a significant role in funding those schools. I understand they are feeling some funding strain as well.
There is no doubt we have some incredible people in the Northern Territory working in education. The department is full of Territorians committed to and passionate about driving good education outcomes. We have amazing teachers, support staff and principals in the Territory. As a government you have to support them. You have a clear opportunity in the 2016 budget to ease the pressure they are feeling. We continue to hear about this, and we need to support them because every dollar we invest in education now will save money down the track.
I am proud of what Labor wants to do, particularly with the early critical years before students start school – the zero to four. We are committed to looking at the Australian Early Development Census indicators and ensuring we do everything we can so Territory kids from day one, Term 1, Year 1 are meeting the benchmarks they need to. Once they are in the school system, if they are meeting the benchmarks they have more opportunity to thrive and their life outcomes will be so much better. It is a critical area and we need more investment into it as we know it works.
If we have the opportunity to form government I look forward to seeing the work that can be done in the critical area of early years so that by the time kids get to school they will thrive, grow and learn the most they can through the Territory education system.
I thank the minister for this important motion. I had time to prepare my response as the minister delivered it. We knew it was coming on so I pulled out budget papers and some annual reports to look at. It is a telling situation at the moment as we wait for the 2016 Territory and federal budgets. The Northern Territory, in its submission, advocated to the Commonwealth that every single dollar in education counts, yet they have not done that when sitting around the Cabinet table committing dollars in their budget.
We look forward to the budget.
The minister said today that enrolments are on the increase. That is fantastic because we want a thriving public education system. Again, looking at enrolment numbers versus government education investment on a per student basis, it has gone backwards since the CLP government came to power.
You are advocating to the Commonwealth you need every cent possible in education to help overcome the extreme disadvantage and educational issues we have. We need more students in the NT hitting the national minimum standards and attending school every day. We are severely lacking there.
We can be proud of some of the wonderful things achieved, but we cannot – and no one would ever mean to – turn our backs on the disadvantage. As parliamentarians we need to do everything we can to support those kids and give them an education. If they are educated they will have so much more opportunity in life. Too many are falling behind and not finishing their schooling, and sadly their opportunities in life are limited.
Funding helps. Having teachers and support staff in classrooms helps. You acknowledged this in your submission to the Commonwealth government. Thank you, minister, for bringing this important education debate before the parliament. Your heart is in the right place, and I hope your colleagues support you to get more funding into this important area. We need more support through funding, especially for government schools, which have done it hard under this CLP government. We have seen huge cuts to teacher and support staff numbers in schools.
Mr STYLES (Deputy Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I agree with the member for Wanguri that this is an important motion. I will clarify some of the things the member for Wanguri said.
First, I will clear up some of the debate about funding to NT schools. Although the Northern Territory did not sign up to the Gonski funding offer, the amount of Students First funding provided by the federal Coalition government to the NT for 2014-17 matches the amount offered under the Gonski agreement.
The Northern Territory was provided with $505.9m in Students First funding for 2014-17. This includes $272m more for government schools than under the previous funding arrangement. At this stage we are in negotiations with the federal government, and Territorians can be assured that the funding agreement the Minister for Education had with the former federal minister, Christopher Pyne, locked in a four-year funding agreement, and the NT got every cent we would have if we had signed up to Gonski but with no strings attached. That was quite an achievement by the Minister for Education.
It is interesting that in her role as shadow minister for Education the member for Wanguri spent all her time talking about funding and did not mention the main business of schools, which is teaching and learning. This government has focused on what really matters, and that is improving outcomes for students.
The Minister for Education provided a detailed address which outlined the many achievements of this government, all in three-and-a-half years. The Labor government could not achieve these outcomes in 11 years. Most indicators are up for students in the Northern Territory, all improving the education of young Territorians.
The Giles Country Liberals government has funded the education system to a high level. We have fully funded preschools, and we have the highest expenditure per student in the country. Our teacher/student radio is the lowest in the country. We have the highest percentage of students in the government school system, which shows the faith Territorians have in the service this government is providing.
In responding to comments on the implementation of global budgets, the underlying assumption is that in 2012 everything in the education sector was fine and there was no need to look at anything. Middle years were fine, Indigenous education was great, the central bureaucracy was going well and the staffing formula put resources where they were needed. The assumption was that more money needed to be added. The assumption was that education was a perfect world and we were getting good results. However, we could and should have been doing a lot better. It was clear that this government needed to look at the outcomes more closely. We reminded ourselves that money is an input not an outcome.
Principals were telling us that the staffing formula and the central office controlled process of allocating staff to schools were outdated and not flexible enough. It was full of red tape with layers of approval processes.
Bruce Wilson’s Indigenous education review found the system was failing our most disadvantaged students and required a different approach. It was not to have more resources tipped into the same system, but a new approach to achieve sustained improvement in Indigenous student outcomes based on what we knew worked and what we could measure.
Vic Zbar’s review of middle schools identified the system had focused on structural change, and there was a lack of focus on the middle schools teaching and learning program by the system. The review found middle schools needed a new focus to create an orderly learning environment for students based on maximising their wellbeing and connectedness, and a rigorous teaching and learning program consistent across all middle schools was required.
The central bureaucracy and education agency was top heavy and lacked direction. There were 53 highly paid executive contract staff earning more than $180 000 per year employed in the central office. That number has been reduced by 30% and is now down to 37.
The centrally controlled staffing formula determined down to the fraction of an FTE how many teachers, assistant teachers, admin staff and other support staff each school was entitled to. There was limited local control.
Global budgets were introduced to all NT government schools from the start of the 2015 school year. This followed an extensive period of consultation throughout 2014 with all stakeholders, in particular school principals and business managers. Specific training was provided to principals and business managers in 2014 and 2015 to assist with the transition to global school budgets and that continues. The transition to the global school budget system has been a significant change for schools and the bureaucracy. It has been for the better and has created a much stronger schooling system.
Principals have embraced the change from the old school staffing formula, which required them to seek permission from bureaucrats in the central office to change their staffing profile and approve employment decisions.
In relation to comments regarding reductions in staffing, in the first six months the Country Liberals were in government, permanency was provided to 288 classroom teachers. The 2014-17 teacher and educator enterprise agreement included a move to merit-based selection of teachers. This is consistent with the rest of the public service and community expectations that the very best teachers are employed in our schools. Since 2015, 130 school-based employees have gained permanency through merit-based selection, including 85 teaching staff.
This government has increased resources in areas focused on delivering our strategic reforms. For example, 22 staff have been employed in the Transition Support Unit to assist remote students and their families make choices about secondary schooling options and support their successful transition into a secondary school pathway. This is an Indigenous Education Strategy program. Similarly, the six child and family centres have been allocated funding by government to provide 12 coordination and liaison positions. These positions are managed locally by the school principal and support the delivery of quality early years education and care.
The member for Wanguri said schools were not able to get additional funding for students who have exceptional circumstances, and mentioned the impact of teacher leave arrangements on funding. Schools apply for exceptional circumstances funding in demonstrated cases of financial hardship where unexpected or unforeseen events have impacted on the school’s ability to continue to deliver quality education programs giving consideration to the overall budget position of the school. Applications are assessed by a panel, which includes the principal and a regional director, both strongly connected to schools. Of 151 government schools, 17 applied for exceptional circumstances funding for expenses incurred in 2015. Of the 17 applicants, 10 were approved in whole or in part, with $718 862 being distributed to 10 schools in week 10 of Term 1. A further two schools were asked for further information and will be reconsidered shortly.
It is important to remember that many school expenses continue to be met centrally and thus do not impact on schools’ budgets. For example, workers compensation, remote allowances and entitlements including housing, long service leave, remote study leave, parental leave, highly accomplished and lead teacher allowances, principal and teacher relocation costs, and principals’ salaries and vehicles.
In relation to strategic direction, we are in a much better position now than we were under a Labor government. The Northern Territory government has a strategic approach to the allocation of funding, ensuring that our investments in education are evidence based, with student outcomes at the forefront of all decisions.
The Department of Education is now an efficient and focused organisation with little or no wastage of education resources. The department’s corporate overheads are 3% of the total expenditure, a very low proportion compared to other government agencies. This means 90% of the budget is applied to education service provision.
Over the past three years there has been a significant decrease in the number of education-related, short-term Australian government funding agreements. For example, national partnership agreements for the Northern Territory reduced from 13 in 2012 to four in 2016. While many of these agreements previously provided valuable supplementary funding for education in a number of areas, particularly for Indigenous students, many were not long term in nature, leading to short-term employment arrangements for teachers and wasted effort.
We are in a much better position now to provide sustainable and effective services, with a long-term 10-year plan to improve outcomes for all Territory students. We will no longer be captivated by the latest good idea driven by fickle funding regimes. We will stick to the plan and continue to build an evidence-based review of our performance to ensure we are heading in the right direction. Already we are seeing early signs of success, with an increase of 700 enrolments in government schools and gains in NAPLAN and the NT Certificate of Education and Training.
The Leader of the Opposition continually shows he does not understand what is going on around him. To provide education, health and law, and order services you need a vibrant economy that creates the right circumstances and provides taxes, GST, stamp duties and royalties. All those things add to the government receipts. What educational message does it send to students if we provide an education on borrowed money?
If you do not have a vibrant economy and want to provide these services it has to come from somewhere. You either cut the public service or jobs elsewhere, reduce expenditure or put up taxes. Otherwise you borrow it and one day, when everyone realises what you have done and you have a 98% debt to income ratio – which the previous government was prepared to go to with its projected $5.5bn debt – you do not have a vibrant economy.
The member for Wanguri spoke about young Territorians heading off to university. These young Territorians – and I agree with the member for Wanguri – were given a great Year 12 education and are off to university if that is what they want to do. Others will choose a different stream and go through the VET process.
However, you need jobs at the end. This government is committed to diversifying the economy. Every time we try to diversify the economy the Leader of the Opposition says, ‘We won’t do that. We will review this and put a moratorium on that.’ They have already announced 12 reviews and we are still a long way out from the election. What other reviews will come? What will we see? Will they shut everything down and have a talkfest and review everything?
We need a well-educated workforce. I have spoken to potential investors in Asia who ask about our workforce and the skills and capacity of local people. We need to invest money into education and training, and as it is one of my portfolios I am keen to look at it. However, you need an economy so there are jobs.
As a former police officer I have spoken to many people who have been a bit down and out. There was a common theme and people would ask, ‘Why should I go to school, do an apprenticeship or go to university when there are no jobs?’ That, sadly, is something I have been aware of as a minister in the Giles government. I make sure, every time I can, I say we need a good economy, and we need to diversify it and make sure people have a reason to get up in the morning.
If you take away diversification and jobs – we are talking about the onshore gas we know members opposite want to shut down. They not only want to stop jobs in the onshore gas industry now – there is potential, according to Deloitte, for another 6300 jobs which does not take into account the downstream processing of gas.
As the Chief Minister pointed out in Question Time today, this pen on my desk, the top of the water container, the plastic sleeve, the keyboard, half the computer, some of the clothes we are wearing and the products around us come from gas. Offshore companies want to make sure they have onshore gas as a backup. I do not mind where they get it from, but they have contracts to fulfil. If there is a problem with an offshore platform – a cyclone or another incident – they want to ensure they have a backup plan.
I would like to be sure Darwin has a backup plan. When we had the problem with offshore gas from Blacktip there was a blackout. Gas from the Alice Springs Dingo fields is fracked gas. The lights are on and gas is powering the microphones we are using now, and other things – our electricity generation – to make sure Territorians can continue doing what they want to do every day. It is important that the Leader of the Opposition takes this into account.
Last year the Giles government committed all the royalties from onshore gas to the VET sector and higher education. That could be for scholarships, bursaries and support for Territorians. We need this money flowing into education so we can help Territory kids.
Overseas investors want to know the Territory has a skilled workforce. We discussed that in Cabinet last year, and with input from other ministers we agreed – the Chief Minister drove this – that all royalties from onshore gas would go into education.
That is about making us the knowledge state, and creating opportunities for young Territorians and people who may wish to upskill or change in the middle of their working life. This is about ordinary mums and dads in Anula, Wulagi, Sanderson, Nhulunbuy, Port Darwin and the Tiwi Islands. Tiwi Island kids can come in on scholarships to take those jobs. These are the high-end jobs we all talk about. It is about making sure our children, and some adults in our community, have a go at training or retraining so they can get the high-value jobs and put that money into the Northern Territory economy. That is the secret.
When looking at how to do that – we on this side are fine; we are happy.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I request an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, member for Port Darwin and Mr Deputy Speaker.
The government recently released the Boosting Our Economy package. We listened to industry and looked at what we could do. These are small packages for mum and dad businesses – the painters, the chippies, the tilers – and a lot is in schools. Members opposite from time to time say we need more work and better facilities. Facilities are terrific, and you want to ensure that kids have nice facilities at school, although they are not essential. In developing countries you find engineers, doctors and people who studied under a tree, but we are further down the continuum than those countries and fortunate to have the facilities we do.
Much of our $100m Boosting Our Economy package is going to schools and school communities.
With regard to international students, investors say they are looking for high-value, high paid people in jobs of a technical nature – engineering, the petrochemical business, electrical engineering and all those high-end jobs. They are also looking for people skilled in other areas. It might be fabricators, welders or people with skills to run plants. This is what we are looking at in the VET and higher education sectors, where we need to train local people. To that end, we will create incubators for international students because many will come here to study, do their masters and PhD here and, while they are doing that, have the opportunity to go to incubators where they can develop ideas. Many of these young people are entrepreneurial, and the Department of Business will provide a way forward for them to develop their stuff in the Territory so we can take technology and innovation to the world.
I opened the ICT forum at the Convention Centre this morning. Many Territory companies put on display a lot of the technology innovated in the Territory. Some of it was from around the world, but what a fantastic opportunity for our local people to showcase what we are doing in the Territory.
The employee/employer incentives the Department of Business has created in getting apprenticeships – there are incentives for employers to take on apprentices and incentives for apprentices. Anyone listening who does not know about this, ring the Department of Business or get on the website and see what is happening.
With regard to onshore gas, the Giles government supports the environmentally responsible and rigorous regulations which will be put in place this term to support the shale gas industry. This is different to coal seam gas extraction. We do not engage in coal seam fracking in the NT; we do shale gas fracking, which is totally different in nature.
The 6300 jobs are on top of the jobs already in the onshore gas industry, which the opposition wants to shut down, as announced in this House. I will quote the member for Barkly’s statement from the Hansard last night:
That is pretty clear; you cannot say it is incorrect. Labor members on radio this morning said that is not correct. I refer those Labor members to the Hansard and what was said in parliament last night.
We are asking people to make a clear decision. Do they want a vibrant economy to pay for the things I have mentioned, or do they want to shut down industry? This is just gas. We are talking about water and agriculture, and the opposition is talking about reviewing water licences and, if necessary, removing some issued since 2012.
Business and industry do not have certainty. If you introduce sovereign risk you introduce a massive risk for shareholders of investing companies. Those companies have said if Labor gets in they will not bring their money to the Territory. Over $1bn of investment has already been taken away since the Leader of the Opposition announced a moratorium on fracking. Now we see they will shut down the onshore gas industry in the Northern Territory. Some of the benefits that might bring to downstream industries – producing the seats you are sitting on and the cabling comes from gas, from petrochemical plants.
The geographical location of Darwin puts it in the box seat for one of the major petrochemical companies in the world – there are two major ones, Mitsui and Dow Corporation – to build a petrochemical plant here because we have the gas they can strip the ethaline from and turn into the products we take for granted each day. The handle and seal on your refrigerator, the handle on your oven and half your car all come from gas. It takes thousands of people to run petrochemical plants these days. They do not build little ones; they build big ones. There are not too many around the world. If we have the gas supply, we could possibly have a petrochemical plant built here and enjoy the benefit of thousands of high-end jobs.
The businesses that come to a petrochemical plant and take the feedstock that comes out of them – the ratio is about three to one. Even conservatively, if you have 2000 or 3000 people employed in a petrochemical plant the ratio of three to one means another 9000, which makes 12 000 new jobs in the Northern Territory. This is the multiplier effect. Companies fracking shale gas in the Northern Territory have done that responsibly for nearly 50 years.
South Australia and Queensland, the two Labor states adjacent to the Northern Territory, are welcoming the millions of dollars of investment and the jobs to go with it.
I fail to understand, with what could be up to $1bn going into education, why the opposition is happy to send those dollars and thousands of jobs from the Northern Territory into the Labor states of South Australia and Queensland. Why would you do that? That is very un-Territorian.
While I am fortunate that people want me to represent them and put the case for young Territorians and our future, I will oppose anyone who wants to export the jobs of my children or grandchildren from the Northern Territory to Labor states.
To those listening or watching, the Leader of the Opposition does not have the vision we on this side do, otherwise he would have a totally different attitude. He does not understand the ramifications or consequences of his motion at the annual conference on fracking shale gas in the Territory.
I will oppose anyone who wants to export those jobs and that investment. I cannot understand why the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party are out of step with every other Labor government or opposition around the country – state, territory, federal and the former federal minister for Resources. All the peer assessed reports have been conducted by representatives of nine countries from around the world. It has all happened and I ask you to reconsider.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak on this motion and I thank the Minister for Education for bringing it to the Chamber. Education of our young people is extremely important to me. I am proud to be a member of a government that has invested so much in our schools. Our government is committed to ensuring young Territorians have access to high-quality education facilities.
We are committed to improving facilities in Territory schools and providing the infrastructure that allows our schools to continue to grow as our student numbers increase. It was great to hear the minister talk about the $150m the government has invested into our schools and Territory children. This includes new classrooms in urban, rural and remote schools. With our investment in distance education, the Northern Territory Open Education Centre will be a world-class facility. With state-of-the-art technology, this facility will improve the educational outcomes for 600 students who engage in distance education.
It is important for government to invest in our students with high and special needs by committing $45.35m to fund construction of both a new Henbury School and a new special school at Bellamack, Palmerston.
Our Country Liberals government has shown an unwavering commitment to improving educational outcomes for young Territorians. This commitment has once again been demonstrated by the provision of $68.5m to educational projects under the Boosting our Economy package. While this package has been designed to create work for our small and medium businesses, the impact this package has on education is enormous.
Refurbished, upgraded and new school facilities will benefit thousands of children and their families by improving infrastructure standards and the capacity of our schools. This package sees an investment into early childhood facilities in Alpurrurulam and Ampilatwatja schools. These schools educate some of our youngest Territorians in remote communities. This commitment to early childhood education can be seen in the construction of the Larapinta school child and family centre. This centre will be the sixth of its kind, joining Gunbalanya and Maningrida, both in my electorate, as well as Ngukurr, Palmerston and Yuendumu.
The federal government funded construction of these five centres and the Territory government is now operating them. This government has changed the education landscape for Territorians. The Minister for Education should be proud of the work he and his department have done.
I take this opportunity to talk about success in education in my electorate. Gunbalanya School has achieved fantastic results. In 2015 the school successfully applied to become the first remote independent public school. It commenced operating as an IPS in 2016. This required the school to undergo a rigorous assessment process against three criteria, being vision and innovation, local support and capacity. Since 2013, Gunbalanya has had 21 Indigenous students successfully complete their NTCET, the most of any remote school in the Northern Territory.
Since 2012 it has operated its own flexible school year, ensuring school term dates are suitable and appropriate for the community. Since 2014 it has operated a successful child and family centre which runs the FaFT program, preschool and crche, and provides a seamless education pathway for students from birth.
The school successfully operates a core leadership model, with an Indigenous and a non-Indigenous principal working side by side to achieve the best possible outcomes for their students. I thank Esther Djayhgurrnga and Sue Trimble for what they have achieved.
It is clear that students in the NT are in a much better position now than they were three-and-a-half years ago to learn, achieve and become competent and capable global citizens.
I am proud to be part of a government that is committed to ensuring our young Territorians are afforded the same educational opportunities and first-class facilities as their southern counterparts.
I thank the minister for all the work he has done in this area. So much has been achieved in three short years, but we have so much more to do.
Mrs PRICE (Local Government and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I support this motion. We are lucky in the Territory to have a hard-working Country Liberals Education minister who is delivering results.
The Country Liberals are delivering major reforms and building a first-class education system. Listening to this debate – and Question Time – about education, it is clear Labor does not care about results. Labor measures how much it spends and ignores the results, but that is the wrong way to look at it. Results and outcomes are what matter. Labor talks about funding to distract from results, but the facts are clear.
The Country Liberals fund education to a very high level. We have the highest expenditure per student in the country and the lowest teacher to student ratio. In 2014 we averaged 12.6 students per teacher, and we have the highest percentage of students in the government school system. Labor talks about funding but ignores what really matters.
Let us talk about results. Education is about students doing well and reaching their potential, not about wasting money. In 2015, a record 1338 Northern Territory Year 12 students graduated with their Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training. More students are completing their NTCET and more are achieving A+ merits. Numbers and levels of achievement are up. The Country Liberals are delivering results and when I talk to people that is what they care about.
The number of Indigenous students completing their NTCET in 2015 increased to 187 compared to 173 in 2014. That compares to 99 students in 2010 under the previous Labor government. Indigenous Year 12 achievement keeps building and providing real career options and pathways for young Indigenous Territorians. Twenty-seven of the 2015 Indigenous Year 12 students completed their studies in their home communities, which is fantastic. Adding to these positive results, seven students completed the NTCET from Shepherdson College. Despite two cyclones in the region earlier last year, Gunbalanya continues to grow its number of graduates, with eight in 2015.
Under this government the 10-year Indigenous Education Strategy, A share in the future, is being implemented. This government has continued to expand the Families as First Teachers program, with programs in five additional communities starting this year and a further six scheduled to commence in 2017. In Semester 2 2015, 1316 children and 1404 parents participated in this valuable program. In my electorate the Yuendumu Child and Family Centre was officially opened by Senator Scullion and the Minister for Education last month. The centre has 24 community members working in different programs, the majority being local Indigenous people. Local community members working in the centre allows the children and their families to engage in activities in English and Warlpiri.
This centre operates the Families as First Teachers program, an early learning and family support program for Aboriginal families with children aged up to three. I have seen great results from this program in early learning, health, childcare, parenting and family support services.
The Country Liberals are delivering results in education across the Territory and in my electorate. We continue to focus on improving Indigenous student performance and advancing our high and middle achievers. We want to ensure our students have the best possible outcomes and results across all our schools and communities whether they are remote, regional or in Darwin. The Country Liberals have funded education to a high level. That is why we have the highest expenditure per student in the country and the lowest teacher to student ratio.
Thanks to the reforms of this government our NAPLAN data is starting to improve. From 2011 to 2015 Northern Territory student NAPLAN achievement gains have been higher than the national gains for reading, grammar and punctuation, and spelling for the Year 3 to Year 7 cohort, and numeracy, grammar and punctuation and spelling in the Year 5 to Year 9 student cohort. That is why parents trust the Country Liberals with schools. We have the highest percentage of students in the government school system.
The Country Liberals achieve results and fund education to a high level with the most funding per student in the country. The Country Liberals are setting people up for jobs and for life. This government is committed to preparing students for a future in trade. In 2015, 1894 students received a statement of attainment for one or more units of competency, and 985 students completed a full VET qualification.
Industry groups are working with us to make sure our students are work ready and able to make successful transitions from school to employment. The government is committed to ensuring our students leave school work ready and able to contribute to the Northern Territory’s economic growth. By supporting our schools to provide students with access to accredited vocational education and training programs and school based apprenticeships in local industries we are building their ability to get real jobs.
This government acknowledges the significant pace and breadth of the government’s education reforms. These results show the reforms are working. We see results in remote communities. Direct Instruction is making a difference for students in schools across the Territory. A total of 15 schools in very remote communities are now participating in the program.
Education researcher, John Hattie’s comprehensive analysis of curriculum reform rates Direct Instruction as one of the most effective teaching strategies. Our decisions are based on evidence. The education system is about results, and evidence shows we are improving results.
Direct Instruction is improving outcomes for students who are regularly attending school and is leading to increased attendance. This model of teaching and learning focuses on what students need, and provides opportunity for students to receive regular feedback on their achievements. This program offers stable curriculum delivery for students, which is essential for areas of high student mobility.
Young Territorians cannot afford another Labor government that focuses on money and not outcomes. Young Territorians can trust a Country Liberals government that funds education to a high level, that has the highest funding per student in the country, the lowest student to teacher ratio, and, importantly, young Territorians can trust a Country Liberals government that focuses on results. At the end of the day, that is what really matters.
We must be motivated to continue to drive the reform agenda to improve educational outcomes for all young Territorians. Young Territorians deserve a high-quality education, and that is what the CLP government has offered them and will continue to offer.
I commend the motion to the House.
Debate adjourned.
Continued from 16 March 2016.
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, Labor supports this bill. It is a sensible move and a practical, short bill. I remember reading the second reading speech, and I think it holds the record for the shortest second reading speech. The bill abolishes a host of old appropriation acts that are no longer relevant and serve no ongoing purpose.
I am not sure, Treasurer, how many people have been confused. I am not sure how many people Google appropriation acts or go back through all of them. I am sure it confuses people searching through the acts we have, and obviously getting rid of bills that no longer serve a purpose makes sense. We are going back a fair way, so it has taken some time to realise we do not need the acts any longer and we should get rid of them.
I commend the Treasurer for introducing this straightforward bill. It is a five-paragraph second reading, and I do not think I have gone as long as you, Treasurer, but I thank you for introducing it and commend you for it.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I thank the Opposition Leader and members opposite for supporting this bill. As the Opposition Leader said, in so many ways it is a no-brainer. These are all defunct pieces of legislation and requirements that still appear on our books but have no use whatsoever.
The point the Opposition Leader made is a good one. We should do this more often. Future parliaments might want to devote a day a term to cleaning up some of our outdated laws.
I thank the Opposition Leader, those opposite and my colleagues, and commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter proposing a discussion of the following definite matter of public importance from the member for Nelson:
Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, my two supporters left. Thank you to those who are still here, otherwise we might have had a gap in proceedings we were not expecting.
This issue is important. For me it has come quite suddenly, but I miss things occasionally.
As much as I had ideas about how our new Parliament House would look when discussions about the building took place, we have two of the finest buildings in the Northern Territory here. I congratulate those who had the vision to go through the pain of putting forward their ideas. It cost a lot of money at the time and there was quite a bit of controversy over it, but we now have two of the finest buildings in the Northern Territory.
It concerns me that the original State Square plan was never completed. The Chan Building, the building referred to in this MPI, was built in the early 1970s. It is one of a number of Commonwealth buildings that existed in the precinct which later became offices of the Department of the Chief Minister. With redevelopment of the area to make way for the new State Square precinct, the Chan Building was the only one retained and was used by the Legislative Assembly from 1990 until the current Parliament House was completed and opened.
In 1988 the government approved plans for the overall development concept of the government precinct, as it was then called. The original and subsequent plans show that the government precinct at that time did not include the Chan Building. The original plans, drawn up by architect Mr Roger Linklater, representing Tipperary Developments, clearly showed there was to be no Chan Building. There were to be three sight lines: one along Mitchell Street, one diagonally from the corner of Bennett and Smith Streets, and one in Civic Park.
I have, from the NT News of 1 November 1988, an article which shows Mr Roger Linklater, architect, with a plan which showed this building, the Supreme Court and a diagonal view from where these two buildings meet through to the Smith Street Mall. It was not the mall then, still Smith Street.
That was the original concept. I believe that is what the government at the time intended to finish with when it completed the State Square precinct.
After the new parliament building was opened the Chan Building became vacant. I read from an extract from Ms Sarah McAusland in the Journal of Northern Territory History called The best house in town: the development of State Square:
She goes on to say:
Sarah McAusland was a history student at NT University at that time.
In 2006 the Labor government issued a document called Creating Darwin’s Future – a Tropical Harbour City, which showed a State Square precinct plan without the Chan Building and similar to Roger Linklater’s original one with the same sight lines. A proposed visitor centre was included fronting Smith Street, where the present law court car park is situated.
I have a picture from the 2006 document Creating Darwin’s Future – a Tropical Harbour City which clearly shows no Chan Building. The buildings to remain were the old Reserve Bank, which is still there, the town hall ruins, the Administrator’s office, and there was talk of have a World War II museum where the court used to be. That did not happen and the museum went to East Point.
The concept was to develop parks, gardens and sites around these two buildings, from Mitchell Street, the civic gardens near the council and the intersection of the mall and Bennett Street. You concentrated people’s sight lines on these two magnificent buildings. That was the intent of Labor’s plan in 2006.
In 2010 the CLP introduced its plan for the Darwin central business district under Planning for Greater Darwin, a document I know well because parts of the Darwin region where I live were meant to be rural. Slowly that is being eaten away. However, I digress. The document stated that the address of one of the most important Northern Territory civic buildings was inadequate.
Page 64 of that document says:
It also says how this development would fit in with the existing buildings. The plan shows no Chan Building. It seems that we have done a U-turn. Last year the government issued a media release saying it would spend money doing up State Square by transforming the Chan Building. A media release dated 30 November 2015 – there may have been one earlier – said:
The CLP government issued a plan, and sometimes there is nothing worse than politicians forgetting the plan. The plan was to get rid of the building. Until that building goes, these two buildings will never be seen at their best. Adding three storeys to that building will make it as high as Parliament House. Looking from Parliament House all you will see is a building that was never meant to be there. I do not want that building to destroy the beautiful architecture we have here. This, in itself, should attract people. We have two fine buildings, and people come past and take photographs, but we have not completed the plan – never taken it to its full extent.
It reminds me of Canberra. Walter Burley Griffin and his wife designed Canberra. I believe she did more of the work than him as he was more of an architect. Politicians became involved and Canberra is not quite the same as Walter Burley Griffin designed. We have an opportunity to show we have faith in the original planners, and we need to show them we will complete State Square the way it was meant to be.
I was called by a government architect who has concerns about what is happening. People have said, ‘Gerry Wood, you’re not an architect’. I agree, but I have a love for our city even if I do not live in it. This is my capital city. I have a love for beautiful buildings and good design. The government architect, Professor Lawrence Nield, told the ABC he had reservations about the viability of the project. I quote from the ABC webpage news article dated 5 April 2016:
I did not know there was a competition:
People said that even if we wanted to do it we do not have enough money, and we have a government plan to pull down the Chan Building and look at the original plan for the site.
We should take a deep breath and say, ‘We need something to attract visitors. Where could that be if the Chan Building was demolished?’ The Labor Party had an idea – which may or may not be a good one – to develop the law courts’ car park facing Mitchell Street. That is where people walk from the waterfront. Could something be developed underground and connected to the tunnels? Could you have a museum and art gallery underground and connected to the World War II tunnels?
Even better, why not develop the old hospital site? That site has been vacant for as long as the old power house has been. Many years ago a government left the old hospital site and the old power house site vacant under the guise of, ‘It has to be knocked down because it will be developed’. The old Darwin hospital site has lots of potential as Mitchell Street runs straight to it. People would like some idea of what was there before, such as those in the old Kahlin Compound and those who worked at or were born in the old Darwin hospital. There is an opportunity to include those people in an art gallery or museum.
You could have an iconic building there looking straight up Mitchell Street with art within the gardens. I presume the minister has been overseas and seen beautiful gardens in Europe where they are a part of the art of the nation, state or city. There is an opportunity to say, ‘Let’s not put $19.3m into a project which the government architecture says will not build what has been designed or planned. Let’s rethink.’
I am scared we will get the Richardson Park version of the art world if we are not careful. Someone will have a thought bubble that the building should be developed. Did they look at the plans for State Square? Did they know about the plans? Did they recognise that these two buildings are far superior to the Chan building? It might be covered with fancy architectural design but it is a block. These two buildings are well designed and should be seen at their best. While that building stays there they never will be.
We need to find somewhere else and the old Darwin hospital site is an opportunity, or perhaps the law courts car park. It could go underground and join the World War II tunnels. We need to think outside the square. It looks like we thought that would do and it was designed in a hurry because the government architect said it would not work.
I believe we should not call for tenders, although that is another issue. The funny thing is, I put a submission to the DCA on this and it was to hear it. DCA submissions close three days before tender submissions. I could not work that out, although people say it is normal. I thought you would put up a proposal to build and see if the DCA approves it then call for tenders.
If you go to the trouble of designing and the DCA says it is not a good place for a museum, you have wasted money on tender documents. Others might say it is the way the system works, but I received a letter from the Development Consent Authority saying it has been put on hold and I hope that is because the government is rethinking it.
The government needs to rethink this. The original plan from the 1990s was that the Chan Building would go so these two buildings could be seen at their best. That plan, which the government would have a copy of, should be completed. That would honour the people who originally designed State Square. Do not leave things half done. We left a few columns out of the amphitheatre and it fell down.
If you go ahead with it do you have enough money? That is what the government architect said. If you do not have money then do not start and find you have to ask the Treasurer for more.
Let us put it to the professionals and the residents of Darwin and the greater Darwin area. This is our capital city so ask for ideas. The Larrakia people might be interested. I do not know what happened to a Larrakia cultural precinct, something that has been on the cards for umpteen years.
Let us take our time and see if we can get something better than what has been proposed. The bottom line is it is time for the Chan Building to go. Let us look at another place and make sure these two buildings are left for people to enjoy, as originally planned, for years to come.
Mr HIGGINS (Arts and Museums): Madam Speaker, there is no wonder people are cynical about politicians. While I have no doubt the member for Nelson genuinely has concerns about the proposed repurposing of the Chan Building, I question the timing and method. It does not justify an MPI.
As honourable members know, the Chan Building project was announced by government a year ago last week. The member did not mention that the Chan Building was used as contemporary art space. Also, the town hall behind the Chan Building was the first museum and art gallery of the Northern Territory when Hinton was around.
The project was not announced in a media release but in last year’s budget. The Chief Minister and I were joined by the Museum and Art Gallery NT Board Chair, Allan Myers AC QC, and proudly announced the project on the steps of the Chan Building. I gave follow-up media interviews, as did Mr Myers and MAGNT Director, Marcus Schutenko.
In October we released the tender for its design, and in November we announced the successful tenderer as local firm DKJ projects.architecture, in partnership with the nationally-accredited Fender – I will not pronounce the rest of names. The member for Nelson struggled with them too.
We released the winning designs at the time and they were well publicised through general media, social media and the press. In February this year the Infrastructure minister and I announced the release of a tender for the design, development and construction with novated design for the project. This gained media exposure, as has government’s decision to extend the tender following several requests from tenderers for more detailed information and associated time extensions.
All that, then in late March the member for Nelson decided to pipe a bit louder. He has never been a fan of the project, but this is his loudest protest. He issued a media release in late March essentially saying the building should be demolished and any new art gallery should be built elsewhere. This is why you cannot blame people for being cynical.
Throughout this very public and open process there has barely been a murmur from opposition members. Then, bang, there was a definitive tear-it-down release from the member for Nelson, followed by this time-wasting motion. This is not a matter of public importance. A cynic might say this is an easy media hit for politicians 128 days out from a Territory general election, but allow me to address the honourable member’s claims.
The member for Nelson said the repurposing project will result in the Chan Building dominating the skyline and will be detrimental to the other buildings. How bizarre when you consider that just across the road is the Charles Darwin Centre and NT House, both much bigger buildings. Is the member more qualified and experienced to judge aesthetics and good design than the two multi-award winning architects with experience in gallery and cultural projects?
As to architect Professor Lawrence Nield’s comment, I can only express deep disappointment. Professor Nield sat on the design, tender and assessment panel for the project. For him to now say he has issues with the design is not cricket – to be polite and parliamentary.
The member for Nelson has questioned how we can call for tenders for a building that has not gone to the DCA for approval. He said he is confused. The DCA application is based on the advanced concept design and runs in parallel with the current tender process. I am advised this is not unusual.
It is important to remember the government’s intent. We want to create a brand new cultural institution for the Northern Territory, a dedicated visual art gallery. We want this to be central and take advantage of the increasing tourism trade this government has been building up, and to make use of the prime position the Chan Building offers. As the Chief Minister said, the redevelopment will cement Darwin’s position as a must-do arts and cultural destination.
On 16 June 2015 Allan Myers AC QC said:
He added:
I am surprised the member has called for the tearing down of the Chan Building, especially given its rich history. The repurposing of the Chan Building gives it fresh life and will invigorate not only State Square but also Bennett Park and the town hall ruins, which I said was the first museum and art gallery of the Northern Territory.
Before the opposition squeals about not telling anyone, we have had, and are continuing, conversations with the City of Darwin about the project to ensure it complements its city master plan. So far feedback has been positive.
I will give the member for Nelson something to chew on. As I said earlier, the design, development and construct tender period has been extended at the request of tenderers. I am happy to be guided by experts on this. But if – and it is a very big if – the tender submissions come back, for whatever reason, with proposals that do not hit our high water mark I will take the issue back to Cabinet for further consideration. That would not be unusual for a project of this magnitude.
We want to get this right. We want an iconic venue for future generations. We want a top class art gallery in the heart of Darwin, a venue which will enchant visitors and become a must-do on the arts and cultural tourism circuit. We will not settle for less.
With regard to heritage issues with the Chan Building, it is my understanding – I am waiting for confirmation on this for the member for Nelson – that an application has been received to have the Chan Building heritage listed.
Members interjecting.
Mr HIGGINS: I know. I do not know who, but not me. I am advised that while the application is being considered it is not possible to pull the building down.
I have a long connection with the Chan Building. The previous Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, worked for me and was based in the Chan Building. I am sure he would love to see the Chan Building remain. Labor has already said they are happy to continue with the Chan project. Previous plans have their arts centre in the law courts car park. I am sure they are willing to wait for the tenders to come back and see how this pans out in the long run.
This does not deserve to be a matter of public importance. The issue has been ongoing for over 12 months. I am cynical about the timing, not just by the member for Nelson but other people. They have had plenty of time to express their concerns so I find the timing somewhat questionable.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, there is a common theme running through the Country Liberal Party government that they get to say what is a matter of public importance. Perhaps a hint of arrogance is creeping into government in its dying months.
This is a matter of public importance. The Chan Building is an iconic building in the heart of State Square. We should debate in parliament the future of the State Square area, its use, and whether an iconic building is dramatically changed beyond recognition – currently the government plan – or is removed, as proposed in previous Labor government plans. I have the 2006 plans here which provide for no Chan Building, and sight lines from the old town hall ruins through to Government House and out into the harbour, which I believe the member for Nelson referred to.
These are all considerations. I had a view when I was Lands and Planning minister, which was different to the 2006 Labor view. I like the Chan Building and would like to see it remain as is. I am one of those old Darwin people who do not want to see every building I have grown up with removed or changed beyond recognition. The Chan Building is a symbol of my childhood and a representation of old government buildings architecture.
It is also an historic site, as parliament was run from there when the old Legislative Assembly building was damaged beyond its use and function and had to be raised. The old Legislative Assembly shifted to the Chan Building. For me, that building is important.
I would hate to see it altered as per the proposed CLP government plans. I believe today they are backing out of it to an extent. I thank them for that as it will give us time to adequately consider use of the site. Is it to be raised or stay as it is externally in keeping with its history? They are genuine considerations.
I understand the thinking around its removal and opening up of State Square to allow the sight lines between the historic old town hall and the beautiful buildings of the Supreme Court and Parliament House. I understand the town planning considerations and design. I have a strong personal view that the Chan Building represents so much of our history. The architecture of those old government buildings that sat beside it has disappeared. There used to be a row of them and they are gone. The only one left standing is the Chan Building.
My father was a senior public servant. He started as a junior and went through the ranks to become a senior in the era of long white socks held up with elastic bands, sandals and shorts.
As a child I would visit my dad in the government office buildings that sat alongside the Chan Building. I hold those memories, but I cannot talk about what Darwin was like then. If we remove everything Darwin was – I point out the Chan Building to my children and grandchildren and say, ‘A row of buildings looked like this. This is where government was run from when we were administered by the Commonwealth. It is our history.’ I do not know who has sought heritage listing but I am glad they have.
The practical side the government has not been honest, open or transparent about is what sits below the ground. The hub of the government computer is below the ground. The figures have probably changed, but there would be no change from $30m to relocate what is in the Chan Building.
To most people this building looks like an old empty relic because the CLP, in its infinite lack of wisdom, decided to stop it being an art gallery. People think it is a shell of a building when it is really running government through its computer networks and systems underground. I do not understand it because I am not a computer whiz and did not experience working from that building like the member for Daly or the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson.
As a former minister I know there is enough money involved in relocating what is in the Chan Building to make it reasonably fiscally prohibitive. The CLP promises all types of strange and wonderful things which are not delivered and this is one of them. ‘Let’s build this amazing’ – maybe we can call it Giles Tower – ‘phallic symbol to the Giles era and the CLP government’.
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 31. I ask the member for Karama to withdraw the comment relating to a symbol.
Ms LAWRIE: If he finds it offensive I withdraw it. Many tall buildings are referred to architecturally that way. It was not a personal reference, but if you find it offensive so be it.
Giles Tower, a tall edifice representative of the soon to be departing CLP government. It is a vision and dream not realised, just like the vision and dream for the dirty port or the chest beating when things were not realised.
Not one extra cent from the Commonwealth for infrastructure funding in the Territory was delivered by the Giles government. It has been a joke. Fortunately the member for Nelson did not see the Chan Building redevelopment as a joke but as something of great concern. He listened to architectural advice and has brought the matter of public importance before us.
If there is light at the end of the tunnel because the building has a heritage listing application that is good. I hope that in a mature government in the future we carefully and genuinely consider all the options for our iconic State Square and the Chan Building, the last example of the old Commonwealth government office blocks. It is part of our history, I believe, but I do not have the expertise the Heritage Council has.
I thank the member for Nelson for bringing this grave matter of public importance before us. In any other mature capital city, if a government proposed such a drastic change in the centre of State Square there would be huge debate. One issue with the lack of debate in the Territory is people know the CLP government does not listen. It says something, and people have given up saying anything in response because they know that, whatever they say, nothing will change.
The CLP rushes headlong into what it says, like the sale of TIO and the port, the removal of the First Home Owner Grant for existing dwellings, the cuts to education, the running down of our overburdened health system and the Chief Minister laughing at nurses in ED when they raised issues. As a community we know, and have seen it for three-and-a-half years, that the CLP does not listen. That is why I say not to be shocked when there is no significant public debate on your grandiose announcements. Anyone with knowledge of the details and issues knows things will never come to pass because you cannot get a project off the ground. You have failed to deliver on simple projects. We know you are hopeless, chaotic and dysfunctional and do not have the wherewithal to undertake this project.
I am pleased an application for heritage listing has delayed your fumbling of this project to the point we will go to an election and there will no longer be a CLP government. Whoever the future Minister for Lands and Planning is, please do not rush the Chan Building decision, but genuinely consult with all stakeholders. A future government may decide to go back to the 2006 plans of former Chief Minister, Clare Martin, about removing it altogether, albeit it at very high cost, or the idea I had when Lands and Planning minister of not removing it because it represents part of our history and should be opened to public use. We do not have enough open space for our arts sector.
It could go further than it previously did and be used for music. I have not seen any scope or design on what it would take for it to become a live music venue for the not-for-profit music scene. Can we encourage young artists and give them affordable and accessible space?
There are a few ideas, and I thank the member for Nelson for bring this matter of public importance to the Chamber.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I also thank the member for Nelson for bring this matter of public importance to this Chamber. Essentially, it is about appropriation of $20m of taxpayers’ funds. If that is not a matter of public importance I do not know what is.
I am honoured to participate in this debate. It is a good opportunity for not only a local member, but any member of parliament or minister to contribute to a debate and outcome for – I cannot remember the quote from the member for Port Darwin – the true and good welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
Mr Elferink: I say it every day, ‘For the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory’.
Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, member for Port Darwin. I hope Hansard caught that because I would like it included. Essentially that is why I am on my feet now.
I congratulate whoever wrote the minister’s speech. It was a clever twist on words, was laid back and had humour. I would like to know who wrote that for you, minister.
Your delivery was excellent. You showed a resonance of community values which could not be recorded. We got the feeling you shared many of the member for Nelson’s sentiments about appropriation of $20m in taxpayers’ funds.
I challenged this project from the start. I am on the public record during the budget announcements, at the 2015-16 estimates hearings, and the Parliamentary Record on a number of occasions challenging the minister with questions like, ‘Is this a good investment for the arts in the Northern Territory? Is it a good infrastructure investment? Could it be utilised better?’
Minister, your comment, ‘Before the opposition squeals’, was interesting. I remind you in opposition we have been very active with the Country Liberal Party’s budget appropriations. At the risk of spin doctors with semantic distortions – not quite as good as a Fender Super-Sonic 65 W – we have discussed this at length. With regard to Labor’s infrastructure policy, if the Country Liberal Party was to go ahead with this, as a responsible alternative government we would deal with it. Before the spin doctors play havoc with opportunities to waste time in this House with cheap semantic distortions, that is a pragmatic and realistic Labor policy. We have an opportunity to continue the debate, and the minister has suggested it could be on hold.
That brings me to an important point. This started when the CLP tried to create a record infrastructure budget and I took on three headline issues. One was the $20m appropriated to the redevelopment of Richardson Park. History shows what happened there with a government that does not consult. Then $20m was appropriated to the Chan Building and $20m appropriated to a Territory Indigenous art gallery.
I reminded the CLP then, and remind them today, that they have $80m of taxpayer funds in the back pocket that can be appropriated into significant infrastructure for the Northern Territory and, therefore, a great opportunity to debate this.
That $80m is a realistic figure because Richardson Park did not go ahead, it looks like the Chan Building plan is on hold, and there is $20m for an Indigenous art gallery we have not heard about again. However, Labor has put out some powerful infrastructure policies to fund the construction industry in the Northern Territory, the tourism sector – new ways of attracting markets to the Northern Territory and new tourists, diverse tourists who will come in search of our arts, culture, heritage and history. Our policy crosses into regional development for the length and breadth of the Northern Territory.
Significant cash is floating around but seems to be on hold now. It will be interesting to see Budget 2016-17 unpack the revotes for this famous record infrastructure budget of the CLP, while the middle-level manufacturing sector and the contractors in the greater Darwin area and across the regions of the Northern Territory are going broke. That is an interesting situation for a government that wants to crow about infrastructure and development.
This brings me to my relationship with the Chan Building. For anybody interested, and those listening who plan to enter parliament, I was a new member elected in August 2008. I came to parliament and was inducted. Then I was given a fabulous office on the fifth floor. Mind you, it was a rough neighbourhood in those days. You had to lock your doors and windows because it was full of CLP.
I opened the curtains of my fifth floor office and there was the roofline of the Chan Building. Being an ex-teacher and principal who had wrangled through repairs and maintenance budgets, minor new works budgets and capital works programs for over 30 years, I was looking at a roofline with significant issues. There were panels hanging off the air conditioner shrouding, it looked like excessive water pouring off the roof from the air conditioning plant, significant rust could be seen across different sectors of the roof, and from my lay perspective this building needed some tender love and care.
I reported it to the Speaker. I thought, ‘This is the line management for my new position’, and I reported it in good faith. To my shock, a few days later when I opened the same curtains groups of contractors were on the roof repairing the infrastructure issues. It was amazing. That was my formal introduction to the Chan Building.
As minister for Construction and Infrastructure at the time, I had the staff of DCI relocated into the Chan Building while the Palmerston building was being refurbished. That was a great exercise in refurbishment. I saw the Chan Building in its entirety as I had access to it and walked its floors. With engineers and construction experts I was able to understand the real constraints with the building. It was definitely 1970s infrastructure with major constraints. Like the member for Karama, I became aware of the ICT component of the Northern Territory government’s operations in the basement of the building. That was essentially a massive no-go zone and a serious constraint to development.
That was not a really happy time for DCI staff. It was a difficult time of relocating twice and occupying the building in a constrained environment. I learnt lots about the building during that time. As minister for Arts and Museums I developed the Chan Contemporary Art Space. That targeted community groups and grassroots arts and culture initiatives and the sector embraced it with open arms. It was a great time to engage with stakeholders, to plan, and then the exhibition started. I remember an outstanding exhibition from the disability sector.
We saw a lot of movement into the State Square precinct through the Chan Contemporary Art Space. It was new and fledgling, but we could see it had opportunity. It engaged with the community and tourists were the next layer.
I have challenged the CLP government on a number of occasions about closing the arts space as a cost-cutting exercise. I was treated with the usual contempt at the estimates hearings. A previous Arts minister, the member for Greatorex – it was a definite challenge and I said, ‘You have missed this opportunity’. The answers are on the public record. It was closed, has never seen the light of day, and that initiative has lost its momentum. The CLP government has lost credibility with the grassroots arts sector, especially in regard to the greater Darwin area. It now has a new plan, but we have heard tonight that has stalled.
As Minister for Lands and Planning it was a privilege to be part of developing the Greater Darwin Plan. That incorporated all aspects of taking Darwin, and the greater Darwin region, forward to what it is, the capital of northern Australia. Part of that work included the old Darwin hospital site, which really is Myilly Point. My definition to the department was the Bennelong Point of Darwin. It is incredible real estate, an asset of the Crown that can be high-end, cultural and significant development for the city in the future.
The member for Nelson mentioned that. I remind the House of the extensive consultation work done with members of the community who represent the Kahlin Compound survivors, the nurses of the old Darwin hospital and the Stolen Generation. There are extensive planning documents that would still be available from the department of Arts and Museums. The department did a lot of research, connection and consultation with those important groups and looked at a master planning exercise around that point.
The member for Nelson has a serious alternative. That area reflects our culture, heritage and history and there is opportunity for government to development that in a modern urban built form. There is an opportunity for high-density living, commercial and retail. It is a great site that can be developed in the future, and has been raised in this MPI. There are significant alternatives. With $80m in the back pocket there is serious cash to progress such plans.
The CLP’s plan for Myilly Point is completely different to Labor’s. Initial discussions reveal they are looking at about 80% high-density residential, which completely gets away from the community aspect, the culture, heritage and the opportunities.
Madam Speaker, I believe I have 20 minutes but the clock only gave me 15.
Madam SPEAKER: No, it is 15.
Mr McCARTHY: I am nearly done?
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, you are nearly done.
Mr McCARTHY: As the first opposition member to speak?
Madam SPEAKER: Standing orders have changed and the time limits have changed.
Mr McCARTHY: I back the member for Nelson on this. The government has an opportunity now. We have heard from the minister that some new issues have emerged. The money is in the bank and together we can look at the best way to deliver these outcomes for the Northern Territory. As I said, there are incredible opportunities to do that.
Mr STYLES (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I agree with the member for Nelson that what happens to our art and space is a matter of public importance.
Irrespective of where museums and art galleries are we need them in the Northern Territory. Art is an important part of our culture and history. There is an old saying, ‘If you don’t know where you’ve been, you don’t know where you’re going’. It is important that Territorians have access to quality museums and art space. Art is a way a community expresses itself, its issues and its priorities, and that comes out in some of the magnificent art works we see across the Territory from the multicultural groups to the Aboriginal population, especially in Central Australia. The Country Liberal Party government is very aware of that.
Art is a way of measuring where a community is in its evolution. Quite often at the beginning of a culture the art work is basic and not shown to many. As a community develops and evolves the art is shown to more people. More people travel and share in the fantastic stories art and the expression of culture through song and dance offer. Art is not just a painting on a piece of bark, a canvas or a piece of timber, it is about dance, music, and the way people tell their stories. It may be through painting, storytelling or the written word.
For that you need a vibrant economy. To undertake extensions or repair and refurbish any building, or build a new one, there must be a vibrant economy to pay for it. You cannot do what the previous Labor government did and put it on the MasterCard. It is all very well for Labor to say, ‘You can do this and that and we will do this and that’, but it is about generating wealth. If you do not, you end up like Greece. I wonder how they maintain historic art works or historic buildings in Greece at the moment. Some of their magnificent buildings are living art, going back to an era where everyone who built something was an artist. I would say people who build today are not artists. There are some fantastic builders with extremely innovative ideas about how to generate good-looking buildings.
However, you need a vibrant economy. To achieve that you can have one-shot-in-the-locker, as the previous government did, or you can have a diversified economy. Many people like to donate to the arts community not necessarily governments.
Philanthropic organisations and people across the country and internationally are happy to contribute money to the arts. However, having spoken to several over the years, they are keen to ensure that art is exposed to as many people as possible. That comes to something the member for Barkly mentioned – tourists and new tourists.
The Giles government has a fantastic record of contributing to increased tourist numbers. Tourist numbers dropped over 11 years of Labor. Those numbers are now growing. You have to invest in tourism and have a vision of where you will take the tourism industry and where you need to support tourism.
For philanthropic organisations to say they will support the Northern Territory we need to demonstrate that the art will be appreciated and looked at. People who seriously want to contribute to art galleries, art spaces and public art want to ensure the number of people who see it is not declining. They enjoy the feeling they get to know more and more people will see what they have publicly displayed.
You need a diversified economy to ensure that you get people on board and into the Territory.
With regard to the city master plan and the Chan Building, government considers all issues affecting the Chan Building. The member for Karama said that we cannot shift the government computer centre from the bottom of the Chan Building. She picked a figure for the move, but I have one which is a lot less. Is the middle of town the right place? There is an ongoing debate on whether it should be somewhere else.
You need businesses to operate in the Northern Territory so people who have spare money can donate to the arts. We rely on donations of paintings, artworks and stories.
There are some great collections in the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory at Bullocky Point. The same can be said for the Araluen Art Centre in Alice Springs. There are art spaces at the cultural centre in Katherine. With regard to the cultural aspects of art, in the Northern Territory we have many different cultures and the depth and breadth of that art is quite remarkable.
The Makassans who came here in excess of 400 years ago brought Indonesian art with them. They brought stick figures, clothing, their artwork and exchanged them with local Aboriginal people in Arnhem Land for things like fresh water and food. When they finished capturing trepang and other things they would catch the trade winds home. When the winds were favourable they would come back again. The Aboriginal people of the Top End have exchanged art for well over 400 years.
More recently the Chinese arrived, and you can see their art in the arts and artefacts museum at the Chung Wah Society in Woods Street, which is a fantastic museum. They have records of all the early Chinese settlers who came here to work on the Pine Creek railway line, the Pine Creek goldfields, to grow vegetables, run factories, laundries and all the things a town needs to sustain ongoing development. They have their own art.
The records of the families and descendants of the early settlers are artwork themselves. It is recorded as a magnificent display of fine art. The scrolls things are written on – the artisans have made the scrolls and the scribes have entered the records in Chinese. They go back to the 1800s.
Looking at the Filipino artworks, through Southeast Asia to the Greeks – the Greeks have a day, which was recently, where they celebrate their independence. The Greeks have artwork that dates back to the original Greek settlers in Darwin. We need to display that art as well. Tourists need to see it. Fortunately our investment in tourism is on the rise and more and more people are arriving.
When you increase population you increase the variety of art. We want the next generation to come along – I wonder if in 50 years’ time a picture of an app on an iPhone will be considered art showing how people did things then. What will be considered art?
Regarding graphic art, when I was a boy we had Space Invaders on the computer. Was that art? Was it an expression of what it is? These are the things we put in museums, and in 50 years’ time it will seem absurd that people did that 50 or 100 years ago.
We appreciate art. Art is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but we are trying to attract people here so they bring their art and culture with them. One of the great advantages of living in Darwin, and to a lesser degree at this point Alice Springs – Alice Springs has a fast-growing multicultural community where people see the centre of Australia as a place of opportunity for families and communities to integrate into Alice Springs and value add not only culturally and with food and dance, but their art. The art space in Alice Springs is important as well.
It is important that we continue to grow our community. For instance, look at international education. We are working hard overseas to attract more international students to study here, either at high school or university, undertake undergraduate programs, MBA programs or doctorates in their chosen field. Many of those people are into art. Hopefully, if they go back to their home country they will take some of the art they purchased here with them.
When looking to increase tourism you hope that whilst people are here, if they have looked at art spaces – both public and privately-held art collections – they take that back and their friends say, ‘I might go to Darwin and the Northern Territory on my way into Australia’.
These are the things you have to work on. It is not just where the building is or how big it will be; it is about the holistic picture of enabling more people to appreciate the art and culture of the Northern Territory. We need to display it.
I heard what the member for Nelson said in relation to the Chan Building. It may or may not be the Chan Building, but wherever it is we need to ensure we have the economy running well so people can get around and have the time and disposable income to enjoy the arts.
As a widower raising kids, there was not much money for petrol to get into town, but we got out from time to time. I feel for those who do not have that opportunity. The better off we are in relation to a vibrant economy, the more people in our community will be able to enjoy the art spaces we create, be it in a public building or in the museum.
Madam Speaker, I agree with the member for Nelson that we should look carefully where we put our art spaces. We need to fit into city master plans, make sure our philanthropic contributors feel great about contributing to the arts in the Northern Territory, that tourism and international student numbers are on the way up and those people continue to contribute to the Northern Territory.
Mr CHANDLER (Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, as Minister for Infrastructure I am responsible for most if not all the construction government decides on, whether it is roads, bridges, barge landings or schools. The Department of Infrastructure is managing the design, documentation and construction of the Chan Building redevelopment on behalf of the client, the Department of Arts and Museums and Board of the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, MAGNT. The Northern Territory government has allocated $11.3m towards construction of this project. The remaining $7m of funding for the project will be contributed by external sources through philanthropic contributions to the project through MAGNT.
The Chief Minister and the Minister for Arts and Museums announced the redevelopment as part of Budget 2015-16. The project is currently at the advanced concept design stage and Tender T15-1955 closes on 27 April 2016, seven days from now. It is for the design, development and construction of the facility.
The principal design consultant initially engaged by the Northern Territory government will be novated to the successful tenderer, who will be responsible for managing to completion the design and construction of the facility. The Development Consent Authority application is based on the advanced concept design and is running parallel with the current tender process. The redevelopment works are expected to be completed for a Dry Season 2017 opening.
The redevelopment will turn the Chan Building into a modern exhibition space. The project will further develop the economic potential of arts and cultural tourism in the city centre. The community will be informed as the project progresses and at significant milestones.
The Chan Building has long been neglected and is half empty, yet is in a prime position for residents and tourists alike to enjoy as a cultural facility. Since 2010 the Chan Contemporary Art Space has operated as a Dry Season visual arts exhibition space for contemporary art on the ground floor of the Chan Building. The new MAGNT gallery will leverage off the success of the CCAS and provide a significant new attraction for locals and tourists.
The Chan Building would become a downtown location for the MAGNT and act as a major anchor for visual arts in the CBD. It is funny that ideas and concepts like this often become controversial, just as public art becomes controversial from time to time. I know the issues the Darwin council has had over the years with certain public art in and around the city. However, the Northern Territory has a remarkable number of art pieces in storage.
It was remarkable to come into government and learn how much of our wonderful art was in storage because there was no space to showcase it to tourists and locals. That was sad. It is always great to rotate a number of art pieces through a museum, but much of this art has not seen the light of day for many a long year.
Art is for the person looking at it. I do not like recommending restaurants to people because I will go somewhere and have a wonderful meal, but if I recommend it to someone they could have a terrible time. It is the same with art, it is a personal thing. I might look at a piece of art and think it is beautiful, see something in it, or find something about my past or something that reminds me of my life. From that I can learn or respect that piece of artwork. Some other people might look at it and ask, ‘What the hell is that?’
I have seen artwork people have made a lot of money from, and I have sometimes thought my own children, back in Year 4 or 5, could have done an equal or better job. Something might be worth millions of dollars, and I do not quite get that. Art is for an individual to appreciate.
It is a marvellous idea to have some space in the Northern Territory where our art, much of it in storage, can be displayed not only to locals but the many tourists that visit our fine city. To have that art on display is important, and the Chan Building could be used for that.
Over the years we have discussed many times what we could use the building for, and the discussions eventually lead to turning it into a contemporary art space. It is a fabulous idea but not without its challenges. In the many discussions I have had with Dave McHugh, the CE of Infrastructure, the type of construction of the building is problematic. I thought we could rip out a couple of floors and make a big space like we have in Parliament House. I thought that somewhere in the centre of the building we could have a great auditorium with things hanging from the ceiling. Maybe we could turn this into a museum.
Mr Higgins: It has the right height.
Mr CHANDLER: It has the right height but Madam Speaker might not approve of that. I thought that could be done to the internal parts of the Chan Building, but, alas, learning more about the construction of that building shows it is not possible. With the type of reinforcement – with high tensile steel and the stress on that steel it is not possible to cut out sections of the building. That was off the table, so people had to come up with unique designs of how we could turn the building into a great public art space.
There is also a great opportunity, and I know this side has spoken about this from time to time – is it time to bulldoze the whole building? Is it time to turn the area into a lovely park and garden area that can be enjoyed by residents and tourists? It would complement the State Square area by having a beautiful and well-designed garden and area to sit. At the same time the government is facing an additional challenge as the building has had an application for heritage listing. That creates some problems.
I expect that not only does it rule out bulldozing the building, but it may prevent certain things happening to change the building. I do not want to go too far into that as I am not entirely across the details of what can and cannot be done when a heritage listing application is made. I know the minister is compelled to protect the building at the moment so nothing major can happen to it. When it is assessed the minister will decide if it will be heritage listed. At the moment there is some hiatus around the building, although that does not stop any of the tender processes continuing.
Tenders close on 27 April. They will then be assessed and a decision made on where we go from here.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I move that the government immediately puts on hold an application by Intrapac to the Water Controller as advertised on Tuesday this week that would allow Intrapac to extract 571 ML of water, or half of the estimated sustainable yield of 1057 ML per year, from the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer, sections 05827, 05758, 05761 and 00507 Hundred of Strangways, known as Noonamah Ridge, until the Environment Protection Authority has completed and released its report on the Noonamah Ridge Development Environmental Impact Statement.
This area is of great importance to many people in the rural area. Madam Speaker, you initiated a meeting about 10 days ago which between 200 and 300 people attended. That number shows the importance of development in the area. There has been a lot of debate in the community about consultation. It was clear from the number of people who attended the meeting that consultation regarding Noonamah Ridge has not happened, and people in that area have not been consulted on whether they want this development to occur.
An application appeared in the paper titled, ‘Notice of Intention to make a Water Extraction Licence Decision pursuant to section 17B of the Water Act’. It says there is an application to extract water from the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer.
After I issued a media release in relation to this I received a copy of a permit issued to a company called Porosus Pty Ltd. I am sure it was on the department’s website. It said a licence had been approved for Porosus to extract 700 ML from the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer. The original application for water said no water extraction licences were currently issued for this aquifer and no stock or domestic bores were using it.
I was confused because there had been one extractive licence issued for Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer which said the aquifers underlying the Noonamah Ridge property – I think this came from the department – are fractured rock-type aquifers commonly developed in the weathered zone of Wildman Siltstone, a widespread geological formation which extends from Noonamah eastward to the Mary River area. This area is represented by two types of rock – siltstone and quartzite. Bores drilled into this aquifer typically obtain moderate air lift yields.
It went on to say that sustainable yields from these bores are again likely to be much lower, for example, 2 L to 5 L per second.
It said the licence application seeks a maximum ground water extraction of 517 ML per year for a public water supply on a land of 2641 ha.
It goes on, ‘Recharge to siltstone aquifers in Darwin is taken to be of the order of 200 mm a year. Given the land of the proposed development is 2641 ha, the annual discharge is estimated to be 5282 ML per year. Based on 80% of this annual recharge being apportioned to environmental uses, the amount available for consumptive use is 1056 ML. The Intrapac application seeks a maximum entitlement of half this, at 517 ML. The requested amount is well within that limit and should have no adverse effects on existing users who are located on the north, north-west and south of the property.’
It goes on to say, ‘It is important to note that bores located within the Darwin water control district are only required to be licensed if they are equipped to pump greater than 15 L per second. The applicant is not required to apply for a licence for bores equipped to pump less than 15 L per second under the Water Act. If granted the water extraction licence allows the Department of Land Resource Management to monitor and therefore manage the resource. Under licence conditions all bores must be metered and pumpage data is provided to the department on a monthly basis. The licence would also be subject to annual announced allocations. Under the annual allocation process extractive entitlements are able to be reduced to accommodate poor Wet Seasons.’
Minister, you say there is some exemption but I am yet to get my head around it. Perhaps you could explain that in your response. I understand you must be licensed to take more than 15 L per second. If you take 14.999 L per second you do not need a licence and can pump until the cows come home, which would be a concern in that area.
That issue got people talking. Residents are concerned that there could be more water drawn out of this aquifer. We know eventually there will be – the executive summary relating to Noonamah Ridge – as this is only stage one and it will require a future stage which will certainly look for more water.
The other issue, which I believe was raised at the meeting, is the company wants to drill bores to provide water for a town. If people are not sure what I am talking about, look at the advertising brochures put out for Noonamah Ridge. Noonamah Ridge is meant to be a residential area, and that was claimed in the original plans. It is part of the peri-urban area the Planning Commission calls part of the Litchfield area. The Noonamah Ridge website says:
The Project Vision is:
It has since gone to the EPA.
Many residents are concerned that this company wants to provide water to what is essentially a residential area because it cannot connect to Power and Water. It wants to be the equivalent of Power and Water in the community. It would need a licence under the Water Supply and Sewerage Services Act.
The Utilities Commission was initially established to play a regulatory role in this area. It is also the body which provides a water licence for a community. In the Darwin region, Power and Water is licensed to provide water to communities connected to potable water, including Noonamah Ridge. That is a requirement under the licence it has been given by the Utilities Commission.
My concern is if a private company provides water for stages one and two – you are dealing with 2000 to 3000 people – you would expect that company to provide fluoridation and chlorination, constantly monitor the quality of the water and meter it.
I have already mentioned this water supply is subject to water allocation. If there was a bad year and not enough water in the aquifer the company would have to restrict the amount of water being pumped. How that would work for a township without a secondary supply? Darwin has two water supplies, one is the borefields in the east Howard area and the other is Darwin River Dam.
Questions need to be asked about why and how this would work in practice. This development is a long way from the water supply. Power and Water have told them there is not enough water and they cannot connect to it. One reason would be the cost, and also Power and Water’s concern about provision of water to that area.
You get the impression this development is in the wrong place. The design might be perfect but in the wrong place. I am concerned that when the company puts in a water application it is saying ‘We’re going ahead with this. The government has given us a general land use objective of urban/semi-urban. We are a long way from any urban development, and we have to supply water from bores rather than the town water supply.’
People in that area have never been asked if they want Noonamah Ridge. I get into debates with the Planning Commission and they say, as they did recently, there has been adequate consultation. Intrapac held two meetings at Humpty Doo, but no one has asked people in the area if they want the land changed from rural to urban. That was never asked by the Planning Commission or Intrapac.
Intrapac said, ‘We’re going there. What do you think of our design?’ People said it was nice; some town people said they would love to live in the rural area so they adjusted the design. They had a second meeting and came up with a design but no one ever asked that question. My concern is that we are being told what our rural area will look like by those who have contacts with the right people.
This development was not on the original plans for the Darwin rural area. The first draft – there were no meetings and you had to respond by e-mail – did not include Noonamah Ridge. Between the first and second draft this appeared. I do not know anyone who barracked for it. It is called Lloyd Creek not Noonamah Ridge. It suddenly popped up out of the blue and received some media hype about how wonderful it would be. Lloyd Creek is not far from where minister Higgins lives. It has been on the map for a long time, and your Litchfield road map will show it is very much part of the rural area.
This is the cart before the horse. We have not asked the people. The application for water presumes this will go ahead. There are many hurdles to cross before that happens, but two surveys have been done. Geoff Butler conducted a survey in Acacia, which is not the nearest place – the south side of Noonamah Ridge – of around 120 people and 91% said they did not want it to happen there.
A survey was also conducted at Kezia Purick’s meeting at Elizabeth Valley, and of around 123 people who filled in the survey only one supported Noonamah Ridge. What is going on? Has there been true consultation? The Planning Commission said my surveys were a little biased and not professionally done, and I accept that, but generally speaking they asked the right questions to get the right answers.
Those surveys were done anonymously. People could have written whatever they wanted on them. The survey for Noonamah asked, ‘Do you support the Noonamah Ridge development? Would you prefer the land to stay rural or do you have another opinion?’
When nearly 100% of people who attended that meeting said they did not want Noonamah Ridge, perhaps the government might have said, ‘We need to put a brake on this because there is obviously a dislike for this type of development’. You want to put 4200 dwelling there, and if you take the latest figures for the Northern Territory of 2.1 children per woman, which was in the NT News recently, that is four people per household, which is roughly 16 000 people.
This development will go into an area where, if it had been developed into a rural area, there would perhaps be 4000 people. It will have nearly four times that number with no upgrading of road infrastructure. People in Elizabeth Valley know that road floods and is the main road out. There have been no discussions about how that road will be upgraded.
I would prefer this application be placed on hold. We should not be looking at water allocation until the Environment Protection Authority has reported on the environmental impact statement provided by Intrapac. I have said publicly the company has done an excellent job with its environmental impact statement, which is about 3 ft thick. I have only used the executive summary because I do not have the time to read such a thick document.
A more obvious reason why this development is in the wrong place is that it requires bore water to run the town. It should be in Weddell. The company told me it has asked the government twice for land for this development, and mentioned Weddell was requested once. I have not seen any paperwork to support that. Does the Minister for Lands and Planning know of an application from this company to acquire Crown land for the development?
The company has obviously done a lot of work and I will not knock the design. It appears to be somewhere people would enjoy being, but it is urban. The Noonamah Ridge website says it is predominantly residential. They have also mentioned country style. If you add ‘country’ it sounds like you are in the country, but you are on a 400 m2 or 800 m2 block and the trees are over there. It is an application for urban development in a rural area.
One interesting thing from the meeting at Elizabeth Valley is we have learnt about the aquifer. This is not the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer, but a different one. There is also Koolpinyah aquifer, and another aquifer was mentioned. People responding to the submission would not know about these things.
That was a good reason for the meeting and I congratulate the member for Goyder for it. I thank the Minister for Land Resource Management for allowing people from his department to explain things.
A fair amount of science was involved. It highlighted the need for government staff – not in controversial matters like this – to attend meetings. I would be happy to help with meetings. I held some at Girraween Primary School when we discussed the Howard East Aquifer. We should have more meetings so people better understand where the water comes from, how it is recharged and so on. People will say things at meetings not necessarily because they are trying to be silly, but because they do not have the knowledge they need to make informed decisions.
The meeting was good and we now seem to be getting more information out about this aquifer. If there is enough water in that aquifer why not develop it as rural?
Some years ago there was an application for this land to be a rural development. At the time it was said there was not enough proof that the aquifer would be recharged. There was talk of allowing people in the area to have rainwater tanks. As you know from the meeting, minister, you would need an enormous number of rainwater tanks over six months to provide water for a family.
If the government has found there are better supplies of water than previously known, why not allow this land to be developed as originally planned? The government can limit the amount of water people take without worrying about 15 L per second. That can be done through the Development Consent Authority. It could say that only a 0.5 L per second pump be on a bore. Part of the development could have meters for monitoring, and people be allowed to pump only a certain amount if that is the best way to look after the aquifer and allow people to live on rural land.
I believe the Planning Commission did not understand the argument put forward. It was not about whether land should be cut into little blocks or big blocks. The argument was about retaining the rural area as a great place to raise families. If people want to live in a suburb they can buy in Palmerston, Darwin or the new city of Weddell. People need a choice if they want room for a horse, chooks, a dog, some bush or some space, and we should promote that.
I believe the Planning Commission is quite happy for people living in the rural area to stay there like museum pieces, and will say it is not interfering with them. However, it is not promoting and expanding the rural area. Anyone who goes to Freds Pass knows lots of young people would like to have a block of land for a horse so they can be polocrosse riders or showjump riders. They may want room to be an ATV quad bike racer, or perhaps open up their land for wildlife. There are many reasons why people live in the rural area.
As rural residents we are being attacked by the planners who have lost their belief in the CLP’s original plan, which was to build five cities: Darwin; Palmerston; Weddell; Cox Peninsula; and Erindale across the other side. We thought that would happen. For some reason there is now a move to urbanise large portions of the rural area. Look at the activity centre plans. They show 20 000 people in activity centres for Howard Springs, Coolalinga, Humpty Doo and Berry Springs. These areas are meant to be villages serving the rural area, not villages served by the rural area. The whole thing is up the creek and around the bend.
Today the Planning Commission issued a media release saying they have handed the Litchfield Subregional Land Use Plan to the minister for Planning. I am concerned that if the minister turns this off before the election and agrees with everything the Planning Commission has said and promoted, the rural area will never be the same again. That is unfortunate because the CLP government protected the rural area in its 2010 plans.
Minister, you might say this is only about a water extraction licence, but you said previously you cannot stop it. It is a matter for the Water Controller, but perhaps as a government member you can understand this is the first stage, if approved, of urbanising the rural area and not something people want.
I do not care how many people Planning Commission members met at the supermarket or how many places they stopped at. Over 200 people attended my meetings. The Planning Commission got 20 at Howard Springs and 15 at Humpty Doo. We had 220. Does that tell you something? That consultation may come under some international standard of consultation, but it is not the type of consultation that suits the rural area. It might suit a suburb in Melbourne or Sydney, but it does not suit the rural area because the people making these decisions do not understand rural people. They do not understand the rural lifestyle and are not prepared to support it. They only want to preserve it. They are not willing to take their families to the rural area for the opportunity of an alternate lifestyle.
The plans put forward by Intrapac are only the first stage. The application for 571 ML says:
I was at a planning meeting recently – I gather there are some people in Virginia on the Koolpinyah Aquifer because it goes up and down. One person was told she could not subdivide. I do not know if it has been approved by the DCA, but at the meeting the Department of Land Resource Management said there is no more water.
That is Virginia and this is Noonamah, but on one hand I hear you cannot take any more water out for a subdivision, and on the other they are asking for water from Koolpinyah Aquifer.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I request an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: They say they want it as the ongoing water supply for Noonamah Ridge. The Noonamah Ridge EIS Executive Summary says:
That explains why they are going for a bore. They cannot afford it. Why would anyone allow a subdivision to occur in this area? It beats me.
I was on Litchfield Shire Council when people said they wanted to subdivide a block. The council said, ‘You’ll have to connect it to a bitumen road’. The bloke said, ‘I can’t afford it’, so we said, ‘Then you have to wait’.
If they are so intent on urbanising the area, wait for Weddell to commence. We will have something to attach to the urban area and can call it peri-urban. This land is in the sticks and was designed to be 2 ha and 8 ha blocks. Some people have influence over the Planning Commission, which then decided, from the original plan, to turn rural land into urban land and not doorknock the area. You need to talk to people on Redcliffe Road, Townend Road, Elizabeth Valley Road and at Acacia. That is what consultation is about, especially if you want to change people’s lifestyle. We do not seem willing to do that. Instead we have a desktop plan and stand at a supermarket for a few hours a day hoping to capture a percentage of people – maybe 1% or less – who live there. This would not have an effect on many of the people going to the supermarket.
That is not consultation; that is cosmetic. It looks good, sounds good, says a number – we have met 1000 people. I am not knocking you, but if there was real consultation tell me who those 1000 people were, minister. If you were to survey those 1000 people at Humpty Doo or Coolalinga markets, how many live in the area you are referring to? I bet it would be a small number.
You need to talk to people who live there then you will get 99% of the people from the area, just as the member for Goyder had at her recent meeting. It shows that people are concerned about the development and that amount of water. They have bores in the area and want to ensure they do not run out of water. This year has been particularly dry – you will get a question tomorrow, minister. The amount of rainfall for the first three months of this year was less than half the average. That is a substantial loss of water for people in the rural area, which means a substantial drop in the water table. It will be interesting to see if bores in the rural area can still pump water at the end of this year.
That is why people are concerned about this. They do not go to a meeting to grumble; they want information and to know why Intrapac is there. When we conducted the survey people could write preferred options on the bottom. The majority of people who filled it in said, ‘Build this town at Weddell’. They did not say it was a bad design, but to build it at Weddell.
The minister lives on a rural block close to this area and has lived in the bush. You are also the minister for water resources, so you understand why people are concerned. I hope, as the minister, you can say to your government, ‘This is not the right place for this development’. People are telling you that, and there are questions about why you would build a city with a town water supply not controlled by Power and Water. If you do not have the money to connect this town, if it is too far away, that tells you this is a residential development with a few blocks on the outside to make it look rural.
I have always supported the CLP’s plan for the future of Darwin. I told Terry Mills that the 2010 plan was better than the Labor Party’s. I supported everything the Country Liberal Party put forward except the Elizabeth River dam.
When the CLP took government it set up a Planning Commission, which turned everything upside down. Weddell is now a long-term plan. I will be dead and buried before it happens if the Planning Commission has its way. Suddenly, the rural area shown in the CLP government plan has been eaten away. Holtze is a classic example. People did not want all that area to become residential and there was some give and take, but the only reason people knew of a development was the area set aside for commercial land was not being used …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, can I ask you to pause please?
Visitors to the gallery, I acknowledge what you are doing but it is not appropriate in a parliament in Australia. I ask you to sit down or I will have the gallery cleared. A member of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly is on his feet. He is an elected member and deserves respect.
Honourable members, thank you for your patience.
Member for Nelson, the clock was stopped.
Mr WOOD: I ask the government to put this application on hold. Leave the decision on a water licence until there has been proper consultation with local residents. I cannot accept there has been proper consultation, especially when we have received overwhelming opposition to this. There may not always have been opposition from people visiting the area, but residents in the area are overwhelmingly opposed to it.
I ask for this to be put on hold so we have time to consult people on whether this should occur. I have given you reasons, even a practical one, such as it is in the wrong place.
Mr HIGGINS (Land Resource Management): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for raising the subject because he knows I am a strong advocate for the opinion of people in my electorate to this development. I always have been, and will continue to be into the future. He knows I was a joint signatory, with the member for Goyder and him, in objecting to some of the lot sizes.
However, as minister, as opposed to the local member, I will concentrate on the water licence application. The proponents of the Noonamah Ridge development, Intrapac Projects Pty Ltd, submitted an application to the Department of Land Resource Management in November 2015 for a ground water extraction licence of up to 571 ML a year. I notice that the member for Nelson said 517 ML then changed it to 571 ML. It is 571 ML in my notes so it is either one or the other.
The application was subject to a public notice of intention which closed on Friday 15 April 2016. I am advised by the department that 44 objections or comments were received by the end of last week in response to the notice of intention. This shows the level of community interest in the Intrapac development and water management in general.
Under the Water Act the Controller of Water Resources must make a decision as soon as practicable after the period allowed for public comment. This must also take into account those comments about the application when making the decision. In other words, the 44 objections. Each of those comments must be assessed against relevance to the application and any relevant conditions set by the controller. The controller makes public his reasons for making a decision for a water extraction licence, including the way in which any comments received have been taken into account.
I, as Minister for Land Resource Management, have no direct role in determination of a licence application. This is a statutory role. It is deliberately and intentionally separate from ministerial powers. My powers in respect to water extraction licences are restricted to decisions on appeals lodged against the granting of licences, and giving approval upon request for licences of more than 10 years.
The member for Nelson has asked the government to put on hold assessment of the licence application by Intrapac pending a full assessment by the Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority.
To provide some perspective to this issue I would like to provide some background details. On 22 December 2013 Intrapac Projects Pty Ltd submitted a notice of intent for the Noonamah Ridge Estate to the NTEPA. On 7 April 2014 the NTEPA decided the Noonamah Ridge Estate required assessment at the level of an environmental impact statement. On 28 November 2014 the Chair of the NTEPA finalised the terms of reference for the Noonamah Ridge Estate and directed Intrapac to prepare a draft environmental impact statement. On 5 December the draft EIS was exhibited for public comment for 12 weeks. Thirty-one submissions were received. On 4 March this year the Chair of the NTEPA directed that a supplement to the draft EIS be prepared. This is under development by Intrapac. There are no agreed time frames for this to be completed by Intrapac or assessment by the NTEPA.
The application from Intrapac is for 571 ML or a little less than half the sustainable yield within the property boundary that overlies the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer. The Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer beneath the property boundary can sustain 1057 ML per year or 20% of the sustainable yield. The remaining 80% of the water in the aquifer is reserved to maintain environmental values.
I am advised that the Controller of Water Resources is required to take any other relevant factors into account in deciding whether to make a water extraction licence decision. This could include completion of the assessment report by the NTEPA. I have not spoken with the Controller of Water Resources on this matter, which is entirely appropriate. This motion would undermine the independence of the Water Controller, which would be totally inappropriate.
The process is there and needs to be followed. The Water Controller could take those comments into account, but is not appropriate for me, as the minister, to do that. It is only after he has made a decision that the minister becomes involved.
I pick up on the member’s comment about this being out in the sticks. I drive there every night and it is not that far out in the sticks.
The meeting organised by the member for Goyder – you and I both appreciated that, as did many of the people there. I was more than willing to organise staff to give a presentation on water resources in the area. I hope they learnt something during that meeting. I agree, and have spoken to the staff saying they need to disseminate more information.
At the beginning of the meeting I said I wanted staff there to get facts out. I have found that when you talk to many people – not just at that meeting, but in my branch meeting we have people there who go over old history. ‘Thirty years ago this happened and 20 years ago that happened.’ From that I have concluded there is a lack of information going to people.
I agree with the member, and I have spoken to the member of Goyder about this as well. I said we need to get staff out more often to explain the aquifers, how they work and the impact on them.
There is an exemption in place for the Darwin water control district. From memory, it is the whole of the Darwin area to the Finniss River on the left when you look at a map of the Territory, and Adelaide River on the right. It goes down to a line just south of Manton Dam. I hope I have that right, but that is a rough description of it.
That exemption applies to bores that pump less than 15 L per second. Even commercial operators in the area – in this instance Intrapac would be a commercial operator – provided they are pumping less than 15 L per second, do not need to a licence.
To give you an idea of the bores around there, overall there are 7500 registered bores in the Darwin water control district. It is more than just the Darwin rural area and goes all the way to Dundee. Many of these are operating under exemptions for stock and domestic, an exemption that uniquely applies to the area.
In addition, under the Water Act, a bore construction permit is issued subject to a number of conditions designed to protect the water resource. It is also subject to water being available. The controller may therefore decline a bore construction permit on the grounds of water not being available, or set conditions in the permit that require the bore to be decommissioned should it intersect a water resource that is over-allocated or stressed. I point this out because it is not actually a licence condition but a condition for constructing a bore.
I am also advised that the Darwin rural area may experience low ground water levels this year as a result of three years of low rainfall. The area is made up of different aquifers, each with their own storage levels. Depending upon which aquifer you are in, you could be affected in different ways.
A number of options and resourcing implications are being developed for my consideration in relation to the bore construction permits and exemptions in the Darwin rural area. Some issues that could come into this are things the three members – the members for Goyder, Nelson and Daly – have discussed. One is could we develop a policy position that a bore construction permit will not be issued for properties that have access to reticulated water supplies unless it is specifically for stock and domestic, with 15 L exemption bores for ground water extraction licences to increase their security in a defined area? In other words, you need a licence so you have security of your water extraction in the future.
Another is voluntary metering, which has been raised previously. Some people asked for that at the meeting. I have asked for more information on these issues and how we progress them.
When we talk about this exemption, in the Berry Springs aquifer, which is about 90km2 in total, there are 12 commercial operations – mango farms – and only two or three have a water licence. A lot do not have a water licence because of this exemption. Those that do, do not have to have them. For security into the future it is advisable they do. The department is trying to encourage the other commercial operators that are pumping less than 15 L per second – they are not breaking any law – to apply for water licenses.
The government cannot postpone consideration of the water licence application until the environmental impact statement is completed. That is not appropriate. There is a process to go through. The option is available to the Controller of Water Resources, but I emphasise I have not spoken to him. If he decides to issue that licence or otherwise, that is the time the minister may become involved if objections to the licence are lodged.
The other issue in regard to water and exemptions which is very close to me is the water bottling plant, a commercial operation. My bore is one of the six in the circle of drawdown on that bore. Mine may be deeper down so they may get drawdown from me. Because it pumps less than 15 L per second there is no licence for the water bottling plant. That also concerns residents in the area and needs to be considered.
I hope that has provided you with some information, member for Nelson. I have tried to answer most of your questions. This is not a question about supporting the development or otherwise, it is about the Water Controller issuing a licence. I hope I have laid out the process that needs to be followed.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will keep my comments brief as we have another important debate before the House. I know the community and the people in attendance tonight would like us to move to that debate.
As shadow minister this important issue needs my attention. Underlying the member for Nelson’s motion are some key issues which I will address from the Northern Territory opposition’s perspective. We strongly believe in keeping the rural area rural. We believe that infill can be achieved in Darwin through the subdivision of Berrimah and building of Weddell. It is important that as our population grows and our city changes we have different options for people to live in, being denser inner city living, tropical suburban blocks and the rural area.
Weddell remains a strategic priority as part of the Greater Darwin Plan. Weddell will happen. Over time it is anticipated the city could contain at least 40 000 residents. With 40 000 residents in close proximity to the proposed development at Noonamah Ridge, Territory Labor does not see the need for high density development in the area.
Territory Labor’s plan is that the development of Noonamah Ridge should be complementary to the planning of the city of Weddell. We cannot ignore the possibility of the exciting development which could eventually take place across the harbour.
Darwin, Palmerston, Weddell and two future satellite cities have always been on that longer-term plan.
We also believe that we need to get this process right and not rush it. The member for Nelson outlined a number of important points. We need to ensure that we get water use planning right and we have not seen that from this CLP government. Water licences have not been issued based on science, and the Lands and Planning minister indicates that cash opens his door.
People want to keep the rural area rural. People in the area have not been asked if they want this development in their community. They are being shown plan A or plan B, but not given a chance to keep the area the way they want to.
I understand there are a number of water issues that indicate this is not sound or sensible development and we should not accept it.
The member for Nelson detailed a number of points, but I would like to ask the government some questions about the aquifer. Page 25 of the Noonamah Ridge Estate Groundwater Report says:
Does that mean the aquifer might be contaminated? We need a full risk assessment undertaken in regard to that. It seems the development has to use the aquifer, as the main water pipeline cannot accommodate an increase in pressure and the existing pump station on the Stuart Highway does not have the capacity to serve this new development.
If the project goes ahead we have concerns around contractor management systems in the future. The developer stated an annual ground water sampling program should be established to monitor ground water quality over time.
This would require drilling and construction of monitoring bores in strategic locations. We do not know the details. What is the time line? How many years and for how long? What will we do once this project is handed back to government? There are a number of questions regarding water contamination and long-term monitoring.
With regard to the amount of water in the aquifer, there is concern that the testing was done at the end of a Wet Season. What conclusive results do we have for the end of a Dry Season? There are also questions about the water. If it is drinking water and the main water supply, where does fluoride come into it? Who will do the long-term monitoring?
The Utilities Commission was initially established to play a regulatory role with regard to water and sewerage services in the Territory, but what will happen to this project in the longer term? Will the developer set tariffs for water consumption? If so, what will they be in comparison to Power and Water tariffs?
The proposal to be an own supplier of water is concerning. Generally property developers do not supply water and sewerage services. Governments tend to provide those essential services, so where is the precedent with regard to licensing?
I mentioned water testing being done at the end of the Wet Season, but what are the contingency plans if we have a series of poor Wet Seasons? This is the only supply of water for those residents, so there are concerns about a backup plan. Darwin River Dam has a backup supply.
If this is the main water supply will fluoride be added to the water? If the developer is providing the water, will they publish drinking water quality reports as Power and Water has to? How will future residents of this potential development know if their water is being treated properly and professionally? Will the developer establish a separate treatment facility and, if so, where are the details?
Residents have expressed strong concerns about the development. They are deeply concerned about the future of their community, and also concerned about water issues. It would make sense to support this motion and ensure we get it right, especially with Weddell being built nearby. What will that turn this estate into? There are not only questions about water, but also about planning.
Time and time again we have heard that Territorians do not trust this government with planning issues. In my community we had the drawn-out saga of Nightcliff island. The community has a right to be concerned.
I thank the member for Nelson for this motion and the people who contacted me and provided information. It is not a quick issue, but it is an important one.
I support the motion.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition benches and the Independents get three-and-a-half hours in a parliamentary sittings week to debate important issues, and it is important that we use every minute possible to ensure democracy in the Northern Territory.
My contribution to this debate goes beyond the people of Barkly. It is about the lessons I learnt as a previous minister for Lands and Planning.
The member for Nelson, a tireless supporter of and fighter for the rural area, has brought a very important issue to this House. Once again the issue crosses over a number of areas. When you look at this it is about natural resources as much as planning. There are clear alternatives for government.
In the brief run-up to our Northern Territory general election it is even more important that we get this right, have the opportunity to influence the government’s decision-making and get the best outcomes for Territorians. When you talk about good planning and the use of sustainable and finite Territory natural resources, it does not present as rocket science that this is not a very serious issue.
The clear alternative has been mentioned by the spokesperson on the Labor bench, the member for Nightcliff: the master plan city of Weddell. I have asked from day one of this CLP government why it continues to look at residential development in areas that are completely unserviced by head services of power, water, sewerage and roads. I have continually challenged this government about the agenda it is running. The member for Nelson adds to the debate regarding keeping the rural area rural.
From my time as minister for Lands and Planning, I understand clearly that good planning means maintaining the lungs of a developing city. It maintains green open areas, and areas of lower density. In the greater Darwin regional area the rural area needs to be preserved.
The crossover with natural resources is a powerful part of the member’s debate. It is about the challenge on aquifer sources with the considerable increase in population density under this planned development.
The master-planned city of Weddell was conducted under the process of Enquiry by Design, which consulted widely and included a diverse sector of the Northern Territory community from the grassroots citizens through to the architects, engineers and town planners, some of the best brains in the country. That work is still contained in the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment. The site is defined. What is often lost in the debate about efficiencies is that under the previous government the head services of roads infrastructure and water and power were secured to Middle Arm Peninsula. It was to support industry, the industrial development of the Ichthys project, but it also had the capacity for efficiencies to support development of the new city of Weddell.
Sewerage is the next challenge. When looking at the head services already available, the efficiencies for any government makes a serious proposition of looking at Weddell as the new major residential, commercial and retail development within the Northern Territory.
The Country Liberal Party government has never been able to explain why it wants to push into greenfield areas with no supporting headwork services. Weddell is relevant, real and a clear alternative. A few months before a Northern Territory general election it makes real sense.
Stop the bus and look at sustainable water resources in this planned development. Look at the densification that is planned over a number of stages. Listen to the residents. That needs to resonate clearly to a government which has not listened for the past three-and-a-half years, now heading into an election that will be decided on honesty, integrity, accountability and listening to constituents. They need to listen to rural residents, the people already living in this area.
The alternative presents, and a government struggling in an economic context looking at economic stimulus plans would be well advised to see the opportunities around Weddell. There are civil construction opportunities, built form and head services. This activity generates economy and tax receipts for any government. It is a real opportunity to start preparing the Northern Territory’s new city. It is clear, defined and common sense.
I thank the member for bringing this motion to the House. Our spokesperson on the Labor benches has already said we support the motion. We support good planning and sustainable finite resources, and I have already spoken about that.
That is a clear definition, and all the spin in the world will not change that. That is a clear definition in the lead-up to the next Northern Territory general election.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the speakers who have contributed to this, especially the minister for clarifying the role of the Water Controller.
I understand some of the issues this has raised, and I am interested to see which direction the new minister takes them. He highlighted the fact – this is the case with the Noonamah Ridge application – that when you are under 15 L per second, or when you are in a certain area, you are exempt from controls. It is concerning that if you wanted to pump 14.99 L per second you could pump it 24 hours a day. This is an issue for people living in the rural area because it relates to the amount they are allowed to pump, which is – I have two figures, 571 and 517.
The minister also mentioned how it will affect others, such as the water bottling plant. If too much water is taken from an area it can affect other people. In this case, thankfully, there are no other bores in the area because there is no development. It would be interesting to see, as the land becomes more developed, whether development will be restricted in the area where this water will be taken from.
The opposition spokesperson on the environment asked why this area is being developed in the first place and why is it not at Weddell? She is spot on saying there has been no public consultation about this going ahead, and asked why the development is not in Weddell.
The member for Barkly, who has been around for a long time, knows some of the issues well, such as lack of infrastructure. Why is this happening in an area where there are major issues with regard to infrastructure?
A major wastewater treatment plant will be required. We know governments prefer not to use those plants, as shown by the government wanting to spend $11.8m taking sewage from Howard Springs and Coolalinga to Zuccoli. It is an expensive program that will take away the need for treatment plants in those areas.
This proposal means going back to a large transportation wastewater treatment system. Sewage ponds are planned for Weddell. You would fit it into a total infrastructure package. Even there, whilst you might have to use this as a temporary solution to sewage, you would know there is a solution.
I have a note from the minister saying if you pump 15 L per second for the whole year you will pump 527 ML.
Mr Higgins: Five-hundred-and-seventy-two.
Mr WOOD: You have 527 ML here but it should be 572 ML. The issue of water being supplied by bore water is amazing. I remind people that Power and Water has advised the existing pump station on the Stuart Highway does not have sufficient capacity to service the entire development and will need to be upgraded if connection to mains water is required. That is another cost and who will pay for that?
The developers have already mentioned they want a shared agreement with Power and Water. If you want a development there it is not up to the taxpayer to help. It is your job to pay for the cost of infrastructure. Why do we need a water extraction licence in an area that should remain rural? If you want to develop this area – this is only stage one and they want the same for stage two – then this should be in Weddell, where there is town water and they do not have to worry about fluoridation and chlorination.
The member for Barkly mentioned an Enquiry by Design process, which applied to Weddell and Kilgariff in Alice Springs. It is a great method of planning, yet we have not done it for the rural area. We have just had the NT Planning Commission draw up some plans with no options. Have you ever an option for Weddell? Have you ever seen an option for activity centres in the rural area? ‘No, this is what the activity centres will look like.’ We should have used the Enquiry by Design process.
Kilgariff used that process, Weddell used that process, and the government put the book on the shelf and left it. There has been three-and-a-half years of wasted time, and rural people are now forced to put up with proposals that are not in keeping with the rural area. They are suburbs stuck in the rural area because someone thought it was a good idea to make money, and the Planning Commission and government said it was good idea.
Unfortunately these mistakes will be felt in the rural area for many years. People did not have the vision to see there is need for rural development and urban development, but they need to be in the right place. This development is not in the right place if it is asking for water from borefields.
I ask the government to put this on hold. As there is an election soon, do not approve the Litchfield Subregional Land Use Plan. Allow that plan to sit until after the election. See if the government wins any seats in the rural area – except the member for Daly, who is in a different party, being the rural Territory party. He obviously believes in retaining the rural area as it is, and I want it to stay that way too.
Let this go to the election and see what comes of it. If the CLP thinks it is good, win my seat and the seat of Goyder. You could then say people support this. This process of urbanising the rural area is wrong. If the government wants to do something quickly it needs to leave it and consider it after the election.
The Assembly divided:
Continued from 16 March 2016.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I concluded my remarks on the last General Business Day. I know there are others keen to speak in this debate.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a sensitive matter in the community. Government has made its position clear on RU486. However, the political party of which I am part, in fact, both political parties and the Independents have decided on a free vote in relation to this bill.
It is important to fill in a little history. I became Health minister about 18 months ago. Whilst I cannot speak about what happens in the Cabinet room or circumstances in relation to Cabinet documents, RU486 was raised with me, and I raised it with a number of people across the community. I am not allowed to say what is in a Cabinet document, but I ask people to turn their minds to the fact that I raised the issue of RU486 with Cabinet, and that is a matter of public record.
Clearly the government of the day made a determination that nothing should change in relation to the use of RU486 in the Northern Territory. That is a board decision to which I am bound. I will maintain my duties to my Cabinet colleagues in that sense, as any member of a board would do in any organisation.
Having made that observation, it is obvious that when government chooses not to change its position it is open to this House to change the government’s mind for it.
In a free vote and free debate I would support the use of RU486 in this community. I believe the member for Goyder understood that when she mentioned, in her second reading speech, an acknowledgment of my concern in this area. I have made available to the member for Goyder what support she needed to pursue the bill, including departmental support.
Government has chosen not to pursue a change in its stance, which is essentially the almost exclusive performance of abortions by way of surgical means rather than use of RU486. There are extremely limited circumstances in which RU486 can be used today without a change of policy. Those circumstances are the abortion of a foetus where the heartbeat is already known to have stopped, tragically.
I believe that RU486 would be kinder on a woman than the surgical procedure. This debate is not about performing abortions or not. That question has pretty much been decided across the OECD for the last 30 years. It is true, and not an issue of debate or dispute in this jurisdiction, that abortion has been available pretty much since we formed self-government.
This debate is how, not if, which is an important distinction to make. Currently the vast majority of abortions carried out in this jurisdiction are done by surgical means. They are carried out inside the hospital environment.
Since becoming Health minister I have authorised that should any private organisation wish to set up a clinic they are able to do so within the terms and rules of setting up clinics. However, no private practitioner has set up in the Northern Territory.
That is the state of play as it currently stands. With government not changing its position on the performance of abortions in the Northern Territory the field has vacated, and the member for Goyder has picked up the ball and run with it, bringing it into this House.
At least the Country Liberals, and I believe the Australian Labor Party – I stand corrected – have determined that this will be a free vote.
This is a case of government policy being set by this House. That is the debate before the House today. How do we do this and how broad do we make the application of the law?
Having explained that, there are a number of observations I want to make. We have to make sure we get the processes right, and I will return to that shortly. Let us not mistake RU486 for an aspirin because it is not. It is not a tablet you take and the pregnancy goes away. Real and serious clinical considerations come with the use of RU486.
A number of organisations, including manufacturers, distributors, the AMA and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists make recommendations in relation to the use of RU486 and I point some of those out to members. By way of example, I quote from page 7 of 22 of the product information:
I raise that because there is no contemplation of using this drug beyond 63 days, which is nine weeks. The obvious question that will now jump into members’ minds is, ‘Does the Medical Services Act not say 14 weeks?’ It does. The Medical Services Act was structured by former Chief Minister, Clare Martin, to always anticipate abortions being performed in hospitals. The drug manufacturer says nine weeks and does not recommend the use of the drug beyond that period, but the Medical Services Act allows for it because it anticipates it occurring in a hospital. That is one reason I introduced the amendments I circulated six to eight weeks ago.
Also, there are a number of contraindications which I will not go through in length. One of the warnings issued by the manufacturer and distributor of the drug, endorsed by the Royal College and supported by the AMA, is that you must be within two hours of emergency medical treatment because things can go wrong when you use RU486.
When they refer to medical treatment they mean being within two hours of a surgery. Let us be clear on that, it is not a clinic but the capacity for surgical interference. If there are complications arising out of a postpartum haemorrhage when this drug is used surgical intervention may be necessary.
The member for Karama said the solution is easy because if this happens in a remote community fly the person to Alice Springs or Darwin for treatment. That is not consistent with the manufacturer, the AMA, the Royal College or the distributor of the drug. It has to be within two hours of being able to deliver surgical intervention to control a haemorrhage should one occur.
The risk of a haemorrhage is similar to or the same as any form of postpartum, including a normal birth. Essentially, this drug brings on labour and the body is effectively tricked by two courses of tablets into giving birth. The risk of postpartum haemorrhage is real and present, and can occur.
Whilst they are not contraindications, there are special precautions which the manufacturer and distributor point out. The special precautions are because there is insufficient research to know the risks, including: cardiovascular disease; hypertensive disease; hepatic or liver disease; respiratory disease; renal disease; diabetes; anaemia; malnutrition; and smoking. That reads like a list of some of the most common medical problems in communities across the Northern Territory that are not even remote. Therefore, one can only conclude, based on what the manufacturer and distributor of the drugs say, that there needs to be close monitoring of a patient when they use the drug.
For that reason my amendments in support of the use of RU486 mean it has to be either in a hospital or close to a hospital. For that reason, I circulated my amendments eight weeks ago. That is the clinical requirement for RU486.
That then raises the next set of challenges in meeting those requirements. A number of people have said that even if you lower the standards or agree with what the member for Goyder has suggested there will be guidelines, such as the Royal College, in relation to how this drug may be applied in this jurisdiction.
To that end we have to be careful, bearing in mind that legislation is a reflection of the community’s opinion, expressed through their elected members in this House. That being the case, we as community members have a responsibility to legislate, even in areas where we may not be experts. I am no doctor, and we have no medical doctors in our government. Nevertheless, we are required to legislate.
There is a suggestion that the Royal College will be binding on people. I do not doubt that the vast majority of doctors would consider themselves bound ethically to the guidelines suggested by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians. However, it does not automatically follow that all doctors will, and that government policy will be adhered to. Remember that government policy in relation to this only applies to doctors in the Northern Territory Health department. However, anyone performing abortions is bound by section 11 of the Medical Services Act which relates to terminations.
However, there is another component. I ask members to cast their minds back to the time Clare Martin removed abortion from the Criminal Code Act and placed it within the Medical Services Act. It was clearly her intention that abortions would continue being performed within the hospital environment. For that reason an important clause was placed in the Medical Services Act, the clause of ‘in good faith’.
That clause has an important resonating impact. ‘In good faith’ in a legislative instrument removes the tortious liability of a doctor to show duty of care, or a standard of care. Good faith is a much lower level of proof. If a person undergoes an abortion and seeks, because of some error, mistake or damage they incur, some redress, the doctor, as constructed in the original legislation, can say, ‘I acted in good faith’. All of a sudden, the exposure of the doctor for any liability under the law of tort is diminished, thus giving the woman less protection.
It did not matter when the bill was passed originally, because government would have always met its standards and duty of care and carried that exposure. However, the amendments suggested today, and the amendments circulated late this morning, complicate the issue because they creates a level of exposure which is intolerable.
Let us look at the bill introduced by the member for Goyder. It was not a long bill, only two or so pages. I had, and still have, sympathy with what the member for Goyder is attempting to achieve, but we have to look at the practical outcomes of what we are being asked to pass today. Let us look at the original short bill she circulated in December last year. During that time I identified a number of issues and I, as the member for Port Darwin and Health minister, thought, ‘I have a few problems with that’, so I circulated some other amendments about six or eight weeks ago. Everybody got a letter from me outlining my proposed amendments.
It is important to pause here and discuss passing a law in this House. I have become a veteran over the past three-and-a-half years, having passed 66 or 67 legislative instruments. It is not as easy as it looks. There are a number of challenges and complications. One thing I try to do when bringing bills before this House is engage in communication prior to the debate. I make briefings available through my departments, write letters, phone people, leave it sitting on the table and try hard to have the issues teased out of whichever legislative instrument is being discussed. Consequently, when members come into the House they are generally fully informed on the issues to debate.
It is a policy I have taken into the private members realm, because my amendments are not as the Health minister of the Northern Territory but are consistent with my opinions as the member for Port Darwin. It is a bit schizophrenic, but I have a free vote and want to see RU486 delivered to women in the Northern Territory.
I know those amendments went out because I have received a number of communications from people outside of this room. I presume people – they are free to do it – have circulated the amendments I circulated to members and they have gone into the public domain.
I have, on a number of occasions, e-mailed and telephoned the member for Goyder to ask for a copy of her amendments so I could better understand what she is attempting to do, because she sought to amend the bill she brought before this House. Those phone calls have not been returned, and the e-mails from my chief of staff have not been answered.
The first I saw of the member for Goyder’s amendments to this bill was at 10.49 am today when the e-mail went out. I had staff in my office quickly add the extra bits the member for Goyder had circulated into the original bill. Everything marked in red are the additions the member for Goyder wants to debate today.
Essentially, the member for Goyder has introduced a new bill which carries all types of implications. The first other members and I saw of it was at 10.49 am today. I am busy today; I am the Leader of Government Business. Other ministers are busy. Members of parliament are busy. I have to then decide, according to the member for Goyder, what these amendments mean and what impact they will have. It is not a responsible legislative process to rush through what is, essentially, a change in policy. It is an abuse of process and of great concern because many things in these amendments fundamentally change the policy. It introduces new crimes. It introduces new aspects in relation to how the bill works and we are being asked, in a little over six hours on a busy working day, to turn our minds to these important issues. For that reason I am deeply concerned.
Having flicked through the bill as best I can, a number of issues leap out at me. Probably the most pronounced is an amendment to remove the second opinion. Currently a doctor and a gynaecologist or an obstetrician must agree and then an abortion can proceed. This amendment, on first blush, removes that second opinion so a medical practitioner decides if a termination should be available. I believe it is probably a drafting error, because I doubt the member for Goyder would seek to intend what appears in the bill. I stand corrected, but believe I am on good ground here.
Because of the speed with which these amendments have been brought forward, the effect of sub-clause 3 now means that only one doctor has to decide whether or not RU486 is prescribed.
Ms PURICK: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! It is one qualified medical doctor, not just a medical practitioner. The word ‘qualified’ is there so please put it in.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Goyder.
Mr ELFERINK: Whatever.
Ms Purick: It is not whatever. It is a qualified medical doctor.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Goyder.
Mr ELFERINK: I accept what you are saying, but that is not the issue. However, the way this is now drafted means a qualified medical practitioner merely needs to prescribe the drug. The person then takes that prescription to a dispensary where the drug is dispensed by the practitioner or pharmacist. The problem is that in the section she recommends this occur, the foetus can be up to 23 weeks.
It is a drafting error. I doubt the member for Goyder would intend this in her legislation, because 23 weeks is more than half term. It is an unintended consequence of the haste in which the amendments to the bill have been brought before this House.
For this reason, eight weeks ago I wrote to every member of parliament with the amendments I proposed attached. I have the privilege of being the Health minister so I had doctors from the Health department review the amendment, and they suggested that it was correct in law.
Different doctors have different points of view on how RU486 should be managed. If you consider the principles around which the original act was created, it was anticipated abortions would be exclusively surgical, or at least under medical supervision in a hospital or clinic. Having a single doctor, a qualified medical practitioner, now issue a prescription which can then be taken by someone who is half term is something we have to be extremely careful about.
Again, I do not believe that is the intention of the member for Goyder, but it appears to be the effect. That is why we cannot rush things. That is why we cannot circulate amendments to legislation a few hours before we debate it, particularly when the amendments so substantively change the bill that it is effectively a fundamental change of policy.
What we are being asked to do cannot be supported by common sense. I do not ascribe any villainy or ill-intent, but this is an unintended consequence and a potential mistake.
I am fully aware the argument will be that the Royal College will set the boundaries on this, and the Health minister of the day would not interfere in relation to the policy. The profession will set the policy and the Health department will comply. That is an argument, and I get that. However, the effect of these amendments will be to unfetter a minister to pretty much do as they please.
The amendments I circulated are designed to fetter a minister and limit them to certain and particular actions. If this bill passes in its current form I will say to my department, ‘Create a set of rules which still meet the expectations of safety I have’. It does not automatically follow that I will forever be the Minister for Health. In four-and-a-half months’ time I will not be because I am retiring. Who will the next Minister for Health be?
If it is the member for Karama, because she has done a deal with a minority Labor government, we know she fully intends to see this drug used in remote communities because she has said as much in debate.
Where are the protections? Where are the boundaries? As I said, I wanted this drug to find its way into the health system because it is kinder than the surgical process, but that was the government’s decision. However, if this legislation passes a future Health minister will be unfettered and those protections may not exist.
Surely a matter which fills up the public galleries and captures as much public attention as this is one the House should consider and not leave a minister unrestrained. If a minister changes the policy, the first time we will become aware of it is when a coroner is investigating a death. It is not something I wish to deal with …
Ms Purick: That is rubbish! That is absolute rubbish, member for Port Darwin, and you know that.
Mr ELFERINK: I heard the member for Goyder interjecting, but if she is serious about this then communicate. Answer phone calls, answer e-mails and circulate amendments, particularly when they are substantive changes. That has not occurred. As a consequence, an opportunity to make a difference may well have been lost because the amendments proposed by the member for Goyder exceed what I could reasonably tolerate as a member of this House. That is a shame, because I wanted to see this drug used in the Northern Territory in a responsible fashion
These amendments do not countenance the responsibility I would expect and I cannot support the amendments to this bill. I can support the amendments I circulated eight weeks ago to all members. I encourage members to look carefully at those proposals because they are sensible, restrained and appropriate.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Goyder for introducing this bill.
Women in the Northern Territory should have the same access to medical services as women around the nation and the world. We are well behind the rest of the country, and it is time that women in the Territory had the same rights of access as other women.
Of course, we want to ensure that access is safe and the highest medical standards followed. We want to ensure that if women choose to access RU486 they have the right support systems around them, they can access it safely and get the right support to undergo a termination of pregnancy.
We all know women do not want to go through it, but it happens. Most members, in their contributions, have stated this is not about whether abortion is right or wrong. This is trying to ensure that we have contemporary medical practices in the Northern Territory, which we do not at present. Territory women do not have the same level of access as other women in Australia. It has taken too long and it is time for us to catch up.
I agree with the member for Port Darwin; the process to get here has not been ideal. In a perfect world we would look at a model like in Victoria, where a consultative body of work was done and the government had well-constructed legislation to contemporise access to medical terminations. In an ideal world the government could have run with this issue, but I accept it is not the will of this Cabinet.
The government had the capacity to use the Department of Health to ensure it had information to construct good legislation for the Northern Territory and ensure safe and appropriate access to RU486. The member for Goyder’s bill heads in a good direction. I commend her for working with advocates on this bill.
For almost three years we have had a strong advocate group pursuing members of parliament, pushing what they feel is the right agenda for the Northern Territory, and giving women the same access to medical termination others in this country receive.
I commend the advocates who have worked hard on this with the member for Goyder, and other members of the parliament, for their tireless lobbying. There has been a respectful level of debate in the community on what can be a sensitive and emotive issue. It means a lot to people, and I have received a lot of representation on this matter.
I fundamentally believe women in the Northern Territory should have the same rights as women in the rest of Australia when it comes to accessing medical services. I have faith in the legislation put forward because I have faith that medical practitioners do not make the decision lightly when dealing with a patient who wants to access RU486 for a medical termination. They follow professional standards and process, which is about ensuring the safety of the person presenting to them.
If somebody wants to access RU486 it is not as simple as asking a doctor for a prescription then going to the pharmacy and filling it. That is not how it works. Doctors still have a level of checks and balances to follow. They will talk to the person about their medical history, make sure they have a blood test, ensure the person undergoes an ultrasound to determine it is not an ectopic pregnancy and determine how far the pregnancy is. They will speak to the person about where they will take the drug. They will take all this into account when they talk to the patient about the process. If they do not consider them a suitable candidate, they will not guide them down that path.
I have faith in medical professionals to do what they are already doing around Australia and the world when administering medication to allow a woman to undergo a medical termination. I have faith in the medical profession to follow the appropriate guidelines and standards set. I believe you do not need two medical professionals to say somebody can seek a medical termination. That is not necessary. I have faith that a single, suitably qualified professional medical practitioner can do the job.
It is good to look at exclusion zones if someone is seeking a medical termination. It is positive that if a doctor is a conscientious objector then patients are still referred on to a doctor who can provide appropriate advice and assist them, but it has been quite a process to get here.
In a perfect world we would have seen the government seek advice to guide this legislation through, because it is not constructive to put more road blocks in the way of medical terminations. It is time we caught up to the rest of the country, and had some faith that our medical professionals can work with somebody to assist in obtaining a medical termination and know they will follow the best possible practices to ensure the safety of that person. They will not give someone RU486 if they are not in an appropriate location to take it, do not have the right medical history for a medical termination to be successful, or if the person is not an appropriate candidate. I have faith that they will make sound decisions.
Why hold this up any longer? Women in the Northern Territory have waited far too long as it is. It is time women had access to medical terminations. It is unbelievable that we are lagging so far behind the rest of the nation.
I support women getting access to RU486 in the Northern Territory so they are on an equal footing as other women in Australia.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a privilege to speak in this House every day and something I do not take for granted.
We have passionately debated many important issues in this House, but this would be the most passionate and personal issue for a woman in this House to debate. I thank the member for Goyder for introducing this bill. At the outset, this is not a debate about termination but safe access to a medical termination.
The Territory Labor opposition is afforded a conscience vote on this bill, and I thank my colleagues for that opportunity. This is a difficult issue and not something we take lightly. It is extremely important and everyone has spent time thinking about, talking about and researching it. It is time Territory women were afforded the same privilege as those in every other state and territory in Australia. Therefore I support this legislation.
The medical abortion drug, RU486, had a delayed and contentious arrival in Australia. The Therapeutic Goods Amendment (Repeal of Ministerial responsibility for approval of RU486) Bill was passed in 2006. It proposed that the decision to allow RU486 to be prescribed in Australia be made by the Therapeutic Goods Administration rather than allowing the then federal Health minister, Tony Abbott, to continue to hold veto rights over introduction of the drug. The RU486 debate became focused on the morality of abortion and who should decide whether a woman should have a medical abortion. In Australia, nearly two decades after the rest of the world, and in the Territory a decade after that again, we are still debating that.
I acknowledge that for some this is a difficult debate which may make them feel uncomfortable, but it is very important for women in the Territory. When Territory women choose a termination, something they do not choose lightly and for which they need their family and friends around them for support, they are forced to leave their family to travel to Darwin, Alice Springs or interstate.
The passage of this legislation would allow Territory women access to a safe medical termination, something women overseas gained in the 1980s and 1990s. Territory women should be afforded this immediately.
Research shows that termination is not easily available in Australia. I quote from The regulation of abortion in Australia: public health perspectives, ACT Public Health Association of Australia, 1998 research. It says:
This is an important debate for women of the Territory because we face that tyranny of distance and location. This is about giving Territory women equal rights that women all over Australia are afforded, except those in the Northern Territory who probably need it the most – access to a medical termination in their communities close to home with support when they need it most. Access to a medical termination is safer and less invasive for women.
This legislation ensures that medical practitioners are trained and appropriate procedures are in place. It allows the Territory to catch up with the rest of the world, the rest of Australia and with modern medicine. For some, this bill does not go far enough in addressing all the recommendations of experts, but it is a big step forward.
I thank the member for Goyder for bringing this bill to the House. I would like to have seen it a long time ago.
I understand the Health minister’s explanation that this was not the will of Cabinet. I acknowledge my colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, who explained she wished it was something Territory Labor had done in government. We need to focus on the here and now; the opportunity this House has to pass this legislation tonight.
As you may be aware, the issue of allowing RU486 to be supplied in Australia has been politically determined over time. The Therapeutic Goods Amendment Bill 1996 created a new class of goods of restricted goods defined as drugs intended for use in women.
I will point out some interesting facts from the bill. Their efforts were ultimately successful, with 90% of women senators voting in favour of the bill, in stark contrast to only 46% of male senators supporting it. They are interesting figures on an issue about women’s health.
This bill tonight will allow the legislation to keep up with changes in medicine. Modern medicine has moved forward and Territory legislation has not kept up. Tonight the Northern Territory parliament can allow medical experts to decide what treatment is best for a woman and her body. This legislation will allow Territory women to access the medical intervention of their choice. By supporting this legislation we say we trust Territory medical professionals and, more importantly, we trust Territory women with their bodies, something that is vitally important.
My colleague, the member for Wanguri, eloquently articulated trust in doctors. The Minister for Health pointed out that no one is a medical doctor. This legislation will put trust in our medical teams and doctors that they will look after their patients. This legislation will allow Territory women to decide what happens to their bodies. It is important to repeat this debate is not about termination. That was decided decades ago, and is something women of all generations are grateful for.
This debate is about passing legislation to allow medical terminations to take place in the Northern Territory. I thank all the professionals who have given their time and knowledge to prepare me for this debate. I do not support the Attorney-General’s amendments as I believe access is particularly important in the Northern Territory because of our remote distances. I pointed out statistics earlier around access to termination.
My colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, quoted from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists that the unavailability of termination of pregnancy services has been shown to increase maternal morbidity and mortality. It also says access to termination services should not be limited to a number of factors, including geographical isolation, something so important in the Northern Territory.
The Health minister spoke about access to hospitals and surgeries. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has clear guidelines on where this drug can be used. Quoting from the guidelines:
I am concerned the Attorney-General’s amendments would mean the Health minister would decide where and what facilities were needed. That could mean RU486 may become restricted by location, or cost to travel to a location. Concerns have been raised regarding location and availability, but I am reassured by these strict guidelines and the arrangements for its use.
It has been a long road to get here. We have acknowledged the path we followed under former Chief Minister Clare Martin, but tonight we have an opportunity to pass this legislation. I acknowledge the Minister for Health’s support, and his offer that if this legislation passes his department will ensure it happens.
It would have been ideal if the Northern Territory had followed a model similar to Victoria, with a full comprehensive review, but I praise the member for Goyder for her tenacity in introducing this bill – not an easy bill – into the House.
I would like to acknowledge the WHAT RU4 NT? group, which has provided guidance and support. They have been lobbying in a respectful way. I am assured that if this bill passes tonight our highly trained medical experts and doctors will hold this legislation in the highest regard.
It is time for Territory women to have the same rights as women across Australia. I urge my colleagues to consider those thoughts and support this legislation.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this is touching legislation from the member for Goyder, especially for someone like me who represents 80% of the bush.
We all know if these ladies – as it stands – want an abortion they have to travel all the way from remote communities, be seen in remote clinics, have an ultrasound to know the exact term of the pregnancy – we all know the minute you look at that baby the bonding happens. That is very touching. I know that as I have four kids. These women then have to travel all the way to Darwin to have the abortion. It is a one day procedure. That is something I have also experienced.
I am not the only one in the remote areas, but not everybody have access to that, and that is the most touching part.
After the member for Goyder introduced this to the House I went to my electorate – some of the most remote communities – and spoken to the ladies about it. You cannot really talk to the men because of cultural aspects, so we have to respect a woman’s view.
They are horrified by the fact their kids, or anybody in the community, can take a pill and could go through up to three weeks in agony, and get to see the baby come out and hold it, whether it is in the toilet or wherever. That is the most terrifying part. Who will do counselling in remote communities if this legislation passes? Is there anything in place, especially for ladies in remote communities? That is the biggest concern I have with this bill, other than that it is free will. It is a great thing. Women should have rights like everybody else. We are 10 years behind every other state. If we are to pass this legislation we need clear consideration of what and how this drug affects people in remote communities.
I trust doctors, but I know only one doctor flies here from Adelaide to get this done. I have spoken to gynaecologists and general practitioners, and there is no for or against with this drug. They are happy for it to happen and I respect that, but my biggest concern is Aboriginal women in remote communities accessing this drug and having nothing in place when they go through this.
If this is to go ahead, you cannot have them taking the drug out there. There has to be something in place here. This does not happen for only 24 hours; it goes on a lot longer. In the meantime, who wants to wake up to their 18-year old daughter lying crippled in bed? If anyone has kids they will understand where I am coming from – especially girls. I have three girls. The last thing I want to see is my daughter crippled in bed, and having to wash the sheets and change the mattress. It is the worst fear of any Aboriginal mother.
The majority of people in remote communities are Christian or Catholic. Member for Arafura, the majority of people on the Tiwi Islands are Catholic. My area is mainly Christian. My grandmother was a deacon and I understand where she was coming from, but she is not alive. I am a modern day woman. I have faith in God but do not practice from the Bible as any other Christian would.
This is serious. It is a great honour to speak about this because it will be recorded in history, and I want to make sure this gets out. I heard the member for Karama say that Aboriginal practitioners are capable of handing out this drug. No, they are not. I come from that background, and the majority cannot even put a drip in. I was in fear of putting a drip in when I was a practitioner, and you want to give them the right to do that, especially when a person is haemorrhaging. That is scary stuff.
You obviously do not understand what it is like out there. I have lived and worked in that field. It took me almost five years to learn how to put a drip into a person – four years of training. I was in that field for over a decade and have spoken to Aboriginal health practitioners. They do not want this responsibility.
I understand nurses in the Darwin hospital do. There are nurses in remote communities who do, yes, but there is still a doubt about getting them out of there if something serious happens. If there is a serious situation it takes hours for CareFlight to get the person to Darwin hospital. That is my biggest concern.
There are very remote outstations where people live 300 km to 500 km away from the nearest remote community. There are probably only five people in those outstations and the majority of them do not know of the RU486 drug. The know abortion exists but do not understand how it is done, let alone this. We will give this to the most vulnerable people and that is my concern.
Do not get me wrong, I have nothing against women’s rights in the Northern Territory. If you give this to the people I represent, you have to make sure you have things properly in place, otherwise I am not for it. I will not give something to my people I know will seriously hurt them.
I know, from doing my own research, the good and bad of this. Some things were brought to my attention. A lady from Leanyer wrote to me saying there have been many horror stories from women who had taken this drug, including weeks of excessive bleeding, extreme pain or haemorrhaging, serious internal infections because of retained body parts, fever and flu-like symptoms, hospitalisation and further surgical abortion.
It is no secret that a high number of young girls in remote communities get pregnant. That has been there for decades. If they know they have access to this drug from the clinic pharmacy – if they do not have explained properly what they will go through.
It is like Implanon. When you put Implanon in your arm you do not know whether you will still bleed severely or if bleeding stops completely. You can put on weight or lose it. When you take the drug you find out how it affects you. That is like any other drug you take. A high number of people in remote areas have chronic diseases. Kids are born with diabetes, we all know that. Being able to access this contradicts chronic disease. This drug can cause an imbalance of insulin and that is a concern. I do not know if anyone has thought about this, but that is the first thing that lit up my little spark.
There are other ways of doing it. At the moment you go to the clinic, have it surgically removed and in 24 hours are out – not even that. You always need someone with you. When I went in I needed my friend with me. It is hard to deal with, knowing you are going to give away a life you are carrying. You do not even know what will happen to it.
This drug that you want to bring into the Northern Territory totally undermines it. The woman will look at the baby. How do you think it affected me? It took me years to get over it. I blamed myself for years. I come from the same educational background as the majority of them. English is not my first language, but there are a lot of girls out there who do not have the same educational level as I do and I am concerned about that.
You will need an interpreter in the room. Even if there is a family member there they will not interpret entirely what the doctor is saying to them. We have to be realistic. A doctor speaks in their terminology. It is a different language and environment out there.
The lady who takes this drug will see the sac of tissue come out. The baby will already be formed. It will have eyes, a head, legs and feet. I was lucky because I did not see it, but imagine what that girl will go through.
I understand there is a national outcry and everybody wants to compete with the other states. Thirty percent of the Territory population is Indigenous, more than any other state in Australia. Eighty per cent of my electorate is Indigenous and it is my job to tell you how it is. I understand because I come from that situation. I was not raised in a town or a city. I lived in a tin shack until I went to boarding school, and by that time my family had a house.
Do not think that because I am coloured I am from a prestigious background. I am not. Our dinner was cooked on a fireplace because we did not have a stove. We had to wake up at 5 am every day to catch the bus to school in the nearest community, and back again. It was hard yakka for kids, but there was a determination to be educated. We made our own little tin trucks.
One lady who wrote to me said in one state there is a house for people who go through these things. If they need counselling or support in making a decision – you cannot say that everybody – if I could go back I would never have done what I did. I would have kept my first child.
With the lower education rate, the lower health rate and the housing problems everything is behind the eight ball out there. We want to bring this forward because this is 10 years behind. That is like a millennium. My point is to explain this to young girls out there is the hardest part and changing the minds of the mothers and grandmothers these girls live with.
I bet that any bush member in this House – ask your electorate how they feel about this. They will tell you exactly what I am saying. It is against our culture to have an abortion, but it is a modern world. Only 10% of us have access to the hospital and access to clinics to get here. Not many do and that is my concern. Give this to a committee, put it to remote communities and consult with the people. Your facial expression says obviously you do not want that. That is okay.
Ms Purick: Easier to send it to a committee.
Ms LEE: If you can promise me this will go to a committee and be consulted on then I am all for it.
There are things in this that will undermine people I represent and I will not put them at risk. I will not put my daughter at risk. Do not get me wrong, I work with doctors and understand the level of expertise. I trust them with my life. Dr Scattini, in Katherine, saved my life. I would feel privileged if he were to speak to me about this. He has always been my family. He brought me into this world and he saved my life. He has retired now.
I do not want to look at laws in other states because that is not my concern. I will look at the law, the complications of this drug for and against, and will decide where I stand. I will not bring my Christianity or personal view into it, but I will consider the people I represent. At the end of the day that is what we are voted into this House to do. I am not with any party, Labor or Liberal. I represent Arnhem.
After looking at some of this, including how this drug works – one lady sent me this so I could understand it properly. I did not take this out to the remote communities because it would cause an outcry and a protest at these doors. I will read it here, but if I have to take it further I will.
What are the side effects for a woman? There were 832 reports of adverse reactions to this drug between April 2006 and June 2012. At least one Australian woman has died. That is a low number but still a casualty. Are we guinea pigs? Will you take this drug and see if it kills you? With the low health outcomes in my area I cannot afford to risk it unless safeguards are put in place. I will not have ladies or young girls take this drug. I do not know if the age is over 16 or over 18.
What are we looking at? Girls in remote communities cannot have it because you will put their lives at risk. It is terrifying. You cannot have them take this drug there; they would have to be brought into Darwin. There would have to be in a self-care unit and stay here the whole time they were taking the drug. Are there plans in place for that? Are there nurses? Will they be monitored? With excessive bleeding, will they pick themselves up when in agony, drag themselves to the shower, wash and dry themselves and put their clothes back on?
Has anyone on that side gone through the extreme pain of childbirth? I have never been under the knife as all of my births were natural. If you say you understand the pain these girls will go through but have never had kids you are fooling yourself. It is extreme pain. It is like a chainsaw ripping through your ribcage. From what I read, this causes excessive pain. In a nursing term it is a range of one to 10. Is this 10?
At the end of the day I do not represent the city or the town; I represent the bush. I respect every woman and her choice, like anybody else.
The only new electorate I have is Jabiru, which has a hospital. There is still a high number of remote areas, and a high number of Indigenous people in very remote areas. There have been reports of up to 122 children surviving this procedure. These ladies probably had to have a medical procedure. I do not know if this has been looked at properly or not, but if there are safeguards for Aboriginal people – if I cannot be guaranteed that I will not put my people at risk.
I trust people in hospitals to do the right thing. I know they will. I come from that background but did not work in hospitals. I worked in very remote areas so I know where I am coming from. I have been there for a very long time. All I ever wanted to do when I was growing up was be a medical practitioner and help my people. That was my passion. I did for many years, until I got this job. There is nothing more fulfilling in life than following your passion and doing what you set out to.
Many women are passionate about having this drug in the Northern Territory, and I respect that. Everybody has their passion. You must think about others in the Northern Territory. I have strong views, like every other woman, but we have to consider the ones who cannot speak up for themselves and do not know we are debating this bill to be passed in a rush today. They will not have a say in this bill, will not be consulted and have not been considered. I asked them if anyone from the clinic spoke to them about the bill and they said no.
If there is such a need then why are you not reaching out to the most isolated people it will affect the most? Why is nobody considering that? Everyone wants the bush vote. You really care about the bush? This bill contradicts where you stand and your passion about the bush.
I know where I stand, I am from there. If anybody is to bring anything into this House then I will have my say. I always have and people in this House know that, especially when it comes to the people I represent.
I am disappointed that people have not been consulted, especially Aboriginal health workers, because you want to give them responsibility. The amendments to the bill will require them to be trained to prescribe it from the pharmacy. This makes me wonder if people really understand the bush.
It takes four years for them to finish a Certificate IV. Only a few get into doing a Certificate IV in Health and qualify to administer drugs. They are not experts on drugs but experts on primary care. They are not even experts in putting a drip in at that stage let alone giving a needle. It is a fear.
They jump into the job because they are passionate but they still fear things. They overcome that eventually. The majority of girls I worked with have never attended a road accident, unlike me, but you want to allow them to administer this drug. I do not believe the members for Karama and Goyder have looked at the diagram and spoken to people who understand how this affects the bush.
After this I will tell them who is for and against this, and what you are trying to bring into this House. Many people will not be happy because no one has spoken to the bush. It goes against our culture. The ladies I spoke to said, ‘Larisa, when you go in that House you’d better not let this happen’.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I seek an extension of time for the member pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LEE: The ladies I spoke to are against it. I will be honest, these females are from remote areas. They are educated, have a job and they are against it. They are not willing to put their kids, their sisters and their brothers at risk. Unless you have safeguards in place to ensure people in remote communities are safe I will not support it. I will not put these ladies or their kids at risk. I ask the member for Goyder to refer it to a committee so this legislation can be put in place properly and there are safeguards for not only people in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine and Tennant Creek, but also people in remote areas. We have to consider everybody in this bill.
That is my argument. I am sorry, but at the end of the day if you do not put that in place and help the people I represent understand this better or have access to real medical care then it speaks for itself. I will not put their lives at risk for something that is so outdated, and that is where I stand.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I represent about 7000 people who live in regional and remote areas, some of the remotest areas of the Northern Territory, and some would say Australia.
I also declare a conflict of interest as I am a practicing Catholic. I have to fess up; I am a left-of-centre practicing Catholic. I was in a relationship with a woman for 10 years and we had three children and one on the way. We sat at the back of the church because we were not allowed to receive the sacraments. We stuck with it and celebrated our marriage in 1993. We travelled from Borroloola to Christ the King Church in Tennant Creek to be married.
It was a great gathering of family and friends. My wife had a one-night honeymoon in the Goldfields Hotel Motel in Tennant Creek, and then we travelled to Darwin to go through the medicals for the birth of our fourth boy, Simon Peter. We had come from a regional remote area into the town of Borroloola. We had been living in very remote areas for over a decade but had moved to town. We still needed to travel to Darwin. My wife was going through the ultrasounds and tests, and all that needed to be done. A contingent of health professionals ushered me out of the room and my wife stayed. They communicated to me, as the father, that the baby had some deficits. It looked like the baby’s spine was growing outside his body. They immediately spoke to me about termination, abortion, and all those medical procedures available to terminate this baby and move on.
It was not long before my wife cottoned on to what was happening. I do not have the time or the emotion to share that with you, but we had some important decisions to make as a family. We went back to Borroloola and Simon Peter continued to develop. We had no services. There was a GP in the town, a great bloke, but my wife ended up teaching him more about what was happening in the pregnancy. He still thanks my wife for the education she provided. She studied and was intensive with everything she did to learn about what was happening with this baby. It was hard and traumatic. We spent many hours on the back steps of that house in Yanyula Street, howling at the moon, but she refused to give in and we supported each other with the children around us and continued on.
We were visiting friends at Wollogorang Station at the time, about 262 km east of Borroloola across rough roads and having a great weekend when Simon Peter decided he would enter the world. I organised a road evacuation. I had a choice. I thought I could get to the Calvert Hills airstrip, we could call in the cavalry – maybe we would do it that way – or try to get to the Borroloola clinic where there was a GP and a supportive nursing sister, a good friend of the family. My wife chose to go for it, so we arrived at Borroloola clinic and Simon Peter was born. He was not quite born as he passed away in labour. I baptised him with a phone stuck to my head talking to the parish priest in Tennant Creek. The doctor and the nursing sister organised an aeromedical evacuation because it had become the life of the mother.
We were evacuated to Royal Darwin Hospital and received great care. Our baby was delivered but was not alive. He had passed in Borroloola. So we were given a beautiful card that had his hand prints and footprints on it. As a family we came together to deal with another challenge. The following day I hit the streets of Darwin to organise a funeral for my son.
In all this time we survived with no services and very little support. My wife dealt with this in an incredibly powerful way. I organised my youngest son’s funeral, we cremated my son and we have his ashes at home. We have never released them; we are still planning that. We then returned to Borroloola with no services and no medical support. People were getting on with their busy lives. I was principal of the school, my wife still had one child at home, one at school and one at boarding school, and life went on.
If there is one thing that snaps you out of the grieving process for a lost a son it is when your next son, the three-year old, receives burns to 40% of his body in a house two streets up the road. The McCarthy family had another aeromedical evacuation, this time with Joseph McCarthy’s life hanging in the balance with full thickness burns to 40% of his body while my wife was dealing with the loss of our youngest son. That was another experience in the bush.
As the member for Arnhem said, this is about all Territorians. This is where we live, raise our children, work, dream and where we play.
That flight to Darwin was a bit radical because I could not go. This was an intensive aeromedical evacuation. The doctor who returned to Borroloola clinic to try to get a drip into Joseph’s neck was unsuccessful. He says today it was the fluids we poured down his throat that kept him alive between Borroloola and Darwin. He landed at Royal Darwin Hospital. The decision of medical staff was they could not deal with this child and that was communicated to me over the phone. My decision was Sydney. I had family in Sydney, I had a support network in Sydney and I knew the Camperdown hospital had the best burns ward in Australia at the time. My wife and Joseph pushed four people off a commercial jet, had a nurse attached to their contingent and went to Camperdown where Joseph spent the next four months. I was able to visit them on two occasions.
Once again, my wife became the best physiotherapist, the best occupational therapist and the best psychiatrist in the Northern Territory. She returned to Borroloola with Joseph in a full burns suit with treatments that went for hours daily. Modern medical procedures, with pharmaceutical goods I had never seen before in my life, were shipped up in boxes. My wife not only looked after Joseph and conducted all his physiotherapy and occupational therapy, she taught assistant teachers and inclusion support assistants. We taught the school and the town and then we became attached to Westmead children’s hospital. Joseph McCarthy had his last reconstructive surgery on his left hand at the age of 16. He fought us all the way; he is a tough Territorian. The surgeon in Sydney who did the last reconstruction convinced him that he would shave a couple of milliseconds off his left-hand pass, as he was then playing Rugby League at a state and territory level. He played A grade for Nightcliff at 17 years of age.
Why am I sharing this story in this debate? We lived in the bush with no services and no support. We were surrounded by good people with great intentions but we are survivors. Dawn McCarthy is the strongest, most courageous and determined woman in surviving and our family members surviving. I am participating in this debate because I have to shift back to being a politician.
As the member for Port Darwin outlined, this legislation is deficit. It is not good legislation. There has been a myriad of amendments, and a rush and continual move and shake to try to reach an end for Territory women’s rights. Nobody is arguing about that, and the member Nightcliff was very clear. We are not arguing about the rights of Territory women, how dare I do that, but I am arguing about the rights of all Territory women and this legislation does not provide for that.
It is completely deficit, it is not good legislation and as a senior legal counsel advised; this legislation could provide a pathway to a coroner. Any elected community member in this House needs to be cognisant of what it entails. As lawmakers we do not take this lightly.
Some amazing communication has come in. I have felt like a politician because I have received correspondence from all over the Territory and some from interstate. The positions have been both pro and against. I will share some of the correspondence from the NT Working Women’s Centre. ‘We seek your support in reforming the Medical Services Act to ensure that women in the Northern Territory have the same access to choices as women in all other Australian jurisdictions.’
This communication was interesting and came from a group called WHAT RU4 NT? It was addressed ‘Dear member of the Legislative Assembly’. It said ‘You are likely to have an opinion on abortion. Probably some of your electorate have contacted you. You may have had some conversations with friends and colleagues. You may be concerned with two elections looming that if you vote for changes to the Medical Services Act that voters will rail against you. According to Pringle, you do not need to worry. On analysing voting patterns over decades, voters have continued to support reformist minded politicians on the matter of abortion in Australia.’
I was not too influenced by that; it was not a good lobby. That was a political lobby, almost considered to be a cheap shot, and did not influence my decision-making.
The Katherine Times of 9 December 2015 printed that:
The story goes on, but that is essentially good advice. It should not be about philosophy but a legislative instrument that will provide equality, certainty and safety. This legislation does none of that. This legislation is conflicted with a series of amendments and philosophical opinions in a rush to provide a new pharmaceutical product in the Northern Territory that is not completely safe.
Many interviews were conducted, and when I reached radio range I listened to them. On ABC Darwin 105.7 on 2 December 2015 I heard that Robert Parker, President of the AMA(NT), is still concerned about the safety of the drug and the need for women to consult with a psychologist.
This became my thinking, psychosocial support networks for Territory women who undergo this process. If you live in the greater Darwin region you have access to those supports, but if you live in Tennant Creek or Borroloola you do not. Most people in this Chamber might not even know where Najabarra and Murun Murula are, but they definitely do not have access to those important psychosocial supports.
I can tell you about that, but someone better qualified is Dawn Margaret McCarthy. She received no wraparound psychosocial support for what we went through and still live with. That courageous woman dealt with it herself, but she understands. I asked her opinion and she said, ‘I would never wish this on any Territory woman in a lifetime’. I know there are some tough Territory women out there, but I would not like to test that either. Dawn is a survivor and she can talk.
This was in the Katherine Times on 16 December 2015:
From that rather crass opinion I will go back to the important element where the contributor says:
That is a simple statement, ‘Make it happen, and don’t forget the counselling’. What does counselling mean? It is something I know a lot about, as does my family and people in regional and remote areas.
That brings me to the Indigenous community.
As the member for Arnhem said, it is difficult to articulate this as a local member, but I tried. I found some women and men who were willing to talk about this. It was difficult to talk about, but there is something I am concerned about. When trying to broker this conversation in regional and remote areas of the Barkly electorate, I discovered that by the end of 2015 there were six stillborn babies in the morgue at Alice Springs Hospital, a number of them from Tennant Creek and the Barkly. One of the women was very brave, courageous and articulate in her first language and English and chose to speak to me about this bill.
One of those babies is her granddaughter. We have embarked on this campaign to try to conduct a closing ceremony, a funeral for this stillborn. It is unknown territory for me. I do not know what the public health system does. I know I was given my son, held him and organised his funeral. I do not know what happens when there are a number of infants in a Territory morgue.
I am working with one family, and I hope to get somewhere with this issue and Indigenous people. There are many sensitive challenges and this bill has pushed me off on a tangent. Once again, it is about dealing with the psychosocial wraparound support for young women who have suffered stillborn babies and walked away from that unfortunate experience.
This legislature needs to think about how we can deal with that and lead in that area. Whilst I do not support this bill, I will try to be of some use to Territory women facing this issue.
I spoke to remote clinicians about this bill and I thank them. These people are on the front line, our registered nurses, health workers in our clinics and health professionals. When I brokered this conversation they were very articulate. They came from a medical perspective and were able to debate this with their knowledge of medicine, pharmaceuticals and procedures. However, they were concerned about the regional and remote areas. They said the bill has deficits because it did not deal with the big, wide, geographic areas of the Northern Territory. It is focused on a small urban cohort, educated and articulate, and who want access to this medicine. They talked about sensitive cross-cultural issues. They were concerned about this legislation.
It then turned into a political debate not orchestrated by government employees but by me. I challenged the level of services available in our regional and remote areas and the level of services we need.
The health professionals were quick to advise me what we need. When we talked about the wraparound services, the support services for any Territory women accessing this pharmaceutical and using this product outside the major hospitals, it stacked up in major budgetary considerations for any government.
What does this legislation say? We will just walk away from that and not worry about it yet. Let us just get it operating, into the hospital pharmacy, and then we will worry about all the people living out there later. It does not work that way. That is not good legislation and that is why I will not back it.
People from regional and remote areas who want to terminate a foetus have an opportunity to do that. There is a process and a structure. I do not support that, but that is my problem and I do not overlay that to any Territorian. As a member of parliament I know that if a Territory woman or a Territory family choose that, it is available and there will be wraparound support services.
I thank my colleagues on this side of the House for sharing the debate. It is good, healthy and important for the law makers of the Northern Territory. Some interesting comments were provided in the debate relating to some of the amendments, and I acknowledge our Health minister, the member for Port Darwin, who provided a very thorough, succinct approach to amending this legislation. He is a lawyer; he gets it. My colleagues on this side also debated the amendments.
I will share some information that came my way. One of the minister’s amendments would give the minister the power to decide how many abortion clinics there were, where they were and what facilities they would need. The suggestion was that this could probably align with private practice. There would be clinics in Darwin or Alice Springs based on economics which would become fee for service.
Once again we are asked to pass legislation which pitches to the elite of the Territory. That is not good legislation. If this legislation is for all Territorians it should be accessible to all Territorians. That is why, minister, debate of your amendments was good, open and honest.
The other important comment which was provided by a doctor related to the arrangements of this bill and the outcomes it will produce. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines say:
In layman’s terms that means if you go down that road make sure you have sound and credible medical services to ensure it is safe. That will mean no Health minister has to go to the coroner, and no woman or her family have to suffer.
The information sent by people who I define as pro-life activists, God love them, is interesting. It has taken various shapes and forms, but one has reinforced that RU486 is not as simple as it sounds. There is empirical evidence from around the world and Australia to show adverse things can occur. There has been a death. Many women have gone through secondary stages of needing serious medical intervention to complete the process started by a pharmaceutical abortion.
Many studies have shown women have been readmitted to hospitals, and there has been physical damage and this pharmaceutical has failed to work. One would expect, in the big wide world of medicine, that these things might happen. However, as legislators we must be cognisant of the fact we cannot allow those deficits because we are lazy, philosophically driven and really do not care. We have to ensure that Territory law is proper, fit and accountable, and therefore I cannot support this.
I will separate my personal views and religious faith and go to this legislation. I cannot support this. As politicians, if we are serious about going down this road for Territory women we have a number of challenges. One is to get the legislation right, and the other is to make sure it is for all Territory women. If you really want to debate it, I challenge you to debate it with Dawn Margaret McCarthy.
I just want a rational position here, and as an elected member will try to use common sense, good manners and a proper legislative approach. As the clock ticks down on me I urge us to turn our attention to a pressing issue in regional and remote areas of cross-cultural significance where there are multiple stillborn infants in our morgues with mothers, families and clans struggling to deal with the issue. As legislators, that is a real issue and we need to lead.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, legalisation of RU486 is an emotive issue and we have seen that tonight. People are for or against the legalisation of a medical termination, and some people do not have an opinion either way.
This debate is not about abortion; that debate has been had. Surgical abortion is legal in the NT. In preparing to debate this bill I met with WHAT RU4 NT, Family Planning, AMA NT, Top End Women’s Legal Service and the Australian Christian Lobby NT and Queensland. I thank them for their time and for explaining to me their positions on introduction of RU486 into the Territory.
I have also received correspondence through letters and e-mails from people in and out of my electorate expressing their views. I thank them for taking the time to do that. I have spoken to people in my electorate about this method of abortion.
As other members have mentioned this evening, this is a conscience vote and I respect the fact the government and opposition have allowed their members to freely express their position.
On the information I have read, heard and obtained, I understand the main concern in relation to the use of RU486 by Territory women is safety. I could not agree more; the safety of women is paramount when considering legislative amendments such as these.
The bill is complex. It was brought to our attention at 10.49 am today that the member for Goyder would propose significant amendments to the bill originally proposed. There is no question that the amendments are significant, and I will not hide from the fact that I am disappointed proper time was not afforded to all members in this House to consider the proposed amendments well in advance of debating the bill and moving to consideration in detail.
The bill is too important to get wrong and make bad law without proper time to scrutinise. It is a shame we could not have had more time, but any amendments – multiple amendments have been circulated to the House – are open for debate during the consideration in detail stage.
AMA NT has stated that provided the use of RU486 follows the authoritative clinical guidelines issued by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists it can be administered safely.
The reason the bill is so complex, polarising and emotive is because it can be either extremely prescriptive and enshrine all the details around how to dispense the drug, take the drug and how the drug and the woman are monitored. It can be as prescriptive as details of the gestation period, the number of doctors required to sign off on a medical abortion and parental and guardian consent for minors seeking termination. Some would argue all those issues need to be considered and prescribed within the legislation.
Other views say it can be less prescriptive, and leave the details to be developed by the Department of Health in consultation with the medical profession. An example I received was from Dr Jacqueline Murdoch, who e-mailed me with a good example. ‘We do not legislate that you cannot do an appendectomy in a remote community and yet it is not done because it is not appropriate. Medical guidelines are used to determine appropriate and safe professional practice.’
I have confidence in the profession, the AMA and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists to determine the appropriate administration of RU486 and the guidelines associated with it. The medical board and the Australian health practitioner regulation agencies are our professional watchdogs over the medical profession.
It is true that all jurisdictions except the Northern Territory allow the use of RU486 outside a hospital environment for medical terminations of pregnancy up to nine weeks under the supervision and assessment of a medical practitioner. This debate is not about the introduction of the drug RU486 in Australia but introduction into the Northern Territory. We are the exception, and the question is whether or not we want to become the rule.
I am a proud Territorian. The Territory does many things differently and we are proud of it. Unfortunately, there are examples of where Northern Territory differences are not something to be proud of. I am thinking specifically of issues affecting women, such as our higher rates of domestic violence and our inability to access RU486.
I support reform to the Medical Services Act. It is important and it is time. It is also Country Liberal Party policy that the Northern Territory be brought into line with other Australian jurisdictions by supporting legislative and statutory changes to enable the use of RU486. I support the Country Liberal Party’s policy position. I also support the aspirations of the Office of Women’s Policy framework, which strives for equity and access to health services for all Northern Territory women.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank members for their contribution to a difficult debate. I listened carefully to the members for Arnhem and Barkly and share their concerns. I take this slightly differently. This is a conscience vote, and it is difficult for me to separate myself from legislation and what I believe is the taking of the life of the unborn. There are two sides. I believe that life begins at conception. At the same time, I believe we have legislation before us which I have to consider.
I accept what the member for Port Darwin said. I have amendments before me which I only received at midday. I have not had the chance to deal with them in any detail, nor get serious advice on them. On the surface I have some serious concerns.
This issue is still about abortion. Some people might say I am fighting the tide. This is women’s business, go away. I believe just because something is the fashion it does not mean it is correct. G K Chesterton, a great English writer and philosopher, once wrote:
So it is with abortion. You can read all the glossy magazines, listen to the media commentators, the midday TV shows and what the family planning and YWCA people say. Of course, some people here would know about EMILY’S List. You then see what this fashion is about. According to this fashion, in the western society we live in the unborn is an indeterminate bunch of cells which only becomes a human being when it leaves its mother’s womb. Until then it has no status, no protection and is not human. That is the fashion of the day and the fallacy of the world today.
In the second reading there is a continuance of that fallacy when it says this debate is not about abortion or human rights but about RU486, a drug. It is not a medicine; that is a euphemism. Medicines make you well and pregnancy is not a sickness. It is a drug that will give women a choice of how to destroy an unborn human life. We will debate abortion, and we will debate human life.
The drug, combined with another drug, destroys an unborn human life. That is what it is designed to do and what it does. It is not the case that we are asked to approve a drug which is said by some to be safer, by some to be more convenient, and by some to be more private. You do not have to worry about abortion because it is keeping the status quo, keeping up with the other states and giving people a choice.
If you do not support the existing process of abortion, then just because a different method is developed to achieve the same goal does not mean it can be supported. To do so, for me, would be hypocritical. It is a bit like asking me if I would like to be hit by a bus or a car. The end result is the same.
In the American Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson said:
That is a fine statement, but it is obvious interpretation of that statement has excluded the unalienable right endowed by the Creator of life. It is a pity, because I too believe we have the right to life endowed by our Creator from the day we are conceived. Any law which says that the unborn have no rights is discriminatory and gives rights to some and deliberately excludes others.
Humanity starts at conception. We are individual humans, neither the same as our mother or father. We are like no other human being, and the start of our existence is no different from any other stage of our life. Conception, embryo, foetus, baby, child, teenager, adolescent, adult, middle aged, senior and aged we are always human, and we as a parliament have a responsibility to protect our fellow humans, especially at their weakest and most vulnerable.
It is amazing that parliaments will pass laws and set up organisations to protect children, make sure their health is looked after, and if they are not doing enough are criticised for not looking after the welfare of the child. If a child is injured, abused or killed the perpetrators are tried and sent to gaol. Parliaments support the child through the legislation they pass. Parliaments make sure children are educated, and if they are not attending school parliaments make laws to make sure they do. Parliaments make sure children’s health is looked after by providing adequate medical services, and where there are not are brought to task. Parliaments care about the welfare of children. However, the unborn, as the family planners say, are a bunch of cells, a product, irrelevant to this debate and it is a woman’s right to have an abortion. I sometimes question if other rights are overridden.
According to a report by Professor Caroline de Costa, in the NT there are between 650 to 850 abortions per year, meaning nearly one in every four pregnancies is aborted. In the NT one in four babies is never born. Surely we need to do something about that. Surely that many abortions cannot be justified on medical grounds, especially in this day and age when we have such wonderful facilities and doctors and nurses in our hospitals to make giving birth a relatively safe procedure.
If a woman wants an abortion for whatever reason – financial, unplanned, anxiety – why are we in parliament not saying, ‘We will help you through this difficult time’? Why are we not pro-life and look after the needs of the mother, the family and the unborn by setting up ways to help them through this period? We look after people with depression, mental illness, suicidal tendencies, budgetary problems and housing, etcetera. Many NGOs would help. As parliamentarians we need to focus on the unborn, and put in place strategies which reduce the need for abortions. We need to support our unborn Territorians, promote life in our society and the beauty of each human being regardless of their circumstances. We need to give them every opportunity to shine in the world, not just after they are born but at conception.
Tonight’s debate is the about the negative and should be about the positive. It is about a dangerous drug designed to destroy human life. This bill is also an attempt to have abortion on demand, as seen in the letter from Family Planning NT and endorsed by a number of speakers. The amendments try to make doctors who refuse, in conscience, to have anything to do with abortion, or give advice which would assist someone get an abortion, break the law. The amendments impose an obligation on the practitioner. Thank God there are doctors who believe in the Hippocratic Oath and their conscience. I will quote from it:
I will go against fashion and support what I believe is right. Our nation is slipping into a vacuum of values and beliefs, where people who believe in a God from whom all life comes are ridiculed and mocked, yet those who believe in the fashionable non-beliefs held in the new world should be followed. It is a nihilist approach to life and its meanings, with about as much depth as the reporting one gets from the nightly news.
Perhaps this is why we have so many social problems that our government and NGOs can hardly keep up with. We are a society for today and not the long term. We see our Facebook but cannot see the sky.
Whether RU486 is safe is an argument based on what is safe for the woman. No one asked the unborn if they think it is safe. That is the irony of the debate; it is upside down.
The debate is deliberately false as it tries to hide what it does, which is termination of pregnancy. Regardless, I do not believe this drug is safe. There are split opinions on this, but some months ago I received a book titled RU486: Misconceptions, Myths and Morals from our Parliamentary Library. Some of you may also have received it. Its three authors are mentioned in the front of the book.
Debate suspended.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a travel report received from the member for Goyder pursuant to clause 6.11 of the RTD. It is dated 19 April 2016.
Mrs PRICE (Parks and Wildlife): Mr Deputy Speaker, this reserve is the most visited park in the Northern Territory. I feel it is important to share this plan with the House, a Country Liberals management plan which promotes a balanced environment, sets out the direction for the reserve’s future management and outlines how the needs of the community and conservation will be met.
Unfortunately Labor was complacent with our unique Territory lifestyle and neglected our parks and reserves, but we want to open them up to business and opportunities so more Territorians can enjoy our parks, sunsets, walking and cycling tracks or just a quick escape to nature.
If Labor got hold of our parks no one would be allowed in them. The management plan has been developed by the Parks and Wildlife Commission together with the Casuarina Coastal Reserve Advisory Committee, the community and key stakeholders, including the Amateur Fishermen’s Association of the Northern Territory, Tourism NT and recreation groups. It includes implementing the Country Liberals’ $10.7m infrastructure development to improve visitor experiences at the reserve, which has already commenced. Under the plan of management, the reserve will be managed for its natural, cultural and visitor values. We will manage our parks; those opposite will lock them up.
The management plan includes changes to domestic animal regulations, which will mean the reserve is more user-friendly, with a larger section of beach now dedicated for off-leash dog walking. The new regulations will also provide additional protection for the significant migratory birds that visit the reserve.
The management plan also focuses on promoting more public involvement in the reserve, and working with the community and environmental and recreational user groups. This is a key commitment from the Country Liberals to open up parks to increased visitation through sustainable development and increased commercial partnerships. That is right; the CLP has opened up the parks. Those opposite and on the cross benches would padlock our parks and keep all Territorians out.
The plan spells out a bright future for the reserve and everyone who has an interest in it. The visitor experience will be enhanced and the natural and cultural values protected. Importantly, the reserve will provide visitors with a safe and enjoyable experience. I am confident the public and the Assembly will welcome the future of Casuarina Coastal Reserve as outlined in this plan.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I table this management plan for noting by the Legislative Assembly.
Public Accounts Committee Report – Public Private Partnership Arrangements for the Darwin Correctional Precinct – consideration adjourned.
Public Accounts Committee Report – Inquiry into Structural Separation of the Power and Water Corporation – consideration adjourned.
Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future Report – Key Challenges and Opportunities Issues Paper – consideration adjourned.
Auditor-General for the Northern Territory – Report to the Legislative Assembly, August 2015 – consideration adjourned.
Auditor-General for the Northern Territory – Report to the Legislative Assembly, February 2016 – consideration adjourned.
Standing Orders Committee Report – Matters of Question Time Reform, Infant Care and Right of Reply, March 2016 – consideration adjourned.
Committee of Members’ Interests Report to the Assembly, March 2016 – consideration adjourned.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
When I became Chief Minister on 14 March 2013 I set a personal goal of working to bring the Kenbi Land Claim to a resolution which satisfied all parties. The joint media conference between the Northern Territory government, the Northern Land Council, Kenbi traditional owners and the Commonwealth government, on 6 April 2016, announcing settlement of the Kenbi Land Claim marked a significant milestone in resolution of one of Australia’s longest running and most complex land claims. Lodged in 1979, when I was just six years old, the Kenbi Land Claim has taken 37 years to settle and involved extensive legal processes, lengthy negotiations, four hearings by an Aboriginal Land Commissioner and two High Court challenges.
The land offered as part of the settlement includes 52 000 ha becoming Aboriginal land, 13 000 ha becoming freehold land in the north of the Cox Peninsula, with one-fifth of this freehold in the north east to be granted to the Larrakia Development Corporation. The total freehold area is equivalent to approximately the current City of Darwin municipality area, or 2.3 times the current City of Palmerston municipality area.
This will lead to significantly increased opportunities for residential and commercial developments on the Cox Peninsula for at least the next 100 to 150 years. The settlement also provides perpetual open access to the intertidal zone for recreational and fishing access, as well as certainty for squatters and other interest holders with buildings in the area.
In 2000 the Aboriginal Land Commissioner recommended the vast majority of the land under claim be granted as Aboriginal land. The commissioner also made specific note that granting of the land would benefit many more people than the six named traditional owners at the time, and that it would be misleading to say it will benefit only the named traditional owners. The commissioner further noted that under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 a land trust holds land for a class of people much broader than those who fit within the definition of traditional owners. Those on whose behalf a land trust holds land are Aboriginal people entitled by Aboriginal tradition to the use or occupation of that area of land, whether or not the traditional connection is proven.
I have been informed by the Chair of the Northern Land Council that due to dissatisfaction amongst the broader Larrakia family groups regarding the commissioner’s 2000 decision to only name six traditional Aboriginal owners, not all Larrakia support the settlement.
In order to secure free and public access to the coastal areas of the Cox Peninsula, post the Blue Mud Bay High Court decision, a further package has been offered.
This includes: the grant of Karu Park, the previous site of the well-known Retta Dixon Home, as Crown Lease in perpetuity; the grant of a development lot in the East Arm Darwin Business Park; procurement provisions which incentivise developers to partner with Aboriginal organisations in future land development or industrial projects on Crown Land; and the first right of refusal to partner in the residential land release development of the area of Farrar West.
This package further enhances the opportunities available to the broader Larrakia family groups as part of this innovative settlement.
In relation to Karu Park, the grant of the land is for the purposes of recognising its former use as the Retta Dixon Home and it is a condition of the grant that the site be maintained and accessible to the public.
There was a real risk that if the current opportunity to settle the Kenbi Land Claim was not taken it might never be settled. Therefore, it was fortunate that the stars aligned to pave the way for a settlement.
Leaving an area so important to greater Darwin’s future, long-term growth would have resulted in ongoing uncertainty and frustration for all concerned.
I take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt thanks to those who have worked so hard for so long to bring about this momentous milestone.
I would specifically like to acknowledge the surviving members of the Kenbi traditional owners; the Larrakia family groups; the Northern Land Council; the Commonwealth Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Senator for the Northern Territory Hon Nigel Scullion; key staff from the Department of the Chief Minister; the Solicitor for the Northern Territory; and the Departments of Land Resource Management; Lands, Planning and the Environment; Primary Industry and Fisheries; Transport; Local Government and Community Services; Mines and Energy; and the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Without the constructive and collaborative approach taken by all involved over such a long period of time we would never have reached this point. However, this is not the end of the work required to give effect to the Kenbi Land Claim settlement. Efforts are now being focused on finalising the key agreements required to resolve the land claim.
It is anticipated that the Kenbi Indigenous Land Use Agreement and Side Deed will be executed by the NT government and the Northern Land Council at the end of May 2016. This will allow a ceremony to occur shortly thereafter for the Commonwealth to hand over the deed for Aboriginal land. Execution of the key agreements will also pave the way for all subsequent land transfers to occur to the Kenbi Land Trust and the Larrakia Development Corporation.
The Northern Land Council will also do further work over the next 18 months, following the handover ceremony, to transfer its ownership share of the Larrakia Development Corporation to Larrakia ownership. This will assist in ensuring there is greater transparency and accountability for the broader Larrakia family groups in relation to implementation of the agreements to settle the Kenbi Land Claim.
Developing economic opportunities for Aboriginal Territorians is a priority of the County Liberals government. To be able to structure the settlement to make this possible for traditional owners and family groups certainly helped bring about this settlement. The settlement that has been accepted is extremely innovative as it provides a combination of freehold and Aboriginal land. Settlement of the Kenbi Land Claim is a truly historic occasion and secures the future of Darwin for generations to come. Once again, I thank all those who have assisted in this process throughout the last 37 years.
It is with great sadness that I salute a legendary cattleman, John Atten Dunnicliff, who passed away on 27 March 2016, aged 75. John was not born in the Northern Territory, but as a bush gentleman was about as Territory as they come. He embodied everything that is great about the Northern Territory. John was an innovator, a deep thinker, a genius cattleman and a loving family man. John was an entrepreneur and a risk taker, but they were calculated risks that almost always paid off.
He started farming in 1961 on a small hard block in Bundarra, country New South Wales, which had been brought by his father, a journalist, and his mother, a school teacher. From there he would go on to build properties from King Island in the south to the Kimberley in the north and many places in between. By 2002 the family would own one million hectares of good Barkly tablelands grazing country. Those properties are Beetaloo Station, Mungabroom and O T Downs, but that was not enough for John. John once said, ‘The real thing that holds everyone back is whether you’re game enough to chuck the money at it and get in and do it’. That is exactly what he did, and John never took half measures.
He invested $40m in 600 tanks of 135 000 L, about 3000 km of 75 mm poly pipe, more than 3000 km of fencing and 70 bores. This increased the number of watering points from 40 to 600. The results were spectacular, and the holding’s carrying capacity rose from 20 000 cattle in 2002 to 90 000 today.
Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association President, Tom Stockwell, who described John as a ‘lovely old bushman’, said:
John did not just build his own cattle empire, but helped and motivated others to do the same. NT Cattlemen’s Association chief executive, Tracey Hayes, said:
John was a gentleman and a businessman, and that trait helped the family through the disastrous suspension of live cattle exports in 2011. Because he visited his Indonesian partners every year, his cattle were first back onto the ships when the ban was lifted.
It is hard to imagine the cattle industry without John Dunnicliff. He is already greatly missed. However, his legacy of innovation, problem solving and sheer determination will always live on in the Northern Territory.
On behalf of the government and the people of the Northern Territory, I extend our heartfelt condolences to his wife Trish, his children and children-in-law Jane and Scott, and Kate and Anthony, and his grandchildren Jimmy, Lockie, Jack, Tessie, Sam, Maddie, Charlotte, Elise, Sam, Ruby and Joe.
May you rest in peace, John Atten Dunnicliff.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to continue my remarks about Palmerston’s Citizen of the Year, Rachel Fosdick.
Then the Palmerston and Regional Basketball Association was born. A foundation committee was developed and one of its first jobs was to secure 100 senior members. The committee worked hard at developing the governance structure, the constitution and guiding documents, and recruiting 100 senior players. This was achieved and currently PaRBA has 250 members. That is an astonishing achievement in the last 18 months, and you would expect no less from something Rachel was involved in.
PaRBA is flourishing, as Rachel and Damon envisaged it would. PaRBA hosts mixed senior social competitions on Friday nights, wheelchair basketball for kids and parents on Tuesdays, and plenty more. Rachel proudly explained how PaRBA received a grassroots grant from the NT government to run Fun and Fundamentals, which brought kids from Berry Springs, Batchelor, Belyuen, Adelaide River and Bakewell to Bees Creek, where PaRBA ran a 12-week youth program.
The Fun and Fundamentals program was a test of the committee’s ability to run junior basketball and they excelled at it. The program involved liaising with schools so they would bring the kids up on buses every Saturday morning to participate. The morning would comprise coaching and learning to referee, followed by a healthy lunch and then basketball games. This has now turned into a highly successful school-based and rural competition out of Gray and Girraween Primary Schools.
A passion of PaRBA is to run lightning carnivals after school, and its goal is to bring back playing sport for your school after school as this brings pride to students, their school and the community. PaRBA also aims to inspire its players by having inspirational speakers like Tom O'Neill-Thorne, the Paralympian.
This year PaRBA is excited to host Brittany Ward, the pocket rocket from Texas. Brittany will be participating in the Rising Stars basketball program for kids with disabilities. Rachel is fiercely passionate about this program and has already approached the schools, encouraging them to bus the kids in for a healthy lunch and basketball games.
PaRBA also hosts an emerging athletes program to identify kids who want to progress to representative basketball. Prior to PaRBA fostering emerging athletes there were no options for Palmerston and rural kids other than at 6 am on Tuesday morning in Darwin. Thanks to PaRBA, emerging Palmerston and rural athletes are now supported in our community of Friday nights. It is extremely well – if not over – attended, with 33 excellent basketball players getting specialist attention.
The PaRBA committee is where Rachel feels at home. She loves that everyone on the committee identifies and fulfils a need. There is no ‘this should be done’. Everything is done and it is a committee full of go-getters, which makes life easy and hugely rewarding.
When I asked Rachel how highly she values volunteering for her and her family, she reflected that she comes from a family of volunteers. Rachel was recently chatting to her mum, who is always on a mission for something new to be involved in. Rachel’s mum is a doctor who became a naturopath. She retired but then started volunteering to treat koalas with chlamydia. Rachel’s mother-in-law has a lifelong volunteering commitment to St Vinnies for over 40 years. Rachel reflected by saying:
Rachel estimates that one average she would volunteer five hours a night, and the weekends are full of volunteering. This is an astronomical commitment to our community. You could ask no more of this woman, she gives it all.
Rachel believes an important part of volunteering is to know when to walk away and start something new. Rachel does not know what her next step is because PaRBA has so much potential. She hopes to be involved in PaRBA at an operational level in the future. PaRBA will have 1000 members in five years’ time. It has started servicing Wadeye and the Tiwi Islands. It is achieving great things at warp speed and doing it with love, care and compassion.
Rachel’s proudest moment was at Fun and Fundamentals when someone asked her, ‘Why do you do this?’ They have to drive an hour from Batchelor or Belyuen to get there. The kids said because if they go to school every day they get to play basketball on the weekend. The sense of community was overwhelming. It was a very proud moment. Rachel is driving educational outcomes and could not be prouder, and I could not be prouder of her.
When I asked Rachel about her funniest moment she shared the following story. Rachel had to prepare a risk assessment for the Fun and Fundamentals program. She thought she had covered everything until at Bees Creek Primary School the Belyuen kids were eating berries off a bush. Rachel asked if they should be doing that. They said, yes, it was bush tucker. Rachel was not so sure so she asked an elder. He looked at the bush and said, ‘No, they shouldn’t be eating that’. He asked the kids if it tasted bad and they said, ‘Yes’. He said, ‘If it tastes bad don’t eat it’. Rachel asked if that was a bush tucker trick. He said it was just common sense. It was a wonderful moment for Rachel and they were gorgeous kids.
Rachel loves what she does. She loves her family, loves Palmerston and could never leave there. Rachel cannot imagine bringing up her family anywhere else. She has watched the community grow and loves running into people everywhere she goes. It makes Palmerston home.
I want to thank Rachel on behalf of the people of Palmerston and this House. You are the most deserving Palmerston Citizen of the Year. Your tireless volunteering and efforts have not gone unnoticed, and I hope you have a wonderful twelve months holding this highly honourable position in our community. We look forward to all the volunteering and contributions you will continue to make for the people of Palmerston.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I want to speak about a wonderful relationship that has developed between students of Wulagi Primary School, located in my electorate of Sanderson, and students of a similar age group from Japan.
This inter-country relationship first developed in 2014 for current students of Wulagi Primary School when the Australian Japanese Association of the NT, AJANT, sent information to members of their association inviting them to visit a Japanese naval ship, the JS Hatakaze, which had arrived in Darwin for Exercise KAKADU.
Ms Glenys Clarke, a member of AJANT and the Japanese language teacher at Wulagi Primary School, approached staff at the school to see if an excursion could be arranged to tour the JS Hatakaze.
Due to the efforts of AJANT’s President Kathleen Bresnehan and Vice-President Ms Asako Kobayashi, and with the enthusiastic support of Officer Yamaguchi of the JS Hatakaze, the excursion was arranged.
With a bus provided by INPEX, the support of Principal Jeannie Bennett of the Darwin Languages Centre and some of the language teachers, interpreters and some staff from Wulagi Primary School, about 30 excited students travelled to the ship.
The hospitality provided by the Commanding Officer of JS Hatakaze, Captain Tokihiko Umezaki, Officer Yamaguchi and the crew of JS Hatakaze to these young students and the accompanying adults was welcoming and gracious. It was a fantastic opportunity to experience and learn more about Japanese culture.
Language teacher, Ms Glenys Clarke, was particularly moved by this experience and said, ‘I was particularly touched when I considered that not many years ago Japan and Australia had been at war and fighting had taken place in the very waters where the JS Hatakaze was moored. Yet now in this very place Japanese naval officers were guiding excited Australian school children around their vessel. When we disembarked the crew presented the children with folded paper cranes, a symbol of peace and longevity.’
Following this visit, a Year 3/4 classroom teacher at Wulagi Primary School, Ms Janine Woodroffe, had a great idea to pass on letters from the school’s Japanese language learning students to Officer Yamaguchi in the hope that pen pal correspondence could commence and develop with school children in Japan.
Coincidentally, Officer Yamaguchi’s daughter was in Year 5, and the letters from students of the Northern Territory were given to her school, which is located just north of Tokyo on Japan’s main island of Honshu.
A relationship between young students of two countries developed when the school children of the Japanese primary school wrote back to their counterparts at Wulagi Primary School. Members of AJANT then assisted the Wulagi students to compose the next round of letters in Japanese, and a relationship between students from across the seas continued to develop further.
Through the further efforts of the AJANT the Wulagi students were invited to participate in a Japanese language program aired on community radio in Darwin on a Sunday. This radio program could also be heard through the Internet by students in Japan, further developing communication and friendship between young students from two countries.
In addition to the friendships that have been developed, I understand that through the assistance of Mr Andrew Matz of the Australian Embassy in Tokyo, who is the brother of Wulagi school teacher Ms Janine Woodroffe, students of Wulagi will be introduced to students at another Japanese school, the Tokyo International School.
The inter-country relationships will assist in providing a wonderful insight into our different cultures and languages, but importantly help us understand each other better.
I want to thank everyone who has worked so hard to assist Wulagi Primary School students develop this relationship with Japanese students.
I would also like to add something in relation to the building of relationships between the generations of school children. My granddaughter is a student at Nakara Primary School and Madison is currently learning Japanese. As a result of a family visiting Darwin last year to spread the ashes of the wife of an aviator who died in Darwin in 1943 – he was in a Japanese reconnaissance plane that was shot down and crashed into the sea not far from Bathurst Island.
When the airman’s wife passed away in 2004 she wanted her ashes spread in the waters surrounding Darwin where her husband died. The daughter, who is now in her early 70s, along with her daughter and granddaughter travelled to Darwin to spread those ashes. It was a moving ceremony.
The Royal Australian Navy is to be commended because they facilitated this on one of their vessels in the harbour. It was the first time that such a thing has occurred in Darwin or Australia. At first nobody quite knew the protocols, but between Dr Tom Lewis, the Royal Australian Navy and the Japanese family a ceremony was held and the airman’s wife’s ashes were spread in Darwin harbour.
More significantly, they brought with them an antique doll. They asked me to take responsibility for this doll as the lady wanted it to be in Darwin so it was close to mother and father. The doll had been handed down through her family and she had had it all her life. This significant antique was entrusted to me to look after and handed to my family.
The real human story is the doll was handed down from the daughter to her granddaughter, who passed it to my granddaughter. Two six-year old girls, one of whom speaks limited English and the other speaks limited Japanese, had a conversation in Japanese and English – getting most of the words right – about the doll being looked after.
That doll sits in my ministerial office upstairs facing the ocean, where its owner’s ashes are scattered. It shows how wonderful it is when we move on from times of trouble into times of peace, that our next generation of young girls can continue a relationship. The relationship between those two will continue, as does the one from Wulagi.
We live in a global village and Japan is our main trading partner. It augers well for diversifying our economy and increasing trade between Darwin and Tokyo that we have strong connections and relationships with those people.
I thank INPEX for facilitating the buses and the help they gave Wulagi Primary School to make the excursion happen. They are great corporate citizens who are deeply involved in what is occurring in the community. Actions like this, with the assistance of the Australian Embassy in Japan and the Japanese Embassy in Canberra, as well as local representatives of the Australian Japanese Association of the NT, shows how much can be done when a group of enthusiastic people – irrespective of which country they are from – get together and make a contribution to our multicultural community. It is immeasurable.
I thank the teachers at Wulagi, the people from the Australian Japanese Association of the NT, and all those involved in facilitating this ongoing commitment to multiculturalism, and the peaceful and harmonious relationship we have with our Japanese friends.
Ms MOSS (Casuarina): Mr Deputy Speaker, the lack of remote housing in the Territory is one of the most significant issues facing the government today, and should be one of the most important issues in the Territory this election year. The Territory cannot go on with the housing crisis we have across our communities, both remote and regional, but particularly in our remote areas.
There needs to be a much clearer statement from the Minister for Housing. What we heard in Question Time yesterday could be described as using tricky figures. The minister said 78 new houses have been built since July 2014. In fact, there has only been one.
My question to the minister yesterday was specifically about new houses under the national partnership agreement. Ironically, Labor was not responsible for thinking up this figure. It comes from the minister’s answer to a written question on notice. I specifically asked for a breakdown of what had been added, replaced and refurbished under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, or NPARIH, and Stronger Futures funding streams in the Territory.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table the answer provided.
Leave granted.
Ms MOSS: I accept that replacement of houses is of vital importance, particularly when so many are beyond economic repair and nearing the end of their life as suitable for Territorians to live in. This is the situation in many places in the Territory, and I intend to ask more questions about the number of residents currently not paying rent to the department because of the abysmal state of their housing.
However, the addition of new houses to stock is also of vital importance when we face the huge challenge of overcrowding in many communities in the Territory. We cannot ignore the need for building new houses.
Last week was Youth Homelessness Matters Day. We know that NT youth are a significant proportion of the national youth homelessness population and that overcrowding is part of this.
The answer provided by the department clearly shows there has been one additional house built under NPARIH. If the answer is wrong, then I ask the minister to provide a correction. Of the minister’s numbers, 76 were replacement houses and not what the question related to. An additional one was added, which the minister will need to clarify. Perhaps this has come online since 29 February 2016.
This is about people’s lives. Yesterday a specific question was asked about new additional houses under the agreement. To add two figures together and then misrepresent what was asked will not go a long way to fixing the issues experienced in housing in the Northern Territory. We all know the reason is the minister is part of a government that has refused to put any of its money into growing housing stock in remote communities. In fact, the only government that put one cent of Territory government money into remote housing was a Labor government.
There is clearly no intention to put more money into housing. In estimates last year, in relation to the national partnership agreement, the minister said:
The minister can play games with numbers if she wishes, but I will continue listening to what she says. Yesterday in Question Time she said:
The minister has said there will be no additional dwellings under this agreement only replacement houses. Representing replacements as new additional housing is not right. The minister should immediately outline plans to build new additional houses in the Northern Territory rather than politicking with a straight question.
The contrast between the CLP policy and ours is clear: we will put in place a $1.1bn Territory government-funded housing program. We recognise this is still not enough. We will call on the Australian government to put up funds as well. However, if we want to attract some decent money from the federal government we need to put in as well.
I will leave it there, Mr Deputy Speaker. I hope to hear plans soon with the end of NPARIH fast approaching.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Casuarina for her adjournment, setting the record straight on remote housing and the failings of this government to not deliver on housing. It is an important story which is alive and on the wires in the bush, When I was in Central Australia the last four days before I came to Darwin for sittings, the failings of the current CLP government was what people were talking about, particularly where it is letting people in the bush down.
This evening I will talk about an important bush matter to do with education and government’s failure regarding homelands. I cannot speak for all homelands, but I can for some of the homelands in Arnhem I have visited recently. I discovered an appalling state of affairs regarding arrangements for teachers visiting homelands. Typically, a visiting teacher might leave their main community. In this case I am talking about Gapuwiyak, and I was out there a few weeks ago. I followed protocol and contacted minister Chandler’s office to request permission to visit Gapuwiyak School and also one of the homeland schools serviced by Gapuwiyak, a beautiful little community called Raymangirr on the coast, which is serviced by Laynhapuy Homelands.
What is happening at Raymangirr homeland and Donydji homeland, which is also serviced by Gapuwiyak School, is there was an arrangement whereby a visiting teacher would typically arrive on a Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning. They would stay in the community for three nights and be supported by the very capable Laynhapuy assistant teacher.
Instead of Donydji and Raymangirr receiving a visiting teacher, who comes every week of the term to their school, the arrangement has now become a week-about arrangement. One week the teacher will visit and stay at Raymangirr homeland and teach at that school and the following week travel to Donydji community – which is a bit further away than Gapuwiyak, probably more than an hour by road.
When the teacher is at Donydji homeland there is simply a teacher assistant at Raymangirr. Again, when the visiting teacher goes back to Raymangirr, Donydji has the assistant teacher there. The assistant teachers in the two schools are incredibly competent individuals, I know them both. Joanne Guyula is the assistant teacher at Donydji and Rose Wunumurra is the assistant Yolngu teacher at Raymangirr.
It is not acceptable that these homelands have had visiting teacher hours halved. When I visited the community of Raymangirr people were keen to share their stories and ask why the visiting teacher hours had been reduced by half, as well as other matters I will raise in a minute.
I told them I had no quick answer other than that they were a long way from Darwin, and I asked if they had heard the phrase ‘out of sight out of mind’. I told them the government does not care about them and can save money by providing a teacher week about rather than every week.
As evidence of this – it generated many comments on Facebook – the community wanted a photograph of every child at Raymangirr homeland school that day. All the chairs were brought out and it was like a class photo. They asked me to be in the photograph, and there are some 20 little faces of children who were at school. This was not a stunt on the day, Wednesday 13 April, the final week of term immediately after Easter. I am advised that attendance at Raymangirr has been sustained throughout the term.
It is bewildering why the government would half resources to two homeland communities. The impact this has had on the Donydji community – whilst I have not visited Donydji for a while I am in phone contact with them, and families are concerned that visiting teacher hours have been reduced and some families have moved into Gapuwiyak so their children can attend school there to receive what they call a proper education.
This reduction in services fuels speculation amongst families and community members at the homelands that it is an attempt by the government to force them away from their homelands and into larger centres. I can understand why they would think that. It is not helped by the fact there has been a poorly communicated process regarding the boarding facility currently under construction in Nhulunbuy. There is an expectation that families who want their children to receive secondary education will need to relocate to Nhulunbuy if they want more than basic literacy and numeracy.
This is a dilemma for the homelands and a shameful state of affairs for the government. It is not only Raymangirr and Donydji homelands. On a visit to Milingimbi several weeks ago – Milingimbi also services, like Gapuwiyak, two homeland communities, both island communities. One homeland school is Mooronga, located in the Crocodile Islands. I do not have my notes in front of me and cannot remember the name of the second homeland school serviced by Milingimbi. Similarly, those two homelands in the Crocodile Islands attached to Milingimbi School have also seen a halving of visiting teacher hours. Instead of a teacher going to those homelands weekly it has become fortnightly.
I have written to the Minister for Education formally on this and expect an answer in a few days. I also suspect there is a paper in his hot issues brief for Question Time for fear I might ask why these teaching hours have been reduced. It sends a terrible message to the bush and homeland communities regarding the government supporting them, especially in light of the minister’s – let us face it, it was a ministerial statement and a sneaky way of getting around protocol for statements which requires the government to deliver them to opposition members and Independents by 5 pm the night before. They do not like that so they cooked up a process to move a motion to deliver a ministerial statement. It circumvents the process of providing it to us in advance.
To hear the minister spruik the fact they are creating amazing results in education with fewer resources – nobody buys that, especially people in remote homeland communities who have had their resources reduced considerably.
Another interesting issue raised at Raymangirr was how they struggle to transport children from the neighbouring homeland of Burrum, which is about 30 minutes from Raymangirr. Previously a school troop carrier would be provided by the teacher from Gapuwiyak School, which would be used for school excursions where appropriate. It would also collect children from the neighbouring homeland of Burrum each day and take them back.
That happens in other communities, such as Gawa Christian School at the top of Elcho Island, which is under the NT Christian Schools Association and is not a government school. At Gawa every morning they drive to the neighbouring homeland about 20 minutes down the Gawa road and bring a troop carrier full of children back to school and return them at the end of the day.
Where ownership of vehicles is at a low level in remote communities because people do not have the finances to own one, or might use a communal vehicle, would it not make sense that where communities want children to go to school a level of support be made available by the government to facilitate attendance?
Community members asked if I could raise withdrawal of the school troopie with the minister as a matter of great concern. A senior man and ranger at Burrum has been transporting children to school each day at his expense and wear and tear on the vehicle. One thing we discussed to overcome this problem is that some of the $150 Back to School Payment for every child be pooled to enable fuel to be provided, and some money made available for maintenance of a senior community man’s vehicle.
They were bewildered because their teacher resource has been greatly reduced and they have lost access to a vehicle that was transporting children to school.
The AEU has taken up with the department CEO why these changes occurred. There is some thinking that global school budgets, which we know woefully under-resource so many schools, particularly where the cost of remote service delivery is high, are not adequate. Government puts it on a principal’s desk and says, ‘There you go. That’s your issue to sort out. If you don’t have money to service your homeland school, that’s your problem. You have responsibility for your budget and you can decide where you want to spend it.’ That is unforgiveable. The withdrawal of resources from homeland schools is unforgiveable.
These homelands are strong places of culture, law and language, and people genuinely want their children educated. We know funeral ceremonies interrupt community life and may take children away from school. However, so many families are aware that their djammarrkuli, their children, need to be at school. In the homelands I am talking about that is the case and people are concerned.
I am not the local member for those homeland communities. They sit in the seat of Arnhem, but unfortunately, for reasons that are unclear to me, they do not see their local member and have never seen her. Given their proximity to Nhulunbuy they invite me to their communities to talk to them because it is important they have their voices heard. How often have I heard that catchcry from the government?
I place this matter on the record and daresay the Education minister will respond to it. It was important for the people of Raymangirr I made this known.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Barnardos Mother of the Year is the largest and most recognised national award celebrating motherhood. For over 20 years Barnados have been at the forefront of child welfare service provision across Australia. Their approach is to find real and permanent solutions for children and families in need. That is something Barnados in Australia wants for all children, particularly those who at risk or have been ill-treated.
To celebrate the outstanding achievements of special mothers doing exceptional work each year, Barnados hosts the Mother of the Year awards across the nation. The award is important as it allows us as a community to acknowledge the enormous contribution that mothers make in shaping Australia’s future, and also to hear the stories of some outstanding individuals and their special achievements.
Many mums, including those nominated for this year’s award, go above and beyond the call of duty when caring for their children. Their actions and the examples they set are an inspiration to us all. Not to be forgotten are the people who take the time to nominate these exceptional women. Without them we would not have the opportunity to hear their stories and celebrate the impact these women have had on their families.
In previous years we have had the pleasure of hearing speakers talk about these awards with particular focus on the winner. However, this year I would also like to talk about nominees, as these women are all extraordinary and their stories are incredibly diverse.
In this, the award’s 21st year, the Northern Territory is represented by three amazing finalists: Helen Fejo-Frith, Kelly McNamara and Virginia Rabeling. Please allow me to tell you a little more about these women.
Helen Fejo-Frith was nominated by her adopted daughter, Kieren Sanderson. Seventy-year-old Helen is the much loved and respected mother of eight children, and has 37 grandchildren and 26 great-grandchildren. I have no doubt she is very proud of her granddaughter, Melissa, who has just graduated as a Doctor of Medicine, the first doctor in the family. Helen is also a very proud Aboriginal woman and a great role model.
Assuming the role of guardian and caretaker, she walks around Bagot community at night making sure that the kids are inside and safe with their families. Her daughter Kieren said:
Our second finalist, Kelly McNamara, was nominated by her friend Vanessa Burton. Kelly, aged 30, is a young mother of two girls, Vivienne, aged three, and Lilia, aged 15 months. Vivienne has severe disabilities which require round the clock care and frequent hospitalisation. Kelly refused to accept the medical prognosis that her daughter would be incapable of any movement or speech. Kelly’s devotion to her daughter, Vivienne, included visiting international experts and employing every available therapy to assist with Vivienne’s development. Today Vivienne can move her arms, head and legs. To her mother’s delight, she has also spoken her first word.
Outside her dedicated duties as a mum, Kelly also raises money for children in the Northern Territory via her Yellow Balloon Foundation yoga group.
Last, but by no means least, our third finalist is Virginia Rabeling. A single mum of six children ranging in ages from nine to 23, Virginia, aged 49, supported her family through the hardest of times, moving schools and even homes where it was required to keep them safe. She was nominated by her child, Harmoni, aged 17, who is currently transitioning to a boy named Benji. Benji wants the world to know how important his mother’s unconditional love and support throughout his complex journey has been. Benji said:
I congratulate and pay tribute to each of the finalists. Collectively they display enormous dedication and fortitude to their children, families and the greater community.
As Minister for Children and Families I am honoured to advise the parliament that the Barnardos 2016 NT Mother of the Year, announced in April, is Kelly McNamara. Next month Kelly will join 24 other finalists from around Australia in Sydney to represent the NT at the national awards. The winner will be announced on 5 May 2016.
I recognise the efforts of all mothers who work so very hard every day. It is a relentless job that is often not acknowledged. I am a firm believer that strong families underpin a strong society and, therefore, the devotion of mothers everywhere is fundamental to our mutual success as global citizens.
I also acknowledge Ms Anne Weir in her retirement. At close of business on 18 April 2016 Ms Anne Weir retired from the Royal Darwin Hospital Top End Health Service after more than 33 years of service. Ms Weir commenced her employment as a nurse with the RDH in 1982, and has worked across the Top End Health Service in a diversity of nursing and midwifery roles.
Ms Weir’s passion has been in primary health and child health working with children and families in health prevention, promotion and development in urban and remote primary health. Ms Weir’s career highlights include her involvement in running the East Timor refugee crisis response in 1999, and the RDH Bali bombing response in 2002.
In 2010 Ms Weir chose to take part in the AUSMAT team and was sent to Pakistan in response to devastating floods. She received a Humanitarian Overseas Service Medal for her contribution.
Since 2012 Ms Weir has been working as a senior ear, nose and throat nurse at RDH, focusing on the care of head and neck cancer patients, and Aboriginal patients with hearing loss and ear disease.
Anne is known for going above and beyond the call of duty for her patients, who in turn respond incredibly to her, and for her loyalty and protectiveness towards her colleagues. She will be greatly missed.
I commend and congratulate Anne for her dedicated and outstanding services over 33 years. I am sure the people of the Northern Territory, whilst grateful for her service, will miss her presence in our hospital system.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I add my congratulations to Anne, and to Kelly as NT Barnardos Mother of the Year. What an achievement.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of two Year 5/6 classes from Millner Primary School, accompanied by Sheree Arratta. Welcome to Parliament House, and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
MOTION
Take Two Bills Together
Take Two Bills Together
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the Guardianship of Adults Bill (Serial 160) and the Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill (Serial 161) be considered together for the purposes of the second and third reading debates but separately for any required consideration in detail.
Cognate bills of this nature are not a surprise to the House. In the past this has been done as a matter of mechanics, but I can assure honourable members that the relationship between the two bills is so intimate and intertwined that to deal with them separately would be less efficient and less sensible than dealing with them together. That will become clear during the second reading speech, hopefully in a few minutes’ time.
Motion agreed to.
GUARDIANSHIP OF ADULTS BILL
(Serial 160)
and
ADVANCE PERSONAL PLANNING AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 161)
(Serial 160)
and
ADVANCE PERSONAL PLANNING AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 161)
Bills presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 establishes a contemporary framework for adult guardianship in the Northern Territory and replaces the Adult Guardianship Act 1988. The Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill 2016 makes complementary amendments to the Advance Personal Planning Act to ensure that the adult decision-making and adult guardianship frameworks are aligned.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 provides a new guardianship model that includes comprehensive guardianship principles, creates an independent office of the Public Guardian, allows for guardianship orders to be made for a person from the age of 17 years of age, and transfers jurisdiction of all adult guardianship matters from the Local Court to the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal, hereinafter called the tribunal.
The Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill 2016 amends the Advance Personal Planning Act to transfer jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal, and repeals the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill and the Advance Personal Planning Act both provide for the making of decisions after a person has lost decision-making capacity. The Guardianship of Adults Bill has been drafted to complement the Advance Personal Planning Act, and has resulted in some consequential amendments. These amendments are provided in the Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill and are today being introduced cognate with the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
First I will discuss in detail the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, which retains the primary purpose of ensuring that there is a legal mechanism for decisions to be made on behalf of adults whose capacity to make decisions for themselves is impaired.
Impaired decision-making capacity can affect an individual at any point in their life. It may be due to a pre-existing disability, an accident, illness or an age-related condition. This provides confidence to Territorians who may have impaired decision-making capacity now or into the future that their fundamental rights to continue to participate in everyday life and their own decision-making processes will be protected through the provisions of the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
I note that it is also possible for a person to gain and lose capacity on several occasions during the passage of their life.
The guardianship reform in the Northern Territory is long overdue and welcomed by all stakeholders in the community. The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 has been informed by guardianship review recommendations, notably the WestWood Spice review undertaken in 2005. The recommendations of the review were for significant and wide-ranging reform and required the drafting of new legislation to bring the Northern Territory more closely into line with the national approach and contemporary best practice.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill being introduced today achieves these recommendations and also incorporates feedback from past and more recent consultations. Consultation on the draft Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 occurred in February this year. Community briefings were held in Darwin, Katherine, Gove, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. A further 23 briefings were held with key stakeholders including medical professionals, legal professionals and peak bodies. The response from stakeholders and the community was overwhelmingly supportive of the proposed reforms.
The availability of detailed information explaining the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, combined with the multiple avenues to provide feedback, allowed for a broad cross-section of the community and gave key stakeholders the opportunity to be engaged in the reform process and in the finalisation of this legislation. Personal experiences and suggestions for improvement were shared by guardians and professionals, which will assist in the future development of required policies and procedures upon the commencement of the legislation.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 seeks to recognise the overall wellbeing, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with impaired decision-making capacity and align with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
It is a contemporary piece of legislation drafted to maximise the participation of adults with impaired decision-making capacity in decisions affecting them, and also in everyday life, and to provide guardians with more guidance and certainty about their role.
The current act is underpinned by the concept of adult guardianship being for adults under an intellectual disability. The bill has broadened the user group for guardianship legislation to be any adult with an impaired decision-making capacity, which has been clearly defined.
The bill also defines that an adult does not have impaired decision-making capacity only because the adult has a disability, illness or other medical condition, engages in unconventional behaviour or chooses a living environment or lifestyle with which other people do not agree. Additionally, an adult’s decision-making capacity may be impaired even if the impairment is episodic, or the impairment is subject and time specific.
Importantly, the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 states that a person is presumed to have a decision-making capacity until the contrary is shown and the cause of any impairment is immaterial.
This legislation has been drafted to ensure guardianship orders are only made for matters in which an adult with impaired decision-making capacity needs assistance for some or all personal financial matters and is in need of a guardian for some or all of those matters.
Before making a guardianship order it must be considered whether the adult’s needs could be adequately provided for in a way that is less restrictive of the adult’s freedoms of decision and action rather than appointed a guardian.
The bill includes a new provision to allow the tribunal to make an order in which a guardian or other specified person is authorised to take specific measures or actions to ensure a represented adult complies with a guardian’s decision. For example, this will allow for a represented person to be removed from a setting where they may be subject to abuse, exploitation or neglect but refuse to be removed.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 includes comprehensive guardianship principles to guide any person and the tribunal in the exercise of their authority, and to ensure consistency and accountability in undertaking the important role of guardian. The guardianship principles include acting in the adult’s best interests, taking into account the adult’s wishes and views as far as practicable, and taking into account a number of relevant considerations defined in the bill. Relevant considerations include the views and wishes of the adult and any interested persons for the adult.
The decision-maker’s authority must be exercised in a way that is least restrictive of the adult’s freedom of decision and action as is practicable.
The guardianship principles aim to ensure maximum participation in decision-making and everyday life by adults with impaired decision-making capacity. They apply to any person exercising authority under the bill, including any member of the tribunal, the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 creates an independent statutory officer as the Public Guardian which gives rise to the creation of the independent office of the Public Guardian. This is an essential element of the new legislation, and aligns the Northern Territory with guardianship models used in other jurisdictions and, frankly, relieves me of the duty of being the Public Guardian.
The creation of the independent Public Guardian will remove the current conflict of interest whereby the Minister for Health is responsible for the overall guardianship, health and disability policy directions and, as the Public Guardian, is also required to make decisions in the best interest of individual clients.
The independence of the Public Guardian is prescribed by the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016. Importantly, however, if the Public Guardian is a guardian for an adult this officer is subject to the supervision and direction of the tribunal to the same extent as any other guardian.
Staff of the independent office will perform the functions of the Public Guardian, which are much broader under this bill. Specific functions of the Public Guardian include but are not limited to:
act as a guardian for an adult when appointed by the tribunal
promote access to services for adults with impaired decision-making capacity, their guardians and families
advocate for adults with impaired decision-making capacity by promoting understanding and awareness of relevant issues
provide support and advice to guardians and persons making or proposing to apply for a guardianship order; they undertake research
provide and encourage the provision of education about the relevant issues.
The term ‘relevant issues’ is defined by the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 and means any issue relating to adults with impaired decision-making capacity. This may include the rights and interests of this group, supported services or the law relating to adults with impaired decision-making capacity and the role of guardians, the Public Guardian or the Public Trustee.
The advocacy and guardian support functions of the Public Guardian are not possible under the current model of guardianship in the Northern Territory. They are included in the bill so that individuals choosing to fulfil the important role of the guardian may feel confident and supported in the role.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 gives the Public Guardian a general power to do all things necessary to be done for the performance of the public guardian’s functions. Specific powers of the Public Guardian include an information-gathering power which enables the Public Guardian to require a document or information to be given to the Public Guardian or an information holder to answer questions asked by the Public Guardian, and the power to request an adult to obtain a health assessment report and provide it to the Public Guardian.
Including these specific powers in the legislation leaves no doubt as to the Public Guardian’s authority, and also assures other parties that they are not in breach of any legal or professional duties by honouring the Public Guardian’s requests.
The Public Guardian will be appointed by the Administrator on the recommendation of the minister. This recommendation will be made on the basis that the person has qualifications or experience relating to the Public Guardian’s functions, and is committed to advancing the interests of persons with impaired decision-making capacity and promoting the guardianship principles.
To ensure accountability and transparency the Public Guardian must prepare an annual report detailing the performance of the Public Guardian’s functions during the previous financial year. The report must be given to the Minister for Health by 31 October each year.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 also deals with other essential administrative matters relating to the position of the Public Guardian, including the term and conditions of appointment and delegation of the Public Guardian’s functions and powers.
All adult guardianship matters’ transfer of jurisdiction to the tribunal will allow guardianship proceedings to be determined more quickly and straightforwardly than through the court system. It is anticipated that this approach will reduce delays in hearing and determining guardianship applications. Many procedural matters related to guardianship will be determined be the provisions already in the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act.
The tribunal has a flexible approach to determining applications. The tribunal may determine its own procedures subject to the provisions of the bill and may inform itself in any way it considers appropriated. The use of a tribunal for guardianship matters is consistent with other states and territories.
The current act creates a nexus between personal and financial matters which prevents orders being made for only financial matters. This is not appropriate as decision-making impairment may be decision specific, and while the adult may need a guardian with authority for financial matters they may not need a guardian for personal matters. This nexus is broken by the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016.
The provisions of the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 accommodate different levels of decision-making capacity and the tribunal has increased flexibility to make individualised guardianship orders. The terms of any guardianship order will specify the personal or financial matters, or both matters, for which the guardian has authority.
Under the current act a guardian with authority for healthcare cannot provide consent for major medical procedures, which include procedures relating to contraception and procedures requiring general anaesthetic. These procedures require an application to the Local Court for a consent decision, which can result in treatment delays.
Healthcare has been widely defined in the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 and, subject to the specific terms of the guardianship order, guardians will have greater authority for healthcare matters and be able to consent to a broader spectrum of healthcare actions. The authority of guardians for healthcare actions will also be subject to the relevant provisions of the Advance Personal Planning Act.
Importantly, restrictions will apply to guardians providing consent for healthcare action that is defined as restricted healthcare under the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016. This includes sterilisation of the represented adult, termination of a pregnancy of an adult, removal from the adult of non-regenerative tissue for transplantation to another person and healthcare provided for medical research purposes. Consent for these matters is governed by Part 4 of the Advance Personal Planning Act.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 includes a new provision to allow the tribunal to make a guardianship order for a young person who has attained the age of 17 years, with the order coming into effect when the person turns 18. The tribunal must be satisfied that it is reasonably likely that when the young person turns 18, the person will have impaired decision-making capacity. This provision overcomes any gap in decision-making authority for persons turning 18 and thereby ensures a smooth transition of decision-making authority from childhood to adulthood.
Guardianship orders are not presumed to be permanent or ongoing, and all orders under the new Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 must specify a reassessment date. The term ‘reassessment’ replaces the term ‘review’ which is used in the current act. Reassessments are an important inclusion in the Guardianship of Adults Bill as an impaired decision-making capacity may be temporary, episodic or limited only to certain matters. A reassessment allows the tribunal to consider all of the circumstances relevant to the represented adult and decide if there should be any variations of the guardianship order or if the order should be revoked.
A new provision in the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 allows the tribunal to make an interim guardianship order pending the determination of the application. The tribunal must reasonably believe the adult has impaired decision-making capacity and is in urgent need of a guardian for some or all personal financial matters. An interim order remains in force until it is revoked, it expires or the tribunal decides the application for a guardianship order. In any event the interim order expires 90 days after the order is made.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 introduces registration of interstate guardianship orders by the tribunal. This is legislation that will align the Northern Territory with other jurisdictions and minimise the administrative processes for people affected by adult guardianship legislation who may move between jurisdictions.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 creates specific offences in relation to a guardian’s conduct and the use of information under the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, and confirms the penalty attached to each offence. The inclusion of offences recognises the need for guardians to act in the best interests of the adult to whom the guardianship order relates and in accordance with the provisions of the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
There will continue to be interaction between the new guardianship legislation and the Advance Personal Planning Act. These two items of legislation complement each other so that even if a person is found to have impaired decision-making capacity, any decision they made or directions they gave prior to their impairment will be appropriately recognised.
The Guardianship of Adults Bill provides that if an adult has an advance personal plan and an application is made for a guardianship order, the tribunal must take the existence and terms of the plan, including any appointment of a decision-maker, into account when deciding whether the person needs a guardian and, if so, who to appoint as a guardian and the terms of the guardianship order.
The tribunal cannot make a guardianship order that gives a guardian authority for a matter for which a decision-maker already has authority under the Advance Personal Planning Act, unless specific conditions exist which are defined by the legislation.
To ensure that relevant provisions of the Advance Personal Planning Act are consistent with provisions in the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016, there will be some consequential amendments to the Advance Personal Planning Act with the commencement of the Guardianship of Adults Bill in 2016. A specific consequential amendment to the Advance Personal Planning Act is the insertion of proposed section 39A into the act. This provision provides that if a healthcare provider proposes to provide healthcare for an adult and there is a guardian with decision-making authority for healthcare matters, then this is prima facie evidence for the purposes of Part 4 of the Advance Personal Planning Act that the person has impaired decision-making capacity and may be relied upon by the healthcare provider.
The Advance Personal Planning Act commenced on 1 March 2014 to provide Territorians with modern legislation for the making of advance consent decisions, advance care statements and the appointment of decision-makers. Part 5 of the Advance Personal Planning Act gives the Local Court jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising in relation to the act.
As mentioned earlier, the Guardianship of Adults Bill transfers jurisdiction of all adult guardianship matters from the Local Court to the tribunal. The Advance Personal Planning Amendment Bill amends the Advance Personal Planning Act to transfer jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal. The simultaneous transfer of jurisdiction to the tribunal is necessary to ensure that decisions in relation to health consent matters and responsibilities of decision-makers appointed under both the Advance Personal Planning Act and the Guardianship of Adults Bill 2016 are dealt with by the same body. For example, under the Advance Personal Planning Act an adult may, in an advance personal plan, jointly appoint decision-makers which could include both the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee. Decision-makers may also be appointed in relation to care or welfare and/or property or financial matters.
If there is a disagreement between decision-makers in the making of a decision, an application may be made to the tribunal as the body to hear and determine all those matters together. Matters coming before the tribunal under the Advance Personal Planning Act are new decisions; therefore the jurisdiction given to the tribunal to deal with matters comes within the tribunal’s original jurisdiction. Accordingly, section 56 of the Advance Personal Planning Act has been amended to give the tribunal jurisdiction and specifies that it falls within their original jurisdiction functions.
Currently the Advance Personal Planning Act relies on procedure of the Local Court, except for some specific requirements set out in Division 2 of Part 4 which relate to parties to proceedings, closed proceedings and the reporting of proceedings. Similarly, when jurisdiction is transferred to the tribunal the procedure of the tribunal will also be relied upon. However, there will be no requirement for the tribunal to give reasons for decisions as the majority of decisions and orders sought will be straightforward. However, if a person would like to obtain reasons they can apply for them within 28 days after the hearing of a proceeding of application. The same provision has been included in the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
I now turn to the the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act, which has become redundant because of the Guardianship of Adults Bill. The Guardianship of Adults Bill provides for the power to appoint guardians with powers to deal with a represented adult’s financial affairs. This includes appointing the Public Trustee as the sole guardian if decision-making is limited to financial matters. The majority of other provisions in the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act are also out of date or no longer used by the Office of the Public Trustee. Any provisions still used have been transferred to the Guardianship of Adults Bill. For example, section 23 of the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act, which deems a guardianship order dealing with financial matters to be an instrument under the Land Title Act, has been transferred to proposed section 35A of the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
Transitional provisions are also provided to protect any existing protection orders made under the Aged and Infirm Persons’ Property Act when the Guardianship of Adults Bill commences. On commencement existing protection orders are taken to become a guardianship order, existing protected persons are taken to be a represented guardian, and an existing manager a guardian under the Guardianship of Adults Bill.
Madam Speaker, after that long explanation, I commend these bills to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statements.
Debate adjourned.
JUSTICE AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (RECORDS OF DEPOSITIONS AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL
(Serial 159)
(Serial 159)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The main purpose of this bill is to repeal the Records of Depositions Act in relation to how court records are kept.
Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act 2015, which comes into operation on 1 May 2016 – hallelujah! – will regulate the administration of court records in the Northern Territory’s lower courts. This bill is part of the government’s commitment to rationalising and modernising the courts and court procedures of the Northern Territory.
The Records of Depositions Act commenced operation in 1970. Prior to the introduction of this act the evidence of witnesses in a court was largely taken down in writing. This was done on a typewriter or written by shorthand as witnesses’ evidence was given. Introduction of the Records of Depositions Act in 1970 was aimed at keeping up with technological developments of that time by making provision for the sound recording of evidence in the Magistrates Court. Where a courtroom was not yet equipped with what was then termed ‘sound and recording apparatus’, the Records of Depositions Act continued to make provision for evidence to be recorded in writing.
Technology has come a long way since 1970. ‘Depositions’ is not a word in common usage anymore. The recording of evidence is no longer done by means of sound recording on tape, but is digitally audio recorded. It has been a very long time indeed since anyone has had cause to use shorthand in a courtroom for the purposes of preparing the official court transcript.
The government’s consultation on the Records of Depositions Act formed part of a Territory-wide community consultation on the draft Local Court Bill in 2014. My department released a report on this consultation on 22 September 2014, and the report confirms that the Records of Depositions Act is overly prescriptive and will cease to be of practical relevance with the implementation of the new Local Court Act 2015 and its subordinate legislation.
Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act, which deals with the administration of court records, will cover the majority of the substantive provisions under the Records of Depositions Act. In recognition of this the bill repeals the Records of Depositions Act and makes provisions for the remaining aspects of the act which are still relevant today and are not already included in the Local Court Act.
I now outline the repeals and amendments.
Sections 1 and 2 of the Records of Depositions Act are formal clauses describing the short title and commencement of the act. Section 3 contains definitions, and section 4 describes the application of the act. These sections will no longer be necessary and can be repealed.
Sections 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17 and 20 are substantive provisions which will be covered by Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act. Sections 7, 18 and 19 of the Records of Depositions Act are no longer applicable in light of the current technology.
Sections 11 and 16 of the Records of Depositions Act deal with the evidentiary status and certification elements of court records, which are covered by sections 178(5) and 157 of the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act.
Amendments to the Local Court Act 2015 are required to make provision for sections 12, 14 and 15 of the Records of Depositions Act, which deal with the mandatory transcription of evidence in certain cases. These sections are not currently covered by the Local Court Act or any other legislation.
Under these provisions the court must always provide a transcription where a person lodges an appeal to the Supreme Court, is committed for trial or sentence for an indictable offence, or where the court reserves a question of law for the consideration of the Supreme Court. The bill amends the Local Court Act to require the principal registrar to arrange for the transcription in these cases.
The Records of Depositions Act also covers the administration of court records for the Coroner, the Youth Justice Court and the Work Health Court. These courts do not form part of the Local Court reforms under the Local Court Act. However, the proper administration of records is equally important to these courts. For this reason the bill makes consequential amendments to the Coroners Act, Youth Justice Act and the Work Health Administration Act so that these courts will have the same requirements in relation to the administration of records as the Local Court. The consequential amendments provide that Part 4, Division 2 of the Local Court Act 2015 will also apply to the Coroner, the Youth Justice Court and the Work Health Court.
This reform is important to the harmonisation of the lower courts of the Northern Territory and indicative of this government’s commitment to the orderly administration of justice, something I have taken very seriously as the Attorney-General over the last four years. People who have paid attention have noted the substantial reform to our court system, not necessarily politically sexy but it establishes a court system that is ready to embrace the growth of the Northern Territory over the next 50 years.
I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
MENZIES SCHOOL OF HEALTH RESEARCH AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 163)
(Serial 163)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to amend the existing legislation to reframe the composition of the board of Menzies School of Health Research. The new board will be an independent, influential and skills-based board with a governance framework which is consistent with other high-level medical research institutes within Australia to foster growth and development of northern Australia in health research, education and capacity development.
The main amendments to this bill seek to strengthen the current board structure and expand the skills and expertise of the board of the Menzies School of Health Research. The expansion of the skills and expertise of board members will significantly increase the board’s capacity to enhance commercial opportunities across the Northern Territory, Australia and the Asia-Pacific region. It will also address performance, risk management, marketing, and philanthropic and global engagement to further its objectives through sustainable health and equity improvements.
Section 11 of the act has been amended and reframed to reflect the current best practice and board structure whereby community and business sector representatives will act swiftly in the best interest of the organisation in response to change.
I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
FISHERIES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 162)
(Serial 162)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HIGGINS (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
I am pleased to present the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 to honourable members. It is no secret that fishing is of great importance to the Northern Territory, be it commercial fishing that allows people to buy high-quality local fish, prawns and crabs, or Territorians and visitors wanting to catch a fresh feed for their family.
Fishing is and will remain an integral part of the lifestyle for many Territorians, whether traditionally spearing a fish or mud crab along our nearly 11 000 km of coastline, fishing one of our iconic rivers or travelling offshore for a spot of reef fishing. Let us also not forget the economic boost the Territory gets each year from thousands of recreational anglers who visit to enjoy the thrill of our world-class sports fishing. Some might say there are now even more than a million good reasons as to why they will keep coming.
To ensure the Territory’s aquatic resources are both sustainable and optimally utilised, there is a need to make certain that the underpinning regulatory framework for our fisheries remains contemporary and effective. There is also a need to be mindful of those operating in the industry and, where possible, remove or reduce unnecessary red tape. This bill seeks to achieve these outcomes by making some long-needed amendments to the current Fisheries Act, which was enacted in 1988, some 28 years ago.
As part of this government’s wider reform agenda, relevant agencies were tasked with undertaking audits of industry-based legislation to ensure it remains contemporary, promotes best practice and is workable. I am pleased to say that the results of this important work are before us today in highly anticipated amendments to the Fisheries Act. The amending bill builds on a strong platform provided by the current act and, if passed by this House, will deliver an improved management framework for the future of our fisheries and aquatic resources.
With respect to the broader management of our fisheries, I am pleased to say that this government, via the Fisheries Resource Sharing Framework which was released last year, is the first in the Territory’s history to articulate a fair and transparent policy around the sharing of our valuable aquatic resource. This principle is to be enshrined in an amended section 2A of the act, which sets out the objectives to be followed. The updated objectives will now capture:
maintaining a stewardship of aquatic resources that promotes fairness, equity and access to aquatic resources by all stakeholder groups, including:
- o Indigenous people
o the commercial fishing, aquaculture and fishing tourism industries
o amateur fishers
o others with an interest in the aquatic resources of the Territory, and
Our fisheries legislation sets out a number of principles that need to be weighed up when making decisions under the legislation. This includes the requirement to explicitly allocate access to fish and aquatic resources between stakeholders and to provide for optimal utilisation and equitable distribution of these resources.
Optimal use of our aquatic resources is very important for continued economic growth and development of the Territory and value adding of existing resources is to be encouraged under this legislation.
In general terms, this is an important bill for the Assembly to consider as it:
fulfils commitments made under the settlement agreements for access to waters affected by the Blue Mud Bay decision
provides essential biosecurity powers to deal with the increased risks of pest and disease incursions
removes red tape and administrative burden to increase business flexibility and facilitate industry development
provides for more efficient and effective compliance through the use of electronic vessel monitoring systems, the use of fishery infringement notices for minor offences, and more contemporary penalties that are commensurate with the offence
reduces the cost of fisheries compliance through the use of modern technology
ensures fisheries legislation is consistent with Northern Territory Criminal Code and privacy legislation and other Australian fisheries legislation.
I now concentrate on the key amendments with respect to each of these matters.
Meeting Blue Mud Bay commitments – the amending bill fulfils the government’s legal obligation to deliver on the Blue Mud Bay commitments, specifically:
the ability to issue fisheries enforcement powers to Aboriginal marine rangers commensurate with their skills, knowledge and experience
the power to deal with recidivist offenders by suspending or revoking fishing entitlements for offences committed under the act or other relevant legislation, for example, fishing in a sacred site
Recidivist offenders and the application of a ‘fit and proper’ test for people in charge of fishing operations has been dealt with by the creation of a new fishing activity authorisation, an ‘approved operator’ under new section 17A of the act.
Under section 17A every person in charge of fishing operations will first have to apply to the Director of Fisheries for approved operator status. Applicants will need to pass a national criminal check and not have been convicted of serious fishing offences, or offences under other relevant acts, in the previous five years. Successful applicants will be issued with an approved operator card which can be valid for up to five years. Approved operator status can be revoked by the Director of Fisheries if he/she considers that the person is no longer a fit and proper person, for example, subsequently convicted of an offence.
Under section 17E of the amended act a commercial fishing licensee must appoint an approved operator to undertake fishing operations.
A list of approved operators will be published by the director and licensees can appoint anyone from this list without further approval from the director. This will reduce red tape and make it easier for licence owners to appoint someone to operate their licence. The existing licensing framework is administratively onerous and cumbersome on licence owners and the department. Under the current act, each time a licence owner employs a person to work a licence on their behalf the Director of Fisheries is required to approve this action. This amended approach will provide industry with improved certainty and clarity while ensuring the enabling legislation is in place to fulfil the commitments made under the Blue Mud Bay agreements to deter repeat offending.
The fit and proper person policy will be developed in the form of ministerial guidelines, in consultation with key stakeholders once the act is amended. These ministerial guidelines will provide industry with clarity over the requirements for a person to be in charge of fishing operations.
Increased protection of the Territory’s environment through essential biosecurity powers – aquatic noxious species pose significant risk to the continued ecologically sustainable development of the Territory’s aquatic resources. These species may be plants or animals which have been transported from one location to another, for example, state or country, either accidently or deliberately, and released into local waterways.
In their natural environment these species have evolved with the diseases, predators and controls that act to restrict their growth and maintain the natural balance of the ecosystem. When introduced to a new area noxious species are no longer restricted by the natural controls of their native environment and may consequently overrun their new habitat.
Introduced noxious species can have adverse economic impacts on aquaculture, commercial and recreational fisheries, port industries, tourism and marine infrastructure. As such, aquatic pests and noxious species present a significant risk to the future economic viability of these important industries and assets.
This bill provides new powers to deal with the illegal introduction, sale, purchase and possession of noxious species. The sought amendments contained in clauses 11, 15 and 33C of the bill will provide the necessary powers to further detect, deter and respond to threats to the aquatic environment from noxious fish and aquatic life or from diseased or contaminated fish.
The amendments also include penalties of up to 500 penalty units or two years’ imprisonment for intentionally bringing in, or causing to bring in, and/or releasing pests or disease.
Other measures in the bill will allow for the provision of appropriate powers of entry, inspection and detainment for fisheries officers, and the ability for the Director of Fisheries to issue instructions or orders to respond to biosecurity threats. Commensurate with this, the penalties for aquatic biosecurity offences have been increased to reflect the seriousness of the offence.
Clear, simple licensing framework – the nature of fisheries management in Australia has progressed significantly in the last 20 years. Fisheries management has become more complex to cover the management of entire ecosystems and cumulative impacts as well as catering to the need for increased operational flexibility and security for licensees.
Amendments in the presented bill will remove the unnecessary complexity and ambiguity in the current licensing framework. Under revised section 15 of the act, industry will be provided with greater certainty by increasing licence tenure to 10 years from the current five. There will also be increased clarity around responsibility of licence holders and more flexibility for their business operations.
A number of proposed amendments under an updated Division 2, licences and permits, will allow for a more efficient licensing framework as well as removing unnecessary red tape. These changes will better support the use of contemporary fisheries management techniques, such as resource allocation between sectors and quota management.
Amendments for contemporary management – the current act sets out a comprehensive process for developing and approving fishery management plans while ensuring involvement from all key stakeholders in the preparation of these plans. A key feature of fishery management plans is the requirement to include provisions relating to the allocation of access to aquatic resources and mechanisms for adjusting that access between sectors into the future.
Changes put forward in the new bill will ensure that our fisheries legislation is more consistent with Commonwealth and other state fisheries legislation. This will allow for improved collaborative management of shared fish stocks across northern Australia under the Offshore Constitutional Settlement. Further, it will also protect the privacy of licensees in a manner consistent with the Privacy Act.
A number of sought amendments in the bill will allow for the use of modern technology to deliver more efficient remote monitoring of fishing activities. For example, under a revised section 14 of the act, the director will have the explicit power to require licensees or permit holders to install a vessel monitoring system, or VMS.
Experience elsewhere shows that the use of electronic monitoring devices aboard fishing vessels, and tenders, is an effective tool to deter illegal fishing in waters where fishing is prohibited or restricted by hours of operation. Adopting vessel monitoring systems will lessen the need for fisheries officers to be on the water to check the location of vessels, thus reducing compliance costs.
Responsibilities of licence owner – as mentioned earlier, it is common practice in the Territory’s fishing industry for licensees to engage in leasing arrangements with another person to operate their licence. Upon entering such an agreement the current act deems that the engaged person becomes the holder of the licence or permit for all purposes of the act, except renewing or transferring the licence.
These current deeming provisions exempt the owner of the licence from the responsibility of ensuring that fishing is done so lawfully. Consequently, there is little or no recourse on the licence owner for illegal fishing by a person they have engaged to fish on their behalf.
Clause 17J of the amending bill addresses the situation by requiring the owner of a licence or permit to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure that activities carried out under his or her licence or permit are conducted in a manner which is lawful.
At industry’s request ministerial guidelines will be developed as to what constitutes ‘reasonable and practical’ measures, in consultation with key stakeholders, once the act is amended.
Offences and penalties – this bill has been reviewed by the Solicitor for the Northern Territory to ensure all penalties are commensurate with the nature of the offence. As a consequence, some penalties for breaches of the fisheries legislation have increased.
Over the last 28 years there have been increases in the value of our major fish species. In turn, this increases the incentive of some to try to operate illegally. This bill assists to address the previous imbalance between the level of penalties and the potential impact of illegal activities, both in terms of damage to the fish stock, but also impact on the economic potential of the industry.
To reflect the seriousness of illegal fisheries activity most of the offences in the bill are summary offences and have a maximum penalty of between 100 and 200 penalty units and/or two years imprisonment. The new penalties are considered adequate to deter repeat offending. Penalties in the bill before us are consistent with Part IIAA of the Northern Territory’s Criminal Code Act.
Compliance tools for minor offences – sought amendments in the bill under proposed section 46 allow for increased use of fishery infringement notices for minor offences. Limitations in the current act result in some minor fisheries offences being dealt with by the courts rather than via the issuing of an infringement notice. This outcome is time consuming and costly to the offender, the court, government and the Northern Territory community as a whole.
The sought changes contained in the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 have been developed over a 10-year period of proactive consultation with industry groups, representative Aboriginal organisations and those in the wider community. In this regard, I thank the peak stakeholder groups, which include the Northern Territory Seafood Council, the Northern Territory Guided Fishing Industry Association, the Aboriginal land councils, the Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee and the Amateur Fishermen’s Association of the Northern Territory for their ongoing commitment, support and input to this process.
I also commend staff in the department, as well as those from the Solicitor for the Northern Territory’s Legal Policy Unit and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel for their concerted efforts in the development and finalisation of the bill.
If passed, the significant changes contained in this bill will enhance the management and sustainable development of the Northern Territory’s aquatic resources for the benefit of all Territorians now and into the future.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Building a First-Class Education System
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Madam Speaker, I move that through the government’s reform agenda we have laid the foundations for a first-class education system that meets the Northern Territory’s growing needs.
Today it gives me great pleasure to update the House on the progress of major reforms to shape and build a first-class education system in the Northern Territory. As we all know, accessing quality education is the key to ensuring Territorians can actively and positively participate in our community. It improves the social and economic circumstances of people, and plays a key role in building a strong society with a robust economy and prosperous outlook, which is a fundamental part of the Country Liberal government’s Framing the Future strategy.
Education is at the heart of advancing the development of northern Australia and securing the Northern Territory social and economic future. My department has been implementing an extensive reform agenda and has consulted broadly across the community. We have considered the research, listened to principals and the teaching profession and looked at what the best countries around the world are doing. This has provided us with a deeper understanding of the opportunities and challenges facing education in the Northern Territory and helped identify what is needed to improve student outcomes.
This government knows that significant improvement is required, particularly for Indigenous students. To achieve the change needed we have set ourselves an ambitious reform agenda for government education in the Northern Territory. We have reformed the Education Act, increased school autonomy, invested in schools, developed a long-term plan for Indigenous education and established productive partnerships into Asia.
I take this opportunity to clear up the debate about funding for Territory schools. Although the Northern Territory did not sign up to the Gonski funding offer, the amount of Students First funding provided by the federal Coalition government to the Northern Territory for 2014-17 matches the amount offered under the Gonski agreement. The Northern Territory will receive $505.9m Students First funding for 2014-17. This includes $272m more for Northern Territory government schools than under any previous funding arrangement.
At this stage we are in negotiations with the federal government. Territorians need to be assured the agreement with the former minister, Christopher Pyne, was a four-year funding agreement and we received every cent we would have if we had signed up to Gonski, but with no strings attached. That money covers us through 2016 and 2017.
The funding agreement currently being speculated is for 2018 and beyond. We are in high level discussions with the federal government about this and will continue to advocate for what is best for Territorians. The federal Senate inquiry asked if reductions were made in the Territory what the impact would be. I am confident we can get through this and make sure the Territory gets the best from funding agreements with the federal government.
The federal government should have absolute faith in the Northern Territory government, particularly regarding education. The department is different and has a different system to what we inherited three-and-a-half years ago. It is a mean, lean, fighting machine and we are kicking goals. The results continue to improve and we have better attendance than ever. Our results are the best they have ever been.
More kids are sitting for their NTCET than ever before. The system has had a major reform, the act has changed and we have had Indigenous education reviews. We have done the hard work and now we need the resources to fertilise it. So much work has been done by teachers, our school leaders and the department. All stakeholders should be congratulated for dealing with what some people described as a decade’s worth of reform undertaken in three-and-a-half years. I have every confidence that the system is now so robust all we need is to fertilise it to take education to the next level.
In today’s Northern Territory News Letters to the Editor Simon Birmingham, the current federal Minister for Education and Training, said:
- The Turnbull government’s funding to schools is going to continue to increase from its current record levels, despite the scare campaign being peddled by Labor and the unions …
Our funding commitment to NT schools is set to increase by $96.1m or 47.6% from 2014-15 to 2018-19 and will keep growing thereafter.
…
The fear being spread by Labor and the unions detracts from the real conversation we need to be having.
…
Evidence tells us to focus on the quality of teachers and teaching; the teaching of reading and maths; and the engagement of parents.
Foundation for quality education systems – the government’s reform agenda has laid the foundations for a first-class system which meets the Territory’s growing needs. The Department of Education is working hard to implement comprehensive evidence-based reforms to achieve sustainable improvements in educational outcomes for all children and young people in the Territory.
To build a first-class education system this government has introduced new legislation that supports the delivery of high-quality contemporary education to develop each student’s potential, maximise their educational achievement and open up opportunities for their future. The new Education Act commenced on 1 January 2016. It recognises the importance parents and the community play in ensuring the good governance of schools by providing a more flexible model for schools’ representative bodies.
We have also changed the membership model of the Northern Territory Board of Studies to provide more expert and balanced views in education from across the community. We have demonstrated our commitment to ensuring every Territory student can, and does, access a quality education through provisions which assert that education is free for all Australian citizens or permanent residents living in the Northern Territory who are enrolled in a government school.
The act allows more direct access to support for parents and schools with students with disabilities and learning needs, and reflects current practice. The act fosters the principle that schools are positive and safe environments for students and staff through the introduction of criminal history checks for young adult students returning to schooling who have not been previously enrolled.
The act also includes new provisions for non-government schools with the creation of the statutory position reporting directly to me, with responsibility for administering the registration and compliance regime for non-government schools under the act.
The act allows for the establishment of school boards for independent public schools, supporting an environment of greater autonomy and accountability for the service being delivered at those schools. The act also provides greater flexibility in the formation of school boards in independent public schools, enabling schools to engage with members of the community with specific knowledge and skills needed to support the direction of the school.
Quality facilities – this government is building the structure needed to support a first-class education system by implementing a future-looking infrastructure program of renewal and improvement to cater for the growing demand for enrolment places in government and non-government schools. We are continuing to construct and refurbish teacher housing in remote communities to ensure teachers are provided with safe and comfortable living conditions and are inclined to stay and work longer in remote areas. This is an important aspect of reducing staff turnover so that positive long-term relationships can be built with students to support their learning.
The Northern Territory government has made a significant investment in schools with the construction of new purpose-built facilities and updating of existing facilities. In 2015 nearly $10m worth of refurbishments, new classrooms and school facilities were constructed in Darwin, Maningrida, Galiwinku, Batchelor, Borroloola, Palmerston and Ntaria to meet the growing needs of schools and support the delivery of quality education.
This government has made a substantial investment in distance education in the Northern Territory with construction of the $12.4m Northern Territory Open Education Centre, supported by a contribution of $3.3m from the INPEX Ichthys LNG project. The facility will provide state-of-the-art premises and technology to meet the educational needs of senior secondary students in Years 10 to 12 accessing distance education. The facility is being built on the grounds of Darwin High School and will be completed in Semester 2 this year. It will provide flexible distance study options to over 600 senior secondary students across the Territory.
This government has made a significant and important investment into special needs education to meet the growing educational demands of students with high support and additional needs in Darwin. Construction of the new $31.5m Henbury School is well under way and on track to be completed and fully operation in August 2016. This leading-edge facility will cater for 120 middle and senior years students with special needs. The new school will be co-located with Dripstone Middle School and will include eight general learning areas, as well as purpose-built facilities for science and horticulture, a modern multipurpose hall and a pool for therapy, along with safe and secure car parking and drop-off facilities.
Construction is also under way for the new $21.35m special school in Bellamack, with the project on track to be completed in Semester 2 this year. The state-of-the-art school will provide 84 preschool and primary school places for special needs, high-support children to maximise learning opportunities and provide a teaching environment tailored to the safety and amenity of students.
The Australian government has been supporting our efforts to improve childcare and trade skills facilities by investing $2.35m in the construction of a childcare centre at Ntaria, and investing a further $5.7m in the construction of trade training centres at Borroloola, Maningrida, Ntaria and Galiwinku. These facilities help support families and young people to engage in employment and further study and enable the care and early development of young children.
In addition, $9.2m in minor new works was carried out over 2015-16 to address improvements and upgrades to school buildings, as well as extending existing facilities at schools to provide additional student enrolment capacity.
As part of the $100m Boosting our Economy package announced by this government, an additional $68.5m will be invested in growing and renewing government and non-government school facilities across the Territory. This is responding to school infrastructure needs while providing employment opportunities and stimulating the local economy, particularly for small to medium businesses in the Northern Territory.
This government has made innovative changes to the way our schools operate by increasing school autonomy, a key priority of the Australian and Northern Territory governments. We have increased school autonomy through the establishment of global school budgets and introduction of the independent public schools model.
Global school budgets were implemented in all Northern Territory schools in 2015, informed by a needs-based funding model based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status, stage of schooling, Indigineity and remoteness. Schools now have total visibility over their budgets, including workforce costs.
Historical differences in how funding and staffing was allocated led to complex and varied arrangements for schools. The new funding model ensures budgets are distributed transparently under a one-line budget, giving schools the independence and flexibility to allocate resources as required to deliver the educational services tailored to the local school community’s needs.
In 2015 schools benefited from $428m, and this year we have provided $447m in direct funding for schools, including $388m in global school budgets and $59m for expenses paid centrally on behalf of schools. This also includes a total of $40m over four years to assist schools to transition from current levels of funding to the student needs based funding model.
Schools can apply to become independent public schools which operate with greater autonomy, particularly in relation to staff selection, financial management, governance, and the teaching and learning program. Independent public schools remain in the Northern Territory government schools system but benefit from increased flexibility and responsibility to shape the ethos, priorities and direction of the school.
Not every school will become an independent public school. Through a rigorous selection process schools must demonstrate they have the support of their staff and their school community. They must demonstrate they have a vision, innovation and are a high-performing school. The first six independent public schools commenced in 2015, with a further seven commencing from the start of 2016. This includes primary schools in Darwin, Katherine, Palmerston and Alice Springs, all secondary schools in Darwin, Palmerston and Gunbalanya, which was our first remote Territory school to become an independent public school.
These schools and many others are continuing to lift the bar to improve student outcomes and increase confidence in our government schools. In 2014, 15 of the top 20 who completed a Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training were from government schools. In 2015, 13 were from government schools. Increasing school autonomy is creating new opportunities for students, greater networks and participation by the community and delivering quality government educators.
A first-class education system relies on high-quality staff, an essential element of student success. Teacher quality is a national priority that government is committed to supporting. The Department of Education is ensuring we have the right people in the right place by recruiting, developing and retaining high-quality staff and getting more Indigenous people into early childhood and education positions across the Northern Territory. To do this a strategic workforce plan is being implemented in the government education sector outlining the strategies to ensure we have high quality staff leadership support.
Attracting and retaining high quality staff is pivotal in improving educational outcomes for students. This begins with promoting and marketing careers in education to Northern Territory school students, the local community and across Australia to attract the best staff.
Our continued partnerships with universities are also integral to workforce planning to ensure teaching graduates are equipped with the skills and experience required to succeed in the education sector and meet the needs of Territory students. In 2015, 51 Charles Darwin University graduates were recruited into our schools from the 2014 cohort. This included 13 of the top graduates who were offered ongoing employment from 2015, and three scholarship holders under the More Indigenous Teachers initiative.
The capability of educators continues to be strengthened through the Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers certification program in partnership with the Teacher Registration Board. This year the certification program attracted 48 registrations from teachers within the government school sector, and a further two from the non-government school sector. This will double the total number of highly accomplished and lead teachers across the Territory, which will have a positive impact on schools and student outcomes. These teachers are collaborating at a national level to improve the teaching profession, and a conference will be held later in the year for NT teachers to better utilise their skills and knowledge to foster a strong and collaborative learning culture in schools.
Through the enterprise bargaining process with the Australian Education Union, in 2015 a new policy providing for the permanent appointment of teachers to government schools through an open advertising and merit selection process, as with other public sector positions, was implemented. This forms parts of the Department of Education’s employment strategy to get the right people for the job, moving away from the old way of providing permanency on the basis of longevity and seniority. That did not necessarily lead to getting the best candidate for the job.
The Department of Education has appointed 85 teachers under this new system, which will continue to build on the quality educators already working in government schools, ensuring students’ educational outcomes are enhanced by investing in high quality teachers.
In addition, as part of the department’s Indigenous employment and workforce strategy, special measures are being applied to all assistant teacher positions in remote and very remote schools, and a number of other positions across the department where it is important to have Indigenous employees providing services and advice. These special measures mean only Indigenous people can undertake these roles.
The Department of Education also plans to implement special measures for all other positions to prioritise applicants identified as Indigenous. This will provide better representation of Indigenous people in the education sector, and help support government’s target to increase the number of Indigenous employees in the Northern Territory Public Sector. The Department of Education’s target is 23% Indigenous employees by 2020.
Improving educational outcomes for remote students requires quality leadership and staff. However, we know the difficulty in attracting and retaining quality leaders and staff in remote locations where staff may face complex challenges not found in urban schools. The Department of Education’s strategic workforce plan provides clear direction and outlines strategies to attract, recruit and retain the right people for remote schools with a focus on attracting and developing Indigenous staff in these locations.
A thorough induction program is in place to provide teachers new to government schools with specific information about teaching in a remote environment. The leadership of principals in remote schools is also being enhanced by the development of a mentoring program to strengthen principal skills for working in the unique environment of remote schools.
This government has a vision for the future with a clear long-term plan to lead a world-class education system and improve learning outcomes for children and young people. We cannot do this on our own, so it is important that we continue to work in partnership with families, the community, the Australian government and organisations to improve outcomes for children and young people, especially Indigenous people, by investing in evidence-based strategies and programs.
We continue to work collaboratively with the Australian government to secure long-term funding arrangements to support Territory children and young people. The Northern Territory has secured approximately $120m in funding over three years to support implementation of the Northern Territory’s A share in the future Indigenous Education Strategy 2015-24. The 10-year Indigenous Education Strategy has been operating for nearly 12 months with key projects now well under way, including expansion of the Families as First Teachers program in 22 communities, and a further three this year; annual health checks for students in remote and very remote communities; mandated literacy and numeracy programs; provision of secondary pathway options for remote and very remote students and families with assistance and support from the Transition Support Unit; and construction of a residential facility in Nhulunbuy for remote secondary students.
We know that many Territory children face additional challenges. The Australian Early Development Census measures the development of Australian children in their first year of full-time school, and is reported under five developmental domains. The five domains of physical health and wellbeing, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive skills and communication skills and general knowledge are closely linked to predictors of good adult health, education and social outcomes.
Between 2009 and 2015 the census data showed improvement in the development of Territory children. This improvement aligns with the establishment of early childhood initiatives such as the Families as First Teachers program, which incorporates evidence-based approaches to early learning of literacy and numeracy. However, despite these reported improvements, groups of Territory children continue to experience significant disadvantage.
The 2015 census reported higher levels of vulnerability in the Northern Territory than the Australian average, with 37.2% of children in the Territory developmentally vulnerable on one or more domains compared to 22% across Australia. Non-Indigenous children in the Northern Territory are generally on a par with the Australian average and report lower levels of vulnerability than the Australian average on two of five domains: physical health and communication. However, the proportion of Indigenous children developmentally vulnerable on one or more domains in 2015 was 42% nationally and 63% in the Northern Territory.
Children are the future of the Territory, and a great start for children means a great future for the Northern Territory. This government understands the importance of investing in early childhood services including early childhood education, maternal and child health, family support and the early childhood intervention services.
The implementation of the Great Start, Great Future Northern Territory early years strategic plan 2016-20 will be a key focus of the Northern Territory’s effort to improve early childhood development and provide the best possible outcome for Territory children from birth to eight years old. The plan relies on strong partnerships with families, communities and non-government organisations delivering services supporting the development of children. A coordinated effort will be required to ensure more young children across the Northern Territory are healthy and thriving, living in supportive, resilient families and actively participating in quality learning.
The plan focuses on developing integrated service models, strengthening the quality of child and family-centred education, increasing the capacity of services to identify and respond to children and families affected by trauma and family violence, and delivering quality services through suitable infrastructure and a skilled workforce. The plan builds on the current strengths of the early childhood services system and will make the Territory an even better place for families to live and raise their children.
The Families as First Teachers program, currently operating at 22 remote sites across the Territory, is strengthening parent engagement and provides disadvantaged and vulnerable children with the skills and attributes required to succeed in their education before they enter primary school. The program has continued to operate successfully in remote Indigenous communities and further work is being done to guide the individual learning requirements of young children under the Indigenous Education Strategy. There are plans to expand the program to 32 sites by the end of 2017.
Early childhood educators play a crucial role in shaping children’s development. Through our early years strategic plan and Indigenous Education Strategy we aim to make a positive impact on our children’s development.
One of the barriers to young people attending school can be their health, whether it is through a chronic ear infection, respiratory infection, anaemia or other illness. Government schools and local health clinics are now working together to improve the health and education outcomes for Indigenous students in remote and very remote locations. To date over 2000 children and students have had their health assessed across 30 communities. Regular school attendance is a key component of school learning and improving educational outcomes in the Northern Territory.
Indigenous students in remote and very remote areas have some of the lowest rates of school attendance and achieve the poorest educational outcomes. Effective partnerships between schools, students, families and the community are central to ensuring students attend schools regularly and are supported in their education by their families, which strengthens learning outcomes for students.
Lifting attendance rates in mobile remote communities is one of the greatest challenges and impediments to advancing outcomes for young Indigenous Territorians. School attendance is impacted by experiences in early childhood, health and wellbeing, housing and employment, community governance and leadership, community safety, and domestic and family violence. Therefore, multiple approaches with shared responsibility between students, parents, schools and Northern Territory government agencies are required. Government is working to strengthen efforts to ensure young people attend school regularly and are engaged in learning so educational outcomes of all students across the Territory are improved.
In 2015 only 36% of Indigenous students attended school four or more days per week compared with a target of 42%, whereas the proportion of non-Indigenous students attending school four or more days per week was 87% against a target of 88%. Government’s long-term target is that the proportion of Indigenous students attending four or more days per week is consistent with the Territory’s non-Indigenous students by 2024. Improving school attendance will require effort from all sectors of the community.
Once students are at school different approaches are required to ensure students are successful in their learning and engaged in school throughout their educational journey. Quality teaching and learning programs are crucial in building a first-class education system. That is why all government schools across the Northern Territory are now implementing Visible Learning to create the conditions necessary to bring about ongoing and sustainable improvement in learning achievements.
Visible Learning focuses on using technological strategies that have the greatest impact on student learning and building teacher capacity to analyse data and evaluate their own performance. We are continuing to provide professional development to staff across the Territory to ensure the learning success of our students.
A key initiative under the Indigenous Education Strategy is the implementation of mandated literacy and numeracy programs in remote schools. The two mandated literacy and numeracy approaches being delivered across remote and very remote schools in the Northern Territory are Direct Instruction and Explicit Instruction.
Direct Instruction is a model for teaching that emphasises well developed and carefully planned lessons designed around small learning increments and clearly defined and prescribed teaching tasks. The Direct Instruction program offers students curriculum continuity and stability, which is important in remote schools where there is high student mobility. Fifteen very remote schools are actively engaged in delivering Direct Instruction, and early indicators of success of the program have seen students who attend regularly achieve measurable improvement in their learning.
In remote and very remote schools that are too small for Direct Instruction to be delivered, Explicit Instruction approaches have been developed to provide site-specific curriculum structure.
The Department of Education is also delivering quality and evidence-based programs and support for students in the middle and senior years of schooling, and employment pathways programs to enhance the personal and social development, and education and employment outcomes of students.
Full-time and part-time senior secondary schooling options are provided for students in government schools from Year 10 to Year 12, along with access to vocational education and training in schools. In March this year Work Like the Best, the middle years teaching and learning strategy 2016-18, was launched. The strategy is guided by key recommendations from independent educational consultant Vic Zbar, following the review of middle years education in the Northern Territory. Through this strategy we will ensure middle years education throughout the Northern Territory is best practice …
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I request an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr CHANDLER: … through the delivery of quality programs, quality teaching and strong engagement with the school community.
Quality secondary education is important for students to access employment, training and further education. A key initiative under the government’s Indigenous Education Strategy is the establishment of the Transition Support Unit to support remote Indigenous students to transition to secondary schooling away from home.
Over the past six months Transition Support Unit staff have been working with 42 remote schools and over 250 students and their families from across the Northern Territory who have sought enrolment or re-engagement with boarding facilities. Transition Support Unit staff have also engaged with and assisted students in transit at airports as they travel from remote communities to boarding schools or regional centres.
An employment pathways program based on vocational learning skills development and vocational education and training has also been developed to provide a consistent model of secondary education delivery for remote Indigenous students, which spans very remote, regional and urban centres. Resources developed to support this program include teacher support materials for Explicit Instruction approaches in literacy and numeracy; culture, country and careers-integrated learning; and Leadership Certificate I materials and workbooks delivery. It will be available to remote schools for secondary students who do not elect to transition to regional or urban boarding facilities. Trialling of the program will commence in Term 2 this year.
Government has invested in the construction of a new $20m residential facility in Nhulunbuy, including $9.1m funding from the Australian government. Territory company Norbuilt has commenced construction, creating local job opportunities and employment for local people. The facility will cater for 40 students with scope to expand in future years if required, ensuring remote students across the region have access to a quality secondary education and are well supported in accommodation away from home.
Implementing engagement programs for Indigenous boys and girls has been a priority of this government. The Clontarf program for Indigenous boys is now operating in 13 schools, and, on average, nearly 900 students attended these programs per day in 2015. Six girls’ programs were operational in 2015, with approximately 290 Indigenous girls attending, on average, per day. The Stars Foundation girls’ program commenced in six sites in 2015, and will expand to 13 sites in 2016. These programs provide wellbeing and mentoring support to assist students to complete Year 12.
The performance of the Territory in the 2015 National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy, NAPLAN, shows improvement, with four government schools being above the national average. In 32 Northern Territory government schools achievement was as good as or better than similar school groups nationally, and seven schools were identified as achieving substantially above average national gains.
The matched Years 3 to 5 student gains – the same students tested in 2013 and 2015 – 64% of Northern Territory government schools for numeracy, 62% for writing and 58% for reading were higher than similar schools nationally. The matched Years 7 to 9 student gains – the same students tested in 2013 to 2015 – 79% of Northern Territory government schools for numeracy, 21% for writing and 68% for reading were higher than for similar schools nationally.
For both the Years 3 to 7 and Years 5 to 9 student cohorts, gains from 2011 to 2015 have been larger in the Northern Territory than nationally. In each test domain, except for writing, the Years 3 to 9 cohort gains from 2009 to 2015 were also higher in the Territory compared to nationally for comparable test domains. In 2015 results for Indigenous students for Years 5, 7 and 9 numeracy and Years 5 and 7 reading met or exceeded the Department of Education’s 2015 performance targets. Non-Indigenous students across all levels in numeracy and Years 5, 7 and 9 reading met or exceeded our 2015 performance targets.
The 2015 results show that it takes time for positive system reforms to translate into significant achievement gains. We will continue to work hard to implement initiatives to improve student achievements.
To support the measurement of student progress and inform the development of appropriate benchmarks for reading and mathematics, a Territory-wide assessment program is being implemented. Since Term 1 2015, all Northern Territory government schools have implemented the Australian Council for Educational Research progressive achievement tests in reading and mathematics. The online tests, conducted twice a year, are for students in Years 1 to 10 and are designed to provide objective and standardised information to teachers about their students’ skills and understanding in reading, comprehension and mathematics. The results help teachers and schools understand schools’ current strengths and weaknesses and inform teaching and learning. Territory-wide collection of this data will make it possible to measure student growth in reading and mathematics at a system, school, class and student level, which will help education to focus efforts where most needed.
There has been positive feedback from principals. The test is seen as a valuable resource and tool for schools. There was high participation by students last year, and schools will now be supported to integrate these results further to inform policy and practice.
In 2015, 1338 students across government and non-government schools gained a Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training, the NTCET. That is an increase of 21 completers on 2014, and the greatest number of certificate completions since its inception. Of these NTCET completions 187 were Indigenous, the largest cohort to date. Thirteen of the top 20 students across the Northern Territory were from government schools, with the top students from Darwin High School obtaining an outstanding Australian Tertiary Admission Rank, ATAR, of 99.9. Of 35 students who also received an A+ merit award achievement, 18 were from government schools.
Many students find undertaking vocational education and training options supports their pathways into employment. In 2015, 894 students completed a range of vocational qualifications. Of the 1338 NTCET completions, 926 included a VET component. There were 500 students participating in 784 structured work placements in 2015 to support their industry learning. These programs provide learning opportunities in emergency services, the automotive industry, transport logistics and the pastoral industry. Schools are working hard to support students to achieve educational goals through the culmination of 13 years of schooling and setting their path for life outcomes, including job prospects, growing a family and earning potential.
Vocational education and training programs are being expanded into maritime, fisheries and construction industries to ensure young people have the skills needed to support their future and the Northern Territory’s economy. Government has been implementing a significant reform agenda, but we have a long way to go to ensure there is a sustained improvement in the learning development of children and young people across the Territory.
Regarding the non-government sector, although I have spoken in great depth about the government education sector, our partnerships with non-government schools and the international education sectors are an important part of the government’s vision of building a first-class education system. The non-government education sector plays an essential role in the education landscape across the Territory, providing education choices for Northern Territory families and students.
Although the Australian government is the primary funder of non-government schools in the Territory, the Northern Territory government provides additional support through per capita funding, payments under the capital subsidy scheme and in-kind support, including information technology and curriculum support.
The Northern Territory government has provided $32.6m in 2015-16 in per capita funding to non-government schools and $1.5m in capital subsidy payments so far. The government is also investing $10m in non-government schools across the Territory as part of the Boosting our Economy package. This funding will see upgrades to facilities and repairs and maintenance while ensuring the widest possible community benefit from the investment. It will allow non-government schools in the Territory to cater for future growth in student numbers and will provide students with revitalised and high-quality learning environments.
Increasing market opportunities through the export of educational services into Asia is a key platform of this government. Since the release of our 10-year International Education and Training Strategy 2014-2024 the Northern Territory has grown the number of international student enrolments in schools by 38% in two years. The establishment of the international education and training hub, StudyNT, in partnership with key stakeholders, has laid the foundations for future growth across the international education and training sectors.
In 2013 international education and training was the Northern Territory’s eleventh-largest industry, contributing $49m to the Northern Territory economy. By having a clear plan to increase our efforts in this sector, we are aiming for the sector to be among the top five export earners in the Northern Territory by 2024. We are already seeing growth, with our latest data showing education and training has advanced to the ninth-largest export industry and in 2014-15 it contributed $55m.
The government has transformed the Northern Territory’s education system with a new contemporary Education Act, greater school autonomy that is well supported, and a strong eye to measuring and monitoring student achievement and system performance to enable …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Education for this motion. We agree on the importance of education in the Territory and always welcome debate on the subject. It is vital for the future of the Territory and it is important parliament debates education. Every member has an interest in education because we all have schools in our electorates and are all passionate about education and a better future for the NT. Education will help drive that.
That was a thorough 40-minute contribution from the Minister for Education. It sounded similar to a ministerial statement. There has been some toing and froing between the opposition, the Independents and the government during this term of parliament over processes for ministerial statements. We used to review them the night before, which would allow the opposition and the Independents to look at what the government was placing on the record. It would ensure more work was done rather than just responding to the statement. You could ring people and check figures and stats to ensure you have the right data. It was a good process. The government then changed the process and we were handed ministerial statements while they were being delivered by the minister. You then had to respond on your feet. This then changed back to the old system of ensuring ministerial statements were delivered the night before, generally before 5 pm, to allow for proper debate and good process. We should have good, strong, thorough debate on education.
The minister put nothing controversial on the record. He wanted to, in the second last sittings of this parliament, place on the record his legacy issues and the work he has done …
Mr Chandler: That sounds like I am leaving.
Ms MANISON: For this term of government is what I mean. I am not making any assumptions, minister. I did not mean to put it that way, but we are coming to the end of four years of this Assembly.
There are some questions about moving a motion. I do not understand why the government did not make it a ministerial statement. Anyway, I will get to the point and contribute to the debate.
We have some fantastic schools and see some amazing student achievements every year. When you attend the Northern Territory Board of Studies presentation at the start of the year you see the best of the best of our school students receive acknowledgement and awards for their performance in the previous school year. Most of them head to university. It is an exciting time because these young people have their lives ahead of them and have had a fantastic experience in the Northern Territory education system. They have received a great education and achieved wonderful things.
Every year students do that. We should be proud of their achievements and all the work put in by teachers, support staff, principals, the school council and those tireless volunteering parents who put a lot of time and effort into doing what they can to build a better education system in the Northern Territory.
Each year we hear some good stories, but we have to be realistic about the fact we have big challenges in education. We have the highest percentage of students attending school who do not meet national minimum standards. We have the highest percentage of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and, in many cases, extreme disadvantage. We see that every day.
School attendance, particularly in very remote schools, is still nowhere near the mark. I will go into that further, but for a student to perform well they have to attend at least 80% of the time. I believe we would like to see them there 100% of the time. We want to set the bar high and keep pursuing it, but we are still a long way behind. Let us be realistic, we know we have the biggest challenges.
I find it alarming that with the work this government has put in to address those challenges over the last three-and-a-half years the CLP has driven cuts in education. We can see those cuts in the annual reports and the budget books. We all attend school council meetings and hear about the cuts. You also hear about the cuts and how they impact schools when doorknocking, attending barbecues or speaking to constituents. You hear what schools have had to do, and at the moment I am hearing from schools that are hurting.
It has been a very tough three-and-a-half years under this CLP government. Jobs have gone from education, and programs and resources cut where we need more support than ever before. I do not buy the theory often peddled when governments cut money and resources that they feel you can do much more with much less. That logic does not stack up.
It is the same as having a crime spree and putting fewer police on the streets, or a hospital emergency department overflowing and having fewer doctors and nurses. It does not stack up ...
Mr Elferink: Show us where the results are failing.
Ms MANISON: We know the results are very lumpy and there have been extreme cuts in the last three-and-a-half years.
Prior to the 2012 election the CLP government was thorough in its commitment to public servants. They said to public servants, ‘Your job is safe’. I highlight this again because people need to remember what public servants were told and what was on huge corflutes leading into election booths. It said, ‘Your job is safe’ and was directly targeted at public servants.
A letter that was handed to people at the time said:
- And if you’re on the frontline of police, education or health – regardless of how much you earn – I promise you, your job is safe. I GUARANTEE IT.
That was not the case. There have been huge cuts in education under this government. Looking at the annual reports and the raw data on full-time equivalent staff in the Department of Education to 30 June 2012, there were 4647 FTEs. The Department of Education’s 2014-15 annual report shows 4145 full-time equivalent staff, a cut of 502.
The same departmental annual report shows in 2011-12 there were 3843 FTE school-based employees. In the 2014-15 annual report that number was reduced to 3544, a reduction of 299 full-time staff.
When talking about frontline staff, you do not get more front line than a classroom teacher. They are there every day teaching kids, and they are crucial. A good teacher will make a difference to thousands of lives. The 2011-12 annual report shows there were 2044 full-time equivalent classroom teachers in the Northern Territory. The 2014-15 annual report shows that figure had dropped to 1880 full-time classroom teachers – school-based employees – in the Territory. That is a cut in teacher numbers of 164. Five hundred staff have gone from the Department of Education under the CLP government cuts, and 300 of those staff were based at schools. We know 164 were classroom teachers doing an important job.
It is important for a teacher to have the right support to do the job to the best of their ability. That means you need the right administrative support at schools so frontline teachers can do their job. Sadly, a lot of those positions have gone.
Figures show from 2011-12 to 2014-15, 47 Administrative Officer 2 positions have gone, 35 AO4 have gone, 97 Senior Teacher 1 positions have gone – 421 down to 324. There have been huge cuts across the Department of Education and our schools. This is not made up or hysteria; these are real figures in the Department of Education’s report for everyone to see and it has hurt schools. Schools have had a tough time and it was shocking to see those cuts.
The government has pushed through a heavy reform agenda. If they feel these reforms are required then, by all means, they are the government and they can make them. However, people expect appropriate delivery of the reforms. When it came to global school budgets, one concern was that it was rolled out to schools in a short period of time without an appropriate level of testing to ensure the government had it right.
During that roll-out we heard stories of schools having to do more with less. You still hear stories at school council meetings about having to eat into savings for things they cannot get funding for. If they want to keep assistant teachers, school councils have to fund them from savings.
The government had an agenda to do it; however, the implementation could have been so much better. Doing it all in one hit was not good. It created huge issues and we are still hearing about them.
Numerous issues have been raised with me about exceptional circumstances and the policy that applies to schools. If a school, in circumstances out of its control, has a staff member who goes on extended leave – perhaps someone becomes ill – it has to apply to the department to have the exceptional circumstances recognised so they can be compensated by the department. Schools are having great issues with that. If the minister is listening – the Department of Education would be – we are getting loud and clear feedback on that.
At one school in my electorate I said, ‘I left a briefing with the department last year feeling reassured about the exceptional circumstances policy, and that these situations would be taken into account and schools would be compensated for that money’. That is not the feedback we are getting. I hope the department looks at how it can ensure that schools, when staff members go on extended leave for situations over which they have no control – it is important. Our feedback says it is not happening.
In the last three-and-a-half years we have seen budget cuts to government education by the Northern Territory government. We are coming into the budget now and I hope we see a stop to the trend of the last three-and-a-half years of budget cuts to government education and schools. I hope the member for Fong Lim will put serious money on the table for education. I hope the Minister for Education, who I believe is passionate about education and advocates for it, has had some success in Budget Cabinet this time round. The figures in budget books from the last few years have not been good, particularly in government education. The funding contribution from the Northern Territory government has gone down. It is in plain numbers for everyone to see.
In the meantime, Commonwealth funding has increased. Thank goodness that contribution has increased because without it those cuts would be so much deeper. The budget paper outputs for government education show that in the last CLP budget government education was $663m. In the last Labor budget government education sat at $685m. That is a significant cut of over $20m and does not factor in indexation over time.
Going from one budget to the other, the 2014-15 budget was $676m and the 2015-16 budget was $663m. It is a continuation of cuts to education driven by the CLP government.
If we target the critical developmental areas from day one, Term 1, Year 1 of school – the sooner children are engaged in education and on an equal footing the better they will do at school. One in five Territory students is not meeting the developmental benchmarks in two or more categories, and a third is not meeting one of those categories. The 2012-13 budget was $18m, and it went down in the 2015-16 budget to $16.5m. Preschool education in the 2012-13 budget was $47.8m, and it went down to $37.7m in the 2015-16 budget. Senior years education went from $127.3m in the 2012-13 budget to $109m in the 2015-16 budget. The budget papers show huge cuts which are clear for everybody to see.
In the context of the Commonwealth funding contribution, Labor was committed to the Gonski reforms. The previous federal Labor government put education on the agenda with the work done by Gonski to ensure needs-based education funding was looked at. Needs-based funding is critical in the Northern Territory, where we have students with the greatest needs.
At the time the CLP government did not sign up to the Gonski reforms but signed up to another package with minister Pyne. It secured critical funding for the Northern Territory, which is good to see. For example, we have seen a funding commitment from 2013-14 since the reforms.
Debate suspended.
The Assembly suspended.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
Petitions Nos 56 and 58
Petitions Nos 56 and 58
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 123, I inform honourable members that responses to Petitions Nos 56 and 58 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website. Copies of the responses will be provided to the members who tabled the petitions for distribution to petitioners.
- Petition No 56
Conserve Berry Springs Waterhole
Date presented: 18 November 2015
Presented by: Ms Purick
Referred to: Minister for Lands and Planning
Date response due: 20 April 2016
Date response received: 19 April 2016
Date response presented: 20 April 2016
- Response:
In response, I note the sentiment of the petitions to preserve Berry Springs and the concerns about potential impacts of future development on the sustainability of water resources in the Berry Springs Acquifer. The petition specifically requests constraints be placed on the proposed subdivision of section 1809 Hundred of Ayers, to ensure it does not adversely affect the quality of the springs.
The NT Planning Commission is currently preparing a Litchfield subregional land use plan, and I have requested that consideration be given to opportunities for the provision of reticulated services within the Berry Springs Rural Activity Centre to assist in minimising the impacts of continued population growth on the aquifer.
Berry Springs Nature Park and the Territory Wildlife Park are significant public assets with high environmental, community, recreation and tourism value. The potential impacts of continued development in the locality on sustainability of the water resources that underpin these values is recognised, as are the potential impacts on established commercial horticulture and existing rural residents. The proposed Litchfield subregional land use plan and the Berry Springs water allocation plan will be subject to community consultation. These processes will enhance community understanding of the issues around the sustainability of the water resources and provide the opportunity for informed comment.
- Petition No 58
Conserve Berry Springs Waterhole
Date presented: 1 December 2015
Presented by: Ms Purick
Referred to: Minister for Lands and Planning
Date response due: 24 May 2016
Date response received: 19 April 2016
Date response presented: 20 April 2016
Response:
In response, I note the sentiment of the petitions to preserve Berry Springs and the concerns about potential impacts of future development on the sustainability of water resources in the Berry Springs Aquifer. The petition specifically requests constraints be placed on the proposed subdivision of section 1809 Hundred of Ayers, to ensure it does not adversely affect the quality of the springs.
The NT Planning Commission is currently preparing a Litchfield subregional land use plan, and I have requested that consideration be given to opportunities for the provision of reticulated services within the Berry Springs Rural Activity Centre to assist in minimising the impacts of continued population growth on the aquifer.
Berry Springs Nature Park and the Territory Wildlife Park are significant public assets with high environmental, community, recreation and tourism value. The potential impacts of continued development in the locality on sustainability of the water resources that underpin these values is recognised, as are the potential impacts on established commercial horticulture and existing rural residents. The proposed Litchfield subregional land use plan and the Berry Springs water allocation plan will be subject to community consultation. These processes will enhance community understanding of the issues around the sustainability of the water resources and provide the opportunity for informed comment.
MOTION
Building a First-Class Education System
Building a First-Class Education System
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, we were talking about budget papers and the successive government cuts to education under the CLP government, and also the Commonwealth contribution. The government did not sign up to the Labor Gonski proposal and eventually cut a deal with the federal government. It was positive because we saw significant additional dollars coming to the Territory from the Commonwealth. Whilst that happened, the Territory government started to cut funding to education.
There is a lot more federal debate about education funding, and it will be an important issue in the upcoming federal election. Territorians want funding certainty. I will read from the minister’s submission to the Senate Select Committee on School Funding Investment. It goes to the heart of what the government said about important Commonwealth funding coming to the Territory.
Page three of the submission says:
- Based on announcements in the 2014-15 federal budget, over the period of 2017-18 to 2024-25, it is estimated that across both government and non-government schools, the Northern Territory would be approximately $309 million worse off under these revised arrangements. Northern Territory government schools may receive $166 million less in Students First school funding over this eight year period.
- The end of the current Students First funding arrangements and the shift to reduced funding levels in 2017-18 would have a significant impact on the Northern Territory education budget. Under current indexation arrangements, the Northern Territory would be expected to receive an increase in government school funding from $166.6 million in 2016-17 to $174.4 million in 2017-18. However, current Federal Budget forward estimates show the Northern Territory would receive $153.7 million in 2017-18, a reduction of $20.7 million in funding in the space of one year, equivalent to 200 teachers. This would be followed by further reduction on the same magnitude in the 2018-19 year to $134.7 million.
Further along on page four the submission says:
- Any reduction in funding is likely to have a more significant effect on education service delivery in the Northern Territory than in other jurisdictions, due to the limited economies of scale, dispersion and the extent of disadvantage. Larger jurisdictions and education systems have greater budget capacity and are able to absorb or offset reductions in resources by consolidating school programs and services. This is particularly challenging in the Territory due to small numbers of schools and students, the vast distances between education services in remote and very remote areas, and the higher proportion of our students who live in those areas. Reduced funding will have the most significant impact in these locations, where every additional dollar is critical to closing the gap in Indigenous disadvantage in remote areas. Higher costs of service delivery across all areas, including health, policing and education, places increased pressure on the Northern Territory’s budget and further limits the extent to which funding reductions can be absorbed or offset.
In the meantime, the CLP has continually cut the education budget. On one hand the government says, ‘No problem, there’s nothing to see here. With fewer teachers and less money in the budget what is the problem?’
The government told the Commonwealth government that every dollar is critical in future education funding for the Northern Territory. It is clear that every dollar counts. It must make for an interesting argument when you speak to your Commonwealth colleagues and say we need to secure every additional dollar to make a difference to the education budget, yet you cut the Territory budget. In Budget Cabinet you look at the budget for public education in the Territory – under the CLP we have seen continued cuts to the education budget.
This means a reduction in teacher numbers. We have 164 fewer classroom teachers, 300 fewer school-based staff and 500 fewer staff in the Department of Education. Look at the effort being put into attendance statistics. The most recent information I could get from the government website was for Term 4, 2015. I cannot use Term 1 statistics because I do not have them. We have not seen the movement we wanted to.
I understand the 2012 methodology was different to the 2013 onwards one. Under this government attendance statistics for provincial schools in 2012 were about 88.6%, and in 2013 about 87.9%. In 2014 they were 87.8% and 88% – they pretty much have no effect. In remote areas in 2012 they were 84%; in 2013 they were 82.2%; in 2014, 82.9%; and in 2015, 82%. In very remote areas in 2012 they were 61%, in 2013 they were 58%, in 2014 they were 61.2%, and in 2015 they were 59.9%.
Looking back on Term 2 2015, in provincial, remote and very remote areas year-on-year statistics show no movement. I commend efforts being made in the area of attendance because it is critical, but we are not seeing the results we need because some students are so far behind that we need to catch up at a faster rate than the rest of Australia. We need to surpass the rate of growth and achievement in the rest of Australia …
Ms WALKER: Mr Deputy Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 43, I request an extension of time for my colleague.
Motion agreed to.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, the Chief Minister has been to COAG and spoken to the Prime Minister and other state and territory leaders, yet education was not on the agenda. At the same time, the Minister for Education presented a thorough submission to a Senate committee on schools funding, saying that every dollar counts. In the Northern Territory we need every single dollar of funding. We are in a budget cycle at the moment and about to see the big budget numbers roll out. My goodness, this government has sold TIO and the port, cashed in some other agreements and got money up front rather than over a 10-year period, so the money is there. Let us see what commitment this government gives in its budget to education funding, particularly government schools because that is where there have been continual cuts.
It would also be good to hear about the government’s submission to the federal government, which it was silent on during COAG. What representations have been made to the member for Solomon or Senator Nigel Scullion to ensure there is funding going forward? That is critical. Both the federal and Northern Territory budgets are close, and people want to see a commitment to education funding.
After Question Time today I am not sure that NT education funds will be on the up. That was assured, but I will cross my fingers and hope for the best.
It is clear that the CLP government realises every single dollar counts in education funding. It has told the Commonwealth that we need continued support at the same levels and that certainty for the coming years. Yet this government has cut funding to Northern Territory schools. This has impacted on urban, remote and bush schools. Everybody has been subjected to these cuts.
On a more positive note, where credit is due you give it. I am happy with the commitment to Henbury School and the work happening there. I look forward to the new secondary school. I commend the CLP government for that, and for following on the Henderson government’s special schools infrastructure program and the delivery of Bellamack special school.
There is need for special education, and there have been huge advances in technology and the delivery of education to special needs students. It is great to see a continued sustained investment in special education infrastructure. That is something you can be proud of, and I applaud you for it. I am heartened to know consideration is being given to the current Henbury School site. I hope we see development of post-school options for young Territorians with special needs so their learning does not end when they leave school.
There are concerns in the community about access to special schools and bus service collections. I and my colleagues have heard of various issues regarding collection points. We do not have time to go over that in the contribution today.
Non-government schools play a critical role in the delivery of education in the Northern Territory. It is important that parents have choice when it comes to education. Ensuring there is a good, strong relationship with independent schools and Catholic schools to ensure they do their job to the best of their ability – they serve a lot of students in the Territory and the government plays a significant role in funding those schools. I understand they are feeling some funding strain as well.
There is no doubt we have some incredible people in the Northern Territory working in education. The department is full of Territorians committed to and passionate about driving good education outcomes. We have amazing teachers, support staff and principals in the Territory. As a government you have to support them. You have a clear opportunity in the 2016 budget to ease the pressure they are feeling. We continue to hear about this, and we need to support them because every dollar we invest in education now will save money down the track.
I am proud of what Labor wants to do, particularly with the early critical years before students start school – the zero to four. We are committed to looking at the Australian Early Development Census indicators and ensuring we do everything we can so Territory kids from day one, Term 1, Year 1 are meeting the benchmarks they need to. Once they are in the school system, if they are meeting the benchmarks they have more opportunity to thrive and their life outcomes will be so much better. It is a critical area and we need more investment into it as we know it works.
If we have the opportunity to form government I look forward to seeing the work that can be done in the critical area of early years so that by the time kids get to school they will thrive, grow and learn the most they can through the Territory education system.
I thank the minister for this important motion. I had time to prepare my response as the minister delivered it. We knew it was coming on so I pulled out budget papers and some annual reports to look at. It is a telling situation at the moment as we wait for the 2016 Territory and federal budgets. The Northern Territory, in its submission, advocated to the Commonwealth that every single dollar in education counts, yet they have not done that when sitting around the Cabinet table committing dollars in their budget.
We look forward to the budget.
The minister said today that enrolments are on the increase. That is fantastic because we want a thriving public education system. Again, looking at enrolment numbers versus government education investment on a per student basis, it has gone backwards since the CLP government came to power.
You are advocating to the Commonwealth you need every cent possible in education to help overcome the extreme disadvantage and educational issues we have. We need more students in the NT hitting the national minimum standards and attending school every day. We are severely lacking there.
We can be proud of some of the wonderful things achieved, but we cannot – and no one would ever mean to – turn our backs on the disadvantage. As parliamentarians we need to do everything we can to support those kids and give them an education. If they are educated they will have so much more opportunity in life. Too many are falling behind and not finishing their schooling, and sadly their opportunities in life are limited.
Funding helps. Having teachers and support staff in classrooms helps. You acknowledged this in your submission to the Commonwealth government. Thank you, minister, for bringing this important education debate before the parliament. Your heart is in the right place, and I hope your colleagues support you to get more funding into this important area. We need more support through funding, especially for government schools, which have done it hard under this CLP government. We have seen huge cuts to teacher and support staff numbers in schools.
Mr STYLES (Deputy Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I agree with the member for Wanguri that this is an important motion. I will clarify some of the things the member for Wanguri said.
First, I will clear up some of the debate about funding to NT schools. Although the Northern Territory did not sign up to the Gonski funding offer, the amount of Students First funding provided by the federal Coalition government to the NT for 2014-17 matches the amount offered under the Gonski agreement.
The Northern Territory was provided with $505.9m in Students First funding for 2014-17. This includes $272m more for government schools than under the previous funding arrangement. At this stage we are in negotiations with the federal government, and Territorians can be assured that the funding agreement the Minister for Education had with the former federal minister, Christopher Pyne, locked in a four-year funding agreement, and the NT got every cent we would have if we had signed up to Gonski but with no strings attached. That was quite an achievement by the Minister for Education.
It is interesting that in her role as shadow minister for Education the member for Wanguri spent all her time talking about funding and did not mention the main business of schools, which is teaching and learning. This government has focused on what really matters, and that is improving outcomes for students.
The Minister for Education provided a detailed address which outlined the many achievements of this government, all in three-and-a-half years. The Labor government could not achieve these outcomes in 11 years. Most indicators are up for students in the Northern Territory, all improving the education of young Territorians.
The Giles Country Liberals government has funded the education system to a high level. We have fully funded preschools, and we have the highest expenditure per student in the country. Our teacher/student radio is the lowest in the country. We have the highest percentage of students in the government school system, which shows the faith Territorians have in the service this government is providing.
In responding to comments on the implementation of global budgets, the underlying assumption is that in 2012 everything in the education sector was fine and there was no need to look at anything. Middle years were fine, Indigenous education was great, the central bureaucracy was going well and the staffing formula put resources where they were needed. The assumption was that more money needed to be added. The assumption was that education was a perfect world and we were getting good results. However, we could and should have been doing a lot better. It was clear that this government needed to look at the outcomes more closely. We reminded ourselves that money is an input not an outcome.
Principals were telling us that the staffing formula and the central office controlled process of allocating staff to schools were outdated and not flexible enough. It was full of red tape with layers of approval processes.
Bruce Wilson’s Indigenous education review found the system was failing our most disadvantaged students and required a different approach. It was not to have more resources tipped into the same system, but a new approach to achieve sustained improvement in Indigenous student outcomes based on what we knew worked and what we could measure.
Vic Zbar’s review of middle schools identified the system had focused on structural change, and there was a lack of focus on the middle schools teaching and learning program by the system. The review found middle schools needed a new focus to create an orderly learning environment for students based on maximising their wellbeing and connectedness, and a rigorous teaching and learning program consistent across all middle schools was required.
The central bureaucracy and education agency was top heavy and lacked direction. There were 53 highly paid executive contract staff earning more than $180 000 per year employed in the central office. That number has been reduced by 30% and is now down to 37.
The centrally controlled staffing formula determined down to the fraction of an FTE how many teachers, assistant teachers, admin staff and other support staff each school was entitled to. There was limited local control.
Global budgets were introduced to all NT government schools from the start of the 2015 school year. This followed an extensive period of consultation throughout 2014 with all stakeholders, in particular school principals and business managers. Specific training was provided to principals and business managers in 2014 and 2015 to assist with the transition to global school budgets and that continues. The transition to the global school budget system has been a significant change for schools and the bureaucracy. It has been for the better and has created a much stronger schooling system.
Principals have embraced the change from the old school staffing formula, which required them to seek permission from bureaucrats in the central office to change their staffing profile and approve employment decisions.
In relation to comments regarding reductions in staffing, in the first six months the Country Liberals were in government, permanency was provided to 288 classroom teachers. The 2014-17 teacher and educator enterprise agreement included a move to merit-based selection of teachers. This is consistent with the rest of the public service and community expectations that the very best teachers are employed in our schools. Since 2015, 130 school-based employees have gained permanency through merit-based selection, including 85 teaching staff.
This government has increased resources in areas focused on delivering our strategic reforms. For example, 22 staff have been employed in the Transition Support Unit to assist remote students and their families make choices about secondary schooling options and support their successful transition into a secondary school pathway. This is an Indigenous Education Strategy program. Similarly, the six child and family centres have been allocated funding by government to provide 12 coordination and liaison positions. These positions are managed locally by the school principal and support the delivery of quality early years education and care.
The member for Wanguri said schools were not able to get additional funding for students who have exceptional circumstances, and mentioned the impact of teacher leave arrangements on funding. Schools apply for exceptional circumstances funding in demonstrated cases of financial hardship where unexpected or unforeseen events have impacted on the school’s ability to continue to deliver quality education programs giving consideration to the overall budget position of the school. Applications are assessed by a panel, which includes the principal and a regional director, both strongly connected to schools. Of 151 government schools, 17 applied for exceptional circumstances funding for expenses incurred in 2015. Of the 17 applicants, 10 were approved in whole or in part, with $718 862 being distributed to 10 schools in week 10 of Term 1. A further two schools were asked for further information and will be reconsidered shortly.
It is important to remember that many school expenses continue to be met centrally and thus do not impact on schools’ budgets. For example, workers compensation, remote allowances and entitlements including housing, long service leave, remote study leave, parental leave, highly accomplished and lead teacher allowances, principal and teacher relocation costs, and principals’ salaries and vehicles.
In relation to strategic direction, we are in a much better position now than we were under a Labor government. The Northern Territory government has a strategic approach to the allocation of funding, ensuring that our investments in education are evidence based, with student outcomes at the forefront of all decisions.
The Department of Education is now an efficient and focused organisation with little or no wastage of education resources. The department’s corporate overheads are 3% of the total expenditure, a very low proportion compared to other government agencies. This means 90% of the budget is applied to education service provision.
Over the past three years there has been a significant decrease in the number of education-related, short-term Australian government funding agreements. For example, national partnership agreements for the Northern Territory reduced from 13 in 2012 to four in 2016. While many of these agreements previously provided valuable supplementary funding for education in a number of areas, particularly for Indigenous students, many were not long term in nature, leading to short-term employment arrangements for teachers and wasted effort.
We are in a much better position now to provide sustainable and effective services, with a long-term 10-year plan to improve outcomes for all Territory students. We will no longer be captivated by the latest good idea driven by fickle funding regimes. We will stick to the plan and continue to build an evidence-based review of our performance to ensure we are heading in the right direction. Already we are seeing early signs of success, with an increase of 700 enrolments in government schools and gains in NAPLAN and the NT Certificate of Education and Training.
The Leader of the Opposition continually shows he does not understand what is going on around him. To provide education, health and law, and order services you need a vibrant economy that creates the right circumstances and provides taxes, GST, stamp duties and royalties. All those things add to the government receipts. What educational message does it send to students if we provide an education on borrowed money?
If you do not have a vibrant economy and want to provide these services it has to come from somewhere. You either cut the public service or jobs elsewhere, reduce expenditure or put up taxes. Otherwise you borrow it and one day, when everyone realises what you have done and you have a 98% debt to income ratio – which the previous government was prepared to go to with its projected $5.5bn debt – you do not have a vibrant economy.
The member for Wanguri spoke about young Territorians heading off to university. These young Territorians – and I agree with the member for Wanguri – were given a great Year 12 education and are off to university if that is what they want to do. Others will choose a different stream and go through the VET process.
However, you need jobs at the end. This government is committed to diversifying the economy. Every time we try to diversify the economy the Leader of the Opposition says, ‘We won’t do that. We will review this and put a moratorium on that.’ They have already announced 12 reviews and we are still a long way out from the election. What other reviews will come? What will we see? Will they shut everything down and have a talkfest and review everything?
We need a well-educated workforce. I have spoken to potential investors in Asia who ask about our workforce and the skills and capacity of local people. We need to invest money into education and training, and as it is one of my portfolios I am keen to look at it. However, you need an economy so there are jobs.
As a former police officer I have spoken to many people who have been a bit down and out. There was a common theme and people would ask, ‘Why should I go to school, do an apprenticeship or go to university when there are no jobs?’ That, sadly, is something I have been aware of as a minister in the Giles government. I make sure, every time I can, I say we need a good economy, and we need to diversify it and make sure people have a reason to get up in the morning.
If you take away diversification and jobs – we are talking about the onshore gas we know members opposite want to shut down. They not only want to stop jobs in the onshore gas industry now – there is potential, according to Deloitte, for another 6300 jobs which does not take into account the downstream processing of gas.
As the Chief Minister pointed out in Question Time today, this pen on my desk, the top of the water container, the plastic sleeve, the keyboard, half the computer, some of the clothes we are wearing and the products around us come from gas. Offshore companies want to make sure they have onshore gas as a backup. I do not mind where they get it from, but they have contracts to fulfil. If there is a problem with an offshore platform – a cyclone or another incident – they want to ensure they have a backup plan.
I would like to be sure Darwin has a backup plan. When we had the problem with offshore gas from Blacktip there was a blackout. Gas from the Alice Springs Dingo fields is fracked gas. The lights are on and gas is powering the microphones we are using now, and other things – our electricity generation – to make sure Territorians can continue doing what they want to do every day. It is important that the Leader of the Opposition takes this into account.
Last year the Giles government committed all the royalties from onshore gas to the VET sector and higher education. That could be for scholarships, bursaries and support for Territorians. We need this money flowing into education so we can help Territory kids.
Overseas investors want to know the Territory has a skilled workforce. We discussed that in Cabinet last year, and with input from other ministers we agreed – the Chief Minister drove this – that all royalties from onshore gas would go into education.
That is about making us the knowledge state, and creating opportunities for young Territorians and people who may wish to upskill or change in the middle of their working life. This is about ordinary mums and dads in Anula, Wulagi, Sanderson, Nhulunbuy, Port Darwin and the Tiwi Islands. Tiwi Island kids can come in on scholarships to take those jobs. These are the high-end jobs we all talk about. It is about making sure our children, and some adults in our community, have a go at training or retraining so they can get the high-value jobs and put that money into the Northern Territory economy. That is the secret.
When looking at how to do that – we on this side are fine; we are happy.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I request an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, member for Port Darwin and Mr Deputy Speaker.
The government recently released the Boosting Our Economy package. We listened to industry and looked at what we could do. These are small packages for mum and dad businesses – the painters, the chippies, the tilers – and a lot is in schools. Members opposite from time to time say we need more work and better facilities. Facilities are terrific, and you want to ensure that kids have nice facilities at school, although they are not essential. In developing countries you find engineers, doctors and people who studied under a tree, but we are further down the continuum than those countries and fortunate to have the facilities we do.
Much of our $100m Boosting Our Economy package is going to schools and school communities.
With regard to international students, investors say they are looking for high-value, high paid people in jobs of a technical nature – engineering, the petrochemical business, electrical engineering and all those high-end jobs. They are also looking for people skilled in other areas. It might be fabricators, welders or people with skills to run plants. This is what we are looking at in the VET and higher education sectors, where we need to train local people. To that end, we will create incubators for international students because many will come here to study, do their masters and PhD here and, while they are doing that, have the opportunity to go to incubators where they can develop ideas. Many of these young people are entrepreneurial, and the Department of Business will provide a way forward for them to develop their stuff in the Territory so we can take technology and innovation to the world.
I opened the ICT forum at the Convention Centre this morning. Many Territory companies put on display a lot of the technology innovated in the Territory. Some of it was from around the world, but what a fantastic opportunity for our local people to showcase what we are doing in the Territory.
The employee/employer incentives the Department of Business has created in getting apprenticeships – there are incentives for employers to take on apprentices and incentives for apprentices. Anyone listening who does not know about this, ring the Department of Business or get on the website and see what is happening.
With regard to onshore gas, the Giles government supports the environmentally responsible and rigorous regulations which will be put in place this term to support the shale gas industry. This is different to coal seam gas extraction. We do not engage in coal seam fracking in the NT; we do shale gas fracking, which is totally different in nature.
The 6300 jobs are on top of the jobs already in the onshore gas industry, which the opposition wants to shut down, as announced in this House. I will quote the member for Barkly’s statement from the Hansard last night:
- … Territory Labor proposes a moratorium covering all unconventional gas prospecting, exploration and extraction activities.
That is pretty clear; you cannot say it is incorrect. Labor members on radio this morning said that is not correct. I refer those Labor members to the Hansard and what was said in parliament last night.
We are asking people to make a clear decision. Do they want a vibrant economy to pay for the things I have mentioned, or do they want to shut down industry? This is just gas. We are talking about water and agriculture, and the opposition is talking about reviewing water licences and, if necessary, removing some issued since 2012.
Business and industry do not have certainty. If you introduce sovereign risk you introduce a massive risk for shareholders of investing companies. Those companies have said if Labor gets in they will not bring their money to the Territory. Over $1bn of investment has already been taken away since the Leader of the Opposition announced a moratorium on fracking. Now we see they will shut down the onshore gas industry in the Northern Territory. Some of the benefits that might bring to downstream industries – producing the seats you are sitting on and the cabling comes from gas, from petrochemical plants.
The geographical location of Darwin puts it in the box seat for one of the major petrochemical companies in the world – there are two major ones, Mitsui and Dow Corporation – to build a petrochemical plant here because we have the gas they can strip the ethaline from and turn into the products we take for granted each day. The handle and seal on your refrigerator, the handle on your oven and half your car all come from gas. It takes thousands of people to run petrochemical plants these days. They do not build little ones; they build big ones. There are not too many around the world. If we have the gas supply, we could possibly have a petrochemical plant built here and enjoy the benefit of thousands of high-end jobs.
The businesses that come to a petrochemical plant and take the feedstock that comes out of them – the ratio is about three to one. Even conservatively, if you have 2000 or 3000 people employed in a petrochemical plant the ratio of three to one means another 9000, which makes 12 000 new jobs in the Northern Territory. This is the multiplier effect. Companies fracking shale gas in the Northern Territory have done that responsibly for nearly 50 years.
South Australia and Queensland, the two Labor states adjacent to the Northern Territory, are welcoming the millions of dollars of investment and the jobs to go with it.
I fail to understand, with what could be up to $1bn going into education, why the opposition is happy to send those dollars and thousands of jobs from the Northern Territory into the Labor states of South Australia and Queensland. Why would you do that? That is very un-Territorian.
While I am fortunate that people want me to represent them and put the case for young Territorians and our future, I will oppose anyone who wants to export the jobs of my children or grandchildren from the Northern Territory to Labor states.
To those listening or watching, the Leader of the Opposition does not have the vision we on this side do, otherwise he would have a totally different attitude. He does not understand the ramifications or consequences of his motion at the annual conference on fracking shale gas in the Territory.
I will oppose anyone who wants to export those jobs and that investment. I cannot understand why the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party are out of step with every other Labor government or opposition around the country – state, territory, federal and the former federal minister for Resources. All the peer assessed reports have been conducted by representatives of nine countries from around the world. It has all happened and I ask you to reconsider.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak on this motion and I thank the Minister for Education for bringing it to the Chamber. Education of our young people is extremely important to me. I am proud to be a member of a government that has invested so much in our schools. Our government is committed to ensuring young Territorians have access to high-quality education facilities.
We are committed to improving facilities in Territory schools and providing the infrastructure that allows our schools to continue to grow as our student numbers increase. It was great to hear the minister talk about the $150m the government has invested into our schools and Territory children. This includes new classrooms in urban, rural and remote schools. With our investment in distance education, the Northern Territory Open Education Centre will be a world-class facility. With state-of-the-art technology, this facility will improve the educational outcomes for 600 students who engage in distance education.
It is important for government to invest in our students with high and special needs by committing $45.35m to fund construction of both a new Henbury School and a new special school at Bellamack, Palmerston.
Our Country Liberals government has shown an unwavering commitment to improving educational outcomes for young Territorians. This commitment has once again been demonstrated by the provision of $68.5m to educational projects under the Boosting our Economy package. While this package has been designed to create work for our small and medium businesses, the impact this package has on education is enormous.
Refurbished, upgraded and new school facilities will benefit thousands of children and their families by improving infrastructure standards and the capacity of our schools. This package sees an investment into early childhood facilities in Alpurrurulam and Ampilatwatja schools. These schools educate some of our youngest Territorians in remote communities. This commitment to early childhood education can be seen in the construction of the Larapinta school child and family centre. This centre will be the sixth of its kind, joining Gunbalanya and Maningrida, both in my electorate, as well as Ngukurr, Palmerston and Yuendumu.
The federal government funded construction of these five centres and the Territory government is now operating them. This government has changed the education landscape for Territorians. The Minister for Education should be proud of the work he and his department have done.
I take this opportunity to talk about success in education in my electorate. Gunbalanya School has achieved fantastic results. In 2015 the school successfully applied to become the first remote independent public school. It commenced operating as an IPS in 2016. This required the school to undergo a rigorous assessment process against three criteria, being vision and innovation, local support and capacity. Since 2013, Gunbalanya has had 21 Indigenous students successfully complete their NTCET, the most of any remote school in the Northern Territory.
Since 2012 it has operated its own flexible school year, ensuring school term dates are suitable and appropriate for the community. Since 2014 it has operated a successful child and family centre which runs the FaFT program, preschool and crche, and provides a seamless education pathway for students from birth.
The school successfully operates a core leadership model, with an Indigenous and a non-Indigenous principal working side by side to achieve the best possible outcomes for their students. I thank Esther Djayhgurrnga and Sue Trimble for what they have achieved.
It is clear that students in the NT are in a much better position now than they were three-and-a-half years ago to learn, achieve and become competent and capable global citizens.
I am proud to be part of a government that is committed to ensuring our young Territorians are afforded the same educational opportunities and first-class facilities as their southern counterparts.
I thank the minister for all the work he has done in this area. So much has been achieved in three short years, but we have so much more to do.
Mrs PRICE (Local Government and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I support this motion. We are lucky in the Territory to have a hard-working Country Liberals Education minister who is delivering results.
The Country Liberals are delivering major reforms and building a first-class education system. Listening to this debate – and Question Time – about education, it is clear Labor does not care about results. Labor measures how much it spends and ignores the results, but that is the wrong way to look at it. Results and outcomes are what matter. Labor talks about funding to distract from results, but the facts are clear.
The Country Liberals fund education to a very high level. We have the highest expenditure per student in the country and the lowest teacher to student ratio. In 2014 we averaged 12.6 students per teacher, and we have the highest percentage of students in the government school system. Labor talks about funding but ignores what really matters.
Let us talk about results. Education is about students doing well and reaching their potential, not about wasting money. In 2015, a record 1338 Northern Territory Year 12 students graduated with their Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training. More students are completing their NTCET and more are achieving A+ merits. Numbers and levels of achievement are up. The Country Liberals are delivering results and when I talk to people that is what they care about.
The number of Indigenous students completing their NTCET in 2015 increased to 187 compared to 173 in 2014. That compares to 99 students in 2010 under the previous Labor government. Indigenous Year 12 achievement keeps building and providing real career options and pathways for young Indigenous Territorians. Twenty-seven of the 2015 Indigenous Year 12 students completed their studies in their home communities, which is fantastic. Adding to these positive results, seven students completed the NTCET from Shepherdson College. Despite two cyclones in the region earlier last year, Gunbalanya continues to grow its number of graduates, with eight in 2015.
Under this government the 10-year Indigenous Education Strategy, A share in the future, is being implemented. This government has continued to expand the Families as First Teachers program, with programs in five additional communities starting this year and a further six scheduled to commence in 2017. In Semester 2 2015, 1316 children and 1404 parents participated in this valuable program. In my electorate the Yuendumu Child and Family Centre was officially opened by Senator Scullion and the Minister for Education last month. The centre has 24 community members working in different programs, the majority being local Indigenous people. Local community members working in the centre allows the children and their families to engage in activities in English and Warlpiri.
This centre operates the Families as First Teachers program, an early learning and family support program for Aboriginal families with children aged up to three. I have seen great results from this program in early learning, health, childcare, parenting and family support services.
The Country Liberals are delivering results in education across the Territory and in my electorate. We continue to focus on improving Indigenous student performance and advancing our high and middle achievers. We want to ensure our students have the best possible outcomes and results across all our schools and communities whether they are remote, regional or in Darwin. The Country Liberals have funded education to a high level. That is why we have the highest expenditure per student in the country and the lowest teacher to student ratio.
Thanks to the reforms of this government our NAPLAN data is starting to improve. From 2011 to 2015 Northern Territory student NAPLAN achievement gains have been higher than the national gains for reading, grammar and punctuation, and spelling for the Year 3 to Year 7 cohort, and numeracy, grammar and punctuation and spelling in the Year 5 to Year 9 student cohort. That is why parents trust the Country Liberals with schools. We have the highest percentage of students in the government school system.
The Country Liberals achieve results and fund education to a high level with the most funding per student in the country. The Country Liberals are setting people up for jobs and for life. This government is committed to preparing students for a future in trade. In 2015, 1894 students received a statement of attainment for one or more units of competency, and 985 students completed a full VET qualification.
Industry groups are working with us to make sure our students are work ready and able to make successful transitions from school to employment. The government is committed to ensuring our students leave school work ready and able to contribute to the Northern Territory’s economic growth. By supporting our schools to provide students with access to accredited vocational education and training programs and school based apprenticeships in local industries we are building their ability to get real jobs.
This government acknowledges the significant pace and breadth of the government’s education reforms. These results show the reforms are working. We see results in remote communities. Direct Instruction is making a difference for students in schools across the Territory. A total of 15 schools in very remote communities are now participating in the program.
Education researcher, John Hattie’s comprehensive analysis of curriculum reform rates Direct Instruction as one of the most effective teaching strategies. Our decisions are based on evidence. The education system is about results, and evidence shows we are improving results.
Direct Instruction is improving outcomes for students who are regularly attending school and is leading to increased attendance. This model of teaching and learning focuses on what students need, and provides opportunity for students to receive regular feedback on their achievements. This program offers stable curriculum delivery for students, which is essential for areas of high student mobility.
Young Territorians cannot afford another Labor government that focuses on money and not outcomes. Young Territorians can trust a Country Liberals government that funds education to a high level, that has the highest funding per student in the country, the lowest student to teacher ratio, and, importantly, young Territorians can trust a Country Liberals government that focuses on results. At the end of the day, that is what really matters.
We must be motivated to continue to drive the reform agenda to improve educational outcomes for all young Territorians. Young Territorians deserve a high-quality education, and that is what the CLP government has offered them and will continue to offer.
I commend the motion to the House.
Debate adjourned.
APPROPRIATION ACTS REPEAL BILL
(Serial 158)
(Serial 158)
Continued from 16 March 2016.
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, Labor supports this bill. It is a sensible move and a practical, short bill. I remember reading the second reading speech, and I think it holds the record for the shortest second reading speech. The bill abolishes a host of old appropriation acts that are no longer relevant and serve no ongoing purpose.
I am not sure, Treasurer, how many people have been confused. I am not sure how many people Google appropriation acts or go back through all of them. I am sure it confuses people searching through the acts we have, and obviously getting rid of bills that no longer serve a purpose makes sense. We are going back a fair way, so it has taken some time to realise we do not need the acts any longer and we should get rid of them.
I commend the Treasurer for introducing this straightforward bill. It is a five-paragraph second reading, and I do not think I have gone as long as you, Treasurer, but I thank you for introducing it and commend you for it.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I thank the Opposition Leader and members opposite for supporting this bill. As the Opposition Leader said, in so many ways it is a no-brainer. These are all defunct pieces of legislation and requirements that still appear on our books but have no use whatsoever.
The point the Opposition Leader made is a good one. We should do this more often. Future parliaments might want to devote a day a term to cleaning up some of our outdated laws.
I thank the Opposition Leader, those opposite and my colleagues, and commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Redevelopment of the Chan Building
Redevelopment of the Chan Building
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter proposing a discussion of the following definite matter of public importance from the member for Nelson:
- The government should not continue with its plans to redevelop the Chan Building but instead develop the State Square precinct either as shown in the government’s Planning for Greater Darwin document or the ALP’s’ version, Creating Darwin’s Future – A Tropical Harbour City document. (Both documents recommend the removal of the Chan Building).
that the government invite expressions of interests to develop a museum and art gallery precinct incorporating the history of the Kahlin Compound and the old Darwin Hospital on the old Darwin Hospital site at end of Mitchell Street or at least look at alternate sights.
Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, my two supporters left. Thank you to those who are still here, otherwise we might have had a gap in proceedings we were not expecting.
This issue is important. For me it has come quite suddenly, but I miss things occasionally.
As much as I had ideas about how our new Parliament House would look when discussions about the building took place, we have two of the finest buildings in the Northern Territory here. I congratulate those who had the vision to go through the pain of putting forward their ideas. It cost a lot of money at the time and there was quite a bit of controversy over it, but we now have two of the finest buildings in the Northern Territory.
It concerns me that the original State Square plan was never completed. The Chan Building, the building referred to in this MPI, was built in the early 1970s. It is one of a number of Commonwealth buildings that existed in the precinct which later became offices of the Department of the Chief Minister. With redevelopment of the area to make way for the new State Square precinct, the Chan Building was the only one retained and was used by the Legislative Assembly from 1990 until the current Parliament House was completed and opened.
In 1988 the government approved plans for the overall development concept of the government precinct, as it was then called. The original and subsequent plans show that the government precinct at that time did not include the Chan Building. The original plans, drawn up by architect Mr Roger Linklater, representing Tipperary Developments, clearly showed there was to be no Chan Building. There were to be three sight lines: one along Mitchell Street, one diagonally from the corner of Bennett and Smith Streets, and one in Civic Park.
I have, from the NT News of 1 November 1988, an article which shows Mr Roger Linklater, architect, with a plan which showed this building, the Supreme Court and a diagonal view from where these two buildings meet through to the Smith Street Mall. It was not the mall then, still Smith Street.
That was the original concept. I believe that is what the government at the time intended to finish with when it completed the State Square precinct.
After the new parliament building was opened the Chan Building became vacant. I read from an extract from Ms Sarah McAusland in the Journal of Northern Territory History called The best house in town: the development of State Square:
- By the year 2000, the Chief Minister was Denis Burke and he wanted to leave his mark on State Square. The first step was the demolition of the old Supreme Court building, made famous internationally as the scene of the Lindy Chamberlain trial in the 1980s. A green precinct was to be created in its place. Eventually the Chan Building was to go while the Reserve Bank building was to be preserved. In the meantime, the Chan building would undergo a three hundred thousand dollar temporary renovation in order to host the APEC Trade Ministers’ Conference in June.
She goes on to say:
- The Country Liberal Party lost government in the August 2001 election. It is not yet known whether the new Labor Government …
- … will pursue the plans of its predecessors for the final stage of development of State Square which would involve the demolition of the now empty Chan Building and the development of new parklands.
Sarah McAusland was a history student at NT University at that time.
In 2006 the Labor government issued a document called Creating Darwin’s Future – a Tropical Harbour City, which showed a State Square precinct plan without the Chan Building and similar to Roger Linklater’s original one with the same sight lines. A proposed visitor centre was included fronting Smith Street, where the present law court car park is situated.
I have a picture from the 2006 document Creating Darwin’s Future – a Tropical Harbour City which clearly shows no Chan Building. The buildings to remain were the old Reserve Bank, which is still there, the town hall ruins, the Administrator’s office, and there was talk of have a World War II museum where the court used to be. That did not happen and the museum went to East Point.
The concept was to develop parks, gardens and sites around these two buildings, from Mitchell Street, the civic gardens near the council and the intersection of the mall and Bennett Street. You concentrated people’s sight lines on these two magnificent buildings. That was the intent of Labor’s plan in 2006.
In 2010 the CLP introduced its plan for the Darwin central business district under Planning for Greater Darwin, a document I know well because parts of the Darwin region where I live were meant to be rural. Slowly that is being eaten away. However, I digress. The document stated that the address of one of the most important Northern Territory civic buildings was inadequate.
Page 64 of that document says:
- The address to one of the most important Northern Territory civic buildings is inadequate. Plans should be put in place for the future removal of the Chan Building in order to create a proper address for Parliament House.
An opportunity exists within the State Square Civic Precinct for underground parking and pedestrian access at the sub-ground level to the Wharf Precinct, as well as new access to the existing underground World War II oil tunnels from the city end.
This element may include public art features and/or central sunken rotunda (e.g. Post Office Square, Brisbane and Singapore’s Merlion statue).
Employees of the State Square civic precinct, plus visitors, will use the car parking and in addition it may be appropriate to include an air-conditioned commercial and retail component. This will also enhance the access to the Wharf Precinct and support its activities.
It also says how this development would fit in with the existing buildings. The plan shows no Chan Building. It seems that we have done a U-turn. Last year the government issued a media release saying it would spend money doing up State Square by transforming the Chan Building. A media release dated 30 November 2015 – there may have been one earlier – said:
One of the most exciting architectural projects in the Northern Territory will be lead firm DKJ projects.architects in partnership with the nationally acclaimed Fender Katsalidis Mirams Architects.
The repurposing of Darwin’s Chan Building into a modern, dedicated visual art gallery was announced in the 2015 NT Budget earlier this year.
…
‘The Territory Government is extremely excited about the redevelopment of the Chan Building’, Chief Minister Adam Giles said.
…
‘This project will invigorate the CBD of Darwin and create a drawcard for locals and visitors alike.’
Arts and Museums minister Gary Higgins said the project will deliver a flagship iconic destination.
‘It will become a new cultural institution to further promote Northern Territory culture, especially our Indigenous art and culture, and to support culture exchange with Asia’, Minister Higgins said.
‘It will be a venue Territorians can be proud of and will expand the horizons of the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory substantially.’
MAGNT Chair Allan Myers AO QC said the project is an ‘inspired initiative’.
The CLP government issued a plan, and sometimes there is nothing worse than politicians forgetting the plan. The plan was to get rid of the building. Until that building goes, these two buildings will never be seen at their best. Adding three storeys to that building will make it as high as Parliament House. Looking from Parliament House all you will see is a building that was never meant to be there. I do not want that building to destroy the beautiful architecture we have here. This, in itself, should attract people. We have two fine buildings, and people come past and take photographs, but we have not completed the plan – never taken it to its full extent.
It reminds me of Canberra. Walter Burley Griffin and his wife designed Canberra. I believe she did more of the work than him as he was more of an architect. Politicians became involved and Canberra is not quite the same as Walter Burley Griffin designed. We have an opportunity to show we have faith in the original planners, and we need to show them we will complete State Square the way it was meant to be.
I was called by a government architect who has concerns about what is happening. People have said, ‘Gerry Wood, you’re not an architect’. I agree, but I have a love for our city even if I do not live in it. This is my capital city. I have a love for beautiful buildings and good design. The government architect, Professor Lawrence Nield, told the ABC he had reservations about the viability of the project. I quote from the ABC webpage news article dated 5 April 2016:
- ‘I made my view clear to the Government about issues of cost and design of the redevelopment,’ Professor Nield said.
In an article published late last year in the Australian Institute of Architects’ industry publication, the professional body criticised what the ABC understands to be the Northern Territory Government over the way the competition was run …
I did not know there was a competition:
- ‘The tender involved a commitment to an unrealistic program and the delivery of a range of ambitious outcomes under a potentially inadequate budget’, Jon Clements, national president of the Australian Institute of Architects said.
People said that even if we wanted to do it we do not have enough money, and we have a government plan to pull down the Chan Building and look at the original plan for the site.
We should take a deep breath and say, ‘We need something to attract visitors. Where could that be if the Chan Building was demolished?’ The Labor Party had an idea – which may or may not be a good one – to develop the law courts’ car park facing Mitchell Street. That is where people walk from the waterfront. Could something be developed underground and connected to the tunnels? Could you have a museum and art gallery underground and connected to the World War II tunnels?
Even better, why not develop the old hospital site? That site has been vacant for as long as the old power house has been. Many years ago a government left the old hospital site and the old power house site vacant under the guise of, ‘It has to be knocked down because it will be developed’. The old Darwin hospital site has lots of potential as Mitchell Street runs straight to it. People would like some idea of what was there before, such as those in the old Kahlin Compound and those who worked at or were born in the old Darwin hospital. There is an opportunity to include those people in an art gallery or museum.
You could have an iconic building there looking straight up Mitchell Street with art within the gardens. I presume the minister has been overseas and seen beautiful gardens in Europe where they are a part of the art of the nation, state or city. There is an opportunity to say, ‘Let’s not put $19.3m into a project which the government architecture says will not build what has been designed or planned. Let’s rethink.’
I am scared we will get the Richardson Park version of the art world if we are not careful. Someone will have a thought bubble that the building should be developed. Did they look at the plans for State Square? Did they know about the plans? Did they recognise that these two buildings are far superior to the Chan building? It might be covered with fancy architectural design but it is a block. These two buildings are well designed and should be seen at their best. While that building stays there they never will be.
We need to find somewhere else and the old Darwin hospital site is an opportunity, or perhaps the law courts car park. It could go underground and join the World War II tunnels. We need to think outside the square. It looks like we thought that would do and it was designed in a hurry because the government architect said it would not work.
I believe we should not call for tenders, although that is another issue. The funny thing is, I put a submission to the DCA on this and it was to hear it. DCA submissions close three days before tender submissions. I could not work that out, although people say it is normal. I thought you would put up a proposal to build and see if the DCA approves it then call for tenders.
If you go to the trouble of designing and the DCA says it is not a good place for a museum, you have wasted money on tender documents. Others might say it is the way the system works, but I received a letter from the Development Consent Authority saying it has been put on hold and I hope that is because the government is rethinking it.
The government needs to rethink this. The original plan from the 1990s was that the Chan Building would go so these two buildings could be seen at their best. That plan, which the government would have a copy of, should be completed. That would honour the people who originally designed State Square. Do not leave things half done. We left a few columns out of the amphitheatre and it fell down.
If you go ahead with it do you have enough money? That is what the government architect said. If you do not have money then do not start and find you have to ask the Treasurer for more.
Let us put it to the professionals and the residents of Darwin and the greater Darwin area. This is our capital city so ask for ideas. The Larrakia people might be interested. I do not know what happened to a Larrakia cultural precinct, something that has been on the cards for umpteen years.
Let us take our time and see if we can get something better than what has been proposed. The bottom line is it is time for the Chan Building to go. Let us look at another place and make sure these two buildings are left for people to enjoy, as originally planned, for years to come.
Mr HIGGINS (Arts and Museums): Madam Speaker, there is no wonder people are cynical about politicians. While I have no doubt the member for Nelson genuinely has concerns about the proposed repurposing of the Chan Building, I question the timing and method. It does not justify an MPI.
As honourable members know, the Chan Building project was announced by government a year ago last week. The member did not mention that the Chan Building was used as contemporary art space. Also, the town hall behind the Chan Building was the first museum and art gallery of the Northern Territory when Hinton was around.
The project was not announced in a media release but in last year’s budget. The Chief Minister and I were joined by the Museum and Art Gallery NT Board Chair, Allan Myers AC QC, and proudly announced the project on the steps of the Chan Building. I gave follow-up media interviews, as did Mr Myers and MAGNT Director, Marcus Schutenko.
In October we released the tender for its design, and in November we announced the successful tenderer as local firm DKJ projects.architecture, in partnership with the nationally-accredited Fender – I will not pronounce the rest of names. The member for Nelson struggled with them too.
We released the winning designs at the time and they were well publicised through general media, social media and the press. In February this year the Infrastructure minister and I announced the release of a tender for the design, development and construction with novated design for the project. This gained media exposure, as has government’s decision to extend the tender following several requests from tenderers for more detailed information and associated time extensions.
All that, then in late March the member for Nelson decided to pipe a bit louder. He has never been a fan of the project, but this is his loudest protest. He issued a media release in late March essentially saying the building should be demolished and any new art gallery should be built elsewhere. This is why you cannot blame people for being cynical.
Throughout this very public and open process there has barely been a murmur from opposition members. Then, bang, there was a definitive tear-it-down release from the member for Nelson, followed by this time-wasting motion. This is not a matter of public importance. A cynic might say this is an easy media hit for politicians 128 days out from a Territory general election, but allow me to address the honourable member’s claims.
The member for Nelson said the repurposing project will result in the Chan Building dominating the skyline and will be detrimental to the other buildings. How bizarre when you consider that just across the road is the Charles Darwin Centre and NT House, both much bigger buildings. Is the member more qualified and experienced to judge aesthetics and good design than the two multi-award winning architects with experience in gallery and cultural projects?
As to architect Professor Lawrence Nield’s comment, I can only express deep disappointment. Professor Nield sat on the design, tender and assessment panel for the project. For him to now say he has issues with the design is not cricket – to be polite and parliamentary.
The member for Nelson has questioned how we can call for tenders for a building that has not gone to the DCA for approval. He said he is confused. The DCA application is based on the advanced concept design and runs in parallel with the current tender process. I am advised this is not unusual.
It is important to remember the government’s intent. We want to create a brand new cultural institution for the Northern Territory, a dedicated visual art gallery. We want this to be central and take advantage of the increasing tourism trade this government has been building up, and to make use of the prime position the Chan Building offers. As the Chief Minister said, the redevelopment will cement Darwin’s position as a must-do arts and cultural destination.
On 16 June 2015 Allan Myers AC QC said:
- By expanding its offerings and providing a venue in Darwin City, the MAGNT will be attracting more local visitors and, of course, more tourists, who will enjoy this new space.
He added:
- The MAGNT currently receives more than 200 000 visitors a year and we can anticipate a great deal more people benefiting from this new and strategic location.
I am surprised the member has called for the tearing down of the Chan Building, especially given its rich history. The repurposing of the Chan Building gives it fresh life and will invigorate not only State Square but also Bennett Park and the town hall ruins, which I said was the first museum and art gallery of the Northern Territory.
Before the opposition squeals about not telling anyone, we have had, and are continuing, conversations with the City of Darwin about the project to ensure it complements its city master plan. So far feedback has been positive.
I will give the member for Nelson something to chew on. As I said earlier, the design, development and construct tender period has been extended at the request of tenderers. I am happy to be guided by experts on this. But if – and it is a very big if – the tender submissions come back, for whatever reason, with proposals that do not hit our high water mark I will take the issue back to Cabinet for further consideration. That would not be unusual for a project of this magnitude.
We want to get this right. We want an iconic venue for future generations. We want a top class art gallery in the heart of Darwin, a venue which will enchant visitors and become a must-do on the arts and cultural tourism circuit. We will not settle for less.
With regard to heritage issues with the Chan Building, it is my understanding – I am waiting for confirmation on this for the member for Nelson – that an application has been received to have the Chan Building heritage listed.
Members interjecting.
Mr HIGGINS: I know. I do not know who, but not me. I am advised that while the application is being considered it is not possible to pull the building down.
I have a long connection with the Chan Building. The previous Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, worked for me and was based in the Chan Building. I am sure he would love to see the Chan Building remain. Labor has already said they are happy to continue with the Chan project. Previous plans have their arts centre in the law courts car park. I am sure they are willing to wait for the tenders to come back and see how this pans out in the long run.
This does not deserve to be a matter of public importance. The issue has been ongoing for over 12 months. I am cynical about the timing, not just by the member for Nelson but other people. They have had plenty of time to express their concerns so I find the timing somewhat questionable.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, there is a common theme running through the Country Liberal Party government that they get to say what is a matter of public importance. Perhaps a hint of arrogance is creeping into government in its dying months.
This is a matter of public importance. The Chan Building is an iconic building in the heart of State Square. We should debate in parliament the future of the State Square area, its use, and whether an iconic building is dramatically changed beyond recognition – currently the government plan – or is removed, as proposed in previous Labor government plans. I have the 2006 plans here which provide for no Chan Building, and sight lines from the old town hall ruins through to Government House and out into the harbour, which I believe the member for Nelson referred to.
These are all considerations. I had a view when I was Lands and Planning minister, which was different to the 2006 Labor view. I like the Chan Building and would like to see it remain as is. I am one of those old Darwin people who do not want to see every building I have grown up with removed or changed beyond recognition. The Chan Building is a symbol of my childhood and a representation of old government buildings architecture.
It is also an historic site, as parliament was run from there when the old Legislative Assembly building was damaged beyond its use and function and had to be raised. The old Legislative Assembly shifted to the Chan Building. For me, that building is important.
I would hate to see it altered as per the proposed CLP government plans. I believe today they are backing out of it to an extent. I thank them for that as it will give us time to adequately consider use of the site. Is it to be raised or stay as it is externally in keeping with its history? They are genuine considerations.
I understand the thinking around its removal and opening up of State Square to allow the sight lines between the historic old town hall and the beautiful buildings of the Supreme Court and Parliament House. I understand the town planning considerations and design. I have a strong personal view that the Chan Building represents so much of our history. The architecture of those old government buildings that sat beside it has disappeared. There used to be a row of them and they are gone. The only one left standing is the Chan Building.
My father was a senior public servant. He started as a junior and went through the ranks to become a senior in the era of long white socks held up with elastic bands, sandals and shorts.
As a child I would visit my dad in the government office buildings that sat alongside the Chan Building. I hold those memories, but I cannot talk about what Darwin was like then. If we remove everything Darwin was – I point out the Chan Building to my children and grandchildren and say, ‘A row of buildings looked like this. This is where government was run from when we were administered by the Commonwealth. It is our history.’ I do not know who has sought heritage listing but I am glad they have.
The practical side the government has not been honest, open or transparent about is what sits below the ground. The hub of the government computer is below the ground. The figures have probably changed, but there would be no change from $30m to relocate what is in the Chan Building.
To most people this building looks like an old empty relic because the CLP, in its infinite lack of wisdom, decided to stop it being an art gallery. People think it is a shell of a building when it is really running government through its computer networks and systems underground. I do not understand it because I am not a computer whiz and did not experience working from that building like the member for Daly or the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson.
As a former minister I know there is enough money involved in relocating what is in the Chan Building to make it reasonably fiscally prohibitive. The CLP promises all types of strange and wonderful things which are not delivered and this is one of them. ‘Let’s build this amazing’ – maybe we can call it Giles Tower – ‘phallic symbol to the Giles era and the CLP government’.
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 31. I ask the member for Karama to withdraw the comment relating to a symbol.
Ms LAWRIE: If he finds it offensive I withdraw it. Many tall buildings are referred to architecturally that way. It was not a personal reference, but if you find it offensive so be it.
Giles Tower, a tall edifice representative of the soon to be departing CLP government. It is a vision and dream not realised, just like the vision and dream for the dirty port or the chest beating when things were not realised.
Not one extra cent from the Commonwealth for infrastructure funding in the Territory was delivered by the Giles government. It has been a joke. Fortunately the member for Nelson did not see the Chan Building redevelopment as a joke but as something of great concern. He listened to architectural advice and has brought the matter of public importance before us.
If there is light at the end of the tunnel because the building has a heritage listing application that is good. I hope that in a mature government in the future we carefully and genuinely consider all the options for our iconic State Square and the Chan Building, the last example of the old Commonwealth government office blocks. It is part of our history, I believe, but I do not have the expertise the Heritage Council has.
I thank the member for Nelson for bringing this grave matter of public importance before us. In any other mature capital city, if a government proposed such a drastic change in the centre of State Square there would be huge debate. One issue with the lack of debate in the Territory is people know the CLP government does not listen. It says something, and people have given up saying anything in response because they know that, whatever they say, nothing will change.
The CLP rushes headlong into what it says, like the sale of TIO and the port, the removal of the First Home Owner Grant for existing dwellings, the cuts to education, the running down of our overburdened health system and the Chief Minister laughing at nurses in ED when they raised issues. As a community we know, and have seen it for three-and-a-half years, that the CLP does not listen. That is why I say not to be shocked when there is no significant public debate on your grandiose announcements. Anyone with knowledge of the details and issues knows things will never come to pass because you cannot get a project off the ground. You have failed to deliver on simple projects. We know you are hopeless, chaotic and dysfunctional and do not have the wherewithal to undertake this project.
I am pleased an application for heritage listing has delayed your fumbling of this project to the point we will go to an election and there will no longer be a CLP government. Whoever the future Minister for Lands and Planning is, please do not rush the Chan Building decision, but genuinely consult with all stakeholders. A future government may decide to go back to the 2006 plans of former Chief Minister, Clare Martin, about removing it altogether, albeit it at very high cost, or the idea I had when Lands and Planning minister of not removing it because it represents part of our history and should be opened to public use. We do not have enough open space for our arts sector.
It could go further than it previously did and be used for music. I have not seen any scope or design on what it would take for it to become a live music venue for the not-for-profit music scene. Can we encourage young artists and give them affordable and accessible space?
There are a few ideas, and I thank the member for Nelson for bring this matter of public importance to the Chamber.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I also thank the member for Nelson for bring this matter of public importance to this Chamber. Essentially, it is about appropriation of $20m of taxpayers’ funds. If that is not a matter of public importance I do not know what is.
I am honoured to participate in this debate. It is a good opportunity for not only a local member, but any member of parliament or minister to contribute to a debate and outcome for – I cannot remember the quote from the member for Port Darwin – the true and good welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
Mr Elferink: I say it every day, ‘For the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory’.
Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, member for Port Darwin. I hope Hansard caught that because I would like it included. Essentially that is why I am on my feet now.
I congratulate whoever wrote the minister’s speech. It was a clever twist on words, was laid back and had humour. I would like to know who wrote that for you, minister.
Your delivery was excellent. You showed a resonance of community values which could not be recorded. We got the feeling you shared many of the member for Nelson’s sentiments about appropriation of $20m in taxpayers’ funds.
I challenged this project from the start. I am on the public record during the budget announcements, at the 2015-16 estimates hearings, and the Parliamentary Record on a number of occasions challenging the minister with questions like, ‘Is this a good investment for the arts in the Northern Territory? Is it a good infrastructure investment? Could it be utilised better?’
Minister, your comment, ‘Before the opposition squeals’, was interesting. I remind you in opposition we have been very active with the Country Liberal Party’s budget appropriations. At the risk of spin doctors with semantic distortions – not quite as good as a Fender Super-Sonic 65 W – we have discussed this at length. With regard to Labor’s infrastructure policy, if the Country Liberal Party was to go ahead with this, as a responsible alternative government we would deal with it. Before the spin doctors play havoc with opportunities to waste time in this House with cheap semantic distortions, that is a pragmatic and realistic Labor policy. We have an opportunity to continue the debate, and the minister has suggested it could be on hold.
That brings me to an important point. This started when the CLP tried to create a record infrastructure budget and I took on three headline issues. One was the $20m appropriated to the redevelopment of Richardson Park. History shows what happened there with a government that does not consult. Then $20m was appropriated to the Chan Building and $20m appropriated to a Territory Indigenous art gallery.
I reminded the CLP then, and remind them today, that they have $80m of taxpayer funds in the back pocket that can be appropriated into significant infrastructure for the Northern Territory and, therefore, a great opportunity to debate this.
That $80m is a realistic figure because Richardson Park did not go ahead, it looks like the Chan Building plan is on hold, and there is $20m for an Indigenous art gallery we have not heard about again. However, Labor has put out some powerful infrastructure policies to fund the construction industry in the Northern Territory, the tourism sector – new ways of attracting markets to the Northern Territory and new tourists, diverse tourists who will come in search of our arts, culture, heritage and history. Our policy crosses into regional development for the length and breadth of the Northern Territory.
Significant cash is floating around but seems to be on hold now. It will be interesting to see Budget 2016-17 unpack the revotes for this famous record infrastructure budget of the CLP, while the middle-level manufacturing sector and the contractors in the greater Darwin area and across the regions of the Northern Territory are going broke. That is an interesting situation for a government that wants to crow about infrastructure and development.
This brings me to my relationship with the Chan Building. For anybody interested, and those listening who plan to enter parliament, I was a new member elected in August 2008. I came to parliament and was inducted. Then I was given a fabulous office on the fifth floor. Mind you, it was a rough neighbourhood in those days. You had to lock your doors and windows because it was full of CLP.
I opened the curtains of my fifth floor office and there was the roofline of the Chan Building. Being an ex-teacher and principal who had wrangled through repairs and maintenance budgets, minor new works budgets and capital works programs for over 30 years, I was looking at a roofline with significant issues. There were panels hanging off the air conditioner shrouding, it looked like excessive water pouring off the roof from the air conditioning plant, significant rust could be seen across different sectors of the roof, and from my lay perspective this building needed some tender love and care.
I reported it to the Speaker. I thought, ‘This is the line management for my new position’, and I reported it in good faith. To my shock, a few days later when I opened the same curtains groups of contractors were on the roof repairing the infrastructure issues. It was amazing. That was my formal introduction to the Chan Building.
As minister for Construction and Infrastructure at the time, I had the staff of DCI relocated into the Chan Building while the Palmerston building was being refurbished. That was a great exercise in refurbishment. I saw the Chan Building in its entirety as I had access to it and walked its floors. With engineers and construction experts I was able to understand the real constraints with the building. It was definitely 1970s infrastructure with major constraints. Like the member for Karama, I became aware of the ICT component of the Northern Territory government’s operations in the basement of the building. That was essentially a massive no-go zone and a serious constraint to development.
That was not a really happy time for DCI staff. It was a difficult time of relocating twice and occupying the building in a constrained environment. I learnt lots about the building during that time. As minister for Arts and Museums I developed the Chan Contemporary Art Space. That targeted community groups and grassroots arts and culture initiatives and the sector embraced it with open arms. It was a great time to engage with stakeholders, to plan, and then the exhibition started. I remember an outstanding exhibition from the disability sector.
We saw a lot of movement into the State Square precinct through the Chan Contemporary Art Space. It was new and fledgling, but we could see it had opportunity. It engaged with the community and tourists were the next layer.
I have challenged the CLP government on a number of occasions about closing the arts space as a cost-cutting exercise. I was treated with the usual contempt at the estimates hearings. A previous Arts minister, the member for Greatorex – it was a definite challenge and I said, ‘You have missed this opportunity’. The answers are on the public record. It was closed, has never seen the light of day, and that initiative has lost its momentum. The CLP government has lost credibility with the grassroots arts sector, especially in regard to the greater Darwin area. It now has a new plan, but we have heard tonight that has stalled.
As Minister for Lands and Planning it was a privilege to be part of developing the Greater Darwin Plan. That incorporated all aspects of taking Darwin, and the greater Darwin region, forward to what it is, the capital of northern Australia. Part of that work included the old Darwin hospital site, which really is Myilly Point. My definition to the department was the Bennelong Point of Darwin. It is incredible real estate, an asset of the Crown that can be high-end, cultural and significant development for the city in the future.
The member for Nelson mentioned that. I remind the House of the extensive consultation work done with members of the community who represent the Kahlin Compound survivors, the nurses of the old Darwin hospital and the Stolen Generation. There are extensive planning documents that would still be available from the department of Arts and Museums. The department did a lot of research, connection and consultation with those important groups and looked at a master planning exercise around that point.
The member for Nelson has a serious alternative. That area reflects our culture, heritage and history and there is opportunity for government to development that in a modern urban built form. There is an opportunity for high-density living, commercial and retail. It is a great site that can be developed in the future, and has been raised in this MPI. There are significant alternatives. With $80m in the back pocket there is serious cash to progress such plans.
The CLP’s plan for Myilly Point is completely different to Labor’s. Initial discussions reveal they are looking at about 80% high-density residential, which completely gets away from the community aspect, the culture, heritage and the opportunities.
Madam Speaker, I believe I have 20 minutes but the clock only gave me 15.
Madam SPEAKER: No, it is 15.
Mr McCARTHY: I am nearly done?
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, you are nearly done.
Mr McCARTHY: As the first opposition member to speak?
Madam SPEAKER: Standing orders have changed and the time limits have changed.
Mr McCARTHY: I back the member for Nelson on this. The government has an opportunity now. We have heard from the minister that some new issues have emerged. The money is in the bank and together we can look at the best way to deliver these outcomes for the Northern Territory. As I said, there are incredible opportunities to do that.
Mr STYLES (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I agree with the member for Nelson that what happens to our art and space is a matter of public importance.
Irrespective of where museums and art galleries are we need them in the Northern Territory. Art is an important part of our culture and history. There is an old saying, ‘If you don’t know where you’ve been, you don’t know where you’re going’. It is important that Territorians have access to quality museums and art space. Art is a way a community expresses itself, its issues and its priorities, and that comes out in some of the magnificent art works we see across the Territory from the multicultural groups to the Aboriginal population, especially in Central Australia. The Country Liberal Party government is very aware of that.
Art is a way of measuring where a community is in its evolution. Quite often at the beginning of a culture the art work is basic and not shown to many. As a community develops and evolves the art is shown to more people. More people travel and share in the fantastic stories art and the expression of culture through song and dance offer. Art is not just a painting on a piece of bark, a canvas or a piece of timber, it is about dance, music, and the way people tell their stories. It may be through painting, storytelling or the written word.
For that you need a vibrant economy. To undertake extensions or repair and refurbish any building, or build a new one, there must be a vibrant economy to pay for it. You cannot do what the previous Labor government did and put it on the MasterCard. It is all very well for Labor to say, ‘You can do this and that and we will do this and that’, but it is about generating wealth. If you do not, you end up like Greece. I wonder how they maintain historic art works or historic buildings in Greece at the moment. Some of their magnificent buildings are living art, going back to an era where everyone who built something was an artist. I would say people who build today are not artists. There are some fantastic builders with extremely innovative ideas about how to generate good-looking buildings.
However, you need a vibrant economy. To achieve that you can have one-shot-in-the-locker, as the previous government did, or you can have a diversified economy. Many people like to donate to the arts community not necessarily governments.
Philanthropic organisations and people across the country and internationally are happy to contribute money to the arts. However, having spoken to several over the years, they are keen to ensure that art is exposed to as many people as possible. That comes to something the member for Barkly mentioned – tourists and new tourists.
The Giles government has a fantastic record of contributing to increased tourist numbers. Tourist numbers dropped over 11 years of Labor. Those numbers are now growing. You have to invest in tourism and have a vision of where you will take the tourism industry and where you need to support tourism.
For philanthropic organisations to say they will support the Northern Territory we need to demonstrate that the art will be appreciated and looked at. People who seriously want to contribute to art galleries, art spaces and public art want to ensure the number of people who see it is not declining. They enjoy the feeling they get to know more and more people will see what they have publicly displayed.
You need a diversified economy to ensure that you get people on board and into the Territory.
With regard to the city master plan and the Chan Building, government considers all issues affecting the Chan Building. The member for Karama said that we cannot shift the government computer centre from the bottom of the Chan Building. She picked a figure for the move, but I have one which is a lot less. Is the middle of town the right place? There is an ongoing debate on whether it should be somewhere else.
You need businesses to operate in the Northern Territory so people who have spare money can donate to the arts. We rely on donations of paintings, artworks and stories.
There are some great collections in the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory at Bullocky Point. The same can be said for the Araluen Art Centre in Alice Springs. There are art spaces at the cultural centre in Katherine. With regard to the cultural aspects of art, in the Northern Territory we have many different cultures and the depth and breadth of that art is quite remarkable.
The Makassans who came here in excess of 400 years ago brought Indonesian art with them. They brought stick figures, clothing, their artwork and exchanged them with local Aboriginal people in Arnhem Land for things like fresh water and food. When they finished capturing trepang and other things they would catch the trade winds home. When the winds were favourable they would come back again. The Aboriginal people of the Top End have exchanged art for well over 400 years.
More recently the Chinese arrived, and you can see their art in the arts and artefacts museum at the Chung Wah Society in Woods Street, which is a fantastic museum. They have records of all the early Chinese settlers who came here to work on the Pine Creek railway line, the Pine Creek goldfields, to grow vegetables, run factories, laundries and all the things a town needs to sustain ongoing development. They have their own art.
The records of the families and descendants of the early settlers are artwork themselves. It is recorded as a magnificent display of fine art. The scrolls things are written on – the artisans have made the scrolls and the scribes have entered the records in Chinese. They go back to the 1800s.
Looking at the Filipino artworks, through Southeast Asia to the Greeks – the Greeks have a day, which was recently, where they celebrate their independence. The Greeks have artwork that dates back to the original Greek settlers in Darwin. We need to display that art as well. Tourists need to see it. Fortunately our investment in tourism is on the rise and more and more people are arriving.
When you increase population you increase the variety of art. We want the next generation to come along – I wonder if in 50 years’ time a picture of an app on an iPhone will be considered art showing how people did things then. What will be considered art?
Regarding graphic art, when I was a boy we had Space Invaders on the computer. Was that art? Was it an expression of what it is? These are the things we put in museums, and in 50 years’ time it will seem absurd that people did that 50 or 100 years ago.
We appreciate art. Art is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but we are trying to attract people here so they bring their art and culture with them. One of the great advantages of living in Darwin, and to a lesser degree at this point Alice Springs – Alice Springs has a fast-growing multicultural community where people see the centre of Australia as a place of opportunity for families and communities to integrate into Alice Springs and value add not only culturally and with food and dance, but their art. The art space in Alice Springs is important as well.
It is important that we continue to grow our community. For instance, look at international education. We are working hard overseas to attract more international students to study here, either at high school or university, undertake undergraduate programs, MBA programs or doctorates in their chosen field. Many of those people are into art. Hopefully, if they go back to their home country they will take some of the art they purchased here with them.
When looking to increase tourism you hope that whilst people are here, if they have looked at art spaces – both public and privately-held art collections – they take that back and their friends say, ‘I might go to Darwin and the Northern Territory on my way into Australia’.
These are the things you have to work on. It is not just where the building is or how big it will be; it is about the holistic picture of enabling more people to appreciate the art and culture of the Northern Territory. We need to display it.
I heard what the member for Nelson said in relation to the Chan Building. It may or may not be the Chan Building, but wherever it is we need to ensure we have the economy running well so people can get around and have the time and disposable income to enjoy the arts.
As a widower raising kids, there was not much money for petrol to get into town, but we got out from time to time. I feel for those who do not have that opportunity. The better off we are in relation to a vibrant economy, the more people in our community will be able to enjoy the art spaces we create, be it in a public building or in the museum.
Madam Speaker, I agree with the member for Nelson that we should look carefully where we put our art spaces. We need to fit into city master plans, make sure our philanthropic contributors feel great about contributing to the arts in the Northern Territory, that tourism and international student numbers are on the way up and those people continue to contribute to the Northern Territory.
Mr CHANDLER (Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, as Minister for Infrastructure I am responsible for most if not all the construction government decides on, whether it is roads, bridges, barge landings or schools. The Department of Infrastructure is managing the design, documentation and construction of the Chan Building redevelopment on behalf of the client, the Department of Arts and Museums and Board of the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, MAGNT. The Northern Territory government has allocated $11.3m towards construction of this project. The remaining $7m of funding for the project will be contributed by external sources through philanthropic contributions to the project through MAGNT.
The Chief Minister and the Minister for Arts and Museums announced the redevelopment as part of Budget 2015-16. The project is currently at the advanced concept design stage and Tender T15-1955 closes on 27 April 2016, seven days from now. It is for the design, development and construction of the facility.
The principal design consultant initially engaged by the Northern Territory government will be novated to the successful tenderer, who will be responsible for managing to completion the design and construction of the facility. The Development Consent Authority application is based on the advanced concept design and is running parallel with the current tender process. The redevelopment works are expected to be completed for a Dry Season 2017 opening.
The redevelopment will turn the Chan Building into a modern exhibition space. The project will further develop the economic potential of arts and cultural tourism in the city centre. The community will be informed as the project progresses and at significant milestones.
The Chan Building has long been neglected and is half empty, yet is in a prime position for residents and tourists alike to enjoy as a cultural facility. Since 2010 the Chan Contemporary Art Space has operated as a Dry Season visual arts exhibition space for contemporary art on the ground floor of the Chan Building. The new MAGNT gallery will leverage off the success of the CCAS and provide a significant new attraction for locals and tourists.
The Chan Building would become a downtown location for the MAGNT and act as a major anchor for visual arts in the CBD. It is funny that ideas and concepts like this often become controversial, just as public art becomes controversial from time to time. I know the issues the Darwin council has had over the years with certain public art in and around the city. However, the Northern Territory has a remarkable number of art pieces in storage.
It was remarkable to come into government and learn how much of our wonderful art was in storage because there was no space to showcase it to tourists and locals. That was sad. It is always great to rotate a number of art pieces through a museum, but much of this art has not seen the light of day for many a long year.
Art is for the person looking at it. I do not like recommending restaurants to people because I will go somewhere and have a wonderful meal, but if I recommend it to someone they could have a terrible time. It is the same with art, it is a personal thing. I might look at a piece of art and think it is beautiful, see something in it, or find something about my past or something that reminds me of my life. From that I can learn or respect that piece of artwork. Some other people might look at it and ask, ‘What the hell is that?’
I have seen artwork people have made a lot of money from, and I have sometimes thought my own children, back in Year 4 or 5, could have done an equal or better job. Something might be worth millions of dollars, and I do not quite get that. Art is for an individual to appreciate.
It is a marvellous idea to have some space in the Northern Territory where our art, much of it in storage, can be displayed not only to locals but the many tourists that visit our fine city. To have that art on display is important, and the Chan Building could be used for that.
Over the years we have discussed many times what we could use the building for, and the discussions eventually lead to turning it into a contemporary art space. It is a fabulous idea but not without its challenges. In the many discussions I have had with Dave McHugh, the CE of Infrastructure, the type of construction of the building is problematic. I thought we could rip out a couple of floors and make a big space like we have in Parliament House. I thought that somewhere in the centre of the building we could have a great auditorium with things hanging from the ceiling. Maybe we could turn this into a museum.
Mr Higgins: It has the right height.
Mr CHANDLER: It has the right height but Madam Speaker might not approve of that. I thought that could be done to the internal parts of the Chan Building, but, alas, learning more about the construction of that building shows it is not possible. With the type of reinforcement – with high tensile steel and the stress on that steel it is not possible to cut out sections of the building. That was off the table, so people had to come up with unique designs of how we could turn the building into a great public art space.
There is also a great opportunity, and I know this side has spoken about this from time to time – is it time to bulldoze the whole building? Is it time to turn the area into a lovely park and garden area that can be enjoyed by residents and tourists? It would complement the State Square area by having a beautiful and well-designed garden and area to sit. At the same time the government is facing an additional challenge as the building has had an application for heritage listing. That creates some problems.
I expect that not only does it rule out bulldozing the building, but it may prevent certain things happening to change the building. I do not want to go too far into that as I am not entirely across the details of what can and cannot be done when a heritage listing application is made. I know the minister is compelled to protect the building at the moment so nothing major can happen to it. When it is assessed the minister will decide if it will be heritage listed. At the moment there is some hiatus around the building, although that does not stop any of the tender processes continuing.
Tenders close on 27 April. They will then be assessed and a decision made on where we go from here.
MOTION
Intrapac Application to the Water Controller
Intrapac Application to the Water Controller
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I move that the government immediately puts on hold an application by Intrapac to the Water Controller as advertised on Tuesday this week that would allow Intrapac to extract 571 ML of water, or half of the estimated sustainable yield of 1057 ML per year, from the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer, sections 05827, 05758, 05761 and 00507 Hundred of Strangways, known as Noonamah Ridge, until the Environment Protection Authority has completed and released its report on the Noonamah Ridge Development Environmental Impact Statement.
This area is of great importance to many people in the rural area. Madam Speaker, you initiated a meeting about 10 days ago which between 200 and 300 people attended. That number shows the importance of development in the area. There has been a lot of debate in the community about consultation. It was clear from the number of people who attended the meeting that consultation regarding Noonamah Ridge has not happened, and people in that area have not been consulted on whether they want this development to occur.
An application appeared in the paper titled, ‘Notice of Intention to make a Water Extraction Licence Decision pursuant to section 17B of the Water Act’. It says there is an application to extract water from the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer.
After I issued a media release in relation to this I received a copy of a permit issued to a company called Porosus Pty Ltd. I am sure it was on the department’s website. It said a licence had been approved for Porosus to extract 700 ML from the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer. The original application for water said no water extraction licences were currently issued for this aquifer and no stock or domestic bores were using it.
I was confused because there had been one extractive licence issued for Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer which said the aquifers underlying the Noonamah Ridge property – I think this came from the department – are fractured rock-type aquifers commonly developed in the weathered zone of Wildman Siltstone, a widespread geological formation which extends from Noonamah eastward to the Mary River area. This area is represented by two types of rock – siltstone and quartzite. Bores drilled into this aquifer typically obtain moderate air lift yields.
It went on to say that sustainable yields from these bores are again likely to be much lower, for example, 2 L to 5 L per second.
It said the licence application seeks a maximum ground water extraction of 517 ML per year for a public water supply on a land of 2641 ha.
It goes on, ‘Recharge to siltstone aquifers in Darwin is taken to be of the order of 200 mm a year. Given the land of the proposed development is 2641 ha, the annual discharge is estimated to be 5282 ML per year. Based on 80% of this annual recharge being apportioned to environmental uses, the amount available for consumptive use is 1056 ML. The Intrapac application seeks a maximum entitlement of half this, at 517 ML. The requested amount is well within that limit and should have no adverse effects on existing users who are located on the north, north-west and south of the property.’
It goes on to say, ‘It is important to note that bores located within the Darwin water control district are only required to be licensed if they are equipped to pump greater than 15 L per second. The applicant is not required to apply for a licence for bores equipped to pump less than 15 L per second under the Water Act. If granted the water extraction licence allows the Department of Land Resource Management to monitor and therefore manage the resource. Under licence conditions all bores must be metered and pumpage data is provided to the department on a monthly basis. The licence would also be subject to annual announced allocations. Under the annual allocation process extractive entitlements are able to be reduced to accommodate poor Wet Seasons.’
Minister, you say there is some exemption but I am yet to get my head around it. Perhaps you could explain that in your response. I understand you must be licensed to take more than 15 L per second. If you take 14.999 L per second you do not need a licence and can pump until the cows come home, which would be a concern in that area.
That issue got people talking. Residents are concerned that there could be more water drawn out of this aquifer. We know eventually there will be – the executive summary relating to Noonamah Ridge – as this is only stage one and it will require a future stage which will certainly look for more water.
The other issue, which I believe was raised at the meeting, is the company wants to drill bores to provide water for a town. If people are not sure what I am talking about, look at the advertising brochures put out for Noonamah Ridge. Noonamah Ridge is meant to be a residential area, and that was claimed in the original plans. It is part of the peri-urban area the Planning Commission calls part of the Litchfield area. The Noonamah Ridge website says:
- Noonamah Ridge is the name of a proposed new rural residential community in the Noonamah/Hughes region. It is currently in the early, investigation phases of planning and design.
Noonamah is an outer rural area of Darwin, approximately 36 km SE of the Darwin CBD. Located in the Litchfield municipality, the area is currently mostly rural but has been experiencing strong growth in population and development.
The Project Vision is:
- The vision for Noonamah Ridge is to provide a high quality, predominantly residential estate, providing a range of lot sizes and typologies, with an emphasis on retaining rural character and amenity.
The estate will be serviced by one or more local village centres, encouraging cohesion and social amenity, including the provision of land for new schools, retail facilities, community centres and land for new volunteer fire brigades.
- Noonamah Ridge is currently going through a detailed process to inform the nature of the new community. An Environmental Impact Statement has been completed, with documentation currently in the public exhibition phase.
It has since gone to the EPA.
Many residents are concerned that this company wants to provide water to what is essentially a residential area because it cannot connect to Power and Water. It wants to be the equivalent of Power and Water in the community. It would need a licence under the Water Supply and Sewerage Services Act.
The Utilities Commission was initially established to play a regulatory role in this area. It is also the body which provides a water licence for a community. In the Darwin region, Power and Water is licensed to provide water to communities connected to potable water, including Noonamah Ridge. That is a requirement under the licence it has been given by the Utilities Commission.
My concern is if a private company provides water for stages one and two – you are dealing with 2000 to 3000 people – you would expect that company to provide fluoridation and chlorination, constantly monitor the quality of the water and meter it.
I have already mentioned this water supply is subject to water allocation. If there was a bad year and not enough water in the aquifer the company would have to restrict the amount of water being pumped. How that would work for a township without a secondary supply? Darwin has two water supplies, one is the borefields in the east Howard area and the other is Darwin River Dam.
Questions need to be asked about why and how this would work in practice. This development is a long way from the water supply. Power and Water have told them there is not enough water and they cannot connect to it. One reason would be the cost, and also Power and Water’s concern about provision of water to that area.
You get the impression this development is in the wrong place. The design might be perfect but in the wrong place. I am concerned that when the company puts in a water application it is saying ‘We’re going ahead with this. The government has given us a general land use objective of urban/semi-urban. We are a long way from any urban development, and we have to supply water from bores rather than the town water supply.’
People in that area have never been asked if they want Noonamah Ridge. I get into debates with the Planning Commission and they say, as they did recently, there has been adequate consultation. Intrapac held two meetings at Humpty Doo, but no one has asked people in the area if they want the land changed from rural to urban. That was never asked by the Planning Commission or Intrapac.
Intrapac said, ‘We’re going there. What do you think of our design?’ People said it was nice; some town people said they would love to live in the rural area so they adjusted the design. They had a second meeting and came up with a design but no one ever asked that question. My concern is that we are being told what our rural area will look like by those who have contacts with the right people.
This development was not on the original plans for the Darwin rural area. The first draft – there were no meetings and you had to respond by e-mail – did not include Noonamah Ridge. Between the first and second draft this appeared. I do not know anyone who barracked for it. It is called Lloyd Creek not Noonamah Ridge. It suddenly popped up out of the blue and received some media hype about how wonderful it would be. Lloyd Creek is not far from where minister Higgins lives. It has been on the map for a long time, and your Litchfield road map will show it is very much part of the rural area.
This is the cart before the horse. We have not asked the people. The application for water presumes this will go ahead. There are many hurdles to cross before that happens, but two surveys have been done. Geoff Butler conducted a survey in Acacia, which is not the nearest place – the south side of Noonamah Ridge – of around 120 people and 91% said they did not want it to happen there.
A survey was also conducted at Kezia Purick’s meeting at Elizabeth Valley, and of around 123 people who filled in the survey only one supported Noonamah Ridge. What is going on? Has there been true consultation? The Planning Commission said my surveys were a little biased and not professionally done, and I accept that, but generally speaking they asked the right questions to get the right answers.
Those surveys were done anonymously. People could have written whatever they wanted on them. The survey for Noonamah asked, ‘Do you support the Noonamah Ridge development? Would you prefer the land to stay rural or do you have another opinion?’
When nearly 100% of people who attended that meeting said they did not want Noonamah Ridge, perhaps the government might have said, ‘We need to put a brake on this because there is obviously a dislike for this type of development’. You want to put 4200 dwelling there, and if you take the latest figures for the Northern Territory of 2.1 children per woman, which was in the NT News recently, that is four people per household, which is roughly 16 000 people.
This development will go into an area where, if it had been developed into a rural area, there would perhaps be 4000 people. It will have nearly four times that number with no upgrading of road infrastructure. People in Elizabeth Valley know that road floods and is the main road out. There have been no discussions about how that road will be upgraded.
I would prefer this application be placed on hold. We should not be looking at water allocation until the Environment Protection Authority has reported on the environmental impact statement provided by Intrapac. I have said publicly the company has done an excellent job with its environmental impact statement, which is about 3 ft thick. I have only used the executive summary because I do not have the time to read such a thick document.
A more obvious reason why this development is in the wrong place is that it requires bore water to run the town. It should be in Weddell. The company told me it has asked the government twice for land for this development, and mentioned Weddell was requested once. I have not seen any paperwork to support that. Does the Minister for Lands and Planning know of an application from this company to acquire Crown land for the development?
The company has obviously done a lot of work and I will not knock the design. It appears to be somewhere people would enjoy being, but it is urban. The Noonamah Ridge website says it is predominantly residential. They have also mentioned country style. If you add ‘country’ it sounds like you are in the country, but you are on a 400 m2 or 800 m2 block and the trees are over there. It is an application for urban development in a rural area.
One interesting thing from the meeting at Elizabeth Valley is we have learnt about the aquifer. This is not the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer, but a different one. There is also Koolpinyah aquifer, and another aquifer was mentioned. People responding to the submission would not know about these things.
That was a good reason for the meeting and I congratulate the member for Goyder for it. I thank the Minister for Land Resource Management for allowing people from his department to explain things.
A fair amount of science was involved. It highlighted the need for government staff – not in controversial matters like this – to attend meetings. I would be happy to help with meetings. I held some at Girraween Primary School when we discussed the Howard East Aquifer. We should have more meetings so people better understand where the water comes from, how it is recharged and so on. People will say things at meetings not necessarily because they are trying to be silly, but because they do not have the knowledge they need to make informed decisions.
The meeting was good and we now seem to be getting more information out about this aquifer. If there is enough water in that aquifer why not develop it as rural?
Some years ago there was an application for this land to be a rural development. At the time it was said there was not enough proof that the aquifer would be recharged. There was talk of allowing people in the area to have rainwater tanks. As you know from the meeting, minister, you would need an enormous number of rainwater tanks over six months to provide water for a family.
If the government has found there are better supplies of water than previously known, why not allow this land to be developed as originally planned? The government can limit the amount of water people take without worrying about 15 L per second. That can be done through the Development Consent Authority. It could say that only a 0.5 L per second pump be on a bore. Part of the development could have meters for monitoring, and people be allowed to pump only a certain amount if that is the best way to look after the aquifer and allow people to live on rural land.
I believe the Planning Commission did not understand the argument put forward. It was not about whether land should be cut into little blocks or big blocks. The argument was about retaining the rural area as a great place to raise families. If people want to live in a suburb they can buy in Palmerston, Darwin or the new city of Weddell. People need a choice if they want room for a horse, chooks, a dog, some bush or some space, and we should promote that.
I believe the Planning Commission is quite happy for people living in the rural area to stay there like museum pieces, and will say it is not interfering with them. However, it is not promoting and expanding the rural area. Anyone who goes to Freds Pass knows lots of young people would like to have a block of land for a horse so they can be polocrosse riders or showjump riders. They may want room to be an ATV quad bike racer, or perhaps open up their land for wildlife. There are many reasons why people live in the rural area.
As rural residents we are being attacked by the planners who have lost their belief in the CLP’s original plan, which was to build five cities: Darwin; Palmerston; Weddell; Cox Peninsula; and Erindale across the other side. We thought that would happen. For some reason there is now a move to urbanise large portions of the rural area. Look at the activity centre plans. They show 20 000 people in activity centres for Howard Springs, Coolalinga, Humpty Doo and Berry Springs. These areas are meant to be villages serving the rural area, not villages served by the rural area. The whole thing is up the creek and around the bend.
Today the Planning Commission issued a media release saying they have handed the Litchfield Subregional Land Use Plan to the minister for Planning. I am concerned that if the minister turns this off before the election and agrees with everything the Planning Commission has said and promoted, the rural area will never be the same again. That is unfortunate because the CLP government protected the rural area in its 2010 plans.
Minister, you might say this is only about a water extraction licence, but you said previously you cannot stop it. It is a matter for the Water Controller, but perhaps as a government member you can understand this is the first stage, if approved, of urbanising the rural area and not something people want.
I do not care how many people Planning Commission members met at the supermarket or how many places they stopped at. Over 200 people attended my meetings. The Planning Commission got 20 at Howard Springs and 15 at Humpty Doo. We had 220. Does that tell you something? That consultation may come under some international standard of consultation, but it is not the type of consultation that suits the rural area. It might suit a suburb in Melbourne or Sydney, but it does not suit the rural area because the people making these decisions do not understand rural people. They do not understand the rural lifestyle and are not prepared to support it. They only want to preserve it. They are not willing to take their families to the rural area for the opportunity of an alternate lifestyle.
The plans put forward by Intrapac are only the first stage. The application for 571 ML says:
- Proposed supply strategy future stage – currently with stage one Intrapac intends to investigate the viability of the Koolpinyah aquifer.
I was at a planning meeting recently – I gather there are some people in Virginia on the Koolpinyah Aquifer because it goes up and down. One person was told she could not subdivide. I do not know if it has been approved by the DCA, but at the meeting the Department of Land Resource Management said there is no more water.
That is Virginia and this is Noonamah, but on one hand I hear you cannot take any more water out for a subdivision, and on the other they are asking for water from Koolpinyah Aquifer.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I request an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: They say they want it as the ongoing water supply for Noonamah Ridge. The Noonamah Ridge EIS Executive Summary says:
- This aquifer is accessible through a pastoral lease that has the same owner as the majority of the project area. Water would be piped to the project area, pumped up to water tanks on elevated sites, and then dispersed throughout the development’s internal reticulation. This bore-field, if developed, would be gauged to ensure sustainable extraction.
If the Koolpinyah Aquifer does not present a feasible water supply for the project, Intrapac proposes to enter into an agreement with PWC to connect Noonamah Ridge to mains water supply. This agreement could include cost-sharing or development contributions/levies.
That explains why they are going for a bore. They cannot afford it. Why would anyone allow a subdivision to occur in this area? It beats me.
I was on Litchfield Shire Council when people said they wanted to subdivide a block. The council said, ‘You’ll have to connect it to a bitumen road’. The bloke said, ‘I can’t afford it’, so we said, ‘Then you have to wait’.
If they are so intent on urbanising the area, wait for Weddell to commence. We will have something to attach to the urban area and can call it peri-urban. This land is in the sticks and was designed to be 2 ha and 8 ha blocks. Some people have influence over the Planning Commission, which then decided, from the original plan, to turn rural land into urban land and not doorknock the area. You need to talk to people on Redcliffe Road, Townend Road, Elizabeth Valley Road and at Acacia. That is what consultation is about, especially if you want to change people’s lifestyle. We do not seem willing to do that. Instead we have a desktop plan and stand at a supermarket for a few hours a day hoping to capture a percentage of people – maybe 1% or less – who live there. This would not have an effect on many of the people going to the supermarket.
That is not consultation; that is cosmetic. It looks good, sounds good, says a number – we have met 1000 people. I am not knocking you, but if there was real consultation tell me who those 1000 people were, minister. If you were to survey those 1000 people at Humpty Doo or Coolalinga markets, how many live in the area you are referring to? I bet it would be a small number.
You need to talk to people who live there then you will get 99% of the people from the area, just as the member for Goyder had at her recent meeting. It shows that people are concerned about the development and that amount of water. They have bores in the area and want to ensure they do not run out of water. This year has been particularly dry – you will get a question tomorrow, minister. The amount of rainfall for the first three months of this year was less than half the average. That is a substantial loss of water for people in the rural area, which means a substantial drop in the water table. It will be interesting to see if bores in the rural area can still pump water at the end of this year.
That is why people are concerned about this. They do not go to a meeting to grumble; they want information and to know why Intrapac is there. When we conducted the survey people could write preferred options on the bottom. The majority of people who filled it in said, ‘Build this town at Weddell’. They did not say it was a bad design, but to build it at Weddell.
The minister lives on a rural block close to this area and has lived in the bush. You are also the minister for water resources, so you understand why people are concerned. I hope, as the minister, you can say to your government, ‘This is not the right place for this development’. People are telling you that, and there are questions about why you would build a city with a town water supply not controlled by Power and Water. If you do not have the money to connect this town, if it is too far away, that tells you this is a residential development with a few blocks on the outside to make it look rural.
I have always supported the CLP’s plan for the future of Darwin. I told Terry Mills that the 2010 plan was better than the Labor Party’s. I supported everything the Country Liberal Party put forward except the Elizabeth River dam.
When the CLP took government it set up a Planning Commission, which turned everything upside down. Weddell is now a long-term plan. I will be dead and buried before it happens if the Planning Commission has its way. Suddenly, the rural area shown in the CLP government plan has been eaten away. Holtze is a classic example. People did not want all that area to become residential and there was some give and take, but the only reason people knew of a development was the area set aside for commercial land was not being used …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, can I ask you to pause please?
Visitors to the gallery, I acknowledge what you are doing but it is not appropriate in a parliament in Australia. I ask you to sit down or I will have the gallery cleared. A member of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly is on his feet. He is an elected member and deserves respect.
Honourable members, thank you for your patience.
Member for Nelson, the clock was stopped.
Mr WOOD: I ask the government to put this application on hold. Leave the decision on a water licence until there has been proper consultation with local residents. I cannot accept there has been proper consultation, especially when we have received overwhelming opposition to this. There may not always have been opposition from people visiting the area, but residents in the area are overwhelmingly opposed to it.
I ask for this to be put on hold so we have time to consult people on whether this should occur. I have given you reasons, even a practical one, such as it is in the wrong place.
Mr HIGGINS (Land Resource Management): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for raising the subject because he knows I am a strong advocate for the opinion of people in my electorate to this development. I always have been, and will continue to be into the future. He knows I was a joint signatory, with the member for Goyder and him, in objecting to some of the lot sizes.
However, as minister, as opposed to the local member, I will concentrate on the water licence application. The proponents of the Noonamah Ridge development, Intrapac Projects Pty Ltd, submitted an application to the Department of Land Resource Management in November 2015 for a ground water extraction licence of up to 571 ML a year. I notice that the member for Nelson said 517 ML then changed it to 571 ML. It is 571 ML in my notes so it is either one or the other.
The application was subject to a public notice of intention which closed on Friday 15 April 2016. I am advised by the department that 44 objections or comments were received by the end of last week in response to the notice of intention. This shows the level of community interest in the Intrapac development and water management in general.
Under the Water Act the Controller of Water Resources must make a decision as soon as practicable after the period allowed for public comment. This must also take into account those comments about the application when making the decision. In other words, the 44 objections. Each of those comments must be assessed against relevance to the application and any relevant conditions set by the controller. The controller makes public his reasons for making a decision for a water extraction licence, including the way in which any comments received have been taken into account.
I, as Minister for Land Resource Management, have no direct role in determination of a licence application. This is a statutory role. It is deliberately and intentionally separate from ministerial powers. My powers in respect to water extraction licences are restricted to decisions on appeals lodged against the granting of licences, and giving approval upon request for licences of more than 10 years.
The member for Nelson has asked the government to put on hold assessment of the licence application by Intrapac pending a full assessment by the Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority.
To provide some perspective to this issue I would like to provide some background details. On 22 December 2013 Intrapac Projects Pty Ltd submitted a notice of intent for the Noonamah Ridge Estate to the NTEPA. On 7 April 2014 the NTEPA decided the Noonamah Ridge Estate required assessment at the level of an environmental impact statement. On 28 November 2014 the Chair of the NTEPA finalised the terms of reference for the Noonamah Ridge Estate and directed Intrapac to prepare a draft environmental impact statement. On 5 December the draft EIS was exhibited for public comment for 12 weeks. Thirty-one submissions were received. On 4 March this year the Chair of the NTEPA directed that a supplement to the draft EIS be prepared. This is under development by Intrapac. There are no agreed time frames for this to be completed by Intrapac or assessment by the NTEPA.
The application from Intrapac is for 571 ML or a little less than half the sustainable yield within the property boundary that overlies the Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer. The Wildman Siltstone Formation aquifer beneath the property boundary can sustain 1057 ML per year or 20% of the sustainable yield. The remaining 80% of the water in the aquifer is reserved to maintain environmental values.
I am advised that the Controller of Water Resources is required to take any other relevant factors into account in deciding whether to make a water extraction licence decision. This could include completion of the assessment report by the NTEPA. I have not spoken with the Controller of Water Resources on this matter, which is entirely appropriate. This motion would undermine the independence of the Water Controller, which would be totally inappropriate.
The process is there and needs to be followed. The Water Controller could take those comments into account, but is not appropriate for me, as the minister, to do that. It is only after he has made a decision that the minister becomes involved.
I pick up on the member’s comment about this being out in the sticks. I drive there every night and it is not that far out in the sticks.
The meeting organised by the member for Goyder – you and I both appreciated that, as did many of the people there. I was more than willing to organise staff to give a presentation on water resources in the area. I hope they learnt something during that meeting. I agree, and have spoken to the staff saying they need to disseminate more information.
At the beginning of the meeting I said I wanted staff there to get facts out. I have found that when you talk to many people – not just at that meeting, but in my branch meeting we have people there who go over old history. ‘Thirty years ago this happened and 20 years ago that happened.’ From that I have concluded there is a lack of information going to people.
I agree with the member, and I have spoken to the member of Goyder about this as well. I said we need to get staff out more often to explain the aquifers, how they work and the impact on them.
There is an exemption in place for the Darwin water control district. From memory, it is the whole of the Darwin area to the Finniss River on the left when you look at a map of the Territory, and Adelaide River on the right. It goes down to a line just south of Manton Dam. I hope I have that right, but that is a rough description of it.
That exemption applies to bores that pump less than 15 L per second. Even commercial operators in the area – in this instance Intrapac would be a commercial operator – provided they are pumping less than 15 L per second, do not need to a licence.
To give you an idea of the bores around there, overall there are 7500 registered bores in the Darwin water control district. It is more than just the Darwin rural area and goes all the way to Dundee. Many of these are operating under exemptions for stock and domestic, an exemption that uniquely applies to the area.
In addition, under the Water Act, a bore construction permit is issued subject to a number of conditions designed to protect the water resource. It is also subject to water being available. The controller may therefore decline a bore construction permit on the grounds of water not being available, or set conditions in the permit that require the bore to be decommissioned should it intersect a water resource that is over-allocated or stressed. I point this out because it is not actually a licence condition but a condition for constructing a bore.
I am also advised that the Darwin rural area may experience low ground water levels this year as a result of three years of low rainfall. The area is made up of different aquifers, each with their own storage levels. Depending upon which aquifer you are in, you could be affected in different ways.
A number of options and resourcing implications are being developed for my consideration in relation to the bore construction permits and exemptions in the Darwin rural area. Some issues that could come into this are things the three members – the members for Goyder, Nelson and Daly – have discussed. One is could we develop a policy position that a bore construction permit will not be issued for properties that have access to reticulated water supplies unless it is specifically for stock and domestic, with 15 L exemption bores for ground water extraction licences to increase their security in a defined area? In other words, you need a licence so you have security of your water extraction in the future.
Another is voluntary metering, which has been raised previously. Some people asked for that at the meeting. I have asked for more information on these issues and how we progress them.
When we talk about this exemption, in the Berry Springs aquifer, which is about 90km2 in total, there are 12 commercial operations – mango farms – and only two or three have a water licence. A lot do not have a water licence because of this exemption. Those that do, do not have to have them. For security into the future it is advisable they do. The department is trying to encourage the other commercial operators that are pumping less than 15 L per second – they are not breaking any law – to apply for water licenses.
The government cannot postpone consideration of the water licence application until the environmental impact statement is completed. That is not appropriate. There is a process to go through. The option is available to the Controller of Water Resources, but I emphasise I have not spoken to him. If he decides to issue that licence or otherwise, that is the time the minister may become involved if objections to the licence are lodged.
The other issue in regard to water and exemptions which is very close to me is the water bottling plant, a commercial operation. My bore is one of the six in the circle of drawdown on that bore. Mine may be deeper down so they may get drawdown from me. Because it pumps less than 15 L per second there is no licence for the water bottling plant. That also concerns residents in the area and needs to be considered.
I hope that has provided you with some information, member for Nelson. I have tried to answer most of your questions. This is not a question about supporting the development or otherwise, it is about the Water Controller issuing a licence. I hope I have laid out the process that needs to be followed.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will keep my comments brief as we have another important debate before the House. I know the community and the people in attendance tonight would like us to move to that debate.
As shadow minister this important issue needs my attention. Underlying the member for Nelson’s motion are some key issues which I will address from the Northern Territory opposition’s perspective. We strongly believe in keeping the rural area rural. We believe that infill can be achieved in Darwin through the subdivision of Berrimah and building of Weddell. It is important that as our population grows and our city changes we have different options for people to live in, being denser inner city living, tropical suburban blocks and the rural area.
Weddell remains a strategic priority as part of the Greater Darwin Plan. Weddell will happen. Over time it is anticipated the city could contain at least 40 000 residents. With 40 000 residents in close proximity to the proposed development at Noonamah Ridge, Territory Labor does not see the need for high density development in the area.
Territory Labor’s plan is that the development of Noonamah Ridge should be complementary to the planning of the city of Weddell. We cannot ignore the possibility of the exciting development which could eventually take place across the harbour.
Darwin, Palmerston, Weddell and two future satellite cities have always been on that longer-term plan.
We also believe that we need to get this process right and not rush it. The member for Nelson outlined a number of important points. We need to ensure that we get water use planning right and we have not seen that from this CLP government. Water licences have not been issued based on science, and the Lands and Planning minister indicates that cash opens his door.
People want to keep the rural area rural. People in the area have not been asked if they want this development in their community. They are being shown plan A or plan B, but not given a chance to keep the area the way they want to.
I understand there are a number of water issues that indicate this is not sound or sensible development and we should not accept it.
The member for Nelson detailed a number of points, but I would like to ask the government some questions about the aquifer. Page 25 of the Noonamah Ridge Estate Groundwater Report says:
- A potential number of sources of aquifer contamination may be introduced inadvertently by the proposed development.
Does that mean the aquifer might be contaminated? We need a full risk assessment undertaken in regard to that. It seems the development has to use the aquifer, as the main water pipeline cannot accommodate an increase in pressure and the existing pump station on the Stuart Highway does not have the capacity to serve this new development.
If the project goes ahead we have concerns around contractor management systems in the future. The developer stated an annual ground water sampling program should be established to monitor ground water quality over time.
This would require drilling and construction of monitoring bores in strategic locations. We do not know the details. What is the time line? How many years and for how long? What will we do once this project is handed back to government? There are a number of questions regarding water contamination and long-term monitoring.
With regard to the amount of water in the aquifer, there is concern that the testing was done at the end of a Wet Season. What conclusive results do we have for the end of a Dry Season? There are also questions about the water. If it is drinking water and the main water supply, where does fluoride come into it? Who will do the long-term monitoring?
The Utilities Commission was initially established to play a regulatory role with regard to water and sewerage services in the Territory, but what will happen to this project in the longer term? Will the developer set tariffs for water consumption? If so, what will they be in comparison to Power and Water tariffs?
The proposal to be an own supplier of water is concerning. Generally property developers do not supply water and sewerage services. Governments tend to provide those essential services, so where is the precedent with regard to licensing?
I mentioned water testing being done at the end of the Wet Season, but what are the contingency plans if we have a series of poor Wet Seasons? This is the only supply of water for those residents, so there are concerns about a backup plan. Darwin River Dam has a backup supply.
If this is the main water supply will fluoride be added to the water? If the developer is providing the water, will they publish drinking water quality reports as Power and Water has to? How will future residents of this potential development know if their water is being treated properly and professionally? Will the developer establish a separate treatment facility and, if so, where are the details?
Residents have expressed strong concerns about the development. They are deeply concerned about the future of their community, and also concerned about water issues. It would make sense to support this motion and ensure we get it right, especially with Weddell being built nearby. What will that turn this estate into? There are not only questions about water, but also about planning.
Time and time again we have heard that Territorians do not trust this government with planning issues. In my community we had the drawn-out saga of Nightcliff island. The community has a right to be concerned.
I thank the member for Nelson for this motion and the people who contacted me and provided information. It is not a quick issue, but it is an important one.
I support the motion.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition benches and the Independents get three-and-a-half hours in a parliamentary sittings week to debate important issues, and it is important that we use every minute possible to ensure democracy in the Northern Territory.
My contribution to this debate goes beyond the people of Barkly. It is about the lessons I learnt as a previous minister for Lands and Planning.
The member for Nelson, a tireless supporter of and fighter for the rural area, has brought a very important issue to this House. Once again the issue crosses over a number of areas. When you look at this it is about natural resources as much as planning. There are clear alternatives for government.
In the brief run-up to our Northern Territory general election it is even more important that we get this right, have the opportunity to influence the government’s decision-making and get the best outcomes for Territorians. When you talk about good planning and the use of sustainable and finite Territory natural resources, it does not present as rocket science that this is not a very serious issue.
The clear alternative has been mentioned by the spokesperson on the Labor bench, the member for Nightcliff: the master plan city of Weddell. I have asked from day one of this CLP government why it continues to look at residential development in areas that are completely unserviced by head services of power, water, sewerage and roads. I have continually challenged this government about the agenda it is running. The member for Nelson adds to the debate regarding keeping the rural area rural.
From my time as minister for Lands and Planning, I understand clearly that good planning means maintaining the lungs of a developing city. It maintains green open areas, and areas of lower density. In the greater Darwin regional area the rural area needs to be preserved.
The crossover with natural resources is a powerful part of the member’s debate. It is about the challenge on aquifer sources with the considerable increase in population density under this planned development.
The master-planned city of Weddell was conducted under the process of Enquiry by Design, which consulted widely and included a diverse sector of the Northern Territory community from the grassroots citizens through to the architects, engineers and town planners, some of the best brains in the country. That work is still contained in the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment. The site is defined. What is often lost in the debate about efficiencies is that under the previous government the head services of roads infrastructure and water and power were secured to Middle Arm Peninsula. It was to support industry, the industrial development of the Ichthys project, but it also had the capacity for efficiencies to support development of the new city of Weddell.
Sewerage is the next challenge. When looking at the head services already available, the efficiencies for any government makes a serious proposition of looking at Weddell as the new major residential, commercial and retail development within the Northern Territory.
The Country Liberal Party government has never been able to explain why it wants to push into greenfield areas with no supporting headwork services. Weddell is relevant, real and a clear alternative. A few months before a Northern Territory general election it makes real sense.
Stop the bus and look at sustainable water resources in this planned development. Look at the densification that is planned over a number of stages. Listen to the residents. That needs to resonate clearly to a government which has not listened for the past three-and-a-half years, now heading into an election that will be decided on honesty, integrity, accountability and listening to constituents. They need to listen to rural residents, the people already living in this area.
The alternative presents, and a government struggling in an economic context looking at economic stimulus plans would be well advised to see the opportunities around Weddell. There are civil construction opportunities, built form and head services. This activity generates economy and tax receipts for any government. It is a real opportunity to start preparing the Northern Territory’s new city. It is clear, defined and common sense.
I thank the member for bringing this motion to the House. Our spokesperson on the Labor benches has already said we support the motion. We support good planning and sustainable finite resources, and I have already spoken about that.
That is a clear definition, and all the spin in the world will not change that. That is a clear definition in the lead-up to the next Northern Territory general election.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the speakers who have contributed to this, especially the minister for clarifying the role of the Water Controller.
I understand some of the issues this has raised, and I am interested to see which direction the new minister takes them. He highlighted the fact – this is the case with the Noonamah Ridge application – that when you are under 15 L per second, or when you are in a certain area, you are exempt from controls. It is concerning that if you wanted to pump 14.99 L per second you could pump it 24 hours a day. This is an issue for people living in the rural area because it relates to the amount they are allowed to pump, which is – I have two figures, 571 and 517.
The minister also mentioned how it will affect others, such as the water bottling plant. If too much water is taken from an area it can affect other people. In this case, thankfully, there are no other bores in the area because there is no development. It would be interesting to see, as the land becomes more developed, whether development will be restricted in the area where this water will be taken from.
The opposition spokesperson on the environment asked why this area is being developed in the first place and why is it not at Weddell? She is spot on saying there has been no public consultation about this going ahead, and asked why the development is not in Weddell.
The member for Barkly, who has been around for a long time, knows some of the issues well, such as lack of infrastructure. Why is this happening in an area where there are major issues with regard to infrastructure?
A major wastewater treatment plant will be required. We know governments prefer not to use those plants, as shown by the government wanting to spend $11.8m taking sewage from Howard Springs and Coolalinga to Zuccoli. It is an expensive program that will take away the need for treatment plants in those areas.
This proposal means going back to a large transportation wastewater treatment system. Sewage ponds are planned for Weddell. You would fit it into a total infrastructure package. Even there, whilst you might have to use this as a temporary solution to sewage, you would know there is a solution.
I have a note from the minister saying if you pump 15 L per second for the whole year you will pump 527 ML.
Mr Higgins: Five-hundred-and-seventy-two.
Mr WOOD: You have 527 ML here but it should be 572 ML. The issue of water being supplied by bore water is amazing. I remind people that Power and Water has advised the existing pump station on the Stuart Highway does not have sufficient capacity to service the entire development and will need to be upgraded if connection to mains water is required. That is another cost and who will pay for that?
The developers have already mentioned they want a shared agreement with Power and Water. If you want a development there it is not up to the taxpayer to help. It is your job to pay for the cost of infrastructure. Why do we need a water extraction licence in an area that should remain rural? If you want to develop this area – this is only stage one and they want the same for stage two – then this should be in Weddell, where there is town water and they do not have to worry about fluoridation and chlorination.
The member for Barkly mentioned an Enquiry by Design process, which applied to Weddell and Kilgariff in Alice Springs. It is a great method of planning, yet we have not done it for the rural area. We have just had the NT Planning Commission draw up some plans with no options. Have you ever an option for Weddell? Have you ever seen an option for activity centres in the rural area? ‘No, this is what the activity centres will look like.’ We should have used the Enquiry by Design process.
Kilgariff used that process, Weddell used that process, and the government put the book on the shelf and left it. There has been three-and-a-half years of wasted time, and rural people are now forced to put up with proposals that are not in keeping with the rural area. They are suburbs stuck in the rural area because someone thought it was a good idea to make money, and the Planning Commission and government said it was good idea.
Unfortunately these mistakes will be felt in the rural area for many years. People did not have the vision to see there is need for rural development and urban development, but they need to be in the right place. This development is not in the right place if it is asking for water from borefields.
I ask the government to put this on hold. As there is an election soon, do not approve the Litchfield Subregional Land Use Plan. Allow that plan to sit until after the election. See if the government wins any seats in the rural area – except the member for Daly, who is in a different party, being the rural Territory party. He obviously believes in retaining the rural area as it is, and I want it to stay that way too.
Let this go to the election and see what comes of it. If the CLP thinks it is good, win my seat and the seat of Goyder. You could then say people support this. This process of urbanising the rural area is wrong. If the government wants to do something quickly it needs to leave it and consider it after the election.
The Assembly divided:
- Ayes 11 Noes 13
Ms Anderson Mr Barrett
Ms Fyles Mr Chandler
Mr Gunner Mr Conlan
Ms Lawrie Mr Elferink
Mr McCarthy Mrs Finocchiaro
Ms Manison Mr Giles
Ms Moss Mr Higgins
Ms Purick Mr Kurrupuwu
Mr Vowles Ms Lee
Ms Walker Mrs Price
Mr Wood Mr Styles
Mr Tollner
Mr Westra van Holthe
MEDICAL SERVICES AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 150)
(Serial 150)
Continued from 16 March 2016.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I concluded my remarks on the last General Business Day. I know there are others keen to speak in this debate.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a sensitive matter in the community. Government has made its position clear on RU486. However, the political party of which I am part, in fact, both political parties and the Independents have decided on a free vote in relation to this bill.
It is important to fill in a little history. I became Health minister about 18 months ago. Whilst I cannot speak about what happens in the Cabinet room or circumstances in relation to Cabinet documents, RU486 was raised with me, and I raised it with a number of people across the community. I am not allowed to say what is in a Cabinet document, but I ask people to turn their minds to the fact that I raised the issue of RU486 with Cabinet, and that is a matter of public record.
Clearly the government of the day made a determination that nothing should change in relation to the use of RU486 in the Northern Territory. That is a board decision to which I am bound. I will maintain my duties to my Cabinet colleagues in that sense, as any member of a board would do in any organisation.
Having made that observation, it is obvious that when government chooses not to change its position it is open to this House to change the government’s mind for it.
In a free vote and free debate I would support the use of RU486 in this community. I believe the member for Goyder understood that when she mentioned, in her second reading speech, an acknowledgment of my concern in this area. I have made available to the member for Goyder what support she needed to pursue the bill, including departmental support.
Government has chosen not to pursue a change in its stance, which is essentially the almost exclusive performance of abortions by way of surgical means rather than use of RU486. There are extremely limited circumstances in which RU486 can be used today without a change of policy. Those circumstances are the abortion of a foetus where the heartbeat is already known to have stopped, tragically.
I believe that RU486 would be kinder on a woman than the surgical procedure. This debate is not about performing abortions or not. That question has pretty much been decided across the OECD for the last 30 years. It is true, and not an issue of debate or dispute in this jurisdiction, that abortion has been available pretty much since we formed self-government.
This debate is how, not if, which is an important distinction to make. Currently the vast majority of abortions carried out in this jurisdiction are done by surgical means. They are carried out inside the hospital environment.
Since becoming Health minister I have authorised that should any private organisation wish to set up a clinic they are able to do so within the terms and rules of setting up clinics. However, no private practitioner has set up in the Northern Territory.
That is the state of play as it currently stands. With government not changing its position on the performance of abortions in the Northern Territory the field has vacated, and the member for Goyder has picked up the ball and run with it, bringing it into this House.
At least the Country Liberals, and I believe the Australian Labor Party – I stand corrected – have determined that this will be a free vote.
This is a case of government policy being set by this House. That is the debate before the House today. How do we do this and how broad do we make the application of the law?
Having explained that, there are a number of observations I want to make. We have to make sure we get the processes right, and I will return to that shortly. Let us not mistake RU486 for an aspirin because it is not. It is not a tablet you take and the pregnancy goes away. Real and serious clinical considerations come with the use of RU486.
A number of organisations, including manufacturers, distributors, the AMA and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists make recommendations in relation to the use of RU486 and I point some of those out to members. By way of example, I quote from page 7 of 22 of the product information:
- Studies published on the combination of mifepristone 200 mg and misoprostol 800 micrograms buccally, and reporting outcomes by gestational age, encompass 399 women with gestational ages 50 – 56 days and 344 women with gestational ages on 56 – 63 days. Efficacy ranged from 86.5 to 98.5% in women with gestational age of 50 – 56 days and 93.0 to 100% with gestational age of 57 – 63 days. In these studies, the rate of ongoing pregnancies ranged from 0 to 7.1% in women with a gestational age 50 – 56 days and from 0 to 2.3% with a gestational age 57 – 63 days.
I raise that because there is no contemplation of using this drug beyond 63 days, which is nine weeks. The obvious question that will now jump into members’ minds is, ‘Does the Medical Services Act not say 14 weeks?’ It does. The Medical Services Act was structured by former Chief Minister, Clare Martin, to always anticipate abortions being performed in hospitals. The drug manufacturer says nine weeks and does not recommend the use of the drug beyond that period, but the Medical Services Act allows for it because it anticipates it occurring in a hospital. That is one reason I introduced the amendments I circulated six to eight weeks ago.
Also, there are a number of contraindications which I will not go through in length. One of the warnings issued by the manufacturer and distributor of the drug, endorsed by the Royal College and supported by the AMA, is that you must be within two hours of emergency medical treatment because things can go wrong when you use RU486.
When they refer to medical treatment they mean being within two hours of a surgery. Let us be clear on that, it is not a clinic but the capacity for surgical interference. If there are complications arising out of a postpartum haemorrhage when this drug is used surgical intervention may be necessary.
The member for Karama said the solution is easy because if this happens in a remote community fly the person to Alice Springs or Darwin for treatment. That is not consistent with the manufacturer, the AMA, the Royal College or the distributor of the drug. It has to be within two hours of being able to deliver surgical intervention to control a haemorrhage should one occur.
The risk of a haemorrhage is similar to or the same as any form of postpartum, including a normal birth. Essentially, this drug brings on labour and the body is effectively tricked by two courses of tablets into giving birth. The risk of postpartum haemorrhage is real and present, and can occur.
Whilst they are not contraindications, there are special precautions which the manufacturer and distributor point out. The special precautions are because there is insufficient research to know the risks, including: cardiovascular disease; hypertensive disease; hepatic or liver disease; respiratory disease; renal disease; diabetes; anaemia; malnutrition; and smoking. That reads like a list of some of the most common medical problems in communities across the Northern Territory that are not even remote. Therefore, one can only conclude, based on what the manufacturer and distributor of the drugs say, that there needs to be close monitoring of a patient when they use the drug.
For that reason my amendments in support of the use of RU486 mean it has to be either in a hospital or close to a hospital. For that reason, I circulated my amendments eight weeks ago. That is the clinical requirement for RU486.
That then raises the next set of challenges in meeting those requirements. A number of people have said that even if you lower the standards or agree with what the member for Goyder has suggested there will be guidelines, such as the Royal College, in relation to how this drug may be applied in this jurisdiction.
To that end we have to be careful, bearing in mind that legislation is a reflection of the community’s opinion, expressed through their elected members in this House. That being the case, we as community members have a responsibility to legislate, even in areas where we may not be experts. I am no doctor, and we have no medical doctors in our government. Nevertheless, we are required to legislate.
There is a suggestion that the Royal College will be binding on people. I do not doubt that the vast majority of doctors would consider themselves bound ethically to the guidelines suggested by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians. However, it does not automatically follow that all doctors will, and that government policy will be adhered to. Remember that government policy in relation to this only applies to doctors in the Northern Territory Health department. However, anyone performing abortions is bound by section 11 of the Medical Services Act which relates to terminations.
However, there is another component. I ask members to cast their minds back to the time Clare Martin removed abortion from the Criminal Code Act and placed it within the Medical Services Act. It was clearly her intention that abortions would continue being performed within the hospital environment. For that reason an important clause was placed in the Medical Services Act, the clause of ‘in good faith’.
That clause has an important resonating impact. ‘In good faith’ in a legislative instrument removes the tortious liability of a doctor to show duty of care, or a standard of care. Good faith is a much lower level of proof. If a person undergoes an abortion and seeks, because of some error, mistake or damage they incur, some redress, the doctor, as constructed in the original legislation, can say, ‘I acted in good faith’. All of a sudden, the exposure of the doctor for any liability under the law of tort is diminished, thus giving the woman less protection.
It did not matter when the bill was passed originally, because government would have always met its standards and duty of care and carried that exposure. However, the amendments suggested today, and the amendments circulated late this morning, complicate the issue because they creates a level of exposure which is intolerable.
Let us look at the bill introduced by the member for Goyder. It was not a long bill, only two or so pages. I had, and still have, sympathy with what the member for Goyder is attempting to achieve, but we have to look at the practical outcomes of what we are being asked to pass today. Let us look at the original short bill she circulated in December last year. During that time I identified a number of issues and I, as the member for Port Darwin and Health minister, thought, ‘I have a few problems with that’, so I circulated some other amendments about six or eight weeks ago. Everybody got a letter from me outlining my proposed amendments.
It is important to pause here and discuss passing a law in this House. I have become a veteran over the past three-and-a-half years, having passed 66 or 67 legislative instruments. It is not as easy as it looks. There are a number of challenges and complications. One thing I try to do when bringing bills before this House is engage in communication prior to the debate. I make briefings available through my departments, write letters, phone people, leave it sitting on the table and try hard to have the issues teased out of whichever legislative instrument is being discussed. Consequently, when members come into the House they are generally fully informed on the issues to debate.
It is a policy I have taken into the private members realm, because my amendments are not as the Health minister of the Northern Territory but are consistent with my opinions as the member for Port Darwin. It is a bit schizophrenic, but I have a free vote and want to see RU486 delivered to women in the Northern Territory.
I know those amendments went out because I have received a number of communications from people outside of this room. I presume people – they are free to do it – have circulated the amendments I circulated to members and they have gone into the public domain.
I have, on a number of occasions, e-mailed and telephoned the member for Goyder to ask for a copy of her amendments so I could better understand what she is attempting to do, because she sought to amend the bill she brought before this House. Those phone calls have not been returned, and the e-mails from my chief of staff have not been answered.
The first I saw of the member for Goyder’s amendments to this bill was at 10.49 am today when the e-mail went out. I had staff in my office quickly add the extra bits the member for Goyder had circulated into the original bill. Everything marked in red are the additions the member for Goyder wants to debate today.
Essentially, the member for Goyder has introduced a new bill which carries all types of implications. The first other members and I saw of it was at 10.49 am today. I am busy today; I am the Leader of Government Business. Other ministers are busy. Members of parliament are busy. I have to then decide, according to the member for Goyder, what these amendments mean and what impact they will have. It is not a responsible legislative process to rush through what is, essentially, a change in policy. It is an abuse of process and of great concern because many things in these amendments fundamentally change the policy. It introduces new crimes. It introduces new aspects in relation to how the bill works and we are being asked, in a little over six hours on a busy working day, to turn our minds to these important issues. For that reason I am deeply concerned.
Having flicked through the bill as best I can, a number of issues leap out at me. Probably the most pronounced is an amendment to remove the second opinion. Currently a doctor and a gynaecologist or an obstetrician must agree and then an abortion can proceed. This amendment, on first blush, removes that second opinion so a medical practitioner decides if a termination should be available. I believe it is probably a drafting error, because I doubt the member for Goyder would seek to intend what appears in the bill. I stand corrected, but believe I am on good ground here.
Because of the speed with which these amendments have been brought forward, the effect of sub-clause 3 now means that only one doctor has to decide whether or not RU486 is prescribed.
Ms PURICK: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! It is one qualified medical doctor, not just a medical practitioner. The word ‘qualified’ is there so please put it in.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Goyder.
Mr ELFERINK: Whatever.
Ms Purick: It is not whatever. It is a qualified medical doctor.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Goyder.
Mr ELFERINK: I accept what you are saying, but that is not the issue. However, the way this is now drafted means a qualified medical practitioner merely needs to prescribe the drug. The person then takes that prescription to a dispensary where the drug is dispensed by the practitioner or pharmacist. The problem is that in the section she recommends this occur, the foetus can be up to 23 weeks.
It is a drafting error. I doubt the member for Goyder would intend this in her legislation, because 23 weeks is more than half term. It is an unintended consequence of the haste in which the amendments to the bill have been brought before this House.
For this reason, eight weeks ago I wrote to every member of parliament with the amendments I proposed attached. I have the privilege of being the Health minister so I had doctors from the Health department review the amendment, and they suggested that it was correct in law.
Different doctors have different points of view on how RU486 should be managed. If you consider the principles around which the original act was created, it was anticipated abortions would be exclusively surgical, or at least under medical supervision in a hospital or clinic. Having a single doctor, a qualified medical practitioner, now issue a prescription which can then be taken by someone who is half term is something we have to be extremely careful about.
Again, I do not believe that is the intention of the member for Goyder, but it appears to be the effect. That is why we cannot rush things. That is why we cannot circulate amendments to legislation a few hours before we debate it, particularly when the amendments so substantively change the bill that it is effectively a fundamental change of policy.
What we are being asked to do cannot be supported by common sense. I do not ascribe any villainy or ill-intent, but this is an unintended consequence and a potential mistake.
I am fully aware the argument will be that the Royal College will set the boundaries on this, and the Health minister of the day would not interfere in relation to the policy. The profession will set the policy and the Health department will comply. That is an argument, and I get that. However, the effect of these amendments will be to unfetter a minister to pretty much do as they please.
The amendments I circulated are designed to fetter a minister and limit them to certain and particular actions. If this bill passes in its current form I will say to my department, ‘Create a set of rules which still meet the expectations of safety I have’. It does not automatically follow that I will forever be the Minister for Health. In four-and-a-half months’ time I will not be because I am retiring. Who will the next Minister for Health be?
If it is the member for Karama, because she has done a deal with a minority Labor government, we know she fully intends to see this drug used in remote communities because she has said as much in debate.
Where are the protections? Where are the boundaries? As I said, I wanted this drug to find its way into the health system because it is kinder than the surgical process, but that was the government’s decision. However, if this legislation passes a future Health minister will be unfettered and those protections may not exist.
Surely a matter which fills up the public galleries and captures as much public attention as this is one the House should consider and not leave a minister unrestrained. If a minister changes the policy, the first time we will become aware of it is when a coroner is investigating a death. It is not something I wish to deal with …
Ms Purick: That is rubbish! That is absolute rubbish, member for Port Darwin, and you know that.
Mr ELFERINK: I heard the member for Goyder interjecting, but if she is serious about this then communicate. Answer phone calls, answer e-mails and circulate amendments, particularly when they are substantive changes. That has not occurred. As a consequence, an opportunity to make a difference may well have been lost because the amendments proposed by the member for Goyder exceed what I could reasonably tolerate as a member of this House. That is a shame, because I wanted to see this drug used in the Northern Territory in a responsible fashion
These amendments do not countenance the responsibility I would expect and I cannot support the amendments to this bill. I can support the amendments I circulated eight weeks ago to all members. I encourage members to look carefully at those proposals because they are sensible, restrained and appropriate.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Goyder for introducing this bill.
Women in the Northern Territory should have the same access to medical services as women around the nation and the world. We are well behind the rest of the country, and it is time that women in the Territory had the same rights of access as other women.
Of course, we want to ensure that access is safe and the highest medical standards followed. We want to ensure that if women choose to access RU486 they have the right support systems around them, they can access it safely and get the right support to undergo a termination of pregnancy.
We all know women do not want to go through it, but it happens. Most members, in their contributions, have stated this is not about whether abortion is right or wrong. This is trying to ensure that we have contemporary medical practices in the Northern Territory, which we do not at present. Territory women do not have the same level of access as other women in Australia. It has taken too long and it is time for us to catch up.
I agree with the member for Port Darwin; the process to get here has not been ideal. In a perfect world we would look at a model like in Victoria, where a consultative body of work was done and the government had well-constructed legislation to contemporise access to medical terminations. In an ideal world the government could have run with this issue, but I accept it is not the will of this Cabinet.
The government had the capacity to use the Department of Health to ensure it had information to construct good legislation for the Northern Territory and ensure safe and appropriate access to RU486. The member for Goyder’s bill heads in a good direction. I commend her for working with advocates on this bill.
For almost three years we have had a strong advocate group pursuing members of parliament, pushing what they feel is the right agenda for the Northern Territory, and giving women the same access to medical termination others in this country receive.
I commend the advocates who have worked hard on this with the member for Goyder, and other members of the parliament, for their tireless lobbying. There has been a respectful level of debate in the community on what can be a sensitive and emotive issue. It means a lot to people, and I have received a lot of representation on this matter.
I fundamentally believe women in the Northern Territory should have the same rights as women in the rest of Australia when it comes to accessing medical services. I have faith in the legislation put forward because I have faith that medical practitioners do not make the decision lightly when dealing with a patient who wants to access RU486 for a medical termination. They follow professional standards and process, which is about ensuring the safety of the person presenting to them.
If somebody wants to access RU486 it is not as simple as asking a doctor for a prescription then going to the pharmacy and filling it. That is not how it works. Doctors still have a level of checks and balances to follow. They will talk to the person about their medical history, make sure they have a blood test, ensure the person undergoes an ultrasound to determine it is not an ectopic pregnancy and determine how far the pregnancy is. They will speak to the person about where they will take the drug. They will take all this into account when they talk to the patient about the process. If they do not consider them a suitable candidate, they will not guide them down that path.
I have faith in medical professionals to do what they are already doing around Australia and the world when administering medication to allow a woman to undergo a medical termination. I have faith in the medical profession to follow the appropriate guidelines and standards set. I believe you do not need two medical professionals to say somebody can seek a medical termination. That is not necessary. I have faith that a single, suitably qualified professional medical practitioner can do the job.
It is good to look at exclusion zones if someone is seeking a medical termination. It is positive that if a doctor is a conscientious objector then patients are still referred on to a doctor who can provide appropriate advice and assist them, but it has been quite a process to get here.
In a perfect world we would have seen the government seek advice to guide this legislation through, because it is not constructive to put more road blocks in the way of medical terminations. It is time we caught up to the rest of the country, and had some faith that our medical professionals can work with somebody to assist in obtaining a medical termination and know they will follow the best possible practices to ensure the safety of that person. They will not give someone RU486 if they are not in an appropriate location to take it, do not have the right medical history for a medical termination to be successful, or if the person is not an appropriate candidate. I have faith that they will make sound decisions.
Why hold this up any longer? Women in the Northern Territory have waited far too long as it is. It is time women had access to medical terminations. It is unbelievable that we are lagging so far behind the rest of the nation.
I support women getting access to RU486 in the Northern Territory so they are on an equal footing as other women in Australia.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a privilege to speak in this House every day and something I do not take for granted.
We have passionately debated many important issues in this House, but this would be the most passionate and personal issue for a woman in this House to debate. I thank the member for Goyder for introducing this bill. At the outset, this is not a debate about termination but safe access to a medical termination.
The Territory Labor opposition is afforded a conscience vote on this bill, and I thank my colleagues for that opportunity. This is a difficult issue and not something we take lightly. It is extremely important and everyone has spent time thinking about, talking about and researching it. It is time Territory women were afforded the same privilege as those in every other state and territory in Australia. Therefore I support this legislation.
The medical abortion drug, RU486, had a delayed and contentious arrival in Australia. The Therapeutic Goods Amendment (Repeal of Ministerial responsibility for approval of RU486) Bill was passed in 2006. It proposed that the decision to allow RU486 to be prescribed in Australia be made by the Therapeutic Goods Administration rather than allowing the then federal Health minister, Tony Abbott, to continue to hold veto rights over introduction of the drug. The RU486 debate became focused on the morality of abortion and who should decide whether a woman should have a medical abortion. In Australia, nearly two decades after the rest of the world, and in the Territory a decade after that again, we are still debating that.
I acknowledge that for some this is a difficult debate which may make them feel uncomfortable, but it is very important for women in the Territory. When Territory women choose a termination, something they do not choose lightly and for which they need their family and friends around them for support, they are forced to leave their family to travel to Darwin, Alice Springs or interstate.
The passage of this legislation would allow Territory women access to a safe medical termination, something women overseas gained in the 1980s and 1990s. Territory women should be afforded this immediately.
Research shows that termination is not easily available in Australia. I quote from The regulation of abortion in Australia: public health perspectives, ACT Public Health Association of Australia, 1998 research. It says:
- Furthermore, the prohibitive costs associated with the procedure itself and the travel costs for women from rural and regional areas who may not have a local option mean that socio-economic and geographical factors are significant.
This is an important debate for women of the Territory because we face that tyranny of distance and location. This is about giving Territory women equal rights that women all over Australia are afforded, except those in the Northern Territory who probably need it the most – access to a medical termination in their communities close to home with support when they need it most. Access to a medical termination is safer and less invasive for women.
This legislation ensures that medical practitioners are trained and appropriate procedures are in place. It allows the Territory to catch up with the rest of the world, the rest of Australia and with modern medicine. For some, this bill does not go far enough in addressing all the recommendations of experts, but it is a big step forward.
I thank the member for Goyder for bringing this bill to the House. I would like to have seen it a long time ago.
I understand the Health minister’s explanation that this was not the will of Cabinet. I acknowledge my colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, who explained she wished it was something Territory Labor had done in government. We need to focus on the here and now; the opportunity this House has to pass this legislation tonight.
As you may be aware, the issue of allowing RU486 to be supplied in Australia has been politically determined over time. The Therapeutic Goods Amendment Bill 1996 created a new class of goods of restricted goods defined as drugs intended for use in women.
I will point out some interesting facts from the bill. Their efforts were ultimately successful, with 90% of women senators voting in favour of the bill, in stark contrast to only 46% of male senators supporting it. They are interesting figures on an issue about women’s health.
This bill tonight will allow the legislation to keep up with changes in medicine. Modern medicine has moved forward and Territory legislation has not kept up. Tonight the Northern Territory parliament can allow medical experts to decide what treatment is best for a woman and her body. This legislation will allow Territory women to access the medical intervention of their choice. By supporting this legislation we say we trust Territory medical professionals and, more importantly, we trust Territory women with their bodies, something that is vitally important.
My colleague, the member for Wanguri, eloquently articulated trust in doctors. The Minister for Health pointed out that no one is a medical doctor. This legislation will put trust in our medical teams and doctors that they will look after their patients. This legislation will allow Territory women to decide what happens to their bodies. It is important to repeat this debate is not about termination. That was decided decades ago, and is something women of all generations are grateful for.
This debate is about passing legislation to allow medical terminations to take place in the Northern Territory. I thank all the professionals who have given their time and knowledge to prepare me for this debate. I do not support the Attorney-General’s amendments as I believe access is particularly important in the Northern Territory because of our remote distances. I pointed out statistics earlier around access to termination.
My colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, quoted from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists that the unavailability of termination of pregnancy services has been shown to increase maternal morbidity and mortality. It also says access to termination services should not be limited to a number of factors, including geographical isolation, something so important in the Northern Territory.
The Health minister spoke about access to hospitals and surgeries. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has clear guidelines on where this drug can be used. Quoting from the guidelines:
- These arrangements must include 24 hour access to specific telephone advice and support and to provision of surgical uterine evacuation or other interventions required for the management of complications, for example through on call arrangements or in an emergency department resourced to respond to women’s health needs …
I am concerned the Attorney-General’s amendments would mean the Health minister would decide where and what facilities were needed. That could mean RU486 may become restricted by location, or cost to travel to a location. Concerns have been raised regarding location and availability, but I am reassured by these strict guidelines and the arrangements for its use.
It has been a long road to get here. We have acknowledged the path we followed under former Chief Minister Clare Martin, but tonight we have an opportunity to pass this legislation. I acknowledge the Minister for Health’s support, and his offer that if this legislation passes his department will ensure it happens.
It would have been ideal if the Northern Territory had followed a model similar to Victoria, with a full comprehensive review, but I praise the member for Goyder for her tenacity in introducing this bill – not an easy bill – into the House.
I would like to acknowledge the WHAT RU4 NT? group, which has provided guidance and support. They have been lobbying in a respectful way. I am assured that if this bill passes tonight our highly trained medical experts and doctors will hold this legislation in the highest regard.
It is time for Territory women to have the same rights as women across Australia. I urge my colleagues to consider those thoughts and support this legislation.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this is touching legislation from the member for Goyder, especially for someone like me who represents 80% of the bush.
We all know if these ladies – as it stands – want an abortion they have to travel all the way from remote communities, be seen in remote clinics, have an ultrasound to know the exact term of the pregnancy – we all know the minute you look at that baby the bonding happens. That is very touching. I know that as I have four kids. These women then have to travel all the way to Darwin to have the abortion. It is a one day procedure. That is something I have also experienced.
I am not the only one in the remote areas, but not everybody have access to that, and that is the most touching part.
After the member for Goyder introduced this to the House I went to my electorate – some of the most remote communities – and spoken to the ladies about it. You cannot really talk to the men because of cultural aspects, so we have to respect a woman’s view.
They are horrified by the fact their kids, or anybody in the community, can take a pill and could go through up to three weeks in agony, and get to see the baby come out and hold it, whether it is in the toilet or wherever. That is the most terrifying part. Who will do counselling in remote communities if this legislation passes? Is there anything in place, especially for ladies in remote communities? That is the biggest concern I have with this bill, other than that it is free will. It is a great thing. Women should have rights like everybody else. We are 10 years behind every other state. If we are to pass this legislation we need clear consideration of what and how this drug affects people in remote communities.
I trust doctors, but I know only one doctor flies here from Adelaide to get this done. I have spoken to gynaecologists and general practitioners, and there is no for or against with this drug. They are happy for it to happen and I respect that, but my biggest concern is Aboriginal women in remote communities accessing this drug and having nothing in place when they go through this.
If this is to go ahead, you cannot have them taking the drug out there. There has to be something in place here. This does not happen for only 24 hours; it goes on a lot longer. In the meantime, who wants to wake up to their 18-year old daughter lying crippled in bed? If anyone has kids they will understand where I am coming from – especially girls. I have three girls. The last thing I want to see is my daughter crippled in bed, and having to wash the sheets and change the mattress. It is the worst fear of any Aboriginal mother.
The majority of people in remote communities are Christian or Catholic. Member for Arafura, the majority of people on the Tiwi Islands are Catholic. My area is mainly Christian. My grandmother was a deacon and I understand where she was coming from, but she is not alive. I am a modern day woman. I have faith in God but do not practice from the Bible as any other Christian would.
This is serious. It is a great honour to speak about this because it will be recorded in history, and I want to make sure this gets out. I heard the member for Karama say that Aboriginal practitioners are capable of handing out this drug. No, they are not. I come from that background, and the majority cannot even put a drip in. I was in fear of putting a drip in when I was a practitioner, and you want to give them the right to do that, especially when a person is haemorrhaging. That is scary stuff.
You obviously do not understand what it is like out there. I have lived and worked in that field. It took me almost five years to learn how to put a drip into a person – four years of training. I was in that field for over a decade and have spoken to Aboriginal health practitioners. They do not want this responsibility.
I understand nurses in the Darwin hospital do. There are nurses in remote communities who do, yes, but there is still a doubt about getting them out of there if something serious happens. If there is a serious situation it takes hours for CareFlight to get the person to Darwin hospital. That is my biggest concern.
There are very remote outstations where people live 300 km to 500 km away from the nearest remote community. There are probably only five people in those outstations and the majority of them do not know of the RU486 drug. The know abortion exists but do not understand how it is done, let alone this. We will give this to the most vulnerable people and that is my concern.
Do not get me wrong, I have nothing against women’s rights in the Northern Territory. If you give this to the people I represent, you have to make sure you have things properly in place, otherwise I am not for it. I will not give something to my people I know will seriously hurt them.
I know, from doing my own research, the good and bad of this. Some things were brought to my attention. A lady from Leanyer wrote to me saying there have been many horror stories from women who had taken this drug, including weeks of excessive bleeding, extreme pain or haemorrhaging, serious internal infections because of retained body parts, fever and flu-like symptoms, hospitalisation and further surgical abortion.
It is no secret that a high number of young girls in remote communities get pregnant. That has been there for decades. If they know they have access to this drug from the clinic pharmacy – if they do not have explained properly what they will go through.
It is like Implanon. When you put Implanon in your arm you do not know whether you will still bleed severely or if bleeding stops completely. You can put on weight or lose it. When you take the drug you find out how it affects you. That is like any other drug you take. A high number of people in remote areas have chronic diseases. Kids are born with diabetes, we all know that. Being able to access this contradicts chronic disease. This drug can cause an imbalance of insulin and that is a concern. I do not know if anyone has thought about this, but that is the first thing that lit up my little spark.
There are other ways of doing it. At the moment you go to the clinic, have it surgically removed and in 24 hours are out – not even that. You always need someone with you. When I went in I needed my friend with me. It is hard to deal with, knowing you are going to give away a life you are carrying. You do not even know what will happen to it.
This drug that you want to bring into the Northern Territory totally undermines it. The woman will look at the baby. How do you think it affected me? It took me years to get over it. I blamed myself for years. I come from the same educational background as the majority of them. English is not my first language, but there are a lot of girls out there who do not have the same educational level as I do and I am concerned about that.
You will need an interpreter in the room. Even if there is a family member there they will not interpret entirely what the doctor is saying to them. We have to be realistic. A doctor speaks in their terminology. It is a different language and environment out there.
The lady who takes this drug will see the sac of tissue come out. The baby will already be formed. It will have eyes, a head, legs and feet. I was lucky because I did not see it, but imagine what that girl will go through.
I understand there is a national outcry and everybody wants to compete with the other states. Thirty percent of the Territory population is Indigenous, more than any other state in Australia. Eighty per cent of my electorate is Indigenous and it is my job to tell you how it is. I understand because I come from that situation. I was not raised in a town or a city. I lived in a tin shack until I went to boarding school, and by that time my family had a house.
Do not think that because I am coloured I am from a prestigious background. I am not. Our dinner was cooked on a fireplace because we did not have a stove. We had to wake up at 5 am every day to catch the bus to school in the nearest community, and back again. It was hard yakka for kids, but there was a determination to be educated. We made our own little tin trucks.
One lady who wrote to me said in one state there is a house for people who go through these things. If they need counselling or support in making a decision – you cannot say that everybody – if I could go back I would never have done what I did. I would have kept my first child.
With the lower education rate, the lower health rate and the housing problems everything is behind the eight ball out there. We want to bring this forward because this is 10 years behind. That is like a millennium. My point is to explain this to young girls out there is the hardest part and changing the minds of the mothers and grandmothers these girls live with.
I bet that any bush member in this House – ask your electorate how they feel about this. They will tell you exactly what I am saying. It is against our culture to have an abortion, but it is a modern world. Only 10% of us have access to the hospital and access to clinics to get here. Not many do and that is my concern. Give this to a committee, put it to remote communities and consult with the people. Your facial expression says obviously you do not want that. That is okay.
Ms Purick: Easier to send it to a committee.
Ms LEE: If you can promise me this will go to a committee and be consulted on then I am all for it.
There are things in this that will undermine people I represent and I will not put them at risk. I will not put my daughter at risk. Do not get me wrong, I work with doctors and understand the level of expertise. I trust them with my life. Dr Scattini, in Katherine, saved my life. I would feel privileged if he were to speak to me about this. He has always been my family. He brought me into this world and he saved my life. He has retired now.
I do not want to look at laws in other states because that is not my concern. I will look at the law, the complications of this drug for and against, and will decide where I stand. I will not bring my Christianity or personal view into it, but I will consider the people I represent. At the end of the day that is what we are voted into this House to do. I am not with any party, Labor or Liberal. I represent Arnhem.
After looking at some of this, including how this drug works – one lady sent me this so I could understand it properly. I did not take this out to the remote communities because it would cause an outcry and a protest at these doors. I will read it here, but if I have to take it further I will.
What are the side effects for a woman? There were 832 reports of adverse reactions to this drug between April 2006 and June 2012. At least one Australian woman has died. That is a low number but still a casualty. Are we guinea pigs? Will you take this drug and see if it kills you? With the low health outcomes in my area I cannot afford to risk it unless safeguards are put in place. I will not have ladies or young girls take this drug. I do not know if the age is over 16 or over 18.
What are we looking at? Girls in remote communities cannot have it because you will put their lives at risk. It is terrifying. You cannot have them take this drug there; they would have to be brought into Darwin. There would have to be in a self-care unit and stay here the whole time they were taking the drug. Are there plans in place for that? Are there nurses? Will they be monitored? With excessive bleeding, will they pick themselves up when in agony, drag themselves to the shower, wash and dry themselves and put their clothes back on?
Has anyone on that side gone through the extreme pain of childbirth? I have never been under the knife as all of my births were natural. If you say you understand the pain these girls will go through but have never had kids you are fooling yourself. It is extreme pain. It is like a chainsaw ripping through your ribcage. From what I read, this causes excessive pain. In a nursing term it is a range of one to 10. Is this 10?
At the end of the day I do not represent the city or the town; I represent the bush. I respect every woman and her choice, like anybody else.
The only new electorate I have is Jabiru, which has a hospital. There is still a high number of remote areas, and a high number of Indigenous people in very remote areas. There have been reports of up to 122 children surviving this procedure. These ladies probably had to have a medical procedure. I do not know if this has been looked at properly or not, but if there are safeguards for Aboriginal people – if I cannot be guaranteed that I will not put my people at risk.
I trust people in hospitals to do the right thing. I know they will. I come from that background but did not work in hospitals. I worked in very remote areas so I know where I am coming from. I have been there for a very long time. All I ever wanted to do when I was growing up was be a medical practitioner and help my people. That was my passion. I did for many years, until I got this job. There is nothing more fulfilling in life than following your passion and doing what you set out to.
Many women are passionate about having this drug in the Northern Territory, and I respect that. Everybody has their passion. You must think about others in the Northern Territory. I have strong views, like every other woman, but we have to consider the ones who cannot speak up for themselves and do not know we are debating this bill to be passed in a rush today. They will not have a say in this bill, will not be consulted and have not been considered. I asked them if anyone from the clinic spoke to them about the bill and they said no.
If there is such a need then why are you not reaching out to the most isolated people it will affect the most? Why is nobody considering that? Everyone wants the bush vote. You really care about the bush? This bill contradicts where you stand and your passion about the bush.
I know where I stand, I am from there. If anybody is to bring anything into this House then I will have my say. I always have and people in this House know that, especially when it comes to the people I represent.
I am disappointed that people have not been consulted, especially Aboriginal health workers, because you want to give them responsibility. The amendments to the bill will require them to be trained to prescribe it from the pharmacy. This makes me wonder if people really understand the bush.
It takes four years for them to finish a Certificate IV. Only a few get into doing a Certificate IV in Health and qualify to administer drugs. They are not experts on drugs but experts on primary care. They are not even experts in putting a drip in at that stage let alone giving a needle. It is a fear.
They jump into the job because they are passionate but they still fear things. They overcome that eventually. The majority of girls I worked with have never attended a road accident, unlike me, but you want to allow them to administer this drug. I do not believe the members for Karama and Goyder have looked at the diagram and spoken to people who understand how this affects the bush.
After this I will tell them who is for and against this, and what you are trying to bring into this House. Many people will not be happy because no one has spoken to the bush. It goes against our culture. The ladies I spoke to said, ‘Larisa, when you go in that House you’d better not let this happen’.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I seek an extension of time for the member pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LEE: The ladies I spoke to are against it. I will be honest, these females are from remote areas. They are educated, have a job and they are against it. They are not willing to put their kids, their sisters and their brothers at risk. Unless you have safeguards in place to ensure people in remote communities are safe I will not support it. I will not put these ladies or their kids at risk. I ask the member for Goyder to refer it to a committee so this legislation can be put in place properly and there are safeguards for not only people in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine and Tennant Creek, but also people in remote areas. We have to consider everybody in this bill.
That is my argument. I am sorry, but at the end of the day if you do not put that in place and help the people I represent understand this better or have access to real medical care then it speaks for itself. I will not put their lives at risk for something that is so outdated, and that is where I stand.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I represent about 7000 people who live in regional and remote areas, some of the remotest areas of the Northern Territory, and some would say Australia.
I also declare a conflict of interest as I am a practicing Catholic. I have to fess up; I am a left-of-centre practicing Catholic. I was in a relationship with a woman for 10 years and we had three children and one on the way. We sat at the back of the church because we were not allowed to receive the sacraments. We stuck with it and celebrated our marriage in 1993. We travelled from Borroloola to Christ the King Church in Tennant Creek to be married.
It was a great gathering of family and friends. My wife had a one-night honeymoon in the Goldfields Hotel Motel in Tennant Creek, and then we travelled to Darwin to go through the medicals for the birth of our fourth boy, Simon Peter. We had come from a regional remote area into the town of Borroloola. We had been living in very remote areas for over a decade but had moved to town. We still needed to travel to Darwin. My wife was going through the ultrasounds and tests, and all that needed to be done. A contingent of health professionals ushered me out of the room and my wife stayed. They communicated to me, as the father, that the baby had some deficits. It looked like the baby’s spine was growing outside his body. They immediately spoke to me about termination, abortion, and all those medical procedures available to terminate this baby and move on.
It was not long before my wife cottoned on to what was happening. I do not have the time or the emotion to share that with you, but we had some important decisions to make as a family. We went back to Borroloola and Simon Peter continued to develop. We had no services. There was a GP in the town, a great bloke, but my wife ended up teaching him more about what was happening in the pregnancy. He still thanks my wife for the education she provided. She studied and was intensive with everything she did to learn about what was happening with this baby. It was hard and traumatic. We spent many hours on the back steps of that house in Yanyula Street, howling at the moon, but she refused to give in and we supported each other with the children around us and continued on.
We were visiting friends at Wollogorang Station at the time, about 262 km east of Borroloola across rough roads and having a great weekend when Simon Peter decided he would enter the world. I organised a road evacuation. I had a choice. I thought I could get to the Calvert Hills airstrip, we could call in the cavalry – maybe we would do it that way – or try to get to the Borroloola clinic where there was a GP and a supportive nursing sister, a good friend of the family. My wife chose to go for it, so we arrived at Borroloola clinic and Simon Peter was born. He was not quite born as he passed away in labour. I baptised him with a phone stuck to my head talking to the parish priest in Tennant Creek. The doctor and the nursing sister organised an aeromedical evacuation because it had become the life of the mother.
We were evacuated to Royal Darwin Hospital and received great care. Our baby was delivered but was not alive. He had passed in Borroloola. So we were given a beautiful card that had his hand prints and footprints on it. As a family we came together to deal with another challenge. The following day I hit the streets of Darwin to organise a funeral for my son.
In all this time we survived with no services and very little support. My wife dealt with this in an incredibly powerful way. I organised my youngest son’s funeral, we cremated my son and we have his ashes at home. We have never released them; we are still planning that. We then returned to Borroloola with no services and no medical support. People were getting on with their busy lives. I was principal of the school, my wife still had one child at home, one at school and one at boarding school, and life went on.
If there is one thing that snaps you out of the grieving process for a lost a son it is when your next son, the three-year old, receives burns to 40% of his body in a house two streets up the road. The McCarthy family had another aeromedical evacuation, this time with Joseph McCarthy’s life hanging in the balance with full thickness burns to 40% of his body while my wife was dealing with the loss of our youngest son. That was another experience in the bush.
As the member for Arnhem said, this is about all Territorians. This is where we live, raise our children, work, dream and where we play.
That flight to Darwin was a bit radical because I could not go. This was an intensive aeromedical evacuation. The doctor who returned to Borroloola clinic to try to get a drip into Joseph’s neck was unsuccessful. He says today it was the fluids we poured down his throat that kept him alive between Borroloola and Darwin. He landed at Royal Darwin Hospital. The decision of medical staff was they could not deal with this child and that was communicated to me over the phone. My decision was Sydney. I had family in Sydney, I had a support network in Sydney and I knew the Camperdown hospital had the best burns ward in Australia at the time. My wife and Joseph pushed four people off a commercial jet, had a nurse attached to their contingent and went to Camperdown where Joseph spent the next four months. I was able to visit them on two occasions.
Once again, my wife became the best physiotherapist, the best occupational therapist and the best psychiatrist in the Northern Territory. She returned to Borroloola with Joseph in a full burns suit with treatments that went for hours daily. Modern medical procedures, with pharmaceutical goods I had never seen before in my life, were shipped up in boxes. My wife not only looked after Joseph and conducted all his physiotherapy and occupational therapy, she taught assistant teachers and inclusion support assistants. We taught the school and the town and then we became attached to Westmead children’s hospital. Joseph McCarthy had his last reconstructive surgery on his left hand at the age of 16. He fought us all the way; he is a tough Territorian. The surgeon in Sydney who did the last reconstruction convinced him that he would shave a couple of milliseconds off his left-hand pass, as he was then playing Rugby League at a state and territory level. He played A grade for Nightcliff at 17 years of age.
Why am I sharing this story in this debate? We lived in the bush with no services and no support. We were surrounded by good people with great intentions but we are survivors. Dawn McCarthy is the strongest, most courageous and determined woman in surviving and our family members surviving. I am participating in this debate because I have to shift back to being a politician.
As the member for Port Darwin outlined, this legislation is deficit. It is not good legislation. There has been a myriad of amendments, and a rush and continual move and shake to try to reach an end for Territory women’s rights. Nobody is arguing about that, and the member Nightcliff was very clear. We are not arguing about the rights of Territory women, how dare I do that, but I am arguing about the rights of all Territory women and this legislation does not provide for that.
It is completely deficit, it is not good legislation and as a senior legal counsel advised; this legislation could provide a pathway to a coroner. Any elected community member in this House needs to be cognisant of what it entails. As lawmakers we do not take this lightly.
Some amazing communication has come in. I have felt like a politician because I have received correspondence from all over the Territory and some from interstate. The positions have been both pro and against. I will share some of the correspondence from the NT Working Women’s Centre. ‘We seek your support in reforming the Medical Services Act to ensure that women in the Northern Territory have the same access to choices as women in all other Australian jurisdictions.’
This communication was interesting and came from a group called WHAT RU4 NT? It was addressed ‘Dear member of the Legislative Assembly’. It said ‘You are likely to have an opinion on abortion. Probably some of your electorate have contacted you. You may have had some conversations with friends and colleagues. You may be concerned with two elections looming that if you vote for changes to the Medical Services Act that voters will rail against you. According to Pringle, you do not need to worry. On analysing voting patterns over decades, voters have continued to support reformist minded politicians on the matter of abortion in Australia.’
I was not too influenced by that; it was not a good lobby. That was a political lobby, almost considered to be a cheap shot, and did not influence my decision-making.
The Katherine Times of 9 December 2015 printed that:
- A prominent Katherine general practitioner says debate about providing Northern Territory women with access to so-called ‘abortion pill’ RU486 should be based on medical, not philosophical, arguments.
The story goes on, but that is essentially good advice. It should not be about philosophy but a legislative instrument that will provide equality, certainty and safety. This legislation does none of that. This legislation is conflicted with a series of amendments and philosophical opinions in a rush to provide a new pharmaceutical product in the Northern Territory that is not completely safe.
Many interviews were conducted, and when I reached radio range I listened to them. On ABC Darwin 105.7 on 2 December 2015 I heard that Robert Parker, President of the AMA(NT), is still concerned about the safety of the drug and the need for women to consult with a psychologist.
This became my thinking, psychosocial support networks for Territory women who undergo this process. If you live in the greater Darwin region you have access to those supports, but if you live in Tennant Creek or Borroloola you do not. Most people in this Chamber might not even know where Najabarra and Murun Murula are, but they definitely do not have access to those important psychosocial supports.
I can tell you about that, but someone better qualified is Dawn Margaret McCarthy. She received no wraparound psychosocial support for what we went through and still live with. That courageous woman dealt with it herself, but she understands. I asked her opinion and she said, ‘I would never wish this on any Territory woman in a lifetime’. I know there are some tough Territory women out there, but I would not like to test that either. Dawn is a survivor and she can talk.
This was in the Katherine Times on 16 December 2015:
- Support for RU486 equality – There was overwhelming support for the story about Kezia Purick’s campaign to make RU486 accessible to Territory women, with almost 5000 people reading it and the accompanying editorial. Here is what you had to say on Facebook:
- The fact that a petition is needed makes this whole ‘Territory’ a joke. Make it happen, and the counselling before and afterwards as well. This place needs to stop being an archaic joke.
From that rather crass opinion I will go back to the important element where the contributor says:
- Make it happen, and the counselling before and afterwards as well.
That is a simple statement, ‘Make it happen, and don’t forget the counselling’. What does counselling mean? It is something I know a lot about, as does my family and people in regional and remote areas.
That brings me to the Indigenous community.
As the member for Arnhem said, it is difficult to articulate this as a local member, but I tried. I found some women and men who were willing to talk about this. It was difficult to talk about, but there is something I am concerned about. When trying to broker this conversation in regional and remote areas of the Barkly electorate, I discovered that by the end of 2015 there were six stillborn babies in the morgue at Alice Springs Hospital, a number of them from Tennant Creek and the Barkly. One of the women was very brave, courageous and articulate in her first language and English and chose to speak to me about this bill.
One of those babies is her granddaughter. We have embarked on this campaign to try to conduct a closing ceremony, a funeral for this stillborn. It is unknown territory for me. I do not know what the public health system does. I know I was given my son, held him and organised his funeral. I do not know what happens when there are a number of infants in a Territory morgue.
I am working with one family, and I hope to get somewhere with this issue and Indigenous people. There are many sensitive challenges and this bill has pushed me off on a tangent. Once again, it is about dealing with the psychosocial wraparound support for young women who have suffered stillborn babies and walked away from that unfortunate experience.
This legislature needs to think about how we can deal with that and lead in that area. Whilst I do not support this bill, I will try to be of some use to Territory women facing this issue.
I spoke to remote clinicians about this bill and I thank them. These people are on the front line, our registered nurses, health workers in our clinics and health professionals. When I brokered this conversation they were very articulate. They came from a medical perspective and were able to debate this with their knowledge of medicine, pharmaceuticals and procedures. However, they were concerned about the regional and remote areas. They said the bill has deficits because it did not deal with the big, wide, geographic areas of the Northern Territory. It is focused on a small urban cohort, educated and articulate, and who want access to this medicine. They talked about sensitive cross-cultural issues. They were concerned about this legislation.
It then turned into a political debate not orchestrated by government employees but by me. I challenged the level of services available in our regional and remote areas and the level of services we need.
The health professionals were quick to advise me what we need. When we talked about the wraparound services, the support services for any Territory women accessing this pharmaceutical and using this product outside the major hospitals, it stacked up in major budgetary considerations for any government.
What does this legislation say? We will just walk away from that and not worry about it yet. Let us just get it operating, into the hospital pharmacy, and then we will worry about all the people living out there later. It does not work that way. That is not good legislation and that is why I will not back it.
People from regional and remote areas who want to terminate a foetus have an opportunity to do that. There is a process and a structure. I do not support that, but that is my problem and I do not overlay that to any Territorian. As a member of parliament I know that if a Territory woman or a Territory family choose that, it is available and there will be wraparound support services.
I thank my colleagues on this side of the House for sharing the debate. It is good, healthy and important for the law makers of the Northern Territory. Some interesting comments were provided in the debate relating to some of the amendments, and I acknowledge our Health minister, the member for Port Darwin, who provided a very thorough, succinct approach to amending this legislation. He is a lawyer; he gets it. My colleagues on this side also debated the amendments.
I will share some information that came my way. One of the minister’s amendments would give the minister the power to decide how many abortion clinics there were, where they were and what facilities they would need. The suggestion was that this could probably align with private practice. There would be clinics in Darwin or Alice Springs based on economics which would become fee for service.
Once again we are asked to pass legislation which pitches to the elite of the Territory. That is not good legislation. If this legislation is for all Territorians it should be accessible to all Territorians. That is why, minister, debate of your amendments was good, open and honest.
The other important comment which was provided by a doctor related to the arrangements of this bill and the outcomes it will produce. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines say:
- … must include 24 hour access to specific telephone advice and support and to provision of surgical uterine evacuation or other interventions required for the management of complications, for example through on call arrangements or in an emergency department resourced to respond to women’s health needs (such as required for miscarriage care).
In layman’s terms that means if you go down that road make sure you have sound and credible medical services to ensure it is safe. That will mean no Health minister has to go to the coroner, and no woman or her family have to suffer.
The information sent by people who I define as pro-life activists, God love them, is interesting. It has taken various shapes and forms, but one has reinforced that RU486 is not as simple as it sounds. There is empirical evidence from around the world and Australia to show adverse things can occur. There has been a death. Many women have gone through secondary stages of needing serious medical intervention to complete the process started by a pharmaceutical abortion.
Many studies have shown women have been readmitted to hospitals, and there has been physical damage and this pharmaceutical has failed to work. One would expect, in the big wide world of medicine, that these things might happen. However, as legislators we must be cognisant of the fact we cannot allow those deficits because we are lazy, philosophically driven and really do not care. We have to ensure that Territory law is proper, fit and accountable, and therefore I cannot support this.
I will separate my personal views and religious faith and go to this legislation. I cannot support this. As politicians, if we are serious about going down this road for Territory women we have a number of challenges. One is to get the legislation right, and the other is to make sure it is for all Territory women. If you really want to debate it, I challenge you to debate it with Dawn Margaret McCarthy.
I just want a rational position here, and as an elected member will try to use common sense, good manners and a proper legislative approach. As the clock ticks down on me I urge us to turn our attention to a pressing issue in regional and remote areas of cross-cultural significance where there are multiple stillborn infants in our morgues with mothers, families and clans struggling to deal with the issue. As legislators, that is a real issue and we need to lead.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, legalisation of RU486 is an emotive issue and we have seen that tonight. People are for or against the legalisation of a medical termination, and some people do not have an opinion either way.
This debate is not about abortion; that debate has been had. Surgical abortion is legal in the NT. In preparing to debate this bill I met with WHAT RU4 NT, Family Planning, AMA NT, Top End Women’s Legal Service and the Australian Christian Lobby NT and Queensland. I thank them for their time and for explaining to me their positions on introduction of RU486 into the Territory.
I have also received correspondence through letters and e-mails from people in and out of my electorate expressing their views. I thank them for taking the time to do that. I have spoken to people in my electorate about this method of abortion.
As other members have mentioned this evening, this is a conscience vote and I respect the fact the government and opposition have allowed their members to freely express their position.
On the information I have read, heard and obtained, I understand the main concern in relation to the use of RU486 by Territory women is safety. I could not agree more; the safety of women is paramount when considering legislative amendments such as these.
The bill is complex. It was brought to our attention at 10.49 am today that the member for Goyder would propose significant amendments to the bill originally proposed. There is no question that the amendments are significant, and I will not hide from the fact that I am disappointed proper time was not afforded to all members in this House to consider the proposed amendments well in advance of debating the bill and moving to consideration in detail.
The bill is too important to get wrong and make bad law without proper time to scrutinise. It is a shame we could not have had more time, but any amendments – multiple amendments have been circulated to the House – are open for debate during the consideration in detail stage.
AMA NT has stated that provided the use of RU486 follows the authoritative clinical guidelines issued by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists it can be administered safely.
The reason the bill is so complex, polarising and emotive is because it can be either extremely prescriptive and enshrine all the details around how to dispense the drug, take the drug and how the drug and the woman are monitored. It can be as prescriptive as details of the gestation period, the number of doctors required to sign off on a medical abortion and parental and guardian consent for minors seeking termination. Some would argue all those issues need to be considered and prescribed within the legislation.
Other views say it can be less prescriptive, and leave the details to be developed by the Department of Health in consultation with the medical profession. An example I received was from Dr Jacqueline Murdoch, who e-mailed me with a good example. ‘We do not legislate that you cannot do an appendectomy in a remote community and yet it is not done because it is not appropriate. Medical guidelines are used to determine appropriate and safe professional practice.’
I have confidence in the profession, the AMA and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists to determine the appropriate administration of RU486 and the guidelines associated with it. The medical board and the Australian health practitioner regulation agencies are our professional watchdogs over the medical profession.
It is true that all jurisdictions except the Northern Territory allow the use of RU486 outside a hospital environment for medical terminations of pregnancy up to nine weeks under the supervision and assessment of a medical practitioner. This debate is not about the introduction of the drug RU486 in Australia but introduction into the Northern Territory. We are the exception, and the question is whether or not we want to become the rule.
I am a proud Territorian. The Territory does many things differently and we are proud of it. Unfortunately, there are examples of where Northern Territory differences are not something to be proud of. I am thinking specifically of issues affecting women, such as our higher rates of domestic violence and our inability to access RU486.
I support reform to the Medical Services Act. It is important and it is time. It is also Country Liberal Party policy that the Northern Territory be brought into line with other Australian jurisdictions by supporting legislative and statutory changes to enable the use of RU486. I support the Country Liberal Party’s policy position. I also support the aspirations of the Office of Women’s Policy framework, which strives for equity and access to health services for all Northern Territory women.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank members for their contribution to a difficult debate. I listened carefully to the members for Arnhem and Barkly and share their concerns. I take this slightly differently. This is a conscience vote, and it is difficult for me to separate myself from legislation and what I believe is the taking of the life of the unborn. There are two sides. I believe that life begins at conception. At the same time, I believe we have legislation before us which I have to consider.
I accept what the member for Port Darwin said. I have amendments before me which I only received at midday. I have not had the chance to deal with them in any detail, nor get serious advice on them. On the surface I have some serious concerns.
This issue is still about abortion. Some people might say I am fighting the tide. This is women’s business, go away. I believe just because something is the fashion it does not mean it is correct. G K Chesterton, a great English writer and philosopher, once wrote:
- Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.
So it is with abortion. You can read all the glossy magazines, listen to the media commentators, the midday TV shows and what the family planning and YWCA people say. Of course, some people here would know about EMILY’S List. You then see what this fashion is about. According to this fashion, in the western society we live in the unborn is an indeterminate bunch of cells which only becomes a human being when it leaves its mother’s womb. Until then it has no status, no protection and is not human. That is the fashion of the day and the fallacy of the world today.
In the second reading there is a continuance of that fallacy when it says this debate is not about abortion or human rights but about RU486, a drug. It is not a medicine; that is a euphemism. Medicines make you well and pregnancy is not a sickness. It is a drug that will give women a choice of how to destroy an unborn human life. We will debate abortion, and we will debate human life.
The drug, combined with another drug, destroys an unborn human life. That is what it is designed to do and what it does. It is not the case that we are asked to approve a drug which is said by some to be safer, by some to be more convenient, and by some to be more private. You do not have to worry about abortion because it is keeping the status quo, keeping up with the other states and giving people a choice.
If you do not support the existing process of abortion, then just because a different method is developed to achieve the same goal does not mean it can be supported. To do so, for me, would be hypocritical. It is a bit like asking me if I would like to be hit by a bus or a car. The end result is the same.
In the American Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson said:
- We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
That is a fine statement, but it is obvious interpretation of that statement has excluded the unalienable right endowed by the Creator of life. It is a pity, because I too believe we have the right to life endowed by our Creator from the day we are conceived. Any law which says that the unborn have no rights is discriminatory and gives rights to some and deliberately excludes others.
Humanity starts at conception. We are individual humans, neither the same as our mother or father. We are like no other human being, and the start of our existence is no different from any other stage of our life. Conception, embryo, foetus, baby, child, teenager, adolescent, adult, middle aged, senior and aged we are always human, and we as a parliament have a responsibility to protect our fellow humans, especially at their weakest and most vulnerable.
It is amazing that parliaments will pass laws and set up organisations to protect children, make sure their health is looked after, and if they are not doing enough are criticised for not looking after the welfare of the child. If a child is injured, abused or killed the perpetrators are tried and sent to gaol. Parliaments support the child through the legislation they pass. Parliaments make sure children are educated, and if they are not attending school parliaments make laws to make sure they do. Parliaments make sure children’s health is looked after by providing adequate medical services, and where there are not are brought to task. Parliaments care about the welfare of children. However, the unborn, as the family planners say, are a bunch of cells, a product, irrelevant to this debate and it is a woman’s right to have an abortion. I sometimes question if other rights are overridden.
According to a report by Professor Caroline de Costa, in the NT there are between 650 to 850 abortions per year, meaning nearly one in every four pregnancies is aborted. In the NT one in four babies is never born. Surely we need to do something about that. Surely that many abortions cannot be justified on medical grounds, especially in this day and age when we have such wonderful facilities and doctors and nurses in our hospitals to make giving birth a relatively safe procedure.
If a woman wants an abortion for whatever reason – financial, unplanned, anxiety – why are we in parliament not saying, ‘We will help you through this difficult time’? Why are we not pro-life and look after the needs of the mother, the family and the unborn by setting up ways to help them through this period? We look after people with depression, mental illness, suicidal tendencies, budgetary problems and housing, etcetera. Many NGOs would help. As parliamentarians we need to focus on the unborn, and put in place strategies which reduce the need for abortions. We need to support our unborn Territorians, promote life in our society and the beauty of each human being regardless of their circumstances. We need to give them every opportunity to shine in the world, not just after they are born but at conception.
Tonight’s debate is the about the negative and should be about the positive. It is about a dangerous drug designed to destroy human life. This bill is also an attempt to have abortion on demand, as seen in the letter from Family Planning NT and endorsed by a number of speakers. The amendments try to make doctors who refuse, in conscience, to have anything to do with abortion, or give advice which would assist someone get an abortion, break the law. The amendments impose an obligation on the practitioner. Thank God there are doctors who believe in the Hippocratic Oath and their conscience. I will quote from it:
- I will practice my profession with conscience and dignity … I will maintain the utmost respect for human life ... I will not use my medical knowledge to violate human rights and civil liberties, even under threat … I make these promises solemnly, freely and upon my honor.
I will go against fashion and support what I believe is right. Our nation is slipping into a vacuum of values and beliefs, where people who believe in a God from whom all life comes are ridiculed and mocked, yet those who believe in the fashionable non-beliefs held in the new world should be followed. It is a nihilist approach to life and its meanings, with about as much depth as the reporting one gets from the nightly news.
Perhaps this is why we have so many social problems that our government and NGOs can hardly keep up with. We are a society for today and not the long term. We see our Facebook but cannot see the sky.
Whether RU486 is safe is an argument based on what is safe for the woman. No one asked the unborn if they think it is safe. That is the irony of the debate; it is upside down.
The debate is deliberately false as it tries to hide what it does, which is termination of pregnancy. Regardless, I do not believe this drug is safe. There are split opinions on this, but some months ago I received a book titled RU486: Misconceptions, Myths and Morals from our Parliamentary Library. Some of you may also have received it. Its three authors are mentioned in the front of the book.
Debate suspended.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Report – Member for Goyder
Travel Report – Member for Goyder
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a travel report received from the member for Goyder pursuant to clause 6.11 of the RTD. It is dated 19 April 2016.
Casuarina Coastal Reserve Management Plan
Mrs PRICE (Parks and Wildlife): Mr Deputy Speaker, this reserve is the most visited park in the Northern Territory. I feel it is important to share this plan with the House, a Country Liberals management plan which promotes a balanced environment, sets out the direction for the reserve’s future management and outlines how the needs of the community and conservation will be met.
Unfortunately Labor was complacent with our unique Territory lifestyle and neglected our parks and reserves, but we want to open them up to business and opportunities so more Territorians can enjoy our parks, sunsets, walking and cycling tracks or just a quick escape to nature.
If Labor got hold of our parks no one would be allowed in them. The management plan has been developed by the Parks and Wildlife Commission together with the Casuarina Coastal Reserve Advisory Committee, the community and key stakeholders, including the Amateur Fishermen’s Association of the Northern Territory, Tourism NT and recreation groups. It includes implementing the Country Liberals’ $10.7m infrastructure development to improve visitor experiences at the reserve, which has already commenced. Under the plan of management, the reserve will be managed for its natural, cultural and visitor values. We will manage our parks; those opposite will lock them up.
The management plan includes changes to domestic animal regulations, which will mean the reserve is more user-friendly, with a larger section of beach now dedicated for off-leash dog walking. The new regulations will also provide additional protection for the significant migratory birds that visit the reserve.
The management plan also focuses on promoting more public involvement in the reserve, and working with the community and environmental and recreational user groups. This is a key commitment from the Country Liberals to open up parks to increased visitation through sustainable development and increased commercial partnerships. That is right; the CLP has opened up the parks. Those opposite and on the cross benches would padlock our parks and keep all Territorians out.
The plan spells out a bright future for the reserve and everyone who has an interest in it. The visitor experience will be enhanced and the natural and cultural values protected. Importantly, the reserve will provide visitors with a safe and enjoyable experience. I am confident the public and the Assembly will welcome the future of Casuarina Coastal Reserve as outlined in this plan.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I table this management plan for noting by the Legislative Assembly.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS
Public Accounts Committee Report – Public Private Partnership Arrangements for the Darwin Correctional Precinct – consideration adjourned.
Public Accounts Committee Report – Inquiry into Structural Separation of the Power and Water Corporation – consideration adjourned.
Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future Report – Key Challenges and Opportunities Issues Paper – consideration adjourned.
Auditor-General for the Northern Territory – Report to the Legislative Assembly, August 2015 – consideration adjourned.
Auditor-General for the Northern Territory – Report to the Legislative Assembly, February 2016 – consideration adjourned.
Standing Orders Committee Report – Matters of Question Time Reform, Infant Care and Right of Reply, March 2016 – consideration adjourned.
Committee of Members’ Interests Report to the Assembly, March 2016 – consideration adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
When I became Chief Minister on 14 March 2013 I set a personal goal of working to bring the Kenbi Land Claim to a resolution which satisfied all parties. The joint media conference between the Northern Territory government, the Northern Land Council, Kenbi traditional owners and the Commonwealth government, on 6 April 2016, announcing settlement of the Kenbi Land Claim marked a significant milestone in resolution of one of Australia’s longest running and most complex land claims. Lodged in 1979, when I was just six years old, the Kenbi Land Claim has taken 37 years to settle and involved extensive legal processes, lengthy negotiations, four hearings by an Aboriginal Land Commissioner and two High Court challenges.
The land offered as part of the settlement includes 52 000 ha becoming Aboriginal land, 13 000 ha becoming freehold land in the north of the Cox Peninsula, with one-fifth of this freehold in the north east to be granted to the Larrakia Development Corporation. The total freehold area is equivalent to approximately the current City of Darwin municipality area, or 2.3 times the current City of Palmerston municipality area.
This will lead to significantly increased opportunities for residential and commercial developments on the Cox Peninsula for at least the next 100 to 150 years. The settlement also provides perpetual open access to the intertidal zone for recreational and fishing access, as well as certainty for squatters and other interest holders with buildings in the area.
In 2000 the Aboriginal Land Commissioner recommended the vast majority of the land under claim be granted as Aboriginal land. The commissioner also made specific note that granting of the land would benefit many more people than the six named traditional owners at the time, and that it would be misleading to say it will benefit only the named traditional owners. The commissioner further noted that under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 a land trust holds land for a class of people much broader than those who fit within the definition of traditional owners. Those on whose behalf a land trust holds land are Aboriginal people entitled by Aboriginal tradition to the use or occupation of that area of land, whether or not the traditional connection is proven.
I have been informed by the Chair of the Northern Land Council that due to dissatisfaction amongst the broader Larrakia family groups regarding the commissioner’s 2000 decision to only name six traditional Aboriginal owners, not all Larrakia support the settlement.
In order to secure free and public access to the coastal areas of the Cox Peninsula, post the Blue Mud Bay High Court decision, a further package has been offered.
This includes: the grant of Karu Park, the previous site of the well-known Retta Dixon Home, as Crown Lease in perpetuity; the grant of a development lot in the East Arm Darwin Business Park; procurement provisions which incentivise developers to partner with Aboriginal organisations in future land development or industrial projects on Crown Land; and the first right of refusal to partner in the residential land release development of the area of Farrar West.
This package further enhances the opportunities available to the broader Larrakia family groups as part of this innovative settlement.
In relation to Karu Park, the grant of the land is for the purposes of recognising its former use as the Retta Dixon Home and it is a condition of the grant that the site be maintained and accessible to the public.
There was a real risk that if the current opportunity to settle the Kenbi Land Claim was not taken it might never be settled. Therefore, it was fortunate that the stars aligned to pave the way for a settlement.
Leaving an area so important to greater Darwin’s future, long-term growth would have resulted in ongoing uncertainty and frustration for all concerned.
I take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt thanks to those who have worked so hard for so long to bring about this momentous milestone.
I would specifically like to acknowledge the surviving members of the Kenbi traditional owners; the Larrakia family groups; the Northern Land Council; the Commonwealth Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Senator for the Northern Territory Hon Nigel Scullion; key staff from the Department of the Chief Minister; the Solicitor for the Northern Territory; and the Departments of Land Resource Management; Lands, Planning and the Environment; Primary Industry and Fisheries; Transport; Local Government and Community Services; Mines and Energy; and the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Without the constructive and collaborative approach taken by all involved over such a long period of time we would never have reached this point. However, this is not the end of the work required to give effect to the Kenbi Land Claim settlement. Efforts are now being focused on finalising the key agreements required to resolve the land claim.
It is anticipated that the Kenbi Indigenous Land Use Agreement and Side Deed will be executed by the NT government and the Northern Land Council at the end of May 2016. This will allow a ceremony to occur shortly thereafter for the Commonwealth to hand over the deed for Aboriginal land. Execution of the key agreements will also pave the way for all subsequent land transfers to occur to the Kenbi Land Trust and the Larrakia Development Corporation.
The Northern Land Council will also do further work over the next 18 months, following the handover ceremony, to transfer its ownership share of the Larrakia Development Corporation to Larrakia ownership. This will assist in ensuring there is greater transparency and accountability for the broader Larrakia family groups in relation to implementation of the agreements to settle the Kenbi Land Claim.
Developing economic opportunities for Aboriginal Territorians is a priority of the County Liberals government. To be able to structure the settlement to make this possible for traditional owners and family groups certainly helped bring about this settlement. The settlement that has been accepted is extremely innovative as it provides a combination of freehold and Aboriginal land. Settlement of the Kenbi Land Claim is a truly historic occasion and secures the future of Darwin for generations to come. Once again, I thank all those who have assisted in this process throughout the last 37 years.
It is with great sadness that I salute a legendary cattleman, John Atten Dunnicliff, who passed away on 27 March 2016, aged 75. John was not born in the Northern Territory, but as a bush gentleman was about as Territory as they come. He embodied everything that is great about the Northern Territory. John was an innovator, a deep thinker, a genius cattleman and a loving family man. John was an entrepreneur and a risk taker, but they were calculated risks that almost always paid off.
He started farming in 1961 on a small hard block in Bundarra, country New South Wales, which had been brought by his father, a journalist, and his mother, a school teacher. From there he would go on to build properties from King Island in the south to the Kimberley in the north and many places in between. By 2002 the family would own one million hectares of good Barkly tablelands grazing country. Those properties are Beetaloo Station, Mungabroom and O T Downs, but that was not enough for John. John once said, ‘The real thing that holds everyone back is whether you’re game enough to chuck the money at it and get in and do it’. That is exactly what he did, and John never took half measures.
He invested $40m in 600 tanks of 135 000 L, about 3000 km of 75 mm poly pipe, more than 3000 km of fencing and 70 bores. This increased the number of watering points from 40 to 600. The results were spectacular, and the holding’s carrying capacity rose from 20 000 cattle in 2002 to 90 000 today.
Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association President, Tom Stockwell, who described John as a ‘lovely old bushman’, said:
- His development of Beetaloo will be a long-lasting memorial to his way of thinking and to his efforts of property and herd development throughout his career.
John did not just build his own cattle empire, but helped and motivated others to do the same. NT Cattlemen’s Association chief executive, Tracey Hayes, said:
- In success or failure he shared his knowledge and learnings, providing practical examples and evidence, inspiring others and leading industry.
John was a gentleman and a businessman, and that trait helped the family through the disastrous suspension of live cattle exports in 2011. Because he visited his Indonesian partners every year, his cattle were first back onto the ships when the ban was lifted.
It is hard to imagine the cattle industry without John Dunnicliff. He is already greatly missed. However, his legacy of innovation, problem solving and sheer determination will always live on in the Northern Territory.
On behalf of the government and the people of the Northern Territory, I extend our heartfelt condolences to his wife Trish, his children and children-in-law Jane and Scott, and Kate and Anthony, and his grandchildren Jimmy, Lockie, Jack, Tessie, Sam, Maddie, Charlotte, Elise, Sam, Ruby and Joe.
May you rest in peace, John Atten Dunnicliff.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to continue my remarks about Palmerston’s Citizen of the Year, Rachel Fosdick.
Then the Palmerston and Regional Basketball Association was born. A foundation committee was developed and one of its first jobs was to secure 100 senior members. The committee worked hard at developing the governance structure, the constitution and guiding documents, and recruiting 100 senior players. This was achieved and currently PaRBA has 250 members. That is an astonishing achievement in the last 18 months, and you would expect no less from something Rachel was involved in.
PaRBA is flourishing, as Rachel and Damon envisaged it would. PaRBA hosts mixed senior social competitions on Friday nights, wheelchair basketball for kids and parents on Tuesdays, and plenty more. Rachel proudly explained how PaRBA received a grassroots grant from the NT government to run Fun and Fundamentals, which brought kids from Berry Springs, Batchelor, Belyuen, Adelaide River and Bakewell to Bees Creek, where PaRBA ran a 12-week youth program.
The Fun and Fundamentals program was a test of the committee’s ability to run junior basketball and they excelled at it. The program involved liaising with schools so they would bring the kids up on buses every Saturday morning to participate. The morning would comprise coaching and learning to referee, followed by a healthy lunch and then basketball games. This has now turned into a highly successful school-based and rural competition out of Gray and Girraween Primary Schools.
A passion of PaRBA is to run lightning carnivals after school, and its goal is to bring back playing sport for your school after school as this brings pride to students, their school and the community. PaRBA also aims to inspire its players by having inspirational speakers like Tom O'Neill-Thorne, the Paralympian.
This year PaRBA is excited to host Brittany Ward, the pocket rocket from Texas. Brittany will be participating in the Rising Stars basketball program for kids with disabilities. Rachel is fiercely passionate about this program and has already approached the schools, encouraging them to bus the kids in for a healthy lunch and basketball games.
PaRBA also hosts an emerging athletes program to identify kids who want to progress to representative basketball. Prior to PaRBA fostering emerging athletes there were no options for Palmerston and rural kids other than at 6 am on Tuesday morning in Darwin. Thanks to PaRBA, emerging Palmerston and rural athletes are now supported in our community of Friday nights. It is extremely well – if not over – attended, with 33 excellent basketball players getting specialist attention.
The PaRBA committee is where Rachel feels at home. She loves that everyone on the committee identifies and fulfils a need. There is no ‘this should be done’. Everything is done and it is a committee full of go-getters, which makes life easy and hugely rewarding.
When I asked Rachel how highly she values volunteering for her and her family, she reflected that she comes from a family of volunteers. Rachel was recently chatting to her mum, who is always on a mission for something new to be involved in. Rachel’s mum is a doctor who became a naturopath. She retired but then started volunteering to treat koalas with chlamydia. Rachel’s mother-in-law has a lifelong volunteering commitment to St Vinnies for over 40 years. Rachel reflected by saying:
- When you come from a family of volunteers you don’t know any different and you can’t help it. When you see a need you fill it. It is a good thing. My husband and I asked ourselves what values we want our children to have when they turn 18. We decided they need to have compassion.
Rachel estimates that one average she would volunteer five hours a night, and the weekends are full of volunteering. This is an astronomical commitment to our community. You could ask no more of this woman, she gives it all.
Rachel believes an important part of volunteering is to know when to walk away and start something new. Rachel does not know what her next step is because PaRBA has so much potential. She hopes to be involved in PaRBA at an operational level in the future. PaRBA will have 1000 members in five years’ time. It has started servicing Wadeye and the Tiwi Islands. It is achieving great things at warp speed and doing it with love, care and compassion.
Rachel’s proudest moment was at Fun and Fundamentals when someone asked her, ‘Why do you do this?’ They have to drive an hour from Batchelor or Belyuen to get there. The kids said because if they go to school every day they get to play basketball on the weekend. The sense of community was overwhelming. It was a very proud moment. Rachel is driving educational outcomes and could not be prouder, and I could not be prouder of her.
When I asked Rachel about her funniest moment she shared the following story. Rachel had to prepare a risk assessment for the Fun and Fundamentals program. She thought she had covered everything until at Bees Creek Primary School the Belyuen kids were eating berries off a bush. Rachel asked if they should be doing that. They said, yes, it was bush tucker. Rachel was not so sure so she asked an elder. He looked at the bush and said, ‘No, they shouldn’t be eating that’. He asked the kids if it tasted bad and they said, ‘Yes’. He said, ‘If it tastes bad don’t eat it’. Rachel asked if that was a bush tucker trick. He said it was just common sense. It was a wonderful moment for Rachel and they were gorgeous kids.
Rachel loves what she does. She loves her family, loves Palmerston and could never leave there. Rachel cannot imagine bringing up her family anywhere else. She has watched the community grow and loves running into people everywhere she goes. It makes Palmerston home.
I want to thank Rachel on behalf of the people of Palmerston and this House. You are the most deserving Palmerston Citizen of the Year. Your tireless volunteering and efforts have not gone unnoticed, and I hope you have a wonderful twelve months holding this highly honourable position in our community. We look forward to all the volunteering and contributions you will continue to make for the people of Palmerston.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, this evening I want to speak about a wonderful relationship that has developed between students of Wulagi Primary School, located in my electorate of Sanderson, and students of a similar age group from Japan.
This inter-country relationship first developed in 2014 for current students of Wulagi Primary School when the Australian Japanese Association of the NT, AJANT, sent information to members of their association inviting them to visit a Japanese naval ship, the JS Hatakaze, which had arrived in Darwin for Exercise KAKADU.
Ms Glenys Clarke, a member of AJANT and the Japanese language teacher at Wulagi Primary School, approached staff at the school to see if an excursion could be arranged to tour the JS Hatakaze.
Due to the efforts of AJANT’s President Kathleen Bresnehan and Vice-President Ms Asako Kobayashi, and with the enthusiastic support of Officer Yamaguchi of the JS Hatakaze, the excursion was arranged.
With a bus provided by INPEX, the support of Principal Jeannie Bennett of the Darwin Languages Centre and some of the language teachers, interpreters and some staff from Wulagi Primary School, about 30 excited students travelled to the ship.
The hospitality provided by the Commanding Officer of JS Hatakaze, Captain Tokihiko Umezaki, Officer Yamaguchi and the crew of JS Hatakaze to these young students and the accompanying adults was welcoming and gracious. It was a fantastic opportunity to experience and learn more about Japanese culture.
Language teacher, Ms Glenys Clarke, was particularly moved by this experience and said, ‘I was particularly touched when I considered that not many years ago Japan and Australia had been at war and fighting had taken place in the very waters where the JS Hatakaze was moored. Yet now in this very place Japanese naval officers were guiding excited Australian school children around their vessel. When we disembarked the crew presented the children with folded paper cranes, a symbol of peace and longevity.’
Following this visit, a Year 3/4 classroom teacher at Wulagi Primary School, Ms Janine Woodroffe, had a great idea to pass on letters from the school’s Japanese language learning students to Officer Yamaguchi in the hope that pen pal correspondence could commence and develop with school children in Japan.
Coincidentally, Officer Yamaguchi’s daughter was in Year 5, and the letters from students of the Northern Territory were given to her school, which is located just north of Tokyo on Japan’s main island of Honshu.
A relationship between young students of two countries developed when the school children of the Japanese primary school wrote back to their counterparts at Wulagi Primary School. Members of AJANT then assisted the Wulagi students to compose the next round of letters in Japanese, and a relationship between students from across the seas continued to develop further.
Through the further efforts of the AJANT the Wulagi students were invited to participate in a Japanese language program aired on community radio in Darwin on a Sunday. This radio program could also be heard through the Internet by students in Japan, further developing communication and friendship between young students from two countries.
In addition to the friendships that have been developed, I understand that through the assistance of Mr Andrew Matz of the Australian Embassy in Tokyo, who is the brother of Wulagi school teacher Ms Janine Woodroffe, students of Wulagi will be introduced to students at another Japanese school, the Tokyo International School.
The inter-country relationships will assist in providing a wonderful insight into our different cultures and languages, but importantly help us understand each other better.
I want to thank everyone who has worked so hard to assist Wulagi Primary School students develop this relationship with Japanese students.
I would also like to add something in relation to the building of relationships between the generations of school children. My granddaughter is a student at Nakara Primary School and Madison is currently learning Japanese. As a result of a family visiting Darwin last year to spread the ashes of the wife of an aviator who died in Darwin in 1943 – he was in a Japanese reconnaissance plane that was shot down and crashed into the sea not far from Bathurst Island.
When the airman’s wife passed away in 2004 she wanted her ashes spread in the waters surrounding Darwin where her husband died. The daughter, who is now in her early 70s, along with her daughter and granddaughter travelled to Darwin to spread those ashes. It was a moving ceremony.
The Royal Australian Navy is to be commended because they facilitated this on one of their vessels in the harbour. It was the first time that such a thing has occurred in Darwin or Australia. At first nobody quite knew the protocols, but between Dr Tom Lewis, the Royal Australian Navy and the Japanese family a ceremony was held and the airman’s wife’s ashes were spread in Darwin harbour.
More significantly, they brought with them an antique doll. They asked me to take responsibility for this doll as the lady wanted it to be in Darwin so it was close to mother and father. The doll had been handed down through her family and she had had it all her life. This significant antique was entrusted to me to look after and handed to my family.
The real human story is the doll was handed down from the daughter to her granddaughter, who passed it to my granddaughter. Two six-year old girls, one of whom speaks limited English and the other speaks limited Japanese, had a conversation in Japanese and English – getting most of the words right – about the doll being looked after.
That doll sits in my ministerial office upstairs facing the ocean, where its owner’s ashes are scattered. It shows how wonderful it is when we move on from times of trouble into times of peace, that our next generation of young girls can continue a relationship. The relationship between those two will continue, as does the one from Wulagi.
We live in a global village and Japan is our main trading partner. It augers well for diversifying our economy and increasing trade between Darwin and Tokyo that we have strong connections and relationships with those people.
I thank INPEX for facilitating the buses and the help they gave Wulagi Primary School to make the excursion happen. They are great corporate citizens who are deeply involved in what is occurring in the community. Actions like this, with the assistance of the Australian Embassy in Japan and the Japanese Embassy in Canberra, as well as local representatives of the Australian Japanese Association of the NT, shows how much can be done when a group of enthusiastic people – irrespective of which country they are from – get together and make a contribution to our multicultural community. It is immeasurable.
I thank the teachers at Wulagi, the people from the Australian Japanese Association of the NT, and all those involved in facilitating this ongoing commitment to multiculturalism, and the peaceful and harmonious relationship we have with our Japanese friends.
Ms MOSS (Casuarina): Mr Deputy Speaker, the lack of remote housing in the Territory is one of the most significant issues facing the government today, and should be one of the most important issues in the Territory this election year. The Territory cannot go on with the housing crisis we have across our communities, both remote and regional, but particularly in our remote areas.
There needs to be a much clearer statement from the Minister for Housing. What we heard in Question Time yesterday could be described as using tricky figures. The minister said 78 new houses have been built since July 2014. In fact, there has only been one.
My question to the minister yesterday was specifically about new houses under the national partnership agreement. Ironically, Labor was not responsible for thinking up this figure. It comes from the minister’s answer to a written question on notice. I specifically asked for a breakdown of what had been added, replaced and refurbished under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, or NPARIH, and Stronger Futures funding streams in the Territory.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table the answer provided.
Leave granted.
Ms MOSS: I accept that replacement of houses is of vital importance, particularly when so many are beyond economic repair and nearing the end of their life as suitable for Territorians to live in. This is the situation in many places in the Territory, and I intend to ask more questions about the number of residents currently not paying rent to the department because of the abysmal state of their housing.
However, the addition of new houses to stock is also of vital importance when we face the huge challenge of overcrowding in many communities in the Territory. We cannot ignore the need for building new houses.
Last week was Youth Homelessness Matters Day. We know that NT youth are a significant proportion of the national youth homelessness population and that overcrowding is part of this.
The answer provided by the department clearly shows there has been one additional house built under NPARIH. If the answer is wrong, then I ask the minister to provide a correction. Of the minister’s numbers, 76 were replacement houses and not what the question related to. An additional one was added, which the minister will need to clarify. Perhaps this has come online since 29 February 2016.
This is about people’s lives. Yesterday a specific question was asked about new additional houses under the agreement. To add two figures together and then misrepresent what was asked will not go a long way to fixing the issues experienced in housing in the Northern Territory. We all know the reason is the minister is part of a government that has refused to put any of its money into growing housing stock in remote communities. In fact, the only government that put one cent of Territory government money into remote housing was a Labor government.
There is clearly no intention to put more money into housing. In estimates last year, in relation to the national partnership agreement, the minister said:
- The current focus under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing is only to replace houses that are deemed to be beyond economic repair. As a consequence, the program will not be delivering additional, only new replacement houses.
The minister can play games with numbers if she wishes, but I will continue listening to what she says. Yesterday in Question Time she said:
- When you build a new house it is a new house.
The minister has said there will be no additional dwellings under this agreement only replacement houses. Representing replacements as new additional housing is not right. The minister should immediately outline plans to build new additional houses in the Northern Territory rather than politicking with a straight question.
The contrast between the CLP policy and ours is clear: we will put in place a $1.1bn Territory government-funded housing program. We recognise this is still not enough. We will call on the Australian government to put up funds as well. However, if we want to attract some decent money from the federal government we need to put in as well.
I will leave it there, Mr Deputy Speaker. I hope to hear plans soon with the end of NPARIH fast approaching.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Casuarina for her adjournment, setting the record straight on remote housing and the failings of this government to not deliver on housing. It is an important story which is alive and on the wires in the bush, When I was in Central Australia the last four days before I came to Darwin for sittings, the failings of the current CLP government was what people were talking about, particularly where it is letting people in the bush down.
This evening I will talk about an important bush matter to do with education and government’s failure regarding homelands. I cannot speak for all homelands, but I can for some of the homelands in Arnhem I have visited recently. I discovered an appalling state of affairs regarding arrangements for teachers visiting homelands. Typically, a visiting teacher might leave their main community. In this case I am talking about Gapuwiyak, and I was out there a few weeks ago. I followed protocol and contacted minister Chandler’s office to request permission to visit Gapuwiyak School and also one of the homeland schools serviced by Gapuwiyak, a beautiful little community called Raymangirr on the coast, which is serviced by Laynhapuy Homelands.
What is happening at Raymangirr homeland and Donydji homeland, which is also serviced by Gapuwiyak School, is there was an arrangement whereby a visiting teacher would typically arrive on a Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning. They would stay in the community for three nights and be supported by the very capable Laynhapuy assistant teacher.
Instead of Donydji and Raymangirr receiving a visiting teacher, who comes every week of the term to their school, the arrangement has now become a week-about arrangement. One week the teacher will visit and stay at Raymangirr homeland and teach at that school and the following week travel to Donydji community – which is a bit further away than Gapuwiyak, probably more than an hour by road.
When the teacher is at Donydji homeland there is simply a teacher assistant at Raymangirr. Again, when the visiting teacher goes back to Raymangirr, Donydji has the assistant teacher there. The assistant teachers in the two schools are incredibly competent individuals, I know them both. Joanne Guyula is the assistant teacher at Donydji and Rose Wunumurra is the assistant Yolngu teacher at Raymangirr.
It is not acceptable that these homelands have had visiting teacher hours halved. When I visited the community of Raymangirr people were keen to share their stories and ask why the visiting teacher hours had been reduced by half, as well as other matters I will raise in a minute.
I told them I had no quick answer other than that they were a long way from Darwin, and I asked if they had heard the phrase ‘out of sight out of mind’. I told them the government does not care about them and can save money by providing a teacher week about rather than every week.
As evidence of this – it generated many comments on Facebook – the community wanted a photograph of every child at Raymangirr homeland school that day. All the chairs were brought out and it was like a class photo. They asked me to be in the photograph, and there are some 20 little faces of children who were at school. This was not a stunt on the day, Wednesday 13 April, the final week of term immediately after Easter. I am advised that attendance at Raymangirr has been sustained throughout the term.
It is bewildering why the government would half resources to two homeland communities. The impact this has had on the Donydji community – whilst I have not visited Donydji for a while I am in phone contact with them, and families are concerned that visiting teacher hours have been reduced and some families have moved into Gapuwiyak so their children can attend school there to receive what they call a proper education.
This reduction in services fuels speculation amongst families and community members at the homelands that it is an attempt by the government to force them away from their homelands and into larger centres. I can understand why they would think that. It is not helped by the fact there has been a poorly communicated process regarding the boarding facility currently under construction in Nhulunbuy. There is an expectation that families who want their children to receive secondary education will need to relocate to Nhulunbuy if they want more than basic literacy and numeracy.
This is a dilemma for the homelands and a shameful state of affairs for the government. It is not only Raymangirr and Donydji homelands. On a visit to Milingimbi several weeks ago – Milingimbi also services, like Gapuwiyak, two homeland communities, both island communities. One homeland school is Mooronga, located in the Crocodile Islands. I do not have my notes in front of me and cannot remember the name of the second homeland school serviced by Milingimbi. Similarly, those two homelands in the Crocodile Islands attached to Milingimbi School have also seen a halving of visiting teacher hours. Instead of a teacher going to those homelands weekly it has become fortnightly.
I have written to the Minister for Education formally on this and expect an answer in a few days. I also suspect there is a paper in his hot issues brief for Question Time for fear I might ask why these teaching hours have been reduced. It sends a terrible message to the bush and homeland communities regarding the government supporting them, especially in light of the minister’s – let us face it, it was a ministerial statement and a sneaky way of getting around protocol for statements which requires the government to deliver them to opposition members and Independents by 5 pm the night before. They do not like that so they cooked up a process to move a motion to deliver a ministerial statement. It circumvents the process of providing it to us in advance.
To hear the minister spruik the fact they are creating amazing results in education with fewer resources – nobody buys that, especially people in remote homeland communities who have had their resources reduced considerably.
Another interesting issue raised at Raymangirr was how they struggle to transport children from the neighbouring homeland of Burrum, which is about 30 minutes from Raymangirr. Previously a school troop carrier would be provided by the teacher from Gapuwiyak School, which would be used for school excursions where appropriate. It would also collect children from the neighbouring homeland of Burrum each day and take them back.
That happens in other communities, such as Gawa Christian School at the top of Elcho Island, which is under the NT Christian Schools Association and is not a government school. At Gawa every morning they drive to the neighbouring homeland about 20 minutes down the Gawa road and bring a troop carrier full of children back to school and return them at the end of the day.
Where ownership of vehicles is at a low level in remote communities because people do not have the finances to own one, or might use a communal vehicle, would it not make sense that where communities want children to go to school a level of support be made available by the government to facilitate attendance?
Community members asked if I could raise withdrawal of the school troopie with the minister as a matter of great concern. A senior man and ranger at Burrum has been transporting children to school each day at his expense and wear and tear on the vehicle. One thing we discussed to overcome this problem is that some of the $150 Back to School Payment for every child be pooled to enable fuel to be provided, and some money made available for maintenance of a senior community man’s vehicle.
They were bewildered because their teacher resource has been greatly reduced and they have lost access to a vehicle that was transporting children to school.
The AEU has taken up with the department CEO why these changes occurred. There is some thinking that global school budgets, which we know woefully under-resource so many schools, particularly where the cost of remote service delivery is high, are not adequate. Government puts it on a principal’s desk and says, ‘There you go. That’s your issue to sort out. If you don’t have money to service your homeland school, that’s your problem. You have responsibility for your budget and you can decide where you want to spend it.’ That is unforgiveable. The withdrawal of resources from homeland schools is unforgiveable.
These homelands are strong places of culture, law and language, and people genuinely want their children educated. We know funeral ceremonies interrupt community life and may take children away from school. However, so many families are aware that their djammarrkuli, their children, need to be at school. In the homelands I am talking about that is the case and people are concerned.
I am not the local member for those homeland communities. They sit in the seat of Arnhem, but unfortunately, for reasons that are unclear to me, they do not see their local member and have never seen her. Given their proximity to Nhulunbuy they invite me to their communities to talk to them because it is important they have their voices heard. How often have I heard that catchcry from the government?
I place this matter on the record and daresay the Education minister will respond to it. It was important for the people of Raymangirr I made this known.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Barnardos Mother of the Year is the largest and most recognised national award celebrating motherhood. For over 20 years Barnados have been at the forefront of child welfare service provision across Australia. Their approach is to find real and permanent solutions for children and families in need. That is something Barnados in Australia wants for all children, particularly those who at risk or have been ill-treated.
To celebrate the outstanding achievements of special mothers doing exceptional work each year, Barnados hosts the Mother of the Year awards across the nation. The award is important as it allows us as a community to acknowledge the enormous contribution that mothers make in shaping Australia’s future, and also to hear the stories of some outstanding individuals and their special achievements.
Many mums, including those nominated for this year’s award, go above and beyond the call of duty when caring for their children. Their actions and the examples they set are an inspiration to us all. Not to be forgotten are the people who take the time to nominate these exceptional women. Without them we would not have the opportunity to hear their stories and celebrate the impact these women have had on their families.
In previous years we have had the pleasure of hearing speakers talk about these awards with particular focus on the winner. However, this year I would also like to talk about nominees, as these women are all extraordinary and their stories are incredibly diverse.
In this, the award’s 21st year, the Northern Territory is represented by three amazing finalists: Helen Fejo-Frith, Kelly McNamara and Virginia Rabeling. Please allow me to tell you a little more about these women.
Helen Fejo-Frith was nominated by her adopted daughter, Kieren Sanderson. Seventy-year-old Helen is the much loved and respected mother of eight children, and has 37 grandchildren and 26 great-grandchildren. I have no doubt she is very proud of her granddaughter, Melissa, who has just graduated as a Doctor of Medicine, the first doctor in the family. Helen is also a very proud Aboriginal woman and a great role model.
Assuming the role of guardian and caretaker, she walks around Bagot community at night making sure that the kids are inside and safe with their families. Her daughter Kieren said:
- There is never a time when children are not in her home. Helen has cared for, and brought up, so many children she has lost count over the years.
Our second finalist, Kelly McNamara, was nominated by her friend Vanessa Burton. Kelly, aged 30, is a young mother of two girls, Vivienne, aged three, and Lilia, aged 15 months. Vivienne has severe disabilities which require round the clock care and frequent hospitalisation. Kelly refused to accept the medical prognosis that her daughter would be incapable of any movement or speech. Kelly’s devotion to her daughter, Vivienne, included visiting international experts and employing every available therapy to assist with Vivienne’s development. Today Vivienne can move her arms, head and legs. To her mother’s delight, she has also spoken her first word.
Outside her dedicated duties as a mum, Kelly also raises money for children in the Northern Territory via her Yellow Balloon Foundation yoga group.
Last, but by no means least, our third finalist is Virginia Rabeling. A single mum of six children ranging in ages from nine to 23, Virginia, aged 49, supported her family through the hardest of times, moving schools and even homes where it was required to keep them safe. She was nominated by her child, Harmoni, aged 17, who is currently transitioning to a boy named Benji. Benji wants the world to know how important his mother’s unconditional love and support throughout his complex journey has been. Benji said:
- Last year mum had to deal with a highly anxious and depressed 16-year-old transchild. I think the whole world would have exploded by now if mum was not in it.
I congratulate and pay tribute to each of the finalists. Collectively they display enormous dedication and fortitude to their children, families and the greater community.
As Minister for Children and Families I am honoured to advise the parliament that the Barnardos 2016 NT Mother of the Year, announced in April, is Kelly McNamara. Next month Kelly will join 24 other finalists from around Australia in Sydney to represent the NT at the national awards. The winner will be announced on 5 May 2016.
I recognise the efforts of all mothers who work so very hard every day. It is a relentless job that is often not acknowledged. I am a firm believer that strong families underpin a strong society and, therefore, the devotion of mothers everywhere is fundamental to our mutual success as global citizens.
I also acknowledge Ms Anne Weir in her retirement. At close of business on 18 April 2016 Ms Anne Weir retired from the Royal Darwin Hospital Top End Health Service after more than 33 years of service. Ms Weir commenced her employment as a nurse with the RDH in 1982, and has worked across the Top End Health Service in a diversity of nursing and midwifery roles.
Ms Weir’s passion has been in primary health and child health working with children and families in health prevention, promotion and development in urban and remote primary health. Ms Weir’s career highlights include her involvement in running the East Timor refugee crisis response in 1999, and the RDH Bali bombing response in 2002.
In 2010 Ms Weir chose to take part in the AUSMAT team and was sent to Pakistan in response to devastating floods. She received a Humanitarian Overseas Service Medal for her contribution.
Since 2012 Ms Weir has been working as a senior ear, nose and throat nurse at RDH, focusing on the care of head and neck cancer patients, and Aboriginal patients with hearing loss and ear disease.
Anne is known for going above and beyond the call of duty for her patients, who in turn respond incredibly to her, and for her loyalty and protectiveness towards her colleagues. She will be greatly missed.
I commend and congratulate Anne for her dedicated and outstanding services over 33 years. I am sure the people of the Northern Territory, whilst grateful for her service, will miss her presence in our hospital system.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I add my congratulations to Anne, and to Kelly as NT Barnardos Mother of the Year. What an achievement.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016