2015-12-01
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, you have on your desk a red ribbon which represents the World AIDS Day. The theme for this year continues on from last year’s theme of Getting to Zero: Zero new HIV infections. Zero discrimination. Zero AIDS-related deaths.
The aim of World AIDS Day is to encourage all Australians to be aware of HIV, to take action to reduce its transmission by promoting safe sex practices and to ensure that people living with HIV can participate fully in their life in the community free from stigma and discrimination.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of two Year 5 classes from Rosebery Primary School, accompanied by Jane Bradshaw and Helen Shannon. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also draw your attention to a young gentleman in the gallery named Simon Spillett. The new electorate of Spillett is named after his grandfather. Welcome to Parliament House, Simon.
Members: Hear, hear!
STATEMENTS BY SPEAKER
Reflections on the Chair
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, there is a report on page 9 of today’s NT News which raises some concern. The report does not directly quote a member of this Assembly, but it suggests unspecified actions against the Speaker by a group of members, which could be construed as attempting to reflect upon the Chair.
I remind honourable members that reflection on the Speaker is out of order, and it is only by way of substantive motion that criticism of the Speaker may occur. I will leave this matter at that, but I suggest the Assembly proceeds in an orderly manner and concentrates on the business before it rather than members continually commenting in a manner which can only result in the Assembly being brought into disrepute.
We all have a job to do to restore confidence in our democratic institutions, not bring them down in any shape or form.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also remind you that on your desk is the new standing orders document. You also have a ready reckoner. If you could get across them as quickly as possible it would be appreciated.
I also extend thanks to the Leader of Government Business, Chair of the Standing Orders Committee, and the member for Daly for their input and hard work over the last 12 months to get this document to where it is today.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I think we should more thank the Clerk than any of the members of the committee because the lion’s share of the work was done by the Clerk.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. I extend a thank you to the Clerk’s office also for its work in getting the document to where it is today.
Honourable members, I remind you of new Standing Order 43(4), Speech Time Limits. An extension of time is not permitted during a motion expressing a want of confidence. The first two speakers have 30 minutes each and following speakers have 20 minutes.
MOTION
Want of Confidence in the Government
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move that this Assembly expresses that the government no longer possesses the confidence of the Assembly.
Today we are meeting as members of this House to talk about the future of the Northern Territory. The Territory confronts serious challenges. Successfully meeting them is crucial to delivering on our opportunities.
The foundation for our endeavour as Territorians from all walks of life is stability and confidence in government. It is on this foundation that we build our business and community confidence. People must trust that their government will listen to them and be fair to all Territorians. I believe that this is part of the contract we have as public servants to the people. If Territorians cannot trust their government they will not have confidence in the Territory’s future.
Every day that goes by under an Adam Giles-led CLP government we see the reputation of the Northern Territory diminished. The basic thing our business community, charities, community sector volunteers – people who have invested their time, money and confidence in the Territory – ask for is a government they can trust and which will work and walk with them as we tackle our shared challenges. We do not have that in the Territory today.
We are currently ruled by an arrogant dictatorship more concerned with self-preservation than the best interests of Territorians. Under the leadership of Adam Giles, this CLP government has destroyed the trust Territorians had in their government with broken promises, salacious overseas travel scandals, failed midnight coups, corruption allegations, backroom deals, constant infighting and more.
That is why I am asking members today to make a positive choice for the Territory’s future. We can choose nine more months of arrogance and chaos under an Adam Giles-led CLP government or we can choose to trust Territorians. We can press the reset button and provide Territorians the opportunity to decide who they have confidence in to be their local member. Let candidates – Independent members and party members – put their case to Territorians.
I simply do not believe that the Territory can afford nine more months of a CLP government. We need a fresh start. The only people I trust to reset government in the Northern Territory are Territorians. I trust Territorians to make the right decision at every election.
Over three years ago Territorians chose the CLP. Labor had served three terms and Territorians chose a new direction. They chose Terry Mills, not Adam Giles. They did not choose this CLP government. This is not the CLP government Territorians voted for.
Today we are deciding if we have confidence in Adam Giles to lead the Territory for another nine months. Territorians deserve better than this government.
Territorians from all walks of life have urged me to do everything I can to fix this mess. Up and down the track, east and west, as part of proving to Territorians that Labor can be a government for all, I believe it is crucial to show that we can be an opposition for all. I travel every week to meet and speak with Territorians. From the red dust of Utopia to the island beauty of the Tiwis, people are saying they want a fresh start. Senior community and business leaders are telling me the CLP’s incompetence is preventing the Territory from moving ahead. People are treading water, waiting for an election and the chance to move on.
We need stability and certainty, and the CLP is incapable of delivering that. Territorians deserve the right to make sure the person representing them in parliament is hard-working, is listening and takes their job seriously. The choice I am asking of members is to put their trust in Territorians. That is what Labor will do, just as we do at every election. If you agree with me that three years of rule under Adam Giles has proven the Territory could not be in worse hands, the next step is trusting in Territorians.
In the last three years we have seen decisions made by Adam Giles and the CLP in the name of Territorians, without their permission and without consultation, but by decree. Three decisions stand out for their betrayal of Territorians: the rolling of the elected Chief Minister Terry Mills; the selling of our TIO; and the selling of our Darwin port for 99 years. We must see a return to government decision-making that is grounded in consultation with Territorians. This is a government that has betrayed the trust of Territorians.
The trigger for today’s motion of no confidence in this government was a dirty deal, an arrogant decision and a botched act of vengeance. Only a fortnight ago, in this House, the Chief Minister, as soon as he thought he had the numbers on the floor, tried to execute the Speaker. This is the kind of farce best reserved for the professionals of The Hollowmen or The Thick of It. This is a decision made on the back of a secret deal with the member for Arnhem – a deal Territorians still do not know the detail or the price of, or what they are paying for. If it was above board, we would know. The silence speaks volumes and scares Territorians.
On the back of that dirty deal an arrogant decision was made and an act of childish vengeance was attempted. It was five-and-a-half hours of utter farce. Those five-and-a-half hours have had a significant impact on the Territory we all love. The message of this farce spread like wildfire through social media and media networks, and through business and political circles, from ordinary Australians to people who actively make decisions that affect us in the Northern Territory. What damage did those five-and-a-half hours do to national trust in the governance of the Northern Territory? Much damage was done. Adam Giles and the CLP are a laughing stock on the national stage, and this damage cannot be fixed this term or by this government. This House and all its occupants were diminished in the eyes of the public, once again, by the CLP, particularly by the Chief Minister.
Once again, the trust of Territorians in the governance of the Territory was dealt a body blow. If Territorians cannot trust their government, they will not have confidence in the Northern Territory’s future. Territorians who do not believe this place is on the right track will pack up and take their skills and contributions elsewhere.
If you want any evidence of that, look at our population statistics. In 2014 the Northern Territory lost 3500 more people to interstate migration than it gained. That is 3500 taxpayers with skills and a contribution to make to the future of the Northern Territory. That is 3500 people who will not be spending their hard-earned money in businesses and shops in the Northern Territory. They will not be shopping or eating locally. It is 3500 people who have taken their future elsewhere.
The Chief Minister dismisses this with a sweep of the hand, saying we have always lost population, which is simply not true. Territory Treasury’s briefing papers show that in net migration more people moved here from down south in the periods of 2007 and 2010. We were positive. The Territory gained more people than it lost. For a period of time in the mid-1990s this was also true. In fact, the current losses we are suffering are the worst we have experienced for two decades.
This population loss rocks business and the economy. The CLP can put whatever spin it likes on it but there are serious concerns in the business community about the loss of population and future markets. It is making businesses nervous and conservative, and they are cutting jobs. Once you get into the cycle of population loss, job cuts and more population loss, you are on a dangerous path for a small place like the Northern Territory. We must value all our Territorians, their skills, their knowledge and what they can contribute.
It is critical for the government of the Northern Territory to give confidence to the people of the Northern Territory that it is in control, has a plan and is on the right track. That is not happening with this current CLP government. We need to hit the reset button, give Territorians their voice back and provide an opportunity for candidates, Independents, elected members and parties to put their case to Territorians, and for Territorians to provide a clear mandate for where they want the Territory to go.
Labor will put its case to Territorians with a comprehensive plan that has three clear priorities: giving our kids the best start in life; restoring trust, transparency and accountability; and creating and supporting jobs for locals and work for local businesses. More importantly, I pledge we will listen to Territorians and then act on their behalf.
Labor is listening to Territorians in moving today’s motion, and they have been clear. They are desperate to be heard and want a government with a long-term plan based on their voices. I promise that our plans will be based on what they say.
We know that in debate today the CLP will tell you the world is about to end. The Chief Minister has a standard line about no one on this side having any experience. It is not particularly clever, original or true, and Territorians have heard it all before. More importantly, Territorians have experienced an Adam Giles-led CLP government for three years and they will not be afraid of making change.
Let me deal with these issues. Labor governed in the Northern Territory for 11 years from 2001 to 2012. When we came to office not a single member of the government had been in government. Our first Chief Minister, Clare Martin, a great Territorian, set the shape for a Labor government in the Northern Territory and how it behaved. She told us all to trust the public service and work with it to grow the Territory. She told us all to talk with Territorians and stay in touch with people beyond the walls of the fifth floor of Parliament House. She held regular business round tables and Labor in government will have them again. She had community Cabinet meetings which gave Territorians better access to ministers and CEOs in all parts of the Territory, especially remote areas, and Labor in government will have them again.
She was bold in her policy prescriptions for the Northern Territory and visionary in looking to the future, which is why she and Cabinet ensured they took the baton from the previous CLP government of projects like the railway and ConocoPhillips’ LNG and delivered them. That is why she chased and got the INPEX project, the waterfront and massive expansion of infrastructure across the Northern Territory.
Those principles were taken up by Paul Henderson in turn and delivered over the next four-and-a-half years. The Labor government also delivered seven consecutive surplus budgets because sound governance is the Labor way. For the CLP to suggest that these two great Territorians and the Labor Party did nothing and drove the Territory backwards is both disrespectful and untrue.
The members on this side of the House cut our political teeth in that environment and learnt the lessons of responsible Labor government from those two great leaders. We are ready to govern for all Territorians again, based on learning not just what we did well in government but the mistakes we made. There is no question that Labor, in government, made mistakes.
As you know, it is no secret that we got wrong how we created shires in the Northern Territory. I have said to the land councils, community leaders and ordinary Territorians that we did not listen and we should have. I am also prepared to say we made a mistake by not responding quickly enough to land release pressures. We moved to fix that, but were not quick enough. The CLP changed the name of our policy from Housing for Growth to Real Housing for Growth and continued to implement it. Territorians have benefitted from that handover.
The advantage we have gained from being in and around a long-term Labor government is that each and every one of us has learnt what is required to run government properly. We will listen to Territorians, look at the evidence and then act. That is something you do not see from the current CLP government. That is why it has lost the confidence of the people of the Northern Territory.
Labor has already announced a suite of policies, position papers and strategies, with more to come. We have made it clear that we will focus our government on children aged zero to four in an effort to turn around the intransigent social issues that bedevil the Territory. The evidence is clear that investing in our children is not just the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do. Chronic illnesses, addictions, an unskilled workforce, high incarceration rates and more long-term problems can only be significantly reduced by giving children the best start in life.
Lifelong behaviours are learnt in the early years. We can make sure those are positive behaviours by supporting families and children so we do not have to intervene in later years. We must make sure all children start day one, Term 1, Year 1 equally. We will make this the focus of our government even though it will take decades to reap the full rewards. We have taken this policy discussion to Darwin, Palmerston, Ngukurr, Katherine and Alice Springs. I have engaged with experts working with children in Nhulunbuy, Yirrkala, Jabiru, Maningrida, Utopia and more remote parts of the Northern Territory. People across the Territory have engaged with us in its development. This is a policy based on listening to Territorians and looking at the evidence. It is a long-term plan for the Northern Territory’s future. It is the kind of work missing from this CLP government’s way of doing business. It does not listen to Territorians or make decisions based on evidence. These are some of the reasons why Territorians have lost confidence in this government.
Labor will restore the trust and faith Territorians want in their government. This trust and faith has been destroyed by the CLP. Labor will introduce an ICAC and an integrity commissioner, and will commit to improved access to information. We will be open and transparent in government, and will reform this parliament to make sure there is a greater focus on the business of government and not the business of politics. We will work with whoever is in the Chamber to make this place work better and with the interests of Territorians in mind. Unlike the CLP, we respect the independence of the Speaker.
We will grow the Territory to create jobs for Territorians and attract people to the Territory. As I have already said, 3500 have left the Territory for interstate in just one year. This is the worst result in decades. The next Labor government will support those who work on the front line. We will have a root-and-branch review of the resources available to police. We will provide them with three welfare officers and a properly-resourced chaplain to support them.
By contrast the CLP has not delivered yet on its promise of 120 additional police. The welfare officers are nowhere in sight and police are desperately stretched by patrolling in front of bottle shops because of the CLP’s short-sighted political decision to scrap the Banned Drinker Register, which we will bring back.
Labor will also support Territory teachers. We have made it clear that Labor will resource teachers in the classrooms and rebuild our schools following the ruthless CLP cuts to teacher numbers in our classrooms. We will introduce computer coding into our primary and secondary schools to ensure young Territorians do not miss out on the next generation of jobs.
We have outlined how a Labor government will support innovation in the Territory and unleash the creativity and potential of Territorians. These are all decisions based on listening to Territorians, looking at the evidence and then putting forward our position. You have to engage with Territorians, which is something this government has lost. It has refused to properly engage with Territorians.
The voice of Territorians is no longer present in this CLP government. That is why this government has lost the confidence of Territorians. There is a trust deficit between this government and Territorians. Every action this government takes worsens the trust deficit. Every week we see this government further worsen its trust deficit with Territorians, who do not have confidence in this government to manage the affairs of the Territory for the next nine months, based on the very clear evidence of how Adam Giles and the CLP have managed the Territory for three years.
The evidence is in. We have listened to Territorians. They have lost confidence in this government and its ability to be stable and provide confidence to Territorians that its members are working together. We see constant infighting amongst government members and bad decisions made in an arrogant manner that worsens the trust deficit this government has with Territorians. It is at a point where it has broken and cannot be fixed by this government or in this term.
We must have a government in the Northern Territory that has the confidence of the people of the Northern Territory, provides stability for Territorians and does not trash the reputation of the government on the national stage or in the Territory by its actions. We are being diminished and our national position is being worsened by this government and the actions it takes.
We are at a crossroads and the Territory needs to be reset. The CLP has made bad political decisions. The scrapping of the BDR is perhaps the most stark example of something they scrapped simply because the Labor Party initiated it. I hate 180-degree politics. The experience of watching the CLP come to power and destroy good programs simply because they were not theirs is a salutary lesson.
I will keep the Developing the North framework but will ensure Indigenous Territorians are more directly engaged in the program. I can tell the House, however, that the evidence is in on mandatory alcohol treatment. It does not work. Internationally, nationally and in the Territory the evidence is clear that the policy does not work. We will scrap it and direct the $30m a year to more effective programs.
Labor will commit more funds to building new houses in remote communities, repairing existing houses and supporting people to get into a home. We will commit funds from the Territory’s own infrastructure program towards this very important social and economic issue. There will be more houses built by locals and better maintained. That is what remote Territorians are telling us they want, and not what this government is delivering.
Labor will publish a rolling 10-year infrastructure plan to allow business the opportunity to plan, tender or make their investment decisions. Infrastructure spending will be planned around Darwin as a northern capital of Australia; making Alice Springs our national inland capital and a destination in its own right; the critical importance of Katherine and our Katherine region in diversifying our economy and its advantages in being aligned with our supply chain; and Tennant Creek’s massive opportunity to be a service centre for our resource sector.
Labor will provide a steady, stable alternative to the dysfunction that is the CLP government. We have policies and plans. We have the personnel to create a strong and effective government. We have announced a solid team of candidates for the Northern Territory. Working with my deputy leader and the member for Barkly in the bush are people who are local to the community they seek to represent. In Lawrence Costa, Selena Uibo, Anthony Venes, Scott McConnell and Chansey Paech we have a group of Territorians with a diversity of backgrounds who are already representing Territorians in the bush. We have announced a full Palmerston team of Damian Hale, Eva Lawler, Tony Sievers and Phil Tilbrook. We have alderman Kate Worden for Sanderson and Ward Keller lawyer, Jeff Collins, for Fong Lim in the Darwin seats. There are more announcements to come with candidates of great quality – community leaders who will bring a wealth of experience to this parliament.
Labor is ready to put its case to Territorians and that is what we are asking each member to think about today. We need to press the reset button and let Independents, candidates, members and parties put their case to Territorians. We need to put our trust in Territorians. They are the ones who have been missing from the debates of the CLP government for the last three years. They are the ones desperate to have their voices heard again, for a government which will listen to them and for a fresh start in the Northern Territory. They are sick of the chaos and dysfunction of this CLP government, waking up to front pages of more horror stories from this government, tuning into the radio and hearing more of the chaos of this government, tuning into the nightly news bulletin and hearing more stories of CLP stuff-ups and scandals and of the betrayal by this government of Territorians. They want a fresh start.
Labor today, in this House, is speaking on behalf of the majority of Territorians who are demanding a fresh start in the Northern Territory and stability and confidence in government, which has not been and cannot be delivered by this government. We know, based on the evidence of the last three years, it will not be delivered in the next nine months. The evidence is in: the CLP government has broken the trust and lost the confidence of Territorians, and they are demanding a fresh start in the Northern Territory.
Territorians deserve to hear from each one of us, in our own electorates, about why we deserve to be their local member. They will make decisions based on how people vote in the Chamber today. They want their elected member to represent them in this Chamber, and the majority of Territorians in all seats are demanding a fresh start.
I hate early elections, but this is a crunch moment for the Northern Territory’s future. The CLP has fallen apart and can no longer provide stable and confident government in the Northern Territory. Every day that goes by we see this Adam Giles-led CLP government diminish the reputation of the Northern Territory. I simply do not believe the Northern Territory can afford nine more months of CLP rule. We need a fresh start in the Territory and the only people I trust to reset government in the Northern Territory are the voters.
I am asking all of us in this House to trust Territorians. Labor trusts Territorians. Territorians get it right at elections. We need an election; we need Territorians to get it right again. This is not the CLP government Territorians voted for. Terry Mills has gone from this Chamber. Terry Mills is the one who led the CLP to the election last year, with Madam Speaker as the Deputy Chief Minister. Territorians have been betrayed by this CLP government with decision after decision. They have been betrayed by the behaviour of this government, which has simply not reflected the behaviour Territorians demand of their elected officials.
Madam Speaker, Territorians want to trust their government. Territorians want a fresh start and an early election. Labor is here speaking on behalf of the majority of Territorians. We are asking this House to give the voice back to Territorians and put the fate of the Territory in Territorians’ hands. I urge all members in this House to support the motion.
Mr HIGGINS (Sport and Recreation): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his election launch.
It is with some disappointment that I speak to this motion today. I am disappointed because I believe in the sanctity of this House and the unwritten contract with Territorians that if you are elected to this House for a term you should serve that full term. I am disappointed because this motion is a poke in the eye for this House and for Territorians.
I do not think I am an unreasonable person and I hope people see that I try to do my best and am committed to work for a better life for my constituents and the broader Territory public. I may be a bit naive, but I believe, after 30 years of living here, Territorians can and do sort the politics from the facts. I also believe Territorians are sick of the mud, the silliness and the politicking which too often ends up being the story of the day.
I do not blame the media; it has a job to do. It is inundated with demands from the public a hundredfold these days, especially with the advent of social media and the relentless 24-hour news cycle. But sometimes the news story of the day is just a piece written for no other reason than a presumption of knowing a person’s mind. Sometimes it is a story about a throwaway line like, ‘I will consider my future around Christmas time’. When these stories are front and centre, the public is given a perception that all is not well. We now find more often than not that the media reports comments on events rather than the facts of the story.
I will not deny we have had some less than desirable moments publicly, but when all is said and done, exactly what has government not delivered for Territorians? We fixed the economy, which was in dire straits when we came to office. We reduced by half the previous Labor government’s $5.5bn worth of projected debt. We implemented a tough law-and-order strategy, led the country with the introduction of one-punch legislation, introduced tougher legislation on violent crimes, expanded the CCTV camera network and more. We provide education and health services. We help families through a variety of initiatives, including sport and recreation voucher schemes. We re-established the live cattle and buffalo trade.
In my portfolio alone the achievements are fantastic. Over the last three years we have made some tough decisions but I like to think we have also made some exciting, innovative and effective ones. Among our achievements to date in my portfolio are that we have recognised the importance of peak sporting and recreation bodies and increased their annual grant funding by 50%; we have brought high-quality sporting events to the Territory, such as the England cricket tour match, the Sheffield Shield games, NRL, AFL and, one that I really love, the Davis Cup. We established the Mitchell Street Mile. We made the NT Environment Protection Authority independent and have seen improvements to the regulatory framework which are ongoing and were announced in the last week or so. We have implemented legislation establishing MAGNT as an independent statutory authority, freeing it up to seek and develop partnerships and sponsorships. We funded an upgrade to the Cyclone Tracy exhibition to include digital content, an exhibition which was recently awarded a Chief Minister’s Award for Excellence. We funded renovation at the Strehlow Research Centre in the Museum of Central Australia at the Araluen Cultural Precinct, and last night we announced the awarding of the tender for the design and construct of the Chan Building.
In my electorate alone I have been proud of our achievements, including extra housing for government employees at Wadeye and the new police centre and associated housing; the formation of the West Daly Regional Council, restoring the local voice of the people of Wadeye, Peppimenarti and Palumpa; road upgrades to Fog Bay, Port Keats and Litchfield roads; installation of solar power at Daly River; upgrading the Adelaide River Showgrounds; building a new bridge over the Charlotte River en route to Dundee; providing a new flood boat for the Daly River Volunteer NTES service, which I have a lot of connection and time for; making grants towards improving and upgrading equipment and facilities at Freds Pass Reserve. I have also stood up for my constituents on many issues, including water and planning, lodging my concerns through the proper channels. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.
There is so much more to be done and my constituents should be able to rely on me to see many of our plans through. I would like to see the implementation of our sports and active recreation master plan and our environmental reforms of the arts and cultural policy. I would like to see, through the Chan Building project, the plethora of sports infrastructure we have budgeted for and the strengthening of our environmental processes, which are stronger than Labor ever moved forward.
There is no solid reason for this motion, other than politicking. I ask honourable members how committed they are to seeing out a full term. Everyone on this side of the House is. We are all elected on an unwritten promise of serving a full term. We owe it to our constituents to speak on their behalf and represent them. We owe them a full term of service. I can say with full frankness that I have not had any representations about a loss of confidence in this government. Some of my constituents are well and truly over elections. Decisions of this nature should be made by Territorians, not the 25 people in this parliament. They should get to make that decision on 27 August next year, the same as they did three years ago.
Madam Speaker, I will not be supporting the motion.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the Opposition Leader, for bringing this motion before the House, and the government for giving it precedence over all other business of the House.
This is the most important and grave motion that can come before parliament. I can assure anyone listening to this debate that it has not been moved lightly. The Opposition Leader brought this motion before parliament on behalf of Territorians who tell us overwhelmingly that they have had enough of this dreadful, dysfunctional and unstable government, members of which are more interested in serving their own self-interest than the interests of Territorians they supposedly govern for.
Territorians are aware there are fixed four-year terms in the Northern Territory, which were introduced under Labor, but they cannot stomach another nine months under the CLP. This is a government which does not listen or consult and thinks it knows what is best for Territorians. This is a government which has made some terrible decisions and has betrayed the trust of voters, who now seek to exercise their vote ahead of the four-year fixed term because they have had enough and have no faith in this government.
What a debacle the last three years and three months have been under the CLP government. Since coming to power, the CLP has single-handedly stripped any semblance of trust, integrity and accountability away from government, brought this House into disrepute, tarnished all elected members of this House and made us the laughing stock of the nation. In all my years in the Territory I have never before witnessed the frequency with which this CLP government has thrust us into the national media spotlight for all the wrong reasons.
Looking back at some of the CLP election commitments you have to shake your head. In the five-point plan which was a cut-and-paste job from Campbell Newman’s Queensland campaign – and we know what happened to him at the hands of the electors who felt betrayed – let us go straight to number five:
There is a little gold seal on this commitment of the five-point plan, with number five, ‘we will be accountable or throw us out’. Territorians have spoken loud and clear. They have held you to account and they are ready to throw you out.
You betrayed people’s trust when you hiked up power tariffs by 30% and water tariffs by 40% within two months of coming to government on the back of promising to reduce the cost of living. For the Chief Minister to have announced two days ago a 5% reduction in tariffs is too little, too late, and simply too rich to swallow.
The problem for the Chief Minister is that, like the rest of the government, he has failed to listen to Territorians over the last three years. Territorians have stopped listening to the government. Under the Chief Minister’s watch we have seen an exodus of CLP members from the government. These have been predominantly women but also the member for Arafura, who walked out in disgust but was somehow enticed back to prop up the numbers. That is what is happening and it does not deliver stable government.
I was sworn into this parliament on the same day as the Opposition Leader, the member for Fannie Bay, and the members for Barkly and Braitling in 2008. I recall my four years as a government backbencher – three years in minority government with the support of the member for Nelson – as a time of extremely hard work by a highly consultative government which navigated the Territory through a global financial crisis with record infrastructure spend. This generated jobs and supported local businesses while delivering to Territorians in key areas like health and education. It grew the Territory economy through numerous channels, but importantly by securing the billion-dollar deals associated with the Ichthys Project.
For all of that, we lost the faith of Territorians in the bush. It was the loss of confidence in the bush which saw us lose seats and government. As the Opposition Leader said, Territorians do not get it wrong. They exercise their democratic right to vote, and they voted out a Labor government.
There is nothing like a spell on the opposition benches to allow our members the opportunity and time to look at where we went wrong and what we need to do to regain the confidence of Territorians. There is one thing in opposition we have been very good at: getting around the Territory, listening to people from all walks of life and hearing what they want and expect from their government. The message has been loud and clear: Territorians have had a gutful of the CLP government.
That message has been thunderously loud and clear from the people of northeast Arnhem Land, whose disdain for the CLP government is unparalleled, thanks to the member for Braitling’s single-handed axing of the gas to Gove deal, which plunged Nhulunbuy into crisis with over 1200 people out of jobs as Rio Tinto, without the cheaper energy source promised under the CLP, had no choice but to close its refinery. The Chief Minister, the member for Braitling, ripped up the deal, and in doing so sent a message to the world that you cannot trust the CLP government, and businesses can have no confidence in dealing with this Chief Minister and this government.
On 13 February 2013 former Chief Minister Terry Mills announced, ‘Done deal to secure the future of Gove’, and on the same day, Rio Tinto announced:
People in Nhulunbuy believed what the CLP had to say on behalf of the CLP government and Rio Tinto, and, with confidence, made investment decisions and decisions about their lives, livelihoods and futures. All that changed in Nhulunbuy when the member for Braitling knifed the member for Blain while he was on a trip to Japan, and then on a quiet public holiday, Darwin Show Day 2013, the Chief Minister reneged on the CLP deal for gas to Gove, offering less than half the gas that had been agreed to. It was the beginning of the end.
There are people in Nhulunbuy mums, dads, even kids, business owners, traditional owners and once dyed-in-the-wool conservative voters – who will never forgive the Chief Minister or the CLP government for the betrayal of Gove and who hold this government to account. They say loudly that you have not delivered and they cannot wait to throw you out. For them nine months is too long; they are ready to see you go now. It has been a terrible time for the people in Nhulunbuy. Where we are today is because of the collective strength and resilience of the community. Nhulunbuy is where it is today despite you, Chief Minister, not because of you.
Your government has made some terrible decisions during the downturn in Nhulunbuy, including your abject failure to deliver on the $13m Gove hospital ED upgrade, which has now been reduced to a $7m project and is still to go to tender. So much for the media release on 14 May 2013 that told us the new Gove emergency department was on track and that we deserved this significant health infrastructure. You have completely turned your backs on the people of Nhulunbuy.
What about the disastrous decision made by the CLP government, and consulted with no one in Nhulunbuy, to close an important health facility providing residential, alcohol and other drug services, and to reopen it as a correctional services work camp for low-level offenders? Again, it was a decision this government made without any consultation with the community or traditional owners until after the decision had been made. It was a done deal.
We then discovered the community had been lied to when we found out the camp has housed serious sex offenders and murderers, and one of them was on the loose for two nights in our community. They wonder why it is that people do not trust them and why the people of Nhulunbuy and northeast Arnhem Land want to see this government gone. My constituents feel betrayed by this CLP government.
It is small wonder that the member for Port Darwin saw fit to announce his resignation the week before last. He has had oversight of a litany of failures at the helm of Corrections, and the Health and Justice portfolios, but I will get to those later.
What of this government’s decision to spend $20m on a boarding facility in Nhulunbuy without any consultation process in the lead-up to that decision? That decision sent alarm bells and anger through the communities and homelands. There is no denying the fact that the boarding facility is first and foremost an economic driver, with student outcomes and consideration of families’ wishes and aspirations for their children taking the back seat. I cannot wait for the member for Brennan, the failed Education minister, to front a community meeting to tell people otherwise.
Here we have yet another cart-before-the-horse project of this government which always knows what is best for Territorians, does not need to consult, does not need to work from an evidence-based approach and then reluctantly consults after the fact.
I turn now to some of my shadow responsibilities and the bungling and failures Territorians have witnessed which further provide evidence as to why we need an election and a change in government. Let us start with Health. Thanks to a merry-go-round of Health ministers and infighting in the Cabinet room, which we believe involved heavy folders being thrown by the member for Fong Lim, aimed at Terry Mills, the Palmerston hospital plans have been impacted upon.
Under Labor’s plan it would be built by now and servicing the people of Palmerston and the rural area. They would have their hospital and the burden on the Royal Darwin Hospital would be relieved. But, no, all people know about the Palmerston Regional Hospital is that a couple of months ago there was a big media stunt which resulted in the member for Port Darwin and the member for Solomon presiding over a hole in the ground on the site. They saw it filled with concrete for, supposedly, a stairwell, only to discover a few days later the hole had been filled and was in what was, according to plans, the car park. The member for Solomon asked the Chief Minister for a ‘please explain’, and refused to participate in further botched media stunts ...
Mr Elferink: You are now being dishonest. You are now being deliberately misleading.
Ms WALKER: It is laughable. You are wrong and, member for Port Darwin, we cannot wait for you to get to your seat and tell us how wonderful you are ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, please pause. Leader of Government Business, please withdraw those comments.
Mr ELFERINK: I withdraw that she is not telling the truth.
Ms WALKER: You are such a child, member for Port Darwin, it is no …
Mr Elferink: You should tell the truth; you are not being honest.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin! Cease interjecting!
Ms WALKER: You are the resigned member for Port Darwin. You have no heart, soul or will for the job ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, address your comments through the Chair.
Ms WALKER: He has resigned because he has no ticker for the job. He knows he has failed miserably in Health, corrections, Justice and child protection. The member for Port Darwin is just one of the rats deserting the sinking ship. He has announced his resignation. He will not be contesting the seat of Port Darwin at the next election because he knows he will not win. He knows the CLP government’s days are numbered.
We know they have dumped the member for Fong Lim. We know the member for Daly – and fancy putting up a junior minister as your first speaker in such an important debate – is considering his future. We know the member for Blain is desperately worried about how he will contest the next election. We know the member for Drysdale has jumped ship from her electorate and sought a safer seat in Spillett. It is plain to see they are on the way out.
In our public health system we continue to see dedicated and hard-working public servants. You will not find any people more caring for Territorians who find themselves in the health system. Yet those public servants’ jobs have been made all the more difficult and have been disrupted by restructures and underfunding of services. There is a known culture of bullying which continues to undermine the workplace.
We continue to see worsening results in Royal Darwin Hospital Emergency Department waiting times and elective surgery waiting times. These statistics are all publicly available and are very clear evidence that things are not right. Things are going backwards as long as we have the CLP and the failed Health minister, who has resigned ahead of the next election, at the helm.
We have a lack of focus on aged care and the needs of our elderly. We have a Health minister who made shocking comments in August about whether we should consider redirecting funding away from patients with end-stage renal failure – he gave us an example – and spend it ion kids instead. The outrage that came from the community in response to those comments was unprecedented, but warranted.
Under this minister’s watch we have seen a lack of progress on delivering bush health clinics, most of which are revoted works under funding secured by federal and Territory Labor governments. Clearly this government struggles to deliver capital infrastructure projects, Palmerston Regional Hospital being a case in point.
Try telling that to people in the bush who have been waiting for years for their health clinics, including the one at Galiwinku in my electorate which is home to around 3000 people. They still do not have the tender out on that project.
Bizarrely, they have decided not to progress with spending on a new alcohol mandatory treatment facility in Katherine because, the minister says, they have fixed alcohol addiction issues through temporary beat locations. That is an issue the member for Katherine would be aware of, in that there are businesses in Katherine which are very unhappy with the impact the presence of police has on their businesses. At the same time the AOD statistics from the annual report show the AMT scheme to be an abject and costly failure.
If the CLP had stuck with the Banned Drinker Register instead of taking a populist approach, then we would not have seen the waste of taxpayer dollars nor the alcohol-related issues. But as we know the CLP is simply not interested in an evidenced-based approach.
We are still waiting, and so is the Coroner, for the results of an independent study into the effectiveness of AMT. It must be independent and evidenced-based, but somehow I do not think we will be seeing that before any election.
If the CLP government cannot even get a car parking system at the Royal Darwin Hospital and the foundation of the Palmerston Regional Hospital right how on earth can we expect it to address the most basic and the most complex of Territorians’ health needs?
Let us not forget amongst the many jobs for mates in the last three years the appointment of the Health minister’s former Chief of Staff and a former CLP Health minister to the position of Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner on 1 June this year.
Turning to my shadow responsibility for Attorney-General and Justice, the theme of jobs and favours for CLP mates and donors is a good place to start. There was the appointment of a former CLP member of this House and an active donor and supporter of the member for Port Darwin, who still actively hands out how-to-vote cards and allegedly lobbied the member for Arnhem not to leave the CLP in early 2014, all whilst a magistrate, quite rightly, prompted a review into judicial appointments, something that was instigated for the Chief Minister because the Attorney-General saw no need for it. Once that review was completed, it sat for months before being made public, and only because there was pressure to do so. This is hardly a government which oozes trust and transparency. That report was critical of the Attorney-General’s personal involvement in these judicial appointments, which is simply wrong ...
Mr Elferink: To be trusted you have tell the truth. You are not telling the truth.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms WALKER: I will credit the Attorney-General, who will get a turn to talk in this debate. Even though he has given up on politics he wants to have a say. He will get a say and his turn will come.
I credit him – only a tiny amount since he has been a minister – for implementing NTCAT. But he is to be roundly condemned for the introduction of the paperless arrest law which has seen the death of a harmless Aboriginal man in custody. His responses to Coronials in the cases of Mr Langdon and Ms Brown in AMT are left wanting.
While Daniel’s Law, which was due for debate two weeks ago, has been deferred and not withdrawn, the member for Nelson declared that if Daniel’s Law was passed he would support a motion of no confidence. Never have I seen an Attorney-General dig his heels in to introduce laws in the face of such widespread criticism from legal and advocacy groups saying it was bad law which will do more harm than good. It highlights that the Attorney-General and the government are not interested in an evidenced-based approach to making laws.
In the sphere of public employment we know there has been fear in the public service thanks to a merry-go-round of ministers and Chief Executive Officers – not necessarily appointed on merit – and a constant state of restructure. Let us not forget the outstanding EBA negotiations. Our hard-working firefighters’ EBA is out of date by more than two years. So too is the EBA for our paramedics. Whilst it is under an agreement with St John Ambulance, the Health minister and the government have no interest whatsoever in stepping in and supporting our hard-working paramedics.
Let us remember as well that we have had a reduction in permanency for teachers and a dramatic reduction in staff at the Department of Children and Families which is having terrible consequences. Let us not forget the backwards move in work health and safety, and the CLP’s return to work legislation which has turned back the clock on workers’ rights when it comes to OH&S matters. We cannot afford to have this government remain to wreak further damage and erosion to workplace rights, including a ridiculous expectation in drafted legislation that union representatives provide 24 hours’ notice to access a workplace where an OH&S issue or an accident has occurred.
What do we say about statehood? There is no plan for statehood, given that the minister could not even answer the simplest of questions during estimates in June this year.
As for women’s policy, you only have to look as far as the Attorney-General and the appalling comments he made on the floor of this House, as well as his appalling behaviour towards female members of this House with his ‘slap’ comment. That comment saw him stripped of his White Ribbon Ambassadorship. This is the man who is in charge of the Domestic Violence Directorate.
I have no faith in him whatsoever and no confidence in the CLP government. My constituents have no confidence in them. It is time for them to step aside. But I have confidence in Territorians to make a decision about who they trust to govern them. Territorians placed that trust in the CLP but that trust has been betrayed. Territorians have called on members of this House to allow them their democratic right to recast their vote sooner than the nine months remaining.
Territory Labor, with its elected members and first-class candidates recently announced, is ready to step up to the plate should we earn the trust and confidence of Territorians to elect us to government. We have done much work in the last three years and three months to earn and restore trust, and to bring sound, evidence-based policies which have been informed by Territorians from all walks of life.
I look forward to announcing our health discussion paper before the end of this year that outlines a real and genuinely well-consulted plan to address health issues in the Northern Territory. I look forward to doing the same in the arena of justice. Today members of this parliament have an opportunity to restore trust and integrity.
My Independent colleagues in particular have a role to play in representing their constituents. They need to see you vote, not abstain. Do the Independent members have confidence in the CLP government? Yes or no?
I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing this motion before the House and commend it to honourable members.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I will not be supporting this motion. It should be made clear that the present situation is similar but not quite the same as the no confidence motion about six years ago in 2009. I remember it well.
In this case I do not hold the balance of power. There is no doubt the government is on the nose, and there are some people who want to go to an election. That is obviously something Labor wants, and there is no doubt that this motion is poll-driven. I also read the newspapers. I listened to the Leader of the Opposition this morning. His speech sounded like the launch of an election campaign, which deflects, to some extent, from what the opposition is trying to do by proposing a motion of no confidence.
If I supported this motion, I would say that when the going gets tough I should give in, bring the government down, have an election and forget fixed-terms elections. I have always supported fixed-term elections, even in local government. I remember the debate about extending fixed-term elections recently for local governments.
I am not happy with what the government is doing, especially with planning in my rural area, but there were things Labor intended to do with rural planning when it was in power that I was not happy with either. Madam Speaker, you would remember how you and I got together to publish a booklet which opposed the views of the Labor Party on rural planning. I remember when Labor conveniently changed the rules regarding gas development in the middle of Darwin Harbour and took away the right of Litchfield Shire to be part of the Development Consent Authority when decisions were to be made about that part of the harbour. I did not pull the pin on Labor.
There was also the question of shire amalgamations. Who organised a number of rallies around this parliament protesting against the amalgamation of Litchfield Shire? I did not pull the pin on Labor. Thankfully, through that democratic process, the government changed its mind, at least about Litchfield but not about remote shire amalgamations.
The government has some good policies; there is no doubt about that. Yesterday the Chief Minister issued a media release titled ‘New process for land access agreements for mining and petroleum exploration activities’. I note the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association CEO Tracey Hayes welcomed this announcement. She said the government had listened to concerns raised by the pastoral industry and the broader community. It was also welcomed by the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association and the Minerals Council of Australia.
Regardless of whether you agree with this or not, we need to debate this in parliament. Unfortunately, we are not debating some of the issues that are important to the future of the Northern Territory. Regarding the new gas pipeline, we have hardly had a chance to have a decent discussion about whether it is good that we have a gas pipe going from Tennant Creek to Mount Isa or from Alice Springs to Moomba, or what gas supplies will be used and how long they will last. Those matters should be debated in this parliament but are not. Unfortunately, because of some of the government’s stuff-ups becoming headlines we are losing the opportunity, as members of parliament, to use this place to discuss issues that are important to Territorians.
We have to call then stuff-ups – the hospital hole, Richardson Park and the dismissal by the Treasurer of the PAC and its findings, the Speaker’s sacking and reappointment, the ice ads, the failed coup d’etat; I could go on and on. They have not put the government in a good light and many people think we are the laughing stock of parliaments in Australia. I am sure this concern will be raised by many speakers today, as obviously we will hear about many of the failings of government.
I have said publicly that fixed terms allow voters to judge a government on the whole four years. I supported that, along with Labor and the CLP. With flexible voting dates governments will always go to an election when the polls are high. Now when the polls are bad the Labor Party wants an early poll and the CLP does not.
I clearly remember what happened when I had to make up my mind the last time one of these motions came before this House. I was criticised then by the CLP and praised by Labor, and now the tables are reversed. Life is funny sometimes. As I said before, this time I do not have the balance of power, but regardless I still believe what I believed in 2009: the government should have the right to complete its full term. People will judge that it was okay for me to allow Labor to go for an extra three years by supporting them against a no confidence vote, but it is not all right for me to allow the government to continue for nine months because that is when the next election will be. People will see me as not being even handed if I do not stick to the principle I did then.
I will abstain, as I believe some other Independents intend to; they will speak for themselves. I am abstaining to send a message to the government to get its act together. I am supporting your right to go to the full term, and that is why I will not support this motion of no confidence. On the other hand, I am abstaining because I not happy with your performance, as are many of my constituents.
I listened to the member for Daly who highlighted some of the good things government is doing. You would be extremely biased in a debate like this to say the government has not done some good things. However, they have been drowned out by stupid things, which, unfortunately, is what the public sees. If the government wants to go to an election – I would be surprised if it does – it can change the Electoral Act; it has the numbers. It could change the Electoral Act so we go back to the old system under which an election could be called any time or after three years. The government appears to have the numbers these days so it could do that.
Finally, it is sad to have reached this point today. I am dismayed at how fractured this parliament has become, instead of being a parliament working together to solve problems in trying to make a better life for Territorians. The motion of no confidence illustrates this point because today we will hear one side against the other. We will hear all the downsides of one side, and that will be magnified in this debate as a reason for bringing the government down. I am not saying the government should not cop that criticism, but you would hope in any reasoned debate if there are good sides to the government that should be recognised. A no confidence vote will not promote anything good the government might have done; it will put emphasis on the worst possible reflection of the government.
Well may it deserve some of that. I am not happy with the Darwin Regional Land Use Plan. I am not happy with the government’s response to Richardson Park. But I work in this parliament and debate those issues with the hope I can convince the government to change its mind. In the end, the process is that the people will decide. While we have fixed-term elections, which this House agreed to, that should be the process. We put up with a government, warts and all. We lived with Australian politics for many years where governments took advantage of great times before they called an election, because they knew they had a political advantage. But we decided we would go down the path of fixed terms so the public could assess the whole-term history of that government and could, with proper analysis, add up the good sides of government, take away the negative sides and work out whether to keep the existing government or change governments at an election. That is what I believe we should do.
As I said, Territorians want us to work together where we can and, where we cannot, at least allow good debate. Good debate is what we should, as mature members of this parliament, be allowed to do, and then we should vote on those issues without abusing one another. I know there will be issues in the near future that I will not agree with, but I hope people will listen to my views and at least consider them. If they have different views, well and good; we will vote on those matters. That is the way this parliament should be.
The government will survive today’s vote of no confidence. But I hope, regardless of all the political huffing and puffing, the government members take a good hard look at themselves. Have a look outside this place, which is like a vacuum sometimes. I am not saying all members of parliament exist in a vacuum, but it acts, to some extent, as a buffer to what is happening in the community. Let us get a feel of what is happening where the real people live. Drop the arrogance and listen to what people are saying. You do not have to agree with them, but give them respect and be willing to change if need be. Strong government does not need to be all about tough decisions. There can be compromise; just listen to what people say sometimes.
The last CLP government got the boot because it became arrogant; it lost touch with the people. A long time ago most Territorians voted CLP. I did. Looking at where it is today, I think Bernie Kilgariff, one of the founders of the CLP, would turn in his grave because it is not what it used to be. It once had nearly every member of this parliament supporting it because Territorians saw it as a party for all Territorians and voted that way. Unfortunately, it drifted from being a party that stood up for families and small business to sticking up for the silver circle and people of influence. I still see that today, unfortunately.
I hope this motion will be a warning to the government to pull its head in and review the direction it is heading. I am not sure it will do that, but you never know. Maybe the damage is irreversible. You may hope you can buy your way back by splashing money around, as happens in the last few months before an election, but Territorians see through that.
I will give you a classic example. Labor spent a lot of money in Palmerston. It built the rugby league field, the rugby union field, the Australian Rules football league and put in the super clinic. I know it did other things. It might even have been …
Mr McCarthy: Tennis, hockey.
Mr WOOD: Tennis, yes. It did lots of things which were not mentioned the other day in the biased speech by the member for Brennan. He told us about all the good things the CLP had done as if nothing had been done by Labor. That highlights the problem I have. We have biased debate. I understand there is bias in this place sometimes; the truth does not come out.
The Labor Party was helping people in the community, for sure, but it spent all that money in Palmerston hoping to win some seats. It lost every seat. If that is the way the government approaches this next election, people will see through it. What people want at the next election is for the government to admit it has made mistakes, say it will try to improve things, slow it down a bit and not come across as arrogant.
It is so annoying that the Treasurer said, ‘I will not listen to any of the recommendations of the PAC’. Regardless of whether the Treasurer wants to go to Richardson Park, the PAC did not say where the money should be spent. We just asked government to spend the money wisely, based on some facts and figures obtained before it did it. ‘No, rubbish!’ That is the arrogance that annoys people.
I went to that meeting at 5.30 pm on Sunday night. You could see that people were annoyed. The government has a long way to go. If you take notice of the current polls, the government will lose the next election. The reason for fixed-term elections is for governments to have the opportunity to pick themselves up after down periods, then voters will make a decision about the full four-year period, not just when things were going well for them.
I understand why the opposition has proposed this motion; it is an opportunity to talk about some important issues. But I feel, as I said before, that regardless of what the government has done in the past, whether good or bad, the people of the Northern Territory have supported fixed elections up until now, as both parties have. If we really believe in it, then we should say we believe in it. If we are saying we should shorten the period, then let us see a motion come before this parliament to change the Electoral Act.
However, as it is, I am abstaining because I feel the government has lost its way. It has done some very good things but it needs to settle back, review where it is going and allow the people, at the end of this four years, to make a judgment on whether the Labor Party or the Independents – you never know, we could become the majority of people in the House. Wouldn’t that be good? We might have consensus government one day where we can all sit in this parliament and vote ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Gerry’s dream, hey?
Mr WOOD: That is right. We could even elect the minister for Primary Industry as a minister by a vote of this House, not by a vote of the party. He does a good job as minister for Primary Industry; I am not knocking you, minister.
It works and gives an opportunity for everyone in this parliament to be a full working member of the decision-making process. That is what I believe this parliament lacks at the moment. It is a small parliament, probably smaller than the Geelong or Wollongong City Councils.
Madam Speaker, there is an opportunity for us to change the way we do things. This motion will not do that. Maybe at the next election it will happen.
Ms MOSS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, I speak in support of the important motion put before the House by the Leader of the Opposition. I thank him for that. We all recognise how serious a motion of no confidence in the government is. It is not a decision we take lightly, but we heard overwhelmingly from Territorians that this is the right thing to do and what they want us to do.
It is unfortunate that the CLP government continues on a path that is doing so much damage to the Northern Territory, and that we continue to say the government should get its act together. At this point in its term, it should have its act together. We continue to hear from the government that it will be more consultative and make changes, but nothing changes. We continue to have this debate in this House and Territorians, quite frankly, deserve better.
Territorians deserve representatives who have the people’s best interests at heart rather than their self-interests. Yet we have consistently seen individuals acting for themselves and not for the betterment of the Territory. Territorians deserve a government they can trust because it is supposed to provide stability and certainty, and do the job it has been elected to do. Territorians deserve government leaders who provide leadership in the true sense of the word. That includes taking responsibility when things go wrong and acting with professionalism to put them right. Territorians deserve a government that truly acts in partnership with the non-government sector and industry to deliver the best outcomes for Territorians.
It has been quite some time since Territorians have seen those characteristics in their government. The CLP government that stands before us today is not the government they elected. I have to speak up for the residents of Casuarina and the many people who have spoken to me about this motion and the chaos they continue to see. Territorians do not want another nine months of this shambolic, uncaring and inward-looking CLP government. To stand and say that no representations have been made to you as a member of this House is untrue. It took me 30 seconds during the member for Daly’s speech to find an e-mail that had been sent to every member of this parliament asking members to support this motion of no confidence today.
The member for Daly also said Territorians can sort the politics from the facts. I completely agree with that. They have done that in this case. One fact is that in my electorate many families are bearing the brunt of decisions made by this government and families are doing it tough. They continue to do it exceptionally tough and some are leaving Darwin because of that. They will see through the cynical moves of raising power prices exponentially and then cutting them by 5% and wanting to be patted on the back for it.
Everyday mums and dads, seniors and small business owners in my electorate are doing it tough, yet the CLP government continues to spin. It has its members and candidates spruiking action on crime; however, under the CLP government the northern suburbs have seen crime on the rise again. The statistics show the same change in Darwin and Palmerston.
The CLP government’s failure to adopt consistent Territory-wide policies to address alcohol issues is having an impact on the northern suburbs. The purely political move to scrap the Banned Drinker Register is an example of that. I have raised it before in this House and I will continue to do so. Our police do an exceptional job with the resources they have, despite the CLP’s abject failure to deliver on their promise to increase police numbers.
Casuarina residents deserve better than to be subjected to the high levels of public intoxication and antisocial behaviour we again see around our parks, reserves and shopping and service precincts. In addition, evidenced-based approaches are needed for the identification and treatment of substance misuse across the Northern Territory. The CLP government poured tens of millions of dollars into alcohol mandatory treatment without evaluation and accountability.
Over the last three years schools in the Casuarina electorate have lost teachers. I imagine we will lose more in the coming months. Schools continue to come to grips with the massive changes that have been undertaken by the CLP government and implemented poorly under its continually revolving door of Education ministers.
Since August 2012 there are 330 fewer staff and 165 fewer teachers in Northern Territory schools. Across the board there are no clear improvements in results. It would be ignorant to suggest we will not see the results of these decisions to cut teacher numbers over the coming years. I worry about the impact that will have on my electorate. I worry about the impact on kids in Casuarina as we see more teachers and support staff cut from our schools. What is more important than education? This is not what people in Casuarina want to see.
We hear talk about infrastructure projects and the Treasurer boasts about the economy, yet two years on, and even with former ministers describing it as a mistake, we see no real action on the Royal Darwin Hospital car park. The government cannot fix a car park and reach any milestones with the Palmerston hospital. The car park issue continues to be raised with me across the electorate. I know it is raised with other members of parliament. It is atrocious what is happening there and people want it fixed.
Media releases from the Minister for Business and the member for Blain promising regular meetings with local Casuarina business retail and community stakeholders were issued in April this year. However, some in the precinct missed out on that initial meeting and there has reportedly been very little follow-up since.
Business confidence is down and many small businesses are continuing to do it tough under the CLP government. A lack of visibility of work, jobs for mates and the revolving door of ministers does not paint a rosy picture for those trying to make a real go of it in small business.
The picture is not much better in my portfolio areas. The reality in child protection is that the CLP government is failing increasing numbers of children. An amount of $8m was slashed from the child protection budget when the CLP government came to office, and the minister is now playing catch up. Even if there is a cash injection in the next budget the current issues that are apparent through the recently released Children’s Commissioner and Department of Children and Families reports will not go away.
It is of major concern that the minister who carries the hefty portfolios in our government, the member for Port Darwin, is retiring at the next election with no clear pathway of who, under the existing or proposed CLP team, could take on these important areas.
There are more children than ever coming to the attention of the department, with a 32% increase in notifications and a 23% increase in substantiations, although both the current and former Children’s Commissioners have suggested there is a great likelihood that the number of substantiations is hugely underrepresented.
In August 2012 there were 737 full-time equivalent staff members in the department and at the latest report there were 607. The number of unresolved cases has grown in a year from 1160 to 1301. The number of priority one cases – the children at greatest risk of harm – being responded to in the mandated time frame has reduced by 6%.
Our Children’s Commissioner says our out-of-home care system is in crisis, and I agree with her. In real terms, 156 children assessed as priority one – child in danger – were placed at risk because the investigation did not start within the required 24 hours, compared to 43 the year before. A total of 433 children assessed as priority two were placed at risk because their investigations did not commence within three days, compared to 319 the year before. These are the facts.
The targets in relation to the safety of children continue to reduce. Despite a concentration on out-of-home care and an increase from 918 to 997 children, there was a significant decrease in new placements. It is horrifying to see in out-of-home care the number of children who are further abused, harmed and exploited in placements that are supposed to provide them with safety and security – 110 cases involving 95 children. This is after they have been failed by their parents. Even more disturbingly, 12 of those young people have been harmed multiple times in their placements. The response from the minister and the CLP government, as it has been across a number of portfolios, has been underwhelming.
The system is broken. The Children’s Commissioner, in an ABC report on 23 November, said she believes the department needs to support our foster carers better. That is what I hear as I talk to those who represent foster carers who visit me. There is a real need to work in partnership with and better support foster carers, who are providing such an important service that is an increasing need in the Northern Territory.
The CLP government has failed to revisit the board of inquiry recommendations, one of the most significant bodies of work put together by experts in the field. Many of the recommendations remain relevant and we will revisit them because we believe the system needs to be turned around. We will ensure that children are at the centre of government policy. We recognise the value of early intervention and the need to provide interventions and support to the increasing number of vulnerable children and families who come into contact with the system but do not reach the threshold for investigation. That was upwards of 9000 children and young people in the last year alone.
We will not speak flippantly about those who report a legitimate concern for the wellbeing and safety of a child, because that is exactly what Territorians are obligated to do by law: protect the rights of children to be safe. We will continue to have strong and robust discussions with Territorians about our early childhood policy because we believe those early years are the most important to setting Territorians up for a strong and healthy life.
In relation to the portfolio of Young Territorians, it took some time to release the Youth Participation Framework, which I was on the steering committee for in 2011. I was pleased to see that finally released. I looked at it recently. It refers to a scorecard to be released in April 2015. This scorecard is about looking at what government departments and relevant stakeholders should be focused on in supporting the Territory’s young people. To my knowledge, this has not been released.
We know, however, that after making cuts to youth services upon taking office, including the Youth Street Outreach Service in Alice Springs, the CLP government wanted to be patted on the back in April this year when it announced putting some money back into the youth sector. It is a shame it does not seem to tie up to the strategies it has released.
Alice Springs has waited an incredibly long time for the Chief Minister to sign the agreement which will see night services for young people reinstated, after a lot of pressure in this House and from the local community in Alice Springs. It wants to be patted on the back for it. It concerns me how much time has been lost, especially the closer we get to summer. It also concerns me that the CLP government members refuse to admit that perhaps they made the wrong decision in cutting those services when they came to government. Former ministers, including the member for Araluen, who is now an Independent in this House, have admitted it was a wrong decision by the CLP, yet the government refuses to comment.
Based on the Chief Minister’s comments directed towards me last time we were in this Chamber, I am not convinced he necessarily values or understands those who work alongside young Territorians to improve outcomes for them. I send a very clear message to those who work in the non-government sector and the public service in the Northern Territory: Territory Labor believes you make a valuable contribution and you should have a voice inside and outside this House. Territory Labor believes you have worth and that a range of backgrounds should be represented in here, because diversity increases the quality of our decision-making.
Unfortunately, as was demonstrated by the sale of TIO, the recent lease of the Darwin port and the ongoing issues around Richardson Park, the CLP government grasps steadfastly to making decisions in its own echo chamber in a way that even its own members disagree with. The CLP government lost touch long ago with what is happening in the everyday lives of Territorians, while making decisions that impact so heavily on them. The CLP does not even feel confident enough with this government to support the current Treasurer of the Northern Territory in his seat. I recently hosted an afternoon tea for seniors in my electorate. Upon arrival, one of them said to me, ‘I hope Adam Giles never gets old; he does not care about seniors.’
We have a Minister for Health who made exceptionally offensive comments about terminally-ill seniors, during Seniors Month I might add, without a peep from the minister for seniors. Those comments were widely rejected and they appalled Territorians across the Northern Territory. However, we lack the leadership in government to discipline members over comments such as these because it is all about the numbers and shoring up positions, not standing up for Territorians.
Housing is one of the biggest issues raised by seniors and many other Territorians. Under the CLP government the state of housing is only getting worse. The Minister for Housing and the CLP government, time after time, blatantly attempt to misinform the public about the 11 years of a good Labor government which delivered in the complex area of housing. We acknowledge that it is complex. The claims are untrue and disrespectful. We had a minister who was focused on reducing wait times, which under the CLP government and the watch of the current minister continue to blow out ...
Mr Elferink: Not true.
Ms MOSS: I pick up on the interjection from the member for Port Darwin. It is very true and the statistics back that up. It is getting harder to find the information on how much, because the website has not been updated since March this year. However, it remains the biggest issue raised with us across the Territory, particularly in the bush.
According to the CLP government’s budget papers, it is failing to deliver on social housing, with only 18 of the target of 95 houses delivered in 2014-15. Rather than aim to build the 77 outstanding social housing dwellings plus extra to meet the growing need, the CLP government sets the targets lower. That is an ongoing theme that fails Territorians in the bush and in urban areas.
I have had the opportunity to speak to local residents across the Northern Territory and it is clear that repairs and maintenance remains an urgent issue, with poor communication occurring once reported. Public housing sits vacant for months, as time to return these to stock increases. I see this in my electorate and it is heartbreaking to see those houses sit empty while the need is so high. It was former minister Chris Burns who established an agreement with Treasury that proceeds from the sale of any public housing stock went back into the department for the replenishment of stock. Plenty of good things happened under the Labor government.
The more time grows in getting Territorians into vital housing the harder it will be for any government to catch up. We are yet to hear from the minister about plans post-2018 when the current Commonwealth funding runs out.
Territory Labor recognises the importance of this portfolio area, particularly in the bush. As outlined by the Leader of the Opposition, we recognise the need to invest heavily in housing and in building the role of local people to build and maintain them.
In mental health, as I have raised before, there was a strategic plan released very late in the year, despite being promoted as being a plan for 2014 to 2017 on the Department of Health’s website for quite some time. It refers specifically to the detail contained within a yearly action plan informed by consultation, which will be what it is measured against.
When I made an inquiry as to where this action plan was for the current financial year, the advice was very clear: it is still under development and will be an internal document. I simply do not understand why an action plan for mental health would be kept internal and close to the chest of government, particularly if backed up by ample consultation. Mental health and our plans for improving the mental health of Territorians and for suicide prevention should be community owned, community driven and done in partnership with the community. But once again we see something that is held close to the chest of government and not shared. Unlike business, it does not provide an environment in which the sector can plan, be a partner in or take ownership of.
It is particularly concerning to me during a time when mental health reform on a national level is such a big discussion. We are hearing about some of the biggest mental health reforms seen in Australia in years. There is not even a peep from the current government on how that might affect us. There are huge structural changes we are talking about that will change funding. We need to know that someone will go into bat to see that we will get our fair share because our need continues to be great. Territory Labor will do that. I have been doing it for years and I will not stop.
There are many more examples I could give across my portfolio areas. I have been very lucky over the last couple of weeks to release some of our plans about innovation and technology. I have talked to some of our greatest minds across the Northern Territory about creative ways we can back them, how we can commercialise the best ideas coming out of the Territory and demonstrate the unique assets we have here on a global stage. We will continue to do that.
Madam Speaker, it is clear, based on facts, that the CLP government of the Northern Territory has lost the faith of the people. It is unable to communicate its message and members are paralysed by their distrust of each other. It is time to let Territorians decide. I trust Territorians and I urge all of members of this House to trust them too. I commend this motion to the House.
Mr CHANDLER (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, the crowd does not expect the teams to walk off the field at the three-quarter mark. We do not expect to walk off the field. The paint might be a bit rough around the edges, but I can assure you the engine is fine, the tank is full and the tyres are in really good nick.
This no confidence motion is nothing more than a political stunt by an inexperienced Labor opposition devoid of policy and with no plans to take the Northern Territory forward.
We are not always popular; anyone can recognise that. But that it is the paintwork. This government has the Northern Territory on track despite an opposition determined to derail our fantastic achievements to date. I heard the Chief Minister say on the weekend that perhaps one of our issues is we have tried to do too much too soon and put the Territory in the right direction too quickly. Perhaps we should have taken our time.
However, we have an opposition that cannot be trusted. The Labor opposition hates cattle exporters, tourists, new infrastructure and improving crime statistics. Under Labor, crime statistics were not readily available. This government updates them regularly so all can be seen. It is not hiding away from those facts. Labor hates improving crime statistics. They hate tough laws to crack down on criminals and sex offenders. They hate schools and school councils with autonomy and the capacity to become Independent Public Schools. They hate valuable portfolios like Veterans Support; they do not have a shadow minister for Veterans Support. They hate the developing the north policy. They hate housing reform, affordable housing, reduced rent and lower petrol prices.
They hate the new Palmerston hospital being built. They hate everything that this government is doing. They hate acting swiftly to tackle the epidemic of ice. They hate Palmerston; we can see that. They hate reforming education after extensive consultation because their union masters disagree. They hate releasing crime statistics that tell the true story, which is a good story. They hate Stella Maris remaining a public asset. They hate inquiries. They hate Alice Springs; that is obvious.
They hate accountability and most of all they hate having to come up with anything other than rocks to throw and personal attacks. That is what happens every time we come into this Chamber. All they have in their armoury is rocks and personal attacks. That is all they do.
We all understand what this no confidence motion is all about. We are a minority government, which comes with its own challenges. But the people of the Northern Territory need to understand what this Labor opposition is proposing today. The Labor opposition would like the Northern Territory to go to an election in early January or even as early as 29 December. It would like to be handed government because it believes, as it always has, that it was born to rule.
Many of those on the opposition benches were advisers to the former Labor government. They were tired of developing bad policies and pandering to their union mates with none of the glory so they stood for election in 2012. Now, here they are; the bridesmaids finally want to walk to the altar.
I am sorry but the Northern Territory is too important and there is too much at stake for that to happen. We cannot risk Labor in government again. People will remember what direction this place was heading after nearly 12 years of Labor government. Labor put all its eggs in one basket with one facility and one program, which was INPEX. It was a great initiative for the Northern Territory but the basket was full with one egg. This government has many more eggs in the basket because it is diversifying the economy. That is what the Northern Territory needs to be strong and go forward.
So far we have seen the Leader of the Opposition remain the puppet for the member for Karama. Her policies are largely in the areas this government is focused on, like early childhood, attendance at remote schools, electoral reform and, despite the masterminds of Stella Maris, a policy on openness and accountability. It astounds me.
I cannot forget the Leader of the Opposition’s excellent policy on driverless cars, but this Country Liberals government is delivering for Territorians. We have a plan and a vision to grow the Territory and make Territorians’ lives better. They may not always like us but the facts speak for themselves. There has been record infrastructure spending in this budget, including regional roads – something ignored for many years under Labor – arterial upgrades, cattle routes, bridges and more. There has been record spending in schools, including the introduction of Independent Public Schools, which has schools, school councils and parents excited and lined up at the door to join. There has been world-class support for our police, whose numbers are increasing.
Those police numbers are on track to meet our election commitment. Despite Labor’s claims, we have 117 more police officers on the street today than when Labor was in government. That is a fact. Our policies are putting those police officers on the street more regularly. They are not behind desks doing administrative work; they are on the beat. Not only do we have more police than when Labor was in government, they are more effective because they are on the street where Territorians expect them to be. We are investing in load-bearing vests, the latest weapons, CCTV cameras and more police stations.
We have added hundreds of thousands of cattle to the export numbers from the Territory, and renewed an industry from the brink of disaster under Labor.
We have revolutionised our legislation in relation to criminals and violent offenders – no thanks to Labor – and we are tough on crime and happy to tell the world about Labor’s soft approach that seems to favour the rights of criminals and paedophiles over the innocent.
We have paid off Labor’s debt and brought the economy under control with a steady hand. If this new Labor team wants Territorians to support them and trust that they are a new breed with no links to its past, that is totally wrong. If they want Territorians to believe in them the first thing they should do is apologise for the debt they left the Territory in because every hard financial decision this government has had to make was because of one thing …
Mr Elferink: Your legacy.
Mr CHANDLER: Your legacy, that is right. I will pick up on what the member for Port Darwin said. Your legacy to Territorians was debt, and this government had to make some decisions. Were they appreciated by the public? No, absolutely not! Is the Territory in a far better position now than it was three years ago? Heck, yes, far better. We are not spending anywhere near the amount of money today on interest payments as we did when you led the Territory.
The economy is far more diverse and stable. Under this damn fine government there is a vision for the Northern Territory, unlike the rock throwers from the other side who do nothing more than look for scandal and rot, and throw mud instead of coming up with decent policies for Territorians. They should have an effective opposition. When we were in opposition we made you a better government because we were an effective opposition. At the moment I am not seeing much from the other side.
We have intervened and seen petrol prices in the Northern Territory go from the highest in the country to the lowest. That was done through a range of initiatives through which this government was right there with the rest. I commend not only the local media but also Territorians for doing something about it. We had nearly 12 years of Labor but it was too hard for them. They talk about bringing down the cost of living and policies and initiatives, but in the 12 years they were in government what did they do for the average Territorian when it came to petrol prices? Name one thing! Absolutely nothing.
The Leader of the Opposition today agreed that they dropped the ball on land release. In Palmerston land was approaching $300 000 a block. How in the world does a young Territorian trying to make a difference and get a start in the world come up with $300 000 for a block, before they have even put a house on it. The Labor Party says it is there for those people who are less fortunate in life and that it is trying to give them a hand-up. It is all talk and no action. Do not trust it.
We have had a record land release and reduced the pressure on neglected housing stock. As I said, previously it cost $300 000 for a block of land in Palmerston. Whilst the blocks of land may be a tad smaller today, $118 000 will buy you a block of land in Palmerston. For a young couple that is their start in life. In four or five years they may have the money to move to a larger block of land or a bigger house, but it gets them into the market. They could not do that under the restrictions the former Labor government had in the housing market and the land release program.
We have overhauled Power and Water and brought it to commercial sustainability, and Territorians can now reap the benefits for years to come.
We are building Palmerston hospital and the work will speak for itself ...
Members interjecting.
Mr CHANDLER: Labor may laugh, and here they are laughing again, but the real joke is that in nearly 12 years in government what did we get? Nil, nothing, nada!
Territorians can smile when they walk through the doors of the brand-new state-of-the-art hospital when it opens. That is not a chook fence, not a bush clinic, but a real hospital being constructed.
Tiger Brennan Drive upgrade is a cornerstone investment in the Territory by this government. The Country Liberals started the road and we will see it completed with a near full duplication next year.
Art in the Territory has been boosted with independent art councils, festivals are flourishing and the Chan building is being redeveloped to a world-class facility. Well done, minister Higgins.
The Sport Voucher Scheme is a brilliant initiative and the options are endless. Young people and sports are well supported by this government.
The gas pipeline represents a game changer for the Northern Territory economy. This government is delivering on its commitment to diversify our economic base.
The lease of the port will realise the economic potential of this vital infrastructure and will see more investment, jobs and work come out of that sector.
TIO was heading for a commercial disaster. With the spiralling costs of underwriting insurance and the small purchasing base, the release of the TIO to the open market and purchase by the world’s largest insurer has made sure the vast majority of Territorians will not see spiralling insurance whilst the local investment and uniqueness of the TIO brand is maintained.
Remote communities are being connected with mobile coverage and Internet. They have greater decision-making capacity, and economies and investments are flowing into regions completely ignored by years of Labor neglect.
Palmerston has over $1bn worth of government and private investment at the moment, a sure sign of the confidence in this government and the team Palmerston local members. Darwin’s satellite city is growing by the day and it is the best place in the Territory to live, even if I say so myself. Sorry, Madam Speaker, the rural area is pretty important as well, but Palmerston is the centre.
Our airport is expanding; we have new international services and carriers. We are connecting with our nearby neighbours like Dili, and continuing to look to our closest trading partners as our future. We are connecting the Territory with a spinal service, or milk run as most people remember, with flights from Darwin to Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs.
This government is on track; the Territory is on track, and we cannot risk a Labor government. All those opposite were involved in the failed former Labor Territory government that took us all for granted and ran many aspects of the economy into the ground. They are responsible. We cannot risk Labor based on a popularity contest. We are not always popular, but the results will speak for themselves in the end. Labor wants to steal Christmas and everyone to be talking about us in this room. I do not want to talk about us; I want to talk about the future for Territorians. That is my, the Chief Minister’s and this government’s focus.
As an aside, this year the Department of Infrastructure is managing a program of $1.517bn for capital works, minor new works and repairs and maintenance, with more than $250m spent to date this year. I question whether Labor has any consideration for the construction industry or what this motion and the potential onset of an early election will do to the infrastructure budget.
During the period 1 July to 9 November 2015, 183 contracts were awarded, with a total value of $448m. That is phenomenal. Over 95% of contracts were awarded locally. There is currently $57m in tenders released to the market, and another $73m with the department under assessment. Should this motion be passed, what would happen to these tenders? Everything would be put on hold. The Territory would virtually come to a standstill for two or three months, depending on what the outcome was and what date the election was called. For many businesses, over what can be a difficult time for business through the Wet Season, any money this government puts out is welcome. For the business community any thought of an election at this time of year would be disastrous.
There is another $650m worth of works to be advertised by May 2016. The impact of an early election would put those works on hold as well. It would delay the economy, and the uncertainty would be catastrophic to the construction industry. Businesses would close down and jobs would be lost. I do not think Labor has thought about the impact this motion would have on the construction industry at all. This motion impacts the amount of roadworks delivered and police facilities upgraded and health centres would be put in jeopardy.
This year we are investing over $160m in capital works, minor new works and repairs and maintenance at Territory education centres. We are giving our children more daycare facilities, better opportunities for distance learning and new and improved special education options. There is a new $4m preschool at Braitling Primary School, a new $5.5m child and family centre located at the Larapinta Primary School site, and construction of the new $21.4m Palmerston special school in Bellamack has already commenced. This motion would put all these important infrastructure works in disarray.
I could speak for ages. We acknowledge that what this government fails in from time to time is communication. Even the Opposition Leader said there are often times – and the member for Nelson raised this – when governments do things well but those messages are not communicated well. Like a first-term government – I do not think anyone on this side thinks we get everything right every time. We are learning every day.
This motion puts us on notice. Every letter to the Editor in the NT News and every article written that is negative towards this government has an effect on me and this team. We learn from that impact and we continue to grow. Can we change our ways? Yes, and in some respects we need to change our ways.
Some of the things the member for Nelson said today are true. We debate in this place and sometimes it is a war of words where mud is thrown at each other. ‘You are better than us.’ ‘We are better than you.’ Did it really matter to John Smith as he drove to work this morning or any of the children who go to school? Much of what we do in this place is, quite frankly, a waste of their time because while we are talking about ourselves we are not getting on and doing the job Territorians want us to. That is not just the government; that is this entire parliament. As a child grows, this government will continue to grow. We will have failures and successes and will learn from each.
It is a good government and sometimes people forget it is a first-term government. I am hopeful that Territorians will see that we can throw a bit of polish on that paintwork. The engine is sound, though, the tank is full, the tyres are in good nick and Territorians deserve a government that has transformed this place in the last three years.
Madam Speaker, I reiterate what the Chief Minister said on the weekend. Have we done things too quickly? Maybe. We wanted to get on and do the job so quickly that some Territorians have been left behind a little in that advancement of the Territory. We have taken the Territory a long way in a very short time. We are laying a very solid foundation. As well as this motion, everything that is said to me on doorsteps and when I run into people in the community teaches me something and drives me to be a better Territorian, minister and MLA. I I have said that often it takes motions like this and letters to the editor to make us do our job better. Every time, you make the decision on how you want to improve your own life.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, my comments will purely be in my role as the member for Araluen. I am a resident of Alice Springs and am here as a representative of a third of the population of Alice Springs. The views of Centralians, the people of Central Australia, are slightly different from the views of the people of the Top End.
People in Alice Springs do not have access to the NT News in the same volume as people in the Top End. I have done some research. In Central Australia the distribution of the NT News is around 850 to 900 copies per day. It is slightly higher on Sundays but definitely fewer than 1000 copies per day are sold in Alice Springs. If you generously estimate that another 1000 people go online, not a lot of people in Alice Springs are reading the NT News compared to the number of people who read it in Darwin or the Top End. Similarly, Channel 9 is not recognised as a channel that people watch in Alice Springs for the news. I understand that fairly recently they have started broadcasting Channel 9 news on Gem 90, but I know of hardly anyone who turns to channel 90 at 6 pm every night to catch the Darwin news in Alice Springs.
I am prefacing my comments with the fact that, generally speaking, people in Central Australia have a slightly different perspective to those in the Top End. That is not because they are ignorant or do not understand things as well as people in the Top End; it is about exposure to different types of political analysis.
The other aspect to mention in this debate is that during the 11 years that Labor was in government from 2001 to 2012, the people of Central Australia felt very let down. They felt the Labor government generally neglected Alice Springs and Central Australia. They felt that their needs were not met and they were considered to be second-class citizens, me included. The old Berrimah line was definitely alive and well during those 11 years of Labor in power. People do not forget that. People are still very mindful of those days when we were overlooked and ignored.
So when the Leader of the Opposition gave notice of this motion on Thursday 12 November in the last sittings of parliament, I disembarked the plane the following day in Alice Springs at 9.30 am and embarked on a very intense consultation process. I stood on the side of the road just about every morning and went to shopping centres and as many graduation ceremonies as I could. I attended many events, and at every opportunity asked people, ‘What do you think? Are you ready for an early election? Have you had enough of the CLP government? What should I do? How should I vote?’ Most people by far said they did not want an early election. They did not want to go to the polls, particularly during the Christmas and January school holiday period. They thought a four-year term should be a four-year term and that Labor was not ready to govern.
Debate suspended.
PETITION
Petition No 58 – Conserve Berry Springs Waterhole
Ms PURICK (Goyder)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I present a petition from 118 petitioners not conforming with standing orders relating to the conservation of Berry Springs waterhole. The petition is similar to Petition No 56 presented during the November sittings. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Continued from earlier this day.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Deputy Speaker, continuing my comments from earlier today, despite my serious doubts about the sustainability of the Giles government, I will not be supporting a vote of no confidence, which would take Territorians to an early election.
Since the opposition gave notice of this motion on Thursday 12 November, I have canvassed the views of a significant number of Alice Springs residents. I have concluded that they do not want an early election despite the fact they are unimpressed with the performance of this CLP government. They do not want an early election because a fixed term should remain a fixed term. People do not want an early election over the Christmas holiday period and think Labor has not yet proven to be a viable alternative government.
Whilst I will not be supporting the Labor vote of no confidence and effectively handing over government to Labor, I cannot support the CLP government which continues to unravel and demonstrate a lack of respect and integrity. Territorians deserve better. For these reasons I will be abstaining from the vote.
On a broader level I will make a few comments about my perspective and what I have been observing of the CLP of late. The rot of this government has come from the top. As someone who has been subjected to all sorts of things from this government over the last 12 months, I am deeply saddened by the deterioration and disintegration of the CLP at the hands of the member for Braitling.
But more concerning is the Treasurer, who now finds himself, after the weekend, in a position of being dumped by his party. I believe the member for Fong Lim must go; he must be removed from his position as Treasurer. He has been a poor performer on all levels.
At the height of his career, during last sittings we were delivered a copy of the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report. It has not been absorbed yet by the community, because if it had, it would be revealed to one and all that this TAFR was disclaimed by the Auditor-General in the report. There are three pages of comments from the Auditor-General. The basis on which the disclaimer of opinion was issued was an inability to form an opinion about the Power and Water Corporation, and inadequate books and records maintained by the Power and Water Corporation, all under the watch of the current Treasurer, who effectively had a vote of no confidence against him on the weekend by his party.
If we are to talk about the credibility of this government, we need to seriously look at the role of the Treasurer and whether or not the member for Fong Lim is equipped to retain his position. The role of Treasurer is probably more important than any position in Cabinet. The Treasurer has final responsibility for every cent spent by the government – every bit of revenue and expenditure.
To read in this TAFR that for the second time in the history of Australian governments an Auditor-General has had to disclaim a Treasurer’s report is unbelievable ...
Mr Tollner: That is not true
Mrs LAMBLEY: It is true, despite the call of rejection from the other side of the Chamber. The Public Accounts Committee was informed of this by the Auditor-General, Julie Crisp, in a meeting of the PAC this afternoon.
When we talk about confidence in this government, how can we have confidence in a Treasurer who tables a report in parliament which is disclaimed by the Auditor-General? I have no confidence in this Treasurer for a range of reasons.
For the Chief Minister to go on public radio yesterday morning and tell us again about his unequivocal support for his best mate and Treasurer, the member for Fong Lim, is simply outrageous. People are sick of this. They are fed up to the eyeballs.
My decision to not support this vote of no confidence in the government cannot be construed as a vote of confidence in the government. It is quite the contrary. I have had enough. I have doubts and serious concerns about the viability of this government. I do not think this government will make it to August. The internal problems and the continuing dysfunction of this government will mean it will become impotent and paralysed through its inability to work as a team.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the Treasurer has to go and, in my opinion, the Chief Minister has to go for the CLP to survive.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Madam Speaker, I support the motion of no confidence brought to the House by the Leader of the Opposition, Michael Gunner. A motion of no confidence is the most serious motion that can be brought before the Legislative Assembly. We have not made the decision to go down this path lightly.
Sadly for Territorians we have reached crisis point. This government has overdosed on its own arrogance. It has lost touch with Territorians. It has hit the critical mass of controversy. It has sent in the clowns – free entry into the circus – but Territorians are paying dearly. Enough is enough.
Territorians too regularly have fielded questions of disbelief from their southern mates about the scandalous goings on of the Territory government. This government has repeatedly reduced the Territory to a laughing stock. The Territory has been ridiculed and made the butt of all political jokes across the country. If it was not so serious you would be forgiven for finding it amusing. It is like an old episode of Fawlty Towers with Adam Giles as Basil Fawlty and John Elferink as Manuel. If you did not laugh sometimes, you would cry. However, this is very serious.
How often have each of us heard the phrase ‘only in the Territory’? The Territorian heart beating deep in most of our chests cherishes the element of life in the Top End that makes us a bit different and unique. But because we are in the Territory does not mean our government can take the liberty to be so different and unique as to be detrimental to the people it represents.
It may come as a surprise to the members opposite, but rules apply here. There are expectations of government that you have not met. Your actions have not gone unnoticed. The impact of decisions cannot be swept under the rug. Across the Territory voters are angry and disillusioned. Territorians deserve a government that will answer to them, is accountable and consults. They deserve better than the CLP is giving them. At a bare minimum Territorians need to have confidence that the government of the day is working in Territorians’ best interests. That confidence is gone – eroded and trashed.
Territorians have given this government the benefit of the doubt and more than enough chances to change its ways. Has it learnt from its mistakes? Many people would say no. Territorians have had their fill of this incompetent, dysfunctional, arrogant and untrustworthy government. There is widespread support for a fresh start an election can bring.
This government has made questionable decisions without consulting Territorians. It has flat out ignored the voices of Territorians. It has flogged off public assets like TIO without batting an eyelid, despite the desperate plea from Territorians to stop the sale. The consequence of the sale of TIO is that many Territory residents have been unable to afford insurance for their homes. Families have been quoted insurance premiums that almost trump the cost of their mortgage repayments. These Territorians and their livelihoods are now left exposed.
Under the CLP government Territorians have also had to endure the unsustainable cost of living, businesses closing and families leaving the Territory, a criminal justice system falling apart, the youth justice system in crisis and, sadly, our child protection system in crisis. Our children are suffering. What government allows a teenage girl to go missing and alerts the public three or four months later that the child is missing? Minister for Children and Families, how many other teenagers have gone missing for two or three weeks at a time without anybody knowing? It is a crisis and we need to do what is best for Territorians. We need to make sure, at a bare minimum, our children are cared for when they cannot be cared for by their parents.
The government has failed to properly plan and consult the community on important decisions such as Richardson Park.
Enough has been said about the Palmerston hospital debacle; there has been enough laughter and disbelief about that decision.
On the question of the allocation of water licences, it cost taxpayers $110 000 when the government lost the case on water allocation that was taken to court.
It is holding the community in contempt on important planning issues and over the CLP involvement with the slush fund Foundation 51.
The flawed alcohol policies have seen the rivers of alcohol flow to our problem drinkers.
Territorians are quite rightly concerned about what impact the CLP’s antics will have on business confidence in the Northern Territory, and the future of jobs in the Territory for them and their children. What message does this madness send to the broader business community and potential investors? Our private sector wants stability and certainty to underpin investment decisions and the creation of jobs, but the government does not care because sadly the CLP has governed for the CLP and not for the Territory. It is not just the failings of the CLP that have hit the pages of newspapers that have disappointed us and Territorians. There are policy and portfolio failings that have caused concern as well.
In regard to Indigenous policy, a raft of promises was made to bush voters ahead of the last election which have not been fulfilled. The CLP government flip-flopped between, ‘Yes, we will, no, we will not, yes, we will have a dedicated agency of Indigenous Affairs’. The impact of the CLP government ignoring social services related to early childhood and parenting, health, children and families, education, preventative and early intervention approaches for three years is now showing up in annual report statistics. There is poor attendance and substandard NAPLAN results, and fewer Indigenous teachers and assistant teachers in schools. The Department of Children and Families is overwhelmed with demand. Emergency departments are struggling and elective surgery wait lists are blowing out. All this impacts upon the health, wellbeing and future economic contributions of Indigenous Territorians.
The CLP government is increasingly criticised by independent authorities for its punitive policies such as paperless arrests and alcohol mandatory treatment that disproportionally impact upon Indigenous Territorians. The percentage of Indigenous Territorians incarcerated is dramatically out of proportion to the Territory’s population.
The CLP government has made no secret of the fact it has the land councils in its sights. It wants access to land and will attack Aboriginal land rights until it gets what it wants.
In Fisheries there is the Dundee boat ramp debacle. Amateur fishermen and fishers of all sorts should be using the boat ramp already. The day it was supposed to be completed the minister announced the issuing of the tender. This should have been built and in use by now.
The fishing exclusion zones confused both amateur and commercial fishermen. Only this government can upset both amateur and commercial fishermen.
The impending vessel monitoring system will cost commercial fishermen $5000 extra per boat. The commercial fishing licences and allocation changes have been very controversial within the commercial fishing industry.
Moving on to Transport, there was a 10 000-word statement last year on transport by the then Transport minister, and the next day he announced the privatisation of our public bus service. There have been road and airstrip delays in capital works programs rolled out. There have been other delays to projects because of tensions between the next Chief Minister, possibly – the member for Brennan, who is the Transport minister – and the Chief Minister.
The commercial passenger vehicle review ended in January yet we still have not heard anything about that. The taxi industry is calling for what the minister will release. There are people’s livelihoods and jobs at stake, and we need to come clean with the taxi industry if Uber is coming to the Northern Territory. If it does, we must protect our local taxi industry and ensure there is a level playing field for everybody.
In the area of Asian Relations and Trade, the public has heard about the ministerial travel scandals instead of the trade and investment outcomes. The sacking of Terry Mills has had a lasting impact on our relationships. I applaud the member for Katherine’s for his focus on forging close relationships with Vietnam.
There was the scrapping of the Arafura Games and then the refusal to bring it back, despite the overwhelming evidence of the potential boost to the local economy and the further strengthening of the Territory’s relationship with our neighbours. There was a $10m loss to the local economy because of the scrapping of the Arafura Games. As I said before, if Labor is elected we will bring back the Arafura Games.
These are only a few examples of the CLP’s policy shortfalls in the portfolios I have shadow responsibility for; there are countless more. Territorians feel betrayed. They know there is a better way to govern and it does not have to be like this. Territorians want a fresh approach to government.
I can tell Territorians that Labor is listening. As the Leader of the Opposition outlined earlier today, Labor has a comprehensive plan with three clear policies: giving our kids the best start in life; restoring trust, transparency and accountability; and creating and supporting jobs for locals and work for local businesses. We are listening to the community and are ready to govern in the community’s interest.
Under normal circumstances the community could reasonably expect the government to run its four-year term before facing judgment at the next general election, but these are not ordinary times. A dysfunctional, incompetent, arrogant CLP government has run out of time. Territorians want to deliver their verdict; they want to send a message to the government that they will not tolerate this anymore. They will not sit idly by and watch the CLP ruin the Territory any longer.
The message from Territorians goes out to those beyond the benches on the other side of the room: the cowboys, rogues, renegades, old boys and puppet masters of the CLP.
Madam Speaker, I urge all members of this House to support this motion. Speak up for the Territorians you are elected to represent, end the suffering and give Territorians the opportunity to move on. Let Territorians go to a vote.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, I also contribute to this most sensitive motion brought to the House. The outcome of this debate will impact upon the credibility of this Assembly and the way we are viewed, not only by Territorians but also other Australians.
We are being asked to set aside a properly elected government, not because of what they have done but because of the way they have done it. In history everybody has made mistakes, including the Labor government and Independents. We owe it to Territorians to hold this government to account not based on personalities but on its overall performance and the outcomes it has achieved in the interests of Territorians.
I am one of the first and most vocal to be critical of personal behaviour, in particular the arrogance of some government members, but my major interest lies in what is being delivered for my constituents. I am not here to muckrake; I am tired of that. I am sorry if I ever put anybody down because at the end of the day that is not my personality – I was raised by a Christian lady – and not who I am. I am sick and tired of the muckraking in this House and forgetting the big things and what people are saying. That is what we are missing.
There is talk on the street and in the bush, but what interests me most is what is happening in the bush. That is what I was elected for.
It is terrible to get personal in this House and start dragging family names into it, going to my back yard and doing it to my people, then watching them throw it back into your face. You are losing credibility with people by doing that. They know who I am; they have seen me born and raised. I do not live away from them; I live there with them. One thing we do not like is outsiders coming in and telling us how to live our lives and what our plans are for our future. We know what we want. We won the land rights, member for Johnston. We have native title over our land. My father was one of the biggest winners. I was born in that field.
We want development, economics, jobs, to express ourselves and be part of the big deal. We want to be part of the big wheel moving forward. That is all we want. We do not want to sit back here and keep throwing things at each other. It is not helping the people out there. We want to move forward.
We are land rich and dirt poor. It is the same thing you have heard so many times; I do not know whether anybody in this House will get it through their heads. It is a real life situation and we want to move forward, but you cannot sit here and keep telling us that everything is wrong every time we move forward.
We have two different perspectives. I am an Independent at the end of the day. Let me tell you something I have never told anybody. My father taught me one thing; ‘If there is anything to move forward’, he said, ‘we won the land rights. We won native title.’
The CLP is the way for business; we have to move forward. They are the only visionaries in this sense. They are the only ones to help the bush move forward. We already live in a false social economy, especially in remote areas. There are hardly any jobs. Look at the shires. What are they really providing: a work for the dole scheme?
Barunga was one of the biggest players when it came to the CDP back then. We were the ones who ran the trials, and it was successful for 30 years until it was scrapped. Then what? Kids did not go to school, families started drinking and social problems escalated. Everything escalated, even the health issues. But back then no one was paid until Friday. At least the kids went to school every week; they were fed and the parents had jobs.
I grew up in that life. When I look now at the majority of my family back home in all the other communities, it is not the same. The hope is gone. They have lost it because of the shires. That has really damaged the communities.
What can we do to make things work? We will eventually get there, but why do we have to run each other down all the time? You sit in this House and play silly games. You are playing political games with people outside this House. It does not hurt me what you say in here, but it is damaging the reputation of innocent people outside this House who are trying to make a living. Yes, they have made mistakes, but they are trying to move forward and that is what I cannot forgive. You will come to your judgment day, but that is in your time.
I am pretty happy with what the CLP has been doing in my electorate. At least we are moving forward. At least now local authorities in communities have a say on the direction of their communities. The health centres will eventually be built. They have to be; there is no other choice. There has to be bridges, roads, mobile phone reception and ADSL, especially for Weemol, Bulman, Umbakumba and Manyallaluk, some of the most remote areas in the Northern Territory.
With the cyclone recovery at Ramingining and Milingimbi, most importantly, there are jobs for my people. If that means to pick up their economy and move forward, then jobs it will be. I will support anything that comes my way if it means jobs for my people.
One thing you have to remember is when the dirt was handed into Mr Lingiari’s hands it gave us the opportunity to sit down and earn money for nothing. I am not a big believer in that; everybody should work. I have worked all my life. But that is where the disadvantage started, because of a policy mess up. If you cannot look at that it is your side of the issue, not mine. But I do not see it that way.
Pearson talked about a lot of history. He wanted people to move forward, put their hands up, be educated, have a life and not sit down but earn money. What is that generation to do? Just have babies? Keep them contained so you can always have control over them? You are not educating people by controlling them. Do you think health is the best way forward? What about educating the kids about health before they have health problems?
We are the ones who have to live out there and see these problems every day. When we come into this House all we hear is constant nagging. Everybody wants to be a saviour of the people with their policies. It has done so much damage in history. If you have not read the history books yet, Aboriginal people are what they are because of the policies in and out of this House. It is no joke anymore. When will we see the real big picture and start making things move forward the way they should?
Stop trying to use the Land Rights Act and everything else as a token. If you were not involved in fighting for land rights, how can you talk about it? That is something I was born and raised in. You have no idea where we want to go next, but every time we try to get up on the right foot and move forward, we are crushed down, talked about and dragged through the mud. There is no real support for us. We are business-minded people too. We have moved beyond land rights; we want business and development. We will not sit around and let people dictate to us for the rest of our lives. If you will not move us forward, then people will judge you for that.
The main influence for me entering politics came from my father. As well as being a visionary for his people, my father was a very pragmatic man who played a major role in bringing our people together into what is now known as the Jawoyn nation. He was committed and passionate about furthering and protecting the interests of the future generation of Jawoyn, in particular. Unfortunately, Jawoyn is fractured and broken in half because of politics and people who want to claim they are Jawoyn.
I could name the people in parliament, but what big deal will that make? There will be a time and day when they will realise people know the truth; they are not silly. I would like to bring in the booklet that was recently issued there. I know the stunt that is being played amongst my people. That is for you to find out when it comes to the election.
In this role, my father resisted the temptation to be caught up in the quest for a breakaway land council and sought to work within the NLC to further the interests of his people. He developed a very respectful and fruitful relationship with the NLC chairman, Galarrwuy Yunupingu, which prospered until my dad died. In a similar vein, he wanted to work within the framework of the NT government rather than sit outside and complain.
As part of this strategy, my father urged me to take an active role in politics so that, as a representative of our nation, I could work inside the tent of government to influence better outcomes for my people. My father also suggested the CLP as my best option, not because he thought it had all the right answers on politics – this is straight from the heart – but because he felt it was fully aware it did not. In contrast, he felt that Labor, by and large, believed it knew better for Indigenous people than we did. For this reason he saw the CLP as a political party most likely to accept ideas from Indigenous people.
Even though I previously had personal conflicts with members of the CLP, I believe my father was right. I say this because when I left the CLP it did not stab me, come for me, muckrake or do any of the things Labor has always done to me, dragging my family into the conflict. The CLP did not. It stuck by its beliefs and did its work. It moved forward.
This government, particularly under this Chief Minister, has made the most policy changes to benefit Indigenous Territorians since self-government. That is based on the views of my people. The Chief Minister should be congratulated for most of the work he has done, regardless of how anybody sees him. It takes a man to stand up and do the job. It takes a greater man to lead when the world is against him.
Further to this, Territorians are sick and tired of public infighting between politicians both within and between parties. They want to see us get on with the business of government. I believe the Chief Minister is on the correct path to best help my people, my constituents and all Territorians.
Before I finish I give credit to the members of this Assembly who genuinely have the interests of Indigenous people at heart, particularly those who appear likely to retire at the next election. I first congratulate Mr Elferink for what he has tried to achieve both now and in his previous life as the member for Macdonnell. He has genuine compassion for Indigenous people, and although he sometimes resorts to what I call tough justice, he does so with heart. His credentials with Indigenous people are great.
I also acknowledge my friend and mentor in this House, the member for Namatjira, Alison Anderson. Alison is an outstanding example of an Indigenous woman who has worked tirelessly, at times at great personal cost, particularly to her health, to advance the cause of her people in the face of largely indifferent bureaucrats and legislators. Being an outspoken advocate for Aboriginal people comes at a great personal cost to Aboriginal people. You only need to look at the long list of Indigenous members of the Assembly who are now no longer with us to realise that.
I also wish the best for the member for Fong Lim, David Tollner, for his future career.
But I go back to the Aboriginal leaders who have been in this House, especially Alison. You do not come across many Aboriginal people who fight for what they believe in, especially grassroots people who have grown up in the bush. You do not find many in this House. You have to be passionate about your job. Some people just throw mud because they think they can, but deep down they do not understand the core business we are faced with or how we feel when we walk into this House. We have not grown up in cities or towns. We cannot relate to that kind of life. English is not our first language. Do you know how frightening it is being amongst you in this House? But we have to stand up for what we believe in, because at the end of the day that is who we are. We speak about and fight for what we love.
I have to give credit to Alison in regard to that. She has done that. When she knows something is wrong, she smells it and walks away. Strong Indigenous women are like that. If we feel that we are threatened, are being dragged down or used, we will walk away to a better place. Regardless of this House, when we eventually leave we will be amongst the rest of them and still be doing the good work. Most would not; you will all move on. You will all be buried somewhere else in your own country. We will not. That is our cause in this House, our fight.
I congratulate the next Indigenous candidates for standing up; it takes guts to do it. I have noticed in this House your own can turn on you, and that is something we must remember.
At the end of the day I will not support this motion because the CLP deserves to have its full term in government. In the constitution every government in the Northern Territory has a fixed term and you cannot change that. Nobody wants to go to the polls at Christmas; we all want to celebrate. I wish for snow in the Northern Territory for once, but that is just me and my bucket list.
Madam Speaker, that is my contribution today. Hopefully this is knocked on the head.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, put simply, Territorians have lost confidence in this government. The CLP has broken the trust of Territorians. Today in this parliament we will make a decision. Do we keep going backwards under Adam Giles and the CLP or do we move forward and allow Territorians to make a decision on their government? It is our duty as representatives of our electorates to ensure the harm this government caused and the effect on the people of the Northern Territory is minimised. Therefore, I support this motion today.
We need to ensure there is no more chaos and harm, and Territorians decide who leads them. My colleagues and I have long been voicing the concerns of Territorians and their lack of confidence in the government and especially in the ability of Adam Giles to lead. Adam Giles is the unelected Chief Minister who has caused so much havoc to the Territory and Territorians. With every day that goes by our reputation is diminished and decisions are made that will have a lasting impact on our communities. That is why it is important that we support this motion today.
Madam Speaker, like you, I have spent most of my life in the Northern Territory. I have seen many governments come and go – some I felt more favourably towards – but I have never seen a government like this. Three-and-half years ago Territorians did not elect what we have today. They did not elect three-and-a-half years of chaos, 14 Cabinet reshuffles and, famously, two-and-a-half Chief Ministers. They did not vote for the chaos we have seen within this Chamber.
Only last sittings we saw the government, as soon as it thought it had the numbers, remove the Speaker of this parliament only to have the parliament re-elect that same Speaker. That highlights the chaos of this government.
Every day members of my community ask me when the government will go. They are sick and tired of waking up to the headlines of midnight coups or their assets being sold off without knowing. Under the CLP we have seen our bus network, our port and TIO sold, water licences issued to CLP candidates, a port that is not a port built without any environmental checks, and huge power and water tariff hikes that impact on Territory families every day.
Then, in an insult, the government said it will slightly lower those tariff hikes. Do you on the other side understand what those tariff hikes did to Territorians? Talk to real people, everyday mums and dads who struggle with the cost of living your government imposed on them. Those power and water tariff hikes were unfair. To claim you are now reducing them because you care is appalling.
We have an unelected Chief Minister who axed the gas to Gove deal. My colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, spoke about the impact on Arnhem Land. I visited the region in July and the stories are heartbreaking. All of this was caused by an unelected Chief Minister leading a chaotic government.
Territorians do not trust this government. Across the Territory they want to move on from this bad dream, this nightmare of a government. They do not want another nine months of this chaos. They have had enough.
For members opposite to say this motion puts them on notice, to blame a lack of communication on being a first-term government shows how out of touch they really are. They say everyone on their side is committed to a full term. How can Territorians trust them when we have seen a circus of ministers and Chief Ministers for the past three years, with deals made simply to keep them in power and not made in the best interests of Territorians?
Many sporting teams around the world are still trying to work out how five beats nine. The member for Braitling keeps his position because if he does not, he and the member for Fong Lim will bring the House down with them. The unelected Chief Minister simply refused to stand down and Territorians are stuck.
Today we can change that; we can make a decision to take the Territory forward. Today is the opportunity for members of this House to trust Territorians to make a decision. We are not asking you today to support Labor to come into government. What we are saying is we have had enough of this chaos and dysfunction, and we need to go to Territorians and listen to them, to have trust in their vote. I quote the member for Brennan, ‘As a child grows, this government will continue to grow’.
They have clearly failed their L-plate test. I am not sure that is how Terry Mills would reflect on his knifing. This is not about one side of government against another; this is about a government that does not respect Territorians, the very people it is here to represent.
This government’s cuts and behaviour have impacted across the Territory, but in the electorate of Nightcliff it has been wide and deep. The people of Coconut Grove, Nightcliff and Rapid Creek have been let down by the CLP on more than one occasion. It is evident the CLP government does not respect the people of our community. It has made decision after decision which has greatly impacted on us. As we know, I have spoken in this House on these issues repeatedly.
We have seen the complete reversal from promising a 24-hour, seven-days-a-week police station for our community to the shutting down of our police station. We have gone from one promise to a complete shutdown. In our community that has led to increased antisocial behaviour and an increase in the amount of time it takes police to respond. Our community deserves more. You promised one thing yet you deliver another.
The community of Nightcliff was most upset about the proposed Nightcliff island. It caused a great degree of angst in the electorate of Nightcliff in the suburbs of Coconut Grove, Rapid Creek and Nightcliff, and across the broader Darwin community. I remind the House the CLP government issued a lease of 98 ha of Darwin Harbour without talking to anyone. The proposal had the potential to have a significant environmental and social impact on the amenity of our suburb and the greater Darwin community.
The minister for Planning indicated in this House that the project will not proceed, so I ask him to remove the lease. You have been asked repeatedly, but residents are still being kept in the dark, as they were about that secret lease for 98 ha of the harbour. The people of the Northern Territory and the residents of Nightcliff, Coconut Grove and Rapid Creek need a straight answer. We have been left in the dark through the whole process. That shows the disconnect and arrogance of this government; it thinks it is completely acceptable to create a land lot and issue a lease without telling anyone.
In our community the impacts of this government have been felt the most in our schools and education system. The schools in my electorate have spent three years fighting cuts to teacher, staff and support staff numbers, and budgets. These have impacted across all of our schools. We have seen this every day in our schools. We have less support in our classrooms, larger class sizes and fewer programs.
Anyone who wants to argue with that can answer where the GEMS program is at Nightcliff Middle School. That program was cut by the CLP government and it is impacting on our girls. Our middle school girls are one of our most vulnerable cohorts, but under this government a program was removed and nothing has replaced it. We have seen uncertainty for teachers and support staff, as well as the high student-teacher ratios across the Territory.
One of the other issues this government has completely failed Territorians on – and anybody who chooses to argue otherwise is out of touch – is planning. First, I will touch on my electorate of Nightcliff. This government approved spot rezonings that are unacceptable to the community. They were ad hoc spot rezonings that had a huge impact on families’ homes where they want to live their lives. Because of the government’s carelessness we have seen spot rezonings. The former minister for Planning came to my electorate and agreed with me on some of the issues, yet subsequently approved rezoning applications with traffic impact on amenities. This was in addition to the ludicrous suggestion of a Nightcliff island.
I understand the Nightcliff jetty had issues but you did not even have the courtesy to put up signs and we had to chase for information. This shows the arrogance of this government.
Other issues that have affected my electorate have been bus fares for seniors, public housing properties sitting empty, waiting lists getting longer and rents for public housing tenants being raised but not yet reduced.
The government has shown a contempt for parliamentary procedure and made a circus out of its attempts to govern, not only with the ousting of the elected Chief Minister in a political coup but the subsequent failed coups which all came to a head a couple of weeks ago in a midnight attempt to oust an Independent Speaker. It not only demonstrated poor judgment but an inability to count.
Individual ministers in the Giles government have not performed any better than the Chief Minister. The former White Ribbon Ambassador threatening to slap me was a loud wake-up call to the arrogance and the mentality of certain MLAs. In addition to this appalling comment, the suggestion from the Deputy Chief Minister that women subjected to such inexcusable behaviour just needed to ‘toughen up’ showed a complete lack of understanding on behalf of this government in regard to this very serious issue. There were highly inappropriate comments made by the minister about seniors which followed cuts to supporting seniors. The Chief Minister has arrogantly laughed at our emergency department nurses.
We have seen extraordinary travel by this government. In fact, recent documents from written questions from the opposition show that ministers have taken 57 overseas trips in this term. But more extraordinary is the number of days spent overseas by Giles and Mills government ministers – 1.13 million days overseas is ludicrous. The Chief Minister travelled on private jets …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Ms FYLES: Before the Attorney-General gets excited, $1.13m, sorry, Madam Speaker. That was from recent written question answers.
There was the Palmerston hospital debacle where they dug a hole and then filled it back in. The Deputy Chief Minister, in defending that decision in the House, explained that it was special concrete and you cure it by covering it. Seriously? You expect Territorians to accept that we have some type of special CLP concrete?
I cannot count the number of times I have put forward the pressing and valid concerns of those in and beyond my electorate in this parliament only to be shown contempt by those sitting opposite. It is very clear that this government has forgotten its voters and Territorians have had enough.
I have spoken on occasions about the serious misgivings and concerns in relation to some of my shadow portfolios such as Correctional Services and the juvenile justice system in the Northern Territory. There have been 36 escapes in 18 months that have tested our community’s faith in the government’s ability to keep us safe. The escape three weeks ago was a tipping point. A convicted axe murderer and rapist was placed in a Sentenced to a Job program at a work camp in Nhulunbuy which should never have been there in the first place, except that a health facility was shut down. That escape, coming on the back of the previous escapes, made us a national laughing stock and a disgrace.
There are serious questions the minister for corrections must answer. The events in Nhulunbuy highlight that a person convicted of a very serious crime was allowed to take part in a scheme with minimum supervision whilst being housed in a low-security setting.
This is the most recent in a long list of failures in corrections and Justice. The department’s annual report made it very clear that the government’s priority is locking people up, and demonstrated that its correctional system cannot manage its budget, keep prisoners in prison, keep the community safe, meet its key performance targets, is struggling to support its staff with significant overtime, has a casual workforce and is not adequately investing in and equipping or training staff.
As a result of the government’s failure two reviews were carried out in relation to the juvenile detention system in the Northern Territory, the Vita review and one by the Children’s Commissioner. The Vita report was damning of the juvenile detention system, quoting a long list of failures relating to detainees, procedures, staff and legal responsibilities. The key findings of the Children’s Commissioner’s review also listed the government’s failures to fulfil its responsibilities to detainees. The Children’s Commissioner, in her media release of 17 September, was compelled to state:
that the complete overhaul of initial and refresher training by staff is attached to their personal files and mandatory regulatory refresher training should be ongoing
that Correctional Services recommends psychometric testing as part of its recruitment process
a complete review of every position in the youth justice correctional centre
that the review of operations procedures adheres to the Youth Justice Act and the regulations of the UN Convention of the Rights of a Child for all aspects of detention
that youth justice develops a policy and procedures on the use of spit hoods.
This government’s arrogance knows no bounds. The public has been horrified by the allegations of mistreatment within our youth justice system. It is alleged a youth was strapped to a restraint chair similar to those used in Guantanamo Bay in March this year and had his ankles, shins, shoulders, waist and arms strapped down and a fabric hood placed over his head. That these actions are happening in a youth justice system in Australia is almost unthinkable, but they are happening in the Northern Territory under this minister’s watch.
The Attorney-General has repeatedly ignored the recommendations and insights of experts in the corrections and youth justice field. The two reviews provide a framework that would see significant improvements in the youth justice system which the minister has ignored. Similar contempt has been shown towards the Coroner with this statement:
In any other government a minister who made such comments and oversaw such a system would be sacked, but Adam Giles does not have the ability to do that.
The CLP government has completely lost control because its members are too busy fighting amongst themselves to get on with the job. That has been highlighted by members today. Territorians demand better from this government. It has utterly dropped the ball in our justice and corrections systems. All the evidence points to the fact that the CLP government is too busy looking after itself to look after anything else.
Another area of complete failure by this CLP government is the scrapping of the Banned Drinker Register simply because it was a Labor policy. In the words of police, it was the best tool they ever had ...
Members interjecting.
Mr FYLES: You do not want to listen to my words, but maybe you will listen to the words of the police.
The government’s alcohol mandatory treatment program was a complete failure from the start when patients were kicked out of a medical hostel through to beds lying empty while alcohol-related incidents continue on a daily basis in our community. It is simply unacceptable and has occurred under this Giles government. The CLP passed an act related to AMT on urgency, but 13 months later it had not been used. That shows the incompetence of this government. It is further proof that it cannot be trusted to perform the most basic of functions.
Compounding the government failures regarding AMT is the death of Ms Brown and the Coroner’s findings regarding the government’s paperless arrest procedures.
Individuals suffering from alcohol dependency need help, yet the government rushed through legislation and took over existing facilities in order to provide a smokescreen, but nothing has happened. They cannot even use the legislation they passed on urgency. To pass it and not act on it 11 months later speaks directly to the incompetence of this government.
In relation to licensing, the Leader of the Opposition has previously stated publicly:
We have seen no consultation with the community or community groups that work in this area about whether they want more poker machines in the Territory. It has been nearly a decade since we saw the last gambling prevalence survey, yet the Northern Territory has the highest rate of electronic gaming machines per capita in the country.
Who could forget the outrageous comments from the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing:
How appalling from the minister responsible for this portfolio. Gambling destroys families and lives, yet these are the comments from the minister. This is another Giles minister making appalling comments. Again, he cannot be pulled into line because Adam Giles needs his vote to prop him up.
In my shadow portfolio of Sport and Recreation the government scrapped the Arafura Games, and now we have the Richardson Park debacle. As a Public Accounts Committee member, I feel that the complete lack of respect from this Chief Minister and this Treasurer who refused to participate in the process, answer questions or provide information to the community is appalling. This government makes decisions with its interests at heart, not Territorians. We can highlight that through this situation; simply because our Treasurer and our Chief Minister want something to happen, in complete disregard for our local community of Ludmilla, it happens.
The member for Fong Lim has left his community voiceless and now his party has left him. How can he remain Treasurer? The CLP party wing had a vote of no confidence in the Treasurer, yet he remains in the important roles of Treasurer and Minister for Lands and Planning.
How can we have any trust in this government? If there is one reason to pass this motion today it is in relation to lands and planning. The planning decisions that will be made in the next nine months will impact our community forever, from Central Australia to the Top End. We cannot afford nine more months of CLP in control of lands and planning. There are numerous decisions facing us in the Top End. There were issues in the rural area, about which Madam Speaker had to request documents of her own party at the time through FOI.
Madam Speaker, an agreed inquiry into political donations was overturned by the CLP government. We need an ICAC to get to the bottom of that, but we cannot afford nine more months of the CLP government in relation to planning decisions. When the planning minister said many people want to meet with him and money opens his door, it summed up this failed Giles government.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, let us look at the alternative the members opposite would offer as government. They are asking this House to pass a vote of no confidence in this government, and as a consequence certain things will happen.
One thing I urge people to think about when they assert that a decision should be made is the consequences of that decision. Take, for example, the one decision the Leader of the Opposition has made today, which is to call on this House to pass a motion of no confidence. He has been given three clear days. When I was asked last sittings whether we would accept this motion, of course I said yes because it is an important motion. This is the decision the Leader of the Opposition has brought before us.
Let us examine the consequences. The requisite three clear days have passed and we are now debating the motion. If this motion passes today the requisite eight clear days – so effectively 10 days – that must pass exists in legislation. The Administrator can ask whoever can form a new government in this House to form a government. Clearly the Leader of the Opposition has no intention of forming a government. He will not cobble something together, and I doubt he would get the support of this House. If that is the consequence then the Administrator, after the passage of 10 days – eight clear days which takes us to 10 December – would have to call an election. That is 19 days I think. That would put the election date as Tuesday 29 December. Of course, we do not have elections on Tuesdays so we would have to wait until the next Saturday, which is 2 January.
To put Territorians through an election campaign at this time of the year and have an election on 2 January is irresponsible. Even the Leader of the Opposition acknowledges that and said, ‘We have to wait until some point in late January’. I understand that the Electoral Commission made an observation that it would be very difficult to have it before February. The consequence of the decision we are being asked to make today is to place the government in caretaker mode for 10 weeks, which means the government cannot engage in any form of contractual arrangement. This means the procurement system suddenly has a big question mark hanging over it, if I am not mistaken. This means for 10 weeks at least, the government’s ability to make contracts, provide procurement services, etcetera, is held in hiatus. That is the one decision those people on the other side would have us make.
That is also ignoring the fact that many voters in the Northern Territory will not be able to get to a polling booth by virtue of the fact that the weather at this time of year will prevent that from occurring. The Leader of the Opposition, in his enthusiasm for an election, seeks to deprive so many people who live in the bush from an opportunity to vote, because a polling booth physically will not be able to get to them because the roads will be, in many instances, under water and the creek crossings not able to be crossed. But he is happy to deprive those Territorians of their vote because he cannot see the consequences of this decision, as he could not see the consequences of this at the outset because it was all about politics, not the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
That is what this motion is about today: politics and politicking. It is about trying to put the opposition members on the front foot on every occasion so they can demonstrate what a great mob they are. The point is they have gone from being reasonable human beings to being shrill. We all heard the contribution of the member for Nhulunbuy earlier, which could only be described as shrill. Let us wind the clock back to September when she spoke about the very person – namely yours truly – she just spent time pouring derision over. She was referring to me when she said on 15 September:
All of which is true. But somebody has taken that member aside, as they have taken all members on that side aside, and given them the political lemon juice the Labor Party so likes to drink, so they can then come into this place and do the sour thing because they are positioning themselves for the next Territory election. It is about being shrill, unrepresentative and, often, dishonest and loose with the facts when it is all about trying to convince people of the villainy of this government.
Let us take a look at what the member for Nightcliff just had to say. She talked about the Vita review – that this is a government that is not open and not accountable. The Vita review was in no way required by any law or any impetus to be released, yet I insisted that it be released.
According to the Solicitor-General, it was also not necessary to release the Children’s Commissioner’s report …
Ms Fyles: Rubbish. It had to be tabled.
Mr ELFERINK: No, that is not true; I will show you. Once again, we hear instant dishonesty from the member for Nightcliff. I can show you the legal opinion if you want. The point is it did not have to be tabled and I gave a direct instruction that it should be. Why? Because the system is not perfect and I have never suggested that it is.
What I inherited from the members opposite was a youth justice facility where there were no flushing toilets in the cells in which they put these kids. Those cells in the old Don Dale centre, which I inherited from the former government, stank of urine when I inspected them, which was disgusting.
Without spending $150m of taxpayers’ money I determined that there was a better way forward, which was to use the old Berrimah complex, which has subsequently been visited by the Western Australian oversight commissioner of youth justice facilities, who said it is up to standard. Those kids now have a flushing toilet in every cell. Talk about keeping the basic standards up to speed! I have never prevented cameras from going into the youth justice system facilities.
I agree with the members for Nhulunbuy and Nightcliff that what occurred in relation to Nhulunbuy was wrong and was also contrary to government policy. What concerns me is that the noise they are making is now suggesting that programs like Sentenced to a Job will now be wound back. I and Territorians have heard no reassurance that they would not wind it back. But the point is they want to wind back the Sentenced to a Job and other processes we have in place in the corrections system, as they want to wind back all sorts of other policies.
Let us turn our minds very quickly to the legislation which has been pilloried now by the members opposite on a number of occasions, except on the occasion when it passed through this House without any resistance from them. They had no problem with the paperless arrest law. They did not come in here and say they supported it; they said they would not oppose it, which is the political each-way bet. ‘We will not oppose this legislation.’ The strident opposition I have heard subsequent to that demonstrates a level of hypocrisy which, if introduced into government, would be the same as we saw in that dodgy deal with the Stella Maris inquiry. You say you are better and trustworthy, but you cannot even say, ‘We did not oppose the paperless arrest legislation. We are against it now because some of our lawyer mates have described it as something that it is not.’
One thing it is not is punitive. I can say that because I can rely on six of the seven High Court judges who reviewed the paperless arrest legislation and said it was not punitive. It was never designed to be punitive. The only thing the paperless arrest legislation did was limit the amount of paperwork done by a police officer when effecting arrest for a summary offence. That is all, nothing more. It did not create a new power of arrest or a new offence, or change the nature and processes of custody whatsoever. It said that when a police officer arrested somebody for a summary offence the amount of paperwork they had to do, which would normally occupy them for two to two-and-a-half hours at the police station, would not occupy them so they would be back on patrol protecting Territorians in the first instance.
Now I hear from the members opposite they intend to repeal paperless arrests. They intend to load up police officers with so much paperwork that they will either (a) not arrest people or (b) if they choose to arrest a person for a summary offence they will be buried under a mountain of paperwork when they get back to the police station. The reason that Mitchell Street has not been subject to the serious assaults we have been used to under the former government is because when a police officer now in Mitchell Street says, ‘Move on, mate, otherwise you will be locked up’, you know that police officer means it. That is to protect everybody and hold everybody to account.
This focus on Aboriginal people being targeted by this legislation is not true. The legislation does not say that. Unfortunately, as in so many instances across all the negative indicators in this jurisdiction, Aboriginal people are overrepresented. One of the negative indicators in which Aboriginal people are overrepresented is victim status. Aboriginal people are victims as well as offenders, yet we never hear that from the members opposite. We never hear those words uttered.
When we have a strong policy on domestic violence which has seen in the last 12 months a 9% reduction in domestic violence, the members opposite stay silent. Who do you think is overrepresented in the perpetrators’ field? Aboriginal people unfortunately, particularly men. Who is overrepresented in the victim status? Aboriginal people unfortunately, largely women. I do not believe that a victim of domestic violence or any other sort of crime should have the quality of their victim’s status diminished because the perpetrator happens to be Aboriginal.
Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the perpetrator of a crime should always be held responsible irrespective of their race, religion or gender, and the victim of a crime should always be protected by the state in every possible way the state can.
I am saddened that a person died in custody. Sadly, I do not think that will be the last person in this country to die in custody. But if you look at the specifics of that case, that person was transported to Darwin to undergo medical treatment which that person refused. The person was taken back to the hospital but left to commit offences to the point where they were arrested and placed into custody in the police cells. It is sad that the person needed medical treatment in the first place. I am sad that the person subsequently chose not to stay in the hospital and receive medical treatment, even after being returned there. I am sad that the person was taken into custody.
I would like to shut down every watch house and hospital in this jurisdiction for want of work, but in the real world that is not how it works and the members opposite know that. What the members opposite so blithely ignore and so dishonestly misrepresent is that we have been a government which has been successful in many areas where they thunderously failed for over 12 years.
I have heard the cost of living mentioned by members opposite on several occasions and I am aghast at the suggestion that the cost of living in this jurisdiction is out of control. I will tell you what was out of control. It was the price of petrol which, at the time of Labor in government, was 50 c per litre more expensive than it is now. It was this Chief Minister who drove the petrol summit and had me draft legislation which said if you are found to be price colluding, we will put you in gaol. That message seems to have gotten through. Congratulations to United service stations for being the first to realise we were deadly serious.
They complain about the cost of living and housing when the members opposite presided over a land release policy that even the Leader of the Opposition, whilst attacking government, had to admit his party screwed up completely. I went to a Property Council lunch the other day and its members were screaming that the cost of housing was too low because they were not making enough on deals. Do you know what? The Chief Minister quite rightly said publicly, and I thought privately, ‘Too bloody right’. The cost of housing has now returned to a much more affordable level than it was under a former Labor government. Why? They failed to get the cost of living down because they failed effective land release. This was admitted by the member for Fannie Bay, the Leader of the Opposition.
How did they manage to do that? By reducing everything to a talkfest. What have we heard from the members opposite? ‘We will not make decisions; we will talk to everybody, and unless there is a consensus we will not do anything’, which includes things like land release. Sometimes decisions have to be made and, yes, people get upset as a result of those decisions. But if you are aiming for consensus on all issues, we would still be using chamber pots and buggy whips in this day and age.
The members opposite see this motion as nothing more than a political opportunity. They have not even considered the consequences of what they have proposed in this House. Should they bring that skill – or, more accurately, the absence of that skill – into government then this jurisdiction could well suffer atrophy. The one decision they have asked us to make is a decision which clearly and fundamentally would atrophy this jurisdiction for the next 10 weeks at least. They have shown no consideration for the consequences of it because they do not look beyond the next political opportunity. That is the disgrace being perpetrated in this House today. They have demonstrated that they see not a Territory that has to be governed and attended to, but see this House as a place of opportunity where people can be run down, particularly now that we are in the last year of the electoral cycle. Anybody who honestly believes they can atrophy our government for the next 10 weeks has rocks in their head. It is shallow, facile, ill-considered and demonstrates the inability of the members opposite to see consequences of actions.
It was so with TIO. The former Labor Treasurer, Syd Stirling, could see it, which is why he tried to sell it. He knew what the shortcomings of TIO would be, and it was better to sell an asset while you had it than an asset which would decay to zero value given enough time.
I have heard attacks on the decision to lease the port. The argument from members opposite is not to lease the port, carry the liabilities that you will have to spend on the taxpayers’ tick to get the port repaired, then spend that money indefinitely going forward. We have managed to get somebody else to pay for the repairs to the port to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars going forward, and we get it back in 99 years’ time as an increased asset. I wonder if the Chinese thought it was a bad idea to ask for Hong Kong back in 1997.
Madam Speaker, this is a populist, ill-considered motion before the House today. I wish I had hours to cover some of the nonsense I have heard from the members opposite. I am afraid you will hear and see more of this crass nonsense going forward. The truth and this nonsense will be increasingly separated over time.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, I understand the trigger for the motion of no confidence was the failed attempt by the government to remove you as Speaker, referred to colloquially as ‘another failed midnight coup’. That prompted the Leader of the Opposition to bring a motion of no confidence into the parliament when we last sat just over a week or so ago, which we are debating today.
Part of my concern is the trigger – changing or ceasing parliament off the back of what was quite frankly a ridiculous evening of CLP chaos writ large. Whilst I understand it probably gave a rush of blood to the head for a few people who advise the Leader of the Opposition, in public it is harder to grasp a desire for change and to end parliament early unless there is something profoundly significant affecting them and their lives. The trigger of the CLP chaos midnight coup failure was not profound. It was profound for each of us going through those long hours in parliament and was important to you, Madam Speaker, as it was affecting you significantly. I am eternally grateful that the numbers in the Chamber ensured you remained as Speaker.
It has been relatively difficult to explain to constituents who ask me why it has come on now when essentially it came off the back of that failed midnight coup. Wanting to consult with my electorate, I conducted an online survey as I felt it was important. I am a newly-minted Independent and thought one thing I should at least try to do in the short time available was consult with constituents. I have been won over through consistent lobbying by people who have worked for me to try these new mediums or tools, so we created what is called a survey monkey on Facebook.
I will read the words I wrote:
Can I rely on this survey? No, I cannot. The response rate was far too low. I got seven likes. When I posted a photo of my son’s birthday party it was over 100, which to me indicated how engaged people were with the nonsense of parliament.
One of the things I noticed which made me very concerned was that the business sector was very engaged. Many business people, who own a variety of businesses, contacted me in the last week-and-a-half asking me what I felt would be the result of a no confidence motion in the parliament. They are gravely concerned because they cannot stand the instability. These business people are not a raving fan club of the CLP. They have seen their businesses impacted upon by some very bad decisions, one of which was the hiking up of the power, water and sewerage tariffs. That has hurt business incredibly. The other was the inability of government to find an incoming major project, so investor confidence is down.
We have had huge population loss and have an extremely soft housing market, so people across the construction and real estate sectors are hurting. Retail workers are hurting. There is a very large, complex cause for that: the impact of online shopping. Consumer confidence is low.
When you have three years of chaotic government, including significant job losses across the public service and the private sector, what money people have they hold onto tightly. Their uncertainty means they are trying to get through to a point in time where government changes and things stabilise.
People I know who have businesses in the retail sector are almost hitting the wall. I know quite a few who have hit the wall and gone under. Obviously we are aware of the travel agent businesses that have gone under because of the procurement policies of the CLP.
To pretend that the business sector is embracing the current government would be completely wrong. They are scratching their heads as to why a self-proclaimed business party, the CLP, has not heard or heeded the calls in any way of the local businesses across the Territory. They have seen some business people do well and feel the days of the silver circle are well and truly back and ensconced. They did not want that to come back, which is a message I have received loudly and clearly from the business sector.
The concern they articulated to me was that they do not yet know the Leader of the Opposition well enough to know whether or not he has the capacity to lead the Territory. They do not yet know each of the shadow ministers in key areas well enough, and they want time to get to know them. They are very tuned in and aware that the community sentiment is strongly against the CLP government.
The polls are the polls are the polls. There is no denying that what the polls are reflecting is what we hear in our daily lives: Territorians cannot wait to see the back of the CLP government. They are over its arrogance, the indecent way it treats people and the cuts they have seen to core services like education and health. They despair about the crisis in child protection and the lack of improvements in housing in urban, regional and remote areas.
I could talk first hand for hours if I had the time in debate about the impact on the daily lives of people in my electorate due to the failure of the housing policy of the CLP government. I have seen families turfed out of public housing and families in overcrowded situations begging for one extra room in a transfer application. I have seen homeless people with letters of support from doctors and specialists requiring emergency housing, but the stock is not there because we have a government that has seen fit to sell and reduce stock and abandon the need for public housing to be built in those all-important Palmerston east suburbs of Johnston and Zuccoli. There has been a complete lack of ability for the government to be innovative in the housing space.
It has not worked with the non-government sector. Recently I heard that the non-government organisations which had service agreements with the Department of Children and Families have had them discontinued. They have been told their agreements will not continue and they will have to apply afresh for any service contracts being put to tender by the department. That has plunged a crucial sector into a deeper crisis. I hope that is not true, but I have heard it from a few credible sources. I invite the minister to look at the situation, because what normally happens is service agreements are rolled over until funding decisions are made on ongoing contracts.
One of the things that has been the hallmark of this government, apart from the chaos, dysfunction and indecency in the way it treats people by saying one thing and doing exactly the other – you can look at the cuts in the public service as an example of that. The government said, ‘Your job is safe’, and then sacked public servants and pretended it was not sacking them because they were on contract. But that person lost their job. Hundreds of people lost their jobs, and without a job the cost of living is not only dire, it is impossible to meet. You cannot feed your family or pay the mortgage or rent. That is why we have such a massive population loss. That is not a story the CLP wants to acknowledge, but that is the reality of so many people’s lives in the Territory under the CLP.
One of my concerns is that when it has made the big economic financial decisions, it has done so in a shroud of secrecy; it has not been accountable and transparent. For example, we have heard people refer to the sale of TIO in debate today. We heard the government members say, ‘Well, it was a basket case, we had to sell it. It was a liability.’ We heard concerns from this side of the Chamber from Labor and the crossbenchers about the sale of TIO, and that the government did not have a mandate. There was no evidence, no cost-benefit analysis tabled openly and transparently by the government to justify the sale of TIO.
As a former shareholding Treasurer, I was privy to highly confidential information which I will not breach, but I know for a fact it was a highly viable enterprise, both in the insurance and the banking arms. It weathered the storm of the global financial crisis, and weathered it well. Its books were growing healthier and healthier. It was not the basket case liability the government claims it was. It was not accountable to the people who were the owners of TIO, the public. The CLP broke their trust by selling it after it had campaigned so heavily in opposition to keep it. When you break the trust of the voting public, it is well-nigh impossible to get it back.
You had some chances there. You could have been honest about the sale price, but you were not. You inflated the sale price figures by the drawdown on MACA. You could not even be honest about how much you received for the sale of TIO. You then pretended all through the sale process that it would be okay and jobs would be safe in TIO, banking arrangements would not change, and said premiums would have gone up anyway.
What have we seen? Jobs lost and Territorians unemployed. We heard a glib response from the Treasurer that they can get a job somewhere else in the public service. That is a paraphrase of his glib response. How indecent was that?
We have seen people who moved over to the new banking organisation struggle to access their banking records. We have seen massive premium hikes. Everything the government said at the time turned out not to be true. That is a fact Territorians are living with. It is also a fact that there are Territorians who cannot get the insurance cover they enjoyed under TIO in the zones where they live, such as the surge zones. You are directly affecting people’s lives and their livelihoods.
Then there is the debacle in the way education has been mishandled from the rushed introduction of global school budgets to the strong-arming of schools to take on the mantle of independent schools and the Indigenous education review. This last initiative is about herding kids out of their communities where their families live and the opportunity to learn on country amongst their own people into boarding schools that still are not constructed, with the possible exception of Tennant Creek where they use existing facilities. There has been three years of chaos in Indigenous education under the CLP. Where we needed to make gains, we have gone backwards and the government is still not listening to the people on the ground about what they want and need ...
Mr Chandler interjecting.
Ms LAWRIE: You have your own view, and it is your way or the highway, isn’t it?
That is why people want an election. People are waiting with a big stick for an election. I have heard that consistently and strongly for the last year travelling across the Territory. ‘Hurry up and get these people out.’ That was a polite version of what people say to me. ‘Hurry up, it is hurting. Before they can do more damage, get them out.’
I support the sentiment of the no confidence motion because that is what I have heard, loud and clear. It is what I hear in my own communities of Karama and Malak. People want to go to the polls. No one would enjoy a Christmas period campaign or a Wet Season election. I do not know if one has ever been attempted in the Territory, which is why maybe there was a rush of blood to someone’s head about the timing of the motion. There is nothing wrong, however, with listening to what people have to say. Maybe it is because I have been Labor for years and now I am Independent, but what people feel they can freely say to me is that they are desperate for an election to get the CLP out.
It is not that they are necessarily engaging with the alternative. In some places it is quite mixed. In many cases the jury is still out. There are many good people being preselected. Hopefully they have good connections with their community. Hopefully people know them, trust them and will support them.
In my area people are looking forward to beating both major parties with a big stick. They want me to run at the next election, whenever that may be, as an Independent. They do not like the indecent way I was dealt with because they felt that level of indecency was a hallmark of the CLP, and it shocked them to see it come from them. I hope a lesson has been learnt from that. I hope that level of indecency never occurs again.
I have not set about in this debate to bring anyone down; I simply wanted to express what people are telling me. Yes, business has been concerned about the debate being held because it is uncertainty, but the public, broadly, cannot wait to see the back of the CLP government. The polls do not lie. It is on the nose as a government. People have disengaged. They no longer believe what it says. No amount of multimillion-dollar spends on advertising or parties at Parliament House or other venues around the Territory will save the CLP. It will lose the next election. The polls are not lying. Some members are savvy to that and are getting out before the big stick hits.
The reality is Territorians deserve better from everyone. They deserve to be treated with some decency and respect, with an understanding that we will not always agree on the issues or have the same view on issues. But do not rule with fear, loathing and retribution, and do not break the trust of people consistently. That is not okay and you will be rewarded for that behaviour with a thumping election loss.
In the meantime, I have genuine concerns. Power and Water is one of them. We do not know, because there is no open and transparent accounting, how much separation of the corporation into three corporate entities has cost. There was a confession last estimates that it was about $10m and rising because true separation had not occurred. The SCI is missing in action from Power and Water, but we know in April it was projected to have a $65m revenue gain …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Karama, your time has expired.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing this motion of no confidence to the Chamber.
An old CLP person who was in government in the early time of the Country Liberal Party rang me about a week ago. He has been in the Northern Territory for the last couple of weeks. He said, ‘Alison, I am afraid to say that what I have heard and seen in the Northern Territory in the last two weeks is what I felt, heard and saw in 2001’.
For that to be said by a staunch Country Liberal Party member tells a story. You have to change your focus and the way you are creating policy, and start listening to people. The member for Brennan said they take notice of editorials and try to change things. It is important that you start walking the talk with people. For one of your own to come back after a long time out of the Northern Territory and, in a couple of weeks, feel the same sentiment and see people turned off as in 2001 sends a big message. It is time you started listening to people.
I am the only person in this parliament who can talk from the point of view of having been in both parties, the Labor Party and the Country Liberal Party ...
Mr Chandler: You are special, Alison.
Ms ANDERSON: That is right; I am very special, member for Brennan. In political history there has only been one other person, Winston Churchill, so I take my hat off to that bloke.
It was extraordinary to hear some of the things that have been said. I talk on behalf of my people and many non-Indigenous who live on the edges of society in the Northern Territory. If we continue to keep these people on the edge of society through our bad policies of profiling certain groups, we will keep these people forever on the edge of society. They will not have the opportunity for employment, economic opportunities, a good quality education or to own their homes.
Everything I have heard in both parties has been rhetoric; it is all about getting votes from the most vulnerable people. But those vulnerable people have been educated in the voting system lately and they are watching. The no vote for the Country Liberal Party by the Aboriginal people started a year-and-a-half ago; they will not vote for you. I said the same thing – a year-and-a-half – to the Labor Party from that side and you saw how the votes went at the last election three years ago; they all voted for the Country Liberal Party. They are now saying they will not vote for you.
Talking about ADSL, I like to give credit where credit is due. I want to give credit to the Northern Land Council because it put in a submission to Telstra, talking about the lack of phone access in remote Aboriginal communities. It was very early before this government came to power. They see how their people are struggling by not getting in touch with relatives, sorry business and ceremonies, so they put in an application to Telstra saying it was urgent that it looks at mobile access in communities in the Top End. I think the CLC did the same thing in Central Australia. We have to give credit, not always take it upon ourselves and say, ‘I did it’. They did it; they are on the ground and can see the suffering.
There is much more to do to get socioeconomic indicators up – poor health, poor education, poor housing, poor roads. These are things government have to continually do, whether it is the Country Liberal Party or the ALP. We must not forget these people.
I will go back to what I said at the beginning: if you keep these people on the edge of society they will remain on the edge of society. When you get $5.6bn from the Commonwealth government based on disadvantage factors in the Northern Territory, you have to make sure you allocate a certain amount of money for the disadvantaged factors you have identified in applying to the Commonwealth for this money. This money is not tied to you, as you all know, so you can use it wherever you want. But while you are doing that, you are making a group of people suffer who should not be suffering.
Why is Aboriginal education so complicated? Why can we not have the same amount of teachers, the good schools and good literacy and numeracy you have in the northern suburbs of Darwin? Why can that not be replicated in remote Aboriginal communities? I know someone over there will shout and say, ‘Well, Aboriginal kids do not go to school every day’.
I put this to you. When the football NAB Cup is being held in Alice Springs, it is run by the government. You get the football leagues to play in Alice Springs. You have Centre Bush Bus coming into these communities once a week. The kids have left school that Tuesday or Wednesday, and the bus does not go back to the communities until the week after. It is your policies for getting economic opportunities in towns like Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin that causes this absenteeism as well.
You need to change that because you cannot continuously be picking up the stick to hit parents on the head for not sending their kids to school every day when your policies of getting economic opportunities in a town like Alice Springs gets these kids away from schools for two weeks. They will watch football; they have no way of going home and they will come in three or four days early so the schools are empty. That is the kind of things you have to have a look at. If you want to have your cake and eat it, you will have to suffer the consequences.
There is so much to talk about. There is a wide range of problems in Indigenous communities, such as overcrowding. You would have seen the program last night on the lack of housing at Borroloola. All they want is houses. They are crying out for houses. Why can we not give these people houses? People talk about land rich, dirt poor, but the land councils are statutory bodies that have been brought in under Commonwealth legislation to look after the land of traditional owners ...
Mr Elferink: Justice Mansfield gave them an absolute serve in court last week for dropping the ball.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms ANDERSON: Madam Speaker, the member for Port Darwin had his 20 minutes. It is quite rude for him to interrupt and have his little two-minutes’ worth reigniting something when someone else is talking ...
Mr Elferink: All right. Justice Mansfield had a lot to say about what you are talking about right now.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Port Darwin!
Ms ANDERSON: The land councils are there to serve a purpose: to protect the rights of Indigenous people and make sure their vulnerability is not tested through governments railroading them. They are the things we have to take into account.
I would like to make sure I assign that quote ‘land rich, dirt poor’ to my late brother, Tracker Tilmouth. He was the bloke who came up with all of these little quirky one-liners.
It is fantastic to talk about the things that have been done, but there are a multitude of organisations, such as the land councils, that are working on these issues. Yes, we have problems and we need to be part of the solution as well. If you start having legislation that continuously profiles a group of people you will always run into problems.
We are still talking about generational legislation in today’s parliament. I, for one, spoke of the problem of Commonwealth legislation on the Stolen Generations. It still has effects later through their grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and it will continue. We have to be very careful that we take all Territorians forward socially and economically, and make sure these people are what we want in society today.
I do not think we should be continuously walloping Aboriginal people with a stick every five minutes through legislation, because these people are also voters. We need to educate all Territorians to understand what good-quality education gives you. Through a good education and our parents we have the ability to talk in parliament, talk to journalists, write letters or send e-mails. Those are the kind of abilities we need to give to our children. We can do that by being good legislators in this House.
I spoke from that side of the House about getting football ovals and lights in some regional towns to alleviate the pressure on Alice Springs. We talk about antisocial behaviour in these hubs of Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine all the time, but what are we doing in the regions to make sure we can alleviate that pressure from those towns? Have home-and-away games so if someone is coming we are taking them out to Yuendumu, Ti Tree or Utopia. It gives them the capacity to absorb and understand Aboriginal culture and Aboriginal people at the same time.
People in the tourism industry and tourists in general love to see Aboriginal people and Aboriginal culture. But if you are talking about fracking, the two do not go together. If you allow fracking in the landscape in Central Australia, yet at the same time you are saying we need tourists, well, the two do not go together. We have to look at our water resources. Is it safe for our water? Those are the kind of things we have to do.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion the Opposition Leader has put forward and I thank him.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I speak in support of this no confidence motion.
It is with great sadness and frustration that I speak today because time and time again in this parliament, around my home, and in my own electorate, I am frequently reminded about how chaotic and dysfunctional the last three-and-a-half years of this CLP government have been. The feedback I have received very loud and clear from my constituents is that they are over this government. They are over the chaos and instability and want a fresh start.
The Sunday after our last sittings when there was the failed midnight coup to remove the Speaker, I was shopping at Hibiscus and people came up to me to ask, ‘What on earth went on in there this week? Is there a chance of getting rid of this government because we are sick of them?’ We have had a stand at Casuarina for the last few weeks to catch up with people. We have had plenty of comments from people who are over this government and its atrocious performance. It is coming across loud and clear that people want to see a change of government. They are over the CLP and its way of governing. They want to see a better future for the Northern Territory.
Like me, people are often taken aback when they reflect on what they have seen for the last three-and-a-half years of this government. I never expected to see the things I have in my first term of parliament. It has been a remarkable time in the history of Territory politics for all the wrong reasons. There have been 14 reshuffles. That caused a huge amount of instability, projecting chaos and dysfunction from the top right through to service delivery through the public sector of the Northern Territory.
All I can say is bless those public servants in the Territory public service because they work so hard. They will serve the government of the day as professionally as they can. People working within the public sector generally provide feedback that they are over this government.
There have been two Chief Ministers and one Chief Minister apparent under this government. We are starting to hear chatter around the place that because this government is so deeply unpopular we will see more. The member for Fong Lim is not going in for round two. There is a lot of chatter about whether or not we will see the member for Braitling go to the next election as the Chief Minister. People are wondering if we will have more reshuffles. There is more instability and chaos under this government.
People deserve to feel they can have faith in this government. This motion is before us today because people are over the government; they do not want to see it dragging out another eight months of chaos, instability and dysfunction. They have had enough.
In my first three years as a member of this parliament I did not expect to see a government that kept going after so much infighting, leaking, backstabbing, attempted coups and executions and breakdowns of relationships and respect for each other. If you look at the past three-and-a-half years of this government, it is clinging to power out of arrogance. It makes you shake your head and wonder how things have come to this point. What the Territory and I have seen in the last three years is beyond belief, and people have had enough.
The member for Port Darwin always reminds us that we are here to serve the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. This is something the government has lost sight of. As the member for Fannie Bay said in this important debate, with every day that goes by under an Adam Giles-led CLP government the reputation of the Northern Territory is diminished. Sadly, this is the truth we are facing and why we have to bring forward this most serious of motions to the House. Territorians have lost trust and confidence in this government. It is time for this government to call it a day and let the people of the Territory decide who governs going forward because it can only be better than what we have with this rabble of a CLP government.
This government’s downward spiral has not stopped. Its members’ shamelessness and arrogance has grown even bolder, and the chaotic, dysfunctional mob continues to cling to power and has shown nothing or no one will get in its way of ruling. People across the Territory have had enough and want them gone.
I have been horrified to hear in this term that some people have been arguing whether or not we have the capacity to self-govern in the Northern Territory, which shows how bad this CLP government is. It is also terrible when you realise many people have this train of thought and wonder what on earth this does for us in our pursuit of statehood.
People have lost all trust in this government. It has reached the point that when the Chief Minister and several of his ministers speak, people do not believe them as they think it is spin or they are not telling the whole truth. The population has been driven to this point because of the actions of this government. It has continued to break promises. It has form on saying one thing one day and doing something completely different the next. It has continually failed to be up front with Territorians.
This government’s greatest failure is its inability to consult and, most importantly, listen. It has a completely different definition of consultation. In fact, it seems it has its own meaning for it. When the government says it is consulting, it is all for show. Most people believe consultation is the process of two-way communication and understanding, and, most importantly, listening and taking on board views. The CLP definition of consultation is a meaningless ticked box in order to say it has done it. It is something it says it has done but its definition of consultation does not include listening or acting on genuine feedback.
We have seen several examples of this: the sale of TIO: the 99-year lease, or sale, of the port, as it has been called; and, most recently, the move to upgrade Richardson Park, where the government has only started talking to people seven months after announcing the project. Often people tell me they are sick of this government because it is arrogant and does not listen.
It is also the conduct of government which leaves us believing that strong and stable government is not possible under the CLP government we have. The history of this term of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory will make for some interesting history books and guidelines for future governments on how not to go about the job.
The government’s ongoing chaos and dysfunction is now impacting on core service delivery in the Territory. It is also clear that the relationships within government have totally broken down. Key ministers do not appear to talk to one another, which further contributes to the chaos. To top it off, no one trusts the government.
We are at this point because of what has happened in this term of government. I remind those in the House of what we have seen so far. At the 25 August 2012 election the former member for Blain, Terry Mills, led the CLP government to a victory on promises of a better future, lowering the cost of living and point five of the five-point plan, being accountable. I quote from the plan:
This government scrapped the BDR across the Territory in one of its first actions. That is creating chaos around my electorate. The issues we have with drinking around Vanderlin Drive and Hibiscus shopping centre have not stopped.
In another of its first actions, the government raised the cost of power, water and sewerage through the roof – 30% for power, 40% for water and 25% for sewerage. People have not forgotten that, and they know it is responsible for putting up their power and water bills by an extra $2000 a year for an average family.
We saw the return of many of the old boys working for the government. Then there was the initial failed attempt by the member for Braitling to overthrow the former Chief Minister, Terry Mills. But then the chaos picked up from the point when the member for Braitling managed to succeed and knifed the former Chief Minister, Terry Mills, whilst he was on a trade mission to Japan.
After that all sorts of practices occurred under this government – many I am sure it never thought would be remembered – which were the points of controversy which led to people losing trust in this government. There have been questionable practices with the allocation of water licences.
The members for Arafura, Arnhem and Namatjira left the party. We have seen the member for Arafura return, and it appears the member for Arnhem is now well and truly supporting the government.
The government sold TIO with no genuine consultation, and failed to listen to Territorians as part of its decision-making process about that. After several questions were asked of the government in the lead-up to the sale of TIO, the response was always, ‘Nothing is on the table, and nothing is off the table’. Members never mentioned it during the Casuarina by-election. As soon as that election was finished, all of a sudden, the question was asked, ‘We are looking to sell TIO; what would you like to spend the money on?’, rather than asking the question of the people, ‘Do you want TIO to be sold?’ By far, the majority of Territorians said, ‘No, do not sell it’, yet the government went ahead anyway because it went for the cash grab. We are now seeing the flow-on effects of that.
There have been serious questions raised about the CLP slush fund, Foundation 51. When the member for Nelson was successful in moving for an inquiry into political donations, he was led up the garden path. That inquiry was scrapped on this floor of parliament because the government had the numbers.
We have seen the member for Fong Lim go through plenty of ups and downs in this term of government. We have seen him removed from his job for making slurs and reinstated back into his job. Now he will not be contending the next election because, clearly, he does not have the backing of many people within his party. When he last exited Cabinet I do not think any of us will ever forget the comment he made that his colleagues could be perceived as a nest of vipers. That has been very interesting.
We will never forget the midnight coup of February. We will never forget seeing the members for Katherine and Port Darwin standing side by side in the Elsie Room at a media conference in early February, with the member for Katherine saying:
It was a remarkable event. We knew the member for Katherine had the majority support of his colleagues – nine to five we believe – however, they still did not manage to change the leadership despite having the roaring majority.
The next day the new Chief Minister apparent and Deputy Chief Minister apparent went to see the Administrator and be sworn in, but that was suddenly called off. Then we saw quite a remarkable media conference from the member for Braitling that day – live, straight into our lounge rooms on ABC News 24 – where he refused to go. We got to see the real inner workings of government. Here we are today with a Chief Minister who lost the majority support of his colleagues, and in an unprecedented move, refused to leave the job; he decided to stay. It does not give you much faith in the capacity of this government to do its job when the leader of the Northern Territory does not have the support of his colleagues. People still believe there is very deep division within the government.
Following on from that, more members have since left the government, to the point where it became a minority government. The members for Araluen and Goyder left.
Since then, this government has sold the Port of Darwin – or as it likes to call it, leased the Port of Darwin – for 99 years.
When the minority government situation started, when the government was finally held by the numbers of this parliament, it had to agree and submit to having an independent commission against corruption-type body established in the Northern Territory, after refusing on many occasions.
We have seen the saga of the Palmerston hospital, with grand media events to dig a hole, pour some cement into it, then cover it up with dirt. That did not impress anybody. We have seen the Richardson Park saga continue.
Then, last sittings, there was midnight coup, Round 2 – ding, ding! It was late in the night that this government moved against the Speaker. After the news services had finished for the day and packed up, it moved. It was a disgraceful move. Then, to demonstrate the division within the government and what a foolish move that was, one of its own number did not support the removal of the Speaker. Fortunately, somebody found the sense to ensure the member for Goyder stayed in the job because she does a good job and is well respected.
We now know the member for Port Darwin is retiring, the member for Greatorex is calling it a day and the member for Fong Lim has been given no choice. It makes you wonder what on earth is happening on that side. How will they go along for the next nine months? If they are losing their Treasurer, who are they taking to the next election saying, ‘This is the person we trust with the economy of the Northern Territory’? It will be very interesting to see what happens next.
I turn to some of the key areas of the Northern Territory where we need to see some strong performance by the government. I have some real concerns in my shadow portfolio areas. One key area is education. We know that government expenditure in public education is going down under the CLP government. This year alone there was a $12m cut to government education. In real terms, since 2012, under this government, around $80m has been cut from the Education budget.
In the annual report which was tabled on Thursday night last sittings we could see the numbers who are leaving the education system because the government is cutting jobs. It is cutting school funding to the bone. We now know there are over 500 fewer staff in Education, thanks to the CLP. There are 165 fewer classroom teachers in schools because of this government and its decision to cut the Education budget. Senior teacher numbers are down by almost 100. There are 116 fewer critical support administrative service delivery AO2 and AO5 jobs in the Department of Education to help teachers and principals get on with the job of delivering education in schools. There have been huge cuts …
Mr Chandler: Better results – amazing.
Ms MANISON: You are not seeing results improve and your own annual report will tell you that.
The member for Araluen briefly touched on some of the concerns with Power and Water. We know you are having great problems with the financial management system within the Power and Water Corporation, Jacana Energy and Indigenous Essential Services.
In the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report the Auditor-General has a disclaimer stating she was unable to give an opinion about some matters because the financial information is not available. There are some grave concerns about financial performances because you cannot assess them because the systems are not working the way they are supposed to.
Madam Speaker, I have run out of time speaking on this motion. There are some huge concerns across the Territory about the performance of this government. If we keep going this way, it will be another nine months of chaos, instability and dysfunction. The Territory deserves better. This has been a shocking and appalling term of government. I hope we go to an election sooner rather than later because Territorians deserve better than this rabble.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I start with the member for Brennan’s analogy of the CLP government as a finely-tuned motor vehicle. I retell the story of the member for Brennan on a rural unsealed road in Central Australia in a conventional vehicle in a heavy storm with a flooded road. He regaled the Territory with how the speedo was hitting 130 km/h, and as he looked out the window, the vehicle was not moving. That analogy said to me that, in truth, the CLP is in a motor vehicle, fraudulently using fuel, overheating the motor and scrubbing out the tyres, yet it is going nowhere. That is what this motion is all about.
I stand here on behalf of the people who elected me to the seat of Barkly. I have not arrived at this point in time over the last two weeks; people in the electorate of Barkly have been calling out this government for the past two years. That is of great concern. The people of Barkly who represent the CLP have lost faith in this government. These are good people who I have stood across the political divide from for over 30 years, yet still maintained good social and family relationships and had honest and earnest debates with them. We have stood at mobile polling booths and debated election after election. These people have lost faith in this government and are now calling for an end to it. It is not politics; it is a reality – as you have heard from members on this side of the House – which is resonating across the length and the breadth of the Northern Territory. My position today is to advise the government that there is a vast majority of people in the seat of Barkly who are saying enough is enough.
I was disappointed with the member for Port Darwin, the Leader of Government Business, who today in the media went to the old chestnut about what it will cost the Territory and taxpayers, and said this motion should be pulled. I am afraid the hypocrisy of that statement was writ large, member for Port Darwin. I can remember in 2009 when you led the charge in a motion of no confidence. You had no regrets about using taxpayer funds then and there should not be any regrets now.
Let us go closer to the bone, member for Port Darwin, because as recently as a fortnight ago, you were using a debate on a substantive motion relating to a matter on the Notice Paper to announce retirement. That was truly indulgent. It was a matter that should have been brought up in adjournment which followed that debate. The member for Port Darwin has no credibility about that or about advising Territorians this morning that this is a matter of taxpayers’ money.
Imagine the CLP government as that fine-tuned machine when it tries to announce significant major economic projects. We come into this House to debate those important issues, yet they attempted a midnight coup to sack the Independent Speaker of the Northern Territory. Did we ask for that? Did we call for that? That debate ran for about five-and-a-half hours. On the member for Port Darwin’s reckoning, which he should have announced to Territory listeners this morning, it cost around $25 000 to $30 000. That was a midnight coup a fortnight ago which took parliament to 3 am. I left at 3.30 am. They want to deny Territorians the reality of a chaotic government that needs to be challenged by an opposition, the essence of democracy.
That is what we are doing today with this motion. On behalf of the people of the Barkly and of Territorians we are calling out a government and an executive that is in chaos and has been for years – the revolving door of government ministers. I have had the privilege of serving in a Cabinet. I did my apprenticeship and learnt my trade well, and I can compare a stable Cabinet that was working hard for Territorians through the global financial crisis, the toughest times the Territory had seen, to what I see as a revolving door. My only issue is my concern for the public sector. How will public sector officials implement your policies, mostly chaotic, when there is no stability in the executive of government?
Give it a break. Perhaps it was to happen in 2012? No, 2013. No, again in 2014. Look out, 2015 brought even more creative examples of dysfunction. How can a public sector honestly implement your policies and work for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory when their leadership is crumbling and so involved in infighting that there can be no solidarity and, therefore, no outcomes? The public sector has had nothing but uncertainty and it deserves better.
There is rhetoric from the government about politicians not talking about themselves. Well, you created media headlines for three years all about you. I have not made any of those headlines. Members on this side have not generated those headlines. You have done it all by yourself because of your instability, inability to work together as a team, chaotic policy decisions and infighting, and consequently you deserve the bad press.
We have reached the stage where enough is enough, hence this motion today. The CLP has a higher order to answer to, which is the old guard. The old guard in the Northern Territory, like the people I talk to in the electorate of Barkly, use rhetoric like, ‘These people have trashed our brand’. That cuts deep and you should be very aware of that. Every member on that side should now have the responsibility of rebuilding that brand so we have a robust democracy and a Territory that can move forward with certainty. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is calling for an election.
The member for Port Darwin said the election will be on 2 January. What nonsense. The member for Port Darwin, the professor of parliamentology, knows very well that the Administrator will make that decision for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. That is fact and reality. The Leader of the Opposition has said enough is enough. Some Independents support this motion, and there should be more Independents supporting it.
I have witnessed cuts right through the period of this government. There have been significant cuts, and I have continually called it out as a matter of priority. We can use a fiscal program to move around infrastructure projects, but we should never cut from education, health or child protection.
Through the bitter pills we were told to swallow this government embarked on lavish travel, their lifestyle, their hospitality – one scandal after another. Nobody is denying ministers travel or that they have hospitality responsibilities. But it was brought to light in the media and in the community and reverberated through the bush, where I was trying to work with people who do not have houses, explaining a $100 000 charter flight to make a photo opportunity, not to mention the tickets, that were never redeemed, for around $30 000. The Chief Minister said, ‘That is rubbish, it was $83 000’. That was just for the flight. Let us add on all those tickets that were never redeemed, which taxpayers paid for, for ministers travelling on commercial airlines.
It goes from one scandal to the next. While we were wearing cuts in health, education and child protection, this government was embarking on the high-flying fast travel, the hospitality budgets, and we will not go near the member for Greatorex and his little problem, being taken advantage of by people who knew more than he did in a foreign land. You have to be joking! My kids travel overseas.
This is why we are here today and enough is enough. In health, in the seat of Barkly I can give many examples of where your priorities in policy have gone wrong. We lost a long-term public servant who was responsible for looking after the elderly. Elderly constituents who came into the Barkly office were directed to the office where this public servant sat and operated, and received disability aids instantaneously. That position was taken away. How do I justify that on the government’s behalf as a local member?
The irony is I answer for your decisions. I answer for your chaotic policy and am judged accordingly as the laughing stock of the nation when you have embarked on your incredible dysfunction as responsible elected community leaders. I wear that and I am not happy about it. That is one thing that sticks in my craw. How dare you create chaos for me when I have no opportunity of redress? All of us in this House have been wearing that type of ridicule from the national press right through the constituency. ‘You are all the same, you are all tarred with the same brush and you all have your nose in the trough’, which is very difficult to deal with.
In the education space we are seeing the loss of teachers. The new global budgets are putting pressure on principals and there are chaotic patterns emerging like, ‘Sack local staff so I can employ other staff’. If we do not have local people in our schools, what do we have? We wonder why people are disengaging. We have a preschool in Tennant Creek that had to refuse 20 enrolments in 2015 because it does not have the capacity to deal with them. That is disgraceful. This is the start of a child’s life, let alone when we get to debate how many semesters they can be at school. I can continue that story of the preschool being unable to accept enrolments across the electorate.
We have very successful programs dealing with secondary-age youth in remote schools, yet we now have these same remote youth walking the streets of towns like Elliott and Tennant Creek. They have either been turfed out of the hostel, had trouble at school or have walked, and their parents have asked them to come home. This is the reality of life, yet we have this continual rhetoric.
The annual reports are starting to deliver the true message about outcomes. Child protection in the Barkly – does the minister think I feel good when he is being pasted in public about the caseload and the lack of staff in Barkly?
I will now go to the issue of that high-risk child recently removed from the Tennant Creek Primary School I have been writing to you about for the last few weeks with not one response. I have provided the family’s contacts and mine, and all I have asked for is to be listened to. There has been nothing – no response. That child turned up in national media ‘removed from a primary school’. How do you think that makes me feel? Yet you are in charge. Well, the time has come. It is over for you. We have to stop the bus, stop the car and do a service. We need now to consider enough is enough.
This is not just the Barkly, this is across the Territory. This is coming out of electorates of sitting CLP members. This is chaos.
I continually come into this House and talk about repairs and maintenance and minor new works. Let us go to infrastructure and the road transport network. We saw $98m cut out of the R&M budget and there are high-productivity roads across Central Australia and the Barkly that are falling to pieces. Trucks that are carrying clinic supplies for dialysis patients on home dialysis in the town of Alpurrurulam are stuck on the Sandover, dry bogged. This is not bogged in wet country like you were in a conventional vehicle; this is dry bogged. I have had to continually chase it up. There are grand stories about tourist road infrastructure. I do not deny or criticise that, but there is a balance, and it is about priorities. The repairs and maintenance budget across the Northern Territory has been reduced.
I will now go to a very important point I have been trying to deal with and manage in a logical and just sense, that is, the small to medium business sector that has been hammering me about your management of tendering. They are calling it unjust and corrupt. They have had enough. They are reverting back to the comments about the CLP silver circle and CLP tenders for their mates. I have had contractors tell me they will not invest any longer in that base-level funding for a tender. They will walk and go interstate. They do not believe there is any chance of fair competition, and they are calling you guys out on it. This is across the regions.
The Minister for Housing has plenty of levers to pull in this space. I will put a shout out to the departments of Local Government, Housing and Community Services which have been responding to my cries for help from a baseline of trying to get people to apply for Homeland Extra, then trying to get the work delivered, being smashed by contractors from all over the region who are telling me the tendering processes are unfair, unjust and corrupt. They want a return to something that is fair and equitable. I am continuing to work with you guys. We have had some small wins and the department has been delivering.
I am very concerned now about this gap in national partnership money for Indigenous housing. The member for Arnhem should be very conscious of this. She mentioned roads and bridges, but she did not mention housing. There does not seem to be a lot happening other than in the cyclone-affected areas of Galiwinku, Milingimbi and Ramingining. I am interested in the outcomes that are coming out of those areas, particularly with the training to employment.
There are people across the rest of the Territory who are screaming. Borroloola is an example. Borroloola has pinned the federal minister down. The federal minister said he has handed the money to the Northern Territory, yet the constituents I represent have been told that 25 new houses, 75 refurbishments, a budget of $21.5m is now reduced, never existed, or pushed to 2018. Then there is complete rhetoric around where to put these houses. It is a chaotic strategy to throw in the mix to try to confuse people.
I am not sure what is happening with Housing. I remember SIHIP and you guys in opposition belting the living daylights out of us as 100 houses were built at Maningrida and, project by project, was rolled out across the Territory. I am not denying there were problems. We wrestled on costs from 18% to 8%.
Madam Speaker, this motion is serious. It is a motion to bring the end of the CLP’s term. Let the people decide. Let us allow democracy to rule. It is very simple. It is not a scare tactic about Wet Seasons; it is about accountability, transparency and listening. I listened to an old gentleman at Casuarina recently. His rego was up, his insurance had gone up, as had his costs of living in power, water and sewerage. He was wondering what we would do about it. I listened and I hope to help him.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I hope later today the Leader of the Opposition is afforded the opportunity to apologise to Territorians for not allowing legislation and the general business of government to take place. Also apologise for spending some $32 000 worth of taxpayers’ money for this debate that occurred all day today! Yet again it is a day in parliament where Labor has spent the day complaining.
In one of the very first speeches today Territory net migration was mentioned – who leaves and who comes the Territory. That was raised by one of the members of the Labor Party. I constantly reflect on the population and the level of confidence within the community and the business community because we have positive migration to the Territory.
I thought some of the comments at the start of the speech by the member for Araluen where quite pointed. It reflects on the type of politics the opposition promotes. It comes more from opposition members from the Top End than the bottom of the Territory, and is based on a growing sense of negativity.
It is interesting when you look at the history of the Westminster system and the parliament in which we operate. It is about bringing political debate into a Chamber and not having it on the streets. Politics on the streets is what we see in many parts of the world, all too tragically. You bring that fight and debate into the Chamber, but no, Labor and the unions are bringing it more and more onto the street, parading it as much as they can through different mediums, and we see a growing sense of negativity within our community.
Quite often I applaud those in Central Australia for not taking the same approach. If we reflect on the way the Alice Springs community sees itself in a positive light and we paraded that across the Top End people would have a greater sense of vibrancy. People would be happier, confidence would be up because the fact is things are good. I will run through some things that have changed in a mere three-and-a-half years to show that.
No one is under any illusion that when we came to power, government was nearly bankrupt. We had a debt level of $5.5bn, yet our total budget was $5.5bn. That was a net debt-to-equity ratio of about 98%. It is now down in the low 30% because of what we have done with the budget. We have paid back $3.3bn worth of debt, got rid of the deficit and moved into a position with more than $200m surplus, as at the release of the TAFR.
I notice the members for Wanguri and Nightcliff left the Chamber …
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, withdraw that comment.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. I reflect on some of their comments about the TAFR and the Power and Water Corporation. Little do they understand how Power and Water and its financial statements work. Yes, the TAFR reflects there is a qualification about the financial accounts of Power and Water. That is because we are still trying to clean up the mess of the former Labor government. It is taking us a long time to get the accounts right, and we still cannot get them right. Yes, we have run structural separation. Yes, we now have generation, transmission and retail. Yes, we are bringing competition into generation. On Sunday I announced that we will have competition in the residential retail sector to complement competition in the commercial retail sector. However, the fact remains that we still cannot get the books right in Power and Water.
We have driven down the cost of producing power, are delivering better services and we can put the price down by 5% and not put in place our 2.5% CPI increase. We have removed levels of debt from Power and Water, have structurally separated and are putting downward price pressure on Power and Water, a fantastic achievement in itself.
I have not started reflecting on some of the comments by the member for Port Darwin, who spoke about the price pressures we put in place for fuel prices. How did we drop 50c a litre in fuel prices? Because we have done a lot of hard work. The other side of the question is we copped a lot of flak. The media bagged us out. Labor thought the sky was falling in on all the things we did. I remember holding the fuel summit and everyone bagging the living daylights out of us. The fuel summit started the change in prices of fuel. It allowed us to do other things. It is reflected upon in the ACCC report, where Rod Sims, head of the ACCC, said the fuel summit was the catalyst to change. But no thanks there.
It was good to hear the Leader of the Opposition today admit the former Labor government’s failings on housing. He admitted that Labor drove the cost of housing up. We have driven it down and he acknowledged that today. So, well done, Leader of the Opposition. Not only are we driving down prices in housing, which the Leader of the Opposition admitted, but we are driving them down for fuel and electricity.
In three-and-a-half years we have structurally reformed the economy to a point where we have a 10.5% increase in the gross domestic product, or GDP, for want of a better term, in the Northern Territory. That is the largest of any jurisdiction; in fact, it is the largest in the western world and bigger than China, which many often talk about.
We have the lowest unemployment rate in the country and the highest participation rate. More people in the Northern Territory are in a job or training and fewer are looking for a job than in the rest of the nation. Plus we have paid back debt, got rid of the deficit, have an extra 117 police on the beat plus the other police who have moved from behind the desk to the front.
We have new and upgraded hospitals. We are building the Palmerston hospital and an upgrade at RDH as we speak. We have new special schools at Bellamack and Henbury being constructed right now. More roads than ever before in the history of the Territory are being built – the Santa Teresa Road, the Tanami Road, the Port Keats Road or the road to Pickertaramoor to name a few. I have not spoken about the bridges the member for Arnhem mentioned over the Wilton and the Roper Rivers. We have an Office of Aboriginal Affairs. There is a $50m telecommunications package rolling out telecommunications infrastructure across the bush. Tremendous things have been occurring in the Northern Territory.
We have done big things in big projects such as structurally reforming the port, which will be the biggest infrastructure investment in probably the last 30 years in the Northern Territory and something that will structurally change our economy for the better in the future. Look at such things as the infrastructure fund. It is the first time in any jurisdiction in Australia an infrastructure fund has been set up. The future fund at the national level set up by the former Howard government will not operate the same way ours will. We will invest in infrastructure for the Northern Territory. We are not investing in shares overseas or any of those things. This is about infrastructure for the Northern Territory. We have put $200m of our own in. We will leverage that up to $1bn and build infrastructure for the first time ever.
We have started a gas industry; we will have the gas pipeline. Everyone said it could not be built. It is nation building, historic, across borders. I have sought to find out what infrastructure has been built across jurisdictions over the last 20 years and cannot find anything, because it is so hard to build infrastructure across jurisdictional borders. But we have done it without putting any money in, and have stimulated the development of our onshore gas industry.
Gas exploration cannot occur just anywhere – we have made sure now, through our environmental reforms, you can no longer explore for gas in residential areas, culturally important areas, high-value tourism areas or high-value agricultural areas. You can only have a gas industry in areas where we have identified that there is gas in the Northern Territory, unlike Labor. When we came to government we inherited 95% of the Northern Territory being granted or under application for gas licences. We will now move to a position where they disappear.
Plus, we have had Hawke report one and Hawke report two, moving to a position where from 1 January 2017 we will have the best environmental credentials in Australia. I was told earlier today that when we fully implement Hawke stage two we will have the best environmental guidelines for the gas industry in the world. That is how seriously we take this. There is also benefit from protecting our environment while setting up this industry. Every investment in the gas industry in the Northern Territory will work towards the creation of up to 6300 new jobs in the industry, plus there will be royalties of up to $1bn. We have said every dollar of those royalties, which will be collected between 2020 and 2040, will go towards assisting Territorians to get into vocational education and training or university study to assist them to become smarter Territorians and look for the next economies in the Northern Territory.
I do not think I need to go through other projects in the private sector, such as Project Sea Dragon. I do not need to talk about how Newmont mine is going through a $200m expansion, or Mount Todd mine will have a $1bn investment starting up. I will not talk about the Chandler salt mine at Maryvale Station or what is happening with TNG around Central Australia. I do not need to talk about the Northern Australia Investment Forum, which was held recently, but I will talk about tourism.
We know over 10 years of Labor tourism fell off on an intrastate, interstate basis and international basis. It has taken us a while to turn this around, but the tide has turned. It has turned around significantly in Central Australia, Barkly and Katherine, and it is turning around right now in Darwin.
We have been faced with some challenges of coming to government and having a one-shot-in-the-locker economic policy, which was INPEX, or Ichthys. That is all Labor had when we came to government. There was no strategy in Central Australia, Tennant Creek, Katherine, Nhulunbuy or any of the remote parts of the Territory. There was no strategy in the Top End other than INPEX, so we had to work very hard to turn that around.
We have our seven-stage economic plan which looks at Defence, agribusiness, tourism, international education, mining, energy and the offshore supply sector. There is a range of areas we are investing in. Tourism has turned around. At the time we were paying back Labor debt and fixing the deficit we had an opportunity of putting in $4.75m to the Tourism Infrastructure Development Fund, which provides grants of $30 000 up to $100 000 to tourism businesses to seek to develop new product or redevelop product that can help stimulate the visitor experience. They also spend money in the local economy with those projects of $30 000 to $100 000.
Tourists are now reaping the rewards from those investments. We will continue to see more investment in the tourism industry and our numbers will become greater. I work hard to get more direct flights to the Northern Territory from our northern neighbours. When that is achieved you will see tourism flourish in the Northern Territory.
It is not just about the big projects, it is also about sport. We are seeing investment in sport across the Territory, whether that is the Red CentreNATS, the two AFL games now played in the Northern Territory, the rugby league games or the A-league relationship we have had. Also, of course, who could forget the Davis Cup? It is probably one of the best sporting events I have ever attended. Who would ever have thought that the Davis Cup would come to the Northern Territory?
As I said at the start, fuel prices are down, house prices are down and now electricity prices are down. We have done this while being very busy. At the same time we have rolled out Back to School Vouchers, Sport Vouchers across a wide range of sports and recreational activities, and childcare subsidies, which have increased and are now available for long day care.
All we ever hear from Labor is negativity with not one sense of applause for the achievements to date. The only thing I have heard as an apology was for the first time today when the Leader of the Opposition admitted they failed on their housing policy. I would like the Leader of the Opposition to also apologise for having this debate in parliament and not allowing us to have a clear, transparent and open debate on the Education Act from the start of today, which is want we wanted, or the gas pipeline bill we wanted to debate today. Sure, they might come on sometime later tonight, but we come into parliament to debate the issues that matter to Territorians, not to listen to Labor members carp, whinge and whine again. It is what they do in this Chamber every day.
This parliament is set up so that on every Wednesday night between 5.30 pm and 9 pm the opposition can run its agenda. It is called GBD. But, no, they turn up here every Tuesday and Thursday and carp, whinge and whine all day long so we do not get to any business of this Chamber. Today is no different than any other day. But we can illustrate that it has cost $32 000 to run this place so far today, about $8000 an hour. We have been going on this debate for four hours so Labor can run a motion of no confidence.
If you do not win this, Leader of the Opposition, will you apologise for that $32 000 you have spent? That is something you have just taken off Territorians. You took great offence at us advertising that you blocked ads for ice legislation in this Chamber, which cost about $8000, just 25% of what you have spent today in this Chamber for a no confidence motion designed as a stunt that seeks to further erode confidence in the Northern Territory. That is something you wear on your shoulders. You should apologise for doing this in the Chamber. It is …
Ms Walker: You do not get it, do you, Adam?
Mr GILES: The member for Nhulunbuy has to scream across the Chamber. No matter how much respect you give the opposition members they cannot keep quiet when someone on this side speaks. But that is something we have come to expect from them.
Today we have seen that the opposition is not a credible opposition or alternative government. It does not have the required sense and purpose of leadership on its side of the Chamber. In fact, if anybody was watching today they would have seen that the member for Karama is the de facto leader of the Labor Party who pulls all the strings. But even the member for Karama was wise enough to say that this is a stunt and should not have been brought forward today. Leader of the Opposition, you appear to be somewhat of a lighthouse on a peak on your own in this debate today.
I thank my colleagues – the member for Daly for his initial debate today, the member for Brennan, the Minister for Infrastructure, who so wisely discussed a large part of the $1.4bn infrastructure program, the member for Port Darwin and all on this side of the Chamber who work so hard in government, along with all our staff and those within the bureaucracy who sat back nervously today waiting for this silly stunt of a motion of no confidence to come forward. It has been spoken about for two weeks, has eroded business confidence, got everybody hyped up all over the place, all to no avail.
This shows that you are limp in your leadership as Leader of the Opposition, member for Fannie Bay, and it is a poor reflection upon you. It is a characterisation you do not want to carry with you in your political career, because this is a loss for you today, Leader of the Opposition. You need to have better debate in this Chamber, not just come in and scream at us, yelling and complaining that you are not in government. Come forward with a debate that presents alternatives as an alternative government. You did not do that today. You did not front up and you have not been able to produce results.
Again I say to my colleagues, thank you very much for the teamwork, your efforts and the tenacious approach you take to government. Yes, we have had a couple of defections from our team over the last couple of years; that is politics. We are very happy to admit that. We do not always agree, but when it comes to results we have performed on every occasion in the Northern Territory.
It does not matter who you talk to, people are happy to see fuel, house and electricity prices are down. All those things to help mums and dads with fuel prices, house and electricity prices, the childcare subsidies, Back to School Vouchers and sports vouchers, are what matter. We will continue to talk up our economy and drive down crime to its lowest level since the 1990s. We will continue to deliver for Territorians. I hope the Leader of the Opposition apologises.
Madam Speaker, I move that the question be put.
The Assembly divided:
Madam SPEAKER: The question now is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition be agreed to.
The Assembly divided:
Motion negatived.
Continued from 19 November 2015.
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the opposition supports this legislation. I thank the government for organising a briefing for me and the members for Johnston and Barkly. We support this bill because it is a duplicate of legislation we presented when we were in government. For example, the Bonaparte gas pipeline is now a fairly standard approach to how we go about preparing for the implementation of major projects such as the North East Gas Interconnector.
The bill does not predetermine anything. It does not predetermine environmental or sacred sites outcomes. That is important, because there have been some misunderstandings about this bill. It provides a framework. It acts to amend Territory laws to allow the pipeline to proceed within all the protections required, but gives it priority in determining this.
The situation with the sacred sites legislation is a good example. This does not override the legislation, nor does it reduce any requirements for sites to be protected. Rather, it makes the head contractor, Jemena, responsible for getting the clearances, and then allows those clearances to apply to subcontractors and others constructing the pipeline. Currently, every subcontractor is required to get duplicates certificates, and if Jemena sold its interest in the pipeline while constructing it, a new company would have to go through this all over again. This is a practical solution and is the basis of the operations of this bill.
There have been a number of concerns expressed about this legislation. I have listened to those concerns. The basis of those concerns fundamentally arises from the lack of trust people have in this government to protect and look after the environment. Labor shares a lack of trust in the CLP My shadow ministers have been tasked with keeping a watching brief on the implementation of Territory laws in this project.
The Bonaparte pipeline showed a balance can be achieved. That is what a responsible Labor government did, and what a future responsible Labor government would do again.
Madam Speaker, as it is a duplicate of the Bonaparte legislation, we support this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I also support this bill.
As the Leader of the Opposition said, this is almost a copy of the Bonaparte Gas Pipeline (Special Provisions) Act that was enforced on 7 November 2011.
The purpose of this bill is to make special provisions in connection with the North East Gas Interconnector Pipeline Project. This project is a major infrastructure project representing a significant investment in the Northern Territory’s energy sector and will support the development of both onshore and offshore gas resources.
It is rare these days to have an opportunity to talk about gas. In the argy-bargy of parliament we have not had an opportunity. There has been a statement by the minister, but not in the form of a formal statement we could discuss in more detail.
The minister made the announcement about the pipeline, and unfortunately that headed off into oblivion. This at least gives an opportunity to talk about the importance of gas and the need for legislation that will allow the use of gas going from the Northern Territory to other states.
There are questions that still need to be asked about gas, where it is coming from and the methodology to produce that gas. That would be a fair discussion as we know there are people concerned about hydraulic fracturing. The government has issued new guidliines. It is important for some of those guidelines to be discussed in this parliament. I am pleased the government has announced those guidelines, which have been released for public discussion. Chief Minister, I have photocopied a few of those guidelines and put them on my table and I ask people to read them.
One of the difficulties in this old debate – and the minister for Primary Industry will recall me saying this many times when he was Minister for Mines and Energy – is governments have to be on the front step if they are to put forward these changes to the way we produce gas in the Northern Territory.
I get my fair share of people who are fair dinkum with their concerns asking how gas will be produced in the Territory, what affects it could have on the environment, etcetera. Those people need to be heard. But at the same time we need to make sure the discussion is based on real fact, not what happened to be on the television that night or what some people say are the facts.
The legislation today is part of that. It enables the company building the pipeline to set in place various rules that need to apply. As the Leader of the Opposition said, it does not mean exemption from the Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act or from other matters.
I received an e-mail today and the concerns of the people who sent it were reasonable. They believed this act would exclude the company from doing an environmental impact statement. I must admit I would have been very surprised if that was the case. I do not know of any place in Australia where you can put down a pipeline of that length without having an environmental impact statement.
I e-mailed the Chief Minister’s department and I received an answer by e-mail which said that this NEGI project would have to go through all the usual environmental approvals. This includes in Queensland and under the Commonwealth EPBC Act. In the Northern Territory, Jemena has lodged its notice of intent with the Northern Territory EPA. The draft terms of reference were issued and are on exhibition until 11 December 2015.
That should be at least laid to rest. Regardless of whether people agree with this pipeline or not, it has to go through a proper process. I encourage people, if they have concerns about this pipeline, to get involved in the process. The EPA is an independent body that looks at all these things. There are opportunities for people to have input. If they have concerns then they should not be about this legislation; they should be about what is in the notice of intent. They have until 11 December to comment.
We know the Bonaparte gas pipeline was built using very similar legislation – almost exactly the same except for one small part. The minister may not know the answer to my next point. One of the differences between the Bonaparte legislation and the North East Gas Interconnector Pipeline (Special Provisions) Bill is there was a section on extractive minerals and special provisions for the grant of extractive mineral leases or permits. I imagine that when putting a pipe in the ground you would require sand of some class. I am interested to know why it was in the Bonaparte gas pipeline legislation and not for the North East Gas Interconnector. There may be some perfectly good reason for that being the one point of difference between the two pieces of legislation.
As I said, it is not very often I have the opportunity to talk about gas. I know this is about the pipe and setting up some rules for the company to adhere to in general because it will have to deal with many matters such as roads, waterways, sacred sites, pastoral properties and extractive minerals. There will be other matters, including the Planning Act. It is good that we are talking about that but I would love to have an opportunity to have a good discussion about gas. What are the future gas supplies? The gas for this pipeline will be from, I presume, Bonaparte Gulf, which is the excess gas we are paying for at the moment, and some gas from the Amadeus Basin. What is the length of life for those gas supplies? I expect this pipeline is also meant to take gas from places like Beetaloo. I am not sure of that at the moment, but I understand one of the restrictions on gas coming from other parts of the Territory is simply that there is no pipeline to use.
It would be good to talk about those broader issues. There will be a lot of money spent on this pipeline. I presume the company building the pipeline is expecting to get a return on it. What are the future gas supplies the government can guarantee will go down that pipeline and for how long? Whilst I am only covering it superficially now, there needs to be an opportunity to look at these matters in more detail, perhaps in another debate. I at least had an opportunity to talk about it today.
Madam Speaker, I support the bill. I understand why the bill has been put forward and I do not have any problems with it.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, I do not support the bill; it is a bit of a cart before the horse situation. There are some significant environmental approval processes that need to be done before you deal with this. Ultimately, my fundamental concern with this is that unlike the Bonaparte gas pipeline which was dealing with offshore gas, this is dealing with onshore gas.
My genuine concern is that this is a project the Chief Minister is putting his political hat to and rushing through with it. It is your bull-in-a-china-shop modus operandi which has got you into the political mire you are in.
The reality is Territorians are not convinced that we want to see wholesale fracking occur across the regions for the volumes of gas required to support a project like this. We are talking about hundreds, into the thousands, of wells across the Territory’s environmental landscape. A genuine debate has not occurred amongst the broader Territory community to the extent that it deserves, given the significant impact this will have in years to come. If this pipeline is ultimately constructed, which you seem hell-bent upon ensuring occurs, we would see very large-scale fracking occurring in the Territory.
Let us not pretend this is a pipeline dealing with offshore gas. This is a pipeline that, in your own statement and the statements of the companies in involved in it, deals with the onshore gas industry which, of course, deals with the extractive process of fracking. I do not think you can divorce the technical aspects of this legislation with the reality that it is about creating an environment in the Territory where significant fracking will need to occur to support the gas volumes to support this pipeline. That is my fundamental opposition to this legislation.
I am concerned that many Territorians would not even know we are having this debate today in parliament. It is of such significance, whether you are a proponent for it, such as the government, or an opponent, such as me, that the broader community deserves to know about it. Conspiracy theorists might believe you have deliberately brought it on a very busy day to make sure it slips through relatively unnoticed. But it will not be unnoticed. I have every confidence that the traditional owners, pastoralists and farmers whose lands will be affected will be informed.
I have seen and admired the effort the environment centres have gone to – bodies such as the Arid Lands Centre and the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory – to ensure ignorance does not prevail across the regional areas of the Northern Territory. They will ensure genuine information that needs to be provided to Territorians is provided to them. I thank the Environment Centre for issuing a memo today which members of parliament received. I wish to read the details of that memo into Hansard:
There are significant reasons not to support the legislation in the memo. I know the government does not give a damn about anything that was just said, because that is their attitude. That is the way they work: crash and crash through. They will rant and rave about me being anti-development and all of that. It is nonsense, but that is what you do; that is your form.
I want to ensure, and others will ensure, that what you do and what you say in rushing through a pipeline, to rush open the doors of fracking in the Territory, will be heard by the traditional owners of the lands on which these reserves sit in the Northern Territory. It will be heard by the pastoralists. I have been to the Cattlemen’s Association dinners and listened to the executive. I have listened to the traditional owners across communities. I have listened to farmers. I have listened to the mums and dads who see alarming reports coming out of the US and see with dismay what is occurring in Queensland and New South Wales. They see that this government simply does not give a damn and is rushing ahead with its pipe dream.
It is a pipe dream because economists are saying the market is not there. I remember when I first sounded out people in the oil and gas industry – because this question about whether or not the market was there to sustain it arose a couple of years ago – people told me the market was not there to sustain this project. ‘It is a pipe dream; it will not fly.’ They underestimated the efforts the Chief Minister and the Treasurer would go to, to ensure they went into an election campaign saying, ‘Look at us. Look at this shiny bit of tinsel over here. There will be a major project and it is the pipeline.’
Whether it works and meets environmental approvals remains to be seen. Economists are already reporting that it does not stack up; the market is not there. I refer members to an article that was written by Paul Garvey, the resources reporter from Perth, in The Australian on 23 November:
That is the resources writer for The Australian based in Perth saying that industry analysts are saying to him that it does not stack up.
Here we are, the sittings before Christmas, on a no confidence motion day, rushing through the NEGI pipeline, supporting technical legislation. Fundamentally this is not, I believe, supported by Territorians. I do not think there is anyone who does not want to see regional economic development, but my God, this is again the wrong approach by the government.
You will come and you will go, Chief Minister, but to many of us, this is home; we will stay. I do not want to see the foolish behaviour of the Chief Minister set in place some disastrous environmental outcomes for Territorians for generations to come.
We have great pastoral and farming opportunities. We have great small-scale innovative opportunities for our traditional owners across our regional lands. We could be investing in spending time on the small- and medium-size business enterprises across the Territory in regional areas. You pour your efforts and energies into your white elephants because that is what you like and what you do ...
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama, I ask that you direct your comments through the Chair, please.
Ms LAWRIE: But you will be condemned ultimately by the public for that ...
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama, I ask ...
Ms LAWRIE: I am looking at you, I am directing through the Chair.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I asked you to direct your language through the Chair, please. You do not directly address a member of this parliament. All comments are to be made through the Chair.
Ms LAWRIE: The Chief Minister will be condemned for it.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.
Ms LAWRIE: It will mean the Chief Minister will lose the bush seats for the CLP, the ones he is so desperately on the ground trying to wrestle to be numbers in a future CLP government. Because people are not ignorant, 700 submissions have come from the people of the Territory. They do not want the fracking that your pipeline requires, Chief Minister. They have said no to that but you are not listening. They want a moratorium. You have said no to that because you are not listening ...
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have asked you, member for Karama, to direct your comments through the Chair. I do not care where you look as long as your comments come through this Chair. You are on a warning. Please direct your comments through the Chair.
Ms LAWRIE: The Chief Minister has said no to the wishes of the people across the land, the very same people the Chief Minister will seek support from in the election year. They will not be ignorant; the people of the Northern Territory have been informed. All credit where credit is due, the Arid Zone Research Centre and the Environment Centre are doing the work on the ground to ensure that traditional owners, pastoralists and farmers are informed.
Whilst I stand here, singularly alone in opposing this legislation by the look of things, I know there are vast numbers of Territorians who oppose this. The voices gather in ever-increasing numbers. The people are getting organised, and organised people will ensure they are exercising their votes against a government which trashes across their very real desire to continue to take care of the land.
The changes in here do not even apply to landholders in areas that have already been granted gas exploration approval. That already includes 32% of the Territory, or 44 million hectares, where landowners have no legal rights to object to invasive gas mining that risks their water supplies, the health of residents and the environment.
The Chief Minister will rant and rave about how the Labor government allowed all that exploration. I am not Kon Vatskalis. I will not stand here and say how many he did or did not sign off on. What I do know is that there are very deep and genuine concerns about the licences granted since 2013. That is where the majority of the concerns rest. I do not have the list of all the licences granted since 2013. I probably will have by tomorrow.
We have 44 million hectares where landholders have no legal rights to object to invasive gas mining that risks their waters supplies, the health of residents and the environment. Today, seven major family-run pastoral stations and native title holders in the gulf region have contacted the Chief Minister, the Mines minister and the Department of Mines and Energy to call for exploration permit approvals to the company Armour Energy to be revoked over a lack of consultation with the affected landholders.
Oh, my goodness! I guess that is the question the Chief Minister refused to answer in Question Time today. These pastoral station owners together …
Mr Giles: Permits you approved.
Ms LAWRIE: … represent interests in land of some 50 000 km2 in the gulf region. The stations are some of our major cattle and food producers, and because of the iconic beauty of the region they also run successful fishing and tourism operations on their land.
I will pick up the interjection by the Chief Minister who keeps saying I approved these. I did not sign off on any of these, Chief Minister. Go and have a chat to your mate, Kon Vatskalis ...
Mr Giles: You were Deputy Chief Minister.
Ms LAWRIE: I did not sign off on them. They did not come past my desk, not one of them.
The region is also facing serious drought at the moment and landholders are now forced to compete for water with industry plans for thousands of water-intensive fracking wells, and have the added risk of water and air contamination from leaking wells with industrial gas fields encroaching on their properties and risking their livelihoods. That is not good enough.
The NT government has recently declared the Coomalie region a gas reservation area after sustained community pressure. Will the NT government afford other communities and landholders who can demonstrate a high degree of opposition to the granting of shale gas permits, like those in the gulf, the same protections? That is a good question, Chief Minister. Why not answer that in your wrap?
This access agreement legislation is already in place in Queensland and New South Wales, and it has done nothing to address the high levels of conflict between landholders and fracking companies. In fact, it is escalating. All power to the people. I guess you will feel that, CLP government, come election time. In the bush, fracking will rise up and bite you in the bush.
Access agreements still give the mining company the right to force access to land against the wishes of the landholder. These arrangements are still driving farmers off their land, leading to poor community wellbeing and even tsuicide, as in the tragic and recent high-profile case of cotton farmer, George Bender. Landholders see no light at the end of the tunnel through these forced negotiation processes. If they object, they end up in arbitration featuring a decision-making panel that includes gas industry representatives.
This legislation will lock in the same failed arbitration system that allows resource companies to bully and threaten landholders with legal action unless they agree to the company’s terms of access and mining.
What landholders really want is the right to say no to mining and fracking and the right to protect their business, investments, cultural heritage and families from mining proposals without being bullied, harassed or forced through arbitration. A coalition of Australian landholders, including many Territorians, has this week written to the federal government to ensure this Friday’s COAG meeting discusses a way forward to improve landholder rights to say no to damaging mining projects.
The issue of granting veto rights to reject invasive mining is critical to the resource sector being able to gain a social licence. The right to say no would avoid the high levels of conflict that now exist between the unconventional gas industry and landholders.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I urge the NT government to use this opportunity to stand up for the rights of Territory landholders and admit that this access agreement legislation does not go far enough to give Territorians the right to protect their properties and say no.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, to people who read the debate in Hansard, I inform them that just about everything the member for Karama said was incorrect. She knows that. She was being disingenuous. She knows there have not been 700 letters of complaint to the EPA. She knows there will not be thousands of wells. In fact, she knows when she was Deputy Chief Minister her former Labor government approved 33 well activities, which is more than the Northern Territory Country Liberals government has approved. She also knows that when we came to government on 25 August 2012, 95% of the Territory was either granted or under application of gas licences. She also knows that the permits she called to be taken from Armour Energy were granted by her government when she was Deputy Chief Minister.
It is only fair that we try to have a reasonable and sensible debate. The idea of thousands of wells is completely ludicrous, even though that is separate to this debate. The member for Nelson asked why we do not have a debate in this Chamber, or make a statement. I have had a gutful of bringing statements and being abused up hill and down dale. You cannot have proper debates in this Chamber, so why do them? I would rather have a debate with the community because the current Leader of the Opposition cannot control his team or engage in proper debate.
This legislation for the gas pipeline is simply reflective of previous legislation for the Bonaparte pipeline. It is also reflective of support for the INPEX project, which Labor brought in.
There was a bit of discussion about what would go down the pipeline. It will be gas that is currently fracked today from Central Australia, conventional gas and gas being drilled through rock in the Bonaparte Basin.
Let us see what type of gas will come from the Bonaparte Basin. It will be excess gas from the Power and Water contract, which the former Deputy Chief Minister was a signatory to. She knows that under the take-or-pay arrangements we are paying for gas we do not use. Part of the reason for the tariffs and structure of Power and Water is because we are paying for gas every day that we do not use. That excess gas will go down that pipeline, whether it comes from conventional wells or unconventional gas drilling, which has happened in the Northern Territory for decades. I note that gas was obtained from hydraulically fractured wells in the Northern Territory in 1967 and was used in the production of power for this Chamber. That gas from fracked wells provided power for the lighting in this Chamber and the running of parliament up until a few years ago when gas started coming out of Bonaparte Basin.
I go to the point of the member for Nelson of why we do not debate this. It is because you cannot have sensible, mature debate.
There is a range of mechanisms government is using to ensure we roll back the permits Labor put in place to protect residential and rural areas, Indigenous cultural sites and high-value agribusiness and tourism sites. We have a consultation process looking at how to improve the environmental aspects.
There was a connotation that this is not being talked about publically and the question of why it was brought on today on a day of no confidence motion. Well, why did you bring that silly no confidence motion to the Chamber, member for Fannie Bay, supported by the discredited member for Karama?
I refer to some comments that have been made by the member for Fannie Bay in indicating his support. He tried to have a quiet little jab about sacred sites. I will go through some examples of sacred site desecration prosecutions since 2001 which all reflect on the Labor government.
In 2001 there were charges in regard to carrying out works on a sacred site at Ali Curung, which imposed a bond at that point in time. In 2001 there were charges for carrying out work on a sacred site, again at Ali Curung. There were issues and charges with regard to entering and carrying out works on a sacred site at Ngandadauda Creek in August 2002. In 2002 again, there were charges for entering and remaining on a sacred site in the Victoria River, Gregory National Park. In 2002 there was another episode at the Glyde River mouth. In 2002 there was an episode at the Blyth River in regard to sacred site penetrations under a Labor government. In 2003, at the Blyth River and False Point on the coast of Arnhem Land, there was another example of six offences – three of carrying out works on a sacred site and three of damaging a sacred site, and there were distressed custodians at Green Leaves estate in Alice Springs. In 2004 there was an issue, again around Ngandadauda Creek.
In 2005, Labor gets off; there were no sacred site desecration prosecutions. But in 2006 the Arrernte Council of Central Australia was charged with entering and damaging a sacred site and causing distress to custodians in Alice Springs. In 2008 there was a conviction of carrying out works on a sacred site and damaging a sacred site on Rose Court in Alice Springs. In 2008 there was a conviction of carrying out works on a sacred site and desecrating a sacred site at Whittaker Street in Alice Springs. In 2010 there was a conviction of carrying out works and entering a sacred site. Another one in 2010 occurred in relation to entering a sacred site as a commercial fisherman. In 2010 there was another charge for an incident at Numbulwar. There was another charge for another site in March 2011 for damage to a sacred site contrary to an authority certificate around a mining location. There was another issue with setting fires in Gregory National Park in January 2012.
The only one I am aware of occurring since we came to government was in regard to working at a sacred site, chopping down trees at Coomalie Creek in July 2014.
Labor might like to talk about sacred sites, but it is evident by its performance that the desecration of sacred sites pretty much all occurred under a previous Labor government. Although I support them in this bill, their quiet little snipes and jibes along the way are a bit too much.
As I said at the start, those people who read this Parliamentary Record in times to come will see the disingenuous nature the member for Karama, the quasi-leader of the Labor opposition, has presented in this Chamber. She has given false statements in regard to the number of wells and complaints ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! If he wants to say I was misleading the House he has to do so by way of substantive motion. They are not false.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Chief Minister, could you rephrase that?
Mr GILES: Just about everything she said was incorrect. I look back on what the member for Nelson said about why we do not have a debate in this Chamber. It is because (1) you are completely abused, and (2) it is not a fair debate because the information presented is inaccurate.
If you want to be informed, I am happy to sit down and have a long conversation with you about details. If you are keen to negotiate a way through how we get the best environmental practices, I am happy to do all of that. But I will not come into this Chamber and present a statement just to be abused and have incorrect facts presented. It is very easy for people to talk. I reflect on a radio interview I did probably 24 months ago where someone said there will be 67 000 wells drilled in the Northern Territory in that year. That is incorrect; there were two. You have to get some fairness and evenness in the debate, and you will not get it in this Chamber. I am happy to have the debate in public and try to work with the community on how we make improvements.
Recently we have done that by excluding Coomalie. That is a fine example of how we will not have gas in residential areas, rural areas, areas of high cultural or tourism significance or high agribusiness areas. Yesterday, as I said in Question Time, we announced a new land access agreement framework set of principles that will help us work together with industries such as mining, petroleum and farming. It has never been done before in the Territory. We should be credited with a lot of work we have done in this area to try to improve relationships, but also improve environmental practice and safety in the way we conduct all development on land in the Northern Territory. At the end of the day, we all want to protect the environment. We are all environmentalists. This is the best way we could go to protect the environment.
Labor members say they want to walk away, and I am talking about the member for Karama, who is nothing but a quasi-Labor leader. In the time of their government, 33 well activities were approved when she was Deputy Chief Minister. To now call for people to be stripped of their permits or exploration titles and for a moratorium in those same areas is highly unreasonable. It is professionally unconscionable to walk away from what you approved when you were in government. What we need to do is have a fair, level-headed approach to how we work with industry to keep job growth in the Territory, but make sure we keep the environment with us for years and years to come.
We have excelled as a government a hundredfold on what the previous government had in its environmental credentials. They wanted fracking all over the Territory. The applications for permits were handed out like confetti. They were granted in many areas. There has been process followed and we should respect the process.
I do not agree that all those applications should have been allowed under the former government, but they have been agreed to and we will honour those permits. We may not seek to renew them in the future because we know there is no gas there. We will seek to improve our environmental aspect, give certainty to community about where gas drilling can occur, improve the protections around the construction interface of well heads and so forth, and make sure we have agreement from landholders, whether they are traditional owners, pastoralists, native title holders, farmers or whoever they may be, which is what a fair and reasonable government does.
To suggest you can remove the certainty of a permit would send shivers down the spine of any industry. That is exactly what the quasi-Leader of the Opposition, the member for Karama, has done.
The pipeline will bring about vast benefits for Australia and the Northern Territory in job construction, upstream development, downstream gas utilisation and investing in more infrastructure in roads, bridges and telecommunications. The opportunities that exist in regional and remote parts of the Territory are significant. Downstream in Darwin, for example, will be quite large because we have the ability now to have a source of energy to stimulate a manufacturing industry. That should not be sneezed at.
I support the protection of our environment in Australia, and one thing that grates on my is when protectionists seek to stop energy development and utilisation in Australia, only to export minerals for development offshore where environmental standards are not at the same level as in Australia. Around the room, everything in this Chamber is processed and developed, whether it is the plastic lids on the top of the water jugs or the glass or our mobile phones. They are currently being developed in other parts of the world that I believe do not have the same environmental standards we have in Australia.
As we seek to improve our environmental standards in the Northern Territory we will have the best environmental protection for the petroleum industry in Australia, potentially in the world. It is our responsibility to continue to develop here, not just because it builds jobs but because it protects the environment on a broader level rather than exporting materials overseas to process where they do not have that strength of environmental legislation. It is hypocritical to say, ‘Not in my back yard’. We need to have it in our back yard and do our best to protect everything we can. That is the way we should go.
Mr Deputy Speaker, to the member for Nelson and my parliamentary colleagues, thank you very much for your support on this bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 18 November 2015.
Ms MANSON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a very important debate. It is very clear to me that education is the key to creating a world of opportunity for every child. Education will help the Northern Territory overturn the gross disadvantages we see far too often, and this bill will play an important part in ensuring we can run our schools and education system the way they need to be run.
Until now the government has done a very good job in consulting with Territorians on this bill. Given the seriousness of this body of work, it has made a significant effort to give people an opportunity to have a say. However, the final bill has effectively only had one-and-a-half weeks of full consultation rather than a full month, which should be the case if sound principles of introduction and passage of legislation were followed. Instead, we have had the bare minimum time to consult on this final bill before us. To top it off, this is occurring at what is the busiest time of the year for people working within education and schools.
The bill was introduced in Week 7 of Term 4. We had Week 8 of Term 4 to consult and now we are in Week 9 of Term 4 debating and giving this bill passage. This is terrible timing which means there has not been the opportunity for the full and comprehensive consultation and feedback we would have liked to have seen with this bill.
We have had some debate today on a no confidence motion in which I spoke about consultation and the way in which the government operates. I feel frustrated that at this point we have this extensive bill going through on urgency. The Education Bill is 116 pages so it is an extensive body of work with a lot of detail to go through. I have not been able to go through it with the level of detail, the number of meetings and consultations I would have liked to have had with the final bill that was presented in this Chamber.
I look at the preparation of the Education Bill as preparation for a marathon. It takes months of hard work, training and a plan to get there. You can see that the department has put in a lot of hard work from the point of the discussion paper to the release of the exposure draft and the consultations they undertook. That was not even at the end. Upon making his second reading speech, the minister introduced a 116-page bill, finalised for all to see the content.
There is not enough time at this time of year to properly consult so we can have the full debate we want. It has been very difficult to get to that level. It is as though you are up to the 30 km mark of the race where things get tough and at that point all the training and preparation starts kicking in. We are at the point where we need to get to the end. It is an important part of the race. Unfortunately, at the last minute we have decided it is too hard; let us jump in the car, drive to the end and off we go.
It is a shame that after the good work up to this point we could not give it the time to ensure the final bill was as well consulted as it could have been.
It is clear that the bill will be passed today; the government will get this through. I still have many questions and I will be posing those to the government at the consideration in detail stage. I have been in discussion with the minister, the minister’s office and the Independents today about some amendments that will be forthcoming. Negotiations have been happening behind the scenes, but they are not as extensive as they could have been, which comes down to the issue of time.
I acknowledge the work of those in the agency on the Education Bill project. I understand the commitment staff made, and am aware the work had its internal hurdles before it even appeared in public, and then considerable discussion after that. It is a project the department has put a lot of effort into. I congratulate Mr Ken Davies and his team. I also thank the many stakeholders and education advocates in the community who have been involved in the process of drafting the bill, scrutinising it, speaking to the department and the minister, writing to their local members and having their say at school council meetings across the Territory.
It is important to thank COGSO, particularly Michelle Parker, Gerard Reid and Tabby Fudge for the work they contributed. I extend that thanks to all the teachers and principals, and the Australian Education Union. I had a few discussions and have seen the submissions of the former principal, and strong education advocate in the Northern Territory, Mr Henry Gray.
Why is it that we feel so passionately about education? Labor believes education and training is the key to both individual and social change. We believe that education and training maximise opportunity. It allows for an individual to change the course and direction of their life and, if properly undertaken, allows society to improve and better itself.
Labor believes that education and training is the silver bullet to improving and expanding the Northern Territory. Labor endorses the goals for education and schooling of the Melbourne declaration, goal one being that Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence, and goal two being that all young Australians are to become successful learners, confident and creative individuals and active and informed citizens.
Labor also supports the five stated goals of the Department of Education’s strategic plan that the department has dedicated itself to achieving, which are: A Great Start for Children; Every Student a successful Learner; Quality Leaders, Quality Teachers, Quality Schools; Responsive Services and Systems; and Building Productive Partnerships.
It is Labor’s vision that all children will start school prepared for school and able to learn from day one. That is why we have focused so much of our policy energy on the crucial zero to four age group. We believe changing the lives of young people at this point in their life will well prepare them for the wonderful journey that education and training can bring them in their lives. It is Labor’s vision that our schools will produce students ready to tackle the modern 21st century world and capable of achieving the best they can.
The thing that distinguishes Australia from most other countries in the world is our education system which is an acknowledged world leader. It has been the spine to our growth as a nation, and it requires constant support and innovation to maintain that position. In the Territory our education system must deliver to small numbers over vast distances in circumstances where many do not speak English as a first language. It is a challenge for government to deliver under these circumstances, and requires an education and training system that is well supported and well resourced.
It is on that point that the opposition has had much criticism of the government. On coming to office in 2012 the CLP, in its now notorious mini-budget, attacked education funding. There were 30% cuts over two years administered to most grant programs. Staffing was savagely reduced in the central offices and in schools. Staff formulas were changed and changes were made to how attendance was measured and supported. In the midst of all this cutting, the CLP introduced one reform package after another, leaving the department and schools with fewer people to deal with more change. It is a situation that, three years on, is still not resolved. We have heard much about the reforms from the government. The truth is the disruptive impact of some of these poorly implemented reforms with very tight time lines threw staff and teachers, already stretched and stressed, into some really tough situations.
The continued cuts in Territory resources have only been softened by the increased funding of federal monies. It is clear that as the feds have increased funding, the CLP has withdrawn its funding and is now propping up the responsibilities it should undertake with federal money.
You need go no further than funding available from the feds on the post-Gonski deal done under the Stronger Futures money. The Australian Education Union is right; the feds have put in more money and the CLP has pulled more money out. The net gain to education is not there.
The federal government funding is always supplementary and in addition to what the government is trying to do. The Gonski deal from the previous federal government was structured in a way that was designed to ensure that money was not taken and then substituted. We may argue around the fairness of what was offered. Labor believed at the time that we deserved more, but the proposition that the money was to supplement the activities of the state and Territory governments was the right one and the one we should have adhered to.
Let me make one thing clear. I am not pointing the finger at the agency; the agency has to operate as best it can in the context of the funds available. But I have no doubt the Territory CLP government was not putting in the vital resourcing we still need to see in the front line of education. I am aware that an agency deficit outcome was narrowly avoided by the arrival of Abbott government funding. Not only has this occurred with the post-Gonski funding, but there is no doubt the funding for the education of Indigenous children is now being propped up by expenditure of millions of dollars of federal funding from Stronger Futures. Funding available for education should be efficiently and effectively spent on education, not withdrawn and spent elsewhere.
We have often heard, when we put the hard questions to government about funding expenditure and why we have seen funding cuts to education, that the government felt the Department of Education had become bloated and inefficient with too many staff. I have to criticise that on all fronts. The truth is, despite the claims of efficiency and effectiveness, what we have seen under this government in education is cuts, disruptions and reductions. Thankfully we have very hard-working staff in the department and in schools, but we are hearing they have been pushed to breaking point.
We only have to look at the annual report that was tabled on the last sitting day a week-and-a-half ago to see the cuts within the department. It has been a very tough time in schools; that is for sure. Page 14 showed we had fewer Indigenous students enrolling and fewer students attending preschool in 2014-15. Targets of average Indigenous attendance levels were not being reached and the NAPLAN results show, in every category bar two, that literacy and numeracy for Indigenous children have gone down. When you compare the years you can see that there is little evidence of consistent or significant gains. This was confirmed in the graphs on pages 22 and 23. There was also a reduction in the number of Indigenous students completing the NTCET. You would hope, year by year, you would see a consistent growth in this figure.
Later in the report, on page 49, there is a clear cut of staffing numbers, particularly classroom teachers, which is a shame. If you go back over annual reports from 2012 to the latest annual report of 2014, you will see that classroom teacher numbers are down by 165, senior teacher Level 1 are down 96, with 116 fewer administrative support staff between AO2 and AO5. The huge cuts to staff numbers we have seen under this government have been a real worry.
Turning to the details of this bill before the House, it is a comprehensive modernisation of the Education Act, which is 36 years old. There are many areas from both government and the non-government sector which have been subject to change. It is a very comprehensive document. We have not had the time to go through it. There is a lot in it we support, but there are also elements of this bill we have some questions about. We will be going over that in the consideration in detail stage where we have suggested some amendments which the minister will propose.
It must also be noted that much of the detail of how the Education Bill will be practically implemented will be embedded in regulation. In fact, there are over 50 references to regulation in the bill, which will have the vital detail we all want to see. We have heard a lot from the stakeholders about wanting to see the regulations to get the details of what is in the bill. Given we do not have the full details of those regulations it is difficult to get a full line of sight of how the new act will work and be fully implemented. Not being able to see those full regulations has created further angst amongst education stakeholders. I ask that the government carefully considers making sure it consults with education stakeholders like COGSO and the AEU in the formulation of those regulations. It is important that the government listens to those on the ground to get the very best outcomes for our education system.
However, most of these changes before us are sensible and bring the act into a space where we see the work going forward. A good example of this is the very appropriate removal of references to the term ‘handicap’ and aligning the Education Bill definitions for ‘disability’ to the definition within the Disability Discrimination Act. Another sensible and appropriate change is the express prohibition of corporal punishment. There is also recognition within the act that education has changed beyond the traditional academic pathway, and well-due recognition of vocational education and training is covered. A very sensible position which has been adopted in this bill, through the advice received in the consultation process, is to look at the definition of ‘a parent’ to ensure it is culturally appropriate to Indigenous families of students.
There is a range of areas within the bill I will look at in a bit more detail. First, I turn to the changes which the government has brought forward regarding the NT Board of Studies. Essentially, the NT Board of Studies provides advice to the department and the government on curriculum matters in the NT, and for a long time has done a good job. The initial exposure draft of the Education Bill, however, went too far in deconstructing the NT Board of Studies and was seeking to silence some of the critical voices of experts who sat on the board. It was a step too far to reduce the board from 16 to seven members, which was initially flagged. I welcome that the government has acknowledged this feedback and sought to reinstate some of those important education groups which had been left off in the first instance. Initially the government had sought to leave critical groups of teachers, parents, employers and Indigenous representatives off the board. It is a welcome change that this has been included in the bill.
As honourable members are aware, there are some consideration in detail stage amendments with regard to the composition of the NT Board of Studies. There has been some discussion about this. I understand the minister will be proposing some amendments and we will discuss those further at that stage.
I am seeking to get some commitment that the parent representative comes from a government school in this instance because we have 33 000 students in the Northern Territory enrolled in government schools which represents about three-quarters of the students. It is very important that the parent representative is someone who was endorsed by a body that effectively represents the parents of students in Territory government schools.
It is also important that the teacher representative appointed to the board of studies has the endorsement and support of a group that represents teachers in the Northern Territory. It is important that we know the people endorsed for this important job have the strong support of the community.
The Australian Education Union in the Northern Territory does a very good job of advocating for education. The government has a fair bit of argy-bargy with them at times. When Labor was in government it did not always see eye to eye with the Australian Education Union. But it has a very important voice and expertise that goes directly to those schools and classrooms. It should be listened to, engaged with and consulted. Its views should be taken on board. That is why I propose those changes which will be debated. It is important that those professionals who advocate strongly for students, teachers and, ultimately, for education in the Territory are represented on the NT Board of Studies.
Another notable change in the bill is the compulsory school starting age of Northern Territory students. It has been very clearly proven that a child’s critical development starts well before they are born. From birth to preschool, every effort must be taken to nurture a child’s development and start its education journey. It is abundantly clear that we must start this well before children enter school. Through the consultation process, the government was provided with a range of feedback about what the appropriate age is for a child to begin education.
The government has determined, after consultation, that six is an appropriate age and manages to capture the bulk of the student population, with most children attending school at five years old. We agree that promoting school attendance at five years old for Transition is sensible. We believe we need to keep working and focus on the critical early years from birth to school. We need to see a greater focus on that in government, especially since it is well proven that earlier intervention with children’s developmental issues leads to better long-term outcomes.
It is essential that students and staff have a safe school environment. It is important so all children have a full opportunity to learn. Too often our staff are subject to unacceptable behaviours, and their safety and wellbeing is threatened. This is another area of education where we are still seeing too many issues. It is a critical area that needs support and funding; that way teachers can get on with the job of delivering the best possible education for their students and feel safe whilst doing so, and students can feel safe in the classroom. I have heard of many examples where behaviour becomes a real issue in schools and can often create a divide within that school community. As well as taking away from the educational outcomes of students, the stress effects teachers and support staff and can make school a tough place to be. It requires strong leadership and the right amount of support and commitment from the government with appropriate measures and funds for the agency. It has to be addressed, and in the context of this legislation, strong and clear measures dealing with unacceptable behaviour are welcome.
This needs to be matched with significant effort to handle those students who have been expelled. It is not reasonable for education to expel or suspend students and then wash their hands of them. Society requires an effort to be made to educate and train those students, because without education or training their prospects are dim. There must be every effort made to ensure that, while they have behaved unacceptably, we do not punish these youths for the rest of their lives. We must make sure efforts are made to get these kids on the right education or training pathway to ensure they have the best opportunities in their adult life. If they go off the rails in their youth, they can get back on the right track through education.
Measures within the legislation providing for criminal history checks of mature-age students who have been absent from school for 12 months are sound. However, it is important that the implementation of this measure is monitored to ensure it does not act as a barrier to prevent mature-age students from re-entering the education system. We do not want this measure to deter students from their education.
I now turn to sections of the bill that have caused the greatest debate and go to the heart of the type of education system we want to see in the Northern Territory. I have firm views and values, as do my colleagues. I believe most Territorians share these views on education; that education should be free and accessible; that every child has an education pathway tailored to their individual needs so they are equipped for an adult life with real opportunities; that education is delivered using an evidence-based approach; and that the community and parents have voices in what happens in their schools. These are key values that we want encompassed in the bill that will drive the results everyone wants.
The bill sets out to make language about the cost of government education clearer. However, the detail of what this means is to be set out in the regulations. Clause 75 of the bill, titled ‘Government school education to be free’ sets out in subclause (2) that:
In clause 75(3) we see that school representative bodies can impose a charge for the provision to a student of anything not covered in the standard curriculum. This clearly articulates a school’s obligation to provide a free education. However, there is angst about the question of what will be deemed ‘standard curriculum’ in the regulations.
People want to see that the value of free and accessible education is upheld for Territory children and families, but we know schools are under budgetary pressures in trying to make ends meet. We want to understand from the minister in this debate what we can expect to see in the regulations to define the standard curriculum to be delivered in our schools.
There has been much debate about the provision of 26 semesters of education within the bill, which allows for Transition through to Year 12. We know there will be some students who will need to be in school for longer than 26 semesters. If that is the case there needs to be a great deal of debate about ensuring there are no roadblocks preventing this, because if a child does not get to complete their schooling, their options become greatly limited.
The request for extensions beyond 26 semesters is something parents of children with disabilities and special needs have had to access before in order to help their child complete their schooling, which has taken longer. There have also been several concerns raised by the Family Transition Network in Darwin, which consists of parents of children with disabilities. They are advocating for inclusion and strong education outcomes for their children, and school plays an important role in that. With limited post-school options for some families, extended time at school has been an important choice. The crux of the problem is that we do not have those effective post-school options and more needs to be done. We want to ensure that the education journey and opportunity does not stop with school for children with special needs or disability and there are options beyond school for those students.
The bill creates roadblocks for people who may need more than 26 semesters of education. I am happy that after the discussions I have had with the Independents, the minister’s office and the minister that is something we will look at amending in the legislation today. It has created the greatest concerns in the community. We have had correspondence from school councils and the Australian Education Union, and COGSO has said that in its surveys this is the element of the bill people are worried about. They want to ensure education is as accessible as possible and students are encouraged to complete their education.
At the moment the language in the bill about the allocation of 26 semesters – for example, if a student does not do well in their Year 12 results – is not very encouraging. If someone was in a bad head space and not gone through school the way they wanted and they need to repeat, there is more anxiety with having to go through an application process in order to do that.
We have found some ground today to work on and send the right messages to the community that we want as many people as possible to complete their education and gain the Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training. As members of this parliament we all want to see that, and it is important we actively pursue it to ensure as many people as possible get a good education from their school journey. We will look at that further in the consideration in detail stage.
Another element of the bill I turn to is parent and community involvement through school representative bodies. To maximise the success of the Territory education system, parental involvement is essential. Parents play a vital role in the decisions made for their schools, and to get the best education outcomes they have an important voice on school representative bodies. This bill acknowledges that school councils are changing, and makes allowances for school boards as part of the government’s Independent Public School agenda and joint school representative bodies.
An important principle captured within the act is that school representative bodies must have 50% parent representation. Schools should always make every effort to uphold that and maximise the involvement of parents in their schools and in the future of their school community.
However, it must be noted that the bill makes allowance for Independent Public School boards to apply for an exemption from having 50% representation of parents on those boards. I expect to hear arguments from the government that the reason is to allow Independent Public School boards to seek further expertise. However, I have found from some of the frank conversations I have had with some of the Independent Public Schools that in some cases it is because they cannot get 50% parental involvement on their school councils. It comes back to the point that community consultation was a very important part of selection to be an Independent Public School. It leaves me wondering sometimes how schools managed to get through that process if they were unable to have a fully-engaged school council consisting of 50% parents. What will the minister be doing to monitor the situation when a school asks for an exemption from 50% parental involvement? Will they be seeking assurances that parental and community views are being taken on board by that school board? What processes will be in place to monitor that? I look forward to hearing the minister’s views on how this will work in practice within the legislation.
As I said up front, this is an extensive bill. We have had limited time to go through it in the detail we would like to. I appreciate there has been an exposure draft process, but ultimately when the final bill is released, that is what you talk to people about. This is the busiest time of the year for schools. I believe the government’s wanted the very best body of work done. Up until this point the consultation process has been solid, but today I would have liked to have gone into the depth of the detail much more because this will be very important work to help shape our schools for the future.
Given the quick time frame we have in implementing this bill, I will be seeking some assurances that there will be a review process of the implementation of the bill. Given the rush of this legislation we do not want to see any unintended consequences arise. I believe there is genuine goodwill to get the best result possible; however, importantly, this is going through on urgency, which is not an ideal process for anyone as it has not given us time to scrutinise this bill properly. It will be good to have assurances that there will be a review process of the implementation of this bill because it is important that we get as much of this right as possible. We have a lot of work to do to ensure what we want embedded in the bill is done properly.
I thank the people in the department, the minister for being so open and happy to oblige in briefings on this bill, his staff, and of course Mr Ken Davies and his team in the department. I also pay tribute to COGSO, AEU, parents, teachers, principals and the people in the community who have contributed to this process, because their voices are so important. As we go through the debate I am glad to see there is willingness from government to look at some of the elements those people have raised about the legislation.
Mr Deputy Speaker, again, we would have liked more time. I am looking forward to hearing from other members who contribute to this important debate. Schools and education are critical to the Territory and we want to see the best result possible.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Wanguri for her valuable contribution. I agree with pretty well everything she said. I am here because of the result of a good education but I am not an expert on education. There are a couple of people on my right, the members for Barkly and Nhulunbuy, who have spent a good part of their lives in the teaching fraternity and know a lot more about it than I do.
I have at least had the experience of about five school councils, three non-government schools and about four or five government schools I try to attend as often as possible. I get a fair indication of how people think, both from talking to parents and attending school council meetings to hear what people have to say. There is no doubt we have a good education system.
At times it has been criticised. I would be one of the first to criticise the education system we have in relation to the levels of literacy and numeracy in remote communities. I criticised the previous government many times on some of those failings. It was not always to do with the Education Act but sometimes about the difficulty of getting kids to go to school.
This is an important act. It represents the basis of our society, economic survival and culture, whether Indigenous or non-Indigenous. It is based on our ability to understand, learn and pass on what we learn to others. You need a good education to do that.
I am disappointed that it is being hurried. I congratulate the government on the amount of consultation it has had with various stakeholders on the Education Bill. I understand it is rushed because the government gave an extension to people like COGSO, who I thank very much. Tabby must be sick of me ringing her. She has been sending me e-mails.
I have been doing my best to understand a lot of what has been going on, but my problem is I am a member of parliament and not an expert on education, although I have a lady helping me who has that background. Although I have had that consultation I still have to deal with this act in this parliament. Dealing with the bill is based on trust and talking to the minister, the shadow minister and people from COGSO to get an understanding of how they feel. There is no doubt that people are satisfied with the changes in general but they have some concerns.
I thank the minister, who has been listening, and the shadow minister, who has also been coming to my door to discuss this. That is good. If people can get together and come up with some solution to an issue that stalls the passage of this bill and find a compromise that allows the bill to pass that is a great thing. That means people are working together to make sure people in the Territory have a good Education Act.
I have seen the surveys that COGSO issued and its concerns. Some of those issues will be resolved if these amendments go through.
I have other concerns, minister. The shadow minister spoke about the definition of ‘standard curriculum’. The definition is based on a regulation, but we have not seen it. Regulations can still come to this parliament. It is difficult. I found out the hard way when I tried to look up the regulations for the increase in poker machine numbers. They are done out of sight, out of mind. I had to find out the process of bringing those regulations into parliament to at least debate them. I hope the minister can let us know beforehand what those regulations will be so if we have concerns about them we are able, through the system, to bring them to this parliament to be debated. I have told bodies like COGSO that we will try to get those regulations to them. I imagine the government will try to do the same thing so people can at least have a chance to look at those regulations, which are mentioned in this bill a number of times. It is important that people have an understanding of what those regulations are. I will be keeping an eye on what is happening.
There is a lot of concern about the 26 semester limit. We will come to that debate later. Thank you, minister, for at least looking at that issue. The amendments are a great improvement.
In relation to the NT Board of Studies, Tabby Fudge, the president of COGSO, wrote to me during the week as a representative of parents, stating they would like a public school education representative on the NT Board of Studies, and I believe that is being proposed.
Another issue I have, minister, is in relation to full-time work where students who have completed Year 10 must be either at school or in an eligible option. I do not have the clause written down. The eligible options stipulate full-time work. Is part-time work or voluntary work acceptable? If you are doing CDEP in a community, is that counted as full-time work, because normally CDEP is not. Where there are not enough jobs for people who have left school, are they exempt if they are not going to school as there is no alternative either in a form of training or getting a job? Minister, maybe you could answer that when you are summarising in the debate today.
I note that regarding school closure, clause 97 on page 52 of the bill states that if the government is considering closing or amalgamating a school, the minister must talk to the community affected by the proposal. However, the explanatory notes do not mention the community discussion. I am concerned that if you close a school, especially in a community, not only the parents and staff must be notified of your intention but the community also, because it can have major impacts on that community. Reading the bill rather than the explanatory notes, that concern is addressed.
There was a concern raised that the Chair of the NT Board of Studies should be independent. At the moment the minister appoints the chair. Is this usual practice for a board of studies? A chair appointed by the minister through the Administrator is not independent. Do you ever have an independent group which decides who the chair should be? I am interested in the minister’s answer.
I will not say which school or which teacher, but the other day a teacher told me that one of her students called her two words that I will not even attempt pronouncing here. If I had been called that on a football field they would have been sent off for at least two weeks. It says in the front of the bill under ‘Guiding principles’ that students and staff of schools are entitled to a safe environment. There is also a clause in regard to managing behaviour, suspension, expulsion and exclusion, but I get the feeling that we are not protecting our teachers enough.
I have had reports from husbands whose wives came home shattered. They have been abused and treated disrespectfully. We have a system which is supposed to deal with that. Do we need an Education Act or something which says there is no way it is acceptable for a teacher to be sworn at, abused or have something thrown at them? There is talk that it is because we got rid of corporal punishment. I am not advocating that we bring corporal punishment back. The reason we once had corporal punishment was we thought it was the way discipline should be enforced.
How do we instil some discipline? You cannot learn without discipline. Other kids cannot learn if there are people interfering in the classes. Teachers will leave the profession if they come home every day exhausted not because they are teaching, but because they spend most of the day trying to control children who are misbehaving. Again, I am not the expert and other people in the teaching fraternity might say it is not quite like that.
To raise the level of respect for teachers in our system of education, we need to impress on children that teachers are the very soul of the school whose qualities make them learn. They pass on their knowledge to that child in the hope they will get a good education and a good job that will last them through life. I feel there has to be more emphasis on looking after the teachers’ welfare and telling them, ‘We respect what you are doing’, and reflect that in our Education Act.
The question will be asked, ‘What do you do with the kids who are causing disruption?’ You do not want them wandering the streets. What is the future for children who are disruptive in classes? What do we do with them?
At one of my local high schools there is a fantastic VET course for the kids who do not want to be academic in the sense that they do Year 12 physics, chemistry or history, but they would like to fix a motor car or build something with their hands, which is great. I reckon the VET courses at Taminmin are great. They also have horses, the garden, the cattle and the chooks – cannot forget them. But what about the kids who simply do not want to go to school? I know we have the Malak centre, and in Central Australia we have St Joseph’s Flexible Learning Centre, but that is where we pick them up afterwards. If we expel kids from the school so teachers can teach and the rest of the kids can learn, what do we do with those kids? There is a process which you talk about in the bill.
I feel the teachers are being left out. People knock teachers, and many years ago I probably said unkind things about teachers having long holidays and all sorts of things. But after getting to know teachers, I know many teachers work long hours, well after knock-off time, to get ready for the next day, get exam results and get reports done for students. If there is a day spent teaching and students are disruptive, that does not help. You burn out teachers and they will find another occupation.
I take the opportunity to raise that after hearing it from this lady who is a wonderful teacher. Even though this wonderful teacher took it gracefully, it shocked her that someone called her that and used that language in a classroom.
I have more power when I am umpiring footy. If you swear at me you have a yellow card and you are off, or you get a free kick against you straightaway. If you say something really bad about me, you are off permanently and you go to the tribunal. You will be told that you have two weeks’ suspension, especially if it is a serious offence against an umpire. We need to instil into kids that they cannot get away with that. As I said, teachers ...
Mr Chandler: The two words were not ‘nice apples’.
Mr WOOD: That is right. It was only raised with me recently, and this is an opportunity to say that something has been left out. I hope the government considers having a special school for kids who are not so much drop-outs but people who should not be in the standard classroom because they are a nuisance.
When I went to school there were 44 kids in the class. There was a kid behind me who I wish had been somewhere else. He used to give me a hard time in the class and I would end up getting in trouble because I reacted. I imagine that is what happens in a classroom. Someone will stir up someone who is trying to do some work. They will annoy him because he is trying to study and there is a reaction.
The shadow minister raised most of the issues I would like raised. School representative bodies are extremely important. As you say, you are putting in possible ways for exemptions when you are struggling to get the numbers of parent members. It is tough sometimes. Some school councils do better than others. I go to some school councils and everybody attends. At other school councils, when it comes to the AGM or the first meeting for the year, they are pushing to get a treasurer and struggling to get a secretary. It is not always that easy to get those people to come to those meetings. But other groups are fantastic. If there is a way to make sure they continue, I hope you do not get away with just having a majority of teachers and only one or two parents. You need to make sure there is strong parent representation in school representative bodies.
You mentioned home education. It is good that is in the bill. I do not have the current act with me; I presume it is in there. It is good that it is recognised. A group of people comes to my office about once a month. They are wonderful women who bring their scones, jam, cream and lollies, and they sit down as a group and discuss and work through issues they have with educating children at home.
Some people might ask why they are doing that. The funny thing is the family of the lady who organises this group has done well in higher education. They are exemplary kids and they are off to university now. Home education is an important part of what we do. It is similar in many ways to School of the Air. School of the Air is home education with a radio. In home education, mum or dad teaches the kids at home. It is good that it is recognised here. I am grateful to those women who turn up because I know they are dedicated to educating their children at home. They believe that is the best way.
That recognises the pluralism of our education system. I know what the debates about public education versus independent schools are like. That is a choice we are allowed to have in Australia. Some might argue that you have to pay for the choice, but I sometimes say the first schools in this country were church schools. It took a long time before governments set the pathway to having state or government school education.
We need to be more tolerant about other groups that educate children. It may not be the way we would do it. Look at the people involved in independent schools such as the Steiner school. It is an important part of our education options. Those people have a certain philosophy, and people are free to send their children to that school.
I am sad this has to be rushed through but at the same time I thank the minister for the amount of consultation. Our briefing was on the draft bill the Monday before it was introduced; we did not see the final bill. What was the hurry? I was talking to a principal – I will not say who he was – and said, ‘Government was a bit reluctant to bring this in in February. If it was presented in February you would probably have the regulations and could have debated the whole thing. ‘Government brings in changes in the middle of the year and nobody ever worries about that.’
In our briefing we were told the only reason this could not be done in February was it might upset the semester. The semester is – what? – four months long? The first two weeks being chipped off would not make any difference to a semester. Be that as it may, the government has made a decision to pass it today.
I again place on record my thanks to the schools and the school councils that have looked at this. I thank Tabby from COGSO, who kept me up to date with what is going on. COGSO is made up of many people who are parents. They have some administrative help but there is a lot of work for those people who sent out media releases, e-mails and worked hard to get an understanding of what parents think. They pulled out pie charts and presented lists of comments from parents, both for and against. COGSO has done a fantastic job. I thank them for all the work they have put into this and for giving me advice. As I said, I am not an expert but I hope I have helped them.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I once again thank the shadow minister for the work she has done in bringing these amendments. I am happy to debate those amendments when they come up.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Deputy Speaker, we have before us legislation that seeks to put in place an education vision for the future – indeed, for the next few decades for the students of our Territory.
The legislation, however, comes to us with a flawed consultation process. The minister posed a few general questions last year which did not start a serious conversation. There was a draft bill at the end of May this year. Feedback was sought on the bill and until just over a week ago we had no idea of whether or not that feedback had been listened to and inserted into the bill. We have a ridiculous situation of having the bill lobbed on our desk for the urgency debate so we can deal with it in this sittings. In 14 years in parliament I have never seen such a rushed and clumsy process for crucial reform legislation. It is incredibly disappointing.
We finally got to see the bill itself on 18 November 2015. The minister pushed ahead with the urgency motion, which is why we are here. I note the member for Nelson just talked about how it would not have hurt and there would not have been any dire outcomes if we dealt with this properly in February. I made the point during the urgency motion that it did not afford us much time to consult with our communities; we were dealing with a school system where teachers were under pressure writing end-of-year reports and dealing with end-of-year school concerts. The timing was very difficult for the school community, for both teachers and parents. That did not faze the rush-ahead-my-way-or-the-highway approach of the CLP government, so we are today debating the legislation.
It has not been lost on Territorians that this bill was released after the minister forced an urgency motion that reduced the required 30 days for final consultation. We have had just eight working days. I acknowledge the efforts COGSO has gone to on behalf of parents of the Territory to undertake a final round of consultation. I understand it received feedback from some 310 parents in that time. That is a pretty large response in just eight working days.
As for the minister saying, ‘We do not get everything right and that is good enough’, when it comes to education we need to take the time to get it right.
I note the opposition has proposed Education Bill (Serial 142) clause amendments, particularly to the areas where there has been public concern expressed about the cap on the entitlement to access education, and whether or not there is a parent representative on the education board.
However, neither of the amendment schedules circulated – the opposition and the government amendments – have the word ‘public’ in the description of a person who is a parent of a student enrolled in a school in the Territory. I am interested to hear from the minister whether that is intended to be a parent from a public – that is, a government – school, or whether the minister’s view is more broad than that and it is a parent from either a public or a private school. I seek clarification on that because the feedback from COGSO on behalf of Territory parents is a burning desire to have a parent representative from a public school on that board. Other board representatives cover the independent schools and Catholic education, so there is an assumption with the clause proposed that it is a public school, but it is not explicit. I am sure the minister can inform us of that in the consideration in detail stage.
I will never accept capping the number of semesters. This legislation will pass with these amendments given the weight of numbers of both government and the Labor opposition, but frankly it is wrong to put barriers in place to our children continuing their education beyond the standard 26 semesters.
I note the minister has taken on board to some extent the concerns raised, and is now allowing one year to be repeated external to the allocation so it is not counted; you are allowed to repeat a year and it will not go against your 26 semesters. That is my reading of the clauses. It is a minor victory in the working of this parliament. It is a small clawback but why would we want to limit our children at all?
Some people seem to have the attitude that kids keep repeating and staying at school. It is exceptional to have students at school for 14 to 15 years, and where this occurs it is because they genuinely need longer in their education journey.
But it seems the government is hell-bent on putting limits in. I thank the shadow minister for doing what she could to ensure there was some reasonableness in the limit on education. It is something I have tried to explain to school leavers, existing students, parents, other educators and educators interstate. Everyone is shocked that a government would want to put this in place. I am not shocked because I have seen the government do a range of unconscionable things in the time they have been in power, and this is another one. I put on the record that I fundamentally oppose it. The clawback is a small concession. I still oppose the notion that we will limit, in legislation, access to education.
There is a range of reasons people apply for additional time. It may be that someone has been moving around or had an illness which upsets their schooling, or they need to repeat because of their personal learning journey or difficulties. I am concerned that in regional areas the need to apply for approval to continue education beyond the limit will be a disincentive, and that some people will walk away at that stage.
You have to wonder why we are not instead saying we believe in them and want them to keep going. None of us here had our education capped or limited. A student in a non-government school will not have the same education caps or limits, nor should they.
On the whole, I do not have any grave concerns with the rest of the legislation.
I have serious concerns with the pressures our school system is under with the cutbacks in funding. It has been three consecutive years now, with the impost to global school budgets as well. We are down to the bare bones for our primary, middle and senior schools in staffing allocations, whether they are teacher, support staff or admin staff allocations. It is increasingly difficult in that environment to provide the support our students need in their individual learning plans.
It distresses people working in the school environment. You heard the member for Nelson talk about concerns he has with teachers coming home feeling bullied and harassed by the behaviour directed towards them. It is pretty hard at the coalface in our schools. We have fabulous kids as well as kids with challenging behaviours. I have sat in on many school council meetings where we discussed that there is probably a large cohort of undiagnosed Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder kids sitting in classrooms. They tend to get scooped up into the ADHD bracket, and we have a system that is not designed or specialised to cope with those pressures. I have seen firsthand that if you give the kids additional support, whether it is through the specialist programs of literacy and numeracy or through student services support programs, which are vital, they can indeed flourish.
We can debate education reform legislation like this, or we can deal with the fact we have schools that are under an increasing burden because of the consecutive years of cuts to their school budgets. I know the minister does not agree that the annual report shows the reduction in teacher numbers across the system. I also know the minister’s view is, ‘Teacher numbers do not equate to learning outcomes, etcetera’. It is a deeply disappointing circular debate we keep having around education, and government simply does not seem to care.
I embrace wholeheartedly the opportunity to see how the rubber hits the road in regard to these reforms in schools, and whether or not some of my concerns about the additional pressures flowing out of these reforms will impact on the schools. It is always as good as the support you give our educators.
I acknowledge the work being done by the schools in my region, particularly through the Sanderson alliance, which is an initiative where they are joining together to try to make sure there is a holistic approach taken to improving the lives of the children in our community. Congratulations to the principals of the schools in the region at the primary, middle and senior level in our public schools. I hope the Sanderson alliance continues and the small seed funding it has is rolled over and will continue. I attended the breakfast with the Chief Minister, the member for Sanderson and the shadow minister, and it would be hard to walk away not impressed by the energy and desire in the room of all the non-government organisations, representatives of government agencies, educators and parents alike wanting to improve the lives of children. Good luck to the Sanderson alliance.
I am glad the shadow minister has some movement out of the government in the amendments to the legislation. I do not think there should be a cap at all ...
Mr Chandler: There is no cap.
Ms LAWRIE: I will pick up on the interjection and his laughing, ‘There is no cap’. When you say there are 26 semesters, that is a cap. Then you want someone to trigger through into a process to get approval. Mate, that is a cap. Okay? When people meet barriers in their life like that, they walk away. That is the problem with the ignorance shown in your responses to this ...
Mr Tollner: What is there now?
Ms LAWRIE: People walk away. What is there now is the opportunity for a child, supported by their parent ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hold up. Stop!
Ms LAWRIE: … to go back to school the next year and keep on learning ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama!
Ms LAWRIE: That is what is there now ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama, give me a second. Please stop interjecting and let her finish her speech, please. Continue.
Ms LAWRIE: Live in ignorance and make your glib responses. We will watch the impact it will have on children of the Territory.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, schools are under enormous strain and I will continue to work with them to give them every support they need to get through some pretty tough times under the CLP. You cannot lose the number of teachers we have lost from our primary, middle and senior schools and not start to struggle. They are starting to really struggle. Shame, CLP.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for the opportunity to speak on education.
First I thank the member for Wanguri and the opposition’s team for the work done in the analysis, encouraging the debate and providing Caucus with briefings over this exercise, which is a major exercise for the Education Act.
I will now cross-reference the Education Bill that has been discussed, debated and consulted on among the stakeholder groups. When I leave the fair city of Darwin and the streetlights fade and I cross the length and breadth of the Northern Territory, I have had great difficulty in being able to engage in debate about this Education Bill with parents, teachers, remote communities and students who have a set of very personal agendas around education they need and want, and demand are addressed.
The string of parents through the electorate office over the last two years making appointments to see me to discuss education issues that are almost entirely dominated by behaviour management and support is quite alarming. I am honoured that they have chosen to visit me. I am very guarded, diplomatic and honest in my advice, and I direct them through the existing systems to try to work out their problems. But it is becoming quite alarming. I do not really understand why they are coming to see the local member to engage directly in education issues within their local schools, but as I said, I am supportive and I am doing my best to support you, minister.
Behaviour support and management of high support needs, badly behaved and emotional students across the length and breadth of the Northern Territory is shared by our Top End urban schools in the fair city of Darwin. It is very difficult to cross-reference it with the Education Act. One would have to defend the comments about this being an ingenuous exercise running in parallel with a government that is cutting education funds, under-resourcing the needs of regional and remote education and ignoring teachers and their needs. I find it very difficult to deal with those issues when they come my way. I deal with those problems in a professional, honest and open manner.
It gives me the opportunity to try to cross-reference some of the elements in the new Education Bill with what people are saying to me in the bush. I recently met with a group of teachers at a clandestine meeting. They feared they would be discriminated against should they be seen with a member of the opposition. I am passing on to you, minister, the public sentiment. I assured them this was normal, but they had real concerns, so they will remain unnamed. They were not confident that there would not be discrimination against them, which is a sad indictment.
But we will leave it there, minister, and go on to some of their agenda items. One was a lack of appropriate resourcing for regional and remote schools. I have cross-referenced the Education Act and the new legislation you are passing, and I was not able to give them any support in that area. Another very important issue was school funding and the disappearance of the federal Gonski funding. Our education sector is asking about this. The issue of needs-based support is very important. The member for Nelson touched on what should be included in the Education Act, such as things like special needs-based support, the recognition of disadvantage and how to resource those individual community needs.
The member for Namatjira in debate today made a very important comment: if government policy continues to disadvantage those lower socioeconomic groups that are operating on the fringes of mainstream society, then their problems will escalate and become more severe in the future. I am trying to summarise what the member for Namatjira was saying.
The impact of global budgets on small schools is a very real issue. It is an easy cross-reference to the Education Act. It is an element of the act that I reinforced to people which is now embedded. This legislation will pass through the parliament with a government that has the numbers; therefore, we have to work with this. But these teachers were outlining some deficits in this model. The only solution was to look at a government that will provide those important additional resources through this existing structure.
As the members opposite and the Leader of the Opposition said, the Labor opposition is pragmatic. It is not about tearing things down but about interrogating policies and ministers to see where improvements can be made.
The workload of teaching principals was an interesting topic and I found it very difficult to cross-reference where the new Education Act would be of any use to teachers, particularly in small, regional and remote schools where the administrative load has caused considerable stress and disadvantage to teaching principals. That is especially true in the bush schools where they do not have those support mechanisms, particularly in education management and administration.
There is also the problem with teacher housing and the old challenges of repairs and maintenance. I found it difficult to cross-reference any support from the new Education Bill before parliament.
This is what is coming from the constituency, from the teachers, educators and support staff you represent on the front line as a Cabinet minister achieving appropriate resources to support these people.
Speaking of appropriate resources, it was very difficult to get any kudos in the debate about the Education Act when Tennant Creek has seen a loss of 11 staff. Eleven staff in a town like Tennant Creek is alarming. I am not sure the minister could appreciate how alarming that logistic is. I am not sure whether the Education Act can support this, but it is of grave concern to the schools in town, the existing teachers and staff, the parents and school governance bodies.
I looked for references in the act to regional office staff and school support services to do with curriculum and resources and that important element of teacher professional development. One area resonating throughout the length and breadth of the Territory where I live is what they define as curriculum coaches. It seems that, like the Education Act in some respects, it is operating at a high level. It is an educational discourse about administration and management, but when you look for the detail it seems to be deficient.
The teachers I talk to in the small regional or remote schools are going back to this concept of curriculum coaches – visiting professionals who can support their curriculum practice, their teaching methodology and the teaching of reading and numeracy. Some older ones are reflecting back to the day when this was normal practice, and influencing the younger ones with this opportunity. That is something government can look at, because we are seeing erosion of support staff across the regions. There is no doubt that it directly relates to cuts to the education budget.
We also need to examine closely the concept of how educational support and educational support staff are appropriately designed and delivered for the maximum efficiency and the support of teachers.
I have briefly touched on the administrative load in small schools, and the mentoring of school governance bodies. It is critical at this stage, when you are implementing a new Education Act, but in parallel we are seeing parent and school communities disengaging with their school and there is a perennial challenge of poor attendance.
I appreciate what you are doing and I have watched this journey, albeit I have criticised that you are rushing this through. We have a sense of reality across the length and breadth of the Northern Territory that there are critical elements of the school community disengaging, which I suggest is in relation to the relevance of the curriculum. When I say relevance of the curriculum, we do not underscore the achievements in literacy and numeracy, the national benchmarks and the way the system is created, but we need to acknowledge that a diverse multicultural society needs to reflect on curriculum offerings. We need to focus on how to enhance curriculum to make it appropriate, real, meaningful and exciting. These issues are being raised across the length and breadth of the Territory.
It is an interesting parallel that urgent minor repairs and minor new works money over subsequent years, across both governments, has been used in relation to an agenda to secure school infrastructure. We have seen the building of many big fences around schools for all sorts of reasons. If we are purely looking at that level of infrastructure and security while not addressing a school community cohort that is deserting the school because individuals do not feel engaged with curriculum, we will not achieve attendance, enrolment, participation and engagement.
The other associated issue is school governance models. There was some brief discussion from the spokesperson on the Territory Labor opposition’s team about urban schools that have difficulty attracting school council members, or engaging with parents to make the school a wholesome and encompassing environment that supports improved educational outcomes.
In the bush, I do not see this Education Bill with any new amendments, new material, new flare or innovation that will address this issue within the regional or remote schools. With those cross-cultural, isolated communities, essentially, if we are not seriously engaging in school governance, partnerships or sharing, once again it becomes merely a paper exercise open to criticism about whether that is exactly all it is. These are real issues happening in the Territory. This is about advising the minister and trying to cross-reference this bill to the Education Act for its passage through this parliament.
A good cross-section of the community, such as teachers, parents and all sorts of educationalists, want to see defined a special education formula and how children with special needs will be supported. As a sideline, there is some interesting work going on with the National Disability Insurance Scheme trial in the Barkly which the minister may be interested in. When I talk about special needs, I am not sure about this bill progressing through parliament. There are some areas where there is more of a bureaucratic approach to these challenges. Like the member for Nelson said, it would be good to see if we can identify specific Territory needs and identify the student, parent and school community cohorts that are disadvantaged and why they are disadvantaged, as well as what government policy can do about that.
I will throw straight back out there the incredible work done in this parliament with the select committee around Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. That informative and extremely important report and its recommendations have completely been ignored thus far. One would hope it will find its way back onto the Notice Paper and, as regularly put in discourse in this place, debated. I cannot see a new Education Act progressing without some sort of determination and acknowledgment of special needs.
If we look at the Lililwan project work in the Fitzroy Valley and apply that to possible statistics in regard to the new cohort of children progressing through our schools, we could see up to 50% affected by alcohol in utero. That is alarming. We are not quite sure of those numbers but we know that Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, which will directly impact on special needs provision and support in our school sector over the next decades, needs to be addressed and spoken about. That needs to be led by government.
I acknowledge the CLP government and the Attorney-General for initiating that research. That committee did a mountain of work. It was an extremely beneficial committee to be on as the evidence heard and taken was inclusive of the length and breadth of Territory.
This area of special needs reflects some very special needs in the Northern Territory. I draw the minister’s attention to that in this education debate. We seriously need to look at those demographics. Having had the privilege to work with demographers in Lands and Planning in my previous work, I remember quite an alarming statistic we should be celebrating, but which is also alarming, that is, in 2017-18, 8000 Aboriginal kids in the Northern Territory are turning five. That is a significant challenge for any jurisdiction. If I localise that to some of the Barkly schools I have known for over 30 years, they will not have the desks and chairs to support that enrolment, let alone the special needs and curriculum needs of those children.
That brings me to the point I raised today, which is a very sore point in Tennant Creek, where 20 preschool enrolments have already been denied in 2015. The Chief Minister did exactly what I want to do in Tennant Creek in his own electorate. You have the model and you understand what it does and what it will deliver. We desperately need this in Tennant Creek. In 2016 we are still operating on status quo with 20 enrolments already being denied because there are simply not the resources and the physical logistics to cater for them. That needs to change. I am not quite sure where I can find that in the Education Bill, minister. Parents have been very vocal about that in Tennant Creek. It needs to be addressed.
We do not have a lot of time to do that because if those students do not start to be prepared and formalised into school at the age of five, which the bill has landed on, and they progress through their early childhood years, then we will see more intergenerational dysfunction year after year.
The behaviour management and support area, which this bill could start to look at and localise, can related to the provision of secondary education. The debate has been shifted to the number of semesters. The argument recently was whether it is capped or not. I point the minister to an incredible example of education you can find in a big high school in Fairfield in Sydney. It was a program for young mums who have babies when they are still within school age. It is a unit set up to support their alternative education pathways. There is no cap; it is all about support. It is making sure young mums re-engage with the formal education program while supporting the baby and delivering the best outcome.
That is the approach I would like to see in our Education Act, not a debate about capping or not, or numbers or no numbers and being open to the ridicule that, again, this is an economic rationalist exercise. This is just about rationalising the length of formal public education. The minister is open to that criticism I heard across the regions when I was trying to engage with the constituency about this bill. There is an alternative pathway.
As I said today, when I walk the streets of Elliott, Tennant Creek, Ali Curung, or even further out at Canteen Creek, I see secondary age kids disengaged. This policy needs to be amended; it has to change. We cannot afford to send the signal to remote communities that they are the square peg and this is a round hole; they do not fit, ‘See you later’. These young people are highly vulnerable and wandering the streets.
I often wonder how they are processing their situation in life because there are so many barriers now and many more to come. I do not see that education should be one of them. If we could only make sure we keep education out of this list of barriers for young people. How can we address this in regional and remote areas? We should be looking at technology. I did not really see much about technology and innovation in this bill. I hope that once again we start to amend and continually use this as a living, breathing document, not a paper exercise that will live on a shelf gathering dust. It needs innovation and the incorporation of technology.
There is a very real way to engage secondary-age youth across regional and remote areas in a formal school context without destroying the CLP’s values and policies that students should go to mainstream boarding colleges. I do not deny that policy initiative. Any family I can influence to go beyond the Northern Territory borders and get their kids interstate, I do. I write lots of support letters to Commonwealth agencies trying to secure the funding for that. But we really have to address those kids who have not fitted the mould in our regional and remote towns and communities and how we can engage them.
There are good models. There was a great model operating out of Tennant Creek, particularly doing good work in the small town of Elliott. There was an outstanding school principal and team at Canteen Creek who were engaging secondary-age youth through formal education. Consequently, with this policy change they were completely disadvantaged. The residual effect was that families disengaged from curriculum, school governance and education. This had a negative impact on attendance, participation and educational outcomes.
These are a few areas of cross-reference to this bill. I will continue to draw this debate back to the real issue facing Territorians across the length and the breadth of this jurisdiction. I devoted more than half of my life to this field and I will not give it up. I have unfinished business. One of the main reasons I am in this place is because of that unfinished business. If anybody hits a glass ceiling politically, ideologically, bureaucratically – I have experienced that; I know that story. I chose an alternative pathway to come back and complete that unfinished business.
While I acknowledge the work the minister, the department and the opposition has done in a measured and accountable way in bringing democracy to this place, the real issues will not go away. The real issues are not impossible; they just need to have new creative and innovative solutions with the use of technology and some very important retro-fitting of good teaching methodologies.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I ask the minister not to go to Channel 9 or A Current Affair; it is a trap. Do not go for the package deal, the silver bullet; it is a trap. Go back to truly engaging with people and families and making that education process the most exciting part of those children’s lives so they will beat you to the school gate every day.
Ms MOSS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I speak on the debate of the Education Bill primarily to convey the views of the school community in Casuarina.
I acknowledge the work on the proposed updated act that has been undertaken over a long period of time. Everyone from the Department of Education and the minister’s office involved in its development should be thanked for their time, energy and hard work in putting this together.
The opposition and the member for Wanguri should be thanked for undertaking the research and attending all the briefings. The member for Wanguri was at the public consultation held in the northern suburbs at the start of the process with many teaching and school staff who were interested in the changes to be proposed in the bill when it was introduced in the House.
I recognise there has been consultation during the development of the Education Bill, and that given the act’s age and the rapidly-evolving world of education, it was due to be looked at to ensure it provides for the best possible educational outcomes for Territory children and young people.
However, it is a concern that at this final stage, potentially there are important voices that may not have been heard or people may not have viewed the final product. What this means for them and their ability to ask questions is an important part of the process. It is an important part of why we are here in parliament trying to facilitate those conversations and that understanding.
Some of the local schools in my electorate have lodged submissions during this process, and to have the opportunity to hear from them on the final bill before us today has been incredibly important. However, the timing of the bill means the finalisation is being rushed and many schools have not had sufficient time to consider the changes, nor respond in detail. A little over a week during Week 8 of the school term does not provide much time on the final product for our schools and our stakeholders. For such important legislation, it is unfortunate the consultation process has been let down at this final stage.
The member for Wanguri has articulated the reasons Territory Labor did not support urgency on this bill. We stand by that today. She also talked about the outlined amendments, which I support, to strengthen the existing bill.
I have heard the message about the time frame loud and clear from my local school community. I add my voice to those supporting a review process on its implementation.
I have spoken to parents on school councils and other stakeholders within my electorate in relation to the Education Bill. Like other members of this House I have received correspondence from around the Territory in relation to it. This includes correspondence from parents, school councils and peak representative bodies, the Council of Government School Organisations and the NT Branch of the Australian Education Union. I thank every person who has taken the time to get in touch with us or be part of those discussions about the Education Bill. It was incredibly difficult to get across the legislation and provide feedback to a member of parliament to add their voices to the process.
One of the things I have been thinking about throughout the course of this debate is the voice of students. I spoke a few years ago at an ACSSO national conference that was held in Darwin – the Australian Council of State School Organisation – and talked about the value the voices of students can add to the debate about education. I spoke about what they can tell us about how they want to learn, how they learn best and their needs.
We are at a stage where we should be taking the voices of young people seriously in the decisions that impact on them. I will be very interested to hear from the minister and the government about the involvement of students and young people in the development of this bill.
It is important to acknowledge that an incredible amount of work has been undertaken by all the members of parliament who have debated this bill tonight, and that it is a bill significant in size and complexity.
I mention that rather than criticise the NT stakeholders for continuing to raise concerns, as was seen in the introduction of this bill, the minister should seek to understand why these concerns remain. The overall feedback has been comprehensive, particularly given the short space of time given, and has shown that the level of concern still remaining over aspects of the bill should be spoken about. These pertain predominantly to the speed at which it has been introduced to the House, the allocation of 26 semesters in government schools only, and the representation on the NT Board of Studies of our public school staff.
These issues have been raised within my electorate. Schools are currently undertaking hefty workloads, as they always do, but more so now with budget planning and the impending end of the school year. Parent bodies are also in this position, with their own work and home commitments. The release of such dense legislation to be digested and commented on in such a short period of time, just over a week, is unreasonable.
Our school councils are continuing to upskill themselves in readiness for the changing operational environment in which they work, and the changing expectations that are upon them. I doubt there is a member in this House who does not receive e-mails from school councils about the constant professional development opportunities they are taking hold of so they can be good, effective school council members in a rapidly-changing environment.
General views were backed up by the COGSO survey of over 300 parents across the NT. That feedback stated the allocation of semesters has the potential to further disadvantage students who, for a range of reasons, may be struggling at school. This includes students who may have a disability, a chronic illness, a learning difficulty, issues at home or a host of other pertinent circumstances.
We deal with a complex cohort of children and young people in the Northern Territory, as has been raised by other members of parliament. We will see a cohort of children and young people who are impacted by things like FASD. It is a good opportunity now to encourage the government to look at the report of the parliamentary inquiry into FASD. This is a very real challenge that will be faced by our school system, health system and communities over the coming years.
Access to more than 26 semesters is a factor for many students at present, and for some of those students alternative options for post-school are limited. That is an ongoing conversation we have been having. Why would the proposed legislation regarding time at school put more barriers in the way of young people? Parents should be provided with more support throughout the transition should this go ahead, and a commitment should be made to a stronger focus on the early identification of students who are struggling and may need to apply for additional semesters.
We need to avoid placing additional bureaucratic burdens on our parents and students. Post-school options continue to be raised as an issue, and the Family Transitions Network is an advocate for the discussion around this. There are a number of parents who have left the Territory because of the lack of post-school options for their children. It would be good to have a robust discussion about that and how we can better provide for those students.
It has also been raised with me that the three-month period during which applications are to be made for additional semesters, is too long. Many students will not know at that point whether their results indicate that further study is necessary.
In relation to the NT Board of Studies, I firmly believe there should be a parent representative of government schools, and this needs to be clearly stated. The majority of our Territory children and young people go to government schools and receive public education, as many of us did, and this voice is vitally important. A strong public education sector is vital to our future, and the structure of these representative bodies should reflect that.
Schools and representative bodies have repeatedly expressed their dismay and concern over the number of references made in the legislation – I believe it is 53 times – to regulations they have not been able to see. I understand it is not always common practice to release the regulations; however, it is an important concern because so much of this is about how it is implemented. The regulations are seen by my school communities to be of even greater significance, given that people continue to seek clarification about the way the allocation of semesters will be administered. As with everything, the way in which it is implemented will have an impact on our school bodies. Those who have raised these concerns, and others, want to be assured they are being addressed through the regulations promised.
The rush at the end of the Education Bill, the allocation of semesters and the structure of the NT Board of Studies are only some of the facets of the debate relating to education in the Northern Territory. It is distressing to learn there are fewer staff across our Northern Territory schools and Department of Education and 165 fewer teachers since 2012. There is no way this will not impact on the delivery of education to the Territory’s children and young people, whatever the amended act says.
These cuts have had a real impact on my local schools. In August 2014, in particular, at the start of the introduction of global school budgets, I recall distinctly the number of distressed school staff and teachers who spoke to me about what was occurring in their schools and the uncertainty it had caused.
I acknowledge that the schools in my electorate are doing incredible and very different things focused on the needs of the cohorts of children and young people in our local area. It was recently World Teacher’s Day and I am constantly in awe of the hard work put in by teachers, support staff and parent bodies in getting the best outcomes for the Territory’s children, even when sometimes they are struggling with the many school budgets that are still in deficit. We should be offering them all the support we can through this difficult transition stage. I know we are all on our school councils trying to offer that support, but they are having a difficult time. Parents on our school councils in particular are putting enormous numbers of hours into getting themselves across all the details, making sure they are providing input and representing the needs of their local schools. They should be commended for that.
We must properly resource our schools and provide the support they need to provide the best education for Territory students. For me, a lot of this will come out in the consideration in detail stage. I am interested to hear the greater detail about the consistent issues that have been raised by this side of the House.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Wanguri for proposing amendments and I look forward to hearing the greater detail.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the chaos and dysfunction of this government means we are holding this debate less than two weeks after the bill was introduced into parliament. I sincerely thank the departmental staff, the chief executive, the minister’s office and my colleagues for their time. I have had numerous briefings. To have legislation passed eight working days after it was introduced is not right. To have such a huge number of regulations unsighted that link the legislation is unfair to our students and teachers. This is not proper process or consultation. I question why we would rush such important legislation at the final, crucial point.
I have been contacted by numerous people and organisations in relation to this legislation. I thank everyone who has contacted me – local teachers, schools, the Australian Education Union, COGSO, and schools and parents outside my electorate. The legislation has received a lot of comment, and I have received many e-mails.
I want to reflect on education and the last three-and-a-half years. We have seen chaos, millions of dollars cut from school budgets, teacher numbers cut – the figure is about 165 at this point – and teacher assistant numbers cut. As we speak our schools are struggling with global school budgets at a time when they should be celebrating the results of a hard year’s work and participating in final school concerts. Instead, principals and assistant principals are struggling to make sense of budgets. In the final few weeks the government expects policy and procedures to be drafted and the implementation of a new act.
Not being able to see the regulations has been difficult for us and for stakeholders. It will be interesting to see the regulations and how they impact.
My colleague, the member for Barkly, spoke about his remote electorate and the broader impact on education, but also this short turnaround which could have been avoided. The member for Nelson said if we started a few of weeks late there would not be such a big impact. That is something we could have avoided, either through proper structure of the parliamentary sittings schedule or through accepting that this would not be rushed through eight working days after it was introduced.
Education is the key to changing lives, and all Territorians have the right to access quality public education. As the mother of a Transition student I can see the impact that early childhood education has had on him, both through the National Quality Framework in childcare and the preschool and Transition programs. I am sure he will have a lifelong love of learning. It has become evident when he will not want to play or watch TV, but write Christmas cards as we did last night.
It is disappointing that the Gonski recommendations were not committed to by the Northern Territory CLP government, unlike other states, including conservative states like New South Wales, where you now hear about record levels of school funding. It is disappointing that our children will not have the opportunity of unprecedented levels of public school funding. Under the CLP government we have seen cuts to teacher positions, assistants and funding, and that will not help our students. It would be wonderful needs-based funding and the proper resourcing of our schools.
Today we are talking about the Education Act, a huge document. I have forgotten the time frame, but it is well over 30 years since there have been significant changes and rewrites.
My colleague, the member for Wanguri, spoke about a drop in classroom teacher numbers: 165 fewer teachers and 116 fewer administrative support staff, mentioned in the annual report. In the bill the changes to the NT Board of Studies composition has been a sticking point, reducing significantly the number of representatives and the makeup of representatives. The parent representative is endorsed by a parent representative such as COGSO, and the teacher representative is endorsed by the Australian Education Union.
I acknowledge that the member for Wanguri has done a lot of work in this area. She has spent a lot of time and energy trying to reach an agreement with the government. It is important when we debate this bill that we consider the diversity of our students and educators across the Territory and reflect that representation on the board. I believe in the makeup of the NT Board of Studies we state that it is a public school parent, with 75% or more of our students attending public schools, with the other independent schools and Catholic schools already represented. It is important to have that public school representation.
The other sticking point is 26 semesters. No other state, apart from Queensland, has this. Why would we put this cap in place? Why would we put up more barriers? That is concerning and something people contacted me about. I will read a letter from the Australian Education Union to all members of the Legislative Assembly. It is quite a long letter so I will not read it all. Some of the key points are, ‘We acknowledge the extensive consultation period in the bill and also that the government has made a number of amendments to the earlier bill released in May. Our concerns are thus confined to two parts of the bill: (1) the composition and function of the Board of Studies and the 26 semester allocation of education.’
‘The imposition of this program means the mainstream curriculum for students in these schools will largely be sidelined.’
The letter went on to say that, ‘Changes to curriculum or other aspects of education should not be subject to the political whims of an incumbent government, and the proposal for the minister to appoint four experts makes it far too easy for a partisan minister to stack the board with political appointments’.
The Australian Education Union raised strong concerns and would have liked to have seen the regulations. The Australian Education Union also raised concerns about the 26 semester allocation, and the key point is, ‘Access to the regulations might provide some peace of mind that there are no more sinister motives underpinning the 26 semester proposal and we request that the minister make these available, as the drafting instructions do not provide any more detail in the wording in the draft legislation.’
‘We also recommend that members seek to amend the draft bill in clause 82(1) to include the words “a minimum of” before “26 semesters” so that the entire sentence reads “a student enrolled in a government school has an allocation of a minimum of 26 semesters of a government school education”, the standard allocation from transition to Year 12’.
They were the concerns of the Australian Education Union, the peak body for teachers in the Territory.
There was also considerable feedback from school councils, both within my community and more broadly. I thank the people who took the time. Katherine High School, for example, raised the question of 26 semesters, the final copy of the regulations and the unfair time frame of the final draft bill. When every piece of legislation normally requires 30 days, with only eight days – quote, ‘Whilst there is provision in emergency situations to rush through legislation, it is evident that the Education bill cannot be classified as an emergency’. They are the words from Katherine High School Council member Jacinta Mooney.
Katherine High School also raised questions about the school’s responsibility for setting fees. They are concerned it is a council function and believe, with the population of their school in a climate of shrinking budgets, it will disadvantage their school.
They are some of the points raised by COGSO, the Australian Education Union and schools.
The 26 semesters has been an issue of great debate. We must ensure we do not exclude anyone. The bill puts a barrier up, and we need to ensure this community concern is being heard and we are supporting our students.
I take this opportunity to share a story recently told at a forum. The person who shared that story has given me permission tonight to read it tonight.
Minister, you may not realise that your decision to allocate 26 semesters has the potential to impact lives, to impact on the future hopes and aspirations of a Territory student and to serve as a blocker for a student who wants to strive to better themselves. I offer you this very real example of a Territory parent who told of their anguish at the decision to cut students’ education, and not because it would affect her as a student. She is now a proud parent of children in our excellent public schools. Her anguish is for students to come. She passionately believes that every student deserves the same opportunity she was provided by her public school.
As a Year 12 student, at a vulnerable time in her late teens, there were family challenges and a decision to drop a subject, all the challenges being 17 throws at a young adult.
She failed Year 12 and was devastated. Her dreams of a professional career, in her eyes, were over. Working part-time, she thought this was not her future and not the university studies in the field she dreamed of. Through support and nurturing, she was encouraged to repeat her Year 12 studies. She is passionate about this issue because she says if she was in the same position under this legislation she would have walked away from her education. She already felt like a failure and would have felt too ashamed to apply for permission to repeat Year 12.
This is a block to a child’s future we are talking about, minister. Rather than supporting and nurturing we want to make a vulnerable student who feels like a failure and is ashamed because they failed Year 12, and is lacking self-confidence, apply to repeat Year 12. Also, with the current time frames a student might not have received their results. How does that encourage and empower a vulnerable young person to strive to achieve their best? How does the additional barrier – knowing the cut-off date has passed – encourage them not only apply to repeat, but to apply without knowing their results. They will, in effect, risk walking away without an opportunity to achieve their best? No government has the right to put up a barrier to a student’s education.
The end to this story is this young lady completed Year 12. Her marks were not high enough for her chosen study at university, but she was encouraged to try again. She worked full-time, attended night school and demonstrated tenacity and passion, which she still has today. She never gave up and had had nothing to block her striving again. Today she is a professional who raises her family and volunteers.
We need to make sure future students have the same opportunity. There are so many different stories. In fact, my father repeated Year 12. He felt he could do better and did. He went on to gain a scholarship to teachers college. Why are we putting up barriers to education? It should not be like that.
There was a quote going around social media which I want to read into Hansard, ‘It shouldn’t matter how slowly a child learns, as long as we are encouraging them not to stop’.
That is the true meaning of education and learning.
This is particularly relevant with so many students in the Territory being disadvantaged through the tyranny of distance or ESL, English as a second language. We are putting up unnecessary barriers and have no evidence as to why we need them.
Another concern is around the exemption for non-parents to make up more than 50% of a board under the IPS model. I have strong concerns about this for a number of reasons. My colleague raised a number of questions, but it is concerning. We need to make sure at least 50% of school board members are parents of children at that school. If a school is not able to achieve that, one must question IPS for that school. How did they get it? It is important to have that turnover on school councils and school boards. It is important to have that link with parents.
I have been involved on a number of boards and committees over time, and until entering parliament I was on the local childcare committee. That was cut short by this role, but when I first joined other people in official positions – with the makeup of committees we need to make sure we allow for a turnover of parents. We need parents who have been involved for a while, but we also need to encourage new ideas. I have concerns, with non-parents being less than 50%, that we may lose the parental link and the different stages of that link we need.
We need to focus on the lack of the resources and funding our children deserve. As I mentioned earlier, our schools are struggling with next year’s budget. My colleague spoke about funding and what is provided as free education to Territory kids. We need to acknowledge that all our teachers are working extremely hard. This is a massive bill, and it would have been more appropriate for it to go through the normal legislative channels. It is a busy time of year and urgency is not the correct way when talking about education.
People in my community raised points which I raised with the minister’s office in briefings. I will read those points into the record. The minister’s office has addressed them, and the minister is aware of them.
The first point is that no Northern Territory student can be suspended for more than 20 days – around the clarification of government schools and non-government schools. We need to engage these children, particularly those who potentially have been involved in behaviour that requires them to be suspended. They definitely need to be engaged in programs, not shut out of school and education.
Someone from my electorate raised strong concerns about community enrolment and attendance being tracked and followed up, particularly students moving between non-government and government schools and between communities. We have a highly-transient population but need to ensure its education needs are followed up.
Points were also raised around enrolments plans. The bill raised feedback within our schools and across the broader community.
It is also interesting to note that CLP members have shown their disengagement from students and teachers, with not one government member speaking on this bill. Not one single voice from the government has been heard. We have heard Independent and opposition members. What conversations did government members have with their communities? Member for Stuart, have you spoken to your community about this? It is concerning because this affects a huge number of Territorians. To have the minister, the minister’s office and the department do so much work and have silence tonight from the government speaks volumes to our students and teachers.
I thank the minister, his staff and the departmental staff. I acknowledge the member for Wanguri’s enormous efforts regarding this bill. It is one of the biggest pieces of legislation that has come before this House over the last three or so years. I also thank community stakeholders for the input I have spoken about.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate tonight. I will try to go through some of the questions asked. The sad part for me, though, is it felt like we were in mourning at a time when we should be celebrating education. This is a new Education Act, a new era.
As the member for Wanguri said earlier, 36 years ago they were debating education in this House. It is exciting, but I need to comment on a few things that were said tonight about operational issues. Of course, we will have ongoing debates, but when it comes to the act and what is in it, there are a few things I need to point out.
I will start with the member for Wanguri, who was the first speaker, and thank her again for her contribution. I must take my hat off to the member for Wanguri. She has visited many schools in recent times, which is similar to what the former Labor minister, Chris Burns, did for me. He allowed me to visit many schools across the Northern Territory. It was much appreciated because you see things from the ground up. There is some excitement out there.
In regard to the consultation, I place on the record that a saga has been going on for 20-odd months. In fact, it is very unusual for a government to conduct as much consultation on any legislation, including what we did with the regulations. I will talk on that in a second, but I want to thank everyone who has contributed. I need to thank parents, teachers, even children. Many kids gave me their views on what the Education Act should or should not be, including that an additional four weeks holiday every year should be in the act and supported by everyone in this House.
I also thank all the department staff: principals, parents, teachers and everyone who has had input into this. It has been a huge undertaking. Feedback from school councils, COGSO and even the union helped us put together a far more improved bill.
As for the criticism about the way this has been rushed through, everyone needs to take a chill pill and realise we have been working on this for over 20 months. When the final draft was released a covering letter detailed, quite comprehensively, all the changes that had been made from the draft bill to the final bill. Therefore, anyone worth their salt could have put in the effort and read the old bill, understood it, then quickly read the changes made without necessarily reading the entire thing. That process was done to make sure everybody had a good understanding of the draft and the changes made to it.
We were asked to put in the changes; they were not things we had dreamed up. Most of the changes in the final bill were requested. We had two rounds of public consultation involving COGSO and councils. The number of meetings we held was remarkable. That consultation led to ideas and suggestions that we introduced into the final bill. You cannot say we have not listened. Even tonight we were horse trading on the floor to see if we could reach a compromise on the last few amendments.
From start to finish we have followed an excellent process. Could we be criticised for anything? Perhaps this being introduced on urgency is a fault. The reason is we want to give education a clear start next year. We want to ensure the Education Act is in place and the regulations bedded down so we can start a new year with a new act. That is only fair to everyone who works in education.
I did not have to do that. I could have delayed the legislation or shortened the consultation period to ensure we had a full month between the legislation being tabled and debated. However, we chose to consult because that is what people wanted. The Labor opposition called for more consultation. COGSO, school councils and the general community thought we needed to consult more. We listened and allowed time for more consultation. That is the reason we were forced to rush this through quickly. I argue strongly against saying the process has not been robust and effective. I thank everyone who has provided input.
I need to put some comments in context. A lot of the arguments from members opposite were about operational issues, not specifically around the bill. They were having a sledge at what they perceived to be cuts in education and the big reform agenda of this government. I will not apologise for that because we inherited a system in chaos.
I remind people in the House that in the last few years of the Labor government there were 170 additional students in the Northern Territory but the number of departmental staff grew by 780. You cannot tell me that is not a system in crisis. If we had seen a major improvement in results that would be fair, but there was not. There were no improvements in education in the Northern Territory other than in the budget, and the budget does not improve outcomes. There had to be a change in the way we designed and delivered education in the Northern Territory. We had to be more focused on results and providing opportunities.
I will not shy away from the major reform we have introduced in the Northern Territory. This government has only been in for three years and it is remarkable – Ken Davies, Catherine and the rest of the education team – what they have done in the last few years is remarkable.
We took the time to look at results across the Northern Territory and realised we had to make some big changes. We had the courage to look at middle years. I am still not convinced we have that right, and I will not give up in that area but will work hard to improve middle years programs.
We had to look at Indigenous education in the Northern Territory, something left to rot and wither under the former Labor government. There was not enough focus on improving results in Indigenous education.
I will be criticised for the idea of boarding schools, but it is impossible to provide the same level of education for a student attending Darwin High School as one in Yuendumu, Numbulwar or any other remote community. Those students deserve that opportunity, so how do you do it? As a minister, as a department, you knuckle it out and realise that sometimes it might be better to bring the children to an environment where they can be exposed to a better education.
In years to come people will see this as a turning point for remote education. The member for Barkly says he wanders around remote communities and sees vulnerable middle school-aged kids who seem hopeless. The former system brought us to where we are, and that is why we have to change it. This bill is part of that.
Not only have we looked at middle years, Indigenous education and implementing the recommendations in A share in the future – Indigenous Education Strategy 2015-2024, but we have also invested in the early years of education.
We are building new infrastructure focusing on special education, and this bill is part of the reform agenda. This has all been achieved in three years and many people have been involved.
Spending dollars on something does not mean you achieve anything other than spending money. If you can target that spending and focus on improving results every dollar is worth it. Do not throw money away willy-nilly. We can never go back to the days of not being careful about how we spend money in education.
We have also embedded Independent Public Schools in the bill, another thing that has been taken on with gusto. I take my hat off to the school communities that are taking the challenge, and I think the years to come will show a dramatic change. I go so far as to say the Independent Public School model is worrying the private sector.
In recent years we have seen the departure of children from the public system to the private system. In certain areas – Palmerston is one and Mackillop college, a great school with great leadership – there has been a draw on some of our public schools. What do we do? Do we accept it? No, we do not. We build a robust public education system that people want to come back to.
At the moment with the IPS model, global budgeting and the independence we are giving back to schools and their ability to improve their schools, the private sector is rightly worried. It should be, because we are coming to get it. That is good for education because the bar is pushed higher.
I disagree with NAPLAN results. I can show you NAPLAN years under Labor where there were no improvements. We have seen a steady improvement in almost all areas across every point measured.
One area that worries me is writing. Across the country we have seen a dramatic decrease in the writing ability of students. I am looking at Mr Deputy Speaker, who is on an iPad, and I wonder whether technology today – iPads, iPhones and computers – is taking away the ability to write. Maybe that is part of it, and we have to address it not just in the Territory but across the country.
Member for Wanguri, some things you raised tonight were valid, but we have also addressed many of them in the process. You mentioned a review of the implementation of the act. There is a legislative review on non-government schools, which is Part 7, and we plan to review the implementation of the 26-semester scheme and criminal history check scheme at the end of the 12-month period built into it.
The member for Nelson asked if part-time voluntary work counted as compulsory participation. The student must be doing full-time paid work for no less than 25 hours a week. It does not allow for part-time or voluntary work. CDEP could be included if it is for more than 25 hours a week and they are paid.
The member for Nelson asked if the Chair of the NTBOS will be independent. Under the current act the minister nominates the chair. In this bill, the minister also recommends the chair as one of the expert members. To put more of a framework around that, under the Country Liberal government any minister who recommends a member to a board must go through the Cabinet process. It is not a matter of picking Joe Bloggs and saying, ‘That’s who I want and, therefore, who we will get’. We rely on experts and the department putting forward names. It does all the checks and balances and it then comes to me. I then take it to Cabinet and we decide on who it will be. I cannot attest to that happening under a Labor government, but that is what happens in all board appointments under the Country Liberal government.
I want to touch on something that caused a bit of flak tonight, the education regulations. Regulations include administrative detail that assists in exercising the powers in the act but do not change the act. It is a much simpler and faster process to amend regulations and, as such, consultation does not normally occur. However, in order to be as open and consultative as possible, the Department of Education took the unusual step of providing key stakeholders with drafting instructions for the regulations. They had the opportunity to provide feedback before they were finalised.
We have gone to extraordinary measures to make sure people see what we are doing. The draft bill went out in plenty of time for people to look at it, and when the final bill went out there was a detailed explanation of any changes so people did not have to read the whole thing again; the changes were spelt out. The majority of those changes were what the community had asked for, as well as COGSO, school councils and the union.
One that comes to mind, which most people would realise, was the old act said it was compulsory for a six-year old to be at school. We understand 97% of people send their children to school at the age of five. Thinking logically about it, let us have that in the act. That caused some consternation that we were forcing people to send their children to school at age five. We said, ‘Are we going to die in a ditch over something like this?’ No, it does not change the world, even though I think the earlier a child starts their education the better. Because of the consternation we removed that requirement. These things were changed because of community feedback. For any government this consultation was pretty comprehensive.
In regard to closing schools without consultation, I cannot believe that any government would close a school anywhere in the Territory without fully consulting with the community. When we first came to government Labor was sending messages of doom and gloom and that we were about to close schools. No school has closed since we have been in government. I cannot see that happening in the near future and it would not happen without consultation.
Protecting teachers is a good point. Again, it is an operational issue and something that perhaps does not need to be in the act. Today, with the employee assistance counselling offered to teachers – let us face it, they deal with some daunting issues from time to time from unruly students through to dealing with parents. I have seen principals and teachers abused by members of the general public, in some cases parents of students, in front of students. I fully appreciate some of the things they deal with. We have psychologists available. We even have a fly-in squad that can go anywhere in the Territory to deal with significant events that occur. Recently the fly-in squad went into Angurugu because of community unrest there. We have put these things in place to support teachers.
I take offence to the member for Barkly mentioning provision of good, open and accountable consultation. I cannot recall receiving news flash information when Labor was in government. If something has happened in a school in an electorate held by members opposite and I consider it relevant I will forward the news flash on. You will not get all of them. Some things are probably not relevant, and little things happen that I am made aware of. Some things are significant, and I believe it is important that news flashes are forwarded to members opposite, including the member for Nelson.
I often send news flashes to the member for Goyder, not that schools in her electorate are any worse than others. From time to time I ensure that as local members you are aware of what is happening in your schools. I do not recall that ever happening under a Labor government. Again, that accountability and the relationship I have with you guys I would like to keep strong, particularly with regard to education.
The member for Barkly mentioned clandestine meetings. I remember in opposition how people were often scared to talk to us because of big time ramifications from the then Labor government. I have never shot the messenger. In fact, I applaud people for coming forward because if I do not know the truth how can I fix it? My staff will tell you I do not shoot the messenger. I am familiar with the saying that ministers often drink filtered water. We are told a pretty cleansed version of what is happening. Sometimes you need to hear it from the coalface.
The member for Barkly said he had zipped around the countryside talking about the bill, yet I understand the member for Barkly did not receive a briefing on it. I am not sure what he was discussing with constituents or schools when he did not seek a briefing. He talked about special needs. There was no investment in Tennant Creek for the nearly 12 years you guys were in government. In fact, there was no high-needs support for Tennant Creek under the former Labor government. It is hypocritical to talk about these things when you did nothing when in government.
He mentioned vulnerable students, which is why we are making changes. The easiest thing for us to do coming into government would have been to follow the way you guys operated. In opposition you seem to think you have all the answers. What happened in the nearly 12 years you were in government? I am not saying everything you did was bad; you did some good things. When I was chair at Bakewell, after some chain rattling the minister delivered.
You did not do everything wrong, but you do not have all the answers. We do not have all the answers but are hoping this bill gives us a framework to operate under for decades to come. It can be amended when necessary to provide a modern framework and build education in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Consideration in Detail
Clauses 1 to 27, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 28:
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Chair, I move amendment 42.1 in my name to clause 28(1)(d). The member for Wanguri raised changes to this clause. Clause 28(1)(d) says:
This was originally a public school. The issue I have is 25% of our schools are in the private sector. It would be wrong of this Assembly to potentially rule out the parents of students at 25% of schools. We removed public to include all schools in the Northern Territory.
Ms MANISON: The minister and the Independent members today had discussions on amendments to clause 28. As discussed, and from consultation with education advocate the Council of Government School Organisations, which represents the parents of children in public education, and the Australian Education Union, which represents teachers, it is important to ensure we have those strong voices on the Northern Territory Board of Studies.
On this point I remain firmly of the view that given 33 000 students are in government education in the Northern Territory, it is important that position is held by the parent of a student attending a government school. However, I appreciate this is something the government can move on, and I see positive signs for having it open to parents of non-government school students.
When I weigh up the numbers the 75% argument wins, and also the strong advocacy from groups such as COGSCO, knowing they would endorse that representative. However, we have reached a positive point in amending the legislation to ensure groups that advocate for parents of school students, and groups that advocate for teachers, will ultimately have to endorse nominations to these positions. This is a positive move.
Mr CHANDLER: Will I deal with clause 28(1)(e) now?
Ms MANISON: I have just spoken about both of them, I apologise.
Mr CHANDLER: Did you? That is okay because we are happy with 28(1)(e) the way it is.
Mr WOOD: I appreciate there is always debate about public and private schools, but the functions of the board are:
The functions of the board are not related to whether you are in a public school or a non-government school. It is right for the government to want a parent, but we should not discriminate where that parent comes from because the Education Act covers all students in the Northern Territory. Whilst it is not exactly what COGSO is after – I understand what Tabby sent me – it is a good way of going forward. I support the amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 28, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 29 to 81:
Ms MANISON: When will the regulations be finished? As part of formulating and finalising those regulations, will you be consulting with stakeholders?
Mr CHANDLER: The regulations are all but done. They will pass Cabinet. I believe the next Cabinet meeting is 8 December. We will gazette them and get them out so schools have them before the start of next year. In this regard the regulations have been consulted on as much as possible, given that all the drafting instructions for the regulations have been provided.
Ms MANISON: Will the Council of Government School Organisations and the Australian Education Union get to see them before they are gazetted and have gone through the final process for sign up? Could you share that with them?
Mr CHANDLER: Yes, I am happy to give them copies of the regulations on the understanding that until they are gazetted they are not formal.
Ms MANISON: That would go a long way. I hope you have the legislation in front of you. I will turn to clause 59.
Mr WOOD: Could I ask about clause 38, page 19, which relates to the compulsory school age? You commented on it when you were responding to my earlier comments. This would be mainly in relation to remote communities. You said people could be on CDEP if it was the equivalent of 25 hours a week. A concern is that there would be only so many CDEP jobs available. What happens in remote communities if a person wants to leave school? You might say they have to stay at school, but the bill allows someone to go to work or training but there might not be any full-time work available? Does that student need to stay at school?
Mr CHANDLER: That would be the case. We are trying to get people into full-time employment. The intent of that legislation is to ensure people are either actively employed or seeking some kind of education, whether in school or some type of training. We will not design legislation around people sitting on their backsides.
Mr WOOD: I understand that and support what you are trying to do, but I am looking at the practical implications in a remote community. There are not many jobs, CDEP is possibly capped, so what does someone do? Are you forcing them to stay at school? Is there an exemption when there are no jobs or must they move to another community?
Mr CHANDLER: I cannot imagine high numbers fitting that criterion. Young people will not get a start in life without an education. It is wonderful if they have a job, but if they are in an area where there are no jobs there is ample opportunity to say CDEP is one. However, there are other training opportunities, and there is always school. As we roll out boarding schools in the future the scope of opportunity will grow dramatically. Over time, hopefully, there will be no one, and today the numbers are small.
Ms MANISON: I turn to page 39, clause 75, cost of government school education. The bill provides that a standard curriculum prescribed by regulation will be free, but people want to be assured of what is in the standard curriculum. Are you able to share with the House what you anticipate in the regulations around standard curriculum?
Mr CHANDLER: This, for the first time, provides some level of cover for school councils and schools. As you know, until now it has been difficult for schools to charge fees. Today most people call it a voluntary contribution. For the first time this enshrines the right of schools to charge for a service. It might be they want to run a music program that is well outside the normal curriculum. In that case the school has the right to charge a fee to cover the cost of that over and above standard education. That already happens in some cases, but this gives schools the right to do it.
It is also important to ensure, through legislation, a component of education is free, and anything above that – through their community and with school autonomy – schools can do it. It will come down to whether or not a parent or carer wants their child to do something. This is not forced on them.
Ms MANISON: I am trying to see if it is English, maths or science? I am trying to get details of what is standard curriculum by regulation. What do you anticipate will be in there, minister?
Mr CHANDLER: Clause 75(2)(a) of the bill – the prescribed standard curriculum is the provision of teaching and learning activities, instructional support and instructional materials for delivery of the following: the early years learning framework; the Australian curriculum; the senior secondary Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training; and Vocational Education and Training. All of those things are covered as the standard program.
Ms MANISON: Could you then give me an example of what would be outside the standard curriculum? What might parents be required to pay for?
Mr CHANDLER: Sky diving.
This is straight from the Education Regulations:
This regulation applies to a school body other than a joint school representative body: the provision of instructional support or instructional resources; extra-curricular programs or activities; entry costs associated with performances, productions or events; the provision of material or services that are a higher-cost alternative to those required for the standard curriculum program; and the provision of equipment or other materials, services or facilities.
There are examples of printing for personal use, Internet access for recreational purposes and instrumental music tuition. It might be the use of mahogany in woodwork instead of standard pine. Those things might be used and require extra fees. Do you want me to go on? They are things outside the normal curriculum.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: You have illustrated the point, minister, thank you.
Ms MANISON: I am keen to get an understanding of how the department will ensure schools are adequately delivering standard curriculum for free and not charging for it?
Mr CHANDLER: We all do jobs we are responsible for. Principals in our schools are entrusted to make decisions in that regard. At the end of the day the principal will set the fee, if there is a fee, for anything outside the norm. It comes down to the principal’s responsibility.
Ms MANISON: Is there line of sight from the Department of Education over what individual schools are doing and what they are charging for?
Mr CHANDLER: Facebook and about every other way parents today communicate with MLAs and the department. You cannot get away with anything today. I guarantee that as soon as someone did something outside the norm you and I would hear about it, and I am sure action would be taken.
Ms MANISON: I appreciate that, minister. It is a genuine concern and an appropriate question. What monitoring of fees will there be? How can we ensure the free standard curriculum is delivered in the education system? Surely the Department of Education will have some way of ensuring the key commitment to Territory families of free standard curriculum and free education is upheld?
Mr CHANDLER: I appreciate your concern. The bill does not change what is occurring in our schools now. Principals are doing this now with things outside the curriculum. If there were complaints they would be noticed. I am sure we will hear if there are complaints and the principal would be spoken to. That would happen under normal circumstances. There is a set regulation about the standard curriculum and examples of what is outside it. There are rules to follow. If someone steps outside the rules action will be taken.
Clauses 29 to 81 agreed to.
Clause 82:
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move amendment 42.2 in my name to clause 82:
I spoke to the member for Nelson this morning about the bill, saying a person can apply to the CEO for an extension. On the operational side of things, parents would speak to the principal to see if a child might repeat, or the principal, after speaking to a student’s teacher, might recommend the same action. Through discussions agreed on by the principal a child might repeat a year. The 26 semesters caused some consternation, so we have reached a compromise that if a child repeats a year it does not count in the 26 semesters.
At the end of the day that does not mean there is a cap. Let us use an example. A child might develop a sickness which causes them, over a two or three year period, to only get one good year of education. There is no way in the world a principal would stop a child from repeating to get that additional schooling. It is the same when they reach Year 12. If they have not reached that level, then through discussions with the principal they can seek an extension of another year.
Similarly, if parents wanted their child to do four and five years extra schooling and a principal rejected it the case would be elevated to the chief executive to decide. If the chief executive did not consent there is always NT CAT to appeal to. We are not putting a cap on this. This is just enshrining in legislation the minimum requirement for a government to provide 26 semesters of school.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the minister, his staff, the Independents and Parliamentary Counsel for their advice.
The issue of 26 semesters has been the main point of contention with this bill. It was important to get it on the record, and for the government to show its commitment to making education accessible to as many children and young adults as possible.
There were some problems with the initial bill, particularly the part we are now amending, because it originally stated that if a student enrolled in a government school and repeated a year of schooling, the repeated year counts as part of that student’s standard allocation.
We all want to make it easier for children to have a pathway to finishing their NTCET, and that seemed to be a roadblock. The last thing we want to do is put barriers up which discourage students from completing their schooling.
COGSO was deeply concerned about that, and I am pleased the government has looked at this amendment because it sends the right message. If for some reason during the pathway from Transition to Year 12 a student does not finish one year and needs to repeat, the pathway through to Year 12 is still clear. They will be able to get through without having to apply for an additional year.
It is tough for young people. It is tough failing as an adult and having to face the truth. We should make it as approachable and encouraging as possible. The goodwill shown to amend this part makes it much better than the original bill. It will help get more support from education advocates who have been critical of this point.
I support this amendment to the bill. It is sensible of the government to take that feedback on board and listen. It will assist many students going through their schooling who, for one reason or another, have to repeat a year. It will give them comfort to know they do not have to apply. We all know shame job is a big thing in the Territory, and we want more people approaching education in a positive way.
Mr WOOD: If you have completed Year 10 and find work was not a smart idea and you need to complete Year 11 – the year you were at work – is that counted as two semesters or are you allowed that break? Can you break your semesters?
Mr CHANDLER: There are two things there. The first is, yes. The second is if you are out of the system for more than 12 months and have re-entered, you need to have working with children security checks done. That would be the only thing if it was over 12 months.
Mr WOOD: The other part then comes into play. For one year you could go to work then go back to school.
Does the 26-semester concept apply to non-government schools? If not, why not?
Mr CHANDLER: No, it only covers public schools. The private sector can do what it wants. We want to enshrine in public education, as a responsibility of government, a minimum of 26 semesters.
Mr WOOD: Is that why all the kids go to non-government schools? The NT Board of Studies covers non-government and government schools, so why does the government not cover non-government schools? Why is it not the rule of government to say all children need to do 26 semesters, whether they go to a government or non-government school?
Mr CHANDLER: Parents put their children in the public sector or the private sector. They have to go to a public school; they choose to go a private school. It is not right for a government to dictate what hours private schools operate. They have to stick to a curriculum, and I want to make sure there are educational outcomes, but it is not wise to step into their operations. In the public sector we have a responsibility to ensure students have the rights and ability to access education. For the first time we are enshrining in legislation the right to an education. The private sector is a choice parents make for their children.
Mr WOOD: In relation to compulsory school age and when a child can leave school, does that apply to all children attending school?
Mr CHANDLER: Yes.
Mr WOOD: If that applies, why does the requirement to go to school for 26 semesters not apply?
Mr CHANDLER: I have already answered that question.
Mr WOOD: As this is an evolving act I am interested, and I will talk to the non-government sector.
Mr CHANDLER: They might want to be involved. They might think it is a great idea.
Mr WOOD: I am struggling to see why it does not apply to kids at any school.
Mr CHANDLER: If parents decide to send their child to a private school, how can you make it the responsibility of the private sector to give that child 26 semesters? You could not do that because a child might only be there for a period of time. In the public sector, a child might be there from year dot right through to Year 12 or they might float in and out of the public sector, but you could not make it incumbent on the private sector to ensure there are 26 semesters.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 82, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 83:
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move amendment 42.3 in my name to clause 83(2). We have no problems with the change and we recommend it be accepted. This clause was put forward by the member for Wanguri.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thought I was being ambitious when trying to get this down to 30 days. I am glad you accepted. In a perfect world I would make it a shorter time, and I hope you review it to ensure it is effective. Year 12 results come out in mid-December and then there is Christmas. It does not give people much time. In a perfect world, especially knowing how schools operate – people could turn up in week one, two or six and enrol in a school.
I appreciate that this is a positive change, down from three months to one month for application. I am keen for this to be looked at in the annual review to ensure it is working. The last thing we want is for this to be a barrier to people re-enrolling at school. If people are looking for excuses not to do something – having to go through that process might put some people off. I am keen for it to be monitored to ensure it does not act as a deterrent. Thank you; cutting this by 12 months was sensible.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 83, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill taken as a whole and agreed to.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask some questions about the remainder of the bill.
I turn to clause 92, page 48, relating to exclusion of students by the CEO. Clearly safety is of paramount concern. We want to ensure students are safe at school. This point was raised in a debate when Clontarf students were in this Chamber not long ago. If a child is excluded or expelled from school, what actions are taken by the Department of Education to ensure those children do not miss out on the opportunity to get an education? We all agree that if they do not succeed in that education their opportunities when adults are limited.
Mr CHANDLER: I have been involved in a couple of these situations. I am trying to think of a good way to describe it. A child might have physically assaulted another student so that child has been excluded from school. You might put them into another school to protect the first child. If that is not readily available it is incumbent on the department to find another source of education for that child. In some cases even the Northern Territory Open Education Centre has been used. Yes, it is important.
I would like to think we will reach a day where children are not just suspended to home but sometimes suspended to a facility. We have the Malak Re-engagement Centre, and a school within the Don Dale centre for children who break the law. They still deserve an education, and hopefully through a good education they will not end up in gaol. It is quite clear the department is responsible for ensuring an education program is provided for those children.
Ms MANISON: Can you please turn to page 55 and school representative bodies. Returning to the point I raised during debate, where schools make an application for an exemption for not having 50% parental representation, can you explain the types of situations where you, as minister, would sign off on that? Also, what guarantees would you seek to ensure there is adequate community consultation and the parental voice is not lost from the school representative body?
Mr CHANDLER: This is probably more to do with Independent Public School boards because they can have less than 50% parent membership. However, they must demonstrate how parent and community views will be represented on the board in that case. Through their application they need to demonstrate how that can be achieved. Both an Independent Public School board and a school council must have a parent as the chair, no exceptions, and approval to vary the composition of an Independent Public School board only lasts for two years. After that, the board must reapply to the minister to continue with the varied composition or revert to the standard composition requirements.
Ms MANISON: We all appreciate that a year is a long time, and two years is longer. It is half the time of our parliamentary term. Will the department do any ongoing monitoring to give you assurance that those parental voices will still be heard on school boards in that school community?
Mr CHANDLER: Whether a school is a standard public school or an Independent Public School they still operate under the regulations and control of the Department of Education. Secondly, that rule, as it stands, is something we will review when the time is right. I cannot see any issues arising, but if they do and they are out of kilter things can be reviewed.
Ms MANISON: Thank you, minister, those are all my questions. I thank you again for the briefings, and for listening when I spoke about amendments today. I appreciate that. I thank the Department of Education staff sitting in the box working behind the scenes late tonight. It was important to have a thorough debate on this bill because education is important to the future of the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD: I thank the minister and his staff because they have done a lot of work. I appreciate the work done with the minister on these amendments.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, would you like to thank anyone?
Mr CHANDLER: Everyone!
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Reports for Members for Barkly and Johnston
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I table three travel reports from the members for Johnston and Barkly pursuant to paragraph 4.12 of the RTD.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, while there is no question before the Chair, I seek leave to withdraw the Sex Offender and Child Homicide Offender Public Website (Daniel's Law) Bill 2015 (Serial 139) from the Notice Paper.
Leave granted; bill withdrawn.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will do my Christmas greetings before everyone else. I wish the member for Daly a very happy Christmas. There is always a rush at adjournment to get the Christmas greetings out of the way.
I need to make sure I thank my electorate officer, Kim, who somehow stands by me through thick and thin. She knows I am a completely unorganised person but somehow we get through the mess day in and day out. I appreciate her support.
I also thank my part-time EO, Sharon, who comes in during the week to support Kim and me. Her work is very much appreciated. I also thank my new research person, Helen, who works a number of hours a week and has been a great contributor. She is still learning the tricks of the trade, and there is a fair bit to learn when it comes to dealing with legislation. I wish them all a very happy Christmas.
I also thank all the staff of the Legislative Assembly. Without them we would not be operating at this hour of night. During the last sittings we were still going at 3 am, and staff were still working at that time. The tabling staff, the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk; the Hansard people, who will battle on long after I have made this adjournment speech; all the support staff; and security, who are here through the night and are always pleasant when you speak to them. If you need some help – if you forget your key – they will help you get into your room.
I also thank the staff at the parliamentary library, Liisa and Kaye, who are always helpful when you need to get information in a hurry. A number of my speeches would not have been put together if I had not been given the information I required.
To the media, love them or hate them – without them I do not think we would have democracy. Sometimes they can go a bit overboard with their headlines, but there is no doubt the media plays a very important part in the Northern Territory, especially as we have a unicameral system and they can act as a counterbalance. It is important to have strong media, so I thank them for the work they do.
To people in my electorate of Nelson, regardless of whether you support me or not, I thank you. They do not always support me. I get my fair share of different opinions, but that is fine and healthy and I do not shy away from it. It is good that people have different points of view. Regulars come into my office, sometimes just for the jelly beans. We try to keep the chemist jelly bean supply fresh, because much of it ends up in my office. Many people enjoy coming in for a chat – Mark, Cookie, Annie, Tom – and on Thursday night the mahjong ladies enjoy using the community room.
To all the schools – we have been talking about education tonight – especially the principals, the school councils and the staff. I enjoy visiting our schools as there is always something on. Schools are very much part of our community. Maybe in the old days it was at the barn having a dance, but when do you get a chance to meet people in your community now? You meet them when there is something on at the school – a school dance or an assembly. Schools are very much part of the community and I thank all the people who work in our schools. I have many government and non-government schools in my electorate and I appreciate all the work they do.
I am sure I will leave out someone, but not my good wife, Imelda, who has persevered with my job – it is more than a job. It is something I have spent a fair bit of my life …
Mr Chandler: It is an adventure!
Mr WOOD: It is an adventure, and it never ceases to amaze me how many twists and turns there are in this adventure. Today was another one of those twists and turns.
My wife, Imelda, has travelled down this road with me and supported me all the way. No, she is not a fan of politics, but she supports me. Sometimes I ask her, ‘What do you think of this or that?’ She says, ‘Well, that’s up to you’. She is willing to give advice, but she also trusts whichever decision I make. Without her support I would not be here. We have had our ups and downs. I crack nearly 43 years of marriage next year, so we have been together for a long time and have had a varying life. When it comes to politics, I thank her very much for the support she has given. I love her very much.
I should say hello to my dog, Max, a great supporter. I guarantee when I get home tonight he will turn upside down and expect a rub. That is the sort of dog he is. He is a mad dog.
Most dogs, when there is lightning – we have huge storms in the rural area. My previous dog went straight through the fly wire door in the laundry, straight into the toilet, hid and nearly shook to death. This dog chases lightning. One day he will be a fried dog. I wish Max – mad Max, I call him – a happy Christmas too. I hope you live through this Wet Season because if you keep chasing lightning you will not be around much longer.
I also thank all my friends and colleagues in this House, regardless of the arguments and differences of opinion we have, and regardless of the tantrums. Christmas is a time when we should be wishing goodwill to all men and women. That is one good thing about Christmas. Thank you for all your support. My New Year’s resolution is to work together more because that is what we should do. We should argue less.
I thank the Minister for Education because tonight is a good example of working together to introduce a bill that is important for the Northern Territory.
I wish everyone a happy Christmas.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Mr Deputy Speaker, yes, it is the time of year to take a few minutes to thank people who allow you to do the job you do.
I will start with you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and Madam Speaker, thank you. I also thank the entire Legislative Assembly, particularly the parliamentary officers here. They do a remarkable job putting up with us and our wants and needs.
Before I thank anybody else I have to thank the VIP drivers. Those guys do an amazing job – Bill, Yanni, Ben, David and John. I thank the parliamentary staff, security, Hansard, Parliamentary Counsel and the library staff. Everybody who works in this building deserves a pat on the back. We work long hours, unlike what some in the general public believe. People in this building know the hours spent in this House.
My office had a few changes this year, but a big thank you to Samuel Burke; Jessica Adnams, who has just left but I think we will see her again; Bridie Rogers; Michelle Leonard, the little leprechaun; Sarah Gotch; Linda Sing; Lorne Hamilton; Michelle Wells; Meaghan Jones, who is new in the office so welcome; and Whittney Jago, who happens to be the best media adviser I have ever seen. Benjamin Dawson, my electorate officer, thank you very much. Have a great year, thank you and Merry Christmas to all.
To all the staff working on the fifth floor who make our job a little easier, including my colleagues in the Country Liberals, also our Labor colleagues and the Independents, thank you for a robust year. At this time of year you have time to reflect. We are all here for the same reason and I thank you all.
Member for Wanguri, thank you for your passion for education. It is appreciated, and it is good to have somebody with that passion sitting opposite to keep me doing the job.
Teachers and students, the electorate of Brennan, thank you very much for another year of support. I look forward to seeking your support in 2016. Have a merry Christmas.
As the member for Nelson said, the media – we have this love/hate relationship with the media. I said recently we love them and they must love us for everything we do for them. It is pretty important because I reckon we provide half of their work.
I thank my family, my beautiful wife and my children, without whose support I could not do this job. I know when we spoke about the election next year – do we want to do it? We were coming up to preselection and they were the first people I asked, ‘Do we keep going?’ I have the passion and drive to continue in this role and do what is right for Territorians, but I need their support to do that. I love them dearly. Thank you very much for your support.
We spoke about the possibility of going to an early election had the vote gone the other way today. Those guys put up with not seeing their dad. Most of you guys here are in the same boat – your family misses out on you all year. A week or two with them over the Christmas period is a special time. When I said there was a possibility Michael might have stolen Christmas, they were not happy. The support I was hoping for might have drifted rather quickly. I love you dearly, thank you.
Everybody have a merry Christmas. Please stay safe, particularly on our roads. We want you to get through Christmas, enjoy yourself and we will see you in 2016.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I put my thanks on the record for the hard work of 2015.
I learnt in my first year to thank the most important people first, and they are my electorate officers, Jenny Djerrkura and Chris Grace. They are such fabulous support and I could not do this job without them. Thank you for your time, dedication and support every day. You both do such a wonderful job and the community loves you. Thank you to Syd and Jodie for letting them spend so much time committed to work.
To the loves of my life, my husband, Scott, and my beautiful boy, Aiden, thank you for letting me do this and for your unwavering support every day. Also, the support of my mother, Rose, my father, Gary, and my brother, Luke, is endless as well. They help take care of Aiden so Scott and I can work. If we ever have to attend functions, if I have to be here or at a breakfast at 7 am mum is always happy to take care of him. That has helped me commit fully to this job, but also be able to enjoy being a mum knowing that if I cannot take care of Aiden I have the best of support with my mum and my father doing the job. They are great grandparents. Thank you to the McNeill family and the Herrimans for their love and support.
A new bunch of people in my life are from the Marrara Children’s Centre, which is in my electorate. They take care of Aiden two days a week. There was much anxiety the first time I dropped him off to childcare. I had heard so much about it but never thought I would be holding my breath doing it, only to find out what a wonderful experience it is for my child to go into childcare. The early childcare educators are wonderful. Special thanks to the centre manager, Tara, the little babies’ room – Jenny, Sukprit, Emma, Risha and the ladies because they take care of many children from the electorate. It is a wonderful place.
I thank my team-mates from the mighty Waratah Division 1, premiers this year. It had been 20 years between premierships for me. I last won that when I was in Year 11 playing what used to be called B Grade in the Darwin Netball Association in 1995. It was nice to go back 20 years later and win a premiership with the girls. Thank you, ladies. It was hard fought but it was great to be part of a grand final winning team. Perhaps I can retire from netball now.
I have to thank my wonderful constituents in the Wanguri electorate. It is a delight to be your local member. I love the fact that I am always talking to people, whether I am out running or going to the shops. I feel I have the best electorate in the Northern Territory.
I particularly thank people in the electorate for their ongoing support and advice, and for helping me stay in touch with local issues. It is always frank, fearless advice. Their thoughts and views, particularly from Vim Sharma, Henry Gray and my seniors at Leanyer, Dotty, Rob Portius, Chandra, Hazel, Graham, Porky – Rob Hudson from Wanguri, a passionate advocate for traffic in the area, Sammy and Barry, and God bless you, Davey. I cannot believe it is a year since you have been gone.
Thank you to the team at Hibiscus shops. I always say thank you to Charlie on the checkout at Woolworths. That guy is a legend and knows everybody going through the shops. To Joan and Christine at Strawberry Fields, Nelson, Vincent, Rampor and the ladies at Nelson’s for keeping us full of coffee and good food. To Laura, the centre manager, Tracy, Renee and the girls at Lime Hair, Tania at Hibiscus Health and Beauty, Robyn at the newsagents, Matthew and the team at the Chinese shop, George and Gary at Q Framing, Tracy and the pet shop girls – it is a wonderful community to be part of.
I say thank you to our local police, who are always great at responding when we call with problems. There have been a few problems this year around the shops. Thanks Kerry Hoskins from Casuarina and Scott Pollock. Both are great, proactive police officers and constituents. We thank you for your support in the electorate. Thank you to Jarrod Collins from DHA, who is always approachable to talk about issues within Muirhead and how things are going. Of course, Paul and Sarah at Dollys – you two run a fantastic pub and we all love it.
Thanks to the Tracy Village club, particularly the functions team, because when we hold a big lunch they are always so helpful and do a fabulous job.
I would also like to thank some of my constituents who I met last year at the Muirhead Christmas party. To Angela, Neve, Lani and her husband, Gavin. It has been wonderful to meet people through work events and to meet another mum, and for Aiden to have a little playmate in Neve has been great. I cherish that I have another mum to share this wonderful journey of parenthood in a local community with. I really appreciate all the time you have given to us and your friendship this year.
To my wonderful friend and mentor, the former member for Johnston, Dr Chris Burns. I am still grateful that you are a big part of my life and that we can have some very fired-up conversations. You are a wonderful guide and support for me in this job. I always like having a good debate with you and things have not changed.
To my local schools – Leanyer school with Anne Tonkin; Tania and Louise are Assistant Principals and Neale Cooper, the school council chair. This is a passionate and dedicated school doing some wonderful things in the community, and I look forward to sending Aiden there one day.
To Wanguri School, Gail has gone but we thank her for her contribution to the community. Thank you to Jen Coad for stepping in during the last term and doing a wonderful job, as well as Pam, Michael and Mark, a new addition to our school community. I always like to thank Robyn, who has always been there working hard behind the scenes. She is a wonderful person in the school community.
To Holy Spirit school, Simon Duffy and Paula Sellers, thank you for another wonderful year and all the best.
Karen Koehler and Pastor Geoff from the St Andrew campus of Good Shepherd are doing a great job nurturing and bringing up some wonderful, confident, happy children in our community.
I thank Hansard, security, the cleaners and the Legies staff. Your support is never taken for granted. You are wonderful and thank you for helping us do this job. To the staff in the Leader of the Opposition’s Office, thank you guys. You are fantastic. You work hard and I am eternally grateful.
To my parliamentary colleagues, thank you for another interesting year. I like it when we can have some good conversations with each other and work together effectively. Tonight has been a good demonstration of that. All the best to you and your families over Christmas. I sincerely wish you well.
I would like to touch on a few people who we have lost this year far too young. I have met most of them through this job.
The first one is Campbel Giles. She was the heavyweight title fighter of all the media advisers I have ever met. She lost her battle with cancer earlier this year. She was a funny, fierce, determined, intelligent woman. She was the first person I knew to live tweet this parliament’s Question Time. She is dearly missed and someone I had a huge amount of respect for. All my love to Matt and Elsie for their first Christmas without Campbel. This side of the House will not forget her.
We lost Pippa Rudd earlier this year. Pippa was a star in my eyes. She was a gorgeous, smart woman, so passionate about youth justice and making a difference in the Territory. It was great fun to have long, deep and meaningful conversations with. I remember getting stuck on the balcony with her at Speaker’s drinks and by the time we finished speaking everybody had gone to the pub across the road and we could not believe security had not chased us out of the building. She was the type of person you could get into a conversation like that with. It has been a huge loss and we all miss her dearly. All our love to David, Ginny and Luca. Bless you, Pippa, you were a fabulous girl.
Lastly the late, great Pete Davies. He gave me a huge amount of support when I was nominated, when I became a candidate and when I became a member of this parliament. He gave so many people an opportunity to have a voice whether they were his listeners, politicians or work colleagues he mentored, which is wonderful. It was such a shame to lose him far too soon.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish everyone all the best for a safe and happy Christmas and New Year; all the best for 2016.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will talk about the Chief Minister’s Awards for Excellence.
I congratulate the award winning work of my agencies and staff. My agencies have some extremely talented people in the field and in offices working to make the Territory simpler, safer and smarter.
The Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory won the Chief Minister’s Award for Innovation in the Public Sector for the Be Crocwise animated video and social media campaign. I remember launching this campaign at Barunga School and how excited all the children were to see the video. The video is in six languages – Kriol, Anindilyakwa, Tiwi, Yolngu and English. It is targeted at community children and the wider public to encourage them to Be Crocwise.
I acknowledge Andrew Bridges and everyone in the team – Anne Walters, Mark Crummy, Jo Scott, Joel Carter, Anne Lobo, Jordan Raymond Munro and Michael Roseth – for their excellent work in making sure Territorians are Crocwise and safe around crocodiles. The $10 000 from the award will be reinvested into Be Crocwise and more advertising activity.
On the topic of making the Territory a safer place, the Department of Housing’s housing and community safety and client relations, including the Public Housing Safety Officers, won the Chief Minister’s Award for delivering quality customer services. They worked hard to deliver the public housing safety strategy consisting of the strengthened three strikes policy and the Public Housing Safety Officers.
Their efforts, in addition to the Country Liberals supporting them, the strengthened visitor management policy and the strengthened three strikes policy, have led to reductions in antisocial behaviour.
I went on patrol with the Public Housing Safety Officers and saw firsthand the great work they do in responding to antisocial behaviour in Darwin and Alice Springs. I acknowledge the work of all public housing safety officers, who do a great job. The Public Housing Safety Officers support some of the most vulnerable people in the Northern Territory and it is great to see them win an award.
I congratulate Colleen Rosas from the Department of Local Government and Community Services for receiving the 2015 Chief Minister’s Public Sector Outstanding Indigenous Leadership Medal. Colleen leads the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. I know firsthand how hard it can be for people struggling with English to understand what is happening in a range of complex and unfamiliar environments. The Aboriginal Interpreter Service facilitates effective cross-cultural communication between service providers and Aboriginal people who do not speak English as a first language.
Our interpreters are trained to work in a wide range of settings and environments including healthcare, education, social services, legal and court systems, conferences, community engagement, training programs and Indigenous communication and media.
Colleen has done an excellent job in leading the Aboriginal Interpreter Service from its beginning, and has helped grow it to more than 70 full-time and part-time employees and more than 300 casual interpreters. This is an invaluable service for Aboriginal people and I congratulate Colleen on her efforts.
Mr Deputy Speaker, our public servants do a great job and I am pleased to see so many of my agencies recognised for the work they do. I encourage them to keep up the good work.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
World AIDS Day
World AIDS Day
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, you have on your desk a red ribbon which represents the World AIDS Day. The theme for this year continues on from last year’s theme of Getting to Zero: Zero new HIV infections. Zero discrimination. Zero AIDS-related deaths.
The aim of World AIDS Day is to encourage all Australians to be aware of HIV, to take action to reduce its transmission by promoting safe sex practices and to ensure that people living with HIV can participate fully in their life in the community free from stigma and discrimination.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of two Year 5 classes from Rosebery Primary School, accompanied by Jane Bradshaw and Helen Shannon. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also draw your attention to a young gentleman in the gallery named Simon Spillett. The new electorate of Spillett is named after his grandfather. Welcome to Parliament House, Simon.
Members: Hear, hear!
STATEMENTS BY SPEAKER
Reflections on the Chair
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, there is a report on page 9 of today’s NT News which raises some concern. The report does not directly quote a member of this Assembly, but it suggests unspecified actions against the Speaker by a group of members, which could be construed as attempting to reflect upon the Chair.
I remind honourable members that reflection on the Speaker is out of order, and it is only by way of substantive motion that criticism of the Speaker may occur. I will leave this matter at that, but I suggest the Assembly proceeds in an orderly manner and concentrates on the business before it rather than members continually commenting in a manner which can only result in the Assembly being brought into disrepute.
We all have a job to do to restore confidence in our democratic institutions, not bring them down in any shape or form.
New Standing Orders
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also remind you that on your desk is the new standing orders document. You also have a ready reckoner. If you could get across them as quickly as possible it would be appreciated.
I also extend thanks to the Leader of Government Business, Chair of the Standing Orders Committee, and the member for Daly for their input and hard work over the last 12 months to get this document to where it is today.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I think we should more thank the Clerk than any of the members of the committee because the lion’s share of the work was done by the Clerk.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. I extend a thank you to the Clerk’s office also for its work in getting the document to where it is today.
Honourable members, I remind you of new Standing Order 43(4), Speech Time Limits. An extension of time is not permitted during a motion expressing a want of confidence. The first two speakers have 30 minutes each and following speakers have 20 minutes.
MOTION
Want of Confidence in the Government
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move that this Assembly expresses that the government no longer possesses the confidence of the Assembly.
Today we are meeting as members of this House to talk about the future of the Northern Territory. The Territory confronts serious challenges. Successfully meeting them is crucial to delivering on our opportunities.
The foundation for our endeavour as Territorians from all walks of life is stability and confidence in government. It is on this foundation that we build our business and community confidence. People must trust that their government will listen to them and be fair to all Territorians. I believe that this is part of the contract we have as public servants to the people. If Territorians cannot trust their government they will not have confidence in the Territory’s future.
Every day that goes by under an Adam Giles-led CLP government we see the reputation of the Northern Territory diminished. The basic thing our business community, charities, community sector volunteers – people who have invested their time, money and confidence in the Territory – ask for is a government they can trust and which will work and walk with them as we tackle our shared challenges. We do not have that in the Territory today.
We are currently ruled by an arrogant dictatorship more concerned with self-preservation than the best interests of Territorians. Under the leadership of Adam Giles, this CLP government has destroyed the trust Territorians had in their government with broken promises, salacious overseas travel scandals, failed midnight coups, corruption allegations, backroom deals, constant infighting and more.
That is why I am asking members today to make a positive choice for the Territory’s future. We can choose nine more months of arrogance and chaos under an Adam Giles-led CLP government or we can choose to trust Territorians. We can press the reset button and provide Territorians the opportunity to decide who they have confidence in to be their local member. Let candidates – Independent members and party members – put their case to Territorians.
I simply do not believe that the Territory can afford nine more months of a CLP government. We need a fresh start. The only people I trust to reset government in the Northern Territory are Territorians. I trust Territorians to make the right decision at every election.
Over three years ago Territorians chose the CLP. Labor had served three terms and Territorians chose a new direction. They chose Terry Mills, not Adam Giles. They did not choose this CLP government. This is not the CLP government Territorians voted for.
Today we are deciding if we have confidence in Adam Giles to lead the Territory for another nine months. Territorians deserve better than this government.
Territorians from all walks of life have urged me to do everything I can to fix this mess. Up and down the track, east and west, as part of proving to Territorians that Labor can be a government for all, I believe it is crucial to show that we can be an opposition for all. I travel every week to meet and speak with Territorians. From the red dust of Utopia to the island beauty of the Tiwis, people are saying they want a fresh start. Senior community and business leaders are telling me the CLP’s incompetence is preventing the Territory from moving ahead. People are treading water, waiting for an election and the chance to move on.
We need stability and certainty, and the CLP is incapable of delivering that. Territorians deserve the right to make sure the person representing them in parliament is hard-working, is listening and takes their job seriously. The choice I am asking of members is to put their trust in Territorians. That is what Labor will do, just as we do at every election. If you agree with me that three years of rule under Adam Giles has proven the Territory could not be in worse hands, the next step is trusting in Territorians.
In the last three years we have seen decisions made by Adam Giles and the CLP in the name of Territorians, without their permission and without consultation, but by decree. Three decisions stand out for their betrayal of Territorians: the rolling of the elected Chief Minister Terry Mills; the selling of our TIO; and the selling of our Darwin port for 99 years. We must see a return to government decision-making that is grounded in consultation with Territorians. This is a government that has betrayed the trust of Territorians.
The trigger for today’s motion of no confidence in this government was a dirty deal, an arrogant decision and a botched act of vengeance. Only a fortnight ago, in this House, the Chief Minister, as soon as he thought he had the numbers on the floor, tried to execute the Speaker. This is the kind of farce best reserved for the professionals of The Hollowmen or The Thick of It. This is a decision made on the back of a secret deal with the member for Arnhem – a deal Territorians still do not know the detail or the price of, or what they are paying for. If it was above board, we would know. The silence speaks volumes and scares Territorians.
On the back of that dirty deal an arrogant decision was made and an act of childish vengeance was attempted. It was five-and-a-half hours of utter farce. Those five-and-a-half hours have had a significant impact on the Territory we all love. The message of this farce spread like wildfire through social media and media networks, and through business and political circles, from ordinary Australians to people who actively make decisions that affect us in the Northern Territory. What damage did those five-and-a-half hours do to national trust in the governance of the Northern Territory? Much damage was done. Adam Giles and the CLP are a laughing stock on the national stage, and this damage cannot be fixed this term or by this government. This House and all its occupants were diminished in the eyes of the public, once again, by the CLP, particularly by the Chief Minister.
Once again, the trust of Territorians in the governance of the Territory was dealt a body blow. If Territorians cannot trust their government, they will not have confidence in the Northern Territory’s future. Territorians who do not believe this place is on the right track will pack up and take their skills and contributions elsewhere.
If you want any evidence of that, look at our population statistics. In 2014 the Northern Territory lost 3500 more people to interstate migration than it gained. That is 3500 taxpayers with skills and a contribution to make to the future of the Northern Territory. That is 3500 people who will not be spending their hard-earned money in businesses and shops in the Northern Territory. They will not be shopping or eating locally. It is 3500 people who have taken their future elsewhere.
The Chief Minister dismisses this with a sweep of the hand, saying we have always lost population, which is simply not true. Territory Treasury’s briefing papers show that in net migration more people moved here from down south in the periods of 2007 and 2010. We were positive. The Territory gained more people than it lost. For a period of time in the mid-1990s this was also true. In fact, the current losses we are suffering are the worst we have experienced for two decades.
This population loss rocks business and the economy. The CLP can put whatever spin it likes on it but there are serious concerns in the business community about the loss of population and future markets. It is making businesses nervous and conservative, and they are cutting jobs. Once you get into the cycle of population loss, job cuts and more population loss, you are on a dangerous path for a small place like the Northern Territory. We must value all our Territorians, their skills, their knowledge and what they can contribute.
It is critical for the government of the Northern Territory to give confidence to the people of the Northern Territory that it is in control, has a plan and is on the right track. That is not happening with this current CLP government. We need to hit the reset button, give Territorians their voice back and provide an opportunity for candidates, Independents, elected members and parties to put their case to Territorians, and for Territorians to provide a clear mandate for where they want the Territory to go.
Labor will put its case to Territorians with a comprehensive plan that has three clear priorities: giving our kids the best start in life; restoring trust, transparency and accountability; and creating and supporting jobs for locals and work for local businesses. More importantly, I pledge we will listen to Territorians and then act on their behalf.
Labor is listening to Territorians in moving today’s motion, and they have been clear. They are desperate to be heard and want a government with a long-term plan based on their voices. I promise that our plans will be based on what they say.
We know that in debate today the CLP will tell you the world is about to end. The Chief Minister has a standard line about no one on this side having any experience. It is not particularly clever, original or true, and Territorians have heard it all before. More importantly, Territorians have experienced an Adam Giles-led CLP government for three years and they will not be afraid of making change.
Let me deal with these issues. Labor governed in the Northern Territory for 11 years from 2001 to 2012. When we came to office not a single member of the government had been in government. Our first Chief Minister, Clare Martin, a great Territorian, set the shape for a Labor government in the Northern Territory and how it behaved. She told us all to trust the public service and work with it to grow the Territory. She told us all to talk with Territorians and stay in touch with people beyond the walls of the fifth floor of Parliament House. She held regular business round tables and Labor in government will have them again. She had community Cabinet meetings which gave Territorians better access to ministers and CEOs in all parts of the Territory, especially remote areas, and Labor in government will have them again.
She was bold in her policy prescriptions for the Northern Territory and visionary in looking to the future, which is why she and Cabinet ensured they took the baton from the previous CLP government of projects like the railway and ConocoPhillips’ LNG and delivered them. That is why she chased and got the INPEX project, the waterfront and massive expansion of infrastructure across the Northern Territory.
Those principles were taken up by Paul Henderson in turn and delivered over the next four-and-a-half years. The Labor government also delivered seven consecutive surplus budgets because sound governance is the Labor way. For the CLP to suggest that these two great Territorians and the Labor Party did nothing and drove the Territory backwards is both disrespectful and untrue.
The members on this side of the House cut our political teeth in that environment and learnt the lessons of responsible Labor government from those two great leaders. We are ready to govern for all Territorians again, based on learning not just what we did well in government but the mistakes we made. There is no question that Labor, in government, made mistakes.
As you know, it is no secret that we got wrong how we created shires in the Northern Territory. I have said to the land councils, community leaders and ordinary Territorians that we did not listen and we should have. I am also prepared to say we made a mistake by not responding quickly enough to land release pressures. We moved to fix that, but were not quick enough. The CLP changed the name of our policy from Housing for Growth to Real Housing for Growth and continued to implement it. Territorians have benefitted from that handover.
The advantage we have gained from being in and around a long-term Labor government is that each and every one of us has learnt what is required to run government properly. We will listen to Territorians, look at the evidence and then act. That is something you do not see from the current CLP government. That is why it has lost the confidence of the people of the Northern Territory.
Labor has already announced a suite of policies, position papers and strategies, with more to come. We have made it clear that we will focus our government on children aged zero to four in an effort to turn around the intransigent social issues that bedevil the Territory. The evidence is clear that investing in our children is not just the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do. Chronic illnesses, addictions, an unskilled workforce, high incarceration rates and more long-term problems can only be significantly reduced by giving children the best start in life.
Lifelong behaviours are learnt in the early years. We can make sure those are positive behaviours by supporting families and children so we do not have to intervene in later years. We must make sure all children start day one, Term 1, Year 1 equally. We will make this the focus of our government even though it will take decades to reap the full rewards. We have taken this policy discussion to Darwin, Palmerston, Ngukurr, Katherine and Alice Springs. I have engaged with experts working with children in Nhulunbuy, Yirrkala, Jabiru, Maningrida, Utopia and more remote parts of the Northern Territory. People across the Territory have engaged with us in its development. This is a policy based on listening to Territorians and looking at the evidence. It is a long-term plan for the Northern Territory’s future. It is the kind of work missing from this CLP government’s way of doing business. It does not listen to Territorians or make decisions based on evidence. These are some of the reasons why Territorians have lost confidence in this government.
Labor will restore the trust and faith Territorians want in their government. This trust and faith has been destroyed by the CLP. Labor will introduce an ICAC and an integrity commissioner, and will commit to improved access to information. We will be open and transparent in government, and will reform this parliament to make sure there is a greater focus on the business of government and not the business of politics. We will work with whoever is in the Chamber to make this place work better and with the interests of Territorians in mind. Unlike the CLP, we respect the independence of the Speaker.
We will grow the Territory to create jobs for Territorians and attract people to the Territory. As I have already said, 3500 have left the Territory for interstate in just one year. This is the worst result in decades. The next Labor government will support those who work on the front line. We will have a root-and-branch review of the resources available to police. We will provide them with three welfare officers and a properly-resourced chaplain to support them.
By contrast the CLP has not delivered yet on its promise of 120 additional police. The welfare officers are nowhere in sight and police are desperately stretched by patrolling in front of bottle shops because of the CLP’s short-sighted political decision to scrap the Banned Drinker Register, which we will bring back.
Labor will also support Territory teachers. We have made it clear that Labor will resource teachers in the classrooms and rebuild our schools following the ruthless CLP cuts to teacher numbers in our classrooms. We will introduce computer coding into our primary and secondary schools to ensure young Territorians do not miss out on the next generation of jobs.
We have outlined how a Labor government will support innovation in the Territory and unleash the creativity and potential of Territorians. These are all decisions based on listening to Territorians, looking at the evidence and then putting forward our position. You have to engage with Territorians, which is something this government has lost. It has refused to properly engage with Territorians.
The voice of Territorians is no longer present in this CLP government. That is why this government has lost the confidence of Territorians. There is a trust deficit between this government and Territorians. Every action this government takes worsens the trust deficit. Every week we see this government further worsen its trust deficit with Territorians, who do not have confidence in this government to manage the affairs of the Territory for the next nine months, based on the very clear evidence of how Adam Giles and the CLP have managed the Territory for three years.
The evidence is in. We have listened to Territorians. They have lost confidence in this government and its ability to be stable and provide confidence to Territorians that its members are working together. We see constant infighting amongst government members and bad decisions made in an arrogant manner that worsens the trust deficit this government has with Territorians. It is at a point where it has broken and cannot be fixed by this government or in this term.
We must have a government in the Northern Territory that has the confidence of the people of the Northern Territory, provides stability for Territorians and does not trash the reputation of the government on the national stage or in the Territory by its actions. We are being diminished and our national position is being worsened by this government and the actions it takes.
We are at a crossroads and the Territory needs to be reset. The CLP has made bad political decisions. The scrapping of the BDR is perhaps the most stark example of something they scrapped simply because the Labor Party initiated it. I hate 180-degree politics. The experience of watching the CLP come to power and destroy good programs simply because they were not theirs is a salutary lesson.
I will keep the Developing the North framework but will ensure Indigenous Territorians are more directly engaged in the program. I can tell the House, however, that the evidence is in on mandatory alcohol treatment. It does not work. Internationally, nationally and in the Territory the evidence is clear that the policy does not work. We will scrap it and direct the $30m a year to more effective programs.
Labor will commit more funds to building new houses in remote communities, repairing existing houses and supporting people to get into a home. We will commit funds from the Territory’s own infrastructure program towards this very important social and economic issue. There will be more houses built by locals and better maintained. That is what remote Territorians are telling us they want, and not what this government is delivering.
Labor will publish a rolling 10-year infrastructure plan to allow business the opportunity to plan, tender or make their investment decisions. Infrastructure spending will be planned around Darwin as a northern capital of Australia; making Alice Springs our national inland capital and a destination in its own right; the critical importance of Katherine and our Katherine region in diversifying our economy and its advantages in being aligned with our supply chain; and Tennant Creek’s massive opportunity to be a service centre for our resource sector.
Labor will provide a steady, stable alternative to the dysfunction that is the CLP government. We have policies and plans. We have the personnel to create a strong and effective government. We have announced a solid team of candidates for the Northern Territory. Working with my deputy leader and the member for Barkly in the bush are people who are local to the community they seek to represent. In Lawrence Costa, Selena Uibo, Anthony Venes, Scott McConnell and Chansey Paech we have a group of Territorians with a diversity of backgrounds who are already representing Territorians in the bush. We have announced a full Palmerston team of Damian Hale, Eva Lawler, Tony Sievers and Phil Tilbrook. We have alderman Kate Worden for Sanderson and Ward Keller lawyer, Jeff Collins, for Fong Lim in the Darwin seats. There are more announcements to come with candidates of great quality – community leaders who will bring a wealth of experience to this parliament.
Labor is ready to put its case to Territorians and that is what we are asking each member to think about today. We need to press the reset button and let Independents, candidates, members and parties put their case to Territorians. We need to put our trust in Territorians. They are the ones who have been missing from the debates of the CLP government for the last three years. They are the ones desperate to have their voices heard again, for a government which will listen to them and for a fresh start in the Northern Territory. They are sick of the chaos and dysfunction of this CLP government, waking up to front pages of more horror stories from this government, tuning into the radio and hearing more of the chaos of this government, tuning into the nightly news bulletin and hearing more stories of CLP stuff-ups and scandals and of the betrayal by this government of Territorians. They want a fresh start.
Labor today, in this House, is speaking on behalf of the majority of Territorians who are demanding a fresh start in the Northern Territory and stability and confidence in government, which has not been and cannot be delivered by this government. We know, based on the evidence of the last three years, it will not be delivered in the next nine months. The evidence is in: the CLP government has broken the trust and lost the confidence of Territorians, and they are demanding a fresh start in the Northern Territory.
Territorians deserve to hear from each one of us, in our own electorates, about why we deserve to be their local member. They will make decisions based on how people vote in the Chamber today. They want their elected member to represent them in this Chamber, and the majority of Territorians in all seats are demanding a fresh start.
I hate early elections, but this is a crunch moment for the Northern Territory’s future. The CLP has fallen apart and can no longer provide stable and confident government in the Northern Territory. Every day that goes by we see this Adam Giles-led CLP government diminish the reputation of the Northern Territory. I simply do not believe the Northern Territory can afford nine more months of CLP rule. We need a fresh start in the Territory and the only people I trust to reset government in the Northern Territory are the voters.
I am asking all of us in this House to trust Territorians. Labor trusts Territorians. Territorians get it right at elections. We need an election; we need Territorians to get it right again. This is not the CLP government Territorians voted for. Terry Mills has gone from this Chamber. Terry Mills is the one who led the CLP to the election last year, with Madam Speaker as the Deputy Chief Minister. Territorians have been betrayed by this CLP government with decision after decision. They have been betrayed by the behaviour of this government, which has simply not reflected the behaviour Territorians demand of their elected officials.
Madam Speaker, Territorians want to trust their government. Territorians want a fresh start and an early election. Labor is here speaking on behalf of the majority of Territorians. We are asking this House to give the voice back to Territorians and put the fate of the Territory in Territorians’ hands. I urge all members in this House to support the motion.
Mr HIGGINS (Sport and Recreation): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his election launch.
It is with some disappointment that I speak to this motion today. I am disappointed because I believe in the sanctity of this House and the unwritten contract with Territorians that if you are elected to this House for a term you should serve that full term. I am disappointed because this motion is a poke in the eye for this House and for Territorians.
I do not think I am an unreasonable person and I hope people see that I try to do my best and am committed to work for a better life for my constituents and the broader Territory public. I may be a bit naive, but I believe, after 30 years of living here, Territorians can and do sort the politics from the facts. I also believe Territorians are sick of the mud, the silliness and the politicking which too often ends up being the story of the day.
I do not blame the media; it has a job to do. It is inundated with demands from the public a hundredfold these days, especially with the advent of social media and the relentless 24-hour news cycle. But sometimes the news story of the day is just a piece written for no other reason than a presumption of knowing a person’s mind. Sometimes it is a story about a throwaway line like, ‘I will consider my future around Christmas time’. When these stories are front and centre, the public is given a perception that all is not well. We now find more often than not that the media reports comments on events rather than the facts of the story.
I will not deny we have had some less than desirable moments publicly, but when all is said and done, exactly what has government not delivered for Territorians? We fixed the economy, which was in dire straits when we came to office. We reduced by half the previous Labor government’s $5.5bn worth of projected debt. We implemented a tough law-and-order strategy, led the country with the introduction of one-punch legislation, introduced tougher legislation on violent crimes, expanded the CCTV camera network and more. We provide education and health services. We help families through a variety of initiatives, including sport and recreation voucher schemes. We re-established the live cattle and buffalo trade.
In my portfolio alone the achievements are fantastic. Over the last three years we have made some tough decisions but I like to think we have also made some exciting, innovative and effective ones. Among our achievements to date in my portfolio are that we have recognised the importance of peak sporting and recreation bodies and increased their annual grant funding by 50%; we have brought high-quality sporting events to the Territory, such as the England cricket tour match, the Sheffield Shield games, NRL, AFL and, one that I really love, the Davis Cup. We established the Mitchell Street Mile. We made the NT Environment Protection Authority independent and have seen improvements to the regulatory framework which are ongoing and were announced in the last week or so. We have implemented legislation establishing MAGNT as an independent statutory authority, freeing it up to seek and develop partnerships and sponsorships. We funded an upgrade to the Cyclone Tracy exhibition to include digital content, an exhibition which was recently awarded a Chief Minister’s Award for Excellence. We funded renovation at the Strehlow Research Centre in the Museum of Central Australia at the Araluen Cultural Precinct, and last night we announced the awarding of the tender for the design and construct of the Chan Building.
In my electorate alone I have been proud of our achievements, including extra housing for government employees at Wadeye and the new police centre and associated housing; the formation of the West Daly Regional Council, restoring the local voice of the people of Wadeye, Peppimenarti and Palumpa; road upgrades to Fog Bay, Port Keats and Litchfield roads; installation of solar power at Daly River; upgrading the Adelaide River Showgrounds; building a new bridge over the Charlotte River en route to Dundee; providing a new flood boat for the Daly River Volunteer NTES service, which I have a lot of connection and time for; making grants towards improving and upgrading equipment and facilities at Freds Pass Reserve. I have also stood up for my constituents on many issues, including water and planning, lodging my concerns through the proper channels. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.
There is so much more to be done and my constituents should be able to rely on me to see many of our plans through. I would like to see the implementation of our sports and active recreation master plan and our environmental reforms of the arts and cultural policy. I would like to see, through the Chan Building project, the plethora of sports infrastructure we have budgeted for and the strengthening of our environmental processes, which are stronger than Labor ever moved forward.
There is no solid reason for this motion, other than politicking. I ask honourable members how committed they are to seeing out a full term. Everyone on this side of the House is. We are all elected on an unwritten promise of serving a full term. We owe it to our constituents to speak on their behalf and represent them. We owe them a full term of service. I can say with full frankness that I have not had any representations about a loss of confidence in this government. Some of my constituents are well and truly over elections. Decisions of this nature should be made by Territorians, not the 25 people in this parliament. They should get to make that decision on 27 August next year, the same as they did three years ago.
Madam Speaker, I will not be supporting the motion.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the Opposition Leader, for bringing this motion before the House, and the government for giving it precedence over all other business of the House.
This is the most important and grave motion that can come before parliament. I can assure anyone listening to this debate that it has not been moved lightly. The Opposition Leader brought this motion before parliament on behalf of Territorians who tell us overwhelmingly that they have had enough of this dreadful, dysfunctional and unstable government, members of which are more interested in serving their own self-interest than the interests of Territorians they supposedly govern for.
Territorians are aware there are fixed four-year terms in the Northern Territory, which were introduced under Labor, but they cannot stomach another nine months under the CLP. This is a government which does not listen or consult and thinks it knows what is best for Territorians. This is a government which has made some terrible decisions and has betrayed the trust of voters, who now seek to exercise their vote ahead of the four-year fixed term because they have had enough and have no faith in this government.
What a debacle the last three years and three months have been under the CLP government. Since coming to power, the CLP has single-handedly stripped any semblance of trust, integrity and accountability away from government, brought this House into disrepute, tarnished all elected members of this House and made us the laughing stock of the nation. In all my years in the Territory I have never before witnessed the frequency with which this CLP government has thrust us into the national media spotlight for all the wrong reasons.
Looking back at some of the CLP election commitments you have to shake your head. In the five-point plan which was a cut-and-paste job from Campbell Newman’s Queensland campaign – and we know what happened to him at the hands of the electors who felt betrayed – let us go straight to number five:
- Be accountable.
If we don’t deliver, throw us out. There will be no more political deals to hide the truth from Territorians. The only deal we’ll have is with you, to help make your life better.
There is a little gold seal on this commitment of the five-point plan, with number five, ‘we will be accountable or throw us out’. Territorians have spoken loud and clear. They have held you to account and they are ready to throw you out.
You betrayed people’s trust when you hiked up power tariffs by 30% and water tariffs by 40% within two months of coming to government on the back of promising to reduce the cost of living. For the Chief Minister to have announced two days ago a 5% reduction in tariffs is too little, too late, and simply too rich to swallow.
The problem for the Chief Minister is that, like the rest of the government, he has failed to listen to Territorians over the last three years. Territorians have stopped listening to the government. Under the Chief Minister’s watch we have seen an exodus of CLP members from the government. These have been predominantly women but also the member for Arafura, who walked out in disgust but was somehow enticed back to prop up the numbers. That is what is happening and it does not deliver stable government.
I was sworn into this parliament on the same day as the Opposition Leader, the member for Fannie Bay, and the members for Barkly and Braitling in 2008. I recall my four years as a government backbencher – three years in minority government with the support of the member for Nelson – as a time of extremely hard work by a highly consultative government which navigated the Territory through a global financial crisis with record infrastructure spend. This generated jobs and supported local businesses while delivering to Territorians in key areas like health and education. It grew the Territory economy through numerous channels, but importantly by securing the billion-dollar deals associated with the Ichthys Project.
For all of that, we lost the faith of Territorians in the bush. It was the loss of confidence in the bush which saw us lose seats and government. As the Opposition Leader said, Territorians do not get it wrong. They exercise their democratic right to vote, and they voted out a Labor government.
There is nothing like a spell on the opposition benches to allow our members the opportunity and time to look at where we went wrong and what we need to do to regain the confidence of Territorians. There is one thing in opposition we have been very good at: getting around the Territory, listening to people from all walks of life and hearing what they want and expect from their government. The message has been loud and clear: Territorians have had a gutful of the CLP government.
That message has been thunderously loud and clear from the people of northeast Arnhem Land, whose disdain for the CLP government is unparalleled, thanks to the member for Braitling’s single-handed axing of the gas to Gove deal, which plunged Nhulunbuy into crisis with over 1200 people out of jobs as Rio Tinto, without the cheaper energy source promised under the CLP, had no choice but to close its refinery. The Chief Minister, the member for Braitling, ripped up the deal, and in doing so sent a message to the world that you cannot trust the CLP government, and businesses can have no confidence in dealing with this Chief Minister and this government.
On 13 February 2013 former Chief Minister Terry Mills announced, ‘Done deal to secure the future of Gove’, and on the same day, Rio Tinto announced:
- ‘Gas to Gove is not only important for the refinery and the community of Nhulunbuy, it is important to the entire Northern Territory. This project will double the size of the domestic gas market, drive further investment in gas exploration, increase long-term gas supply, attract new industries and create jobs for Territorians.’
People in Nhulunbuy believed what the CLP had to say on behalf of the CLP government and Rio Tinto, and, with confidence, made investment decisions and decisions about their lives, livelihoods and futures. All that changed in Nhulunbuy when the member for Braitling knifed the member for Blain while he was on a trip to Japan, and then on a quiet public holiday, Darwin Show Day 2013, the Chief Minister reneged on the CLP deal for gas to Gove, offering less than half the gas that had been agreed to. It was the beginning of the end.
There are people in Nhulunbuy mums, dads, even kids, business owners, traditional owners and once dyed-in-the-wool conservative voters – who will never forgive the Chief Minister or the CLP government for the betrayal of Gove and who hold this government to account. They say loudly that you have not delivered and they cannot wait to throw you out. For them nine months is too long; they are ready to see you go now. It has been a terrible time for the people in Nhulunbuy. Where we are today is because of the collective strength and resilience of the community. Nhulunbuy is where it is today despite you, Chief Minister, not because of you.
Your government has made some terrible decisions during the downturn in Nhulunbuy, including your abject failure to deliver on the $13m Gove hospital ED upgrade, which has now been reduced to a $7m project and is still to go to tender. So much for the media release on 14 May 2013 that told us the new Gove emergency department was on track and that we deserved this significant health infrastructure. You have completely turned your backs on the people of Nhulunbuy.
What about the disastrous decision made by the CLP government, and consulted with no one in Nhulunbuy, to close an important health facility providing residential, alcohol and other drug services, and to reopen it as a correctional services work camp for low-level offenders? Again, it was a decision this government made without any consultation with the community or traditional owners until after the decision had been made. It was a done deal.
We then discovered the community had been lied to when we found out the camp has housed serious sex offenders and murderers, and one of them was on the loose for two nights in our community. They wonder why it is that people do not trust them and why the people of Nhulunbuy and northeast Arnhem Land want to see this government gone. My constituents feel betrayed by this CLP government.
It is small wonder that the member for Port Darwin saw fit to announce his resignation the week before last. He has had oversight of a litany of failures at the helm of Corrections, and the Health and Justice portfolios, but I will get to those later.
What of this government’s decision to spend $20m on a boarding facility in Nhulunbuy without any consultation process in the lead-up to that decision? That decision sent alarm bells and anger through the communities and homelands. There is no denying the fact that the boarding facility is first and foremost an economic driver, with student outcomes and consideration of families’ wishes and aspirations for their children taking the back seat. I cannot wait for the member for Brennan, the failed Education minister, to front a community meeting to tell people otherwise.
Here we have yet another cart-before-the-horse project of this government which always knows what is best for Territorians, does not need to consult, does not need to work from an evidence-based approach and then reluctantly consults after the fact.
I turn now to some of my shadow responsibilities and the bungling and failures Territorians have witnessed which further provide evidence as to why we need an election and a change in government. Let us start with Health. Thanks to a merry-go-round of Health ministers and infighting in the Cabinet room, which we believe involved heavy folders being thrown by the member for Fong Lim, aimed at Terry Mills, the Palmerston hospital plans have been impacted upon.
Under Labor’s plan it would be built by now and servicing the people of Palmerston and the rural area. They would have their hospital and the burden on the Royal Darwin Hospital would be relieved. But, no, all people know about the Palmerston Regional Hospital is that a couple of months ago there was a big media stunt which resulted in the member for Port Darwin and the member for Solomon presiding over a hole in the ground on the site. They saw it filled with concrete for, supposedly, a stairwell, only to discover a few days later the hole had been filled and was in what was, according to plans, the car park. The member for Solomon asked the Chief Minister for a ‘please explain’, and refused to participate in further botched media stunts ...
Mr Elferink: You are now being dishonest. You are now being deliberately misleading.
Ms WALKER: It is laughable. You are wrong and, member for Port Darwin, we cannot wait for you to get to your seat and tell us how wonderful you are ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, please pause. Leader of Government Business, please withdraw those comments.
Mr ELFERINK: I withdraw that she is not telling the truth.
Ms WALKER: You are such a child, member for Port Darwin, it is no …
Mr Elferink: You should tell the truth; you are not being honest.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin! Cease interjecting!
Ms WALKER: You are the resigned member for Port Darwin. You have no heart, soul or will for the job ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, address your comments through the Chair.
Ms WALKER: He has resigned because he has no ticker for the job. He knows he has failed miserably in Health, corrections, Justice and child protection. The member for Port Darwin is just one of the rats deserting the sinking ship. He has announced his resignation. He will not be contesting the seat of Port Darwin at the next election because he knows he will not win. He knows the CLP government’s days are numbered.
We know they have dumped the member for Fong Lim. We know the member for Daly – and fancy putting up a junior minister as your first speaker in such an important debate – is considering his future. We know the member for Blain is desperately worried about how he will contest the next election. We know the member for Drysdale has jumped ship from her electorate and sought a safer seat in Spillett. It is plain to see they are on the way out.
In our public health system we continue to see dedicated and hard-working public servants. You will not find any people more caring for Territorians who find themselves in the health system. Yet those public servants’ jobs have been made all the more difficult and have been disrupted by restructures and underfunding of services. There is a known culture of bullying which continues to undermine the workplace.
We continue to see worsening results in Royal Darwin Hospital Emergency Department waiting times and elective surgery waiting times. These statistics are all publicly available and are very clear evidence that things are not right. Things are going backwards as long as we have the CLP and the failed Health minister, who has resigned ahead of the next election, at the helm.
We have a lack of focus on aged care and the needs of our elderly. We have a Health minister who made shocking comments in August about whether we should consider redirecting funding away from patients with end-stage renal failure – he gave us an example – and spend it ion kids instead. The outrage that came from the community in response to those comments was unprecedented, but warranted.
Under this minister’s watch we have seen a lack of progress on delivering bush health clinics, most of which are revoted works under funding secured by federal and Territory Labor governments. Clearly this government struggles to deliver capital infrastructure projects, Palmerston Regional Hospital being a case in point.
Try telling that to people in the bush who have been waiting for years for their health clinics, including the one at Galiwinku in my electorate which is home to around 3000 people. They still do not have the tender out on that project.
Bizarrely, they have decided not to progress with spending on a new alcohol mandatory treatment facility in Katherine because, the minister says, they have fixed alcohol addiction issues through temporary beat locations. That is an issue the member for Katherine would be aware of, in that there are businesses in Katherine which are very unhappy with the impact the presence of police has on their businesses. At the same time the AOD statistics from the annual report show the AMT scheme to be an abject and costly failure.
If the CLP had stuck with the Banned Drinker Register instead of taking a populist approach, then we would not have seen the waste of taxpayer dollars nor the alcohol-related issues. But as we know the CLP is simply not interested in an evidenced-based approach.
We are still waiting, and so is the Coroner, for the results of an independent study into the effectiveness of AMT. It must be independent and evidenced-based, but somehow I do not think we will be seeing that before any election.
If the CLP government cannot even get a car parking system at the Royal Darwin Hospital and the foundation of the Palmerston Regional Hospital right how on earth can we expect it to address the most basic and the most complex of Territorians’ health needs?
Let us not forget amongst the many jobs for mates in the last three years the appointment of the Health minister’s former Chief of Staff and a former CLP Health minister to the position of Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner on 1 June this year.
Turning to my shadow responsibility for Attorney-General and Justice, the theme of jobs and favours for CLP mates and donors is a good place to start. There was the appointment of a former CLP member of this House and an active donor and supporter of the member for Port Darwin, who still actively hands out how-to-vote cards and allegedly lobbied the member for Arnhem not to leave the CLP in early 2014, all whilst a magistrate, quite rightly, prompted a review into judicial appointments, something that was instigated for the Chief Minister because the Attorney-General saw no need for it. Once that review was completed, it sat for months before being made public, and only because there was pressure to do so. This is hardly a government which oozes trust and transparency. That report was critical of the Attorney-General’s personal involvement in these judicial appointments, which is simply wrong ...
Mr Elferink: To be trusted you have tell the truth. You are not telling the truth.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms WALKER: I will credit the Attorney-General, who will get a turn to talk in this debate. Even though he has given up on politics he wants to have a say. He will get a say and his turn will come.
I credit him – only a tiny amount since he has been a minister – for implementing NTCAT. But he is to be roundly condemned for the introduction of the paperless arrest law which has seen the death of a harmless Aboriginal man in custody. His responses to Coronials in the cases of Mr Langdon and Ms Brown in AMT are left wanting.
While Daniel’s Law, which was due for debate two weeks ago, has been deferred and not withdrawn, the member for Nelson declared that if Daniel’s Law was passed he would support a motion of no confidence. Never have I seen an Attorney-General dig his heels in to introduce laws in the face of such widespread criticism from legal and advocacy groups saying it was bad law which will do more harm than good. It highlights that the Attorney-General and the government are not interested in an evidenced-based approach to making laws.
In the sphere of public employment we know there has been fear in the public service thanks to a merry-go-round of ministers and Chief Executive Officers – not necessarily appointed on merit – and a constant state of restructure. Let us not forget the outstanding EBA negotiations. Our hard-working firefighters’ EBA is out of date by more than two years. So too is the EBA for our paramedics. Whilst it is under an agreement with St John Ambulance, the Health minister and the government have no interest whatsoever in stepping in and supporting our hard-working paramedics.
Let us remember as well that we have had a reduction in permanency for teachers and a dramatic reduction in staff at the Department of Children and Families which is having terrible consequences. Let us not forget the backwards move in work health and safety, and the CLP’s return to work legislation which has turned back the clock on workers’ rights when it comes to OH&S matters. We cannot afford to have this government remain to wreak further damage and erosion to workplace rights, including a ridiculous expectation in drafted legislation that union representatives provide 24 hours’ notice to access a workplace where an OH&S issue or an accident has occurred.
What do we say about statehood? There is no plan for statehood, given that the minister could not even answer the simplest of questions during estimates in June this year.
As for women’s policy, you only have to look as far as the Attorney-General and the appalling comments he made on the floor of this House, as well as his appalling behaviour towards female members of this House with his ‘slap’ comment. That comment saw him stripped of his White Ribbon Ambassadorship. This is the man who is in charge of the Domestic Violence Directorate.
I have no faith in him whatsoever and no confidence in the CLP government. My constituents have no confidence in them. It is time for them to step aside. But I have confidence in Territorians to make a decision about who they trust to govern them. Territorians placed that trust in the CLP but that trust has been betrayed. Territorians have called on members of this House to allow them their democratic right to recast their vote sooner than the nine months remaining.
Territory Labor, with its elected members and first-class candidates recently announced, is ready to step up to the plate should we earn the trust and confidence of Territorians to elect us to government. We have done much work in the last three years and three months to earn and restore trust, and to bring sound, evidence-based policies which have been informed by Territorians from all walks of life.
I look forward to announcing our health discussion paper before the end of this year that outlines a real and genuinely well-consulted plan to address health issues in the Northern Territory. I look forward to doing the same in the arena of justice. Today members of this parliament have an opportunity to restore trust and integrity.
My Independent colleagues in particular have a role to play in representing their constituents. They need to see you vote, not abstain. Do the Independent members have confidence in the CLP government? Yes or no?
I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing this motion before the House and commend it to honourable members.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I will not be supporting this motion. It should be made clear that the present situation is similar but not quite the same as the no confidence motion about six years ago in 2009. I remember it well.
In this case I do not hold the balance of power. There is no doubt the government is on the nose, and there are some people who want to go to an election. That is obviously something Labor wants, and there is no doubt that this motion is poll-driven. I also read the newspapers. I listened to the Leader of the Opposition this morning. His speech sounded like the launch of an election campaign, which deflects, to some extent, from what the opposition is trying to do by proposing a motion of no confidence.
If I supported this motion, I would say that when the going gets tough I should give in, bring the government down, have an election and forget fixed-terms elections. I have always supported fixed-term elections, even in local government. I remember the debate about extending fixed-term elections recently for local governments.
I am not happy with what the government is doing, especially with planning in my rural area, but there were things Labor intended to do with rural planning when it was in power that I was not happy with either. Madam Speaker, you would remember how you and I got together to publish a booklet which opposed the views of the Labor Party on rural planning. I remember when Labor conveniently changed the rules regarding gas development in the middle of Darwin Harbour and took away the right of Litchfield Shire to be part of the Development Consent Authority when decisions were to be made about that part of the harbour. I did not pull the pin on Labor.
There was also the question of shire amalgamations. Who organised a number of rallies around this parliament protesting against the amalgamation of Litchfield Shire? I did not pull the pin on Labor. Thankfully, through that democratic process, the government changed its mind, at least about Litchfield but not about remote shire amalgamations.
The government has some good policies; there is no doubt about that. Yesterday the Chief Minister issued a media release titled ‘New process for land access agreements for mining and petroleum exploration activities’. I note the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association CEO Tracey Hayes welcomed this announcement. She said the government had listened to concerns raised by the pastoral industry and the broader community. It was also welcomed by the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association and the Minerals Council of Australia.
Regardless of whether you agree with this or not, we need to debate this in parliament. Unfortunately, we are not debating some of the issues that are important to the future of the Northern Territory. Regarding the new gas pipeline, we have hardly had a chance to have a decent discussion about whether it is good that we have a gas pipe going from Tennant Creek to Mount Isa or from Alice Springs to Moomba, or what gas supplies will be used and how long they will last. Those matters should be debated in this parliament but are not. Unfortunately, because of some of the government’s stuff-ups becoming headlines we are losing the opportunity, as members of parliament, to use this place to discuss issues that are important to Territorians.
We have to call then stuff-ups – the hospital hole, Richardson Park and the dismissal by the Treasurer of the PAC and its findings, the Speaker’s sacking and reappointment, the ice ads, the failed coup d’etat; I could go on and on. They have not put the government in a good light and many people think we are the laughing stock of parliaments in Australia. I am sure this concern will be raised by many speakers today, as obviously we will hear about many of the failings of government.
I have said publicly that fixed terms allow voters to judge a government on the whole four years. I supported that, along with Labor and the CLP. With flexible voting dates governments will always go to an election when the polls are high. Now when the polls are bad the Labor Party wants an early poll and the CLP does not.
I clearly remember what happened when I had to make up my mind the last time one of these motions came before this House. I was criticised then by the CLP and praised by Labor, and now the tables are reversed. Life is funny sometimes. As I said before, this time I do not have the balance of power, but regardless I still believe what I believed in 2009: the government should have the right to complete its full term. People will judge that it was okay for me to allow Labor to go for an extra three years by supporting them against a no confidence vote, but it is not all right for me to allow the government to continue for nine months because that is when the next election will be. People will see me as not being even handed if I do not stick to the principle I did then.
I will abstain, as I believe some other Independents intend to; they will speak for themselves. I am abstaining to send a message to the government to get its act together. I am supporting your right to go to the full term, and that is why I will not support this motion of no confidence. On the other hand, I am abstaining because I not happy with your performance, as are many of my constituents.
I listened to the member for Daly who highlighted some of the good things government is doing. You would be extremely biased in a debate like this to say the government has not done some good things. However, they have been drowned out by stupid things, which, unfortunately, is what the public sees. If the government wants to go to an election – I would be surprised if it does – it can change the Electoral Act; it has the numbers. It could change the Electoral Act so we go back to the old system under which an election could be called any time or after three years. The government appears to have the numbers these days so it could do that.
Finally, it is sad to have reached this point today. I am dismayed at how fractured this parliament has become, instead of being a parliament working together to solve problems in trying to make a better life for Territorians. The motion of no confidence illustrates this point because today we will hear one side against the other. We will hear all the downsides of one side, and that will be magnified in this debate as a reason for bringing the government down. I am not saying the government should not cop that criticism, but you would hope in any reasoned debate if there are good sides to the government that should be recognised. A no confidence vote will not promote anything good the government might have done; it will put emphasis on the worst possible reflection of the government.
Well may it deserve some of that. I am not happy with the Darwin Regional Land Use Plan. I am not happy with the government’s response to Richardson Park. But I work in this parliament and debate those issues with the hope I can convince the government to change its mind. In the end, the process is that the people will decide. While we have fixed-term elections, which this House agreed to, that should be the process. We put up with a government, warts and all. We lived with Australian politics for many years where governments took advantage of great times before they called an election, because they knew they had a political advantage. But we decided we would go down the path of fixed terms so the public could assess the whole-term history of that government and could, with proper analysis, add up the good sides of government, take away the negative sides and work out whether to keep the existing government or change governments at an election. That is what I believe we should do.
As I said, Territorians want us to work together where we can and, where we cannot, at least allow good debate. Good debate is what we should, as mature members of this parliament, be allowed to do, and then we should vote on those issues without abusing one another. I know there will be issues in the near future that I will not agree with, but I hope people will listen to my views and at least consider them. If they have different views, well and good; we will vote on those matters. That is the way this parliament should be.
The government will survive today’s vote of no confidence. But I hope, regardless of all the political huffing and puffing, the government members take a good hard look at themselves. Have a look outside this place, which is like a vacuum sometimes. I am not saying all members of parliament exist in a vacuum, but it acts, to some extent, as a buffer to what is happening in the community. Let us get a feel of what is happening where the real people live. Drop the arrogance and listen to what people are saying. You do not have to agree with them, but give them respect and be willing to change if need be. Strong government does not need to be all about tough decisions. There can be compromise; just listen to what people say sometimes.
The last CLP government got the boot because it became arrogant; it lost touch with the people. A long time ago most Territorians voted CLP. I did. Looking at where it is today, I think Bernie Kilgariff, one of the founders of the CLP, would turn in his grave because it is not what it used to be. It once had nearly every member of this parliament supporting it because Territorians saw it as a party for all Territorians and voted that way. Unfortunately, it drifted from being a party that stood up for families and small business to sticking up for the silver circle and people of influence. I still see that today, unfortunately.
I hope this motion will be a warning to the government to pull its head in and review the direction it is heading. I am not sure it will do that, but you never know. Maybe the damage is irreversible. You may hope you can buy your way back by splashing money around, as happens in the last few months before an election, but Territorians see through that.
I will give you a classic example. Labor spent a lot of money in Palmerston. It built the rugby league field, the rugby union field, the Australian Rules football league and put in the super clinic. I know it did other things. It might even have been …
Mr McCarthy: Tennis, hockey.
Mr WOOD: Tennis, yes. It did lots of things which were not mentioned the other day in the biased speech by the member for Brennan. He told us about all the good things the CLP had done as if nothing had been done by Labor. That highlights the problem I have. We have biased debate. I understand there is bias in this place sometimes; the truth does not come out.
The Labor Party was helping people in the community, for sure, but it spent all that money in Palmerston hoping to win some seats. It lost every seat. If that is the way the government approaches this next election, people will see through it. What people want at the next election is for the government to admit it has made mistakes, say it will try to improve things, slow it down a bit and not come across as arrogant.
It is so annoying that the Treasurer said, ‘I will not listen to any of the recommendations of the PAC’. Regardless of whether the Treasurer wants to go to Richardson Park, the PAC did not say where the money should be spent. We just asked government to spend the money wisely, based on some facts and figures obtained before it did it. ‘No, rubbish!’ That is the arrogance that annoys people.
I went to that meeting at 5.30 pm on Sunday night. You could see that people were annoyed. The government has a long way to go. If you take notice of the current polls, the government will lose the next election. The reason for fixed-term elections is for governments to have the opportunity to pick themselves up after down periods, then voters will make a decision about the full four-year period, not just when things were going well for them.
I understand why the opposition has proposed this motion; it is an opportunity to talk about some important issues. But I feel, as I said before, that regardless of what the government has done in the past, whether good or bad, the people of the Northern Territory have supported fixed elections up until now, as both parties have. If we really believe in it, then we should say we believe in it. If we are saying we should shorten the period, then let us see a motion come before this parliament to change the Electoral Act.
However, as it is, I am abstaining because I feel the government has lost its way. It has done some very good things but it needs to settle back, review where it is going and allow the people, at the end of this four years, to make a judgment on whether the Labor Party or the Independents – you never know, we could become the majority of people in the House. Wouldn’t that be good? We might have consensus government one day where we can all sit in this parliament and vote ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Gerry’s dream, hey?
Mr WOOD: That is right. We could even elect the minister for Primary Industry as a minister by a vote of this House, not by a vote of the party. He does a good job as minister for Primary Industry; I am not knocking you, minister.
It works and gives an opportunity for everyone in this parliament to be a full working member of the decision-making process. That is what I believe this parliament lacks at the moment. It is a small parliament, probably smaller than the Geelong or Wollongong City Councils.
Madam Speaker, there is an opportunity for us to change the way we do things. This motion will not do that. Maybe at the next election it will happen.
Ms MOSS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, I speak in support of the important motion put before the House by the Leader of the Opposition. I thank him for that. We all recognise how serious a motion of no confidence in the government is. It is not a decision we take lightly, but we heard overwhelmingly from Territorians that this is the right thing to do and what they want us to do.
It is unfortunate that the CLP government continues on a path that is doing so much damage to the Northern Territory, and that we continue to say the government should get its act together. At this point in its term, it should have its act together. We continue to hear from the government that it will be more consultative and make changes, but nothing changes. We continue to have this debate in this House and Territorians, quite frankly, deserve better.
Territorians deserve representatives who have the people’s best interests at heart rather than their self-interests. Yet we have consistently seen individuals acting for themselves and not for the betterment of the Territory. Territorians deserve a government they can trust because it is supposed to provide stability and certainty, and do the job it has been elected to do. Territorians deserve government leaders who provide leadership in the true sense of the word. That includes taking responsibility when things go wrong and acting with professionalism to put them right. Territorians deserve a government that truly acts in partnership with the non-government sector and industry to deliver the best outcomes for Territorians.
It has been quite some time since Territorians have seen those characteristics in their government. The CLP government that stands before us today is not the government they elected. I have to speak up for the residents of Casuarina and the many people who have spoken to me about this motion and the chaos they continue to see. Territorians do not want another nine months of this shambolic, uncaring and inward-looking CLP government. To stand and say that no representations have been made to you as a member of this House is untrue. It took me 30 seconds during the member for Daly’s speech to find an e-mail that had been sent to every member of this parliament asking members to support this motion of no confidence today.
The member for Daly also said Territorians can sort the politics from the facts. I completely agree with that. They have done that in this case. One fact is that in my electorate many families are bearing the brunt of decisions made by this government and families are doing it tough. They continue to do it exceptionally tough and some are leaving Darwin because of that. They will see through the cynical moves of raising power prices exponentially and then cutting them by 5% and wanting to be patted on the back for it.
Everyday mums and dads, seniors and small business owners in my electorate are doing it tough, yet the CLP government continues to spin. It has its members and candidates spruiking action on crime; however, under the CLP government the northern suburbs have seen crime on the rise again. The statistics show the same change in Darwin and Palmerston.
The CLP government’s failure to adopt consistent Territory-wide policies to address alcohol issues is having an impact on the northern suburbs. The purely political move to scrap the Banned Drinker Register is an example of that. I have raised it before in this House and I will continue to do so. Our police do an exceptional job with the resources they have, despite the CLP’s abject failure to deliver on their promise to increase police numbers.
Casuarina residents deserve better than to be subjected to the high levels of public intoxication and antisocial behaviour we again see around our parks, reserves and shopping and service precincts. In addition, evidenced-based approaches are needed for the identification and treatment of substance misuse across the Northern Territory. The CLP government poured tens of millions of dollars into alcohol mandatory treatment without evaluation and accountability.
Over the last three years schools in the Casuarina electorate have lost teachers. I imagine we will lose more in the coming months. Schools continue to come to grips with the massive changes that have been undertaken by the CLP government and implemented poorly under its continually revolving door of Education ministers.
Since August 2012 there are 330 fewer staff and 165 fewer teachers in Northern Territory schools. Across the board there are no clear improvements in results. It would be ignorant to suggest we will not see the results of these decisions to cut teacher numbers over the coming years. I worry about the impact that will have on my electorate. I worry about the impact on kids in Casuarina as we see more teachers and support staff cut from our schools. What is more important than education? This is not what people in Casuarina want to see.
We hear talk about infrastructure projects and the Treasurer boasts about the economy, yet two years on, and even with former ministers describing it as a mistake, we see no real action on the Royal Darwin Hospital car park. The government cannot fix a car park and reach any milestones with the Palmerston hospital. The car park issue continues to be raised with me across the electorate. I know it is raised with other members of parliament. It is atrocious what is happening there and people want it fixed.
Media releases from the Minister for Business and the member for Blain promising regular meetings with local Casuarina business retail and community stakeholders were issued in April this year. However, some in the precinct missed out on that initial meeting and there has reportedly been very little follow-up since.
Business confidence is down and many small businesses are continuing to do it tough under the CLP government. A lack of visibility of work, jobs for mates and the revolving door of ministers does not paint a rosy picture for those trying to make a real go of it in small business.
The picture is not much better in my portfolio areas. The reality in child protection is that the CLP government is failing increasing numbers of children. An amount of $8m was slashed from the child protection budget when the CLP government came to office, and the minister is now playing catch up. Even if there is a cash injection in the next budget the current issues that are apparent through the recently released Children’s Commissioner and Department of Children and Families reports will not go away.
It is of major concern that the minister who carries the hefty portfolios in our government, the member for Port Darwin, is retiring at the next election with no clear pathway of who, under the existing or proposed CLP team, could take on these important areas.
There are more children than ever coming to the attention of the department, with a 32% increase in notifications and a 23% increase in substantiations, although both the current and former Children’s Commissioners have suggested there is a great likelihood that the number of substantiations is hugely underrepresented.
In August 2012 there were 737 full-time equivalent staff members in the department and at the latest report there were 607. The number of unresolved cases has grown in a year from 1160 to 1301. The number of priority one cases – the children at greatest risk of harm – being responded to in the mandated time frame has reduced by 6%.
Our Children’s Commissioner says our out-of-home care system is in crisis, and I agree with her. In real terms, 156 children assessed as priority one – child in danger – were placed at risk because the investigation did not start within the required 24 hours, compared to 43 the year before. A total of 433 children assessed as priority two were placed at risk because their investigations did not commence within three days, compared to 319 the year before. These are the facts.
The targets in relation to the safety of children continue to reduce. Despite a concentration on out-of-home care and an increase from 918 to 997 children, there was a significant decrease in new placements. It is horrifying to see in out-of-home care the number of children who are further abused, harmed and exploited in placements that are supposed to provide them with safety and security – 110 cases involving 95 children. This is after they have been failed by their parents. Even more disturbingly, 12 of those young people have been harmed multiple times in their placements. The response from the minister and the CLP government, as it has been across a number of portfolios, has been underwhelming.
The system is broken. The Children’s Commissioner, in an ABC report on 23 November, said she believes the department needs to support our foster carers better. That is what I hear as I talk to those who represent foster carers who visit me. There is a real need to work in partnership with and better support foster carers, who are providing such an important service that is an increasing need in the Northern Territory.
The CLP government has failed to revisit the board of inquiry recommendations, one of the most significant bodies of work put together by experts in the field. Many of the recommendations remain relevant and we will revisit them because we believe the system needs to be turned around. We will ensure that children are at the centre of government policy. We recognise the value of early intervention and the need to provide interventions and support to the increasing number of vulnerable children and families who come into contact with the system but do not reach the threshold for investigation. That was upwards of 9000 children and young people in the last year alone.
We will not speak flippantly about those who report a legitimate concern for the wellbeing and safety of a child, because that is exactly what Territorians are obligated to do by law: protect the rights of children to be safe. We will continue to have strong and robust discussions with Territorians about our early childhood policy because we believe those early years are the most important to setting Territorians up for a strong and healthy life.
In relation to the portfolio of Young Territorians, it took some time to release the Youth Participation Framework, which I was on the steering committee for in 2011. I was pleased to see that finally released. I looked at it recently. It refers to a scorecard to be released in April 2015. This scorecard is about looking at what government departments and relevant stakeholders should be focused on in supporting the Territory’s young people. To my knowledge, this has not been released.
We know, however, that after making cuts to youth services upon taking office, including the Youth Street Outreach Service in Alice Springs, the CLP government wanted to be patted on the back in April this year when it announced putting some money back into the youth sector. It is a shame it does not seem to tie up to the strategies it has released.
Alice Springs has waited an incredibly long time for the Chief Minister to sign the agreement which will see night services for young people reinstated, after a lot of pressure in this House and from the local community in Alice Springs. It wants to be patted on the back for it. It concerns me how much time has been lost, especially the closer we get to summer. It also concerns me that the CLP government members refuse to admit that perhaps they made the wrong decision in cutting those services when they came to government. Former ministers, including the member for Araluen, who is now an Independent in this House, have admitted it was a wrong decision by the CLP, yet the government refuses to comment.
Based on the Chief Minister’s comments directed towards me last time we were in this Chamber, I am not convinced he necessarily values or understands those who work alongside young Territorians to improve outcomes for them. I send a very clear message to those who work in the non-government sector and the public service in the Northern Territory: Territory Labor believes you make a valuable contribution and you should have a voice inside and outside this House. Territory Labor believes you have worth and that a range of backgrounds should be represented in here, because diversity increases the quality of our decision-making.
Unfortunately, as was demonstrated by the sale of TIO, the recent lease of the Darwin port and the ongoing issues around Richardson Park, the CLP government grasps steadfastly to making decisions in its own echo chamber in a way that even its own members disagree with. The CLP government lost touch long ago with what is happening in the everyday lives of Territorians, while making decisions that impact so heavily on them. The CLP does not even feel confident enough with this government to support the current Treasurer of the Northern Territory in his seat. I recently hosted an afternoon tea for seniors in my electorate. Upon arrival, one of them said to me, ‘I hope Adam Giles never gets old; he does not care about seniors.’
We have a Minister for Health who made exceptionally offensive comments about terminally-ill seniors, during Seniors Month I might add, without a peep from the minister for seniors. Those comments were widely rejected and they appalled Territorians across the Northern Territory. However, we lack the leadership in government to discipline members over comments such as these because it is all about the numbers and shoring up positions, not standing up for Territorians.
Housing is one of the biggest issues raised by seniors and many other Territorians. Under the CLP government the state of housing is only getting worse. The Minister for Housing and the CLP government, time after time, blatantly attempt to misinform the public about the 11 years of a good Labor government which delivered in the complex area of housing. We acknowledge that it is complex. The claims are untrue and disrespectful. We had a minister who was focused on reducing wait times, which under the CLP government and the watch of the current minister continue to blow out ...
Mr Elferink: Not true.
Ms MOSS: I pick up on the interjection from the member for Port Darwin. It is very true and the statistics back that up. It is getting harder to find the information on how much, because the website has not been updated since March this year. However, it remains the biggest issue raised with us across the Territory, particularly in the bush.
According to the CLP government’s budget papers, it is failing to deliver on social housing, with only 18 of the target of 95 houses delivered in 2014-15. Rather than aim to build the 77 outstanding social housing dwellings plus extra to meet the growing need, the CLP government sets the targets lower. That is an ongoing theme that fails Territorians in the bush and in urban areas.
I have had the opportunity to speak to local residents across the Northern Territory and it is clear that repairs and maintenance remains an urgent issue, with poor communication occurring once reported. Public housing sits vacant for months, as time to return these to stock increases. I see this in my electorate and it is heartbreaking to see those houses sit empty while the need is so high. It was former minister Chris Burns who established an agreement with Treasury that proceeds from the sale of any public housing stock went back into the department for the replenishment of stock. Plenty of good things happened under the Labor government.
The more time grows in getting Territorians into vital housing the harder it will be for any government to catch up. We are yet to hear from the minister about plans post-2018 when the current Commonwealth funding runs out.
Territory Labor recognises the importance of this portfolio area, particularly in the bush. As outlined by the Leader of the Opposition, we recognise the need to invest heavily in housing and in building the role of local people to build and maintain them.
In mental health, as I have raised before, there was a strategic plan released very late in the year, despite being promoted as being a plan for 2014 to 2017 on the Department of Health’s website for quite some time. It refers specifically to the detail contained within a yearly action plan informed by consultation, which will be what it is measured against.
When I made an inquiry as to where this action plan was for the current financial year, the advice was very clear: it is still under development and will be an internal document. I simply do not understand why an action plan for mental health would be kept internal and close to the chest of government, particularly if backed up by ample consultation. Mental health and our plans for improving the mental health of Territorians and for suicide prevention should be community owned, community driven and done in partnership with the community. But once again we see something that is held close to the chest of government and not shared. Unlike business, it does not provide an environment in which the sector can plan, be a partner in or take ownership of.
It is particularly concerning to me during a time when mental health reform on a national level is such a big discussion. We are hearing about some of the biggest mental health reforms seen in Australia in years. There is not even a peep from the current government on how that might affect us. There are huge structural changes we are talking about that will change funding. We need to know that someone will go into bat to see that we will get our fair share because our need continues to be great. Territory Labor will do that. I have been doing it for years and I will not stop.
There are many more examples I could give across my portfolio areas. I have been very lucky over the last couple of weeks to release some of our plans about innovation and technology. I have talked to some of our greatest minds across the Northern Territory about creative ways we can back them, how we can commercialise the best ideas coming out of the Territory and demonstrate the unique assets we have here on a global stage. We will continue to do that.
Madam Speaker, it is clear, based on facts, that the CLP government of the Northern Territory has lost the faith of the people. It is unable to communicate its message and members are paralysed by their distrust of each other. It is time to let Territorians decide. I trust Territorians and I urge all of members of this House to trust them too. I commend this motion to the House.
Mr CHANDLER (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, the crowd does not expect the teams to walk off the field at the three-quarter mark. We do not expect to walk off the field. The paint might be a bit rough around the edges, but I can assure you the engine is fine, the tank is full and the tyres are in really good nick.
This no confidence motion is nothing more than a political stunt by an inexperienced Labor opposition devoid of policy and with no plans to take the Northern Territory forward.
We are not always popular; anyone can recognise that. But that it is the paintwork. This government has the Northern Territory on track despite an opposition determined to derail our fantastic achievements to date. I heard the Chief Minister say on the weekend that perhaps one of our issues is we have tried to do too much too soon and put the Territory in the right direction too quickly. Perhaps we should have taken our time.
However, we have an opposition that cannot be trusted. The Labor opposition hates cattle exporters, tourists, new infrastructure and improving crime statistics. Under Labor, crime statistics were not readily available. This government updates them regularly so all can be seen. It is not hiding away from those facts. Labor hates improving crime statistics. They hate tough laws to crack down on criminals and sex offenders. They hate schools and school councils with autonomy and the capacity to become Independent Public Schools. They hate valuable portfolios like Veterans Support; they do not have a shadow minister for Veterans Support. They hate the developing the north policy. They hate housing reform, affordable housing, reduced rent and lower petrol prices.
They hate the new Palmerston hospital being built. They hate everything that this government is doing. They hate acting swiftly to tackle the epidemic of ice. They hate Palmerston; we can see that. They hate reforming education after extensive consultation because their union masters disagree. They hate releasing crime statistics that tell the true story, which is a good story. They hate Stella Maris remaining a public asset. They hate inquiries. They hate Alice Springs; that is obvious.
They hate accountability and most of all they hate having to come up with anything other than rocks to throw and personal attacks. That is what happens every time we come into this Chamber. All they have in their armoury is rocks and personal attacks. That is all they do.
We all understand what this no confidence motion is all about. We are a minority government, which comes with its own challenges. But the people of the Northern Territory need to understand what this Labor opposition is proposing today. The Labor opposition would like the Northern Territory to go to an election in early January or even as early as 29 December. It would like to be handed government because it believes, as it always has, that it was born to rule.
Many of those on the opposition benches were advisers to the former Labor government. They were tired of developing bad policies and pandering to their union mates with none of the glory so they stood for election in 2012. Now, here they are; the bridesmaids finally want to walk to the altar.
I am sorry but the Northern Territory is too important and there is too much at stake for that to happen. We cannot risk Labor in government again. People will remember what direction this place was heading after nearly 12 years of Labor government. Labor put all its eggs in one basket with one facility and one program, which was INPEX. It was a great initiative for the Northern Territory but the basket was full with one egg. This government has many more eggs in the basket because it is diversifying the economy. That is what the Northern Territory needs to be strong and go forward.
So far we have seen the Leader of the Opposition remain the puppet for the member for Karama. Her policies are largely in the areas this government is focused on, like early childhood, attendance at remote schools, electoral reform and, despite the masterminds of Stella Maris, a policy on openness and accountability. It astounds me.
I cannot forget the Leader of the Opposition’s excellent policy on driverless cars, but this Country Liberals government is delivering for Territorians. We have a plan and a vision to grow the Territory and make Territorians’ lives better. They may not always like us but the facts speak for themselves. There has been record infrastructure spending in this budget, including regional roads – something ignored for many years under Labor – arterial upgrades, cattle routes, bridges and more. There has been record spending in schools, including the introduction of Independent Public Schools, which has schools, school councils and parents excited and lined up at the door to join. There has been world-class support for our police, whose numbers are increasing.
Those police numbers are on track to meet our election commitment. Despite Labor’s claims, we have 117 more police officers on the street today than when Labor was in government. That is a fact. Our policies are putting those police officers on the street more regularly. They are not behind desks doing administrative work; they are on the beat. Not only do we have more police than when Labor was in government, they are more effective because they are on the street where Territorians expect them to be. We are investing in load-bearing vests, the latest weapons, CCTV cameras and more police stations.
We have added hundreds of thousands of cattle to the export numbers from the Territory, and renewed an industry from the brink of disaster under Labor.
We have revolutionised our legislation in relation to criminals and violent offenders – no thanks to Labor – and we are tough on crime and happy to tell the world about Labor’s soft approach that seems to favour the rights of criminals and paedophiles over the innocent.
We have paid off Labor’s debt and brought the economy under control with a steady hand. If this new Labor team wants Territorians to support them and trust that they are a new breed with no links to its past, that is totally wrong. If they want Territorians to believe in them the first thing they should do is apologise for the debt they left the Territory in because every hard financial decision this government has had to make was because of one thing …
Mr Elferink: Your legacy.
Mr CHANDLER: Your legacy, that is right. I will pick up on what the member for Port Darwin said. Your legacy to Territorians was debt, and this government had to make some decisions. Were they appreciated by the public? No, absolutely not! Is the Territory in a far better position now than it was three years ago? Heck, yes, far better. We are not spending anywhere near the amount of money today on interest payments as we did when you led the Territory.
The economy is far more diverse and stable. Under this damn fine government there is a vision for the Northern Territory, unlike the rock throwers from the other side who do nothing more than look for scandal and rot, and throw mud instead of coming up with decent policies for Territorians. They should have an effective opposition. When we were in opposition we made you a better government because we were an effective opposition. At the moment I am not seeing much from the other side.
We have intervened and seen petrol prices in the Northern Territory go from the highest in the country to the lowest. That was done through a range of initiatives through which this government was right there with the rest. I commend not only the local media but also Territorians for doing something about it. We had nearly 12 years of Labor but it was too hard for them. They talk about bringing down the cost of living and policies and initiatives, but in the 12 years they were in government what did they do for the average Territorian when it came to petrol prices? Name one thing! Absolutely nothing.
The Leader of the Opposition today agreed that they dropped the ball on land release. In Palmerston land was approaching $300 000 a block. How in the world does a young Territorian trying to make a difference and get a start in the world come up with $300 000 for a block, before they have even put a house on it. The Labor Party says it is there for those people who are less fortunate in life and that it is trying to give them a hand-up. It is all talk and no action. Do not trust it.
We have had a record land release and reduced the pressure on neglected housing stock. As I said, previously it cost $300 000 for a block of land in Palmerston. Whilst the blocks of land may be a tad smaller today, $118 000 will buy you a block of land in Palmerston. For a young couple that is their start in life. In four or five years they may have the money to move to a larger block of land or a bigger house, but it gets them into the market. They could not do that under the restrictions the former Labor government had in the housing market and the land release program.
We have overhauled Power and Water and brought it to commercial sustainability, and Territorians can now reap the benefits for years to come.
We are building Palmerston hospital and the work will speak for itself ...
Members interjecting.
Mr CHANDLER: Labor may laugh, and here they are laughing again, but the real joke is that in nearly 12 years in government what did we get? Nil, nothing, nada!
Territorians can smile when they walk through the doors of the brand-new state-of-the-art hospital when it opens. That is not a chook fence, not a bush clinic, but a real hospital being constructed.
Tiger Brennan Drive upgrade is a cornerstone investment in the Territory by this government. The Country Liberals started the road and we will see it completed with a near full duplication next year.
Art in the Territory has been boosted with independent art councils, festivals are flourishing and the Chan building is being redeveloped to a world-class facility. Well done, minister Higgins.
The Sport Voucher Scheme is a brilliant initiative and the options are endless. Young people and sports are well supported by this government.
The gas pipeline represents a game changer for the Northern Territory economy. This government is delivering on its commitment to diversify our economic base.
The lease of the port will realise the economic potential of this vital infrastructure and will see more investment, jobs and work come out of that sector.
TIO was heading for a commercial disaster. With the spiralling costs of underwriting insurance and the small purchasing base, the release of the TIO to the open market and purchase by the world’s largest insurer has made sure the vast majority of Territorians will not see spiralling insurance whilst the local investment and uniqueness of the TIO brand is maintained.
Remote communities are being connected with mobile coverage and Internet. They have greater decision-making capacity, and economies and investments are flowing into regions completely ignored by years of Labor neglect.
Palmerston has over $1bn worth of government and private investment at the moment, a sure sign of the confidence in this government and the team Palmerston local members. Darwin’s satellite city is growing by the day and it is the best place in the Territory to live, even if I say so myself. Sorry, Madam Speaker, the rural area is pretty important as well, but Palmerston is the centre.
Our airport is expanding; we have new international services and carriers. We are connecting with our nearby neighbours like Dili, and continuing to look to our closest trading partners as our future. We are connecting the Territory with a spinal service, or milk run as most people remember, with flights from Darwin to Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs.
This government is on track; the Territory is on track, and we cannot risk a Labor government. All those opposite were involved in the failed former Labor Territory government that took us all for granted and ran many aspects of the economy into the ground. They are responsible. We cannot risk Labor based on a popularity contest. We are not always popular, but the results will speak for themselves in the end. Labor wants to steal Christmas and everyone to be talking about us in this room. I do not want to talk about us; I want to talk about the future for Territorians. That is my, the Chief Minister’s and this government’s focus.
As an aside, this year the Department of Infrastructure is managing a program of $1.517bn for capital works, minor new works and repairs and maintenance, with more than $250m spent to date this year. I question whether Labor has any consideration for the construction industry or what this motion and the potential onset of an early election will do to the infrastructure budget.
During the period 1 July to 9 November 2015, 183 contracts were awarded, with a total value of $448m. That is phenomenal. Over 95% of contracts were awarded locally. There is currently $57m in tenders released to the market, and another $73m with the department under assessment. Should this motion be passed, what would happen to these tenders? Everything would be put on hold. The Territory would virtually come to a standstill for two or three months, depending on what the outcome was and what date the election was called. For many businesses, over what can be a difficult time for business through the Wet Season, any money this government puts out is welcome. For the business community any thought of an election at this time of year would be disastrous.
There is another $650m worth of works to be advertised by May 2016. The impact of an early election would put those works on hold as well. It would delay the economy, and the uncertainty would be catastrophic to the construction industry. Businesses would close down and jobs would be lost. I do not think Labor has thought about the impact this motion would have on the construction industry at all. This motion impacts the amount of roadworks delivered and police facilities upgraded and health centres would be put in jeopardy.
This year we are investing over $160m in capital works, minor new works and repairs and maintenance at Territory education centres. We are giving our children more daycare facilities, better opportunities for distance learning and new and improved special education options. There is a new $4m preschool at Braitling Primary School, a new $5.5m child and family centre located at the Larapinta Primary School site, and construction of the new $21.4m Palmerston special school in Bellamack has already commenced. This motion would put all these important infrastructure works in disarray.
I could speak for ages. We acknowledge that what this government fails in from time to time is communication. Even the Opposition Leader said there are often times – and the member for Nelson raised this – when governments do things well but those messages are not communicated well. Like a first-term government – I do not think anyone on this side thinks we get everything right every time. We are learning every day.
This motion puts us on notice. Every letter to the Editor in the NT News and every article written that is negative towards this government has an effect on me and this team. We learn from that impact and we continue to grow. Can we change our ways? Yes, and in some respects we need to change our ways.
Some of the things the member for Nelson said today are true. We debate in this place and sometimes it is a war of words where mud is thrown at each other. ‘You are better than us.’ ‘We are better than you.’ Did it really matter to John Smith as he drove to work this morning or any of the children who go to school? Much of what we do in this place is, quite frankly, a waste of their time because while we are talking about ourselves we are not getting on and doing the job Territorians want us to. That is not just the government; that is this entire parliament. As a child grows, this government will continue to grow. We will have failures and successes and will learn from each.
It is a good government and sometimes people forget it is a first-term government. I am hopeful that Territorians will see that we can throw a bit of polish on that paintwork. The engine is sound, though, the tank is full, the tyres are in good nick and Territorians deserve a government that has transformed this place in the last three years.
Madam Speaker, I reiterate what the Chief Minister said on the weekend. Have we done things too quickly? Maybe. We wanted to get on and do the job so quickly that some Territorians have been left behind a little in that advancement of the Territory. We have taken the Territory a long way in a very short time. We are laying a very solid foundation. As well as this motion, everything that is said to me on doorsteps and when I run into people in the community teaches me something and drives me to be a better Territorian, minister and MLA. I I have said that often it takes motions like this and letters to the editor to make us do our job better. Every time, you make the decision on how you want to improve your own life.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, my comments will purely be in my role as the member for Araluen. I am a resident of Alice Springs and am here as a representative of a third of the population of Alice Springs. The views of Centralians, the people of Central Australia, are slightly different from the views of the people of the Top End.
People in Alice Springs do not have access to the NT News in the same volume as people in the Top End. I have done some research. In Central Australia the distribution of the NT News is around 850 to 900 copies per day. It is slightly higher on Sundays but definitely fewer than 1000 copies per day are sold in Alice Springs. If you generously estimate that another 1000 people go online, not a lot of people in Alice Springs are reading the NT News compared to the number of people who read it in Darwin or the Top End. Similarly, Channel 9 is not recognised as a channel that people watch in Alice Springs for the news. I understand that fairly recently they have started broadcasting Channel 9 news on Gem 90, but I know of hardly anyone who turns to channel 90 at 6 pm every night to catch the Darwin news in Alice Springs.
I am prefacing my comments with the fact that, generally speaking, people in Central Australia have a slightly different perspective to those in the Top End. That is not because they are ignorant or do not understand things as well as people in the Top End; it is about exposure to different types of political analysis.
The other aspect to mention in this debate is that during the 11 years that Labor was in government from 2001 to 2012, the people of Central Australia felt very let down. They felt the Labor government generally neglected Alice Springs and Central Australia. They felt that their needs were not met and they were considered to be second-class citizens, me included. The old Berrimah line was definitely alive and well during those 11 years of Labor in power. People do not forget that. People are still very mindful of those days when we were overlooked and ignored.
So when the Leader of the Opposition gave notice of this motion on Thursday 12 November in the last sittings of parliament, I disembarked the plane the following day in Alice Springs at 9.30 am and embarked on a very intense consultation process. I stood on the side of the road just about every morning and went to shopping centres and as many graduation ceremonies as I could. I attended many events, and at every opportunity asked people, ‘What do you think? Are you ready for an early election? Have you had enough of the CLP government? What should I do? How should I vote?’ Most people by far said they did not want an early election. They did not want to go to the polls, particularly during the Christmas and January school holiday period. They thought a four-year term should be a four-year term and that Labor was not ready to govern.
Debate suspended.
PETITION
Petition No 58 – Conserve Berry Springs Waterhole
Ms PURICK (Goyder)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I present a petition from 118 petitioners not conforming with standing orders relating to the conservation of Berry Springs waterhole. The petition is similar to Petition No 56 presented during the November sittings. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- There is an 18 x five-acre block subdivision being planned right next door to this beautiful, natural, World War II Heritage waterhole.
While progress is inevitable, we would like some constraints on this proposal put in place so the water quality is not further adversely effected.
1. A Buffer zone be put in place to slow contaminated water runoff.
2. Larger block sizes to minimise sewage contamination in the ground water and less drawing of water from the Berry Springs aquifer.
3. More accurate and transparent investigations on the impact that further development will have on the water quality in the area, particularly to ensure the long-term sustainability of Berry Springs Nature Park.
Please sign the petition to show your support or, sadly, Berry Springs may soon end up like Howard Springs Nature Park – no more swimming – ever!
MOTION
Want of Confidence in the Government
Want of Confidence in the Government
Continued from earlier this day.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Deputy Speaker, continuing my comments from earlier today, despite my serious doubts about the sustainability of the Giles government, I will not be supporting a vote of no confidence, which would take Territorians to an early election.
Since the opposition gave notice of this motion on Thursday 12 November, I have canvassed the views of a significant number of Alice Springs residents. I have concluded that they do not want an early election despite the fact they are unimpressed with the performance of this CLP government. They do not want an early election because a fixed term should remain a fixed term. People do not want an early election over the Christmas holiday period and think Labor has not yet proven to be a viable alternative government.
Whilst I will not be supporting the Labor vote of no confidence and effectively handing over government to Labor, I cannot support the CLP government which continues to unravel and demonstrate a lack of respect and integrity. Territorians deserve better. For these reasons I will be abstaining from the vote.
On a broader level I will make a few comments about my perspective and what I have been observing of the CLP of late. The rot of this government has come from the top. As someone who has been subjected to all sorts of things from this government over the last 12 months, I am deeply saddened by the deterioration and disintegration of the CLP at the hands of the member for Braitling.
But more concerning is the Treasurer, who now finds himself, after the weekend, in a position of being dumped by his party. I believe the member for Fong Lim must go; he must be removed from his position as Treasurer. He has been a poor performer on all levels.
At the height of his career, during last sittings we were delivered a copy of the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report. It has not been absorbed yet by the community, because if it had, it would be revealed to one and all that this TAFR was disclaimed by the Auditor-General in the report. There are three pages of comments from the Auditor-General. The basis on which the disclaimer of opinion was issued was an inability to form an opinion about the Power and Water Corporation, and inadequate books and records maintained by the Power and Water Corporation, all under the watch of the current Treasurer, who effectively had a vote of no confidence against him on the weekend by his party.
If we are to talk about the credibility of this government, we need to seriously look at the role of the Treasurer and whether or not the member for Fong Lim is equipped to retain his position. The role of Treasurer is probably more important than any position in Cabinet. The Treasurer has final responsibility for every cent spent by the government – every bit of revenue and expenditure.
To read in this TAFR that for the second time in the history of Australian governments an Auditor-General has had to disclaim a Treasurer’s report is unbelievable ...
Mr Tollner: That is not true
Mrs LAMBLEY: It is true, despite the call of rejection from the other side of the Chamber. The Public Accounts Committee was informed of this by the Auditor-General, Julie Crisp, in a meeting of the PAC this afternoon.
When we talk about confidence in this government, how can we have confidence in a Treasurer who tables a report in parliament which is disclaimed by the Auditor-General? I have no confidence in this Treasurer for a range of reasons.
For the Chief Minister to go on public radio yesterday morning and tell us again about his unequivocal support for his best mate and Treasurer, the member for Fong Lim, is simply outrageous. People are sick of this. They are fed up to the eyeballs.
My decision to not support this vote of no confidence in the government cannot be construed as a vote of confidence in the government. It is quite the contrary. I have had enough. I have doubts and serious concerns about the viability of this government. I do not think this government will make it to August. The internal problems and the continuing dysfunction of this government will mean it will become impotent and paralysed through its inability to work as a team.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the Treasurer has to go and, in my opinion, the Chief Minister has to go for the CLP to survive.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Madam Speaker, I support the motion of no confidence brought to the House by the Leader of the Opposition, Michael Gunner. A motion of no confidence is the most serious motion that can be brought before the Legislative Assembly. We have not made the decision to go down this path lightly.
Sadly for Territorians we have reached crisis point. This government has overdosed on its own arrogance. It has lost touch with Territorians. It has hit the critical mass of controversy. It has sent in the clowns – free entry into the circus – but Territorians are paying dearly. Enough is enough.
Territorians too regularly have fielded questions of disbelief from their southern mates about the scandalous goings on of the Territory government. This government has repeatedly reduced the Territory to a laughing stock. The Territory has been ridiculed and made the butt of all political jokes across the country. If it was not so serious you would be forgiven for finding it amusing. It is like an old episode of Fawlty Towers with Adam Giles as Basil Fawlty and John Elferink as Manuel. If you did not laugh sometimes, you would cry. However, this is very serious.
How often have each of us heard the phrase ‘only in the Territory’? The Territorian heart beating deep in most of our chests cherishes the element of life in the Top End that makes us a bit different and unique. But because we are in the Territory does not mean our government can take the liberty to be so different and unique as to be detrimental to the people it represents.
It may come as a surprise to the members opposite, but rules apply here. There are expectations of government that you have not met. Your actions have not gone unnoticed. The impact of decisions cannot be swept under the rug. Across the Territory voters are angry and disillusioned. Territorians deserve a government that will answer to them, is accountable and consults. They deserve better than the CLP is giving them. At a bare minimum Territorians need to have confidence that the government of the day is working in Territorians’ best interests. That confidence is gone – eroded and trashed.
Territorians have given this government the benefit of the doubt and more than enough chances to change its ways. Has it learnt from its mistakes? Many people would say no. Territorians have had their fill of this incompetent, dysfunctional, arrogant and untrustworthy government. There is widespread support for a fresh start an election can bring.
This government has made questionable decisions without consulting Territorians. It has flat out ignored the voices of Territorians. It has flogged off public assets like TIO without batting an eyelid, despite the desperate plea from Territorians to stop the sale. The consequence of the sale of TIO is that many Territory residents have been unable to afford insurance for their homes. Families have been quoted insurance premiums that almost trump the cost of their mortgage repayments. These Territorians and their livelihoods are now left exposed.
Under the CLP government Territorians have also had to endure the unsustainable cost of living, businesses closing and families leaving the Territory, a criminal justice system falling apart, the youth justice system in crisis and, sadly, our child protection system in crisis. Our children are suffering. What government allows a teenage girl to go missing and alerts the public three or four months later that the child is missing? Minister for Children and Families, how many other teenagers have gone missing for two or three weeks at a time without anybody knowing? It is a crisis and we need to do what is best for Territorians. We need to make sure, at a bare minimum, our children are cared for when they cannot be cared for by their parents.
The government has failed to properly plan and consult the community on important decisions such as Richardson Park.
Enough has been said about the Palmerston hospital debacle; there has been enough laughter and disbelief about that decision.
On the question of the allocation of water licences, it cost taxpayers $110 000 when the government lost the case on water allocation that was taken to court.
It is holding the community in contempt on important planning issues and over the CLP involvement with the slush fund Foundation 51.
The flawed alcohol policies have seen the rivers of alcohol flow to our problem drinkers.
Territorians are quite rightly concerned about what impact the CLP’s antics will have on business confidence in the Northern Territory, and the future of jobs in the Territory for them and their children. What message does this madness send to the broader business community and potential investors? Our private sector wants stability and certainty to underpin investment decisions and the creation of jobs, but the government does not care because sadly the CLP has governed for the CLP and not for the Territory. It is not just the failings of the CLP that have hit the pages of newspapers that have disappointed us and Territorians. There are policy and portfolio failings that have caused concern as well.
In regard to Indigenous policy, a raft of promises was made to bush voters ahead of the last election which have not been fulfilled. The CLP government flip-flopped between, ‘Yes, we will, no, we will not, yes, we will have a dedicated agency of Indigenous Affairs’. The impact of the CLP government ignoring social services related to early childhood and parenting, health, children and families, education, preventative and early intervention approaches for three years is now showing up in annual report statistics. There is poor attendance and substandard NAPLAN results, and fewer Indigenous teachers and assistant teachers in schools. The Department of Children and Families is overwhelmed with demand. Emergency departments are struggling and elective surgery wait lists are blowing out. All this impacts upon the health, wellbeing and future economic contributions of Indigenous Territorians.
The CLP government is increasingly criticised by independent authorities for its punitive policies such as paperless arrests and alcohol mandatory treatment that disproportionally impact upon Indigenous Territorians. The percentage of Indigenous Territorians incarcerated is dramatically out of proportion to the Territory’s population.
The CLP government has made no secret of the fact it has the land councils in its sights. It wants access to land and will attack Aboriginal land rights until it gets what it wants.
In Fisheries there is the Dundee boat ramp debacle. Amateur fishermen and fishers of all sorts should be using the boat ramp already. The day it was supposed to be completed the minister announced the issuing of the tender. This should have been built and in use by now.
The fishing exclusion zones confused both amateur and commercial fishermen. Only this government can upset both amateur and commercial fishermen.
The impending vessel monitoring system will cost commercial fishermen $5000 extra per boat. The commercial fishing licences and allocation changes have been very controversial within the commercial fishing industry.
Moving on to Transport, there was a 10 000-word statement last year on transport by the then Transport minister, and the next day he announced the privatisation of our public bus service. There have been road and airstrip delays in capital works programs rolled out. There have been other delays to projects because of tensions between the next Chief Minister, possibly – the member for Brennan, who is the Transport minister – and the Chief Minister.
The commercial passenger vehicle review ended in January yet we still have not heard anything about that. The taxi industry is calling for what the minister will release. There are people’s livelihoods and jobs at stake, and we need to come clean with the taxi industry if Uber is coming to the Northern Territory. If it does, we must protect our local taxi industry and ensure there is a level playing field for everybody.
In the area of Asian Relations and Trade, the public has heard about the ministerial travel scandals instead of the trade and investment outcomes. The sacking of Terry Mills has had a lasting impact on our relationships. I applaud the member for Katherine’s for his focus on forging close relationships with Vietnam.
There was the scrapping of the Arafura Games and then the refusal to bring it back, despite the overwhelming evidence of the potential boost to the local economy and the further strengthening of the Territory’s relationship with our neighbours. There was a $10m loss to the local economy because of the scrapping of the Arafura Games. As I said before, if Labor is elected we will bring back the Arafura Games.
These are only a few examples of the CLP’s policy shortfalls in the portfolios I have shadow responsibility for; there are countless more. Territorians feel betrayed. They know there is a better way to govern and it does not have to be like this. Territorians want a fresh approach to government.
I can tell Territorians that Labor is listening. As the Leader of the Opposition outlined earlier today, Labor has a comprehensive plan with three clear policies: giving our kids the best start in life; restoring trust, transparency and accountability; and creating and supporting jobs for locals and work for local businesses. We are listening to the community and are ready to govern in the community’s interest.
Under normal circumstances the community could reasonably expect the government to run its four-year term before facing judgment at the next general election, but these are not ordinary times. A dysfunctional, incompetent, arrogant CLP government has run out of time. Territorians want to deliver their verdict; they want to send a message to the government that they will not tolerate this anymore. They will not sit idly by and watch the CLP ruin the Territory any longer.
The message from Territorians goes out to those beyond the benches on the other side of the room: the cowboys, rogues, renegades, old boys and puppet masters of the CLP.
Madam Speaker, I urge all members of this House to support this motion. Speak up for the Territorians you are elected to represent, end the suffering and give Territorians the opportunity to move on. Let Territorians go to a vote.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, I also contribute to this most sensitive motion brought to the House. The outcome of this debate will impact upon the credibility of this Assembly and the way we are viewed, not only by Territorians but also other Australians.
We are being asked to set aside a properly elected government, not because of what they have done but because of the way they have done it. In history everybody has made mistakes, including the Labor government and Independents. We owe it to Territorians to hold this government to account not based on personalities but on its overall performance and the outcomes it has achieved in the interests of Territorians.
I am one of the first and most vocal to be critical of personal behaviour, in particular the arrogance of some government members, but my major interest lies in what is being delivered for my constituents. I am not here to muckrake; I am tired of that. I am sorry if I ever put anybody down because at the end of the day that is not my personality – I was raised by a Christian lady – and not who I am. I am sick and tired of the muckraking in this House and forgetting the big things and what people are saying. That is what we are missing.
There is talk on the street and in the bush, but what interests me most is what is happening in the bush. That is what I was elected for.
It is terrible to get personal in this House and start dragging family names into it, going to my back yard and doing it to my people, then watching them throw it back into your face. You are losing credibility with people by doing that. They know who I am; they have seen me born and raised. I do not live away from them; I live there with them. One thing we do not like is outsiders coming in and telling us how to live our lives and what our plans are for our future. We know what we want. We won the land rights, member for Johnston. We have native title over our land. My father was one of the biggest winners. I was born in that field.
We want development, economics, jobs, to express ourselves and be part of the big deal. We want to be part of the big wheel moving forward. That is all we want. We do not want to sit back here and keep throwing things at each other. It is not helping the people out there. We want to move forward.
We are land rich and dirt poor. It is the same thing you have heard so many times; I do not know whether anybody in this House will get it through their heads. It is a real life situation and we want to move forward, but you cannot sit here and keep telling us that everything is wrong every time we move forward.
We have two different perspectives. I am an Independent at the end of the day. Let me tell you something I have never told anybody. My father taught me one thing; ‘If there is anything to move forward’, he said, ‘we won the land rights. We won native title.’
The CLP is the way for business; we have to move forward. They are the only visionaries in this sense. They are the only ones to help the bush move forward. We already live in a false social economy, especially in remote areas. There are hardly any jobs. Look at the shires. What are they really providing: a work for the dole scheme?
Barunga was one of the biggest players when it came to the CDP back then. We were the ones who ran the trials, and it was successful for 30 years until it was scrapped. Then what? Kids did not go to school, families started drinking and social problems escalated. Everything escalated, even the health issues. But back then no one was paid until Friday. At least the kids went to school every week; they were fed and the parents had jobs.
I grew up in that life. When I look now at the majority of my family back home in all the other communities, it is not the same. The hope is gone. They have lost it because of the shires. That has really damaged the communities.
What can we do to make things work? We will eventually get there, but why do we have to run each other down all the time? You sit in this House and play silly games. You are playing political games with people outside this House. It does not hurt me what you say in here, but it is damaging the reputation of innocent people outside this House who are trying to make a living. Yes, they have made mistakes, but they are trying to move forward and that is what I cannot forgive. You will come to your judgment day, but that is in your time.
I am pretty happy with what the CLP has been doing in my electorate. At least we are moving forward. At least now local authorities in communities have a say on the direction of their communities. The health centres will eventually be built. They have to be; there is no other choice. There has to be bridges, roads, mobile phone reception and ADSL, especially for Weemol, Bulman, Umbakumba and Manyallaluk, some of the most remote areas in the Northern Territory.
With the cyclone recovery at Ramingining and Milingimbi, most importantly, there are jobs for my people. If that means to pick up their economy and move forward, then jobs it will be. I will support anything that comes my way if it means jobs for my people.
One thing you have to remember is when the dirt was handed into Mr Lingiari’s hands it gave us the opportunity to sit down and earn money for nothing. I am not a big believer in that; everybody should work. I have worked all my life. But that is where the disadvantage started, because of a policy mess up. If you cannot look at that it is your side of the issue, not mine. But I do not see it that way.
Pearson talked about a lot of history. He wanted people to move forward, put their hands up, be educated, have a life and not sit down but earn money. What is that generation to do? Just have babies? Keep them contained so you can always have control over them? You are not educating people by controlling them. Do you think health is the best way forward? What about educating the kids about health before they have health problems?
We are the ones who have to live out there and see these problems every day. When we come into this House all we hear is constant nagging. Everybody wants to be a saviour of the people with their policies. It has done so much damage in history. If you have not read the history books yet, Aboriginal people are what they are because of the policies in and out of this House. It is no joke anymore. When will we see the real big picture and start making things move forward the way they should?
Stop trying to use the Land Rights Act and everything else as a token. If you were not involved in fighting for land rights, how can you talk about it? That is something I was born and raised in. You have no idea where we want to go next, but every time we try to get up on the right foot and move forward, we are crushed down, talked about and dragged through the mud. There is no real support for us. We are business-minded people too. We have moved beyond land rights; we want business and development. We will not sit around and let people dictate to us for the rest of our lives. If you will not move us forward, then people will judge you for that.
The main influence for me entering politics came from my father. As well as being a visionary for his people, my father was a very pragmatic man who played a major role in bringing our people together into what is now known as the Jawoyn nation. He was committed and passionate about furthering and protecting the interests of the future generation of Jawoyn, in particular. Unfortunately, Jawoyn is fractured and broken in half because of politics and people who want to claim they are Jawoyn.
I could name the people in parliament, but what big deal will that make? There will be a time and day when they will realise people know the truth; they are not silly. I would like to bring in the booklet that was recently issued there. I know the stunt that is being played amongst my people. That is for you to find out when it comes to the election.
In this role, my father resisted the temptation to be caught up in the quest for a breakaway land council and sought to work within the NLC to further the interests of his people. He developed a very respectful and fruitful relationship with the NLC chairman, Galarrwuy Yunupingu, which prospered until my dad died. In a similar vein, he wanted to work within the framework of the NT government rather than sit outside and complain.
As part of this strategy, my father urged me to take an active role in politics so that, as a representative of our nation, I could work inside the tent of government to influence better outcomes for my people. My father also suggested the CLP as my best option, not because he thought it had all the right answers on politics – this is straight from the heart – but because he felt it was fully aware it did not. In contrast, he felt that Labor, by and large, believed it knew better for Indigenous people than we did. For this reason he saw the CLP as a political party most likely to accept ideas from Indigenous people.
Even though I previously had personal conflicts with members of the CLP, I believe my father was right. I say this because when I left the CLP it did not stab me, come for me, muckrake or do any of the things Labor has always done to me, dragging my family into the conflict. The CLP did not. It stuck by its beliefs and did its work. It moved forward.
This government, particularly under this Chief Minister, has made the most policy changes to benefit Indigenous Territorians since self-government. That is based on the views of my people. The Chief Minister should be congratulated for most of the work he has done, regardless of how anybody sees him. It takes a man to stand up and do the job. It takes a greater man to lead when the world is against him.
Further to this, Territorians are sick and tired of public infighting between politicians both within and between parties. They want to see us get on with the business of government. I believe the Chief Minister is on the correct path to best help my people, my constituents and all Territorians.
Before I finish I give credit to the members of this Assembly who genuinely have the interests of Indigenous people at heart, particularly those who appear likely to retire at the next election. I first congratulate Mr Elferink for what he has tried to achieve both now and in his previous life as the member for Macdonnell. He has genuine compassion for Indigenous people, and although he sometimes resorts to what I call tough justice, he does so with heart. His credentials with Indigenous people are great.
I also acknowledge my friend and mentor in this House, the member for Namatjira, Alison Anderson. Alison is an outstanding example of an Indigenous woman who has worked tirelessly, at times at great personal cost, particularly to her health, to advance the cause of her people in the face of largely indifferent bureaucrats and legislators. Being an outspoken advocate for Aboriginal people comes at a great personal cost to Aboriginal people. You only need to look at the long list of Indigenous members of the Assembly who are now no longer with us to realise that.
I also wish the best for the member for Fong Lim, David Tollner, for his future career.
But I go back to the Aboriginal leaders who have been in this House, especially Alison. You do not come across many Aboriginal people who fight for what they believe in, especially grassroots people who have grown up in the bush. You do not find many in this House. You have to be passionate about your job. Some people just throw mud because they think they can, but deep down they do not understand the core business we are faced with or how we feel when we walk into this House. We have not grown up in cities or towns. We cannot relate to that kind of life. English is not our first language. Do you know how frightening it is being amongst you in this House? But we have to stand up for what we believe in, because at the end of the day that is who we are. We speak about and fight for what we love.
I have to give credit to Alison in regard to that. She has done that. When she knows something is wrong, she smells it and walks away. Strong Indigenous women are like that. If we feel that we are threatened, are being dragged down or used, we will walk away to a better place. Regardless of this House, when we eventually leave we will be amongst the rest of them and still be doing the good work. Most would not; you will all move on. You will all be buried somewhere else in your own country. We will not. That is our cause in this House, our fight.
I congratulate the next Indigenous candidates for standing up; it takes guts to do it. I have noticed in this House your own can turn on you, and that is something we must remember.
At the end of the day I will not support this motion because the CLP deserves to have its full term in government. In the constitution every government in the Northern Territory has a fixed term and you cannot change that. Nobody wants to go to the polls at Christmas; we all want to celebrate. I wish for snow in the Northern Territory for once, but that is just me and my bucket list.
Madam Speaker, that is my contribution today. Hopefully this is knocked on the head.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, put simply, Territorians have lost confidence in this government. The CLP has broken the trust of Territorians. Today in this parliament we will make a decision. Do we keep going backwards under Adam Giles and the CLP or do we move forward and allow Territorians to make a decision on their government? It is our duty as representatives of our electorates to ensure the harm this government caused and the effect on the people of the Northern Territory is minimised. Therefore, I support this motion today.
We need to ensure there is no more chaos and harm, and Territorians decide who leads them. My colleagues and I have long been voicing the concerns of Territorians and their lack of confidence in the government and especially in the ability of Adam Giles to lead. Adam Giles is the unelected Chief Minister who has caused so much havoc to the Territory and Territorians. With every day that goes by our reputation is diminished and decisions are made that will have a lasting impact on our communities. That is why it is important that we support this motion today.
Madam Speaker, like you, I have spent most of my life in the Northern Territory. I have seen many governments come and go – some I felt more favourably towards – but I have never seen a government like this. Three-and-half years ago Territorians did not elect what we have today. They did not elect three-and-a-half years of chaos, 14 Cabinet reshuffles and, famously, two-and-a-half Chief Ministers. They did not vote for the chaos we have seen within this Chamber.
Only last sittings we saw the government, as soon as it thought it had the numbers, remove the Speaker of this parliament only to have the parliament re-elect that same Speaker. That highlights the chaos of this government.
Every day members of my community ask me when the government will go. They are sick and tired of waking up to the headlines of midnight coups or their assets being sold off without knowing. Under the CLP we have seen our bus network, our port and TIO sold, water licences issued to CLP candidates, a port that is not a port built without any environmental checks, and huge power and water tariff hikes that impact on Territory families every day.
Then, in an insult, the government said it will slightly lower those tariff hikes. Do you on the other side understand what those tariff hikes did to Territorians? Talk to real people, everyday mums and dads who struggle with the cost of living your government imposed on them. Those power and water tariff hikes were unfair. To claim you are now reducing them because you care is appalling.
We have an unelected Chief Minister who axed the gas to Gove deal. My colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, spoke about the impact on Arnhem Land. I visited the region in July and the stories are heartbreaking. All of this was caused by an unelected Chief Minister leading a chaotic government.
Territorians do not trust this government. Across the Territory they want to move on from this bad dream, this nightmare of a government. They do not want another nine months of this chaos. They have had enough.
For members opposite to say this motion puts them on notice, to blame a lack of communication on being a first-term government shows how out of touch they really are. They say everyone on their side is committed to a full term. How can Territorians trust them when we have seen a circus of ministers and Chief Ministers for the past three years, with deals made simply to keep them in power and not made in the best interests of Territorians?
Many sporting teams around the world are still trying to work out how five beats nine. The member for Braitling keeps his position because if he does not, he and the member for Fong Lim will bring the House down with them. The unelected Chief Minister simply refused to stand down and Territorians are stuck.
Today we can change that; we can make a decision to take the Territory forward. Today is the opportunity for members of this House to trust Territorians to make a decision. We are not asking you today to support Labor to come into government. What we are saying is we have had enough of this chaos and dysfunction, and we need to go to Territorians and listen to them, to have trust in their vote. I quote the member for Brennan, ‘As a child grows, this government will continue to grow’.
They have clearly failed their L-plate test. I am not sure that is how Terry Mills would reflect on his knifing. This is not about one side of government against another; this is about a government that does not respect Territorians, the very people it is here to represent.
This government’s cuts and behaviour have impacted across the Territory, but in the electorate of Nightcliff it has been wide and deep. The people of Coconut Grove, Nightcliff and Rapid Creek have been let down by the CLP on more than one occasion. It is evident the CLP government does not respect the people of our community. It has made decision after decision which has greatly impacted on us. As we know, I have spoken in this House on these issues repeatedly.
We have seen the complete reversal from promising a 24-hour, seven-days-a-week police station for our community to the shutting down of our police station. We have gone from one promise to a complete shutdown. In our community that has led to increased antisocial behaviour and an increase in the amount of time it takes police to respond. Our community deserves more. You promised one thing yet you deliver another.
The community of Nightcliff was most upset about the proposed Nightcliff island. It caused a great degree of angst in the electorate of Nightcliff in the suburbs of Coconut Grove, Rapid Creek and Nightcliff, and across the broader Darwin community. I remind the House the CLP government issued a lease of 98 ha of Darwin Harbour without talking to anyone. The proposal had the potential to have a significant environmental and social impact on the amenity of our suburb and the greater Darwin community.
The minister for Planning indicated in this House that the project will not proceed, so I ask him to remove the lease. You have been asked repeatedly, but residents are still being kept in the dark, as they were about that secret lease for 98 ha of the harbour. The people of the Northern Territory and the residents of Nightcliff, Coconut Grove and Rapid Creek need a straight answer. We have been left in the dark through the whole process. That shows the disconnect and arrogance of this government; it thinks it is completely acceptable to create a land lot and issue a lease without telling anyone.
In our community the impacts of this government have been felt the most in our schools and education system. The schools in my electorate have spent three years fighting cuts to teacher, staff and support staff numbers, and budgets. These have impacted across all of our schools. We have seen this every day in our schools. We have less support in our classrooms, larger class sizes and fewer programs.
Anyone who wants to argue with that can answer where the GEMS program is at Nightcliff Middle School. That program was cut by the CLP government and it is impacting on our girls. Our middle school girls are one of our most vulnerable cohorts, but under this government a program was removed and nothing has replaced it. We have seen uncertainty for teachers and support staff, as well as the high student-teacher ratios across the Territory.
One of the other issues this government has completely failed Territorians on – and anybody who chooses to argue otherwise is out of touch – is planning. First, I will touch on my electorate of Nightcliff. This government approved spot rezonings that are unacceptable to the community. They were ad hoc spot rezonings that had a huge impact on families’ homes where they want to live their lives. Because of the government’s carelessness we have seen spot rezonings. The former minister for Planning came to my electorate and agreed with me on some of the issues, yet subsequently approved rezoning applications with traffic impact on amenities. This was in addition to the ludicrous suggestion of a Nightcliff island.
I understand the Nightcliff jetty had issues but you did not even have the courtesy to put up signs and we had to chase for information. This shows the arrogance of this government.
Other issues that have affected my electorate have been bus fares for seniors, public housing properties sitting empty, waiting lists getting longer and rents for public housing tenants being raised but not yet reduced.
The government has shown a contempt for parliamentary procedure and made a circus out of its attempts to govern, not only with the ousting of the elected Chief Minister in a political coup but the subsequent failed coups which all came to a head a couple of weeks ago in a midnight attempt to oust an Independent Speaker. It not only demonstrated poor judgment but an inability to count.
Individual ministers in the Giles government have not performed any better than the Chief Minister. The former White Ribbon Ambassador threatening to slap me was a loud wake-up call to the arrogance and the mentality of certain MLAs. In addition to this appalling comment, the suggestion from the Deputy Chief Minister that women subjected to such inexcusable behaviour just needed to ‘toughen up’ showed a complete lack of understanding on behalf of this government in regard to this very serious issue. There were highly inappropriate comments made by the minister about seniors which followed cuts to supporting seniors. The Chief Minister has arrogantly laughed at our emergency department nurses.
We have seen extraordinary travel by this government. In fact, recent documents from written questions from the opposition show that ministers have taken 57 overseas trips in this term. But more extraordinary is the number of days spent overseas by Giles and Mills government ministers – 1.13 million days overseas is ludicrous. The Chief Minister travelled on private jets …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Ms FYLES: Before the Attorney-General gets excited, $1.13m, sorry, Madam Speaker. That was from recent written question answers.
There was the Palmerston hospital debacle where they dug a hole and then filled it back in. The Deputy Chief Minister, in defending that decision in the House, explained that it was special concrete and you cure it by covering it. Seriously? You expect Territorians to accept that we have some type of special CLP concrete?
I cannot count the number of times I have put forward the pressing and valid concerns of those in and beyond my electorate in this parliament only to be shown contempt by those sitting opposite. It is very clear that this government has forgotten its voters and Territorians have had enough.
I have spoken on occasions about the serious misgivings and concerns in relation to some of my shadow portfolios such as Correctional Services and the juvenile justice system in the Northern Territory. There have been 36 escapes in 18 months that have tested our community’s faith in the government’s ability to keep us safe. The escape three weeks ago was a tipping point. A convicted axe murderer and rapist was placed in a Sentenced to a Job program at a work camp in Nhulunbuy which should never have been there in the first place, except that a health facility was shut down. That escape, coming on the back of the previous escapes, made us a national laughing stock and a disgrace.
There are serious questions the minister for corrections must answer. The events in Nhulunbuy highlight that a person convicted of a very serious crime was allowed to take part in a scheme with minimum supervision whilst being housed in a low-security setting.
This is the most recent in a long list of failures in corrections and Justice. The department’s annual report made it very clear that the government’s priority is locking people up, and demonstrated that its correctional system cannot manage its budget, keep prisoners in prison, keep the community safe, meet its key performance targets, is struggling to support its staff with significant overtime, has a casual workforce and is not adequately investing in and equipping or training staff.
As a result of the government’s failure two reviews were carried out in relation to the juvenile detention system in the Northern Territory, the Vita review and one by the Children’s Commissioner. The Vita report was damning of the juvenile detention system, quoting a long list of failures relating to detainees, procedures, staff and legal responsibilities. The key findings of the Children’s Commissioner’s review also listed the government’s failures to fulfil its responsibilities to detainees. The Children’s Commissioner, in her media release of 17 September, was compelled to state:
- … ‘We need to make sure that young people in youth detention are treated in accordance with the Youth Justice Act and our international obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child ...
that the complete overhaul of initial and refresher training by staff is attached to their personal files and mandatory regulatory refresher training should be ongoing
that Correctional Services recommends psychometric testing as part of its recruitment process
a complete review of every position in the youth justice correctional centre
that the review of operations procedures adheres to the Youth Justice Act and the regulations of the UN Convention of the Rights of a Child for all aspects of detention
that youth justice develops a policy and procedures on the use of spit hoods.
This government’s arrogance knows no bounds. The public has been horrified by the allegations of mistreatment within our youth justice system. It is alleged a youth was strapped to a restraint chair similar to those used in Guantanamo Bay in March this year and had his ankles, shins, shoulders, waist and arms strapped down and a fabric hood placed over his head. That these actions are happening in a youth justice system in Australia is almost unthinkable, but they are happening in the Northern Territory under this minister’s watch.
The Attorney-General has repeatedly ignored the recommendations and insights of experts in the corrections and youth justice field. The two reviews provide a framework that would see significant improvements in the youth justice system which the minister has ignored. Similar contempt has been shown towards the Coroner with this statement:
- ‘While (Mr Cavanagh) might criticise AMT and paperless arrests in respect to the Langdon and Brown matters he said Mr Langdon should have died a free man, in truth Mr Langdon would have died a free man in the gutter, as would Ms Brown,’ …
In any other government a minister who made such comments and oversaw such a system would be sacked, but Adam Giles does not have the ability to do that.
The CLP government has completely lost control because its members are too busy fighting amongst themselves to get on with the job. That has been highlighted by members today. Territorians demand better from this government. It has utterly dropped the ball in our justice and corrections systems. All the evidence points to the fact that the CLP government is too busy looking after itself to look after anything else.
Another area of complete failure by this CLP government is the scrapping of the Banned Drinker Register simply because it was a Labor policy. In the words of police, it was the best tool they ever had ...
Members interjecting.
Mr FYLES: You do not want to listen to my words, but maybe you will listen to the words of the police.
The government’s alcohol mandatory treatment program was a complete failure from the start when patients were kicked out of a medical hostel through to beds lying empty while alcohol-related incidents continue on a daily basis in our community. It is simply unacceptable and has occurred under this Giles government. The CLP passed an act related to AMT on urgency, but 13 months later it had not been used. That shows the incompetence of this government. It is further proof that it cannot be trusted to perform the most basic of functions.
Compounding the government failures regarding AMT is the death of Ms Brown and the Coroner’s findings regarding the government’s paperless arrest procedures.
Individuals suffering from alcohol dependency need help, yet the government rushed through legislation and took over existing facilities in order to provide a smokescreen, but nothing has happened. They cannot even use the legislation they passed on urgency. To pass it and not act on it 11 months later speaks directly to the incompetence of this government.
In relation to licensing, the Leader of the Opposition has previously stated publicly:
- ‘The CLP government is looking to benefit from the increased revenue from an increase in the number of gaming machine licences with little regard given to the social impacts gambling can have on the community,’ …
We have seen no consultation with the community or community groups that work in this area about whether they want more poker machines in the Territory. It has been nearly a decade since we saw the last gambling prevalence survey, yet the Northern Territory has the highest rate of electronic gaming machines per capita in the country.
Who could forget the outrageous comments from the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing:
- ‘I do not know whether we have services available for women who are addicted to shoes – I know a couple of women who are addicted to shoes and fashion … ‘Perhaps they might like to apply through the Community Benefit Fund for a grant for those who are addicted to those things.’
How appalling from the minister responsible for this portfolio. Gambling destroys families and lives, yet these are the comments from the minister. This is another Giles minister making appalling comments. Again, he cannot be pulled into line because Adam Giles needs his vote to prop him up.
In my shadow portfolio of Sport and Recreation the government scrapped the Arafura Games, and now we have the Richardson Park debacle. As a Public Accounts Committee member, I feel that the complete lack of respect from this Chief Minister and this Treasurer who refused to participate in the process, answer questions or provide information to the community is appalling. This government makes decisions with its interests at heart, not Territorians. We can highlight that through this situation; simply because our Treasurer and our Chief Minister want something to happen, in complete disregard for our local community of Ludmilla, it happens.
The member for Fong Lim has left his community voiceless and now his party has left him. How can he remain Treasurer? The CLP party wing had a vote of no confidence in the Treasurer, yet he remains in the important roles of Treasurer and Minister for Lands and Planning.
How can we have any trust in this government? If there is one reason to pass this motion today it is in relation to lands and planning. The planning decisions that will be made in the next nine months will impact our community forever, from Central Australia to the Top End. We cannot afford nine more months of CLP in control of lands and planning. There are numerous decisions facing us in the Top End. There were issues in the rural area, about which Madam Speaker had to request documents of her own party at the time through FOI.
Madam Speaker, an agreed inquiry into political donations was overturned by the CLP government. We need an ICAC to get to the bottom of that, but we cannot afford nine more months of the CLP government in relation to planning decisions. When the planning minister said many people want to meet with him and money opens his door, it summed up this failed Giles government.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, let us look at the alternative the members opposite would offer as government. They are asking this House to pass a vote of no confidence in this government, and as a consequence certain things will happen.
One thing I urge people to think about when they assert that a decision should be made is the consequences of that decision. Take, for example, the one decision the Leader of the Opposition has made today, which is to call on this House to pass a motion of no confidence. He has been given three clear days. When I was asked last sittings whether we would accept this motion, of course I said yes because it is an important motion. This is the decision the Leader of the Opposition has brought before us.
Let us examine the consequences. The requisite three clear days have passed and we are now debating the motion. If this motion passes today the requisite eight clear days – so effectively 10 days – that must pass exists in legislation. The Administrator can ask whoever can form a new government in this House to form a government. Clearly the Leader of the Opposition has no intention of forming a government. He will not cobble something together, and I doubt he would get the support of this House. If that is the consequence then the Administrator, after the passage of 10 days – eight clear days which takes us to 10 December – would have to call an election. That is 19 days I think. That would put the election date as Tuesday 29 December. Of course, we do not have elections on Tuesdays so we would have to wait until the next Saturday, which is 2 January.
To put Territorians through an election campaign at this time of the year and have an election on 2 January is irresponsible. Even the Leader of the Opposition acknowledges that and said, ‘We have to wait until some point in late January’. I understand that the Electoral Commission made an observation that it would be very difficult to have it before February. The consequence of the decision we are being asked to make today is to place the government in caretaker mode for 10 weeks, which means the government cannot engage in any form of contractual arrangement. This means the procurement system suddenly has a big question mark hanging over it, if I am not mistaken. This means for 10 weeks at least, the government’s ability to make contracts, provide procurement services, etcetera, is held in hiatus. That is the one decision those people on the other side would have us make.
That is also ignoring the fact that many voters in the Northern Territory will not be able to get to a polling booth by virtue of the fact that the weather at this time of year will prevent that from occurring. The Leader of the Opposition, in his enthusiasm for an election, seeks to deprive so many people who live in the bush from an opportunity to vote, because a polling booth physically will not be able to get to them because the roads will be, in many instances, under water and the creek crossings not able to be crossed. But he is happy to deprive those Territorians of their vote because he cannot see the consequences of this decision, as he could not see the consequences of this at the outset because it was all about politics, not the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
That is what this motion is about today: politics and politicking. It is about trying to put the opposition members on the front foot on every occasion so they can demonstrate what a great mob they are. The point is they have gone from being reasonable human beings to being shrill. We all heard the contribution of the member for Nhulunbuy earlier, which could only be described as shrill. Let us wind the clock back to September when she spoke about the very person – namely yours truly – she just spent time pouring derision over. She was referring to me when she said on 15 September:
- The minister knows best because he is an ex-policeman and he holds a law degree, and he has been served some of life’s challenges which, to his credit, he has overcome. The minister is very passionate; there is no doubt about that. He is very passionate about his portfolios. He is a hard worker and, being the first law officer of the Northern Territory, there is no doubt he takes his role seriously.
All of which is true. But somebody has taken that member aside, as they have taken all members on that side aside, and given them the political lemon juice the Labor Party so likes to drink, so they can then come into this place and do the sour thing because they are positioning themselves for the next Territory election. It is about being shrill, unrepresentative and, often, dishonest and loose with the facts when it is all about trying to convince people of the villainy of this government.
Let us take a look at what the member for Nightcliff just had to say. She talked about the Vita review – that this is a government that is not open and not accountable. The Vita review was in no way required by any law or any impetus to be released, yet I insisted that it be released.
According to the Solicitor-General, it was also not necessary to release the Children’s Commissioner’s report …
Ms Fyles: Rubbish. It had to be tabled.
Mr ELFERINK: No, that is not true; I will show you. Once again, we hear instant dishonesty from the member for Nightcliff. I can show you the legal opinion if you want. The point is it did not have to be tabled and I gave a direct instruction that it should be. Why? Because the system is not perfect and I have never suggested that it is.
What I inherited from the members opposite was a youth justice facility where there were no flushing toilets in the cells in which they put these kids. Those cells in the old Don Dale centre, which I inherited from the former government, stank of urine when I inspected them, which was disgusting.
Without spending $150m of taxpayers’ money I determined that there was a better way forward, which was to use the old Berrimah complex, which has subsequently been visited by the Western Australian oversight commissioner of youth justice facilities, who said it is up to standard. Those kids now have a flushing toilet in every cell. Talk about keeping the basic standards up to speed! I have never prevented cameras from going into the youth justice system facilities.
I agree with the members for Nhulunbuy and Nightcliff that what occurred in relation to Nhulunbuy was wrong and was also contrary to government policy. What concerns me is that the noise they are making is now suggesting that programs like Sentenced to a Job will now be wound back. I and Territorians have heard no reassurance that they would not wind it back. But the point is they want to wind back the Sentenced to a Job and other processes we have in place in the corrections system, as they want to wind back all sorts of other policies.
Let us turn our minds very quickly to the legislation which has been pilloried now by the members opposite on a number of occasions, except on the occasion when it passed through this House without any resistance from them. They had no problem with the paperless arrest law. They did not come in here and say they supported it; they said they would not oppose it, which is the political each-way bet. ‘We will not oppose this legislation.’ The strident opposition I have heard subsequent to that demonstrates a level of hypocrisy which, if introduced into government, would be the same as we saw in that dodgy deal with the Stella Maris inquiry. You say you are better and trustworthy, but you cannot even say, ‘We did not oppose the paperless arrest legislation. We are against it now because some of our lawyer mates have described it as something that it is not.’
One thing it is not is punitive. I can say that because I can rely on six of the seven High Court judges who reviewed the paperless arrest legislation and said it was not punitive. It was never designed to be punitive. The only thing the paperless arrest legislation did was limit the amount of paperwork done by a police officer when effecting arrest for a summary offence. That is all, nothing more. It did not create a new power of arrest or a new offence, or change the nature and processes of custody whatsoever. It said that when a police officer arrested somebody for a summary offence the amount of paperwork they had to do, which would normally occupy them for two to two-and-a-half hours at the police station, would not occupy them so they would be back on patrol protecting Territorians in the first instance.
Now I hear from the members opposite they intend to repeal paperless arrests. They intend to load up police officers with so much paperwork that they will either (a) not arrest people or (b) if they choose to arrest a person for a summary offence they will be buried under a mountain of paperwork when they get back to the police station. The reason that Mitchell Street has not been subject to the serious assaults we have been used to under the former government is because when a police officer now in Mitchell Street says, ‘Move on, mate, otherwise you will be locked up’, you know that police officer means it. That is to protect everybody and hold everybody to account.
This focus on Aboriginal people being targeted by this legislation is not true. The legislation does not say that. Unfortunately, as in so many instances across all the negative indicators in this jurisdiction, Aboriginal people are overrepresented. One of the negative indicators in which Aboriginal people are overrepresented is victim status. Aboriginal people are victims as well as offenders, yet we never hear that from the members opposite. We never hear those words uttered.
When we have a strong policy on domestic violence which has seen in the last 12 months a 9% reduction in domestic violence, the members opposite stay silent. Who do you think is overrepresented in the perpetrators’ field? Aboriginal people unfortunately, particularly men. Who is overrepresented in the victim status? Aboriginal people unfortunately, largely women. I do not believe that a victim of domestic violence or any other sort of crime should have the quality of their victim’s status diminished because the perpetrator happens to be Aboriginal.
Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the perpetrator of a crime should always be held responsible irrespective of their race, religion or gender, and the victim of a crime should always be protected by the state in every possible way the state can.
I am saddened that a person died in custody. Sadly, I do not think that will be the last person in this country to die in custody. But if you look at the specifics of that case, that person was transported to Darwin to undergo medical treatment which that person refused. The person was taken back to the hospital but left to commit offences to the point where they were arrested and placed into custody in the police cells. It is sad that the person needed medical treatment in the first place. I am sad that the person subsequently chose not to stay in the hospital and receive medical treatment, even after being returned there. I am sad that the person was taken into custody.
I would like to shut down every watch house and hospital in this jurisdiction for want of work, but in the real world that is not how it works and the members opposite know that. What the members opposite so blithely ignore and so dishonestly misrepresent is that we have been a government which has been successful in many areas where they thunderously failed for over 12 years.
I have heard the cost of living mentioned by members opposite on several occasions and I am aghast at the suggestion that the cost of living in this jurisdiction is out of control. I will tell you what was out of control. It was the price of petrol which, at the time of Labor in government, was 50 c per litre more expensive than it is now. It was this Chief Minister who drove the petrol summit and had me draft legislation which said if you are found to be price colluding, we will put you in gaol. That message seems to have gotten through. Congratulations to United service stations for being the first to realise we were deadly serious.
They complain about the cost of living and housing when the members opposite presided over a land release policy that even the Leader of the Opposition, whilst attacking government, had to admit his party screwed up completely. I went to a Property Council lunch the other day and its members were screaming that the cost of housing was too low because they were not making enough on deals. Do you know what? The Chief Minister quite rightly said publicly, and I thought privately, ‘Too bloody right’. The cost of housing has now returned to a much more affordable level than it was under a former Labor government. Why? They failed to get the cost of living down because they failed effective land release. This was admitted by the member for Fannie Bay, the Leader of the Opposition.
How did they manage to do that? By reducing everything to a talkfest. What have we heard from the members opposite? ‘We will not make decisions; we will talk to everybody, and unless there is a consensus we will not do anything’, which includes things like land release. Sometimes decisions have to be made and, yes, people get upset as a result of those decisions. But if you are aiming for consensus on all issues, we would still be using chamber pots and buggy whips in this day and age.
The members opposite see this motion as nothing more than a political opportunity. They have not even considered the consequences of what they have proposed in this House. Should they bring that skill – or, more accurately, the absence of that skill – into government then this jurisdiction could well suffer atrophy. The one decision they have asked us to make is a decision which clearly and fundamentally would atrophy this jurisdiction for the next 10 weeks at least. They have shown no consideration for the consequences of it because they do not look beyond the next political opportunity. That is the disgrace being perpetrated in this House today. They have demonstrated that they see not a Territory that has to be governed and attended to, but see this House as a place of opportunity where people can be run down, particularly now that we are in the last year of the electoral cycle. Anybody who honestly believes they can atrophy our government for the next 10 weeks has rocks in their head. It is shallow, facile, ill-considered and demonstrates the inability of the members opposite to see consequences of actions.
It was so with TIO. The former Labor Treasurer, Syd Stirling, could see it, which is why he tried to sell it. He knew what the shortcomings of TIO would be, and it was better to sell an asset while you had it than an asset which would decay to zero value given enough time.
I have heard attacks on the decision to lease the port. The argument from members opposite is not to lease the port, carry the liabilities that you will have to spend on the taxpayers’ tick to get the port repaired, then spend that money indefinitely going forward. We have managed to get somebody else to pay for the repairs to the port to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars going forward, and we get it back in 99 years’ time as an increased asset. I wonder if the Chinese thought it was a bad idea to ask for Hong Kong back in 1997.
Madam Speaker, this is a populist, ill-considered motion before the House today. I wish I had hours to cover some of the nonsense I have heard from the members opposite. I am afraid you will hear and see more of this crass nonsense going forward. The truth and this nonsense will be increasingly separated over time.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, I understand the trigger for the motion of no confidence was the failed attempt by the government to remove you as Speaker, referred to colloquially as ‘another failed midnight coup’. That prompted the Leader of the Opposition to bring a motion of no confidence into the parliament when we last sat just over a week or so ago, which we are debating today.
Part of my concern is the trigger – changing or ceasing parliament off the back of what was quite frankly a ridiculous evening of CLP chaos writ large. Whilst I understand it probably gave a rush of blood to the head for a few people who advise the Leader of the Opposition, in public it is harder to grasp a desire for change and to end parliament early unless there is something profoundly significant affecting them and their lives. The trigger of the CLP chaos midnight coup failure was not profound. It was profound for each of us going through those long hours in parliament and was important to you, Madam Speaker, as it was affecting you significantly. I am eternally grateful that the numbers in the Chamber ensured you remained as Speaker.
It has been relatively difficult to explain to constituents who ask me why it has come on now when essentially it came off the back of that failed midnight coup. Wanting to consult with my electorate, I conducted an online survey as I felt it was important. I am a newly-minted Independent and thought one thing I should at least try to do in the short time available was consult with constituents. I have been won over through consistent lobbying by people who have worked for me to try these new mediums or tools, so we created what is called a survey monkey on Facebook.
I will read the words I wrote:
- Next Tuesday 1 December NT parliament will vote on a no confidence motion in the Giles Government. If successful, this would create a trigger for an early election.
To be successful 13 members will need to vote in favour of the motion.
I’m inviting feedback from residents on whether they want me to vote in support of a no confidence motion.
I have grave concerns regarding CLP’s capacity to govern:
cost-of-living increases
sold TIO and our Port without a mandate
infighting & chaos – 3 Chief Ministers (Mills, Giles & Westra van Holthe midnight coup) and at least 14 Cabinet reshuffles.
cuts to education – teachers and support workers sacked
Royal Darwin Hospital is in crisis and the Palmerston hospital delayed
public housing is in crisis
small business closures and job losses
split up PowerWater into 3 different corporations, hiked up power, water & sewerage tariffs in preparation for privatisation.
The CLP have a snouts in the trough mentality, it seems to me they are more concerned about looking after their mates than Territorians.
If you would like to provide feedback, please click the link below and answer my quick 2 question survey.
Can I rely on this survey? No, I cannot. The response rate was far too low. I got seven likes. When I posted a photo of my son’s birthday party it was over 100, which to me indicated how engaged people were with the nonsense of parliament.
One of the things I noticed which made me very concerned was that the business sector was very engaged. Many business people, who own a variety of businesses, contacted me in the last week-and-a-half asking me what I felt would be the result of a no confidence motion in the parliament. They are gravely concerned because they cannot stand the instability. These business people are not a raving fan club of the CLP. They have seen their businesses impacted upon by some very bad decisions, one of which was the hiking up of the power, water and sewerage tariffs. That has hurt business incredibly. The other was the inability of government to find an incoming major project, so investor confidence is down.
We have had huge population loss and have an extremely soft housing market, so people across the construction and real estate sectors are hurting. Retail workers are hurting. There is a very large, complex cause for that: the impact of online shopping. Consumer confidence is low.
When you have three years of chaotic government, including significant job losses across the public service and the private sector, what money people have they hold onto tightly. Their uncertainty means they are trying to get through to a point in time where government changes and things stabilise.
People I know who have businesses in the retail sector are almost hitting the wall. I know quite a few who have hit the wall and gone under. Obviously we are aware of the travel agent businesses that have gone under because of the procurement policies of the CLP.
To pretend that the business sector is embracing the current government would be completely wrong. They are scratching their heads as to why a self-proclaimed business party, the CLP, has not heard or heeded the calls in any way of the local businesses across the Territory. They have seen some business people do well and feel the days of the silver circle are well and truly back and ensconced. They did not want that to come back, which is a message I have received loudly and clearly from the business sector.
The concern they articulated to me was that they do not yet know the Leader of the Opposition well enough to know whether or not he has the capacity to lead the Territory. They do not yet know each of the shadow ministers in key areas well enough, and they want time to get to know them. They are very tuned in and aware that the community sentiment is strongly against the CLP government.
The polls are the polls are the polls. There is no denying that what the polls are reflecting is what we hear in our daily lives: Territorians cannot wait to see the back of the CLP government. They are over its arrogance, the indecent way it treats people and the cuts they have seen to core services like education and health. They despair about the crisis in child protection and the lack of improvements in housing in urban, regional and remote areas.
I could talk first hand for hours if I had the time in debate about the impact on the daily lives of people in my electorate due to the failure of the housing policy of the CLP government. I have seen families turfed out of public housing and families in overcrowded situations begging for one extra room in a transfer application. I have seen homeless people with letters of support from doctors and specialists requiring emergency housing, but the stock is not there because we have a government that has seen fit to sell and reduce stock and abandon the need for public housing to be built in those all-important Palmerston east suburbs of Johnston and Zuccoli. There has been a complete lack of ability for the government to be innovative in the housing space.
It has not worked with the non-government sector. Recently I heard that the non-government organisations which had service agreements with the Department of Children and Families have had them discontinued. They have been told their agreements will not continue and they will have to apply afresh for any service contracts being put to tender by the department. That has plunged a crucial sector into a deeper crisis. I hope that is not true, but I have heard it from a few credible sources. I invite the minister to look at the situation, because what normally happens is service agreements are rolled over until funding decisions are made on ongoing contracts.
One of the things that has been the hallmark of this government, apart from the chaos, dysfunction and indecency in the way it treats people by saying one thing and doing exactly the other – you can look at the cuts in the public service as an example of that. The government said, ‘Your job is safe’, and then sacked public servants and pretended it was not sacking them because they were on contract. But that person lost their job. Hundreds of people lost their jobs, and without a job the cost of living is not only dire, it is impossible to meet. You cannot feed your family or pay the mortgage or rent. That is why we have such a massive population loss. That is not a story the CLP wants to acknowledge, but that is the reality of so many people’s lives in the Territory under the CLP.
One of my concerns is that when it has made the big economic financial decisions, it has done so in a shroud of secrecy; it has not been accountable and transparent. For example, we have heard people refer to the sale of TIO in debate today. We heard the government members say, ‘Well, it was a basket case, we had to sell it. It was a liability.’ We heard concerns from this side of the Chamber from Labor and the crossbenchers about the sale of TIO, and that the government did not have a mandate. There was no evidence, no cost-benefit analysis tabled openly and transparently by the government to justify the sale of TIO.
As a former shareholding Treasurer, I was privy to highly confidential information which I will not breach, but I know for a fact it was a highly viable enterprise, both in the insurance and the banking arms. It weathered the storm of the global financial crisis, and weathered it well. Its books were growing healthier and healthier. It was not the basket case liability the government claims it was. It was not accountable to the people who were the owners of TIO, the public. The CLP broke their trust by selling it after it had campaigned so heavily in opposition to keep it. When you break the trust of the voting public, it is well-nigh impossible to get it back.
You had some chances there. You could have been honest about the sale price, but you were not. You inflated the sale price figures by the drawdown on MACA. You could not even be honest about how much you received for the sale of TIO. You then pretended all through the sale process that it would be okay and jobs would be safe in TIO, banking arrangements would not change, and said premiums would have gone up anyway.
What have we seen? Jobs lost and Territorians unemployed. We heard a glib response from the Treasurer that they can get a job somewhere else in the public service. That is a paraphrase of his glib response. How indecent was that?
We have seen people who moved over to the new banking organisation struggle to access their banking records. We have seen massive premium hikes. Everything the government said at the time turned out not to be true. That is a fact Territorians are living with. It is also a fact that there are Territorians who cannot get the insurance cover they enjoyed under TIO in the zones where they live, such as the surge zones. You are directly affecting people’s lives and their livelihoods.
Then there is the debacle in the way education has been mishandled from the rushed introduction of global school budgets to the strong-arming of schools to take on the mantle of independent schools and the Indigenous education review. This last initiative is about herding kids out of their communities where their families live and the opportunity to learn on country amongst their own people into boarding schools that still are not constructed, with the possible exception of Tennant Creek where they use existing facilities. There has been three years of chaos in Indigenous education under the CLP. Where we needed to make gains, we have gone backwards and the government is still not listening to the people on the ground about what they want and need ...
Mr Chandler interjecting.
Ms LAWRIE: You have your own view, and it is your way or the highway, isn’t it?
That is why people want an election. People are waiting with a big stick for an election. I have heard that consistently and strongly for the last year travelling across the Territory. ‘Hurry up and get these people out.’ That was a polite version of what people say to me. ‘Hurry up, it is hurting. Before they can do more damage, get them out.’
I support the sentiment of the no confidence motion because that is what I have heard, loud and clear. It is what I hear in my own communities of Karama and Malak. People want to go to the polls. No one would enjoy a Christmas period campaign or a Wet Season election. I do not know if one has ever been attempted in the Territory, which is why maybe there was a rush of blood to someone’s head about the timing of the motion. There is nothing wrong, however, with listening to what people have to say. Maybe it is because I have been Labor for years and now I am Independent, but what people feel they can freely say to me is that they are desperate for an election to get the CLP out.
It is not that they are necessarily engaging with the alternative. In some places it is quite mixed. In many cases the jury is still out. There are many good people being preselected. Hopefully they have good connections with their community. Hopefully people know them, trust them and will support them.
In my area people are looking forward to beating both major parties with a big stick. They want me to run at the next election, whenever that may be, as an Independent. They do not like the indecent way I was dealt with because they felt that level of indecency was a hallmark of the CLP, and it shocked them to see it come from them. I hope a lesson has been learnt from that. I hope that level of indecency never occurs again.
I have not set about in this debate to bring anyone down; I simply wanted to express what people are telling me. Yes, business has been concerned about the debate being held because it is uncertainty, but the public, broadly, cannot wait to see the back of the CLP government. The polls do not lie. It is on the nose as a government. People have disengaged. They no longer believe what it says. No amount of multimillion-dollar spends on advertising or parties at Parliament House or other venues around the Territory will save the CLP. It will lose the next election. The polls are not lying. Some members are savvy to that and are getting out before the big stick hits.
The reality is Territorians deserve better from everyone. They deserve to be treated with some decency and respect, with an understanding that we will not always agree on the issues or have the same view on issues. But do not rule with fear, loathing and retribution, and do not break the trust of people consistently. That is not okay and you will be rewarded for that behaviour with a thumping election loss.
In the meantime, I have genuine concerns. Power and Water is one of them. We do not know, because there is no open and transparent accounting, how much separation of the corporation into three corporate entities has cost. There was a confession last estimates that it was about $10m and rising because true separation had not occurred. The SCI is missing in action from Power and Water, but we know in April it was projected to have a $65m revenue gain …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Karama, your time has expired.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing this motion of no confidence to the Chamber.
An old CLP person who was in government in the early time of the Country Liberal Party rang me about a week ago. He has been in the Northern Territory for the last couple of weeks. He said, ‘Alison, I am afraid to say that what I have heard and seen in the Northern Territory in the last two weeks is what I felt, heard and saw in 2001’.
For that to be said by a staunch Country Liberal Party member tells a story. You have to change your focus and the way you are creating policy, and start listening to people. The member for Brennan said they take notice of editorials and try to change things. It is important that you start walking the talk with people. For one of your own to come back after a long time out of the Northern Territory and, in a couple of weeks, feel the same sentiment and see people turned off as in 2001 sends a big message. It is time you started listening to people.
I am the only person in this parliament who can talk from the point of view of having been in both parties, the Labor Party and the Country Liberal Party ...
Mr Chandler: You are special, Alison.
Ms ANDERSON: That is right; I am very special, member for Brennan. In political history there has only been one other person, Winston Churchill, so I take my hat off to that bloke.
It was extraordinary to hear some of the things that have been said. I talk on behalf of my people and many non-Indigenous who live on the edges of society in the Northern Territory. If we continue to keep these people on the edge of society through our bad policies of profiling certain groups, we will keep these people forever on the edge of society. They will not have the opportunity for employment, economic opportunities, a good quality education or to own their homes.
Everything I have heard in both parties has been rhetoric; it is all about getting votes from the most vulnerable people. But those vulnerable people have been educated in the voting system lately and they are watching. The no vote for the Country Liberal Party by the Aboriginal people started a year-and-a-half ago; they will not vote for you. I said the same thing – a year-and-a-half – to the Labor Party from that side and you saw how the votes went at the last election three years ago; they all voted for the Country Liberal Party. They are now saying they will not vote for you.
Talking about ADSL, I like to give credit where credit is due. I want to give credit to the Northern Land Council because it put in a submission to Telstra, talking about the lack of phone access in remote Aboriginal communities. It was very early before this government came to power. They see how their people are struggling by not getting in touch with relatives, sorry business and ceremonies, so they put in an application to Telstra saying it was urgent that it looks at mobile access in communities in the Top End. I think the CLC did the same thing in Central Australia. We have to give credit, not always take it upon ourselves and say, ‘I did it’. They did it; they are on the ground and can see the suffering.
There is much more to do to get socioeconomic indicators up – poor health, poor education, poor housing, poor roads. These are things government have to continually do, whether it is the Country Liberal Party or the ALP. We must not forget these people.
I will go back to what I said at the beginning: if you keep these people on the edge of society they will remain on the edge of society. When you get $5.6bn from the Commonwealth government based on disadvantage factors in the Northern Territory, you have to make sure you allocate a certain amount of money for the disadvantaged factors you have identified in applying to the Commonwealth for this money. This money is not tied to you, as you all know, so you can use it wherever you want. But while you are doing that, you are making a group of people suffer who should not be suffering.
Why is Aboriginal education so complicated? Why can we not have the same amount of teachers, the good schools and good literacy and numeracy you have in the northern suburbs of Darwin? Why can that not be replicated in remote Aboriginal communities? I know someone over there will shout and say, ‘Well, Aboriginal kids do not go to school every day’.
I put this to you. When the football NAB Cup is being held in Alice Springs, it is run by the government. You get the football leagues to play in Alice Springs. You have Centre Bush Bus coming into these communities once a week. The kids have left school that Tuesday or Wednesday, and the bus does not go back to the communities until the week after. It is your policies for getting economic opportunities in towns like Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin that causes this absenteeism as well.
You need to change that because you cannot continuously be picking up the stick to hit parents on the head for not sending their kids to school every day when your policies of getting economic opportunities in a town like Alice Springs gets these kids away from schools for two weeks. They will watch football; they have no way of going home and they will come in three or four days early so the schools are empty. That is the kind of things you have to have a look at. If you want to have your cake and eat it, you will have to suffer the consequences.
There is so much to talk about. There is a wide range of problems in Indigenous communities, such as overcrowding. You would have seen the program last night on the lack of housing at Borroloola. All they want is houses. They are crying out for houses. Why can we not give these people houses? People talk about land rich, dirt poor, but the land councils are statutory bodies that have been brought in under Commonwealth legislation to look after the land of traditional owners ...
Mr Elferink: Justice Mansfield gave them an absolute serve in court last week for dropping the ball.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms ANDERSON: Madam Speaker, the member for Port Darwin had his 20 minutes. It is quite rude for him to interrupt and have his little two-minutes’ worth reigniting something when someone else is talking ...
Mr Elferink: All right. Justice Mansfield had a lot to say about what you are talking about right now.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Port Darwin!
Ms ANDERSON: The land councils are there to serve a purpose: to protect the rights of Indigenous people and make sure their vulnerability is not tested through governments railroading them. They are the things we have to take into account.
I would like to make sure I assign that quote ‘land rich, dirt poor’ to my late brother, Tracker Tilmouth. He was the bloke who came up with all of these little quirky one-liners.
It is fantastic to talk about the things that have been done, but there are a multitude of organisations, such as the land councils, that are working on these issues. Yes, we have problems and we need to be part of the solution as well. If you start having legislation that continuously profiles a group of people you will always run into problems.
We are still talking about generational legislation in today’s parliament. I, for one, spoke of the problem of Commonwealth legislation on the Stolen Generations. It still has effects later through their grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and it will continue. We have to be very careful that we take all Territorians forward socially and economically, and make sure these people are what we want in society today.
I do not think we should be continuously walloping Aboriginal people with a stick every five minutes through legislation, because these people are also voters. We need to educate all Territorians to understand what good-quality education gives you. Through a good education and our parents we have the ability to talk in parliament, talk to journalists, write letters or send e-mails. Those are the kind of abilities we need to give to our children. We can do that by being good legislators in this House.
I spoke from that side of the House about getting football ovals and lights in some regional towns to alleviate the pressure on Alice Springs. We talk about antisocial behaviour in these hubs of Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine all the time, but what are we doing in the regions to make sure we can alleviate that pressure from those towns? Have home-and-away games so if someone is coming we are taking them out to Yuendumu, Ti Tree or Utopia. It gives them the capacity to absorb and understand Aboriginal culture and Aboriginal people at the same time.
People in the tourism industry and tourists in general love to see Aboriginal people and Aboriginal culture. But if you are talking about fracking, the two do not go together. If you allow fracking in the landscape in Central Australia, yet at the same time you are saying we need tourists, well, the two do not go together. We have to look at our water resources. Is it safe for our water? Those are the kind of things we have to do.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion the Opposition Leader has put forward and I thank him.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I speak in support of this no confidence motion.
It is with great sadness and frustration that I speak today because time and time again in this parliament, around my home, and in my own electorate, I am frequently reminded about how chaotic and dysfunctional the last three-and-a-half years of this CLP government have been. The feedback I have received very loud and clear from my constituents is that they are over this government. They are over the chaos and instability and want a fresh start.
The Sunday after our last sittings when there was the failed midnight coup to remove the Speaker, I was shopping at Hibiscus and people came up to me to ask, ‘What on earth went on in there this week? Is there a chance of getting rid of this government because we are sick of them?’ We have had a stand at Casuarina for the last few weeks to catch up with people. We have had plenty of comments from people who are over this government and its atrocious performance. It is coming across loud and clear that people want to see a change of government. They are over the CLP and its way of governing. They want to see a better future for the Northern Territory.
Like me, people are often taken aback when they reflect on what they have seen for the last three-and-a-half years of this government. I never expected to see the things I have in my first term of parliament. It has been a remarkable time in the history of Territory politics for all the wrong reasons. There have been 14 reshuffles. That caused a huge amount of instability, projecting chaos and dysfunction from the top right through to service delivery through the public sector of the Northern Territory.
All I can say is bless those public servants in the Territory public service because they work so hard. They will serve the government of the day as professionally as they can. People working within the public sector generally provide feedback that they are over this government.
There have been two Chief Ministers and one Chief Minister apparent under this government. We are starting to hear chatter around the place that because this government is so deeply unpopular we will see more. The member for Fong Lim is not going in for round two. There is a lot of chatter about whether or not we will see the member for Braitling go to the next election as the Chief Minister. People are wondering if we will have more reshuffles. There is more instability and chaos under this government.
People deserve to feel they can have faith in this government. This motion is before us today because people are over the government; they do not want to see it dragging out another eight months of chaos, instability and dysfunction. They have had enough.
In my first three years as a member of this parliament I did not expect to see a government that kept going after so much infighting, leaking, backstabbing, attempted coups and executions and breakdowns of relationships and respect for each other. If you look at the past three-and-a-half years of this government, it is clinging to power out of arrogance. It makes you shake your head and wonder how things have come to this point. What the Territory and I have seen in the last three years is beyond belief, and people have had enough.
The member for Port Darwin always reminds us that we are here to serve the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. This is something the government has lost sight of. As the member for Fannie Bay said in this important debate, with every day that goes by under an Adam Giles-led CLP government the reputation of the Northern Territory is diminished. Sadly, this is the truth we are facing and why we have to bring forward this most serious of motions to the House. Territorians have lost trust and confidence in this government. It is time for this government to call it a day and let the people of the Territory decide who governs going forward because it can only be better than what we have with this rabble of a CLP government.
This government’s downward spiral has not stopped. Its members’ shamelessness and arrogance has grown even bolder, and the chaotic, dysfunctional mob continues to cling to power and has shown nothing or no one will get in its way of ruling. People across the Territory have had enough and want them gone.
I have been horrified to hear in this term that some people have been arguing whether or not we have the capacity to self-govern in the Northern Territory, which shows how bad this CLP government is. It is also terrible when you realise many people have this train of thought and wonder what on earth this does for us in our pursuit of statehood.
People have lost all trust in this government. It has reached the point that when the Chief Minister and several of his ministers speak, people do not believe them as they think it is spin or they are not telling the whole truth. The population has been driven to this point because of the actions of this government. It has continued to break promises. It has form on saying one thing one day and doing something completely different the next. It has continually failed to be up front with Territorians.
This government’s greatest failure is its inability to consult and, most importantly, listen. It has a completely different definition of consultation. In fact, it seems it has its own meaning for it. When the government says it is consulting, it is all for show. Most people believe consultation is the process of two-way communication and understanding, and, most importantly, listening and taking on board views. The CLP definition of consultation is a meaningless ticked box in order to say it has done it. It is something it says it has done but its definition of consultation does not include listening or acting on genuine feedback.
We have seen several examples of this: the sale of TIO: the 99-year lease, or sale, of the port, as it has been called; and, most recently, the move to upgrade Richardson Park, where the government has only started talking to people seven months after announcing the project. Often people tell me they are sick of this government because it is arrogant and does not listen.
It is also the conduct of government which leaves us believing that strong and stable government is not possible under the CLP government we have. The history of this term of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory will make for some interesting history books and guidelines for future governments on how not to go about the job.
The government’s ongoing chaos and dysfunction is now impacting on core service delivery in the Territory. It is also clear that the relationships within government have totally broken down. Key ministers do not appear to talk to one another, which further contributes to the chaos. To top it off, no one trusts the government.
We are at this point because of what has happened in this term of government. I remind those in the House of what we have seen so far. At the 25 August 2012 election the former member for Blain, Terry Mills, led the CLP government to a victory on promises of a better future, lowering the cost of living and point five of the five-point plan, being accountable. I quote from the plan:
- Be accountable.
If we don’t deliver, throw us out. There will be no more political deals to hide the truth from Territorians. The only deal we’ll have is with you, to help make your life better.
This government scrapped the BDR across the Territory in one of its first actions. That is creating chaos around my electorate. The issues we have with drinking around Vanderlin Drive and Hibiscus shopping centre have not stopped.
In another of its first actions, the government raised the cost of power, water and sewerage through the roof – 30% for power, 40% for water and 25% for sewerage. People have not forgotten that, and they know it is responsible for putting up their power and water bills by an extra $2000 a year for an average family.
We saw the return of many of the old boys working for the government. Then there was the initial failed attempt by the member for Braitling to overthrow the former Chief Minister, Terry Mills. But then the chaos picked up from the point when the member for Braitling managed to succeed and knifed the former Chief Minister, Terry Mills, whilst he was on a trade mission to Japan.
After that all sorts of practices occurred under this government – many I am sure it never thought would be remembered – which were the points of controversy which led to people losing trust in this government. There have been questionable practices with the allocation of water licences.
The members for Arafura, Arnhem and Namatjira left the party. We have seen the member for Arafura return, and it appears the member for Arnhem is now well and truly supporting the government.
The government sold TIO with no genuine consultation, and failed to listen to Territorians as part of its decision-making process about that. After several questions were asked of the government in the lead-up to the sale of TIO, the response was always, ‘Nothing is on the table, and nothing is off the table’. Members never mentioned it during the Casuarina by-election. As soon as that election was finished, all of a sudden, the question was asked, ‘We are looking to sell TIO; what would you like to spend the money on?’, rather than asking the question of the people, ‘Do you want TIO to be sold?’ By far, the majority of Territorians said, ‘No, do not sell it’, yet the government went ahead anyway because it went for the cash grab. We are now seeing the flow-on effects of that.
There have been serious questions raised about the CLP slush fund, Foundation 51. When the member for Nelson was successful in moving for an inquiry into political donations, he was led up the garden path. That inquiry was scrapped on this floor of parliament because the government had the numbers.
We have seen the member for Fong Lim go through plenty of ups and downs in this term of government. We have seen him removed from his job for making slurs and reinstated back into his job. Now he will not be contending the next election because, clearly, he does not have the backing of many people within his party. When he last exited Cabinet I do not think any of us will ever forget the comment he made that his colleagues could be perceived as a nest of vipers. That has been very interesting.
We will never forget the midnight coup of February. We will never forget seeing the members for Katherine and Port Darwin standing side by side in the Elsie Room at a media conference in early February, with the member for Katherine saying:
… I have been elected the Chief Minister apparent …
‘A majority of my colleagues and I met and voted in favour of me as the Chief Minister over Adam Giles ...
I will be running in a fashion that is far more consultative with the people of the Northern Territory.’
… ‘discontent with the government’ led to the challenge.
It was a remarkable event. We knew the member for Katherine had the majority support of his colleagues – nine to five we believe – however, they still did not manage to change the leadership despite having the roaring majority.
The next day the new Chief Minister apparent and Deputy Chief Minister apparent went to see the Administrator and be sworn in, but that was suddenly called off. Then we saw quite a remarkable media conference from the member for Braitling that day – live, straight into our lounge rooms on ABC News 24 – where he refused to go. We got to see the real inner workings of government. Here we are today with a Chief Minister who lost the majority support of his colleagues, and in an unprecedented move, refused to leave the job; he decided to stay. It does not give you much faith in the capacity of this government to do its job when the leader of the Northern Territory does not have the support of his colleagues. People still believe there is very deep division within the government.
Following on from that, more members have since left the government, to the point where it became a minority government. The members for Araluen and Goyder left.
Since then, this government has sold the Port of Darwin – or as it likes to call it, leased the Port of Darwin – for 99 years.
When the minority government situation started, when the government was finally held by the numbers of this parliament, it had to agree and submit to having an independent commission against corruption-type body established in the Northern Territory, after refusing on many occasions.
We have seen the saga of the Palmerston hospital, with grand media events to dig a hole, pour some cement into it, then cover it up with dirt. That did not impress anybody. We have seen the Richardson Park saga continue.
Then, last sittings, there was midnight coup, Round 2 – ding, ding! It was late in the night that this government moved against the Speaker. After the news services had finished for the day and packed up, it moved. It was a disgraceful move. Then, to demonstrate the division within the government and what a foolish move that was, one of its own number did not support the removal of the Speaker. Fortunately, somebody found the sense to ensure the member for Goyder stayed in the job because she does a good job and is well respected.
We now know the member for Port Darwin is retiring, the member for Greatorex is calling it a day and the member for Fong Lim has been given no choice. It makes you wonder what on earth is happening on that side. How will they go along for the next nine months? If they are losing their Treasurer, who are they taking to the next election saying, ‘This is the person we trust with the economy of the Northern Territory’? It will be very interesting to see what happens next.
I turn to some of the key areas of the Northern Territory where we need to see some strong performance by the government. I have some real concerns in my shadow portfolio areas. One key area is education. We know that government expenditure in public education is going down under the CLP government. This year alone there was a $12m cut to government education. In real terms, since 2012, under this government, around $80m has been cut from the Education budget.
In the annual report which was tabled on Thursday night last sittings we could see the numbers who are leaving the education system because the government is cutting jobs. It is cutting school funding to the bone. We now know there are over 500 fewer staff in Education, thanks to the CLP. There are 165 fewer classroom teachers in schools because of this government and its decision to cut the Education budget. Senior teacher numbers are down by almost 100. There are 116 fewer critical support administrative service delivery AO2 and AO5 jobs in the Department of Education to help teachers and principals get on with the job of delivering education in schools. There have been huge cuts …
Mr Chandler: Better results – amazing.
Ms MANISON: You are not seeing results improve and your own annual report will tell you that.
The member for Araluen briefly touched on some of the concerns with Power and Water. We know you are having great problems with the financial management system within the Power and Water Corporation, Jacana Energy and Indigenous Essential Services.
In the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report the Auditor-General has a disclaimer stating she was unable to give an opinion about some matters because the financial information is not available. There are some grave concerns about financial performances because you cannot assess them because the systems are not working the way they are supposed to.
Madam Speaker, I have run out of time speaking on this motion. There are some huge concerns across the Territory about the performance of this government. If we keep going this way, it will be another nine months of chaos, instability and dysfunction. The Territory deserves better. This has been a shocking and appalling term of government. I hope we go to an election sooner rather than later because Territorians deserve better than this rabble.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I start with the member for Brennan’s analogy of the CLP government as a finely-tuned motor vehicle. I retell the story of the member for Brennan on a rural unsealed road in Central Australia in a conventional vehicle in a heavy storm with a flooded road. He regaled the Territory with how the speedo was hitting 130 km/h, and as he looked out the window, the vehicle was not moving. That analogy said to me that, in truth, the CLP is in a motor vehicle, fraudulently using fuel, overheating the motor and scrubbing out the tyres, yet it is going nowhere. That is what this motion is all about.
I stand here on behalf of the people who elected me to the seat of Barkly. I have not arrived at this point in time over the last two weeks; people in the electorate of Barkly have been calling out this government for the past two years. That is of great concern. The people of Barkly who represent the CLP have lost faith in this government. These are good people who I have stood across the political divide from for over 30 years, yet still maintained good social and family relationships and had honest and earnest debates with them. We have stood at mobile polling booths and debated election after election. These people have lost faith in this government and are now calling for an end to it. It is not politics; it is a reality – as you have heard from members on this side of the House – which is resonating across the length and the breadth of the Northern Territory. My position today is to advise the government that there is a vast majority of people in the seat of Barkly who are saying enough is enough.
I was disappointed with the member for Port Darwin, the Leader of Government Business, who today in the media went to the old chestnut about what it will cost the Territory and taxpayers, and said this motion should be pulled. I am afraid the hypocrisy of that statement was writ large, member for Port Darwin. I can remember in 2009 when you led the charge in a motion of no confidence. You had no regrets about using taxpayer funds then and there should not be any regrets now.
Let us go closer to the bone, member for Port Darwin, because as recently as a fortnight ago, you were using a debate on a substantive motion relating to a matter on the Notice Paper to announce retirement. That was truly indulgent. It was a matter that should have been brought up in adjournment which followed that debate. The member for Port Darwin has no credibility about that or about advising Territorians this morning that this is a matter of taxpayers’ money.
Imagine the CLP government as that fine-tuned machine when it tries to announce significant major economic projects. We come into this House to debate those important issues, yet they attempted a midnight coup to sack the Independent Speaker of the Northern Territory. Did we ask for that? Did we call for that? That debate ran for about five-and-a-half hours. On the member for Port Darwin’s reckoning, which he should have announced to Territory listeners this morning, it cost around $25 000 to $30 000. That was a midnight coup a fortnight ago which took parliament to 3 am. I left at 3.30 am. They want to deny Territorians the reality of a chaotic government that needs to be challenged by an opposition, the essence of democracy.
That is what we are doing today with this motion. On behalf of the people of the Barkly and of Territorians we are calling out a government and an executive that is in chaos and has been for years – the revolving door of government ministers. I have had the privilege of serving in a Cabinet. I did my apprenticeship and learnt my trade well, and I can compare a stable Cabinet that was working hard for Territorians through the global financial crisis, the toughest times the Territory had seen, to what I see as a revolving door. My only issue is my concern for the public sector. How will public sector officials implement your policies, mostly chaotic, when there is no stability in the executive of government?
Give it a break. Perhaps it was to happen in 2012? No, 2013. No, again in 2014. Look out, 2015 brought even more creative examples of dysfunction. How can a public sector honestly implement your policies and work for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory when their leadership is crumbling and so involved in infighting that there can be no solidarity and, therefore, no outcomes? The public sector has had nothing but uncertainty and it deserves better.
There is rhetoric from the government about politicians not talking about themselves. Well, you created media headlines for three years all about you. I have not made any of those headlines. Members on this side have not generated those headlines. You have done it all by yourself because of your instability, inability to work together as a team, chaotic policy decisions and infighting, and consequently you deserve the bad press.
We have reached the stage where enough is enough, hence this motion today. The CLP has a higher order to answer to, which is the old guard. The old guard in the Northern Territory, like the people I talk to in the electorate of Barkly, use rhetoric like, ‘These people have trashed our brand’. That cuts deep and you should be very aware of that. Every member on that side should now have the responsibility of rebuilding that brand so we have a robust democracy and a Territory that can move forward with certainty. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is calling for an election.
The member for Port Darwin said the election will be on 2 January. What nonsense. The member for Port Darwin, the professor of parliamentology, knows very well that the Administrator will make that decision for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. That is fact and reality. The Leader of the Opposition has said enough is enough. Some Independents support this motion, and there should be more Independents supporting it.
I have witnessed cuts right through the period of this government. There have been significant cuts, and I have continually called it out as a matter of priority. We can use a fiscal program to move around infrastructure projects, but we should never cut from education, health or child protection.
Through the bitter pills we were told to swallow this government embarked on lavish travel, their lifestyle, their hospitality – one scandal after another. Nobody is denying ministers travel or that they have hospitality responsibilities. But it was brought to light in the media and in the community and reverberated through the bush, where I was trying to work with people who do not have houses, explaining a $100 000 charter flight to make a photo opportunity, not to mention the tickets, that were never redeemed, for around $30 000. The Chief Minister said, ‘That is rubbish, it was $83 000’. That was just for the flight. Let us add on all those tickets that were never redeemed, which taxpayers paid for, for ministers travelling on commercial airlines.
It goes from one scandal to the next. While we were wearing cuts in health, education and child protection, this government was embarking on the high-flying fast travel, the hospitality budgets, and we will not go near the member for Greatorex and his little problem, being taken advantage of by people who knew more than he did in a foreign land. You have to be joking! My kids travel overseas.
This is why we are here today and enough is enough. In health, in the seat of Barkly I can give many examples of where your priorities in policy have gone wrong. We lost a long-term public servant who was responsible for looking after the elderly. Elderly constituents who came into the Barkly office were directed to the office where this public servant sat and operated, and received disability aids instantaneously. That position was taken away. How do I justify that on the government’s behalf as a local member?
The irony is I answer for your decisions. I answer for your chaotic policy and am judged accordingly as the laughing stock of the nation when you have embarked on your incredible dysfunction as responsible elected community leaders. I wear that and I am not happy about it. That is one thing that sticks in my craw. How dare you create chaos for me when I have no opportunity of redress? All of us in this House have been wearing that type of ridicule from the national press right through the constituency. ‘You are all the same, you are all tarred with the same brush and you all have your nose in the trough’, which is very difficult to deal with.
In the education space we are seeing the loss of teachers. The new global budgets are putting pressure on principals and there are chaotic patterns emerging like, ‘Sack local staff so I can employ other staff’. If we do not have local people in our schools, what do we have? We wonder why people are disengaging. We have a preschool in Tennant Creek that had to refuse 20 enrolments in 2015 because it does not have the capacity to deal with them. That is disgraceful. This is the start of a child’s life, let alone when we get to debate how many semesters they can be at school. I can continue that story of the preschool being unable to accept enrolments across the electorate.
We have very successful programs dealing with secondary-age youth in remote schools, yet we now have these same remote youth walking the streets of towns like Elliott and Tennant Creek. They have either been turfed out of the hostel, had trouble at school or have walked, and their parents have asked them to come home. This is the reality of life, yet we have this continual rhetoric.
The annual reports are starting to deliver the true message about outcomes. Child protection in the Barkly – does the minister think I feel good when he is being pasted in public about the caseload and the lack of staff in Barkly?
I will now go to the issue of that high-risk child recently removed from the Tennant Creek Primary School I have been writing to you about for the last few weeks with not one response. I have provided the family’s contacts and mine, and all I have asked for is to be listened to. There has been nothing – no response. That child turned up in national media ‘removed from a primary school’. How do you think that makes me feel? Yet you are in charge. Well, the time has come. It is over for you. We have to stop the bus, stop the car and do a service. We need now to consider enough is enough.
This is not just the Barkly, this is across the Territory. This is coming out of electorates of sitting CLP members. This is chaos.
I continually come into this House and talk about repairs and maintenance and minor new works. Let us go to infrastructure and the road transport network. We saw $98m cut out of the R&M budget and there are high-productivity roads across Central Australia and the Barkly that are falling to pieces. Trucks that are carrying clinic supplies for dialysis patients on home dialysis in the town of Alpurrurulam are stuck on the Sandover, dry bogged. This is not bogged in wet country like you were in a conventional vehicle; this is dry bogged. I have had to continually chase it up. There are grand stories about tourist road infrastructure. I do not deny or criticise that, but there is a balance, and it is about priorities. The repairs and maintenance budget across the Northern Territory has been reduced.
I will now go to a very important point I have been trying to deal with and manage in a logical and just sense, that is, the small to medium business sector that has been hammering me about your management of tendering. They are calling it unjust and corrupt. They have had enough. They are reverting back to the comments about the CLP silver circle and CLP tenders for their mates. I have had contractors tell me they will not invest any longer in that base-level funding for a tender. They will walk and go interstate. They do not believe there is any chance of fair competition, and they are calling you guys out on it. This is across the regions.
The Minister for Housing has plenty of levers to pull in this space. I will put a shout out to the departments of Local Government, Housing and Community Services which have been responding to my cries for help from a baseline of trying to get people to apply for Homeland Extra, then trying to get the work delivered, being smashed by contractors from all over the region who are telling me the tendering processes are unfair, unjust and corrupt. They want a return to something that is fair and equitable. I am continuing to work with you guys. We have had some small wins and the department has been delivering.
I am very concerned now about this gap in national partnership money for Indigenous housing. The member for Arnhem should be very conscious of this. She mentioned roads and bridges, but she did not mention housing. There does not seem to be a lot happening other than in the cyclone-affected areas of Galiwinku, Milingimbi and Ramingining. I am interested in the outcomes that are coming out of those areas, particularly with the training to employment.
There are people across the rest of the Territory who are screaming. Borroloola is an example. Borroloola has pinned the federal minister down. The federal minister said he has handed the money to the Northern Territory, yet the constituents I represent have been told that 25 new houses, 75 refurbishments, a budget of $21.5m is now reduced, never existed, or pushed to 2018. Then there is complete rhetoric around where to put these houses. It is a chaotic strategy to throw in the mix to try to confuse people.
I am not sure what is happening with Housing. I remember SIHIP and you guys in opposition belting the living daylights out of us as 100 houses were built at Maningrida and, project by project, was rolled out across the Territory. I am not denying there were problems. We wrestled on costs from 18% to 8%.
Madam Speaker, this motion is serious. It is a motion to bring the end of the CLP’s term. Let the people decide. Let us allow democracy to rule. It is very simple. It is not a scare tactic about Wet Seasons; it is about accountability, transparency and listening. I listened to an old gentleman at Casuarina recently. His rego was up, his insurance had gone up, as had his costs of living in power, water and sewerage. He was wondering what we would do about it. I listened and I hope to help him.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I hope later today the Leader of the Opposition is afforded the opportunity to apologise to Territorians for not allowing legislation and the general business of government to take place. Also apologise for spending some $32 000 worth of taxpayers’ money for this debate that occurred all day today! Yet again it is a day in parliament where Labor has spent the day complaining.
In one of the very first speeches today Territory net migration was mentioned – who leaves and who comes the Territory. That was raised by one of the members of the Labor Party. I constantly reflect on the population and the level of confidence within the community and the business community because we have positive migration to the Territory.
I thought some of the comments at the start of the speech by the member for Araluen where quite pointed. It reflects on the type of politics the opposition promotes. It comes more from opposition members from the Top End than the bottom of the Territory, and is based on a growing sense of negativity.
It is interesting when you look at the history of the Westminster system and the parliament in which we operate. It is about bringing political debate into a Chamber and not having it on the streets. Politics on the streets is what we see in many parts of the world, all too tragically. You bring that fight and debate into the Chamber, but no, Labor and the unions are bringing it more and more onto the street, parading it as much as they can through different mediums, and we see a growing sense of negativity within our community.
Quite often I applaud those in Central Australia for not taking the same approach. If we reflect on the way the Alice Springs community sees itself in a positive light and we paraded that across the Top End people would have a greater sense of vibrancy. People would be happier, confidence would be up because the fact is things are good. I will run through some things that have changed in a mere three-and-a-half years to show that.
No one is under any illusion that when we came to power, government was nearly bankrupt. We had a debt level of $5.5bn, yet our total budget was $5.5bn. That was a net debt-to-equity ratio of about 98%. It is now down in the low 30% because of what we have done with the budget. We have paid back $3.3bn worth of debt, got rid of the deficit and moved into a position with more than $200m surplus, as at the release of the TAFR.
I notice the members for Wanguri and Nightcliff left the Chamber …
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, withdraw that comment.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. I reflect on some of their comments about the TAFR and the Power and Water Corporation. Little do they understand how Power and Water and its financial statements work. Yes, the TAFR reflects there is a qualification about the financial accounts of Power and Water. That is because we are still trying to clean up the mess of the former Labor government. It is taking us a long time to get the accounts right, and we still cannot get them right. Yes, we have run structural separation. Yes, we now have generation, transmission and retail. Yes, we are bringing competition into generation. On Sunday I announced that we will have competition in the residential retail sector to complement competition in the commercial retail sector. However, the fact remains that we still cannot get the books right in Power and Water.
We have driven down the cost of producing power, are delivering better services and we can put the price down by 5% and not put in place our 2.5% CPI increase. We have removed levels of debt from Power and Water, have structurally separated and are putting downward price pressure on Power and Water, a fantastic achievement in itself.
I have not started reflecting on some of the comments by the member for Port Darwin, who spoke about the price pressures we put in place for fuel prices. How did we drop 50c a litre in fuel prices? Because we have done a lot of hard work. The other side of the question is we copped a lot of flak. The media bagged us out. Labor thought the sky was falling in on all the things we did. I remember holding the fuel summit and everyone bagging the living daylights out of us. The fuel summit started the change in prices of fuel. It allowed us to do other things. It is reflected upon in the ACCC report, where Rod Sims, head of the ACCC, said the fuel summit was the catalyst to change. But no thanks there.
It was good to hear the Leader of the Opposition today admit the former Labor government’s failings on housing. He admitted that Labor drove the cost of housing up. We have driven it down and he acknowledged that today. So, well done, Leader of the Opposition. Not only are we driving down prices in housing, which the Leader of the Opposition admitted, but we are driving them down for fuel and electricity.
In three-and-a-half years we have structurally reformed the economy to a point where we have a 10.5% increase in the gross domestic product, or GDP, for want of a better term, in the Northern Territory. That is the largest of any jurisdiction; in fact, it is the largest in the western world and bigger than China, which many often talk about.
We have the lowest unemployment rate in the country and the highest participation rate. More people in the Northern Territory are in a job or training and fewer are looking for a job than in the rest of the nation. Plus we have paid back debt, got rid of the deficit, have an extra 117 police on the beat plus the other police who have moved from behind the desk to the front.
We have new and upgraded hospitals. We are building the Palmerston hospital and an upgrade at RDH as we speak. We have new special schools at Bellamack and Henbury being constructed right now. More roads than ever before in the history of the Territory are being built – the Santa Teresa Road, the Tanami Road, the Port Keats Road or the road to Pickertaramoor to name a few. I have not spoken about the bridges the member for Arnhem mentioned over the Wilton and the Roper Rivers. We have an Office of Aboriginal Affairs. There is a $50m telecommunications package rolling out telecommunications infrastructure across the bush. Tremendous things have been occurring in the Northern Territory.
We have done big things in big projects such as structurally reforming the port, which will be the biggest infrastructure investment in probably the last 30 years in the Northern Territory and something that will structurally change our economy for the better in the future. Look at such things as the infrastructure fund. It is the first time in any jurisdiction in Australia an infrastructure fund has been set up. The future fund at the national level set up by the former Howard government will not operate the same way ours will. We will invest in infrastructure for the Northern Territory. We are not investing in shares overseas or any of those things. This is about infrastructure for the Northern Territory. We have put $200m of our own in. We will leverage that up to $1bn and build infrastructure for the first time ever.
We have started a gas industry; we will have the gas pipeline. Everyone said it could not be built. It is nation building, historic, across borders. I have sought to find out what infrastructure has been built across jurisdictions over the last 20 years and cannot find anything, because it is so hard to build infrastructure across jurisdictional borders. But we have done it without putting any money in, and have stimulated the development of our onshore gas industry.
Gas exploration cannot occur just anywhere – we have made sure now, through our environmental reforms, you can no longer explore for gas in residential areas, culturally important areas, high-value tourism areas or high-value agricultural areas. You can only have a gas industry in areas where we have identified that there is gas in the Northern Territory, unlike Labor. When we came to government we inherited 95% of the Northern Territory being granted or under application for gas licences. We will now move to a position where they disappear.
Plus, we have had Hawke report one and Hawke report two, moving to a position where from 1 January 2017 we will have the best environmental credentials in Australia. I was told earlier today that when we fully implement Hawke stage two we will have the best environmental guidelines for the gas industry in the world. That is how seriously we take this. There is also benefit from protecting our environment while setting up this industry. Every investment in the gas industry in the Northern Territory will work towards the creation of up to 6300 new jobs in the industry, plus there will be royalties of up to $1bn. We have said every dollar of those royalties, which will be collected between 2020 and 2040, will go towards assisting Territorians to get into vocational education and training or university study to assist them to become smarter Territorians and look for the next economies in the Northern Territory.
I do not think I need to go through other projects in the private sector, such as Project Sea Dragon. I do not need to talk about how Newmont mine is going through a $200m expansion, or Mount Todd mine will have a $1bn investment starting up. I will not talk about the Chandler salt mine at Maryvale Station or what is happening with TNG around Central Australia. I do not need to talk about the Northern Australia Investment Forum, which was held recently, but I will talk about tourism.
We know over 10 years of Labor tourism fell off on an intrastate, interstate basis and international basis. It has taken us a while to turn this around, but the tide has turned. It has turned around significantly in Central Australia, Barkly and Katherine, and it is turning around right now in Darwin.
We have been faced with some challenges of coming to government and having a one-shot-in-the-locker economic policy, which was INPEX, or Ichthys. That is all Labor had when we came to government. There was no strategy in Central Australia, Tennant Creek, Katherine, Nhulunbuy or any of the remote parts of the Territory. There was no strategy in the Top End other than INPEX, so we had to work very hard to turn that around.
We have our seven-stage economic plan which looks at Defence, agribusiness, tourism, international education, mining, energy and the offshore supply sector. There is a range of areas we are investing in. Tourism has turned around. At the time we were paying back Labor debt and fixing the deficit we had an opportunity of putting in $4.75m to the Tourism Infrastructure Development Fund, which provides grants of $30 000 up to $100 000 to tourism businesses to seek to develop new product or redevelop product that can help stimulate the visitor experience. They also spend money in the local economy with those projects of $30 000 to $100 000.
Tourists are now reaping the rewards from those investments. We will continue to see more investment in the tourism industry and our numbers will become greater. I work hard to get more direct flights to the Northern Territory from our northern neighbours. When that is achieved you will see tourism flourish in the Northern Territory.
It is not just about the big projects, it is also about sport. We are seeing investment in sport across the Territory, whether that is the Red CentreNATS, the two AFL games now played in the Northern Territory, the rugby league games or the A-league relationship we have had. Also, of course, who could forget the Davis Cup? It is probably one of the best sporting events I have ever attended. Who would ever have thought that the Davis Cup would come to the Northern Territory?
As I said at the start, fuel prices are down, house prices are down and now electricity prices are down. We have done this while being very busy. At the same time we have rolled out Back to School Vouchers, Sport Vouchers across a wide range of sports and recreational activities, and childcare subsidies, which have increased and are now available for long day care.
All we ever hear from Labor is negativity with not one sense of applause for the achievements to date. The only thing I have heard as an apology was for the first time today when the Leader of the Opposition admitted they failed on their housing policy. I would like the Leader of the Opposition to also apologise for having this debate in parliament and not allowing us to have a clear, transparent and open debate on the Education Act from the start of today, which is want we wanted, or the gas pipeline bill we wanted to debate today. Sure, they might come on sometime later tonight, but we come into parliament to debate the issues that matter to Territorians, not to listen to Labor members carp, whinge and whine again. It is what they do in this Chamber every day.
This parliament is set up so that on every Wednesday night between 5.30 pm and 9 pm the opposition can run its agenda. It is called GBD. But, no, they turn up here every Tuesday and Thursday and carp, whinge and whine all day long so we do not get to any business of this Chamber. Today is no different than any other day. But we can illustrate that it has cost $32 000 to run this place so far today, about $8000 an hour. We have been going on this debate for four hours so Labor can run a motion of no confidence.
If you do not win this, Leader of the Opposition, will you apologise for that $32 000 you have spent? That is something you have just taken off Territorians. You took great offence at us advertising that you blocked ads for ice legislation in this Chamber, which cost about $8000, just 25% of what you have spent today in this Chamber for a no confidence motion designed as a stunt that seeks to further erode confidence in the Northern Territory. That is something you wear on your shoulders. You should apologise for doing this in the Chamber. It is …
Ms Walker: You do not get it, do you, Adam?
Mr GILES: The member for Nhulunbuy has to scream across the Chamber. No matter how much respect you give the opposition members they cannot keep quiet when someone on this side speaks. But that is something we have come to expect from them.
Today we have seen that the opposition is not a credible opposition or alternative government. It does not have the required sense and purpose of leadership on its side of the Chamber. In fact, if anybody was watching today they would have seen that the member for Karama is the de facto leader of the Labor Party who pulls all the strings. But even the member for Karama was wise enough to say that this is a stunt and should not have been brought forward today. Leader of the Opposition, you appear to be somewhat of a lighthouse on a peak on your own in this debate today.
I thank my colleagues – the member for Daly for his initial debate today, the member for Brennan, the Minister for Infrastructure, who so wisely discussed a large part of the $1.4bn infrastructure program, the member for Port Darwin and all on this side of the Chamber who work so hard in government, along with all our staff and those within the bureaucracy who sat back nervously today waiting for this silly stunt of a motion of no confidence to come forward. It has been spoken about for two weeks, has eroded business confidence, got everybody hyped up all over the place, all to no avail.
This shows that you are limp in your leadership as Leader of the Opposition, member for Fannie Bay, and it is a poor reflection upon you. It is a characterisation you do not want to carry with you in your political career, because this is a loss for you today, Leader of the Opposition. You need to have better debate in this Chamber, not just come in and scream at us, yelling and complaining that you are not in government. Come forward with a debate that presents alternatives as an alternative government. You did not do that today. You did not front up and you have not been able to produce results.
Again I say to my colleagues, thank you very much for the teamwork, your efforts and the tenacious approach you take to government. Yes, we have had a couple of defections from our team over the last couple of years; that is politics. We are very happy to admit that. We do not always agree, but when it comes to results we have performed on every occasion in the Northern Territory.
It does not matter who you talk to, people are happy to see fuel, house and electricity prices are down. All those things to help mums and dads with fuel prices, house and electricity prices, the childcare subsidies, Back to School Vouchers and sports vouchers, are what matter. We will continue to talk up our economy and drive down crime to its lowest level since the 1990s. We will continue to deliver for Territorians. I hope the Leader of the Opposition apologises.
Madam Speaker, I move that the question be put.
The Assembly divided:
- Ayes 13 Noes 9
Mr Barrett Ms Anderson
Mr Chandler Ms Fyles
Mr Conlan Mr Gunner
Mr Elferink Ms Lawrie
Mrs Finocchiaro Mr McCarthy
Mr Giles Ms Manison
Mr Higgins Ms Moss
Mr Kurrupuwu Mr Vowles
Ms Lee Ms Walker
Mrs Price
Mr Styles
Mr Tollner
Mr Westra van Holthe
Madam SPEAKER: The question now is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition be agreed to.
The Assembly divided:
- Ayes 9 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
Mr Vowles Mr Kurrupuwu
Ms Walker Ms Lee
Mrs Price
Mr Styles
Mr Tollner
Motion negatived.
NORTH EAST GAS INTERCONNECTOR PIPELINE (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) BILL
(Serial 143)
(Serial 143)
Continued from 19 November 2015.
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the opposition supports this legislation. I thank the government for organising a briefing for me and the members for Johnston and Barkly. We support this bill because it is a duplicate of legislation we presented when we were in government. For example, the Bonaparte gas pipeline is now a fairly standard approach to how we go about preparing for the implementation of major projects such as the North East Gas Interconnector.
The bill does not predetermine anything. It does not predetermine environmental or sacred sites outcomes. That is important, because there have been some misunderstandings about this bill. It provides a framework. It acts to amend Territory laws to allow the pipeline to proceed within all the protections required, but gives it priority in determining this.
The situation with the sacred sites legislation is a good example. This does not override the legislation, nor does it reduce any requirements for sites to be protected. Rather, it makes the head contractor, Jemena, responsible for getting the clearances, and then allows those clearances to apply to subcontractors and others constructing the pipeline. Currently, every subcontractor is required to get duplicates certificates, and if Jemena sold its interest in the pipeline while constructing it, a new company would have to go through this all over again. This is a practical solution and is the basis of the operations of this bill.
There have been a number of concerns expressed about this legislation. I have listened to those concerns. The basis of those concerns fundamentally arises from the lack of trust people have in this government to protect and look after the environment. Labor shares a lack of trust in the CLP My shadow ministers have been tasked with keeping a watching brief on the implementation of Territory laws in this project.
The Bonaparte pipeline showed a balance can be achieved. That is what a responsible Labor government did, and what a future responsible Labor government would do again.
Madam Speaker, as it is a duplicate of the Bonaparte legislation, we support this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I also support this bill.
As the Leader of the Opposition said, this is almost a copy of the Bonaparte Gas Pipeline (Special Provisions) Act that was enforced on 7 November 2011.
The purpose of this bill is to make special provisions in connection with the North East Gas Interconnector Pipeline Project. This project is a major infrastructure project representing a significant investment in the Northern Territory’s energy sector and will support the development of both onshore and offshore gas resources.
It is rare these days to have an opportunity to talk about gas. In the argy-bargy of parliament we have not had an opportunity. There has been a statement by the minister, but not in the form of a formal statement we could discuss in more detail.
The minister made the announcement about the pipeline, and unfortunately that headed off into oblivion. This at least gives an opportunity to talk about the importance of gas and the need for legislation that will allow the use of gas going from the Northern Territory to other states.
There are questions that still need to be asked about gas, where it is coming from and the methodology to produce that gas. That would be a fair discussion as we know there are people concerned about hydraulic fracturing. The government has issued new guidliines. It is important for some of those guidelines to be discussed in this parliament. I am pleased the government has announced those guidelines, which have been released for public discussion. Chief Minister, I have photocopied a few of those guidelines and put them on my table and I ask people to read them.
One of the difficulties in this old debate – and the minister for Primary Industry will recall me saying this many times when he was Minister for Mines and Energy – is governments have to be on the front step if they are to put forward these changes to the way we produce gas in the Northern Territory.
I get my fair share of people who are fair dinkum with their concerns asking how gas will be produced in the Territory, what affects it could have on the environment, etcetera. Those people need to be heard. But at the same time we need to make sure the discussion is based on real fact, not what happened to be on the television that night or what some people say are the facts.
The legislation today is part of that. It enables the company building the pipeline to set in place various rules that need to apply. As the Leader of the Opposition said, it does not mean exemption from the Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act or from other matters.
I received an e-mail today and the concerns of the people who sent it were reasonable. They believed this act would exclude the company from doing an environmental impact statement. I must admit I would have been very surprised if that was the case. I do not know of any place in Australia where you can put down a pipeline of that length without having an environmental impact statement.
I e-mailed the Chief Minister’s department and I received an answer by e-mail which said that this NEGI project would have to go through all the usual environmental approvals. This includes in Queensland and under the Commonwealth EPBC Act. In the Northern Territory, Jemena has lodged its notice of intent with the Northern Territory EPA. The draft terms of reference were issued and are on exhibition until 11 December 2015.
That should be at least laid to rest. Regardless of whether people agree with this pipeline or not, it has to go through a proper process. I encourage people, if they have concerns about this pipeline, to get involved in the process. The EPA is an independent body that looks at all these things. There are opportunities for people to have input. If they have concerns then they should not be about this legislation; they should be about what is in the notice of intent. They have until 11 December to comment.
We know the Bonaparte gas pipeline was built using very similar legislation – almost exactly the same except for one small part. The minister may not know the answer to my next point. One of the differences between the Bonaparte legislation and the North East Gas Interconnector Pipeline (Special Provisions) Bill is there was a section on extractive minerals and special provisions for the grant of extractive mineral leases or permits. I imagine that when putting a pipe in the ground you would require sand of some class. I am interested to know why it was in the Bonaparte gas pipeline legislation and not for the North East Gas Interconnector. There may be some perfectly good reason for that being the one point of difference between the two pieces of legislation.
As I said, it is not very often I have the opportunity to talk about gas. I know this is about the pipe and setting up some rules for the company to adhere to in general because it will have to deal with many matters such as roads, waterways, sacred sites, pastoral properties and extractive minerals. There will be other matters, including the Planning Act. It is good that we are talking about that but I would love to have an opportunity to have a good discussion about gas. What are the future gas supplies? The gas for this pipeline will be from, I presume, Bonaparte Gulf, which is the excess gas we are paying for at the moment, and some gas from the Amadeus Basin. What is the length of life for those gas supplies? I expect this pipeline is also meant to take gas from places like Beetaloo. I am not sure of that at the moment, but I understand one of the restrictions on gas coming from other parts of the Territory is simply that there is no pipeline to use.
It would be good to talk about those broader issues. There will be a lot of money spent on this pipeline. I presume the company building the pipeline is expecting to get a return on it. What are the future gas supplies the government can guarantee will go down that pipeline and for how long? Whilst I am only covering it superficially now, there needs to be an opportunity to look at these matters in more detail, perhaps in another debate. I at least had an opportunity to talk about it today.
Madam Speaker, I support the bill. I understand why the bill has been put forward and I do not have any problems with it.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, I do not support the bill; it is a bit of a cart before the horse situation. There are some significant environmental approval processes that need to be done before you deal with this. Ultimately, my fundamental concern with this is that unlike the Bonaparte gas pipeline which was dealing with offshore gas, this is dealing with onshore gas.
My genuine concern is that this is a project the Chief Minister is putting his political hat to and rushing through with it. It is your bull-in-a-china-shop modus operandi which has got you into the political mire you are in.
The reality is Territorians are not convinced that we want to see wholesale fracking occur across the regions for the volumes of gas required to support a project like this. We are talking about hundreds, into the thousands, of wells across the Territory’s environmental landscape. A genuine debate has not occurred amongst the broader Territory community to the extent that it deserves, given the significant impact this will have in years to come. If this pipeline is ultimately constructed, which you seem hell-bent upon ensuring occurs, we would see very large-scale fracking occurring in the Territory.
Let us not pretend this is a pipeline dealing with offshore gas. This is a pipeline that, in your own statement and the statements of the companies in involved in it, deals with the onshore gas industry which, of course, deals with the extractive process of fracking. I do not think you can divorce the technical aspects of this legislation with the reality that it is about creating an environment in the Territory where significant fracking will need to occur to support the gas volumes to support this pipeline. That is my fundamental opposition to this legislation.
I am concerned that many Territorians would not even know we are having this debate today in parliament. It is of such significance, whether you are a proponent for it, such as the government, or an opponent, such as me, that the broader community deserves to know about it. Conspiracy theorists might believe you have deliberately brought it on a very busy day to make sure it slips through relatively unnoticed. But it will not be unnoticed. I have every confidence that the traditional owners, pastoralists and farmers whose lands will be affected will be informed.
I have seen and admired the effort the environment centres have gone to – bodies such as the Arid Lands Centre and the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory – to ensure ignorance does not prevail across the regional areas of the Northern Territory. They will ensure genuine information that needs to be provided to Territorians is provided to them. I thank the Environment Centre for issuing a memo today which members of parliament received. I wish to read the details of that memo into Hansard:
- This is an urgent memo to NT parliamentary sitting members.
Don’t support rushed approval on the North East Gas Interconnect Pipeline legislation that risks fracking the Territory. There is no environmental or economic case to justify the NEGI pipeline. The Northern Territory government NEGI pipeline is a high-risk project on both environmental and economic grounds.
Today’s no confidence motion is further evidence the government lacks a mandate to lock in fracked gas infrastructure without appropriate public consultation and project assessment. Approval of the NEGI will drive a fracked gas industry in the NT.
Approval of the NEGI pipeline cannot be decoupled from approval for a dangerous fracked gas industry to proceed against the wishes of a majority of Territorians from urban, regional and remote communities.
In their first public media statement as the successful bidder for the pipeline Jemena Managing Director Paul Adam said the pipeline would be a ‘catalyst to fast-track development of the NT’s gas fields’, and acknowledged that after a few short years unconventional gas supplies in the NT would be insufficient to justify the pipeline without bringing new unconventional gas reserves online.
Further assessments are needed. The approvals for the project are only in their earliest stages with the terms of reference for the EIS not even having finished being out for public consultation. These stages should be completed before we make a new act through parliament. The federal government has already called in the project under federal environment laws as posing a risk to nationally-listed threatened species. It is unclear that this project will received environmental approvals. A feasibility study should be undertaken to address significant financial risks associated with the project for the Northern Territory (see below).
Gas demand is falling not rising; there is no east coast gas crisis. Gas demand is falling on the east coast and will be oversupplied in Asian markets, negating the need for more expensively produced Territory shale gas and the NEGI. Gas demand on the east coast is declining in response to high prices brought on by the recent commencement of exports to the world market.
In April 2015 the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) released updated gas projections that showed that demand is falling which confirmed that there are no gas supply shortfalls on the east coast.”
- The NEGI is a major financial risk for the Territory. Further, highly-regarded international financial analysts Wood Mackenzie are also stating clearly this pipeline could be an expensive and risky white elephant in the report last week titled Risk remain for the NEGI. Wood Mackenzie released information stating:
- The North Eastern Gas Interconnector is no certainty to make financial decisions at the end of 2016.
- And said they:
- … have revealed a litany of issues with the proposed pipeline.
- Further, claims the NEGI will reduce household gas prices are false. Australian domestic gas markets are now linked to world prices. Any production facilitated by the NEGI would have a minimal impact on world supply, and therefore on Australian domestic gas prices.
- The NEGI legislation does not provide protection for waterways impacted by its route. Section 7 of the North East Gas Interconnector Pipeline (Special Provisions) Bill 2015 (the bill) gives the water minister, as defined:
- … broad authority to issue a written approval for the construction and operation of the pipeline across the waterway.
This provision obviates the need for pipeline work which goes across an environmental assessment under the NT environmental assessment regime. Environmental assessment procedures would only be triggered if the pipeline’s activities across the waterway would trigger the Commonwealth assessment regime by having a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance.
The bill does state that a condition applies to the approval: that the project participants must not:
1. prevent, restrict or interfere with the passage of vessels on the waterway or
2. divert or use water in the waterway or
3. obstruct the flow of water in the waterway.
However, this condition is subject to an important caveat, namely, that the instrument of approval can provide for the above things to occur.
This bill does not give any guidance on what the water minister must consider before issuing a permit, and gives the minister far too broad a discretion and very little accountability over what should be a matter of environmental significance, particularly in such an arid region of the Territory.
These issues cannot be rushed through by a government with no mandate. The impacts of unconventional gas development spurred by the NEGI must be fully considered by members of parliament, not pushed through a legislative rush job that will lock Territory communities and landholders into decades of invasive gas field industrialisation.
We need to wait until we have a Territory-wide discussion about this pipeline and its plan to fast-track gas fields. Territorians want to be consulted about this pipeline and its relationship to onshore shale gas fracking, not find out we have pushed through a new law in the final days of parliament.
No mandate for fracked gas infrastructure.
Debate on this Act must be postponed until a feasibility study and environmental assessments are concluded.
This year, over 700 submissions were received by the Northern Territory EPA objecting to the pipeline proposal citing it as a driver of fracked gas development which risks our water, impinges on landholder rights and has a negative economic impact on other industries like farming and pastoralism and a strong driver of climate change.
Territorians must be consulted about any final approvals for the pipeline proposal before committing more Territory capital and resources to advancing this unproven project.
There are significant reasons not to support the legislation in the memo. I know the government does not give a damn about anything that was just said, because that is their attitude. That is the way they work: crash and crash through. They will rant and rave about me being anti-development and all of that. It is nonsense, but that is what you do; that is your form.
I want to ensure, and others will ensure, that what you do and what you say in rushing through a pipeline, to rush open the doors of fracking in the Territory, will be heard by the traditional owners of the lands on which these reserves sit in the Northern Territory. It will be heard by the pastoralists. I have been to the Cattlemen’s Association dinners and listened to the executive. I have listened to the traditional owners across communities. I have listened to farmers. I have listened to the mums and dads who see alarming reports coming out of the US and see with dismay what is occurring in Queensland and New South Wales. They see that this government simply does not give a damn and is rushing ahead with its pipe dream.
It is a pipe dream because economists are saying the market is not there. I remember when I first sounded out people in the oil and gas industry – because this question about whether or not the market was there to sustain it arose a couple of years ago – people told me the market was not there to sustain this project. ‘It is a pipe dream; it will not fly.’ They underestimated the efforts the Chief Minister and the Treasurer would go to, to ensure they went into an election campaign saying, ‘Look at us. Look at this shiny bit of tinsel over here. There will be a major project and it is the pipeline.’
Whether it works and meets environmental approvals remains to be seen. Economists are already reporting that it does not stack up; the market is not there. I refer members to an article that was written by Paul Garvey, the resources reporter from Perth, in The Australian on 23 November:
- The economics behind the Northern Territory’s new $800m pipeline simply don’t stack up, a leading oil and gas consultant has warned, and said the project could struggle to meet its key objectives.
Joe Collins, a senior development engineer with Perth-based Resource Investment Strategy Consultants, told The Australian the scale of the proposed pipeline, the shortage of defined gas in the NT and the large gas resources already in place in eastern Australia could all work against the project.
He also said he believed the NT government would be effectively underwriting the development in the form of minimum volume and tariff income guarantees in the contract, unless Jemena – the Asian conglomerate awarded the contract last week – was prepared to carry an unusually high level of risk with the project.
‘It has to be the Northern Territory government underwriting this, and they’re taking a real risk here,’ Mr Collins said.
The NT government last week announced it had awarded Jemena, jointly owned by the State Grid Corporation of China and Singapore Power, the contract to build a 622 km pipeline between Tennant Creek and Mt Isa in Queensland.
The pipeline has been touted as a means of boosting gas exploration in and around the NT by connecting the territory to the east coast gas market.
A spokesman for the NT government, however, told The Australian the project would not require underwriting by taxpayers. Instead, the spokesman said, the territory’s commitments were to provide major project facilitation and co-ordination services and to supply surplus gas from the government-owned Power and Water Commission into the project.
Modelling by Mr Collins suggested that without some form of government assistance the pipeline would need to charge tariffs of up to $4 a gigajoule to meet traditional industry rates of return, compared with typical pipeline tariffs in Australia of $1 to $2 per gigajoule.
Mr Collins said customers were unlikely to agree to such high tariffs, meaning the NT government and therefore taxpayers would need to step in and pay a ‘large portion’ of those costs through much higher tariffs on the Power and Water Commission gas it has agreed to sell into the pipeline.
A spokeswoman for Jemena noted that there were already contracts in place for gas from the pipeline, and that the tariffs would be in line with other Australian pipelines.
‘While the details of the deal cannot be divulged for commercial reasons, Jemena can confirm that there is no requirement for the NT government to underwrite the pipeline as there are commercial contracts in place to secure the volumes required to support the investment.
‘Jemena can also confirm the pipeline tariffs are comparable with those being charged by other pipelines in the country, and are at a level where shippers are prepared to enter into gas transportation agreements and which will encourage the development of NT gas resources’ she said.
The success of the project will depend heavily on whether it can inspire the exploration and development of new gas reserves around the territory, which has been identified as hosting vast amounts of untapped gas potential.
But Mr Collins also queried whether the pipeline would achieve that goal, given the small scale of the pipeline and the inability of small exploration companies to secure new funding in the low oil price environment.
‘It’s really small onshore discoveries that are going to be the target for this pipeline, and those sorts of explorers aren’t exploring in the current climate. They just don’t have those sorts of funds,’ he said.
There was also a real risk that significant volumes of cheaper gas could find its way into the east coast market targeted by the new pipeline if state governments changed their policies towards gas exploration and development.
That is the resources writer for The Australian based in Perth saying that industry analysts are saying to him that it does not stack up.
Here we are, the sittings before Christmas, on a no confidence motion day, rushing through the NEGI pipeline, supporting technical legislation. Fundamentally this is not, I believe, supported by Territorians. I do not think there is anyone who does not want to see regional economic development, but my God, this is again the wrong approach by the government.
You will come and you will go, Chief Minister, but to many of us, this is home; we will stay. I do not want to see the foolish behaviour of the Chief Minister set in place some disastrous environmental outcomes for Territorians for generations to come.
We have great pastoral and farming opportunities. We have great small-scale innovative opportunities for our traditional owners across our regional lands. We could be investing in spending time on the small- and medium-size business enterprises across the Territory in regional areas. You pour your efforts and energies into your white elephants because that is what you like and what you do ...
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama, I ask that you direct your comments through the Chair, please.
Ms LAWRIE: But you will be condemned ultimately by the public for that ...
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama, I ask ...
Ms LAWRIE: I am looking at you, I am directing through the Chair.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I asked you to direct your language through the Chair, please. You do not directly address a member of this parliament. All comments are to be made through the Chair.
Ms LAWRIE: The Chief Minister will be condemned for it.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.
Ms LAWRIE: It will mean the Chief Minister will lose the bush seats for the CLP, the ones he is so desperately on the ground trying to wrestle to be numbers in a future CLP government. Because people are not ignorant, 700 submissions have come from the people of the Territory. They do not want the fracking that your pipeline requires, Chief Minister. They have said no to that but you are not listening. They want a moratorium. You have said no to that because you are not listening ...
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have asked you, member for Karama, to direct your comments through the Chair. I do not care where you look as long as your comments come through this Chair. You are on a warning. Please direct your comments through the Chair.
Ms LAWRIE: The Chief Minister has said no to the wishes of the people across the land, the very same people the Chief Minister will seek support from in the election year. They will not be ignorant; the people of the Northern Territory have been informed. All credit where credit is due, the Arid Zone Research Centre and the Environment Centre are doing the work on the ground to ensure that traditional owners, pastoralists and farmers are informed.
Whilst I stand here, singularly alone in opposing this legislation by the look of things, I know there are vast numbers of Territorians who oppose this. The voices gather in ever-increasing numbers. The people are getting organised, and organised people will ensure they are exercising their votes against a government which trashes across their very real desire to continue to take care of the land.
The changes in here do not even apply to landholders in areas that have already been granted gas exploration approval. That already includes 32% of the Territory, or 44 million hectares, where landowners have no legal rights to object to invasive gas mining that risks their water supplies, the health of residents and the environment.
The Chief Minister will rant and rave about how the Labor government allowed all that exploration. I am not Kon Vatskalis. I will not stand here and say how many he did or did not sign off on. What I do know is that there are very deep and genuine concerns about the licences granted since 2013. That is where the majority of the concerns rest. I do not have the list of all the licences granted since 2013. I probably will have by tomorrow.
We have 44 million hectares where landholders have no legal rights to object to invasive gas mining that risks their waters supplies, the health of residents and the environment. Today, seven major family-run pastoral stations and native title holders in the gulf region have contacted the Chief Minister, the Mines minister and the Department of Mines and Energy to call for exploration permit approvals to the company Armour Energy to be revoked over a lack of consultation with the affected landholders.
Oh, my goodness! I guess that is the question the Chief Minister refused to answer in Question Time today. These pastoral station owners together …
Mr Giles: Permits you approved.
Ms LAWRIE: … represent interests in land of some 50 000 km2 in the gulf region. The stations are some of our major cattle and food producers, and because of the iconic beauty of the region they also run successful fishing and tourism operations on their land.
I will pick up the interjection by the Chief Minister who keeps saying I approved these. I did not sign off on any of these, Chief Minister. Go and have a chat to your mate, Kon Vatskalis ...
Mr Giles: You were Deputy Chief Minister.
Ms LAWRIE: I did not sign off on them. They did not come past my desk, not one of them.
The region is also facing serious drought at the moment and landholders are now forced to compete for water with industry plans for thousands of water-intensive fracking wells, and have the added risk of water and air contamination from leaking wells with industrial gas fields encroaching on their properties and risking their livelihoods. That is not good enough.
The NT government has recently declared the Coomalie region a gas reservation area after sustained community pressure. Will the NT government afford other communities and landholders who can demonstrate a high degree of opposition to the granting of shale gas permits, like those in the gulf, the same protections? That is a good question, Chief Minister. Why not answer that in your wrap?
This access agreement legislation is already in place in Queensland and New South Wales, and it has done nothing to address the high levels of conflict between landholders and fracking companies. In fact, it is escalating. All power to the people. I guess you will feel that, CLP government, come election time. In the bush, fracking will rise up and bite you in the bush.
Access agreements still give the mining company the right to force access to land against the wishes of the landholder. These arrangements are still driving farmers off their land, leading to poor community wellbeing and even tsuicide, as in the tragic and recent high-profile case of cotton farmer, George Bender. Landholders see no light at the end of the tunnel through these forced negotiation processes. If they object, they end up in arbitration featuring a decision-making panel that includes gas industry representatives.
This legislation will lock in the same failed arbitration system that allows resource companies to bully and threaten landholders with legal action unless they agree to the company’s terms of access and mining.
What landholders really want is the right to say no to mining and fracking and the right to protect their business, investments, cultural heritage and families from mining proposals without being bullied, harassed or forced through arbitration. A coalition of Australian landholders, including many Territorians, has this week written to the federal government to ensure this Friday’s COAG meeting discusses a way forward to improve landholder rights to say no to damaging mining projects.
The issue of granting veto rights to reject invasive mining is critical to the resource sector being able to gain a social licence. The right to say no would avoid the high levels of conflict that now exist between the unconventional gas industry and landholders.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I urge the NT government to use this opportunity to stand up for the rights of Territory landholders and admit that this access agreement legislation does not go far enough to give Territorians the right to protect their properties and say no.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, to people who read the debate in Hansard, I inform them that just about everything the member for Karama said was incorrect. She knows that. She was being disingenuous. She knows there have not been 700 letters of complaint to the EPA. She knows there will not be thousands of wells. In fact, she knows when she was Deputy Chief Minister her former Labor government approved 33 well activities, which is more than the Northern Territory Country Liberals government has approved. She also knows that when we came to government on 25 August 2012, 95% of the Territory was either granted or under application of gas licences. She also knows that the permits she called to be taken from Armour Energy were granted by her government when she was Deputy Chief Minister.
It is only fair that we try to have a reasonable and sensible debate. The idea of thousands of wells is completely ludicrous, even though that is separate to this debate. The member for Nelson asked why we do not have a debate in this Chamber, or make a statement. I have had a gutful of bringing statements and being abused up hill and down dale. You cannot have proper debates in this Chamber, so why do them? I would rather have a debate with the community because the current Leader of the Opposition cannot control his team or engage in proper debate.
This legislation for the gas pipeline is simply reflective of previous legislation for the Bonaparte pipeline. It is also reflective of support for the INPEX project, which Labor brought in.
There was a bit of discussion about what would go down the pipeline. It will be gas that is currently fracked today from Central Australia, conventional gas and gas being drilled through rock in the Bonaparte Basin.
Let us see what type of gas will come from the Bonaparte Basin. It will be excess gas from the Power and Water contract, which the former Deputy Chief Minister was a signatory to. She knows that under the take-or-pay arrangements we are paying for gas we do not use. Part of the reason for the tariffs and structure of Power and Water is because we are paying for gas every day that we do not use. That excess gas will go down that pipeline, whether it comes from conventional wells or unconventional gas drilling, which has happened in the Northern Territory for decades. I note that gas was obtained from hydraulically fractured wells in the Northern Territory in 1967 and was used in the production of power for this Chamber. That gas from fracked wells provided power for the lighting in this Chamber and the running of parliament up until a few years ago when gas started coming out of Bonaparte Basin.
I go to the point of the member for Nelson of why we do not debate this. It is because you cannot have sensible, mature debate.
There is a range of mechanisms government is using to ensure we roll back the permits Labor put in place to protect residential and rural areas, Indigenous cultural sites and high-value agribusiness and tourism sites. We have a consultation process looking at how to improve the environmental aspects.
There was a connotation that this is not being talked about publically and the question of why it was brought on today on a day of no confidence motion. Well, why did you bring that silly no confidence motion to the Chamber, member for Fannie Bay, supported by the discredited member for Karama?
I refer to some comments that have been made by the member for Fannie Bay in indicating his support. He tried to have a quiet little jab about sacred sites. I will go through some examples of sacred site desecration prosecutions since 2001 which all reflect on the Labor government.
In 2001 there were charges in regard to carrying out works on a sacred site at Ali Curung, which imposed a bond at that point in time. In 2001 there were charges for carrying out work on a sacred site, again at Ali Curung. There were issues and charges with regard to entering and carrying out works on a sacred site at Ngandadauda Creek in August 2002. In 2002 again, there were charges for entering and remaining on a sacred site in the Victoria River, Gregory National Park. In 2002 there was another episode at the Glyde River mouth. In 2002 there was an episode at the Blyth River in regard to sacred site penetrations under a Labor government. In 2003, at the Blyth River and False Point on the coast of Arnhem Land, there was another example of six offences – three of carrying out works on a sacred site and three of damaging a sacred site, and there were distressed custodians at Green Leaves estate in Alice Springs. In 2004 there was an issue, again around Ngandadauda Creek.
In 2005, Labor gets off; there were no sacred site desecration prosecutions. But in 2006 the Arrernte Council of Central Australia was charged with entering and damaging a sacred site and causing distress to custodians in Alice Springs. In 2008 there was a conviction of carrying out works on a sacred site and damaging a sacred site on Rose Court in Alice Springs. In 2008 there was a conviction of carrying out works on a sacred site and desecrating a sacred site at Whittaker Street in Alice Springs. In 2010 there was a conviction of carrying out works and entering a sacred site. Another one in 2010 occurred in relation to entering a sacred site as a commercial fisherman. In 2010 there was another charge for an incident at Numbulwar. There was another charge for another site in March 2011 for damage to a sacred site contrary to an authority certificate around a mining location. There was another issue with setting fires in Gregory National Park in January 2012.
The only one I am aware of occurring since we came to government was in regard to working at a sacred site, chopping down trees at Coomalie Creek in July 2014.
Labor might like to talk about sacred sites, but it is evident by its performance that the desecration of sacred sites pretty much all occurred under a previous Labor government. Although I support them in this bill, their quiet little snipes and jibes along the way are a bit too much.
As I said at the start, those people who read this Parliamentary Record in times to come will see the disingenuous nature the member for Karama, the quasi-leader of the Labor opposition, has presented in this Chamber. She has given false statements in regard to the number of wells and complaints ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! If he wants to say I was misleading the House he has to do so by way of substantive motion. They are not false.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Chief Minister, could you rephrase that?
Mr GILES: Just about everything she said was incorrect. I look back on what the member for Nelson said about why we do not have a debate in this Chamber. It is because (1) you are completely abused, and (2) it is not a fair debate because the information presented is inaccurate.
If you want to be informed, I am happy to sit down and have a long conversation with you about details. If you are keen to negotiate a way through how we get the best environmental practices, I am happy to do all of that. But I will not come into this Chamber and present a statement just to be abused and have incorrect facts presented. It is very easy for people to talk. I reflect on a radio interview I did probably 24 months ago where someone said there will be 67 000 wells drilled in the Northern Territory in that year. That is incorrect; there were two. You have to get some fairness and evenness in the debate, and you will not get it in this Chamber. I am happy to have the debate in public and try to work with the community on how we make improvements.
Recently we have done that by excluding Coomalie. That is a fine example of how we will not have gas in residential areas, rural areas, areas of high cultural or tourism significance or high agribusiness areas. Yesterday, as I said in Question Time, we announced a new land access agreement framework set of principles that will help us work together with industries such as mining, petroleum and farming. It has never been done before in the Territory. We should be credited with a lot of work we have done in this area to try to improve relationships, but also improve environmental practice and safety in the way we conduct all development on land in the Northern Territory. At the end of the day, we all want to protect the environment. We are all environmentalists. This is the best way we could go to protect the environment.
Labor members say they want to walk away, and I am talking about the member for Karama, who is nothing but a quasi-Labor leader. In the time of their government, 33 well activities were approved when she was Deputy Chief Minister. To now call for people to be stripped of their permits or exploration titles and for a moratorium in those same areas is highly unreasonable. It is professionally unconscionable to walk away from what you approved when you were in government. What we need to do is have a fair, level-headed approach to how we work with industry to keep job growth in the Territory, but make sure we keep the environment with us for years and years to come.
We have excelled as a government a hundredfold on what the previous government had in its environmental credentials. They wanted fracking all over the Territory. The applications for permits were handed out like confetti. They were granted in many areas. There has been process followed and we should respect the process.
I do not agree that all those applications should have been allowed under the former government, but they have been agreed to and we will honour those permits. We may not seek to renew them in the future because we know there is no gas there. We will seek to improve our environmental aspect, give certainty to community about where gas drilling can occur, improve the protections around the construction interface of well heads and so forth, and make sure we have agreement from landholders, whether they are traditional owners, pastoralists, native title holders, farmers or whoever they may be, which is what a fair and reasonable government does.
To suggest you can remove the certainty of a permit would send shivers down the spine of any industry. That is exactly what the quasi-Leader of the Opposition, the member for Karama, has done.
The pipeline will bring about vast benefits for Australia and the Northern Territory in job construction, upstream development, downstream gas utilisation and investing in more infrastructure in roads, bridges and telecommunications. The opportunities that exist in regional and remote parts of the Territory are significant. Downstream in Darwin, for example, will be quite large because we have the ability now to have a source of energy to stimulate a manufacturing industry. That should not be sneezed at.
I support the protection of our environment in Australia, and one thing that grates on my is when protectionists seek to stop energy development and utilisation in Australia, only to export minerals for development offshore where environmental standards are not at the same level as in Australia. Around the room, everything in this Chamber is processed and developed, whether it is the plastic lids on the top of the water jugs or the glass or our mobile phones. They are currently being developed in other parts of the world that I believe do not have the same environmental standards we have in Australia.
As we seek to improve our environmental standards in the Northern Territory we will have the best environmental protection for the petroleum industry in Australia, potentially in the world. It is our responsibility to continue to develop here, not just because it builds jobs but because it protects the environment on a broader level rather than exporting materials overseas to process where they do not have that strength of environmental legislation. It is hypocritical to say, ‘Not in my back yard’. We need to have it in our back yard and do our best to protect everything we can. That is the way we should go.
Mr Deputy Speaker, to the member for Nelson and my parliamentary colleagues, thank you very much for your support on this bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
EDUCATION BILL
(Serial 142)
(Serial 142)
Continued from 18 November 2015.
Ms MANSON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a very important debate. It is very clear to me that education is the key to creating a world of opportunity for every child. Education will help the Northern Territory overturn the gross disadvantages we see far too often, and this bill will play an important part in ensuring we can run our schools and education system the way they need to be run.
Until now the government has done a very good job in consulting with Territorians on this bill. Given the seriousness of this body of work, it has made a significant effort to give people an opportunity to have a say. However, the final bill has effectively only had one-and-a-half weeks of full consultation rather than a full month, which should be the case if sound principles of introduction and passage of legislation were followed. Instead, we have had the bare minimum time to consult on this final bill before us. To top it off, this is occurring at what is the busiest time of the year for people working within education and schools.
The bill was introduced in Week 7 of Term 4. We had Week 8 of Term 4 to consult and now we are in Week 9 of Term 4 debating and giving this bill passage. This is terrible timing which means there has not been the opportunity for the full and comprehensive consultation and feedback we would have liked to have seen with this bill.
We have had some debate today on a no confidence motion in which I spoke about consultation and the way in which the government operates. I feel frustrated that at this point we have this extensive bill going through on urgency. The Education Bill is 116 pages so it is an extensive body of work with a lot of detail to go through. I have not been able to go through it with the level of detail, the number of meetings and consultations I would have liked to have had with the final bill that was presented in this Chamber.
I look at the preparation of the Education Bill as preparation for a marathon. It takes months of hard work, training and a plan to get there. You can see that the department has put in a lot of hard work from the point of the discussion paper to the release of the exposure draft and the consultations they undertook. That was not even at the end. Upon making his second reading speech, the minister introduced a 116-page bill, finalised for all to see the content.
There is not enough time at this time of year to properly consult so we can have the full debate we want. It has been very difficult to get to that level. It is as though you are up to the 30 km mark of the race where things get tough and at that point all the training and preparation starts kicking in. We are at the point where we need to get to the end. It is an important part of the race. Unfortunately, at the last minute we have decided it is too hard; let us jump in the car, drive to the end and off we go.
It is a shame that after the good work up to this point we could not give it the time to ensure the final bill was as well consulted as it could have been.
It is clear that the bill will be passed today; the government will get this through. I still have many questions and I will be posing those to the government at the consideration in detail stage. I have been in discussion with the minister, the minister’s office and the Independents today about some amendments that will be forthcoming. Negotiations have been happening behind the scenes, but they are not as extensive as they could have been, which comes down to the issue of time.
I acknowledge the work of those in the agency on the Education Bill project. I understand the commitment staff made, and am aware the work had its internal hurdles before it even appeared in public, and then considerable discussion after that. It is a project the department has put a lot of effort into. I congratulate Mr Ken Davies and his team. I also thank the many stakeholders and education advocates in the community who have been involved in the process of drafting the bill, scrutinising it, speaking to the department and the minister, writing to their local members and having their say at school council meetings across the Territory.
It is important to thank COGSO, particularly Michelle Parker, Gerard Reid and Tabby Fudge for the work they contributed. I extend that thanks to all the teachers and principals, and the Australian Education Union. I had a few discussions and have seen the submissions of the former principal, and strong education advocate in the Northern Territory, Mr Henry Gray.
Why is it that we feel so passionately about education? Labor believes education and training is the key to both individual and social change. We believe that education and training maximise opportunity. It allows for an individual to change the course and direction of their life and, if properly undertaken, allows society to improve and better itself.
Labor believes that education and training is the silver bullet to improving and expanding the Northern Territory. Labor endorses the goals for education and schooling of the Melbourne declaration, goal one being that Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence, and goal two being that all young Australians are to become successful learners, confident and creative individuals and active and informed citizens.
Labor also supports the five stated goals of the Department of Education’s strategic plan that the department has dedicated itself to achieving, which are: A Great Start for Children; Every Student a successful Learner; Quality Leaders, Quality Teachers, Quality Schools; Responsive Services and Systems; and Building Productive Partnerships.
It is Labor’s vision that all children will start school prepared for school and able to learn from day one. That is why we have focused so much of our policy energy on the crucial zero to four age group. We believe changing the lives of young people at this point in their life will well prepare them for the wonderful journey that education and training can bring them in their lives. It is Labor’s vision that our schools will produce students ready to tackle the modern 21st century world and capable of achieving the best they can.
The thing that distinguishes Australia from most other countries in the world is our education system which is an acknowledged world leader. It has been the spine to our growth as a nation, and it requires constant support and innovation to maintain that position. In the Territory our education system must deliver to small numbers over vast distances in circumstances where many do not speak English as a first language. It is a challenge for government to deliver under these circumstances, and requires an education and training system that is well supported and well resourced.
It is on that point that the opposition has had much criticism of the government. On coming to office in 2012 the CLP, in its now notorious mini-budget, attacked education funding. There were 30% cuts over two years administered to most grant programs. Staffing was savagely reduced in the central offices and in schools. Staff formulas were changed and changes were made to how attendance was measured and supported. In the midst of all this cutting, the CLP introduced one reform package after another, leaving the department and schools with fewer people to deal with more change. It is a situation that, three years on, is still not resolved. We have heard much about the reforms from the government. The truth is the disruptive impact of some of these poorly implemented reforms with very tight time lines threw staff and teachers, already stretched and stressed, into some really tough situations.
The continued cuts in Territory resources have only been softened by the increased funding of federal monies. It is clear that as the feds have increased funding, the CLP has withdrawn its funding and is now propping up the responsibilities it should undertake with federal money.
You need go no further than funding available from the feds on the post-Gonski deal done under the Stronger Futures money. The Australian Education Union is right; the feds have put in more money and the CLP has pulled more money out. The net gain to education is not there.
The federal government funding is always supplementary and in addition to what the government is trying to do. The Gonski deal from the previous federal government was structured in a way that was designed to ensure that money was not taken and then substituted. We may argue around the fairness of what was offered. Labor believed at the time that we deserved more, but the proposition that the money was to supplement the activities of the state and Territory governments was the right one and the one we should have adhered to.
Let me make one thing clear. I am not pointing the finger at the agency; the agency has to operate as best it can in the context of the funds available. But I have no doubt the Territory CLP government was not putting in the vital resourcing we still need to see in the front line of education. I am aware that an agency deficit outcome was narrowly avoided by the arrival of Abbott government funding. Not only has this occurred with the post-Gonski funding, but there is no doubt the funding for the education of Indigenous children is now being propped up by expenditure of millions of dollars of federal funding from Stronger Futures. Funding available for education should be efficiently and effectively spent on education, not withdrawn and spent elsewhere.
We have often heard, when we put the hard questions to government about funding expenditure and why we have seen funding cuts to education, that the government felt the Department of Education had become bloated and inefficient with too many staff. I have to criticise that on all fronts. The truth is, despite the claims of efficiency and effectiveness, what we have seen under this government in education is cuts, disruptions and reductions. Thankfully we have very hard-working staff in the department and in schools, but we are hearing they have been pushed to breaking point.
We only have to look at the annual report that was tabled on the last sitting day a week-and-a-half ago to see the cuts within the department. It has been a very tough time in schools; that is for sure. Page 14 showed we had fewer Indigenous students enrolling and fewer students attending preschool in 2014-15. Targets of average Indigenous attendance levels were not being reached and the NAPLAN results show, in every category bar two, that literacy and numeracy for Indigenous children have gone down. When you compare the years you can see that there is little evidence of consistent or significant gains. This was confirmed in the graphs on pages 22 and 23. There was also a reduction in the number of Indigenous students completing the NTCET. You would hope, year by year, you would see a consistent growth in this figure.
Later in the report, on page 49, there is a clear cut of staffing numbers, particularly classroom teachers, which is a shame. If you go back over annual reports from 2012 to the latest annual report of 2014, you will see that classroom teacher numbers are down by 165, senior teacher Level 1 are down 96, with 116 fewer administrative support staff between AO2 and AO5. The huge cuts to staff numbers we have seen under this government have been a real worry.
Turning to the details of this bill before the House, it is a comprehensive modernisation of the Education Act, which is 36 years old. There are many areas from both government and the non-government sector which have been subject to change. It is a very comprehensive document. We have not had the time to go through it. There is a lot in it we support, but there are also elements of this bill we have some questions about. We will be going over that in the consideration in detail stage where we have suggested some amendments which the minister will propose.
It must also be noted that much of the detail of how the Education Bill will be practically implemented will be embedded in regulation. In fact, there are over 50 references to regulation in the bill, which will have the vital detail we all want to see. We have heard a lot from the stakeholders about wanting to see the regulations to get the details of what is in the bill. Given we do not have the full details of those regulations it is difficult to get a full line of sight of how the new act will work and be fully implemented. Not being able to see those full regulations has created further angst amongst education stakeholders. I ask that the government carefully considers making sure it consults with education stakeholders like COGSO and the AEU in the formulation of those regulations. It is important that the government listens to those on the ground to get the very best outcomes for our education system.
However, most of these changes before us are sensible and bring the act into a space where we see the work going forward. A good example of this is the very appropriate removal of references to the term ‘handicap’ and aligning the Education Bill definitions for ‘disability’ to the definition within the Disability Discrimination Act. Another sensible and appropriate change is the express prohibition of corporal punishment. There is also recognition within the act that education has changed beyond the traditional academic pathway, and well-due recognition of vocational education and training is covered. A very sensible position which has been adopted in this bill, through the advice received in the consultation process, is to look at the definition of ‘a parent’ to ensure it is culturally appropriate to Indigenous families of students.
There is a range of areas within the bill I will look at in a bit more detail. First, I turn to the changes which the government has brought forward regarding the NT Board of Studies. Essentially, the NT Board of Studies provides advice to the department and the government on curriculum matters in the NT, and for a long time has done a good job. The initial exposure draft of the Education Bill, however, went too far in deconstructing the NT Board of Studies and was seeking to silence some of the critical voices of experts who sat on the board. It was a step too far to reduce the board from 16 to seven members, which was initially flagged. I welcome that the government has acknowledged this feedback and sought to reinstate some of those important education groups which had been left off in the first instance. Initially the government had sought to leave critical groups of teachers, parents, employers and Indigenous representatives off the board. It is a welcome change that this has been included in the bill.
As honourable members are aware, there are some consideration in detail stage amendments with regard to the composition of the NT Board of Studies. There has been some discussion about this. I understand the minister will be proposing some amendments and we will discuss those further at that stage.
I am seeking to get some commitment that the parent representative comes from a government school in this instance because we have 33 000 students in the Northern Territory enrolled in government schools which represents about three-quarters of the students. It is very important that the parent representative is someone who was endorsed by a body that effectively represents the parents of students in Territory government schools.
It is also important that the teacher representative appointed to the board of studies has the endorsement and support of a group that represents teachers in the Northern Territory. It is important that we know the people endorsed for this important job have the strong support of the community.
The Australian Education Union in the Northern Territory does a very good job of advocating for education. The government has a fair bit of argy-bargy with them at times. When Labor was in government it did not always see eye to eye with the Australian Education Union. But it has a very important voice and expertise that goes directly to those schools and classrooms. It should be listened to, engaged with and consulted. Its views should be taken on board. That is why I propose those changes which will be debated. It is important that those professionals who advocate strongly for students, teachers and, ultimately, for education in the Territory are represented on the NT Board of Studies.
Another notable change in the bill is the compulsory school starting age of Northern Territory students. It has been very clearly proven that a child’s critical development starts well before they are born. From birth to preschool, every effort must be taken to nurture a child’s development and start its education journey. It is abundantly clear that we must start this well before children enter school. Through the consultation process, the government was provided with a range of feedback about what the appropriate age is for a child to begin education.
The government has determined, after consultation, that six is an appropriate age and manages to capture the bulk of the student population, with most children attending school at five years old. We agree that promoting school attendance at five years old for Transition is sensible. We believe we need to keep working and focus on the critical early years from birth to school. We need to see a greater focus on that in government, especially since it is well proven that earlier intervention with children’s developmental issues leads to better long-term outcomes.
It is essential that students and staff have a safe school environment. It is important so all children have a full opportunity to learn. Too often our staff are subject to unacceptable behaviours, and their safety and wellbeing is threatened. This is another area of education where we are still seeing too many issues. It is a critical area that needs support and funding; that way teachers can get on with the job of delivering the best possible education for their students and feel safe whilst doing so, and students can feel safe in the classroom. I have heard of many examples where behaviour becomes a real issue in schools and can often create a divide within that school community. As well as taking away from the educational outcomes of students, the stress effects teachers and support staff and can make school a tough place to be. It requires strong leadership and the right amount of support and commitment from the government with appropriate measures and funds for the agency. It has to be addressed, and in the context of this legislation, strong and clear measures dealing with unacceptable behaviour are welcome.
This needs to be matched with significant effort to handle those students who have been expelled. It is not reasonable for education to expel or suspend students and then wash their hands of them. Society requires an effort to be made to educate and train those students, because without education or training their prospects are dim. There must be every effort made to ensure that, while they have behaved unacceptably, we do not punish these youths for the rest of their lives. We must make sure efforts are made to get these kids on the right education or training pathway to ensure they have the best opportunities in their adult life. If they go off the rails in their youth, they can get back on the right track through education.
Measures within the legislation providing for criminal history checks of mature-age students who have been absent from school for 12 months are sound. However, it is important that the implementation of this measure is monitored to ensure it does not act as a barrier to prevent mature-age students from re-entering the education system. We do not want this measure to deter students from their education.
I now turn to sections of the bill that have caused the greatest debate and go to the heart of the type of education system we want to see in the Northern Territory. I have firm views and values, as do my colleagues. I believe most Territorians share these views on education; that education should be free and accessible; that every child has an education pathway tailored to their individual needs so they are equipped for an adult life with real opportunities; that education is delivered using an evidence-based approach; and that the community and parents have voices in what happens in their schools. These are key values that we want encompassed in the bill that will drive the results everyone wants.
The bill sets out to make language about the cost of government education clearer. However, the detail of what this means is to be set out in the regulations. Clause 75 of the bill, titled ‘Government school education to be free’ sets out in subclause (2) that:
- The cost of providing the following at the Government school to the student must be met by the Territory:
(a) instruction that forms part of the program that is prescribed by regulation (the standard curriculum program);
In clause 75(3) we see that school representative bodies can impose a charge for the provision to a student of anything not covered in the standard curriculum. This clearly articulates a school’s obligation to provide a free education. However, there is angst about the question of what will be deemed ‘standard curriculum’ in the regulations.
People want to see that the value of free and accessible education is upheld for Territory children and families, but we know schools are under budgetary pressures in trying to make ends meet. We want to understand from the minister in this debate what we can expect to see in the regulations to define the standard curriculum to be delivered in our schools.
There has been much debate about the provision of 26 semesters of education within the bill, which allows for Transition through to Year 12. We know there will be some students who will need to be in school for longer than 26 semesters. If that is the case there needs to be a great deal of debate about ensuring there are no roadblocks preventing this, because if a child does not get to complete their schooling, their options become greatly limited.
The request for extensions beyond 26 semesters is something parents of children with disabilities and special needs have had to access before in order to help their child complete their schooling, which has taken longer. There have also been several concerns raised by the Family Transition Network in Darwin, which consists of parents of children with disabilities. They are advocating for inclusion and strong education outcomes for their children, and school plays an important role in that. With limited post-school options for some families, extended time at school has been an important choice. The crux of the problem is that we do not have those effective post-school options and more needs to be done. We want to ensure that the education journey and opportunity does not stop with school for children with special needs or disability and there are options beyond school for those students.
The bill creates roadblocks for people who may need more than 26 semesters of education. I am happy that after the discussions I have had with the Independents, the minister’s office and the minister that is something we will look at amending in the legislation today. It has created the greatest concerns in the community. We have had correspondence from school councils and the Australian Education Union, and COGSO has said that in its surveys this is the element of the bill people are worried about. They want to ensure education is as accessible as possible and students are encouraged to complete their education.
At the moment the language in the bill about the allocation of 26 semesters – for example, if a student does not do well in their Year 12 results – is not very encouraging. If someone was in a bad head space and not gone through school the way they wanted and they need to repeat, there is more anxiety with having to go through an application process in order to do that.
We have found some ground today to work on and send the right messages to the community that we want as many people as possible to complete their education and gain the Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training. As members of this parliament we all want to see that, and it is important we actively pursue it to ensure as many people as possible get a good education from their school journey. We will look at that further in the consideration in detail stage.
Another element of the bill I turn to is parent and community involvement through school representative bodies. To maximise the success of the Territory education system, parental involvement is essential. Parents play a vital role in the decisions made for their schools, and to get the best education outcomes they have an important voice on school representative bodies. This bill acknowledges that school councils are changing, and makes allowances for school boards as part of the government’s Independent Public School agenda and joint school representative bodies.
An important principle captured within the act is that school representative bodies must have 50% parent representation. Schools should always make every effort to uphold that and maximise the involvement of parents in their schools and in the future of their school community.
However, it must be noted that the bill makes allowance for Independent Public School boards to apply for an exemption from having 50% representation of parents on those boards. I expect to hear arguments from the government that the reason is to allow Independent Public School boards to seek further expertise. However, I have found from some of the frank conversations I have had with some of the Independent Public Schools that in some cases it is because they cannot get 50% parental involvement on their school councils. It comes back to the point that community consultation was a very important part of selection to be an Independent Public School. It leaves me wondering sometimes how schools managed to get through that process if they were unable to have a fully-engaged school council consisting of 50% parents. What will the minister be doing to monitor the situation when a school asks for an exemption from 50% parental involvement? Will they be seeking assurances that parental and community views are being taken on board by that school board? What processes will be in place to monitor that? I look forward to hearing the minister’s views on how this will work in practice within the legislation.
As I said up front, this is an extensive bill. We have had limited time to go through it in the detail we would like to. I appreciate there has been an exposure draft process, but ultimately when the final bill is released, that is what you talk to people about. This is the busiest time of the year for schools. I believe the government’s wanted the very best body of work done. Up until this point the consultation process has been solid, but today I would have liked to have gone into the depth of the detail much more because this will be very important work to help shape our schools for the future.
Given the quick time frame we have in implementing this bill, I will be seeking some assurances that there will be a review process of the implementation of the bill. Given the rush of this legislation we do not want to see any unintended consequences arise. I believe there is genuine goodwill to get the best result possible; however, importantly, this is going through on urgency, which is not an ideal process for anyone as it has not given us time to scrutinise this bill properly. It will be good to have assurances that there will be a review process of the implementation of this bill because it is important that we get as much of this right as possible. We have a lot of work to do to ensure what we want embedded in the bill is done properly.
I thank the people in the department, the minister for being so open and happy to oblige in briefings on this bill, his staff, and of course Mr Ken Davies and his team in the department. I also pay tribute to COGSO, AEU, parents, teachers, principals and the people in the community who have contributed to this process, because their voices are so important. As we go through the debate I am glad to see there is willingness from government to look at some of the elements those people have raised about the legislation.
Mr Deputy Speaker, again, we would have liked more time. I am looking forward to hearing from other members who contribute to this important debate. Schools and education are critical to the Territory and we want to see the best result possible.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Wanguri for her valuable contribution. I agree with pretty well everything she said. I am here because of the result of a good education but I am not an expert on education. There are a couple of people on my right, the members for Barkly and Nhulunbuy, who have spent a good part of their lives in the teaching fraternity and know a lot more about it than I do.
I have at least had the experience of about five school councils, three non-government schools and about four or five government schools I try to attend as often as possible. I get a fair indication of how people think, both from talking to parents and attending school council meetings to hear what people have to say. There is no doubt we have a good education system.
At times it has been criticised. I would be one of the first to criticise the education system we have in relation to the levels of literacy and numeracy in remote communities. I criticised the previous government many times on some of those failings. It was not always to do with the Education Act but sometimes about the difficulty of getting kids to go to school.
This is an important act. It represents the basis of our society, economic survival and culture, whether Indigenous or non-Indigenous. It is based on our ability to understand, learn and pass on what we learn to others. You need a good education to do that.
I am disappointed that it is being hurried. I congratulate the government on the amount of consultation it has had with various stakeholders on the Education Bill. I understand it is rushed because the government gave an extension to people like COGSO, who I thank very much. Tabby must be sick of me ringing her. She has been sending me e-mails.
I have been doing my best to understand a lot of what has been going on, but my problem is I am a member of parliament and not an expert on education, although I have a lady helping me who has that background. Although I have had that consultation I still have to deal with this act in this parliament. Dealing with the bill is based on trust and talking to the minister, the shadow minister and people from COGSO to get an understanding of how they feel. There is no doubt that people are satisfied with the changes in general but they have some concerns.
I thank the minister, who has been listening, and the shadow minister, who has also been coming to my door to discuss this. That is good. If people can get together and come up with some solution to an issue that stalls the passage of this bill and find a compromise that allows the bill to pass that is a great thing. That means people are working together to make sure people in the Territory have a good Education Act.
I have seen the surveys that COGSO issued and its concerns. Some of those issues will be resolved if these amendments go through.
I have other concerns, minister. The shadow minister spoke about the definition of ‘standard curriculum’. The definition is based on a regulation, but we have not seen it. Regulations can still come to this parliament. It is difficult. I found out the hard way when I tried to look up the regulations for the increase in poker machine numbers. They are done out of sight, out of mind. I had to find out the process of bringing those regulations into parliament to at least debate them. I hope the minister can let us know beforehand what those regulations will be so if we have concerns about them we are able, through the system, to bring them to this parliament to be debated. I have told bodies like COGSO that we will try to get those regulations to them. I imagine the government will try to do the same thing so people can at least have a chance to look at those regulations, which are mentioned in this bill a number of times. It is important that people have an understanding of what those regulations are. I will be keeping an eye on what is happening.
There is a lot of concern about the 26 semester limit. We will come to that debate later. Thank you, minister, for at least looking at that issue. The amendments are a great improvement.
In relation to the NT Board of Studies, Tabby Fudge, the president of COGSO, wrote to me during the week as a representative of parents, stating they would like a public school education representative on the NT Board of Studies, and I believe that is being proposed.
Another issue I have, minister, is in relation to full-time work where students who have completed Year 10 must be either at school or in an eligible option. I do not have the clause written down. The eligible options stipulate full-time work. Is part-time work or voluntary work acceptable? If you are doing CDEP in a community, is that counted as full-time work, because normally CDEP is not. Where there are not enough jobs for people who have left school, are they exempt if they are not going to school as there is no alternative either in a form of training or getting a job? Minister, maybe you could answer that when you are summarising in the debate today.
I note that regarding school closure, clause 97 on page 52 of the bill states that if the government is considering closing or amalgamating a school, the minister must talk to the community affected by the proposal. However, the explanatory notes do not mention the community discussion. I am concerned that if you close a school, especially in a community, not only the parents and staff must be notified of your intention but the community also, because it can have major impacts on that community. Reading the bill rather than the explanatory notes, that concern is addressed.
There was a concern raised that the Chair of the NT Board of Studies should be independent. At the moment the minister appoints the chair. Is this usual practice for a board of studies? A chair appointed by the minister through the Administrator is not independent. Do you ever have an independent group which decides who the chair should be? I am interested in the minister’s answer.
I will not say which school or which teacher, but the other day a teacher told me that one of her students called her two words that I will not even attempt pronouncing here. If I had been called that on a football field they would have been sent off for at least two weeks. It says in the front of the bill under ‘Guiding principles’ that students and staff of schools are entitled to a safe environment. There is also a clause in regard to managing behaviour, suspension, expulsion and exclusion, but I get the feeling that we are not protecting our teachers enough.
I have had reports from husbands whose wives came home shattered. They have been abused and treated disrespectfully. We have a system which is supposed to deal with that. Do we need an Education Act or something which says there is no way it is acceptable for a teacher to be sworn at, abused or have something thrown at them? There is talk that it is because we got rid of corporal punishment. I am not advocating that we bring corporal punishment back. The reason we once had corporal punishment was we thought it was the way discipline should be enforced.
How do we instil some discipline? You cannot learn without discipline. Other kids cannot learn if there are people interfering in the classes. Teachers will leave the profession if they come home every day exhausted not because they are teaching, but because they spend most of the day trying to control children who are misbehaving. Again, I am not the expert and other people in the teaching fraternity might say it is not quite like that.
To raise the level of respect for teachers in our system of education, we need to impress on children that teachers are the very soul of the school whose qualities make them learn. They pass on their knowledge to that child in the hope they will get a good education and a good job that will last them through life. I feel there has to be more emphasis on looking after the teachers’ welfare and telling them, ‘We respect what you are doing’, and reflect that in our Education Act.
The question will be asked, ‘What do you do with the kids who are causing disruption?’ You do not want them wandering the streets. What is the future for children who are disruptive in classes? What do we do with them?
At one of my local high schools there is a fantastic VET course for the kids who do not want to be academic in the sense that they do Year 12 physics, chemistry or history, but they would like to fix a motor car or build something with their hands, which is great. I reckon the VET courses at Taminmin are great. They also have horses, the garden, the cattle and the chooks – cannot forget them. But what about the kids who simply do not want to go to school? I know we have the Malak centre, and in Central Australia we have St Joseph’s Flexible Learning Centre, but that is where we pick them up afterwards. If we expel kids from the school so teachers can teach and the rest of the kids can learn, what do we do with those kids? There is a process which you talk about in the bill.
I feel the teachers are being left out. People knock teachers, and many years ago I probably said unkind things about teachers having long holidays and all sorts of things. But after getting to know teachers, I know many teachers work long hours, well after knock-off time, to get ready for the next day, get exam results and get reports done for students. If there is a day spent teaching and students are disruptive, that does not help. You burn out teachers and they will find another occupation.
I take the opportunity to raise that after hearing it from this lady who is a wonderful teacher. Even though this wonderful teacher took it gracefully, it shocked her that someone called her that and used that language in a classroom.
I have more power when I am umpiring footy. If you swear at me you have a yellow card and you are off, or you get a free kick against you straightaway. If you say something really bad about me, you are off permanently and you go to the tribunal. You will be told that you have two weeks’ suspension, especially if it is a serious offence against an umpire. We need to instil into kids that they cannot get away with that. As I said, teachers ...
Mr Chandler: The two words were not ‘nice apples’.
Mr WOOD: That is right. It was only raised with me recently, and this is an opportunity to say that something has been left out. I hope the government considers having a special school for kids who are not so much drop-outs but people who should not be in the standard classroom because they are a nuisance.
When I went to school there were 44 kids in the class. There was a kid behind me who I wish had been somewhere else. He used to give me a hard time in the class and I would end up getting in trouble because I reacted. I imagine that is what happens in a classroom. Someone will stir up someone who is trying to do some work. They will annoy him because he is trying to study and there is a reaction.
The shadow minister raised most of the issues I would like raised. School representative bodies are extremely important. As you say, you are putting in possible ways for exemptions when you are struggling to get the numbers of parent members. It is tough sometimes. Some school councils do better than others. I go to some school councils and everybody attends. At other school councils, when it comes to the AGM or the first meeting for the year, they are pushing to get a treasurer and struggling to get a secretary. It is not always that easy to get those people to come to those meetings. But other groups are fantastic. If there is a way to make sure they continue, I hope you do not get away with just having a majority of teachers and only one or two parents. You need to make sure there is strong parent representation in school representative bodies.
You mentioned home education. It is good that is in the bill. I do not have the current act with me; I presume it is in there. It is good that it is recognised. A group of people comes to my office about once a month. They are wonderful women who bring their scones, jam, cream and lollies, and they sit down as a group and discuss and work through issues they have with educating children at home.
Some people might ask why they are doing that. The funny thing is the family of the lady who organises this group has done well in higher education. They are exemplary kids and they are off to university now. Home education is an important part of what we do. It is similar in many ways to School of the Air. School of the Air is home education with a radio. In home education, mum or dad teaches the kids at home. It is good that it is recognised here. I am grateful to those women who turn up because I know they are dedicated to educating their children at home. They believe that is the best way.
That recognises the pluralism of our education system. I know what the debates about public education versus independent schools are like. That is a choice we are allowed to have in Australia. Some might argue that you have to pay for the choice, but I sometimes say the first schools in this country were church schools. It took a long time before governments set the pathway to having state or government school education.
We need to be more tolerant about other groups that educate children. It may not be the way we would do it. Look at the people involved in independent schools such as the Steiner school. It is an important part of our education options. Those people have a certain philosophy, and people are free to send their children to that school.
I am sad this has to be rushed through but at the same time I thank the minister for the amount of consultation. Our briefing was on the draft bill the Monday before it was introduced; we did not see the final bill. What was the hurry? I was talking to a principal – I will not say who he was – and said, ‘Government was a bit reluctant to bring this in in February. If it was presented in February you would probably have the regulations and could have debated the whole thing. ‘Government brings in changes in the middle of the year and nobody ever worries about that.’
In our briefing we were told the only reason this could not be done in February was it might upset the semester. The semester is – what? – four months long? The first two weeks being chipped off would not make any difference to a semester. Be that as it may, the government has made a decision to pass it today.
I again place on record my thanks to the schools and the school councils that have looked at this. I thank Tabby from COGSO, who kept me up to date with what is going on. COGSO is made up of many people who are parents. They have some administrative help but there is a lot of work for those people who sent out media releases, e-mails and worked hard to get an understanding of what parents think. They pulled out pie charts and presented lists of comments from parents, both for and against. COGSO has done a fantastic job. I thank them for all the work they have put into this and for giving me advice. As I said, I am not an expert but I hope I have helped them.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I once again thank the shadow minister for the work she has done in bringing these amendments. I am happy to debate those amendments when they come up.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Deputy Speaker, we have before us legislation that seeks to put in place an education vision for the future – indeed, for the next few decades for the students of our Territory.
The legislation, however, comes to us with a flawed consultation process. The minister posed a few general questions last year which did not start a serious conversation. There was a draft bill at the end of May this year. Feedback was sought on the bill and until just over a week ago we had no idea of whether or not that feedback had been listened to and inserted into the bill. We have a ridiculous situation of having the bill lobbed on our desk for the urgency debate so we can deal with it in this sittings. In 14 years in parliament I have never seen such a rushed and clumsy process for crucial reform legislation. It is incredibly disappointing.
We finally got to see the bill itself on 18 November 2015. The minister pushed ahead with the urgency motion, which is why we are here. I note the member for Nelson just talked about how it would not have hurt and there would not have been any dire outcomes if we dealt with this properly in February. I made the point during the urgency motion that it did not afford us much time to consult with our communities; we were dealing with a school system where teachers were under pressure writing end-of-year reports and dealing with end-of-year school concerts. The timing was very difficult for the school community, for both teachers and parents. That did not faze the rush-ahead-my-way-or-the-highway approach of the CLP government, so we are today debating the legislation.
It has not been lost on Territorians that this bill was released after the minister forced an urgency motion that reduced the required 30 days for final consultation. We have had just eight working days. I acknowledge the efforts COGSO has gone to on behalf of parents of the Territory to undertake a final round of consultation. I understand it received feedback from some 310 parents in that time. That is a pretty large response in just eight working days.
As for the minister saying, ‘We do not get everything right and that is good enough’, when it comes to education we need to take the time to get it right.
I note the opposition has proposed Education Bill (Serial 142) clause amendments, particularly to the areas where there has been public concern expressed about the cap on the entitlement to access education, and whether or not there is a parent representative on the education board.
However, neither of the amendment schedules circulated – the opposition and the government amendments – have the word ‘public’ in the description of a person who is a parent of a student enrolled in a school in the Territory. I am interested to hear from the minister whether that is intended to be a parent from a public – that is, a government – school, or whether the minister’s view is more broad than that and it is a parent from either a public or a private school. I seek clarification on that because the feedback from COGSO on behalf of Territory parents is a burning desire to have a parent representative from a public school on that board. Other board representatives cover the independent schools and Catholic education, so there is an assumption with the clause proposed that it is a public school, but it is not explicit. I am sure the minister can inform us of that in the consideration in detail stage.
I will never accept capping the number of semesters. This legislation will pass with these amendments given the weight of numbers of both government and the Labor opposition, but frankly it is wrong to put barriers in place to our children continuing their education beyond the standard 26 semesters.
I note the minister has taken on board to some extent the concerns raised, and is now allowing one year to be repeated external to the allocation so it is not counted; you are allowed to repeat a year and it will not go against your 26 semesters. That is my reading of the clauses. It is a minor victory in the working of this parliament. It is a small clawback but why would we want to limit our children at all?
Some people seem to have the attitude that kids keep repeating and staying at school. It is exceptional to have students at school for 14 to 15 years, and where this occurs it is because they genuinely need longer in their education journey.
But it seems the government is hell-bent on putting limits in. I thank the shadow minister for doing what she could to ensure there was some reasonableness in the limit on education. It is something I have tried to explain to school leavers, existing students, parents, other educators and educators interstate. Everyone is shocked that a government would want to put this in place. I am not shocked because I have seen the government do a range of unconscionable things in the time they have been in power, and this is another one. I put on the record that I fundamentally oppose it. The clawback is a small concession. I still oppose the notion that we will limit, in legislation, access to education.
There is a range of reasons people apply for additional time. It may be that someone has been moving around or had an illness which upsets their schooling, or they need to repeat because of their personal learning journey or difficulties. I am concerned that in regional areas the need to apply for approval to continue education beyond the limit will be a disincentive, and that some people will walk away at that stage.
You have to wonder why we are not instead saying we believe in them and want them to keep going. None of us here had our education capped or limited. A student in a non-government school will not have the same education caps or limits, nor should they.
On the whole, I do not have any grave concerns with the rest of the legislation.
I have serious concerns with the pressures our school system is under with the cutbacks in funding. It has been three consecutive years now, with the impost to global school budgets as well. We are down to the bare bones for our primary, middle and senior schools in staffing allocations, whether they are teacher, support staff or admin staff allocations. It is increasingly difficult in that environment to provide the support our students need in their individual learning plans.
It distresses people working in the school environment. You heard the member for Nelson talk about concerns he has with teachers coming home feeling bullied and harassed by the behaviour directed towards them. It is pretty hard at the coalface in our schools. We have fabulous kids as well as kids with challenging behaviours. I have sat in on many school council meetings where we discussed that there is probably a large cohort of undiagnosed Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder kids sitting in classrooms. They tend to get scooped up into the ADHD bracket, and we have a system that is not designed or specialised to cope with those pressures. I have seen firsthand that if you give the kids additional support, whether it is through the specialist programs of literacy and numeracy or through student services support programs, which are vital, they can indeed flourish.
We can debate education reform legislation like this, or we can deal with the fact we have schools that are under an increasing burden because of the consecutive years of cuts to their school budgets. I know the minister does not agree that the annual report shows the reduction in teacher numbers across the system. I also know the minister’s view is, ‘Teacher numbers do not equate to learning outcomes, etcetera’. It is a deeply disappointing circular debate we keep having around education, and government simply does not seem to care.
I embrace wholeheartedly the opportunity to see how the rubber hits the road in regard to these reforms in schools, and whether or not some of my concerns about the additional pressures flowing out of these reforms will impact on the schools. It is always as good as the support you give our educators.
I acknowledge the work being done by the schools in my region, particularly through the Sanderson alliance, which is an initiative where they are joining together to try to make sure there is a holistic approach taken to improving the lives of the children in our community. Congratulations to the principals of the schools in the region at the primary, middle and senior level in our public schools. I hope the Sanderson alliance continues and the small seed funding it has is rolled over and will continue. I attended the breakfast with the Chief Minister, the member for Sanderson and the shadow minister, and it would be hard to walk away not impressed by the energy and desire in the room of all the non-government organisations, representatives of government agencies, educators and parents alike wanting to improve the lives of children. Good luck to the Sanderson alliance.
I am glad the shadow minister has some movement out of the government in the amendments to the legislation. I do not think there should be a cap at all ...
Mr Chandler: There is no cap.
Ms LAWRIE: I will pick up on the interjection and his laughing, ‘There is no cap’. When you say there are 26 semesters, that is a cap. Then you want someone to trigger through into a process to get approval. Mate, that is a cap. Okay? When people meet barriers in their life like that, they walk away. That is the problem with the ignorance shown in your responses to this ...
Mr Tollner: What is there now?
Ms LAWRIE: People walk away. What is there now is the opportunity for a child, supported by their parent ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hold up. Stop!
Ms LAWRIE: … to go back to school the next year and keep on learning ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama!
Ms LAWRIE: That is what is there now ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Karama, give me a second. Please stop interjecting and let her finish her speech, please. Continue.
Ms LAWRIE: Live in ignorance and make your glib responses. We will watch the impact it will have on children of the Territory.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, schools are under enormous strain and I will continue to work with them to give them every support they need to get through some pretty tough times under the CLP. You cannot lose the number of teachers we have lost from our primary, middle and senior schools and not start to struggle. They are starting to really struggle. Shame, CLP.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for the opportunity to speak on education.
First I thank the member for Wanguri and the opposition’s team for the work done in the analysis, encouraging the debate and providing Caucus with briefings over this exercise, which is a major exercise for the Education Act.
I will now cross-reference the Education Bill that has been discussed, debated and consulted on among the stakeholder groups. When I leave the fair city of Darwin and the streetlights fade and I cross the length and breadth of the Northern Territory, I have had great difficulty in being able to engage in debate about this Education Bill with parents, teachers, remote communities and students who have a set of very personal agendas around education they need and want, and demand are addressed.
The string of parents through the electorate office over the last two years making appointments to see me to discuss education issues that are almost entirely dominated by behaviour management and support is quite alarming. I am honoured that they have chosen to visit me. I am very guarded, diplomatic and honest in my advice, and I direct them through the existing systems to try to work out their problems. But it is becoming quite alarming. I do not really understand why they are coming to see the local member to engage directly in education issues within their local schools, but as I said, I am supportive and I am doing my best to support you, minister.
Behaviour support and management of high support needs, badly behaved and emotional students across the length and breadth of the Northern Territory is shared by our Top End urban schools in the fair city of Darwin. It is very difficult to cross-reference it with the Education Act. One would have to defend the comments about this being an ingenuous exercise running in parallel with a government that is cutting education funds, under-resourcing the needs of regional and remote education and ignoring teachers and their needs. I find it very difficult to deal with those issues when they come my way. I deal with those problems in a professional, honest and open manner.
It gives me the opportunity to try to cross-reference some of the elements in the new Education Bill with what people are saying to me in the bush. I recently met with a group of teachers at a clandestine meeting. They feared they would be discriminated against should they be seen with a member of the opposition. I am passing on to you, minister, the public sentiment. I assured them this was normal, but they had real concerns, so they will remain unnamed. They were not confident that there would not be discrimination against them, which is a sad indictment.
But we will leave it there, minister, and go on to some of their agenda items. One was a lack of appropriate resourcing for regional and remote schools. I have cross-referenced the Education Act and the new legislation you are passing, and I was not able to give them any support in that area. Another very important issue was school funding and the disappearance of the federal Gonski funding. Our education sector is asking about this. The issue of needs-based support is very important. The member for Nelson touched on what should be included in the Education Act, such as things like special needs-based support, the recognition of disadvantage and how to resource those individual community needs.
The member for Namatjira in debate today made a very important comment: if government policy continues to disadvantage those lower socioeconomic groups that are operating on the fringes of mainstream society, then their problems will escalate and become more severe in the future. I am trying to summarise what the member for Namatjira was saying.
The impact of global budgets on small schools is a very real issue. It is an easy cross-reference to the Education Act. It is an element of the act that I reinforced to people which is now embedded. This legislation will pass through the parliament with a government that has the numbers; therefore, we have to work with this. But these teachers were outlining some deficits in this model. The only solution was to look at a government that will provide those important additional resources through this existing structure.
As the members opposite and the Leader of the Opposition said, the Labor opposition is pragmatic. It is not about tearing things down but about interrogating policies and ministers to see where improvements can be made.
The workload of teaching principals was an interesting topic and I found it very difficult to cross-reference where the new Education Act would be of any use to teachers, particularly in small, regional and remote schools where the administrative load has caused considerable stress and disadvantage to teaching principals. That is especially true in the bush schools where they do not have those support mechanisms, particularly in education management and administration.
There is also the problem with teacher housing and the old challenges of repairs and maintenance. I found it difficult to cross-reference any support from the new Education Bill before parliament.
This is what is coming from the constituency, from the teachers, educators and support staff you represent on the front line as a Cabinet minister achieving appropriate resources to support these people.
Speaking of appropriate resources, it was very difficult to get any kudos in the debate about the Education Act when Tennant Creek has seen a loss of 11 staff. Eleven staff in a town like Tennant Creek is alarming. I am not sure the minister could appreciate how alarming that logistic is. I am not sure whether the Education Act can support this, but it is of grave concern to the schools in town, the existing teachers and staff, the parents and school governance bodies.
I looked for references in the act to regional office staff and school support services to do with curriculum and resources and that important element of teacher professional development. One area resonating throughout the length and breadth of the Territory where I live is what they define as curriculum coaches. It seems that, like the Education Act in some respects, it is operating at a high level. It is an educational discourse about administration and management, but when you look for the detail it seems to be deficient.
The teachers I talk to in the small regional or remote schools are going back to this concept of curriculum coaches – visiting professionals who can support their curriculum practice, their teaching methodology and the teaching of reading and numeracy. Some older ones are reflecting back to the day when this was normal practice, and influencing the younger ones with this opportunity. That is something government can look at, because we are seeing erosion of support staff across the regions. There is no doubt that it directly relates to cuts to the education budget.
We also need to examine closely the concept of how educational support and educational support staff are appropriately designed and delivered for the maximum efficiency and the support of teachers.
I have briefly touched on the administrative load in small schools, and the mentoring of school governance bodies. It is critical at this stage, when you are implementing a new Education Act, but in parallel we are seeing parent and school communities disengaging with their school and there is a perennial challenge of poor attendance.
I appreciate what you are doing and I have watched this journey, albeit I have criticised that you are rushing this through. We have a sense of reality across the length and breadth of the Northern Territory that there are critical elements of the school community disengaging, which I suggest is in relation to the relevance of the curriculum. When I say relevance of the curriculum, we do not underscore the achievements in literacy and numeracy, the national benchmarks and the way the system is created, but we need to acknowledge that a diverse multicultural society needs to reflect on curriculum offerings. We need to focus on how to enhance curriculum to make it appropriate, real, meaningful and exciting. These issues are being raised across the length and breadth of the Territory.
It is an interesting parallel that urgent minor repairs and minor new works money over subsequent years, across both governments, has been used in relation to an agenda to secure school infrastructure. We have seen the building of many big fences around schools for all sorts of reasons. If we are purely looking at that level of infrastructure and security while not addressing a school community cohort that is deserting the school because individuals do not feel engaged with curriculum, we will not achieve attendance, enrolment, participation and engagement.
The other associated issue is school governance models. There was some brief discussion from the spokesperson on the Territory Labor opposition’s team about urban schools that have difficulty attracting school council members, or engaging with parents to make the school a wholesome and encompassing environment that supports improved educational outcomes.
In the bush, I do not see this Education Bill with any new amendments, new material, new flare or innovation that will address this issue within the regional or remote schools. With those cross-cultural, isolated communities, essentially, if we are not seriously engaging in school governance, partnerships or sharing, once again it becomes merely a paper exercise open to criticism about whether that is exactly all it is. These are real issues happening in the Territory. This is about advising the minister and trying to cross-reference this bill to the Education Act for its passage through this parliament.
A good cross-section of the community, such as teachers, parents and all sorts of educationalists, want to see defined a special education formula and how children with special needs will be supported. As a sideline, there is some interesting work going on with the National Disability Insurance Scheme trial in the Barkly which the minister may be interested in. When I talk about special needs, I am not sure about this bill progressing through parliament. There are some areas where there is more of a bureaucratic approach to these challenges. Like the member for Nelson said, it would be good to see if we can identify specific Territory needs and identify the student, parent and school community cohorts that are disadvantaged and why they are disadvantaged, as well as what government policy can do about that.
I will throw straight back out there the incredible work done in this parliament with the select committee around Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. That informative and extremely important report and its recommendations have completely been ignored thus far. One would hope it will find its way back onto the Notice Paper and, as regularly put in discourse in this place, debated. I cannot see a new Education Act progressing without some sort of determination and acknowledgment of special needs.
If we look at the Lililwan project work in the Fitzroy Valley and apply that to possible statistics in regard to the new cohort of children progressing through our schools, we could see up to 50% affected by alcohol in utero. That is alarming. We are not quite sure of those numbers but we know that Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, which will directly impact on special needs provision and support in our school sector over the next decades, needs to be addressed and spoken about. That needs to be led by government.
I acknowledge the CLP government and the Attorney-General for initiating that research. That committee did a mountain of work. It was an extremely beneficial committee to be on as the evidence heard and taken was inclusive of the length and breadth of Territory.
This area of special needs reflects some very special needs in the Northern Territory. I draw the minister’s attention to that in this education debate. We seriously need to look at those demographics. Having had the privilege to work with demographers in Lands and Planning in my previous work, I remember quite an alarming statistic we should be celebrating, but which is also alarming, that is, in 2017-18, 8000 Aboriginal kids in the Northern Territory are turning five. That is a significant challenge for any jurisdiction. If I localise that to some of the Barkly schools I have known for over 30 years, they will not have the desks and chairs to support that enrolment, let alone the special needs and curriculum needs of those children.
That brings me to the point I raised today, which is a very sore point in Tennant Creek, where 20 preschool enrolments have already been denied in 2015. The Chief Minister did exactly what I want to do in Tennant Creek in his own electorate. You have the model and you understand what it does and what it will deliver. We desperately need this in Tennant Creek. In 2016 we are still operating on status quo with 20 enrolments already being denied because there are simply not the resources and the physical logistics to cater for them. That needs to change. I am not quite sure where I can find that in the Education Bill, minister. Parents have been very vocal about that in Tennant Creek. It needs to be addressed.
We do not have a lot of time to do that because if those students do not start to be prepared and formalised into school at the age of five, which the bill has landed on, and they progress through their early childhood years, then we will see more intergenerational dysfunction year after year.
The behaviour management and support area, which this bill could start to look at and localise, can related to the provision of secondary education. The debate has been shifted to the number of semesters. The argument recently was whether it is capped or not. I point the minister to an incredible example of education you can find in a big high school in Fairfield in Sydney. It was a program for young mums who have babies when they are still within school age. It is a unit set up to support their alternative education pathways. There is no cap; it is all about support. It is making sure young mums re-engage with the formal education program while supporting the baby and delivering the best outcome.
That is the approach I would like to see in our Education Act, not a debate about capping or not, or numbers or no numbers and being open to the ridicule that, again, this is an economic rationalist exercise. This is just about rationalising the length of formal public education. The minister is open to that criticism I heard across the regions when I was trying to engage with the constituency about this bill. There is an alternative pathway.
As I said today, when I walk the streets of Elliott, Tennant Creek, Ali Curung, or even further out at Canteen Creek, I see secondary age kids disengaged. This policy needs to be amended; it has to change. We cannot afford to send the signal to remote communities that they are the square peg and this is a round hole; they do not fit, ‘See you later’. These young people are highly vulnerable and wandering the streets.
I often wonder how they are processing their situation in life because there are so many barriers now and many more to come. I do not see that education should be one of them. If we could only make sure we keep education out of this list of barriers for young people. How can we address this in regional and remote areas? We should be looking at technology. I did not really see much about technology and innovation in this bill. I hope that once again we start to amend and continually use this as a living, breathing document, not a paper exercise that will live on a shelf gathering dust. It needs innovation and the incorporation of technology.
There is a very real way to engage secondary-age youth across regional and remote areas in a formal school context without destroying the CLP’s values and policies that students should go to mainstream boarding colleges. I do not deny that policy initiative. Any family I can influence to go beyond the Northern Territory borders and get their kids interstate, I do. I write lots of support letters to Commonwealth agencies trying to secure the funding for that. But we really have to address those kids who have not fitted the mould in our regional and remote towns and communities and how we can engage them.
There are good models. There was a great model operating out of Tennant Creek, particularly doing good work in the small town of Elliott. There was an outstanding school principal and team at Canteen Creek who were engaging secondary-age youth through formal education. Consequently, with this policy change they were completely disadvantaged. The residual effect was that families disengaged from curriculum, school governance and education. This had a negative impact on attendance, participation and educational outcomes.
These are a few areas of cross-reference to this bill. I will continue to draw this debate back to the real issue facing Territorians across the length and the breadth of this jurisdiction. I devoted more than half of my life to this field and I will not give it up. I have unfinished business. One of the main reasons I am in this place is because of that unfinished business. If anybody hits a glass ceiling politically, ideologically, bureaucratically – I have experienced that; I know that story. I chose an alternative pathway to come back and complete that unfinished business.
While I acknowledge the work the minister, the department and the opposition has done in a measured and accountable way in bringing democracy to this place, the real issues will not go away. The real issues are not impossible; they just need to have new creative and innovative solutions with the use of technology and some very important retro-fitting of good teaching methodologies.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I ask the minister not to go to Channel 9 or A Current Affair; it is a trap. Do not go for the package deal, the silver bullet; it is a trap. Go back to truly engaging with people and families and making that education process the most exciting part of those children’s lives so they will beat you to the school gate every day.
Ms MOSS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I speak on the debate of the Education Bill primarily to convey the views of the school community in Casuarina.
I acknowledge the work on the proposed updated act that has been undertaken over a long period of time. Everyone from the Department of Education and the minister’s office involved in its development should be thanked for their time, energy and hard work in putting this together.
The opposition and the member for Wanguri should be thanked for undertaking the research and attending all the briefings. The member for Wanguri was at the public consultation held in the northern suburbs at the start of the process with many teaching and school staff who were interested in the changes to be proposed in the bill when it was introduced in the House.
I recognise there has been consultation during the development of the Education Bill, and that given the act’s age and the rapidly-evolving world of education, it was due to be looked at to ensure it provides for the best possible educational outcomes for Territory children and young people.
However, it is a concern that at this final stage, potentially there are important voices that may not have been heard or people may not have viewed the final product. What this means for them and their ability to ask questions is an important part of the process. It is an important part of why we are here in parliament trying to facilitate those conversations and that understanding.
Some of the local schools in my electorate have lodged submissions during this process, and to have the opportunity to hear from them on the final bill before us today has been incredibly important. However, the timing of the bill means the finalisation is being rushed and many schools have not had sufficient time to consider the changes, nor respond in detail. A little over a week during Week 8 of the school term does not provide much time on the final product for our schools and our stakeholders. For such important legislation, it is unfortunate the consultation process has been let down at this final stage.
The member for Wanguri has articulated the reasons Territory Labor did not support urgency on this bill. We stand by that today. She also talked about the outlined amendments, which I support, to strengthen the existing bill.
I have heard the message about the time frame loud and clear from my local school community. I add my voice to those supporting a review process on its implementation.
I have spoken to parents on school councils and other stakeholders within my electorate in relation to the Education Bill. Like other members of this House I have received correspondence from around the Territory in relation to it. This includes correspondence from parents, school councils and peak representative bodies, the Council of Government School Organisations and the NT Branch of the Australian Education Union. I thank every person who has taken the time to get in touch with us or be part of those discussions about the Education Bill. It was incredibly difficult to get across the legislation and provide feedback to a member of parliament to add their voices to the process.
One of the things I have been thinking about throughout the course of this debate is the voice of students. I spoke a few years ago at an ACSSO national conference that was held in Darwin – the Australian Council of State School Organisation – and talked about the value the voices of students can add to the debate about education. I spoke about what they can tell us about how they want to learn, how they learn best and their needs.
We are at a stage where we should be taking the voices of young people seriously in the decisions that impact on them. I will be very interested to hear from the minister and the government about the involvement of students and young people in the development of this bill.
It is important to acknowledge that an incredible amount of work has been undertaken by all the members of parliament who have debated this bill tonight, and that it is a bill significant in size and complexity.
I mention that rather than criticise the NT stakeholders for continuing to raise concerns, as was seen in the introduction of this bill, the minister should seek to understand why these concerns remain. The overall feedback has been comprehensive, particularly given the short space of time given, and has shown that the level of concern still remaining over aspects of the bill should be spoken about. These pertain predominantly to the speed at which it has been introduced to the House, the allocation of 26 semesters in government schools only, and the representation on the NT Board of Studies of our public school staff.
These issues have been raised within my electorate. Schools are currently undertaking hefty workloads, as they always do, but more so now with budget planning and the impending end of the school year. Parent bodies are also in this position, with their own work and home commitments. The release of such dense legislation to be digested and commented on in such a short period of time, just over a week, is unreasonable.
Our school councils are continuing to upskill themselves in readiness for the changing operational environment in which they work, and the changing expectations that are upon them. I doubt there is a member in this House who does not receive e-mails from school councils about the constant professional development opportunities they are taking hold of so they can be good, effective school council members in a rapidly-changing environment.
General views were backed up by the COGSO survey of over 300 parents across the NT. That feedback stated the allocation of semesters has the potential to further disadvantage students who, for a range of reasons, may be struggling at school. This includes students who may have a disability, a chronic illness, a learning difficulty, issues at home or a host of other pertinent circumstances.
We deal with a complex cohort of children and young people in the Northern Territory, as has been raised by other members of parliament. We will see a cohort of children and young people who are impacted by things like FASD. It is a good opportunity now to encourage the government to look at the report of the parliamentary inquiry into FASD. This is a very real challenge that will be faced by our school system, health system and communities over the coming years.
Access to more than 26 semesters is a factor for many students at present, and for some of those students alternative options for post-school are limited. That is an ongoing conversation we have been having. Why would the proposed legislation regarding time at school put more barriers in the way of young people? Parents should be provided with more support throughout the transition should this go ahead, and a commitment should be made to a stronger focus on the early identification of students who are struggling and may need to apply for additional semesters.
We need to avoid placing additional bureaucratic burdens on our parents and students. Post-school options continue to be raised as an issue, and the Family Transitions Network is an advocate for the discussion around this. There are a number of parents who have left the Territory because of the lack of post-school options for their children. It would be good to have a robust discussion about that and how we can better provide for those students.
It has also been raised with me that the three-month period during which applications are to be made for additional semesters, is too long. Many students will not know at that point whether their results indicate that further study is necessary.
In relation to the NT Board of Studies, I firmly believe there should be a parent representative of government schools, and this needs to be clearly stated. The majority of our Territory children and young people go to government schools and receive public education, as many of us did, and this voice is vitally important. A strong public education sector is vital to our future, and the structure of these representative bodies should reflect that.
Schools and representative bodies have repeatedly expressed their dismay and concern over the number of references made in the legislation – I believe it is 53 times – to regulations they have not been able to see. I understand it is not always common practice to release the regulations; however, it is an important concern because so much of this is about how it is implemented. The regulations are seen by my school communities to be of even greater significance, given that people continue to seek clarification about the way the allocation of semesters will be administered. As with everything, the way in which it is implemented will have an impact on our school bodies. Those who have raised these concerns, and others, want to be assured they are being addressed through the regulations promised.
The rush at the end of the Education Bill, the allocation of semesters and the structure of the NT Board of Studies are only some of the facets of the debate relating to education in the Northern Territory. It is distressing to learn there are fewer staff across our Northern Territory schools and Department of Education and 165 fewer teachers since 2012. There is no way this will not impact on the delivery of education to the Territory’s children and young people, whatever the amended act says.
These cuts have had a real impact on my local schools. In August 2014, in particular, at the start of the introduction of global school budgets, I recall distinctly the number of distressed school staff and teachers who spoke to me about what was occurring in their schools and the uncertainty it had caused.
I acknowledge that the schools in my electorate are doing incredible and very different things focused on the needs of the cohorts of children and young people in our local area. It was recently World Teacher’s Day and I am constantly in awe of the hard work put in by teachers, support staff and parent bodies in getting the best outcomes for the Territory’s children, even when sometimes they are struggling with the many school budgets that are still in deficit. We should be offering them all the support we can through this difficult transition stage. I know we are all on our school councils trying to offer that support, but they are having a difficult time. Parents on our school councils in particular are putting enormous numbers of hours into getting themselves across all the details, making sure they are providing input and representing the needs of their local schools. They should be commended for that.
We must properly resource our schools and provide the support they need to provide the best education for Territory students. For me, a lot of this will come out in the consideration in detail stage. I am interested to hear the greater detail about the consistent issues that have been raised by this side of the House.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Wanguri for proposing amendments and I look forward to hearing the greater detail.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the chaos and dysfunction of this government means we are holding this debate less than two weeks after the bill was introduced into parliament. I sincerely thank the departmental staff, the chief executive, the minister’s office and my colleagues for their time. I have had numerous briefings. To have legislation passed eight working days after it was introduced is not right. To have such a huge number of regulations unsighted that link the legislation is unfair to our students and teachers. This is not proper process or consultation. I question why we would rush such important legislation at the final, crucial point.
I have been contacted by numerous people and organisations in relation to this legislation. I thank everyone who has contacted me – local teachers, schools, the Australian Education Union, COGSO, and schools and parents outside my electorate. The legislation has received a lot of comment, and I have received many e-mails.
I want to reflect on education and the last three-and-a-half years. We have seen chaos, millions of dollars cut from school budgets, teacher numbers cut – the figure is about 165 at this point – and teacher assistant numbers cut. As we speak our schools are struggling with global school budgets at a time when they should be celebrating the results of a hard year’s work and participating in final school concerts. Instead, principals and assistant principals are struggling to make sense of budgets. In the final few weeks the government expects policy and procedures to be drafted and the implementation of a new act.
Not being able to see the regulations has been difficult for us and for stakeholders. It will be interesting to see the regulations and how they impact.
My colleague, the member for Barkly, spoke about his remote electorate and the broader impact on education, but also this short turnaround which could have been avoided. The member for Nelson said if we started a few of weeks late there would not be such a big impact. That is something we could have avoided, either through proper structure of the parliamentary sittings schedule or through accepting that this would not be rushed through eight working days after it was introduced.
Education is the key to changing lives, and all Territorians have the right to access quality public education. As the mother of a Transition student I can see the impact that early childhood education has had on him, both through the National Quality Framework in childcare and the preschool and Transition programs. I am sure he will have a lifelong love of learning. It has become evident when he will not want to play or watch TV, but write Christmas cards as we did last night.
It is disappointing that the Gonski recommendations were not committed to by the Northern Territory CLP government, unlike other states, including conservative states like New South Wales, where you now hear about record levels of school funding. It is disappointing that our children will not have the opportunity of unprecedented levels of public school funding. Under the CLP government we have seen cuts to teacher positions, assistants and funding, and that will not help our students. It would be wonderful needs-based funding and the proper resourcing of our schools.
Today we are talking about the Education Act, a huge document. I have forgotten the time frame, but it is well over 30 years since there have been significant changes and rewrites.
My colleague, the member for Wanguri, spoke about a drop in classroom teacher numbers: 165 fewer teachers and 116 fewer administrative support staff, mentioned in the annual report. In the bill the changes to the NT Board of Studies composition has been a sticking point, reducing significantly the number of representatives and the makeup of representatives. The parent representative is endorsed by a parent representative such as COGSO, and the teacher representative is endorsed by the Australian Education Union.
I acknowledge that the member for Wanguri has done a lot of work in this area. She has spent a lot of time and energy trying to reach an agreement with the government. It is important when we debate this bill that we consider the diversity of our students and educators across the Territory and reflect that representation on the board. I believe in the makeup of the NT Board of Studies we state that it is a public school parent, with 75% or more of our students attending public schools, with the other independent schools and Catholic schools already represented. It is important to have that public school representation.
The other sticking point is 26 semesters. No other state, apart from Queensland, has this. Why would we put this cap in place? Why would we put up more barriers? That is concerning and something people contacted me about. I will read a letter from the Australian Education Union to all members of the Legislative Assembly. It is quite a long letter so I will not read it all. Some of the key points are, ‘We acknowledge the extensive consultation period in the bill and also that the government has made a number of amendments to the earlier bill released in May. Our concerns are thus confined to two parts of the bill: (1) the composition and function of the Board of Studies and the 26 semester allocation of education.’
‘The imposition of this program means the mainstream curriculum for students in these schools will largely be sidelined.’
The letter went on to say that, ‘Changes to curriculum or other aspects of education should not be subject to the political whims of an incumbent government, and the proposal for the minister to appoint four experts makes it far too easy for a partisan minister to stack the board with political appointments’.
The Australian Education Union raised strong concerns and would have liked to have seen the regulations. The Australian Education Union also raised concerns about the 26 semester allocation, and the key point is, ‘Access to the regulations might provide some peace of mind that there are no more sinister motives underpinning the 26 semester proposal and we request that the minister make these available, as the drafting instructions do not provide any more detail in the wording in the draft legislation.’
‘We also recommend that members seek to amend the draft bill in clause 82(1) to include the words “a minimum of” before “26 semesters” so that the entire sentence reads “a student enrolled in a government school has an allocation of a minimum of 26 semesters of a government school education”, the standard allocation from transition to Year 12’.
They were the concerns of the Australian Education Union, the peak body for teachers in the Territory.
There was also considerable feedback from school councils, both within my community and more broadly. I thank the people who took the time. Katherine High School, for example, raised the question of 26 semesters, the final copy of the regulations and the unfair time frame of the final draft bill. When every piece of legislation normally requires 30 days, with only eight days – quote, ‘Whilst there is provision in emergency situations to rush through legislation, it is evident that the Education bill cannot be classified as an emergency’. They are the words from Katherine High School Council member Jacinta Mooney.
Katherine High School also raised questions about the school’s responsibility for setting fees. They are concerned it is a council function and believe, with the population of their school in a climate of shrinking budgets, it will disadvantage their school.
They are some of the points raised by COGSO, the Australian Education Union and schools.
The 26 semesters has been an issue of great debate. We must ensure we do not exclude anyone. The bill puts a barrier up, and we need to ensure this community concern is being heard and we are supporting our students.
I take this opportunity to share a story recently told at a forum. The person who shared that story has given me permission tonight to read it tonight.
Minister, you may not realise that your decision to allocate 26 semesters has the potential to impact lives, to impact on the future hopes and aspirations of a Territory student and to serve as a blocker for a student who wants to strive to better themselves. I offer you this very real example of a Territory parent who told of their anguish at the decision to cut students’ education, and not because it would affect her as a student. She is now a proud parent of children in our excellent public schools. Her anguish is for students to come. She passionately believes that every student deserves the same opportunity she was provided by her public school.
As a Year 12 student, at a vulnerable time in her late teens, there were family challenges and a decision to drop a subject, all the challenges being 17 throws at a young adult.
She failed Year 12 and was devastated. Her dreams of a professional career, in her eyes, were over. Working part-time, she thought this was not her future and not the university studies in the field she dreamed of. Through support and nurturing, she was encouraged to repeat her Year 12 studies. She is passionate about this issue because she says if she was in the same position under this legislation she would have walked away from her education. She already felt like a failure and would have felt too ashamed to apply for permission to repeat Year 12.
This is a block to a child’s future we are talking about, minister. Rather than supporting and nurturing we want to make a vulnerable student who feels like a failure and is ashamed because they failed Year 12, and is lacking self-confidence, apply to repeat Year 12. Also, with the current time frames a student might not have received their results. How does that encourage and empower a vulnerable young person to strive to achieve their best? How does the additional barrier – knowing the cut-off date has passed – encourage them not only apply to repeat, but to apply without knowing their results. They will, in effect, risk walking away without an opportunity to achieve their best? No government has the right to put up a barrier to a student’s education.
The end to this story is this young lady completed Year 12. Her marks were not high enough for her chosen study at university, but she was encouraged to try again. She worked full-time, attended night school and demonstrated tenacity and passion, which she still has today. She never gave up and had had nothing to block her striving again. Today she is a professional who raises her family and volunteers.
We need to make sure future students have the same opportunity. There are so many different stories. In fact, my father repeated Year 12. He felt he could do better and did. He went on to gain a scholarship to teachers college. Why are we putting up barriers to education? It should not be like that.
There was a quote going around social media which I want to read into Hansard, ‘It shouldn’t matter how slowly a child learns, as long as we are encouraging them not to stop’.
That is the true meaning of education and learning.
This is particularly relevant with so many students in the Territory being disadvantaged through the tyranny of distance or ESL, English as a second language. We are putting up unnecessary barriers and have no evidence as to why we need them.
Another concern is around the exemption for non-parents to make up more than 50% of a board under the IPS model. I have strong concerns about this for a number of reasons. My colleague raised a number of questions, but it is concerning. We need to make sure at least 50% of school board members are parents of children at that school. If a school is not able to achieve that, one must question IPS for that school. How did they get it? It is important to have that turnover on school councils and school boards. It is important to have that link with parents.
I have been involved on a number of boards and committees over time, and until entering parliament I was on the local childcare committee. That was cut short by this role, but when I first joined other people in official positions – with the makeup of committees we need to make sure we allow for a turnover of parents. We need parents who have been involved for a while, but we also need to encourage new ideas. I have concerns, with non-parents being less than 50%, that we may lose the parental link and the different stages of that link we need.
We need to focus on the lack of the resources and funding our children deserve. As I mentioned earlier, our schools are struggling with next year’s budget. My colleague spoke about funding and what is provided as free education to Territory kids. We need to acknowledge that all our teachers are working extremely hard. This is a massive bill, and it would have been more appropriate for it to go through the normal legislative channels. It is a busy time of year and urgency is not the correct way when talking about education.
People in my community raised points which I raised with the minister’s office in briefings. I will read those points into the record. The minister’s office has addressed them, and the minister is aware of them.
The first point is that no Northern Territory student can be suspended for more than 20 days – around the clarification of government schools and non-government schools. We need to engage these children, particularly those who potentially have been involved in behaviour that requires them to be suspended. They definitely need to be engaged in programs, not shut out of school and education.
Someone from my electorate raised strong concerns about community enrolment and attendance being tracked and followed up, particularly students moving between non-government and government schools and between communities. We have a highly-transient population but need to ensure its education needs are followed up.
Points were also raised around enrolments plans. The bill raised feedback within our schools and across the broader community.
It is also interesting to note that CLP members have shown their disengagement from students and teachers, with not one government member speaking on this bill. Not one single voice from the government has been heard. We have heard Independent and opposition members. What conversations did government members have with their communities? Member for Stuart, have you spoken to your community about this? It is concerning because this affects a huge number of Territorians. To have the minister, the minister’s office and the department do so much work and have silence tonight from the government speaks volumes to our students and teachers.
I thank the minister, his staff and the departmental staff. I acknowledge the member for Wanguri’s enormous efforts regarding this bill. It is one of the biggest pieces of legislation that has come before this House over the last three or so years. I also thank community stakeholders for the input I have spoken about.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate tonight. I will try to go through some of the questions asked. The sad part for me, though, is it felt like we were in mourning at a time when we should be celebrating education. This is a new Education Act, a new era.
As the member for Wanguri said earlier, 36 years ago they were debating education in this House. It is exciting, but I need to comment on a few things that were said tonight about operational issues. Of course, we will have ongoing debates, but when it comes to the act and what is in it, there are a few things I need to point out.
I will start with the member for Wanguri, who was the first speaker, and thank her again for her contribution. I must take my hat off to the member for Wanguri. She has visited many schools in recent times, which is similar to what the former Labor minister, Chris Burns, did for me. He allowed me to visit many schools across the Northern Territory. It was much appreciated because you see things from the ground up. There is some excitement out there.
In regard to the consultation, I place on the record that a saga has been going on for 20-odd months. In fact, it is very unusual for a government to conduct as much consultation on any legislation, including what we did with the regulations. I will talk on that in a second, but I want to thank everyone who has contributed. I need to thank parents, teachers, even children. Many kids gave me their views on what the Education Act should or should not be, including that an additional four weeks holiday every year should be in the act and supported by everyone in this House.
I also thank all the department staff: principals, parents, teachers and everyone who has had input into this. It has been a huge undertaking. Feedback from school councils, COGSO and even the union helped us put together a far more improved bill.
As for the criticism about the way this has been rushed through, everyone needs to take a chill pill and realise we have been working on this for over 20 months. When the final draft was released a covering letter detailed, quite comprehensively, all the changes that had been made from the draft bill to the final bill. Therefore, anyone worth their salt could have put in the effort and read the old bill, understood it, then quickly read the changes made without necessarily reading the entire thing. That process was done to make sure everybody had a good understanding of the draft and the changes made to it.
We were asked to put in the changes; they were not things we had dreamed up. Most of the changes in the final bill were requested. We had two rounds of public consultation involving COGSO and councils. The number of meetings we held was remarkable. That consultation led to ideas and suggestions that we introduced into the final bill. You cannot say we have not listened. Even tonight we were horse trading on the floor to see if we could reach a compromise on the last few amendments.
From start to finish we have followed an excellent process. Could we be criticised for anything? Perhaps this being introduced on urgency is a fault. The reason is we want to give education a clear start next year. We want to ensure the Education Act is in place and the regulations bedded down so we can start a new year with a new act. That is only fair to everyone who works in education.
I did not have to do that. I could have delayed the legislation or shortened the consultation period to ensure we had a full month between the legislation being tabled and debated. However, we chose to consult because that is what people wanted. The Labor opposition called for more consultation. COGSO, school councils and the general community thought we needed to consult more. We listened and allowed time for more consultation. That is the reason we were forced to rush this through quickly. I argue strongly against saying the process has not been robust and effective. I thank everyone who has provided input.
I need to put some comments in context. A lot of the arguments from members opposite were about operational issues, not specifically around the bill. They were having a sledge at what they perceived to be cuts in education and the big reform agenda of this government. I will not apologise for that because we inherited a system in chaos.
I remind people in the House that in the last few years of the Labor government there were 170 additional students in the Northern Territory but the number of departmental staff grew by 780. You cannot tell me that is not a system in crisis. If we had seen a major improvement in results that would be fair, but there was not. There were no improvements in education in the Northern Territory other than in the budget, and the budget does not improve outcomes. There had to be a change in the way we designed and delivered education in the Northern Territory. We had to be more focused on results and providing opportunities.
I will not shy away from the major reform we have introduced in the Northern Territory. This government has only been in for three years and it is remarkable – Ken Davies, Catherine and the rest of the education team – what they have done in the last few years is remarkable.
We took the time to look at results across the Northern Territory and realised we had to make some big changes. We had the courage to look at middle years. I am still not convinced we have that right, and I will not give up in that area but will work hard to improve middle years programs.
We had to look at Indigenous education in the Northern Territory, something left to rot and wither under the former Labor government. There was not enough focus on improving results in Indigenous education.
I will be criticised for the idea of boarding schools, but it is impossible to provide the same level of education for a student attending Darwin High School as one in Yuendumu, Numbulwar or any other remote community. Those students deserve that opportunity, so how do you do it? As a minister, as a department, you knuckle it out and realise that sometimes it might be better to bring the children to an environment where they can be exposed to a better education.
In years to come people will see this as a turning point for remote education. The member for Barkly says he wanders around remote communities and sees vulnerable middle school-aged kids who seem hopeless. The former system brought us to where we are, and that is why we have to change it. This bill is part of that.
Not only have we looked at middle years, Indigenous education and implementing the recommendations in A share in the future – Indigenous Education Strategy 2015-2024, but we have also invested in the early years of education.
We are building new infrastructure focusing on special education, and this bill is part of the reform agenda. This has all been achieved in three years and many people have been involved.
Spending dollars on something does not mean you achieve anything other than spending money. If you can target that spending and focus on improving results every dollar is worth it. Do not throw money away willy-nilly. We can never go back to the days of not being careful about how we spend money in education.
We have also embedded Independent Public Schools in the bill, another thing that has been taken on with gusto. I take my hat off to the school communities that are taking the challenge, and I think the years to come will show a dramatic change. I go so far as to say the Independent Public School model is worrying the private sector.
In recent years we have seen the departure of children from the public system to the private system. In certain areas – Palmerston is one and Mackillop college, a great school with great leadership – there has been a draw on some of our public schools. What do we do? Do we accept it? No, we do not. We build a robust public education system that people want to come back to.
At the moment with the IPS model, global budgeting and the independence we are giving back to schools and their ability to improve their schools, the private sector is rightly worried. It should be, because we are coming to get it. That is good for education because the bar is pushed higher.
I disagree with NAPLAN results. I can show you NAPLAN years under Labor where there were no improvements. We have seen a steady improvement in almost all areas across every point measured.
One area that worries me is writing. Across the country we have seen a dramatic decrease in the writing ability of students. I am looking at Mr Deputy Speaker, who is on an iPad, and I wonder whether technology today – iPads, iPhones and computers – is taking away the ability to write. Maybe that is part of it, and we have to address it not just in the Territory but across the country.
Member for Wanguri, some things you raised tonight were valid, but we have also addressed many of them in the process. You mentioned a review of the implementation of the act. There is a legislative review on non-government schools, which is Part 7, and we plan to review the implementation of the 26-semester scheme and criminal history check scheme at the end of the 12-month period built into it.
The member for Nelson asked if part-time voluntary work counted as compulsory participation. The student must be doing full-time paid work for no less than 25 hours a week. It does not allow for part-time or voluntary work. CDEP could be included if it is for more than 25 hours a week and they are paid.
The member for Nelson asked if the Chair of the NTBOS will be independent. Under the current act the minister nominates the chair. In this bill, the minister also recommends the chair as one of the expert members. To put more of a framework around that, under the Country Liberal government any minister who recommends a member to a board must go through the Cabinet process. It is not a matter of picking Joe Bloggs and saying, ‘That’s who I want and, therefore, who we will get’. We rely on experts and the department putting forward names. It does all the checks and balances and it then comes to me. I then take it to Cabinet and we decide on who it will be. I cannot attest to that happening under a Labor government, but that is what happens in all board appointments under the Country Liberal government.
I want to touch on something that caused a bit of flak tonight, the education regulations. Regulations include administrative detail that assists in exercising the powers in the act but do not change the act. It is a much simpler and faster process to amend regulations and, as such, consultation does not normally occur. However, in order to be as open and consultative as possible, the Department of Education took the unusual step of providing key stakeholders with drafting instructions for the regulations. They had the opportunity to provide feedback before they were finalised.
We have gone to extraordinary measures to make sure people see what we are doing. The draft bill went out in plenty of time for people to look at it, and when the final bill went out there was a detailed explanation of any changes so people did not have to read the whole thing again; the changes were spelt out. The majority of those changes were what the community had asked for, as well as COGSO, school councils and the union.
One that comes to mind, which most people would realise, was the old act said it was compulsory for a six-year old to be at school. We understand 97% of people send their children to school at the age of five. Thinking logically about it, let us have that in the act. That caused some consternation that we were forcing people to send their children to school at age five. We said, ‘Are we going to die in a ditch over something like this?’ No, it does not change the world, even though I think the earlier a child starts their education the better. Because of the consternation we removed that requirement. These things were changed because of community feedback. For any government this consultation was pretty comprehensive.
In regard to closing schools without consultation, I cannot believe that any government would close a school anywhere in the Territory without fully consulting with the community. When we first came to government Labor was sending messages of doom and gloom and that we were about to close schools. No school has closed since we have been in government. I cannot see that happening in the near future and it would not happen without consultation.
Protecting teachers is a good point. Again, it is an operational issue and something that perhaps does not need to be in the act. Today, with the employee assistance counselling offered to teachers – let us face it, they deal with some daunting issues from time to time from unruly students through to dealing with parents. I have seen principals and teachers abused by members of the general public, in some cases parents of students, in front of students. I fully appreciate some of the things they deal with. We have psychologists available. We even have a fly-in squad that can go anywhere in the Territory to deal with significant events that occur. Recently the fly-in squad went into Angurugu because of community unrest there. We have put these things in place to support teachers.
I take offence to the member for Barkly mentioning provision of good, open and accountable consultation. I cannot recall receiving news flash information when Labor was in government. If something has happened in a school in an electorate held by members opposite and I consider it relevant I will forward the news flash on. You will not get all of them. Some things are probably not relevant, and little things happen that I am made aware of. Some things are significant, and I believe it is important that news flashes are forwarded to members opposite, including the member for Nelson.
I often send news flashes to the member for Goyder, not that schools in her electorate are any worse than others. From time to time I ensure that as local members you are aware of what is happening in your schools. I do not recall that ever happening under a Labor government. Again, that accountability and the relationship I have with you guys I would like to keep strong, particularly with regard to education.
The member for Barkly mentioned clandestine meetings. I remember in opposition how people were often scared to talk to us because of big time ramifications from the then Labor government. I have never shot the messenger. In fact, I applaud people for coming forward because if I do not know the truth how can I fix it? My staff will tell you I do not shoot the messenger. I am familiar with the saying that ministers often drink filtered water. We are told a pretty cleansed version of what is happening. Sometimes you need to hear it from the coalface.
The member for Barkly said he had zipped around the countryside talking about the bill, yet I understand the member for Barkly did not receive a briefing on it. I am not sure what he was discussing with constituents or schools when he did not seek a briefing. He talked about special needs. There was no investment in Tennant Creek for the nearly 12 years you guys were in government. In fact, there was no high-needs support for Tennant Creek under the former Labor government. It is hypocritical to talk about these things when you did nothing when in government.
He mentioned vulnerable students, which is why we are making changes. The easiest thing for us to do coming into government would have been to follow the way you guys operated. In opposition you seem to think you have all the answers. What happened in the nearly 12 years you were in government? I am not saying everything you did was bad; you did some good things. When I was chair at Bakewell, after some chain rattling the minister delivered.
You did not do everything wrong, but you do not have all the answers. We do not have all the answers but are hoping this bill gives us a framework to operate under for decades to come. It can be amended when necessary to provide a modern framework and build education in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Consideration in Detail
Clauses 1 to 27, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 28:
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Chair, I move amendment 42.1 in my name to clause 28(1)(d). The member for Wanguri raised changes to this clause. Clause 28(1)(d) says:
- a person who is a parent of a student enrolled in a school in the Territory …
This was originally a public school. The issue I have is 25% of our schools are in the private sector. It would be wrong of this Assembly to potentially rule out the parents of students at 25% of schools. We removed public to include all schools in the Northern Territory.
Ms MANISON: The minister and the Independent members today had discussions on amendments to clause 28. As discussed, and from consultation with education advocate the Council of Government School Organisations, which represents the parents of children in public education, and the Australian Education Union, which represents teachers, it is important to ensure we have those strong voices on the Northern Territory Board of Studies.
On this point I remain firmly of the view that given 33 000 students are in government education in the Northern Territory, it is important that position is held by the parent of a student attending a government school. However, I appreciate this is something the government can move on, and I see positive signs for having it open to parents of non-government school students.
When I weigh up the numbers the 75% argument wins, and also the strong advocacy from groups such as COGSCO, knowing they would endorse that representative. However, we have reached a positive point in amending the legislation to ensure groups that advocate for parents of school students, and groups that advocate for teachers, will ultimately have to endorse nominations to these positions. This is a positive move.
Mr CHANDLER: Will I deal with clause 28(1)(e) now?
Ms MANISON: I have just spoken about both of them, I apologise.
Mr CHANDLER: Did you? That is okay because we are happy with 28(1)(e) the way it is.
Mr WOOD: I appreciate there is always debate about public and private schools, but the functions of the board are:
- (a) to provide advice to the Minister and the CEO on curriculum policy in relation to:
- (i) establishing and maintaining curriculum frameworks that address the needs of all students in the Territory school education system; and
(ii) establishing and maintaining procedures for student assessment, reporting and certification; and
- (iii) monitoring, evaluating and reporting on student performance; and
- (iv) improving student outcomes
- (b) to provide advice to the Minister and the CEO on government policy affecting the Board’s functions.
The functions of the board are not related to whether you are in a public school or a non-government school. It is right for the government to want a parent, but we should not discriminate where that parent comes from because the Education Act covers all students in the Northern Territory. Whilst it is not exactly what COGSO is after – I understand what Tabby sent me – it is a good way of going forward. I support the amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 28, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 29 to 81:
Ms MANISON: When will the regulations be finished? As part of formulating and finalising those regulations, will you be consulting with stakeholders?
Mr CHANDLER: The regulations are all but done. They will pass Cabinet. I believe the next Cabinet meeting is 8 December. We will gazette them and get them out so schools have them before the start of next year. In this regard the regulations have been consulted on as much as possible, given that all the drafting instructions for the regulations have been provided.
Ms MANISON: Will the Council of Government School Organisations and the Australian Education Union get to see them before they are gazetted and have gone through the final process for sign up? Could you share that with them?
Mr CHANDLER: Yes, I am happy to give them copies of the regulations on the understanding that until they are gazetted they are not formal.
Ms MANISON: That would go a long way. I hope you have the legislation in front of you. I will turn to clause 59.
Mr WOOD: Could I ask about clause 38, page 19, which relates to the compulsory school age? You commented on it when you were responding to my earlier comments. This would be mainly in relation to remote communities. You said people could be on CDEP if it was the equivalent of 25 hours a week. A concern is that there would be only so many CDEP jobs available. What happens in remote communities if a person wants to leave school? You might say they have to stay at school, but the bill allows someone to go to work or training but there might not be any full-time work available? Does that student need to stay at school?
Mr CHANDLER: That would be the case. We are trying to get people into full-time employment. The intent of that legislation is to ensure people are either actively employed or seeking some kind of education, whether in school or some type of training. We will not design legislation around people sitting on their backsides.
Mr WOOD: I understand that and support what you are trying to do, but I am looking at the practical implications in a remote community. There are not many jobs, CDEP is possibly capped, so what does someone do? Are you forcing them to stay at school? Is there an exemption when there are no jobs or must they move to another community?
Mr CHANDLER: I cannot imagine high numbers fitting that criterion. Young people will not get a start in life without an education. It is wonderful if they have a job, but if they are in an area where there are no jobs there is ample opportunity to say CDEP is one. However, there are other training opportunities, and there is always school. As we roll out boarding schools in the future the scope of opportunity will grow dramatically. Over time, hopefully, there will be no one, and today the numbers are small.
Ms MANISON: I turn to page 39, clause 75, cost of government school education. The bill provides that a standard curriculum prescribed by regulation will be free, but people want to be assured of what is in the standard curriculum. Are you able to share with the House what you anticipate in the regulations around standard curriculum?
Mr CHANDLER: This, for the first time, provides some level of cover for school councils and schools. As you know, until now it has been difficult for schools to charge fees. Today most people call it a voluntary contribution. For the first time this enshrines the right of schools to charge for a service. It might be they want to run a music program that is well outside the normal curriculum. In that case the school has the right to charge a fee to cover the cost of that over and above standard education. That already happens in some cases, but this gives schools the right to do it.
It is also important to ensure, through legislation, a component of education is free, and anything above that – through their community and with school autonomy – schools can do it. It will come down to whether or not a parent or carer wants their child to do something. This is not forced on them.
Ms MANISON: I am trying to see if it is English, maths or science? I am trying to get details of what is standard curriculum by regulation. What do you anticipate will be in there, minister?
Mr CHANDLER: Clause 75(2)(a) of the bill – the prescribed standard curriculum is the provision of teaching and learning activities, instructional support and instructional materials for delivery of the following: the early years learning framework; the Australian curriculum; the senior secondary Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training; and Vocational Education and Training. All of those things are covered as the standard program.
Ms MANISON: Could you then give me an example of what would be outside the standard curriculum? What might parents be required to pay for?
Mr CHANDLER: Sky diving.
This is straight from the Education Regulations:
This regulation applies to a school body other than a joint school representative body: the provision of instructional support or instructional resources; extra-curricular programs or activities; entry costs associated with performances, productions or events; the provision of material or services that are a higher-cost alternative to those required for the standard curriculum program; and the provision of equipment or other materials, services or facilities.
There are examples of printing for personal use, Internet access for recreational purposes and instrumental music tuition. It might be the use of mahogany in woodwork instead of standard pine. Those things might be used and require extra fees. Do you want me to go on? They are things outside the normal curriculum.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: You have illustrated the point, minister, thank you.
Ms MANISON: I am keen to get an understanding of how the department will ensure schools are adequately delivering standard curriculum for free and not charging for it?
Mr CHANDLER: We all do jobs we are responsible for. Principals in our schools are entrusted to make decisions in that regard. At the end of the day the principal will set the fee, if there is a fee, for anything outside the norm. It comes down to the principal’s responsibility.
Ms MANISON: Is there line of sight from the Department of Education over what individual schools are doing and what they are charging for?
Mr CHANDLER: Facebook and about every other way parents today communicate with MLAs and the department. You cannot get away with anything today. I guarantee that as soon as someone did something outside the norm you and I would hear about it, and I am sure action would be taken.
Ms MANISON: I appreciate that, minister. It is a genuine concern and an appropriate question. What monitoring of fees will there be? How can we ensure the free standard curriculum is delivered in the education system? Surely the Department of Education will have some way of ensuring the key commitment to Territory families of free standard curriculum and free education is upheld?
Mr CHANDLER: I appreciate your concern. The bill does not change what is occurring in our schools now. Principals are doing this now with things outside the curriculum. If there were complaints they would be noticed. I am sure we will hear if there are complaints and the principal would be spoken to. That would happen under normal circumstances. There is a set regulation about the standard curriculum and examples of what is outside it. There are rules to follow. If someone steps outside the rules action will be taken.
Clauses 29 to 81 agreed to.
Clause 82:
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move amendment 42.2 in my name to clause 82:
- omit, insert
(6) If a student enrolled in a Government school repeats one or more years of schooling:
- (a) the repeated year (or first repeated year) does not count as part of the student’s standard allocation; and
(b) any other repeated year counts as the student’s standard allocation.
I spoke to the member for Nelson this morning about the bill, saying a person can apply to the CEO for an extension. On the operational side of things, parents would speak to the principal to see if a child might repeat, or the principal, after speaking to a student’s teacher, might recommend the same action. Through discussions agreed on by the principal a child might repeat a year. The 26 semesters caused some consternation, so we have reached a compromise that if a child repeats a year it does not count in the 26 semesters.
At the end of the day that does not mean there is a cap. Let us use an example. A child might develop a sickness which causes them, over a two or three year period, to only get one good year of education. There is no way in the world a principal would stop a child from repeating to get that additional schooling. It is the same when they reach Year 12. If they have not reached that level, then through discussions with the principal they can seek an extension of another year.
Similarly, if parents wanted their child to do four and five years extra schooling and a principal rejected it the case would be elevated to the chief executive to decide. If the chief executive did not consent there is always NT CAT to appeal to. We are not putting a cap on this. This is just enshrining in legislation the minimum requirement for a government to provide 26 semesters of school.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the minister, his staff, the Independents and Parliamentary Counsel for their advice.
The issue of 26 semesters has been the main point of contention with this bill. It was important to get it on the record, and for the government to show its commitment to making education accessible to as many children and young adults as possible.
There were some problems with the initial bill, particularly the part we are now amending, because it originally stated that if a student enrolled in a government school and repeated a year of schooling, the repeated year counts as part of that student’s standard allocation.
We all want to make it easier for children to have a pathway to finishing their NTCET, and that seemed to be a roadblock. The last thing we want to do is put barriers up which discourage students from completing their schooling.
COGSO was deeply concerned about that, and I am pleased the government has looked at this amendment because it sends the right message. If for some reason during the pathway from Transition to Year 12 a student does not finish one year and needs to repeat, the pathway through to Year 12 is still clear. They will be able to get through without having to apply for an additional year.
It is tough for young people. It is tough failing as an adult and having to face the truth. We should make it as approachable and encouraging as possible. The goodwill shown to amend this part makes it much better than the original bill. It will help get more support from education advocates who have been critical of this point.
I support this amendment to the bill. It is sensible of the government to take that feedback on board and listen. It will assist many students going through their schooling who, for one reason or another, have to repeat a year. It will give them comfort to know they do not have to apply. We all know shame job is a big thing in the Territory, and we want more people approaching education in a positive way.
Mr WOOD: If you have completed Year 10 and find work was not a smart idea and you need to complete Year 11 – the year you were at work – is that counted as two semesters or are you allowed that break? Can you break your semesters?
Mr CHANDLER: There are two things there. The first is, yes. The second is if you are out of the system for more than 12 months and have re-entered, you need to have working with children security checks done. That would be the only thing if it was over 12 months.
Mr WOOD: The other part then comes into play. For one year you could go to work then go back to school.
Does the 26-semester concept apply to non-government schools? If not, why not?
Mr CHANDLER: No, it only covers public schools. The private sector can do what it wants. We want to enshrine in public education, as a responsibility of government, a minimum of 26 semesters.
Mr WOOD: Is that why all the kids go to non-government schools? The NT Board of Studies covers non-government and government schools, so why does the government not cover non-government schools? Why is it not the rule of government to say all children need to do 26 semesters, whether they go to a government or non-government school?
Mr CHANDLER: Parents put their children in the public sector or the private sector. They have to go to a public school; they choose to go a private school. It is not right for a government to dictate what hours private schools operate. They have to stick to a curriculum, and I want to make sure there are educational outcomes, but it is not wise to step into their operations. In the public sector we have a responsibility to ensure students have the rights and ability to access education. For the first time we are enshrining in legislation the right to an education. The private sector is a choice parents make for their children.
Mr WOOD: In relation to compulsory school age and when a child can leave school, does that apply to all children attending school?
Mr CHANDLER: Yes.
Mr WOOD: If that applies, why does the requirement to go to school for 26 semesters not apply?
Mr CHANDLER: I have already answered that question.
Mr WOOD: As this is an evolving act I am interested, and I will talk to the non-government sector.
Mr CHANDLER: They might want to be involved. They might think it is a great idea.
Mr WOOD: I am struggling to see why it does not apply to kids at any school.
Mr CHANDLER: If parents decide to send their child to a private school, how can you make it the responsibility of the private sector to give that child 26 semesters? You could not do that because a child might only be there for a period of time. In the public sector, a child might be there from year dot right through to Year 12 or they might float in and out of the public sector, but you could not make it incumbent on the private sector to ensure there are 26 semesters.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 82, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 83:
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move amendment 42.3 in my name to clause 83(2). We have no problems with the change and we recommend it be accepted. This clause was put forward by the member for Wanguri.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thought I was being ambitious when trying to get this down to 30 days. I am glad you accepted. In a perfect world I would make it a shorter time, and I hope you review it to ensure it is effective. Year 12 results come out in mid-December and then there is Christmas. It does not give people much time. In a perfect world, especially knowing how schools operate – people could turn up in week one, two or six and enrol in a school.
I appreciate that this is a positive change, down from three months to one month for application. I am keen for this to be looked at in the annual review to ensure it is working. The last thing we want is for this to be a barrier to people re-enrolling at school. If people are looking for excuses not to do something – having to go through that process might put some people off. I am keen for it to be monitored to ensure it does not act as a deterrent. Thank you; cutting this by 12 months was sensible.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 83, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill taken as a whole and agreed to.
Ms MANISON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask some questions about the remainder of the bill.
I turn to clause 92, page 48, relating to exclusion of students by the CEO. Clearly safety is of paramount concern. We want to ensure students are safe at school. This point was raised in a debate when Clontarf students were in this Chamber not long ago. If a child is excluded or expelled from school, what actions are taken by the Department of Education to ensure those children do not miss out on the opportunity to get an education? We all agree that if they do not succeed in that education their opportunities when adults are limited.
Mr CHANDLER: I have been involved in a couple of these situations. I am trying to think of a good way to describe it. A child might have physically assaulted another student so that child has been excluded from school. You might put them into another school to protect the first child. If that is not readily available it is incumbent on the department to find another source of education for that child. In some cases even the Northern Territory Open Education Centre has been used. Yes, it is important.
I would like to think we will reach a day where children are not just suspended to home but sometimes suspended to a facility. We have the Malak Re-engagement Centre, and a school within the Don Dale centre for children who break the law. They still deserve an education, and hopefully through a good education they will not end up in gaol. It is quite clear the department is responsible for ensuring an education program is provided for those children.
Ms MANISON: Can you please turn to page 55 and school representative bodies. Returning to the point I raised during debate, where schools make an application for an exemption for not having 50% parental representation, can you explain the types of situations where you, as minister, would sign off on that? Also, what guarantees would you seek to ensure there is adequate community consultation and the parental voice is not lost from the school representative body?
Mr CHANDLER: This is probably more to do with Independent Public School boards because they can have less than 50% parent membership. However, they must demonstrate how parent and community views will be represented on the board in that case. Through their application they need to demonstrate how that can be achieved. Both an Independent Public School board and a school council must have a parent as the chair, no exceptions, and approval to vary the composition of an Independent Public School board only lasts for two years. After that, the board must reapply to the minister to continue with the varied composition or revert to the standard composition requirements.
Ms MANISON: We all appreciate that a year is a long time, and two years is longer. It is half the time of our parliamentary term. Will the department do any ongoing monitoring to give you assurance that those parental voices will still be heard on school boards in that school community?
Mr CHANDLER: Whether a school is a standard public school or an Independent Public School they still operate under the regulations and control of the Department of Education. Secondly, that rule, as it stands, is something we will review when the time is right. I cannot see any issues arising, but if they do and they are out of kilter things can be reviewed.
Ms MANISON: Thank you, minister, those are all my questions. I thank you again for the briefings, and for listening when I spoke about amendments today. I appreciate that. I thank the Department of Education staff sitting in the box working behind the scenes late tonight. It was important to have a thorough debate on this bill because education is important to the future of the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD: I thank the minister and his staff because they have done a lot of work. I appreciate the work done with the minister on these amendments.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, would you like to thank anyone?
Mr CHANDLER: Everyone!
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Reports for Members for Barkly and Johnston
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I table three travel reports from the members for Johnston and Barkly pursuant to paragraph 4.12 of the RTD.
WITHDRAW BILL FROM NOTICE PAPER
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, while there is no question before the Chair, I seek leave to withdraw the Sex Offender and Child Homicide Offender Public Website (Daniel's Law) Bill 2015 (Serial 139) from the Notice Paper.
Leave granted; bill withdrawn.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will do my Christmas greetings before everyone else. I wish the member for Daly a very happy Christmas. There is always a rush at adjournment to get the Christmas greetings out of the way.
I need to make sure I thank my electorate officer, Kim, who somehow stands by me through thick and thin. She knows I am a completely unorganised person but somehow we get through the mess day in and day out. I appreciate her support.
I also thank my part-time EO, Sharon, who comes in during the week to support Kim and me. Her work is very much appreciated. I also thank my new research person, Helen, who works a number of hours a week and has been a great contributor. She is still learning the tricks of the trade, and there is a fair bit to learn when it comes to dealing with legislation. I wish them all a very happy Christmas.
I also thank all the staff of the Legislative Assembly. Without them we would not be operating at this hour of night. During the last sittings we were still going at 3 am, and staff were still working at that time. The tabling staff, the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk; the Hansard people, who will battle on long after I have made this adjournment speech; all the support staff; and security, who are here through the night and are always pleasant when you speak to them. If you need some help – if you forget your key – they will help you get into your room.
I also thank the staff at the parliamentary library, Liisa and Kaye, who are always helpful when you need to get information in a hurry. A number of my speeches would not have been put together if I had not been given the information I required.
To the media, love them or hate them – without them I do not think we would have democracy. Sometimes they can go a bit overboard with their headlines, but there is no doubt the media plays a very important part in the Northern Territory, especially as we have a unicameral system and they can act as a counterbalance. It is important to have strong media, so I thank them for the work they do.
To people in my electorate of Nelson, regardless of whether you support me or not, I thank you. They do not always support me. I get my fair share of different opinions, but that is fine and healthy and I do not shy away from it. It is good that people have different points of view. Regulars come into my office, sometimes just for the jelly beans. We try to keep the chemist jelly bean supply fresh, because much of it ends up in my office. Many people enjoy coming in for a chat – Mark, Cookie, Annie, Tom – and on Thursday night the mahjong ladies enjoy using the community room.
To all the schools – we have been talking about education tonight – especially the principals, the school councils and the staff. I enjoy visiting our schools as there is always something on. Schools are very much part of our community. Maybe in the old days it was at the barn having a dance, but when do you get a chance to meet people in your community now? You meet them when there is something on at the school – a school dance or an assembly. Schools are very much part of the community and I thank all the people who work in our schools. I have many government and non-government schools in my electorate and I appreciate all the work they do.
I am sure I will leave out someone, but not my good wife, Imelda, who has persevered with my job – it is more than a job. It is something I have spent a fair bit of my life …
Mr Chandler: It is an adventure!
Mr WOOD: It is an adventure, and it never ceases to amaze me how many twists and turns there are in this adventure. Today was another one of those twists and turns.
My wife, Imelda, has travelled down this road with me and supported me all the way. No, she is not a fan of politics, but she supports me. Sometimes I ask her, ‘What do you think of this or that?’ She says, ‘Well, that’s up to you’. She is willing to give advice, but she also trusts whichever decision I make. Without her support I would not be here. We have had our ups and downs. I crack nearly 43 years of marriage next year, so we have been together for a long time and have had a varying life. When it comes to politics, I thank her very much for the support she has given. I love her very much.
I should say hello to my dog, Max, a great supporter. I guarantee when I get home tonight he will turn upside down and expect a rub. That is the sort of dog he is. He is a mad dog.
Most dogs, when there is lightning – we have huge storms in the rural area. My previous dog went straight through the fly wire door in the laundry, straight into the toilet, hid and nearly shook to death. This dog chases lightning. One day he will be a fried dog. I wish Max – mad Max, I call him – a happy Christmas too. I hope you live through this Wet Season because if you keep chasing lightning you will not be around much longer.
I also thank all my friends and colleagues in this House, regardless of the arguments and differences of opinion we have, and regardless of the tantrums. Christmas is a time when we should be wishing goodwill to all men and women. That is one good thing about Christmas. Thank you for all your support. My New Year’s resolution is to work together more because that is what we should do. We should argue less.
I thank the Minister for Education because tonight is a good example of working together to introduce a bill that is important for the Northern Territory.
I wish everyone a happy Christmas.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Mr Deputy Speaker, yes, it is the time of year to take a few minutes to thank people who allow you to do the job you do.
I will start with you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and Madam Speaker, thank you. I also thank the entire Legislative Assembly, particularly the parliamentary officers here. They do a remarkable job putting up with us and our wants and needs.
Before I thank anybody else I have to thank the VIP drivers. Those guys do an amazing job – Bill, Yanni, Ben, David and John. I thank the parliamentary staff, security, Hansard, Parliamentary Counsel and the library staff. Everybody who works in this building deserves a pat on the back. We work long hours, unlike what some in the general public believe. People in this building know the hours spent in this House.
My office had a few changes this year, but a big thank you to Samuel Burke; Jessica Adnams, who has just left but I think we will see her again; Bridie Rogers; Michelle Leonard, the little leprechaun; Sarah Gotch; Linda Sing; Lorne Hamilton; Michelle Wells; Meaghan Jones, who is new in the office so welcome; and Whittney Jago, who happens to be the best media adviser I have ever seen. Benjamin Dawson, my electorate officer, thank you very much. Have a great year, thank you and Merry Christmas to all.
To all the staff working on the fifth floor who make our job a little easier, including my colleagues in the Country Liberals, also our Labor colleagues and the Independents, thank you for a robust year. At this time of year you have time to reflect. We are all here for the same reason and I thank you all.
Member for Wanguri, thank you for your passion for education. It is appreciated, and it is good to have somebody with that passion sitting opposite to keep me doing the job.
Teachers and students, the electorate of Brennan, thank you very much for another year of support. I look forward to seeking your support in 2016. Have a merry Christmas.
As the member for Nelson said, the media – we have this love/hate relationship with the media. I said recently we love them and they must love us for everything we do for them. It is pretty important because I reckon we provide half of their work.
I thank my family, my beautiful wife and my children, without whose support I could not do this job. I know when we spoke about the election next year – do we want to do it? We were coming up to preselection and they were the first people I asked, ‘Do we keep going?’ I have the passion and drive to continue in this role and do what is right for Territorians, but I need their support to do that. I love them dearly. Thank you very much for your support.
We spoke about the possibility of going to an early election had the vote gone the other way today. Those guys put up with not seeing their dad. Most of you guys here are in the same boat – your family misses out on you all year. A week or two with them over the Christmas period is a special time. When I said there was a possibility Michael might have stolen Christmas, they were not happy. The support I was hoping for might have drifted rather quickly. I love you dearly, thank you.
Everybody have a merry Christmas. Please stay safe, particularly on our roads. We want you to get through Christmas, enjoy yourself and we will see you in 2016.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I put my thanks on the record for the hard work of 2015.
I learnt in my first year to thank the most important people first, and they are my electorate officers, Jenny Djerrkura and Chris Grace. They are such fabulous support and I could not do this job without them. Thank you for your time, dedication and support every day. You both do such a wonderful job and the community loves you. Thank you to Syd and Jodie for letting them spend so much time committed to work.
To the loves of my life, my husband, Scott, and my beautiful boy, Aiden, thank you for letting me do this and for your unwavering support every day. Also, the support of my mother, Rose, my father, Gary, and my brother, Luke, is endless as well. They help take care of Aiden so Scott and I can work. If we ever have to attend functions, if I have to be here or at a breakfast at 7 am mum is always happy to take care of him. That has helped me commit fully to this job, but also be able to enjoy being a mum knowing that if I cannot take care of Aiden I have the best of support with my mum and my father doing the job. They are great grandparents. Thank you to the McNeill family and the Herrimans for their love and support.
A new bunch of people in my life are from the Marrara Children’s Centre, which is in my electorate. They take care of Aiden two days a week. There was much anxiety the first time I dropped him off to childcare. I had heard so much about it but never thought I would be holding my breath doing it, only to find out what a wonderful experience it is for my child to go into childcare. The early childcare educators are wonderful. Special thanks to the centre manager, Tara, the little babies’ room – Jenny, Sukprit, Emma, Risha and the ladies because they take care of many children from the electorate. It is a wonderful place.
I thank my team-mates from the mighty Waratah Division 1, premiers this year. It had been 20 years between premierships for me. I last won that when I was in Year 11 playing what used to be called B Grade in the Darwin Netball Association in 1995. It was nice to go back 20 years later and win a premiership with the girls. Thank you, ladies. It was hard fought but it was great to be part of a grand final winning team. Perhaps I can retire from netball now.
I have to thank my wonderful constituents in the Wanguri electorate. It is a delight to be your local member. I love the fact that I am always talking to people, whether I am out running or going to the shops. I feel I have the best electorate in the Northern Territory.
I particularly thank people in the electorate for their ongoing support and advice, and for helping me stay in touch with local issues. It is always frank, fearless advice. Their thoughts and views, particularly from Vim Sharma, Henry Gray and my seniors at Leanyer, Dotty, Rob Portius, Chandra, Hazel, Graham, Porky – Rob Hudson from Wanguri, a passionate advocate for traffic in the area, Sammy and Barry, and God bless you, Davey. I cannot believe it is a year since you have been gone.
Thank you to the team at Hibiscus shops. I always say thank you to Charlie on the checkout at Woolworths. That guy is a legend and knows everybody going through the shops. To Joan and Christine at Strawberry Fields, Nelson, Vincent, Rampor and the ladies at Nelson’s for keeping us full of coffee and good food. To Laura, the centre manager, Tracy, Renee and the girls at Lime Hair, Tania at Hibiscus Health and Beauty, Robyn at the newsagents, Matthew and the team at the Chinese shop, George and Gary at Q Framing, Tracy and the pet shop girls – it is a wonderful community to be part of.
I say thank you to our local police, who are always great at responding when we call with problems. There have been a few problems this year around the shops. Thanks Kerry Hoskins from Casuarina and Scott Pollock. Both are great, proactive police officers and constituents. We thank you for your support in the electorate. Thank you to Jarrod Collins from DHA, who is always approachable to talk about issues within Muirhead and how things are going. Of course, Paul and Sarah at Dollys – you two run a fantastic pub and we all love it.
Thanks to the Tracy Village club, particularly the functions team, because when we hold a big lunch they are always so helpful and do a fabulous job.
I would also like to thank some of my constituents who I met last year at the Muirhead Christmas party. To Angela, Neve, Lani and her husband, Gavin. It has been wonderful to meet people through work events and to meet another mum, and for Aiden to have a little playmate in Neve has been great. I cherish that I have another mum to share this wonderful journey of parenthood in a local community with. I really appreciate all the time you have given to us and your friendship this year.
To my wonderful friend and mentor, the former member for Johnston, Dr Chris Burns. I am still grateful that you are a big part of my life and that we can have some very fired-up conversations. You are a wonderful guide and support for me in this job. I always like having a good debate with you and things have not changed.
To my local schools – Leanyer school with Anne Tonkin; Tania and Louise are Assistant Principals and Neale Cooper, the school council chair. This is a passionate and dedicated school doing some wonderful things in the community, and I look forward to sending Aiden there one day.
To Wanguri School, Gail has gone but we thank her for her contribution to the community. Thank you to Jen Coad for stepping in during the last term and doing a wonderful job, as well as Pam, Michael and Mark, a new addition to our school community. I always like to thank Robyn, who has always been there working hard behind the scenes. She is a wonderful person in the school community.
To Holy Spirit school, Simon Duffy and Paula Sellers, thank you for another wonderful year and all the best.
Karen Koehler and Pastor Geoff from the St Andrew campus of Good Shepherd are doing a great job nurturing and bringing up some wonderful, confident, happy children in our community.
I thank Hansard, security, the cleaners and the Legies staff. Your support is never taken for granted. You are wonderful and thank you for helping us do this job. To the staff in the Leader of the Opposition’s Office, thank you guys. You are fantastic. You work hard and I am eternally grateful.
To my parliamentary colleagues, thank you for another interesting year. I like it when we can have some good conversations with each other and work together effectively. Tonight has been a good demonstration of that. All the best to you and your families over Christmas. I sincerely wish you well.
I would like to touch on a few people who we have lost this year far too young. I have met most of them through this job.
The first one is Campbel Giles. She was the heavyweight title fighter of all the media advisers I have ever met. She lost her battle with cancer earlier this year. She was a funny, fierce, determined, intelligent woman. She was the first person I knew to live tweet this parliament’s Question Time. She is dearly missed and someone I had a huge amount of respect for. All my love to Matt and Elsie for their first Christmas without Campbel. This side of the House will not forget her.
We lost Pippa Rudd earlier this year. Pippa was a star in my eyes. She was a gorgeous, smart woman, so passionate about youth justice and making a difference in the Territory. It was great fun to have long, deep and meaningful conversations with. I remember getting stuck on the balcony with her at Speaker’s drinks and by the time we finished speaking everybody had gone to the pub across the road and we could not believe security had not chased us out of the building. She was the type of person you could get into a conversation like that with. It has been a huge loss and we all miss her dearly. All our love to David, Ginny and Luca. Bless you, Pippa, you were a fabulous girl.
Lastly the late, great Pete Davies. He gave me a huge amount of support when I was nominated, when I became a candidate and when I became a member of this parliament. He gave so many people an opportunity to have a voice whether they were his listeners, politicians or work colleagues he mentored, which is wonderful. It was such a shame to lose him far too soon.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish everyone all the best for a safe and happy Christmas and New Year; all the best for 2016.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will talk about the Chief Minister’s Awards for Excellence.
I congratulate the award winning work of my agencies and staff. My agencies have some extremely talented people in the field and in offices working to make the Territory simpler, safer and smarter.
The Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory won the Chief Minister’s Award for Innovation in the Public Sector for the Be Crocwise animated video and social media campaign. I remember launching this campaign at Barunga School and how excited all the children were to see the video. The video is in six languages – Kriol, Anindilyakwa, Tiwi, Yolngu and English. It is targeted at community children and the wider public to encourage them to Be Crocwise.
I acknowledge Andrew Bridges and everyone in the team – Anne Walters, Mark Crummy, Jo Scott, Joel Carter, Anne Lobo, Jordan Raymond Munro and Michael Roseth – for their excellent work in making sure Territorians are Crocwise and safe around crocodiles. The $10 000 from the award will be reinvested into Be Crocwise and more advertising activity.
On the topic of making the Territory a safer place, the Department of Housing’s housing and community safety and client relations, including the Public Housing Safety Officers, won the Chief Minister’s Award for delivering quality customer services. They worked hard to deliver the public housing safety strategy consisting of the strengthened three strikes policy and the Public Housing Safety Officers.
Their efforts, in addition to the Country Liberals supporting them, the strengthened visitor management policy and the strengthened three strikes policy, have led to reductions in antisocial behaviour.
I went on patrol with the Public Housing Safety Officers and saw firsthand the great work they do in responding to antisocial behaviour in Darwin and Alice Springs. I acknowledge the work of all public housing safety officers, who do a great job. The Public Housing Safety Officers support some of the most vulnerable people in the Northern Territory and it is great to see them win an award.
I congratulate Colleen Rosas from the Department of Local Government and Community Services for receiving the 2015 Chief Minister’s Public Sector Outstanding Indigenous Leadership Medal. Colleen leads the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. I know firsthand how hard it can be for people struggling with English to understand what is happening in a range of complex and unfamiliar environments. The Aboriginal Interpreter Service facilitates effective cross-cultural communication between service providers and Aboriginal people who do not speak English as a first language.
Our interpreters are trained to work in a wide range of settings and environments including healthcare, education, social services, legal and court systems, conferences, community engagement, training programs and Indigenous communication and media.
Colleen has done an excellent job in leading the Aboriginal Interpreter Service from its beginning, and has helped grow it to more than 70 full-time and part-time employees and more than 300 casual interpreters. This is an invaluable service for Aboriginal people and I congratulate Colleen on her efforts.
Mr Deputy Speaker, our public servants do a great job and I am pleased to see so many of my agencies recognised for the work they do. I encourage them to keep up the good work.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016