2016-02-09
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10.15 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I welcome the 2016 sitting year, an election year, and no doubt one full of measured and intelligent debate. I trust all members will insist on upholding the highest standards and adhere to the standing orders.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to Standing Order 167 I advise that I received Message No 30 from the Administrator notifying assent to the bills passed at the November and December 2016 sittings of the Assembly. The message is dated 5 February 2016.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, I table the Subordinate Legislation and Publications Committee’s Report on the Ports Management Regulations: Subordinate Legislation No. 13 of 2015, pursuant to the new Standing Order 200(1). I also table a copy of the associated minutes of the committee’s proceedings.
The committee routinely scrutinises all rules, regulations and bylaws tabled in the Assembly. They are subject to disallowance to ensure they are fit for purpose. Standing orders require that where the committee is of the opinion that an instrument or provision of an instrument ought to be disallowed or disapproved, it is to report the matter to the Assembly within the disallowance period.
Based on the advice of its independent legal counsel, Professor Ned Aughterson, the committee is of the view that Regulation 10 of the Ports Management Regulations is a case in point.
The Ports Management Regulations support the operation of the Ports Management Act, which commenced on 9 June 2015. In conjunction with the act, the regulations establish a regulatory framework for control, management and operation of designated ports in the Northern Territory.
Tabled in the Assembly on 25 August, I note that the disallowance period for regulation expires on 9 February 2016. As detailed in the committee’s report, Professor Aughterson has advised that the legislative authority for Regulation 10 is unclear. Regulation 10 creates offences where a licensed pilot demands or receives any reward in relation to pilotage services or where a person associated with a vessel offers or provides such a reward.
While section 81 of the Ports Management Act sets out the offences that might be committed by or in relation to pilots, it does not include the offences in Regulation 10. As such, Regulation 10 effectively extends the range of offences beyond those provided for in section 81 of the act and does not appear to fall within any specific matters in relation to which regulations may be made under the act.
As is the case whenever the committee has concerns about a regulation, this advice was forwarded to the minister for his consideration and comment. In response, the minister noted that the regulation power under section 155(1) that provides ‘the administrator may make regulations under this act’ is broad and allows regulations to be made to deal with a myriad of issues that ensure the safe operation of the port, and it needs to be read in context of subsection 65(1) and 65A of the Interpretation Act. Also, Regulation 10 is not a new provision; rather, it is a provision that has been carried over from the port bylaws.
The committee sought further advice from professor Aughterson regarding the minister’s comments. Professor Aughterson raised the following points. The scope of a general regulation power – section 65(1) of the Interpretation Act provides:
While acknowledging that a regulation may well be necessary:
As Professor Aughterson points out, a number of High Court judges have noted that a provision in 65(1) of the Interpretation Act NT:
As the High Court has previously stated, a general provision such as in the present case:
Professor Aughterson further advised it is generally accepted that a penalty cannot be imposed for a breach of subordinate legislation unless it is authorised by the empowering act.
As noted by the Australian Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances:
Whilst this is not a trivial matter, the authority-imposed penalty should not be assumed by the executive. The legislature may find it convenient to authorise the executive to create penalties by regulation, but the executive cannot assume to have such an authority without express authority from an act of parliament merely because it considers it to be a good idea. This is a line that should not be crossed so easily in a democracy.
The precedent of former bylaw 47 under the Darwin Port Authority Act – while the minister notes that Regulation 10 is a provision that has been carried over from the port bylaws, Professor Aughterson points out that former bylaw 47 was not made under general regulation power. Rather, the Darwin Port Authority Act, under which it was made, included specific bylaw making provisions for the control, regulation and management of the port, particularly in relation to the control, conduct and behaviour of persons within the port and the imposition of penalties for a contravention or failure to comply with the bylaws. Thus, while bylaw 47 was supported by an express regulation power for the bylaws to impose penalties, no similar express regulation powers exist under the Ports Management Act.
The committee notes that it is not its function to consider the policy merits of a regulation, but the need for a law only increases the need for it to be made properly. Based on Professor Aughterson’s advice, if Regulation 10 were to be tested in court it is likely to be found to be beyond the power of the Ports Management Act and, therefore, of no effect.
Having formed the view that the regulation’s lack of clear authority and purported creation of penalties by regulation, without explicit legislative authority to do so, warranted a recommendation to disallow the regulation under Standing Order 20(2), the committee wrote to the minister to convey its concerns and seek his advice on how he will address the committee’s concerns with a regulation, with a view to avoiding unwanted gaps in the regulatory regime for ports. In his reply to the committee the minister stated:
However, the minister made no comment regarding the committee’s concerns about the importance of the reasonable certainty in regulations or the executive creating penalties without explicit legislative authority to do so. The committee disagrees with this, and amending the act seems as much a cautionary approach as a necessary one. The committee is concerned not only about the likelihood of a person being prosecuted under regulation, but also the regulatory standards in the Northern Territory, the proper use of the Assembly’s delegated legislative power and respect for the proper constitutional roles of the legislature and executive within our system of government.
At its meeting on 2 December 2015 the committee resolved to seek clarification from the minister regarding the time frame for the proposed amendment to the Ports Management Act and to advise of the committee’s intention to report the matter to the Assembly and give notice of a motion to disallow Regulation 10.
On 27 January 2016 the minister was subsequently advised that, given the committee’s ongoing concerns, it was his intention to recommend that the executive council repeals Regulation 10, and that this should occur by March 2016.
While the committee welcomes the minister’s advice and proposed course of action to remedy this matter, the committee is of the view that as a matter of principle it should not allow its jurisdiction over the regulation to expire before the matter is finally resolved.
As such, on behalf of the committee, this afternoon I will give notice of a motion of disallowance to be moved on 19 April 2016. The committee proposes that the notice of motion to disallow the regulation will be withdrawn following the repeal of the regulation prior to it being moved in the April sittings.
Given the above, the committee recommends that the Assembly agrees that:
(a) as far as practicable, the validity of regulations should be clear
On behalf of the committee, I thank Professor Aughterson for his attention to detail and diligence in advising the committee. I also thank members of the committee for their bipartisan approach in seeking to ensure that regulations in the Northern Territory are of the standard the Assembly requires under standing orders.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, I move that the paper be noted.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 141 I seek leave to withdraw from the Notice Paper General Business Order of the Day No 2, Public Information Amendment Bill 2015 (Serial 140), standing in my name.
Leave granted; bill withdrawn.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Leave is granted for her to withdraw it, but now I think she has to go through the process of the actual withdrawing.
Madam SPEAKER: Leave is granted to withdraw.
Mr ELFERINK: In that case Madam Speaker, I seek leave to make a very brief comment. I was proceeding on the assumption that leave was being granted to move a motion to withdraw.
Leave granted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I thank honourable members for their indulgence.
The honourable member has sought leave to withdraw a bill that she has brought into this House. The question I asked prior to coming into this room with the member was, ‘Why do you need to withdraw it?’ She explained it. There were problems with the bill which, effectively, rendered it terminal before this House, and she has indicated that she will choose another path forward. It is all good; no problem.
The only observation I wish to make is that this makes it clear that the business of complaining about something in this House is easy; the business of doing something in this House is much more difficult. Whilst I welcome the member’s attempt to be constructive, there is a salient lesson to be learnt here. The lesson is this: any opposition can complain, whinge, whine and carp. The moment you take on the role of actively promoting something and trying to do something positive in this House, it becomes much harder to achieve. I ask all honourable members to think about this very important truth, because it clearly demonstrates that bringing things to this House because you have had an emotional response, or a brain fart, I think, is the common vernacular nowadays …
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable member, can you withdraw that?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, a thought bubble is the common vernacular. The fact of the matter remains that whilst I congratulate the member on bringing something forward, it is not always that easy. It is hard getting legislation through this place. It is hard being constructive for the people of the Northern Territory.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Chamber graciously gave the Attorney-General leave to speak, but can he stop the verbal diarrhoea and let us get on with business.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you member for Karama. Mr Elferink, if you could get to the point.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, Mr Elf will get to the point. The point has already been made. Do not just whinge, whine and carp. When you try to bring something into this place, understand that as the alternative government it is not always that easy.
Continued from 3 December 2015.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 before the House. I also thank the minister’s office and the officials from the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice for briefing me a couple of weeks ago.
There is no higher priority for a government than to look after and protect our most vulnerable citizens. This includes those who find themselves as vulnerable witnesses and victims interfacing with the justice system. On that note, the opposition supports this bill which sees amendments to three legislative instruments: the Domestic and Family Violence Act; the Evidence Act; and the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act.
As per the explanatory statement, if we can amend legislation to:
then surely that is a good thing. No one would argue to the contrary. Further, the amended legislation will, according to the explanatory statement:
Again, surely nobody would argue with that.
During my briefing in the Attorney-General’s office, the opening remark in relation to this bill was that it has quite a long history. Indeed, it has a very long history. To be honest I am not sure why these amendments before us today have taken so long to come to light, other than the homily and pearls of wisdom just delivered by the Attorney-General that it is hard getting legislation through this House. Perhaps it is because of the sheer volume of legislation the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice must manage, contemporise and prioritise, or the complexity of making changes, drafting amendments and ensuring consistency where justice legislation amendments cross over multiple legislative instruments. Or is it the priorities of the government of the day? Perhaps it is a combination of all these factors.
As the minister outlined in his second reading speech, this bill implements a number of recommendations from the Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report, which was produced by the former Department of Justice in June 2011. This report was born out of the 2007 Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse and its report titled Little Children are Sacred in 2008.
I understand the bill implements the recommendations of the 2011 report and that some of the recommendations – there were nine in total – were able to be implemented through non-legislative means. I will not go back to those as the minister covered those that were implemented through non-legislative means in his second reaching speech at the end of last year.
I welcome the amendment in clause 11 to section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act in accordance with Recommendation 6 of the review, which amends and broadens the definition of ‘vulnerable witness’ and removes reference to ‘special disability’, replacing the term with ‘cognitive impairment or intellectual disability’.
Further, the new section 21A(1)(a) provides further scope around defining who may be regarded as a vulnerable witness which, while giving guidance to the court, still allows for judicial discretion. I think that is important. I see this amendment has been adopted following the Victorian Evidence Act and the New South Wales Evidence Act. The minister noted this in his second reading speech, and it is noted in the June 2011 report I referred to. A very sensible explanation is provided. It says in that report:
I turn briefly to Recommendation 8 of the report, which was:
This recommendation, dating back to 2011, has not been pursued. I hope the minister can expand on this. He makes reference to it in his second reading speech and refers to the outcome of the Consultation Report: Response to the High Court decision in Crofts: giving of directions during sexual assault trials regarding the timing of a complaint.
I am sure, and the minister has already acknowledged that he is happy to respond, that there is a very technical and complex legal argument as to why Recommendation 8 has not been implemented. At the same time I note that Recommendations 2 and 7 have been implemented. While on face value they appear to be sensible, concerns remain about the practicalities of the amendment of section 21B of the Evidence Act, which provides that the court may provide for and admit a vulnerable witness’s pre-recorded statement.
In my contact with legal stakeholders in relation to this bill, all of whom are supportive of amendments, there was concern raised in relation to section 21B, not criticism but more going to the heart of resourcing of the courts to make section 21B and the business of pre-recorded evidence workable and to benefit those who appear before the court. There are concerns it could impact adversely on victims, as well as defendants, due to the perception that there will be inevitable delays created in the conduct of proceedings, given that the practicalities of pre-recorded evidence are recognised to appreciate the impact that will have on the administration of justice.
I quote from this submission, and I am sure it will be familiar to the Attorney-General. ‘The majority of hearings in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction relate to serious violence offences and this coupled with the proposal to broaden the definition of vulnerable witness pursuant to section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act will lead to a high number of matters proceeding along these lines if the proposed reforms are implemented. The numerous sittings that will be required to conduct pre-recorded evidence before the hearing will inflate the likely timelines for hearings, particularly as the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, soon to be known as the Local Court, calendar gets filled. Should the provisions of section 21B of the Evidence Act be extended into the Court of Summary Jurisdiction and Youth Justice Court, it is essential that a dedicated pre-recorded sittings list be established to expedite matters, otherwise, lengthy waits will ensue risking the whole process being brought to a grinding halt. The timely resolution of matters is in the interests of both victims and defendants and these anticipated delays may well present problems for both sides.’
There is further comment, ‘The legal provider routinely gets late service of brief material, including electronic records of interviews and child forensic interviews, and very rarely gets transcripts. Preparing for legal argument about redactions in these circumstances will be difficult and may lead to adjournments.’
Again, this will lengthen the legal process for victims as well as defendants. I am advised by legal stakeholders that there are already difficulties they experience regarding the availability of pre-recorded statements.
With resource implications we are talking about practical and logistical issues that have been identified. As a result, a request or answer regarding what the government will do in regard to the significant additional resourcing will be required to accommodate these amendments.
Legal stakeholders have raised their continued concerns with me, which predate this current government, about the state of bush courts. With such inadequate court infrastructure in many of our remote communities it is next to impossible to afford vulnerable witnesses a waiting area or a court space which allows safe separation, safe from intimidation from the defendant.
One of the recommendations to be implemented through non-legislative means was putting up screens in the Alice Springs courthouse to separate vulnerable witnesses from defendants. It is harder to make those separations in bush courts and to find a decent area in bush courts where lawyers can work with their clients. You are lucky if it is a shady tree, and it is bad luck if it is raining on that day.
I can always tell when the magistrate is visiting Nhulunbuy because our town centre has a number of people who gather with their families; the lawyers set up a table under a tree and that is how court operates for a day or two when the magistrate is there. If that is how things are in Nhulunbuy, with a reasonable level of infrastructure, then things must be that much more difficult in the remote courts.
I am not telling the Attorney-General anything he does not know. This issue predates the current government and it is how we have operated our courts in the Northern Territory for many years.
As I have just pointed out, the amendment to section 21B under new clause 3A states:
I go to not only a matter of resourcing, time and availability of the court, but that some bush courts may be precluded here. Even the minister’s second reading speech notes this, where he said:
I appreciate the intent of a bill such as this, which brings forward amendments which aim to minimise harm, reduce pain and fear, lessen trauma for vulnerable witnesses, and assist them to be more confident and comfortable giving evidence, hopefully leading to more successful prosecutions. Those vulnerable witnesses include, but are not limited to, women, children, people with cognitive impairments and intellectual disability, and victims of sexual assault and domestic and family violence.
At the same time, we cannot debate amendments to an act without also debating government’s investment in protecting these vulnerable citizens of the Northern Territory before they find themselves as victims. We need to strengthen protection for our vulnerable witnesses, but we need to see government strengthen systems and approaches in partnership with the non-government sector, and people at the grassroots level in communities, who so often have many ideas about how these matters can be addressed to prevent them from harm before they become victims.
I know these to be questions for this government and the future government, and they were for past governments for that matter. We cannot just continue to deal with systems in crisis and the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. We need to reduce the number of victims appearing before our courts. We need strong prevention measures in place and to adequately resource those measures, including education, counselling services and programs for perpetrators, and the right support for vulnerable victims. That is not an exhaustive list of the things we might do.
The 2011 Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report was a product of the Little Children are Sacred report into the sexual abuse of children, which tells us that, overwhelmingly, those witnesses are Indigenous. The problem, under that very heading, The Problem, is quantified on the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice’s website, as the agency which also has responsibility for the relatively new Domestic Violence Directorate. I will quote the statistics from that web page:
I am sure the Attorney-General and other members of this House will agree that these stark figures are alarming, that we cannot continue to accept them or see them rise, and that we must work collectively to reduce them through broad-ranging strategies in partnership with stakeholders, including the non-government organisation sector and, as I said earlier, the women and men at the grassroots of their communities.
In reducing these numbers we reduce the number of people who face the court as victims and as defendants. We reduce the amount of pain and trauma that people go through. I am pleased that this bill sets out to lessen the trauma vulnerable witnesses face, but we cannot lose focus on avoiding the terrible exposure to trauma that women and children face behind closed doors.
In looking specifically at the cohort of vulnerable children in the Northern Territory, I refer to data provided by the Department of Children and Families Annual Report 2014-15, which the minister is familiar with and grappling with, because in his fairly heavy workload he also has responsibility for this agency.
Some of the statistics in it are deeply concerning. Had the minister and his predecessors – he is not the only minister who has held this portfolio in three-and-a-half years of government – not dropped the ball on the recommendations of the more recent board of inquiry in the Growing them strong, together report, we might have seen statistics which showed a snapshot of improvement and not a system in crisis.
I refer to the Department of Children and Families Annual Report of 2014-15 and place on the record some of the data that comes from that report.
As of 24 August 2012 there were 737 full-time employees; that is obviously the date at the change of government. There are now 607 full-time employees. That is 130 fewer full-time employees in the Department of Children and Families since the change of government. There were 646 full-time employees as at June last year – a slight increase. There is no reporting on turnover this year. There has been an increase of 20 P1 professionals, a decrease of 15 P2 professionals and a decrease of 15 P3 professionals. P1 and P2 are statutory officers who can undertake investigations and P3 are team leaders. There has been a net loss on these statistics of 10 professional stream staff. The cost to senior professionals is worrying. How can dedicated staff within this agency – and I know how hard they work, especially with increased workloads – manage heavy workloads and deliver the very best service to children? The answer is that they struggle to.
I wish to place on the record some of the other statistics from the DCF annual report under the heading of Child Protection. The substantiation rate for cases of abuse, a 23% increase, is not commensurate with a 32% increase in notifications, a 44% increase in investigations and a 60% increase in investigations finalised. Category 1 investigation response times decreased by 6%; Category 2 increased by 1%; Category 3 decreased by 4%; and Category 4 decreased by 18%. This is due to a significant increase of notifications, coupled with fewer staff.
Last year 156 children assessed as Priority 1, child in danger, were placed at risk because investigations did not start within the 24 hours required, compared to the 2013-14 figure of 43. A total of 433 children assessed as Priority 2 were placed at risk because their investigations did not commence within three days, compared to 319 in 2013-14.
I wish to place on the record some data from the report under the heading, Out of Home Care Services. The number of children in foster and kinship care declined from 529 to 482, from 58% to 48%. Instead, more children were in purchased home-based care, 33% up from 27%, and more children in residential care, 10% from 9%. The number of foster and kinship places of care only increased by 5% last year, compared to 11% the year before.
Within the annual report, under the heading, Family Support Services, there was no data on family support services in the 2014-15 financial year, which is deeply concerning.
Forgive me, Madam Speaker, regarding my last comment about no data on family support services at the time the report was prepared. This is referring to the Children’s Commissioner’s annual report examining the DCF report, so is not quoting directly from the DCF report, but rather the Children’s Commissioner’s annual report.
Under the Children’s Commissioner’s report in regard to abuse in care, on page 78 the commissioner noted:
I place these comments and data from the Department of Children and Families’ annual report and the Children’s Commissioner’s report on the record to highlight areas where there needs to be government attention and focus to prevent young people becoming victims – where they are reported. Hopefully we will see an increase in reporting that would progress to a court case.
As I have said, opposition members welcome the amendments to this bill to support vulnerable witnesses, but we also call upon the government on its duty and responsibility to be focused on the other end of the spectrum, not just the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, in supporting and reducing incidents of harm. I know it is not easy or simple, but the fact we have seen a decrease in the resourcing of agencies is deeply worrying.
I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House. As I said, members of the opposition support this bill. Thank you.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I support the amendments that have been brought forward to the Domestic and Family Violence Act, the Evidence Act and the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act. I also concur with many of the matters raised by the member for Nhulunbuy, who always does a thorough job investigating these changes. It is sometimes difficult with changes to law; they require a bit of understanding.
I have some queries as to why it has taken so long, because there has been a lot of emphasis over the last few years about sexual abuse of children, especially through the Little Children are Sacred report. It will be good if the minister explains why this has taken a considerable length of time. It is not only in his time in government, but the previous government as well. Were there issues that required this length of time to bring those changes to the House to be approved?
I support the recommendation for section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act:
That means that the definition of ‘vulnerable witness’ is a witness in proceedings:
That is more definitive in explaining what that means. There is also the change to the Evidence Act which specifically provides that a vulnerable witness does not need to be present in a courtroom where their pre-recorded statement of evidence is played. I think that is appropriate. There is talk about expanding the operations of lower courts.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 6 students from Durack Primary School, accompanied by their teacher, Julia Walsh. We also have Year 6 students from Bakewell Primary School, accompanied by their teacher, Peter Usher.
On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD: Also, 21D of the Evidence Act adds an additional principle about providing that all efforts should be made to ensure matters that could delay or interrupt a child’s evidence are determined pre-trial.
Clause 5 talks about an amendment to the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act to:
In the minister’s second reading speech he explains:
Further, minister, you note that the Northern Territory Legal Aid Commission has been consulted in relation to potential resource implications if they are required to appear to present questions in relation to what I just read. Does it require a person to have a legal background or could it be anyone? Because all they ask in the first place is that the appointed person cannot provide any legal service. Can that position be someone who does not necessarily have a legal background? It is only a minor question, but those two paragraphs contradict each another. If you can answer that during the …
Mr Elferink: Technically yes, but generally, no.
Mr WOOD: Okay. Could you help explain this – it was a bit legal eagle. In the second reading speech you said, under the amended section 5 of the evidence and procedure for sexual offences – legal people might certainly have a better understanding than me, but you explain in the second reading:
Mr Elferink: That is the rule of Browne v Dunn.
Mr WOOD: The famous case of Browne v Dunn. If you could explain what that means in layman’s terms it would be good.
There is a section which I could not find in the second reading. I could find it in the explanatory notes, but when I read the explanatory notes I got more confused. It is the section that relates to changes to section 13 of the amendment of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act. It relates to:
I looked at the second reading and I could not see what all that meant. I have a rough idea, but we are talking about an amendment of a sexual offences act, and here we have ‘criminal liability of executive officer of body corporate - evidential burden of proof on defence’.
Can you elaborate on where this section of the act would apply in practice? It seems, when dealing with court cases or individuals, we then come across ‘criminal liability of executive officer of body corporate’. As I said, the explanatory notes mention it, but when I read it I got more confused as to what it was all about.
Mr Elferink: I think you want to understand the rationale behind the language.
Mr WOOD: That is right, the rationale and why it is in the bill. Could you give an example of where this would apply? They are my only concerns.
I take the same point as the member for Nhulunbuy – it is not the only bill. The number of bills we get here which are trying to fix a problem after the event – there is no easy solution to the issues you are dealing with here. There will be members of this parliament debating similar issues for many years to come, but, hopefully, less of that debate. Just because we have difficult issues, it does not mean we strive to continue to change things in a world where this piece of legislation is not needed.
We have to teach respect. It is one of those things that, to me, has drifted out of our society. You might be told you are an old-fashioned so-and-so for opening the door for a lady. I was taught to stand for a woman on the bus. Some women may say that is offensive because it tends to put them in a position which they do not appreciate. Regardless of whether you agree with that, what was drilled into me at home was to have respect for other people. It did not have to be a woman; it could be an old person who had to go into the shop and you needed to open the door. It was basic things like saying ‘thank you’ and ‘please’. It was caring for other people. I wonder whether we have that society now. Many members of parliament go to school assemblies and probably hand out prizes. How many people say ‘thank you’? When someone thanks me I nearly say, ‘Wow. Great. Thank you.’ I play Santa Claus a lot. I give out lots of presents, and it is nice to hear someone appreciate that they are being given something.
I wonder, in a more general way, if we have lost respect for one another. Do we not care about one another to the point where, in some cases, we are violent towards people because we do not get what we want? Again, I suppose a lot depends on the way you were raised. Do we have problems where parents who were not raised to be respectful pass that lack of respect on to their children, and so the cycle goes on? I think back to my mother, and I was told never to lose my temper. When I have I regretted it, because there was a belief in my family that it was the wrong thing to do. You should control yourself and not lose your temper. When do people get violent? It is when they have lost their temper. If may be accentuated because of alcohol, but there is a lack of control.
It would be a very large task, but even though sometimes it is taught at schools we need to bring back those notions of respect for ourselves and our parents. A good old piece of the Ten Commandments is to respect your mother and father – and it is a long time since that was around – and to respect everyone as being equal as fellow humans, whether it is your wife, husband or children. That does not mean you cannot have debates or disagreements, but do it in a respectful way.
I hear the language used today, even in the media, and it is not respectful language. A lot of language is swearing. It is certainly not respectful, and it is disrespectful to women. I have heard women using it. I umpire football and I have to pull people up for the language they use because it is disrespectful. We have a society that has slowly eroded those values. It might be that some parts of our society do not want that respect. They see that as placing them as unequal, but I do not accept that. The things I was taught are good things.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of 22 students from Nemarluk Primary School, accompanied by their Principal, Lorraine Hodgson. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD: They can see how much respect I have for Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: They waved.
Mr WOOD: I do not know how you would change it, but if we want people in our society who promote better behaviour, they are the values we need to reinforce in our society. Once upon a time you would never hear a swear word on the television. You certainly hear them now; they are not even beeped out. There is some atrocious language around, and many movies are quite violent and explicit. I have always said I would prefer White Ribbon Day to be against violence, regardless of whether it is violence against men, women, boys or girls. We need to reinforce the fact that violence is not the answer to the issues we face today. We need to do that in a peaceful and compassionate way, respecting other people’s points of view.
I thank the minister for introducing this important legislation. Hopefully it will protect the people who need protecting and will make it easier to bring those people who have caused violence against vulnerable witnesses to justice. At the same time, we have to look at the basis of why we need this legislation and whether we can turn our society around enough so this legislation will hardly ever be used in the future. That is wishful thinking, but you still need to have positive goals, otherwise you would have to ask why we are we here.
Mr STYLES (Business): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for presenting this legislation. I agree with not only the minister, but the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson; this is a very important issue. The way the Westminster system and our court systems work in our society means we need to protect vulnerable witnesses, be it old or young people. Young people are particularly vulnerable. It is very important.
As a former police prosecutor and school-based police officer working in the community, I have considerable experience in working with vulnerable witnesses. Over the years I have thought about what we need to do as a community. I take on board what the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson said. It is extremely important that we educate people on how the system works so they understand why there is a need to protect vulnerable witnesses. We also need to offer support to all members of our community. It may not necessarily be financial support, but emotional support. Communities can provide support to those in our community who need help, support and comfort so they know there are people who care.
We want to make sure children are not isolated and families can function freely in our community. That has a lot to do with the policies that governments introduce. I looked at some figures this morning in relation to crime statistics being down. It has to do with what governments do with their policing policies. It has to do with our social policy, which is extremely important because human beings are a community’s greatest asset. We need to look after these people. I have heard the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson in this debate so far. The member for Nhulunbuy said that it is not easy or simple to prevent people from becoming victims. I agree; if you do not have those ideas or the experience in those areas, it is hard. I heard the member for Nelson say there is no easy solution. Again if you do not have the experience, knowledge or good advice then it cannot be easy or simple.
On this side of the House, for quite some time, I have been working on a solution to some of these problems. It is an innovative program involving Neighbourhood Activity Centres. This is about everything the opposition members and the member for Nelson are talking about. The amendments in this bill are very important. I agree with both of them; one of the most important things we can do as a government, a society and a community is make sure our vulnerable people and children are protected. How do we do that? Some say it is not easy or simple and others say there is no easy solution.
You have to look at what we do at the grassroots. I will tell a little story which follows on from what the member for Nelson said about people in our community having respect; perhaps that has become a little disjointed in this modern day. I will tell you a little story from when I was growing up; probably about the same age as the people sitting in the gallery at the moment.
I lived in a short street with four houses in it between two very long streets. On the corner of that long street was a lady by the name of Mrs Downing. Mr Downing was also there. They were retired farmers and wonderful people. They had contributed to their community for many years, providing some of the staple items that sustain any community. I used to go into town for music lessons and all sorts of things. I tried to learn to play the guitar; I could play it a bit but did not succeed greatly at it. On the way home I used to find Mrs Downing at the railway station, and she would have string bags full of groceries that she had purchased in town. My job, as my mother said, being a farmer’s daughter – she said, ‘Mrs Downing is an older lady; if you see her carrying those string bags you should offer to carry them home for her.’
What happens when you are young and you do those things is Mrs Downing says to you, ‘Thanks very much, Peter, that is a very nice thing to do’, and all the other accolades you get for being polite, nice and looking after the older people in your community. It is very important to look after the old folks because they once looked after us. That is what my mother taught me. I took that on as a very young boy and, as the years went by, I grew very close to Mrs Downing; she thought it was wonderful. The other children in the street used to do the same thing for her. She lived in a very supportive community where she was not afraid to move around. If anything happened she was not afraid to talk to people because she knew she had the community’s confidence. It is about people having the confidence to move around the community.
When I was working as a school-based police officer I saw disconnect in our community between older people and younger people. I started to think about how we could get this back. How can we get to Mrs Downing so she is not afraid to walk in her community or for someone to offer help? These days I talk to seniors and they say they probably would not give their string bag to someone who offered to help because they think they will run away with it. That is what they tell me and it has hit home with me for many years.
Over 15 years I started to gather all this information and put it together. In my role as a community police officer, and as a police prosecutor, I saw the victims. It is really sad when we have so many victims. How do we change that? I came up with a model that I pestered my colleagues about called Neighbourhood Activity Centres. If you ask any one of them they will tell you they hear from me ad infinitum about school-based policing and Neighbourhood Activity Centres. I can see the Treasurer sitting there, nodding his head and smiling. In the end, my colleagues agreed that we needed to support the new initiative and concept of Neighbourhood Activity Centres.
The Neighbourhood Activity Centre pilot program is being run at Sanderson Middle School. I worked there as a school-based police officer and it was perfect because it is in my electorate where I can fully support it, not only as a local member, but as a Territorian. I worked with Liz Veel, who is now the principal, in the classroom many years ago when I was a school-based police officer. Liz Veel, somewhere between 10 and 15 years ago, was fortunate enough to win a trip to Canada to look at some of the school programs that were occurring there. She went to a school that runs similarly to what the broad Neighbourhood Activity Centre is about. She came back and spoke to people, and there was not a great deal of support for it 10 years ago. When I came along, with my concept that I had been working on for 15 years, she leapt at the opportunity to discuss it. She also knows, in the education field, that the closer our community is the better off people are. If you understand what is happening in your community then you do not fear your community.
There is an old saying: fear is fear of the unknown. That is where many people get their fear from. If you are not afraid because you know what is going on in your community and that there is support right across the community, not only from the police but from people within the community and in your neighbourhood, then you have less fear and you are less likely to be a victim.
The member for Nhulunbuy quoted some statistics, and it was sad to hear them. We, as a community, need to do something about it. Everything she said about what government should be doing we are already doing. I hope for bipartisan support for Neighbourhood Activity Centres. Whoever wins the next election, I will hold that government to account and pull these things out of Hansard and say, ‘This is what you say the government should be doing; well, this is what we are doing.’
I want to give the people listening and watching, and those in the gallery, some idea of the things we do to build young people’s confidence, and not just young people, but everyone in our community.
Let us look at it. I took this idea to the Police Commissioner last year when we were putting this together, and he got his executive team together. They support it 110% and see this initiative as something that can change what is happening in our community. They are on board.
The Department of Education and its minister are on board. The Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services, as well as Cabinet and our parliamentary wing, also supports this fantastic initiative. This is the pilot program; once we get the nuts and bolts sorted out it will go Territory-wide.
People from interstate look at it and they are watching. They want to take the intellectual property interstate. Most of this intellectual property I developed over 15 years, and I am very happy to gift that intellectual property to anyone who wants to take up the opportunity to emulate what we are doing in the Northern Territory. That is something everyone can take. I have numerous files on this initiative and am willing to share with anyone.
Let us look at some of the things we might do to build young people’s confidence, and all those other people who are likely to become victims. Remember, strong people who understand what is going on around them are less likely to be victims. The figures and percentages the member for Nhulunbuy quoted are what we are targeting to reduce.
Not only are we enacting legislation to make it easier for victims to not be intimidated in courts and after the events, but we are trying to ensure they do not become victims. That is something we are working very strongly on.
Let us look at what is happening at Sanderson Middle School in the Neighbourhood Activity Centre. We have been very fortunate to get the services of Paul Wyatt, a guy who has worked in the community and is well known there. It is something you want to get right. When he was brought into that project everyone, bar none, said we have a round peg in a round hole and that he is totally suitable.
He has made advances in engaging with the community and with business. This is not about throwing money at the problem. When I was in opposition, the previous government used to say, ‘We spent more money on this and more money on that’. We had to continually remind the ALP government that money is an input and not an outcome.
We are looking for outcomes. It is not necessarily about money; it is about the community getting involved and making sure they can give. There are so many people who have great hearts and just want to give. I have been talking to seniors and seniors’ organisations about this. There are many people who have been in this world for a while who understand what victims are about. They do not want to see more victims, nor do they want to be victims themselves. They want a better community. They realise they need to contribute as a community, and they want to. They do not necessarily want to sit around the house all day watching television; they want to be out there, loved, wanted and needed. That is one of the things Maslow talks about in his hierarchy of needs. They need those things. They want to get out and help. Some women talk to me about when their kids leave home, especially when they have been a homemaker for much of their life. When they get to the stage of retiring and the kids are at university or living somewhere else, these women just want to give. In their local neighbourhood they can go to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre and do all sorts of things to help.
How do we do that? Homework centres. I was at a function recently and was talking to a couple of older people who have retired. They said they would love to help some of the young people who are struggling. Neighbourhood Activity Centres are facilitating homework centres to get these people to help those in the neighbourhood who are less fortunate than themselves.
Madam SPEAKER: I advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of two Year 9 classes from Dripstone Middle School, accompanied by their teachers Irini Pikoulos and Marita Fitzpatrick. We have had so many students in today. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr STYLES: What a great day to be here – all these young people. We are talking about the opportunities we are providing in the northern suburbs in giving people activities that do not cost money, or if they do it is very little.
One of the things I hear from young people is that there are things to do, but they cost money. We would like more things to do that do not cost money, such as abseiling off the back of the school building, going fishing and learning about things that can lead to future employment. Let us look at after school opportunities for lagging students. These seniors want to help.
Yesterday I spoke to the manager at Coles Northlakes. Geoff is a nice bloke and I wanted to reinforce what previous managers had done with donating food. I doorknock in one suburb of my electorate where there are many migrant women. The problem is that we see too many migrant women who suffer domestic violence and other problems. There is frustration in the household that ends in abuse. Sadly, some of them are physically abused and sexually abused, and things deteriorate.
When I knock on some of these doors I find the husband, who can speak English, is at work. If the woman is at home and struggles with English, which is the case in many migrant families, mum has to get the daughter to interpret. I stand at the door talking to these people, with a 10-year-old interpreting for mum. How does a 10-year-old child translate from her mother that she was bashed last night after the kids went to bed or was sexually abused? How do you get your 10-year-old daughter to translate that to someone at the door so she can say there is a problem?
I speak to people who lead organisations and multicultural groups and I get feedback on what is going on there. We make sure mum can come to the school with the daughter, and you can find all these wonderful people in the community who are retired and want to give. They give one-on-one lessons in conversational English. Once they get into conversational English, they start to pick up the language a lot faster. Once they get a fairly good grasp on English, as opposed to their mother tongue, they can start articulating to people what the problems are.
When we get these migrant women to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, other women start to talk to them, comfort them and build their confidence. Once you get their confidence up, information can pass. The women in our community, who have time to spend with those migrant women, can then make sure these things are happening less and less in our community.
Much of the time, mum has a problem when she has little kids or kids at school. After school, what does she do in order to come to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre when it opens after school? Someone has to cook dinner. At the Neighbourhood Activity Centre we are getting food from my friend, Geoff, at Coles. He donates food that will expire that day, which might be some mince, and you can get the spaghetti that has nearly expired. Then the commercial kitchens at the school at Sanderson will prepare meals. This serves a number of purposes. There are young, vulnerable people who, instead of running around in the parks at night, or looking for something to steal so they can buy something to eat – these people exist in our community – can be at the Neighbourhood Activity Centre where there are young people learning to cook a meal that might be the only meal they have had that day. Sadly, there are children whose parents do not care about them. We have heard about that in the Chamber many times.
This is the start of what we are doing. It started a couple of weeks ago and will improve and increase as more people come on board. This is an initiative that will help feed young children who will not get a feed that night. Many people in the community will say it should be the parents’ responsibility, but the community is suffering. These kids become victims because they do not fully understand what is happening around them. We need to educate them and make sure they are in a safe, secure environment.
I know some ladies and home economics teachers who have offered to run these programs after school. They do not have to be there every day; there are enough of them to run this. Between the two home economics kitchens at Sanderson Middle School there is a large room. In previous days it was set up as a restaurant. The basic VET in Schools program they were running was about tourism and training people to work in restaurants so young people could get jobs. The plan is to open that again.
The migrant woman who is learning one-on-one English can come there, and while she is learning, the kids are on the oval playing bubble soccer, hockey, football or other things being run by the community, and having some fun. The mum can be at the Neighbourhood Activity Centre with her kids and does not have to cook at home. Dad can come straight there from work and they can go upstairs into the home economics centre and have something to eat. She does not have to cook dinner so it is a bit less pressure on mum. The kids will be learning and serving the meals, and there will probably be some restaurateurs who might offer the kids a part-time job. That is what used to happen there and it will happen again.
When you are looking at building confidence in your community you can see that there are many aspects to this. To a large degree, if you do not have the experience or have never been involved in this, as was said earlier in this debate, it cannot be easy or simple, and there is no easy solution. But there is. I hope those opposite will continue to support the government in its endeavours to make sure we can get people sorted in our community and give them confidence.
There are about 40 kids attending every day after school at the bike workshop, fixing bikes. We have organised with the police for abandoned bikes that are not auctioned to be donated. We have bike shops giving bits and pieces because they look at what they can do for their community. I applaud those people from businesses who get involved with the Neighbourhood Activity Centre and are giving. They were also giving last year, and their contribution to their community, be it small, medium or large, will make a difference.
I congratulate Ben, who is teaching all these young blokes how to fix bikes. There are now kids who have bikes they can ride, not only to and from school, but on the new BMX track. They were there not last weekend but the weekend before. The Neighbourhood Activity Centre had some equipment, soil, woodchips and other things donated to it. This is the community pulling together to create things for people to do. We have a BMX track on a block of land right next to Sanderson Middle School.
There are plans to increase the garden there, which teaches young people about irrigation, fencing and a range of real-life skills. It is about teaching mathematics, not necessarily in the classroom, but in the real world where they will have to survive and get a job. If people walk out with real skills and understanding, they are less likely to become a victim because they can see what is going on.
When I go doorknocking, people say to me, ‘Pete, what are the five most important things to you?’ I ask them what the important things are to them. The first for me is law and order; the next is health and then education. Those are three very important things. Number four is a vibrant economy to pay for those three. We need a vibrant economy, and you cannot do it on borrowed money. You have to generate economy and wealth. The fifth thing is hope. They all nod and say, ‘You are right’. If you do not have hope, you do not get up in the morning.
This government is making sure it works with our community and the business community, and generates hope. That is what makes people get up in the morning, which is what makes people want to get involved. It is what makes businesses want to contribute to our Neighbourhood Activity Centre. They hope what they do will make a better and safer community for many of us.
Retired teachers are coming on board to do a range of things. We are very fortunate at Sanderson Middle School to have the school of music. That facility is absolutely fantastic. We have seen the school bands go from half a dozen to hundreds. So many people there are getting into music.
Paul Wyatt, the director of the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, has his own community band. People in this Chamber, on both sides, may be aware that Paul and his band played at many of the fundraisers. They do not charge; they just do the community work. There is a bunch of good people who contribute their time, free of charge, to community events so those communities can raise money.
We have an area outside, the general purpose area, which we will use for concerts. Come Dry Season we will have the school band putting on concerts there. What a great thing, for young people to have a venue. I am in the process of lobbying my colleagues to get lights for the oval there so we can play bubble soccer at night. Bubble soccer, for those who may not be initiated, involves a big round ball full of air; you play soccer and roll around the place. It is a lot of fun. That is happening there already.
I was doorknocking in Anula the other day and many people said, ‘We love the park down there; if you put lights down there it would be fantastic. We go down there with our kids and play, but when it gets a bit dark we need to come home.’ They think then they can stay longer and get their kids out and get them active. One of the things governments are trying to get people to do these days is become more active. It is better for your mental and physical health to be out. A lot of activity releases endorphins, which gives you a lift, which means you are less likely to be a victim.
Understanding what is happening in the world is about making sure you do not become a victim. It is particularly important for young people – to the young people sitting in the gallery – that you do not become a victim. I hope some of you, and those from Dripstone High School who are in the gallery today, can go across from Leanyer, where you live, to Vanderlin Drive and go to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre.
Let us look at some of the other things we do. There are jam sessions, if you are into music. Dripstone High School is into music; it has a good school band. My sons went to Dripstone High School and were in the band. It is a really good, music-orientated school. It will be great to see all those people from Dripstone come to Sanderson Middle School, where the pilot program for the Neighbourhood Activity Centre is.
I think back to some of the more vulnerable people in our community who cannot get out. It has been raised with me by one of my seniors, who is a retired driving instructor. She would be very happy to give driving lessons to some of the less fortunate people who struggle to get it right. You have to build up that confidence, and if you have someone there on a regular basis looking after some of these people to get them the basics, then they can take driving lessons through all sorts of sponsored courses, such as the Passport to Drive, the Multicultural Council of the NT or other programs. There are vulnerable people.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask that the member be granted an extension of time, pursuant of Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: I imagine most people in this House have a drivers licence. It is a passport to freedom. I remember the day I got mine; I was so happy because I could get in my little car, which did not cost me much in those days, but it went. That enabled me to visit friends and move around the community, and it was fantastic. I did it in far less time than on my bike prior to getting a drivers licence. It means a lot to people, especially mothers with little kids - if we can help those people, it gets them out and gives them more confidence to go out. Once you get out and about you can start to do things that give you more confidence. It is probably less likely that you will suffer from domestic violence, for instance. We get figures from across the community. This is not only about migrant women. This is about all women in our community with kids. They are generally the primary caregivers, but I know that is changing.
With my children, I was the primary caregiver for about seven or eight months of their life, so I got them from when they were babies until just before they turned one. I understand what it is like to be at home with three babies. Having a drivers licence, it was heaven to put them in their car seats, visit my mother and ask her for a bit of free advice about what I was doing. It was important, so we need to do that. This is what the Neighbourhood Activity Centre is about. It is also what the member for Nhulunbuy was talking about when she said it is not easy or simple – these things are easy, simple things that we can do to empower people. I reiterate for those listening: if you empower people, you have fewer victims.
Let us look at some of the stuff people do. I talked about some of the women who have already volunteered to run cooking classes. Some of these people have left employment, were not part of the digital age and struggle to use a mobile phone. As we all know, if you want to get your DVD player or recorder at home sorted, you ask a 10-year-old child to program it for you. They are really smart and good at that; they know this stuff.
I have spoken to some of the older ladies who volunteered and said, ‘Do you understand what Skype is?’, and they say, ‘What?’ ‘Skype. You know, Skype!’ ‘No, I have no idea what you are talking about.’ They do not understand they can get on an iPad and onto Skype, and that if they want to talk to family or grandchildren who are somewhere else they can look at them while they are talking. When you talk to them and show them this stuff they are amazed. ‘This is like something out of Star Trek or Star Wars.’ There are people in our community who could use some instructions from some of the 10-year-old people who are running around.
We have to get them into one place, a common place with a safe environment. As I mentioned before, the Commissioner of Police is well aware of this broad community-based Neighbourhood Activity Centre and the importance of getting people connected. If somebody’s grandmother is teaching young people how to cook, when they have finished their meal they can then go to the computer labs, where kids will be doing all sorts of activities, and they can teach grandma how to Skype her grandchildren anywhere in the world. What a wonderful thing.
This goes back to what I opened with, when I talked about Mrs Downing who lived on the corner of my street when I was a kid. It is about building trust. When Mrs Downing was walking down the street, if someone harassed her or wanted to steal her string bag full of goodies, the young people in the street would say, ‘Excuse me; you leave Mrs Downing alone. She is our friend.’ Mrs Downing could then walk down the street confidently and not become a victim. This is not only because of her confidence, but because everyone else in the community who knew her felt good because we all exchange things in this community-based place. Those people – and we probably still have them because it is not a utopia – will find it harder to perpetrate crimes or offences on people in our community because people will have more confidence.
This is a very important factor in what we do on this side of the House; we do what others find to be not easy or simple.
Let us look at some of the stuff in relation to people’s health and wellbeing. Going back to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, it states we need safety and security of body, employment, resources, morality, family, health and property. That is in the second block from the bottom. When you give people an education – when you have people in the community who will help struggling kids get through and raise them so they do not feel isolated from their peers – that is the sort of thing you build.
You have kids running around the ovals – I cannot go through this list; there are about 300 activities on it – having fun and getting their adrenaline rush from jumping off the top of buildings at schools attached to an abseiling rope. They are doing fun things like learning from fishing clubs about how to fish from a boat, and when they pass the test and get all the ticks in the boxes – showing they know how to tie a reef knot, what a fender is, what a springer is and how to tie a boat up – the fishing club can then say to these young people, ‘How would you like to come out fishing next Saturday?’ There are kids in our community who cannot afford to buy a photo of a boat, let alone go on one.
We are building confidence in these young people. They go out on a boat and drive it. They get to understand what is going on and learn that they could have a future in the marine industry. Where do we get our skippers, deckhands and engineers from? We have to teach them at an early age.
It is not the time to discuss all the VET initiatives this government has, but we have the ability to get our young people trained and interested in things at an early age. Interested, confident kids do not become victims. They do not become victims of sexual assault. If they know they have a network of people they can talk to and who will support them, and they understand what is going on around them, they are far more likely to communicate their concerns. Instead of waiting until these crimes have been perpetrated for quite some time, the alarm bells go off in these young people and in older people that something is not right. Then you can get people, like school counsellors, to talk to them. They can refer them to professionals.
Not everyone is a professional. I think my mother did a pretty good job raising me and she was not a professional. She taught me so much of who I am today. She did not have a degree in counselling, yet I think she did a pretty good job. There are people – mothers and fathers and people in our community – who have the ability to give anyone in our community the confidence to sit down and talk about it. This is the crux of some of the things that have been said here today.
We have this fantastic bill to make changes to the vulnerable witness legislation, but the comment in this debate has been that the government needs to do this and that before the event. I relish the opportunity to stand in this House and not only inform those members opposite, but those people watching and listening, and, of course, those fantastic young people in the gallery, who make up about 20% of our population and are 100% of our future, because we will handball all this to them in a few years and they will be the leaders.
Leadership is about getting out there and doing things. It is not necessarily about spending money. Leadership is about making sure our communities are safe, fun environments for people to grow up in, work in, live in and retire in. As a government, we have acknowledged that. I can assure people listening that we are doing the things the opposition said we should be doing. We are leading the way in the country. There are people from interstate looking at what we are doing.
I had a conversation with Liz Veel, the Principal of Sanderson Middle School, and she said she went to Canada to see what they were doing. She said it will be ironic because this will be a fabulously successful program and we might have to sponsor some Canadian people to come and see what we have done here. She believes, as do the director, my colleagues and I, that we will lead the way in preventing people from becoming vulnerable witnesses and victims. That is our aim. If we are not working for our community and our family, what are we working for?
I will close on something the member for Nelson said. He spoke about respect. I go back to some of my opening words about Mrs Downing and her string bags. I learnt to respect older people when I was a kid. My mother taught me that and I am very grateful. I still respect older people. I have said today and will say it again: look after the old folks because they once looked after you. I was one of those people they looked after.
My obligation to my community is to ensure that everyone in the community – or as many people as I possibly can influence – has respect. We do that through things like the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, other government initiatives, and the crime initiatives which are working and will work even better as time goes by. We have been given this opportunity. When you look at crime figures you can see they have reduced and engagement with the community is going up. It is a good story.
Even though people say it is not easy or simple and that there is no easy solution, I am very proud to be part of a government that is finding solutions across many portfolios, which are working and making a real difference to Territorians’ lives.
Debate suspended.
The Assembly suspended.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, I present a petition from 1376 petitioners, including 1162 electronic petitioners, relating to medical termination of pregnancy. This petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 123, I inform honourable members that responses to Petition Nos 54, 55 and 57 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website.
A copy of the response will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to the petitioners.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 will strengthen existing vulnerable witness protections, thereby reducing the impact and trauma of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses. This will also ensure that witnesses are more confident and comfortable giving evidence, which will likely lead to more successful prosecutions. This government is committed to supporting victims to ensure safer homes and a safer society.
The Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 will contribute to these goals and will ensure that vulnerable witnesses are provided the utmost protection and support. Consequently, today I rise in this House in support of this bill introduced by my colleague, the Minister for Justice and member for Port Darwin. The amendments to this bill are extremely important.
The purpose of this bill is to implement a number of recommendations of the Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report. The Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report arose from the Little Children are Sacred report and Closing the Gap of Indigenous Disadvantage: A Generational Plan of Action. These documents recommended a review of all legislation relating to court procedures for vulnerable witnesses and child victims of alleged sexual abuse in the Northern Territory.
Child sexual offences are among the worst crimes that can be committed against a person. The negative impacts are lasting, and the statistics are a stark reminder of how difficult it is for child victims to have a happy and healthy adult life.
The Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report contained nine recommendations focusing on ways to reduce the impact of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses. Subsequent to the finalisation of the review, two further issues were raised by stakeholders and were included in that report. I believe the bill put forward by the Attorney-General will only serve to strengthen existing vulnerable witness provisions and protections.
Often, for victims and witnesses of crime, giving evidence is one of the hardest parts of criminal proceedings. Reliving something they are trying so hard to forget, often while fearing for their own safety, is an enormous burden. In fact, during my time as a police officer, with some 21 years of service, I dealt with many people who refused to go to court or go on record for fear of repercussions. It will be hard to give examples of that other than to generalise about a few things I recall during my time as a police officer.
So many women, particularly those who have been victims of violent crime, are incredibly unwilling to go to court for fear of the unknown, fear of what lays beyond making that statement and giving that information to police. There is also the fear of repercussions and retribution, but there is also fear of a system they do not understand, that being the court and justice system.
There is the fear of being a witness, the fear of being taken into an open court and having to relive the details of those crimes. This bill to amend the current legislation will go a long way to reducing some of the perceived impacts that victims will feel once they provide evidence to police in the form of a statement before having to make a subsequent court appearance.
I remember many cases of women sitting around with broken limbs after being savagely assaulted and, no doubt, many people who had been sexually assaulted and not reported the crime because they feared what lay beyond reporting it to the police. The vulnerable witness legislation is intended to minimise any harm that could be caused to a vulnerable witness when giving evidence, balancing the interests of justice with the interests of giving quality evidence by that witness.
The Country Liberal government knows the current legislation does not go far enough. I am pleased to note that Recommendations 1, 3 and 4 regarding monitoring the effectiveness of the vulnerable witness legislation, the use of screens at the Alice Springs Magistrates Court and the imposing nature of judicial dress have been implemented by non-legislative means. I am certain these changes are already having a positive impact on vulnerable witnesses across the Northern Territory. In order to implement the recommendations of the Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report, the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 amends several key sections.
The proposed amendments will strengthen existing vulnerable witness provisions and protections, thereby reducing the impact and trauma of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses. This will also ensure witnesses are more confident and comfortable giving evidence, which will likely lead to more successful prosecutions. Safety is the right of every Territorian, particularly vulnerable witnesses who have already been through so much. That is why our government has placed a strong focus on strengthening our police, justice and correctional systems. Under the Country Liberal government there is a coordinated approach to protecting the most vulnerable in our society. We want a justice system that is contemporary and fair.
In my home town of Katherine the biggest blight on our community is, undoubtedly, drunkenness. It often leads to criminal offending. On that point, the difference in Katherine since the introduction of police at bottle shops has been as stark as it has been remarkable. The levels of public drunkenness in Katherine, as is true in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, have dropped significantly, which has led to a corresponding drop in the amount of violent offending that occurs, usually after dark. Hospital presentations, calls to St John Ambulance and our crime statistics have reduced significantly. That is a testament to this government’s commitment to dealing with this problem at its root cause.
As a government, we uphold the many pillars that deal with matters in the criminal justice system by supporting witnesses, and reducing crime and the impact of it on the community, victims and witnesses. It is important to always remember that women and children in Katherine, Darwin, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and everywhere in the Territory are protected.
This Country Liberal government is committed to ensuring the burden on vulnerable witnesses is eased, and this bill goes a long way to doing just that. The Northern Territory’s Court of Summary Jurisdiction is an exceptionally busy place, with more than 11 000 criminal files processed across the Territory in a single year. There are many victims of crime represented in those files who are among the most vulnerable in our society. Each and every one of those people deserves justice to be delivered in a sensitive and less intrusive fashion.
As a former police officer who served in Katherine, Alice Springs and Darwin, along with several regional and remote communities, I can say these proposed changes to the bill will be overwhelmingly welcomed.
Keeping Territorians safe is at the heart of all the Country Liberal government does. Making people feel protected in whatever environment they find themselves is also at the front of our minds. We are seeing real results for Territorians through the introduction of our Pillars of Justice strategy.
Under the Country Liberal government there is a coordinated approach. Pillar five of the justice, law and order reform strategies specifically focuses on victims. This multipronged approach includes a domestic and family violence reduction strategy which is a comprehensive strategy to address, reduce and prevent the unacceptably high level of domestic and family violence in the Northern Territory.
Another prong is keeping serious sex offenders locked up. Serious sex offenders who pose a high risk to the community will now continue to be locked up or monitored indefinitely.
The Northern Territory government is working in partnership with Victims of Crime NT to ensure this program is as effective as it can be. Our government’s comprehensive criminal law reform strategy is solutions-based and has tangible targets. It cannot be underestimated how important it is that victims of crime not only are protected and supported, but also feel protected and supported. I am proud to be part of a government that is leading this important reform to give victims all the assistance and support they require. These comprehensive changes to the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill offer solutions to what are decade-old problems.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this bill in its entirety.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank honourable members for their contribution to this debate, and I have a number of explanations to make to members. I note the presence of the member for Nelson, so I will readjust my response so I deal with his matters first, if that gives him any comfort.
I take a small issue with one of the things the member for Nelson said about it taking too long. That places me, as a minister in this government, on the horns of a dilemma because the most regular criticism I hear is that we rush things through. I am not entirely sure how to respond to the criticism that I have consulted too broadly. I think I am one of the more consultative people in this room in relation to getting legislation out and about before I introduce it to this place. As much as I like to think I have covered the field over any bill I bring to this House, invariably one hears other people’s opinions, and they come from a perspective that you do not anticipate and which your imagination does not extend to.
For that reason I am happy to go through a longer process, especially with something as complex as evidence. I am one of the strange parliamentarians who believe, in spite of the fact that I have probably produced half the legislation of this government, that we should question the need for any legislation prior to bringing it to this House. There is an expectation, as a general principle, that we will cast a net into the future in the form of legislation and hope to catch only one type of fish. How often do we find that our well-intentioned legislation leads to anomalous or unintended consequences? For that reason one has to, from time to time, be a little more cautious when stepping through the legislative process, particularly when you are dealing with something as complex as the rules and laws of evidence.
I am a champion of the adoption in the Northern Territory - in fact, I drove it as the Attorney-General - of the uniform evidence legislation which is operating in most jurisdictions in this country. Nevertheless, it did not mean I repealed the Evidence Act of the Northern Territory, nor for that matter touched the Evidence Act dealing with sexual offences, which is a separate legislative instrument. We have a number of legislative instruments that touch on the evidentiary environment, but much of what is in that legislation is collected from many centuries of the creation of the common law. It is a truism that all too often we try to adopt legislation which already exists in the common law domain. For that reason we step tentatively into this space.
I take it from listening to the debate before this House that this bill will pass unopposed by honourable members. I thank them for their support because ultimately we are talking about vulnerable witnesses.
I note the questions raised by the member in relation to the rule in Browne v Dunn. The rule in Browne v Dunn, put simply, is a notion of fairness in the judicial system. As far back as and even before the late 1800s people would go into a courtroom and cross-examine a witness. It would be only reasonable in the process of cross-examining a witness that you touched on a matter you were to later put to the court in regard to the credibility of that witness. It is impossible to suggest that a person, in your summation in a trial, was an unreliable witness when you had not put to that person the grounds of their unreliability while cross-examining them in a courtroom.
To argue in front of a jury that witness A was unreliable because he was the second half cousin of the accused, without challenging that witness about their relationship with the accused, is not acceptable. Lord Chancellor Herschell, in Browne v Dunn, addressed this issue. I quote Lord Herschell from Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R, 67 at 70-71:
Member for Nelson, place yourself, if you like, in the witness box to be cross-examined on an assault you saw on the football field against your wife, who happened to be playing football on that day. As a result of that, an obvious thing to raise with you as a witness is that you are related by marriage, hence it was your wife who was the victim of this assault. You would say, ‘Yes, that is the case’. Then it would be open for me to ask you questions about any potential bias you may have as a witness.
As a result of that, I can then say in subsequent summation to a jury, ‘You may not want to rely too heavily on the witness who gave evidence because of the bias he has to his wife’. It is up to the jury or the court to make a determination as to whether or not it places any weight on that evidence. It is impossible under the rule in Browne v Dunn for me to cross-examine you in relation to what you witness and then excuse you from the witness box and say to the court or the jury that might be listening to the matter, ‘He is clearly an unreliable witness because he is married to the victim’. You cannot put any weight on that. That would be an unfair treatment of the witness because it does not give them a capacity, as Lord Herschell described, to defend the integrity of their evidence.
What you should be given is an opportunity to say any number of things. You may say, ‘Absolutely; I want to see that bugger go to gaol for doing what he did to my wife’, in which case I can then impeach the quality of your evidence to the jury. You may alternatively say, ‘No, I am under oath and I know I have to tell the truth, as I remember it, to the best of my ability. The victim being my wife does not particularly influence me.’ That may be the answer you give. It will then be open for me to say, ‘Well, he said that, but you have to think about the weight you give that evidence’. But I cannot lead such statements in my summation or my address to a court or jury unless I give you, the witness, an opportunity to address the issue of impeachment that I would bring forward in relation to the evidence you have given.
I hope that covers the field. That is the explanation of the rule in Brown v Dunn. I noticed also that you were concerned about the person relaying the questions. That is the current issue I am seeking to remedy through this bill before the House. Under the current system, when dealing with a vulnerable witness the judge relays the questions. I will give you an example of the most manifestly unsatisfactory structure of how this can work. Picture this: a woman is raped by a man. That woman is then placed in the witness box to give evidence against the man charged with the crime, the indictable offence. Under the principles of law that we operate, a person is innocent until the contrary is proved. As a consequence, a trial determines whether the contrary can be proved. Part of the evidence in relation to a rape trial is the victim of that rape sitting in the witness box, telling the court what happened to them. It is an essential component of the evidence of any rape trial.
If you imagine circumstances in which a person accused of that crime chooses to defend themselves, you may have the most unsatisfactory circumstance in which an accused person, the alleged rapist, gets to cross-examine the victim. That was addressed some time ago in the statute book. What it has been replaced with is an approach by which the accused person is not able to directly question the witness sitting in the witness box. The vehicle that has been chosen to deal with that issue is that the judge then has the role of taking the question from the accused person and putting the question to the victim, the witness in the witness box.
The reason that throws up a complexity is that from the outside looking in, in an environment where impartiality is at the core of our judicial system, a judge essentially asking cross-examination questions, albeit relayed from the accused, is not a good look if you think about the mechanics of how that works in a courtroom.
I have no doubt that a judge will be very careful, and has historically been very careful, in the process of relaying those questions. Nevertheless, it takes the judge away from the position of judgment and places them as a participant in the trial. A judge is, as far as possible, not a participant in the trial in the sense that they actively take a role. In a simple hearing in a magistrates court there might be some points of clarification from time to time, but a magistrate sitting in a magistrates court rarely involves themselves, if at all, in the matter other than directing traffic, so to speak, in the courtroom.
To have a judge relaying these questions drags them into a difficult position. From the outside looking in, in the integrity of the judicial system, what does the public think when a judge is asking questions which are, essentially, questions of cross-examination?
The fix in this bill is quite simple. Remove the judge from that process. Bring in a third party, probably a lawyer; but can the third party be a non-lawyer? The answer is yes. The third party may be a non-lawyer, that is, an interpreter from English to English. I imagine it would be a person of acceptable integrity to all parties. The prosecution as well as the defence would doubtlessly have to agree that person is suitable for the job, in the same way they would agree on the presence of a particular interpreter. In most instances it would be a lawyer or a person of legal training, but, in any other instance, a person who is up to the job and understands their role makes perfect sense. It is eminently more preferable to have such a circumstance operating in our courts than asking judges to relay questions from accused people to the witnesses, who are often giving evidence against them.
I hope that covers the field of the issues raised by the member for Nelson.
Mr Wood: The corporate section …
Mr ELFERINK: Section 13 – I will return to that. I will go through the other issues raised by other members.
I note the comments made by the member for Nhulunbuy, who raised a number of issues. She raised, amongst other things, the information being given to defence lawyers. It is clear that there is a direct link between the defence community and the shadow Attorney-General because many of the arguments, in fact almost all the arguments I hear from the shadow Attorney-General, are almost verbatim arguments from criminal defence lawyers. As much as I respect the role of criminal defence lawyers in our justice system – they are a necessary component – it does not automatically follow that I and this House are necessarily bound to agree with them. I think many of the pontifications of criminal defence lawyers often abrade with the attitudes and expectations of the community at large.
However, I will touch on one issue, which is the reference to the information coming from prosecutions to criminal defence lawyers being done in a timely fashion. The member opposite quoted at some length in relation to submissions made during the process of sending this legislation out for consultation. I suggest to the member opposite that the document she is relying on is redundant by virtue of the fact we changed the summary procedures in this House not long before Christmas. Sorry, about nine months ago in this House we passed pre-trial disclosure legislation, which meant prosecution and defence were obliged, in the pre-trial phase, to make disclosure to each other in the summary courts. The reason we have chosen to do this is to add lubrication to the wheels of justice and so entrapment is no longer a vehicle of justice.
Open communication becomes a vehicle of criminal justice in the summary division and in the Local Courts going forward. We have chosen to do that because pre-trial disclosure has, for decades, been a straight up and down element of the civil domain. The civil domain is better for it. If you come into a court in the civil domain and you have not disclosed a salient point or matter through the discovery process or otherwise, a fact upon which you seek to rely during that trial, then you will be hounded out of court by the presiding judge immediately because there is a requirement in the civil domain to disclose the evidence to the other side. Whilst we have not extended to doing that in the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, we have demanded and expected it of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, soon to be the Local Courts. We have done this so people get a fair trial and we stop playing silly games between prosecutors and defence.
Good prosecutors and defence lawyers have practised this for a long time. They do not need to play games as they already understand the court system so well that there are no prizes for doing anything other than serving the interests of the courts.
From time to time I remind lawyers when I speak to them, as I remind myself, that the primary role as a lawyer is not to the client but to the court. Sometimes, in their enthusiasm to defend and prosecute, that idea is lost on lawyers. It is taught in Law School 101 that you are a servant of the court in the first instance and have duties and responsibilities in that environment. Consequently, I hear what the member for Nhulunbuy had to say. I am, however, comforted that the subsequent passage of legislation will have substantially addressed the issue which she raises.
That then takes us to the matter of the Crofts direction, which I believe the member for Nhulunbuy touched on briefly. The Crofts direction is a by-product of what was originally called the Kilby direction, where a court will make a comment to the jury during a rape case in relation to the time it took the rape victim to come forward and give or make a complaint to police.
If you think about it, if a person has taken 10, 11 or 20 years to make a complaint of a sexual crime against them – the matter in Kilby asserted that a certain direction had to be given to the jury. The Crofts direction, which is still captured in the Evidence Act of the Northern Territory, does not help because it generates a certain element of ambiguity. The Crofts direction says you can mention to the jury that this might be an issue, but, whatever you do, do not think about it too much. That is a crushing over-simplification of the Crofts direction. However, looking at how the Crofts direction is explained I think even judges in their quieter moments will be scratching their heads asking what exactly they are required to tell the jury.
Whilst it forms part of the Territory statute book, one of these laws where we, as legislators, seem to embrace the common law, the Crofts direction does not give much clarity to the situation at all. I do not believe it has ever been relied on in the Northern Territory as any form of appellant approach, and I encourage the courts to maintain their current approach in which they ultimately determine, based on the circumstances of the case, whether any weight is given to the delay in coming forward in the first instance. It is extraordinarily difficult to imagine a circumstance in which a parliament could second guess the myriad circumstances in which a delayed prosecution was brought forward by a victim. It is one of those circumstances where you would have to say it is the court. I am pleased to advise the House that is pretty much the practice in the Northern Territory.
I note the use of phrases which I am quite critical of, by the member for Nhulunbuy. That is, the more general conversation she had relating to matters specifically regarding this bill, particularly in the area of child protection.
I listened carefully to what she had to say. She then used the chestnut which has been bandied around in a number of circles that we need a fence on top of the cliff rather than an ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. I understand the logic and why people with a much better education than I use the expression. But the expression fails in a very important way to make a distinction. It is one that I seek to question in this House today. The ambulance at the bottom of the cliff is the government response. It is the arrest of the bad guy, the person turning up to the health clinic with an injury or an illness, and the child taken into care because of the crashing failure of that child’s family to protect them. It is the government response. The argument goes that the fence at the top of the cliff would stop people falling down so we do not need the hospital or child protection response, or an arrest to be made.
The problem is the metaphor breaks down at a very important point. It is where the member for Nhulunbuy said what the fence at the top of the cliff looks like. As the member for Nhulunbuy expressed it, the fence at the top of the cliff is a program; it is education and all the things we can do. This is why I am critical of the metaphor; this is where the metaphor does not work. Education, a course showing somebody at risk, etcetera, is not a fence. It is a warning sign saying, ‘Do not go near the edge of the cliff because if you fall off you will get hurt’. We educate our kids every day, so there is the warning sign at the top of the cliff.
I am somewhat minded of Khalil Gibran’s book, The Prophet, in which he says, using another metaphor, that bringing up a child is not entirely unlike firing an arrow. You can make sure that the shaft of the arrow is perfect, the flights are adhered as carefully and delicately as possible against the side of the shaft, the head of the arrow is honed to its finest ability, and that the bow, the drawstring and the draw itself are in every way perfect. Then you release and there is absolutely nothing you can do about the flight of the arrow. That is a nice metaphor for bringing up kids. I rely on that because it is part of the process of putting up warning signs.
The fence at the top of the cliff is something else entirely. That is a restraint. What is the nature of the restraint when exercised by the government in relation to child protection, for argument’s sake? How do we restrain people from hurting their children? We do all the education programs and put up the signs, but what is the restraint? If you start to think about what they are – spot-checking children and randomly knocking on people’s doors saying, ‘Hi, we are from the department of Child Protection; we will check your kids now’, would be a restraint. ‘You will potentially hurt your children because of your character, so we will remove your children before that occurs’, is a restraint.
In a free and civil society, no government would exercise power in that fashion. If a government chose to exercise power in that fashion in protecting people from themselves, you would have civil unrest in our streets. We live in a free country and one of the sad manifestations of freedom is that people make mistakes. They are free to screw up, and they do with regularity. I should know as I have done it often enough. I have exercised the freedoms available to me – the right to drink liquor, the right to buy a motorcycle that drives faster than the speed limit, etcetera. None of those things are prevented from occurring. I can buy a motorcycle that goes …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 43, I request an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK: We live in a free society. If you put a fence at the top of the cliff, what you are talking about is laws that are pre-emptive and which restrain people based on what they might do. If a jurisdiction goes into that space, it must do so very sparingly and carefully indeed.
I also note that the member opposite made a number of comments in relation to child protection. I am not afforded sufficient time to comprehensively cover the field of all the issues she raised; suffice to say I wish to turn to one area where she made a criticism, which I think is unfortunate. The reliance on notifications to the central intake of the Department of Children and Families is no measure of whether there are issues in the community. A person who makes a complaint to the Child Protection Hotline expresses their concern. It does not confirm that any form of neglect or abuse has occurred.
Not everybody who rings a police station reporting a crime is the victim of a crime. It may be that something has occurred to them that has nothing to do with criminal law at all. The greatest source of these notifications is the police. If you track back though the Children’s Commissioner’s reports over the last few years, you can see they go through the roof. I have spoken on a number of occasions to my CEO, Anne Bradford, and the Commissioner for Police to raise this issue because it gets in the way. Once the central intake process is followed they will then dispose of most of those reports as not being sufficient to amount to child abuse or child neglect.
At that point, the person who takes the call must then refer that call for investigation. As a consequence of that, in recent times investigations have increased somewhat, but nowhere to the degree that notifications have increased. We knock out the vast majority of those notifications before there is even a look at an investigation. An investigation into child abuse is not a substantiation of child abuse. An investigation is where we look, and the vast majority of those investigations do not reveal child abuse. However, some of those investigations lead to substantiations. These substantiations are child neglect or child abuse, and they have been tracking along, level pegging for the last seven or eight years.
Last year there was an increase and the year before that there was a substantial decrease. The year before that it was lower and the year before that it was higher. There was an increase in the last 12 months, but in trying to find a significant shift in the number of substantiations over time, it is not being reflected in the number of substantiations we are getting. I think it has travelled in the last four years from about 1700 to 1400, then 1400 to 1900. It is higher in the last 12 months, but it is not an enormous blowout. Is it too much? My word, it is 1900 too much, but that is unfortunately the social problem we have to deal with. It is mischievous, at best, to start rolling out notifications as a measure for child neglect, because a notification is somebody simply ringing up central intake and saying, ‘This is the issue at hand’.
As a consequence, I critique the member for Nhulunbuy’s approach to that issue. It is unfair and it misrepresents the actual nature of what is occurring. That is not to say that what is occurring is good. It is not good. Child neglect, abuse and sexual abuse are not good. It is important in the context of this conversation, particularly considering the emotional responses it engenders, that we keep a sober and temperate debate going. We must be cautious not to enliven people’s passions when it would be contrary to the ultimate good that I suspect we are all trying to achieve.
That pretty much covers the field. I thank honourable members for their support. This is good legislation and it will continue to support the plan we have as a government to protect victims of crime since our first day. We have had some support from the members opposite in our pursuit of protecting victims, and in some instances they have dug their heels in and decided to be quite contrary and support the arguments of defence lawyers over the expectations of the average person in the Northern Territory.
When we introduced mandatory sentencing we were proud to do so because it was about protecting victims. When we introduced the paperless arrest policy we were proud to do so because, ultimately, it prevented more people becoming victims. Since putting police outside bottle shops then the number of victims has fallen sharply. Whilst the members opposite criticise us for protecting victims or pursuing policies that hold the guilty to account, they may do so and that is a matter for the public to decide whose world view they value more. From our perspective as a government it has been a plan from the get-go, and we will continue to protect victims, whether they are sitting in the witness box or at home nursing their injuries, either financial or physical.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice) (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 24 February 2015.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, today I am delighted to advise the Legislative Assembly, as the Chief Minister and Minister for Indigenous Affairs, that we are kicking goals in Aboriginal affairs across the Northern Territory and leading across the nation.
I am aware that tomorrow in Canberra a federal Closing the Gap speech will be made by the Prime Minister. I believe this will be its eighth year. I am very interested to hear the content of that Closing the Gap speech. I anticipate there will not be much advancement on previous years’ outcomes.
Yesterday I was pleased to speak about the Indigenous Affairs strategy, particularly the Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Framework, or the MERF. I also spoke about the 34 action areas where we are seeking to drive change, of which there are two areas of interest, one being to decentralise former Labor government approaches and give back to communities, and the other being about economic development and employment. As part of the statement on vocational education and training I will directly relate that Indigenous Affairs strategy to employment and training.
The Northern Territory is making economic advancement throughout the Territory, especially in the bush, by implementing the newly-launched Aboriginal Affairs Strategy. The strategy sets a shared vision for the NT government for Aboriginal people and communities to work in partnership to increase the capability and capacity of Aboriginal Territorians and businesses to deliver economic and cultural success.
For those who are reading this transcript or listening online, Aboriginal people make up about 33% of the Northern Territory population, with 80% of that population living in remote communities across the regions. This equates to around 70 000 people living in areas with little or no economic activity. While this is a challenge, it also presents a time of opportunity, which my government is willing to explore and invest in to help build sustainable local remote communities and their economies, creating employment and benefits for those communities now and into the future.
This is a partnership with Aboriginal people and their communities. The Northern Territory is a unique place with a proud, strong Aboriginal identity, culture and languages. As a Territory, we want to see this strength resonated in all areas of people’s lives, such as education, health, employment and business development.
I believe that the integral link between economic and cultural success is through Aboriginal people gaining access to, and participating in, a local economy with employment and training. This means an individual can build a life for themselves and their family, and contribute to the broader community and society in general. That is why this strategy is vital to the Country Liberal government. We have a plan in Aboriginal affairs which the Northern Territory has never had before, and which has never prefaced any other Northern Territory government.
Our strategic plan for Aboriginal affairs is aligned to the Northern Territory government’s Framing the Future strategic plan, with objectives identified in each of these four priority areas: a prosperous economy; a strong society; a balanced environment; and a confident culture. The Country Liberals’ plan articulates my government’s strategic direction and priorities in Aboriginal affairs. Its focus is on ensuring Aboriginal Territorians enjoy substantially improved livelihoods and outcomes, including increased opportunities for business and job growth, as well as improved educational outcomes, improved physical and mental health and wellbeing, and enhanced community safety while maintaining and promoting cultural identity.
The Country Liberal government is committed to making long-lasting changes in Aboriginal affairs and driving change differently than has been done in the past, especially reversing failed Labor policies of centralisation, closing down communities and taking housing off communities. That is why the Office of Aboriginal Affairs was established in 2015 to drive and coordinate the whole-of-government responsibility through the overall Aboriginal Affairs Strategy. This plan is underpinned by a comprehensive monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework to ensure the highest levels of accountability and transparency across government.
As I have already said, the Country Liberal government is committed to, and serious about, making long-lasting changes in Aboriginal affairs in the Territory. This is demonstrated by my government setting specific targets and allocated time frames to be reached. Early indications through procurement reforms aligned to remote contracting policy are showing significant improvements in Aboriginal employment figures already.
Through the Department of Infrastructure’s Indigenous employment provisional sum, the strategy sets a target of creating 1000 private sector jobs for Aboriginal people through each contractor being required to achieve 30% Aboriginal employment. To date, this mechanism alone has seen Aboriginal employment increase from 40 individuals in a 12-month period to more than 500 over the last 12 months.
My government’s objectives have always focused on increasing the capability and capacity of Aboriginal people and business by unlocking the potential of our regions and remote communities. By increasing Aboriginal people’s participation in the economy we will see Aboriginal people have greater financial independence and a better quality of life, and breaking the cycle of intergenerational disadvantage.
There are challenges to be faced by government, and remote communities, after many decades of welfare dependency exacerbated by Labor failing to invest in these communities and centralising services from those communities back into Darwin. I strongly believe that if we genuinely work together and share the decision-making, the responsibility and the accountability as a government and a community, we can make a change for future generations through facilitating sustainable remote economies and communities.
From a government perspective we have changed the existing procurement practices to meet the objectives of remote contracting and Indigenous provisional sum policies. We have set a target of at least 2000 new private sector jobs for Aboriginal people living in remote communities across the Territory by 2017, and made a commitment to create a further 1600 jobs for Aboriginal people in the public service by 2020. At the start of 2015, at the commencement of the policy to double the Indigenous employment rate in the public service, there were 1600 Aboriginal people working in the public sector, representing a rate of about 8%. We set a target to double that, increasing it to 3600 Indigenous employees in the public service by 2020. Early indications show that we are on track to reach this target with an increase to 9.5% already. While we have a long way to go, evidence already shows that we are making signification progress.
When we made the announcement that we would seek to double the employment rate of Indigenous people in the public service, we were laughed at. We were belittled by Labor and bemoaned by many others. People from interstate said it could never be done. Through previous employment I have undertaken, I know that an increase in the rate of Indigenous employment by any public service by as little as 0.1% is unheard of. It has already increased in the NT by 1.5% in 12 months. We are on target to double that by 2020. We are changing people’s lives and changing the face of the Northern Territory.
I thank the public service commission for driving these changes. To everybody in all agencies, thank you very much. It has been a changing time and a changing organisational culture, but we are changing for the better in the Northern Territory.
A sum of $21.4m has been awarded in select tenders for the construction of housing in four remote Aboriginal communities in southwest Northern Territory. A sum of $5.9m for the Ngukurr Health Centre construction project was awarded last June to a joint venture between Probuild NT and Yugal Mangi. That forms part of our commitment, which is in our MERF, as one of our policies to see five projects of $5m or more go towards a joint venture partner with an Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory.
This was the first one at Ngukurr Health Centre with Probuild NT – $5.9m. Yugal Mangi is the project manager and is delivering a fantastic outcome. I was told from last night when talking to the CEO of Yugal Mangi that it is only a couple of weeks away from completion. I look forward to officially opening that.
Both of those commitments, the Ngukurr Health Clinic and the $21.4m as a select tender for four remote Aboriginal communities for the construction of housing, showcase our commitment to ensure that 70% of small contracts under $500 000 for construction, repairs and maintenance go to local Aboriginal businesses. As I said, a minimum of five civil and construction contracts over $5m are rewarded to joint venture proposals with Aboriginal businesses.
I have instructed, through the Office of Aboriginal Affairs, that whole-of-government, five-year infrastructure mapping must be undertaken for all remote communities based on all known planned expenditure across all tiers of government, including the community sector. This will assist government to better direct contracts released for major works, and to support long-term job creation through direct work to local Aboriginal businesses in an open tender or select tender environment, with a joint venture proposal with Aboriginal businesses, organisations or communities. This ensures that Aboriginal people in the community are ready for such opportunities.
The Department of Business is working with industry bodies and the not-for-profit sector to map local Aboriginal businesses and determine their capabilities to deliver on these outcomes. If needed, we will support appropriate local Aboriginal businesses to be upskilled and have all the required accreditation to bid for and win government contracts.
The purpose of mapping the work is so we do not have one project that lasts for three month, and then people get a job and finish. Government’s role is to facilitate and stimulate the economy and construction. Once you build a bridge or a road you do not keep building that same bridge and road. We want to start the opportunities and work to facilitate or identify where the next projects are, whether that is in the community sector or, preferably, in the private sector. In many remote communities the private sector is not actively engaged, but we are working on that.
As you can see, this plan is about being prosperous, strong and confident. It is about exploring, supporting and opening up economic development opportunities. It is about people being in charge of their own businesses, caring for their own communities, managing their own lands and celebrating their own culture, which is something Labor took away.
A strong society is one in which each member has an equal opportunity to reach their full potential. In the Northern Territory we are blessed with a diverse society, with high levels of social inclusion and cross-cultural respect and celebration. This includes 30% of the Territory population being Indigenous, with 80% living in remote or very remote areas. This remoteness has previously presented challenges for government in delivering public goods, such as education, health and essential services, including power, water and sewerage. However, through the Aboriginal Affairs Strategy we are tackling these factors in a different fashion.
The Country Liberal government, with its plan, has set high targets in health, education, justice and safety to significantly improve the livelihoods of Aboriginal people. Key targets in our MERF include reducing the number of Aboriginal children suffering chronic otitis media; severely reducing the Indigenous suicide rate so there is no longer a high discrepancy between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal rates; reaching at least 80% school attendance for Aboriginal students within five years; reducing incarceration rates by 50% by 2030, along with a reduction in recidivism; eliminating all 266 houses beyond economic repair by 2025; and decreasing the number of Aboriginal children subject to child protection investigations.
The Northern Territory is home to some of the most beautiful and rare environments on earth. The Country Liberal government’s plan is striking the right balance between protection and use of our environment, preventing or minimising the impact development may have on it, especially large resource projects. We are respectful and supportive of Aboriginal people’s connection to, and responsibility for, land and sea country, along with their desire to utilise their lands to provide sustainable economic and social opportunities. The Country Liberal government will continue to support Aboriginal people’s wishes through increased land use planning in remote areas, increase jobs on country and increase business opportunities for Aboriginal people to be involved in the delivery of environmental services.
It is partly for this reason I hung my head in shame after listening to the Leader of the Opposition talk about a moratorium on gas and natural gas drilling in the Northern Territory. The Leader of the Opposition is putting an $800m gas pipeline from Tennant Creek to Mount Isa at risk, a pipeline that would see the utilisation of 900 jobs, 300 in Tennant Creek alone, not counting the others through the supply chain. A good example of that is $150m will be spent on purchasing the steel pipes, which will come from overseas through the Darwin port, down the transport corridor and onto land arrangements in Tennant Creek.
That is a fair amount of expenditure occurring in the Northern Territory. It is not just about the limits that are now being put on exploration and development in the Northern Territory – and I gave a back-of-the-envelope number in Question Time. I said that roughly five major companies are doing exploration development in the Territory right now – Pangaea, Santos, Origin, INPEX and Central Petroleum. Each would be spending about $200m this year, or another $1bn. That $1bn is at risk this financial year because there is no longer a bipartisan approach supporting industry. That is because Labor wants to cancel jobs.
Of the $1bn that is supposed to be spent in the Northern Territory this year, about 2% to 3% of that would go as royalties to Aboriginal people. Approximately $20m to $30m, roughly speaking, back-of-the-envelope numbers, in royalties to Indigenous Territorians will no longer be paid because of the Leader of the Opposition and his ignorant Labor position.
The other thing, of even larger concern, is what is happening with Indigenous employment and training, which is what this statement is all about. Pangaea is running a program which is training 12 Aboriginal Territorians to get jobs at Pangaea in the gas industry in the Daly region.
In Mereenie natural gas comes from fracked gas wells, which powers Yulara, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, and keeps the lights on. There are 55 wells – approved by previous CLP and Labor governments – employing 26% Aboriginal labour. What has changed? Now those traditional owners working in Mereenie have their arms in the air. I ask again about the policy for the moratorium; how long will the moratorium last?
If you were successful, would you immediately turn off all the fracking so lights would go out in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Yulara? That is a serious question because that fracked gas is powering half the Northern Territory. People should know that before Blacktip came on board, fracked gas was powering Darwin, Katherine and Palmerston.
I am a supporter of moving from diesel to gas, especially in our remote communities. Last week I announced that $75m is being put towards building a new power station in Alice Springs to remove diesel so we can get onto more gas, but Labor’s proposal would stop the $75m generation project for Power and Water because they do not want any more gas.
That is in your electorate, Mr Deputy Speaker; it is a real problem. Labor should reconsider its policy on this moratorium.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I seek an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much for the enthusiasm. Labor members were not very enthusiastic just then because they do not like hearing about the negativities of their proposed moratorium. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to explain how long a moratorium would go for. Explain why, in government, Labor allocated gas leases to 95% of the Northern Territory, whether granted or under application.
Why did they grant them in Aboriginal communities? Why did they grant them in Watarrka National Park? Why did they put them in tourist sites and heritage sites? They were happy to put them out to all the communities and businesses, but now there is an election coming up they want to say, ‘Hang on, put them on hold’.
That is not a way to encourage investment and job growth. It is especially not a way to support Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, so many of whom rely on investment in the gas industry either through royalties, employment and training or jobs. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to cancel his moratorium policy or come clean about why he did it.
Did he do it to get a deal with the Greens? Was it because he could see the member for Karama, Delia Lawrie, at his left flank about to announce it herself? He had to quieten that down before they had the Territory convention this weekend. That smells of the member for Karama, the quasi-Opposition Leader. That is exactly what it stinks of.
I will return to a confident culture being one of the Framing the Future objectives in relation to the Indigenous Affairs strategy. Territorians are self-sufficient people, confident in our capacity to succeed and our ability to look after each other.
We persevere through the tough times, celebrate together in the good times, and respect and celebrate each other’s differences as well as the contributions we make to society. Aboriginal people have been doing that for tens of thousands of years in the Northern Territory. There is extraordinary diversity amongst Aboriginal people. Not everybody is the same. More than a hundred different languages are spoken.
The Country Liberal government will work in partnership with Aboriginal people across the Territory to promote and protect their languages, cultures and customs. The Northern Territory government wants to decentralise decision-making to provide significantly increased opportunities for Aboriginal people at the community level to be directly involved in, and lead the design and delivery of, relevant government policies, programs and funding.
We will also prioritise investment in cultural and artistic activities and events that provide opportunities for people to learn from, communicate with and understand each other better. These cultural activities and events have direct and indirect social and economic benefits, particularly through tourism, the largest employment sector in the NT.
In addition to the strategy, there is a series of programs that play a critical role in bringing remote communities to their full potential. These include the Community Champions program and the First Circles Engagement program, which are so vital to us in engaging closely with remote towns, their residents and their leaders, young and old. The Community Champions program is providing communities with front-door access to government through 13 chief executive officers. The partnership forged through this program will work to provide local solutions for creating economic independence. First Circles is an important pathway for emerging leaders from our remote areas to become active participants in leading their own communities and helping shape the future of the Northern Territory.
I have outlined my government’s direction and our plan for Aboriginal affairs in the Northern Territory. The direction is underpinned by a series of whole-of-government reforms, programs and initiatives to drive economic development in remote communities. This is the Country Liberals’ plan for working in partnership with Aboriginal people, remote communities and the private sector to achieve a shared vision.
The Country Liberals’ plan to help Aboriginal Territorians have an opportunity they have never had before to progress through life cannot be risked by a potential Labor government. The risk that Labor presents to Aboriginal people is unheard of. To think this could all be thrown out should cause people to shiver down their spines to their boots.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I know there is a lot of committee business which is about to come forward, so I seek leave to continue my comments at a later date.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! The opposition was of the understanding that it would be one speaker from the government and one speaker from the opposition on this statement today.
Mr Giles: I did not know you were going to speak on it.
Mr Elferink: I did not make an agreement to that end. However, if you would like to …
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Chief Minister has only just sought leave to continue his remarks later.
Mr Giles: Do you have a speaker?
Ms Fyles: Yes, that was our understanding.
Mr Elferink: I do not know who you communicated that to, but I will not get in the way of open debate in this House.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for ordering the House, and the Chief Minister for neatly dovetailing in a new statement on the CLP’s Aboriginal affairs policy. I would love to debate that new statement because there are some very interesting aspects to it.
I am disappointed that I did not receive an invitation to come to your official function in the great hall, but I have become used to that MO from our senior minister.
I also need to comment on two of the Chief Minister’s cheap and nasty political digressions. It is difficult for an old dog that has shed blood, sweat and tears over 36 years to be lectured by a young fellow, who has been in the Territory 30 seconds, on centralisation policies. The town of Tennant Creek, and the immediate region, was the powerhouse of the Northern Territory in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. It produced more gross state product than Darwin. Upon the demise of the global price for metals, the closure of seven major mines and the loss of the skilled workforce, Tennant Creek then faced the challenges of a flatlined economy.
Under the CLP government of 27 years, the response was to sell half the Territory housing stock, close a primary school and centralise our government services into Alice Springs. If the Chief Minister tries the cheap and nasty political shots with a basis of 30 seconds in the Northern Territory, it is risky business.
The other aspect of your cheap and nasty political digressions is my fear that you are backing away from the pipeline between Tennant Creek and Mount Isa. I have great fear, after listening to your diatribe at Question Time, that you are the first one trying to back out of this.
You have negotiated this pipeline contract; you have signed up a contractor and made mega announcements all over the planet, and it is based on take-or-pay gas. It is based on the offshore supply of gas from Eni that will be piped through to your major customer, which was negotiated with the pipeline contractor at Phosphate Hill in Queensland, due south of Mount Isa.
There is no risk of that project. You have announced it, spruiked it, and now you are trying to back away from it. That is what Territorians should be worried about. If you back away as a leading minister from this project, it could incur significant financial liability to Territory taxpayers. Change your diatribe. You are leading that project and we are very keen to be involved in it. You have named 300 jobs in Tennant Creek; thank you for putting that on the public record. We will hold you to account.
I digress; I need to get back to the statement before the House from Hon Peter Styles MLA, Minister for Employment and Training. It is a ministerial statement on a new direction for vocational education and training in the Northern Territory, delivered on 24 February 2015. It is interesting to look at Hansard because, as the minister started to deliver the statement on 24 February 2015, I raised the point of order:
At that stage the opposition had not been given a copy of the government’s statement. The response from the Leader of Government Business was, essentially, ‘Find your own’. I then needed to raise another point of order which was:
Then the bells were rung and a quorum was gathered. That shows the enthusiasm from the other side, and it puts this statement into a historical context.
The minister went on to talk about Deloitte forecasts for the Northern Territory economy and some significant figures. We have established today that it is all about statistics. The Deloitte statistics were very good, as they should be, coming off the back of a $34bn investment in the INPEX project and infrastructure, and the LNG gas processing plant. With its associated bolt-on projects, it was gearing up for a big time in the Northern Territory. As has been debated today, it is not so good anymore. We are looking at completely different Deloitte figures. This information is nearly 12 months old. The Executive Summary of CommSec State of the States, January 2016 State and Territory economic performance report says the Northern Territory has dropped from being number one in the country in relation to its indicators of construction work, population growth and economic growth, to number three. That is in less than 12 months.
We are debating a new direction for vocational education and training, growing jobs and growing the economy, yet while we waited for this statement to come back to the House we experienced a significant drop in economic growth. I will quote from that report:
That is an interesting comparison. If you look at the graph you can see we have dropped down in the running order. In retail spending the Northern Territory is now fifth out of the states and Territories. Dropping from a commanding position just under 12 months ago, we are now down to number five across the country.
Why have Territorians stopped spending? We know the big spend was in relation to construction and equipment, but why has that figure, in less than 12 months, dropped to the bottom of the list, minister? This is after 12 months of your new direction. We are looking at drops in construction work and we have a decline in population. The Northern Territory is now seventh on the ladder, and housing finance was declared by CommSec in 2016 as the weakest in the country. That is an interesting comparison.
We have heard about land release and we can debate that until the cows come home. We have not heard of Tollnerville. There were no new names under the CLP, but they continued Labor’s land release programs – credit where credit is due. However, alarmingly, for dwelling starts the Northern Territory is now seventh out of eight across the country. We are dropping from these great lead figures to having serious economic concerns. Minister, as I have said, this was in less than 12 months. There are written notes all over this statement because I was scribbling as the speech was being delivered. At that time the minister had not provided the opposition with a statement, but do not worry; we are a resilient mob and we work.
I can skip over those notes because they were challenging the minister about a realistic time frame to research this statement, but then he adjourned it. Upon researching it I revisited a lot of Labor’s initiatives, particularly in the vocational education and training area, adopted by the CLP. It will be good in estimates this year to thoroughly analyse the budget appropriation in the area of training, because just before the 2012 election Labor appropriated significant money, from memory about $450m, to zone in on and gear up our workforce for the major activities that were occurring. This year will be a good comparison to see where that money ended up and how much the total is under the stewardship of the CLP.
The statement covered a number of issues and addressed an initiative in partnership with the Master Builders Association and the Department of Business. It was an agreement to facilitate training for 90 people in the building industry to undertake Certificate IV in Building and Construction.
Credit where credit is due, but the minister did not talk about the innovative policy initiative from Labor, which was aimed at young people being able to operate construction machines on construction sites at the age of 16 years. As they were progressing to get their learners and their P plates for driving a motor vehicle on Territory roads, they could already operate construction equipment. It was very defined and specific, and a great initiative that was worked through with industry. I remember working on that, and great suggestions were coming from industry. In that period of time we were listening to Territorians. We were very much in partnership with the Territory and we were heading in the right direction. That was not mentioned in the statement, but I will raise it.
The school industry partnerships are what I define and what we need to look at in this sector. In your statement you made a grand position saying, ‘We on this side listen. No more training for training’s sake.’ I will debate with you, but more encourage you to look at, school industry partnerships, which is where Labor was putting its focus. The Chief Minister talked about 300 jobs for the pipeline that will be built between Tennant Creek and Mount Isa, taking that take-or-pay gas to the customer at Phosphate Hill. As that pipeline is being built, the Chief Minister has put on the public record that there will be 300 jobs for Tennant Creek.
When you live in Tennant Creek, especially when you have an office on the main street, the reality is that around 200 people are gainfully socialising each day on the main street of Tennant Creek but do not have a job. They do not have employment, so there is a real need to engage these people. In my debate it is about targeting the young people in this cohort. There are so many constraints to putting together a workforce to work on the Chief Minister’s signature economic project – the gas pipeline between Tennant Creek and Mount Isa – which he guaranteed and now seems to be backing away from, which is of great concern to people in Tennant Creek and across the Territory. We need a policy that zones in on these young people and engages and prepares them.
The Chief Minister made the announcement with the pipeline contractor and we are looking at work starting in 2018. We have a bit of time to prepare these young people and, minister, in the statement you do not define how you will do that. That is my advice, and you have the capacity. As a minister in government, you can make this happen. The best way to do it would be – first of all, you are most welcome in Tennant Creek. Come down any time and we can start to look at how to prepare those 300 young people who will emerge in this new industry sector you have promised and will then translate those industry skills into other areas.
The estimates period of last year was interesting. I framed a prosecution around what is new and I was trying to zone in on this area, but the minister was not able to explain anything about what is new. I found that very interesting after this statement, called ‘A New Direction’, was delivered in this House in February. That was an interesting period in time.
In relation to my advice and the debate I am running around focusing on young people, a news bulletin by Alyssa Betts was posted on Thursday 26 February, just after this statement was delivered in the House in 2015. It was titled, ‘Daly River’s unemployed face disappointment and despair’. There were some alarming quotes in the article, such as:
It featured a number of Daly River residents who wanted jobs and saw no progress in Indigenous employment. They were unemployed and doing little jobs, as it says in the article, and they had the enthusiasm, the desire and the dream.
It is good to hear that the Chief Minister has come back, 12 months later, with an Indigenous advancement strategy to go back and target that. But I am disappointed that in 12 months, under your stewardship and new direction, not a lot has changed. The Chief Minister alluded to the Closing the Gap report, which I think he said will be delivered tomorrow. That has already been very critical of movement in Indigenous employment. We have some major challenges. We have some great opportunities and I hope you can start to refine your new direction in training and we can start to see some real results.
There is a good section in the statement which is about the Territory’s population, training providers and jobs on country. It related to a story around the Tiwi Islands and people training in coxswain certificates and licensing. I encourage that. I have spoken in this House many times about your opportunities as a minister in government, your connections to your Liberal mates in Canberra, and trying to find new revenue streams to support Indigenous employment on country. Let us face it, we should be looking at Defence, Immigration and Border Protection, and Customs, because they are very real issues for the development of northern Australia and are a creative way to employ people, because they are significant budget streams.
We spend a fortune in this country training our military. Why are we not training our military in northeast Arnhem Land or the Barkly Tableland? Why are we not appropriating the same amount of money and giving our military personnel experience on country and, in parallel, working with Indigenous Australians on land trusts, Crown land and pastoral leases? There are partnerships to be developed, minister. I have lots of ideas around this and I have a desire to be back in your chair, where I will have access to the resources to make this a reality.
The statement was a good read, and there were some good outcomes for the Tiwi Islands. I remember one of my visits there, getting off the ferry and onto a barge, and being barged in to the beach, then returning on that barge to cross over to Melville Island. I had to ask the skipper about his training and accreditation. With a little hesitation - he was rather reticent - he told me very quietly that he got his accreditation in the Darwin Correctional Centre. We had a great conversation about the new era in corrections, him achieving that accreditation and being employed and mentoring younger people coming through that industry.
It is a good story and more can be made of it. The statement went on – I have written a comment at the back, ‘If we do not include the locals, minister’. It got quite waffly towards the end. Those 300 people are socialising each day on the main street of Tennant Creek. Unfortunately, a degree of that cohort has two benchmarks. One is that the hotel opens at 12 pm and the other one is that the bottle shop opens at 2 pm. They are major constraints to engaging locals, but we need to deal with that. We need to get over that and make sure it happens. I want you to consider that the young cohort in the Territory, particularly in the regions and the remote areas, is the cohort we need to entirely support.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 43, I seek an extension of time for my colleague.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: There is much talk in this House about Labor not having any policy. You can tell it is an election year, after watching the Chief Minister today. He looks a tad nervous. It is interesting that, as a Labor opposition, we are releasing policy earlier than any opposition in a Westminster system would do. We are very proud of that. It has been an intense time; we have had workshop after workshop. I have been at a few of the live shows, have done work over the phone and have tried to be part of everything we do. It is sometimes hard when you are living and travelling in regional and remote areas. But there is good policy developing.
In this vocational education and training statement we are debating today, Labor understands that increasing participation drives economic growth. That was very evident in our 11 years of government through major infrastructure spends, and significant investment in apprenticeships and training. We learnt many lessons in that time and we understand there is a significant disconnection and underrepresentation of young Indigenous Territorians in the economy. We were going after that market and will continue to do so.
The key to improving participation is training more Territorians in skills that lead to employment. The minister mentioned that 12 months ago. We also understand that it is imperative. The minister made the comment, ‘No more training for training’s sake’. Let us change it again, minister. But we are not seeing a lot changing on the ground, as the Closing the Gap report will testify.
Labor will invest in training, and we need to, because we need to engage apprentices and trainees. We understand from the business sector and the people we talk to in our policy development that apprenticeships and traineeships are collapsing in the Northern Territory. That is why I said in Question Time, minister, that you need to talk to real Territorians and listen. Sometimes the political rhetoric takes over and you miss the reality of what is happening in the business sector and the community. We are deeply concerned that the number of apprenticeships and traineeships is collapsing, and it will impact of the lives of young Territorians and the future growth of the Northern Territory.
A Labor government will create a training environment where every Territorian has an entitlement to a government-subsidised Certificate III or higher as their first qualification on a pathway to a job. Territorians are able to choose the type of provider they want and should be able to choose the path of training they need in order to get a job. I think the Chief Minister needs to adopt that principle in the new Indigenous advancement strategy he launched.
It is not about training for training’s sake or pigeonholing people; it is about providing choice and matching. It is about school industry partnerships, and training and community partnerships. Territorians have better information on training, especially career pathways more readily available across the country under a Labor government. We will do that. We will make sure the information and communication is relevant and meaningful, and it will provide that access.
We will define industry skill sets and provide funding to increase productivity. There will be certainty in contestable funding and public provider funding, strengthening choice for employers and Territorians undertaking training. That is a very important point. Contestable funding and a matching exercise – government needs to be aware and listening, and it needs to be on the game and aware of the best value for the taxpayer dollar.
Labor is interested in innovation in our training market and across all sectors of the Northern Territory’s growth and development. We aim to increase educational opportunities, especially in the international sector, and we prove that. We are now training doctors in the Territory, and we have faculties of engineering at Charles Darwin University focused on oil and gas. We were very targeted and specific, and we were growing this training sector. But unfortunately we lost control and had to depend on the CLP to continue it. We are not confident that has happened.
Territory Labor’s investment and training will be informed through a structured consultative body, modelling the skills required to meet current and emerging Territory opportunities; input from Territory employers, unions and communities on their skilling and regional priorities; advice from industry and its peak bodies; the Northern Territory Industry Training Advisory Councils; the Australian Council for Private Education and Training NT; public and private training providers; group training organisations; unions; and our education sector and schools.
Labor will develop an annual investment statement on skilling Territorians. It will inform the funding mix of programs available in the Territory and be aimed at providing greater transparency and access, and equity opportunities. We will undertake an awareness campaign to promote the skilling Territorians investment statement, which will allow all Territorians to see where they can participate in the training environment.
We will do all this and we will not abolish Training Advisory Councils, as the CLP government intends to do. I am deeply concerned about CLP plans to reduce the number of Training Advisory Councils and to make executive officers public servants. Training Advisory Councils are an independent voice of the employers, and their executive officers remain independent and able to give fair and fearless advice by not being public servants.
This move by the CLP is a retrograde step. Labor opposes it and will reverse it if we are judged worthy and elected to government. These are short snippets of some of the policy development occurring in partnership with Territorians and stakeholders. This opposition is very serious about the Territory. We have set our course and are communicating it. The Chief Minister chooses to pick out small semantic anecdotes to cause mischief in this House, but he knows the truth is that this discourse, this narrative, is now resonating in the Territory. Stakeholders, public servants, the community, the non-government sector and environmental groups are all looking for the alternative; that is, working with them to gain their trust.
This statement is an interesting collective of material which is just under 12 months old. The Chief Minister introduced to this House a statement – dovetailed into this part of the Notice Paper – on Indigenous advancement, after three years in government, and it looks to me like reactive politics. This is a sign of a government that is in deep trouble. This government is purely reactive, has entered the stadium, is in the straight and is trying to get across the finish line.
I thank the minister for bringing this statement to the House nearly 12 months ago. I was ready to debate it then. The Chief Minister tried to shut it down after he dovetailed his own agenda into the Notice Paper, and the opposition has just presented some very clear perspectives on Labor’s policy. This policy is being clearly articulated to the community.
Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to make comment, and I thank the members for listening.
Debate adjourned.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to clause 4.12 of RTD No 1 of 2013, I table travel reports from the members for Karama, Casuarina, Arafura, Barkly, Wanguri and Johnston.
Continued from 16 May 2013.
Consideration adjourned.
Continued from 7 May 2014.
Consideration adjourned.
Note Paper – Northern Territory’s Energy Future Committee Key Challenges and Opportunities Issues Paper
Continued from 15 May 2014.
Consideration adjourned.
Continued from 15 May 2014.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Continued from 27 August 2014.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Continued from 30 October 2014.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Continued from 26 February 2015.
Consideration adjourned.
Continued from 27 August 2015.
Consideration adjourned.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received correspondence in accordance with Standing Order 66 as follows:
The letter is signed by the Opposition Leader.
Is the discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the Territory has a bright future but there are clouds on the horizon. The CLP is in denial about the reality of what is happening in the Territory, and if you are in denial you cannot have a plan. The CLP has no economic plan for the Northern Territory. You cannot plan properly for the future of the Territory if you refuse to listen to your economic data and to Territorians.
We need a jobs plan for the Territory. Labor is listening. Labor has a plan, based on the voices of businesses and Territorians, to grow jobs in the Territory. There are many in small and medium businesses who are feeling the hurt. If you run a small business in the Territory today, right this minute, you will go home tonight after a long day, exhausted and worried about how you will juggle the bills.
People in small businesses in the Territory are hurting now more than ever, and they need a shot of confidence in the arm. What they continue to get from the CLP government is confusion, dysfunction, random decisions, inconsistent policy-making without consultation and useless rhetoric. From the Business minister they get advice commentary that ignores them. ‘We are travelling very well in the Territory’, the Business minister says, without acknowledging the pain and hurt some businesses in the Territory are going through. Small businesses in the Territory are hurting.
Under the CLP’s watch the economy of the Northern Territory has gone backwards. According to the December 2015 Sensis Business Index, business confidence in the Territory has slumped. The Northern Territory has the second-lowest business confidence in Australia. Territory business expectations for the year ahead are the most negative in Australia at -8%. Territory businesses believe that perception of the economy now is slowing, a view held by 40% of businesses. The index shows that 32% of Territory businesses expect that the economy a year from now will be worse, with only 23% thinking it will improve. Profitability in the NT is very weak at -17%. Attitudes towards Territory government policies show a -4% result.
These figures are bad for the Territory. Business confidence has slumped and community confidence has been shaken. We are losing more people to down south now than in the last three decades. In 2014 a total of 3329 more Territorians left for interstate than arrived. Advice from Treasury last estimates is that we usually get about 16 000 people in and 16 000 out for a net rate of zero. To lose over 3000 Territorians in one year is extraordinary. We have never lost more Territorians in a single year. It is beyond careless; it is negligent.
In the Economy Overview from the last budget, on page 17 Treasury forecasts that:
Our population will hurt us if we do not look after our Territorians and keep them here. If we keep losing Territorians to down south we will hurt in the Territory.
Territorians are not fooled by the CLP. We have heard plenty of evidence of that in recent days as they have called in to radio to tell their stories, often in response to the CLP issuing empty rhetoric. John from Wanguri said, ‘I had a listen to Mr Giles and the only thing he got right is that the Territory is the only place to be, a great place to live. But there is no work here, mate, it is dead. It has been dead for a long time and it is going to get deader. And for them clowns to have to get around and go and meet the businesses last year to find out they were going bad just shows how out of touch they are with everything that is going on.’ The report said, ‘Have you got work at the moment, John?’ John said, ‘Negative’. The reporter then said, ‘How long have you been out of work for?’ John said, ‘Eight weeks. I have been here 15 years and I have never been out of work before, actually, in my life. Never.’ The reporter said, ‘What is that doing to your bank account?’, and John said, ‘I have got three months to survive and then I am gone’.
That is one of the real concerns we have. If you are unemployed in the Territory, you cannot afford to stay and you have to leave. The CLP has no plan to grow the Territory. Net interstate migration loss continued throughout 2015 and now into 2016.
We had six positive years of population growth under Labor. In the Territory we have a history of problems with transition, or turnover, but the scope and scale of the loss of population we are experiencing under the CLP is devastating. Our retail trade growth is the lowest in Australia. Our building activity for the September quarter is down 22.8%, the worst result in Australia by a country mile. Our motor vehicle sales are down 4.3% year-on-year in December, the second-worst result in Australia behind WA. ANZ job ads are down by 19.5% in December.
These results do not just happen. This is not just a result of some cyclical economic event; this is the result of poor government planning, inconsistent government policy and thought-bubble politics. It is what happens when you have a government whose members are too busy fighting each other to plan properly for the Territory. The CLP keeps making bad decisions for the Northern Territory. It is obvious that the economic levers pulled by the CLP were wrong. The first thing they did when they were elected was increase power prices by 30%, water prices by 40% and sewerage prices by 25%. The CLP increased the cost of living when it promised to cut it.
This decision had a direct hit on the hip pocket. It made household bills more expensive. More than that, it saw the price of goods and services go up. Businesses had to pass on the cost. That hurt the Territorians who live here, and the businesses suffered from people not being able to afford their products and services. It means the cost of living in the Territory is now so high that people cannot afford to stay if they do not have work, so they leave. If you are unemployed, you are incredibly unlikely to have the luxury of waiting for another job in the Territory. That is devastating. We lose skills, knowledge and good people. We lose customers and the loss of people hurts businesses.
The CLP then turned on the pensioners and seniors, limiting the benefits and removing them for many. As we know, many senior Territorians have to make a decision about whether they stay or leave the Territory when they retire. As the Treasurer said during estimates, the people who leave the Territory are generally senior Territorians moving interstate for retirement. The Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme card system was part of the attraction of the Territory. The CLP removed it from many people and downgraded the benefits available.
Housing is also a big issue for seniors. The CLP had an opportunity to use the Sports House site as an extension for Pearl Retirement Resort, the neighbouring retirement village and nursing home. I have seen the significant benefit of building retirement villages and keeping people living in the Territory.
I know people who moved into Pearl. They were going to move down south. They had the option, they stayed here, and that is great. If you keep the grandparents, you keep the grandkids. When we lose seniors from the Territory we lose our community, we lose history and, as I said, we often lose the grandchildren. We need a plan to keep seniors in the Territory. Instead, we have a government that has made decisions resulting in more people leaving the Territory than ever before.
The Sports House site was sold, which provided no benefit to seniors and did not provide them with other housing options. The site has not been developed yet. We have not seen a benefit for the Territory in that regard. I think that was a very bad decision. That is a local example of how you can look after seniors and keep people in the Territory.
Straight after the Chief Minister rolled Terry Mills, he decided to play high-stakes poker with the careful deal that was pulled together to keep the Rio Tinto refinery in Nhulunbuy. The Chief Minister pulled the wrong lever and has seen Territory jobs lost and businesses going broke not just in Nhulunbuy, but in a ripple effect across the Territory.
We have excess gas today because the Chief Minister dumped the gas to Gove deal. Selling that excess gas to Queensland and the east coast is the easy decision we have to make, because that opportunity for jobs and industry was lost in the Territory by a reckless Chief Minister.
They are now building a gas pipeline to the east coast, which is what we have to do. It is like a Plan B. Plan A was keeping the millions of dollars’ worth of industry and the thousands of jobs in the Territory, but that opportunity was lost.
Let us not forget, the CLP is selling gas that could have been used to fire up jobs in Nhulunbuy and the Territory, and is now selling that gas to fire up jobs in Queensland. Once again, there are fewer jobs and, as a result, fewer people staying in the Territory because of this government’s decisions. That hurts the economy.
The CLP pulled the wrong economic lever by removing the First Home Owner Grant for people buying existing homes. What has been the result of that? Today there is a 24.2% decline in housing finance applications by first home buyers. At the same time, we are seeing house prices reducing. There is often a cycle to home ownership. A first home buyer buys an existing home and the person selling that home goes on to buy a new home. By targeting First Home Owner Grants at only new properties, the CLP has stopped that cycle.
The government has confused a grant which is meant to help someone into a new home with construction stimulation, and this has hurt first home owners and the market. The end result of pulling this economic lever was to drive people out of the market and it has hurt the Territory economy. We are not seeing the turnover we normally see in the real estate market of people buying and selling. We have hurt the market and Territorians who want to get into their first home.
We want to see our home ownership rates in the Territory increase because we have low rates of home ownership, and if people own a home they are more likely to stay.
The CLP then sold TIO without consultation with Territorians. It was sold against the wishes of the business community to a large international conglomerate whose first two actions have been to ditch 42 jobs and increase premiums.
Businesses tell me that their options for competition in the provision of insurance policies are now lower than they can ever remember them being, and I can guarantee this will mean higher premiums over time. We have lost competition. We have lost the point of difference that we had for private sector investment in the Territory – competitive, affordable insurance – as identified in the Pivot North report. This is all because the CLP chose to pull the economic lever of selling TIO against Territorians’ wishes.
Every economic lever the CLP has pulled has hurt Territorians, and the economic statistics are there to show it. More importantly, the human face of these decisions – people without jobs, closing down businesses, leaving and travelling interstate – is there for the Chief Minister to see and for the CLP to hear. But they refuse to listen.
We heard many people call in to radio over the last couple of weeks in response to ignorant comments from the government. They were hurt by the government’s claims which ignored the facts of what is happening in the Territory and the voices of Territorians and Territory business owners.
We heard from Maria, a business owner at Casuarina, who said, ‘It (business) is pretty well lacking. There are a lot of people out there hurting.’
We heard from Nick, who said, ‘Peter Styles does not know what he is talking about. There is no work out there. There are subcontractors who are doing it hard. A lot of people are refinancing their situation to get past this bad bit. My father started it, I have taken over and now I am going to shut it.’
Brian, a retired business owner, said, ‘I had to close up because there was nothing doing. The worst I saw it here was 1982-83, and that pales in comparison to what it is now. It is the worst I have ever seen. There is no confidence in the place whatsoever.’
Donna Johnson from Totally Workwear said:
It is now more important than ever for the government to play a central role in the economy. Now, more than ever, the government must consult, plan and invest. Instead, the CLP has more policy thought bubbles, dysfunction in the ranks and distractions. The government is not getting on with the job of looking after and listening to Territorians and Territory businesses, and planning properly. You cannot plan properly if you ignore what is happening in the Territory and ignore the voices of Territorians.
We need a plan for the Territory. Labor is listening. Labor has a plan for the Territory that provides certainty and restores confidence. We have a plan that focuses on children, trust and jobs. We intend to grow jobs to grow the economy, and we will do so in consultation with Territory industry, with proper planning and focused investment.
Economic growth is the only way to create high-wage, secure jobs. These jobs will be in the economic sectors that we see as our current strengths, as well as in a new digital economy which is embracing the rapidly advancing technology and innovation. We have to plan for the technological changes of the future. Our economy will be trade focused, with Labor continuing the work it undertook in government to get Territory business to markets of Asia.
The CLP is trying to develop the theme that Labor had one shot – the INPEX project. Let us look at the facts. The Labor government delivered an economic strategy that saw six new suburbs built and get under way around Palmerston and Darwin. We had planning in place for the expansion to Weddell, which has not been advanced by the CLP. The old CLP government got it, but we originally delivered the railway. We also delivered ConocoPhillips gas; I also credit the former CLP governments with that. We managed and delivered those projects.
We built a health strategy designed to keep people here. We expanded the number of specialist facilities, built the oncology unit, expanded birthing services and the palliative care unit. We developed a full medical facility at Charles Darwin University, which means you can stay in the Territory and become a doctor.
We delivered the Marine Supply Base, an important next step within the gas servicing industry. We delivered Eni gas, but the Chief Minister broke the Rio deal.
Let us turn to the INPEX project. The CLP does nothing but rubbish this nation-leading project. It accounts for more value delivered to the economy than all CLP projects combined since self-government, and it is a gift that will keep on giving for more than 40 years. The CLP has never delivered anything close to that. Can you imagine where our economy would be if this project did not exist? It is a great project for the Territory, but Labor did more than deliver INPEX. It is one big project, and we get that. It dwarfs many other things, but Labor did more than INPEX during its term. INPEX is a fantastic citizen of the Territory and it does great work in the Territory.
The CLP has been churlish about INPEX because it was a Labor project. That is not what good government is about. The CLP should be working better with INPEX and not having cracks at a one-shot-in-the-locker project. We have a diverse Territory and economy, and Labor did more than INPEX, but we are very proud of INPEX. It is a first-class project.
In the strong messages we hear from business and industry across sectors, the CLP does not engage, does not listen, believes it knows best and, as a result, does not plan with the private sector. A Labor government will consult widely with Territorians about how we implement our plan.
It will be a key to our plan to seize the opportunities presented by revolutions in renewable energy and technology, particularly digital technology, which are currently sweeping the global economy and are a key challenge for any plan to create and maintain high-wage jobs. That is why Labor will hold a Territory economic summit shortly after the election. From this summit we will craft the final agreed jobs plan that will underpin government action and investment. Industry wants to be engaged; this is a very clear message from those in the business industry, who we talk to. They want to be part of the proper long-term planning for the Territory. It has been lacking under this government, and government is criticised for it. It would be welcome under a Labor government if elected.
We have to make sure our investment unlocks private sector investment, and that we are on the same page and sequence our projects properly. That is how you restore confidence and provide certainty. Labor will provide a rolling 10-year infrastructure plan that shows what projects are planned and when, what business needs to do to gear up for them, and where they can invest as a result of knowing what government intends to do. Investing in infrastructure and innovation is a key feature of Labor’s Northern Territory jobs plan. These critical areas are enablers in expanding our economic diversity and increasing our growth.
Labor will ensure the infrastructure program is spread across the Territory. We will ensure it is released in a way that supports local industry. Labor will also support the expansion of ICT infrastructure across the Territory. Investment in expanding the download and upload capacity of people living in the bush will unlock business investment opportunities, eHealth and distance education. These are things we need to do. We will also ensure infrastructure expenditure is efficient and focused on the right projects; that is why we are emphasising the need to develop a clear Territory economic development plan through the Northern Territory jobs plan. With this plan in place, Labor can properly direct infrastructure investment. We support private investment in Territory infrastructure. We recognise that for this to occur, the private sector needs the risk of that investment to be minimised.
A Territory-wide economic plan with clearly defined goals helps minimise risk and will attract greater levels of private sector investment in Territory infrastructure needs. Labor will work with the private sector to make this happen. We will invest in Katherine as a major transport and logistics hub. We will invest in Tennant Creek as a major mining and mining services centre. We will invest in Alice Springs as our inland capital. Over the next 15 years Labor will create a world-class Indigenous arts trail across the Territory.
We want the NT to be the nation’s leading centre for Indigenous art, and to be recognised as one of the world’s leading places for Indigenous art. We want visitors to come to Australia knowing they have to come to the Territory to receive the experience of art and culture. Labor will develop the iconic national Indigenous fine art gallery in Alice Springs, part of developing Alice Springs as the nation’s inland capital.
We will support and champion small business. We have had before, and will have again, a small business champions unit in a new department of business, innovation and trade. We recognise that an increase in participation drives economic growth, and there is a significant disconnection and underrepresentation of young Indigenous Territorians in our economy. We will improve how we train Territorians in the skills that lead to employment. The key to participation and increasing and improving it is to invest in training.
Labor will invest in training. We will have economic participation by Indigenous Territorians. That is critical to the growth and development of the Territory. We will work with Indigenous Territorians and their representative organisations to ensure their voices are heard; they are too often silenced nowadays.
We have announced a $1.1bn housing strategy to get money across the Territory. There is much more I could say. We have a jobs plan for the Territory. We will restore confidence and provide certainty to the Territory.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, what an interesting speech delivered by the Leader of the Opposition. It was a real leadership challenge speech. It is getting close to D-Day for the Opposition Leader. He knows he is being stalked by the member for Karama. The member for Karama is making big inroads into his support base.
I was informed that on Saturday night the Minister for Business was at a function with some Vietnamese people; a number of Labor identities were there as well. The Minister for Business made a speech on behalf of the Chief Minister, and the person who spoke on behalf of the Opposition Leader was the shadow-shadow Opposition Leader, the member for Karama. I think the member for Casuarina was asked to speak but deferred to her leader, the member for Karama.
We can see what is happening from this side of the Chamber. Labor is in a bit of leadership turmoil. It has the left calling the shots on a range of things, and the Opposition Leader is desperately trying to claw in and hang on to his job.
The nature of this MPI is quite interesting. I just listened to some of the things the Opposition Leader spoke about. It is interesting to see how he tries to rewrite history and walk on both sides of the street at the same time, which is very difficult to achieve. The Northern Territory still has a long way to go after inheriting Labor’s financial mess, but we have put a plan in place that creates certainty. However, we agree there are currently threats and challenges to the Northern Territory economy.
The Australian economy is now in an environment of lower commodity prices. Falling commodity prices are outside of government control, and they are impacting on the long-run investment decisions of business. Since being in government we have continued to chip away at the debt we inherited from Labor.
In 2015-16 we expect to knock a further $322m off the current debt level. While a small deficit of $27m is now predicted in 2017-18, largely as a result of non-policy changes in revenues, net debt is now projected to peak at $2bn and be lower than when we took office in 2012. This is an outstanding achievement when compared to the forecasted debt levels of $5.5bn projected under Labor. This improvement in net debt since April 2015 is largely driven by the improved 2014-15 outcome of a fiscal surplus of $286m and the proceeds of a $506m sale for the long-term lease of the Darwin port. As I said, we are confronting challenges as the investment phase of the resources boom recedes and our economy transitions to the production and export phase of the resource cycle.
The NT government is preparing for the Territory’s economic transition by providing a supportive environment for investment to encourage further northern development. This includes the construction of the NEGI, the North East Gas Interconnector, and the establishment of the Northern Territory Infrastructure Development Fund.
In reality, the Northern Territory economy continues to perform strongly across a range of indicators when compared to other jurisdictions in the Australian average. The NT grew by 10.5% in 2014-15, which was more than three times the gross state product of any other jurisdiction in the country, and more than four times the gross domestic product of Australia. The NT has the lowest inflation rate in Australia at 0.5% for 2015. The NT also has the lowest unemployment rate in Australia at 4.1%, with the next-closest being ACT and New South Wales at 5.2%. We still have the highest participation rate and employment growth of 2.2%, which signals a strong labour market. The NT business community has shown that it is behind the government’s plan to establish a local benefit advisory panel, which will include a suite of procurement reforms to assist local businesses to earn a greater percentage of government spending.
The panel is just one component of the Buy Local Plan being promoted by our Minister for Business, and is part of a suite of measures targeting the full procurement and contracting lifestyle. The CLP announced its Buy Local Plan in December after consulting widely over many months with local businesses, industry associations and other stakeholders. Our plan will ensure that $3bn spent annually on goods and services by the Territory government will deliver for Territory businesses.
We understand that the 14280 small to medium-sized businesses in the Territory play a very important role in the economy and we understand that from time to time they need assistance from government. We offer a range of grants and assistance to help businesses start, run and grow. The Business Growth Grants budget increased in 2015-16 to $1.69m from $958 000. Services offered were expanded, including the criteria to include not-for-profit organisations and Indigenous enterprises throughout the Northern Territory. The Indigenous Business Development Program grant budget increased in 2015-16 to $1m from $700 000, supporting small to medium Indigenous enterprises throughout the Northern Territory.
The Smarter Business Solutions program – formally ecoBiz NT – grant increased in 2015-16 to $400 000 from $362 000.
Northern Territory business confidence in the most recent Sensis survey recorded an overall confidence level of +24%, increasing two percentage points from the previous quarter. National business confidence increased by 12% from the previous quarter to 39%.
As I said earlier, we still have the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 4.1%. This is below the national rate of 5.8% and is forecast to remain the lowest of all jurisdictions over five years. Employment growth is expected to strengthen to 1.5% in 2015-16 as work in the Ichthys LNG Project reaches its peak, before slowing over the medium term as the project transitions from the construction phase to the less labour-intensive production phase.
Employment in the Northern Territory will be supported by the construction of the Palmerston hospital, the Gateway Shopping Centre and the expansion of Casuarina Square. The opposition likes to talk about the failure of the CLP’s policies, but last week the Opposition Leader fully endorsed those policies. He announced that Labor would take a set of policies to the election, which are identical to what the CLP has implemented over the last three years.
Labor’s jobs plan is, essentially, a complete endorsement of the Country Liberal initiatives, such as our shiplift facility, the Marine Industry Park, the railway from Tennant Creek to Mount Isa and, of course, the Infrastructure Development Fund. This follows recent similar announcements that they would copy the Country Liberals’ business policy and procurement reforms, and support our plans for a national Indigenous cultural centre in Alice Springs.
Labor’s plan commits to spending the same amount of money the government is already spending on the things the government is already building. While on the one hand Labor supports what the government is doing, on the other hand it says we have no vision for the Territory.
As I said earlier, the Opposition Leader cannot walk on both sides of the street. He either supports the government’s plans or he does not. If he has new, fresh ideas he should show them to us. Do not just copy ours and say you will do something different.
Labor has shown it has nothing innovative to create new jobs and no interest in developing new opportunities other than what the government is already pursuing. Despite announcing a so-called jobs plan, Labor has shown it is anti-jobs by proposing to ban future onshore gas exploration.
Labor’s ban threatens a $1bn gas pipeline to the east coast, and the 900 jobs it will directly create, by robbing the pipeline of the gas needed to make it viable. The pipeline developer has the option of expanding the pipeline’s capacity prior to laying the first pipe, if market conditions support increased capacity. But Labor would put an end to that with its plan to stop supply. The people in Tennant Creek are shaking in their boots over what Labor has announced.
I was in Sydney late last week and I spoke to people from a number of gas resource companies. They are all paranoid. The only thing they had to talk about was Labor’s plan to kill their businesses and their industry. It is shocking.
Despite what the Opposition Leader says, Labor supported fracking when in government only three years ago. Labor was its biggest supporter. Labor opened 95% of the Northern Territory to oil and gas exploration. The Country Liberals are winding that back to something more acceptable and to better locations. The Country Liberals made the decision not to grant exploration permits for Watarrka National Park and parks in the Coomalie region. The Country Liberals are committed to developing the best possible regulatory system that will allow for the future growth of the onshore oil and gas industry in a balanced and environmentally sustainable manner.
The Country Liberals have worked hard to rebuild the Territory’s economy and repair government finances since coming to office. In just three years government debt has disintegrated to less than half of Labor’s projected $5.5bn debt legacy, while the Northern Territory now has the lowest unemployment rate in the country and the highest employment participation rate. The CLP has embarked on a massive infrastructure program. It is building new roads specifically intended to boost tourism, agriculture and mining, and we have cut more than 200 pieces of Labor’s red tape to make it easier to do business in the Territory.
We have developed a comprehensive economic development strategy that builds on our proximity to Asia and is designed to smooth out the peaks and troughs of economic activity. The Opposition Leader and Labor have admitted that what the CLP government is doing is right for the Territory. His jobs plan, business plan and arts plan are an endorsement of what the government is doing. The gas pipeline, the railway line to the east coast, the North East Gas Interconnector and the infrastructure fund are already being done by the CLP government. The Opposition Leader’s 10-point business plan is what the Country Liberal government is already doing.
The Buy Local campaign was announced by government last year. The 25% weighting for local business in procurement is happening. An independent panel for procurement is being implemented. The mandatory local worker involvement in requests for quotes has been implemented by the Country Liberal government. The central plank of the Opposition Leader’s Aboriginal arts plan is what the CLP government is doing. The arts centre in Alice Springs has already been announced by the Country Liberals. The Opposition Leader is being totally dishonest with Territorians by not telling Territorians that his plans are about what the CLP government is already doing.
It reinforces what a phony the Opposition Leader is and how bereft of ideas the Labor Party is. He promised a time-wasting economic summit upon coming to government to find out what business wants. He should already know what business wants; he reckons he has been out consulting. He is inept on a raft of issues. He trots out a 10-point business plan which is exactly what we are doing in government. It is fine to endorse our business plan, but at least be honest and tell Territorians your plan is based on what government is already doing.
The Opposition Leader opposed the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement until Labor realised the anti-Chinese sentiment was causing a backlash amongst the local Chinese community. He claims unemployment was 6.6% when we all know it is just above 4%, a full 2% lower than what he is quoting to other people. The Opposition Leader did not tell you that CommSec recently said that the Territory is still performing strongly on a range of indicators, ranking first in construction work done and second for economic growth, business investment and employment.
The Opposition Leader and Labor talk the Territory down at every opportunity. Labor comes in today with an MPI, worrying about business confidence and telling the world the sky is falling in. Chicken Little, the Opposition Leader, is scaring people and telling them it is all terrible, that people are leaving and unemployment rates are high.
When the Opposition Leader in Question Time was talking about John, who phoned the ABC saying he cannot find a job, why did he not ring the ABC and say that John might find it a bit harder to get a job anywhere else in Australia? The easiest place in Australia to get a job is the Northern Territory.
I get around the Territory business community quite often. I speak to business people every day. I have a strong affinity with business in the Territory. The biggest complaint business people have is that they cannot get workers. At the last budget the one soft spot, the one area where we were lacking, was population growth. We had to do more to attract people to the Northern Territory because we cannot keep up; we need more workers.
Over the last three years, when I was Business minister, and with the current Business minister, we have been flitting all around Australia trying to drum up workers for the Northern Territory. We want people to come to the Northern Territory, live in the Territory, enjoy our wonderful lifestyle and, most importantly, get a job in the Territory. We have had a bit of difficulty trying to attract people to the north. It is more a culture of Australians than anything we are doing wrong in the Northern Territory.
Territorians know that this is the best place in the world to live. They know it because they are here. They want to keep it the best place in the world to live. The only thing that threatens that is a Labor government. The biggest threat to the lifestyle, security, enjoyment and comfort of Territorians is a Labor government, because when they make these policy announcements they clearly demonstrate that they have no clue. They are a fraud on the community.
It is a disgrace to see Labor here at the moment. You would think, after almost four years in opposition you could come up with one or two novel ideas, but there is nothing. All we are promised from this opposition as a future government is more debt, deficit and crime, fewer kids going to school and more disadvantage in remote communities. That is the Labor way. That is what Labor governments do.
They are economic vandals and we see it time and time again. Every time we come into this place Labor says, ‘Why are you not you spending money on this? Why are you not spending money on that?’ Not once do they say, ‘We can find savings here and improve the lives of Territorians by doing this or doing that’.
It is basically copycat politics. What a pathetic effort to come in here and search through all the reams of indicators, latch onto the Sensis Business Index, which has a slight glitch in business confidence, and say the Northern Territory is going to hell in a hand basket. Shame on you mob for bringing this MPI to the House. You are a disgrace and Territorians deserve better.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, unlike the Treasurer, I believe that this is an extremely important matter of public importance. I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing it forward because what we have just seen demonstrated was a continuation of what we saw in Question Time, when we put some very important questions to the government with regard to business confidence in the Northern Territory, how people are feeling, how they want to go forward and the government’s answers to that.
When we put those questions to the government members today, they threw them back at us and said that we talk down the Territory. They wanted to talk about the last term of the Labor government. They did not seem to want to take people like John from Wanguri seriously. This is a real person, a genuine bloke doing it very hard, and having to make some very hard decisions with his family.
When we put these serious questions to government members about business confidence, as we are doing in this matter of public importance, they do not seem to take it seriously. They do not seem to realise that they have been in government, running the show in the Northern Territory, for the last three-and-a-half years. What have we seen in that time? I think the Leader of the Opposition put it very well. We have seen absolute disarray and chaos under this government. We have seen the most unstable, chaotic, dysfunctional government in the history of the Northern Territory, and that is a fact.
There have been multiple reshuffles, members of the government have left and the government has sold Territory-owned assets. They talk about debt and about where they are finding money in this place. You do not need to look much further than the fact they sold TIO, privatised the port and put up the power, water and sewerage bills by 30%, 40% and 25%.
These are the things this government has done to get to where it is today. We have had three-and-a-half years of this CLP government and this is where we are at. We have brought forward this matter of public importance because of what people in the community are telling us, and what people like John are telling us in our electorates. People are worried about business confidence going forward, having a job and where the Territory is going as they see the INPEX project starting to wind down. They are extremely worried.
Territorians across the Territory have shown they are deeply concerned about the direction of this government and have no confidence in its policies and actions. What they get from this government in response to their concerns – through the media, for example, which we have heard a lot of debate on in recent times, especially Mix 104.9 and ABC radio – are statements from the Minister for Business. On 4 February on Mix 104.9 he said, ‘You will find that in an economy people are up and people are down. It fluctuates quite though. The figures are actually quite good but there is always going to be someone who is not happy.’
I happened to speak to him before that interview and he is a genuine person in the community who is doing it tough.
Another caller said, ‘This is the quietest it has been in 10 years and I do not know what other figures people are putting out there, but you talk to tradesmen and the average worker around town and they will just tell you it’s quiet’.
The Mix 104.9 show on Wednesday 3 February and Thursday 4 February had caller after caller talking about the issues they are facing in the Territory. In my electorate, in the last week of doorknocking, I have heard a few stories from constituents and their worries about going forward. Those stories are very consistent with what we have heard through the media.
I spoke to a local builder last week and he told me that things are slowing down and not at the levels he was hoping for. I was speaking to a small-time fashion retailer the other day, and they said it is very tough at the moment and they cannot see a way forward. They are getting quite concerned about where they will end up, and they have been in this business for 10 years now.
I spoke to a tradie on Sunday morning who is fortunate to be in a government-owned agency and has a permanent job there, but the feedback from this person was, ‘I am glad I have a permanent job because a lot of people are knocking on the door, trying to get in and get a job because they are out of work’. Many people are worried about what is coming up in the future.
John from Wanguri has been referred to quite a bit in this place today, but he represents genuine sentiment and feeling in the community.
There are real concerns in the level of confidence going forward. This is something we want government to listen to. We want to see it take it into account. We want to see it working as hard as they can on these issues.
From the responses we have heard today in this Chamber, I do not get the sense that the government feels there are deep issues to tackle here. I have heard from them that apparently it is just an opposition conspiracy theory to talk the Territory down and that Labor did nothing in its time in government. We are not hearing much about government taking responsibility, pulling those economic levers – realising they have been doing this job for three-and-a-half years now.
The government has to understand that more people are leaving the Territory for interstate than ever before. A total of 3329 more people left in 2014 than came here, which is a massive gap.
Today we are tackling the issue of local employment and supporting local business. We have heard this government claim time and again that they support locals. We have heard them speak about how they spend many thousands of taxpayers’ dollars on trying to do exactly that. We have also heard about showcases they have coming up, such as a month of events designed to convince people that this government is committed to locals.
Actions speak louder than words. This government has shown form in denying locals the contracts they need to survive. Look at the Palmerston hospital, for example. That contract could have been won by local Territory companies.
Territorians built the Darwin Convention Centre as well as the extensions to the Royal Darwin Hospital over many years, but apparently government did not think Territorians were good enough to build the Palmerston hospital, a $150m job.
Let us turn to the Territory Insurance Office, TIO, a Territory icon that was owned by Territorians, employing Territorians for Territorians. It was an insurer that gave market options and competition, and provided fairness and understanding during events like the Katherine floods, cyclones and storm surges. It was there for Territorians through thick and thin. But, without any consultation, this government sold TIO. Now we have in place a major international insurer that does not have that level of commitment and responsibility to Territorians. That major international insurer has already shed 42 jobs. Let us see what happens in the future.
I am sure many members in this Chamber have heard from their constituents about insurance premiums going up. In just one stroke the CLP government destroyed local jobs and increased the cost of living for Territorians.
Let us turn to the issue of investing in businesses in the Territory. Let us look at the issue of travel agents in the Northern Territory. We heard through the Public Accounts Committee last week that the government is looking to give $40m worth of travel to an interstate contractor. It is deeply concerning when this government should be supporting local businesses, jobs and livelihoods, but its decisions regarding travel mean local businesses will suffer and close their doors.
Sandra Lew Fatt has been a Territory travel icon for 45 years. She, her husband Benny and their children have contributed to the Territory over many years. They are Territory icons and real treasures. Their business is gone and will have to shut. She has made clear what removing this income from travel agents will do. It will shut down local businesses and businesses will have to shed jobs. We will see office closures, business people will lose rent and it will add to office vacancy rates. In a media conference on Sunday, this is what Sandra Lew Fatt had to say about the CLP government, ‘This town was born again twice, once after World War II and once after Cyclone Tracy. Of small business people, my family included, that put this town back on the map again and Adam Giles has cut this all off from under our feet. Not just me, not just my family, other families that I could name. And that, I think, is simple. He does not deserve to be Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, a Territory that we locals know and love. He does not deserve to be in politics as far as I am concerned and the quicker he goes the better.’
Some strong sentiment was certainly expressed.
In order for these CLP government members to know what it means to support locals, they need to talk to locals. They will hear from locals who will tell it straight; they will tell members at their doors, standing in front of supermarkets and walking down the mall that people are doing it tough. They want to see investment in local businesses and do not want to see people like Sandra Lew Fatt going out of business. Labor and the CLP have issued policies relating to local business and the government wants to claim our policies are the same, but that could not be further from the truth.
The government may want to be the same as Labor, but it is not. We are both committed to a 25% local weighting, but that is where the comparison tips. Labor will implement an independent oversight board. The CLP says it will do the same, but does not tell Territorians it will only examine contracts worth $5m or more and that it will have no auditing powers. Labor’s board will be able to audit everything the government does, will not be limited to contracts of a larger size and will be able to look at the decision-making across the board, and audit and recommend training for procurement staff. Labor has a 10-year infrastructure plan to allow businesses to see well in advance what jobs will be released and when. It allows local businesses to plan for those jobs well in advance. The CLP refused to put in a 10-year infrastructure plan.
Labor’s plan has a pre-tender communication process with local businesses on jobs. There is no such commitment from the CLP. Labor has committed to assisting local businesses to joint venture for larger opportunities where this will help them gain those contracts. There is no commitment from the CLP. Labor is committed to publishing a long list of what goods and services are purchased from interstate so businesses can see what goods have a market under government procurement. This is not being done by the CLP and it has no plans to do so. These are just some of the significant differences between Labor’s approach and the CLP’s approach, but this is not the end of them all.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this matter of public importance forward. This is a really important issue across the Territory. People feel stressed going forward. They want to have confidence that government has a plan for the future to support local jobs, local business, industry and the Territory economy.
Mr STYLES (Business): Madam Speaker, I agree with one thing the member for Wanguri said, which was about being grateful to the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this matter of public importance forward. It gives those listening and watching a very clear indication of how out of depth the shadow minister for Business is, that is, the Leader of the Opposition. It is astounding how confused the shadow Business minister is. On the one hand, however, the member for Fannie Bay and Labor admit that what the CLP government is doing for the Territory and business is correct.
I want to deal with a couple of issues raised by the Leader of the Opposition. As the Treasurer said, the Leader of the Opposition tries to rewrite history. Sadly, all he does is demonstrate how little he knows about what is happening in the Territory.
He talked about gas to Gove. The people who run Rio Tinto came to us after some argy bargy that was occurring; they opened their books and showed us some facts and figures. When you are producing alumina at $2200 a tonne and the Chinese are selling it for $1800 a tonne, on every tonne you produce you are losing $400. That is how little the Opposition Leader understands economics.
When we discussed this matter with the people at Rio Tinto they said that all the extra gas belonging to the Northern Territory government would not save their business. In that period of time the Chinese had put an extra 45 million tonnes into the marketplace at $1800 a tonne. You cannot sustain that sort of a loss over a period of time. A Labor government can sustain that loss because you simply keep borrowing money. Look at what happened to Greece. When you continue to borrow all that money someone has to pay it back.
The Opposition Leader talked about housing. I have been doorknocking in Anula recently and I spoke to some people whose kids used to live with them. I was there about two years ago and the kids were still living with them. Both kids, who were living there with small children, now have their own houses. It was a pretty crowded house – upstairs and downstairs. They have been able to buy a house. Some women have come into my electorate office saying, ‘Thank you very much for lowering the cost of housing’. That is fantastic.
The member for Wanguri spoke about TIO. TIO, like every other company around the world, is going to what is called technical pricing. There is a shift in the world and we are no different. We cannot sustain what we were doing in that area. You cannot go against what the world is doing.
When the member for Wanguri spoke about this she said it was owned by Territorians, and it was. Your fiduciary duty as a director is to keep giving correct information to your shareholders. When the board of TIO came to the Northern Territory government and said it was in a situation where, if a major cyclone came through, it would be exposed for billions of dollars that it did not have reinsurance for. It had a total of $700m reinsurance that it was paying 33% of its premiums for. My understanding is that similar companies today which shift that to the world market – larger companies are down to about 6% of their premiums, which means they can lower the premiums. The member for Wanguri talked about people with increasing premiums. Some people are getting reduced premiums, but I do not want to dwell on that.
The Leader of the Opposition said there is no work; he said it is terrible and that we are in dire straits. We have heard a number of times today about what CommSec had to say about the Territory. The Opposition Leader talked about how we trashed INPEX. I do not know how the Leader of the Opposition sleeps at night; I have never heard anyone on this side trash INPEX. It is wrong to suggest that is the case.
I accept that they did the negotiations for INPEX. He says it is great and they support it, and that we rubbish it. The only person rubbishing INPEX is the Leader of the Opposition. He talks about jobs creation. INPEX is looking at onshore gas exploration. If it can get gas to process, it will buy gas, process it and supply it to people. If you have a gas moratorium, what happens? INPEX does not build the next train so there are fewer jobs. If you want an ongoing economic development plan – by introducing his moratorium, the Leader of the Opposition has killed off any plans for economic development the Territory may have. You scare people away so they go to other parts of the world and invest there, and our children and grandchildren will then miss out.
He talked on the radio the other day about his support for INPEX, but he is being very selective. He mentioned a woman from Totally Workwear, and he quoted part of this interview. I will read part of it because either the Opposition Leader does not listen, has selective hearing or simply does not want to talk about this part of the interview:
She said:
I am a bit surprised that he did not talk about more things from that interview. Many businesses in this town are doing business with INPEX and JKC. The people I talk to say we are doing quite well, and I acknowledge the people who are doing it tough. In a dynamic economy, like we run in the Northern Territory, the government works very hard to make sure we level out the peaks and troughs. But for every person out there who may not be happy with the economy, there are plenty of others who are. There are plenty of others who do not want to live in a debt-ridden Northern Territory.
Look at Greece. If you continue to borrow as Labor had planned to do, eventually you have to pay it back. The Leader of the Opposition talks about consultation, and he talks about his business summit. I am surprised that he will wait until after the election to find out what business wants. We have already been out there. Last year we consulted extensively, trying to sort some of the issues we inherited from the previous government.
The member for Wanguri said we only want to talk about the last term of Labor. I am happy to talk about the whole term of Labor because, after 12 years, what did we end up with? We have heard about some of the problems across the portfolios we inherited. When you look at some of the things we have achieved you will see we have had excellent results in achieving better outcomes for Territorians across most portfolios.
The Leader of the Opposition says Labor delivered the railway. Again, I do not know how he sleeps at night. He obviously does not read his history books. It is like the CLP saying, ‘We delivered INPEX’. I acknowledge that they started the LNG project with ConocoPhillips. From there on we had an established industry which made it more attractive for people to come here, but all credit to the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, for getting that project here. For the Leader of the Opposition to then claim that he got the railway as well is nonsense. For those listening, Google the history books and you will see that he is totally incorrect.
The member for Wanguri spoke about John from Wanguri, and I feel for John. I am sure that if he spoke to some of the employment agencies around town – I do not know what industry he is in. Some industries come and go, and some are dynamic. I was talking to someone recently who mentioned a friend of theirs who used to have a DVD shop. They ended up going out of business because people now download movies online. I made the comment, ‘Are they blaming the CLP government for that loss or are they blaming Labor for that loss?’ The thing is, some businesses are dynamic.
For the member for Wanguri to say this is what John is saying – we do not know John. I cannot even comment on what industry he is in, but if you listen to the member for Wanguri we are in dire straits and the sky is about to fall in. The good thing for the Northern Territory is that is not the case. We have a plan.
One thing I am encouraged by is that the Leader of the Opposition’s jobs plan endorses what we are already doing. The Treasurer went through a list of things Labor has endorsed which we are already doing. Either the Leader of the Opposition does not read what the government is doing, has no idea about the good things the government is doing for the Territory or is trying to be cute and say these are all their ideas.
It will be interesting to see, and I put this challenge to them, if they go to the next election saying, ‘The CLP copied our policies’. You need to look at the date we announced the arts plan for Alice Springs, the gas pipeline, the railway to the east coast and the 10-point business plan. I cannot believe the Leader of the Opposition is saying, ‘This is our plan’. He is only demonstrating that we are on the right track.
When they do these MPIs, I suggest they have a look at what they are talking about. Even in the Chamber today, it would appear that Labor is on a pathway to claim that the CLP is copying what they are doing.
I put that challenge out to them, and I ask those who are reading this to look at the dates things were done. Last year we announced the procurement claims. When you talk about the fact that we do not support local business, you could not be further from the truth, so you need to look at the business plan again. It is about supporting Territory businesses. We consulted with people a lot last year. For instance, we had procurement roadshows in Darwin, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Katherine. These roadshows provided direct engagement with more than 200 Territory enterprises.
In relation to supporting local business and our Buy Local campaign, we surveyed businesses and we had more than 500 written responses from individual businesses and local industry associations.
We have consulted. The Leader of the Opposition has admitted today, in this MPI, that he will go out after the election and find out what business wants. I assure everyone listening that we have already consulted with hundreds of businesses and received written submissions from more than 500 businesses about what they need. We do what they ask. It demonstrates that this government is listening, paying attention and developing policies that are responsive to what Territorians need.
The Buy Local campaign – the 25% loading is the highest in the country and I note that Labor will now try to match that. I throw this question out to those opposite when they talk about economic development: how many members on the other side have owned and operated a business? I would be interested to hear how many understand what business is about, because about 60% to 70% of people on this side of the House have owned and operated businesses. How many on the other side are aware of what it is like out there? How many people understand the changing dynamics of the economic environment in which we live?
As the Treasurer pointed out, the OECD countries are experiencing some headwinds. We are not immune from that, but we are the place with the lowest unemployment in Australia and you can get a job here if you are looking for one.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I knew I had to stand up and say something after listening to the diatribe from the member for Sanderson, who started out by providing us with a lecture on economics and how Rio Tinto does its business.
He has obviously had a bit of a thought bubble, because the Minister for Business represented the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, who at that time was Terry Mills, at a major celebration in Nhulunbuy in February 2013 to celebrate the gas to Gove deal. Rio Tinto, with the Territory government, had very publicly announced that a deal had been reached to provide gas to Gove. Just about every member of that Cabinet came to Nhulunbuy, held meetings and sought out any photo opportunity that was going. Good on them; why not? Terry Mills had done a deal. He had worked for many weeks on it and had secured gas for Gove.
Securing a gas contract for Gove, which could have kept the refinery operating because it was important for the company to get a cheaper supply of energy, would have doubled the gas market in the Northern Territory. The members opposite know that to be a fact. Contracted gas to the Northern Territory government, from the Blacktip gas fields in the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf, was what that deal would have achieved. There were many accolades when that deal was announced after several months of enormous anxiety in that community. It was not only about the impact it had on businesses, but on people’s lives and mental health issues. I cannot remember the date, but it was in February 2013; I witnessed what people went through when the former member for Blain, former Chief Minister Terry Mills, announced that deal.
When the gas to Gove celebration was held, government invested heavily in providing a live act. An ABBA cover band, Bjorn Again, performed, and it was fantastic. Hindle Oval in Nhulunbuy was jam packed. Families, kids, picnic blankets – I am sure burgers were being sold or given away. It was an alcohol-free night, a family night, and the sense of relief in the community on that night was palpable. People in that community did not care about the politics of it. They were prepared to congratulate Terry Mills and the CLP government for doing a deal that would enable continuation of the mining company and jobs in that community.
I am sure the minister remembers it well because he was there representing the Chief Minister. He was the only man there in a tie, I might add. He now lectures us, saying, ‘Oh, Rio Tinto; if you knew anything about economics and costs you would know this is why you could not do it.’ Shame on him.
What a different story he tells now, speaking in this debate and defending this dreadful government, saying it is doing wonderful things for the economy. The reality outside this House, as seen in the daily newspaper and heard on talkback radio, is that the Northern Territory is going backwards. There is nothing happening. This place has flatlined because we have a divided government in disunity and they do not like one another. We have had a revolving door through Cabinet of how many Health ministers? Four or five. How many Education ministers? Four or five. How many Chief Ministers? Two-and-a-half – let us not forget that. What does this do to the confidence of a jurisdiction? What does it tell the business community when the government is such a rabble and members are so inwardly focused on themselves that they cannot do the job?
People will not invest. When they make decisions they say, ‘Yes, we have a deal, Rio Tinto. You can have a portion of our gas, which we will sell to you commercially. We are not giving it away.’ Then there is a change of Chief Minister, and on a public holiday in July, Darwin Show day, he pulls the rug out. He reneges on the gas deal and does not even bother to tell Pacific Aluminium that he has made that decision. I know that because Pacific Aluminium was on the phone to me that day.
I will not be lectured by this government and this useless Business minister about how things are rosy and members on this side have no idea what they are talking about, because it is not true.
The Leader of the Opposition, Michael Gunner, a Territory born and bred man, knows what it is like to be in local business. If you have not heard Michael’s story, he was born in Alice Springs, schooled in Tennant Creek and did his senior schooling in the Northern Territory. His family was in business. He knows what it is like to do it tough.
I have worked in business. I worked for the largest employer in the Northern Territory. I have a fair idea about how Nabalco, Alcan, and Rio Tinto operations worked in the mining sector. I worked there for 11 years. I spent longer working in the mining sector than I ever did in a classroom. It is where I met the Speaker, the member for Goyder. She was involved in the mining industry as the head of the Minerals Council of Australia. So do not come at us saying we do not know about the business world and what is happening outside of here.
We consult. Last week people were turned away from a function that the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Fannie Bay, had called. There were 110 business and community leaders who arrived at this function where he spoke about the Northern Territory jobs plan and Labor’s plan. At that event he delivered a plan, and questions were answered on the back of three years of travelling around the Territory talking to Territorians and understanding their issues. That is what this opposition has done. Every one of the members on this side of the House, in the Territory Labor opposition, talks to and listens to people. We do not sit in a room and dream up something we think is a great idea. We do not do stuff just because we are trying to support certain mates in businesses. We develop plans based on what Territorians tell us.
It is good for every member of parliament to spend time in opposition, have a spell on the cross benches, see where it was you might have gone wrong in government and reformulate those plans. We have seen this government sell TIO with no mandate, a taxpayer-owned asset. Since then we have heard some announcements, because we now have a cashed-up government. We have also seen insurance premiums go through the roof.
I have not heard anything further from the Treasurer, who is out of a job as of 27 August, about the plan he had to buy back the properties for which people can no longer afford the insurance premiums. These are very real stories, like the one from John on ABC talkback radio, a very real Territorian and constituent in Wanguri, about what is going on. That lot over there just laughs. They do not believe it. They think they are only stories. ‘Where did you get that from? That is not what people are telling us.’ What a joke they are. The sale of the Port of Darwin – it is a 99-year lease so you might as well call it a sale. Another publicly-owned asset has been taken away from taxpayers. We no longer have control over the port because there is a long-term lease on it.
In regard to business confidence and stimulus for Nhulunbuy – I have to go back to my own electorate because those are the people I represent. The Education minister at Question Time today talked about a boarding facility that was announced. We know this boarding facility has been coming for some time. Let us face it; it was announced as an economic stimulus when the government was scrambling to find an alternative and new economy for Nhulunbuy after it pulled the gas deal and closed the refinery, and more than 1200 jobs were lost. Everybody knew from the outset that the announcement of the boarding facility was all about an economic stimulus. Then they tried to back it up by saying it was about improving student outcomes.
I know this boarding facility is coming and it will provide a stimulus for our community. Norbuilt is a Territory-owned company so good on it, but there were businesses hanging onto that contract. We have major contractors and building companies which were really looking forward to that project. The fact it has gone to a larger contractor outside of the community will be a great source of income.
The Minister for Education, in his contribution in Question Time today, said that students in that region could access a first-class facility for secondary education for the first time. I cannot begin to tell you how offensive that will be for schools, teachers, families and school council members in places like Gapuwiyak, Yirrkala, Ramingining and Milingimbi. They have been told, not consulted, at some kind of catch up consultation process that they can no longer offer the NTCET at their schools and will have to send those children to board in Nhulunbuy to complete their senior schooling, or they will just be doing literacy and numeracy programs in their senior school.
That is an incredible source of disappointment. It is a slap in the face for the people in those communities who may have come around to the idea of a boarding facility and sending their children away, if they had been engaged from the outset in some semblance of a consultation process. Sadly, that consultation process was put in place long after a decision had been made. Let us face it; this is how this government operates. CLP members do not consult; they are a ‘we know what is best for you’ government. They make a decision about how things will be done and then pretend to consult after the fact. I have noticed in their media releases in more recent weeks that we are seeing more words like ‘consult’. ‘We are consulting with Territorians; we are listening to Territorians.’ Hello, for the last three years we have not seen any of that. All of this reflects the feeling in the Territory now and the lack of business confidence.
People are really worried about their future. Those who have jobs are thankful to be in that job. As the Leader of the Opposition said, if you do not have a job or if you lose your job in the Northern Territory, you will have no choice but to go. Massive price hikes were introduced in spite of the government saying, on an election promise in the lead up to 2012, ‘We will reduce the cost of living’. They were far from it. Power prices, utility prices, motor vehicle registration, you name it, all have gone up in price.
In regard to business confidence and economic stimulus, I go back to my electorate. There was $13m allocated for an ED upgrade to the Gove District Hospital. It came out of the federal budget which was handed down in 2011-12. It has still not been delivered. The funding has been almost halved; it is now in the vicinity of about $7m and it has still not started. That speaks volumes about how useless this government is at managing major infrastructure projects, case in point being Palmerston hospital. Nobody in the history of the Territory will ever forget the story about the hole that was dug and filled with concrete as a media stunt to distract people from the fact the hospital is long overdue, and which we now learn will be overspent.
This government has failed miserably when it comes to delivering capital infrastructure. There is a massive works program in the department at the moment, and they are racing towards the election, which is some six months out. For all things such as the revoted works they have not been able to deliver on, and for any other announcements they have made, there is a mad scramble of activity to try to get things out the door.
This government has done absolutely nothing for business confidence – quite the opposite. To be honest, we are all waiting with great interest to see what will happen with this minority government in the coming weeks, knowing that the Chief Minister, the member for Braitling, is the most unpopular Chief Minister in the history of the Northern Territory. He is regarded as arrogant and untrustworthy. Goodness me, I hope people are reading the document I tabled at Question Time today from the focus group regarding your On Track campaign, because that pretty much sums up how people are feeling about the current government. You will really struggle under the member for Braitling’s leadership and I dare say it is only a matter of time before the member for Brennan puts his hand up. Who knows?
Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to talk in this debate.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for introducing this.
Listening to some of the speeches this afternoon, I feel like the government members are fooling themselves. They have concentrated on the big picture and have forgotten the little people. The Minister for Business and I were on the Katie Woolf show about two weeks ago discussing this issue. I asked how many ministers have been out knocking on doors. Have they been out into the East Arm and Winnellie areas and talked to people? The impression I got from the Minister for Business was that there have been a few ups and downs, but generally speaking we are doing really well.
After we left, Katie Wolfe asked listeners to phone in to make comment, and she said she was inundated with calls from businesses. A number of them were anonymous because they did not feel it was good to give their name out in public. She gave a couple of examples; one was a scaffolding company that has been here for two generations and is going broke. Yet at the big new Gateway development in Palmerston you can see scaffolding. Do you know where it comes from? Cairns.
Is the government concerned about that? All right, it is a private development, but that is the bread and butter of people and businesses in our community.
She spoke of another woman who rang and said she is struggling to put food on the table because business is so bad. Sometimes we talk about businesses in Winnellie and Berrimah but there are also shops. Have a look around the Mall. Why have some of the shops closed down?
I have been here long enough to know that when the Labor Party was in power and the CLP was in opposition, the CLP would continually use the Smith Street Mall as a way of saying the economy was in a dreadful state.
Has anyone been to Anthony Plaza? It used to be a lively place, but now it is dead as a doornail. There is some activity that Gwelo has put into the old Woolworths site, but do you really think the economy is booming in the Smith Street Mall? Maybe when the odd ship comes in it might help.
I remember when the boot was on the other foot; the CLP was getting stuck into Labor because of the empty shops. It concerns me that the government does not know what is happening on the ground.
I met a supplier in the industrial area on Thorngate Road last year. It was when I was dropping off my newsletter. He said to me, ‘We had a meeting with the Chamber of Commerce. We were all concerned that we were going broke.’ If local companies are going broke, that means local people are leaving the Territory, local kids are leaving the schools and partners or spouses may be pulling out of a job. That affects the economy.
After three-and-a-half years the government decided we should buy local. I raised the issue that I had seen tender documents in Canada where there was an emphasis on ensuring either the town or the territory had an advantage when it came to these contracts.
The government had a procurement advisory board, which it got rid of last year. It was made up of government and private sector representatives, which would be ideal to give government advice on retaining jobs in the Northern Territory through a sensible procurement policy.
What have we done now? We have found out there is a problem. We removed the policy advisory board and I am not 100% sure why. Instead of then using the existing Procurement Review Board we have decided on a bit more bureaucracy, and we ended up with the Local Benefit Advisory Panel. One could ask why you did not keep the procurement advisory board in the first place, which could have told you these things. Why did you not use the Procurement Review Board? Perhaps it could have done the work of the Local Benefit Advisory Panel.
We have scrapped one board and introduced another one; talk about bureaucracy. One issue you have with too many boards is you get people with a conflict of interest in a small town like Darwin, or a small constituency like the Northern Territory.
I have been told that about 20 years ago, when any contractor applied for a tender, they had to describe who would work for them and where they came from. Were they a Territory subcontractor? They had an advantage in employing Territory subcontractors, and if they won the job they had to show that what they had promised when they got the tender was who they were employing. The idea was that it would benefit local companies. As time went on, and both governments are probably to blame, that started to disappear. When the CLP came to power it disappeared altogether.
There has been a lot of talk about the big picture. I have no problem talking about pipelines, gas and the creation of jobs. All governments and oppositions will talk about that. We are in an election year, but does that help the scaffolding company? Does that help the small shop that is struggling for business at the moment? I do not think so. If the government genuinely wants to find out the state of the economy, I want it to spend money like it did on the Department of the Chief Minister’s communications research. This stuff, to me, is a waste of money. You spend all this money finding out whether your communications strategy is any good. The best way to do that is to wait for the election.
I would rather you spent money like that by handing it to a business and asking what it thought of the economy in the Northern Territory at present. I do not think you would get a very good answer. Yes, some businesses are doing well. Some people have benefited from INPEX, but many have not. I do not think the government understands that.
I heard the member for Fong Lim, the Treasurer, say he is in contact with business every day. They must be different people to the ones I was in contact with. They were just ordinary people who were struggling. I was at East Arm a couple of months ago and looked at the number of vacant blocks with a For Sale sign. It was not that good.
We know there are ups and downs. The Minister for Business said we live in an economy where there are ups and downs, but do not gloss over the issue. By all means promote the Territory, but do not promote the Territory and avoid the reality. The reality is that there are small businesses which are struggling.
I was talking to someone about the way government does projects in the Northern Territory, and it was interesting. His concern was that the government does not have enough skilled people in the departments to deal with major projects. He feels that when you get a major tender which goes out to contract for design, there are not enough people within the department to make sure that design is correct. He even said they have not had an electrical engineer in the department for about 15 years. If you look at a set of plans for a complicated building, you need someone to understand the electrical side of the building.
If you do not believe me, the proof is in the pudding; if we do not have the skilled people we should have, you will start to get variations in contracts. The taxpayer will have to pay for that because we do not necessarily have enough of the skills to make sure when these major jobs go out that they are done correctly. If we still had a procurement advisory board, some of these issues might have been taken up by the government.
I support the government on the Buy Local Plan, but this should have happened ages ago. It should not be happening three-and-a-half years into a government operation, and it should not require the setting up of another piece of bureaucracy, that is, the Local Benefit Advisory Panel.
The people are employed; do not create more bureaucracy for whatever reason. Keep it simple, set out the requirements for buying local, use an existing board and do not expand bureaucracy beyond what you need, especially when you are trying to help small businesses which are struggling and they see you employing more people and establishing new bodies.
I thank the member for Fannie Bay again for bringing this forward. As I said, it is great that the government is trying to initiate policy. I was at the Aboriginal policy session last night. The one area that still needs development is housing, especially on outstations. Self-help programs are important. If we do not do some work then we will continue to see overcrowding in houses in communities, where there is no future in regard to government supplying houses. We will also have people sitting around doing nothing, getting into trouble and smoking ganja instead of having an active lifestyle with some meaning, in other words, helping their community and having some pride.
That is an area the government needs to work on. That is where small business can work, because there will need to be people with a saw mill and block-making machines; skilled people will be needed to work in those communities. It is an area we can develop, but nothing was mentioned.
I have raised it with the Chief Minister and, as he said, there is a bit more work to be done on the housing policy, which is an area that would help develop jobs. On the one side the government has issues, and on the other side I am putting forward some positives to try to stimulate the market.
I also agree with one of the other speakers. If you want to have the First Home Owner Grant, put it on older houses. Let older people move out, as the Real Estate Institute NT said, and let young people move into those houses. By selling older houses you stimulate the economy. People will have to repair the house and paint it. All those things stimulate the economy. At the moment you only have one side of the economy, which is about new houses. Allow older houses to be used, or perhaps scrap the whole thing, but allow young people to get into the second-hand housing market. It is important for us to look at that.
I am glad we have an MPI today. I was worried that we would adjourn at about 3.30 pm. It is good that we have this discussion, because it is very important for the Northern Territory economy, and that we highlight the issues that need to be addressed.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, after listening to some of the information that has been bandied around the House today, I cannot help myself; I need to make a few things clear, particularly for those members opposite who probably do not understand the issues. They do not understand why the macro picture is the way it is. If opposition members do not understand why the macro situation is the way it is, that makes it really hard for them to formulate any kind of policy because they will be dealing with symptoms and not the underlying issues.
We need to look at the issue the Northern Territory is facing at the moment, how it works from an international and national level, and how it works at an interstate competitive function level as well as a local level. It is very important to understand. We cannot sit here and listen to frantic diatribes filled with emotion from the other side of the House and think it will somehow make up for policy.
Policy needs to be clear headed. It needs to be well thought through. It needs to take into account the entire macro environment so we use the most accurate information to create our policy settings going forward, which the opposition would have us believe are bad and that we are the worst government the world has ever seen. I think they should look at themselves in many of these regards. The history of the Labor Party in this country, and how it has handled things, is not exemplary.
Having said that, most of the issues that I will talk about transcend whether one is Labor or Liberal. They come down to looking at good economic management. How do we economically manage our environment with the limited levers we have available and do the very best we can for the majority of Territorians, which is why we are all here?
Lesson one in Economics 101 – economic is about achieving sustainable economic growth. That is what we are after; it is why are here and why we manage levers in the economy. It is about managing …
Ms Walker: No growth in two years.
Mr BARRETT: You should listen more and speak less.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 33; can the member for Blain refrain from making offensive comments?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Blain, please address your comments through the Chair.
Mr BARRETT: I shall endeavour to do so. The member for Nhulunbuy should listen more and speak less regarding these issues, especially if she wants to learn anything from the debate. They have had their chance to debate. It would be nice if we had our chance to bring some kind of balance to the frantic garble that has come across the floor.
I digress. I was speaking about economic growth before I was interrupted. Economic growth is what managing an economy is all about. We look at a few things within economic growth which we need to manage in this process. Sustainable economic growth means you work on an employment level which is as close as you can get to the natural unemployment rate of an economy. The natural unemployment rate relates to how many people are unemployable in the economy and how many people are between jobs. We are not looking at people who are not looking for work, cannot be employed or happen to be in the natural flux of between jobs. There is always a percentage there.
We look at natural unemployment rates as sitting around 5%, which is pretty normal in big OECD countries. If you get employment levels lower than this you tend to have inflationary effects. If you have unemployment rates higher than this you have disinflationary effects. The two things are not the same.
We are looking at the global employment issues that we are dealing with right now. We are dealing with a macro picture where unemployment is in a huge degree of flux. There are employment issues in first world countries, as well as in second world countries where it is becoming more of a problem. There was a riot in Chine recently where a group of workers went completely nuts and trashed a factory because they felt they were not being heard. I think it is a fantastic time for something like the labour movement to rise up in China and work with some of the workers there. I am not against a union movement where people are being abused.
However, when we look at employment and economic growth from an international level we also need to look at inflation at an international level.
Inflation is a strong guide because our inflation rate as a nation, in comparison to around the world, needs to be managed. You cannot have a growth rate that generates an inflation rate where you lose your terms of trade on an international standing.
I am not sure if the members opposite noticed, but the rest of the world is not in a good place right now. We have just come through the GFC and things are still quite slow. The United States economy, which is still four times the size of China’s, remains sluggish after all kinds of quantitative easing aimed at creating an inflation rate because growth was completely zeroed out. They were losing money on assets, which was wiping billions of dollars off the assets side of ledgers and creating solvency issues for major companies.
With slowing growth rates in the second world, particularly China, we have a commodities issue. The commodities prices, which drove the mining boom that was supposed to take us well into the 2020s, are well and truly not going in that direction, at least for the time being.
We have seen iron ore contract prices come off; we have also seen other major commodities prices, such as coal, which Australia based a lot of its survival on throughout the GFC, come off. We have seen nickel plants close down, most recently in Queensland.
Combined with the issues we are seeing at an international level, we have a national issue. We have an interstate problem because what we see in other states is a higher level of unemployment than here. We see a lower level of economic activity than here and many businesses are trying to get work elsewhere in the country just to get cash flow.
This has created some of the problems we are seeing, which the member for Nelson raised, in how the states are interacting with each other. At an interstate level, states are becoming a lot more protective. They are going almost insular and trying to create legislation to protect businesses within that state from competition outside the state.
We are not immune to that because we all know the very real problem that exists right now. Many interstate companies are undercutting local providers, which is causing a lot of the pain. I understand this problem and why we have it.
When we consider the interstate competitive and, dare I say, protectionist model, the Northern Territory needs to reciprocate. Protectionism ends up being more like a price war than anything else. It is not conducive to a good interstate competitive framework; it just makes things a lot harder.
We have interstate companies looking at the current definitions of local providers, or local provisions for local business, and they have found ways of getting around that. What we are debating is procurement policy that is trying to keep up with the different ways in which businesses get around that policy, because they have workers down south and elsewhere who need to be employed. They go after that dollar whether it is government or private.
I also see the issues surrounding local businesses. For example, when we visited manufacturing businesses – welders, for example, are an important part of our economy – the wages they have to pay their staff are about $10 an hour more than places down south. To keep workers working at their premises, local businesses have to pay an artificially higher wage to compete with wages that workers would be getting at INPEX.
Local providers have to quote jobs with these wage pressures on them. Interstate companies do not have these wage pressures because, effectively, huge sectors of their economy are in technical recession. They have a declining wage and workers who are very happy to be paid a lot less than workers here. What we see happening in manufacturing is providers looking to get things manufactured elsewhere and brought here on trucks. We see about three trucks a week coming from down south with light manufactured material on them, which could have been done here by any one of a number of local fabricators. That is a direct function of an uncompetitive situation that Territory businesses are in, which is due to the artificially high wages because of INPEX.
It would not matter what we did as a government. Yelling abuse across the floor and carrying on will not help. It does not matter who is in government because wages are artificially high right now. That will correct out and we will see it come back to some kind of normality, but I understand why the businesses are in their current situation.
What do we need to do? First, we need to assess it. What is our growth rate right now? Our growth is sitting at 4.4%, projected to be above 3% going forward. That is good. Inflation is sitting between 2% and 3%, which is quite low. When we look at the unemployment rate in the Northern Territory being as low as what it was – somewhere between 5% and 6% is stable, and we have seen an unemployment rate lower than that. We are doing well to keep inflation under control in the Northern Territory. Ours is a well-managed economy and there is no way of arguing that, no matter how loud you scream from the other side of the Chamber. It is being well managed.
There are problems; I hear that loud and clear from people in the manufacturing sector who speak to us. Saying our economic policy settings have failed is a misnomer and a dismissal of the truth behind what is happening at the macro level. The Northern Territory should probably be doing an awful lot worse.
It is not like we have just figured out this is a problem. The Department of Business, under minister Styles, has been working very hard on this because the procurement problem we are facing is a bit like cat and mouse. We need to build a procurement that works for people in the Northern Territory and gives businesses in the Northern Territory a fair chance when they are tendering for government work. That is very true. We need to make sure those procurement guidelines are not too protectionist because that is why we have problems. We see problems between Victoria and South Australia where they are being very protectionist. Queensland and New South Wales are also very protectionist. They are very angry about New South Wales companies crossing into Queensland and winning work, and Victorian companies going to South Australia and winning work. The economies in the north have employment and growth problems of their own.
The Northern Territory is doing well. Our Treasury department has its finger on the pulse. Minister Tollner has done a great job at pulling levers at the right time. Minister Styles is doing a great job of working through this procurement process to make sure this cat and mouse game – we are staying ahead of this from a procurement perspective. We need to continually work with our procurement process because businesses are chasing money to keep their people employed and they are working around that.
Minister Styles, I am pleased with the work you are doing. I want to see a way of moving this forward for local businesses to win things while facing the wage pressures they experience here. It is no surprise they are losing work, especially on the private front. People in the private sector can do their own procurement procedures. Much of that work is not being won and not being done by people in the Northern Territory, despite ample capacity to do it. It is price related.
What can the Northern Territory do? We do not want to lose our capacity. As a government we want to improve our procurement so we can help these guys ride through. I know our departments have been working hard to bring this forward.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Blain, your time has expired.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I rise to support the Leader of the Opposition’s matter of public importance. It is of great importance not just for Darwin and the Top End, but for the Territory, as the MPI says.
This sentiment of the loss of business confidence is resonating through the regions. It is great to discover today that the Treasurer of the Northern Territory has had an epiphany. He has admitted these are tough economic times under the CLP’s economic parameters, and he is drawing those perspectives to a global financial crisis. That is an interesting story because before today there was complete denial.
I go back to 2008. The Minister for Business challenged the Labor opposition and said we have no experience and do not know anything. We managed the Territory economy, and a Labor government managed the Australian economy, through the global financial crisis and became what the member for Blain was alluding to, the envy of the Western world. There was a focused attempt to make sure we did not go under. There was a fiscal stimulus strategy, and the rhetoric used by the CLP since it attained government – and it drops in and out – is around this projected debt. Territorians have come to realise that both sides had a plan, and now they have had three years of a CLP plan based on massive public asset sales to try to cash up for an election.
The CLP’s plan has unravelled because of a completely dysfunctional government, and you only have yourselves to blame. The public has lost confidence in you as community leaders. The story is coherent and has been told one day after another. The media in the Northern Territory has been having a field day because you have been providing that exciting narrative of dysfunction, disunity, scandal, gossip and innuendo. These factors are all playing into a very complex psychological position where Territory businesses, and many Territorians, have lost confidence in government.
The member for Blain talked about the nature of protectionist states. I remember when Labor had to put in plans to manage the global financial crisis …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 43 says that a debate on a matter of public importance should not exceed two hours. I am advised by the Clerk that the debate commenced at 4.48 pm, and it is now 6.48 pm.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, the time has now expired.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, tonight I speak about the increasing levels of antisocial behaviour in my electorate of Nightcliff, and what I believe is the CLP government’s failure to adequately protect the residents, visitors and businesses of this beautiful area.
The electorate of Nightcliff is uniquely placed between the airport and the hospital, and has large public areas, particularly along the foreshore. In the 2012 election campaign, the CLP government made a special contract with the people of Nightcliff. It promised to improve police resources, invest $2m to upgrade the police station facilities and open the Nightcliff Police Station 24/7. It also promised to reduce crime by 10% every year across the Territory. What has come of these promises? The Nightcliff community is increasingly frustrated by the antisocial behaviour and alcohol-fuelled violence we are dealing with every day.
Our police beat was removed not long after the CLP came to government, and last year the police station was shut down. That is completely backflipping on its commitment to the people of the Nightcliff community. We have not seen crime driven down by nearly 35% across the Territory.
Each week my office is approached by local residents, business owners and visitors to the area who are concerned about the levels of antisocial behaviour, the public drunkenness, and the impact it has. I cannot fault our police; they do a fantastic job under very trying circumstances.
Before the budget last year I wrote to the Chief Minister urging him to invest in permanent CCTV cameras in the Nightcliff community. Yet that commitment was not met, and since approximately July last year we have seen the mobile CCTV cameras based in Nightcliff. For the couple of weekends they have been gone, the community has cried out for them to return, and they have.
We have a government in denial about antisocial behaviour and public drunkenness. It closed down the police station that it promised would be a 24/7 station. When the local member, on behalf of the community, requested that the government invest in permanent CCTV cameras, she was told that was not needed or possible. Yet the mobile resource that was designed to move around the communities across the Top End was permanently placed at Nightcliff.
The antisocial behaviour and public drunkenness is at the point of being out of control. It is affecting shopkeepers and businesses. Police officers, who I meet with and speak to regularly, do the best they can, but the CLP government simply ignores the issue.
In a letter the Chief Minister sent to my office in May last year he acknowledged the antisocial behaviour hot spot, but what has he done to address the situation? Late last year an assault occurred in my electorate office where a man physically assaulted a women, leaving her quite upset and shaken. Although this was the first incident in my electorate office, sadly it is a very regular occurrence outside and in other parts of our community. My office, along with other local businesses, regularly calls police to incidents. Police work tirelessly but they cannot be everywhere at one time.
The Chief Minister has acknowledged that the Nightcliff area is a hot spot for antisocial behaviour, public drunkenness and alcohol-fuelled crime; however, he fails to take any real action to fix the problem. He has broken a promise and failed the people of our community.
Every day the impacts of antisocial behaviour are being felt. Business customers do not feel safe when they visit the area and it is impacting on small businesses. I have been speaking to shopkeepers who have to leave their shop doors closed and locked during the day as they do not want people coming in who may engage in this behaviour. Some local businesses have talked about moving because they cannot put up with the antisocial behaviour they are witnessing and which is deterring customers.
Businesses do not like to speak out against this because it may bring bad publicity. They come to me, as their local member, and share their stories. That is why I am raising them in this House tonight, on behalf of our community.
With the removal of the BDR there is wider access to alcohol and a further strain on police resources. The level of public drunkenness is simply unacceptable. We are seeing people accessing alcohol, drinking in public and getting drunk, which is fuelling the antisocial behaviour situation. When people are passed out next to the children’s playground you have to watch them to see if they are okay or whether you need to call an ambulance. It is just not acceptable.
We have situations where members of the community do not feel comfortable moving around the community. In my doorknocking last week, a couple of members of the community raised that they go on quite long walks along the foreshore out towards Casuarina cliffs and back down through Rapid Creek, and they no longer feel safe doing that. They feel the behaviour, particularly to do with alcohol, is very brazen.
When I asked the former, elected Chief Minister about the CLP’s commitment to make the Nightcliff Police Station a 24/7 station, he said that would happen. I quote from the Parliamentary Record:
The answer I received from former Chief Minister Terry Mills was:
Well, unelected Chief Minister, some three years later we are still waiting. Our community has had enough. You have backflipped on your promise, closed our police station, and now we have had word from your CLP candidate for Nightcliff that the CLP has no intention to restore the police station to our community to help restore community safety to our streets. It is simply not acceptable to our community. I urge the government to review its decisions about the police station and the police beat, given the current levels of antisocial behaviour.
It has been increasing in our community, but these past few weeks and months have been particularly bad. Those impacts are far-reaching, affecting small business, the safety of families and our lifestyle. People do not feel comfortable in situations they previously would have, whether it is going to the local playgrounds or walking along the foreshore.
Madam Speaker, the Chief Minister is in denial about this issue. Every time I ask about the issue he tries to shrug it off and say antisocial behaviour is not an issue. It is an issue which needs to be addressed. The Nightcliff community urges the Chief Minister to reconsider the Nightcliff Police Station and police beat, and to put in place real measures that will help curb this antisocial behaviour and make our community a safer place.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, this is the final report card on the government’s four-year term since the NT general election. This year, 2016, is election year for the Northern Territory, where people decide on the performance of the government, balanced against policies of opposition parties and Independents.
The Country Liberal Party report card 2012 to 2016 testifies to glaring self-interest over good governance, lack of open and transparent process and a government not listening, constrained by the demands of its own elite.
Who can forget the Renewal Management Board, a concoction of the past CLP ‘in crowd’ paid millions of dollars to produce a financial statement lacking substance and credibility, now collecting dust on the shelf?
The CLP set a course of public asset sales, including the Government Printing Office, Darwin Bus Service, the Territory Insurance Office and the Darwin Port Corporation – raising United States’ indignation – orchestrated by the Chief Minister, Adam Giles, Northern Territory resident since 2006.
Government leads public sector policy; however, 14 CLP Cabinet reshuffles in three years and a revolving door of ministers strangled public sector management, with Mr Giles now returning as Police minister, allegedly, amid unresolved allegations against senior police.
Ministers set government standards with the CLP reaching historical lows: deposing an elected Chief Minister fronting Japan’s $34bn investment; a failed midnight coup – laughing stock of a nation; ministers sacked, resigning and behaving badly; and a Treasurer dumped from the party.
Underlying the litany of failures resides the alleged ‘boys’ club’ suggesting a culture of bullying, with four CLP MLA women deserting the party, political staff leaving and minority government clinging to power while ministerial travel becomes subject to court proceedings.
CLP insiders admit the government lacks the ability to sell a message. However, utility increases – 30% for electricity, 40% for water, 25% for sewerage – car registration and insurance hikes, and a minister spending $5000 on a late night Tokyo bar tab, all made the media.
The government avoiding scrutiny over political donations, water licences, public asset sales, employment contracts and ministerial travel amid frantic public comment, including social media, risk, a trust deficit, and lacks ethics and morality.
Territorians expect government to listen, enhance our public assets, protect natural resources, act with integrity and honesty and be open to independent inquiry, with politicians they can trust.
Mr Giles used taxpayer money to fund a $500 000 independent inquiry into my term as Minister for Lands and Planning in the Henderson Labor government, with which I fully cooperated. Chief Minister Giles deserves nothing less than an open and transparent assessment of his CLP government, or going to the polls, suggesting something to hide.
You know me: live long democracy. Bring on the election and let the people of the Northern Territory decide.
In the debate of the matter of public importance about Territorians and the Territory business sector losing confidence across the Northern Territory, the Minister for Business said some interesting words. ‘Some are doing it tough and others are doing it fine.’
This is a very difficult conversation for me to have, but Minister for Business, across the regions in that central Australian block where I live, work and travel, businesses have completely lost confidence in your government. They see the haves and the have nots, a culture of elite and privileged, and they translate that into the local context of not having a level playing field to compete for government work. I have had a number of regional businesses tell me they no longer invest and spend the money on important tendering for government work because they no longer have confidence that this government is fair, open and transparent.
These business owners are CLP supporters. Politically I do not have a problem in the electorate that I have lived in for 36 years. I accept everyone, and most people accept me. In politics, the traditional business sector that has always supported the CLP through the grand 27 years of reign and through opposition is now voicing concerns about what has emerged.
As I said, this is a difficult story for me. Local business owners who have operated for over 30 years have told me that it is not fair as processes are not open or transparent.
This has to be the responsibility of all members of government, Caucus and Cabinet, but most of all of the leader. If conservative Territorians voters who have built businesses, are raising their families and have invested in the regions have lost confidence in the integrity of a government then we have serious problems.
This is not – as some members today said – a rabble on this side with worthless contributions made up in back rooms. This is an opposition that brings forward the voice of the people. I am continually challenged by conservative people in the electorate about the governance and leadership of the CLP.
It will come down to an election which is a fair and to democratic process. We should thank our lucky stars that we live in the freedom and democracy of Australia and the Northern Territory. However, this conversation, as difficult as it is, should be thoroughly deconstructed by the current government before the election.
This is a matter of public importance now. This cannot wait until Territory businesses close their doors. It is not good enough for a government to rest on a statement that ‘some are doing it tough but others are doing fine’. Essentially that reflects a culture that is not healthy, open or transparent. There are economic levers that can be pulled and better equity created. It needs to start now and cannot wait for any further economic downturn in the small to medium business sector.
This is a particularly difficult conversation for Territorians and members of parliament. In a historical perspective, this government has what is left of a term to try to turn this around. It has, supposedly, money in the bank as there have been significant public asset sales. It has important levers it can adjust to start to feed that small to medium business sector.
The Leader of the Opposition has issued important statements already. In an election year it is almost unheard of for an opposition to provide its plan and policy. It is a conversation we have with the community. It is so much more doable from the government side than the opposition side. It seriously needs to be done before businesses close their doors, because in the Northern Territory it does not mean that family will relocate to new employment in the next suburb. It generally means that family will pack the trailer or the truck and leave the Northern Territory.
We have been witnessing record movement south in relation to many different factors, but essentially they all relate to this tough economic circumstance, the cost of living and, as the member for Nightcliff said, to challenges within our society such as antisocial behaviour.
Madam Speaker, if there is one lesson I learnt in government – and I learnt many – there are no excuses; the buck stops with the minister. There is no side step; it is your responsibility as you have been elected to do the job. You have a short space of time left to make that turnaround. On behalf of Territorians who are seriously concerned I urge you to take that leadership and make the change.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, tonight I intended to make an adjournment speech to celebrate Steve Rothwell’s retirement from his position of Chief Fire Officer for the Northern Territory after a stellar 38-year career across a number of jurisdictions. However, even Steve would understand if I bumped him until tomorrow to respond to some of the things the member for Nightcliff raised tonight.
For the record, under the CLP government the Northern Territory Police Force has established well-resourced and structured strike forces focused on combating volume property crime and recidivist offending.
Strike Force Trident operates across the Darwin metropolitan command in Darwin, Casuarina and Palmerston. This strike force is well resourced with dedicated officers who track and monitor recidivist offenders utilising an intelligence-led approach. Strike Force Trident has a primary focus on reducing volume crime, particularly unlawful entries, through to the targeted enforcement action on recidivist property crime offending and volume crime. Strategies to achieve this include early detection of offenders, supported by quality forensic examination, expedited fingerprint analysis and a collation of intelligence product. The Forensic Science Branch assists by prioritising fingerprint identification to allow for early arrests.
Soft-on-crime Labor and the quasi-Independent shadow Labor leader, the member for Karama, would tell you not to bother with ‘gammon statistics’. We know that statistics is how we operate, and they are not based on lies.
As reported on the news tonight, the current published year-on-year crime statistics for house break-ins in the Palmerston region for the reporting period 1 December 2013 to 30 November 2014 compared to 1 December 2014 to 30 November 2015 indicate an increase of 37.8%. That is 76 additional house break-ins over the 12-month reporting period in Palmerston compared to the year prior – 277 last year compared to 201 the previous year.
This is why police have ramped up their community engagement and provision of safety and crime prevention advice to householders. This partnership approach supports the exceptional work being undertaken by investigators in Strike Force Trident to drive down property crime by targeting and enforcing against repeat offenders.
The reality is house break-ins did increase in Palmerston last year, but total property crime across the Darwin Metropolitan Command is on the decrease thanks in no small part to the hard work of our relentless, hard-working officers. Total property crime offences across the DMC are showing a decrease for the 2015-16 financial year compared to the same period in 2014-15.
The number of reported unlawful entries with intent offences has decreased for the 2015-16 financial year when compared to the 2014-15 financial year, with a consistent downward trend evident throughout the year. Let us not forget, for the same reporting period in Palmerston, domestic violence-related assaults are down 21.6%, sexual assaults are down 26.3% and alcohol-related assaults are down 33.5%. That is remarkable.
Palmerston police mean business, and with more police on the beat under the CLP government we will drive down crime. Unlike Labor, we have a plan. There are 78 staff gazetted to the Palmerston Police Station, inclusive of front counter, youth engagement and administrative support capability. Palmerston operates a 24-hour, seven-day response capability from the police station. Palmerston operates a social order team, which focuses on high visibility engagement activities, predominantly in the CBD, engaging with youth in the area.
Palmerston proactively manages bail and arrest targets in the district, conducting daily checks on curfew compliance for youth offenders. Local capability is enhanced by Strike Force Trident with 26 operational investigators who devote up to 50% of their time operating in the Palmerston area.
Due to the representation of youths in property offending, Strike Force Trident and youth engagement police officers based at Darwin, Casuarina and Palmerston interact regularly with youth in both a proactive and reactive space across the Darwin metropolitan command. Trident officers proactively manage youth offenders in Palmerston, conduct day-to-day investigations and deliver night shift patrolling into the district every day.
Bail compliance checks with offenders on bail conditions are continually undertaken by Strike Force Trident and front line uniformed members. Where breaches are detected, enforcement action is undertaken and can include their immediate reappearance before the courts.
Strike Force Trident has made seven successful applications under the provisions of section 36A of the Bail Act for immediate review of offender bail granted by the courts over the past 12 months. In addition to this capability, Palmerston station is supported by the Drug and Organised Crime Division, the Territory Response Group, Traffic Police and other specialist areas which also conduct duties in Palmerston on a regular basis.
Regular execution of warrants target property and drug offending as stolen property is often a currency for illicit substances or sold for cash. Between 12 and 18 October 2015, police from Palmerston, Darwin and Casuarina – with support from Darwin Traffic Operations, MPU and Strike Force Trident – undertook a multifaceted policing operation in the suburbs of Palmerston city. Policing activities included community engagement, doorknocking residents in Rosebery, bail enforcement, traffic duties, reassurance policing and saturation policing. The operation resulted in 324 drivers being subjected to a random breath test, eight notices to appear issued, 15 traffic infringement notices issued, three individuals arrested, four liquor infringement notices and 313 residents spoken to. No unlawful entries were recorded in the suburb of concern – Rosebery – during the week.
Between 14 and 24 December 2015, police from Casuarina and Palmerston ran a public engagement and crime prevention operation, Operation Sunningdale 2, at the major shopping centres. Police utilised the opportunity to broadcast images of previously unidentified persons captured on closed circuit television committing property crimes. At least 10 individuals were identified by members of the public, directly leading to prosecutions for dishonesty offences.
Between 7 and 25 January 2016, police from Casuarina conducted Operation Bicosa 2, similar to the operation held at Palmerston in October 2015. Residents living in the area in the northern suburbs who had been subjected to high levels of property crimes received a safety package from police with a letter from their regional superintendent advising that a property crime had occurred in their area. There was a noticeable decrease in the reported property crime in these areas during the period of the operation, with positive feedback provided to police from members of the public appreciative of the information.
Police continue to focus on combating crime in Palmerston and across the Territory, and welcome any assistance or information residents can provide. Commander Brent Warren from the Darwin Metropolitan Command has publicly urged the community to work in partnership with police to stamp out criminality and antisocial behaviour.
Street patrols by residents are not the answer. The best way for the community to help fight crime is to report it directly to the police or through Crime Stoppers. Commander Warren said, ‘When crime and suspicious activity is reported to police they will investigate’. Offences reported to police are recorded and publicly reported. On a financial year/date comparison, unlawful entries are 20.7% lower for Palmerston and 24.5% lower in Casuarina and Darwin. Three weeks ago, on 17 January 2016, Superintendent Daniel Shean attended a community meeting with concerned residents at Carallia Court in Rosebery, which was coordinated by the member for Blain as a result of high levels of community concern expressed on social media. Twelve residents attended the meeting, which was addressed by Superintendent Shean. It was clear from comments made by community members that they had an inflated perception about how much property crime was occurring in their area. Education and awareness about the level of reported crime and the actions of police was provided for all attendees.
It is understood that a similar event is planned in the next fortnight. Police will again attend and provide factual information to the community regarding the level of reported crime and the actions of police. Yes, factual information, not gammon statistics.
Building on previous successful operations, planning is now under way to conduct Operation Bicosa 3 in Palmerston utilising a multifaceted approach of prevention awareness, engagement and enforcement to help improve community resilience, enhance the public perception of safety and deliver high-profile enforcement.
Unlike Labor, the Giles government is not soft on crime. Unlike Labor, the CLP has a plan and the policies. Under the CLP government, the Northern Territory Police Force established structured strike forces such as Strike Force Trident in Darwin, Casuarina and Palmerston, and Strike Force Vega in Alice Springs, to deal with property crime. These well-resourced strike force investigations focus on combatting volume property crime and recidivist offending and are getting results. Since July 1 2015, Strike Force Trident has made 631 arrests and summonsed 46 people to court for property crime.
Madam Speaker, two facts cannot be denied: we have more police on the beat today than we did under a Labor government and crime is down compared to when Labor was in government. Those are the facts, which speak for themselves.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Madam Speaker, being the member for Stuart and a minister has been a great opportunity for me to learn how to navigate my way through what happens here that other people do not see.
I am here to help my people, the Aboriginal people, have a better lifestyle, and to represent them. I am not negative; I am positive. I have always believed in being positive to make things happen. I do not want negativity to get in the way. I am here to make sure people like me are seen to be positive people who are here to give other people a chance to live life the way they want.
I will tell you good stories about what has been happening in the seat of Stuart. For me it has been a great year so far and it is looking very optimistic for the future. As you all know, I am from the bush and know the bush well. I know the problems and the issues faced by people living in remote communities. I also know that not every story from the bush is negative.
Since becoming the member for Stuart I have seen many new businesses start up. Many of these businesses are Indigenous owned and operated. I am pleased to say there are real signs that they are starting to thrive. Three in particular come to mind: MTP Contracting from Corella Creek; Triple P Contracting from Elliott; and Bradshaw & Timber Creek Contracting and Resource Co Pty Ltd.
These three Indigenous businesses have formed an alliance which is being championed by two seasoned businessmen from the bush, John Jansen and Greg Kimpton. The alliance is designed to equip the businesses with the resources to apply for large government tenders. They still work individually on their local projects, but they now come together to pitch for bigger contracts. By joining forces they are able to successfully compete for larger contracts. By operating across a large footprint, they will ultimately provide more Indigenous employment.
The range of support given to the businesses so far has improved their capacity to grow their individual businesses and employ, upskill and retain local Indigenous job seekers, many of whom are long-term unemployed job seekers. This alliance represents everything we, as government, are aiming to do in the bush: support those who want to work and encourage them to join forces with people there who are willing to help.
The Country Liberal Party remote contracting policy requires 70% of all contracts with civil and construction projects under $5m in remote Aboriginal communities to go to Aboriginal businesses. This is further incentive for people like Dan Jones and Gordon Jackson from the alliance.
These three businesses work cooperatively with regional councils, local authorities, RJCP providers, local Indigenous leaders and broader community members. They are bidding for and winning local tenders for building and maintenance, building remote infrastructure, fencing, mobile plant hire, road surfacing and roadside slashing and maintenance. The support networks are in the bush, and it is encouraging to see such a successful model operating in my electorate.
I was in Katherine last weekend and handed over keys for two slashers. These fellows were so excited. The Chair of the Northern Land Council, Samuel Bush-Blanasi, and the Deputy Chair, Wayne Wauchope, attended as well. They were proud to be part of the new champions who are willing to work and make sure there is enough work for our people.
The CLP focus on the bush and Indigenous economic independence is alive and well in the Territory. It should be recognised as a national leader in this area. This is just one example of many models which are starting to emerge. These are the models that have given us, as a government, confidence that Indigenous businesses are capable, reliable and serious about undertaking government contracts. I am so proud to be part of that as well in my involvement as the member of Stuart, encouraging and supporting them all the way. This is a growth area for the bush.
As the member for Stuart, I am proud that this Indigenous business model is being established in my electorate. I congratulate all of them, especially Mr Jackson. It took me going to Elliott for one meeting to give them the incentive to be creative and develop a working relationship with other partners who are long-time bushies who have lived and worked with Aboriginal people on cattle stations.
Madam Speaker, these are the people we need to connect with to make sure there is enough employment for everybody and that we all look after each other instead of dividing and conquering.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Stuart for her discussion about Aboriginal employment. As I mentioned before, there is a lot of scope for microeconomic reform in some of the smaller communities where they can create employment by building their own houses. In Arnhem Land they are already doing that. They have timber mills and are building their own houses. There are more opportunities in the Northern Territory for that to occur.
I will comment on the minister’s response to my question in parliament today which related to alcohol policy and specifically spoke about the 11 outlets in Palmerston which already exist and another four applications for liquor licences in the Palmerston area.
Even though there needs to be some much broader discussion in Palmerston about how many liquor licences there should be, the minister gives the impression that alcohol is like ice cream and we can have many shops selling alcohol. I did not hear anything about the government’s view on the number of alcohol outlets.
We used to have a moratorium and discuss the number of liquor licences in an area, but I had the strong feeling today that the minister was basically saying the Licencing Commissioner will look at it and there will be a little discussion.
The word ‘catchment’ was discussed. That catchment was very small. In these hearings some people were not allowed to be involved in the discussions about a licence because they were regarded as living too far away. As the local member, I was even told that when there was an application to put a boutique liquor outlet in Coolalinga which would have special brews and would open from 10 am to midnight. It sounded more like a pub than a tourism operation. I was told my comments would not be taken into account because I was not in the catchment area.
You need to allow broader community comment on alcohol and pokies. With planning, for instance, you can be in Alice Springs and comment on something in Darwin. I admit that it probably would not get much attention because of the distance. However, there are groups which live in a community and groups which deal with alcohol and gambling that should participate in some of these hearings. Perhaps they can submit a letter.
With the number of licences and the obvious lack of policy, it is important that not only the immediate community but the broader community has some say in where we are going with the number of licences and poker machines being allowed now, especially with the changes the government has introduced.
I noticed that on the Department of Business website there is a page called ‘Alcohol Policy and Strategy’, but I did not see any alcohol policy. It says:
We have a number of members from Palmerston. The Attorney-General, through the Department of Health, will be concerned about alcohol and the law. The minister for Police would be interested in an alcohol policy from a policing point of view. He also lives in Palmerston. You would have thought the policy and strategy would be controlled by the Minister for Business. Where is this strategy? The website also says:
Are alcohol management plans only for Aboriginal communities?
My concern is that the government will hide behind the Licencing Commissioner, saying it is her job to look at these issues. That is not right. The Licencing Commissioner works under the policy and direction of the government. The government sets the limitations on the number of licences and poker machines we should have in a community. What are the chances of people in a community or a suburb in Palmerston saying, ‘We would like to be licence-free’? Do they have a hope, or will the government say, ‘Oh no, if a local shop there applies for a liquor licence, it can have it because it needs to be on equal footing with the supermarket up the road’?
If people do not want pokies in their area, is it automatic that the local tavern will get them? My understanding is there is an application for some pokies and a takeaway liquor licence for the Flynn tavern – I stand to be corrected. They are building the tavern already and it is to have a restaurant. I wonder what will happen. After listening to the minister, is it a sure thing? Some people would like this tavern to be a non-pokie, non-takeaway licensed tavern, with a nice restaurant they can use. Is it automatic that under the government’s non-policy, which appears to be that anything goes as we must allow businesses here to have a level playing field, that the Flynn tavern will get what it is after? I will be interested to know the decision of the hearing when the application is completed.
I am concerned that we do not have a policy about issues that have social impact from the point of view of alcohol and gambling. I was interested in an ABC show some months ago which was a documentary on poker machines. I gather one of the legal firms is now looking at whether poker machines are legal because they are programmed to win for the owner. There is no sense of pure luck. They are programmed so that over a number of spins the owner of that poker machine will make money and you will not. You might make money for a short period but they showed the mathematics; they are programmed to take money. That is not gambling; that is ripping people off.
There needs to be real discussions about the dangers of poker machines. I might throw $10 in, have a bit of fun and go home. There are many people who do not. I also wonder whether we should be asking whether these machines should be allowed if they are not a lottery and are not controlled so it is a pure fluke which way the numbers come up. But, that is not the case. They are not pure fluke; they are controlled by computer and in the end the owners – as you can see from the records – will make lots of money out of these poker machines. There needs to be some real discussions about whether poker machines are a fair type of gambling. Horses run up and down. Maybe one jockey falls off and one jockey pulls it up a bit, but you have some control over who you pick. It is the same with TattsLotto or Keno; you fill in the numbers and you have some chance. But with poker machines you press a button and it is up to the computer to decide.
The government needs a policy, not just for Aboriginal communities but for the general community as well. It needs to say what its policy is before the next election.
Madam Speaker, quickly before I finish, I note the electoral legislation will be debated tomorrow but I am not debating that at present. I am disappointed that the government is bringing it forward. I hope members consider it properly. I believe it is a flawed bill and I hope members of the government consider it before they vote on it tomorrow because I do not think it is a good for democracy in the Northern Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, this evening I talk about Australia Day celebrations in Nhulunbuy on 26 January. It is always a great and very special day in our community. For the last few years the events of Australia Day, including the official part of the day with the swearing-in ceremony of our new citizens as well as the Australia Day citizenship ceremony, has been held at our town pool. We have been fairly blessed in the last few years. I do not think we have been rained out for several years and 26 January this year was no exception.
I thank Nhulunbuy Corporation CEO, Angela MacMiIlan, and her very hard-working staff, including Anna McDonald, who does a lot of work in liaising with community and sporting groups. Anna had a very big hand in making sure the events for Australia Day ran smoothly. That is not to say there were no other corporation staff who were involved because there were.
The day commenced with a 5 km fun run and walk at 6 am, coordinated by our Nhulunbuy’s Runners North group. People who know me know that I do not do really early mornings and I certainly do not do fun runs. If I had been able to get out of bed I would have done the walk but I confess that I did not manage to get there.
I was pleased to get to the pool in time for the 9 am start of the citizenship ceremony and the swearing-in ceremony.
I acknowledge the members of the Rirratjingu Clan who performed the welcome to country that morning; it was spectacular. I reckon there were probably 30 or 40 men, women and kids of the Rirratjingu Clan. There is nothing quite like watching the little ones who are painted up and wearing some of the ceremonial feathers. They are expert little dancers even though some of them look like they are only two or three years old. Congratulations to the Rirratjingu Clan, particularly to Wityana Marika, ceremonial leader, who always does a fabulous job. It was probably the highlight of the day for most people at the pool, being in the heart of northeast Arnhem Land and treated to this Bunggal and Manikay from traditional owners.
I was delighted to see that the Australia Day Young Citizen of the Year Award went to Ineke Wallis. Ineke is a very talented young woman who works at the East Arnhem Regional Council. She sits on the Chief Minister’s First Circles Council and has also been on the Youth Round Table. I have known Ineke since she was a little girl. She is a very talented dancer and her mother, Rachael, is the principal dance teacher with Arafura Dance. Congratulations to Ineke. It is a well-deserved award for the role model she is and the advocacy and leadership she provides on youth and Indigenous issues.
Leanne Parise was announced as our Australia Day Citizen of the Year, a well-deserved recognition for Leanne who happens to be an employee of the corporation but is probably as well known for her tireless work with Nhulunbuy Rotary Club staging community events each year. Her husband Pino is never far from her side and is an equally hard worker. I was pleased to see Leanne receive that recognition.
The Garland family was nominated and named in the Australia Day Community Event of the Year. As long as I have lived in Nhulunbuy, which is more than 20 years, the Garland family has decorated their home every year on Halloween and opened their ‘haunted’ house to the community. The extended Garland family works hard to make a really fun night on Halloween. It was terrific to see them recognised for something they have done at their own cost for many years. Well done to the Garland family – Len and Karen, your kids and your extended family network.
I was delighted to be part of the Citizenship Ceremony. Angela MacMillan, the Chief Executive of the corporation, invited me to read the message from the federal Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Hon Peter Dutton. I was pleased to have that responsibility.
Then we witnessed the swearing-in of the following citizens to whom I wish to again extend my congratulations on becoming Australian citizens: Ms Monica Nyanlong-Aken; Mr Fahim Fahim and his wife Mrs Shaheen Fahim, and very special wishes to them as they are awaiting the arrival of their first baby; Mr Michael Ali Matrough and Mr Jason Abbas Hani Matrough, Michael’s son; and Mr Bastien Miorin, who has lived in Nhulunbuy for a number of years. He is a terrific young man and I am delighted for him and his family. He and everybody else who was sworn in on Australia Day in Nhulunbuy are delighted to be Nhulunbuy’s newest citizens.
I have a couple of other acknowledgements for the day. I acknowledge members of the Datjala Work Camp who worked alongside Nhulunbuy Corporation employees from the depot in setting up tables, marquees, the stage and decorations and flags. It is a great support they provide to our community.
The Arnhem Early Learning Centre, which we call the turtle school, was involved in doing face painting on the day. The local neighbourhood centre looked after the bouncy castle at the pool. It is important to acknowledge our Navy cadets from Training Ship Melville Bay, who conducted the raising of the flag ceremony, as they do at all of our RSL ceremonies and special days like Australia Day. I also acknowledge Grahame Deppeler, who devotes a lot of time to looking after our Navy cadets.
I acknowledge Woolworths, a major sponsor of the Australia Day activities around the country. It was great to have the Assistant Manager of our local Woolworths store, Jarrod Ferguson, attend. Thanks to their sponsorship, Amy Hetherington came across from Darwin as our Australia Day ambassador. Amy Hetherington is a very talented and upcoming young comedian from Darwin. I was lucky enough to see her perform live at the Henbury corporate lunch at the end of last year. It was great to have Amy, who had visited Nhulunbuy before. She made a few people laugh when she delivered her speech.
I am sure there is somebody else I need to acknowledge in the Australia Day thank yous. Of course, how could I forget? Chase Aston, a Year 11 student at Nhulunbuy High School sang the Australian National Anthem. He has the most beautiful voice and did a fantastic job on that day.
A few market food stall vendors arrived. It is very much a community event. It was a hot day and people were using the pool, but it was a terrific day in Nhulunbuy. Unfortunately I was unable to stay for the whole day as I had to fly out that afternoon to Darwin. However, I know once the events had wound up at the pool, the Arnhem Club held activities, including live music, as did the Walkabout Lodge and the boat club. It was a very special day.
I enjoyed the opening ceremony this morning. It is great to celebrate Chinese New Year as there is lots of colour and noise. With Darwin being a very diverse community with a very strong presence from our Chinese population, it is fantastic to see them involved.
I have to express my disappointment, however. I noted, Madam Speaker, in your address in the opening this morning you acknowledged the traditional owners. It is a shame because we are missing something when we do not have a formal welcome to country and the presence of the traditional owners, the Larrakia, on whose land this building and House of democracy stands. I would like to see in the future, when the parliamentary year opens and on very special occasions, the involvement of the traditional owners, perhaps performing a dance as they do in other places.
Last night I was at the Chief Minister’s function in the Main Hall where he launched the Aboriginal Affairs strategy. I did not get an invitation, but I snuck in through the back door because I could see a number of my constituents. It was nice to be welcomed to country by Bilawara Lee.
Madam Speaker, it would be nice to have something like that in our House of parliament. However, I am not for a moment taking away what otherwise was a special opening this morning. It was terrific to see Reverend Mauboy deliver the prayer and a short speech this morning, and to see that so many people were here to share the opening of parliament.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Welcoming 2016 Sitting Year
Welcoming 2016 Sitting Year
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I welcome the 2016 sitting year, an election year, and no doubt one full of measured and intelligent debate. I trust all members will insist on upholding the highest standards and adhere to the standing orders.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Message No 30 – Assent to Bills Passed in November and December Sittings
Message No 30 – Assent to Bills Passed in November and December Sittings
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to Standing Order 167 I advise that I received Message No 30 from the Administrator notifying assent to the bills passed at the November and December 2016 sittings of the Assembly. The message is dated 5 February 2016.
TABLED PAPER
Subordinate Legislation and Publications Committee Report On the Ports Management Regulations
Subordinate Legislation and Publications Committee Report On the Ports Management Regulations
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, I table the Subordinate Legislation and Publications Committee’s Report on the Ports Management Regulations: Subordinate Legislation No. 13 of 2015, pursuant to the new Standing Order 200(1). I also table a copy of the associated minutes of the committee’s proceedings.
The committee routinely scrutinises all rules, regulations and bylaws tabled in the Assembly. They are subject to disallowance to ensure they are fit for purpose. Standing orders require that where the committee is of the opinion that an instrument or provision of an instrument ought to be disallowed or disapproved, it is to report the matter to the Assembly within the disallowance period.
Based on the advice of its independent legal counsel, Professor Ned Aughterson, the committee is of the view that Regulation 10 of the Ports Management Regulations is a case in point.
The Ports Management Regulations support the operation of the Ports Management Act, which commenced on 9 June 2015. In conjunction with the act, the regulations establish a regulatory framework for control, management and operation of designated ports in the Northern Territory.
Tabled in the Assembly on 25 August, I note that the disallowance period for regulation expires on 9 February 2016. As detailed in the committee’s report, Professor Aughterson has advised that the legislative authority for Regulation 10 is unclear. Regulation 10 creates offences where a licensed pilot demands or receives any reward in relation to pilotage services or where a person associated with a vessel offers or provides such a reward.
While section 81 of the Ports Management Act sets out the offences that might be committed by or in relation to pilots, it does not include the offences in Regulation 10. As such, Regulation 10 effectively extends the range of offences beyond those provided for in section 81 of the act and does not appear to fall within any specific matters in relation to which regulations may be made under the act.
As is the case whenever the committee has concerns about a regulation, this advice was forwarded to the minister for his consideration and comment. In response, the minister noted that the regulation power under section 155(1) that provides ‘the administrator may make regulations under this act’ is broad and allows regulations to be made to deal with a myriad of issues that ensure the safe operation of the port, and it needs to be read in context of subsection 65(1) and 65A of the Interpretation Act. Also, Regulation 10 is not a new provision; rather, it is a provision that has been carried over from the port bylaws.
The committee sought further advice from professor Aughterson regarding the minister’s comments. Professor Aughterson raised the following points. The scope of a general regulation power – section 65(1) of the Interpretation Act provides:
- If an Act authorises or requires the making of subordinate legislation under the Act, the power enables subordinate legislation to be made with respect to any matter that:
(a) is required or permitted to be prescribed by the Act; or
While acknowledging that a regulation may well be necessary:
- … the question for the Court is not whether the power should, but whether it does exist’. It was further stated, at 92: ‘In other words, in the absence of express statement to the contrary, you may complement, but you may not supplement, a granted power.
As Professor Aughterson points out, a number of High Court judges have noted that a provision in 65(1) of the Interpretation Act NT:
- … does not give carte blanche to enact independent legislation.
As the High Court has previously stated, a general provision such as in the present case:
- … does not enable the authority by regulations to extend the scope or general operation of the enactment but is strictly ancillary. It will authorise the provision of subsidiary means of carrying into effect what is enacted in the statute itself and will cover what is incidental to the execution of its specific provisions. But such a provision will not support attempts to widen the purposes of the Act, to add new and different means of carrying them out or to depart from or vary the plan which the legislature has adopted to attain its ends.
Professor Aughterson further advised it is generally accepted that a penalty cannot be imposed for a breach of subordinate legislation unless it is authorised by the empowering act.
As noted by the Australian Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances:
- … provisions dealing with offences are not authorised by a general regulation-making power and that if such provisions “are required for an Act that includes only a general rule-making power, it would be necessary to amend the Act to include a regulation making power that expressly authorises the provisions.
Whilst this is not a trivial matter, the authority-imposed penalty should not be assumed by the executive. The legislature may find it convenient to authorise the executive to create penalties by regulation, but the executive cannot assume to have such an authority without express authority from an act of parliament merely because it considers it to be a good idea. This is a line that should not be crossed so easily in a democracy.
The precedent of former bylaw 47 under the Darwin Port Authority Act – while the minister notes that Regulation 10 is a provision that has been carried over from the port bylaws, Professor Aughterson points out that former bylaw 47 was not made under general regulation power. Rather, the Darwin Port Authority Act, under which it was made, included specific bylaw making provisions for the control, regulation and management of the port, particularly in relation to the control, conduct and behaviour of persons within the port and the imposition of penalties for a contravention or failure to comply with the bylaws. Thus, while bylaw 47 was supported by an express regulation power for the bylaws to impose penalties, no similar express regulation powers exist under the Ports Management Act.
The committee notes that it is not its function to consider the policy merits of a regulation, but the need for a law only increases the need for it to be made properly. Based on Professor Aughterson’s advice, if Regulation 10 were to be tested in court it is likely to be found to be beyond the power of the Ports Management Act and, therefore, of no effect.
Having formed the view that the regulation’s lack of clear authority and purported creation of penalties by regulation, without explicit legislative authority to do so, warranted a recommendation to disallow the regulation under Standing Order 20(2), the committee wrote to the minister to convey its concerns and seek his advice on how he will address the committee’s concerns with a regulation, with a view to avoiding unwanted gaps in the regulatory regime for ports. In his reply to the committee the minister stated:
- Considering the conflicting advice with regard to this matter, the ongoing concern of the Committee and to provide certainty as to the validity of the regulation, I have asked the Department of Transport to make the necessary amendments to the Ports Management Act as soon as reasonably practicable.
However, the minister made no comment regarding the committee’s concerns about the importance of the reasonable certainty in regulations or the executive creating penalties without explicit legislative authority to do so. The committee disagrees with this, and amending the act seems as much a cautionary approach as a necessary one. The committee is concerned not only about the likelihood of a person being prosecuted under regulation, but also the regulatory standards in the Northern Territory, the proper use of the Assembly’s delegated legislative power and respect for the proper constitutional roles of the legislature and executive within our system of government.
At its meeting on 2 December 2015 the committee resolved to seek clarification from the minister regarding the time frame for the proposed amendment to the Ports Management Act and to advise of the committee’s intention to report the matter to the Assembly and give notice of a motion to disallow Regulation 10.
On 27 January 2016 the minister was subsequently advised that, given the committee’s ongoing concerns, it was his intention to recommend that the executive council repeals Regulation 10, and that this should occur by March 2016.
While the committee welcomes the minister’s advice and proposed course of action to remedy this matter, the committee is of the view that as a matter of principle it should not allow its jurisdiction over the regulation to expire before the matter is finally resolved.
As such, on behalf of the committee, this afternoon I will give notice of a motion of disallowance to be moved on 19 April 2016. The committee proposes that the notice of motion to disallow the regulation will be withdrawn following the repeal of the regulation prior to it being moved in the April sittings.
Given the above, the committee recommends that the Assembly agrees that:
(a) as far as practicable, the validity of regulations should be clear
On behalf of the committee, I thank Professor Aughterson for his attention to detail and diligence in advising the committee. I also thank members of the committee for their bipartisan approach in seeking to ensure that regulations in the Northern Territory are of the standard the Assembly requires under standing orders.
MOTION
Note Paper – Subordinate Legislation and Publications Committee Report on the Ports Management Regulations
Note Paper – Subordinate Legislation and Publications Committee Report on the Ports Management Regulations
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, I move that the paper be noted.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
WITHDRAW BILL FROM NOTICE PAPER
Public Information Amendment Bill (Serial 140)
Public Information Amendment Bill (Serial 140)
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 141 I seek leave to withdraw from the Notice Paper General Business Order of the Day No 2, Public Information Amendment Bill 2015 (Serial 140), standing in my name.
Leave granted; bill withdrawn.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Leave is granted for her to withdraw it, but now I think she has to go through the process of the actual withdrawing.
Madam SPEAKER: Leave is granted to withdraw.
Mr ELFERINK: In that case Madam Speaker, I seek leave to make a very brief comment. I was proceeding on the assumption that leave was being granted to move a motion to withdraw.
Leave granted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I thank honourable members for their indulgence.
The honourable member has sought leave to withdraw a bill that she has brought into this House. The question I asked prior to coming into this room with the member was, ‘Why do you need to withdraw it?’ She explained it. There were problems with the bill which, effectively, rendered it terminal before this House, and she has indicated that she will choose another path forward. It is all good; no problem.
The only observation I wish to make is that this makes it clear that the business of complaining about something in this House is easy; the business of doing something in this House is much more difficult. Whilst I welcome the member’s attempt to be constructive, there is a salient lesson to be learnt here. The lesson is this: any opposition can complain, whinge, whine and carp. The moment you take on the role of actively promoting something and trying to do something positive in this House, it becomes much harder to achieve. I ask all honourable members to think about this very important truth, because it clearly demonstrates that bringing things to this House because you have had an emotional response, or a brain fart, I think, is the common vernacular nowadays …
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable member, can you withdraw that?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, a thought bubble is the common vernacular. The fact of the matter remains that whilst I congratulate the member on bringing something forward, it is not always that easy. It is hard getting legislation through this place. It is hard being constructive for the people of the Northern Territory.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Chamber graciously gave the Attorney-General leave to speak, but can he stop the verbal diarrhoea and let us get on with business.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you member for Karama. Mr Elferink, if you could get to the point.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, Mr Elf will get to the point. The point has already been made. Do not just whinge, whine and carp. When you try to bring something into this place, understand that as the alternative government it is not always that easy.
JUSTICE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (VULNERABLE WITNESSES) BILL
(Serial 146)
(Serial 146)
Continued from 3 December 2015.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 before the House. I also thank the minister’s office and the officials from the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice for briefing me a couple of weeks ago.
There is no higher priority for a government than to look after and protect our most vulnerable citizens. This includes those who find themselves as vulnerable witnesses and victims interfacing with the justice system. On that note, the opposition supports this bill which sees amendments to three legislative instruments: the Domestic and Family Violence Act; the Evidence Act; and the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act.
As per the explanatory statement, if we can amend legislation to:
- … strengthen existing vulnerable witness provisions and protections, thereby reducing the impact and trauma of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses.
then surely that is a good thing. No one would argue to the contrary. Further, the amended legislation will, according to the explanatory statement:
- … ensure witnesses are more confident and comfortable giving evidence in court, especially where their evidence is critical to a prosecution and may lead to more successful prosecutions.
Again, surely nobody would argue with that.
During my briefing in the Attorney-General’s office, the opening remark in relation to this bill was that it has quite a long history. Indeed, it has a very long history. To be honest I am not sure why these amendments before us today have taken so long to come to light, other than the homily and pearls of wisdom just delivered by the Attorney-General that it is hard getting legislation through this House. Perhaps it is because of the sheer volume of legislation the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice must manage, contemporise and prioritise, or the complexity of making changes, drafting amendments and ensuring consistency where justice legislation amendments cross over multiple legislative instruments. Or is it the priorities of the government of the day? Perhaps it is a combination of all these factors.
As the minister outlined in his second reading speech, this bill implements a number of recommendations from the Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report, which was produced by the former Department of Justice in June 2011. This report was born out of the 2007 Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse and its report titled Little Children are Sacred in 2008.
I understand the bill implements the recommendations of the 2011 report and that some of the recommendations – there were nine in total – were able to be implemented through non-legislative means. I will not go back to those as the minister covered those that were implemented through non-legislative means in his second reaching speech at the end of last year.
I welcome the amendment in clause 11 to section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act in accordance with Recommendation 6 of the review, which amends and broadens the definition of ‘vulnerable witness’ and removes reference to ‘special disability’, replacing the term with ‘cognitive impairment or intellectual disability’.
Further, the new section 21A(1)(a) provides further scope around defining who may be regarded as a vulnerable witness which, while giving guidance to the court, still allows for judicial discretion. I think that is important. I see this amendment has been adopted following the Victorian Evidence Act and the New South Wales Evidence Act. The minister noted this in his second reading speech, and it is noted in the June 2011 report I referred to. A very sensible explanation is provided. It says in that report:
- The Victorian Law Reform Commission has noted that this definition of vulnerable witness:23 removes the need for argument as to whether a witness is vulnerable in the most obvious of cases, while leaving scope for a witness to be treated as a vulnerable witness in other circumstances. A witness may be vulnerable not because of any inherent attribute he or she may have, but because of the circumstances of the particular offence or a relationship to other parties to the proceedings. Conversely, a witness may not be vulnerable simply because he or she is the victim of a certain type of offence. Judges, therefore, must be given some capacity to find a witness vulnerable for the purposes of limiting cross-examination based on the particular circumstances of the case.
I turn briefly to Recommendation 8 of the report, which was:
- That an amendment be made to the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act in response to the High Court’s decision in Crofts to provide clear guidance as to the directions, if any, that should be given to the jury in relation to the timing of a complaint.
- It is the view of the ODPP that the giving of a Crofts direction fails to accurately reflect the reality of patterns of disclosure of sexually abused children, namely that delay in disclosure is a typical feature of child abuse rather than an aberrant one. In Queensland, s4A(4) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act) effectively abolishes the Crofts direction by prohibiting a trial judge from warning a jury or suggesting to it “that the law regards the complainant’s evidence to be more reliable or less reliable only because of the length of time before the complainant made a preliminary or other complaint”. Similar legislation should be enacted in the Northern Territory.
This recommendation, dating back to 2011, has not been pursued. I hope the minister can expand on this. He makes reference to it in his second reading speech and refers to the outcome of the Consultation Report: Response to the High Court decision in Crofts: giving of directions during sexual assault trials regarding the timing of a complaint.
I am sure, and the minister has already acknowledged that he is happy to respond, that there is a very technical and complex legal argument as to why Recommendation 8 has not been implemented. At the same time I note that Recommendations 2 and 7 have been implemented. While on face value they appear to be sensible, concerns remain about the practicalities of the amendment of section 21B of the Evidence Act, which provides that the court may provide for and admit a vulnerable witness’s pre-recorded statement.
In my contact with legal stakeholders in relation to this bill, all of whom are supportive of amendments, there was concern raised in relation to section 21B, not criticism but more going to the heart of resourcing of the courts to make section 21B and the business of pre-recorded evidence workable and to benefit those who appear before the court. There are concerns it could impact adversely on victims, as well as defendants, due to the perception that there will be inevitable delays created in the conduct of proceedings, given that the practicalities of pre-recorded evidence are recognised to appreciate the impact that will have on the administration of justice.
I quote from this submission, and I am sure it will be familiar to the Attorney-General. ‘The majority of hearings in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction relate to serious violence offences and this coupled with the proposal to broaden the definition of vulnerable witness pursuant to section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act will lead to a high number of matters proceeding along these lines if the proposed reforms are implemented. The numerous sittings that will be required to conduct pre-recorded evidence before the hearing will inflate the likely timelines for hearings, particularly as the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, soon to be known as the Local Court, calendar gets filled. Should the provisions of section 21B of the Evidence Act be extended into the Court of Summary Jurisdiction and Youth Justice Court, it is essential that a dedicated pre-recorded sittings list be established to expedite matters, otherwise, lengthy waits will ensue risking the whole process being brought to a grinding halt. The timely resolution of matters is in the interests of both victims and defendants and these anticipated delays may well present problems for both sides.’
There is further comment, ‘The legal provider routinely gets late service of brief material, including electronic records of interviews and child forensic interviews, and very rarely gets transcripts. Preparing for legal argument about redactions in these circumstances will be difficult and may lead to adjournments.’
Again, this will lengthen the legal process for victims as well as defendants. I am advised by legal stakeholders that there are already difficulties they experience regarding the availability of pre-recorded statements.
With resource implications we are talking about practical and logistical issues that have been identified. As a result, a request or answer regarding what the government will do in regard to the significant additional resourcing will be required to accommodate these amendments.
Legal stakeholders have raised their continued concerns with me, which predate this current government, about the state of bush courts. With such inadequate court infrastructure in many of our remote communities it is next to impossible to afford vulnerable witnesses a waiting area or a court space which allows safe separation, safe from intimidation from the defendant.
One of the recommendations to be implemented through non-legislative means was putting up screens in the Alice Springs courthouse to separate vulnerable witnesses from defendants. It is harder to make those separations in bush courts and to find a decent area in bush courts where lawyers can work with their clients. You are lucky if it is a shady tree, and it is bad luck if it is raining on that day.
I can always tell when the magistrate is visiting Nhulunbuy because our town centre has a number of people who gather with their families; the lawyers set up a table under a tree and that is how court operates for a day or two when the magistrate is there. If that is how things are in Nhulunbuy, with a reasonable level of infrastructure, then things must be that much more difficult in the remote courts.
I am not telling the Attorney-General anything he does not know. This issue predates the current government and it is how we have operated our courts in the Northern Territory for many years.
As I have just pointed out, the amendment to section 21B under new clause 3A states:
- Without limiting subsection (3), when considering the prosecutor's request to admit a recorded statement or to hold a special sitting, the court must take into account whether a recorded statement can be played or a special sitting can be held in the courtroom for the proceedings.
I go to not only a matter of resourcing, time and availability of the court, but that some bush courts may be precluded here. Even the minister’s second reading speech notes this, where he said:
- This provision has relevance to bush courts where there may not be facilities for evidence to be pre-recorded and replayed.
I appreciate the intent of a bill such as this, which brings forward amendments which aim to minimise harm, reduce pain and fear, lessen trauma for vulnerable witnesses, and assist them to be more confident and comfortable giving evidence, hopefully leading to more successful prosecutions. Those vulnerable witnesses include, but are not limited to, women, children, people with cognitive impairments and intellectual disability, and victims of sexual assault and domestic and family violence.
At the same time, we cannot debate amendments to an act without also debating government’s investment in protecting these vulnerable citizens of the Northern Territory before they find themselves as victims. We need to strengthen protection for our vulnerable witnesses, but we need to see government strengthen systems and approaches in partnership with the non-government sector, and people at the grassroots level in communities, who so often have many ideas about how these matters can be addressed to prevent them from harm before they become victims.
I know these to be questions for this government and the future government, and they were for past governments for that matter. We cannot just continue to deal with systems in crisis and the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. We need to reduce the number of victims appearing before our courts. We need strong prevention measures in place and to adequately resource those measures, including education, counselling services and programs for perpetrators, and the right support for vulnerable victims. That is not an exhaustive list of the things we might do.
The 2011 Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report was a product of the Little Children are Sacred report into the sexual abuse of children, which tells us that, overwhelmingly, those witnesses are Indigenous. The problem, under that very heading, The Problem, is quantified on the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice’s website, as the agency which also has responsibility for the relatively new Domestic Violence Directorate. I will quote the statistics from that web page:
- More than 60% of assault offences in the Northern Territory are associated with domestic violence.
82% of domestic violence victims in the Northern Territory are women.
More than 70% of sentenced prisoners in the Northern Territory have one or more convictions of domestic violence-related offences.
Indigenous females in the Northern Territory are almost 22 times more likely to be victims of domestic violence than non-Indigenous females.
Indigenous females represent 73% of domestic violence victims in the Northern Territory.
I am sure the Attorney-General and other members of this House will agree that these stark figures are alarming, that we cannot continue to accept them or see them rise, and that we must work collectively to reduce them through broad-ranging strategies in partnership with stakeholders, including the non-government organisation sector and, as I said earlier, the women and men at the grassroots of their communities.
In reducing these numbers we reduce the number of people who face the court as victims and as defendants. We reduce the amount of pain and trauma that people go through. I am pleased that this bill sets out to lessen the trauma vulnerable witnesses face, but we cannot lose focus on avoiding the terrible exposure to trauma that women and children face behind closed doors.
In looking specifically at the cohort of vulnerable children in the Northern Territory, I refer to data provided by the Department of Children and Families Annual Report 2014-15, which the minister is familiar with and grappling with, because in his fairly heavy workload he also has responsibility for this agency.
Some of the statistics in it are deeply concerning. Had the minister and his predecessors – he is not the only minister who has held this portfolio in three-and-a-half years of government – not dropped the ball on the recommendations of the more recent board of inquiry in the Growing them strong, together report, we might have seen statistics which showed a snapshot of improvement and not a system in crisis.
I refer to the Department of Children and Families Annual Report of 2014-15 and place on the record some of the data that comes from that report.
As of 24 August 2012 there were 737 full-time employees; that is obviously the date at the change of government. There are now 607 full-time employees. That is 130 fewer full-time employees in the Department of Children and Families since the change of government. There were 646 full-time employees as at June last year – a slight increase. There is no reporting on turnover this year. There has been an increase of 20 P1 professionals, a decrease of 15 P2 professionals and a decrease of 15 P3 professionals. P1 and P2 are statutory officers who can undertake investigations and P3 are team leaders. There has been a net loss on these statistics of 10 professional stream staff. The cost to senior professionals is worrying. How can dedicated staff within this agency – and I know how hard they work, especially with increased workloads – manage heavy workloads and deliver the very best service to children? The answer is that they struggle to.
I wish to place on the record some of the other statistics from the DCF annual report under the heading of Child Protection. The substantiation rate for cases of abuse, a 23% increase, is not commensurate with a 32% increase in notifications, a 44% increase in investigations and a 60% increase in investigations finalised. Category 1 investigation response times decreased by 6%; Category 2 increased by 1%; Category 3 decreased by 4%; and Category 4 decreased by 18%. This is due to a significant increase of notifications, coupled with fewer staff.
Last year 156 children assessed as Priority 1, child in danger, were placed at risk because investigations did not start within the 24 hours required, compared to the 2013-14 figure of 43. A total of 433 children assessed as Priority 2 were placed at risk because their investigations did not commence within three days, compared to 319 in 2013-14.
I wish to place on the record some data from the report under the heading, Out of Home Care Services. The number of children in foster and kinship care declined from 529 to 482, from 58% to 48%. Instead, more children were in purchased home-based care, 33% up from 27%, and more children in residential care, 10% from 9%. The number of foster and kinship places of care only increased by 5% last year, compared to 11% the year before.
Within the annual report, under the heading, Family Support Services, there was no data on family support services in the 2014-15 financial year, which is deeply concerning.
Forgive me, Madam Speaker, regarding my last comment about no data on family support services at the time the report was prepared. This is referring to the Children’s Commissioner’s annual report examining the DCF report, so is not quoting directly from the DCF report, but rather the Children’s Commissioner’s annual report.
Under the Children’s Commissioner’s report in regard to abuse in care, on page 78 the commissioner noted:
- Of concern are the number of cases of children being abused in kinship and relative carer placements.
…
The department requires kinship carers to be assessed and often the child is placed with the carer while an interim assessment is conducted. There is a requirement that a full assessment is then undertaken.
…
Of equal concern is the high number of children abused in foster care. In 2014-15, more children were abused in foster care than any other placement type. The reasons for this are beyond the scope of this review, however the question arises as to the level of screening, adequacy of training and support to carers, and the level of monitoring of the placements by DCF.
…
However it is indefensible that 12 children were abused not only once while being in care but on a number of occasions.
I place these comments and data from the Department of Children and Families’ annual report and the Children’s Commissioner’s report on the record to highlight areas where there needs to be government attention and focus to prevent young people becoming victims – where they are reported. Hopefully we will see an increase in reporting that would progress to a court case.
As I have said, opposition members welcome the amendments to this bill to support vulnerable witnesses, but we also call upon the government on its duty and responsibility to be focused on the other end of the spectrum, not just the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, in supporting and reducing incidents of harm. I know it is not easy or simple, but the fact we have seen a decrease in the resourcing of agencies is deeply worrying.
I thank the minister for bringing this bill before the House. As I said, members of the opposition support this bill. Thank you.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I support the amendments that have been brought forward to the Domestic and Family Violence Act, the Evidence Act and the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act. I also concur with many of the matters raised by the member for Nhulunbuy, who always does a thorough job investigating these changes. It is sometimes difficult with changes to law; they require a bit of understanding.
I have some queries as to why it has taken so long, because there has been a lot of emphasis over the last few years about sexual abuse of children, especially through the Little Children are Sacred report. It will be good if the minister explains why this has taken a considerable length of time. It is not only in his time in government, but the previous government as well. Were there issues that required this length of time to bring those changes to the House to be approved?
I support the recommendation for section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act:
- … section 21A(1) of the Evidence Act to provide for a list of factors to be considered by the court when addressing whether a witness is vulnerable, including the relationship between witness and defendant …
That means that the definition of ‘vulnerable witness’ is a witness in proceedings:
(a) who is a child
(b) who has a cognitive impairment or intellectual disability
(c) who is the alleged victim of a sexual offence to which the proceedings relate; or
(d) whom a court considers to be vulnerable.
That is more definitive in explaining what that means. There is also the change to the Evidence Act which specifically provides that a vulnerable witness does not need to be present in a courtroom where their pre-recorded statement of evidence is played. I think that is appropriate. There is talk about expanding the operations of lower courts.
__________________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 6 students from Durack Primary School, accompanied by their teacher, Julia Walsh. We also have Year 6 students from Bakewell Primary School, accompanied by their teacher, Peter Usher.
On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
__________________________
Mr WOOD: Also, 21D of the Evidence Act adds an additional principle about providing that all efforts should be made to ensure matters that could delay or interrupt a child’s evidence are determined pre-trial.
Clause 5 talks about an amendment to the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act to:
- (a) relieve judges of the responsibility of relaying questions from self-represented defendants during sexual offence trials; and
(b) provide the court with the power to appoint a person to put questions to the complainant on behalf of unrepresented defendants
In the minister’s second reading speech he explains:
- The provision has been drafted to restrict questioning by the appointed person to that which is requested by the defendant. The appointed person must therefore not provide any legal advice or ask any question beyond that provided to them by the defendant.
Further, minister, you note that the Northern Territory Legal Aid Commission has been consulted in relation to potential resource implications if they are required to appear to present questions in relation to what I just read. Does it require a person to have a legal background or could it be anyone? Because all they ask in the first place is that the appointed person cannot provide any legal service. Can that position be someone who does not necessarily have a legal background? It is only a minor question, but those two paragraphs contradict each another. If you can answer that during the …
Mr Elferink: Technically yes, but generally, no.
Mr WOOD: Okay. Could you help explain this – it was a bit legal eagle. In the second reading speech you said, under the amended section 5 of the evidence and procedure for sexual offences – legal people might certainly have a better understanding than me, but you explain in the second reading:
- New section 5(3) has been inserted to require the court to warn the defendant that they will not be permitted to adduce evidence in relation to a fact in issue in order to contradict evidence of the complainant if they do not accede to cross-examination being conducted by the appointed person.
Mr Elferink: That is the rule of Browne v Dunn.
Mr WOOD: The famous case of Browne v Dunn. If you could explain what that means in layman’s terms it would be good.
There is a section which I could not find in the second reading. I could find it in the explanatory notes, but when I read the explanatory notes I got more confused. It is the section that relates to changes to section 13 of the amendment of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act. It relates to:
- Criminal liability of executive officer of body corporate – evidential burden of proof on defence.
I looked at the second reading and I could not see what all that meant. I have a rough idea, but we are talking about an amendment of a sexual offences act, and here we have ‘criminal liability of executive officer of body corporate - evidential burden of proof on defence’.
Can you elaborate on where this section of the act would apply in practice? It seems, when dealing with court cases or individuals, we then come across ‘criminal liability of executive officer of body corporate’. As I said, the explanatory notes mention it, but when I read it I got more confused as to what it was all about.
Mr Elferink: I think you want to understand the rationale behind the language.
Mr WOOD: That is right, the rationale and why it is in the bill. Could you give an example of where this would apply? They are my only concerns.
I take the same point as the member for Nhulunbuy – it is not the only bill. The number of bills we get here which are trying to fix a problem after the event – there is no easy solution to the issues you are dealing with here. There will be members of this parliament debating similar issues for many years to come, but, hopefully, less of that debate. Just because we have difficult issues, it does not mean we strive to continue to change things in a world where this piece of legislation is not needed.
We have to teach respect. It is one of those things that, to me, has drifted out of our society. You might be told you are an old-fashioned so-and-so for opening the door for a lady. I was taught to stand for a woman on the bus. Some women may say that is offensive because it tends to put them in a position which they do not appreciate. Regardless of whether you agree with that, what was drilled into me at home was to have respect for other people. It did not have to be a woman; it could be an old person who had to go into the shop and you needed to open the door. It was basic things like saying ‘thank you’ and ‘please’. It was caring for other people. I wonder whether we have that society now. Many members of parliament go to school assemblies and probably hand out prizes. How many people say ‘thank you’? When someone thanks me I nearly say, ‘Wow. Great. Thank you.’ I play Santa Claus a lot. I give out lots of presents, and it is nice to hear someone appreciate that they are being given something.
I wonder, in a more general way, if we have lost respect for one another. Do we not care about one another to the point where, in some cases, we are violent towards people because we do not get what we want? Again, I suppose a lot depends on the way you were raised. Do we have problems where parents who were not raised to be respectful pass that lack of respect on to their children, and so the cycle goes on? I think back to my mother, and I was told never to lose my temper. When I have I regretted it, because there was a belief in my family that it was the wrong thing to do. You should control yourself and not lose your temper. When do people get violent? It is when they have lost their temper. If may be accentuated because of alcohol, but there is a lack of control.
It would be a very large task, but even though sometimes it is taught at schools we need to bring back those notions of respect for ourselves and our parents. A good old piece of the Ten Commandments is to respect your mother and father – and it is a long time since that was around – and to respect everyone as being equal as fellow humans, whether it is your wife, husband or children. That does not mean you cannot have debates or disagreements, but do it in a respectful way.
I hear the language used today, even in the media, and it is not respectful language. A lot of language is swearing. It is certainly not respectful, and it is disrespectful to women. I have heard women using it. I umpire football and I have to pull people up for the language they use because it is disrespectful. We have a society that has slowly eroded those values. It might be that some parts of our society do not want that respect. They see that as placing them as unequal, but I do not accept that. The things I was taught are good things.
______________________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of 22 students from Nemarluk Primary School, accompanied by their Principal, Lorraine Hodgson. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
______________________________
Mr WOOD: They can see how much respect I have for Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: They waved.
Mr WOOD: I do not know how you would change it, but if we want people in our society who promote better behaviour, they are the values we need to reinforce in our society. Once upon a time you would never hear a swear word on the television. You certainly hear them now; they are not even beeped out. There is some atrocious language around, and many movies are quite violent and explicit. I have always said I would prefer White Ribbon Day to be against violence, regardless of whether it is violence against men, women, boys or girls. We need to reinforce the fact that violence is not the answer to the issues we face today. We need to do that in a peaceful and compassionate way, respecting other people’s points of view.
I thank the minister for introducing this important legislation. Hopefully it will protect the people who need protecting and will make it easier to bring those people who have caused violence against vulnerable witnesses to justice. At the same time, we have to look at the basis of why we need this legislation and whether we can turn our society around enough so this legislation will hardly ever be used in the future. That is wishful thinking, but you still need to have positive goals, otherwise you would have to ask why we are we here.
Mr STYLES (Business): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for presenting this legislation. I agree with not only the minister, but the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson; this is a very important issue. The way the Westminster system and our court systems work in our society means we need to protect vulnerable witnesses, be it old or young people. Young people are particularly vulnerable. It is very important.
As a former police prosecutor and school-based police officer working in the community, I have considerable experience in working with vulnerable witnesses. Over the years I have thought about what we need to do as a community. I take on board what the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson said. It is extremely important that we educate people on how the system works so they understand why there is a need to protect vulnerable witnesses. We also need to offer support to all members of our community. It may not necessarily be financial support, but emotional support. Communities can provide support to those in our community who need help, support and comfort so they know there are people who care.
We want to make sure children are not isolated and families can function freely in our community. That has a lot to do with the policies that governments introduce. I looked at some figures this morning in relation to crime statistics being down. It has to do with what governments do with their policing policies. It has to do with our social policy, which is extremely important because human beings are a community’s greatest asset. We need to look after these people. I have heard the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson in this debate so far. The member for Nhulunbuy said that it is not easy or simple to prevent people from becoming victims. I agree; if you do not have those ideas or the experience in those areas, it is hard. I heard the member for Nelson say there is no easy solution. Again if you do not have the experience, knowledge or good advice then it cannot be easy or simple.
On this side of the House, for quite some time, I have been working on a solution to some of these problems. It is an innovative program involving Neighbourhood Activity Centres. This is about everything the opposition members and the member for Nelson are talking about. The amendments in this bill are very important. I agree with both of them; one of the most important things we can do as a government, a society and a community is make sure our vulnerable people and children are protected. How do we do that? Some say it is not easy or simple and others say there is no easy solution.
You have to look at what we do at the grassroots. I will tell a little story which follows on from what the member for Nelson said about people in our community having respect; perhaps that has become a little disjointed in this modern day. I will tell you a little story from when I was growing up; probably about the same age as the people sitting in the gallery at the moment.
I lived in a short street with four houses in it between two very long streets. On the corner of that long street was a lady by the name of Mrs Downing. Mr Downing was also there. They were retired farmers and wonderful people. They had contributed to their community for many years, providing some of the staple items that sustain any community. I used to go into town for music lessons and all sorts of things. I tried to learn to play the guitar; I could play it a bit but did not succeed greatly at it. On the way home I used to find Mrs Downing at the railway station, and she would have string bags full of groceries that she had purchased in town. My job, as my mother said, being a farmer’s daughter – she said, ‘Mrs Downing is an older lady; if you see her carrying those string bags you should offer to carry them home for her.’
What happens when you are young and you do those things is Mrs Downing says to you, ‘Thanks very much, Peter, that is a very nice thing to do’, and all the other accolades you get for being polite, nice and looking after the older people in your community. It is very important to look after the old folks because they once looked after us. That is what my mother taught me. I took that on as a very young boy and, as the years went by, I grew very close to Mrs Downing; she thought it was wonderful. The other children in the street used to do the same thing for her. She lived in a very supportive community where she was not afraid to move around. If anything happened she was not afraid to talk to people because she knew she had the community’s confidence. It is about people having the confidence to move around the community.
When I was working as a school-based police officer I saw disconnect in our community between older people and younger people. I started to think about how we could get this back. How can we get to Mrs Downing so she is not afraid to walk in her community or for someone to offer help? These days I talk to seniors and they say they probably would not give their string bag to someone who offered to help because they think they will run away with it. That is what they tell me and it has hit home with me for many years.
Over 15 years I started to gather all this information and put it together. In my role as a community police officer, and as a police prosecutor, I saw the victims. It is really sad when we have so many victims. How do we change that? I came up with a model that I pestered my colleagues about called Neighbourhood Activity Centres. If you ask any one of them they will tell you they hear from me ad infinitum about school-based policing and Neighbourhood Activity Centres. I can see the Treasurer sitting there, nodding his head and smiling. In the end, my colleagues agreed that we needed to support the new initiative and concept of Neighbourhood Activity Centres.
The Neighbourhood Activity Centre pilot program is being run at Sanderson Middle School. I worked there as a school-based police officer and it was perfect because it is in my electorate where I can fully support it, not only as a local member, but as a Territorian. I worked with Liz Veel, who is now the principal, in the classroom many years ago when I was a school-based police officer. Liz Veel, somewhere between 10 and 15 years ago, was fortunate enough to win a trip to Canada to look at some of the school programs that were occurring there. She went to a school that runs similarly to what the broad Neighbourhood Activity Centre is about. She came back and spoke to people, and there was not a great deal of support for it 10 years ago. When I came along, with my concept that I had been working on for 15 years, she leapt at the opportunity to discuss it. She also knows, in the education field, that the closer our community is the better off people are. If you understand what is happening in your community then you do not fear your community.
There is an old saying: fear is fear of the unknown. That is where many people get their fear from. If you are not afraid because you know what is going on in your community and that there is support right across the community, not only from the police but from people within the community and in your neighbourhood, then you have less fear and you are less likely to be a victim.
The member for Nhulunbuy quoted some statistics, and it was sad to hear them. We, as a community, need to do something about it. Everything she said about what government should be doing we are already doing. I hope for bipartisan support for Neighbourhood Activity Centres. Whoever wins the next election, I will hold that government to account and pull these things out of Hansard and say, ‘This is what you say the government should be doing; well, this is what we are doing.’
I want to give the people listening and watching, and those in the gallery, some idea of the things we do to build young people’s confidence, and not just young people, but everyone in our community.
Let us look at it. I took this idea to the Police Commissioner last year when we were putting this together, and he got his executive team together. They support it 110% and see this initiative as something that can change what is happening in our community. They are on board.
The Department of Education and its minister are on board. The Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services, as well as Cabinet and our parliamentary wing, also supports this fantastic initiative. This is the pilot program; once we get the nuts and bolts sorted out it will go Territory-wide.
People from interstate look at it and they are watching. They want to take the intellectual property interstate. Most of this intellectual property I developed over 15 years, and I am very happy to gift that intellectual property to anyone who wants to take up the opportunity to emulate what we are doing in the Northern Territory. That is something everyone can take. I have numerous files on this initiative and am willing to share with anyone.
Let us look at some of the things we might do to build young people’s confidence, and all those other people who are likely to become victims. Remember, strong people who understand what is going on around them are less likely to be victims. The figures and percentages the member for Nhulunbuy quoted are what we are targeting to reduce.
Not only are we enacting legislation to make it easier for victims to not be intimidated in courts and after the events, but we are trying to ensure they do not become victims. That is something we are working very strongly on.
Let us look at what is happening at Sanderson Middle School in the Neighbourhood Activity Centre. We have been very fortunate to get the services of Paul Wyatt, a guy who has worked in the community and is well known there. It is something you want to get right. When he was brought into that project everyone, bar none, said we have a round peg in a round hole and that he is totally suitable.
He has made advances in engaging with the community and with business. This is not about throwing money at the problem. When I was in opposition, the previous government used to say, ‘We spent more money on this and more money on that’. We had to continually remind the ALP government that money is an input and not an outcome.
We are looking for outcomes. It is not necessarily about money; it is about the community getting involved and making sure they can give. There are so many people who have great hearts and just want to give. I have been talking to seniors and seniors’ organisations about this. There are many people who have been in this world for a while who understand what victims are about. They do not want to see more victims, nor do they want to be victims themselves. They want a better community. They realise they need to contribute as a community, and they want to. They do not necessarily want to sit around the house all day watching television; they want to be out there, loved, wanted and needed. That is one of the things Maslow talks about in his hierarchy of needs. They need those things. They want to get out and help. Some women talk to me about when their kids leave home, especially when they have been a homemaker for much of their life. When they get to the stage of retiring and the kids are at university or living somewhere else, these women just want to give. In their local neighbourhood they can go to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre and do all sorts of things to help.
How do we do that? Homework centres. I was at a function recently and was talking to a couple of older people who have retired. They said they would love to help some of the young people who are struggling. Neighbourhood Activity Centres are facilitating homework centres to get these people to help those in the neighbourhood who are less fortunate than themselves.
_____________________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: I advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of two Year 9 classes from Dripstone Middle School, accompanied by their teachers Irini Pikoulos and Marita Fitzpatrick. We have had so many students in today. On behalf of honourable members, welcome to Parliament House. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Members: Hear, hear!
_____________________________
Mr STYLES: What a great day to be here – all these young people. We are talking about the opportunities we are providing in the northern suburbs in giving people activities that do not cost money, or if they do it is very little.
One of the things I hear from young people is that there are things to do, but they cost money. We would like more things to do that do not cost money, such as abseiling off the back of the school building, going fishing and learning about things that can lead to future employment. Let us look at after school opportunities for lagging students. These seniors want to help.
Yesterday I spoke to the manager at Coles Northlakes. Geoff is a nice bloke and I wanted to reinforce what previous managers had done with donating food. I doorknock in one suburb of my electorate where there are many migrant women. The problem is that we see too many migrant women who suffer domestic violence and other problems. There is frustration in the household that ends in abuse. Sadly, some of them are physically abused and sexually abused, and things deteriorate.
When I knock on some of these doors I find the husband, who can speak English, is at work. If the woman is at home and struggles with English, which is the case in many migrant families, mum has to get the daughter to interpret. I stand at the door talking to these people, with a 10-year-old interpreting for mum. How does a 10-year-old child translate from her mother that she was bashed last night after the kids went to bed or was sexually abused? How do you get your 10-year-old daughter to translate that to someone at the door so she can say there is a problem?
I speak to people who lead organisations and multicultural groups and I get feedback on what is going on there. We make sure mum can come to the school with the daughter, and you can find all these wonderful people in the community who are retired and want to give. They give one-on-one lessons in conversational English. Once they get into conversational English, they start to pick up the language a lot faster. Once they get a fairly good grasp on English, as opposed to their mother tongue, they can start articulating to people what the problems are.
When we get these migrant women to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, other women start to talk to them, comfort them and build their confidence. Once you get their confidence up, information can pass. The women in our community, who have time to spend with those migrant women, can then make sure these things are happening less and less in our community.
Much of the time, mum has a problem when she has little kids or kids at school. After school, what does she do in order to come to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre when it opens after school? Someone has to cook dinner. At the Neighbourhood Activity Centre we are getting food from my friend, Geoff, at Coles. He donates food that will expire that day, which might be some mince, and you can get the spaghetti that has nearly expired. Then the commercial kitchens at the school at Sanderson will prepare meals. This serves a number of purposes. There are young, vulnerable people who, instead of running around in the parks at night, or looking for something to steal so they can buy something to eat – these people exist in our community – can be at the Neighbourhood Activity Centre where there are young people learning to cook a meal that might be the only meal they have had that day. Sadly, there are children whose parents do not care about them. We have heard about that in the Chamber many times.
This is the start of what we are doing. It started a couple of weeks ago and will improve and increase as more people come on board. This is an initiative that will help feed young children who will not get a feed that night. Many people in the community will say it should be the parents’ responsibility, but the community is suffering. These kids become victims because they do not fully understand what is happening around them. We need to educate them and make sure they are in a safe, secure environment.
I know some ladies and home economics teachers who have offered to run these programs after school. They do not have to be there every day; there are enough of them to run this. Between the two home economics kitchens at Sanderson Middle School there is a large room. In previous days it was set up as a restaurant. The basic VET in Schools program they were running was about tourism and training people to work in restaurants so young people could get jobs. The plan is to open that again.
The migrant woman who is learning one-on-one English can come there, and while she is learning, the kids are on the oval playing bubble soccer, hockey, football or other things being run by the community, and having some fun. The mum can be at the Neighbourhood Activity Centre with her kids and does not have to cook at home. Dad can come straight there from work and they can go upstairs into the home economics centre and have something to eat. She does not have to cook dinner so it is a bit less pressure on mum. The kids will be learning and serving the meals, and there will probably be some restaurateurs who might offer the kids a part-time job. That is what used to happen there and it will happen again.
When you are looking at building confidence in your community you can see that there are many aspects to this. To a large degree, if you do not have the experience or have never been involved in this, as was said earlier in this debate, it cannot be easy or simple, and there is no easy solution. But there is. I hope those opposite will continue to support the government in its endeavours to make sure we can get people sorted in our community and give them confidence.
There are about 40 kids attending every day after school at the bike workshop, fixing bikes. We have organised with the police for abandoned bikes that are not auctioned to be donated. We have bike shops giving bits and pieces because they look at what they can do for their community. I applaud those people from businesses who get involved with the Neighbourhood Activity Centre and are giving. They were also giving last year, and their contribution to their community, be it small, medium or large, will make a difference.
I congratulate Ben, who is teaching all these young blokes how to fix bikes. There are now kids who have bikes they can ride, not only to and from school, but on the new BMX track. They were there not last weekend but the weekend before. The Neighbourhood Activity Centre had some equipment, soil, woodchips and other things donated to it. This is the community pulling together to create things for people to do. We have a BMX track on a block of land right next to Sanderson Middle School.
There are plans to increase the garden there, which teaches young people about irrigation, fencing and a range of real-life skills. It is about teaching mathematics, not necessarily in the classroom, but in the real world where they will have to survive and get a job. If people walk out with real skills and understanding, they are less likely to become a victim because they can see what is going on.
When I go doorknocking, people say to me, ‘Pete, what are the five most important things to you?’ I ask them what the important things are to them. The first for me is law and order; the next is health and then education. Those are three very important things. Number four is a vibrant economy to pay for those three. We need a vibrant economy, and you cannot do it on borrowed money. You have to generate economy and wealth. The fifth thing is hope. They all nod and say, ‘You are right’. If you do not have hope, you do not get up in the morning.
This government is making sure it works with our community and the business community, and generates hope. That is what makes people get up in the morning, which is what makes people want to get involved. It is what makes businesses want to contribute to our Neighbourhood Activity Centre. They hope what they do will make a better and safer community for many of us.
Retired teachers are coming on board to do a range of things. We are very fortunate at Sanderson Middle School to have the school of music. That facility is absolutely fantastic. We have seen the school bands go from half a dozen to hundreds. So many people there are getting into music.
Paul Wyatt, the director of the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, has his own community band. People in this Chamber, on both sides, may be aware that Paul and his band played at many of the fundraisers. They do not charge; they just do the community work. There is a bunch of good people who contribute their time, free of charge, to community events so those communities can raise money.
We have an area outside, the general purpose area, which we will use for concerts. Come Dry Season we will have the school band putting on concerts there. What a great thing, for young people to have a venue. I am in the process of lobbying my colleagues to get lights for the oval there so we can play bubble soccer at night. Bubble soccer, for those who may not be initiated, involves a big round ball full of air; you play soccer and roll around the place. It is a lot of fun. That is happening there already.
I was doorknocking in Anula the other day and many people said, ‘We love the park down there; if you put lights down there it would be fantastic. We go down there with our kids and play, but when it gets a bit dark we need to come home.’ They think then they can stay longer and get their kids out and get them active. One of the things governments are trying to get people to do these days is become more active. It is better for your mental and physical health to be out. A lot of activity releases endorphins, which gives you a lift, which means you are less likely to be a victim.
Understanding what is happening in the world is about making sure you do not become a victim. It is particularly important for young people – to the young people sitting in the gallery – that you do not become a victim. I hope some of you, and those from Dripstone High School who are in the gallery today, can go across from Leanyer, where you live, to Vanderlin Drive and go to the Neighbourhood Activity Centre.
Let us look at some of the other things we do. There are jam sessions, if you are into music. Dripstone High School is into music; it has a good school band. My sons went to Dripstone High School and were in the band. It is a really good, music-orientated school. It will be great to see all those people from Dripstone come to Sanderson Middle School, where the pilot program for the Neighbourhood Activity Centre is.
I think back to some of the more vulnerable people in our community who cannot get out. It has been raised with me by one of my seniors, who is a retired driving instructor. She would be very happy to give driving lessons to some of the less fortunate people who struggle to get it right. You have to build up that confidence, and if you have someone there on a regular basis looking after some of these people to get them the basics, then they can take driving lessons through all sorts of sponsored courses, such as the Passport to Drive, the Multicultural Council of the NT or other programs. There are vulnerable people.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask that the member be granted an extension of time, pursuant of Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: I imagine most people in this House have a drivers licence. It is a passport to freedom. I remember the day I got mine; I was so happy because I could get in my little car, which did not cost me much in those days, but it went. That enabled me to visit friends and move around the community, and it was fantastic. I did it in far less time than on my bike prior to getting a drivers licence. It means a lot to people, especially mothers with little kids - if we can help those people, it gets them out and gives them more confidence to go out. Once you get out and about you can start to do things that give you more confidence. It is probably less likely that you will suffer from domestic violence, for instance. We get figures from across the community. This is not only about migrant women. This is about all women in our community with kids. They are generally the primary caregivers, but I know that is changing.
With my children, I was the primary caregiver for about seven or eight months of their life, so I got them from when they were babies until just before they turned one. I understand what it is like to be at home with three babies. Having a drivers licence, it was heaven to put them in their car seats, visit my mother and ask her for a bit of free advice about what I was doing. It was important, so we need to do that. This is what the Neighbourhood Activity Centre is about. It is also what the member for Nhulunbuy was talking about when she said it is not easy or simple – these things are easy, simple things that we can do to empower people. I reiterate for those listening: if you empower people, you have fewer victims.
Let us look at some of the stuff people do. I talked about some of the women who have already volunteered to run cooking classes. Some of these people have left employment, were not part of the digital age and struggle to use a mobile phone. As we all know, if you want to get your DVD player or recorder at home sorted, you ask a 10-year-old child to program it for you. They are really smart and good at that; they know this stuff.
I have spoken to some of the older ladies who volunteered and said, ‘Do you understand what Skype is?’, and they say, ‘What?’ ‘Skype. You know, Skype!’ ‘No, I have no idea what you are talking about.’ They do not understand they can get on an iPad and onto Skype, and that if they want to talk to family or grandchildren who are somewhere else they can look at them while they are talking. When you talk to them and show them this stuff they are amazed. ‘This is like something out of Star Trek or Star Wars.’ There are people in our community who could use some instructions from some of the 10-year-old people who are running around.
We have to get them into one place, a common place with a safe environment. As I mentioned before, the Commissioner of Police is well aware of this broad community-based Neighbourhood Activity Centre and the importance of getting people connected. If somebody’s grandmother is teaching young people how to cook, when they have finished their meal they can then go to the computer labs, where kids will be doing all sorts of activities, and they can teach grandma how to Skype her grandchildren anywhere in the world. What a wonderful thing.
This goes back to what I opened with, when I talked about Mrs Downing who lived on the corner of my street when I was a kid. It is about building trust. When Mrs Downing was walking down the street, if someone harassed her or wanted to steal her string bag full of goodies, the young people in the street would say, ‘Excuse me; you leave Mrs Downing alone. She is our friend.’ Mrs Downing could then walk down the street confidently and not become a victim. This is not only because of her confidence, but because everyone else in the community who knew her felt good because we all exchange things in this community-based place. Those people – and we probably still have them because it is not a utopia – will find it harder to perpetrate crimes or offences on people in our community because people will have more confidence.
This is a very important factor in what we do on this side of the House; we do what others find to be not easy or simple.
Let us look at some of the stuff in relation to people’s health and wellbeing. Going back to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, it states we need safety and security of body, employment, resources, morality, family, health and property. That is in the second block from the bottom. When you give people an education – when you have people in the community who will help struggling kids get through and raise them so they do not feel isolated from their peers – that is the sort of thing you build.
You have kids running around the ovals – I cannot go through this list; there are about 300 activities on it – having fun and getting their adrenaline rush from jumping off the top of buildings at schools attached to an abseiling rope. They are doing fun things like learning from fishing clubs about how to fish from a boat, and when they pass the test and get all the ticks in the boxes – showing they know how to tie a reef knot, what a fender is, what a springer is and how to tie a boat up – the fishing club can then say to these young people, ‘How would you like to come out fishing next Saturday?’ There are kids in our community who cannot afford to buy a photo of a boat, let alone go on one.
We are building confidence in these young people. They go out on a boat and drive it. They get to understand what is going on and learn that they could have a future in the marine industry. Where do we get our skippers, deckhands and engineers from? We have to teach them at an early age.
It is not the time to discuss all the VET initiatives this government has, but we have the ability to get our young people trained and interested in things at an early age. Interested, confident kids do not become victims. They do not become victims of sexual assault. If they know they have a network of people they can talk to and who will support them, and they understand what is going on around them, they are far more likely to communicate their concerns. Instead of waiting until these crimes have been perpetrated for quite some time, the alarm bells go off in these young people and in older people that something is not right. Then you can get people, like school counsellors, to talk to them. They can refer them to professionals.
Not everyone is a professional. I think my mother did a pretty good job raising me and she was not a professional. She taught me so much of who I am today. She did not have a degree in counselling, yet I think she did a pretty good job. There are people – mothers and fathers and people in our community – who have the ability to give anyone in our community the confidence to sit down and talk about it. This is the crux of some of the things that have been said here today.
We have this fantastic bill to make changes to the vulnerable witness legislation, but the comment in this debate has been that the government needs to do this and that before the event. I relish the opportunity to stand in this House and not only inform those members opposite, but those people watching and listening, and, of course, those fantastic young people in the gallery, who make up about 20% of our population and are 100% of our future, because we will handball all this to them in a few years and they will be the leaders.
Leadership is about getting out there and doing things. It is not necessarily about spending money. Leadership is about making sure our communities are safe, fun environments for people to grow up in, work in, live in and retire in. As a government, we have acknowledged that. I can assure people listening that we are doing the things the opposition said we should be doing. We are leading the way in the country. There are people from interstate looking at what we are doing.
I had a conversation with Liz Veel, the Principal of Sanderson Middle School, and she said she went to Canada to see what they were doing. She said it will be ironic because this will be a fabulously successful program and we might have to sponsor some Canadian people to come and see what we have done here. She believes, as do the director, my colleagues and I, that we will lead the way in preventing people from becoming vulnerable witnesses and victims. That is our aim. If we are not working for our community and our family, what are we working for?
I will close on something the member for Nelson said. He spoke about respect. I go back to some of my opening words about Mrs Downing and her string bags. I learnt to respect older people when I was a kid. My mother taught me that and I am very grateful. I still respect older people. I have said today and will say it again: look after the old folks because they once looked after you. I was one of those people they looked after.
My obligation to my community is to ensure that everyone in the community – or as many people as I possibly can influence – has respect. We do that through things like the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, other government initiatives, and the crime initiatives which are working and will work even better as time goes by. We have been given this opportunity. When you look at crime figures you can see they have reduced and engagement with the community is going up. It is a good story.
Even though people say it is not easy or simple and that there is no easy solution, I am very proud to be part of a government that is finding solutions across many portfolios, which are working and making a real difference to Territorians’ lives.
Debate suspended.
The Assembly suspended.
PETITION
Petition No 59 – Medical Termination of Pregnancy
Petition No 59 – Medical Termination of Pregnancy
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Deputy Speaker, I present a petition from 1376 petitioners, including 1162 electronic petitioners, relating to medical termination of pregnancy. This petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- Northern Territory Legislative Assembly
1. The laws regulating termination of pregnancy encompassed in the Medical Services Act and Criminal Code Act are out of date.
2. The Northern Territory is the only jurisdiction in Australia in which medical termination of pregnancy (with Mifepristone and Misoprostol herein referred to as 'RU486') is unavailable.
3. The World Health Organisation's Model List of Essential Medicines lists the ru486 combination.
4. The Therapeutic Goods Administration approved RU486 to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme on 30 June 2013.
Community organisations and your petitioners therefore humbly pray:
1. That all reference to termination of pregnancy or abortion in any form be removed from the Criminal Code Act.
2. That the Medical Services Act be amended to clarify that medical termination of pregnancy, including RU486, can be administered by appropriately qualified medical practitioners (including accredited general practitioners) in the Northern Territory, including outside of a hospital setting.
3. That the laws be amended so that a minor's capacity to give consent be assessed by an appropriately qualified medical practitioner and if capable, give consent for termination. If deemed incapable of providing such consent only one person having authority in law be sufficient to provide consent on behalf of the minor.
4. That the laws be amended to ensure doctors who have a conscientious objection to termination refer a woman to a medical practitioner who does not hold such an objection as soon as practicable.
5. That the Medical Services Act be amended to only require the approval of one medical practitioner to approve termination of pregnancy up to the first 14 weeks of pregnancy and a woman should not be required to justify that termination is necessary to prevent physical and mental harm to herself.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
Petitions Nos 54, 55 and 57
Petitions Nos 54, 55 and 57
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 123, I inform honourable members that responses to Petition Nos 54, 55 and 57 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website.
A copy of the response will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to the petitioners.
Petition No 54
Save Darwin River Ridge
Date presented: 17 November 2015
Presented by: Hon Kezia Purick MLA
Referred to: Minister for Mines and Energy
Date response due: 19 April 2016
Date response received: 19 January 2016
Date response presented: 9 February 2016
Response:
I note the concerns of residents of Darwin River Ridge and can confirm that prior to the petition being lodged and in view of the growing number of extractive mineral title applications in this region, my Department of Mines and Energy had been working closely with the adjacent landowner, Power and Water Corporation, to develop a long term plan to manage areas surrounding Manton Dam, Manton Dam Recreation Reserve and Darwin River Dam.
These discussions continue and are well advanced. Once concluded they will provide a way forward that will not only ensure the protection of the Darwin and surrounds main source of drinking water, but also provide a balanced approach to the needs of local residents and other stakeholders. No further action will be taken in relation to the grant of existing mineral title applications nor will any further applications be accepted until these discussions have been concluded.
I would like to thank the petition organisers and the members of the public who have taken the time to sign it. I am confident of an outcome that will address the needs of all stakeholders.
Petition No 55
Fred’s Pass road upgrade infrastructure
Date presented: 17 November 2015
Presented by: Hon Kezia Purick MLA
Referred to: Minister for Infrastructure
Date response due: 19 April 2016
Date response received: 14 December 2015
Date response presented: 9 February 2016
Response:
Fred’s Pass Road is under the care, control and management of the Litchfield Council. An application has been submitted by the Litchfield Council for a grant to upgrade Fred’s Pass Road under the Improving Strategic Local Roads Infrastructure Program.
I am pleased to advise that their application has been successful and $1 220 500 of NT Government funding will be provided to the Council towards this project. The Department of Transport has also made a submission to the Australian Government for upgrades along the Arnhem Highway near Fred’s Pass Road, the outcome of these submission will be known in early 2016.
In addition, the Department of Transport is looking at funding options to upgrade the intersection of the Arnhem Highway and Fred’s Pass Road.
- Petition No 57
Unsuitable prisoners in Datjala Work Camp
Date presented: 19 November 2015
Presented by: Ms Walker MLA
Referred to: Minister for Corrections
Date response due: 21 April 2016
Date response received: 22 December 2015
Date response presented: 9 February 2016
Response:
Firstly I would like to convey my sheerest apologies to the petitioners regarding any anxiety generated following the escape of prisoner Edward Horrell. As Minister for Correctional Services the safety of all communities is my paramount focus.
Regrettably, the Department of Correctional Services (NTDCS) did not follow government policy surrounding the 'Sentenced to a Job' program. I initiated an immediate internal investigation following the escape which resulted in the follow directions:
Prisoners ever convicted of a sex offence or murder can never achieve an open security rating and therefore cannot be placed at facilities such as Datjala Work Camp (DWC); and
All prisoners at DWC will be fitted with an Electronic Monitoring bracelet.
The company installing electronic monitoring at DWC has completed the preliminary works and all prisoners will have the devices fitted as a priority. A serious error in the use of discretion has been made by NTDCS; however, everything is being done by my Office and NTDCS to ensure that such matters will not occur again. A town meeting was held on 26 November 2015, in Nhulunbuy to provide a forum for the community to engage in open discussion regarding their concerns. The forum was attended by Mr Mark Payne, Commissioner, NTDCS and Mr Kevin Raby, Superintendent Regional Operations. The Town meeting was attended by 40 – 50 people and the concerns raised were listened to closely with a commitment by the Commissioner to engage further with key stakeholders and the DWC Community Consultative Committee.
In relation to your concern, ‘3. That all person/s responsible for the decision to house Edward Horrell at Datjala Work Camp be immediately and permanently sacked from the public service’; the then Commissioner, NTDCS accepted full responsibility for the placement of Edward Horrell at DWC and as you are aware has subsequently resigned. His replacement, Mr Payne has been tasked to undertake a comprehensive 'root and branch' review of NTDCS.
I can assure the Nhulunbuy community that everything is being done by my Office and NTDCS to rebuild and earn the trust from the Nhulunbuy community.
JUSTICE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (VULNERABLE WITNESSSES) BILL
(Serial 146)
(Serial 146)
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 will strengthen existing vulnerable witness protections, thereby reducing the impact and trauma of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses. This will also ensure that witnesses are more confident and comfortable giving evidence, which will likely lead to more successful prosecutions. This government is committed to supporting victims to ensure safer homes and a safer society.
The Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 will contribute to these goals and will ensure that vulnerable witnesses are provided the utmost protection and support. Consequently, today I rise in this House in support of this bill introduced by my colleague, the Minister for Justice and member for Port Darwin. The amendments to this bill are extremely important.
The purpose of this bill is to implement a number of recommendations of the Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report. The Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report arose from the Little Children are Sacred report and Closing the Gap of Indigenous Disadvantage: A Generational Plan of Action. These documents recommended a review of all legislation relating to court procedures for vulnerable witnesses and child victims of alleged sexual abuse in the Northern Territory.
Child sexual offences are among the worst crimes that can be committed against a person. The negative impacts are lasting, and the statistics are a stark reminder of how difficult it is for child victims to have a happy and healthy adult life.
The Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report contained nine recommendations focusing on ways to reduce the impact of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses. Subsequent to the finalisation of the review, two further issues were raised by stakeholders and were included in that report. I believe the bill put forward by the Attorney-General will only serve to strengthen existing vulnerable witness provisions and protections.
Often, for victims and witnesses of crime, giving evidence is one of the hardest parts of criminal proceedings. Reliving something they are trying so hard to forget, often while fearing for their own safety, is an enormous burden. In fact, during my time as a police officer, with some 21 years of service, I dealt with many people who refused to go to court or go on record for fear of repercussions. It will be hard to give examples of that other than to generalise about a few things I recall during my time as a police officer.
So many women, particularly those who have been victims of violent crime, are incredibly unwilling to go to court for fear of the unknown, fear of what lays beyond making that statement and giving that information to police. There is also the fear of repercussions and retribution, but there is also fear of a system they do not understand, that being the court and justice system.
There is the fear of being a witness, the fear of being taken into an open court and having to relive the details of those crimes. This bill to amend the current legislation will go a long way to reducing some of the perceived impacts that victims will feel once they provide evidence to police in the form of a statement before having to make a subsequent court appearance.
I remember many cases of women sitting around with broken limbs after being savagely assaulted and, no doubt, many people who had been sexually assaulted and not reported the crime because they feared what lay beyond reporting it to the police. The vulnerable witness legislation is intended to minimise any harm that could be caused to a vulnerable witness when giving evidence, balancing the interests of justice with the interests of giving quality evidence by that witness.
The Country Liberal government knows the current legislation does not go far enough. I am pleased to note that Recommendations 1, 3 and 4 regarding monitoring the effectiveness of the vulnerable witness legislation, the use of screens at the Alice Springs Magistrates Court and the imposing nature of judicial dress have been implemented by non-legislative means. I am certain these changes are already having a positive impact on vulnerable witnesses across the Northern Territory. In order to implement the recommendations of the Review of Vulnerable Witness Legislation report, the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill 2015 amends several key sections.
The proposed amendments will strengthen existing vulnerable witness provisions and protections, thereby reducing the impact and trauma of court proceedings on vulnerable witnesses. This will also ensure witnesses are more confident and comfortable giving evidence, which will likely lead to more successful prosecutions. Safety is the right of every Territorian, particularly vulnerable witnesses who have already been through so much. That is why our government has placed a strong focus on strengthening our police, justice and correctional systems. Under the Country Liberal government there is a coordinated approach to protecting the most vulnerable in our society. We want a justice system that is contemporary and fair.
In my home town of Katherine the biggest blight on our community is, undoubtedly, drunkenness. It often leads to criminal offending. On that point, the difference in Katherine since the introduction of police at bottle shops has been as stark as it has been remarkable. The levels of public drunkenness in Katherine, as is true in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, have dropped significantly, which has led to a corresponding drop in the amount of violent offending that occurs, usually after dark. Hospital presentations, calls to St John Ambulance and our crime statistics have reduced significantly. That is a testament to this government’s commitment to dealing with this problem at its root cause.
As a government, we uphold the many pillars that deal with matters in the criminal justice system by supporting witnesses, and reducing crime and the impact of it on the community, victims and witnesses. It is important to always remember that women and children in Katherine, Darwin, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and everywhere in the Territory are protected.
This Country Liberal government is committed to ensuring the burden on vulnerable witnesses is eased, and this bill goes a long way to doing just that. The Northern Territory’s Court of Summary Jurisdiction is an exceptionally busy place, with more than 11 000 criminal files processed across the Territory in a single year. There are many victims of crime represented in those files who are among the most vulnerable in our society. Each and every one of those people deserves justice to be delivered in a sensitive and less intrusive fashion.
As a former police officer who served in Katherine, Alice Springs and Darwin, along with several regional and remote communities, I can say these proposed changes to the bill will be overwhelmingly welcomed.
Keeping Territorians safe is at the heart of all the Country Liberal government does. Making people feel protected in whatever environment they find themselves is also at the front of our minds. We are seeing real results for Territorians through the introduction of our Pillars of Justice strategy.
Under the Country Liberal government there is a coordinated approach. Pillar five of the justice, law and order reform strategies specifically focuses on victims. This multipronged approach includes a domestic and family violence reduction strategy which is a comprehensive strategy to address, reduce and prevent the unacceptably high level of domestic and family violence in the Northern Territory.
Another prong is keeping serious sex offenders locked up. Serious sex offenders who pose a high risk to the community will now continue to be locked up or monitored indefinitely.
The Northern Territory government is working in partnership with Victims of Crime NT to ensure this program is as effective as it can be. Our government’s comprehensive criminal law reform strategy is solutions-based and has tangible targets. It cannot be underestimated how important it is that victims of crime not only are protected and supported, but also feel protected and supported. I am proud to be part of a government that is leading this important reform to give victims all the assistance and support they require. These comprehensive changes to the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vulnerable Witnesses) Bill offer solutions to what are decade-old problems.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this bill in its entirety.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank honourable members for their contribution to this debate, and I have a number of explanations to make to members. I note the presence of the member for Nelson, so I will readjust my response so I deal with his matters first, if that gives him any comfort.
I take a small issue with one of the things the member for Nelson said about it taking too long. That places me, as a minister in this government, on the horns of a dilemma because the most regular criticism I hear is that we rush things through. I am not entirely sure how to respond to the criticism that I have consulted too broadly. I think I am one of the more consultative people in this room in relation to getting legislation out and about before I introduce it to this place. As much as I like to think I have covered the field over any bill I bring to this House, invariably one hears other people’s opinions, and they come from a perspective that you do not anticipate and which your imagination does not extend to.
For that reason I am happy to go through a longer process, especially with something as complex as evidence. I am one of the strange parliamentarians who believe, in spite of the fact that I have probably produced half the legislation of this government, that we should question the need for any legislation prior to bringing it to this House. There is an expectation, as a general principle, that we will cast a net into the future in the form of legislation and hope to catch only one type of fish. How often do we find that our well-intentioned legislation leads to anomalous or unintended consequences? For that reason one has to, from time to time, be a little more cautious when stepping through the legislative process, particularly when you are dealing with something as complex as the rules and laws of evidence.
I am a champion of the adoption in the Northern Territory - in fact, I drove it as the Attorney-General - of the uniform evidence legislation which is operating in most jurisdictions in this country. Nevertheless, it did not mean I repealed the Evidence Act of the Northern Territory, nor for that matter touched the Evidence Act dealing with sexual offences, which is a separate legislative instrument. We have a number of legislative instruments that touch on the evidentiary environment, but much of what is in that legislation is collected from many centuries of the creation of the common law. It is a truism that all too often we try to adopt legislation which already exists in the common law domain. For that reason we step tentatively into this space.
I take it from listening to the debate before this House that this bill will pass unopposed by honourable members. I thank them for their support because ultimately we are talking about vulnerable witnesses.
I note the questions raised by the member in relation to the rule in Browne v Dunn. The rule in Browne v Dunn, put simply, is a notion of fairness in the judicial system. As far back as and even before the late 1800s people would go into a courtroom and cross-examine a witness. It would be only reasonable in the process of cross-examining a witness that you touched on a matter you were to later put to the court in regard to the credibility of that witness. It is impossible to suggest that a person, in your summation in a trial, was an unreliable witness when you had not put to that person the grounds of their unreliability while cross-examining them in a courtroom.
To argue in front of a jury that witness A was unreliable because he was the second half cousin of the accused, without challenging that witness about their relationship with the accused, is not acceptable. Lord Chancellor Herschell, in Browne v Dunn, addressed this issue. I quote Lord Herschell from Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R, 67 at 70-71:
- Now, my Lords, I cannot help saying that it seems to me to be absolutely essential to the proper conduct of a cause, where it is intended to suggest that a witness is not speaking the truth on a particular point, to direct his attention to the fact by some questions put in cross-examination showing that that imputation is intended to be made, and not to take his evidence and pass it by as a matter altogether unchallenged, and then, when it is impossible for him to explain, as perhaps he might have been able to do if such questions had been put to him, the circumstances which it is suggested indicate that the story he tells ought not to be believed, to argue that he is a witness unworthy of credit. My Lords, I have always understood that if you intend to impeach a witness you are bound, whilst he is in the box, to give him an opportunity of making any explanation which is open to him; and as it seems to me, that is not only a rule of professional practice in the conduct of a case, but is essential to fair play and fair dealing with witnesses. Sometimes reflections have been made upon excessive cross-examination of witnesses, and it has been complained of as undue; but it seems to me that a cross-examination of a witness which errs in the direction of excess may be far more fair to him than to leave him without cross-examination, and afterwards to suggest that he is not a witness of truth, I mean upon a point which it is not otherwise perfectly clear that he has had full notice beforehand that there is an intention to impeach the credibility of the story which he is telling. Of course I do not deny for a moment that there are cases in which that notice has been so distinctly and unmistakably given, and the point upon which he is impeached, and is to be impeached, is so manifest, that it is not necessary to waste time in putting questions to him upon it. All I am saying is that it will not do to impeach the credibility of a witness upon a matter on which he has not had any opportunity of giving an explanation by reason of there having been no suggestion whatever in the course of the case that his story is not accepted.
Member for Nelson, place yourself, if you like, in the witness box to be cross-examined on an assault you saw on the football field against your wife, who happened to be playing football on that day. As a result of that, an obvious thing to raise with you as a witness is that you are related by marriage, hence it was your wife who was the victim of this assault. You would say, ‘Yes, that is the case’. Then it would be open for me to ask you questions about any potential bias you may have as a witness.
As a result of that, I can then say in subsequent summation to a jury, ‘You may not want to rely too heavily on the witness who gave evidence because of the bias he has to his wife’. It is up to the jury or the court to make a determination as to whether or not it places any weight on that evidence. It is impossible under the rule in Browne v Dunn for me to cross-examine you in relation to what you witness and then excuse you from the witness box and say to the court or the jury that might be listening to the matter, ‘He is clearly an unreliable witness because he is married to the victim’. You cannot put any weight on that. That would be an unfair treatment of the witness because it does not give them a capacity, as Lord Herschell described, to defend the integrity of their evidence.
What you should be given is an opportunity to say any number of things. You may say, ‘Absolutely; I want to see that bugger go to gaol for doing what he did to my wife’, in which case I can then impeach the quality of your evidence to the jury. You may alternatively say, ‘No, I am under oath and I know I have to tell the truth, as I remember it, to the best of my ability. The victim being my wife does not particularly influence me.’ That may be the answer you give. It will then be open for me to say, ‘Well, he said that, but you have to think about the weight you give that evidence’. But I cannot lead such statements in my summation or my address to a court or jury unless I give you, the witness, an opportunity to address the issue of impeachment that I would bring forward in relation to the evidence you have given.
I hope that covers the field. That is the explanation of the rule in Brown v Dunn. I noticed also that you were concerned about the person relaying the questions. That is the current issue I am seeking to remedy through this bill before the House. Under the current system, when dealing with a vulnerable witness the judge relays the questions. I will give you an example of the most manifestly unsatisfactory structure of how this can work. Picture this: a woman is raped by a man. That woman is then placed in the witness box to give evidence against the man charged with the crime, the indictable offence. Under the principles of law that we operate, a person is innocent until the contrary is proved. As a consequence, a trial determines whether the contrary can be proved. Part of the evidence in relation to a rape trial is the victim of that rape sitting in the witness box, telling the court what happened to them. It is an essential component of the evidence of any rape trial.
If you imagine circumstances in which a person accused of that crime chooses to defend themselves, you may have the most unsatisfactory circumstance in which an accused person, the alleged rapist, gets to cross-examine the victim. That was addressed some time ago in the statute book. What it has been replaced with is an approach by which the accused person is not able to directly question the witness sitting in the witness box. The vehicle that has been chosen to deal with that issue is that the judge then has the role of taking the question from the accused person and putting the question to the victim, the witness in the witness box.
The reason that throws up a complexity is that from the outside looking in, in an environment where impartiality is at the core of our judicial system, a judge essentially asking cross-examination questions, albeit relayed from the accused, is not a good look if you think about the mechanics of how that works in a courtroom.
I have no doubt that a judge will be very careful, and has historically been very careful, in the process of relaying those questions. Nevertheless, it takes the judge away from the position of judgment and places them as a participant in the trial. A judge is, as far as possible, not a participant in the trial in the sense that they actively take a role. In a simple hearing in a magistrates court there might be some points of clarification from time to time, but a magistrate sitting in a magistrates court rarely involves themselves, if at all, in the matter other than directing traffic, so to speak, in the courtroom.
To have a judge relaying these questions drags them into a difficult position. From the outside looking in, in the integrity of the judicial system, what does the public think when a judge is asking questions which are, essentially, questions of cross-examination?
The fix in this bill is quite simple. Remove the judge from that process. Bring in a third party, probably a lawyer; but can the third party be a non-lawyer? The answer is yes. The third party may be a non-lawyer, that is, an interpreter from English to English. I imagine it would be a person of acceptable integrity to all parties. The prosecution as well as the defence would doubtlessly have to agree that person is suitable for the job, in the same way they would agree on the presence of a particular interpreter. In most instances it would be a lawyer or a person of legal training, but, in any other instance, a person who is up to the job and understands their role makes perfect sense. It is eminently more preferable to have such a circumstance operating in our courts than asking judges to relay questions from accused people to the witnesses, who are often giving evidence against them.
I hope that covers the field of the issues raised by the member for Nelson.
Mr Wood: The corporate section …
Mr ELFERINK: Section 13 – I will return to that. I will go through the other issues raised by other members.
I note the comments made by the member for Nhulunbuy, who raised a number of issues. She raised, amongst other things, the information being given to defence lawyers. It is clear that there is a direct link between the defence community and the shadow Attorney-General because many of the arguments, in fact almost all the arguments I hear from the shadow Attorney-General, are almost verbatim arguments from criminal defence lawyers. As much as I respect the role of criminal defence lawyers in our justice system – they are a necessary component – it does not automatically follow that I and this House are necessarily bound to agree with them. I think many of the pontifications of criminal defence lawyers often abrade with the attitudes and expectations of the community at large.
However, I will touch on one issue, which is the reference to the information coming from prosecutions to criminal defence lawyers being done in a timely fashion. The member opposite quoted at some length in relation to submissions made during the process of sending this legislation out for consultation. I suggest to the member opposite that the document she is relying on is redundant by virtue of the fact we changed the summary procedures in this House not long before Christmas. Sorry, about nine months ago in this House we passed pre-trial disclosure legislation, which meant prosecution and defence were obliged, in the pre-trial phase, to make disclosure to each other in the summary courts. The reason we have chosen to do this is to add lubrication to the wheels of justice and so entrapment is no longer a vehicle of justice.
Open communication becomes a vehicle of criminal justice in the summary division and in the Local Courts going forward. We have chosen to do that because pre-trial disclosure has, for decades, been a straight up and down element of the civil domain. The civil domain is better for it. If you come into a court in the civil domain and you have not disclosed a salient point or matter through the discovery process or otherwise, a fact upon which you seek to rely during that trial, then you will be hounded out of court by the presiding judge immediately because there is a requirement in the civil domain to disclose the evidence to the other side. Whilst we have not extended to doing that in the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, we have demanded and expected it of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, soon to be the Local Courts. We have done this so people get a fair trial and we stop playing silly games between prosecutors and defence.
Good prosecutors and defence lawyers have practised this for a long time. They do not need to play games as they already understand the court system so well that there are no prizes for doing anything other than serving the interests of the courts.
From time to time I remind lawyers when I speak to them, as I remind myself, that the primary role as a lawyer is not to the client but to the court. Sometimes, in their enthusiasm to defend and prosecute, that idea is lost on lawyers. It is taught in Law School 101 that you are a servant of the court in the first instance and have duties and responsibilities in that environment. Consequently, I hear what the member for Nhulunbuy had to say. I am, however, comforted that the subsequent passage of legislation will have substantially addressed the issue which she raises.
That then takes us to the matter of the Crofts direction, which I believe the member for Nhulunbuy touched on briefly. The Crofts direction is a by-product of what was originally called the Kilby direction, where a court will make a comment to the jury during a rape case in relation to the time it took the rape victim to come forward and give or make a complaint to police.
If you think about it, if a person has taken 10, 11 or 20 years to make a complaint of a sexual crime against them – the matter in Kilby asserted that a certain direction had to be given to the jury. The Crofts direction, which is still captured in the Evidence Act of the Northern Territory, does not help because it generates a certain element of ambiguity. The Crofts direction says you can mention to the jury that this might be an issue, but, whatever you do, do not think about it too much. That is a crushing over-simplification of the Crofts direction. However, looking at how the Crofts direction is explained I think even judges in their quieter moments will be scratching their heads asking what exactly they are required to tell the jury.
Whilst it forms part of the Territory statute book, one of these laws where we, as legislators, seem to embrace the common law, the Crofts direction does not give much clarity to the situation at all. I do not believe it has ever been relied on in the Northern Territory as any form of appellant approach, and I encourage the courts to maintain their current approach in which they ultimately determine, based on the circumstances of the case, whether any weight is given to the delay in coming forward in the first instance. It is extraordinarily difficult to imagine a circumstance in which a parliament could second guess the myriad circumstances in which a delayed prosecution was brought forward by a victim. It is one of those circumstances where you would have to say it is the court. I am pleased to advise the House that is pretty much the practice in the Northern Territory.
I note the use of phrases which I am quite critical of, by the member for Nhulunbuy. That is, the more general conversation she had relating to matters specifically regarding this bill, particularly in the area of child protection.
I listened carefully to what she had to say. She then used the chestnut which has been bandied around in a number of circles that we need a fence on top of the cliff rather than an ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. I understand the logic and why people with a much better education than I use the expression. But the expression fails in a very important way to make a distinction. It is one that I seek to question in this House today. The ambulance at the bottom of the cliff is the government response. It is the arrest of the bad guy, the person turning up to the health clinic with an injury or an illness, and the child taken into care because of the crashing failure of that child’s family to protect them. It is the government response. The argument goes that the fence at the top of the cliff would stop people falling down so we do not need the hospital or child protection response, or an arrest to be made.
The problem is the metaphor breaks down at a very important point. It is where the member for Nhulunbuy said what the fence at the top of the cliff looks like. As the member for Nhulunbuy expressed it, the fence at the top of the cliff is a program; it is education and all the things we can do. This is why I am critical of the metaphor; this is where the metaphor does not work. Education, a course showing somebody at risk, etcetera, is not a fence. It is a warning sign saying, ‘Do not go near the edge of the cliff because if you fall off you will get hurt’. We educate our kids every day, so there is the warning sign at the top of the cliff.
I am somewhat minded of Khalil Gibran’s book, The Prophet, in which he says, using another metaphor, that bringing up a child is not entirely unlike firing an arrow. You can make sure that the shaft of the arrow is perfect, the flights are adhered as carefully and delicately as possible against the side of the shaft, the head of the arrow is honed to its finest ability, and that the bow, the drawstring and the draw itself are in every way perfect. Then you release and there is absolutely nothing you can do about the flight of the arrow. That is a nice metaphor for bringing up kids. I rely on that because it is part of the process of putting up warning signs.
The fence at the top of the cliff is something else entirely. That is a restraint. What is the nature of the restraint when exercised by the government in relation to child protection, for argument’s sake? How do we restrain people from hurting their children? We do all the education programs and put up the signs, but what is the restraint? If you start to think about what they are – spot-checking children and randomly knocking on people’s doors saying, ‘Hi, we are from the department of Child Protection; we will check your kids now’, would be a restraint. ‘You will potentially hurt your children because of your character, so we will remove your children before that occurs’, is a restraint.
In a free and civil society, no government would exercise power in that fashion. If a government chose to exercise power in that fashion in protecting people from themselves, you would have civil unrest in our streets. We live in a free country and one of the sad manifestations of freedom is that people make mistakes. They are free to screw up, and they do with regularity. I should know as I have done it often enough. I have exercised the freedoms available to me – the right to drink liquor, the right to buy a motorcycle that drives faster than the speed limit, etcetera. None of those things are prevented from occurring. I can buy a motorcycle that goes …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 43, I request an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK: We live in a free society. If you put a fence at the top of the cliff, what you are talking about is laws that are pre-emptive and which restrain people based on what they might do. If a jurisdiction goes into that space, it must do so very sparingly and carefully indeed.
I also note that the member opposite made a number of comments in relation to child protection. I am not afforded sufficient time to comprehensively cover the field of all the issues she raised; suffice to say I wish to turn to one area where she made a criticism, which I think is unfortunate. The reliance on notifications to the central intake of the Department of Children and Families is no measure of whether there are issues in the community. A person who makes a complaint to the Child Protection Hotline expresses their concern. It does not confirm that any form of neglect or abuse has occurred.
Not everybody who rings a police station reporting a crime is the victim of a crime. It may be that something has occurred to them that has nothing to do with criminal law at all. The greatest source of these notifications is the police. If you track back though the Children’s Commissioner’s reports over the last few years, you can see they go through the roof. I have spoken on a number of occasions to my CEO, Anne Bradford, and the Commissioner for Police to raise this issue because it gets in the way. Once the central intake process is followed they will then dispose of most of those reports as not being sufficient to amount to child abuse or child neglect.
At that point, the person who takes the call must then refer that call for investigation. As a consequence of that, in recent times investigations have increased somewhat, but nowhere to the degree that notifications have increased. We knock out the vast majority of those notifications before there is even a look at an investigation. An investigation into child abuse is not a substantiation of child abuse. An investigation is where we look, and the vast majority of those investigations do not reveal child abuse. However, some of those investigations lead to substantiations. These substantiations are child neglect or child abuse, and they have been tracking along, level pegging for the last seven or eight years.
Last year there was an increase and the year before that there was a substantial decrease. The year before that it was lower and the year before that it was higher. There was an increase in the last 12 months, but in trying to find a significant shift in the number of substantiations over time, it is not being reflected in the number of substantiations we are getting. I think it has travelled in the last four years from about 1700 to 1400, then 1400 to 1900. It is higher in the last 12 months, but it is not an enormous blowout. Is it too much? My word, it is 1900 too much, but that is unfortunately the social problem we have to deal with. It is mischievous, at best, to start rolling out notifications as a measure for child neglect, because a notification is somebody simply ringing up central intake and saying, ‘This is the issue at hand’.
As a consequence, I critique the member for Nhulunbuy’s approach to that issue. It is unfair and it misrepresents the actual nature of what is occurring. That is not to say that what is occurring is good. It is not good. Child neglect, abuse and sexual abuse are not good. It is important in the context of this conversation, particularly considering the emotional responses it engenders, that we keep a sober and temperate debate going. We must be cautious not to enliven people’s passions when it would be contrary to the ultimate good that I suspect we are all trying to achieve.
That pretty much covers the field. I thank honourable members for their support. This is good legislation and it will continue to support the plan we have as a government to protect victims of crime since our first day. We have had some support from the members opposite in our pursuit of protecting victims, and in some instances they have dug their heels in and decided to be quite contrary and support the arguments of defence lawyers over the expectations of the average person in the Northern Territory.
When we introduced mandatory sentencing we were proud to do so because it was about protecting victims. When we introduced the paperless arrest policy we were proud to do so because, ultimately, it prevented more people becoming victims. Since putting police outside bottle shops then the number of victims has fallen sharply. Whilst the members opposite criticise us for protecting victims or pursuing policies that hold the guilty to account, they may do so and that is a matter for the public to decide whose world view they value more. From our perspective as a government it has been a plan from the get-go, and we will continue to protect victims, whether they are sitting in the witness box or at home nursing their injuries, either financial or physical.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice) (by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Statement – A New Direction for Vocational Education and Training
Note Statement – A New Direction for Vocational Education and Training
Continued from 24 February 2015.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, today I am delighted to advise the Legislative Assembly, as the Chief Minister and Minister for Indigenous Affairs, that we are kicking goals in Aboriginal affairs across the Northern Territory and leading across the nation.
I am aware that tomorrow in Canberra a federal Closing the Gap speech will be made by the Prime Minister. I believe this will be its eighth year. I am very interested to hear the content of that Closing the Gap speech. I anticipate there will not be much advancement on previous years’ outcomes.
Yesterday I was pleased to speak about the Indigenous Affairs strategy, particularly the Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Framework, or the MERF. I also spoke about the 34 action areas where we are seeking to drive change, of which there are two areas of interest, one being to decentralise former Labor government approaches and give back to communities, and the other being about economic development and employment. As part of the statement on vocational education and training I will directly relate that Indigenous Affairs strategy to employment and training.
The Northern Territory is making economic advancement throughout the Territory, especially in the bush, by implementing the newly-launched Aboriginal Affairs Strategy. The strategy sets a shared vision for the NT government for Aboriginal people and communities to work in partnership to increase the capability and capacity of Aboriginal Territorians and businesses to deliver economic and cultural success.
For those who are reading this transcript or listening online, Aboriginal people make up about 33% of the Northern Territory population, with 80% of that population living in remote communities across the regions. This equates to around 70 000 people living in areas with little or no economic activity. While this is a challenge, it also presents a time of opportunity, which my government is willing to explore and invest in to help build sustainable local remote communities and their economies, creating employment and benefits for those communities now and into the future.
This is a partnership with Aboriginal people and their communities. The Northern Territory is a unique place with a proud, strong Aboriginal identity, culture and languages. As a Territory, we want to see this strength resonated in all areas of people’s lives, such as education, health, employment and business development.
I believe that the integral link between economic and cultural success is through Aboriginal people gaining access to, and participating in, a local economy with employment and training. This means an individual can build a life for themselves and their family, and contribute to the broader community and society in general. That is why this strategy is vital to the Country Liberal government. We have a plan in Aboriginal affairs which the Northern Territory has never had before, and which has never prefaced any other Northern Territory government.
Our strategic plan for Aboriginal affairs is aligned to the Northern Territory government’s Framing the Future strategic plan, with objectives identified in each of these four priority areas: a prosperous economy; a strong society; a balanced environment; and a confident culture. The Country Liberals’ plan articulates my government’s strategic direction and priorities in Aboriginal affairs. Its focus is on ensuring Aboriginal Territorians enjoy substantially improved livelihoods and outcomes, including increased opportunities for business and job growth, as well as improved educational outcomes, improved physical and mental health and wellbeing, and enhanced community safety while maintaining and promoting cultural identity.
The Country Liberal government is committed to making long-lasting changes in Aboriginal affairs and driving change differently than has been done in the past, especially reversing failed Labor policies of centralisation, closing down communities and taking housing off communities. That is why the Office of Aboriginal Affairs was established in 2015 to drive and coordinate the whole-of-government responsibility through the overall Aboriginal Affairs Strategy. This plan is underpinned by a comprehensive monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework to ensure the highest levels of accountability and transparency across government.
As I have already said, the Country Liberal government is committed to, and serious about, making long-lasting changes in Aboriginal affairs in the Territory. This is demonstrated by my government setting specific targets and allocated time frames to be reached. Early indications through procurement reforms aligned to remote contracting policy are showing significant improvements in Aboriginal employment figures already.
Through the Department of Infrastructure’s Indigenous employment provisional sum, the strategy sets a target of creating 1000 private sector jobs for Aboriginal people through each contractor being required to achieve 30% Aboriginal employment. To date, this mechanism alone has seen Aboriginal employment increase from 40 individuals in a 12-month period to more than 500 over the last 12 months.
My government’s objectives have always focused on increasing the capability and capacity of Aboriginal people and business by unlocking the potential of our regions and remote communities. By increasing Aboriginal people’s participation in the economy we will see Aboriginal people have greater financial independence and a better quality of life, and breaking the cycle of intergenerational disadvantage.
There are challenges to be faced by government, and remote communities, after many decades of welfare dependency exacerbated by Labor failing to invest in these communities and centralising services from those communities back into Darwin. I strongly believe that if we genuinely work together and share the decision-making, the responsibility and the accountability as a government and a community, we can make a change for future generations through facilitating sustainable remote economies and communities.
From a government perspective we have changed the existing procurement practices to meet the objectives of remote contracting and Indigenous provisional sum policies. We have set a target of at least 2000 new private sector jobs for Aboriginal people living in remote communities across the Territory by 2017, and made a commitment to create a further 1600 jobs for Aboriginal people in the public service by 2020. At the start of 2015, at the commencement of the policy to double the Indigenous employment rate in the public service, there were 1600 Aboriginal people working in the public sector, representing a rate of about 8%. We set a target to double that, increasing it to 3600 Indigenous employees in the public service by 2020. Early indications show that we are on track to reach this target with an increase to 9.5% already. While we have a long way to go, evidence already shows that we are making signification progress.
When we made the announcement that we would seek to double the employment rate of Indigenous people in the public service, we were laughed at. We were belittled by Labor and bemoaned by many others. People from interstate said it could never be done. Through previous employment I have undertaken, I know that an increase in the rate of Indigenous employment by any public service by as little as 0.1% is unheard of. It has already increased in the NT by 1.5% in 12 months. We are on target to double that by 2020. We are changing people’s lives and changing the face of the Northern Territory.
I thank the public service commission for driving these changes. To everybody in all agencies, thank you very much. It has been a changing time and a changing organisational culture, but we are changing for the better in the Northern Territory.
A sum of $21.4m has been awarded in select tenders for the construction of housing in four remote Aboriginal communities in southwest Northern Territory. A sum of $5.9m for the Ngukurr Health Centre construction project was awarded last June to a joint venture between Probuild NT and Yugal Mangi. That forms part of our commitment, which is in our MERF, as one of our policies to see five projects of $5m or more go towards a joint venture partner with an Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory.
This was the first one at Ngukurr Health Centre with Probuild NT – $5.9m. Yugal Mangi is the project manager and is delivering a fantastic outcome. I was told from last night when talking to the CEO of Yugal Mangi that it is only a couple of weeks away from completion. I look forward to officially opening that.
Both of those commitments, the Ngukurr Health Clinic and the $21.4m as a select tender for four remote Aboriginal communities for the construction of housing, showcase our commitment to ensure that 70% of small contracts under $500 000 for construction, repairs and maintenance go to local Aboriginal businesses. As I said, a minimum of five civil and construction contracts over $5m are rewarded to joint venture proposals with Aboriginal businesses.
I have instructed, through the Office of Aboriginal Affairs, that whole-of-government, five-year infrastructure mapping must be undertaken for all remote communities based on all known planned expenditure across all tiers of government, including the community sector. This will assist government to better direct contracts released for major works, and to support long-term job creation through direct work to local Aboriginal businesses in an open tender or select tender environment, with a joint venture proposal with Aboriginal businesses, organisations or communities. This ensures that Aboriginal people in the community are ready for such opportunities.
The Department of Business is working with industry bodies and the not-for-profit sector to map local Aboriginal businesses and determine their capabilities to deliver on these outcomes. If needed, we will support appropriate local Aboriginal businesses to be upskilled and have all the required accreditation to bid for and win government contracts.
The purpose of mapping the work is so we do not have one project that lasts for three month, and then people get a job and finish. Government’s role is to facilitate and stimulate the economy and construction. Once you build a bridge or a road you do not keep building that same bridge and road. We want to start the opportunities and work to facilitate or identify where the next projects are, whether that is in the community sector or, preferably, in the private sector. In many remote communities the private sector is not actively engaged, but we are working on that.
As you can see, this plan is about being prosperous, strong and confident. It is about exploring, supporting and opening up economic development opportunities. It is about people being in charge of their own businesses, caring for their own communities, managing their own lands and celebrating their own culture, which is something Labor took away.
A strong society is one in which each member has an equal opportunity to reach their full potential. In the Northern Territory we are blessed with a diverse society, with high levels of social inclusion and cross-cultural respect and celebration. This includes 30% of the Territory population being Indigenous, with 80% living in remote or very remote areas. This remoteness has previously presented challenges for government in delivering public goods, such as education, health and essential services, including power, water and sewerage. However, through the Aboriginal Affairs Strategy we are tackling these factors in a different fashion.
The Country Liberal government, with its plan, has set high targets in health, education, justice and safety to significantly improve the livelihoods of Aboriginal people. Key targets in our MERF include reducing the number of Aboriginal children suffering chronic otitis media; severely reducing the Indigenous suicide rate so there is no longer a high discrepancy between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal rates; reaching at least 80% school attendance for Aboriginal students within five years; reducing incarceration rates by 50% by 2030, along with a reduction in recidivism; eliminating all 266 houses beyond economic repair by 2025; and decreasing the number of Aboriginal children subject to child protection investigations.
The Northern Territory is home to some of the most beautiful and rare environments on earth. The Country Liberal government’s plan is striking the right balance between protection and use of our environment, preventing or minimising the impact development may have on it, especially large resource projects. We are respectful and supportive of Aboriginal people’s connection to, and responsibility for, land and sea country, along with their desire to utilise their lands to provide sustainable economic and social opportunities. The Country Liberal government will continue to support Aboriginal people’s wishes through increased land use planning in remote areas, increase jobs on country and increase business opportunities for Aboriginal people to be involved in the delivery of environmental services.
It is partly for this reason I hung my head in shame after listening to the Leader of the Opposition talk about a moratorium on gas and natural gas drilling in the Northern Territory. The Leader of the Opposition is putting an $800m gas pipeline from Tennant Creek to Mount Isa at risk, a pipeline that would see the utilisation of 900 jobs, 300 in Tennant Creek alone, not counting the others through the supply chain. A good example of that is $150m will be spent on purchasing the steel pipes, which will come from overseas through the Darwin port, down the transport corridor and onto land arrangements in Tennant Creek.
That is a fair amount of expenditure occurring in the Northern Territory. It is not just about the limits that are now being put on exploration and development in the Northern Territory – and I gave a back-of-the-envelope number in Question Time. I said that roughly five major companies are doing exploration development in the Territory right now – Pangaea, Santos, Origin, INPEX and Central Petroleum. Each would be spending about $200m this year, or another $1bn. That $1bn is at risk this financial year because there is no longer a bipartisan approach supporting industry. That is because Labor wants to cancel jobs.
Of the $1bn that is supposed to be spent in the Northern Territory this year, about 2% to 3% of that would go as royalties to Aboriginal people. Approximately $20m to $30m, roughly speaking, back-of-the-envelope numbers, in royalties to Indigenous Territorians will no longer be paid because of the Leader of the Opposition and his ignorant Labor position.
The other thing, of even larger concern, is what is happening with Indigenous employment and training, which is what this statement is all about. Pangaea is running a program which is training 12 Aboriginal Territorians to get jobs at Pangaea in the gas industry in the Daly region.
In Mereenie natural gas comes from fracked gas wells, which powers Yulara, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, and keeps the lights on. There are 55 wells – approved by previous CLP and Labor governments – employing 26% Aboriginal labour. What has changed? Now those traditional owners working in Mereenie have their arms in the air. I ask again about the policy for the moratorium; how long will the moratorium last?
If you were successful, would you immediately turn off all the fracking so lights would go out in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Yulara? That is a serious question because that fracked gas is powering half the Northern Territory. People should know that before Blacktip came on board, fracked gas was powering Darwin, Katherine and Palmerston.
I am a supporter of moving from diesel to gas, especially in our remote communities. Last week I announced that $75m is being put towards building a new power station in Alice Springs to remove diesel so we can get onto more gas, but Labor’s proposal would stop the $75m generation project for Power and Water because they do not want any more gas.
That is in your electorate, Mr Deputy Speaker; it is a real problem. Labor should reconsider its policy on this moratorium.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I seek an extension of time for the member, pursuant to Standing Order 43.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much for the enthusiasm. Labor members were not very enthusiastic just then because they do not like hearing about the negativities of their proposed moratorium. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to explain how long a moratorium would go for. Explain why, in government, Labor allocated gas leases to 95% of the Northern Territory, whether granted or under application.
Why did they grant them in Aboriginal communities? Why did they grant them in Watarrka National Park? Why did they put them in tourist sites and heritage sites? They were happy to put them out to all the communities and businesses, but now there is an election coming up they want to say, ‘Hang on, put them on hold’.
That is not a way to encourage investment and job growth. It is especially not a way to support Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, so many of whom rely on investment in the gas industry either through royalties, employment and training or jobs. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to cancel his moratorium policy or come clean about why he did it.
Did he do it to get a deal with the Greens? Was it because he could see the member for Karama, Delia Lawrie, at his left flank about to announce it herself? He had to quieten that down before they had the Territory convention this weekend. That smells of the member for Karama, the quasi-Opposition Leader. That is exactly what it stinks of.
I will return to a confident culture being one of the Framing the Future objectives in relation to the Indigenous Affairs strategy. Territorians are self-sufficient people, confident in our capacity to succeed and our ability to look after each other.
We persevere through the tough times, celebrate together in the good times, and respect and celebrate each other’s differences as well as the contributions we make to society. Aboriginal people have been doing that for tens of thousands of years in the Northern Territory. There is extraordinary diversity amongst Aboriginal people. Not everybody is the same. More than a hundred different languages are spoken.
The Country Liberal government will work in partnership with Aboriginal people across the Territory to promote and protect their languages, cultures and customs. The Northern Territory government wants to decentralise decision-making to provide significantly increased opportunities for Aboriginal people at the community level to be directly involved in, and lead the design and delivery of, relevant government policies, programs and funding.
We will also prioritise investment in cultural and artistic activities and events that provide opportunities for people to learn from, communicate with and understand each other better. These cultural activities and events have direct and indirect social and economic benefits, particularly through tourism, the largest employment sector in the NT.
In addition to the strategy, there is a series of programs that play a critical role in bringing remote communities to their full potential. These include the Community Champions program and the First Circles Engagement program, which are so vital to us in engaging closely with remote towns, their residents and their leaders, young and old. The Community Champions program is providing communities with front-door access to government through 13 chief executive officers. The partnership forged through this program will work to provide local solutions for creating economic independence. First Circles is an important pathway for emerging leaders from our remote areas to become active participants in leading their own communities and helping shape the future of the Northern Territory.
I have outlined my government’s direction and our plan for Aboriginal affairs in the Northern Territory. The direction is underpinned by a series of whole-of-government reforms, programs and initiatives to drive economic development in remote communities. This is the Country Liberals’ plan for working in partnership with Aboriginal people, remote communities and the private sector to achieve a shared vision.
The Country Liberals’ plan to help Aboriginal Territorians have an opportunity they have never had before to progress through life cannot be risked by a potential Labor government. The risk that Labor presents to Aboriginal people is unheard of. To think this could all be thrown out should cause people to shiver down their spines to their boots.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I know there is a lot of committee business which is about to come forward, so I seek leave to continue my comments at a later date.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! The opposition was of the understanding that it would be one speaker from the government and one speaker from the opposition on this statement today.
Mr Giles: I did not know you were going to speak on it.
Mr Elferink: I did not make an agreement to that end. However, if you would like to …
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Chief Minister has only just sought leave to continue his remarks later.
Mr Giles: Do you have a speaker?
Ms Fyles: Yes, that was our understanding.
Mr Elferink: I do not know who you communicated that to, but I will not get in the way of open debate in this House.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for ordering the House, and the Chief Minister for neatly dovetailing in a new statement on the CLP’s Aboriginal affairs policy. I would love to debate that new statement because there are some very interesting aspects to it.
I am disappointed that I did not receive an invitation to come to your official function in the great hall, but I have become used to that MO from our senior minister.
I also need to comment on two of the Chief Minister’s cheap and nasty political digressions. It is difficult for an old dog that has shed blood, sweat and tears over 36 years to be lectured by a young fellow, who has been in the Territory 30 seconds, on centralisation policies. The town of Tennant Creek, and the immediate region, was the powerhouse of the Northern Territory in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. It produced more gross state product than Darwin. Upon the demise of the global price for metals, the closure of seven major mines and the loss of the skilled workforce, Tennant Creek then faced the challenges of a flatlined economy.
Under the CLP government of 27 years, the response was to sell half the Territory housing stock, close a primary school and centralise our government services into Alice Springs. If the Chief Minister tries the cheap and nasty political shots with a basis of 30 seconds in the Northern Territory, it is risky business.
The other aspect of your cheap and nasty political digressions is my fear that you are backing away from the pipeline between Tennant Creek and Mount Isa. I have great fear, after listening to your diatribe at Question Time, that you are the first one trying to back out of this.
You have negotiated this pipeline contract; you have signed up a contractor and made mega announcements all over the planet, and it is based on take-or-pay gas. It is based on the offshore supply of gas from Eni that will be piped through to your major customer, which was negotiated with the pipeline contractor at Phosphate Hill in Queensland, due south of Mount Isa.
There is no risk of that project. You have announced it, spruiked it, and now you are trying to back away from it. That is what Territorians should be worried about. If you back away as a leading minister from this project, it could incur significant financial liability to Territory taxpayers. Change your diatribe. You are leading that project and we are very keen to be involved in it. You have named 300 jobs in Tennant Creek; thank you for putting that on the public record. We will hold you to account.
I digress; I need to get back to the statement before the House from Hon Peter Styles MLA, Minister for Employment and Training. It is a ministerial statement on a new direction for vocational education and training in the Northern Territory, delivered on 24 February 2015. It is interesting to look at Hansard because, as the minister started to deliver the statement on 24 February 2015, I raised the point of order:
- Will we be given a copy of this statement?
At that stage the opposition had not been given a copy of the government’s statement. The response from the Leader of Government Business was, essentially, ‘Find your own’. I then needed to raise another point of order which was:
A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 36: I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Then the bells were rung and a quorum was gathered. That shows the enthusiasm from the other side, and it puts this statement into a historical context.
The minister went on to talk about Deloitte forecasts for the Northern Territory economy and some significant figures. We have established today that it is all about statistics. The Deloitte statistics were very good, as they should be, coming off the back of a $34bn investment in the INPEX project and infrastructure, and the LNG gas processing plant. With its associated bolt-on projects, it was gearing up for a big time in the Northern Territory. As has been debated today, it is not so good anymore. We are looking at completely different Deloitte figures. This information is nearly 12 months old. The Executive Summary of CommSec State of the States, January 2016 State and Territory economic performance report says the Northern Territory has dropped from being number one in the country in relation to its indicators of construction work, population growth and economic growth, to number three. That is in less than 12 months.
We are debating a new direction for vocational education and training, growing jobs and growing the economy, yet while we waited for this statement to come back to the House we experienced a significant drop in economic growth. I will quote from that report:
- By contrast, the Northern Territory economy is down 13.9 per cent on a year ago, while Western Australian economic activity is down 1.6 per cent …
That is an interesting comparison. If you look at the graph you can see we have dropped down in the running order. In retail spending the Northern Territory is now fifth out of the states and Territories. Dropping from a commanding position just under 12 months ago, we are now down to number five across the country.
Why have Territorians stopped spending? We know the big spend was in relation to construction and equipment, but why has that figure, in less than 12 months, dropped to the bottom of the list, minister? This is after 12 months of your new direction. We are looking at drops in construction work and we have a decline in population. The Northern Territory is now seventh on the ladder, and housing finance was declared by CommSec in 2016 as the weakest in the country. That is an interesting comparison.
We have heard about land release and we can debate that until the cows come home. We have not heard of Tollnerville. There were no new names under the CLP, but they continued Labor’s land release programs – credit where credit is due. However, alarmingly, for dwelling starts the Northern Territory is now seventh out of eight across the country. We are dropping from these great lead figures to having serious economic concerns. Minister, as I have said, this was in less than 12 months. There are written notes all over this statement because I was scribbling as the speech was being delivered. At that time the minister had not provided the opposition with a statement, but do not worry; we are a resilient mob and we work.
I can skip over those notes because they were challenging the minister about a realistic time frame to research this statement, but then he adjourned it. Upon researching it I revisited a lot of Labor’s initiatives, particularly in the vocational education and training area, adopted by the CLP. It will be good in estimates this year to thoroughly analyse the budget appropriation in the area of training, because just before the 2012 election Labor appropriated significant money, from memory about $450m, to zone in on and gear up our workforce for the major activities that were occurring. This year will be a good comparison to see where that money ended up and how much the total is under the stewardship of the CLP.
The statement covered a number of issues and addressed an initiative in partnership with the Master Builders Association and the Department of Business. It was an agreement to facilitate training for 90 people in the building industry to undertake Certificate IV in Building and Construction.
Credit where credit is due, but the minister did not talk about the innovative policy initiative from Labor, which was aimed at young people being able to operate construction machines on construction sites at the age of 16 years. As they were progressing to get their learners and their P plates for driving a motor vehicle on Territory roads, they could already operate construction equipment. It was very defined and specific, and a great initiative that was worked through with industry. I remember working on that, and great suggestions were coming from industry. In that period of time we were listening to Territorians. We were very much in partnership with the Territory and we were heading in the right direction. That was not mentioned in the statement, but I will raise it.
The school industry partnerships are what I define and what we need to look at in this sector. In your statement you made a grand position saying, ‘We on this side listen. No more training for training’s sake.’ I will debate with you, but more encourage you to look at, school industry partnerships, which is where Labor was putting its focus. The Chief Minister talked about 300 jobs for the pipeline that will be built between Tennant Creek and Mount Isa, taking that take-or-pay gas to the customer at Phosphate Hill. As that pipeline is being built, the Chief Minister has put on the public record that there will be 300 jobs for Tennant Creek.
When you live in Tennant Creek, especially when you have an office on the main street, the reality is that around 200 people are gainfully socialising each day on the main street of Tennant Creek but do not have a job. They do not have employment, so there is a real need to engage these people. In my debate it is about targeting the young people in this cohort. There are so many constraints to putting together a workforce to work on the Chief Minister’s signature economic project – the gas pipeline between Tennant Creek and Mount Isa – which he guaranteed and now seems to be backing away from, which is of great concern to people in Tennant Creek and across the Territory. We need a policy that zones in on these young people and engages and prepares them.
The Chief Minister made the announcement with the pipeline contractor and we are looking at work starting in 2018. We have a bit of time to prepare these young people and, minister, in the statement you do not define how you will do that. That is my advice, and you have the capacity. As a minister in government, you can make this happen. The best way to do it would be – first of all, you are most welcome in Tennant Creek. Come down any time and we can start to look at how to prepare those 300 young people who will emerge in this new industry sector you have promised and will then translate those industry skills into other areas.
The estimates period of last year was interesting. I framed a prosecution around what is new and I was trying to zone in on this area, but the minister was not able to explain anything about what is new. I found that very interesting after this statement, called ‘A New Direction’, was delivered in this House in February. That was an interesting period in time.
In relation to my advice and the debate I am running around focusing on young people, a news bulletin by Alyssa Betts was posted on Thursday 26 February, just after this statement was delivered in the House in 2015. It was titled, ‘Daly River’s unemployed face disappointment and despair’. There were some alarming quotes in the article, such as:
- People in community 'like zombies'.
It featured a number of Daly River residents who wanted jobs and saw no progress in Indigenous employment. They were unemployed and doing little jobs, as it says in the article, and they had the enthusiasm, the desire and the dream.
It is good to hear that the Chief Minister has come back, 12 months later, with an Indigenous advancement strategy to go back and target that. But I am disappointed that in 12 months, under your stewardship and new direction, not a lot has changed. The Chief Minister alluded to the Closing the Gap report, which I think he said will be delivered tomorrow. That has already been very critical of movement in Indigenous employment. We have some major challenges. We have some great opportunities and I hope you can start to refine your new direction in training and we can start to see some real results.
There is a good section in the statement which is about the Territory’s population, training providers and jobs on country. It related to a story around the Tiwi Islands and people training in coxswain certificates and licensing. I encourage that. I have spoken in this House many times about your opportunities as a minister in government, your connections to your Liberal mates in Canberra, and trying to find new revenue streams to support Indigenous employment on country. Let us face it, we should be looking at Defence, Immigration and Border Protection, and Customs, because they are very real issues for the development of northern Australia and are a creative way to employ people, because they are significant budget streams.
We spend a fortune in this country training our military. Why are we not training our military in northeast Arnhem Land or the Barkly Tableland? Why are we not appropriating the same amount of money and giving our military personnel experience on country and, in parallel, working with Indigenous Australians on land trusts, Crown land and pastoral leases? There are partnerships to be developed, minister. I have lots of ideas around this and I have a desire to be back in your chair, where I will have access to the resources to make this a reality.
The statement was a good read, and there were some good outcomes for the Tiwi Islands. I remember one of my visits there, getting off the ferry and onto a barge, and being barged in to the beach, then returning on that barge to cross over to Melville Island. I had to ask the skipper about his training and accreditation. With a little hesitation - he was rather reticent - he told me very quietly that he got his accreditation in the Darwin Correctional Centre. We had a great conversation about the new era in corrections, him achieving that accreditation and being employed and mentoring younger people coming through that industry.
It is a good story and more can be made of it. The statement went on – I have written a comment at the back, ‘If we do not include the locals, minister’. It got quite waffly towards the end. Those 300 people are socialising each day on the main street of Tennant Creek. Unfortunately, a degree of that cohort has two benchmarks. One is that the hotel opens at 12 pm and the other one is that the bottle shop opens at 2 pm. They are major constraints to engaging locals, but we need to deal with that. We need to get over that and make sure it happens. I want you to consider that the young cohort in the Territory, particularly in the regions and the remote areas, is the cohort we need to entirely support.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 43, I seek an extension of time for my colleague.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: There is much talk in this House about Labor not having any policy. You can tell it is an election year, after watching the Chief Minister today. He looks a tad nervous. It is interesting that, as a Labor opposition, we are releasing policy earlier than any opposition in a Westminster system would do. We are very proud of that. It has been an intense time; we have had workshop after workshop. I have been at a few of the live shows, have done work over the phone and have tried to be part of everything we do. It is sometimes hard when you are living and travelling in regional and remote areas. But there is good policy developing.
In this vocational education and training statement we are debating today, Labor understands that increasing participation drives economic growth. That was very evident in our 11 years of government through major infrastructure spends, and significant investment in apprenticeships and training. We learnt many lessons in that time and we understand there is a significant disconnection and underrepresentation of young Indigenous Territorians in the economy. We were going after that market and will continue to do so.
The key to improving participation is training more Territorians in skills that lead to employment. The minister mentioned that 12 months ago. We also understand that it is imperative. The minister made the comment, ‘No more training for training’s sake’. Let us change it again, minister. But we are not seeing a lot changing on the ground, as the Closing the Gap report will testify.
Labor will invest in training, and we need to, because we need to engage apprentices and trainees. We understand from the business sector and the people we talk to in our policy development that apprenticeships and traineeships are collapsing in the Northern Territory. That is why I said in Question Time, minister, that you need to talk to real Territorians and listen. Sometimes the political rhetoric takes over and you miss the reality of what is happening in the business sector and the community. We are deeply concerned that the number of apprenticeships and traineeships is collapsing, and it will impact of the lives of young Territorians and the future growth of the Northern Territory.
A Labor government will create a training environment where every Territorian has an entitlement to a government-subsidised Certificate III or higher as their first qualification on a pathway to a job. Territorians are able to choose the type of provider they want and should be able to choose the path of training they need in order to get a job. I think the Chief Minister needs to adopt that principle in the new Indigenous advancement strategy he launched.
It is not about training for training’s sake or pigeonholing people; it is about providing choice and matching. It is about school industry partnerships, and training and community partnerships. Territorians have better information on training, especially career pathways more readily available across the country under a Labor government. We will do that. We will make sure the information and communication is relevant and meaningful, and it will provide that access.
We will define industry skill sets and provide funding to increase productivity. There will be certainty in contestable funding and public provider funding, strengthening choice for employers and Territorians undertaking training. That is a very important point. Contestable funding and a matching exercise – government needs to be aware and listening, and it needs to be on the game and aware of the best value for the taxpayer dollar.
Labor is interested in innovation in our training market and across all sectors of the Northern Territory’s growth and development. We aim to increase educational opportunities, especially in the international sector, and we prove that. We are now training doctors in the Territory, and we have faculties of engineering at Charles Darwin University focused on oil and gas. We were very targeted and specific, and we were growing this training sector. But unfortunately we lost control and had to depend on the CLP to continue it. We are not confident that has happened.
Territory Labor’s investment and training will be informed through a structured consultative body, modelling the skills required to meet current and emerging Territory opportunities; input from Territory employers, unions and communities on their skilling and regional priorities; advice from industry and its peak bodies; the Northern Territory Industry Training Advisory Councils; the Australian Council for Private Education and Training NT; public and private training providers; group training organisations; unions; and our education sector and schools.
Labor will develop an annual investment statement on skilling Territorians. It will inform the funding mix of programs available in the Territory and be aimed at providing greater transparency and access, and equity opportunities. We will undertake an awareness campaign to promote the skilling Territorians investment statement, which will allow all Territorians to see where they can participate in the training environment.
We will do all this and we will not abolish Training Advisory Councils, as the CLP government intends to do. I am deeply concerned about CLP plans to reduce the number of Training Advisory Councils and to make executive officers public servants. Training Advisory Councils are an independent voice of the employers, and their executive officers remain independent and able to give fair and fearless advice by not being public servants.
This move by the CLP is a retrograde step. Labor opposes it and will reverse it if we are judged worthy and elected to government. These are short snippets of some of the policy development occurring in partnership with Territorians and stakeholders. This opposition is very serious about the Territory. We have set our course and are communicating it. The Chief Minister chooses to pick out small semantic anecdotes to cause mischief in this House, but he knows the truth is that this discourse, this narrative, is now resonating in the Territory. Stakeholders, public servants, the community, the non-government sector and environmental groups are all looking for the alternative; that is, working with them to gain their trust.
This statement is an interesting collective of material which is just under 12 months old. The Chief Minister introduced to this House a statement – dovetailed into this part of the Notice Paper – on Indigenous advancement, after three years in government, and it looks to me like reactive politics. This is a sign of a government that is in deep trouble. This government is purely reactive, has entered the stadium, is in the straight and is trying to get across the finish line.
I thank the minister for bringing this statement to the House nearly 12 months ago. I was ready to debate it then. The Chief Minister tried to shut it down after he dovetailed his own agenda into the Notice Paper, and the opposition has just presented some very clear perspectives on Labor’s policy. This policy is being clearly articulated to the community.
Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to make comment, and I thank the members for listening.
Debate adjourned.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Reports for Members for Arafura, Barkly, Casuarina, Johnston, Karama and Wanguri
Travel Reports for Members for Arafura, Barkly, Casuarina, Johnston, Karama and Wanguri
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to clause 4.12 of RTD No 1 of 2013, I table travel reports from the members for Karama, Casuarina, Arafura, Barkly, Wanguri and Johnston.
MOTIONS
Note Paper – Public Accounts Committee – Public Private Partnership Arrangements for the Darwin Correctional Precinct
May 2013 Report
Note Paper – Public Accounts Committee – Public Private Partnership Arrangements for the Darwin Correctional Precinct
May 2013 Report
Continued from 16 May 2013.
Consideration adjourned.
Note Paper – Public Accounts Committee Report into Structural Separation of Power and Water Corporation
Continued from 7 May 2014.
Consideration adjourned.
Note Paper – Northern Territory’s Energy Future Committee Key Challenges and Opportunities Issues Paper
Continued from 15 May 2014.
Consideration adjourned.
Note Paper – Public Accounts Committee Report on Management of Information
and Communication Projects by
Government Agencies
and Communication Projects by
Government Agencies
Continued from 15 May 2014.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Note Paper – Public Accounts Committee Annual Report 2013-14
Continued from 27 August 2014.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Note Paper – Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee Report
Continued from 30 October 2014.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Note Paper – Select Committee on Action to Prevent Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder
Report – The Preventable Disability
Report – The Preventable Disability
Continued from 26 February 2015.
Consideration adjourned.
Note Paper – Auditor-General’s August 2015 Report to the Legislative Assembly
Continued from 27 August 2015.
Consideration adjourned.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Drop in Business Confidence
Drop in Business Confidence
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received correspondence in accordance with Standing Order 66 as follows:
- Dear Madam Speaker,
I propose for discussion this day as a definite matter of public importance the drop in business confidence across the Territory, especially the significant slump in support for Territory government policies because of the failure of the Territory government to address issues of concern to small and medium businesses.
The letter is signed by the Opposition Leader.
Is the discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr GUNNER (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the Territory has a bright future but there are clouds on the horizon. The CLP is in denial about the reality of what is happening in the Territory, and if you are in denial you cannot have a plan. The CLP has no economic plan for the Northern Territory. You cannot plan properly for the future of the Territory if you refuse to listen to your economic data and to Territorians.
We need a jobs plan for the Territory. Labor is listening. Labor has a plan, based on the voices of businesses and Territorians, to grow jobs in the Territory. There are many in small and medium businesses who are feeling the hurt. If you run a small business in the Territory today, right this minute, you will go home tonight after a long day, exhausted and worried about how you will juggle the bills.
People in small businesses in the Territory are hurting now more than ever, and they need a shot of confidence in the arm. What they continue to get from the CLP government is confusion, dysfunction, random decisions, inconsistent policy-making without consultation and useless rhetoric. From the Business minister they get advice commentary that ignores them. ‘We are travelling very well in the Territory’, the Business minister says, without acknowledging the pain and hurt some businesses in the Territory are going through. Small businesses in the Territory are hurting.
Under the CLP’s watch the economy of the Northern Territory has gone backwards. According to the December 2015 Sensis Business Index, business confidence in the Territory has slumped. The Northern Territory has the second-lowest business confidence in Australia. Territory business expectations for the year ahead are the most negative in Australia at -8%. Territory businesses believe that perception of the economy now is slowing, a view held by 40% of businesses. The index shows that 32% of Territory businesses expect that the economy a year from now will be worse, with only 23% thinking it will improve. Profitability in the NT is very weak at -17%. Attitudes towards Territory government policies show a -4% result.
These figures are bad for the Territory. Business confidence has slumped and community confidence has been shaken. We are losing more people to down south now than in the last three decades. In 2014 a total of 3329 more Territorians left for interstate than arrived. Advice from Treasury last estimates is that we usually get about 16 000 people in and 16 000 out for a net rate of zero. To lose over 3000 Territorians in one year is extraordinary. We have never lost more Territorians in a single year. It is beyond careless; it is negligent.
In the Economy Overview from the last budget, on page 17 Treasury forecasts that:
- Over the medium term, growth in retail and wholesale trade is expected to be constrained by slow growth in population, employment and wages.
Our population will hurt us if we do not look after our Territorians and keep them here. If we keep losing Territorians to down south we will hurt in the Territory.
Territorians are not fooled by the CLP. We have heard plenty of evidence of that in recent days as they have called in to radio to tell their stories, often in response to the CLP issuing empty rhetoric. John from Wanguri said, ‘I had a listen to Mr Giles and the only thing he got right is that the Territory is the only place to be, a great place to live. But there is no work here, mate, it is dead. It has been dead for a long time and it is going to get deader. And for them clowns to have to get around and go and meet the businesses last year to find out they were going bad just shows how out of touch they are with everything that is going on.’ The report said, ‘Have you got work at the moment, John?’ John said, ‘Negative’. The reporter then said, ‘How long have you been out of work for?’ John said, ‘Eight weeks. I have been here 15 years and I have never been out of work before, actually, in my life. Never.’ The reporter said, ‘What is that doing to your bank account?’, and John said, ‘I have got three months to survive and then I am gone’.
That is one of the real concerns we have. If you are unemployed in the Territory, you cannot afford to stay and you have to leave. The CLP has no plan to grow the Territory. Net interstate migration loss continued throughout 2015 and now into 2016.
We had six positive years of population growth under Labor. In the Territory we have a history of problems with transition, or turnover, but the scope and scale of the loss of population we are experiencing under the CLP is devastating. Our retail trade growth is the lowest in Australia. Our building activity for the September quarter is down 22.8%, the worst result in Australia by a country mile. Our motor vehicle sales are down 4.3% year-on-year in December, the second-worst result in Australia behind WA. ANZ job ads are down by 19.5% in December.
These results do not just happen. This is not just a result of some cyclical economic event; this is the result of poor government planning, inconsistent government policy and thought-bubble politics. It is what happens when you have a government whose members are too busy fighting each other to plan properly for the Territory. The CLP keeps making bad decisions for the Northern Territory. It is obvious that the economic levers pulled by the CLP were wrong. The first thing they did when they were elected was increase power prices by 30%, water prices by 40% and sewerage prices by 25%. The CLP increased the cost of living when it promised to cut it.
This decision had a direct hit on the hip pocket. It made household bills more expensive. More than that, it saw the price of goods and services go up. Businesses had to pass on the cost. That hurt the Territorians who live here, and the businesses suffered from people not being able to afford their products and services. It means the cost of living in the Territory is now so high that people cannot afford to stay if they do not have work, so they leave. If you are unemployed, you are incredibly unlikely to have the luxury of waiting for another job in the Territory. That is devastating. We lose skills, knowledge and good people. We lose customers and the loss of people hurts businesses.
The CLP then turned on the pensioners and seniors, limiting the benefits and removing them for many. As we know, many senior Territorians have to make a decision about whether they stay or leave the Territory when they retire. As the Treasurer said during estimates, the people who leave the Territory are generally senior Territorians moving interstate for retirement. The Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme card system was part of the attraction of the Territory. The CLP removed it from many people and downgraded the benefits available.
Housing is also a big issue for seniors. The CLP had an opportunity to use the Sports House site as an extension for Pearl Retirement Resort, the neighbouring retirement village and nursing home. I have seen the significant benefit of building retirement villages and keeping people living in the Territory.
I know people who moved into Pearl. They were going to move down south. They had the option, they stayed here, and that is great. If you keep the grandparents, you keep the grandkids. When we lose seniors from the Territory we lose our community, we lose history and, as I said, we often lose the grandchildren. We need a plan to keep seniors in the Territory. Instead, we have a government that has made decisions resulting in more people leaving the Territory than ever before.
The Sports House site was sold, which provided no benefit to seniors and did not provide them with other housing options. The site has not been developed yet. We have not seen a benefit for the Territory in that regard. I think that was a very bad decision. That is a local example of how you can look after seniors and keep people in the Territory.
Straight after the Chief Minister rolled Terry Mills, he decided to play high-stakes poker with the careful deal that was pulled together to keep the Rio Tinto refinery in Nhulunbuy. The Chief Minister pulled the wrong lever and has seen Territory jobs lost and businesses going broke not just in Nhulunbuy, but in a ripple effect across the Territory.
We have excess gas today because the Chief Minister dumped the gas to Gove deal. Selling that excess gas to Queensland and the east coast is the easy decision we have to make, because that opportunity for jobs and industry was lost in the Territory by a reckless Chief Minister.
They are now building a gas pipeline to the east coast, which is what we have to do. It is like a Plan B. Plan A was keeping the millions of dollars’ worth of industry and the thousands of jobs in the Territory, but that opportunity was lost.
Let us not forget, the CLP is selling gas that could have been used to fire up jobs in Nhulunbuy and the Territory, and is now selling that gas to fire up jobs in Queensland. Once again, there are fewer jobs and, as a result, fewer people staying in the Territory because of this government’s decisions. That hurts the economy.
The CLP pulled the wrong economic lever by removing the First Home Owner Grant for people buying existing homes. What has been the result of that? Today there is a 24.2% decline in housing finance applications by first home buyers. At the same time, we are seeing house prices reducing. There is often a cycle to home ownership. A first home buyer buys an existing home and the person selling that home goes on to buy a new home. By targeting First Home Owner Grants at only new properties, the CLP has stopped that cycle.
The government has confused a grant which is meant to help someone into a new home with construction stimulation, and this has hurt first home owners and the market. The end result of pulling this economic lever was to drive people out of the market and it has hurt the Territory economy. We are not seeing the turnover we normally see in the real estate market of people buying and selling. We have hurt the market and Territorians who want to get into their first home.
We want to see our home ownership rates in the Territory increase because we have low rates of home ownership, and if people own a home they are more likely to stay.
The CLP then sold TIO without consultation with Territorians. It was sold against the wishes of the business community to a large international conglomerate whose first two actions have been to ditch 42 jobs and increase premiums.
Businesses tell me that their options for competition in the provision of insurance policies are now lower than they can ever remember them being, and I can guarantee this will mean higher premiums over time. We have lost competition. We have lost the point of difference that we had for private sector investment in the Territory – competitive, affordable insurance – as identified in the Pivot North report. This is all because the CLP chose to pull the economic lever of selling TIO against Territorians’ wishes.
Every economic lever the CLP has pulled has hurt Territorians, and the economic statistics are there to show it. More importantly, the human face of these decisions – people without jobs, closing down businesses, leaving and travelling interstate – is there for the Chief Minister to see and for the CLP to hear. But they refuse to listen.
We heard many people call in to radio over the last couple of weeks in response to ignorant comments from the government. They were hurt by the government’s claims which ignored the facts of what is happening in the Territory and the voices of Territorians and Territory business owners.
We heard from Maria, a business owner at Casuarina, who said, ‘It (business) is pretty well lacking. There are a lot of people out there hurting.’
We heard from Nick, who said, ‘Peter Styles does not know what he is talking about. There is no work out there. There are subcontractors who are doing it hard. A lot of people are refinancing their situation to get past this bad bit. My father started it, I have taken over and now I am going to shut it.’
Brian, a retired business owner, said, ‘I had to close up because there was nothing doing. The worst I saw it here was 1982-83, and that pales in comparison to what it is now. It is the worst I have ever seen. There is no confidence in the place whatsoever.’
Donna Johnson from Totally Workwear said:
- Just recently I had a man in the store talking about how people are coming to him asking for work. He said grown men are crying …
…
They cannot get the work. Some are overcommitted but others just want to put food on the table.
Others are saying that they've been in the Territory for 20 to 25 years and they've gone from 20 employees to just a handful.
It's actually quite dire at the moment. I feel very sorry for a lot of our customers.
It is now more important than ever for the government to play a central role in the economy. Now, more than ever, the government must consult, plan and invest. Instead, the CLP has more policy thought bubbles, dysfunction in the ranks and distractions. The government is not getting on with the job of looking after and listening to Territorians and Territory businesses, and planning properly. You cannot plan properly if you ignore what is happening in the Territory and ignore the voices of Territorians.
We need a plan for the Territory. Labor is listening. Labor has a plan for the Territory that provides certainty and restores confidence. We have a plan that focuses on children, trust and jobs. We intend to grow jobs to grow the economy, and we will do so in consultation with Territory industry, with proper planning and focused investment.
Economic growth is the only way to create high-wage, secure jobs. These jobs will be in the economic sectors that we see as our current strengths, as well as in a new digital economy which is embracing the rapidly advancing technology and innovation. We have to plan for the technological changes of the future. Our economy will be trade focused, with Labor continuing the work it undertook in government to get Territory business to markets of Asia.
The CLP is trying to develop the theme that Labor had one shot – the INPEX project. Let us look at the facts. The Labor government delivered an economic strategy that saw six new suburbs built and get under way around Palmerston and Darwin. We had planning in place for the expansion to Weddell, which has not been advanced by the CLP. The old CLP government got it, but we originally delivered the railway. We also delivered ConocoPhillips gas; I also credit the former CLP governments with that. We managed and delivered those projects.
We built a health strategy designed to keep people here. We expanded the number of specialist facilities, built the oncology unit, expanded birthing services and the palliative care unit. We developed a full medical facility at Charles Darwin University, which means you can stay in the Territory and become a doctor.
We delivered the Marine Supply Base, an important next step within the gas servicing industry. We delivered Eni gas, but the Chief Minister broke the Rio deal.
Let us turn to the INPEX project. The CLP does nothing but rubbish this nation-leading project. It accounts for more value delivered to the economy than all CLP projects combined since self-government, and it is a gift that will keep on giving for more than 40 years. The CLP has never delivered anything close to that. Can you imagine where our economy would be if this project did not exist? It is a great project for the Territory, but Labor did more than deliver INPEX. It is one big project, and we get that. It dwarfs many other things, but Labor did more than INPEX during its term. INPEX is a fantastic citizen of the Territory and it does great work in the Territory.
The CLP has been churlish about INPEX because it was a Labor project. That is not what good government is about. The CLP should be working better with INPEX and not having cracks at a one-shot-in-the-locker project. We have a diverse Territory and economy, and Labor did more than INPEX, but we are very proud of INPEX. It is a first-class project.
In the strong messages we hear from business and industry across sectors, the CLP does not engage, does not listen, believes it knows best and, as a result, does not plan with the private sector. A Labor government will consult widely with Territorians about how we implement our plan.
It will be a key to our plan to seize the opportunities presented by revolutions in renewable energy and technology, particularly digital technology, which are currently sweeping the global economy and are a key challenge for any plan to create and maintain high-wage jobs. That is why Labor will hold a Territory economic summit shortly after the election. From this summit we will craft the final agreed jobs plan that will underpin government action and investment. Industry wants to be engaged; this is a very clear message from those in the business industry, who we talk to. They want to be part of the proper long-term planning for the Territory. It has been lacking under this government, and government is criticised for it. It would be welcome under a Labor government if elected.
We have to make sure our investment unlocks private sector investment, and that we are on the same page and sequence our projects properly. That is how you restore confidence and provide certainty. Labor will provide a rolling 10-year infrastructure plan that shows what projects are planned and when, what business needs to do to gear up for them, and where they can invest as a result of knowing what government intends to do. Investing in infrastructure and innovation is a key feature of Labor’s Northern Territory jobs plan. These critical areas are enablers in expanding our economic diversity and increasing our growth.
Labor will ensure the infrastructure program is spread across the Territory. We will ensure it is released in a way that supports local industry. Labor will also support the expansion of ICT infrastructure across the Territory. Investment in expanding the download and upload capacity of people living in the bush will unlock business investment opportunities, eHealth and distance education. These are things we need to do. We will also ensure infrastructure expenditure is efficient and focused on the right projects; that is why we are emphasising the need to develop a clear Territory economic development plan through the Northern Territory jobs plan. With this plan in place, Labor can properly direct infrastructure investment. We support private investment in Territory infrastructure. We recognise that for this to occur, the private sector needs the risk of that investment to be minimised.
A Territory-wide economic plan with clearly defined goals helps minimise risk and will attract greater levels of private sector investment in Territory infrastructure needs. Labor will work with the private sector to make this happen. We will invest in Katherine as a major transport and logistics hub. We will invest in Tennant Creek as a major mining and mining services centre. We will invest in Alice Springs as our inland capital. Over the next 15 years Labor will create a world-class Indigenous arts trail across the Territory.
We want the NT to be the nation’s leading centre for Indigenous art, and to be recognised as one of the world’s leading places for Indigenous art. We want visitors to come to Australia knowing they have to come to the Territory to receive the experience of art and culture. Labor will develop the iconic national Indigenous fine art gallery in Alice Springs, part of developing Alice Springs as the nation’s inland capital.
We will support and champion small business. We have had before, and will have again, a small business champions unit in a new department of business, innovation and trade. We recognise that an increase in participation drives economic growth, and there is a significant disconnection and underrepresentation of young Indigenous Territorians in our economy. We will improve how we train Territorians in the skills that lead to employment. The key to participation and increasing and improving it is to invest in training.
Labor will invest in training. We will have economic participation by Indigenous Territorians. That is critical to the growth and development of the Territory. We will work with Indigenous Territorians and their representative organisations to ensure their voices are heard; they are too often silenced nowadays.
We have announced a $1.1bn housing strategy to get money across the Territory. There is much more I could say. We have a jobs plan for the Territory. We will restore confidence and provide certainty to the Territory.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, what an interesting speech delivered by the Leader of the Opposition. It was a real leadership challenge speech. It is getting close to D-Day for the Opposition Leader. He knows he is being stalked by the member for Karama. The member for Karama is making big inroads into his support base.
I was informed that on Saturday night the Minister for Business was at a function with some Vietnamese people; a number of Labor identities were there as well. The Minister for Business made a speech on behalf of the Chief Minister, and the person who spoke on behalf of the Opposition Leader was the shadow-shadow Opposition Leader, the member for Karama. I think the member for Casuarina was asked to speak but deferred to her leader, the member for Karama.
We can see what is happening from this side of the Chamber. Labor is in a bit of leadership turmoil. It has the left calling the shots on a range of things, and the Opposition Leader is desperately trying to claw in and hang on to his job.
The nature of this MPI is quite interesting. I just listened to some of the things the Opposition Leader spoke about. It is interesting to see how he tries to rewrite history and walk on both sides of the street at the same time, which is very difficult to achieve. The Northern Territory still has a long way to go after inheriting Labor’s financial mess, but we have put a plan in place that creates certainty. However, we agree there are currently threats and challenges to the Northern Territory economy.
The Australian economy is now in an environment of lower commodity prices. Falling commodity prices are outside of government control, and they are impacting on the long-run investment decisions of business. Since being in government we have continued to chip away at the debt we inherited from Labor.
In 2015-16 we expect to knock a further $322m off the current debt level. While a small deficit of $27m is now predicted in 2017-18, largely as a result of non-policy changes in revenues, net debt is now projected to peak at $2bn and be lower than when we took office in 2012. This is an outstanding achievement when compared to the forecasted debt levels of $5.5bn projected under Labor. This improvement in net debt since April 2015 is largely driven by the improved 2014-15 outcome of a fiscal surplus of $286m and the proceeds of a $506m sale for the long-term lease of the Darwin port. As I said, we are confronting challenges as the investment phase of the resources boom recedes and our economy transitions to the production and export phase of the resource cycle.
The NT government is preparing for the Territory’s economic transition by providing a supportive environment for investment to encourage further northern development. This includes the construction of the NEGI, the North East Gas Interconnector, and the establishment of the Northern Territory Infrastructure Development Fund.
In reality, the Northern Territory economy continues to perform strongly across a range of indicators when compared to other jurisdictions in the Australian average. The NT grew by 10.5% in 2014-15, which was more than three times the gross state product of any other jurisdiction in the country, and more than four times the gross domestic product of Australia. The NT has the lowest inflation rate in Australia at 0.5% for 2015. The NT also has the lowest unemployment rate in Australia at 4.1%, with the next-closest being ACT and New South Wales at 5.2%. We still have the highest participation rate and employment growth of 2.2%, which signals a strong labour market. The NT business community has shown that it is behind the government’s plan to establish a local benefit advisory panel, which will include a suite of procurement reforms to assist local businesses to earn a greater percentage of government spending.
The panel is just one component of the Buy Local Plan being promoted by our Minister for Business, and is part of a suite of measures targeting the full procurement and contracting lifestyle. The CLP announced its Buy Local Plan in December after consulting widely over many months with local businesses, industry associations and other stakeholders. Our plan will ensure that $3bn spent annually on goods and services by the Territory government will deliver for Territory businesses.
We understand that the 14280 small to medium-sized businesses in the Territory play a very important role in the economy and we understand that from time to time they need assistance from government. We offer a range of grants and assistance to help businesses start, run and grow. The Business Growth Grants budget increased in 2015-16 to $1.69m from $958 000. Services offered were expanded, including the criteria to include not-for-profit organisations and Indigenous enterprises throughout the Northern Territory. The Indigenous Business Development Program grant budget increased in 2015-16 to $1m from $700 000, supporting small to medium Indigenous enterprises throughout the Northern Territory.
The Smarter Business Solutions program – formally ecoBiz NT – grant increased in 2015-16 to $400 000 from $362 000.
Northern Territory business confidence in the most recent Sensis survey recorded an overall confidence level of +24%, increasing two percentage points from the previous quarter. National business confidence increased by 12% from the previous quarter to 39%.
As I said earlier, we still have the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 4.1%. This is below the national rate of 5.8% and is forecast to remain the lowest of all jurisdictions over five years. Employment growth is expected to strengthen to 1.5% in 2015-16 as work in the Ichthys LNG Project reaches its peak, before slowing over the medium term as the project transitions from the construction phase to the less labour-intensive production phase.
Employment in the Northern Territory will be supported by the construction of the Palmerston hospital, the Gateway Shopping Centre and the expansion of Casuarina Square. The opposition likes to talk about the failure of the CLP’s policies, but last week the Opposition Leader fully endorsed those policies. He announced that Labor would take a set of policies to the election, which are identical to what the CLP has implemented over the last three years.
Labor’s jobs plan is, essentially, a complete endorsement of the Country Liberal initiatives, such as our shiplift facility, the Marine Industry Park, the railway from Tennant Creek to Mount Isa and, of course, the Infrastructure Development Fund. This follows recent similar announcements that they would copy the Country Liberals’ business policy and procurement reforms, and support our plans for a national Indigenous cultural centre in Alice Springs.
Labor’s plan commits to spending the same amount of money the government is already spending on the things the government is already building. While on the one hand Labor supports what the government is doing, on the other hand it says we have no vision for the Territory.
As I said earlier, the Opposition Leader cannot walk on both sides of the street. He either supports the government’s plans or he does not. If he has new, fresh ideas he should show them to us. Do not just copy ours and say you will do something different.
Labor has shown it has nothing innovative to create new jobs and no interest in developing new opportunities other than what the government is already pursuing. Despite announcing a so-called jobs plan, Labor has shown it is anti-jobs by proposing to ban future onshore gas exploration.
Labor’s ban threatens a $1bn gas pipeline to the east coast, and the 900 jobs it will directly create, by robbing the pipeline of the gas needed to make it viable. The pipeline developer has the option of expanding the pipeline’s capacity prior to laying the first pipe, if market conditions support increased capacity. But Labor would put an end to that with its plan to stop supply. The people in Tennant Creek are shaking in their boots over what Labor has announced.
I was in Sydney late last week and I spoke to people from a number of gas resource companies. They are all paranoid. The only thing they had to talk about was Labor’s plan to kill their businesses and their industry. It is shocking.
Despite what the Opposition Leader says, Labor supported fracking when in government only three years ago. Labor was its biggest supporter. Labor opened 95% of the Northern Territory to oil and gas exploration. The Country Liberals are winding that back to something more acceptable and to better locations. The Country Liberals made the decision not to grant exploration permits for Watarrka National Park and parks in the Coomalie region. The Country Liberals are committed to developing the best possible regulatory system that will allow for the future growth of the onshore oil and gas industry in a balanced and environmentally sustainable manner.
The Country Liberals have worked hard to rebuild the Territory’s economy and repair government finances since coming to office. In just three years government debt has disintegrated to less than half of Labor’s projected $5.5bn debt legacy, while the Northern Territory now has the lowest unemployment rate in the country and the highest employment participation rate. The CLP has embarked on a massive infrastructure program. It is building new roads specifically intended to boost tourism, agriculture and mining, and we have cut more than 200 pieces of Labor’s red tape to make it easier to do business in the Territory.
We have developed a comprehensive economic development strategy that builds on our proximity to Asia and is designed to smooth out the peaks and troughs of economic activity. The Opposition Leader and Labor have admitted that what the CLP government is doing is right for the Territory. His jobs plan, business plan and arts plan are an endorsement of what the government is doing. The gas pipeline, the railway line to the east coast, the North East Gas Interconnector and the infrastructure fund are already being done by the CLP government. The Opposition Leader’s 10-point business plan is what the Country Liberal government is already doing.
The Buy Local campaign was announced by government last year. The 25% weighting for local business in procurement is happening. An independent panel for procurement is being implemented. The mandatory local worker involvement in requests for quotes has been implemented by the Country Liberal government. The central plank of the Opposition Leader’s Aboriginal arts plan is what the CLP government is doing. The arts centre in Alice Springs has already been announced by the Country Liberals. The Opposition Leader is being totally dishonest with Territorians by not telling Territorians that his plans are about what the CLP government is already doing.
It reinforces what a phony the Opposition Leader is and how bereft of ideas the Labor Party is. He promised a time-wasting economic summit upon coming to government to find out what business wants. He should already know what business wants; he reckons he has been out consulting. He is inept on a raft of issues. He trots out a 10-point business plan which is exactly what we are doing in government. It is fine to endorse our business plan, but at least be honest and tell Territorians your plan is based on what government is already doing.
The Opposition Leader opposed the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement until Labor realised the anti-Chinese sentiment was causing a backlash amongst the local Chinese community. He claims unemployment was 6.6% when we all know it is just above 4%, a full 2% lower than what he is quoting to other people. The Opposition Leader did not tell you that CommSec recently said that the Territory is still performing strongly on a range of indicators, ranking first in construction work done and second for economic growth, business investment and employment.
The Opposition Leader and Labor talk the Territory down at every opportunity. Labor comes in today with an MPI, worrying about business confidence and telling the world the sky is falling in. Chicken Little, the Opposition Leader, is scaring people and telling them it is all terrible, that people are leaving and unemployment rates are high.
When the Opposition Leader in Question Time was talking about John, who phoned the ABC saying he cannot find a job, why did he not ring the ABC and say that John might find it a bit harder to get a job anywhere else in Australia? The easiest place in Australia to get a job is the Northern Territory.
I get around the Territory business community quite often. I speak to business people every day. I have a strong affinity with business in the Territory. The biggest complaint business people have is that they cannot get workers. At the last budget the one soft spot, the one area where we were lacking, was population growth. We had to do more to attract people to the Northern Territory because we cannot keep up; we need more workers.
Over the last three years, when I was Business minister, and with the current Business minister, we have been flitting all around Australia trying to drum up workers for the Northern Territory. We want people to come to the Northern Territory, live in the Territory, enjoy our wonderful lifestyle and, most importantly, get a job in the Territory. We have had a bit of difficulty trying to attract people to the north. It is more a culture of Australians than anything we are doing wrong in the Northern Territory.
Territorians know that this is the best place in the world to live. They know it because they are here. They want to keep it the best place in the world to live. The only thing that threatens that is a Labor government. The biggest threat to the lifestyle, security, enjoyment and comfort of Territorians is a Labor government, because when they make these policy announcements they clearly demonstrate that they have no clue. They are a fraud on the community.
It is a disgrace to see Labor here at the moment. You would think, after almost four years in opposition you could come up with one or two novel ideas, but there is nothing. All we are promised from this opposition as a future government is more debt, deficit and crime, fewer kids going to school and more disadvantage in remote communities. That is the Labor way. That is what Labor governments do.
They are economic vandals and we see it time and time again. Every time we come into this place Labor says, ‘Why are you not you spending money on this? Why are you not spending money on that?’ Not once do they say, ‘We can find savings here and improve the lives of Territorians by doing this or doing that’.
It is basically copycat politics. What a pathetic effort to come in here and search through all the reams of indicators, latch onto the Sensis Business Index, which has a slight glitch in business confidence, and say the Northern Territory is going to hell in a hand basket. Shame on you mob for bringing this MPI to the House. You are a disgrace and Territorians deserve better.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, unlike the Treasurer, I believe that this is an extremely important matter of public importance. I thank the Opposition Leader for bringing it forward because what we have just seen demonstrated was a continuation of what we saw in Question Time, when we put some very important questions to the government with regard to business confidence in the Northern Territory, how people are feeling, how they want to go forward and the government’s answers to that.
When we put those questions to the government members today, they threw them back at us and said that we talk down the Territory. They wanted to talk about the last term of the Labor government. They did not seem to want to take people like John from Wanguri seriously. This is a real person, a genuine bloke doing it very hard, and having to make some very hard decisions with his family.
When we put these serious questions to government members about business confidence, as we are doing in this matter of public importance, they do not seem to take it seriously. They do not seem to realise that they have been in government, running the show in the Northern Territory, for the last three-and-a-half years. What have we seen in that time? I think the Leader of the Opposition put it very well. We have seen absolute disarray and chaos under this government. We have seen the most unstable, chaotic, dysfunctional government in the history of the Northern Territory, and that is a fact.
There have been multiple reshuffles, members of the government have left and the government has sold Territory-owned assets. They talk about debt and about where they are finding money in this place. You do not need to look much further than the fact they sold TIO, privatised the port and put up the power, water and sewerage bills by 30%, 40% and 25%.
These are the things this government has done to get to where it is today. We have had three-and-a-half years of this CLP government and this is where we are at. We have brought forward this matter of public importance because of what people in the community are telling us, and what people like John are telling us in our electorates. People are worried about business confidence going forward, having a job and where the Territory is going as they see the INPEX project starting to wind down. They are extremely worried.
Territorians across the Territory have shown they are deeply concerned about the direction of this government and have no confidence in its policies and actions. What they get from this government in response to their concerns – through the media, for example, which we have heard a lot of debate on in recent times, especially Mix 104.9 and ABC radio – are statements from the Minister for Business. On 4 February on Mix 104.9 he said, ‘You will find that in an economy people are up and people are down. It fluctuates quite though. The figures are actually quite good but there is always going to be someone who is not happy.’
I happened to speak to him before that interview and he is a genuine person in the community who is doing it tough.
Another caller said, ‘This is the quietest it has been in 10 years and I do not know what other figures people are putting out there, but you talk to tradesmen and the average worker around town and they will just tell you it’s quiet’.
The Mix 104.9 show on Wednesday 3 February and Thursday 4 February had caller after caller talking about the issues they are facing in the Territory. In my electorate, in the last week of doorknocking, I have heard a few stories from constituents and their worries about going forward. Those stories are very consistent with what we have heard through the media.
I spoke to a local builder last week and he told me that things are slowing down and not at the levels he was hoping for. I was speaking to a small-time fashion retailer the other day, and they said it is very tough at the moment and they cannot see a way forward. They are getting quite concerned about where they will end up, and they have been in this business for 10 years now.
I spoke to a tradie on Sunday morning who is fortunate to be in a government-owned agency and has a permanent job there, but the feedback from this person was, ‘I am glad I have a permanent job because a lot of people are knocking on the door, trying to get in and get a job because they are out of work’. Many people are worried about what is coming up in the future.
John from Wanguri has been referred to quite a bit in this place today, but he represents genuine sentiment and feeling in the community.
There are real concerns in the level of confidence going forward. This is something we want government to listen to. We want to see it take it into account. We want to see it working as hard as they can on these issues.
From the responses we have heard today in this Chamber, I do not get the sense that the government feels there are deep issues to tackle here. I have heard from them that apparently it is just an opposition conspiracy theory to talk the Territory down and that Labor did nothing in its time in government. We are not hearing much about government taking responsibility, pulling those economic levers – realising they have been doing this job for three-and-a-half years now.
The government has to understand that more people are leaving the Territory for interstate than ever before. A total of 3329 more people left in 2014 than came here, which is a massive gap.
Today we are tackling the issue of local employment and supporting local business. We have heard this government claim time and again that they support locals. We have heard them speak about how they spend many thousands of taxpayers’ dollars on trying to do exactly that. We have also heard about showcases they have coming up, such as a month of events designed to convince people that this government is committed to locals.
Actions speak louder than words. This government has shown form in denying locals the contracts they need to survive. Look at the Palmerston hospital, for example. That contract could have been won by local Territory companies.
Territorians built the Darwin Convention Centre as well as the extensions to the Royal Darwin Hospital over many years, but apparently government did not think Territorians were good enough to build the Palmerston hospital, a $150m job.
Let us turn to the Territory Insurance Office, TIO, a Territory icon that was owned by Territorians, employing Territorians for Territorians. It was an insurer that gave market options and competition, and provided fairness and understanding during events like the Katherine floods, cyclones and storm surges. It was there for Territorians through thick and thin. But, without any consultation, this government sold TIO. Now we have in place a major international insurer that does not have that level of commitment and responsibility to Territorians. That major international insurer has already shed 42 jobs. Let us see what happens in the future.
I am sure many members in this Chamber have heard from their constituents about insurance premiums going up. In just one stroke the CLP government destroyed local jobs and increased the cost of living for Territorians.
Let us turn to the issue of investing in businesses in the Territory. Let us look at the issue of travel agents in the Northern Territory. We heard through the Public Accounts Committee last week that the government is looking to give $40m worth of travel to an interstate contractor. It is deeply concerning when this government should be supporting local businesses, jobs and livelihoods, but its decisions regarding travel mean local businesses will suffer and close their doors.
Sandra Lew Fatt has been a Territory travel icon for 45 years. She, her husband Benny and their children have contributed to the Territory over many years. They are Territory icons and real treasures. Their business is gone and will have to shut. She has made clear what removing this income from travel agents will do. It will shut down local businesses and businesses will have to shed jobs. We will see office closures, business people will lose rent and it will add to office vacancy rates. In a media conference on Sunday, this is what Sandra Lew Fatt had to say about the CLP government, ‘This town was born again twice, once after World War II and once after Cyclone Tracy. Of small business people, my family included, that put this town back on the map again and Adam Giles has cut this all off from under our feet. Not just me, not just my family, other families that I could name. And that, I think, is simple. He does not deserve to be Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, a Territory that we locals know and love. He does not deserve to be in politics as far as I am concerned and the quicker he goes the better.’
Some strong sentiment was certainly expressed.
In order for these CLP government members to know what it means to support locals, they need to talk to locals. They will hear from locals who will tell it straight; they will tell members at their doors, standing in front of supermarkets and walking down the mall that people are doing it tough. They want to see investment in local businesses and do not want to see people like Sandra Lew Fatt going out of business. Labor and the CLP have issued policies relating to local business and the government wants to claim our policies are the same, but that could not be further from the truth.
The government may want to be the same as Labor, but it is not. We are both committed to a 25% local weighting, but that is where the comparison tips. Labor will implement an independent oversight board. The CLP says it will do the same, but does not tell Territorians it will only examine contracts worth $5m or more and that it will have no auditing powers. Labor’s board will be able to audit everything the government does, will not be limited to contracts of a larger size and will be able to look at the decision-making across the board, and audit and recommend training for procurement staff. Labor has a 10-year infrastructure plan to allow businesses to see well in advance what jobs will be released and when. It allows local businesses to plan for those jobs well in advance. The CLP refused to put in a 10-year infrastructure plan.
Labor’s plan has a pre-tender communication process with local businesses on jobs. There is no such commitment from the CLP. Labor has committed to assisting local businesses to joint venture for larger opportunities where this will help them gain those contracts. There is no commitment from the CLP. Labor is committed to publishing a long list of what goods and services are purchased from interstate so businesses can see what goods have a market under government procurement. This is not being done by the CLP and it has no plans to do so. These are just some of the significant differences between Labor’s approach and the CLP’s approach, but this is not the end of them all.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this matter of public importance forward. This is a really important issue across the Territory. People feel stressed going forward. They want to have confidence that government has a plan for the future to support local jobs, local business, industry and the Territory economy.
Mr STYLES (Business): Madam Speaker, I agree with one thing the member for Wanguri said, which was about being grateful to the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this matter of public importance forward. It gives those listening and watching a very clear indication of how out of depth the shadow minister for Business is, that is, the Leader of the Opposition. It is astounding how confused the shadow Business minister is. On the one hand, however, the member for Fannie Bay and Labor admit that what the CLP government is doing for the Territory and business is correct.
I want to deal with a couple of issues raised by the Leader of the Opposition. As the Treasurer said, the Leader of the Opposition tries to rewrite history. Sadly, all he does is demonstrate how little he knows about what is happening in the Territory.
He talked about gas to Gove. The people who run Rio Tinto came to us after some argy bargy that was occurring; they opened their books and showed us some facts and figures. When you are producing alumina at $2200 a tonne and the Chinese are selling it for $1800 a tonne, on every tonne you produce you are losing $400. That is how little the Opposition Leader understands economics.
When we discussed this matter with the people at Rio Tinto they said that all the extra gas belonging to the Northern Territory government would not save their business. In that period of time the Chinese had put an extra 45 million tonnes into the marketplace at $1800 a tonne. You cannot sustain that sort of a loss over a period of time. A Labor government can sustain that loss because you simply keep borrowing money. Look at what happened to Greece. When you continue to borrow all that money someone has to pay it back.
The Opposition Leader talked about housing. I have been doorknocking in Anula recently and I spoke to some people whose kids used to live with them. I was there about two years ago and the kids were still living with them. Both kids, who were living there with small children, now have their own houses. It was a pretty crowded house – upstairs and downstairs. They have been able to buy a house. Some women have come into my electorate office saying, ‘Thank you very much for lowering the cost of housing’. That is fantastic.
The member for Wanguri spoke about TIO. TIO, like every other company around the world, is going to what is called technical pricing. There is a shift in the world and we are no different. We cannot sustain what we were doing in that area. You cannot go against what the world is doing.
When the member for Wanguri spoke about this she said it was owned by Territorians, and it was. Your fiduciary duty as a director is to keep giving correct information to your shareholders. When the board of TIO came to the Northern Territory government and said it was in a situation where, if a major cyclone came through, it would be exposed for billions of dollars that it did not have reinsurance for. It had a total of $700m reinsurance that it was paying 33% of its premiums for. My understanding is that similar companies today which shift that to the world market – larger companies are down to about 6% of their premiums, which means they can lower the premiums. The member for Wanguri talked about people with increasing premiums. Some people are getting reduced premiums, but I do not want to dwell on that.
The Leader of the Opposition said there is no work; he said it is terrible and that we are in dire straits. We have heard a number of times today about what CommSec had to say about the Territory. The Opposition Leader talked about how we trashed INPEX. I do not know how the Leader of the Opposition sleeps at night; I have never heard anyone on this side trash INPEX. It is wrong to suggest that is the case.
I accept that they did the negotiations for INPEX. He says it is great and they support it, and that we rubbish it. The only person rubbishing INPEX is the Leader of the Opposition. He talks about jobs creation. INPEX is looking at onshore gas exploration. If it can get gas to process, it will buy gas, process it and supply it to people. If you have a gas moratorium, what happens? INPEX does not build the next train so there are fewer jobs. If you want an ongoing economic development plan – by introducing his moratorium, the Leader of the Opposition has killed off any plans for economic development the Territory may have. You scare people away so they go to other parts of the world and invest there, and our children and grandchildren will then miss out.
He talked on the radio the other day about his support for INPEX, but he is being very selective. He mentioned a woman from Totally Workwear, and he quoted part of this interview. I will read part of it because either the Opposition Leader does not listen, has selective hearing or simply does not want to talk about this part of the interview:
- INPEX says they will be at the peak amount of workers in the next quarter or so. I think there will be about 8000 people here. Has INPEX had a positive or negative effect on your business?
She said:
- Well, I personally believe it has had a negative effect. We have not received any direct sales from INPEX. Very early on when INPEX came we did a quote for JKC with only a 5% mark up and could not even win that job, so I am at a loss as to how people are making money selling to INPEX.
I am a bit surprised that he did not talk about more things from that interview. Many businesses in this town are doing business with INPEX and JKC. The people I talk to say we are doing quite well, and I acknowledge the people who are doing it tough. In a dynamic economy, like we run in the Northern Territory, the government works very hard to make sure we level out the peaks and troughs. But for every person out there who may not be happy with the economy, there are plenty of others who are. There are plenty of others who do not want to live in a debt-ridden Northern Territory.
Look at Greece. If you continue to borrow as Labor had planned to do, eventually you have to pay it back. The Leader of the Opposition talks about consultation, and he talks about his business summit. I am surprised that he will wait until after the election to find out what business wants. We have already been out there. Last year we consulted extensively, trying to sort some of the issues we inherited from the previous government.
The member for Wanguri said we only want to talk about the last term of Labor. I am happy to talk about the whole term of Labor because, after 12 years, what did we end up with? We have heard about some of the problems across the portfolios we inherited. When you look at some of the things we have achieved you will see we have had excellent results in achieving better outcomes for Territorians across most portfolios.
The Leader of the Opposition says Labor delivered the railway. Again, I do not know how he sleeps at night. He obviously does not read his history books. It is like the CLP saying, ‘We delivered INPEX’. I acknowledge that they started the LNG project with ConocoPhillips. From there on we had an established industry which made it more attractive for people to come here, but all credit to the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, for getting that project here. For the Leader of the Opposition to then claim that he got the railway as well is nonsense. For those listening, Google the history books and you will see that he is totally incorrect.
The member for Wanguri spoke about John from Wanguri, and I feel for John. I am sure that if he spoke to some of the employment agencies around town – I do not know what industry he is in. Some industries come and go, and some are dynamic. I was talking to someone recently who mentioned a friend of theirs who used to have a DVD shop. They ended up going out of business because people now download movies online. I made the comment, ‘Are they blaming the CLP government for that loss or are they blaming Labor for that loss?’ The thing is, some businesses are dynamic.
For the member for Wanguri to say this is what John is saying – we do not know John. I cannot even comment on what industry he is in, but if you listen to the member for Wanguri we are in dire straits and the sky is about to fall in. The good thing for the Northern Territory is that is not the case. We have a plan.
One thing I am encouraged by is that the Leader of the Opposition’s jobs plan endorses what we are already doing. The Treasurer went through a list of things Labor has endorsed which we are already doing. Either the Leader of the Opposition does not read what the government is doing, has no idea about the good things the government is doing for the Territory or is trying to be cute and say these are all their ideas.
It will be interesting to see, and I put this challenge to them, if they go to the next election saying, ‘The CLP copied our policies’. You need to look at the date we announced the arts plan for Alice Springs, the gas pipeline, the railway to the east coast and the 10-point business plan. I cannot believe the Leader of the Opposition is saying, ‘This is our plan’. He is only demonstrating that we are on the right track.
When they do these MPIs, I suggest they have a look at what they are talking about. Even in the Chamber today, it would appear that Labor is on a pathway to claim that the CLP is copying what they are doing.
I put that challenge out to them, and I ask those who are reading this to look at the dates things were done. Last year we announced the procurement claims. When you talk about the fact that we do not support local business, you could not be further from the truth, so you need to look at the business plan again. It is about supporting Territory businesses. We consulted with people a lot last year. For instance, we had procurement roadshows in Darwin, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Katherine. These roadshows provided direct engagement with more than 200 Territory enterprises.
In relation to supporting local business and our Buy Local campaign, we surveyed businesses and we had more than 500 written responses from individual businesses and local industry associations.
We have consulted. The Leader of the Opposition has admitted today, in this MPI, that he will go out after the election and find out what business wants. I assure everyone listening that we have already consulted with hundreds of businesses and received written submissions from more than 500 businesses about what they need. We do what they ask. It demonstrates that this government is listening, paying attention and developing policies that are responsive to what Territorians need.
The Buy Local campaign – the 25% loading is the highest in the country and I note that Labor will now try to match that. I throw this question out to those opposite when they talk about economic development: how many members on the other side have owned and operated a business? I would be interested to hear how many understand what business is about, because about 60% to 70% of people on this side of the House have owned and operated businesses. How many on the other side are aware of what it is like out there? How many people understand the changing dynamics of the economic environment in which we live?
As the Treasurer pointed out, the OECD countries are experiencing some headwinds. We are not immune from that, but we are the place with the lowest unemployment in Australia and you can get a job here if you are looking for one.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I knew I had to stand up and say something after listening to the diatribe from the member for Sanderson, who started out by providing us with a lecture on economics and how Rio Tinto does its business.
He has obviously had a bit of a thought bubble, because the Minister for Business represented the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, who at that time was Terry Mills, at a major celebration in Nhulunbuy in February 2013 to celebrate the gas to Gove deal. Rio Tinto, with the Territory government, had very publicly announced that a deal had been reached to provide gas to Gove. Just about every member of that Cabinet came to Nhulunbuy, held meetings and sought out any photo opportunity that was going. Good on them; why not? Terry Mills had done a deal. He had worked for many weeks on it and had secured gas for Gove.
Securing a gas contract for Gove, which could have kept the refinery operating because it was important for the company to get a cheaper supply of energy, would have doubled the gas market in the Northern Territory. The members opposite know that to be a fact. Contracted gas to the Northern Territory government, from the Blacktip gas fields in the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf, was what that deal would have achieved. There were many accolades when that deal was announced after several months of enormous anxiety in that community. It was not only about the impact it had on businesses, but on people’s lives and mental health issues. I cannot remember the date, but it was in February 2013; I witnessed what people went through when the former member for Blain, former Chief Minister Terry Mills, announced that deal.
When the gas to Gove celebration was held, government invested heavily in providing a live act. An ABBA cover band, Bjorn Again, performed, and it was fantastic. Hindle Oval in Nhulunbuy was jam packed. Families, kids, picnic blankets – I am sure burgers were being sold or given away. It was an alcohol-free night, a family night, and the sense of relief in the community on that night was palpable. People in that community did not care about the politics of it. They were prepared to congratulate Terry Mills and the CLP government for doing a deal that would enable continuation of the mining company and jobs in that community.
I am sure the minister remembers it well because he was there representing the Chief Minister. He was the only man there in a tie, I might add. He now lectures us, saying, ‘Oh, Rio Tinto; if you knew anything about economics and costs you would know this is why you could not do it.’ Shame on him.
What a different story he tells now, speaking in this debate and defending this dreadful government, saying it is doing wonderful things for the economy. The reality outside this House, as seen in the daily newspaper and heard on talkback radio, is that the Northern Territory is going backwards. There is nothing happening. This place has flatlined because we have a divided government in disunity and they do not like one another. We have had a revolving door through Cabinet of how many Health ministers? Four or five. How many Education ministers? Four or five. How many Chief Ministers? Two-and-a-half – let us not forget that. What does this do to the confidence of a jurisdiction? What does it tell the business community when the government is such a rabble and members are so inwardly focused on themselves that they cannot do the job?
People will not invest. When they make decisions they say, ‘Yes, we have a deal, Rio Tinto. You can have a portion of our gas, which we will sell to you commercially. We are not giving it away.’ Then there is a change of Chief Minister, and on a public holiday in July, Darwin Show day, he pulls the rug out. He reneges on the gas deal and does not even bother to tell Pacific Aluminium that he has made that decision. I know that because Pacific Aluminium was on the phone to me that day.
I will not be lectured by this government and this useless Business minister about how things are rosy and members on this side have no idea what they are talking about, because it is not true.
The Leader of the Opposition, Michael Gunner, a Territory born and bred man, knows what it is like to be in local business. If you have not heard Michael’s story, he was born in Alice Springs, schooled in Tennant Creek and did his senior schooling in the Northern Territory. His family was in business. He knows what it is like to do it tough.
I have worked in business. I worked for the largest employer in the Northern Territory. I have a fair idea about how Nabalco, Alcan, and Rio Tinto operations worked in the mining sector. I worked there for 11 years. I spent longer working in the mining sector than I ever did in a classroom. It is where I met the Speaker, the member for Goyder. She was involved in the mining industry as the head of the Minerals Council of Australia. So do not come at us saying we do not know about the business world and what is happening outside of here.
We consult. Last week people were turned away from a function that the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Fannie Bay, had called. There were 110 business and community leaders who arrived at this function where he spoke about the Northern Territory jobs plan and Labor’s plan. At that event he delivered a plan, and questions were answered on the back of three years of travelling around the Territory talking to Territorians and understanding their issues. That is what this opposition has done. Every one of the members on this side of the House, in the Territory Labor opposition, talks to and listens to people. We do not sit in a room and dream up something we think is a great idea. We do not do stuff just because we are trying to support certain mates in businesses. We develop plans based on what Territorians tell us.
It is good for every member of parliament to spend time in opposition, have a spell on the cross benches, see where it was you might have gone wrong in government and reformulate those plans. We have seen this government sell TIO with no mandate, a taxpayer-owned asset. Since then we have heard some announcements, because we now have a cashed-up government. We have also seen insurance premiums go through the roof.
I have not heard anything further from the Treasurer, who is out of a job as of 27 August, about the plan he had to buy back the properties for which people can no longer afford the insurance premiums. These are very real stories, like the one from John on ABC talkback radio, a very real Territorian and constituent in Wanguri, about what is going on. That lot over there just laughs. They do not believe it. They think they are only stories. ‘Where did you get that from? That is not what people are telling us.’ What a joke they are. The sale of the Port of Darwin – it is a 99-year lease so you might as well call it a sale. Another publicly-owned asset has been taken away from taxpayers. We no longer have control over the port because there is a long-term lease on it.
In regard to business confidence and stimulus for Nhulunbuy – I have to go back to my own electorate because those are the people I represent. The Education minister at Question Time today talked about a boarding facility that was announced. We know this boarding facility has been coming for some time. Let us face it; it was announced as an economic stimulus when the government was scrambling to find an alternative and new economy for Nhulunbuy after it pulled the gas deal and closed the refinery, and more than 1200 jobs were lost. Everybody knew from the outset that the announcement of the boarding facility was all about an economic stimulus. Then they tried to back it up by saying it was about improving student outcomes.
I know this boarding facility is coming and it will provide a stimulus for our community. Norbuilt is a Territory-owned company so good on it, but there were businesses hanging onto that contract. We have major contractors and building companies which were really looking forward to that project. The fact it has gone to a larger contractor outside of the community will be a great source of income.
The Minister for Education, in his contribution in Question Time today, said that students in that region could access a first-class facility for secondary education for the first time. I cannot begin to tell you how offensive that will be for schools, teachers, families and school council members in places like Gapuwiyak, Yirrkala, Ramingining and Milingimbi. They have been told, not consulted, at some kind of catch up consultation process that they can no longer offer the NTCET at their schools and will have to send those children to board in Nhulunbuy to complete their senior schooling, or they will just be doing literacy and numeracy programs in their senior school.
That is an incredible source of disappointment. It is a slap in the face for the people in those communities who may have come around to the idea of a boarding facility and sending their children away, if they had been engaged from the outset in some semblance of a consultation process. Sadly, that consultation process was put in place long after a decision had been made. Let us face it; this is how this government operates. CLP members do not consult; they are a ‘we know what is best for you’ government. They make a decision about how things will be done and then pretend to consult after the fact. I have noticed in their media releases in more recent weeks that we are seeing more words like ‘consult’. ‘We are consulting with Territorians; we are listening to Territorians.’ Hello, for the last three years we have not seen any of that. All of this reflects the feeling in the Territory now and the lack of business confidence.
People are really worried about their future. Those who have jobs are thankful to be in that job. As the Leader of the Opposition said, if you do not have a job or if you lose your job in the Northern Territory, you will have no choice but to go. Massive price hikes were introduced in spite of the government saying, on an election promise in the lead up to 2012, ‘We will reduce the cost of living’. They were far from it. Power prices, utility prices, motor vehicle registration, you name it, all have gone up in price.
In regard to business confidence and economic stimulus, I go back to my electorate. There was $13m allocated for an ED upgrade to the Gove District Hospital. It came out of the federal budget which was handed down in 2011-12. It has still not been delivered. The funding has been almost halved; it is now in the vicinity of about $7m and it has still not started. That speaks volumes about how useless this government is at managing major infrastructure projects, case in point being Palmerston hospital. Nobody in the history of the Territory will ever forget the story about the hole that was dug and filled with concrete as a media stunt to distract people from the fact the hospital is long overdue, and which we now learn will be overspent.
This government has failed miserably when it comes to delivering capital infrastructure. There is a massive works program in the department at the moment, and they are racing towards the election, which is some six months out. For all things such as the revoted works they have not been able to deliver on, and for any other announcements they have made, there is a mad scramble of activity to try to get things out the door.
This government has done absolutely nothing for business confidence – quite the opposite. To be honest, we are all waiting with great interest to see what will happen with this minority government in the coming weeks, knowing that the Chief Minister, the member for Braitling, is the most unpopular Chief Minister in the history of the Northern Territory. He is regarded as arrogant and untrustworthy. Goodness me, I hope people are reading the document I tabled at Question Time today from the focus group regarding your On Track campaign, because that pretty much sums up how people are feeling about the current government. You will really struggle under the member for Braitling’s leadership and I dare say it is only a matter of time before the member for Brennan puts his hand up. Who knows?
Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to talk in this debate.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for introducing this.
Listening to some of the speeches this afternoon, I feel like the government members are fooling themselves. They have concentrated on the big picture and have forgotten the little people. The Minister for Business and I were on the Katie Woolf show about two weeks ago discussing this issue. I asked how many ministers have been out knocking on doors. Have they been out into the East Arm and Winnellie areas and talked to people? The impression I got from the Minister for Business was that there have been a few ups and downs, but generally speaking we are doing really well.
After we left, Katie Wolfe asked listeners to phone in to make comment, and she said she was inundated with calls from businesses. A number of them were anonymous because they did not feel it was good to give their name out in public. She gave a couple of examples; one was a scaffolding company that has been here for two generations and is going broke. Yet at the big new Gateway development in Palmerston you can see scaffolding. Do you know where it comes from? Cairns.
Is the government concerned about that? All right, it is a private development, but that is the bread and butter of people and businesses in our community.
She spoke of another woman who rang and said she is struggling to put food on the table because business is so bad. Sometimes we talk about businesses in Winnellie and Berrimah but there are also shops. Have a look around the Mall. Why have some of the shops closed down?
I have been here long enough to know that when the Labor Party was in power and the CLP was in opposition, the CLP would continually use the Smith Street Mall as a way of saying the economy was in a dreadful state.
Has anyone been to Anthony Plaza? It used to be a lively place, but now it is dead as a doornail. There is some activity that Gwelo has put into the old Woolworths site, but do you really think the economy is booming in the Smith Street Mall? Maybe when the odd ship comes in it might help.
I remember when the boot was on the other foot; the CLP was getting stuck into Labor because of the empty shops. It concerns me that the government does not know what is happening on the ground.
I met a supplier in the industrial area on Thorngate Road last year. It was when I was dropping off my newsletter. He said to me, ‘We had a meeting with the Chamber of Commerce. We were all concerned that we were going broke.’ If local companies are going broke, that means local people are leaving the Territory, local kids are leaving the schools and partners or spouses may be pulling out of a job. That affects the economy.
After three-and-a-half years the government decided we should buy local. I raised the issue that I had seen tender documents in Canada where there was an emphasis on ensuring either the town or the territory had an advantage when it came to these contracts.
The government had a procurement advisory board, which it got rid of last year. It was made up of government and private sector representatives, which would be ideal to give government advice on retaining jobs in the Northern Territory through a sensible procurement policy.
What have we done now? We have found out there is a problem. We removed the policy advisory board and I am not 100% sure why. Instead of then using the existing Procurement Review Board we have decided on a bit more bureaucracy, and we ended up with the Local Benefit Advisory Panel. One could ask why you did not keep the procurement advisory board in the first place, which could have told you these things. Why did you not use the Procurement Review Board? Perhaps it could have done the work of the Local Benefit Advisory Panel.
We have scrapped one board and introduced another one; talk about bureaucracy. One issue you have with too many boards is you get people with a conflict of interest in a small town like Darwin, or a small constituency like the Northern Territory.
I have been told that about 20 years ago, when any contractor applied for a tender, they had to describe who would work for them and where they came from. Were they a Territory subcontractor? They had an advantage in employing Territory subcontractors, and if they won the job they had to show that what they had promised when they got the tender was who they were employing. The idea was that it would benefit local companies. As time went on, and both governments are probably to blame, that started to disappear. When the CLP came to power it disappeared altogether.
There has been a lot of talk about the big picture. I have no problem talking about pipelines, gas and the creation of jobs. All governments and oppositions will talk about that. We are in an election year, but does that help the scaffolding company? Does that help the small shop that is struggling for business at the moment? I do not think so. If the government genuinely wants to find out the state of the economy, I want it to spend money like it did on the Department of the Chief Minister’s communications research. This stuff, to me, is a waste of money. You spend all this money finding out whether your communications strategy is any good. The best way to do that is to wait for the election.
I would rather you spent money like that by handing it to a business and asking what it thought of the economy in the Northern Territory at present. I do not think you would get a very good answer. Yes, some businesses are doing well. Some people have benefited from INPEX, but many have not. I do not think the government understands that.
I heard the member for Fong Lim, the Treasurer, say he is in contact with business every day. They must be different people to the ones I was in contact with. They were just ordinary people who were struggling. I was at East Arm a couple of months ago and looked at the number of vacant blocks with a For Sale sign. It was not that good.
We know there are ups and downs. The Minister for Business said we live in an economy where there are ups and downs, but do not gloss over the issue. By all means promote the Territory, but do not promote the Territory and avoid the reality. The reality is that there are small businesses which are struggling.
I was talking to someone about the way government does projects in the Northern Territory, and it was interesting. His concern was that the government does not have enough skilled people in the departments to deal with major projects. He feels that when you get a major tender which goes out to contract for design, there are not enough people within the department to make sure that design is correct. He even said they have not had an electrical engineer in the department for about 15 years. If you look at a set of plans for a complicated building, you need someone to understand the electrical side of the building.
If you do not believe me, the proof is in the pudding; if we do not have the skilled people we should have, you will start to get variations in contracts. The taxpayer will have to pay for that because we do not necessarily have enough of the skills to make sure when these major jobs go out that they are done correctly. If we still had a procurement advisory board, some of these issues might have been taken up by the government.
I support the government on the Buy Local Plan, but this should have happened ages ago. It should not be happening three-and-a-half years into a government operation, and it should not require the setting up of another piece of bureaucracy, that is, the Local Benefit Advisory Panel.
The people are employed; do not create more bureaucracy for whatever reason. Keep it simple, set out the requirements for buying local, use an existing board and do not expand bureaucracy beyond what you need, especially when you are trying to help small businesses which are struggling and they see you employing more people and establishing new bodies.
I thank the member for Fannie Bay again for bringing this forward. As I said, it is great that the government is trying to initiate policy. I was at the Aboriginal policy session last night. The one area that still needs development is housing, especially on outstations. Self-help programs are important. If we do not do some work then we will continue to see overcrowding in houses in communities, where there is no future in regard to government supplying houses. We will also have people sitting around doing nothing, getting into trouble and smoking ganja instead of having an active lifestyle with some meaning, in other words, helping their community and having some pride.
That is an area the government needs to work on. That is where small business can work, because there will need to be people with a saw mill and block-making machines; skilled people will be needed to work in those communities. It is an area we can develop, but nothing was mentioned.
I have raised it with the Chief Minister and, as he said, there is a bit more work to be done on the housing policy, which is an area that would help develop jobs. On the one side the government has issues, and on the other side I am putting forward some positives to try to stimulate the market.
I also agree with one of the other speakers. If you want to have the First Home Owner Grant, put it on older houses. Let older people move out, as the Real Estate Institute NT said, and let young people move into those houses. By selling older houses you stimulate the economy. People will have to repair the house and paint it. All those things stimulate the economy. At the moment you only have one side of the economy, which is about new houses. Allow older houses to be used, or perhaps scrap the whole thing, but allow young people to get into the second-hand housing market. It is important for us to look at that.
I am glad we have an MPI today. I was worried that we would adjourn at about 3.30 pm. It is good that we have this discussion, because it is very important for the Northern Territory economy, and that we highlight the issues that need to be addressed.
Mr BARRETT (Blain): Madam Speaker, after listening to some of the information that has been bandied around the House today, I cannot help myself; I need to make a few things clear, particularly for those members opposite who probably do not understand the issues. They do not understand why the macro picture is the way it is. If opposition members do not understand why the macro situation is the way it is, that makes it really hard for them to formulate any kind of policy because they will be dealing with symptoms and not the underlying issues.
We need to look at the issue the Northern Territory is facing at the moment, how it works from an international and national level, and how it works at an interstate competitive function level as well as a local level. It is very important to understand. We cannot sit here and listen to frantic diatribes filled with emotion from the other side of the House and think it will somehow make up for policy.
Policy needs to be clear headed. It needs to be well thought through. It needs to take into account the entire macro environment so we use the most accurate information to create our policy settings going forward, which the opposition would have us believe are bad and that we are the worst government the world has ever seen. I think they should look at themselves in many of these regards. The history of the Labor Party in this country, and how it has handled things, is not exemplary.
Having said that, most of the issues that I will talk about transcend whether one is Labor or Liberal. They come down to looking at good economic management. How do we economically manage our environment with the limited levers we have available and do the very best we can for the majority of Territorians, which is why we are all here?
Lesson one in Economics 101 – economic is about achieving sustainable economic growth. That is what we are after; it is why are here and why we manage levers in the economy. It is about managing …
Ms Walker: No growth in two years.
Mr BARRETT: You should listen more and speak less.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 33; can the member for Blain refrain from making offensive comments?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Blain, please address your comments through the Chair.
Mr BARRETT: I shall endeavour to do so. The member for Nhulunbuy should listen more and speak less regarding these issues, especially if she wants to learn anything from the debate. They have had their chance to debate. It would be nice if we had our chance to bring some kind of balance to the frantic garble that has come across the floor.
I digress. I was speaking about economic growth before I was interrupted. Economic growth is what managing an economy is all about. We look at a few things within economic growth which we need to manage in this process. Sustainable economic growth means you work on an employment level which is as close as you can get to the natural unemployment rate of an economy. The natural unemployment rate relates to how many people are unemployable in the economy and how many people are between jobs. We are not looking at people who are not looking for work, cannot be employed or happen to be in the natural flux of between jobs. There is always a percentage there.
We look at natural unemployment rates as sitting around 5%, which is pretty normal in big OECD countries. If you get employment levels lower than this you tend to have inflationary effects. If you have unemployment rates higher than this you have disinflationary effects. The two things are not the same.
We are looking at the global employment issues that we are dealing with right now. We are dealing with a macro picture where unemployment is in a huge degree of flux. There are employment issues in first world countries, as well as in second world countries where it is becoming more of a problem. There was a riot in Chine recently where a group of workers went completely nuts and trashed a factory because they felt they were not being heard. I think it is a fantastic time for something like the labour movement to rise up in China and work with some of the workers there. I am not against a union movement where people are being abused.
However, when we look at employment and economic growth from an international level we also need to look at inflation at an international level.
Inflation is a strong guide because our inflation rate as a nation, in comparison to around the world, needs to be managed. You cannot have a growth rate that generates an inflation rate where you lose your terms of trade on an international standing.
I am not sure if the members opposite noticed, but the rest of the world is not in a good place right now. We have just come through the GFC and things are still quite slow. The United States economy, which is still four times the size of China’s, remains sluggish after all kinds of quantitative easing aimed at creating an inflation rate because growth was completely zeroed out. They were losing money on assets, which was wiping billions of dollars off the assets side of ledgers and creating solvency issues for major companies.
With slowing growth rates in the second world, particularly China, we have a commodities issue. The commodities prices, which drove the mining boom that was supposed to take us well into the 2020s, are well and truly not going in that direction, at least for the time being.
We have seen iron ore contract prices come off; we have also seen other major commodities prices, such as coal, which Australia based a lot of its survival on throughout the GFC, come off. We have seen nickel plants close down, most recently in Queensland.
Combined with the issues we are seeing at an international level, we have a national issue. We have an interstate problem because what we see in other states is a higher level of unemployment than here. We see a lower level of economic activity than here and many businesses are trying to get work elsewhere in the country just to get cash flow.
This has created some of the problems we are seeing, which the member for Nelson raised, in how the states are interacting with each other. At an interstate level, states are becoming a lot more protective. They are going almost insular and trying to create legislation to protect businesses within that state from competition outside the state.
We are not immune to that because we all know the very real problem that exists right now. Many interstate companies are undercutting local providers, which is causing a lot of the pain. I understand this problem and why we have it.
When we consider the interstate competitive and, dare I say, protectionist model, the Northern Territory needs to reciprocate. Protectionism ends up being more like a price war than anything else. It is not conducive to a good interstate competitive framework; it just makes things a lot harder.
We have interstate companies looking at the current definitions of local providers, or local provisions for local business, and they have found ways of getting around that. What we are debating is procurement policy that is trying to keep up with the different ways in which businesses get around that policy, because they have workers down south and elsewhere who need to be employed. They go after that dollar whether it is government or private.
I also see the issues surrounding local businesses. For example, when we visited manufacturing businesses – welders, for example, are an important part of our economy – the wages they have to pay their staff are about $10 an hour more than places down south. To keep workers working at their premises, local businesses have to pay an artificially higher wage to compete with wages that workers would be getting at INPEX.
Local providers have to quote jobs with these wage pressures on them. Interstate companies do not have these wage pressures because, effectively, huge sectors of their economy are in technical recession. They have a declining wage and workers who are very happy to be paid a lot less than workers here. What we see happening in manufacturing is providers looking to get things manufactured elsewhere and brought here on trucks. We see about three trucks a week coming from down south with light manufactured material on them, which could have been done here by any one of a number of local fabricators. That is a direct function of an uncompetitive situation that Territory businesses are in, which is due to the artificially high wages because of INPEX.
It would not matter what we did as a government. Yelling abuse across the floor and carrying on will not help. It does not matter who is in government because wages are artificially high right now. That will correct out and we will see it come back to some kind of normality, but I understand why the businesses are in their current situation.
What do we need to do? First, we need to assess it. What is our growth rate right now? Our growth is sitting at 4.4%, projected to be above 3% going forward. That is good. Inflation is sitting between 2% and 3%, which is quite low. When we look at the unemployment rate in the Northern Territory being as low as what it was – somewhere between 5% and 6% is stable, and we have seen an unemployment rate lower than that. We are doing well to keep inflation under control in the Northern Territory. Ours is a well-managed economy and there is no way of arguing that, no matter how loud you scream from the other side of the Chamber. It is being well managed.
There are problems; I hear that loud and clear from people in the manufacturing sector who speak to us. Saying our economic policy settings have failed is a misnomer and a dismissal of the truth behind what is happening at the macro level. The Northern Territory should probably be doing an awful lot worse.
It is not like we have just figured out this is a problem. The Department of Business, under minister Styles, has been working very hard on this because the procurement problem we are facing is a bit like cat and mouse. We need to build a procurement that works for people in the Northern Territory and gives businesses in the Northern Territory a fair chance when they are tendering for government work. That is very true. We need to make sure those procurement guidelines are not too protectionist because that is why we have problems. We see problems between Victoria and South Australia where they are being very protectionist. Queensland and New South Wales are also very protectionist. They are very angry about New South Wales companies crossing into Queensland and winning work, and Victorian companies going to South Australia and winning work. The economies in the north have employment and growth problems of their own.
The Northern Territory is doing well. Our Treasury department has its finger on the pulse. Minister Tollner has done a great job at pulling levers at the right time. Minister Styles is doing a great job of working through this procurement process to make sure this cat and mouse game – we are staying ahead of this from a procurement perspective. We need to continually work with our procurement process because businesses are chasing money to keep their people employed and they are working around that.
Minister Styles, I am pleased with the work you are doing. I want to see a way of moving this forward for local businesses to win things while facing the wage pressures they experience here. It is no surprise they are losing work, especially on the private front. People in the private sector can do their own procurement procedures. Much of that work is not being won and not being done by people in the Northern Territory, despite ample capacity to do it. It is price related.
What can the Northern Territory do? We do not want to lose our capacity. As a government we want to improve our procurement so we can help these guys ride through. I know our departments have been working hard to bring this forward.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Blain, your time has expired.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I rise to support the Leader of the Opposition’s matter of public importance. It is of great importance not just for Darwin and the Top End, but for the Territory, as the MPI says.
This sentiment of the loss of business confidence is resonating through the regions. It is great to discover today that the Treasurer of the Northern Territory has had an epiphany. He has admitted these are tough economic times under the CLP’s economic parameters, and he is drawing those perspectives to a global financial crisis. That is an interesting story because before today there was complete denial.
I go back to 2008. The Minister for Business challenged the Labor opposition and said we have no experience and do not know anything. We managed the Territory economy, and a Labor government managed the Australian economy, through the global financial crisis and became what the member for Blain was alluding to, the envy of the Western world. There was a focused attempt to make sure we did not go under. There was a fiscal stimulus strategy, and the rhetoric used by the CLP since it attained government – and it drops in and out – is around this projected debt. Territorians have come to realise that both sides had a plan, and now they have had three years of a CLP plan based on massive public asset sales to try to cash up for an election.
The CLP’s plan has unravelled because of a completely dysfunctional government, and you only have yourselves to blame. The public has lost confidence in you as community leaders. The story is coherent and has been told one day after another. The media in the Northern Territory has been having a field day because you have been providing that exciting narrative of dysfunction, disunity, scandal, gossip and innuendo. These factors are all playing into a very complex psychological position where Territory businesses, and many Territorians, have lost confidence in government.
The member for Blain talked about the nature of protectionist states. I remember when Labor had to put in plans to manage the global financial crisis …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 43 says that a debate on a matter of public importance should not exceed two hours. I am advised by the Clerk that the debate commenced at 4.48 pm, and it is now 6.48 pm.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, the time has now expired.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, tonight I speak about the increasing levels of antisocial behaviour in my electorate of Nightcliff, and what I believe is the CLP government’s failure to adequately protect the residents, visitors and businesses of this beautiful area.
The electorate of Nightcliff is uniquely placed between the airport and the hospital, and has large public areas, particularly along the foreshore. In the 2012 election campaign, the CLP government made a special contract with the people of Nightcliff. It promised to improve police resources, invest $2m to upgrade the police station facilities and open the Nightcliff Police Station 24/7. It also promised to reduce crime by 10% every year across the Territory. What has come of these promises? The Nightcliff community is increasingly frustrated by the antisocial behaviour and alcohol-fuelled violence we are dealing with every day.
Our police beat was removed not long after the CLP came to government, and last year the police station was shut down. That is completely backflipping on its commitment to the people of the Nightcliff community. We have not seen crime driven down by nearly 35% across the Territory.
Each week my office is approached by local residents, business owners and visitors to the area who are concerned about the levels of antisocial behaviour, the public drunkenness, and the impact it has. I cannot fault our police; they do a fantastic job under very trying circumstances.
Before the budget last year I wrote to the Chief Minister urging him to invest in permanent CCTV cameras in the Nightcliff community. Yet that commitment was not met, and since approximately July last year we have seen the mobile CCTV cameras based in Nightcliff. For the couple of weekends they have been gone, the community has cried out for them to return, and they have.
We have a government in denial about antisocial behaviour and public drunkenness. It closed down the police station that it promised would be a 24/7 station. When the local member, on behalf of the community, requested that the government invest in permanent CCTV cameras, she was told that was not needed or possible. Yet the mobile resource that was designed to move around the communities across the Top End was permanently placed at Nightcliff.
The antisocial behaviour and public drunkenness is at the point of being out of control. It is affecting shopkeepers and businesses. Police officers, who I meet with and speak to regularly, do the best they can, but the CLP government simply ignores the issue.
In a letter the Chief Minister sent to my office in May last year he acknowledged the antisocial behaviour hot spot, but what has he done to address the situation? Late last year an assault occurred in my electorate office where a man physically assaulted a women, leaving her quite upset and shaken. Although this was the first incident in my electorate office, sadly it is a very regular occurrence outside and in other parts of our community. My office, along with other local businesses, regularly calls police to incidents. Police work tirelessly but they cannot be everywhere at one time.
The Chief Minister has acknowledged that the Nightcliff area is a hot spot for antisocial behaviour, public drunkenness and alcohol-fuelled crime; however, he fails to take any real action to fix the problem. He has broken a promise and failed the people of our community.
Every day the impacts of antisocial behaviour are being felt. Business customers do not feel safe when they visit the area and it is impacting on small businesses. I have been speaking to shopkeepers who have to leave their shop doors closed and locked during the day as they do not want people coming in who may engage in this behaviour. Some local businesses have talked about moving because they cannot put up with the antisocial behaviour they are witnessing and which is deterring customers.
Businesses do not like to speak out against this because it may bring bad publicity. They come to me, as their local member, and share their stories. That is why I am raising them in this House tonight, on behalf of our community.
With the removal of the BDR there is wider access to alcohol and a further strain on police resources. The level of public drunkenness is simply unacceptable. We are seeing people accessing alcohol, drinking in public and getting drunk, which is fuelling the antisocial behaviour situation. When people are passed out next to the children’s playground you have to watch them to see if they are okay or whether you need to call an ambulance. It is just not acceptable.
We have situations where members of the community do not feel comfortable moving around the community. In my doorknocking last week, a couple of members of the community raised that they go on quite long walks along the foreshore out towards Casuarina cliffs and back down through Rapid Creek, and they no longer feel safe doing that. They feel the behaviour, particularly to do with alcohol, is very brazen.
When I asked the former, elected Chief Minister about the CLP’s commitment to make the Nightcliff Police Station a 24/7 station, he said that would happen. I quote from the Parliamentary Record:
- In the lead up to the election, you promised the people of Nightcliff the police station would be open 24/7. Can you please explain to the people of Nightcliff if you are axing their local Police Beat?
The answer I received from former Chief Minister Terry Mills was:
- … I thank the member for Nightcliff for her question. Perhaps it is hard to believe, but we will honour our commitments. Wait for the mini budget!
Well, unelected Chief Minister, some three years later we are still waiting. Our community has had enough. You have backflipped on your promise, closed our police station, and now we have had word from your CLP candidate for Nightcliff that the CLP has no intention to restore the police station to our community to help restore community safety to our streets. It is simply not acceptable to our community. I urge the government to review its decisions about the police station and the police beat, given the current levels of antisocial behaviour.
It has been increasing in our community, but these past few weeks and months have been particularly bad. Those impacts are far-reaching, affecting small business, the safety of families and our lifestyle. People do not feel comfortable in situations they previously would have, whether it is going to the local playgrounds or walking along the foreshore.
Madam Speaker, the Chief Minister is in denial about this issue. Every time I ask about the issue he tries to shrug it off and say antisocial behaviour is not an issue. It is an issue which needs to be addressed. The Nightcliff community urges the Chief Minister to reconsider the Nightcliff Police Station and police beat, and to put in place real measures that will help curb this antisocial behaviour and make our community a safer place.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, this is the final report card on the government’s four-year term since the NT general election. This year, 2016, is election year for the Northern Territory, where people decide on the performance of the government, balanced against policies of opposition parties and Independents.
The Country Liberal Party report card 2012 to 2016 testifies to glaring self-interest over good governance, lack of open and transparent process and a government not listening, constrained by the demands of its own elite.
Who can forget the Renewal Management Board, a concoction of the past CLP ‘in crowd’ paid millions of dollars to produce a financial statement lacking substance and credibility, now collecting dust on the shelf?
The CLP set a course of public asset sales, including the Government Printing Office, Darwin Bus Service, the Territory Insurance Office and the Darwin Port Corporation – raising United States’ indignation – orchestrated by the Chief Minister, Adam Giles, Northern Territory resident since 2006.
Government leads public sector policy; however, 14 CLP Cabinet reshuffles in three years and a revolving door of ministers strangled public sector management, with Mr Giles now returning as Police minister, allegedly, amid unresolved allegations against senior police.
Ministers set government standards with the CLP reaching historical lows: deposing an elected Chief Minister fronting Japan’s $34bn investment; a failed midnight coup – laughing stock of a nation; ministers sacked, resigning and behaving badly; and a Treasurer dumped from the party.
Underlying the litany of failures resides the alleged ‘boys’ club’ suggesting a culture of bullying, with four CLP MLA women deserting the party, political staff leaving and minority government clinging to power while ministerial travel becomes subject to court proceedings.
CLP insiders admit the government lacks the ability to sell a message. However, utility increases – 30% for electricity, 40% for water, 25% for sewerage – car registration and insurance hikes, and a minister spending $5000 on a late night Tokyo bar tab, all made the media.
The government avoiding scrutiny over political donations, water licences, public asset sales, employment contracts and ministerial travel amid frantic public comment, including social media, risk, a trust deficit, and lacks ethics and morality.
Territorians expect government to listen, enhance our public assets, protect natural resources, act with integrity and honesty and be open to independent inquiry, with politicians they can trust.
Mr Giles used taxpayer money to fund a $500 000 independent inquiry into my term as Minister for Lands and Planning in the Henderson Labor government, with which I fully cooperated. Chief Minister Giles deserves nothing less than an open and transparent assessment of his CLP government, or going to the polls, suggesting something to hide.
You know me: live long democracy. Bring on the election and let the people of the Northern Territory decide.
In the debate of the matter of public importance about Territorians and the Territory business sector losing confidence across the Northern Territory, the Minister for Business said some interesting words. ‘Some are doing it tough and others are doing it fine.’
This is a very difficult conversation for me to have, but Minister for Business, across the regions in that central Australian block where I live, work and travel, businesses have completely lost confidence in your government. They see the haves and the have nots, a culture of elite and privileged, and they translate that into the local context of not having a level playing field to compete for government work. I have had a number of regional businesses tell me they no longer invest and spend the money on important tendering for government work because they no longer have confidence that this government is fair, open and transparent.
These business owners are CLP supporters. Politically I do not have a problem in the electorate that I have lived in for 36 years. I accept everyone, and most people accept me. In politics, the traditional business sector that has always supported the CLP through the grand 27 years of reign and through opposition is now voicing concerns about what has emerged.
As I said, this is a difficult story for me. Local business owners who have operated for over 30 years have told me that it is not fair as processes are not open or transparent.
This has to be the responsibility of all members of government, Caucus and Cabinet, but most of all of the leader. If conservative Territorians voters who have built businesses, are raising their families and have invested in the regions have lost confidence in the integrity of a government then we have serious problems.
This is not – as some members today said – a rabble on this side with worthless contributions made up in back rooms. This is an opposition that brings forward the voice of the people. I am continually challenged by conservative people in the electorate about the governance and leadership of the CLP.
It will come down to an election which is a fair and to democratic process. We should thank our lucky stars that we live in the freedom and democracy of Australia and the Northern Territory. However, this conversation, as difficult as it is, should be thoroughly deconstructed by the current government before the election.
This is a matter of public importance now. This cannot wait until Territory businesses close their doors. It is not good enough for a government to rest on a statement that ‘some are doing it tough but others are doing fine’. Essentially that reflects a culture that is not healthy, open or transparent. There are economic levers that can be pulled and better equity created. It needs to start now and cannot wait for any further economic downturn in the small to medium business sector.
This is a particularly difficult conversation for Territorians and members of parliament. In a historical perspective, this government has what is left of a term to try to turn this around. It has, supposedly, money in the bank as there have been significant public asset sales. It has important levers it can adjust to start to feed that small to medium business sector.
The Leader of the Opposition has issued important statements already. In an election year it is almost unheard of for an opposition to provide its plan and policy. It is a conversation we have with the community. It is so much more doable from the government side than the opposition side. It seriously needs to be done before businesses close their doors, because in the Northern Territory it does not mean that family will relocate to new employment in the next suburb. It generally means that family will pack the trailer or the truck and leave the Northern Territory.
We have been witnessing record movement south in relation to many different factors, but essentially they all relate to this tough economic circumstance, the cost of living and, as the member for Nightcliff said, to challenges within our society such as antisocial behaviour.
Madam Speaker, if there is one lesson I learnt in government – and I learnt many – there are no excuses; the buck stops with the minister. There is no side step; it is your responsibility as you have been elected to do the job. You have a short space of time left to make that turnaround. On behalf of Territorians who are seriously concerned I urge you to take that leadership and make the change.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, tonight I intended to make an adjournment speech to celebrate Steve Rothwell’s retirement from his position of Chief Fire Officer for the Northern Territory after a stellar 38-year career across a number of jurisdictions. However, even Steve would understand if I bumped him until tomorrow to respond to some of the things the member for Nightcliff raised tonight.
For the record, under the CLP government the Northern Territory Police Force has established well-resourced and structured strike forces focused on combating volume property crime and recidivist offending.
Strike Force Trident operates across the Darwin metropolitan command in Darwin, Casuarina and Palmerston. This strike force is well resourced with dedicated officers who track and monitor recidivist offenders utilising an intelligence-led approach. Strike Force Trident has a primary focus on reducing volume crime, particularly unlawful entries, through to the targeted enforcement action on recidivist property crime offending and volume crime. Strategies to achieve this include early detection of offenders, supported by quality forensic examination, expedited fingerprint analysis and a collation of intelligence product. The Forensic Science Branch assists by prioritising fingerprint identification to allow for early arrests.
Soft-on-crime Labor and the quasi-Independent shadow Labor leader, the member for Karama, would tell you not to bother with ‘gammon statistics’. We know that statistics is how we operate, and they are not based on lies.
As reported on the news tonight, the current published year-on-year crime statistics for house break-ins in the Palmerston region for the reporting period 1 December 2013 to 30 November 2014 compared to 1 December 2014 to 30 November 2015 indicate an increase of 37.8%. That is 76 additional house break-ins over the 12-month reporting period in Palmerston compared to the year prior – 277 last year compared to 201 the previous year.
This is why police have ramped up their community engagement and provision of safety and crime prevention advice to householders. This partnership approach supports the exceptional work being undertaken by investigators in Strike Force Trident to drive down property crime by targeting and enforcing against repeat offenders.
The reality is house break-ins did increase in Palmerston last year, but total property crime across the Darwin Metropolitan Command is on the decrease thanks in no small part to the hard work of our relentless, hard-working officers. Total property crime offences across the DMC are showing a decrease for the 2015-16 financial year compared to the same period in 2014-15.
The number of reported unlawful entries with intent offences has decreased for the 2015-16 financial year when compared to the 2014-15 financial year, with a consistent downward trend evident throughout the year. Let us not forget, for the same reporting period in Palmerston, domestic violence-related assaults are down 21.6%, sexual assaults are down 26.3% and alcohol-related assaults are down 33.5%. That is remarkable.
Palmerston police mean business, and with more police on the beat under the CLP government we will drive down crime. Unlike Labor, we have a plan. There are 78 staff gazetted to the Palmerston Police Station, inclusive of front counter, youth engagement and administrative support capability. Palmerston operates a 24-hour, seven-day response capability from the police station. Palmerston operates a social order team, which focuses on high visibility engagement activities, predominantly in the CBD, engaging with youth in the area.
Palmerston proactively manages bail and arrest targets in the district, conducting daily checks on curfew compliance for youth offenders. Local capability is enhanced by Strike Force Trident with 26 operational investigators who devote up to 50% of their time operating in the Palmerston area.
Due to the representation of youths in property offending, Strike Force Trident and youth engagement police officers based at Darwin, Casuarina and Palmerston interact regularly with youth in both a proactive and reactive space across the Darwin metropolitan command. Trident officers proactively manage youth offenders in Palmerston, conduct day-to-day investigations and deliver night shift patrolling into the district every day.
Bail compliance checks with offenders on bail conditions are continually undertaken by Strike Force Trident and front line uniformed members. Where breaches are detected, enforcement action is undertaken and can include their immediate reappearance before the courts.
Strike Force Trident has made seven successful applications under the provisions of section 36A of the Bail Act for immediate review of offender bail granted by the courts over the past 12 months. In addition to this capability, Palmerston station is supported by the Drug and Organised Crime Division, the Territory Response Group, Traffic Police and other specialist areas which also conduct duties in Palmerston on a regular basis.
Regular execution of warrants target property and drug offending as stolen property is often a currency for illicit substances or sold for cash. Between 12 and 18 October 2015, police from Palmerston, Darwin and Casuarina – with support from Darwin Traffic Operations, MPU and Strike Force Trident – undertook a multifaceted policing operation in the suburbs of Palmerston city. Policing activities included community engagement, doorknocking residents in Rosebery, bail enforcement, traffic duties, reassurance policing and saturation policing. The operation resulted in 324 drivers being subjected to a random breath test, eight notices to appear issued, 15 traffic infringement notices issued, three individuals arrested, four liquor infringement notices and 313 residents spoken to. No unlawful entries were recorded in the suburb of concern – Rosebery – during the week.
Between 14 and 24 December 2015, police from Casuarina and Palmerston ran a public engagement and crime prevention operation, Operation Sunningdale 2, at the major shopping centres. Police utilised the opportunity to broadcast images of previously unidentified persons captured on closed circuit television committing property crimes. At least 10 individuals were identified by members of the public, directly leading to prosecutions for dishonesty offences.
Between 7 and 25 January 2016, police from Casuarina conducted Operation Bicosa 2, similar to the operation held at Palmerston in October 2015. Residents living in the area in the northern suburbs who had been subjected to high levels of property crimes received a safety package from police with a letter from their regional superintendent advising that a property crime had occurred in their area. There was a noticeable decrease in the reported property crime in these areas during the period of the operation, with positive feedback provided to police from members of the public appreciative of the information.
Police continue to focus on combating crime in Palmerston and across the Territory, and welcome any assistance or information residents can provide. Commander Brent Warren from the Darwin Metropolitan Command has publicly urged the community to work in partnership with police to stamp out criminality and antisocial behaviour.
Street patrols by residents are not the answer. The best way for the community to help fight crime is to report it directly to the police or through Crime Stoppers. Commander Warren said, ‘When crime and suspicious activity is reported to police they will investigate’. Offences reported to police are recorded and publicly reported. On a financial year/date comparison, unlawful entries are 20.7% lower for Palmerston and 24.5% lower in Casuarina and Darwin. Three weeks ago, on 17 January 2016, Superintendent Daniel Shean attended a community meeting with concerned residents at Carallia Court in Rosebery, which was coordinated by the member for Blain as a result of high levels of community concern expressed on social media. Twelve residents attended the meeting, which was addressed by Superintendent Shean. It was clear from comments made by community members that they had an inflated perception about how much property crime was occurring in their area. Education and awareness about the level of reported crime and the actions of police was provided for all attendees.
It is understood that a similar event is planned in the next fortnight. Police will again attend and provide factual information to the community regarding the level of reported crime and the actions of police. Yes, factual information, not gammon statistics.
Building on previous successful operations, planning is now under way to conduct Operation Bicosa 3 in Palmerston utilising a multifaceted approach of prevention awareness, engagement and enforcement to help improve community resilience, enhance the public perception of safety and deliver high-profile enforcement.
Unlike Labor, the Giles government is not soft on crime. Unlike Labor, the CLP has a plan and the policies. Under the CLP government, the Northern Territory Police Force established structured strike forces such as Strike Force Trident in Darwin, Casuarina and Palmerston, and Strike Force Vega in Alice Springs, to deal with property crime. These well-resourced strike force investigations focus on combatting volume property crime and recidivist offending and are getting results. Since July 1 2015, Strike Force Trident has made 631 arrests and summonsed 46 people to court for property crime.
Madam Speaker, two facts cannot be denied: we have more police on the beat today than we did under a Labor government and crime is down compared to when Labor was in government. Those are the facts, which speak for themselves.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Madam Speaker, being the member for Stuart and a minister has been a great opportunity for me to learn how to navigate my way through what happens here that other people do not see.
I am here to help my people, the Aboriginal people, have a better lifestyle, and to represent them. I am not negative; I am positive. I have always believed in being positive to make things happen. I do not want negativity to get in the way. I am here to make sure people like me are seen to be positive people who are here to give other people a chance to live life the way they want.
I will tell you good stories about what has been happening in the seat of Stuart. For me it has been a great year so far and it is looking very optimistic for the future. As you all know, I am from the bush and know the bush well. I know the problems and the issues faced by people living in remote communities. I also know that not every story from the bush is negative.
Since becoming the member for Stuart I have seen many new businesses start up. Many of these businesses are Indigenous owned and operated. I am pleased to say there are real signs that they are starting to thrive. Three in particular come to mind: MTP Contracting from Corella Creek; Triple P Contracting from Elliott; and Bradshaw & Timber Creek Contracting and Resource Co Pty Ltd.
These three Indigenous businesses have formed an alliance which is being championed by two seasoned businessmen from the bush, John Jansen and Greg Kimpton. The alliance is designed to equip the businesses with the resources to apply for large government tenders. They still work individually on their local projects, but they now come together to pitch for bigger contracts. By joining forces they are able to successfully compete for larger contracts. By operating across a large footprint, they will ultimately provide more Indigenous employment.
The range of support given to the businesses so far has improved their capacity to grow their individual businesses and employ, upskill and retain local Indigenous job seekers, many of whom are long-term unemployed job seekers. This alliance represents everything we, as government, are aiming to do in the bush: support those who want to work and encourage them to join forces with people there who are willing to help.
The Country Liberal Party remote contracting policy requires 70% of all contracts with civil and construction projects under $5m in remote Aboriginal communities to go to Aboriginal businesses. This is further incentive for people like Dan Jones and Gordon Jackson from the alliance.
These three businesses work cooperatively with regional councils, local authorities, RJCP providers, local Indigenous leaders and broader community members. They are bidding for and winning local tenders for building and maintenance, building remote infrastructure, fencing, mobile plant hire, road surfacing and roadside slashing and maintenance. The support networks are in the bush, and it is encouraging to see such a successful model operating in my electorate.
I was in Katherine last weekend and handed over keys for two slashers. These fellows were so excited. The Chair of the Northern Land Council, Samuel Bush-Blanasi, and the Deputy Chair, Wayne Wauchope, attended as well. They were proud to be part of the new champions who are willing to work and make sure there is enough work for our people.
The CLP focus on the bush and Indigenous economic independence is alive and well in the Territory. It should be recognised as a national leader in this area. This is just one example of many models which are starting to emerge. These are the models that have given us, as a government, confidence that Indigenous businesses are capable, reliable and serious about undertaking government contracts. I am so proud to be part of that as well in my involvement as the member of Stuart, encouraging and supporting them all the way. This is a growth area for the bush.
As the member for Stuart, I am proud that this Indigenous business model is being established in my electorate. I congratulate all of them, especially Mr Jackson. It took me going to Elliott for one meeting to give them the incentive to be creative and develop a working relationship with other partners who are long-time bushies who have lived and worked with Aboriginal people on cattle stations.
Madam Speaker, these are the people we need to connect with to make sure there is enough employment for everybody and that we all look after each other instead of dividing and conquering.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Stuart for her discussion about Aboriginal employment. As I mentioned before, there is a lot of scope for microeconomic reform in some of the smaller communities where they can create employment by building their own houses. In Arnhem Land they are already doing that. They have timber mills and are building their own houses. There are more opportunities in the Northern Territory for that to occur.
I will comment on the minister’s response to my question in parliament today which related to alcohol policy and specifically spoke about the 11 outlets in Palmerston which already exist and another four applications for liquor licences in the Palmerston area.
Even though there needs to be some much broader discussion in Palmerston about how many liquor licences there should be, the minister gives the impression that alcohol is like ice cream and we can have many shops selling alcohol. I did not hear anything about the government’s view on the number of alcohol outlets.
We used to have a moratorium and discuss the number of liquor licences in an area, but I had the strong feeling today that the minister was basically saying the Licencing Commissioner will look at it and there will be a little discussion.
The word ‘catchment’ was discussed. That catchment was very small. In these hearings some people were not allowed to be involved in the discussions about a licence because they were regarded as living too far away. As the local member, I was even told that when there was an application to put a boutique liquor outlet in Coolalinga which would have special brews and would open from 10 am to midnight. It sounded more like a pub than a tourism operation. I was told my comments would not be taken into account because I was not in the catchment area.
You need to allow broader community comment on alcohol and pokies. With planning, for instance, you can be in Alice Springs and comment on something in Darwin. I admit that it probably would not get much attention because of the distance. However, there are groups which live in a community and groups which deal with alcohol and gambling that should participate in some of these hearings. Perhaps they can submit a letter.
With the number of licences and the obvious lack of policy, it is important that not only the immediate community but the broader community has some say in where we are going with the number of licences and poker machines being allowed now, especially with the changes the government has introduced.
I noticed that on the Department of Business website there is a page called ‘Alcohol Policy and Strategy’, but I did not see any alcohol policy. It says:
- The role of the Alcohol Policy and Strategy is to:
develop alcohol policy and strategy across government.
We have a number of members from Palmerston. The Attorney-General, through the Department of Health, will be concerned about alcohol and the law. The minister for Police would be interested in an alcohol policy from a policing point of view. He also lives in Palmerston. You would have thought the policy and strategy would be controlled by the Minister for Business. Where is this strategy? The website also says:
- work with communities, government agencies and other stakeholders to develop and implement Alcohol Management Plans ...
Are alcohol management plans only for Aboriginal communities?
My concern is that the government will hide behind the Licencing Commissioner, saying it is her job to look at these issues. That is not right. The Licencing Commissioner works under the policy and direction of the government. The government sets the limitations on the number of licences and poker machines we should have in a community. What are the chances of people in a community or a suburb in Palmerston saying, ‘We would like to be licence-free’? Do they have a hope, or will the government say, ‘Oh no, if a local shop there applies for a liquor licence, it can have it because it needs to be on equal footing with the supermarket up the road’?
If people do not want pokies in their area, is it automatic that the local tavern will get them? My understanding is there is an application for some pokies and a takeaway liquor licence for the Flynn tavern – I stand to be corrected. They are building the tavern already and it is to have a restaurant. I wonder what will happen. After listening to the minister, is it a sure thing? Some people would like this tavern to be a non-pokie, non-takeaway licensed tavern, with a nice restaurant they can use. Is it automatic that under the government’s non-policy, which appears to be that anything goes as we must allow businesses here to have a level playing field, that the Flynn tavern will get what it is after? I will be interested to know the decision of the hearing when the application is completed.
I am concerned that we do not have a policy about issues that have social impact from the point of view of alcohol and gambling. I was interested in an ABC show some months ago which was a documentary on poker machines. I gather one of the legal firms is now looking at whether poker machines are legal because they are programmed to win for the owner. There is no sense of pure luck. They are programmed so that over a number of spins the owner of that poker machine will make money and you will not. You might make money for a short period but they showed the mathematics; they are programmed to take money. That is not gambling; that is ripping people off.
There needs to be real discussions about the dangers of poker machines. I might throw $10 in, have a bit of fun and go home. There are many people who do not. I also wonder whether we should be asking whether these machines should be allowed if they are not a lottery and are not controlled so it is a pure fluke which way the numbers come up. But, that is not the case. They are not pure fluke; they are controlled by computer and in the end the owners – as you can see from the records – will make lots of money out of these poker machines. There needs to be some real discussions about whether poker machines are a fair type of gambling. Horses run up and down. Maybe one jockey falls off and one jockey pulls it up a bit, but you have some control over who you pick. It is the same with TattsLotto or Keno; you fill in the numbers and you have some chance. But with poker machines you press a button and it is up to the computer to decide.
The government needs a policy, not just for Aboriginal communities but for the general community as well. It needs to say what its policy is before the next election.
Madam Speaker, quickly before I finish, I note the electoral legislation will be debated tomorrow but I am not debating that at present. I am disappointed that the government is bringing it forward. I hope members consider it properly. I believe it is a flawed bill and I hope members of the government consider it before they vote on it tomorrow because I do not think it is a good for democracy in the Northern Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, this evening I talk about Australia Day celebrations in Nhulunbuy on 26 January. It is always a great and very special day in our community. For the last few years the events of Australia Day, including the official part of the day with the swearing-in ceremony of our new citizens as well as the Australia Day citizenship ceremony, has been held at our town pool. We have been fairly blessed in the last few years. I do not think we have been rained out for several years and 26 January this year was no exception.
I thank Nhulunbuy Corporation CEO, Angela MacMiIlan, and her very hard-working staff, including Anna McDonald, who does a lot of work in liaising with community and sporting groups. Anna had a very big hand in making sure the events for Australia Day ran smoothly. That is not to say there were no other corporation staff who were involved because there were.
The day commenced with a 5 km fun run and walk at 6 am, coordinated by our Nhulunbuy’s Runners North group. People who know me know that I do not do really early mornings and I certainly do not do fun runs. If I had been able to get out of bed I would have done the walk but I confess that I did not manage to get there.
I was pleased to get to the pool in time for the 9 am start of the citizenship ceremony and the swearing-in ceremony.
I acknowledge the members of the Rirratjingu Clan who performed the welcome to country that morning; it was spectacular. I reckon there were probably 30 or 40 men, women and kids of the Rirratjingu Clan. There is nothing quite like watching the little ones who are painted up and wearing some of the ceremonial feathers. They are expert little dancers even though some of them look like they are only two or three years old. Congratulations to the Rirratjingu Clan, particularly to Wityana Marika, ceremonial leader, who always does a fabulous job. It was probably the highlight of the day for most people at the pool, being in the heart of northeast Arnhem Land and treated to this Bunggal and Manikay from traditional owners.
I was delighted to see that the Australia Day Young Citizen of the Year Award went to Ineke Wallis. Ineke is a very talented young woman who works at the East Arnhem Regional Council. She sits on the Chief Minister’s First Circles Council and has also been on the Youth Round Table. I have known Ineke since she was a little girl. She is a very talented dancer and her mother, Rachael, is the principal dance teacher with Arafura Dance. Congratulations to Ineke. It is a well-deserved award for the role model she is and the advocacy and leadership she provides on youth and Indigenous issues.
Leanne Parise was announced as our Australia Day Citizen of the Year, a well-deserved recognition for Leanne who happens to be an employee of the corporation but is probably as well known for her tireless work with Nhulunbuy Rotary Club staging community events each year. Her husband Pino is never far from her side and is an equally hard worker. I was pleased to see Leanne receive that recognition.
The Garland family was nominated and named in the Australia Day Community Event of the Year. As long as I have lived in Nhulunbuy, which is more than 20 years, the Garland family has decorated their home every year on Halloween and opened their ‘haunted’ house to the community. The extended Garland family works hard to make a really fun night on Halloween. It was terrific to see them recognised for something they have done at their own cost for many years. Well done to the Garland family – Len and Karen, your kids and your extended family network.
I was delighted to be part of the Citizenship Ceremony. Angela MacMillan, the Chief Executive of the corporation, invited me to read the message from the federal Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Hon Peter Dutton. I was pleased to have that responsibility.
Then we witnessed the swearing-in of the following citizens to whom I wish to again extend my congratulations on becoming Australian citizens: Ms Monica Nyanlong-Aken; Mr Fahim Fahim and his wife Mrs Shaheen Fahim, and very special wishes to them as they are awaiting the arrival of their first baby; Mr Michael Ali Matrough and Mr Jason Abbas Hani Matrough, Michael’s son; and Mr Bastien Miorin, who has lived in Nhulunbuy for a number of years. He is a terrific young man and I am delighted for him and his family. He and everybody else who was sworn in on Australia Day in Nhulunbuy are delighted to be Nhulunbuy’s newest citizens.
I have a couple of other acknowledgements for the day. I acknowledge members of the Datjala Work Camp who worked alongside Nhulunbuy Corporation employees from the depot in setting up tables, marquees, the stage and decorations and flags. It is a great support they provide to our community.
The Arnhem Early Learning Centre, which we call the turtle school, was involved in doing face painting on the day. The local neighbourhood centre looked after the bouncy castle at the pool. It is important to acknowledge our Navy cadets from Training Ship Melville Bay, who conducted the raising of the flag ceremony, as they do at all of our RSL ceremonies and special days like Australia Day. I also acknowledge Grahame Deppeler, who devotes a lot of time to looking after our Navy cadets.
I acknowledge Woolworths, a major sponsor of the Australia Day activities around the country. It was great to have the Assistant Manager of our local Woolworths store, Jarrod Ferguson, attend. Thanks to their sponsorship, Amy Hetherington came across from Darwin as our Australia Day ambassador. Amy Hetherington is a very talented and upcoming young comedian from Darwin. I was lucky enough to see her perform live at the Henbury corporate lunch at the end of last year. It was great to have Amy, who had visited Nhulunbuy before. She made a few people laugh when she delivered her speech.
I am sure there is somebody else I need to acknowledge in the Australia Day thank yous. Of course, how could I forget? Chase Aston, a Year 11 student at Nhulunbuy High School sang the Australian National Anthem. He has the most beautiful voice and did a fantastic job on that day.
A few market food stall vendors arrived. It is very much a community event. It was a hot day and people were using the pool, but it was a terrific day in Nhulunbuy. Unfortunately I was unable to stay for the whole day as I had to fly out that afternoon to Darwin. However, I know once the events had wound up at the pool, the Arnhem Club held activities, including live music, as did the Walkabout Lodge and the boat club. It was a very special day.
I enjoyed the opening ceremony this morning. It is great to celebrate Chinese New Year as there is lots of colour and noise. With Darwin being a very diverse community with a very strong presence from our Chinese population, it is fantastic to see them involved.
I have to express my disappointment, however. I noted, Madam Speaker, in your address in the opening this morning you acknowledged the traditional owners. It is a shame because we are missing something when we do not have a formal welcome to country and the presence of the traditional owners, the Larrakia, on whose land this building and House of democracy stands. I would like to see in the future, when the parliamentary year opens and on very special occasions, the involvement of the traditional owners, perhaps performing a dance as they do in other places.
Last night I was at the Chief Minister’s function in the Main Hall where he launched the Aboriginal Affairs strategy. I did not get an invitation, but I snuck in through the back door because I could see a number of my constituents. It was nice to be welcomed to country by Bilawara Lee.
Madam Speaker, it would be nice to have something like that in our House of parliament. However, I am not for a moment taking away what otherwise was a special opening this morning. It was terrific to see Reverend Mauboy deliver the prayer and a short speech this morning, and to see that so many people were here to share the opening of parliament.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016