2010-06-10
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I thank my female parliamentary colleagues for wearing red today as part of a promotion for the Heart Foundation’s Go Red For Women Day, which is tomorrow and encourages women, and the men who support them, to check their health. I encourage all members to consider wearing red tomorrow for the cause. That would be particularly wonderful for the first day of the estimates process.
Continued from 8 June 2010.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, at the outset I thank the minister for the briefing he recently gave me and my colleague, the member for Braitling. It is an urgent bill and we support it.
The intention of the bill is to amend the Building Act to provide the Director of Building Control with powers to resolve an impasse in the buildings certification process. This applies to both commercial and private residential buildings. Before a building occupancy permit can be issued, a declaration stating the completed work complies with the building permit for that work must be provided to the certifier who issued the building permit. The declaration must be made by a person responsible for the work, and this declaration and other certificates must accompany an application for an occupation permit.
There have been recent problems - well-known, well documented, very public problems - caused when the person contracted to do the work has either: not completed the work due to death or loss of accreditation; gone out of business; been put into receivership, as was the case with Poretti Property Group in the Top End; or has completed the work but not provided the declaration or other certification.
The intention of this bill is to rectify this problem by issuing an exemption certificate exempting the work from a declaration or other certification if the building work has not been completed due to a declared event such as death, bankruptcy or insolvency, allowing a declaration to be made by a person other than the person responsible for the work, provided they are satisfied the work complies with the relevant building permit.
There are other amendments. One of them is the bill will serve also to validate exemption certificates which have already been issued by the Appeals Board. The legal advice the department received was that some past decisions, of which there were only a few, may not have been exactly legal so there is an amendment to validate those decisions so they are okay.
In general, the bill is welcome because there is more protection for consumers. I am slightly concerned with the requirement the person, or the family, may be required to get more technical reports which could cost them more money. They are already in a situation of emotional and financial stress, and perhaps government could consider an initial assessment of the work or the project, so it alleviates some of the concern and problems for that family.
I have spoken previously about the problems we had in the Top End with the Poretti Property Group, and the five families I was trying to assist in regard to that crooked and dodgy builder. I can tell you, the emotional stress on those families was just enormous. One family, in particular, with four children was very strained; the mother was completely beside herself. I am sure this legislation will go some way to assist that family to try to complete their house in Palmerston so that family can come together again.
An area of interest is a situation in Alice Springs - and my colleague, the member for Braitling, talked about the Carey Builders situation. It concerns me that the government allowed the certifiers to give building permits to this builder, even though he had not been registered for some 15 months. There seemed to be knowledge and an understanding this fellow was building and committing to building properties, yet nothing was done. If the department and the government is choosing to regulate the building industry - it does not matter what nature, shape or form – they too should accept full responsibility for what happens in regard to those regulations and the issuing of building permits, certificates, and things of that nature.
I am aware that the Building Industry Reference Group has met, and they have delivered a report to the minister. I know it covers the three broad areas of compliance, occupation, and consumer protection. I look forward to the time when that report is public with recommendations on how we can ensure the whole process of commitment to building, compliance, and occupancy is better for consumers, thus avoiding the problems we have had over the last 12 months of people getting into the system, building houses unregistered, doing unprofessional work, and being in the Small Claims Court every second week for non-payment to their contractors. Complaints are lodged with the department and the minister’s office yet, somehow, these crooked and dodgy builders continue to operate under the auspices of having a builder’s registration.
I also want to raise one issue for the minister’s benefit, which I hope he will take on board. There is still some concern regarding obtaining a building permit although work undertaken does not require a registered builder. The classic example is renovations of bathrooms or wet areas. There are various businesses in the Territory undertaking this work. As long as the work is under the roof line a person can strip it down to its framework and it could be hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of work. A building permit is required, but it does not require a person to be a registered builder. Again, we are leaving consumers in a vulnerable position because there are unscrupulous people out there who are doing this kind of work.
I have an example, which I will be writing to the minister about, where the work is unprofessional and unsafe. The electrical work in this particular case was done by a non-registered electrician; however, another electrician has signed off on the work. It is upwards of $25 000 to $30 000 yet the person who undertook the work was not a registered builder and they are now in trouble. There is no consumer protection for that kind of work. As long as it is under the roof line, they do not have to be a registered builder. As soon as they step outside the roof line, they do have to be a registered builder and there is slightly more protection.
Coming back to the department and the information that the department has put out, there are fact sheets on how you should go about your business getting permits. There are guidelines, there are check sheets if you need to do building work such as renovating a bathroom, changing walls, fixtures, plumbing, yes, you need a building permit, yes, you need insurance, no, you do not need a registered builder. Renovating bathrooms, no change to walls, fixtures or plumbing, do not need a building permit, do not need insurance, and do not need a registered builder. My concern is the bathroom where you substantially change things, including plumbing, electrical and sewerage. I am talking hundreds and thousands of dollars, and that person could be just me or you, minister, who does that work. There is no protection for the consumer, and I ask the minister to look into that and I will be sending documentation to support what I am trying to explain.
Madam Speaker, we do not oppose this legislation. It adds more protection to our consumers, and that is a welcome move. I thank the minister for the briefing he gave me and my colleague, the member for Braitling.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this on, on urgency, and also thank his advisor, Brett Brogan, for contacting me about this.
The case of Carey Builders has been an ongoing saga, and it is unfortunate it took this case to bring this matter to a head. As I understand it, the legislative amendments put forward are really cementing a temporary arrangement put in place by the Departments of Construction and Infrastructure, and Lands and Planning in Alice Springs for Carey Builders; a temporary measure that, in layman’s terms, was to say the work they have undertaken to date was certified so a new builder could come in without having to take on the warranty obligations and move forward.
That was a measure I have called for, and the government did come some way to doing that, although it was not effective. At the time, they said they would bring in legislative changes such as these in 12 to 18 months. I was highly critical of that and said it needed to be done on urgency, and they have responded, so I thank the government for doing that.
In relation to this bill, I wonder if the director should have the ability to issue an automatic exemption certificate for all outstanding work in the event of the death of a builder, a time almost as traumatic for those who rely on the deceased’s services as the deceased family. What this amendment bill does, if a builder dies or goes bankrupt, or runs away, the director of building can have an application made to him so an exemption certificate can be put over the building work undertaken so a new builder can come in.
There is a time process, and we want to ensure that that time process is not lengthy so people can move on fairly quickly. We do not have time parameters around this amendment legislation, but I would like to think the department could put in place, as well as a code of standards, other such words to ensure people have a reasonable time frame in which they could expect to see these changes have actually been made.
If I understand the problem correctly, when a builder dies or walks away, and so forth, other builders do not want to take responsibility for the work not done and have responsibility for it. I believe it would be good if the director was able to issue an automatic exemption certificate for a builder’s work in the event the builder dies, so the Territory would be accepting liability if that work was not up to standard, and so forth, through a building fund we have previously spoken about, and work could be transferred smoothly to another builder for completion.
I do not have any amendments at the moment. I am more than happy to go into committee stage and work through amendments line-by-line to see if that is possible to do, although it is not a stop-gap measure for supporting that, but I do think it is an opportunity to do that now so if a builder did die, the director could do an automatic exemption. I am more than happy to take advice if that could happen.
One problem I am wrangling with is allowing an automatic exemption certificate to be applied in the event the work already undertaken would need to be inspected for compliance. So, if there was to be an automatic exemption, that inspection would have to be undertaken at the cost of the homebuilder or the person who has engaged the builder and that would be completely understood.
If these changes cannot be made and accepted now, I understand that, but I would like to have the opportunity for them be changed in the regulations. If you are amenable to that concept, that can be changed in regulation later, rather than amendment of the legislation itself.
However, there would be nothing to stop the director contacting the parties who have the building contracts with the deceased to arrange an inspection of the work, like a corporation is able to in the event a nominee or director is unable to make a declaration. That is if the builder had died. This would remove the burden of searching for and arranging inspections by others.
Another issue of concern in the case of Carey Builders was the failure of the director to notify the people of the decision to cancel the builder’s registration which has led to much of the publicised expense and delays. While I understand that a person engaging a builder can inspect the register to check the builder’s status to ensure registration remains throughout the building project, they would have to check the register regularly to ensure the builder was still registered throughout the life of the building work. What I am saying is, when someone engages a builder to do work, that person undertakes an initial inspection to see whether the builder is licensed and so forth as due process one would expect to do, but if it takes nine months or 12 months or whatever the time frame is to build a house, no one can realistically expect a home purchaser to sit on the Internet every day to check whether that builder has had their licence cancelled. We just would not do that. Even politicians who read the Internet every day would not do that, so how can we expect anyone else to keep checking if that happens.
In relation to the building licences, as I understand it, there is no common anniversary for builders in the Northern Territory; I am happy to be corrected. I understand that you can have a licence registered at a different date throughout the year and your renewal comes up on different days. So, if you have five builders working on your project, there may be five different expiry dates you have to keep track of for those licences.
There should be an opportunity at some point in time, or you could set a 12 month period, when there is a common anniversary for all registered builders in the Northern Territory to re-register, published in the Government Gazette each year, and available to prospective clients. In the event the director was to cancel a registration, on the director’s initiative or by request of the builder during the course of that year, then the notification of that decision should also be published by Government Gazette so clients of the builder are aware their builder is no longer certified as licensed. That would have helped prevent much of the situation with Carey Builders. You could actually go further than just gazetting it. I do not think an advertisement in the NT News, Territory Regional Weekly, the Advocate and Alice Springs News, for example, would be too hard to let people know.
I also believe the government could go further. The government knows who has contracted a licensed builder to conduct works, and if that builder unfortunately died, went missing, or cancelled his registration, I do think it is too hard for the government, whether through the practitioner’s board or otherwise, to inform the owners of buildings under construction that the builder is no longer licensed - a process by which appropriate ‘consumer beware’ information could be triggered when it became known the licence was cancelled. It is a sensitive issue.
We will be supporting the government amendment. I was genuine when I said if you put in an automatic exemption upon death of a builder, I would be more then happy to go through that now; otherwise, if you could accept that, we could do it in a regulation at a later date, or the Country Liberals would move to that model if we were lucky enough to win government by 2012. There needs to be much more work in this area and more refinement in the planning process of government in the Northern Territory.
On a final note, in relation to the Carey Builders situation specifically, this amendment will solidify some of the temporary arrangements put in place for Carey Builders, and will potentially assist people from Augusto or Poretti. It will also provide safeguards for future building in the Northern Territory, which can only be a good thing, and is what we are here for as regulators.
I have been quite vocal about Carey Builders; the government has received some criticism over its role, and with the motion passed - thanks to the support of the members for Macdonnell and Nelson – we have been given the opportunity to set up a fund to assist victims of Carey Builders to finish their properties.
We have been quite lenient in acknowledging the government is working on this issue through the Department of Justice. It would be good if the minister could provide a rough overview of what is happening with that process. We saw last night on the ABC an Indian family who are victims of Carey Builders who were overseas when this fiasco occurred. They have returned to find the state of their property - I inspected their property last week and it is probably the worst one - it is a small house, not at lock up stage, the walls have been kicked in, and things have been damaged or stolen. It is their first house and they were really having a go. The lady’s name is Pritti. They live in a rented two-bedroom apartment at the moment and, paying their rent, they cannot afford to have a principal interest loan on this house. They have an interest only loan on which they are paying $2000 a month. They do not have access to more money and the bank is going to foreclose on them and they will lose that.
As the local member it is important for me to keep the pressure on government and you, as minister, to make this move quickly. I am maintaining the rage by not speaking out against it; however, I would like the minister to provide an update so I can inform my constituents, the victims of the NT government and Carey Builders, what is happening.
Madam Speaker, I will leave it there. I will see what the minister has to say, and I might reserve further comments for a third reading speech.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I support the legislation. I am not always a fan of matters being passed under urgency. I am unsure whether this is a case that requires urgency because the government has already given some exemptions for people in Alice Springs; but that is also for the future, in cases like this.
What may be of concern is whether this bill has had enough circulation in the building industry. It is a matter of urgency. Normally, it would sit on the floor of parliament until the next sittings, and there may be some things in there which I am interested to hear from the building industry itself. The minister may be able to give us some response as to what the building industry says about this bill.
It is important we have this legislation. It is obvious from reading the minister’s second reading where he said: ‘The deficiency relates to the inability to obtain a builder’s declaration at the end of the project when the original builder is no longer operating’; which is obviously the case with Carey Builders, and is obviously one of the major problems with people, if they had the finance, to continue to construct their house. From that point of view, it is certainly a good thing this legislation has been presented. Also, in the process, they have found legal advice was requested and the Building Appeals Board was found not to have the power to give those exemptions, as the requirement is in the act and not the regulations. So this is also fixing that particular issue.
I believe this is a sensible approach. It not only affects Carey Builders, as the member for Braitling said. I have also been contacted by a person who has lost a considerable amount of money in relation to Augusto Homes.
Discussing this particular bill lends itself to the debate about how best we can protect people. You cannot always protect people from their own mistakes, but how can we protect people from this type of thing happening again? There has been discussion about house insurance in relation to a building firm collapsing, and it seems we did introduce and pass legislation a few years ago in relation to this; then, I gather, the government had advice this legislation was not going to work. I have heard other states have pulled out of this type of legislation and only two states have house warranty legislation. This is an area where I hope the government will come back to this House and bring it forward as a matter for discussion as to where we are going with this type of insurance. Are there other ways to try to reduce the risk?
I was recently told when it comes to paying off a builder, which is usually done in instalments, in sections, when the work is completed, the banks, in many cases, pay the builder. So, if you have a case where the builder is, or appears to be, a reputable builder, the banks might go out and inspect the work to see if it is completed, and they hand over a cheque. However, after a while and a fair bit of work, the banks say: ‘We know this builder is doing a good job; always reliable, so we just put the cheque in the mail’, without visibly checking if all the work has been done.
Some issues arise in relation to whether part payments to builders in these circumstances should be regulated. Obviously, it is not only the bank that pays the money. In some cases the owner of the house pays that contribution. Are they sometimes conned into paying money ahead of the work being done? That is probably what has happened in some cases with Carey Builders - money has been paid out before work has been done. The builder has gone off with the money, the work has never been completed, people have a house not completed, and they are out of pocket as well. I do not know whether that side could also be looked at to see if there are ways it could be tightened. If the insurance is not a feasible means of overcoming some of these problems - and I do not think the insurance was ever meant to overcome all these problems - are there other avenues which could reduce the risk of this happening again?
Unfortunately, the Territory seems to have a legacy of builders going under. I believe Price Master was one which went under some years ago in Darwin and recently Augusto Homes have also, which was a real tragedy for many people, and other builders have done the same.
Although it is probably easy to say: ‘That is the open market and that is the way we operate’, I am not sure that we cannot do something to reduce the risk of it happening again. In the case of Carey Builders there were faults by government in allowing a company, which appears to have been bankrupt in Queensland, operating in the Territory. I believe there were loopholes, there were processes not carried out to the extent they should have been, and that has to be looked at as well.
I support the changes. My only real concern is that as this legislation was rushed there may be things in here which are not quite right. I suppose we can always come back and amend it if there are issues. I am interested to know whether the building industry, the TCA, the Housing Association, or individual builders, contractors and building certifiers have had a look at these amendments and what their comments have been. They are the people at the coalface; they are the people who have to deal with these issues. I believe it is a requirement of government, when it rushes something through like this, to ensure they have as much information from the industry as possible before they introduce it to the House. I will be interested in hearing any comments from the minister.
Madam Speaker, I support the changes to this bill, but I will be keeping an eye out to see whether it does exactly what it is meant to do and, if it needs some amendments, I will improve it.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I also support this bill as minister for Housing, but also as a former Minister for Lands and Planning.
It is good to see Mr John Gronow, I know he is a very shy man, sitting in the advisor’s box, someone who has long experience in this area, now in retirement, and still contributing his knowledge, and has done fine work for governments of all political colours. He is a very apolitical public servant who gives frank and fearless advice and it is great to see someone like John continuing in that role. I am sure he is giving advice and history to the minister, because this area of building and building regulation is a very complex area. You can look at things which appear simple, but it is actually a very complex area.
I remember, and the member for Nelson will remember, raising the certificates of occupancy issue which, on the surface seemed quite simple, but we worked through the issue with all sectors of the industry, and it did cause alarm. We were able, working with people like Mr Gronow and Mr Fabio Finocchiaro, and the industry, to come to a resolution and give homebuyers some certainty about that.
Emotions certainly run high when people are acquiring a home. It is the single, biggest purchase people make in their lives and there are risks associated with it. As the minister said in his second reading speech, 99% of building works go through and people are satisfied 99% of the time. There will always be things people say could have been done better but, generally, people get the result that they want. Occasionally, building companies fall over, not just in the Northern Territory but throughout Australia. That was why, I believe it was in 2006, I introduced into this parliament builders’ licensing registration in the Northern Territory. Again, it was a very complex area, full of emotion for those in the building industry, but with consultation with all sectors of the industry we were able to arrive at a result which was a step forward. It was a very important step because up to that time in the Northern Territory there had not been licensing of builders.
I will also say, no matter how many regulations and laws you have in this area, you will always find instances where building companies fall over and leave people in the lurch, so to speak. This is obviously what has happened with Carey Builders in Alice Springs, and I commend the member for Braitling, as a local member, running hard on this issue and representing the views and the interests of those people who have been caught up in this issue.
I understand this is a matter before the courts and I need to be very careful in what I say. There is the issue of the money people have expended and I understand there are approximately 15 properties involved with varying degrees of exposure to Carey Builders and the non-completion of work. I also understand that, in some cases, people had handed over up to 90% of the cost of the building, and in some cases 100%. The old saying the member for Nelson used - he did not say it in Latin, although I am sure he knows it in Latin - is caveat emptor, and the member for Nelson raised the issue of how we best safeguard the interests of people who are acting in good faith, who may not be acquainted with commercial transactions and contractual arrangements. How do we safeguard them from handing over 90% or 100% of the cost of the building to someone who has subsequently gone bankrupt?
I daresay there will be a debate in terms of public policy where the government should put forward that type of bill for people in this position but, as the member for Nelson says, there is more we can do. We need to work with industry in the same ways I outlined before in terms of builders’ registration and certificates of occupancy, etcetera, to find ways we can get agreement from industry about contractual arrangements and payments during the construction of houses.
I was also the minister who brought in home warranty insurance some years ago. I did make an undertaking to the parliament at that time, which I think is useful to revisit. I do not have the Hansard in front of me but I do remember very clearly what I said at that time about the introduction of home warranty insurance. The legislation was introduced and we would be looking, over the next 12 months, to the products and companies and competition in the marketplace of home warranty insurance before we actually introduced it in the Northern Territory. The last thing I wanted to do, as minister, was introduce a regime which did not fit the Northern Territory, was not acceptable to the industry, and at a price far outside what people, the homebuyer, would be willing to pay; in other words, adding a substantial extra cost to the construction of the house.
History has shown, and I have followed home warranty insurance nationwide, that in some jurisdictions there is actually a winding down or even a winding up of home warranty insurance. So the member for Nelson is going in the right direction here: we need to look at other ways to introduce changes to regulation, and work with the industry on contractual arrangements people enter into when building a house.
I deeply sympathise with those who have been burned by Carey Builders. There is a great deal I would like to say about Randal Carey, but I am prohibited from doing so because there is a court case on foot and that is a matter that has to play out.
What the minister has done, with the support of the opposition and the Independent, is introduce legislation, and in his second reading speech he said:
That is simply said; however, in the drafting of this legislation it is more complex and, as the member for Nelson says, there is always a risk when you bring in legislation on urgency. I have every confidence in those within the Department of Construction and Infrastructure to develop this legislation, and the processes through the Parliamentary Counsel, and the review through the Cabinet process. That does not mean we get everything perfect all the time, and this is an issue I am sure the minister will flag and we will continue to be vigilant.
The bill proposes, and I quote from the second reading speech:
Those burned by Carey Builders, and other builders, would feel this probably does not go far enough to address and redress their circumstances. I believe this is a responsible step in the right direction and it is giving support to those people affected by this to move forward and complete the works, and it is giving administrative certainty. However, as the member for Braitling has said, this whole issue has a long way to go. I have every confidence in the minister; he is attending to this issue and we will try, as a government, to reach a fair and equitable outcome for those affected in Alice Springs, and also the future protection for those who purchase and build their own homes in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.
Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, I thank members for participating in today’s debate. It is good to participate in an open and frank debate which is important for the Northern Territory not only to address issues from the past, but to move on to provide certainty in the future.
This is important legislation, and it continues this government’s commitment to get our building regulation regime right. I thank the member for Nelson, the member for Braitling, the member for Goyder, and the member for Johnston for participating in the debate and, more importantly, to the members opposite for accepting and agreeing to this debate as a matter of urgency. They understand the need to have this amendment in place to help to get homes finished. I also thank them for taking the time, on very short notice, to be briefed on the bill prior to today’s debate. We believe this bill is a further step in the right direction. It provides the appropriate mechanism to help get homes back under way in the event a builder fails to deliver under the contract with a consumer.
The member for Johnston provided a detailed background and highlighted a number of important issues which relate to the work we have undertaken to create a modern and professional building industry in the Territory. As the member outlined for the House, in the vast majority of cases, it works - 99% of building works undertaken in the Territory do so without generating a formal complaint.
This bill is about providing a safety mechanism when a builder is no longer able to complete the job. To recap, the purpose of the bill is to amend the Building Act and Building Regulations to resolve impasses which can occur in the building certification process. The deficiency relates to the inability to obtain a builder’s declaration and occupancy permit at the end of a project when the original builder is no longer operating.
The bill proposes a director, appointed under the Building Act, be given the power to issue exemption certificates to allow the certification process to continue when any of the required certificates are unable to be obtained. The bill describes the grounds for an impasse as a prescribed event. If the director is satisfied information provided indicates the work to date has been carried out materially in accordance with the building permit, the director may issue a certificate of exemption. An exemption certificate removes the requirement for the missing certificate causing the impasse, and the certification process may continue through to the issue of an occupancy permit by a building certifier.
The bill allows an applicant to appeal a decision of the director to not issue an exemption certificate. Once the legislation is enacted, the government will launch a public education campaign for registered practitioners such as building certifiers and building contractors.
The overarching principle behind the bill is that property owners are entitled to have confidence in the building regulation regime in that, having commenced the building in accordance with the Building Act, the process will be able to be closed as required by the act and regulations. The process should be able to be closed even when a step in that process reaches an impasse due to unexpected circumstances.
Each registered practitioner will now be able to sign off for the work for which he or she was responsible, even part-way through the construction process. If that is not possible due to the loss of registration or death, for example, the exemption certificate process is activated. While on the face of it, it appeared a relatively simple matter, it has translated to a series of amendments which are interwoven. This is because building regulation is primarily within the private sector and the processes and responsibilities of the practitioners need to cover all possibilities.
The consumer also has responsibilities in the building process, and the member for Johnston talked about the clear need for consumers to take every precaution within contracts to protect themselves.
I value the comments from members in the House and I will talk about those. The member for Goyder started with a very important point which relates to the emotional space that people enter, and the emotional stress that can be caused. The examples are among us all; we probably all have an example of where people have suffered stress and uncertainty, and that is what the regulation process is all about. However, we must accept there is great need for caution in entering into any contractual agreements.
If we talk about the Building Industry Reference Group and a report to improve the landscape for consumers – absolutely. That is exactly what my predecessors did in structuring these reference groups, not only for government, but for the community as well.
The member for Goyder commented on concern for potential additional costs to families in the event a builder goes bust. This is an important consideration, and this bill puts in the appropriate framework for government to take an active role in getting homes finished to minimise costs to affected owners. The current requirements put the entire responsibility on the landowner, but this bill enables the government to resolve certification impasses.
In regard to the comments from the member for Goyder about licensing of contractors, it is a very important point. I agree this needs further consideration, and this is a key issue within the Building Industry Reference Group.
The member for Goyder highlighted what other members have said, and questions I have asked myself, about the department providing good communication networks and relevant advice. I have met some incredible people in the department so far; we have an incredible knowledge base there, and I encourage all Territorians operating in this area to use them; but we want to get it better. I have asked that we look at communication, information and, specifically look at ways we can put that into the public arena to work with people from all walks of life to ensure they have the best information to go forward.
In relation to the member for Braitling - and I thank him for his comments - I need to clarify that this bill will have an impact far greater than the Carey matter. This bill provides the appropriate framework for any persons who need assistance in the event a builder fails to complete their contractual obligations.
The concept of an automatic certificate is not appropriate, as the purpose of building controls is to uphold building standards. The Director of Building Control needs to ensure the works completed meet the minimum standards of the Building Code of Australia. We will not put consumers in a position of continuing to build on works that have poor foundations and could only end in further grief. That is a very good response from people who are well versed and experienced in this industry.
When I took on the point from the member for Braitling, I looked at it from a lay perspective, and that is immediately what came to mind: we have to be very sure in terms of our regulation that we do not set people up for further failure. I was thinking along the lines that we have to be very sure all work is up to the correct standard, otherwise we will apply, through our regulation, further complications, further costs, and further stress. It was put more succinctly in the response I just supplied to the House, and it is probably up for further debate, but it is a very strong point to start the debate.
Home builders need to be confident in our building certification process. When building permits are issued, a check is undertaken to ensure that builders are registered. The important point raised is that a builder continues to be registered throughout the process. This is something that can be looked at as part of the review of the NT Building Industry Reference Group report. That was another interesting point from the member for Braitling who has already thrown in ideas we have captured about the anniversary of renewal, common anniversary dates, applications in terms of gazetting and advertising. These are points that, as the minister, I will take back and discuss. The Building Industry Reference Group are those experts in the Territory who work directly with the department and me and can provide the best practice information around these additions, opportunities, or members’ ideas coming forward.
The department treats all complaints with priority. As part of the complaints investigation process, it is important that registered practitioners are provided with opportunities to respond to claims. That is the point of natural justice and, in the hardest of times in our democratic society, the principle of natural justice must be afforded. This is a very difficult area. It is a very difficult outcome for some, but in ensuring we have matters dealt with in principle, legally and appropriately, we have to accept a process of natural justice must occur.
The member for Braitling talked about ‘consumer beware’ information and he shared the ideas of the member for Goyder and the member for Nelson, and I agree. I have raised these points myself already working with the department, and I have said we really need to look at education and communication; we need to look at regulation, but we also need to ensure we are communicating with Territorians about one of the most important decisions they will make in their life - engaging in the building of their home.
Every effort is made to minimise the time taken to investigate complaints within the department and the department has provided me with advice on how this process can be improved. This is an honourable position and a challenge for government. We are up for challenges, and we will work on that and move forward.
I take on board the member for Nelson’s first point about matters of urgency. I have learnt a great deal from you in parliament, and I know you are a thorough researcher, and I can appreciate the principle you have raised. This matter sits outside the boundary. I thank you for accepting that, because this is a matter we need to resolve and move on and is one step on the way to improving our regulation in the building industry. There will be more to come as we continue to work. Thank you for your contribution today, and thank you for your support of the bill.
The member for Nelson made some very interesting points. First of all, I respond that we are committed to introducing a home warranty insurance scheme, and I am happy to provide members with further details on this issue in due course. It is a very complex matter. In the case of Carey Builders, I discovered it would not have been provided for under home warranty insurance. Carey was building without a licence and that is why we are taking the appropriate action in the courts to hold him accountable for his activities. That process will also deliver many answers for Territorians, and highlight areas that may need to be improved in government regulation.
Briefings have commenced with the building industry, and future briefings and an education campaign will commence following the passage of this bill. The department will be following this up with formal sessions. It is a matter I take very seriously, and the department takes very seriously as well. From the discussion so far with industry I can inform the House their view is supportive of the amendments. That was made known to me in briefings and has been reiterated today. I take that on board and I hope other members accept that.
The legislation has been brought under urgency and we are confident that the drafters have it right. This resolves an impasse in the certification process, and it maintains the integrity of the building certification process.
In terms of the Building Act - and the member for Nelson has rightly challenged government once again, coming into this portfolio, a massive portfolio - I have been asked to undertake a steep learning curve and look at what predecessors have done, look at what government has done. I am proud to say there have been many initiatives under this government. My predecessor, in 2009, commissioned the Building Industry Reference Group, commissioned the Queensland report looking at other jurisdictions, and consultation with industry stakeholders and the community is regular and ongoing with the department.
There is always more work to be done and that relates to members understanding it is important with stakeholders and the community. It then moves to the formal level in the department, and then it goes to Cabinet. Madam Speaker, as you are aware, being a former minister, that is where the finals are done and that is when we move forward with legislation for the Northern Territory.
I want to briefly touch on the motion this Assembly passed relating to the matter of Carey Builders. As this bill goes some way to resolving the matters which the government was called upon to address, government has taken decisive action regarding the Carey matter to help the affected families finish their homes. We believe the best way to get the homes completed is to work one-on-one with the affected parties. We have sent senior public servants to Alice Springs to work through the details of the building process, to provide advice tailored to their needs, and I am pleased to inform the House many took up this offer. That includes our public service in Alice Springs and the important work they have done on a daily basis in supporting the affected families and which needs to be recognised.
Government has also provided funds for the original certifier to establish the certification status of each project. The certifier’s report, together with the additional protections provided by this bill, will increase the ability of the home builder to attract a new contractor and understand what future costs may be incurred. There are many legal, financial and administrative hurdles in implementing the motion. The intent of the motion is problematic and, for a range of reasons, the proposed outcome of government recovering its money is unlikely to be achieved.
The overarching consideration is two tests the government must apply to this motion. The first is the legal test, and legal advice is there is nothing in the known chronology and information that would indicate any basis upon which the Territory might be found liable to any person.
The second is the moral test. While any government can compensate constituents who suffer loss through contractual failure, it has a responsibility to the whole community on the expenditure of public funds, and the expectation that would build in consumers across the board. On the basis of precedent, it is considered there would be an irresistible moral force to compensate for future business failures by builders. Further, from a wider policy point of view, there is nothing different, in principle, for consumers of a variety of non-building services expecting compensation in case of future contractual failure. Accordingly, the government is not in a position to compensate.
In conclusion, my focus will now be to improve consumer protection and, at the same time, ensure the building regulation regime is manageable and cost efficient for industry. We have the opportunity to build on all the reports and consultation done in 2009 and this year, to reshape the framework of the building regulations regime, to position industry well for the next era of development in the best interests of all Territorians.
Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contributions and support for this bill, and I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
Mr GILES: Madam Chair, I seek clarification from the minister on the last point he made. Were you saying, minister, the government cannot support the motion for Carey Builders to assist the people affected finishing their houses and putting a caveat on the property?
Mr McCARTHY: Yes, the final point was the most salient; we are not in a position to compensate.
Mr GILES: Minister, outside of compensation, the motion expressly mentioned seeking assistance from the Northern Territory government to finish those houses, and put a caveat over the properties which would be paid once those properties were sold. It was not about compensation. I want to ensure that is clear.
Mr McCARTHY: The situation outlined to me, and I am now outlining to the House, relates to the bigger picture of precedence, about expending taxpayers’ funds to support contractual obligations. We have moved, I believe, great lengths – and there is more work to be done as outlined in the debate - to assist the affected families in the failed Carey Builders matter. However, I was not able to deliver the final part of that motion. That is based on both legal grounds and on the precedent that government could be challenged by failed contractive obligations throughout the community.
Mr GILES: Minister, are you aware of the Carey situation going to court in South Australia?
Mr McCARTHY: I am aware of the Carey Builders situation going to court in the Northern Territory. I believe that is an Alice Springs on 30th of this month.
Mr GILES: Did you know Randal Carey was taken to court recently in South Australia? I am sure your government advisors would advise you on these matters.
Mr McCARTHY: I am aware of the legal action the Northern Territory government has taken against Carey Builders which is part of litigation which will be heard this month in the Northern Territory. It is not appropriate that I should comment any further on that matter.
Mr GILES: I appreciate the sensitivities about anything before the courts. Is the purpose of the litigation to prosecute for performing or undertaking duties and roles as a builder while unlicensed, or is the purpose trying to get some financial return in compensation or money back from that builder or the building company?
Mr McCARTHY: They are very legalistic questions. My only answer is: that is why we are taking legal action. Those matters related to legal action will be determined in a formal litigation process. As I mentioned in my previous response, a formal litigation process in the courts will answer many questions about this issue. Having said that, it is a very formal process and it is not appropriate for me to make predictions about how a formal legal case will be heard, or what outcomes will evolve from that. As I said, this matter is before the courts and it is not appropriate for me to comment any further.
Mr GILES: I may have been slightly obscure in my request. What I want to know is: are you pursuing him on criminal grounds for being unlicensed and operating, or are you seeking some financial return on this matter?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, with all due respect, you want me to comment on the legal process. I cannot make those comments; there are legal issues and protocols around that, and this matter is before the courts.
Mr GILES: I will provide some guidance on the outcome in South Australia. I am surprised you are not over your portfolio, or you have not been briefed on this. The outcome in South Australia, as I understand it, was a guilty verdict and the company is now insolvent. So, if it is the pursuit of finances through the Northern Territory process, I would wonder how successful that might be. If it is for other matters, I can understand the direction you are heading. How much has the Northern Territory government set aside to pay for these legal costs?
Mr McCARTHY: First of all, thank you for the advice to the House, member for Braitling. You are obviously taking great interest in the legal processes of South Australia, and I am taking great interest in the processes of the legal action in the Northern Territory. In terms of cost, I will need to take advice on that, and I have very expert advice on that. If I could call for advice from the Attorney-General?
Ms LAWRIE: All legal costs are naturally borne by government, which is always the case when government takes legal action.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much, Attorney-General.
Madam Chair, my question is probably to the Attorney-General, who seems to have more knowledge on these matters. How much do you expect it will cost in kind, or government expenses, to prosecute this case in the Northern Territory on behalf of the Northern Territory government?
Ms LAWRIE: Madam Chair, I believe the member opposite is getting somewhat distracted from the legislation before the House, and I suggest he get back to it.
Madam CHAIR: Member for Braitling, if you could keep your line of questioning to the bill, which is the purpose of the committee of the whole, to scrutinise the bill in detail.
Mr GILES: Madam Chair, the purpose of the amendments to this bill is to assist the victims of Carey Builders, and we are right within the parameters of discussing this matter. It is not outside this matter at all. I am trying to find out how much money the Northern Territory government will spend in trying to prosecute this case, rather than trying to assist the victims of Carey Builders. That is the direction I am heading.
Dr Burns: You can ask that in estimates.
Mr GILES: This is a building matter, to the junior minister over there. We passed a motion in parliament, minister, to try to support these victims. I appreciate that government does not like supporting motions which have been brought about by opposition, but I am interested to know how much money government will spend to prosecute this person, when the money would be far better utilised supporting those victims? Attorney-General, possibly?
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Chair, let me start by responding to the quips about junior minister and the usual diatribe. It is great to see you have slipped back into it because Hansard will record the history of your political career, member for Braitling, and you are documenting it so well. There is so much you can offer the Northern Territory, but there is the issue of you continually tripping over your ego. Call me names all you like, but let us get back to the legislation. Let us get back to the committee stage of the legislation, and let us talk about the motion.
Our government has no problems with motions but, being in government, they all have to be evaluated because we are dealing with the whole of the Territory, we are dealing with Territory public funds, and we are dealing with Territorians. If you want to go back to the motion and look at the very complex matters you created around equity and around a range of legalistic areas, I do not have a PhD in law like you obviously do so I go to wiser heads, and I use a thorough process to get the best advice.
The advice from the department and from Treasury is government cannot accept the final point of the motion is a proper way forward, and we cannot deliver public funds to prop up failed contractual obligations. It is a tough call. I do not take any joy in that, but when you are in a position where you have to make tough decisions, then you take it on the chin, and I have had to do that. We have done a great deal of work to deliver for the affected families, and we will continue to work to deliver for Territorians but, on the final point of the motion, as I pointed to in the debate, it is not something government can support.
Mr WOOD: Minister, the motion was not to just hand over money to people. It was actually to help people bring their houses up to certificate of occupancy standard, and that money would have to be repaid. You said there were some legal reasons why that could not be done. Are you saying that government cannot give a loan to a private individual?
Ms LAWRIE: Yes, it establishes an unacceptable precedent.
Mr WOOD: I understand there is always a possibility of a precedent, but in this case you are not giving a person a grant; you are actually giving them a loan. Is the government not able to give a person a loan? Why would that necessarily be a precedent? Loans are given out by the government in a range of areas within departments.
Ms LAWRIE: Not to individuals.
Mr GILES: How much money have you loaned the Darwin Waterfront to get that going?
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Chair! We seem to be getting off the point of the committee stage amendments. I have not heard any amendments come forward from the member for Braitling. These are questions he can ask in estimates. We have estimates next week, we have parliamentary Question Time, and in the interests of expediting the committee stages of a bill we all agree to, we are getting sidetracked here.
Madam CHAIR: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. If members could resume their seats, please, before I call the next person. I just remind members that the purpose of the committee of the whole stage is to scrutinise the bill and the details of the bill before us. Therefore, questions outside of that, such as the Darwin Waterfront, are quite irrelevant in this debate.
Mr WOOD: Can I ask a couple of questions specifically on the amendment? Are there any amendments in here which really are not urgent? In other words, what has been added to this bill that really is not part of the urgency requirements of this bill? Because, minister, in your second reading speech you talk about having an opportunity to do some things, for instance, I use new section 37A as an example of why that should be part of this bill under urgency.
Mr McCARTHY: I will respond, member for Nelson, as the minister, and then I will get some expert advice to follow up. The first matter we are dealing with is the impasse that related to supporting affected Territory families. That then went on to the bigger picture of this being a very practical and sensible amendment to the Building Act, but I will also get some expert advice on this.
Member for Nelson, I am advised first of all under the Statutory Law Revision Bill, there were minor technicalities. If you look through that you will see they have been adjusted, and it is a good process to do that while we have it out on the floor. The other more complex part is the legislation relates to companies and nominees. That has been amended in the act and is a substantial way forward in addressing the problem and will be beneficial in this amendment and the whole process for Territorians.
Ms PURICK: Madam Chair, to the minister, I mentioned in my speech the issue of renovations within a roof line, the bathroom area, wet areas. Yes, the person doing the work requires a building permit, but because it is within the roof line that person does not have to be a registered builder. Outside the roof line, and I will stand corrected, it is my understanding from industry people I have spoken with, that you do have to be a registered builder if you put a carport on, extend your house, or things of that nature. You said you would look at it, and I said I would make presentations to you.
There are situations where a building permit has been obtained, work has been done, and then there is an impasse. Would the changes to the legislation scoop up that situation – when a building permit has been obtained, certification process and certificates have been obtained and, in this case, the certifier has failed the work – it is not up to codes and standards. So, they have a building permit, the certifier has failed the work so there is an impasse, and the work is shoddy. They have lodged complaints with the Building Board and had no joy, basically saying bad luck.
That does not seem right or fair because they have been given guidelines, they have been given fact sheets from the department and the person obtained a building permit, but for whatever reason is not a registered builder, and the works failed and they are at an impasse. There may need to be other amendments to the Building Act, in due course, so people who renovate inside houses, bathrooms and wet areas, laundries, have a registration category of their own. I do not know, but consumers are being dudded. Will it scoop up those people, or is there another way those consumers can be protected? I have probably four or five I could put in my letter to you, minister.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Goyder, you have raised many points. This amendment before us deals with the impasse relating to death, disappearance or the total inability of not delivering. In the instances you are talking about, the players are generally still on the scene, and it needs to be resolved under the contractual obligations of the parties. You are right: I did take on the point we need to explore more the registration or the licensing of contractors, and this will provide more certainty for people engaging in those important examples you have provided.
Mr WOOD: Minister, I will go specifically to new section 37A - no interference with building practitioners by a corporation. I am having trouble understanding the basis, and I have the explanatory notes, of the background to this section occurring in this legislation, and is it something that needs to be passed as part of an urgency bill? This is the section which says: no interference with building practitioner by a corporation.
I had a briefing but the briefing dealt with the core areas we are talking about: to get an exemption, to change the process which would allow a building, if a building practitioner died or went broke, to have an exemption, the building was inspected and a new builder could take over. That, I thought, was the crux of this legislation. I see other pieces tacked onto it and whilst I am happy the part we are sorting out should go through urgency, I was concerned when I saw things which may be outside that realm. I am asking why, for instance, is clause 37A part of this legislation, and what brought it forward? What is the reason it has been put here?
Mr McCARTHY: I answer that in lay speak, however, I will get you expert advice.
Mr WOOD: Lay speak is all right for me.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, the essence of this amendment is dealing with an impasse. This part of the amendment deals with a company structure - a registered company and a registered nominee. This part of the amendment deals with any problems that could be encountered between the company and the nominee, which relates to the possibility of disagreements, dysfunction, and the nominee not being around. It is an important part that relates to the whole building industry and different aspects of how the industry operates.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. New section 37A(3) says:
The corporation must not:
I note it says penalty $50 000. I am not sure why it is not penalty units, but it is a fairly big penalty.
What would be a case of preventing a nominee or other building practitioner from complying with the provision of the act? What would be the reason behind a corporation preventing a nominee or other building practitioner from complying with the provision of the act? What would they actually physically be doing? How does it work in reality?
Mr McCARTHY: I am advised the part is meant to be part of the whole process; that the directors cannot operate outside of that process. You want an example?
Mr WOOD: An example is what I am after.
Mr McCARTHY: An example is: the directors could book an inspection as part of the certification process, and not involve the nominee, not tell the nominee - operating outside the legislative process.
Mr WOOD: I will not harp too much on it, but just so I can get it clear. How does this section relate to the impasse? I want to ensure we are not passing legislation that is not needed to be on urgency. If this is on urgency, it must relate to the impasse we are talking about. How does this legislation relate to what we are here for, to overcome the impasse of work on a building stopping unless you have a certificate of exemption to allow another builder to come in? How does that fit?
Mr McCARTHY: I have been advised a good example of an impasse is where the directors are putting pressure on the nominee; the nominee resigns and departs the process, and therefore we have an impasse in the certification process. This amendment captures that company structure and those internal difficulties which can occur in the private sector.
Mr WOOD: I think I get the gist of it. There are probably more questions I could ask on that, but I think I understand where you are coming from.
In relation to section 48C(1) and (2), especially (2), which says:
I do not have those sections and I hope I am getting this right. So, I get a shed built. When it has been completed, no later than 14 days, I must get a declaration under those two sections that the work has been completed. What is different now than what this legislation is doing?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, Parliamentary Counsel took out the whole section. The 14 day clause does not change, but what is changed, what has been added, is dealing with the impasse that now covers any work which was partially completed, and the ability to get that issue solved and for the work to continue.
Mr WOOD: The understanding is that this section here, as it says, section 48C is repealed and substituted and, again, I do not have the original act with me. Are you saying some of what has been substituted is what is already in the act, and you have added to it to cover the case of partial works of a particular building?
Mr McCARTHY: Yes, I am advised that is the only change. That is moving to the essence of what we are doing here, which is to solve any impasses and the issue of work partially completed.
Mr WOOD: So, the issue of 48C(2), there is no change to what exists presently?
Mr McCARTHY: I am advised, no.
Mr WOOD: I have one other question there, minister. New section 48G - I love trying to read these numbers - is on page 6 of the act, also 69, I am never sure whether 69 comes under 48G, or where 69 comes from, but it is 69(1) Declaration to accompany application::
What is the difference between what exists today and this section?
Mr McCARTHY: I have been advised 48G deals with the aim of the bill, once again, to move into the essence of this amendment. Section 69 talks about the natural person who conducted the work.
Mr WOOD: Where does it state a ‘natural person’ in that section?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, in section 69(2).
Mr WOOD: So you have to read it in conjunction with section 69(2)?
I will ask a more technical question which I did raise when speaking on a previous section of the act. Why are there no penalty units, why is it put in a dollar form?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, the original act is all in dollars, and while this amendment has made significant changes in terms of benefit to Territorians, it is still premised on the original act and there has not been time to change the actual dollar figure.
Mr WOOD: Thank you. I cannot say whether this question is part of the bill or not, but talking about the section under occupancy permits, in relation to the houses in Alice Springs, and we have to realise this legislation has come from what happened in Alice Springs, can the government give an occupancy permit for a house that is partially completed? I will give you an example, and I am looking at ways to find a solution to other matters where a house is not completed. The original house, for instance, might have had three bathrooms and a three-car carport. Is it possible to give an occupancy licence that says we will allow one bathroom to be used, and a two-car carport? In other words, can someone live in a house that is partially completed and still get an occupancy permit?
Mr McCARTHY: All occupancy permits may apply to the whole or part of the building, and shall specify the classification of the building, or part of the building, to which it applies.
Mr WOOD: In the case of Carey Builders and the people who could not complete their houses, one of the issues raised was people could not move into the houses because they could not complete the houses therefore, you would have thought, a certificate of occupancy. I do not know the houses individually, but I am trying to determine whether the cost of people moving into houses could be reduced by allowing them to move into a partially completed house. I give an example: there might be two bathrooms in the house and they might say they cannot afford to complete one bathroom, but they can afford to build the other bathroom. It is possible, therefore, you could give a house a certificate of occupancy even though the internal part of the house is not totally completed?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, the optimal word there is ‘partial’, and they still need a builder’s declaration. The case we are talking about, the failed Carey case where the builder is not around, they would need to seek the certificate of exemption.
Mr WOOD: I understand that. If I am looking at a house that is partially completed, and there is a bathroom which is incomplete, but what is built is according to what should be there - it might be concrete floor and a few pipes sticking out of the ground. What I am saying is you cannot use that bathroom because it has not been finished, however, if there is another bathroom in the house which has been completed - it might be a studio in the house which has not been completed and is not essential for living. If you have two bedrooms, a bathroom, a kitchen which all come up to standard, even though the rest of the house is not complete, can you get a certificate of occupancy so people can move into that section of the house, bearing in mind the rest of the house has been built accordingly, and has a certificate of exemption?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, our partial occupancy permit deals with the living area, however, because we are breaking it down into real world speak, you should be aware by doing that you would still need to allow flexibility and opportunity for the builder to continue the process of completing that house.
Mr WOOD: I thank the minister for the answer. That is probably what I am after. I am not saying there are not issues - the rest of the house has to be completed - but I was trying to find a solution for the people in Alice Springs. I have not been to each house but I have seen photographs. It may be they can get enough money to open the house up for living, and they will have to sort out the rest of the house in due course. I presume that one of the issues with Carey Builders was people lost money and did not have enough money to complete the whole house. I am looking for a window of opportunity where a small amount of money would get the house open to have a certificate of occupancy for that part of the house, and continue on.
My other question in relation to the bill - I asked about it in the general debate - was what feedback did you get from people like the TCA, the Housing Industry Association, or building certifiers who would be the people at the coalface of this particular legislation? Did you get any feedback from them? Do they think this is a good move? Were there any concerns about this legislation working in practice? I would like to know what comments you got back from the industry.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, when I engaged with this process, the first thing issued was a building note which goes out widely right across the sector, and there were no negatives on that. The office, as well, has engaged with more major stakeholders, and the feeling is people agree there has to be something done. It is in the interests of industry continuing and in the interests of the consumer as well. It has been positive. That communication has been out there for a considerable time now, and we believe we have the support of industry.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. Of course, the other side of this is the financial side. Did you have any discussions with financial institutions such as banks and lending companies in relation to matters that arise from a company going broke? The banks, obviously, have an interest in the house where the work cannot continue because they want their money from the person who has the loan. The person who has the loan can neither sell the house nor – up until now – even complete the house. Has there been any discussion in relation to this bill, leading on to something from a financial point of view that can alleviate the other side of the stress – (1) the stress that you cannot live in your house, and (2) the financial stress that is caused by it. Whether it is caused by the owner paying out money when they probably should not have, or whether it is the issue I raised before where banks sometimes control the payments, and they have given out money before they have inspected what has been done. Have there been any discussions with financial institutions about this process we are going through today?
Mr McCARTHY: When I engaged with the issue of the Carey Builders’ impasse, I engaged the whole department and we sent senior members of the department to work with affected families one-on-one. Part of that communication and support network was not only the building industry regulations and how we could offer support, but also advice and real compassion around other ways their situation could be addressed, which involved dealing with their financial institutions; and we continue to offer that support. Should any of the financial institutions want the department to comment, then we are available. It is a very complex matter when you deal with individual financial contracts people have with a financial institution, but we are still there to advise them on any way possible.
Mr WOOD: I appreciate your response, minister, and you mentioned compassion. From my point of view, the reason I supported the third part of the motion is about compassion. I also understand government does not want to get into a precedent over this issue; however, part of the reason I am supporting this is compassion.
I know you said home warranty insurance would not cover this because Carey was not licensed. Then I go back to that is the government’s fault they were not licensed, and because the government has some blame in this - I am not saying they have the whole blame, and maybe the people themselves have some blame - but there was an opportunity for compassion, not through giving people money, a blank cheque, but by giving them some money to get them out of the problem. That is why the amount of money could be small, just to allow people to live in their house. It would be a loan, because there would be a covenant on the block
I do not know if there is any illegality in there, because the council I was on, Litchfield Council, put covenants on blocks if people were not able to pay their rates. They put the rates on the block, and when the person sold, or died, or whatever, that money was paid back when the block was sold.
Although we are discussing today some technical issues, and I understand the Chair does not want me to talk too much off the amendments and this is a technical issue, but it also has another side to it - it is a people issue. That is the reason we are discussing this, because of Carey Builders and people unable to complete their houses. Carey Builders is also about people losing money. The motion is not just about getting the legislation right. It is about asking the government to have some compassion. I know you said legally you could not do this and I will debate that in estimates, because we do not have all day.
Sometimes governments have to think outside the square. People might have been to blame, others might be to blame, but the reality is, could we find a solution, and could it be in a form which explains the reasons we are doing it? That does not mean it is a precedent; you might say we will look at each particular case on its merit.
I thank the government for bringing this matter forward. I thank the member for Braitling, and I agree, he has done good work as a local member, forget the politics about it. It is what local members should be doing. I have people come and talk to me about Augusto Homes, who were in much bigger debt, probably, than some of the people in the case of Carey Builders. They have come to me because they saw what happened in Alice Springs and, I take your point, they could see it as a precedent. However, I believe we need to look at each case on its merit. I will be taking back to the people involved in Augusto that you are at least allowing inspection to occur, and they can get someone to come in and take over the building of the house.
I will take the other issue up in estimates. I appreciate what you have said today, but we need to flesh that out more at a different time. Thank you, minister.
I do not have any other questions in relation to the bill. It has been a little difficult to look at everything. I only got the explanatory notes this morning, and I appreciate the briefing, but I do take on trust what is in here needs to be on urgency, and hopefully what you have in here does not need to come back later for amendments at another stage.
Mr GILES: I thank the member for Nelson for his comments. Madam Chair, you did say before we are not allowed to digress. I did seek advice from Madam Speaker earlier whether I could raise matters in the third reading speech or should I raise them now, and she said I should be speaking in committee as we have more flexibility in the committee stage to talk about different areas.
Madam CHAIR: Well, that may be so, but certainly questions about costs associated with the port are way outside of this debate.
Mr GILES: In relation to section 48C, and I know the member for Nelson has spoken about some of this, 48C requires a building contractor to make a declaration as required by section 69(1), stating that the building work was completed in accordance with the building permit within 14 days of completion, and the penalty for breach of that requirement was $10 000.
With the amendment, the building declaration still forms part of the application to gain a certificate of occupancy. The requirement for a building contractor to make a declaration on completed work, and the penalty for not doing so, has remained essentially the same with the additional reference of section 69(2).
Section 48C requires a building contractor to give the declaration to the building certifier that granted the permit for the building work within 14 days of completion. Completion is when the building contractor, as I understand it, ceases the building work regardless of whether the building works specified by the contractor is fully or partially complete. If the building contractor is a direct nominee of a corporation and ceases to hold that position, that building contractor is still responsible for providing a declaration.
The logical application of this provision is, once the portion of the building project the director/nominee is responsible for has been completed, they make the declaration relating to their portion. So there could be multiple declarations made by multiple contractors. What is not clear is whether the director or nominee must provide a declaration prior to leaving that position only at the completion of their portion, or only when the corporation, presumably with another director or nominee, ceases work on the building. And, if a former nominee or director has to be located to sign a declaration, how would that occur if they have relocated interstate or overseas before completion?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, I have been advised there are two parts to the answer. First of all, the transitional stage is what this amendment is all about. In the future, the nominee will be required to sign off before they depart the process; they will be responsible for that sign off. And in the transitional phase it is declared as an impasse, and that is the essence of this amendment.
Mr GILES: Can you clarify the second part? I think you said they have to sign it before they leave, but what if they left and moved interstate or overseas or cannot be found to sign it?
Mr McCARTHY: I have been advised two stages, again, prior to the commencement of the act. In the future, in terms of the act, if the nominee does depart then: (1) it creates an impasse, but (2) they are in breach. So they can be pursued and prosecuted.
Mr GILES: In light of creating a breach and an impasse they can be prosecuted, what happens to the building while they are being found and prosecuted?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, that relates to the essence of this amendment. If the nominee disappears the amendment deals with the impasse created, and therefore the certification process will be continued.
Mr GILES: That is not the way I understand the amendment. From the briefing, I thought it was the case they had to sign a declaration before they left. One of the questions we had in the briefing was: what if they had not signed before they left? And there was no real answer to that question.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, in the case of a nominee, the corporation has the power to solve it.
Mr GILES: How would this work in an alliance contracting model such as SIHIP?
Mr McCARTHY: You are talking about a registered practitioner - a registered builder as being part of that corporation. So, with an alliance model, if you want to talk about SIHIP, we are talking about outside of building regulated areas. If we talk about the principle of your question, you would have the same structure, which would be a building company, an appointed nominee, who would be a registered builder in that process, and therefore everything then is the same. If that nominee disappears, it would be the corporation’s responsibility to pursue that.
This amendment also allows for the impasse which has been created and the process of certification to continue.
Debate suspended.
Continued from earlier this day.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move - that:
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): We accept this and indicate our support for the motion.
Debate adjourned.
With regard to health reform - that is what it is called, I cannot avoid the word – we have flagged the hospital board situation and I need to bring this up briefly. It will be swallowed up into a super board, and this is our greatest fears realised. The member for Nelson, and the opposition, fought pretty hard during the debate last year to protect hospital boards throughout the Northern Territory, to give them the autonomy to retain local hospital boards, and it is still the will of the community.
For a community with half a dozen hospitals in a 10 km or 15 km radius, that might work. The funding split and how that is going to eventually benefit the Northern Territory is yet to be seen. One thing is for sure, local boards as we know them today, despite the protections put in and rigorously fought for by the opposition and the member for Nelson last year, will cease. That is not a good thing for local communities. It might work for a very large community in a large city with half a dozen hospitals within a stone’s throw of each other. A local hospital network might work there. The Northern Territory only has five hospitals spread over 1500 km, or more, and it is going to operate over one local hospital network. I do not think it is good enough. I do not think it is fair for the hospitals and the staff trying to deliver services that relate to particular community needs, and it also not good for the patients and those people utilising our health services.
This is something I urge the Health minister and the Chief Minister to address. We have a very good case for some exception with this local hospital network, purely by virtue of our own circumstances in the Territory. Five hospitals spread across such an enormous distance is no way in keeping with the intent of what the Prime Minister outlined - however flawed you, or we, think it is. It is not in keeping with his rhetoric of ‘locally run and locally operated’. It will be exactly the opposite. It will not be locally run and locally operated. Essentially, these boards will now be amalgamated into one super board local hospital network - no doubt out of Darwin.
Madam Speaker, I needed to flag those concerns because this relates to the health and hospital reform package introduced by the federal government earlier in the year and needs to be in line with that before any of this can get up and running. At the end of the day, we will support this. It is a little bug uncovered and, as it was put to me in the briefing, we need to squash that bug. I guess that is what we are doing.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I thank everyone for their support. It is a little bug we actually uncovered studying the legislation. It creates some problems for our medical practitioners and we want to protect medical practitioners so they are fully covered. Doubtless, it is nothing to do with the reform. Actually, this legislation started during the Howard government era, and is very good legislation, bringing everything under one roof rather than having different boards everywhere. People have to register, and at least we now have a centralised national system and we know where everyone stands.
It was a discrepancy in the way national law interprets certain areas of legislation and the way our legislation does. Now we have brought it together and we cover all health practitioners.
Once again, I thank the opposition for their understanding. It has to be done now because a new law will apply from 1 July, and we want all our medical practitioners to be covered at that time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 6 May 2010.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, this is a bill we also support. Anything that goes towards reducing smoking or, indeed, stamping it out right across the Northern Territory can only be a good thing. We have a couple of concerns and, rather than get into some argy-bargy and take this into committee, I will, on the way through, raise some of those concerns, and perhaps the minister can respond to those in his final speech.
Regarding the estimated cost to retailers, this is going to be an issue for smaller operators who sell tobacco products. The cost of complying with this legislation is going to be somewhere between $5000 and $10000 per store. That is a large impost on a small business to outfit the shop to comply with this legislation. It is a significant amount of money for small businesses to raise in, what we think, is a short period of time, between now and 2 January. In fact, by the time this bill is assented to it might be July, maybe August and that really only gives an operator six months maximum. I would suggest we can put a moratorium or an extension on it for smaller businesses, those with under 20 staff, to extend the time for them to comply with this legislation. Obviously, some of the larger stores will have the resources to do it.
We believe with the money raised through the licensing fees, I believe about $165 000 annually, the government should consider providing nicotine replacement therapy rebates for parents and expectant parents on referral by their doctor. We see this as a positive step towards stamping out smoking, and also would make good use of the money raised through the tobacco retail licensing fees. I know the federal government was considering a similar subsidy, but they are only at the consideration stage at this point.
Our recommendation was to cut the NRT, the nicotine replacement therapy, by $112 per month to around $33 per month for a non-pensioner, and approximately $5 for a pensioner. Based on these figures, subsiding one 12-week course within a 12-month period would cost the scheme about $336 per person. The $165 000 would provide approximately 490 people per year with more affordable access to nicotine replacement therapy. We have particularly targeted pensioners and parents in this proposal.
The Country Liberals also promised in the 2008 election campaign to provide healthy prescriptions from doctors. Of course, it is not the be-all and end-all but, certainly, we believe a step in the right direction. We know that the Territory has the highest prevalence of smoking in Australia, particularly amongst Indigenous Territorians. In 2008, the AMA ranked the Territory as the worst-performing jurisdiction with the annual Dirty Ashtray Award; and I think this year we have come second. The AMA said in a media release on 31 May 2008:
We are all responsible for this, all governments of all persuasions, but as the prevalence of smoking and the awareness of smoking has gained momentum, I believe we have been dragging the chain, particularly over the last couple of years. We believe by directing some of this money, or all of this money, raised through the licensing fees into a program which will clearly help those people who cannot afford NRTs - they are quite expensive - this will be a step in the right direction and demonstrate to the rest of the nation, and perhaps lead the way, that we are serious about stamping out nicotine use amongst all of us, and in particular those Indigenous communities which rely on it so much.
The Country Liberals did put in place a policy at the last election regarding doctors and prescriptions for this type of thing. We would like to see more of that in this bill but, essentially, we do support it. I suggest that if the minister would consider those proposals by the opposition then we would be a long way down the track to addressing nicotine addiction throughout the Northern Territory.
Ms LAWRIE (Racing, Gaming and Licensing): Madam Speaker, as Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing, I support the Health minister with this legislation. As he made very clear in his second reading speech smoking kills and he has pointed out that one in five Territorians die as a result of tobacco use. That is a pretty frightening statistic and is at the heart of what this legislation is about: making a safer environment, a safer entertainment environment, and a safer workplace for those people who work in the hospitality industry.
The types of controls being put in place in this legislation have existed throughout Australia. We are the last jurisdiction to put this in place and, for that, we have received the Dirty Ashtray Award. I note we got away from the Dirty Ashtray this year, albeit still towards the bottom of the pack. It took a Labor government to introduce tobacco reform. It did not happen in 27 years of CLP government. It has been hard and we have copped the political blows for this stance but, I believe, one in five Territorians dying as a result of tobacco use speaks for itself.
I understand the grief smokers have about the controls governments are progressively putting in which limit their ability to smoke when and how they choose. I have only been off the dreaded cigarettes for about seven weeks now, and every day is a struggle. As a smoker, I can understand how alcoholics must feel; you literally get up every day and tell yourself you are not going to have a cigarette that day. There are 1000 reasons that tempt you to have that cigarette, but I look at my children and I think there is every reason why I will not be having a cigarette.
As a very recent former smoker I have noticed that the controls government has put in place make it harder for a smoker to have that cigarette inside or outside. This legislation puts further controls in place and that is a good thing because it reduces your smoking intake. Tobacco is a highly addictive substance, and if there are external controls put in place that reduces your intake, it is a good thing.
Without these reforms to tobacco legislation in the Territory making us change, as smokers, our habits, I probably would not have reduced my smoking intake as dramatically as I have over the time, and it would have been much harder for me to have chosen the path of cold turkey and given up. As I said, I get it and I understand the grief smokers feel about this type of legislation. I also understand and have seen firsthand the grief a family experiences as they witness someone battling emphysema. It is a terrible way; it is a long, lingering, nasty death to go through. I get this debate at every level.
As Racing, Gaming and Licensing minister, I get the debate from a business perspective, from the venues that rely on a take over the bar and a take through the gaming machines in terms of their business bottom line. I understand the issues the industry has had. I put on the record my thanks to the Australian Hotels Association, and Clubs NT, for steadfastly returning to the negotiating table despite not really wanting this to happen - wanting to stop it from happening - but understanding it has happened everywhere else in Australia and they have really had two or three years reprieve. They have had two to three years of this impact not hitting their books and, as we all have seen from what has occurred elsewhere, it will have an impact on their financial take for a period of time but, over time, their revenues will return to a healthier position.
I am not discounting at all how tough it is for them to go through that early period, and they are going through it right here and right now; but as a government we are committed to continuing to work with them and listen to them and understand the venue-by-venue issues that arise with outside smoking area requirements, and work in an environment of consensus to ensure they meet the requirements of the legislation before us today.
You cannot get away from it; the reckoning time has arrived in the Territory. Fundamentally, it is about making venues safer for those people who use a venue for recreation and have had to endure passive smoking in the past. And let us not forget those members of the Miscellaneous Workers Union who were fairly voiceless in much of this debate; the ones who had no choice but to earn their dollar in a smoking environment.
I congratulate my colleagues for taking the tough stance in bringing this bill before the Chamber. We have found, after a difficult and tense debate with the AHA and Clubs NT, an outdoor smoking area agreement which suits the Territory, which puts us in the middle of the pack of what is occurring around our nation, and is a reasonable approach. The devil is always in the detail, which is why we have taken so long to crunch through the detail of this, particularly with the regulations for the industry.
No doubt more discussions will occur because we have recognised, due to the planning certainty around the design of outdoor smoking areas and all those logistics, we need to continue working with venues to ensure they get it right. Also, due to the construction of windows in the Top End, we need to have provisions to ensure industry can get reprieves with time lines if they have a genuine case to argue, a case backed up by the fact they have the designs and the building schedule to go ahead; they just need some extra time to finish off those building works.
That was a fair and reasonable point the government reached with industry, and with the close contact I have as Racing, Gaming and Licensing minister with industry, the majority get it. In relation to venues, the majority understood it was coming and it was always a case of when. They understood the devil was going to be in the detail, and was the government of the day prepared to work through in detail the issues each venue would confront with their outdoor smoking areas; and that is the approach government is taking.
I am aware the ban has affected the pubs’ and clubs’ bottom line, and we see that coming through with the gaming data. In the first quarter of this calendar year we saw gaming turnover in pubs and clubs was down around 20% from the same time last year. A 20% cut for any business is going to hurt significantly. They know as an industry, based on what we have seen interstate - we have no reason to think we will be dramatically different in the Territory - there will be a gradual rebound from this position. The reduction has been patchy. Some venues got in ahead and created outdoor smoking areas and introduced their patrons to the outdoor smoking areas before the bans commenced, and they saw less reduction in turnover than the venues which did not. It is interesting that you can train your clientele, your patrons, to deal with a change in habit and routine.
We have taken the position that health comes first – the health of patrons who visit these venues, and the health of those who work in these venues.
This bill gives industry the certainty it has been seeking, and I thank the opposition for its support. With its passage today, this bill has dotted the I’s and crossed the T’s, and industry knows exactly what it is dealing with. It is the certainty they want, and it is the certainty they have pursued, and we are delivering that certainty in this bill.
A great deal of work has occurred between the Health department, Racing, Gaming and Licensing, and the industry. I sincerely thank all officers of those departments, and the staff of the ministerial offices involved in working through the devil in the detail. It has been an arduous and difficult process. Everyone had a view, and it was very hard at times to find a view that lined up with someone else’s view. There were many different voices coming from different directions within the industry, and also from within government. This government pulled all that together and has landed at a point of certainty for everyone, and that certainty is within this bill before the Chamber today. I sincerely thank the opposition for its support.
As I said, we will continue to work venue by venue to ensure they get the details of outdoor smoking areas right. We are not going to be aggressive; we are going to be reasonable and fair. We have put structures in place to be reasonable and fair and have set down legislation and regulations with which their outdoor plans must comply.
We have also put in an exemption for high-roller rooms at the casino where a limited number of poker machines will be allowed for ancillary use by the companions of those people playing at high-roller tables. This is common practice in casinos around our nation, and we did not want to disadvantage SKYCITY, which has high-roller rooms, in the casino marketplace. This government took a fair and reasonable approach in understanding there is a place for high rollers in casinos in Australia. Our proximity to Asia gives SKYCITY some advantages to go after what we see as the middle bracket of wealth throughout South-East Asia. They are not going to go head-to-head in competing with Burswood in the top bracket of wealth thought South-East Asia. I have seen Burswood’s high-roller facilities, as have SKYCITY casino officials, and there is no way, in a market of this size, we can go head-to-head with the type of infrastructure available in Perth.
That being said, there is a middle wealth of South-East Asian travellers, tourists, gamblers, to attract to those high-roller rooms, but they come with an entourage. They come with their wives, their amahs, girlfriends - often several, all at the one time, which is interesting and a bit of a shock to those of us not quite used to that. Having lived and worked in Hong Kong for four-and-a-half years, I understand it, I have seen it. Wife No 1 puts up with concubines No 2, 3, 4, and 5. We are talking immense wealth here. However, the women in the entourage do not play the tables; the men do. The women play the poker machines quietly in a discreet area of the high-roller room. So, that is what we are providing for here …
Ms Purick: We are talking about smoking and tobacco.
Ms LAWRIE: I know the member for Goyder does not like to hear it, but I am simply just talking about the practice within the high-roller rooms in the industry.
Ms Purick: I thought you were talking about the tobacco bill?
Ms LAWRIE: It is contained within the bill, Kezia. Have a read of it.
Anyway, the reason why I am talking about the exemption for the high-roller room is because industry has been saying: ‘Why them, why not us? Okay, we have poker machines in a pub. Why do they get the exemption and why don’t we?’ This is why I am explaining it in the debate. There is a big difference between a middle wealthy Asian tourist in a high-roller room who will play for millions of dollars at those tables, and someone who is going to go down to the Casuarina Club on a Friday night with their family, have a buffet meal, and play some pokies - a completely different marketplace.
We are not pitching the high-roller room against the marketplace in pubs and clubs, and the people who are playing poker machines there. The regulations around this will have conditions put in place by the Director of Licensing.
The second aspect of this bill relates to the point of sale restrictions. Retailers will no longer be able to display tobacco products at the point of sale. This is consistent with the principle we do not support tobacco advertising. Retailers will also pay an annual $200 licensing fee. Revenue from this fee will support the Director of Licensing’s regulatory costs, and government’s initiatives to encourage people to quit smoking.
I will go back to where I started. Smoking kills! One in five Territorians die as a result of tobacco use. This is the right legislation to bring before this Chamber, and I am pleased to see it is attracting bipartisan support. I certainly hope it goes some way to making a safer entertainment environment for Territorians, and also a much safer workplace for those working in the hospitality industry
Madam Speaker, as a recently reformed smoker, I understand the harder it is for you to have a cigarette, the more you reduce your intake, and it helps you get off the dreaded tobacco. I congratulate the Minister for Health for this legislation.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I have to declare a long-standing interest in this legislation. It probably goes back long before I entered politics, when I was at the Menzies School of Health Research, and probably before that. I was an inaugural member of what was called the Tobacco Interest Group, or TIG, and there were four of us on that particular group. There was myself; Dr Tarun Weeramanthri, he is probably known to most people in the Chamber; Dr Joe Wright, who certainly was, and remains, very passionate in regard to this; and, representing the government was the former member for Port Darwin, Sue Carter. I can remember sitting in the hospital meeting rooms looking at the way ahead. I think we are talking in the mid-1990s and there was very little in the way of tobacco legislation in the Northern Territory. Today represents another major step along the way. You, Madam Speaker, when you were Minister for Health, I believe in 2002, introduced the first tranche of tobacco control legislation in the Northern Territory, so it is significant.
I would like to outline the reasons I have always been committed in this area before I entered politics, when I was with the National Heart Foundation which, of course, has a major agenda in tobacco control. Why? I am talking here not only about people smoking directly, but what is known as second-hand smoke, so the death risk increases from various tobacco-related causes. Respiratory ailments are caused and worsened; heart and vascular disease and conditions are caused and worsened; cancer - second-hand smoke is a proven carcinogenic risk; harm for workers and patrons result from their exposure; and a range of other health concerns - sexual, reproductive, prenatal harm - including diabetes, meningococcal disease, osteoporosis and other things. The US Surgeon-General’s report in 2006 is quite stark reading. It says in its conclusions:
Then it says:
That is pretty stark reading and conclusions coming from an authority like the US Surgeon-General. He goes on to say, in a particular chapter, Conclusions of Toxicology of Secondhand Smoke:
He goes on identify that:
Then an epidemiological report, which includes author, Stanton Glantz, who is very well-known in this area, says in Background:
In the Conclusions, they say:
That was a US study published in the very authoritative journal Circulation. Studies show increased asthma, lung cancer danger, and second-hand smoke kills by damaging lungs. In the workplace, very importantly, even brief exposure can increase workers’ cancer risk.
In 2007, in the American Journal of Public Health they found that brief exposure to second-hand smoke in bars and restaurants can increase workers’ risk of cancer. So this is significant for people working in these environments. Once again, in the workplace, 2004, it says:
That is pretty scary, but I believe there are legal issues involved here which are very important for industry, because I believe industry has a duty of care to its workers. We know the tobacco industry for a long time has tried to deny the direct link between tobacco smoking and lung cancer, which dates back to the 1950s; they have certainly been obstructive of the message and the findings of second-hand smoke and they have fought every step along the way against this. Employers, amongst others, should take note of this: there have been at least 28 cases in Australia where compensation has been awarded to people affected by passive smoking.
This comes from the ASH website and it talks about the case Marlene Sharp v Port Kembla RSL and Port Kembla Hotel in 2001, and it says a former barmaid sued the RSL and hotel after contracting neck and throat cancer caused by years of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke during the course of her employment. She sued in common law negligence, a breach of duty of care, and was awarded $466 000 by a New South Wales Supreme Court jury.
So there you have it. In the workplace there is a duty of care, and I believe this legislation is another step to ensuring the safety of not only patrons, but also workers in these workplaces, and that is why it is significant.
Let us look at the efficacy of going smoke-free. We know about the health effects, but is this type of legislation effective in reducing the adverse health effects of second-hand tobacco smoke? The member for Brennan and I have discussed the Corcoran collaboration a number of times: in May 2010 a worldwide review released by the Corcoran collaboration finds that legislated smoking bans have achieved their primary objective of reducing exposure to second-hand smoke. The review of 50 studies examined the effects of clean air legislation in countries, states and regional areas. It found these laws: reduce exposure to second-hand smoke, especially for hospitality workers; reduce hospital admissions for heart attacks; reduce tobacco consumption; meet with increasing public approval over time, and the authors conclude that:
That is the very prestigious Corcoran collaboration reviewing, and peer reviewing a number of evidence-based studies.
The British Medical Journal in 2004 showed a study from Montana in the US that showed a 40% drop in heart attack rates in six months after state-wide smoke bans in public buildings. Sadly, the ban was later reversed and heart attack rates shot back up to their previous levels. So we have to show courage here as legislators. There is an onus on us as legislators and we have to keep moving forward.
In terms of pubs, everyone thinks of Irish pubs as places of gaiety and enjoyment. Irish heart attacks fell 11% after smoke-free pubs. In 2007, heart attacks in the Irish Republic fell by 11% in the year after a nationwide ban on smoking in workplaces, including pubs. The author of the study from Cork University Hospital said:
As the member for Karama said - and it is great to hear she is now a former smoker - she is quitting, and it is a hard road. I was a tobacco smoker 40 years ago, and I found it very difficult to give up. It is one of the hardest things to give up, and I commend the member for Karama.
These steps encourage people to quit, as she said. Here is a media release from the Cancer Council in 2008 which says:
In 2007, Quit Victoria issued a press release saying:
Here is a positive knock-on effect of these legislative steps. You have to take into account the public view. A government report on adult health in New South Wales in 2008 showed people attracted to smoke-free dining outnumbered those deterred by more than seven to one. The Cancer Council in South Australia conducted a survey: it had 90% public approval - 86% managers in these areas and 72% smokers. These are important views, not only of the public but people who work in these environments. There was a Quit evaluation study from the Centre for Behavioural Research into Cancer, 1998. In 1997 only 3% of restaurant patrons in Melbourne supported no restrictions on smoking. Two-thirds of patrons always request smoke-free dining, and over 75% prefer to eat in the smoke-free area. That is a fairly important aspect.
The member for Karama, rightly, showed concern and understanding of the effects of this on industry. There is no doubt in the first 12, possibly 18, months after these changes are introduced; there is a downturn in revenue in the liquor and hospitality industry. I had the opportunity, when I had carriage of that portfolio, to visit the Hotels Association in Queensland where they had smoke-free areas for close to two years. I met with the President and some of the Executive Officers and they said they were quite comfortable with the changes a year or so on. There was an initial downturn after the changes were introduced but, with time, their takings returned to where they were. So, that is heartening.
We have to remember that where you have smoking in large areas there is much more expense in cleaning up and disinfecting air-conditioners; so there are savings associated with this. However, as the member for Karama said, we are sympathetic to the needs of industry and are very attentive to what they say.
Others have talked about the Northern Territory context of tobacco smoking. The member for Greatorex spoke about the very high rates of tobacco smoking in the Northern Territory. For non-Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, I believe it is about 50% higher than the Australian average. It is not only Indigenous people; we also have high rates of smoking in the non-Indigenous population. In the Indigenous population, it is over three times the Australian average, and research has shown in some remote areas smoking prevalence rates can be up to 70% of the entire community. The challenges are great.
I know there are a number of people working in this area; people from the Menzies School of Health Research, and my colleague and friend from James Cook University, Alan Clough, is working in a number of communities in the Northern Territory and Queensland to try to turn around this situation of tobacco smoking in Indigenous communities.
As the member for Karama pointed out, approximately 20% of all deaths in the Northern Territory are tobacco-related, and that equates to 180 people a year. The costs are enormous, conservatively estimated somewhere around $310m per year to the Northern Territory - probably much higher than that when you add it all up. This is the reason we are moving down this path. This is a step, it is not the solution by itself, but I certainly commend this bill to the House.
I turn to the bill and look at some of the measures. I have already mentioned we brought in the Tobacco Control Act in 2002 and I commend the Speaker, who was then Health minister. I know there was a lot of flack about it at that stage, and she was very resolute in introducing this legislation, just as our current Health minister is resolute in bringing this matter forward also. In his second reading speech, he talked about the Dirty Ashtray Award. There was a time when I thought we were going to get the Perpetual Dirty Ashtray Award, which is no commendation. I understand South Australia has it recently, so the challenge is in their court, and we have taken the steps we need to take.
The member for Karama has already talked about lifting the exemption on indoor smoking bans in licensed premises in January 2010, and some of the attendant effects of that. Nonetheless, I am approached almost on a weekly basis at the Rapid Creek markets; people ask: ‘When is it going to happen? You promised it’. Which I did – in the 2008 election I said we were going to take these steps – so people approach me and say: ‘You promised it, when is it going to happen?’ I acknowledge there has been a delay; I would have liked it happen sooner but, as the member for Karama said, there had to be a great deal of consultation, of discussion, and we have moved forward in a very positive way.
The main elements of the bill are smoke-free areas, with the introduction of a ban on smoking in all public outdoor eating and drinking areas, with some exempt areas for licensed venues. There will be areas where people will be able to have a smoke, and that is very well defined within the act. However, people will not be able to have a meal and smoke within the same area. It has been raised by some people that, somehow, this is not best practice for people to drink without having access to a meal. People can have a meal; they just cannot have a smoke while they are having that meal; and that is what it is all about.
It certainly seems to have worked in Queensland. I am not aware of any significant increase in road fatality rates in Queensland. I did ring a former colleague of mine, Mr Cameron Prout, Director of the National Heart Foundation in Queensland, and put this premise to him that this may have occurred. Cameron told me he believed road fatalities had actually decreased significantly in the last year in Queensland, although I have not had a chance to check that out myself. He did not seem to be of the opinion there had been any driver in the changes in Queensland in this particular aspect of the legislation over the last couple of years.
I commend smoke-free areas. As has been mentioned, there will be a prohibition on the display of tobacco products at the point of sale. I believe this is a very important aspect. Tobacco companies will not like this, and they certainly will not like the changes happening federally, as well, but it is a step in the right direction. Tobacco companies are very clever in the way that they market their product. Let us face it, this is a product that kills; this is a lethal product. If tobacco did not have the history it has, if it was introduced as a drug it just would not cut the grade. It certainly would not be able to be retailed, and it would not be able to be sold. But there has been a history of tobacco in the western world for centuries now, and that is where it all comes from. I watch this very carefully. Tobacco advertising has been prohibited in magazines, it has been prohibited on television, and it has been prohibited as sponsors at sporting venues.
If I could just digress: I was living in New South Wales in Armidale at the time, and I can remember John Laws talking about a footballer, I think he played for South Sydney, and he had been caught with drugs. John Laws said how terrible this was, and this guy should be banned and flogged. Well, he did not say that exactly, but he wanted this guy shamed and embarrassed, and run down in football and whatever, and we cannot have drug takers in sport. Well, one of the few times I have ever rung up talkback radio, I rang up John Laws and I said: ‘Isn’t this being a little hypocritical, John?’ He said: ‘What do you mean?’ I said: ‘When people were making this announcement, the higher-ups of the Rugby League had the Winfield logo behind them, and you are talking about drug-free sport. Come on!’ He cut me off when I asked him whether he received any consideration from tobacco companies. There was a two-second delay and I did not get an answer from John Laws about that. It was not too long after that he was in trouble with the broadcasting authority, but he did not want to answer that particular question.
Tobacco companies are very clever in the way they market. They do it in video clips and in movies, and they make it attractive. I know smoking is incidental in movies, but you can tell when it is being glamorised, and I think Hollywood has a lot to answer for in the connections there and recruiting new smokers. Let’s face it, the old smokers die so it is all about getting young people hooked on the drug. It is a very addictive substance and they are very canny the way they do it.
I fully applaud this step being taken in the legislation of licensing tobacco retailers, and there will be an introduction of the annual licence fees and greater powers to impose licence conditions on retailers. That is positive, and there have been discussions about the licence fee.
It will be brought in from 2 January 2011 and, as the member for Karama says, we will be working with industry in a cooperative, collaborative way to bring a sensible, flexible way forward on this. We are not out to punish industry, but from what I have said earlier in my speech to this House, it is clear that second-hand smoke is very toxic. I know the evidence is there, and that is why we are taking these steps and I believe industry realises that. No doubt there will be further steps and, no doubt, anomalies will arise. We have a very diverse Territory, we have very diverse licensed premises, and eating premises, and restaurants, etcetera, but we will deal with that flexibly. I know the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing will deal with it, and I know the Minister for Health will also deal with it.
As the member for Karama said, in order to assist industry make any required changes to their premises, the bill provides for exemptions from these restrictions until September 2011 where building modifications will not be possible prior to 2 January 2011. We realise, particularly with clubs, and this was the view put to me by a number of clubs across the Territory when I was Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing, that they actually have a process; they have to go to their board, build it into a budget, get building approval, and carry out the works. So, they have a process and we have recognised that, as government, and we respect that.
There is also the capacity for owner/occupiers of a building to voluntarily accelerate or otherwise implement outdoor smoke-free areas by designating all or part of the property to be a smoke-free area under the act. No doubt, there will be some businesses which will want to go faster and do it because their patrons demand it.
This is a very important act and I am very glad the opposition is supporting it. As I said, one of the foundation members of the Tobacco Interest Group was Sue Carter, the former member for Port Darwin. I am sure she will be very glad about these changes coming in. Many people work hard in the non-government sector: Healthy Living NT, and all the members of the various alliances, the Cancer Council, the Heart Foundation, Diabetes Australia, and a range of groups that are interested. The unions are interested and I know the LHMU, of which I am a member - I declare that interest as well - are very active because many of their workers work in these areas and they have mounted a number of national campaigns in this regard. I commend them for their efforts.
Madam Deputy Speaker, in closing, I commend the bill to the House. I am very glad there is bipartisan support across the Chamber for this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of this bill even though I have concerns in relation to some of the matters which will be discussed today.
I certainly do not support smoking although, I have to admit, at some time in my distant youth I was caught with a packet of cigarettes in my back pocket by my mother when she went through the washing. They do not sell those little packs anymore; that is a bit unfortunate. I probably saw the light and thought: what the heck am I smoking for because it is a fairly pointless thing.
Unfortunately, people do pick up the habit. I hope my daughter does not go crook at me, but she went out bush to be a ringer and she learnt a few things: one was to swear, one was to smoke, and one was to have a beer. Unfortunately, she still has the habit of smoking. I encourage her as much as I can to give it away. As you grow older it is so sad to see people pass away due to the effects of smoking. I do not say that as a preacher because I believe trying to get off the habit of tobacco is a very hard habit to kick. Some people have been known to stop it in one go, but it is not easy and we should not be judgmental of people. We should encourage people by all means to stop smoking, but we also have to be careful we are not being smarty pants because we do not smoke and start preaching to others about the dangers of smoking. By all means encourage people, but do not be holier-than-thou in these cases.
One of the good things happening today is we are introducing a series of amendments and, at the same time, the government has brought out this tobacco action plan. Whilst it is glossy - and I must admit I groan when I see pages of activity numbers and things – overall, I think its intended target, Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, is certainly very worthwhile. The figures suggest up to 70% of Indigenous people smoke and that should ring alarm bells, especially when we are doing our best to reduce death rates in Indigenous communities from other aspects of life that people in certain communities live with. If we can reduce smoking rates in those communities it would be good.
It is not easy to do because you have to convince people it is a bad thing. I do not know the history of smoking in the Northern Territory, but I do know people at Bathurst Island smoked out of a long bum shell. They did not need to roll their own; they just put tobacco in a long bum shell and lit it; it saved paper. Obviously, it had been around for a while. Chewing tobacco, which you do not see any more, was common at Daly River. When mixed with the ash of the stringy bark tree, it gave you a nice feeling for the rest of the day. You would see people with a lump of tobacco mixed with ash, which was called kungalung, which gave people a drowsy feeling, but they were, of course, absorbing nicotine.
When talking about Indigenous issues, it is not quite as simple as it may be from a non-Indigenous point of view, because to some extent there has been an acceptance that this is okay; it has been passed down. Maybe other forms of addictive substances were used by Indigenous people in years gone by. I do not doubt that is the case because if you look through a pharmacopeia you will see a range of uses for native plants for different reasons, for health, for food, etcetera.
When tackling Indigenous issues, the main drivers will be Indigenous people themselves, otherwise it is like preaching rather than bringing people along with change. In my time on Bathurst Island, when we were able to sit in the back of utes, I remember driving through the main street when the kids were going to school and they would yell out at the adults sitting in the back: ‘Cigarettes!’ And they would throw handfuls of cigarettes on the road and the kids would pick them up and it was like: who cares? That is the way things are.
Much work needs to be done to convince people, especially Indigenous people in remote communities, for their own sake and a healthier lifestyle they need to change something that has been around a long time which people have accepted as being okay. Somehow we have to turn that around to say: it is not good for you. It is a big task, and I welcome the government’s tobacco action plan, but Aboriginal people have to be the drivers behind this because that is the only way it will be successful.
Getting back to the amendment bill before us, as the minister said, it covers three areas: smoke-free areas, no displays at point of sale, and the licensing of tobacco retailers. There are a number of issues and if we go to the committee stage I will ask questions during that time.
At the Alice Springs sittings, the member for Sanderson and I were involved in discussions with the Hotels Association regarding timing of when the outdoor restrictions will come into place, and we were also involved with serving of meals in the smoking section of an outdoor area. I thank the government for giving people the right guidance to what is required, and the time to make the changes to those premises; many of the premises have already done their alterations.
There were some issues in relation to what was regarded as outdoor and not outdoor. I can cite the case of the Howard Springs Tavern, which was the Pub of the Year in the Northern Territory awards recently. It has a large area with plastic see-through blinds which can be pulled up or dropped down according to the weather. The question for those people is: when is it outdoor and when is it not outdoor? Maybe they have given up asking that question because they are now building an extension on the side, which is definitely outdoor. You have to be fair. You might say pubs make a lot of money, but pubs have actually lost some money when no smoking in pokies rooms came in. You do not have to give me statistics. I know when I walk through the pokies area at Howard Springs Tavern – it ain’t crowded anymore. In some ways, I am not that sad, because pokies are not the best thing for you either, but they have certainly lost revenue. With other additions required, such as putting on a new extension to fit in with the requirements of the outdoor smoking area, some hotels have lost revenue and have had to spend money to fit in with these conditions.
I am not complaining. I must admit I like our pubs without the smoking. It is much better and people are coming to accept it, but there are still some issues. There are issues of what you can eat in outdoor smoking areas. It is interesting because - I will try to put it nicely - I was hauled up before the ladies involved in, I believe it was the Northern Territory Tobacco Summit Steering Committee, and they were not happy with my idea that one should be able to eat in an outdoor smoking area where you are also allowed to drink. The argument I, and other people had, is if you are going to allow people to drink, you should allow them to eat because it is good policy to ensure people do not get drunk ...
Mr Chandler: It worked for me.
Mr WOOD: You have been in the outdoor area there often, member for Brennan, I can see that.
The argument from the committee was it should not happen at all and it does not happen in Queensland. In this case - I suppose you could call it compromise - you can have a pie, as long as it is in a plastic bag, and you can have a sandwich as long as it is marked with the right details by someone who makes sandwiches. That is fine but, in reality, it is not very practical. If I go to the bar in the pub, I am not going to get food served to me but, if ask them for a takeaway which they put in a polystyrene container, what difference is there in getting a meal in a takeaway pack to getting a pie in a sealed plastic bag, or some sandwiches? I am not sure too many people who drink beer and smoke cigarettes are really worried about salad sandwiches - they are watching the television to see who won the fourth race at Eagle Farm – but they should be entitled to more than just a pie. Are we encouraging healthy meals - a pie, a packet of chips? I am not sure.
I suppose this is a compromise between people who said: ‘No eating at all’, and people like me who said: You can have a meal’. It is something we can argue about. I must admit, I would hate to see someone prosecuted for eating a takeaway from Hungry Jacks in the pub down the road. Anyway, we will see what happens.
There are other areas of concern. One is exemption for high rollers at the casino. If I was to take the moral high ground, I could say: if you are wealthy, we make an exemption. The human beings in the casino are not as important, when it comes to a healthy lifestyle and no smoking, as the people in my pub. That is the message you are sending out: if you have the money, you can be exempted. I know there are exemptions for other places, which is probably practical, such as the V8s and places like that where it would be impractical to have a total smoke ban. But why should high rollers be exempted? Why should the casino have an exemption when it is not allowed in gaming areas in pubs? I do not believe there should be an exemption, and I do not believe the pubs will be happy about that. I believe high rollers should not be exempted.
In this section dealing with obtaining a certificate for outdoor smoking areas, I believe it is good that the government has funded an industry-based liaison officer for 18 months. That is a very good move, considering some of the argy-bargy going on for the last couple of years. The relationship between the government and the industry has been a bit touchy, and I believe the government funding a liaison officer to help with these changes is an excellent move.
I do not have a problem with disclosure at points of sale. It would be good if you can get the cigarettes away from behind the cash registers. It is my understanding that is where they normally have to be under existing legislation, but you still see them. You can see the packs, and the tobacco industry certainly knows the way, even in small spaces, of making their product look good.
I had an e-mail from a tobacco company this week and they were trying to convince me about the evil intent of this legislation although, I felt that that was not their great concern. Their concern is, under this legislation, they have very little way of promoting their product against another product. In other words, when it is put on the shelf, if you have the right connections, my product can be up here, and the competition’s product pushed down there. What is happening now is the product will hardly be seen. I understand there will be plain packs for all cigarettes so it will be very difficult to tell the difference between ‘Lungreach’ as I call it, and Holiday. That was their complaint, but I think it was more: ‘We are still in the business and we want a fair share of the market’. That is fair enough; they are still a legal business.
That is what concerns me - the fact that tobacco is still legal. How can tobacco companies actually compete against one another? Even though they are hidden, there will still be a sign to say what is for sale and the price.
As in the briefing papers here, I went to Coles on Mitchell Street, because in my briefing notes it says Coles have already put their cigarettes away. They have not quite put them behind the counter. You can actually see them but they are much lower down, about chest height, and they go right down to the floor now. That is a question I might ask in the committee stage. The writing on them is very tiny and you need a pair of binoculars to read it. I gather most of that is going to go anyway, but out the front is a list of all the cigarettes they sell, with the price per packet and the price per carton, and that is basically it. The only thing, in my reading of our legislation, is you are not supposed to see them at all. In this case, you can see them, although you would have to walk right up to the counter.
I asked the lady behind the counter if the changes have had any effect. It was good to talk to her because she knows about the changes, and this is obviously a national program by Coles to not display cigarettes. She said sales only dropped off for the first few days. The industry is saying if you put them behind the counter, you will create an illegal market, etcetera. But, from what that lady said, who deals with it, no, once people know the cigarettes are still there and still available, they do not have a problem. Smokers know where their smokes are.
Mr Chandler: Is it effective legislation?
Mr WOOD: So the question is, as the member for Brennan says, is it effective legislation? That is similar to what the Imperial Tobacco Company said to me when that was my argument. They said: ‘This has been shown not to work in Canada and Iceland’. Well, that was great.
But I do not regard this legislation as legislation you can judge on its own. It is part of a long-term package and if taken purely as a single piece of legislation not connected to any other activity that occurs, it may not have a huge effect. Overall, I believe it is part of a good campaign which does not say you cannot have cigarettes; it just does not promote them. I believe that is the key behind what we are trying to do. It does not say it is a good thing; it does not advertise ‘Holiday’ or ‘Longbeach’. I have always wanted to change that big notice board out at Holtze that used to have ‘Longbeach’ on it. If you changed it just a little you have ‘Lungreach’, and I thought that is more appropriate for a packet of cigarettes.
The idea is to stop promoting them, but you also have to balance that and that is why I had an argument with the ladies on the committee. You also have to be realistic; there are people who still smoke. We do not want them to smoke but they are doing something legal, they are citizens and they are entitled to smoke if they want to smoke - so give them a place to smoke – do not punish them anymore. We are not promoting it, but when they said you could not eat, I thought: come on, give me a break. They are still human beings; they are still people. I might not like them smoking but I am not going to starve them. We have to ensure when we are talking about this legislation that we are realistic. It is not difficult to hide cigarettes and make it harder for people to see them, that is fine, but when you are dealing with smokers, they are still human beings; you do not want them to smoke, but you still treat them as decent folk.
The other issue in relation to licensing tobacco retailers is the fee. I am not sure if it is correct, but the Imperial Tobacco people told me we are the only place that applies this fee. The minister says no, and that is fair enough, but that was the information they gave me. What worries me is it costs money to administer a fee, so although the government says it is going to return the figure, it is $200 per tobacco licence and there are 825 tobacco retailers, so that should generate $165 000. I hope that would not get eaten up in administration because the theory is this contributes to the provision of services to support smokers to quit smoking.
I will be interested to see that it does not go into internal revenue and disappear into the murky waters of the budget, but show it is doing something. Maybe we could use it to encourage people to get on to patches or other alternatives. If people say they want to go on patches maybe you could say: ‘If you sign up here, you can have them at a cheaper price’, or something like that. Use that money and show it is directly working to help people to stop smoking.
I support the amendments. As I said, I still have some concerns but, overall, the legislation does bring us in line with other states. I know there is always the Territory lifestyle issue and we cannot stop people smoking. What we are trying to do is not promote it. I hope we do not try to punish people who smoke. That is the feeling I got to some extent when talking to the committee; that people would become pariahs. I do not believe that is the way to go. When you are talking about adults, you do it sensibly and logically.
The last thing I would like to say, and it is something I mentioned at the briefing, for which I thank the minister, when you open up this book, Northern Territory Tobacco Action Plan, it says under your foreword, minister:
That is fine, minister, but if we do not do something similar with an alcohol action plan and make a similar effort, then we are being discriminatory. Alcohol has many more social effects than tobacco. It also has health implications, yet, do we stop advertising alcohol? Do we stop advertising alcohol at sporting facilities? No. Do we produce an alcohol action plan? Are you planning to do it? Do we say drunkenness is not a good lifestyle? No, we talk about binge drinking, but do we talk about the other problems we should have concerns about regarding alcohol?
Alcohol is just as big a problem. Alcohol is the main reason most people, especially Indigenous people, are in prison. They might not have died; however, they are costing $160 a day in prison. There are other costs incurred by the abuse of alcohol, and we need to do just as much work, or more, than we have with tobacco.
I have always felt, to some extent, we picked on the industry which could not kick as much. You touch the alcohol industry, and you see the kicking. Look at the noise when the Police Commissioner said we were going to sell light beer at Marrara – Boom! That is what it is like - it is a very powerful industry. Many of our sporting facilities and groups depend on them, but that does not mean we should not say alcohol causes problems. It is a legal drug enjoyed by many people and it needs to be used in a moderate and mature manner.
Minister, I welcome what is before us today. I welcome the package. I also say if the government is serious about health it has to come up with a strategy as forceful as the tobacco legislation.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, my understanding is we are not going to committee, and I would like to answer as many questions as possible in my final speech.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that alcohol is as big a problem as cigarettes. The reality is if you smoke and drive it is not as dangerous as people drink-driving, and we are likely to see more people drink-driving than smoking. I agree it is a legal product but, as Minister for Health there is one area in my department I would not like to see last forever, and that is the oncology centre, because many people have cancer because of smoking. I will never forget looking at a person who had a tracheotomy and he lifted the flap up and was smoking through the hole in his larynx -I will never forget it.
Most of us smoked when we were young. In my culture when you smoked you became a man. I was 16-years old when I tried my first cigarette. At the time I enjoyed going out with my friends and smoking. I gave up when I was 21 because I realised it was a waste of time, a waste of money, and a waste of my health. I always bought Colts because they lasted longer, but the aftermath of the Colts was dreadful, and the cough was even worse.
Nicotine is highly addictive, and many people cannot give up. I know many people who have given up about 25 times in 10 years. It is very difficult to give up - but some people make the effort.
The other thing which does not help is advertising. If you want to see what the companies do, I suggest you watch the film Thank You for Smoking. It is very interesting to see what tricks the companies have been using to attract you to smoking. Remember the exotic visions? We all remember the Marlboro Man riding down the plains on his horse and stopping to light a cigarette. I wonder which company would be brave enough to show us the last days of the Marlboro Man’s life - he died from lung cancer.
It is a dreadful product. As my colleague, the member for Johnston said, if it was introduced for sale today it would not never be approved. It is a high cost to Australians - to Territorians. Some people will say we are killing the Territory lifestyle; no, we are saving Territorians’ lives by introducing it.
There are two elements in this. For people who smoke you can argue it is their choice, but people who go to work in a place where other people smoke, go there for employment, and no one has the right to jeopardise the health of other people. We have seen in the past people get sick, and what it takes for the industry to take some action is the fact these people took them to court and, all of a sudden, multimillion dollar compensation claims were launched, and people had to pay.
Instead of treating the problem, it is better to prevent it. These amendments today do exactly that - not only protect the workers in the entertainment industry, in the clubs and pubs and other places, but also gives the opportunity to people who want to give up smoking to be in a non-smoking environment; gives the opportunity for people who want to enjoy a meal without the smell of cigarettes hanging around them to do so; and, at the same time, gives the opportunity to people who want to smoke to have a place where they can smoke and drink their beer.
Of course, if it had been left to the industry, the industry would say: ‘Here is the non-smoking area - tables, places where we serve dinner; and this is the smoking area with a band and gaming facilities’ - and everything to try to make it more attractive. We are trying to make smoking unattractive, and I do not apologise for it. We have to make it unattractive, to take people out of that area and give them an opportunity to break the habit.
Many people tell me they have given up smoking, but they have started smoking again when they go out and their mates light up cigarettes and the smell of the tobacco hits their nose and, all of a sudden, they are hooked again. Some of my colleagues have said exactly the same; they light one cigarette, and the one becomes two, and the two becomes five and, then, a packet a day. We have to give them the opportunity and help them escape.
We have also given the opportunity to the industry to adjust. We have given them until 1 January next year to come up with modifications. Should they be unable to meet the modifications and the timetable, and they provide us with evidence why they cannot do it, there is another nine months until September 2010 to achieve it, which is very generous and very fair.
It is not true there are no annual licence fees in other jurisdictions. Western Australia, the ACT, South Australia, and Tasmania have an annual tobacco retail licence ranging from $185 to $215 a year. Ours is $200, and that money will generate about $165 000 per year, which will go back into the campaign. I like the suggestion from the member for Greatorex that we actually direct this money to something people can actually see, such as subsidising nicotine patches, or something like that. I will ask the department to model this to see how far this money can go, and if we can provide just the beginning of the treatment for tobacco - chewing gum or nicotine patches. However, I have seen people who have decided to give up smoking use a nicotine patch, then go out on the balcony and take it off; light a cigarette, then put it back on again. It is a terrible, terrible drug. So, money from the licensing program will go back.
What is really pleasing is to find out Coles New World has decided to take all the cigarettes from the front counter and put them behind the counter, and with the new legislation, they will not be able to display them at all. In other jurisdictions, they have become really tough and are banning specialist tobacconists from exhibiting cigarettes and tobacco, which is fair enough. Most of the specialist tobacconists now have diversified so much you can buy flasks, wallets, and all types of things and, incidentally, you can buy cigarettes. So they are not relying heavily on cigarettes to actually survive. Also, two of the large tobacco companies have agreed to work with my department, which is really pleasing, in order to modify and transfer from the current situation to the situation next year when they will not be able to display their products.
We have been very active. I have to say the department has prosecuted someone for selling cigarettes illegally to underage people. I congratulate them for that, and they will continue to do so. That underage kid could be my son, or your son - someone’s child. Do not start him because, if he continues, he is another statistic, unfortunately, thanks to cigarettes.
I heard the member for Johnston speaking analytically about the bill, and the member for Nelson also, so I will not go back and repeat the same things. It took so long to reach this stage today where we have a bipartisan approach and agreement to what we are going to do: we are going to ban tobacco and assist people to break away from tobacco, and I do not want to delay it anymore. Enough Dirty Ashtrays - the Territory has come of age. The Territory has decided this is the time to do it; we can do it, and we owe it to Territorians.
Our target now should turn to Indigenous Territorians who, unfortunately, smoke too much, five times more than the other Territorians in the cities, and many Indigenous Territorians start to smoke very early. We have to develop a campaign they understand, a campaign in language, a campaign to show Indigenous Territorians the damage they do to themselves and to their families and to their children, to try to get them away from it.
There is a very vicious plot by the tobacco companies; they know very well in western society smoking is now not trendy, so they start targeting the Third World countries. If you go to places like Africa or China, I have never seen so many people smoking in the streets and in the restaurants as I have seen in China. I would walk into a restaurant to have dinner, and people would sit at the next table and would light a cigarette, and every table would have an ashtray. I like Chinese food, it tastes terrific, but I cannot smell anything because of the smoke from tobacco. I do not mind people smoking, but, hey, not next to me while I am eating. This is one thing, besides them smoking, that really turns me off.
I mentioned before about the cost. We understand there is going to be a cost, and some people say there will be a decline in earnings. The indications we have from other states is, initially, there is a decline in earnings because people do not go to the pokies, and do not go to the pubs, but eventually people will go back. Why? Because their mates are there; they are not going to stay home by themselves and smoke. The attraction of entertainment outside of home is so great that people will go, even if they cannot smoke; they will walk out and smoke in another area and then go back in.
I remember a few years ago, I met a Malaysian person and when we asked him his impression of Darwin he said: ‘A very nice place, but too many prostitutes’. I said: ‘What are you talking about?’ He said: ‘All those women smoking outside’. So I had to explain that they could not smoke in the workplace anymore, so everyone was coming outside to have a cigarette. It was not what he thought it was; it was actually an effect of our banning cigarette smoking. He was very embarrassed because he had misunderstood the situation, but there can be no misunderstanding when we apply the legislation.
I thank the member for Nelson and the member for Greatorex for coming to a briefing and I hope the briefing eliminated the misinformation. This bill does not promote bad eating habits. I do not think a pie is bad nutritionally, especially if you do not eat them every day. We have a range of pies today, and some are so expensive it is like buying a meal at a restaurant. I have never seen some of the pies you buy at Woolworths or other supermarkets - different types from grain-fed animals from King Island from Tasmania. I mean, we are talking about gourmet pies, luxury pies, and venison pies. I do not think they could be declared junk food; I would say they are very nice luxury food. Again, it depends what you consider to be a snack. For you, a pie is a snack. For me, on Saturday morning, it is a meal, especially if I sit down and have a beer with it.
It is actually a choice people make; what is important is we give people a choice. People can have a meal without cigarette smoke, theirs or others, or they have the choice to go to a place physically separated by a non-smoking area, where they can sit down and have a cigarette, and a pie and have a beer. I think it is about choice.
Madam Speaker, as I said before, the Territory has come of age. It is very important we have a bipartisan approach on this issue because it affects everyone: it affects members of our family, it affects our friends. It is fantastic that we now have this situation in the Territory and, hopefully, we will not see anymore Dirty Ashtrays.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, Madam Chair. Minister, thank you for answering most of the questions I put before you earlier. One of the questions you did not mention is Regulation 8A on page 6. This is in relation to the casino licence. The concern I have is the reasoning behind the casino being able to declare an area as a high roller room and this room may be exempt from no smoking indoors conditions. Why are they allowed to have that condition and other gambling facilities not allowed to have that exemption?
Mr VATSKALIS: This is not unique to the Territory; it happens throughout Australia. As a matter of fact, the Licensing minister had a look at it before she advised me about the situation, and it is because of market forces. Many people using these gaming rooms are not walking in off the street but are there by invitation, and they are usually high rollers. These people come mainly from interstate and overseas where smoking is allowed in these areas. So, it is not unique to the Territory; it is common around Australia. There are exemptions in all states and territories around Australia because the market forces specifically request they be able to smoke in high roller rooms.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister, but regarding market forces, if I own a tavern, or I own the Casuarina Club, could I not say that market forces are also important for me, not just for the casino?
Mr VATSKALIS: The difference is in a pub or the general area of a casino, the number of people exposed to tobacco smoke is significantly larger than in the high roller’s room. The high roller’s room might have one, or two, or three people who smoke themselves and only expose themselves to smoking. It is not like you have 100, 200, 300 or 400 people as you have in other rooms at the casino or in pubs and clubs.
Mr WOOD: Minister, in your action plan you mentioned concerns about passive smoking. How does that sit with the staff who work in the high roller facility at the casino?
Mr VATSKALIS: The casino has to implement special measures to protect these people from passive smoking such as not being exposed for a significant period of time, and rotating regularly. Also, this does not happen every hour of every day. These people are flying in specifically for a particular period of time before they fly out. It is not a continuous event like SKYCITY starting at 7 am and going until 12 noon continuously.
Mr WOOD: Could I just go a little deeper on that? It says on page 7 of your action plan that:
How then do you protect staff who work in the high roller’s area when we have already said we need to protect staff in the local pub who are not allowed to serve meals in the outdoor smoking area? What actual preventative methods are you putting in place to protect the staff who work in the high roller area?
Mr VATSKALIS: The exposure of staff to passive smoking, because of the special conditions and plans the casino has put in place, is not long-term and cannot be long-term. In addition, casinos have to operate separate and different quality air-conditioners from the rest of the building in order to cope with the smoke and the smell in the high roller area. This is part of the plan the casino has put in place.
Mr WOOD: I will not continue in that area but I repeat: I believe casinos should not be exempt because small business is as important, when it comes to marketplace, as big business.
Section 20, Display of tobacco products, the clause says:
I looked at the display unit in Coles and it is obvious they have put some money into making a display unit which accords to some national guidelines. My notes are that Coles has done this as part of its national compliance program. Has Coles checked with you before installing those display cabinets to see if they fit the requirements of this new amendment?
Mr VATSKALIS: Coles does not have to comply yet; it has to comply by 1 January 2011. However, we have provided all retailers with information about how to display. We have made clear here - and I am happy to table this - to show people how to display or not display products, and how to stop their products being displayed openly to people. I would like to be clear; this is a document from Victoria which we will use to show people what to do.
Mr WOOD: Are our requirements part of a national compliance program? Is there such a thing?
Mr VATSKALIS: These are our requirements.
Mr WOOD: Do they match up with any other state, or is it something we thought up ourselves?
Mr VATSKALIS: They are probably slightly tougher than other states because we say they must be completely out of sight. Victoria is very similar to ours. We are not going to reinvent the wheel. If something works in other states, why would we not copy it if it is so effective?
Mr WOOD: If we have a retailer in the Northern Territory who has spent money on doing the right thing - maybe for a big company like Wesfarmers the money is not the end of the world - but it would be sad if they have set up cabinets obviously with legislation in mind and according to some national compliance program, and when this comes into being it does not fit. Would they be required to knock those cabinets down, or could they get an exemption if it was close enough to what you wanted?
Mr VATSKALIS: Coles is the only supermarket chain that has already done it. It has been inspected by the department and fully complies with our requirements. The others have not started yet but they have been working very closely with my department in order to comply with the requirements.
Mr WOOD: You said it fully complies. I can see it when I walk up to the counter so how does it fit within the definition that products cannot be seen from inside or outside the premises? Further down the bill it talks about:
That was the first thing that came to my mind when I visited Coles - I could see them. I know they are all going to have a similar pack, but you can see them. My concern is whether it fits within the legislation. If you are saying it does, it does not seem to match what is written here.
Mr VATSKALIS: I have been advised one of the windows to cover the top of this display will be modified to completely seal the products, so you will not be able to see them.
Mr WOOD: I must admit I do have a laugh when you talk about specialist tobacconists can sell other products - we are trying to get rid of cigarettes, but we can still sell bongs. I am wondering whether they might be part of some restrictions too, minister? Maybe I will leave that question for another day. I thank you for those answers, anyway.
The only other one - I have mentioned about pies being a healthy food. Well, some of this weight is caused by pies; I like pies too. There are various types and quality of pies but my feeling is there is some discrimination there. I cannot see why a person who is smoking at the pub, who is having a drink at the pub, cannot serve themselves with a takeaway meal, or bring in a Hungry Jack’s if that is their cup of tea, or bring a meal into that area, as long as they are not being served by staff.
One of the matters raised was that someone has to clean up the mess and has to enter that area. I say someone has to clean up the mess anyway, because if you are drinking, staff are going to collect the glasses. This is an area where I would have liked to see more leniency.
Mr VATSKALIS: Member for Nelson, first of all, Hungry Jacks is not a packaged food. It is takeaway. The way it is produced, it is not considered to be pre-packaged food. It does not comply with label requirements and everything else. Please do not start …
Mr WOOD: No, that is all right.
Mr VATSKALIS: As I said before, what we are trying to do is encourage people to give up. People make choices. If I eat chips while my mate has steak and kidney pie, or parmigiana, I am stuck there like a shag on a rock. I have to make my choice.
I know that there is the argument: ‘But where do we stop?’ The other thing is, if a person uses a plate someone, as you said, has to clean it up. I do not think the pubs would be very keen on closing that area for an hour or half-an-hour every three hours for someone to clean it up. The easy way out is, if you want to have a smoke you can have a pre-packaged pie, pre-packaged sandwiches, chips - something easy which is a quality snack rather than fast food.
Mr WOOD: As I said, if you are allowed to drink, and this is the difference we have with Queensland - you cannot only smoke, you can drink, and someone has to pick up the glasses, so the argument about staff having to pick up food containers - they still have to come up and pick up the glasses. So, I just make the point.
I know what you are saying, and the argument from those ladies from the committee who saw me was it must discourage people as much as possible. The point is we have done a great deal; we have shifted smokers. A few months ago they were at the bar. We have now shifted them out to the back corner. If that does not make them feel like pariahs, I do not know what will. I do not know whether we really have to kick them too hard while they are down. All I am saying is that they cannot have a decent meal. Lack of promotion, lack of advertising, and moving people out there somewhere certainly sends the message. But, as I said, they are still human beings. They are still friends of mine. If they have a smoking problem, I do not think we should restrict them too much on what they eat. That is all I have to say, Madam Chair.
Bill agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 9 June 2010.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I will continue from where I left off yesterday prior to the lunch recess. I was speaking about the Auditor-General’s report into SIHIP and the relationship this report will have and brings to bear upon the deliberation of the Council of Territory Cooperation.
Importantly, Madam Speaker.
That is the End of Year Review 2009, some five or six months ago, and the situation has not got any better. The End of Year 2009 Review continues:
A lack of supporting documentation in respect to costs being claimed. The issues raised with the department included:
This is singularly one of the important issues arising out of this report. It goes directly to the heart of the capacity of the department of Local Government and, by extension, the minister, to manage the financial operations of SIHIP.
There are a number of other points underneath that. Discrepancies we know of in the financials audit and review process, the cost control of positions had not been formally established to review and validate progress payments; appropriate performance and monitoring reports were unavailable in order to gauge the progress of SIHIP; corporate governance issues in relation to SIHIP needed to be addressed; the Alliance Management Plan did not appear to exist resulting in non-compliance with the SIHIP agreement, and it goes on.
Again, it comes back to the total lack of control that the minister, during 2009 and prior to that, and his department, and his government, had with respect to SIHIP. That is why we are seeing SIHIP becoming singularly the most monumental failure to deliver a program - any program - whatsoever with respect to Aboriginal people.
I will turn quickly to the conclusions of this report. It says, and quote in part:
That simply goes to incompetence. It goes on:
That is quite clear from the other parts of this report I have read into Hansard, and I can also add that the key management control and governance issues still need to be addressed:
The report goes on:
In other words, both the Northern Territory government and the federal government got it wrong:
That simply goes back to the incompetence of both the Northern Territory and federal governments in implementing SIHIP. They started with incorrect premises and the problems just compounded themselves on top of that.
I shall not delay with the report any further. My colleagues canvassed this for some time in parliament yesterday but, simply put, this review by the Auditor-General opens up a whole new line of inquiries for the Council of Territory Cooperation which I know we will attempt to pursue with a great fervour. SIHIP as a program cannot go unchallenged and we must get to the bottom of where the rot started. This report details some of that, but there is certainly more information that needs to be gathered and clearly not all the information about SIHIP was made available to the Auditor-General, and those are the types of issues we will need to canvass.
I will wind up there as I am almost out of time. In general terms, I feel the committee is on fairly positive ground. We seem to be moving forward on many issues and I am looking forward to spending time with my committee colleagues investigating particularly SIHIP. Notwithstanding the debacle with the shires, SIHIP probably now ranks as the single most important issue that needs to be canvassed by the committee. Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I very much look forward to working on that.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak on the second report of the Council of Territory Cooperation as was tabled in this House on the last day of the sittings in May.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! My understanding is the member for Nhulunbuy has already spoken on this.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, she has not.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I stand corrected.
Ms WALKER: As I am a new member to the Council of Territory Cooperation, having taken up the position vacated by the member for Fannie Bay in March. I attended my first meeting on Thursday, 25 March, and the contents of this second report have been compiled from public hearings and evidence provided by many witnesses, as well as information gathered from briefings and meetings during January, February and March, none of which I was present.
For me, personally, this represents an opportunity to step outside my electorate and examine how government policies and programs are unfolding in other parts of the Territory. This opportunity is there for all members of the CTC. I have heard much of what happens in other members’ electorates, from both sides of the House, and also through the print and electronic media. I might be so bold as to say these channels are not always reliable sources of information in terms of accuracy and the certain bias.
The other important channel through which I have heard about what is going on in other parts of the Territory has been through the Council of Territory Cooperation’s first report tabled in February, and this second report.
I am very fortunate to have stepped outside my electorate. Since becoming a member of CTC, I have travelled with members to Central Australia - to the electorate of Macdonnell where we had a very fruitful two-day visit; and to the communities of Alice Springs, Santa Teresa, and Ntaria or Hermannsburg. No doubt we will be talking about that more when we table the third report.
These reports have a good deal of credibility in that they contain information and findings gathered through public hearings and meetings. Many of these meetings are held in different and often remote locations around the Territory where members of the council have the opportunity to see and hear for themselves, firsthand, how government policy is travelling and how well it is or, in some cases is not, delivering programs. It is not only a chance to get out and kick the tyres, but to be at the coalface and talk to members of the public, residents, public servants, non-government organisations, and anyone else who chooses to attend and provide evidence at these public hearings.
I am fortunate as a backbencher and relatively new member to this parliament, to participate and, I hope, to contribute positively to the Council of Territory Cooperation. Possibly members of the opposition are considering rotating their members through the council. I am not sure if they, like us, have juggled workloads and interests, but I could recommend to the Leader of the Opposition he might want to consider other members within his party who may wish to take up a position and learn from the experience it provides. Not only to learn, but contribute to addressing some of the important issues in the Northern Territory.
The member for Nelson, as chair of the CTC, was very genuine when he said in his foreword to the very first CTC report tabled in February:
I hope to be part of that education, and while I understand a good deal of what I will be involved in as a member of CTC is finding out and identifying the problems, I genuinely believe the CTC will play a pivotal role in finding solutions at a time when we see unprecedented activity and expenditure in the Northern Territory.
The member for Katherine, whilst he and the other opposition member, the member for Port Darwin, possess a certain degree of cynicism about the value of the Council of Territory Cooperation, I believe they are beginning to recognise the value. The member for Katherine said in response to the first report when it was tabled in February:
That is a very positive thing for opposition members as well as the rest of the CTC.
It is unfortunate the member for Macdonnell sees very limited value in the Council of Territory Cooperation as indicated by her non-attendance at many meetings and visits. She has been to some, but since I have become a member in March, she has not been to one of them. I know she feels very passionately about SIHIP in particular, and I know that had everything to do with her decision to depart the government last year, which is most unfortunate. As members of parliament we all want to participate, contribute, and work to see things through, see programs delivered. So, it is disappointing she has the opportunity to be part of a council where we can effect change, where we have unique access to sites and to people to gather information, produce these reports, and put recommendations to government. It is a shame the member for Macdonnell, for whatever reason, chooses often not to so participate in the CTC - even when we were in her own electorate in Central Australia in May, and I am sure she has her reasons why she could not be there, but it was very unfortunate.
I take heed of some of the remarks made by my colleague, the minister for Housing, the other day in reference to the member for Braitling being able to throw out photographs and throw out what is wrong with everything. As the minister for Housing said, the hard part is when it comes to actually doing something. It is about working hard to try to make that change and I know so many members of this parliament are committed to that.
Of course, I had the advantage of joining the CTC after its initial start-up, there being no other council like this in any other Australian jurisdiction. It is, of course, all new territory - if you will pardon the pun. A good deal of hard work went into the first few months to work out the logistics and the forward planning, together with the staffing and resourcing. The hard work of the Secretariat certainly continues. As I said, there has also been the challenge of trying to bring the opposition members along for what they regard as a somewhat cynical exercise, which was certainly evidenced by the first report with a 22-page dissenting report tabled by the Country Liberal Party members.
I take some heart the second report has been agreed to by all members of the CTC and there is no dissenting report. As I said, I am a newcomer to the CTC and I did join at a pivotal time. On 25 March, our new secretary, Helen Campbell, came to her first meeting. It was a very successful planning meeting; each member of the council articulated what they were looking to gain from the CTC, and what we saw as to where the CTC needed to focus. I do not think any of us see the Council of Territory Cooperation as the fixer of problems, but rather as a committee which has the ability to provide close examination and scrutiny of government policy and programs, and get out to the coalface, have public servants before us, and speak to residents firsthand to be able to deliver that information via reports and recommendations to this parliament.
Going back to that initial meeting I attended on 25 March, we also developed a time line - quite a challenging one at that - to draft the second report we are talking about now to be delivered to members. The draft was circulated within just a week and thanks must go to the members of the Secretariat, in particular, Jan Whitehead, for her efforts.
At our next meeting on 14 April, we went through the report and recommendations and, with some give and take, some robust debate and a smattering of goodwill and grudging, we reached agreement. It made the member for Nelson’s day to have a report we all agreed upon with its recommendations and no dissenting report. I am not entirely confident it will be quite as straightforward with future reports or the Country Liberals will not choose to table dissenting reports in the future; however, that is the robust nature of the council and, of course, they are quite entitled to do so.
I now return to the report itself and reaffirm the 14 recommendations have been agreed to by the CTC members. The first three recommendations pertain to the matter of the power supply failure on 23 November 2009. I was not part of the meetings or hearings in relation to this issue. The reality is consumers, be they residents or businesses, need certainty of the reliability of power supply, and government needs assurances that its assets and taxpayer dollars are returning value for money. As to whether the minister, as per Recommendation 3, attends a hearing of the CTC, I have no doubt the members for Port Darwin and Nelson will seize the opportunity during the upcoming estimates to ask questions about this matter, which is the purpose of the estimates process.
As for Recommendations 4 and 5 regarding statistics gathered by the Department of Justice and Police about domestic violence and assaults statistics, the recommendations are straightforward and logical, even if the issue around the anomalies of how information is recorded, collated, analysed and reported across the two agencies is not. Domestic violence is a terrible issue in communities across the Territory, and one which the government takes a strong stand on, including legislating for mandatory reporting last year. The more robust the data we have from across the Territory, the better positioned we are to understand and continue to address this issue, which impacts on far too many Territory families, and women in particular.
Recommendation 6, 7 and 8 pertain to the A Working Future policy, and the responsibilities of both Australian and Territory governments to progress and accommodate the needs of residents of growth towns, as well as those involved in remote service delivery such as the shires and homeland resource agencies. There needs to be better coordination between the two levels of government, especially when calling upon the new third sphere of government in the Territory, our local governments or shires and, most definitely we must ensure housing standards meet existing agreed national standards for Indigenous community housing.
On my copy of the report which I have marked with notations, I put a triple tick alongside Recommendation No 7. The over-bureaucratisation of consultation, the duplication and layering of reference groups, consultative groups, boards, or whatever they might be called, is, quite simply, unproductive, unnecessary and the source of much angst in communities. This imposition on people’s lives is not acceptable. It causes headaches, it causes worry, and it causes leadership fatigue which was reaffirmed on our recent visit to Santa Teresa, where we met mainly women from that community.
The Council of Territory Cooperation has much more work to do and more evidence to take as it continues to evolve, but frustrations around the workability of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act have come up in discussions, and I am sure this is an issue we will continue to examine as we meet with people in communities and at public hearings. I know, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, that it is a subject you are very positive about and very familiar with.
The ninth recommendation is that the Northern Territory government permit shires to development an organisation without requiring approval from government. If there is one thing I do know, the one-size-fits-all approach to regions and how different organisations operate in those regions does not always work. Shires need to have some flexibility to make decisions about their organisational structure to best meet the needs of their service delivery model.
In that same part of the report is recorded concerns about the Tiwi Shire Council and difficulties for them in finding stability, and being able to move forward with constant changes in the senior executive, starting with their CEO position. I understand the Barkly Shire is having a few problems as well. For shires, it is also issues around their accounting system, which we have heard a great deal about, and difficulties in accessing adequate funding to deliver services as well as dealing with bureaucracies of the Australian and Northern Territory governments. Apart from what I read and hear, my experiences with local government reforms to date are largely limited to my electorate and the workings of the East Arnhem Shire, which is why it is all the more interesting to be a member of CTC and go out into the Territory and, most recently, meet with the MacDonnell Shire.
I do need to point out, the East Arnhem Shire stretches across my electorate and the electorate of the member for Arnhem, where the communities of Ramingining, Gapuwiyak, Milyakburra and Groote Eylandt sit, so I cannot speak for those places but, on a positive note, the East Arnhem Shire, apart from a rocky start-up period as was the case for all the shires on 1 July 2008, has achieved good stability thus far, no doubt helped by the fact they have the same CEO, the same CFO …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: A quorum is called. Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Ms WALKER: Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as I was saying, one of the reasons for stability within the East Arnhem Shire is since start-up on 1 July 2008 they have had the same CEO, the same CFO, the same Technical Services Manager, the same Community Services Manager and the same Shire Services Manager at Yirrkala, Galiwinku and Gunyangara, and the same elected president, Mr Banambi Wunungmurra, and, bar one, the same elected council members from each of the four wards that make up the East Arnhem Shire.
They have become a cohesive group because under strong leadership and with a determination to work together they are working as a true council should. As a regular attender at their council meetings either in person or on the phone, and the same for the member for Arnhem, I have been able to witness firsthand how the group and the shire has evolved and continues to evolve.
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the last East Arnhem Shire Council meeting held in May in Jabiru because I was in Central Australia with the CTC. That was a combined meeting of the East Arnhem and the West Arnhem Shires. It is the second time they have combined, and given their boundaries border one another and their clans cross over, it makes sense for shires to be working together to learn from what the other is doing. Whilst I could not get to that meeting in Jabiru, I know the member for Katherine was able to attend in his capacity as the shadow for Local Government, and I know council members appreciated his attendance and his interest.
It is very clear that shires are frustrated. They are frustrated with the Australian government, they are frustrated with Northern Territory government, and their funding arrangement responsibilities. The fact is they have inherited debt from the former community government councils, not all of them, but most of them; they have inherited old and unworkable equipment and assets; they have inherited decades of neglect, and acceptance of a workplace culture in some communities where it is regarded as okay not to be at work but still be paid as an employee.
They have frustrations around the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and working with the land councils as highlighted by the fact we have roads in dire need of repair and yet the whole process is complicated by the fact they are on Aboriginal Land Trust land. These findings emerged in the first report of the Council of Territory Corporation.
I do not want to go on about shires but rather look forward to members and the secretariat of CTC making a visit to Northeast Arnhem Land, noting that CTC has already visited Groote Eylandt and its three main communities in March. I hope they come to north-east Arnhem Land to Galiwinku on Elcho Island, to Nhulunbuy to Yirrkala, to Laynhapuy Homelands and Gunyangara or Ski Beach. I hope they get there on the ground and see for themselves how government policy and programs in areas like the shire of north East Arnhem Land are travelling.
The remaining recommendations of the second CTC report, recommendations 10 to 14, address aspects of SIHIP, and I agree with each one of them. These recommendations build on the recommendations of the first report tabled in February and ...
Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I seek an extension of time to allow the member to complete her speech, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker and thank you to my colleague, the member for Stuart.
These recommendations build on the recommendations of the first report tabled in February. Of the 21 recommendations in that report, half of them are regarding SIHIP. I appreciate this is the single, biggest, Indigenous housing project ever undertaken in the Territory trying to address decades of neglect in remote communities, and it will deliver all the promises over the life of the program. Working under the alliance contracting model clearly has had its challenges and drawbacks and, whilst I will not speak directly to the Auditor-General’s report tabled in the House this week, clearly the Auditor-General’s report recognised some of the issues the program has had, but recognises it is getting back on track and we are working towards this program being delivered.
One of the things the CTC offers which this parliament does not is the level of theatrics, grandstanding, chest thumping, and people out to grab headlines without any real substance. Members of the opposition, who want to knock the CTC, may pay heed to the CTC and what it can achieve.
In my own electorate, where Galiwinku and Yirrkala are part of the program, Galiwinku in particular has a substantial package including 19 new houses. I have had assurances Territory Alliance will have capacity to deliver on schedule even though they have now taken on the packages previously undertaken by Earth Connect. I welcome my colleagues of the CTC visiting the East Arnhem region and seeing and hearing for themselves how SIHIP is being delivered, and what the barriers are, or have been, in delivery to that community, including the delays caused by protracted negotiations around land use agreements.
I look forward to being part of the ongoing deliberations of the Council of Territory Cooperation and having the opportunity to travel to other parts of the Territory and electorates of other members to meet and talk with Territorians and learning, firsthand, not only what the issues are, but what the positives are. I know the member for Nelson is very focused on looking for those positives, and I know my colleague, the member for Arafura, is always looking for positives, and they are certainly are out there.
The member for Nelson, the member for Arafura and I take every opportunity in this House to share with members and put on the public record the many good things which happen in the bush which do not make the front page of the NT News, or any paper for that matter. I am determined to continue to promote the positives while also recognising there are areas of government policy and program delivery which need to be addressed, and see them delivered successfully for the benefit of Territorians. This government is about transparency and communication - elements which were sadly lacking under years of CLP leadership.
I believe the Council of Territory Cooperation has a strong and positive role to play in that area, and I look forward to contributing and being a part of it. Like the member for Nelson said when presenting the first report:
Surely there would not be a member in this House who could disagree with that sentiment.
Madam Speaker, I commend the report to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank all speakers who are members of the CTC. I should note the member for Fannie Bay was a member of the CTC for a period, and his job was taken over by the member for Nhulunbuy.
I will not repeat what I said when I spoke to the second report; many of those issues have been raised in previous debates in parliament. In summary, I believe we are moving ahead. It is not an easy process because the concept of the CTC is a new one of trying to bring a different approach to parliament to bring all sides together for a common goal.
In the second report issues were raised about Power and Water, which highlights one of the significant differences between some other committees and this committee - its self-referral powers enabled the CTC to look at issues related to electricity problems which occurred in the Darwin region late last year. Through self-referral, the CTC was also able to look at some of the statistics used by the Department of Justice and the Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency in relation to what appeared to be inconsistencies in the way certain matters were reported. There were also responses to issues in relation to local government, and SIHIP took up quite a large part of the second report.
Some may ask what the CTC actually does in the type of actions and achievements it has on the ground. The CTC, in that sense, is the same as other committees in putting together serious recommendations to the government; and it will be up to the government to act on those recommendations. The CTC’s first report has had a response from the government and, so far, that is the response. The question is: can those actions be turned into something concrete? Again, that is the role of government. The CTC will continue to recommend changes to the government, and it will be on the government’s head if it does not accept or does not act on those recommendations it agrees to. Naturally, the government may not agree with every recommendation, and that is the right of the government when it comes to the operations of our committee system.
I remember when the Environment committee recommended we put a fence across the Cobourg Peninsula to try to stop the invasion by cane toads ...
Ms Scrymgour: I thought you had forgotten that.
Ms Lawrie: I have not.
Mr WOOD: I notice the member for Karama has a smile on her face. I thought that was a good recommendation but it was not taken up by the government at the time.
The CTC will continue to put forward recommendations to government and monitor the government’s response to those recommendations.
I heard the member for Nhulunbuy talking about Recommendation 7. I have a lot of sympathy with her in relation to Recommendation 7, which I will read:
It has come to our attention - and we are very conscious that we could be part of that problem. It may be we have to have a different approach, perhaps a more informal approach sometimes. We may have to, as the member for Nhulunbuy said to me yesterday, fit in with the community’s requirements; that is, meetings will be held perhaps once a month in a community. So, instead of us trying to get the community to fit in with our requirements, we fit in with the community’s requirements and take pressure off those communities because they do have other work to do besides sitting down and talking endlessly. That may be something the CTC has to look at, bearing in mind it is actually one of its own recommendations.
A good aspect of the CTC is we get together, in contrast to some of the language and the debate held yesterday following the Auditor-General’s report. It is that contrast that disappoints me, to some extent; no doubt the government should be criticised; however, the Auditor-General’s report should be looked at with a certain amount of balance. There is no doubt there are issues out there which are concerning, otherwise the CTC would not have been putting out a series of recommendations in the first report and, in its second report, criticising a number of elements of SIHIP. I have publicly come out and criticised SIHIP, especially the method of funding and the quality of the houses being refurbished.
Criticism is fine, constructive criticism is even finer, and what is even finer is not getting engrossed in negativity for political purposes; you criticise but, at the same time, give positive alternatives. Issues such as SIHIP, growth towns, and the amalgamation of councils are all extremely important issues, especially to those people who live in our remote communities. I feel, from a personal perspective, regardless of my frustration at some things I see, I have to stick by it to ensure these programs actually work. We need Indigenous housing; it has run into problems, there is no doubt about it, but we have to work through it.
I note what the Auditor-General said in his conclusions about SIHIP - that he has doubts this program will be able to accomplish what it sets out to do unless more funds are made available. What appears to be happening with SIHIP is there is a goal, there is an objective, there is a timetable, and there is an amount of money to do all that. The problem is: will that be achieved? And if it is achieved, what will be the quality of those changes? I believe that is important and that is what has been missed.
This report highlights some of the facts about how this whole program started which is an issue that has been of concern to CTC. But I felt, in the end, judgment of the alliance system on which this program is run, fortunately or unfortunately, cannot be judged until the program comes to its end, and then there needs to be a proper audit of the system, which was actually decided by the Howard government in mid-2007 along with Northern Territory government public servants. I have made the point about the expertise of those public servants in making this decision, and the question I would like to ask at a later stage is why DPI was not involved in SIHIP? With a construction program as big as this you would have thought DPI would have taken control; but that did not happen. That is a question that could be put in estimates.
There have been many failings in the way it has been managed and the CTC has seen those failings, but it has been difficult to get a handle on them because of the alliance system. The Auditor-General, in his conclusions and in his report, gives quite a clear indication of why that happened: we have set up a program that had never been used in the Territory before, and it has been pushed forward for political reasons or otherwise, without the controls needed to be in place before it happened. That is what we are picking up now. We are picking up the legacy of a poor start to a program which could have been done much better.
There has been discussion in this parliament about some bad systems that have occurred, about the way expenditure has not been approved correctly, etcetera, and there is no excuse for that but, as the Auditor-General says, the systems are now coming into place. He says:
There has been mention of maladministration; there has even been a mention of my agreement, and my ears pricked up and I wondered whether there was another agenda in there, but maybe I am seeing something that is not the case. I say again: this document has been written by an independent person, the Auditor-General. And, as with any document, and I can give you a classic example: the Bible is often used by taking chunks out of it and quoting those chunks out of context. You can also take things out of here and on their own they can look disastrous, but taken in context of the history and what is happening, you can get a more considered opinion about SIHIP. That is where I believe the CTC does its job.
The CTC does not just look at a particular problem in one spot, it has tried to look at the issues overall. It has gone to communities; it has seen the good side as well as the bad side. Some of the houses I saw at Port Keats, at Wadeye, are excellent houses and we would not be doing our job if we just sat here and criticised everything that is happening and did not report the good things happening.
Ms Scrymgour: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD: Where is the praise for the many Indigenous people who are employed under this program? That in itself has some issues; I know there are some issues and the member for Arafura knows we have issues with Aboriginal employment on SIHIP in relation to what they will do after SIHIP finishes. But, as it is, there are large numbers of Aboriginal people being employed; should we not say that is something good? Should we not be saying that there are some houses happening and, even though it is a fact of life that the number of houses being built is pretty small compared to the target, to some extent we have to be cautious in our judgment because the target by the end of this year, I gather, is 150 new houses. Let us see whether they get to those 150 houses, because if you go out to the communities you will see the slabs have been poured, and houses are at different stages. To some extent what we are getting, we hope, is a snowballing effect and these numbers will move on. If they do not, if they are still well below this target then criticism of this program would be proper.
It is a big program done under a new concept of alliance, and I struggle with that concept. It is difficult for the CTC; it has asked a number of times for some indication of how much houses are costing. I believe, although I am not sure, that is partly due to reluctance within the alliance system, or it is the alliance system which makes that difficult to uncover. You would think that if the Commonwealth can set figures for houses and refurbishments and rebuilds, then it would be asking to see where we are in relation to those costs.
The CTC will continue to question SIHIP. It will continue to question the amalgamation of councils. It will put more emphasis on growth towns. I know it is also going to look at some matters in relation to Power and Water, and has the opportunity to look at other matters as well. Looking at some of the issues surrounding the growth towns in itself is a huge area, and it is good we have a bipartisan subcommittee made up of the member for Arafura and the member for Port Darwin who are hoping to look at issues related to the Land Rights Act. The Land Rights Act is the key to how these growth towns will be established in relation to leases, gazetting of roads, and a range of issues which have to be looked at if the government’s concept of growth towns is the normalisation of towns. They are expecting to have high schools and services you would expect in any other regional centre in Australia In those towns. It is good to see we have a bipartisan subcommittee looking at a very important part, the crux, of how these growth towns will operate.
I look positively towards the CTC. I know it has come under criticism, and I know why - I accept that, but I move on. It is good for the system of government because we are learning and there is much to learn about what happens out there in the Northern Territory. It is good for government to have a bipartisan body willing to say: these are issues you need to look at. We cannot force the government to do that; it is on the government’s own head, and if it ignores our recommendations, that is a decision of government.
We will continue to highlight the issues out there, and the reason for doing that should not be for political gain or political purposes. It should be because we, as a group of politicians in this parliament, want to bring in change, want to do the right thing by the constituents of the Northern Territory, so they, in remote areas, can achieve success in their own lives and improvements in their townships, and they can turn things around, especially in employment, health, education and lifestyle. The government always talks about lifestyle, but lifestyle in some parts of the Northern Territory is not crash hot. That is where we have a role to do our best to change things.
I hope the CTC will continue to work together. There is the opportunity for members to put in dissenting reports and that is the robustness of our democracy and the robustness of the system. People should be entitled to do so if they do not agree with others.
I thank all members of the CTC for their support and hard work because it does take up time for members. I thank very much our committee secretary, Ms Pat Hancock, and our new committee secretary, Ms Helen Campbell; our research officer, Ms Jan Whitehead; and our administrative assistants, Mrs Kay Parsons, Ms Karen Turner and Ms Kim Cowcher. I appreciate all the hard work they have done.
Motion agreed to; report noted.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have a document relating to pairs for the members for Arafura and Drysdale, for the period from 6.45 pm until the close of the evening. I table that document.
Continued from 8 June 2010.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I support the Minister for Women’s Policy’s statement to the House on developing and progressing women’s policy in our Territory. Together with her ministerial colleagues from the Commonwealth, states and territories of Australia, and the New Zealand Minister’s Conference on the Status of Women, they identified four key national priorities for women: women’s economic security, women’s safety, women’s leadership, and women and social inclusion.
The Territory, in the time I have seen, has made a very strong contribution to the development of national policies as they apply to women, particularly women in our remote and regional settings.
In 2008, the then Minister for Women’s Policy, the member for Arafura, launched the NT road map for progressing issues important to women as a plan titled, Building on our Strengths: a Framework for Action for Women in the Northern Territory 2008-2012. If you want to look at areas of women’s economic security you need to go to policies which aim at greater economic security for women, including equal pay. Whilst the Territory government strongly supports these policies, I recognise, as an employer of a vast number of Territorians, we still have a way to go to ensure more women are encouraged to the most senior levels of management.
I am proud we have a female Under Treasurer. However, when I look across the chief executives and the very senior ranks of our public service, obviously, we have a long way to go in increasing the number of women in those very senior roles across government.
I know the better workplaces have in place programs and systems which include recognising flexible working hours and the needs of women, and focus on professional development and opportunities. I do not want to brag too much about Treasury, but I believe it is the better workplace in providing professional development for its employees; we have an extremely good training program, the FOIT program. Treasury not only has a female Under Treasurer, but the Deputy Under Treasurer is also a woman. Key management positions are taken up by women.
We have also effectively used the mechanisms within the EBAs to ensure we have in place conditions of employment which are attractive to women and make it a fairer playing field with flexible work arrangements, particularly for woman who have interruption to their careers when having children. That is an issue which confronts many women in our workforce, and being able to come back on flexible working arrangements – part-time, permanent part-time arrangements, and so on - is critical and essential. I ensured we inserted into the EBAs this time improvements in parental leave; originally there was a view it would be maternity leave only and I argued, successfully, it should be parental leave. Why should women be naturally burdened with extra leave to care for the new child, when there might be more men wanting to step into that role? It should be a decision made by both parents after personal consideration.
There are ways in which EBAs can be used to provide more grunt to policies by making it a fairer and more equitable workplace by increasing female participation in the workforce. We have seen the pay gap in the Territory fluctuate between 12% and 22% since 1994. It is currently sitting at 14% for ordinary time, but for total earnings the gap is closer to 9%. What does that suggest? As we know, men have the greater capacity to work longer hours than women, because women tend, more often than not, to take up the extra burden of family responsibility.
I feel and know all too well, being the most senior woman office holder as Deputy Chief Minister in our government, I, too, struggle with that work/life balance in caring for family. When you have three kids, I know how …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells, a quorum is required.
A quorum is present.
Ms LAWRIE: I recognise how real that issue for women in the workplace can be when you need to cater to the care requirements of a family, particularly when the family includes young children. Childcare centres close at 5.30 pm and, if you are not there on the knocker you have excessive payments in late fees and, obviously, you can only run your luck so far in how often you are late. The reality for women in the workforce is, particularly with young children and relying on childcare, they cannot work the longer hours often required in very senior positions. That puts the glass ceiling firmly and squarely in place when it comes to childcare.
The debate can rage forever about workplace childcare. I participated in various feasibility studies about workplace childcare systems, but I believe from a certain time it will not work because kids need to be home getting ready for dinner and bed and so on. Therefore, for those who have to work extended evening hours, work-based childcare is not going to be the solution to that problem either. Obviously, shift worker professions such as nursing, police, firefighters and so on, confront those issues in a very real way when working the night shift. Obviously, there is no childcare operating through the night hours.
These are real issues for women working longer hours to get into those important senior positions where long work is part and parcel of holding down a job with significant responsibility. Those issues are still there, and it is interesting to see the different ways in which people tackle them. I believe paying people commensurately with a significant level of pay for working those much longer hours is one way of addressing the cost of care for their children. I notice sometimes this packaging is more effective in the private sector than the public sector, maybe because we are more hamstrung at times with the flexibility of work packages we can provide for government employees.
I believe the federal government has taken an important first step in addressing a national Paid Parental Leave Scheme and what occurs in the private sector versus the public sector on the broader issue of parental leave. It is something the private sector has needed for a long time, and something which our nation has been sadly lacking for many years. I am very pleased to see the policy directions for paid parental leave happening at the federal level, and also the way we are leading through our EBA system in the Territory.
The critical importance of women’s safety cannot be overstated, particularly in the Northern Territory. We have an unacceptable level of domestic violence in the Territory, which is why we have taken some pretty strong steps in legislating for mandatory reporting of domestic violence and backing that up with resources - some $15m across a few years - into safe houses, accommodation, counselling and support, promotion and awareness, and support through a raft of different initiatives which was critically important. I congratulate my colleague, the member for Arnhem, for the work she did in leading the way in tackling domestic violence, getting down to the community level and focusing not only on community campaigns, but some very good and effective programs within the public service. The Family Violence Program is one where we are training people at community level to say no to violence. It is critical to the safety of women.
In the Department of Justice, measures are being taken to improve the way we provide support and assistance to vulnerable witnesses, such as the introduction of pre-recorded evidence. After an expert review of equipment in the Vulnerable Witness Room and the courtroom at Alice Springs Court House, the Department of Justice has upgraded the Vulnerable Witness Room, and there are now videoconferencing systems in those rooms. It sounds like small measures but, I can assure you, for the victims, they are incredibly significant measures.
Installing the up-to-the-minute videoconferencing facilities in the Alice Springs Magistrates Court No 2 is identified as a priority, and it is planned to roll out in mid-2010. It is also planned to upgrade the videoconferencing facilities in the Tennant Creek Court House. This government introduced vulnerable witness provisions in 2004. We recognised, for children and other vulnerable witnesses, the giving of evidence is often an extremely traumatic experience; and further reforms in 2007 made it easier for children and other vulnerable witnesses to give evidence in sexual and violent offender cases.
Some features of our provisions are extremely relevant to women. Women are often vulnerable witnesses and should be entitled to give their evidence in a room remote from the court room, or from behind the screen. They are entitled to have a support person with them while they give evidence, and the evidence of chief or vulnerable witnesses in sexual or serious violence offence proceedings can be given by way of a recorded statement so they do not have to tell their story over and over again, although, of course, they are cross-examined. The evidence of vulnerable witnesses, including their cross-examination, can be recorded before the trial which can alleviate the stress of waiting. This recorded evidence can then be used in further proceedings; for example, a mistrial. In other words, the vulnerable witness does not have to give evidence again. We are committed to protecting our vulnerable witnesses who, as I have said, far too often include women who, sadly, are the victims of sexual assault. I use these very stark examples to demonstrate the critical importance of safety for women.
I recognise we have a growing number of women in the police force, and I believe that is a good thing. I have been looking at ways to improve the awareness of incident operations where women are involved, and how, at the frontline level, people are responding appropriately to the victim and the victim’s needs. We have the victim support services available but often, sadly, when an incident occurs it is a legal law enforcement response that is first and foremost in people's minds. The more effective we are in understanding how to deal with women at that level, the better we will be as a society.
With regard to women’s leadership, it is good to see there has been some movement in women’s representation increasing on government boards in the Territory. Again, we have a way to go; 37% of elective representatives to local government are women - we are leading the nation, which is good to see. As a government, we target women for participation in leadership roles; for example, the Chief Minister’s study scholarship for women where we pay tribute to Northern Territory women and recognise notable recipients. We also have the International Women’s Day Grants to support local organisations to hold events. I am sure many women’s groups would want us to be doing more, and this government is open to ideas and suggestions.
Regarding women and social inclusion, it is an area where we could see a greater use of gender analysis in policy development. I believe we need to look at how all government departments undertake gender analysis. Advancing the interests of Territory women under the banner of A Working Future policy initiatives has been a key focus of our Minister for Women’s Policy, and I am pleased she has that focus in that important role to make a difference.
I am not nave enough to think we are ever going to have a society where access is equitable for women; I cannot imagine a society like that, sadly. What I can see is, as a Territory, we are open to advancing the status of women and the participation of women in our lives and in our society, whether it is in a professional way or by social inclusion. We have some very good pioneer women in our history; women who inspire women in the current era in the Territory to continue to make strides forward for the women who will follow us.
I also want to say I am incredibly impressed whenever I visit schools anywhere in the Territory, in my own electorate or elsewhere, at the huge strength and dynamic way in which the young women in our schools are developing. The girls of today in schools are far more strident and stronger than the girls of my era, and the senior female students are quite dynamic and, I find, inspirational. I have no doubt Women’s Policy will continue to strengthen and evolve and the women of the future, the leaders of tomorrow, I have seen in our community will be an incredibly exciting generation to continue the pursuit of equity for women.
Madam Speaker, I commend the ministerial statement on the achievements in developing and progressing women’s policy in the Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Women’s Policy for bringing this statement before the House and updating members on the current state of progress to date regarding women’s policy, which actively seeks to improve the lives of women in the Territory by specifically looking at the key areas of women’s economic security, women’s safety, women’s leadership, and women and social inclusion.
There have been some interesting and valuable contributions, and some fairly wide-ranging subjects associated with women’s issues across the House in all these areas. I acknowledge the work of previous ministers for Women’s Policy, including the former Chief Minister, Clare Martin, and my colleague, the member for Arafura, both of whom I first met at the women’s forum held in Nhulunbuy as part of Community Cabinet - I think it was in 2003; it might have been earlier.
I remember it quite vividly because, in the years I had been in Nhulunbuy, apart from perhaps the Education minister visiting the school when I was a school teacher, we did not see many ministers, certainly not under the CLP. On this particular day, we had the whole Labor Cabinet in Nhulunbuy. This was a pretty exciting day in our community and, what is more, there was a women’s forum. I can tell you, you only have to advertise a women’s event in Gove and you are packed to the rafters.
I registered to attend the event and there were 80 women present. The organisers were surprised by the number of people interested. I went with a particular agenda, as did some friends and colleagues of mine. We had childcare on the top of our agenda. Tables were set up in the red room at the Captain Cook Community Centre, which doubles as the foyer for our local theatre, and is also a little function room. It was a bit squeezy in there, because we had to set up extra tables for people who came.
The then Minister for Women’s Policy - was she Women’s Policy at that time? - the member for Arafura and the Chief Minister, Clare Martin, arrived to welcome everyone. They then left and went to another meeting and participants were in the care of officers from Women’s Policy. We were given butcher’s paper across every table and textas and, on a whiteboard, we were told: ‘This is what we would like to do in your group; these are the things we would like you to outline’. I and my good friend, Wendy Troe said: ‘We do not want to do that; we want to talk about childcare’. They said: ‘We want everyone to go through this list of issues and then we are going to have everyone report back’. We said: ‘Sorry, we do not want to do that, we want to talk about childcare at our table’. ‘Okay, if that is really what you want to do’. We looked around and said: ‘Does anyone else want to talk about childcare?’ The issue at that time - and I was on the management committee of our childcare centre - was we were desperate for additional places at our childcare centre. We had issues housing staff. It probably sounds familiar to the member for Karama because she was the next minister.
The good thing was we had the ear of the Chief Minister, the ear of the member for Arafura, and when our table spoke about childcare and our issues, they really sat up and listened. I remember vividly the member for Arafura saying: ‘We are going to fix this problem, even if it kills me’. She organised to meet with me and the women at the table later that afternoon at the Arnhem Club, where we had further discussion to detail our issues and concerns.
The good thing was, it worked. It took a while, as the member for Karama knows, but progress in childcare issues in our community worked, because we had the opportunity for face-to-face contact with a couple of key women in the government, including the Chief Minister, and issues were then picked up by our local member at the time, Syd Stirling.
I am all praise for women’s forums and Community Cabinet, and the fact this Labor government continues to get out and talk to the community. I went to the next women’s forum because I enjoyed the first one so much. I also managed, through my employer at the time, Rio Tinto Alcan, to convince them to put on a charter plane so I could take other key women from Nhulunbuy to participate in the women’s forum held at Galiwinku. That was also a fascinating forum and again, we had Chief Minister, Clare Martin, and the member for Arafura. Women in that community did not want to talk about childcare, they wanted to talk about housing, family matters, and looking after old people in their community. It was a fantastic forum and a perfect opportunity for people to get the ear of the Chief Minister. That is how this government operates; getting out and talking to people and finding out what their issues are, dealing with them face-to-face and taking them away and dealing with them. I cannot thank those people enough for conducting those forums.
Back to the document tabled by our Minister for Women’s Policy, Building on Our Strengths: a Framework for Action for Women in the Northern Territory 2008-2012. Part of this is based on information collected at those forums. It provides a snapshot as to where we are in May 2010 in the Territory and, importantly, how we are supporting policies, especially things like pay equity at national level. On the issue of pay equity, we have a long way to go, not just in the Territory but across Australia, to see equity for Australian women. Obviously, I am not alone in welcoming the House of Representatives Standing Committee’s report which examined closely and identified issues preventing greater participation of women in the workforce and seeing women on a more even keel with their male counterparts, and ensuring the 63 recommendations of that report are seriously addressed. It goes without saying these issues of equity - that is, pay and conditions, not just pay, also conditions - must address the needs of all women, irrespective of their ethnic background, whether they be Indigenous women or migrant women.
I have some concerns about how we address equity based on age of women, as well. The member for Goyder highlighted what she perceived as things missing from this report; she thought we had missed talking about young people. However, I see many young women - teenagers - employed in supermarkets, in fast food outlets with varying pay and conditions - keen to make a buck. They are less inclined to engage with their employer and ask the right questions about how they are being paid, the hours they are expected to work, and the conditions they might be expected to work in, especially when it comes to OHS matters. Like other areas of women’s policy, we need to continue looking at legislative reforms and the support of advocacy through bodies such as unions.
We could talk about any number of areas of employment where there are glaring gaps in equity, but I would like to single out the area of childcare workers, not just because it is currently in the media. It is an area covered under federal government but, obviously, the Territory government has a role to play as well. It is an industry which is dominated by women, who are more inclined to take on the traditional role of carer. For many, it is an extension of their mothering roles; and it is a really important role.
My husband and I were consumers of childcare services in Nhulunbuy raising our three children - in fact, we still engage in the school holiday program - especially before our children started school. Like many working families we juggled full-time jobs with a baby, a toddler, a pregnancy, and maternity leave in between. When we got through those childcare years with full-time childcare through our community-based childcare centre, we went to after-school care and vacation care. These services were absolutely critical to me. They are to any families who use childcare. I am eternally grateful to the women - and they were all women - who cared for and nurtured my children. We recognise these formative years for children are so critical in their development and the start of their lifelong journey of learning.
I could say probably everyone in this Chamber has had firsthand experience, or has seen what family and friends go through when a parent, particularly a mother, leaves their child for the first time at a childcare centre as a toddler or a baby. It is an awful moment, especially when they are crying their heart out watching you walk out the door, and you are feeling incredibly guilty you are not with your child and are going back to work. However, we do it and we place absolute faith in those caring for our children, and we discover kids are incredibly resilient and adaptable; my kids absolutely thrived in full-time care.
For such an important job childcare workers are, by and large, poorly paid; and for this reason it comes as no surprise the profession is often the domain of short-term employment. Childcare is such a difficult area of employment, sitting more and more in the private sector with the steady demise of community-based childcare, where income for a centre is based on fees paid by parents, and wage increases for staff impact directly on that.
Family Allowance paid by the federal government certainly helps, and this government is the only jurisdiction in Australia to subsidise childcare fees with a contribution per child. Forgive me, Madam Speaker, I do not have that figure to hand. It is getting harder now, but when my children were in care, I served for several years on the management committee of Nhulunbuy Community Childcare Centre and, in negotiating the EBA with staff, we endeavoured to offer as many incentives as we could, recognising the valuable contribution of our childcare workers, and our strong desire to retain staff but, at the same time, we wanted to see staff in training and reach qualifications, and that was all part of the deal. In the mid-1990s, we were able to offer our staff 22% above the award wage; however, I would say that would be increasingly difficult to maintain.
What made circumstances for me easier in those early days with my children was the fact I received paid maternity leave as a public servant, at least for my first two children. With my third child I was working for Alcan, which provided unpaid leave, for which I was grateful, especially as I was able to retain my company-supplied house during that period. I am pleased to see Alcan has now moved to a paid parental leave scheme, as many in the corporate world have.
While the government sector has long provided paid maternity leave, or parental leave, it is, as the minister explained, another key area where we continue to deliver policy for a national paid parental leave scheme which supports families and women in particular; and all women, irrespective of their residence or their ethnic background. This is an issue which has progressed well under the Rudd government, and I hope we will see the Rudd government returned to office because I shudder to think what would happen to progress in women’s policy issues under the ultra-conservative, right wing Tony Abbott. I shudder even more at the prospect of who on his front bench would take on the portfolio – Bronwyn Bishop or Julie Bishop.
Yesterday, I saw a federal media release from Senator Trish Crossin regarding the announcement of minister Julia Gillard’s support for the NT Working Women’s Centre. It says it delivers vital workplace services and advice for our most vulnerable workers, and it will receive a further two years funding. The NT Working Women’s Centre will receive, for the next two years, $207 000 per year out of a total funding pool, nationally, of $1.2m. It is good news irrespective of who we have at federal level after the next election – either government. We know Labor will and, hopefully, a Liberal government would continue that support.
Without doubt, progressing economic independence for women is inextricably linked to women’s capacity to participate in the workforce and their preparedness and readiness to do that, based on a solid and comprehensive education, irrespective of where they live in Australia, and of their language background. It sounds ideal, but we know the reality is far from this.
Women are under-represented as participants in our workforce, though I note the unemployment rate for women in the Territory has dropped from 4.9% in January 2000 to 3.5% in January 2010 and, of course, we would like to see that reduce even further. We know it is young women we need to target and, to this end, I welcome the establishment in the Northern Territory of the Young Women and Unemployed Reference Group, which works with government to develop effective strategies to improve equitable participation of young women in the workforce. I note this working group feeds into a national working group, and I look forward to hearing the national strategy which is being developed for presentation at the Minister for Women’s Policy conference in September this year.
The core issue of this is the basic imperative of getting children to school - girls and boys - and keep them at school from preschool through to completion of at least Year 11, and preferably Year 12, which is the critical springboard to further education and employment. Whilst it is not government’s sole responsibility to meet this challenge, we need to work with families and communities to ensure children are supported to get to school every day.
On the subject of women’s safety, I too applaud the progress which has been made to address violence against women and family violence, and highlight the legislation passed in this Chamber to make mandatory the reporting of domestic and family violence. Quite rightly, the focus has placed an onus of responsibility on individuals, on communities, not to turn our backs away from episodes of family violence when it occurs. This government is putting considerable funding commitment, $15m over three years, to support this legislative change by providing the necessary additional services, as well as dedicated information and advertising campaigns.
I attended an information session at Yirrkala in March which was run by the East Arnhem Shire Council and led by the shire’s Women’s and Children’s Services Coordinator, Diane Kearney. The session took women through the mandatory reporting and what it meant for them. Communication of this information was also supported by a DVD which had been made locally and provides dramatisations of situations women might find themselves in, and commentary or information for viewers about why this is not acceptable and what a woman’s rights are under the legislation.
Importantly, the information in the DVD was delivered in Yolngu Matha with English translation. Having been at the 10-year celebration of the Aboriginal Interpreter Service today - and what a fantastic service - it is employing, I believe, over 325 people who have acted as interpreters in the past 12 months and dedicated to over 6000 interpreting jobs. The capacity to put things in language for people, for women’s issues, for health issues, for legal issues, is absolutely critical.
The sad reality is while we are focused on reducing domestic and family violence, it does occur. I cannot speak highly enough of those services we have in Nhulunbuy to assist women in the region. Gove Crisis Accommodation has operated for 25 years to provide a safe haven to women and children and can take up to 18 clients at a time, who are escaping domestic and family violence. It offers 24-hour secure care, employs three people full-time, as well as four to five casuals to ensure coverage of the roster over a 24-hour period. They provide support and access to services with the aim to work with families to keep families together and get families back together. For the past three or so years it has employed a children’s worker, so children who so often come into crisis accommodation with their mothers can be cared for.
They were grateful for funding they received from the Northern Territory government to enable them to travel through the region to advise communities about mandatory reporting and why domestic and family violence cannot and must not be tolerated. I acknowledge the contribution of the RaypirriRom program based at Yirrkala under the umbrella of Miwatj Health, funded jointly by this government and federal government ...
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move the member for Nhulunbuy be given an extension of 10 minutes, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank you, member for Barkly.
The Raypirri team is headed by Fiona Djerrkura who is proud to be in this role and fulfilling the vision of her father, the late Mr Djerrkura, who was a prominent man from Yirrkala and former ATSIC Commissioner, whose vision was always to see Yolngu communities take responsibility for their own problems by reinforcing customary law, obligations and culture, and do this with the support of mainstream government agencies. Raypirri Rom workers, strong women and strong men, are quite literally the peacemakers in their communities.
Regarding women’s safety within my electorate, I want to highlight the enormous and positive role community Night Patrol has played for many years. The service is currently in the capable hands of the shire, and I have been able to see firsthand how the service works having accompanied night patrollers as an observer on several shifts between Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala. Employees of this service are dedicated and trained individuals; 21 of them across the region graduated with Certificate III in Community Night Patrol last November. The reality is most of the employees with Night Patrol are women. The service ensures people who need to get home safely will get home, but those who need to spend the night in the sobering-up shelter do so. It is important the Night Patrol have strict protocols around not returning those individuals to their homes at Yirrkala or Ski beach if they are under the influence of alcohol and, therefore, a real risk of causing trouble.
I would like to address the key issue contained within this report about women’s leadership. We all know women continue to be under-represented in their membership of government boards and committees, although figures quoted in the minister’s statement indicate we do have higher representation than any other jurisdiction in the government sector.
Before I mention some of the women from my electorate who make valuable contributions in leadership roles, I would like to share an observation. Speaking on the basis of my electorate - and perhaps I am not alone - I find it ironic while women are under-represented in formal roles of leadership, they are more often than not the ones to step up to the plate and lead the charge when there is a community issue to be addressed. It could be something like a family in our small, close-knit community facing a very difficult time, a sudden death, or a family member diagnosed with a life threatening illness - and I have seen our community dig deep into their pockets, hold fundraisers and raise thousands of dollars for those in need. I have a feeling those of us in this Chamber would probably say it is not unique to Nhulunbuy. I have seen women take on causes to rally, meet, fundraise, petition, and ensure their voices are heard. They certainly did it with Gove District Hospital last year when our maternity ward was closed for a period of five weeks, not because government wanted to close it, but because we went through a period where recruiting doctors was incredibly challenging. That said, I am sure the 300 women, both Yolngu and Ngapaki, who marched down the main street of Nhulunbuy to a public meeting at our town hall, certainly helped put pressure on the minister to expedite the recruitment process.
Late last year, one of our lovely local ladies, Trina O’Brien, approached me with concerns about changes to a school crossing near Nhulunbuy Primary School. She assured me she was not a rabblerouser and had never done anything like this, but felt really strongly and asked what suggestions I might have about raising this and obtaining community support. She made an incredible effort in getting publicity, getting the word out there, getting support, and getting 500 people to sign a petition asking Nhulunbuy Corporation to reverse the plans they had made on the pedestrian crossing - a crossing out the front of her house and very close to Nhulunbuy Primary School, where her children attend, along with about 500 others. The book has not closed on that; the petition was tabled with the Nhulunbuy Corporation - our town council. It remains a work in progress, and Trina, along with the primary school council and other concerned members of the community, will continue negotiating with Nhulunbuy Corporation to have this crossing changed to make it safer.
The Yolngu women of the region are well-known for their strength in rallying to drive change, one of the most significant being - I know I have mentioned it in the House several times - their efforts in driving a program to restrict alcohol, and the eventual development of a takeaway liquor permit system which has worked incredibly well in addressing alcohol-related issues in the community. It is not just for the Indigenous community; it is something which impacts on the non-Indigenous community. I take my hat off to that group of women who started that process several years ago.
The efforts of Yolngu women were highlighted at a wonderful International Women’s Day event, a very special day of celebration, held at Yirrkala, where the Chair of Laynhapuy Homelands, Mr Barayuwa Mununggurr, was invited along as the sole male in the room to do the official opening and welcome everyone. He brought the house down when he said he wanted to acknowledge the role the women in our community play. He said, and I remember it very vividly: ‘It is the women who lead the way in our community, and it is the men who are dragging the chain’. That admission from a strong man, a community leader in a hall full of Yolngu women, absolutely brought the house down. He was so right, because the Yolngu women so much lead the way out there.
Even so, on the Board of Laynhapuy Homelands - and I have just double-checked the newsletter I have - of the 15 places on the board, only four are women. However, I note Yananymul Mununggurr is very strong as their first and very successful Chief Executive Officer. A snapshot of where there are other women in leadership roles on boards and councils in my electorate is, amongst the 12 members who make up the East Arnhem Shire Council, there are just three women elected. Mind you, they are very vocal and very effective on council and also in representing their communities. Nhulunbuy Town Board has only four elected members, all of whom are men. I am not sure how many women, over the years, have been elected members; I was the last woman elected and, obviously, I had to resign in the lead-up to the election. However, with the elections coming up in February next year, I encourage many women in our community to put their hand up to ensure women and the views of women in the community, and families, are represented through the town board.
At Rio Tinto Alcan, where I worked for many years, their executive management team is overwhelmingly filled by men. Their entire workforce employs - and I think this is accurate - 8% women, which is reflective pretty much of mining companies being dominated by male employees. I acknowledge Rio Tinto, over the years, have had some women in key positions; a growing number of young female graduates and, over the years, female apprentices have taken up roles there and, though they are outnumbered, they have done an incredible job and have been well supported by their employer.
Going from a male dominated area, our school councils in the region are overwhelmingly dominated by women. I guess it comes down to the caring aspect that goes with schools.
I want to highlight some of the terrific Yolngu in my community who were noted at International Women’s Day. I have already mentioned Yananymul Mununggurr. I put on the record Dhangal Gurruwiwi, who is a very strong woman; she is an interpreter, an artist, a leader amongst women in her clan, and also part of the visiting elders program coming in regularly to the Don Dale Centre and Berrimah prison. I mention Dhalulu Ganambarr-Stubbs, who is a member of the Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council. I also mention Marrpalawuy Marika, who is currently Chair of Yambirrpa School Council, and I mention Phyllis Batambil from the community of Mutta Mutta.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for presenting this statement. I have enjoyed listening to the contributions of other members of this House, the debate, and the things people see as important are wide-ranging. I congratulate our minister, and previous ministers, for work to date and look forward to seeing women’s issues in the Territory continue to progress and prosper.
Ms McCARTHY (Women’s Policy): Madam Speaker, I thank all members of the House for contributing to this statement. It has been terrific to hear member’s comments in regard to Women’s Policy in the Northern Territory. As I said in my opening statement, this is about taking on board comments by members of the House and women across the Northern Territory on how we can strengthen even more the role of the Women’s Policy Unit.
The parliamentary debate about Women's Policy which followed this statement has been extremely valuable. The Women's Policy portfolio, as its name implies, is a policy unit which sets important priorities for the Northern Territory government such as the Building on our Strengths action framework to progress the women’s equity agenda and advance the economic and social standing of Territory women.
The member for Goyder noted some concerns with this important policy framework. She commented our Women's Policy statement did not provide any information about outcomes achieved for women. In response; I would like to point out colleagues on this side of the House have described some significant outcomes delivered by our government for women which have flowed from our overarching Women's Policy, particularly the Building on our Strengths framework.
The Chief Minister explained how Women's Policy has informed his agencies, particularly the police. He spoke of a greater police focus on domestic violence, both strategically and in resources. There are now dedicated police domestic violence teams in Darwin, Katherine and Alice Springs, and these teams work in a proactive way to target repeat perpetrators of domestic violence. As the Chief Minister said in his response, this increased vigilance has resulted in a 36.8% increase in domestic violence orders. Rather than the increase in domestic violence orders being indicative of a failure by our government to address violence against women - and this was an important issue raised by the member for Araluen, which I take on board; the commitment by the member for Araluen in this area and the comments by the Chief Minister - suggests women are becoming more confident in reporting instances of domestic violence. Police have the resources to respond, and women are more confident to report domestic violence knowing police will respond. It is not the only reason but it certainly is helping, particularly in many places I travel across the regions and hear that type of feedback. As the Chief Minister put it, the light is being shone on domestic violence, hence our government’s commitment to ensuring children and families growing up today recognise domestic violence, or any kind of violence, is just not on.
The member for Goyder asked how many cases of domestic violence had been reported since the introduction of the mandatory reporting requirement. The Chief Minister, in his response, told the House while there is yet to be an analysis applied to determine what portion of the increase in domestic violence orders can be attributed to mandatory reporting, our government is certainly monitoring this.
The Minister for Health highlighted another important aspect of our government’s commitment to the safety of women, the family violence initiative. In particular, this initiative includes the establishment and operation of 20 safe places in 15 remote communities across the Territory, in partnership with the Australian government. These safe places employ 67 local people; 11 of the safe places are for women and nine are men’s cooling down centres. These are some of the significant initiatives and achievements of this government, in partnership with the Commonwealth, which have flowed from our Women's Policy. For these reasons, I can talk strongly about our government’s domestic and family violence strategies and resourcing the policy, and what we are doing to tackle it head on.
Other outcomes flowing from our Women's Policy were described by the Minister for Lands and Planning. Of the 67 recommendations in the Ombudsman’s 2007 report, 41 relate to Northern Territory Correctional Services. The minister told us 37 of these 41 recommendations have been completed, and four partially completed. The implementation of these recommendations has included: development of the Female Prisoners in Prison policy, which is a commitment under the Building on our Strengths framework; the establishment of female community service work parties in Darwin and Alice Springs, an initiative which allows women to give something back to the community and promotes rehabilitation and engenders new skills; and the construction of a new education program facility for female prisoners at Darwin Correctional Centre, in which seven women had hands-on involvement.
The implementation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations has also included the provision of improved infrastructure for women prisoners such as: accommodation for women who have achieved the lowest possible security rating at Darwin Correctional Centre; a new visiting facility at the women’s block at Darwin Correctional Centre; and a 25-bed women’s facility at Alice Springs Correctional Centre which addresses a previous shortage of beds for women prisoners at the centre. This shortage of beds had meant Alice Springs women prisoners would sometimes be transferred to Darwin Correctional Centre, away from their families. The provision of this new 25-bed facility means women prisoners in Alice Springs can remain close to their families.
In addition, the Northern Territory Correctional Services has established a Women’s Advisory Committee which monitors the achievement of priorities identified in the Building on Our Strengths action framework for women employees within correctional services, and provides a voice for these women.
The committee’s terms of reference are to progress the relevant themes and goals under the Building on Our Strengths framework, and provide advice to the Executive Director of Corrections through the executive management group on specific policy and program initiatives. The committee members reflect a cross-section of employees from Correctional Services, custodial and non-custodial, Indigenous and non-Indigenous. Meetings are held quarterly, with members outside Darwin participating via teleconference.
The member for Araluen asked about the Sex Offender Treatment Program, pointing out most sex offences in the Northern Territory are committed against women. The minister for Corrections told this House access to the Sex Offender Treatment Program is an important part of prisoner rehabilitation. The Sex Offender Treatment Program is currently under review to ensure it is better targeted to Territorians. The minister also mentioned the Indigenous Family Violence Program; as of 30 April 2010 the Indigenous Family Violence Program is being delivered in 12 Territory communities.
The Building on Our Strengths framework identified women’s health and wellbeing as one of the key areas for action. The Minister for Health described some of the initiatives which have been established by our government to address this key action area. The Core of Life is a program operating in the Northern Territory to improve women’s health, particularly young women. Core of Life is a hands-on life education program designed to improve young people's understanding about pregnancy, giving birth, parenting a newborn, nutrition, health care, and the impact of drugs and alcohol during pregnancy. Core of Life facilitators are providing training courses across the Top End of the Territory, and these courses will train community-based health staff, teachers and midwives to conduct Core of Life programs in schools across the Territory and with adolescent groups at camps.
The minister also told the House the NT Maternity Services Review and recommendations continue to be progressed. A Midwifery Group Practice in Darwin and Alice Springs has been established. During the first year of operation in Alice Springs, 162 babies were born through the Midwifery Group Practice, including 75 babies to remote Indigenous women, and nine home births. The Darwin Midwifery Group Practice commenced in September 2009, and 100 babies were born through the practice in the first six months. Five remote area midwife positions have been established and are based in communities in both Central Australia and the Top End.
The minister also pointed out the progress of the NT Maternity Services Review is seen in the development of a program for maternity care and community-based workers, the Strong Women, Strong Babies, Strong Culture program. This bi-cultural community development program respects and supports the cultural way of promoting good heath for women and babies during pregnancy and early parenting in Indigenous communities.
The minister also told the House the Strong Women worker for Wadeye divides her time between the community and Royal Darwin Hospital, where she supports women during labour, birth and the early postnatal period. Recruitment is also under way for community-based workers in Maningrida to undertake the Strong Women program.
The member for Goyder indicated she suspected the number of women in senior positions in the Northern Territory Public Service is not that great, yet the Minister for Lands and Planning spoke of a majority of women at the executive level in the department. Similarly, there is a majority of women at the executive level within the Local Government branch of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services. The Treasurer told the House this afternoon women occupy the key management positions in Treasury: the Under Treasurer and the Deputy Under Treasurer. In addition, the Minister for Health told the House in the department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources female employees currently represent 50% of department staff and, more significantly, they are extremely well represented in the professional and technical streams. Approximately 40% of professional positions and over 60% of technical positions are held by women.
Our government is committed to building on these numbers and is not about pandering to tokenism, as mentioned by the Opposition Leader in his reply. It is about increasing women’s participation and representation in leadership roles, and creating opportunities for developing and exercising women’s decision-making skills.
Accordingly, the Territory 2030 long-term strategic plan includes initiatives to increase the proportion of Territory women in senior public sector positions. As part of this government’s commitment, the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment has implemented a number of initiatives and programs to help do so. The Minister for Public Employment described these initiatives to the House, and they include: the Discovery Leadership Program held in Darwin and Alice Springs aimed at women in public service positions of AO4 and above; the Lookrukin Indigenous Women’s Leadership Program for Indigenous women employed in the Northern Territory Public Sector, designed to increase effectiveness in employee’s current positions and improve career progression; a public sector management program which is a joint venture between the Northern Territory government and Flinders University; and the Australian and New Zealand School of Government established in 2002 by a consortium of Australian and New Zealand governments. This school provides teaching programs for current and emerging public sector leaders to enhance the breadth and depth of their policy leadership and management skills.
Two highly regarded Territory women, Penny Fielding and Liz Morris have completed the Executive Masters in Public Administration. Liz Morris has since been appointed as magistrate in the Darwin Magistrates Court.
In addition, the Chief Minister spoke about initiatives being implemented in the police force. Importantly, the latest police recruitment TV advertisements feature women in a prominent role. The Northern Territory Police Force is focused upon improving policing for women, and as a result, 10 of the latest 27 police recruits are women, and women made up 29% of the Northern Territory Police Force as of June 2009.
Our government is committed to building on these initiatives to support a workforce which is equitable and fair, thereby engendering women’s leadership and participation and, ultimately, enhancing women’s economic security.
Another way our government is supporting a workforce that is equitable and fair is through our flexible maternity leave policy. The Minister for Public Employment explained this policy: it consists of 14 weeks maternity leave at full pay to public service employees of 12 months service, or 28 weeks of maternity leave at half pay, with the ability to combine this with other forms of pay such as recreational leave, up to a maximum of 52 weeks. Further, our government allows six years of leave without pay after birth or adoption. Adoption leave refers to leave given to an employee, male or female, in connection with the adoption of a child. I can clarify for the member for Goyder our government is accommodating working families and working women, and we can keep building on these initiatives.
Members have highlighted the important leadership roles of Territory women, as well as our government’s leadership initiatives for women which have flowed from our Women’s Policy. The Minister for Lands and Planning described key NT art dealers are women, and the pre-eminent Territory art fairs and awards are heavily driven by women in the arts sector. The minister for Business spoke about leaders in the communities who raise the bar for women, including women like Roslyn Frith who now heads the Katherine West Health Board and stands up for the rights of women in her region, Betty Daly who is encouraging and guiding leaders of the future in her area, and Regina Wilson, a matriarch and business leader in Peppimenarti.
The minister for Business also spoke about our government’s exciting A Working Future policy initiative which will provide 10 000 new apprenticeships and traineeships in regions across the Territory - a 50% increase since 2001. These apprenticeships and traineeships will advance the interests of Territory women by enabling more women across our regions to establish economic security. The Chief Minister and the minister for Business both spoke about the substantial contribution being made by women to our Caucus and Cabinet. There was also mention of the recent appointment of Justice Kelly and Justice Blokland to the Northern Territory Supreme Court. In addition, there are now more female Magistrates than ever before. As the Chief Minister said, the glass ceiling is well and truly being broken on the Bench.
The Chief Minister also commended the Northern Territory Women’s Register, more than just a website or a token gesture as the Opposition Leader has said. The Women’s Register is a practical initiative to encourage Territory women to nominate themselves for government boards and committees, and bring vacancies to the attention of interested women.
As the Member for Goyder indicated during this debate, women in agriculture and horticulture play a vital leadership role in the Territory. On 12 May this year, I was very pleased to announce Carmel McCaskill-Ball as the 2010 recipient of the Rural Industries and Research Development Corporation Rural Women’s Award. Ms McCaskill-Ball is the owner of the Darwin Fish Market; Board Member of the Northern Territory Seafood Council, and a consultant to the primary industries in the Northern Territory. As the NT Rural Women’s Award winner, Ms McCaskill-Ball received a $10 000 bursary which she plans to invest in furthering her leadership skills to raise awareness of locally caught produce, and local producers, to increase the viability and sustainability of the local seafood industry.
The Minister for Health highlighted another important leadership initiative for women: a collaboration between the Northern Territory department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources, Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, and the Australian government, to roll out a series of workshops in September last year, aimed at building capacity amongst the women in the pastoral industry. The minister described the response to these workshops was extremely positive, with over 100 women attending across the Territory. Further funding has been secured for this year, and planning is under way for the next series of workshops to be held in October this year. These are the initiatives and achievements of our government in relation to women in leadership roles.
The members for Araluen, Goyder, and Macdonnell raised concern about the need for face-to-face contact with women, and the Opposition Leader echoed this concern and suggested our community wants a women’s round table forum to bring together dynamic members representing diverse views and interests. As I said, I am looking forward to using the opportunity of this debate to review our directions and activities in the area of Women’s Policy, particularly in relation to community engagement.
In the meantime, I inform this House the Office of Women’s Policy has actively engaged with the community over the past year by establishing the Young Women and Unemployment Reference Group. This reference group has been set up to develop effective strategies to improve the equitable participation of young women in the workforce. This reference group has helped inform the National Young Women and Unemployment Working Group about specific issues from the Territory, and was instrumental in gaining support from all jurisdictions to include a specific target group of young Aboriginal women.
I note the member for Goyder, quite rightly, pointed out young women must be a focus of our women’s policy. The Office of Women’s Policy has been engaged in topic-focused community engagement such as: gender pay equity seminars in Darwin on a quarterly basis which provide an opportunity to work with the NT Working Women’s Centre and the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner to raise awareness among government, business and industry about gender pay equity, workplace harassment and discrimination; consultations with women in Darwin, Hermannsburg and Maningrida as part of a research project on micro-credit for Aboriginal women in remote communities; a women’s legal forum in Katherine, hosted by the Katherine Women’s Legal and Information Service; and engagement with migrant women and migrant support organisations in the Northern Territory as part of a discrete project to gain a picture of migrant and refugee women’s health issues and barriers to health service access in the Northern Territory.
My communication and contact with the women members of my Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council and Chair, Bess Price, is also making an important contribution to my thinking on Women’s Policy and this government’s broader work under the banner of A Working Future, to improve the day-to-day life of Indigenous Territorians. In addition, our four NT delegates to the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women’s Gathering: Joy Cardona, Ngaree Ah Kit, Moogie Patu and Susan Murray, have held forums in Darwin and Alice Springs with local women to discuss key issues relating to women and their communities. I look forward to continuing to work with our NATSIWG delegates to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women across the Territory a strong voice, and to tackle issues relating to women’s equal standing in society.
I take this opportunity to thank the staff in the Office of Women’s Policy under Janette Galton for the tremendous work they do, day-in-day-out over the years to ensure women across the Northern Territory are considered in every aspect of government policy.
I take note of the member for Macdonnell’s view that White Ribbon Ambassadors must go beyond just wearing the white ribbon. Part of the role of the 36 Northern Territory White Ribbon Ambassadors is talking with colleagues and friends to highlight the importance of respect for women and attitude change; attending events in their local community; hosting awareness-raising events and fundraising activities with their personal networks throughout the year; and encouraging community groups, local councils, workplaces, men’s organisations, sports and services clubs to buy and distribute white ribbons. I also spoke, during my statement, of the tremendous work of Charlie King within the community in relation to the No More initiative.
In conclusion, I can speak quite proudly about our government’s Women’s Policy. Our Women’s Policy is about setting priorities for the Territory government to progress the women’s equity agenda and advance the economic and social standing of Territory women. The positive outcomes for women, which colleagues on this side of the House have described, show these priorities are being achieved and our government is serious about Women’s Policy. This debate has presented us with an opportunity to review our directions, initiatives and actions in the area of Women’s Policy, and I am looking forward to doing so.
Madam Deputy Speaker, 2011 will be a special year for women; 8 March 2011 marks the Centenary of International Women’s Day. I have already begun talking to women across the Territory, at women’s meetings on Groote Island last week, and in Numbulwar, Yuendumu, Alice Springs and Borroloola last month. I have asked these women to start thinking about how they would like to be involved in celebrating our past and planning for our future as part of the Centenary of International Women’s Day.
Again, I thank all members of the House for their contribution to this statement, and I will certainly take on board each and every member’s contribution.
I commend this statement to the House.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Deputy Speaker, we all recognise the unique geographical position Darwin enjoys in relation to access to Australia. Our location and our expanding infrastructure provide the Territory a wonderful opportunity to capture advantages in trade with our near neighbours. The Henderson government is focused on the development of productive and, importantly, enduring relationships and trade links with our northern neighbours.
To ensure Territory business is best placed to take advantage of our growing relationship with Asia, the Henderson government has developed a five-year trade plan which recognises the need for government to work closely with the private sector. It is also a plan which acknowledges the importance of people-to-people contact as integral to the development of ongoing and productive relationships with our neighbours.
I wish to report to the House on the progress of priority actions outlined under the Henderson government’s International Trade Strategy – Growing International Trade Priority Action Plan 2009-2013.
The Growing International Trade Strategy was launched in September 2009 to ensure a focused approach for the growth of the Territory’s international trade performance over the five years of the strategy. The Henderson government is targeting key activities to build on the Territory’s core strengths and capabilities, provide practical assistance, maintain a presence in selected markets, and work in partnerships with business and industry to achieve tangible, economic outcomes for the Territory.
I am pleased to report, since its launch, significant progress has been made and real and tangible outcomes have been achieved across a range of priority actions identified in the strategy. Target engagement plays a key role in establishing a platform for cooperation and productive outcomes across the range of issues. The enduring relationships which flow from personal engagement help underpin the efforts made by business and industry to establish commercial links in key and emerging markets.
In February this year, I travelled to Japan and was accompanied by representatives from the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce - namely the president, George Roussos - and the Northern Territory Industry Capability Network. During this visit I met with representatives from the Japanese government and promoted our local industry participation in the INPEX project with the relevant Japanese companies. My visit was well received and helped to reinforce the Territory’s relationship with the newly elected Japanese government and key stakeholders in Japan following the Chief Minister’s visit last November.
In March, I led a business delegation to Jakarta, Indonesia, to participate in the OZ Mine Expo and Conference. 27 people representing 10 companies participated in the delegation from the Northern Territory and, importantly, this included representatives from the NTICN. While in Jakarta, I delivered the opening address at the OZ Mine Conference and had a number of high level one-on-one meetings. These included meetings with the Indonesian Minister for Trade, Mari Pangestu, the Indonesian Minister for Transport, Freddy Numberi, and meetings with several provincial governors. Key Northern Territory events associated with the OZ Mine Expo were attended by a range of senior Indonesian mining executives. We were able to showcase the capabilities of the Northern Territory directly to key procurement and decision-makers in the mining industry. The OZ Mine Expo also provided an important opportunity to promote the third Indonesian Mining Procurement Forum which was held in Darwin on 29 April.
The Henderson government is proud to support Territory businesses through events like this forum to help promote their potential to export into important markets like Indonesia. Niche sector development, where there is real capacity to increase export revenue, is a key and clear focus under the growing international trade strategy. The forum provided an important opportunity for Northern Territory companies to promote themselves to the Indonesian mining sector. About 175 people attended the forum, including approximately 25 Indonesian visitors.
The Indonesian mining sector is vast and presents significant opportunities for Territory businesses. Indonesia is home to some of the world largest coal, copper, gold and nickel mines. The majority of these mines are within 2000 km of Darwin. This year’s mining procurement forum saw participation from a number of Indonesian companies including Weda Bay Nickel, Kideco Coal, Petrosea Contracting, KBU Contracting, Laing O’Rourke Indonesia, Worley Parsons - Kutai Coal, HHR Legal Services Indonesia, Kiroyan Partners Jakarta, Indonesia Customs and Excise, Meratus Shipping, Schenker Petrolog and PT Agility Logistics.
Recent forums involving Territory trade missions in both Jakarta and Balikpapan, in the province of East Kalimantan, have produced a number of investment results. Bridge Toyota secured contracts for vehicle parts to major mine sites in eastern Indonesia. Engine Engineering of Berrimah, and its Indonesian joint venture partner, PT Power Trains, established an income stream of $850 000 per year from a newly established Balikpapan engine overhaul operation. They expect that figure to grow to $1.5m per annum within the next three years.
Linetec of Darwin has also won $700 000 in export orders to Indonesian mines for their LT1000 hydraulic ladders. These ladders are designed and manufactured at Linetec’s Yarrawonga operations, and shipped to Kalimantan for fitting to large dozers and excavators in the coal mining sector.
Blackwoods Winnellie has developed significant opportunities in eastern Indonesia for industrial hardware products. Blackwoods new 5000 m2 automated warehouse and distribution facility in Winnellie is expected to be commissioned this month, with a key aim to supply projects to Indonesia from Darwin – a great new warehouse. Neddrill Drilling and Blasting of Humpty Doo are in discussions regarding supply of drilling rigs and personnel for a new project on the island of Sulawesi. This year’s forum will also draw discussions on the potential development of Darwin as a distribution centre for chemicals and petroleum products to mines in eastern Indonesia.
The Henderson government will continue to work with Territory business to assist them promote themselves in markets like Indonesia. Given the significant growth of mining operations in our near region, particularly across the South-East Asian area, the opportunity exists to continue to develop Darwin as a key mining supply and service centre for the Indonesian mining sector. To achieve this goal, the Henderson government has been working closely with business and industry to promote awareness of the Northern Territory’s capability and capacity to service and supply large-scale mining operations across the region with a clear focus on Indonesia. As I have highlighted, we are starting to see some real results.
The discovery of large oil and gas reserves within our region is emerging as a significant opportunity for Territory-based businesses to provide support to this rapidly growing industry. Highlighting the increased awareness of the opportunities occurring in our region, a 14-member delegation from the Energy Industry Council of the UK, US, Singapore and Perth visited Darwin last November. This visit was essentially a fact-finding mission, and a follow-up meeting with the council will occur later this year in conjunction with the Territory’s participation at the Offshore South-East Asian Conference, OSEA, and a planned investment seminar after that conference in Singapore in November 2010.
In March 2010, officers from the Northern Territory government led a business delegation of 26 people to the Australasian Oil and Gas Exhibition and Conference in Perth. Most delegates reported making significant connections and advised they wrote new business through the contacts they made at this event - again, real and tangible commercial outcomes for Territory businesses. This positive response has resulted in exhibition space booked for next year’s event. During this visit to Perth, the Wood Group outlined its strategy to expand in Australia, including a greater presence in Darwin.
The Northern Territory also participated in the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association conference in Brisbane in May. During this conference, the Chief Minister held a number of one-on-one meetings with key industry stakeholders important to the Northern Territory, and briefed some 85 industry executives about emerging opportunities in the Territory. Planning has also commenced for the South-East Asian Australian Offshore Conference which will be held at the Convention Centre, Darwin in September this year; the 16th year the event has been held in Darwin. Participation in OSEA is a partnership between the Northern Territory government and private enterprise, and continues to grow and promote opportunities for Territory businesses.
International education is one of Australia’s largest export earners and a positive generator of employment providing multiple benefits for our local economy. Barney Glover, the Vice Chancellor of the Charles Darwin University, is very focused on the potential for international education.
Under the auspices of the Charles Darwin University/Northern Territory government partnership agreement, a number of target markets have been identified for joint collaboration to increase international student enrolments in the Territory, including China, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, East Timor and Malaysia. My colleague, the minister for Education, will be speaking to this statement later, and will expand on the strides the Territory is making in relation to international education.
Indigenous art and craft is an important part of the Territory and is attracting increasing appreciation by international audiences. Indigenous arts and crafts are to be used extensively at the Australian Pavilion at the Shanghai World Expo. Earlier this year, Maningrida Arts Centre oversaw the installation of Indigenous artworks and paintings of the Bedrock theme at the Australian Pavilion. In March, Ms Gulumbu Yunupingu visited Shanghai for the launch of the Sisters theme on International Women’s Day at the Australian Pavilion. Under the Sisters theme, Ms Yunupingu’s achievements as an artist and a leader in her community will be showcased alongside her Chinese sister, who is also an acclaimed artist and influential leader in her in community in China. Additionally, artworks by Ms Yunupingu have recently been installed in the VIP reception area at the pavilion.
Complementing the strong Indigenous theme at the Australian Pavilion and coinciding with NT Week at the expo, a Northern Territory Indigenous art and craft exhibition will be staged at the public art gallery in Shanghai, external to the expo site, from August to October this year. This exhibition will showcase the works of five Indigenous artists from across the Northern Territory, and will provide a significant platform for this industry to gain entry into the Chinese market.
The pastoral industry is an important contributor to the Territory’s economy, particularly in regional areas. The value of this industry has also established the Port of Darwin as Australia’s largest live cattle export port. Currently, Indonesia is the receiver of approximately 90% of the Territory’s live cattle exports. We continue to support our existing markets, particularly Indonesia. I met with the Indonesian minister for Agriculture, His Excellency Suswono and his delegation in March this year, here at Parliament House, along with the minister for Primary Industry. Minister Suswono and the delegation of 25, accepted an invitation from the Northern Territory government to visit the Territory and attend the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association Conference at the same time. It was a positive step to discuss business opportunities and reaffirm the strong relationship between the Northern Territory and Indonesia. The Indonesian minister and his delegation also raised the general issue of investment in respective jurisdictions, and we committed to ensure regular discussions to facilitate trade.
New market development is a key focus of this industry to diversify and expand its market base. In October 2009 the NT Cattlemen’s Association, Khanh Hoa Trading and Investment Company and the Mid-Vietnam Live Cattle Breeding Corporation signed a purchase agreement which will see the first shipment of 1000 head of live cattle to Vietnam later this year. This agreement was an important milestone for the industry and the result of successful collaboration between industry and government.
Plans are being made to bring Indonesian feedlot industry members to Darwin as part of a development project to improve the management and welfare of Territory livestock in other countries. The Northern Territory government has, and will continue, to work closely to provide practical assistance for this industry to develop new markets and secure its future.
The business events sector is a lucrative market which offers multiple benefits across a range of industry sectors and provides an important platform for showcasing emerging opportunities to key decision-makers who ordinarily would not visit the Northern Territory.
There have been successful negotiations involving conference convenors to attract three new business events to the Territory. These are the Bulky Goods Retailers Association Annual Conference; the International Cargo Handling Coordination Association International Conference; and SKAL’s International Annual Conference. These three business events have confirmed Darwin will be the host venue for conferences throughout 2010. The Bulky Goods Retailers Association will hold their annual conference in Darwin in mid-July; and the International Cargo Handling Coordination Association will hold their international conference in August this year, and that conference will be opened by the Chief Minister.
This is a tremendous outcome which will provide the Territory economy with a significant additional injection. These conferences will also provide the Territory with an opportunity to showcase its capability and capacity directly to key investors and decision-makers who have not previously visited the Northern Territory, and will highlight Darwin’s strategic proximity to key mining, oil and gas developments in our region, including Indonesia and the rest of Asia.
The Shanghai World Expo will be the single largest event in 2010 to showcase the Northern Territory to a high level international audience. Particular focus in planning this has been given to NT Week, which will occur between 23 and 27 August, and will include five high level events, three of which will be held at the VIP lounge at the Australian Pavilion.
I am pleased to advise Mr George Roussos, President of the NT Chamber of Commerce, has accepted an invitation to accompany the Chief Minister to the Shanghai World Expo, and will be the MC for the five high-level events which will take place during NT Week. A range of complementary activities will also occur at the expo site, including performances by Gurrumul Yunupingu, resident Indigenous artist at the Australian Pavilion, and two youth basketball teams who will compete in international basketball exhibitions during the expo.
Consideration is also being given for a three province tour of China following the expo to further strengthen our physical presence and bilateral relationships with key provinces of strategic interest to the Northern Territory. A dedicated website has been launched to provide regular updates on the Territory’s involvement and participation at the expo. People can visit the website www.growingnt.nt.gov.au/shanghai.
Importantly, the Trade Support Scheme continues to be a key mechanism for supporting business and industry in its endeavours to pursue commercial opportunities in international markets. Officers of the scheme make regular trips to new and existing clients across the Territory, and regional centres, to ensure its accessibility. Three visits have been made to Alice Springs, and one each to Katherine and Tennant Creek.
The Henderson government has and will continue to work closely with Territory business and industry associations to ensure the goals of this trade strategy continue to be relevant to the priorities of Territory business and result in real and tangible outcomes that continue to drive the Territory’s economy into the future.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House, and move the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish tonight to comment on the minister’s statement, Growing International Trade. On reading the statement, the government has not had a plan involving international trade with real outcomes since 2005 when the portfolio moved from the then Business department to the Chief Minister’s Department under the previous Chief Minister, Clare Martin. Prior to that, the then minister had the Business department working on the international trade strategy and, whilst it was not perfect, it was a document with five clear, definable and measurable outcomes to deliver. Quarterly reports were required from the minister detailing the progress or otherwise against the targets, and the department worked towards the targets and was clear in what could not be measured or achieved, nor seen to be achieved.
As I recall the situation, the department worked in an environment without ambiguity. There was a focus on results, and expanding markets reached beyond a handful of standard targets. This was, in large part, due to the fact it was a business department they were working within, and the clear imperative of that department was increasing business - not a political department whose imperative was spin and glossy brochures.
The Territory had a strong relationship with the BIMP-EAGA region. Relations with this economic group were commenced by Shane Stone who established amazing and lasting relationships; he is mentioned even today amongst senior government officials. Under previous Country Liberal governments, robust relationships were developed in the region and continued in the early days of this government before they lost the plot. I can recall the staging of three dialogue meetings in Darwin which included senior ministers from around the region, but this activity appears to have all but disappeared off the international trade radar.
I ask the minister: why is there no reference at all to the BIMP-EAGA region and the associated benefits which could flow to the Territory especially in tourism, education, and knowledge exchange? Where is the minister’s reference to linkages with Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, the Middle East, India, Thailand and Korea? We once sought to establish trade ties and relationships very successfully with a number of countries and for many years punched well above our weight, and it was seen that way in these Asian countries. We seem to have lost that drive for success.
When the trade group moved into the Chief Minister’s Department the rot began to set in and the focus became blurry. The International Trade Strategy was all but forgotten and replaced with a document that did not do the Territory justice, nor did it promote or assist in providing real direction to developing trade and trade outcomes. I mean no disrespect to the hard-working government officials; however, they did not have the full support of the Chief Minister of the day, nor did they have a clear and concise plan to move the Territory forward in developing new trade markets for Territory businesses.
I turn my comments to the statement before the House today, which I find sadly lacking and containing nothing of real substance. Before I start, I pay a compliment to the minister which I would not normally do. However, since taking up the portfolio I have seen - and people have told me - he has worked hard at the job including trips to Japan to talk with the INPEX people and attending conferences and events in Indonesia. I hope he continues to work with the industry and travel to these countries for important events to achieve better trade outcomes for our small and medium business enterprises in Darwin and the Territory.
Page 2 of the statement mentions targeting key activities to build on core strengths and capability. My questions are: what are the key activities to be targeted - there is no reference - and what are the core strengths and capabilities? On page 2 there is reference to:
What the hell do those two sentences mean? The author of the statement has put in a large level of fluff and jumbled up the words hoping they would sound intelligent. Big tip, minister: they do not. What is the significant progress, and where? Was it thought about? What benchmark started the milestones, minister? How can you judge progress if you do not know where you started? What are the real tangibles, and where? No details at all, just more gobbledegook. What is the targeted engagement, with whom, and where? What is the platform referred to? What are the intended outcomes, and what is the range of issues?
It seems to me the United Nations is alive and well in the Northern Territory and has solved the oil spill, the Palestinian question, the Iraqi issue, the Greek financial crisis, and the UK deficit; all that remains is to make Kevin Rudd popular. Simply put, many recourses used for non-committal of statement.
The statement talks about various events, conferences, visits, and educational opportunities, and I commend them; they are important planks in developing and improving trade outcomes. Participation in these events should be continued, along with encouraging Asian country events to be held in the Northern Territory. Engagement in these types of events is not new. There are references to two Darwin companies in the statement which secured contracts as a result of a visit to Balikpapan, Indonesia. Talks on these activities commenced in 2005, when the first trade mission went to Balikpapan; so I fear the minister may be fudging his success at this point. Do not get me wrong, all these missions and the trade they bring should be encouraged and supported, but I become offended when credit for success goes to the wrong people.
There are references in the statement to the livestock trade, which is an export commodity important to the Territory’s economy and employs between 1500 and 2000 people depending on varying conditions which can affect the industry, such as weather, lock-down or drought times.
The pastoral industry provides wonderful opportunities for employment in remote and regional areas. I congratulate the government and the industry on the recent signing of the memorandum of understanding with Vietnam; this is a good first step. However, there is a long way to go before the Territory truly reaps the full benefit of this arrangement, including working with the Vietnamese people and officials and the industry to ensure feedlots work well and provide a return for all parties. It is all too easy to muck up with animal management, including feedlots, and I would not like this to occur after so much hard work to get to the stage of signing the MOU.
In regard to the livestock export trade out of Darwin, there are some key problems the minister did not address in his statement and I ask him to address them. They are: cattle boats currently do not have priority at our port and, if a container ship comes in, the cattle boats have to wait. This situation is unacceptable and creates unnecessary cost increases and delays in offloading cattle from trucks onto ships when they can finally load. I ask the minister to work harder and further with the port corporation to resolve this impasse so loading can be undertaken efficiently and effectively. Also, I have been told by industry people access to the port is problematic because there is always merchandise on the ground which interferes with road trains accessing the port area. Again, I ask the minister to talk with the port corporation to ensure safe access for road trains so they can unload livestock safely.
The other issue in the export of cattle is the size and location of the holding yards. The loading yard on Wishart Road corner is far too small; it can hold approximately 3700 cattle, and needs to hold upwards of 10 000. I know the company involved has had discussions with the Land Development Corporation and I urge the minister to talk with the Planning minister to find an alternate site which can hold 10 000 cattle. My discussions with industry tell me they desperately need a bigger yard closer to the port.
Another important issue with the live export trade is the change occurring in Indonesia’s push for self-sufficiency which has created a backlog in permit allocation and trouble at some Australian ports. About three weeks ago, a boatload of cattle went from Broome to Indonesia - 1200 to 1500 cattle - and were seized by Indonesia authorities because they did not have the correct permit system; and those cattle were lost. I would not like that situation to occur with cattle going over from Darwin Port.
The ongoing restrictions on Indonesia’s beef import permits could cause price depressions in the Australian domestic market. As well as slowing down the issue of import permits, the Indonesian government recently enforced a 350 kg upper weight limit on cattle exported into the country. That is creating problems, not so much for the actual exporters, but for the producers on the ground. Understandably, Indonesia wants to promote growth in the feedstock industry; however, there is a danger if the restrictions are not lifted soon, export cattle would flood the domestic market and could cause a slump in beef prices across Australia. I call on the minister to work harder and assiduously with the Indonesian authorities so we can protect our live cattle export trade, particularly for the Northern Territory, and also other cattle that come through our yards and into the port.
Has the minister seriously explored alternative markets such as the Middle East, or returning to the Philippines, where we once had a vibrant export market?
On the last page of the statement there is reference to the Trade Support Scheme; I was disappointed it was only one paragraph, and I quote:
When that scheme was originally set up, the export and trade people were located in the Business department, however since moving to the Chief Minister’s Department I have been told by industry people and others that, yes, it is an important mechanism, but accessing the scheme is way too difficult. The paperwork is burdensome, it is too costly and, sometimes, it is not worth the effort. So, I ask the minister to see if he can make that scheme more efficient. I am also curious to know how many businesses have accessed the scheme in the last 12 months - and that may be something I will pursue in the Estimates Committee.
The other subject I turn my attention to, which was overlooked completely in the minister’s statement, is two federally-funded schemes: the Export Market Development Grants Scheme which, in the recent federal budget, was severely slashed. It will fall short this year by an estimated $30m across the country, and will mean it could be up to $80m short next year. This will destroy the confidence of small and medium exporters who will stop spending on developing their overseas markets. Australia and the Territory may have escaped the full impact of the global financial crisis, but that is not the case for exporters; let us not forget the impact the dollar is having on remaining competition. With the scheme slashed at the national level, it will be slashed at the Northern Territory level.
Further, the Austrade new exporter development program called TradeStart also suffered severe slashing in the federal budget - it was cut by half. I cannot understand, and I know the Australian Institute of Export and the Australian Chamber of Commerce, and others, cannot understand either why, at a time we are trying to promote exports, it would be slashed.
These two programs are Commonwealth programs, but the TradeStart program is under contract to the Chamber of Commerce. The minister makes absolutely no reference in his statement to the Territory scheme, apart from the fact it is important. He does not talk about what has happened to it, how much it is funded, or whether funding and promotion is going to be increased. In the last round of the TradeStart scheme, $150 000 came into the Territory which enabled one person in Darwin and half a person in Alice Springs; 25 contracts were expected and 15 exports per annum. The TradeStart scheme has been cut to $80 000 for the Northern Territory, yet they expect 40 contracts and 25 exports. They have halved the money and doubled the workload. I do not see anything in the minister’s statement to indicate he has taken up with his federal colleagues that this is not acceptable, given the potential in the Northern Territory for small and medium business to enter into export markets and the cleverness we have in small and medium business across all industries.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I will leave my comments there for now. It is not a bad effort in regard to the statement; it is a little light on substance. I am disappointed it does not reference the Northern Territory trade incentive schemes, and makes absolutely no reference to the fact the federal Labor government has slashed both the export schemes they promote, which will mean a flow-on effect and a drop in funding to the Northern Territory. The minister does not address this at all, which is exceptionally disappointing.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the statement made by the Minister for Asian Relations and Minister for Trade. My statement will concentrate on the Northern Territory’s trade in international education services.
This government has education at the core of its Territory 2030 strategic plan. We recognise education is the key to achieving social and economic improvements and education, and education-related services, are a genuine trade commodity. Across the world more people than ever are undertaking international education and our nearest neighbour, Asia, is spearheading that demand.
Rapid economic growth in Asia has been the most important cause of growth in trade of education over the past 25 years. The rise in per capita income in Asian countries has resulted in a greater desire to access all forms of education through international education. The sector has experienced extraordinary growth in the past few years Australia-wide, from 228 119 in 2002 to 491 565 students in 2009. Those 491 565 students contributed $17.2bn to the Australian economy.
The Northern Territory government is working with the Australian government to implement initiatives to improve the Territory’s image as a study destination for overseas students, and support a high-quality education experience for international students.
The Council of Australian Governments announced last year an international student strategy for Australia would be developed. In April, COAG noted progress on the strategy, which contains 12 initiatives under four broad action areas: student wellbeing; quality of education; consumer protection; and better information. A website will be developed as a single source of authoritative, comprehensive, accurate and up-to-date information for international students. This will mean overseas students wanting to study in the Northern Territory will be better informed about their options.
Our efforts to attract overseas students are certainly paying dividends. International student numbers in the Northern Territory have nearly doubled in the past few years, increasing from 401 in 2007 to 790 in May this year. That figure of 790 is made up of 44 international students at government schools, 52 at non-government schools, 406 in higher education, 202 studying Vocational Education and Training, and 86 undertaking intensive English language courses. These students contribute more than $23m to the Northern Territory economy through the payment of tuition fees, accommodation, meals, return airfares, clothing, entertainment and other general expenses.
Education and training providers, including the Department of Education and Training and Charles Darwin University, regularly attend international trade fairs to recruit international students to study in Darwin. As my colleague, the member for Daly mentioned, a partnership between Charles Darwin University and the Northern Territory government has identified several countries as target markets to increase international student enrolments in the Territory. These countries include China, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, Timor-Leste and Malaysia.
Last year, I accompanied the Chief Minister to the inaugural Timor-Leste Northern Territory Ministerial Forum in Dili. We were joined by a 60-strong delegation, including the Vice Chancellor of Charles Darwin University, Barney Glover, and the Director of the Menzies School of Health Research, Dr Jonathon Carapetis. We met the Timor-Leste Secretary of State for Professional Training and Employment, Bendito Freitas which resulted in Charles Darwin University and Menzies jointly offering two PhD scholarships for Timorese students in the health field. The first scholar was recently welcomed at Charles Darwin University, and the second scholar is preparing to arrive shortly.
The Northern Territory also recently hosted visiting Research Fellow, Valentin Ximenes from the Universidade Nasionl Timr Lorosa'e, UNTL. He completed a 12-week visiting research fellowship in May, and his research focused mainly on the design and policy formulation on local government reform in Timor-Leste.
A Territory government and Charles Darwin University joint exploratory visit to southern Vietnam in December last year identified further educational exchange opportunity, in particular through partnership agreements with Vietnamese tertiary institutions. This included research opportunities and twinning arrangements to establish courses which acknowledge study at each institution. These opportunities were further explored by Charles Darwin University during a follow-up visit by the Vice Chancellor, Barney Glover, in March. As a result of this work, a service agreement was negotiated with Austrade to undertake an education sector study in Vietnam to identify future opportunities.
Participation in the Shanghai World Expo later this year is expected to provide the education sector with a significant platform for high-level engagement in China. The Department of Education and Training will be providing material for distribution at the expo promoting the Northern Territory as a study destination for international students. Students from Darwin High School will also be visiting the expo while undertaking an exchange program in Shanghai. This is reflective of the interest our high schools, and even our primary schools, have in taking advantage of this trade in education.
More sister school relationships are being established and more teacher exchanges are happening. Government and private schools host visiting study tour groups of students from countries such as Japan, China and Indonesia. During his last trip to Tokyo the Chief Minister visited Akabane Primary School, where students were very keen to set up a sister school relationship with a school in the Territory so they could learn about crocodiles …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. A quorum is required. Please ring the bells.
Thank you. We have a quorum.
Dr BURNS: In my capacity as Minister for Public Employment, I am very pleased to inform the House the Northern Territory Public Service is involved in international study exchanges. The first four participants in the Timor-Leste Civil Service Capacity Building Internship Scheme began an eight-week placement in human resource management in the NT Public Service in June last year. The participants found the exchange extremely useful and the next intake of three participants is expected to commence a six-week placement in the NT Public Service this month.
The three were selected by the Timor-Leste Civil Service, and are senior managers from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of State Administration and the Ministry of Economy and Development. They will be exposed to the public sector’s financial management practices and procedures and will be placed in the Department of the Chief Minister, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services and the Department of Business and Employment for the operational component.
I recently met with a delegation of seven members from the Timor-Leste Civil Service who were visiting Darwin as part of a number of planned study tours to gain a greater understanding of other public sector environments. They were very keen to learn all they could about our public service, and the Office of Public Employment was just as keen to share what knowledge they could.
I have outlined the educational and economic benefits to the Territory for trade and education and education-related services. There is another benefit: the opportunity to share our unique customs, culture and way of life with those who choose to study in the Northern Territory. Our students also have the opportunity to travel overseas, to learn a new language, a new culture and enhance their education beyond books - that is a wonderful and very special opportunity.
The trade in education and education-related services is one of our fastest-growing commodities. As outlined, the benefits to the Territory are numerous to our economy, our education system and our society. It is certainly a trade this government will continue to pursue and develop.
Debate adjourned.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move the House do now adjourn.
Tonight I would like to talk about the spectacular event my wife and I attended on behalf of the Chief Minister on Saturday, 29 May 2010, the 2010 Rose of Tralee Pageant Ball, held in the Ballroom of SKYCITY Casino, Darwin.
At the ball I had the great pleasure of meeting the Irish ambassador to Australia, his Excellency Mairtin O Fainin, and his wife Mrs Anne O Fainin. I also met the winner of the 2009 International Rose of Tralee, Charmaine Kenny, and the 2009 winner of Darwin Rose, Anne McNamee.
The Rose of Tralee Pageant is an annual event which offers young Territory ladies of Irish descent an excellent opportunity for personal growth and the chance to trace, rediscover and celebrate their Irish heritage and culture. For one lucky contestant, it also presents an opportunity to travel to Ireland and represent the Northern Territory at the distinguished international Rose of Tralee festival. The Rose of Tralee International Festival has its inspiration in the story of the ill-fated love between a servant girl and the son of wealthy merchant, made famous in the love song, The Rose of Tralee.
The festival is one of the pre-eminent festivals of Europe and attracts girls of Irish descent from all over the world, and the selection of the Rose of Tralee is shown on TV in over 30 countries across the globe. The winner is selected for her good character, qualities, personality, talent and charm. So far, Darwin has sent 25 representatives to Tralee, this year being the 26th, and each year the feedback on the performance of the representatives is most complimentary.
This year’s pageant attracted seven entrants, and I congratulate each and every one for their contribution to a successful event. Their efforts in organising extensive fundraising saw them raise a total of $8000; the pageant donated $5000 to the Starlight Foundation
Government House, Parliament House and the Lord Mayor’s office each had a reception for the entrants, which plays a very important role in the selection of the Darwin Rose of Tralee representative, providing the contestants with the opportunity to develop and improve their public speaking and networking skills, and fostering their confidence.
I congratulate Valerie O’Halloran. Valerie was the lucky winner of this year’s Rose of Tralee NT competition. I wish Valerie all the best for the Rose of Tralee international competition to be held in Ireland in August 2010.
There are a number of people who have made a worthy contribution to the pageant’s success and these people deserve to be acknowledged for their tireless efforts and hard work. I acknowledge the great work of the Irish Association committee members, including Julia Baxter, President; Mary McAlpine - what a character as Vice President; Kay Gargett, Secretary, and committee members Ray Willoughby and Pat Murray.
I also acknowledge the good work of the Rince na h’Eirean Darwin Irish Association committee members. Well done to Romola Sebastianpillai, Chairperson; Kerri Cramp, Vice Chairman/ Treasurer; Maree McLinden, Secretary; Mara Dobrini, Secretary; Lorraine Evans and Kylie Tune, committee members. The Rince na h’Eirean Darwin Irish Dance Association is an Irish dancing school which has served the people of Darwin and surrounding regions for over a decade. It has approximately 60 members ranging in age from four to over 60 years. The name Rince na h’Eirean means Dance of Ireland, and the association’s motto is ‘We Dance with our Hearts’; and this is how they encourage their dancers to perform - with a smile on their faces and a spring in their steps. The school performs regularly at community events, school fetes, and aged-care facilities.
The Rince na h’Eirean Darwin Irish Dance Association was privileged to perform at the Rose of Tralee ball this year. The dancers were Rosie O’Reilly, teacher; Alex Gotze, teacher; Michaela Blake, Rochelle Blake, Shannon McLinden, Kate Kenny, Tim Miles, Ellie Miles, Karen Spencer, Ashlyn Lans and Isobelle Lans. The dancers performed a lively selection of traditional Irish ceili and choreographed soft-shoe and hard-shoe dances. It really was spectacular, and heartily enjoyed by everyone who attended.
They performed the opening number with a hard-shoe choreographed dance which had the audience’s toes tapping and set the scene for the rest of the performance. The dances that followed were high energy, especially the three hands and jigs; and it was a delight to see two young dancers performs solos. The enthusiasm and skill level of the dancers made for a very enjoyable and polished performance.
I was particularly impressed at the way the dancers encouraged and supported each other; there really is a great spirit amongst that group. Well done for a fantastic and excellent performance and I look forward to attending the pageant again next year. It really is a highlight of the Darwin calendar and I commend it to members.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I recognise the outstanding service of the outgoing Deputy Clerk, Captain David Horton.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mrs AAGAARD: Captain Horton has had a long and distinguished career, first in the Royal Australian Navy where he spent 35 years rising from the junior sailor rank to Captain, a position which included Commanding Officer of HMAS Coonawarra from 1989 to 1992; followed by a period as Chief of Staff of the Naval Training Command. After leaving the Navy, he became the official Secretary to the Administrator and, from 1998, has been Deputy Clerk of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly.
I asked David for some reflections on his time as the Deputy Clerk, and he has provided me with some observations. I will be reading in the first person, so this is David speaking - unfortunately, he cannot speak on our floor. His introduction to the parliament was a phone call from the then Public Service Commissioner while he was on leave in the United Kingdom in 1988. He was asked if he interested in this job in the parliament and he said: ‘I know nothing about parliaments’; but he said: ‘I would learn, and learn I did’:
Although I must say I believe the Clerks are sometimes amused:
David, you put in a huge amount of work with the four sittings we have had in Alice Springs, and they are a testimony to you:
Then he says:
David, I am sure all honourable members join with me in wishing you a very happy time in the next part of your journey – I hope it is on some kind of a ship. Maybe we should be saying bon voyage. I hope the next part of your journey with Lorraine, your wife, is a very good one. I wish you all the best for your future.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I, too, pass on my thanks to our Deputy Clerk for his years of long and distinguished service to our Legislative Assembly.
The advice David has always provided, frank and fearless to all members, has assisted us in the work we do. I suppose much of the work we do here is unlike work conducted anywhere else, and it is a unique experience to participate and work in this parliament, and to have served all 25 sitting members with absolute grace, respect and diligence. To be around some of the big debates of the day and of the time must have been an interesting ride given your background, David.
I sincerely thank you for your advice, your support, the good grace and humour you have had in this role. I wish you well in the next phase of your life and career and, whatever you choose to do, I know you will do with distinction.
Thank you for your great contribution to a fabulous institution, the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Territory opposition, I also pass on our sincere best wishes, and thank you for the service you have provided this parliament.
I find it amazing the member for Wanguri and I are like the fathers of the House, but I feel we have not been here that long. You have been here longer and have observed people come and go; you have observed the activities of the Chamber - and I note the words spoken ‘maintaining courage under fire’ - quietly observing the behaviour of the Chamber and making your own quiet assessments. I would love to give you a penny for your thoughts and what you really think about what is going on in here. It is having that still space within the Chamber to look across, and is a reference point. I really appreciate the role played by officers of the parliament and, in this case, particularly you, Sir, for that still point in a storm which sometimes helps us to gain a reference point.
I know you have had an interesting journey, just by bearing the title Captain - I have a bit of an Army background; a Captain in the Army is quite different to a Captain in the Navy; I understand and respect that - and then to serve in this capacity with distinction.
It is a big decision to say farewell, but I am sure you will cherish the memories you take with you. And I still would not mind giving you a penny for your thoughts. Thank you, and all the very best.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I also add my thanks to those of my parliamentary colleagues who have spoken tonight to thank our outgoing Deputy Clerk, Captain David Horton. He is a man who brought a distinguished Naval career with the wealth of experience that brings, as well as the role with the Administrator of the Territory, to great use in serving our parliament and, therefore, the people of the Northern Territory.
From 1998 to today; what an incredible series of changes you have seen and the characters who have paraded through this parliament as politicians who are here to ultimately serve the people.
As we have heard in debate, you have been fair and frank with your advice, your support to all members of this Chamber, regardless of where they sit on the benches and of the roles they play. I have some very fond memories of the various tasks and challenges I have had to set for the officers of the Assembly. I remember when I had to test the Hansard equipment to see if my baby monitor would work in this Chamber, being the first parliamentarian to have a child in office. It was with good grace you ensured the staff of the Assembly worked with me so I could be at the sittings of parliament just after the birth of my youngest.
Sitting on the House Committee, which deals with the functioning of the parliament, was an opportunity to see at close quarters, Captain, the way you and the senior officers of this Assembly steered this ship through somewhat stormy seas, particularly through the stormiest of seas with the introduction of the broadcast of parliament - a significant change opening up parliament to broadcast.
The evolution of that was Question Time and all the work that went into it. Further evolution was through the Internet and now, ultimately, through not just audio but visuals that go right through the sittings. I commend you for the logistics, research, and effort that has gone into that. I know you have been diligent in the way you have applied yourself to those tasks on behalf of not just the parliamentarians, but the broader Territory community who benefit.
I echo the sentiments of the member for Nightcliff regarding the sheer logistics of getting parliament to sit in Alice Springs, albeit it just for three days every two years. Anyone who has glimpsed behind the scene knows the effort staff of the Assembly goes through to ensure it occurs seemingly without a glitch.
I know, Captain, your training in the Navy ensured everything you did was done thoroughly and diligently and we have seen the success of that with the sittings in Alice Springs. We could not have pulled off such a feat without the effort you made. As a Territorian, it is a great legacy you are leaving all officers of the Assembly in being able to take on fairly Herculean tasks and deliver them with great professionalism.
I have learnt from the way you approached your job in this Assembly that diligence and thoroughness, and sometimes being quiet when you are otherwise tempted to speak, is perhaps the best path.
I have seen this Assembly through its various ages and I have seen officers of the Assembly, Clerks and Deputy Clerks, and I will always have the fondest of memories of working with you in your time here, and the highest respect and regard for you, Captain Horton. Thank you.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate Captain David Horton for his many years of service to this parliament.
I want to share for a moment with the House some absolute fundamentals of democracy. What is essential is open and transparent processes so it is clear who is driving the agenda, and what that agenda is. What is also essential is economic empowering of the community, ensuring every citizen is truly equal before the law. It is also essential and most important, and comes at the forefront of everything we do, that government is the servant of the people, not their master. It is our job to listen, respond and deliver that which is demanded by the people. Let me share with you some basic points on democracy prepared for a civic education campaign in Iraq:
In a democracy the exercise of political power must respect the law, the constitution, and the will of the people through the decisions of their elected legislative representatives. In a democracy, government is based on the will of the people. The elected representatives at the national and local levels must listen to the people and be responsive to their needs. Democracy is a system of rule by laws, not individuals. All citizens are equal under the law.
I am emphasising these principles in the House today because this government is flagrantly undermining the democratic process. I will give you three glaring examples, and I wish there was a simple three strikes and you are out policy. Major causes behind the failure of democracy here include a lack of timely financial management, and a lack of transparency. As the member for Braitling noted last night regarding the Auditor-General’s report on SIHIP:
One of the items in the Attorney-General’s report stated:
In the member for Nelson’s response to the censure motion he said, and I quote:
The member for Macdonnell put a motion to the House for the establishment of a Territory Indigenous Expenditure Review Committee to: inquire into all areas of Indigenous expenditure, including allocations by the Territory government, and made by the federal government, which are both administered by the Territory and federal governments; and to match said related expenditure allocations with actual expenditure and evaluate the outcomes achieved. This Labor government’s response was in the negative.
The member for Macdonnell stated she was:
It was of great concern the government’s response had been so negative, when the member for Arnhem’s own words in response to the motion were:
I note the Indigenous Expenditure Review Steering Committee, under the auspice of the Council of Australian Governments, has developed a national framework for collecting and recording government expenditure on services to Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Its aim is to provide vital transparency, and we should be doing the same here. Not only with SIHIP, but across every other program.
There is the calamity we witnessed last night, when the member for Nelson’s carefully considered amendment to the motion on the establishment of an independent inquiry to report on breaches of environmental standards and related matters was completely overlooked. Let me remind you of this amendment:
We did not support his amendment, we supported his intent. How little respect was he and those he represents shown? This process failed and the democratic process was undermined because the member for Nelson went to government seeking a change in a motion supported by government, but this Labor government took his good faith in very bad faith.
Wind the clock back to August 2009 when the member for Nelson had very serious concerns about the siting of a new prison. Let me remind you when, in April 2008, the government announced a new prison, the then Department of Planning and Infrastructure identified a number of potential sites, but ‘an important element of this consideration will be taking into account community concerns about the placement of a new prison’. Like the recent, non-existent secure care facility consultations in Alice Springs and Bees Creek, there were no public consultations for the new prison. As the member for Goyder said in a matter of public importance debate in February last year:
In August 2009, the member for Nelson stated:
Let me remind you a majority of members in this Legislative Assembly represent the majority of people in the Northern Territory. In the case of the Carey Builders debacle, this House should have worked together, as required by the majority, to assist those affected in their time of need. Yet again, this government said no, and refused to establish the fund we suggested should be calculated by a relevant, qualified person to complete the unfinished homes. This, despite the fact the motion we proposed was supported by the two Independent MLAs.
The Alice Springs News summed up the local disgust:
And the government has. This government has failed in every single way to be properly democratic. We saw it today where the Speaker failed to pass on the intent of this parliament to the federal parliament, and it makes me hang my head in shame at times.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will start by saying the Finke Desert Race is coming up this weekend, and I wish riders, drivers, and spectators all the best in safety. I thank the organisers of the Finke Desert Race, and I also wish my colleague, the member for Drysdale, good luck. When he drives past me when I am camping on the Finke track, I expect him to toot the horn, and I would like him to make it a little further past me this year. I wish spectators, drivers, and riders all the best and, hopefully, people get through safely. It will be another fantastic year, and Finke just gets bigger and better.
In relation to Carey Builders, my colleague, the member for Fong Lim, briefly spoke about that. Let me express my utmost disgust at the government going back on its decision to support those victims of Carey Builders. Let it be known people will lose their homes as part of the government’s reluctance to help victims of Carey Builders.
It is a complete breakdown in the democratic process when we try to get something through to help people. It is our role to advocate on behalf of our constituents. Parliament supported that motion; government will not do it. They are happy to pork-barrel their own electorates, happy to feather their own nest, happy to look after their own interests, but when people really need assistance, it is not good enough. The government is quite happy to spend $200m-plus to build 11 houses under SIHIP, quite happy to spend $95 000 buying tents for Alice Springs, quite happy to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on consultants, but cannot afford a couple of hundred thousand dollars as a loan to the victims of Carey Builders.
We heard the Treasurer say in the Chamber today the government does not give loans to individuals - they have the Homestart program and the Buildstart program where they take an equity stake. They have a loan to the waterfront of millions and millions of dollars, yet they cannot help people who are about to have their loan foreclosed and are going to be kicked out on the street. I believe that is devastating.
Before I go on, I would like to say it is not often unions reflect the views of the Liberals. What we see today is a very interesting piece by someone who has put up a blog on the Your Rights at Work Campaign, someone by the name of Kara Touchie. She has really come on board taking the views of the No More Sit Down Money Scheme. I would like to read a document she has written. I will read it really fast.
I will cut some out here to save time.
It is interesting to digress for a second and think about those 500 people who are taken off CDEP and put into real jobs as part of the transition program at the start of the intervention, in recognition of the liberal philosophy that people should be getting a fair day’s pay, with superannuation, maternity leave, sick leave, and long service leave.
Those 500 people were put through what thousands of others were put through due to federal government and Northern Territory government employment. The federal government said: ‘For three years we will pay the salary but give all the money to the local councils and shires. It is your job to come up with a model where you can keep those people employed after three years’.
What did the government do three weeks before 30 June after three years? Contacted the federal government and said: ‘Is that Jenny Macklin? We need some more money. We can’t do this ourselves’.
Those 500 people are even worse off than has been explained by Kara because they cannot go back onto CDEP; they have to go on the dole. We had all the huff and puff by the Minister for Indigenous Development and Local Government earlier in the week. These 500 people will go back on the dole. There is no other choice unless the federal government puts money in, which is not its responsibility. It is the responsibility of the Northern Territory government to design a local government model which enables the appropriate resource identifications, whether through the rate base or other fees and charges, to ensure it has enough money and resources to run the council and pay the workers.
What we will see now is an inadequate local government model which will force local shires to sack 500 Indigenous workers. We are trying to fix things in the Territory and the Labor government is trying to stuff it up, to put it bluntly. Kara writes this interesting article saying: ‘Why can’t we get equality for these workers?’ We cannot get equality because we have a Labor government. The previous Liberal federal government put 500 people into work and they are now going to be sacked because this government did not do the job.
We now hear reports about shire councils being so in debt the only way they can get out is to sack people. Ask the Barkly Shire how much in debt they are. Ask the Tiwi Shire how they are going, or how the management of their CDEP program is going. Go out there and see exactly what is going on. They do not have the rate base to attract the funds. They did not set up a model where the rate base would be increased so they could keep these people employed. We will see more people being sacked, and that is another sad indictment.
The member for Fong Lim spoke about the breakdown in democracy in the Northern Territory and you see it clearly in the role of the Speaker, and the Chief Minister, and the performance of some members who are clearly over-promoted and unable to do their job. We see the struggles with the Carey Builders’ motion; we see SIHIP where people cannot understand how, for some reason, you get value for money for $200m and 11 houses. They do not seem to get that.
We have this ‘council of Territory love’, the Council of Territory Cooperation which, for all intents and purposes, is supposed to bring about reform in the Territory, and all they do is talk and spend money. Now I hear they are going to have a stand at the show. What is this? A way they can get more travel allowance, more flights and more movement within the Territory so they can go to the shows? We have more flights, more TA, so people can talk to the CTC. That is what we, as politicians, are there to do; listen to the interests of constituents within our electorates and bring it to debate, and parliament come up with some concept, idea, or legislation, and you move forward with that. The motion on Carey Builders was a perfect example. Parliament said this and government chose not to do it. I believe the CTC needs to have a good hard look at it, and the Country Liberals need to have a good hard look at our role on the CTC.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is with great pride I speak tonight in the House about a hand-back ceremony I attended on Thursday, 13 May at the beautiful Jasper Gorge in the Jutpurra National Park, also known as Gregory National Park.
As the Minister for Parks and Wildlife, and the local member for Stuart, and as a proud Territorian who has travelled through the VRD on many occasions, the event was truly a special one. It was a bumpy ride out to the gorge from Timber Creek, but we eventually emerged from the dust to a clearing where there were hundreds of people who had arrived to take part in this historic occasion which will see a new agreement between Aboriginal people, the traditional owners, and the Northern Territory government working together to maintain this breathtakingly beautiful country.
If I say the mood at Jasper Gorge was very moving, I do not think I would be exaggerating. As everyone mingled waiting for the formalities to begin, there was a hint of sadness for all those who were no longer with us to see this important event become part of our history. There was dancing, music and speeches from many people including the old men from around the VRD, the lady dancers from the Gurindji lands at Kalkarindji, and many other local groups talking about their connection to country, and what an important day this was for the people of the region.
The hand-back was a significant and historic step forward in acknowledging and respecting the continuing cultural attachment the traditional owners have to that part of the country. I quote one of the senior men who spoke at the opening ceremony, Mr Larry Johns:
And:
I acknowledge the presence of many people at the ceremony. Australia’s Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Jenny Macklin, the local member and federal member and Minister for Indigenous Health, Warren Snowdon, were all there to celebrate the handover.
I also acknowledge the elders who were there who have done so much work in discussions with Parks and Wildlife and the government about the joint management, including: Mr Peter Waterloo, Mr Jimmy Wavehill, Mr Jack Little, Bill Harney, Mae Rosas, David Ross, Kim Hill, and two park rangers from Bullita, Rhese and Derek.
A large contingent of media from across the country flocked to document this historic event, which added to the great sense of unity, reconciliation, and progress felt by all. It was a moment for all Australians, and a moment we can all be proud of.
The former Gregory National Park was first established in 1984, with the acquisition of Bullita Station and portions of adjoining pastoral stations. In 1990, it was formally declared Gregory National Park under the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act. In 1996, a further portion of Mount Sandford Station was included, bringing the total area of the park to around 1.3 million hectares. This is the Territory’s biggest park and, after nearly six years of negations, the Aboriginal rightful owners have an agreement with the Northern Territory government and a 99-year lease for joint management. The joint management plan involves the traditional owners having a say in the management and operations of the park, which will contribute to making the Northern Territory parks estate of world-class standard.
The underlying title to the land rests with the traditional owners, but the social, cultural, and environmental assets will be conserved using their knowledge and skills for the benefit of their country, their community, and all Australians. The agreement will allow Aboriginal people to keep their culture strong and create ongoing economic opportunities for their children through a range of industries, including both conservation and tourism industries.
I was humbled by the strength of culture and perseverance of the Aboriginal people in the VRD region. The magnificent gorges, escarpments, and plains are now to be jointly managed by Aboriginal owners and park rangers, and Jutpurra National Park marks the way forward for land management in Australia; looking after country together two ways.
I acknowledge the Northern and Central Land Councils and their personnel who, for many years, worked on this agreement, and many of whom were there on the day. I also acknowledge the senior members and members of the Nalipinkak, Bilinurra, Jutpurra and Winan Aboriginal Land Trusts.
It has been a privilege for me, as Minister for Parks and Wildlife, to attend a few of these handovers, including the ones at Jesse and Emily Gaps in Alice Springs. I look forward to signing more joint management agreements with traditional owners in the future, for the benefit of all Australians.
I inform the House tonight of the resignation of Mr Bill Konstandas, the Chief Executive Officer of Football Federation NT. Bill has done a fantastic job over a short period of time, and the management and promotion of football in the Territory has benefited greatly from his experience. He has also fostered great working relationships with Football Federation Timor-Leste, with the Timor Sea Cup, an Under 18 tournament between Timor-Leste, the Indonesian province of Nusa Tenggara Timur, and the NT. The second round of the Timor Sea Cup was played in Dili recently, and the third round will be held during the Arafura Games next year.
Bill has also worked hard in travelling around the Northern Territory, and it has been my privilege to catch up with him in the Alice where he has done a great deal of work with the Football in Central Australia group, and also a couple of times in Borroloola where we were both there promoting the game, along with the people from Adelaide United.
I wish Bill and his family all the best for the future, and again thank him for his endeavours and efforts during his short period here.
While on football or soccer, and on the eve of the World Cup, I update the House on football or soccer in the Northern Territory. This government is providing $225 000 over three years to the Football Federation of Australia for the Indigenous Football Festival to be held in Alice Springs in 2010, 2011, and 2012, further developing Alice Springs as the hub for Indigenous sport in Australia. Football is making big inroads across the community, and it was inspiring to see the support at last year’s Arafura Games for the talented Borroloola Cyclones who did their town and the Territory proud against teams including those from China, East Timor, and Macau.
This government is a strong supporter of football in Central Australia and, as the Minister for Central Australia, I was proud to recently open the $500 000 upgrade to Ross Park for their clubhouse and lighting; and also support football in Central Australia with $65 000 for the purchase of a portable football arena for the Street Soccer initiative. I also thank Paul Elliott and Mark Wakeling for their efforts in Central Australia in promoting soccer.
In 2009, the A League’s Adelaide United and North Queensland Fury played a pre-season match at Larrakia Park, with Paul Henderson in the goals for the Fury - that is not our Paul Henderson, it is the name of the goalie for the Fury. We are in serious negotiations to secure home and away matches in the A League for Territory football fans.
The Chief Minister and I recently met with representatives of Football Federation of Australia to discuss the Territory’s involvement in Australia’s World Cup bid for 2018 and 2022. We are proud to announce both Traeger Park in Alice Springs, my hometown, and Larrakia Park in Darwin were included in the list of possible training sites for the Football Federation of Australia World Cup bid. The fact we may now have the chance of seeing the Cahills, Messis, Ronaldinhos, Rooneys or Drogbas running around on our sporting venues is a testament to how far the world game has come in the Territory.
This government is proud to support football in the Territory and, once again, I wish Bill and his family all the best for the future.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I apologise in advance: my speech has ‘Madam Speaker’ written throughout and I will try not to refer to you as Madam Speaker; I know you are not a lady.
It is with absolute shame I highlight tonight what has been, for me, a sincere and bitter low since becoming a member of the Legislative Assembly. In politics I, as most people, appreciate a fair level of argy-bargy, passionate debate as the war of words cross paths in this Chamber. At times the debate turns heated, as one might expect, with different views and philosophies exchanged in the battle of wits, the battle of minds, and the battle, perhaps, designed to ensure tomorrow’s headline.
Yesterday, the minister for Environment, Karl Hampton, issued a media release indicating I had reached a new low for mentioning one single word contained in a question asked during Question Time yesterday - one word. What I find amazing is, from this one word he has been able to construct a full-page media release on the subject of all things ‘gutter politics’. A full page from one single word, at a time when our harbour and environment are under attack from some unknown and potentially devastating pathogen! We hear nought from the very minister charged with the responsibility of protecting our environment except for a media release on an unrelated issue I am passionate about.
Using children, particularly children with disabilities, to score a political point is about as low as a politician could go. The minister’s attack was personal in this case, and made worse considering one of my own children has a disability, and they are directly involved with tenpin bowling through Total Recreation, a program I have absolute admiration for, as well as the wonderful staff who provide this valuable service.
Given this, I now question my role in this House. I have, to date, thought I had been given the responsibilities of a shadow ministry and my role was to scrutinise the minister wherever and whenever necessary. This is the role of an opposition member, and of all members on this side. I have considered my input to date has been both firm and fair in my arguments and the manner in which I operate. I have always given credit where credit is due, congratulate ministers and government in general when they have provided our community with a genuine and decent service, but my role includes scrutinising the minister and criticising government whenever it is obvious things have gone terribly wrong. However, any attack needs to be fair and focused on the issue, not the member. What does this minister expect me to do? Stay silent? Hide, and not raise concerns in our community?
I appreciate the minister did not, perhaps, draft this media release; I certainly hope not. I certainly hope he spends his valuable time on more important issues, such as protecting our environment and managing his ministerial portfolios. However, I have concerns with the focus of his office if this is what they are paid for. If this is what they spend their time on, and if it is the instruction from this minister, then I feel deeply sorry for him; and I feel deeply sorry for Territorians. However, at the end of the day, the buck stops with him. It is his media release, his words, and his thoughts.
I was perplexed to some degree as to what to do; how to react to this unprovoked attack on my credibility; how to react to an unexpected charge by a minister, by a man I did have respect for; a man I honestly considered a decent man, a decent human being. Is this just a glimpse of who Karl Hampton is; of the Henderson government minister’s real self; of the quality of person minister Hampton is? If it is, as I said, I feel sorry for him - sincerely sorry.
Before considering how I react - should I react or just let it go through to the keeper? - I e-mailed the minister earlier today to detail how I felt about this low act hoping, I suppose, he might respond and pull me aside and speak with me and explain the logic of lowering his own standards - but nothing, no response, nothing. That is why I am raising this issue here tonight - not in a media release, here.
This is a sign of a minister in crisis, reacting like a scared, timid dog that has been backed into a corner and has no other option than to lash out and bite. It is not the reaction one might expect from a minister of the Crown, from a fair and decent human being. It is an absolute bloody insult that this minister used an organisation I have supported to score cheap, grubby political points. My comments about tenpin bowling were related to your failure to issue a media release on the environment, not an attack on disabled bowling; as you are well aware.
One of my boys has a disability, and he has been involved in disabled bowling for some time now. He enjoys the experience - actually loves the experience - of bowling. For you to try to score political capital using a service organisation I hold in the highest regard is a disgrace. You should hang your head in shame.
I want an apology, not to me, but to the volunteers and kids involved in disabled bowling for your self-serving, pathetic attempt to get at me in this Chamber. In the process, you have used the kids and volunteers associated with this terrific organisation. For that, you should hang your head in shame. My question was about the environment and your incapacity and incompetence in managing the Environment portfolio. This is an act of a useless minister.
My question was borne out by the question I asked on Wednesday: why did you or the Health Minister not issue a media release before the Channel 9 News announced the closure of Mindil and Vesteys Beaches? A decent minister, a good minister, a capable and competent minister, would have taken carriage of his portfolio. That is called leadership - damn leadership! You did not even know how often the water quality was checked at Darwin Harbour. This is pathetic. You, and others, do the work and make political capital out of disabled kids. That is a disgraceful act.
It is the same neglect of the Environment portfolio that has us in a situation tonight where our so-called environmental watchdog, whether NRETAS or the EPA, has no involvement in the investigation into a chemical spill at East Arm. A properly functioning environmental watchdog would be at the site of the spill right now, finding out what happened and how to stop it happening again. A proper minister would have convinced his Cabinet colleagues this was a job for the EPA. Minister, you will go down in the annals of Territory political history as a do-nothing, know-nothing loafer who amazed both his colleagues and opponents with his slothfulness.
Your actions, minister, are a disgrace.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk about a couple of things this evening but, first, I will talk about the AFL Grand Final which I attended at Galiwinku on Elcho Island on 15 May. I remember someone telling me the best way to make contact with people was through family, football, or fishing. He was certainly correct when I looked at the number of who attended the Grand Final game at Galiwinku.
It was a very hard-fought and close contest between the teams, Tigers and Eagles. For the Tigers it was their debut year on the football scene at Galiwinku, and they won by just two points; the final scores being 10.9.69 for the Tigers, and 10.7.67 for the Eagles. It was an incredible contest.
I had e-mail contact prior to the game from a fellow by the name of Tavis Perry, who is the AFLNT Development Officer based at Galiwinku. I think he has been there for 10 months or so. Tavis assured me, via e-mail, it would be a fantastic contest and such is the interest of the community in football that there are eight teams in that competition which, for a community of around 2000, is incredible. On the whole of the Gove Peninsula, we have five teams but, at Elcho in their competition, they have eight teams.
He also assured me they had successfully eliminated both on-field and off-field violence, which I found incredible, but I saw it for myself when I was there. Whilst in the excitement of any Grand Final there is always going to be a few flare-ups around the grounds, there was certainly no violence. People were extremely well behaved, both on-field and off-field. I am not very good at crowd estimation, but I reckon there would have been 800 to 1000 people gathered around the oval at Galiwinku watching this game. I took my husband and my two sons with me, and they found it a fantastic experience. They also enjoyed the night on the island; and the next day we returned to Gove.
Going back to the Grand Final results, I will list the best players for the Tiger’s team. Tyrese Dhurrkay, Nathan Yunupingu, Nathan Wunungmurra, Quinten Gurruwiwi, Alex Bukulaptji and Stephen Dhamarrandji.
From the Eagles side the best players were: Phillip Bukulaptji, Gabriel Dhamarrandji, Wayne Dhamarrandji, Andrew Bukulaptji, Ennis Dhamarrandji and Bruce Dhurrkay.
The winner of the Perkins Bravery Award - Perkins being one of the sponsors and, of course, we know Perkins contribute quite a bit to football in the Northern Territory - went to Quinten Gurruwiwi; and the Gary Dhurrkay Award for Best on Ground went to Phillip Bukulaptji. Congratulations to those players. Congratulations to those teams, and all the teams in the competition. What a fantastic result!
I also highlight one of the players from the Galiwinku competition, a fellow by the name of Lochlan Dhamarrandji, who has played the season for the Kangaroos at Galiwinku and was the joint winner of the Jacky Gumbula Player of the Year Award this year, has recently been selected to play in the NT Thunder team. I would like to quote from a write-up Tavis Perry sent through to me. It says:
So, well done, Lochlan Dhamarrandji! We certainly wish him all the very best.
I would also like to highlight, again, some information Tavis Perry, AFLNT Development Officer at Galiwinku has sent me about some up and coming stars from Shepherdson College who have recently participated in a competition in Darwin. It was held over the weekend of 3 to 6 June, and were the AFL Kickstart Country Championships:
Congratulations to these three young fellows from Galiwinku: Raven Marika, Nathan Thorne and Desmond Dhurrkay, and we certainly wish them every success with their football careers
I also acknowledge the contribution Skinnyfish Music is making to support football at Elcho Island - Skinnyfish being Mark Grose and Michael Hohnen. Whilst people might not recognise those names, they recognise the name Skinnyfish, which is a music production company working with Indigenous artists. Perhaps the most famous person it is dealing with is Geoffrey Gurrumul Yunupingu. It is fantastic to see Skinnyfish has broadened its horizons and is very generously supporting football at Elcho Island - obviously talent is not limited to music; there are football stars as well. That competition is now called the Skinnyfish Galiwinku Football Association. That is fantastic, and why would you not? That is what corporate sponsorship is all about; you get to have naming rights for the competition. I will not disclose what their contribution has been, because I do not know if it is public knowledge, but I can tell you what they are putting into the competition is considerable. So that is fantastic.
I also sing the praises, metaphorically, of a group of young fellows from Nhulunbuy in a band known as the Sleeveheads. Their claim to fame is they won the NT Battle of the School Bands Competition held in the Northern Territory, and played at the recent BassintheGrass concert, playing second fiddle to Silverchair, Jessica Mauboy, and a few others. What a fantastic opportunity for those young fellows: Reid Cooper, Roy Kellaway, Nelson Browne, Brandon Peckham, Wilson Lui, very ably supported by music teacher, Tim Webb, and Roy Kellaway’s dad, Stu, who has music in the genes because Stu, of course, is from the Yothu Yindi Foundation.
Here is the member for Nhulunbuy’s hit prediction: look out for Sleeveheads; they are absolutely incredible. They are having a fundraiser at the town hall tomorrow night because these guys are looking to get on the national scene, and I reckon they will do it. I wish them very well.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, briefly tonight I join in the chorus from the Chamber thanking Captain David Horton for his services to the Northern Territory parliament and, more importantly, the people of the Northern Territory this parliament represents. David, being of a salty dog by nature, understands the importance of setting a plan and, as salty dogs know, you do not go to sea without a good plan. You do not simply wander into the big blue without knowing what you are going to do, how you are going to do it, where you are heading, what course you need to take, and at what time.
I appreciate the direction David brings to such committees as the House Committee, on which I sit. His direction, planning, and his thoughts have gone into the continuance of this House into the future - as a salty dog, you do not make a journey without setting a plan. He has done that; he has laid out some plans for this great House, and I believe they will be there forever more because of his planning. It is an important thing, and is a lesson that can be learnt by many members of this parliament.
I, too, say thank you. Your advice, your knowledge, your friendship, and great personality have been very warming for someone so new to this House. It is great to see we have fantastic support services and staff within this House who work tirelessly
David, move on, enjoy yourself, get on with what you need to do, what you believe you should be doing. Good luck and best wishes.
I will move on. As mentioned earlier, the Finke Desert Race for 2010 will be held in Central Australia. I am competing this year. It is my fourth race in a row …
A member: Good luck to you.
Mr BOHLIN: Thank you. Hopefully, we will succeed. As many people do, I have an understanding when you go in such a large open desert race - the largest in the southern hemisphere and, without doubt, the toughest around; it is comparable to the Dakar, to the Baja 1000 and Baja 500 in Mexico - it is a tough race. It would put any machine from around the world to its limit. We have 500 entrants this year; 88 vehicle entrants - record numbers. I understand the pressures on the teams whether you are rider, driver, navigator or support crew, because you do not do this on your own. It is the support crew which will help you compete and, hopefully, complete the entire event.
All the crews, as we have seen on Facebook, have been travelling all over the country for over a week now. I see tags come up all the time: ‘We are on our way to Finke; we are on our way to Finke’. It is coming from all over the country. It is the big storm in the middle of the desert. Best of luck to all the crews; they are appreciated by all off-roaders. They are a great bunch of people, off-road racers; they have a humility I find very genuine. Whilst being competitive, they will still help each other. More importantly, they understand and respect all the volunteers who help make this event, and many other events similar to it around Australia, happen. They understand, as competitors, if you find yourself coming to grief on this long journey down to Finke, town of Aputula, there are many volunteers along the way including St John – who are tied up directly with the Finke Committee - who will be there to help you.
Spectators, please be safe when you camp along the track. Please ensure your kids, your mates, do not wander onto the track whilst racing is occurring. It is a dangerous sport at times, and everyone is going as hard as they can. Please look after each other so you, as a spectator, can enjoy this great sport and no one gets hurt. Thank you very much for watching all the competitors, because there is such an amazing feeling to even be coming last, in the middle, or at the front, and have the crowd cheering you, no matter how fast or how slow you are going. Also, if you break down, they are there to help you; they will give you some food, give you some shelter, and look after you. That is Australia for you - it is an amazing thing.
I move on to something I am not very happy with. Take ourselves back to Tuesday, 8 June 2010 in this Chamber. In my budget reply, I spoke about continual revoted works which is, in my opinion, where the government has failed to deliver for Territory people, and I pointed out some significant failures. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to swallow, but the public can read what I said in the Daily Hansard debate dated Tuesday, 8 June 2010, starting at page 16. I have a copy of my notes, which clearly state my argument.
I mentioned the Education budget and its $137m revote, and the failure by this government to spend. Then I spoke of the department of Housing, and its $17m revote and failure to spend. Then I spoke of the Health department, and its $149m spend. After health, I talked about services for those who have loved ones with Asperger’s, or autism, and the lack of direct funding for that support service.
Unfortunately, one of the members in this House, the member for Nhulunbuy - and I have had a personal conversation with that member about this - took it to mean something different. I will read from the Hansard dated Tuesday, 8 June 2010, page 20, the top paragraph. The member for Nhulunbuy states:
That is not an acceptable comment; they are not my words. They are a mismatch, an adjustment, to what was spoken in this House. People can get my drift. If you come into this House, hold your integrity high; do not create things people have said. This is in the Hansard, it is there to be read. Do not come into this House and say words that are not appropriate, correct or accurate. It is not acceptable - learn some manners and accept when you are wrong.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak tonight on an issue in relation to a visit recently by a wonderful group of young people, young Territorians, students from Wulagi Primary School from Year 5/6 Reardon and Year 5/6 Houghton.
These students were very excited to come to their Parliament House, to have a look and be shown around by a wonderful group of people who form our educational unit. Since I have come to this parliament, I have seen the staff of that unit provide a fabulous service in teaching our young people what their parliament is all about and showing them around this magnificent building.
It is with great pleasure that I have incorporated on the public record and into Hansard, a number of things; one is a list of the young people who visited, and in particular, a recount of their trip by one Corben York. Corben did a recount and it was chosen by the teachers and students to be the one they would supply to me as local member, member for Sanderson, to be read out in parliament and recorded on the public record. When they start to research these things on the Internet, they will find their recount and their names incorporated into the Parliamentary Record. I will read the recount by young Corben. It goes like this:
It is one of those honest and terrific recounts of a young person’s trip to their Parliament House. Now it is on the record, I hope young Corben, in a number of year’s time, will go back and have a look and be very proud of the recount of his visit. It is interesting what young people see. It is, obviously, different to what we see when we walk into this building; and a terrific recount it was. So Corben, congratulations on being chosen to have your recount read out in the parliament of the Northern Territory.
I put on the Parliamentary Record the names of those wonderful young people who came and had a terrific time. I was fortunate to attend their school assembly not long after, and also visit the classrooms. Those young people were so excited and talked about their trip and what they saw and their experiences. It is great to see such enthusiasm and excitement in our young people.
The students in Year 5/6 Reardon are: Erica Core, Zackary Derksen, Peter Gast, Marnie Hake, Kiara Hendy, Seth Kapser, Aisha Lay, Jaden Marsh, Yanni Mavromatis, Matthew Motlop, Anthony O’Brien, Sean Quinn-Byers, Lucas Schober, Vaughan Straughair, Joseph Tinoco, Elwin Vung, and Corben York.
From Year 5/6 Houghton students were: Courtney Allardice, Oceane-Kauri Bedggood, Rebecca Burke, Isaac Cammarano, Letisha Carter, Joshua Chugg, Rebecca Cotterill, Jaiden-John Cummings, Jordan Harris, Zachary Kirby, Talia Knights, Joseph Martin-Jard, Alasdair McGregor, Daniel Modoh, Vicki Nguyen, Shania Rego, Demi-Jo Roads, Sean Ruger, Paige Straughair, Shuan Trainor, Quentin Vanda, and Corey White-Johansen.
It was with great deal of pride I stood in the classrooms and listened to these young people recount their visit. It is great to see our schools are pleased to come to this House, and for our young people to receive an education about the very basis of our democracy and what it stands for, why we are here, and what people have fought to protect over the years. This is the epitome of democracy, where we do get up and have our say, and are able to hold each other -both opposition and government - accountable for our actions. To have young people come here and witness it, in all its glory, is a fabulous thing.
We should encourage all schools to participate, as often as they can, in the democratic process of our parliament, especially that of the Northern Territory.
I am very pleased to record these names in the Parliamentary Record. I congratulate them all and I hope, in the years to come, they will have very fond memories when they search the Parliamentary Record with their kids and their grandkids to show, they too, were part of the process of ensuring democracy continues in this fantastic Territory of ours.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Go Red for Women Day
Go Red for Women Day
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I thank my female parliamentary colleagues for wearing red today as part of a promotion for the Heart Foundation’s Go Red For Women Day, which is tomorrow and encourages women, and the men who support them, to check their health. I encourage all members to consider wearing red tomorrow for the cause. That would be particularly wonderful for the first day of the estimates process.
BUILDING LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 108)
(Serial 108)
Continued from 8 June 2010.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, at the outset I thank the minister for the briefing he recently gave me and my colleague, the member for Braitling. It is an urgent bill and we support it.
The intention of the bill is to amend the Building Act to provide the Director of Building Control with powers to resolve an impasse in the buildings certification process. This applies to both commercial and private residential buildings. Before a building occupancy permit can be issued, a declaration stating the completed work complies with the building permit for that work must be provided to the certifier who issued the building permit. The declaration must be made by a person responsible for the work, and this declaration and other certificates must accompany an application for an occupation permit.
There have been recent problems - well-known, well documented, very public problems - caused when the person contracted to do the work has either: not completed the work due to death or loss of accreditation; gone out of business; been put into receivership, as was the case with Poretti Property Group in the Top End; or has completed the work but not provided the declaration or other certification.
The intention of this bill is to rectify this problem by issuing an exemption certificate exempting the work from a declaration or other certification if the building work has not been completed due to a declared event such as death, bankruptcy or insolvency, allowing a declaration to be made by a person other than the person responsible for the work, provided they are satisfied the work complies with the relevant building permit.
There are other amendments. One of them is the bill will serve also to validate exemption certificates which have already been issued by the Appeals Board. The legal advice the department received was that some past decisions, of which there were only a few, may not have been exactly legal so there is an amendment to validate those decisions so they are okay.
In general, the bill is welcome because there is more protection for consumers. I am slightly concerned with the requirement the person, or the family, may be required to get more technical reports which could cost them more money. They are already in a situation of emotional and financial stress, and perhaps government could consider an initial assessment of the work or the project, so it alleviates some of the concern and problems for that family.
I have spoken previously about the problems we had in the Top End with the Poretti Property Group, and the five families I was trying to assist in regard to that crooked and dodgy builder. I can tell you, the emotional stress on those families was just enormous. One family, in particular, with four children was very strained; the mother was completely beside herself. I am sure this legislation will go some way to assist that family to try to complete their house in Palmerston so that family can come together again.
An area of interest is a situation in Alice Springs - and my colleague, the member for Braitling, talked about the Carey Builders situation. It concerns me that the government allowed the certifiers to give building permits to this builder, even though he had not been registered for some 15 months. There seemed to be knowledge and an understanding this fellow was building and committing to building properties, yet nothing was done. If the department and the government is choosing to regulate the building industry - it does not matter what nature, shape or form – they too should accept full responsibility for what happens in regard to those regulations and the issuing of building permits, certificates, and things of that nature.
I am aware that the Building Industry Reference Group has met, and they have delivered a report to the minister. I know it covers the three broad areas of compliance, occupation, and consumer protection. I look forward to the time when that report is public with recommendations on how we can ensure the whole process of commitment to building, compliance, and occupancy is better for consumers, thus avoiding the problems we have had over the last 12 months of people getting into the system, building houses unregistered, doing unprofessional work, and being in the Small Claims Court every second week for non-payment to their contractors. Complaints are lodged with the department and the minister’s office yet, somehow, these crooked and dodgy builders continue to operate under the auspices of having a builder’s registration.
I also want to raise one issue for the minister’s benefit, which I hope he will take on board. There is still some concern regarding obtaining a building permit although work undertaken does not require a registered builder. The classic example is renovations of bathrooms or wet areas. There are various businesses in the Territory undertaking this work. As long as the work is under the roof line a person can strip it down to its framework and it could be hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of work. A building permit is required, but it does not require a person to be a registered builder. Again, we are leaving consumers in a vulnerable position because there are unscrupulous people out there who are doing this kind of work.
I have an example, which I will be writing to the minister about, where the work is unprofessional and unsafe. The electrical work in this particular case was done by a non-registered electrician; however, another electrician has signed off on the work. It is upwards of $25 000 to $30 000 yet the person who undertook the work was not a registered builder and they are now in trouble. There is no consumer protection for that kind of work. As long as it is under the roof line, they do not have to be a registered builder. As soon as they step outside the roof line, they do have to be a registered builder and there is slightly more protection.
Coming back to the department and the information that the department has put out, there are fact sheets on how you should go about your business getting permits. There are guidelines, there are check sheets if you need to do building work such as renovating a bathroom, changing walls, fixtures, plumbing, yes, you need a building permit, yes, you need insurance, no, you do not need a registered builder. Renovating bathrooms, no change to walls, fixtures or plumbing, do not need a building permit, do not need insurance, and do not need a registered builder. My concern is the bathroom where you substantially change things, including plumbing, electrical and sewerage. I am talking hundreds and thousands of dollars, and that person could be just me or you, minister, who does that work. There is no protection for the consumer, and I ask the minister to look into that and I will be sending documentation to support what I am trying to explain.
Madam Speaker, we do not oppose this legislation. It adds more protection to our consumers, and that is a welcome move. I thank the minister for the briefing he gave me and my colleague, the member for Braitling.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this on, on urgency, and also thank his advisor, Brett Brogan, for contacting me about this.
The case of Carey Builders has been an ongoing saga, and it is unfortunate it took this case to bring this matter to a head. As I understand it, the legislative amendments put forward are really cementing a temporary arrangement put in place by the Departments of Construction and Infrastructure, and Lands and Planning in Alice Springs for Carey Builders; a temporary measure that, in layman’s terms, was to say the work they have undertaken to date was certified so a new builder could come in without having to take on the warranty obligations and move forward.
That was a measure I have called for, and the government did come some way to doing that, although it was not effective. At the time, they said they would bring in legislative changes such as these in 12 to 18 months. I was highly critical of that and said it needed to be done on urgency, and they have responded, so I thank the government for doing that.
In relation to this bill, I wonder if the director should have the ability to issue an automatic exemption certificate for all outstanding work in the event of the death of a builder, a time almost as traumatic for those who rely on the deceased’s services as the deceased family. What this amendment bill does, if a builder dies or goes bankrupt, or runs away, the director of building can have an application made to him so an exemption certificate can be put over the building work undertaken so a new builder can come in.
There is a time process, and we want to ensure that that time process is not lengthy so people can move on fairly quickly. We do not have time parameters around this amendment legislation, but I would like to think the department could put in place, as well as a code of standards, other such words to ensure people have a reasonable time frame in which they could expect to see these changes have actually been made.
If I understand the problem correctly, when a builder dies or walks away, and so forth, other builders do not want to take responsibility for the work not done and have responsibility for it. I believe it would be good if the director was able to issue an automatic exemption certificate for a builder’s work in the event the builder dies, so the Territory would be accepting liability if that work was not up to standard, and so forth, through a building fund we have previously spoken about, and work could be transferred smoothly to another builder for completion.
I do not have any amendments at the moment. I am more than happy to go into committee stage and work through amendments line-by-line to see if that is possible to do, although it is not a stop-gap measure for supporting that, but I do think it is an opportunity to do that now so if a builder did die, the director could do an automatic exemption. I am more than happy to take advice if that could happen.
One problem I am wrangling with is allowing an automatic exemption certificate to be applied in the event the work already undertaken would need to be inspected for compliance. So, if there was to be an automatic exemption, that inspection would have to be undertaken at the cost of the homebuilder or the person who has engaged the builder and that would be completely understood.
If these changes cannot be made and accepted now, I understand that, but I would like to have the opportunity for them be changed in the regulations. If you are amenable to that concept, that can be changed in regulation later, rather than amendment of the legislation itself.
However, there would be nothing to stop the director contacting the parties who have the building contracts with the deceased to arrange an inspection of the work, like a corporation is able to in the event a nominee or director is unable to make a declaration. That is if the builder had died. This would remove the burden of searching for and arranging inspections by others.
Another issue of concern in the case of Carey Builders was the failure of the director to notify the people of the decision to cancel the builder’s registration which has led to much of the publicised expense and delays. While I understand that a person engaging a builder can inspect the register to check the builder’s status to ensure registration remains throughout the building project, they would have to check the register regularly to ensure the builder was still registered throughout the life of the building work. What I am saying is, when someone engages a builder to do work, that person undertakes an initial inspection to see whether the builder is licensed and so forth as due process one would expect to do, but if it takes nine months or 12 months or whatever the time frame is to build a house, no one can realistically expect a home purchaser to sit on the Internet every day to check whether that builder has had their licence cancelled. We just would not do that. Even politicians who read the Internet every day would not do that, so how can we expect anyone else to keep checking if that happens.
In relation to the building licences, as I understand it, there is no common anniversary for builders in the Northern Territory; I am happy to be corrected. I understand that you can have a licence registered at a different date throughout the year and your renewal comes up on different days. So, if you have five builders working on your project, there may be five different expiry dates you have to keep track of for those licences.
There should be an opportunity at some point in time, or you could set a 12 month period, when there is a common anniversary for all registered builders in the Northern Territory to re-register, published in the Government Gazette each year, and available to prospective clients. In the event the director was to cancel a registration, on the director’s initiative or by request of the builder during the course of that year, then the notification of that decision should also be published by Government Gazette so clients of the builder are aware their builder is no longer certified as licensed. That would have helped prevent much of the situation with Carey Builders. You could actually go further than just gazetting it. I do not think an advertisement in the NT News, Territory Regional Weekly, the Advocate and Alice Springs News, for example, would be too hard to let people know.
I also believe the government could go further. The government knows who has contracted a licensed builder to conduct works, and if that builder unfortunately died, went missing, or cancelled his registration, I do think it is too hard for the government, whether through the practitioner’s board or otherwise, to inform the owners of buildings under construction that the builder is no longer licensed - a process by which appropriate ‘consumer beware’ information could be triggered when it became known the licence was cancelled. It is a sensitive issue.
We will be supporting the government amendment. I was genuine when I said if you put in an automatic exemption upon death of a builder, I would be more then happy to go through that now; otherwise, if you could accept that, we could do it in a regulation at a later date, or the Country Liberals would move to that model if we were lucky enough to win government by 2012. There needs to be much more work in this area and more refinement in the planning process of government in the Northern Territory.
On a final note, in relation to the Carey Builders situation specifically, this amendment will solidify some of the temporary arrangements put in place for Carey Builders, and will potentially assist people from Augusto or Poretti. It will also provide safeguards for future building in the Northern Territory, which can only be a good thing, and is what we are here for as regulators.
I have been quite vocal about Carey Builders; the government has received some criticism over its role, and with the motion passed - thanks to the support of the members for Macdonnell and Nelson – we have been given the opportunity to set up a fund to assist victims of Carey Builders to finish their properties.
We have been quite lenient in acknowledging the government is working on this issue through the Department of Justice. It would be good if the minister could provide a rough overview of what is happening with that process. We saw last night on the ABC an Indian family who are victims of Carey Builders who were overseas when this fiasco occurred. They have returned to find the state of their property - I inspected their property last week and it is probably the worst one - it is a small house, not at lock up stage, the walls have been kicked in, and things have been damaged or stolen. It is their first house and they were really having a go. The lady’s name is Pritti. They live in a rented two-bedroom apartment at the moment and, paying their rent, they cannot afford to have a principal interest loan on this house. They have an interest only loan on which they are paying $2000 a month. They do not have access to more money and the bank is going to foreclose on them and they will lose that.
As the local member it is important for me to keep the pressure on government and you, as minister, to make this move quickly. I am maintaining the rage by not speaking out against it; however, I would like the minister to provide an update so I can inform my constituents, the victims of the NT government and Carey Builders, what is happening.
Madam Speaker, I will leave it there. I will see what the minister has to say, and I might reserve further comments for a third reading speech.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I support the legislation. I am not always a fan of matters being passed under urgency. I am unsure whether this is a case that requires urgency because the government has already given some exemptions for people in Alice Springs; but that is also for the future, in cases like this.
What may be of concern is whether this bill has had enough circulation in the building industry. It is a matter of urgency. Normally, it would sit on the floor of parliament until the next sittings, and there may be some things in there which I am interested to hear from the building industry itself. The minister may be able to give us some response as to what the building industry says about this bill.
It is important we have this legislation. It is obvious from reading the minister’s second reading where he said: ‘The deficiency relates to the inability to obtain a builder’s declaration at the end of the project when the original builder is no longer operating’; which is obviously the case with Carey Builders, and is obviously one of the major problems with people, if they had the finance, to continue to construct their house. From that point of view, it is certainly a good thing this legislation has been presented. Also, in the process, they have found legal advice was requested and the Building Appeals Board was found not to have the power to give those exemptions, as the requirement is in the act and not the regulations. So this is also fixing that particular issue.
I believe this is a sensible approach. It not only affects Carey Builders, as the member for Braitling said. I have also been contacted by a person who has lost a considerable amount of money in relation to Augusto Homes.
Discussing this particular bill lends itself to the debate about how best we can protect people. You cannot always protect people from their own mistakes, but how can we protect people from this type of thing happening again? There has been discussion about house insurance in relation to a building firm collapsing, and it seems we did introduce and pass legislation a few years ago in relation to this; then, I gather, the government had advice this legislation was not going to work. I have heard other states have pulled out of this type of legislation and only two states have house warranty legislation. This is an area where I hope the government will come back to this House and bring it forward as a matter for discussion as to where we are going with this type of insurance. Are there other ways to try to reduce the risk?
I was recently told when it comes to paying off a builder, which is usually done in instalments, in sections, when the work is completed, the banks, in many cases, pay the builder. So, if you have a case where the builder is, or appears to be, a reputable builder, the banks might go out and inspect the work to see if it is completed, and they hand over a cheque. However, after a while and a fair bit of work, the banks say: ‘We know this builder is doing a good job; always reliable, so we just put the cheque in the mail’, without visibly checking if all the work has been done.
Some issues arise in relation to whether part payments to builders in these circumstances should be regulated. Obviously, it is not only the bank that pays the money. In some cases the owner of the house pays that contribution. Are they sometimes conned into paying money ahead of the work being done? That is probably what has happened in some cases with Carey Builders - money has been paid out before work has been done. The builder has gone off with the money, the work has never been completed, people have a house not completed, and they are out of pocket as well. I do not know whether that side could also be looked at to see if there are ways it could be tightened. If the insurance is not a feasible means of overcoming some of these problems - and I do not think the insurance was ever meant to overcome all these problems - are there other avenues which could reduce the risk of this happening again?
Unfortunately, the Territory seems to have a legacy of builders going under. I believe Price Master was one which went under some years ago in Darwin and recently Augusto Homes have also, which was a real tragedy for many people, and other builders have done the same.
Although it is probably easy to say: ‘That is the open market and that is the way we operate’, I am not sure that we cannot do something to reduce the risk of it happening again. In the case of Carey Builders there were faults by government in allowing a company, which appears to have been bankrupt in Queensland, operating in the Territory. I believe there were loopholes, there were processes not carried out to the extent they should have been, and that has to be looked at as well.
I support the changes. My only real concern is that as this legislation was rushed there may be things in here which are not quite right. I suppose we can always come back and amend it if there are issues. I am interested to know whether the building industry, the TCA, the Housing Association, or individual builders, contractors and building certifiers have had a look at these amendments and what their comments have been. They are the people at the coalface; they are the people who have to deal with these issues. I believe it is a requirement of government, when it rushes something through like this, to ensure they have as much information from the industry as possible before they introduce it to the House. I will be interested in hearing any comments from the minister.
Madam Speaker, I support the changes to this bill, but I will be keeping an eye out to see whether it does exactly what it is meant to do and, if it needs some amendments, I will improve it.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I also support this bill as minister for Housing, but also as a former Minister for Lands and Planning.
It is good to see Mr John Gronow, I know he is a very shy man, sitting in the advisor’s box, someone who has long experience in this area, now in retirement, and still contributing his knowledge, and has done fine work for governments of all political colours. He is a very apolitical public servant who gives frank and fearless advice and it is great to see someone like John continuing in that role. I am sure he is giving advice and history to the minister, because this area of building and building regulation is a very complex area. You can look at things which appear simple, but it is actually a very complex area.
I remember, and the member for Nelson will remember, raising the certificates of occupancy issue which, on the surface seemed quite simple, but we worked through the issue with all sectors of the industry, and it did cause alarm. We were able, working with people like Mr Gronow and Mr Fabio Finocchiaro, and the industry, to come to a resolution and give homebuyers some certainty about that.
Emotions certainly run high when people are acquiring a home. It is the single, biggest purchase people make in their lives and there are risks associated with it. As the minister said in his second reading speech, 99% of building works go through and people are satisfied 99% of the time. There will always be things people say could have been done better but, generally, people get the result that they want. Occasionally, building companies fall over, not just in the Northern Territory but throughout Australia. That was why, I believe it was in 2006, I introduced into this parliament builders’ licensing registration in the Northern Territory. Again, it was a very complex area, full of emotion for those in the building industry, but with consultation with all sectors of the industry we were able to arrive at a result which was a step forward. It was a very important step because up to that time in the Northern Territory there had not been licensing of builders.
I will also say, no matter how many regulations and laws you have in this area, you will always find instances where building companies fall over and leave people in the lurch, so to speak. This is obviously what has happened with Carey Builders in Alice Springs, and I commend the member for Braitling, as a local member, running hard on this issue and representing the views and the interests of those people who have been caught up in this issue.
I understand this is a matter before the courts and I need to be very careful in what I say. There is the issue of the money people have expended and I understand there are approximately 15 properties involved with varying degrees of exposure to Carey Builders and the non-completion of work. I also understand that, in some cases, people had handed over up to 90% of the cost of the building, and in some cases 100%. The old saying the member for Nelson used - he did not say it in Latin, although I am sure he knows it in Latin - is caveat emptor, and the member for Nelson raised the issue of how we best safeguard the interests of people who are acting in good faith, who may not be acquainted with commercial transactions and contractual arrangements. How do we safeguard them from handing over 90% or 100% of the cost of the building to someone who has subsequently gone bankrupt?
I daresay there will be a debate in terms of public policy where the government should put forward that type of bill for people in this position but, as the member for Nelson says, there is more we can do. We need to work with industry in the same ways I outlined before in terms of builders’ registration and certificates of occupancy, etcetera, to find ways we can get agreement from industry about contractual arrangements and payments during the construction of houses.
I was also the minister who brought in home warranty insurance some years ago. I did make an undertaking to the parliament at that time, which I think is useful to revisit. I do not have the Hansard in front of me but I do remember very clearly what I said at that time about the introduction of home warranty insurance. The legislation was introduced and we would be looking, over the next 12 months, to the products and companies and competition in the marketplace of home warranty insurance before we actually introduced it in the Northern Territory. The last thing I wanted to do, as minister, was introduce a regime which did not fit the Northern Territory, was not acceptable to the industry, and at a price far outside what people, the homebuyer, would be willing to pay; in other words, adding a substantial extra cost to the construction of the house.
History has shown, and I have followed home warranty insurance nationwide, that in some jurisdictions there is actually a winding down or even a winding up of home warranty insurance. So the member for Nelson is going in the right direction here: we need to look at other ways to introduce changes to regulation, and work with the industry on contractual arrangements people enter into when building a house.
I deeply sympathise with those who have been burned by Carey Builders. There is a great deal I would like to say about Randal Carey, but I am prohibited from doing so because there is a court case on foot and that is a matter that has to play out.
What the minister has done, with the support of the opposition and the Independent, is introduce legislation, and in his second reading speech he said:
- The over-arching principle behind the bill is that property owners are entitled to have confidence in the building regulation regime in that, having commenced the building in accordance with the Building Act, the process will be able to be closed as required by the act and regulations. The process should be able to be closed even when a step in that process reaches an impasse, due to unexpected circumstances.
That is simply said; however, in the drafting of this legislation it is more complex and, as the member for Nelson says, there is always a risk when you bring in legislation on urgency. I have every confidence in those within the Department of Construction and Infrastructure to develop this legislation, and the processes through the Parliamentary Counsel, and the review through the Cabinet process. That does not mean we get everything perfect all the time, and this is an issue I am sure the minister will flag and we will continue to be vigilant.
The bill proposes, and I quote from the second reading speech:
- … the Director of Building Control, appointed under the Building Act, be given power to issue exemption certificates to allow the certification process to continue when any of the required certificates are unable to be obtained.
Those burned by Carey Builders, and other builders, would feel this probably does not go far enough to address and redress their circumstances. I believe this is a responsible step in the right direction and it is giving support to those people affected by this to move forward and complete the works, and it is giving administrative certainty. However, as the member for Braitling has said, this whole issue has a long way to go. I have every confidence in the minister; he is attending to this issue and we will try, as a government, to reach a fair and equitable outcome for those affected in Alice Springs, and also the future protection for those who purchase and build their own homes in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.
Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, I thank members for participating in today’s debate. It is good to participate in an open and frank debate which is important for the Northern Territory not only to address issues from the past, but to move on to provide certainty in the future.
This is important legislation, and it continues this government’s commitment to get our building regulation regime right. I thank the member for Nelson, the member for Braitling, the member for Goyder, and the member for Johnston for participating in the debate and, more importantly, to the members opposite for accepting and agreeing to this debate as a matter of urgency. They understand the need to have this amendment in place to help to get homes finished. I also thank them for taking the time, on very short notice, to be briefed on the bill prior to today’s debate. We believe this bill is a further step in the right direction. It provides the appropriate mechanism to help get homes back under way in the event a builder fails to deliver under the contract with a consumer.
The member for Johnston provided a detailed background and highlighted a number of important issues which relate to the work we have undertaken to create a modern and professional building industry in the Territory. As the member outlined for the House, in the vast majority of cases, it works - 99% of building works undertaken in the Territory do so without generating a formal complaint.
This bill is about providing a safety mechanism when a builder is no longer able to complete the job. To recap, the purpose of the bill is to amend the Building Act and Building Regulations to resolve impasses which can occur in the building certification process. The deficiency relates to the inability to obtain a builder’s declaration and occupancy permit at the end of a project when the original builder is no longer operating.
The bill proposes a director, appointed under the Building Act, be given the power to issue exemption certificates to allow the certification process to continue when any of the required certificates are unable to be obtained. The bill describes the grounds for an impasse as a prescribed event. If the director is satisfied information provided indicates the work to date has been carried out materially in accordance with the building permit, the director may issue a certificate of exemption. An exemption certificate removes the requirement for the missing certificate causing the impasse, and the certification process may continue through to the issue of an occupancy permit by a building certifier.
The bill allows an applicant to appeal a decision of the director to not issue an exemption certificate. Once the legislation is enacted, the government will launch a public education campaign for registered practitioners such as building certifiers and building contractors.
The overarching principle behind the bill is that property owners are entitled to have confidence in the building regulation regime in that, having commenced the building in accordance with the Building Act, the process will be able to be closed as required by the act and regulations. The process should be able to be closed even when a step in that process reaches an impasse due to unexpected circumstances.
Each registered practitioner will now be able to sign off for the work for which he or she was responsible, even part-way through the construction process. If that is not possible due to the loss of registration or death, for example, the exemption certificate process is activated. While on the face of it, it appeared a relatively simple matter, it has translated to a series of amendments which are interwoven. This is because building regulation is primarily within the private sector and the processes and responsibilities of the practitioners need to cover all possibilities.
The consumer also has responsibilities in the building process, and the member for Johnston talked about the clear need for consumers to take every precaution within contracts to protect themselves.
I value the comments from members in the House and I will talk about those. The member for Goyder started with a very important point which relates to the emotional space that people enter, and the emotional stress that can be caused. The examples are among us all; we probably all have an example of where people have suffered stress and uncertainty, and that is what the regulation process is all about. However, we must accept there is great need for caution in entering into any contractual agreements.
If we talk about the Building Industry Reference Group and a report to improve the landscape for consumers – absolutely. That is exactly what my predecessors did in structuring these reference groups, not only for government, but for the community as well.
The member for Goyder commented on concern for potential additional costs to families in the event a builder goes bust. This is an important consideration, and this bill puts in the appropriate framework for government to take an active role in getting homes finished to minimise costs to affected owners. The current requirements put the entire responsibility on the landowner, but this bill enables the government to resolve certification impasses.
In regard to the comments from the member for Goyder about licensing of contractors, it is a very important point. I agree this needs further consideration, and this is a key issue within the Building Industry Reference Group.
The member for Goyder highlighted what other members have said, and questions I have asked myself, about the department providing good communication networks and relevant advice. I have met some incredible people in the department so far; we have an incredible knowledge base there, and I encourage all Territorians operating in this area to use them; but we want to get it better. I have asked that we look at communication, information and, specifically look at ways we can put that into the public arena to work with people from all walks of life to ensure they have the best information to go forward.
In relation to the member for Braitling - and I thank him for his comments - I need to clarify that this bill will have an impact far greater than the Carey matter. This bill provides the appropriate framework for any persons who need assistance in the event a builder fails to complete their contractual obligations.
The concept of an automatic certificate is not appropriate, as the purpose of building controls is to uphold building standards. The Director of Building Control needs to ensure the works completed meet the minimum standards of the Building Code of Australia. We will not put consumers in a position of continuing to build on works that have poor foundations and could only end in further grief. That is a very good response from people who are well versed and experienced in this industry.
When I took on the point from the member for Braitling, I looked at it from a lay perspective, and that is immediately what came to mind: we have to be very sure in terms of our regulation that we do not set people up for further failure. I was thinking along the lines that we have to be very sure all work is up to the correct standard, otherwise we will apply, through our regulation, further complications, further costs, and further stress. It was put more succinctly in the response I just supplied to the House, and it is probably up for further debate, but it is a very strong point to start the debate.
Home builders need to be confident in our building certification process. When building permits are issued, a check is undertaken to ensure that builders are registered. The important point raised is that a builder continues to be registered throughout the process. This is something that can be looked at as part of the review of the NT Building Industry Reference Group report. That was another interesting point from the member for Braitling who has already thrown in ideas we have captured about the anniversary of renewal, common anniversary dates, applications in terms of gazetting and advertising. These are points that, as the minister, I will take back and discuss. The Building Industry Reference Group are those experts in the Territory who work directly with the department and me and can provide the best practice information around these additions, opportunities, or members’ ideas coming forward.
The department treats all complaints with priority. As part of the complaints investigation process, it is important that registered practitioners are provided with opportunities to respond to claims. That is the point of natural justice and, in the hardest of times in our democratic society, the principle of natural justice must be afforded. This is a very difficult area. It is a very difficult outcome for some, but in ensuring we have matters dealt with in principle, legally and appropriately, we have to accept a process of natural justice must occur.
The member for Braitling talked about ‘consumer beware’ information and he shared the ideas of the member for Goyder and the member for Nelson, and I agree. I have raised these points myself already working with the department, and I have said we really need to look at education and communication; we need to look at regulation, but we also need to ensure we are communicating with Territorians about one of the most important decisions they will make in their life - engaging in the building of their home.
Every effort is made to minimise the time taken to investigate complaints within the department and the department has provided me with advice on how this process can be improved. This is an honourable position and a challenge for government. We are up for challenges, and we will work on that and move forward.
I take on board the member for Nelson’s first point about matters of urgency. I have learnt a great deal from you in parliament, and I know you are a thorough researcher, and I can appreciate the principle you have raised. This matter sits outside the boundary. I thank you for accepting that, because this is a matter we need to resolve and move on and is one step on the way to improving our regulation in the building industry. There will be more to come as we continue to work. Thank you for your contribution today, and thank you for your support of the bill.
The member for Nelson made some very interesting points. First of all, I respond that we are committed to introducing a home warranty insurance scheme, and I am happy to provide members with further details on this issue in due course. It is a very complex matter. In the case of Carey Builders, I discovered it would not have been provided for under home warranty insurance. Carey was building without a licence and that is why we are taking the appropriate action in the courts to hold him accountable for his activities. That process will also deliver many answers for Territorians, and highlight areas that may need to be improved in government regulation.
Briefings have commenced with the building industry, and future briefings and an education campaign will commence following the passage of this bill. The department will be following this up with formal sessions. It is a matter I take very seriously, and the department takes very seriously as well. From the discussion so far with industry I can inform the House their view is supportive of the amendments. That was made known to me in briefings and has been reiterated today. I take that on board and I hope other members accept that.
The legislation has been brought under urgency and we are confident that the drafters have it right. This resolves an impasse in the certification process, and it maintains the integrity of the building certification process.
In terms of the Building Act - and the member for Nelson has rightly challenged government once again, coming into this portfolio, a massive portfolio - I have been asked to undertake a steep learning curve and look at what predecessors have done, look at what government has done. I am proud to say there have been many initiatives under this government. My predecessor, in 2009, commissioned the Building Industry Reference Group, commissioned the Queensland report looking at other jurisdictions, and consultation with industry stakeholders and the community is regular and ongoing with the department.
There is always more work to be done and that relates to members understanding it is important with stakeholders and the community. It then moves to the formal level in the department, and then it goes to Cabinet. Madam Speaker, as you are aware, being a former minister, that is where the finals are done and that is when we move forward with legislation for the Northern Territory.
I want to briefly touch on the motion this Assembly passed relating to the matter of Carey Builders. As this bill goes some way to resolving the matters which the government was called upon to address, government has taken decisive action regarding the Carey matter to help the affected families finish their homes. We believe the best way to get the homes completed is to work one-on-one with the affected parties. We have sent senior public servants to Alice Springs to work through the details of the building process, to provide advice tailored to their needs, and I am pleased to inform the House many took up this offer. That includes our public service in Alice Springs and the important work they have done on a daily basis in supporting the affected families and which needs to be recognised.
Government has also provided funds for the original certifier to establish the certification status of each project. The certifier’s report, together with the additional protections provided by this bill, will increase the ability of the home builder to attract a new contractor and understand what future costs may be incurred. There are many legal, financial and administrative hurdles in implementing the motion. The intent of the motion is problematic and, for a range of reasons, the proposed outcome of government recovering its money is unlikely to be achieved.
The overarching consideration is two tests the government must apply to this motion. The first is the legal test, and legal advice is there is nothing in the known chronology and information that would indicate any basis upon which the Territory might be found liable to any person.
The second is the moral test. While any government can compensate constituents who suffer loss through contractual failure, it has a responsibility to the whole community on the expenditure of public funds, and the expectation that would build in consumers across the board. On the basis of precedent, it is considered there would be an irresistible moral force to compensate for future business failures by builders. Further, from a wider policy point of view, there is nothing different, in principle, for consumers of a variety of non-building services expecting compensation in case of future contractual failure. Accordingly, the government is not in a position to compensate.
In conclusion, my focus will now be to improve consumer protection and, at the same time, ensure the building regulation regime is manageable and cost efficient for industry. We have the opportunity to build on all the reports and consultation done in 2009 and this year, to reshape the framework of the building regulations regime, to position industry well for the next era of development in the best interests of all Territorians.
Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contributions and support for this bill, and I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
Mr GILES: Madam Chair, I seek clarification from the minister on the last point he made. Were you saying, minister, the government cannot support the motion for Carey Builders to assist the people affected finishing their houses and putting a caveat on the property?
Mr McCARTHY: Yes, the final point was the most salient; we are not in a position to compensate.
Mr GILES: Minister, outside of compensation, the motion expressly mentioned seeking assistance from the Northern Territory government to finish those houses, and put a caveat over the properties which would be paid once those properties were sold. It was not about compensation. I want to ensure that is clear.
Mr McCARTHY: The situation outlined to me, and I am now outlining to the House, relates to the bigger picture of precedence, about expending taxpayers’ funds to support contractual obligations. We have moved, I believe, great lengths – and there is more work to be done as outlined in the debate - to assist the affected families in the failed Carey Builders matter. However, I was not able to deliver the final part of that motion. That is based on both legal grounds and on the precedent that government could be challenged by failed contractive obligations throughout the community.
Mr GILES: Minister, are you aware of the Carey situation going to court in South Australia?
Mr McCARTHY: I am aware of the Carey Builders situation going to court in the Northern Territory. I believe that is an Alice Springs on 30th of this month.
Mr GILES: Did you know Randal Carey was taken to court recently in South Australia? I am sure your government advisors would advise you on these matters.
Mr McCARTHY: I am aware of the legal action the Northern Territory government has taken against Carey Builders which is part of litigation which will be heard this month in the Northern Territory. It is not appropriate that I should comment any further on that matter.
Mr GILES: I appreciate the sensitivities about anything before the courts. Is the purpose of the litigation to prosecute for performing or undertaking duties and roles as a builder while unlicensed, or is the purpose trying to get some financial return in compensation or money back from that builder or the building company?
Mr McCARTHY: They are very legalistic questions. My only answer is: that is why we are taking legal action. Those matters related to legal action will be determined in a formal litigation process. As I mentioned in my previous response, a formal litigation process in the courts will answer many questions about this issue. Having said that, it is a very formal process and it is not appropriate for me to make predictions about how a formal legal case will be heard, or what outcomes will evolve from that. As I said, this matter is before the courts and it is not appropriate for me to comment any further.
Mr GILES: I may have been slightly obscure in my request. What I want to know is: are you pursuing him on criminal grounds for being unlicensed and operating, or are you seeking some financial return on this matter?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, with all due respect, you want me to comment on the legal process. I cannot make those comments; there are legal issues and protocols around that, and this matter is before the courts.
Mr GILES: I will provide some guidance on the outcome in South Australia. I am surprised you are not over your portfolio, or you have not been briefed on this. The outcome in South Australia, as I understand it, was a guilty verdict and the company is now insolvent. So, if it is the pursuit of finances through the Northern Territory process, I would wonder how successful that might be. If it is for other matters, I can understand the direction you are heading. How much has the Northern Territory government set aside to pay for these legal costs?
Mr McCARTHY: First of all, thank you for the advice to the House, member for Braitling. You are obviously taking great interest in the legal processes of South Australia, and I am taking great interest in the processes of the legal action in the Northern Territory. In terms of cost, I will need to take advice on that, and I have very expert advice on that. If I could call for advice from the Attorney-General?
Ms LAWRIE: All legal costs are naturally borne by government, which is always the case when government takes legal action.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much, Attorney-General.
Madam Chair, my question is probably to the Attorney-General, who seems to have more knowledge on these matters. How much do you expect it will cost in kind, or government expenses, to prosecute this case in the Northern Territory on behalf of the Northern Territory government?
Ms LAWRIE: Madam Chair, I believe the member opposite is getting somewhat distracted from the legislation before the House, and I suggest he get back to it.
Madam CHAIR: Member for Braitling, if you could keep your line of questioning to the bill, which is the purpose of the committee of the whole, to scrutinise the bill in detail.
Mr GILES: Madam Chair, the purpose of the amendments to this bill is to assist the victims of Carey Builders, and we are right within the parameters of discussing this matter. It is not outside this matter at all. I am trying to find out how much money the Northern Territory government will spend in trying to prosecute this case, rather than trying to assist the victims of Carey Builders. That is the direction I am heading.
Dr Burns: You can ask that in estimates.
Mr GILES: This is a building matter, to the junior minister over there. We passed a motion in parliament, minister, to try to support these victims. I appreciate that government does not like supporting motions which have been brought about by opposition, but I am interested to know how much money government will spend to prosecute this person, when the money would be far better utilised supporting those victims? Attorney-General, possibly?
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Chair, let me start by responding to the quips about junior minister and the usual diatribe. It is great to see you have slipped back into it because Hansard will record the history of your political career, member for Braitling, and you are documenting it so well. There is so much you can offer the Northern Territory, but there is the issue of you continually tripping over your ego. Call me names all you like, but let us get back to the legislation. Let us get back to the committee stage of the legislation, and let us talk about the motion.
Our government has no problems with motions but, being in government, they all have to be evaluated because we are dealing with the whole of the Territory, we are dealing with Territory public funds, and we are dealing with Territorians. If you want to go back to the motion and look at the very complex matters you created around equity and around a range of legalistic areas, I do not have a PhD in law like you obviously do so I go to wiser heads, and I use a thorough process to get the best advice.
The advice from the department and from Treasury is government cannot accept the final point of the motion is a proper way forward, and we cannot deliver public funds to prop up failed contractual obligations. It is a tough call. I do not take any joy in that, but when you are in a position where you have to make tough decisions, then you take it on the chin, and I have had to do that. We have done a great deal of work to deliver for the affected families, and we will continue to work to deliver for Territorians but, on the final point of the motion, as I pointed to in the debate, it is not something government can support.
Mr WOOD: Minister, the motion was not to just hand over money to people. It was actually to help people bring their houses up to certificate of occupancy standard, and that money would have to be repaid. You said there were some legal reasons why that could not be done. Are you saying that government cannot give a loan to a private individual?
Ms LAWRIE: Yes, it establishes an unacceptable precedent.
Mr WOOD: I understand there is always a possibility of a precedent, but in this case you are not giving a person a grant; you are actually giving them a loan. Is the government not able to give a person a loan? Why would that necessarily be a precedent? Loans are given out by the government in a range of areas within departments.
Ms LAWRIE: Not to individuals.
Mr GILES: How much money have you loaned the Darwin Waterfront to get that going?
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Chair! We seem to be getting off the point of the committee stage amendments. I have not heard any amendments come forward from the member for Braitling. These are questions he can ask in estimates. We have estimates next week, we have parliamentary Question Time, and in the interests of expediting the committee stages of a bill we all agree to, we are getting sidetracked here.
Madam CHAIR: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. If members could resume their seats, please, before I call the next person. I just remind members that the purpose of the committee of the whole stage is to scrutinise the bill and the details of the bill before us. Therefore, questions outside of that, such as the Darwin Waterfront, are quite irrelevant in this debate.
Mr WOOD: Can I ask a couple of questions specifically on the amendment? Are there any amendments in here which really are not urgent? In other words, what has been added to this bill that really is not part of the urgency requirements of this bill? Because, minister, in your second reading speech you talk about having an opportunity to do some things, for instance, I use new section 37A as an example of why that should be part of this bill under urgency.
Mr McCARTHY: I will respond, member for Nelson, as the minister, and then I will get some expert advice to follow up. The first matter we are dealing with is the impasse that related to supporting affected Territory families. That then went on to the bigger picture of this being a very practical and sensible amendment to the Building Act, but I will also get some expert advice on this.
Member for Nelson, I am advised first of all under the Statutory Law Revision Bill, there were minor technicalities. If you look through that you will see they have been adjusted, and it is a good process to do that while we have it out on the floor. The other more complex part is the legislation relates to companies and nominees. That has been amended in the act and is a substantial way forward in addressing the problem and will be beneficial in this amendment and the whole process for Territorians.
Ms PURICK: Madam Chair, to the minister, I mentioned in my speech the issue of renovations within a roof line, the bathroom area, wet areas. Yes, the person doing the work requires a building permit, but because it is within the roof line that person does not have to be a registered builder. Outside the roof line, and I will stand corrected, it is my understanding from industry people I have spoken with, that you do have to be a registered builder if you put a carport on, extend your house, or things of that nature. You said you would look at it, and I said I would make presentations to you.
There are situations where a building permit has been obtained, work has been done, and then there is an impasse. Would the changes to the legislation scoop up that situation – when a building permit has been obtained, certification process and certificates have been obtained and, in this case, the certifier has failed the work – it is not up to codes and standards. So, they have a building permit, the certifier has failed the work so there is an impasse, and the work is shoddy. They have lodged complaints with the Building Board and had no joy, basically saying bad luck.
That does not seem right or fair because they have been given guidelines, they have been given fact sheets from the department and the person obtained a building permit, but for whatever reason is not a registered builder, and the works failed and they are at an impasse. There may need to be other amendments to the Building Act, in due course, so people who renovate inside houses, bathrooms and wet areas, laundries, have a registration category of their own. I do not know, but consumers are being dudded. Will it scoop up those people, or is there another way those consumers can be protected? I have probably four or five I could put in my letter to you, minister.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Goyder, you have raised many points. This amendment before us deals with the impasse relating to death, disappearance or the total inability of not delivering. In the instances you are talking about, the players are generally still on the scene, and it needs to be resolved under the contractual obligations of the parties. You are right: I did take on the point we need to explore more the registration or the licensing of contractors, and this will provide more certainty for people engaging in those important examples you have provided.
Mr WOOD: Minister, I will go specifically to new section 37A - no interference with building practitioners by a corporation. I am having trouble understanding the basis, and I have the explanatory notes, of the background to this section occurring in this legislation, and is it something that needs to be passed as part of an urgency bill? This is the section which says: no interference with building practitioner by a corporation.
I had a briefing but the briefing dealt with the core areas we are talking about: to get an exemption, to change the process which would allow a building, if a building practitioner died or went broke, to have an exemption, the building was inspected and a new builder could take over. That, I thought, was the crux of this legislation. I see other pieces tacked onto it and whilst I am happy the part we are sorting out should go through urgency, I was concerned when I saw things which may be outside that realm. I am asking why, for instance, is clause 37A part of this legislation, and what brought it forward? What is the reason it has been put here?
Mr McCARTHY: I answer that in lay speak, however, I will get you expert advice.
Mr WOOD: Lay speak is all right for me.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, the essence of this amendment is dealing with an impasse. This part of the amendment deals with a company structure - a registered company and a registered nominee. This part of the amendment deals with any problems that could be encountered between the company and the nominee, which relates to the possibility of disagreements, dysfunction, and the nominee not being around. It is an important part that relates to the whole building industry and different aspects of how the industry operates.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. New section 37A(3) says:
The corporation must not:
I note it says penalty $50 000. I am not sure why it is not penalty units, but it is a fairly big penalty.
What would be a case of preventing a nominee or other building practitioner from complying with the provision of the act? What would be the reason behind a corporation preventing a nominee or other building practitioner from complying with the provision of the act? What would they actually physically be doing? How does it work in reality?
Mr McCARTHY: I am advised the part is meant to be part of the whole process; that the directors cannot operate outside of that process. You want an example?
Mr WOOD: An example is what I am after.
Mr McCARTHY: An example is: the directors could book an inspection as part of the certification process, and not involve the nominee, not tell the nominee - operating outside the legislative process.
Mr WOOD: I will not harp too much on it, but just so I can get it clear. How does this section relate to the impasse? I want to ensure we are not passing legislation that is not needed to be on urgency. If this is on urgency, it must relate to the impasse we are talking about. How does this legislation relate to what we are here for, to overcome the impasse of work on a building stopping unless you have a certificate of exemption to allow another builder to come in? How does that fit?
Mr McCARTHY: I have been advised a good example of an impasse is where the directors are putting pressure on the nominee; the nominee resigns and departs the process, and therefore we have an impasse in the certification process. This amendment captures that company structure and those internal difficulties which can occur in the private sector.
Mr WOOD: I think I get the gist of it. There are probably more questions I could ask on that, but I think I understand where you are coming from.
In relation to section 48C(1) and (2), especially (2), which says:
- A prescribed building contractor who has completed the prescribed building work must, not later than 14 days after completing the work, make a declaration mentioned in section 69(1) and in accordance with section 69(2).
I do not have those sections and I hope I am getting this right. So, I get a shed built. When it has been completed, no later than 14 days, I must get a declaration under those two sections that the work has been completed. What is different now than what this legislation is doing?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, Parliamentary Counsel took out the whole section. The 14 day clause does not change, but what is changed, what has been added, is dealing with the impasse that now covers any work which was partially completed, and the ability to get that issue solved and for the work to continue.
Mr WOOD: The understanding is that this section here, as it says, section 48C is repealed and substituted and, again, I do not have the original act with me. Are you saying some of what has been substituted is what is already in the act, and you have added to it to cover the case of partial works of a particular building?
Mr McCARTHY: Yes, I am advised that is the only change. That is moving to the essence of what we are doing here, which is to solve any impasses and the issue of work partially completed.
Mr WOOD: So, the issue of 48C(2), there is no change to what exists presently?
Mr McCARTHY: I am advised, no.
Mr WOOD: I have one other question there, minister. New section 48G - I love trying to read these numbers - is on page 6 of the act, also 69, I am never sure whether 69 comes under 48G, or where 69 comes from, but it is 69(1) Declaration to accompany application::
- A building certifier must not grant an occupancy permit unless the application for the permit is accompanied by a declaration, in an approved form, stating that the building work to which it relates has been carried out in accordance with the building permit granted for the building work.
Penalty: $10 000.
What is the difference between what exists today and this section?
Mr McCARTHY: I have been advised 48G deals with the aim of the bill, once again, to move into the essence of this amendment. Section 69 talks about the natural person who conducted the work.
Mr WOOD: Where does it state a ‘natural person’ in that section?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, in section 69(2).
Mr WOOD: So you have to read it in conjunction with section 69(2)?
I will ask a more technical question which I did raise when speaking on a previous section of the act. Why are there no penalty units, why is it put in a dollar form?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, the original act is all in dollars, and while this amendment has made significant changes in terms of benefit to Territorians, it is still premised on the original act and there has not been time to change the actual dollar figure.
Mr WOOD: Thank you. I cannot say whether this question is part of the bill or not, but talking about the section under occupancy permits, in relation to the houses in Alice Springs, and we have to realise this legislation has come from what happened in Alice Springs, can the government give an occupancy permit for a house that is partially completed? I will give you an example, and I am looking at ways to find a solution to other matters where a house is not completed. The original house, for instance, might have had three bathrooms and a three-car carport. Is it possible to give an occupancy licence that says we will allow one bathroom to be used, and a two-car carport? In other words, can someone live in a house that is partially completed and still get an occupancy permit?
Mr McCARTHY: All occupancy permits may apply to the whole or part of the building, and shall specify the classification of the building, or part of the building, to which it applies.
Mr WOOD: In the case of Carey Builders and the people who could not complete their houses, one of the issues raised was people could not move into the houses because they could not complete the houses therefore, you would have thought, a certificate of occupancy. I do not know the houses individually, but I am trying to determine whether the cost of people moving into houses could be reduced by allowing them to move into a partially completed house. I give an example: there might be two bathrooms in the house and they might say they cannot afford to complete one bathroom, but they can afford to build the other bathroom. It is possible, therefore, you could give a house a certificate of occupancy even though the internal part of the house is not totally completed?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, the optimal word there is ‘partial’, and they still need a builder’s declaration. The case we are talking about, the failed Carey case where the builder is not around, they would need to seek the certificate of exemption.
Mr WOOD: I understand that. If I am looking at a house that is partially completed, and there is a bathroom which is incomplete, but what is built is according to what should be there - it might be concrete floor and a few pipes sticking out of the ground. What I am saying is you cannot use that bathroom because it has not been finished, however, if there is another bathroom in the house which has been completed - it might be a studio in the house which has not been completed and is not essential for living. If you have two bedrooms, a bathroom, a kitchen which all come up to standard, even though the rest of the house is not complete, can you get a certificate of occupancy so people can move into that section of the house, bearing in mind the rest of the house has been built accordingly, and has a certificate of exemption?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, our partial occupancy permit deals with the living area, however, because we are breaking it down into real world speak, you should be aware by doing that you would still need to allow flexibility and opportunity for the builder to continue the process of completing that house.
Mr WOOD: I thank the minister for the answer. That is probably what I am after. I am not saying there are not issues - the rest of the house has to be completed - but I was trying to find a solution for the people in Alice Springs. I have not been to each house but I have seen photographs. It may be they can get enough money to open the house up for living, and they will have to sort out the rest of the house in due course. I presume that one of the issues with Carey Builders was people lost money and did not have enough money to complete the whole house. I am looking for a window of opportunity where a small amount of money would get the house open to have a certificate of occupancy for that part of the house, and continue on.
My other question in relation to the bill - I asked about it in the general debate - was what feedback did you get from people like the TCA, the Housing Industry Association, or building certifiers who would be the people at the coalface of this particular legislation? Did you get any feedback from them? Do they think this is a good move? Were there any concerns about this legislation working in practice? I would like to know what comments you got back from the industry.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Nelson, when I engaged with this process, the first thing issued was a building note which goes out widely right across the sector, and there were no negatives on that. The office, as well, has engaged with more major stakeholders, and the feeling is people agree there has to be something done. It is in the interests of industry continuing and in the interests of the consumer as well. It has been positive. That communication has been out there for a considerable time now, and we believe we have the support of industry.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. Of course, the other side of this is the financial side. Did you have any discussions with financial institutions such as banks and lending companies in relation to matters that arise from a company going broke? The banks, obviously, have an interest in the house where the work cannot continue because they want their money from the person who has the loan. The person who has the loan can neither sell the house nor – up until now – even complete the house. Has there been any discussion in relation to this bill, leading on to something from a financial point of view that can alleviate the other side of the stress – (1) the stress that you cannot live in your house, and (2) the financial stress that is caused by it. Whether it is caused by the owner paying out money when they probably should not have, or whether it is the issue I raised before where banks sometimes control the payments, and they have given out money before they have inspected what has been done. Have there been any discussions with financial institutions about this process we are going through today?
Mr McCARTHY: When I engaged with the issue of the Carey Builders’ impasse, I engaged the whole department and we sent senior members of the department to work with affected families one-on-one. Part of that communication and support network was not only the building industry regulations and how we could offer support, but also advice and real compassion around other ways their situation could be addressed, which involved dealing with their financial institutions; and we continue to offer that support. Should any of the financial institutions want the department to comment, then we are available. It is a very complex matter when you deal with individual financial contracts people have with a financial institution, but we are still there to advise them on any way possible.
Mr WOOD: I appreciate your response, minister, and you mentioned compassion. From my point of view, the reason I supported the third part of the motion is about compassion. I also understand government does not want to get into a precedent over this issue; however, part of the reason I am supporting this is compassion.
I know you said home warranty insurance would not cover this because Carey was not licensed. Then I go back to that is the government’s fault they were not licensed, and because the government has some blame in this - I am not saying they have the whole blame, and maybe the people themselves have some blame - but there was an opportunity for compassion, not through giving people money, a blank cheque, but by giving them some money to get them out of the problem. That is why the amount of money could be small, just to allow people to live in their house. It would be a loan, because there would be a covenant on the block
I do not know if there is any illegality in there, because the council I was on, Litchfield Council, put covenants on blocks if people were not able to pay their rates. They put the rates on the block, and when the person sold, or died, or whatever, that money was paid back when the block was sold.
Although we are discussing today some technical issues, and I understand the Chair does not want me to talk too much off the amendments and this is a technical issue, but it also has another side to it - it is a people issue. That is the reason we are discussing this, because of Carey Builders and people unable to complete their houses. Carey Builders is also about people losing money. The motion is not just about getting the legislation right. It is about asking the government to have some compassion. I know you said legally you could not do this and I will debate that in estimates, because we do not have all day.
Sometimes governments have to think outside the square. People might have been to blame, others might be to blame, but the reality is, could we find a solution, and could it be in a form which explains the reasons we are doing it? That does not mean it is a precedent; you might say we will look at each particular case on its merit.
I thank the government for bringing this matter forward. I thank the member for Braitling, and I agree, he has done good work as a local member, forget the politics about it. It is what local members should be doing. I have people come and talk to me about Augusto Homes, who were in much bigger debt, probably, than some of the people in the case of Carey Builders. They have come to me because they saw what happened in Alice Springs and, I take your point, they could see it as a precedent. However, I believe we need to look at each case on its merit. I will be taking back to the people involved in Augusto that you are at least allowing inspection to occur, and they can get someone to come in and take over the building of the house.
I will take the other issue up in estimates. I appreciate what you have said today, but we need to flesh that out more at a different time. Thank you, minister.
I do not have any other questions in relation to the bill. It has been a little difficult to look at everything. I only got the explanatory notes this morning, and I appreciate the briefing, but I do take on trust what is in here needs to be on urgency, and hopefully what you have in here does not need to come back later for amendments at another stage.
Mr GILES: I thank the member for Nelson for his comments. Madam Chair, you did say before we are not allowed to digress. I did seek advice from Madam Speaker earlier whether I could raise matters in the third reading speech or should I raise them now, and she said I should be speaking in committee as we have more flexibility in the committee stage to talk about different areas.
Madam CHAIR: Well, that may be so, but certainly questions about costs associated with the port are way outside of this debate.
Mr GILES: In relation to section 48C, and I know the member for Nelson has spoken about some of this, 48C requires a building contractor to make a declaration as required by section 69(1), stating that the building work was completed in accordance with the building permit within 14 days of completion, and the penalty for breach of that requirement was $10 000.
With the amendment, the building declaration still forms part of the application to gain a certificate of occupancy. The requirement for a building contractor to make a declaration on completed work, and the penalty for not doing so, has remained essentially the same with the additional reference of section 69(2).
Section 48C requires a building contractor to give the declaration to the building certifier that granted the permit for the building work within 14 days of completion. Completion is when the building contractor, as I understand it, ceases the building work regardless of whether the building works specified by the contractor is fully or partially complete. If the building contractor is a direct nominee of a corporation and ceases to hold that position, that building contractor is still responsible for providing a declaration.
The logical application of this provision is, once the portion of the building project the director/nominee is responsible for has been completed, they make the declaration relating to their portion. So there could be multiple declarations made by multiple contractors. What is not clear is whether the director or nominee must provide a declaration prior to leaving that position only at the completion of their portion, or only when the corporation, presumably with another director or nominee, ceases work on the building. And, if a former nominee or director has to be located to sign a declaration, how would that occur if they have relocated interstate or overseas before completion?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, I have been advised there are two parts to the answer. First of all, the transitional stage is what this amendment is all about. In the future, the nominee will be required to sign off before they depart the process; they will be responsible for that sign off. And in the transitional phase it is declared as an impasse, and that is the essence of this amendment.
Mr GILES: Can you clarify the second part? I think you said they have to sign it before they leave, but what if they left and moved interstate or overseas or cannot be found to sign it?
Mr McCARTHY: I have been advised two stages, again, prior to the commencement of the act. In the future, in terms of the act, if the nominee does depart then: (1) it creates an impasse, but (2) they are in breach. So they can be pursued and prosecuted.
Mr GILES: In light of creating a breach and an impasse they can be prosecuted, what happens to the building while they are being found and prosecuted?
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, that relates to the essence of this amendment. If the nominee disappears the amendment deals with the impasse created, and therefore the certification process will be continued.
Mr GILES: That is not the way I understand the amendment. From the briefing, I thought it was the case they had to sign a declaration before they left. One of the questions we had in the briefing was: what if they had not signed before they left? And there was no real answer to that question.
Mr McCARTHY: Member for Braitling, in the case of a nominee, the corporation has the power to solve it.
Mr GILES: How would this work in an alliance contracting model such as SIHIP?
Mr McCARTHY: You are talking about a registered practitioner - a registered builder as being part of that corporation. So, with an alliance model, if you want to talk about SIHIP, we are talking about outside of building regulated areas. If we talk about the principle of your question, you would have the same structure, which would be a building company, an appointed nominee, who would be a registered builder in that process, and therefore everything then is the same. If that nominee disappears, it would be the corporation’s responsibility to pursue that.
This amendment also allows for the impasse which has been created and the process of certification to continue.
Debate suspended.
BUILDING LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 108)
(Serial 108)
Continued from earlier this day.
_________________
Motion
Defer Committee Stage
Motion
Defer Committee Stage
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move - that:
- (a) consideration of the bill in committee of the whole be adjourned; and
(b) that the date resolved to pass all stages of the bill be amended to read Friday, 18 June 2010.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): We accept this and indicate our support for the motion.
_________________
Debate adjourned.
HEALTH PRACTITIONER (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) IMPLEMENTATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 107)
(Serial 107)
With regard to health reform - that is what it is called, I cannot avoid the word – we have flagged the hospital board situation and I need to bring this up briefly. It will be swallowed up into a super board, and this is our greatest fears realised. The member for Nelson, and the opposition, fought pretty hard during the debate last year to protect hospital boards throughout the Northern Territory, to give them the autonomy to retain local hospital boards, and it is still the will of the community.
For a community with half a dozen hospitals in a 10 km or 15 km radius, that might work. The funding split and how that is going to eventually benefit the Northern Territory is yet to be seen. One thing is for sure, local boards as we know them today, despite the protections put in and rigorously fought for by the opposition and the member for Nelson last year, will cease. That is not a good thing for local communities. It might work for a very large community in a large city with half a dozen hospitals within a stone’s throw of each other. A local hospital network might work there. The Northern Territory only has five hospitals spread over 1500 km, or more, and it is going to operate over one local hospital network. I do not think it is good enough. I do not think it is fair for the hospitals and the staff trying to deliver services that relate to particular community needs, and it also not good for the patients and those people utilising our health services.
This is something I urge the Health minister and the Chief Minister to address. We have a very good case for some exception with this local hospital network, purely by virtue of our own circumstances in the Territory. Five hospitals spread across such an enormous distance is no way in keeping with the intent of what the Prime Minister outlined - however flawed you, or we, think it is. It is not in keeping with his rhetoric of ‘locally run and locally operated’. It will be exactly the opposite. It will not be locally run and locally operated. Essentially, these boards will now be amalgamated into one super board local hospital network - no doubt out of Darwin.
Madam Speaker, I needed to flag those concerns because this relates to the health and hospital reform package introduced by the federal government earlier in the year and needs to be in line with that before any of this can get up and running. At the end of the day, we will support this. It is a little bug uncovered and, as it was put to me in the briefing, we need to squash that bug. I guess that is what we are doing.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I thank everyone for their support. It is a little bug we actually uncovered studying the legislation. It creates some problems for our medical practitioners and we want to protect medical practitioners so they are fully covered. Doubtless, it is nothing to do with the reform. Actually, this legislation started during the Howard government era, and is very good legislation, bringing everything under one roof rather than having different boards everywhere. People have to register, and at least we now have a centralised national system and we know where everyone stands.
It was a discrepancy in the way national law interprets certain areas of legislation and the way our legislation does. Now we have brought it together and we cover all health practitioners.
Once again, I thank the opposition for their understanding. It has to be done now because a new law will apply from 1 July, and we want all our medical practitioners to be covered at that time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
TOBACCO CONTROL LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 104)
(Serial 104)
Continued from 6 May 2010.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, this is a bill we also support. Anything that goes towards reducing smoking or, indeed, stamping it out right across the Northern Territory can only be a good thing. We have a couple of concerns and, rather than get into some argy-bargy and take this into committee, I will, on the way through, raise some of those concerns, and perhaps the minister can respond to those in his final speech.
Regarding the estimated cost to retailers, this is going to be an issue for smaller operators who sell tobacco products. The cost of complying with this legislation is going to be somewhere between $5000 and $10000 per store. That is a large impost on a small business to outfit the shop to comply with this legislation. It is a significant amount of money for small businesses to raise in, what we think, is a short period of time, between now and 2 January. In fact, by the time this bill is assented to it might be July, maybe August and that really only gives an operator six months maximum. I would suggest we can put a moratorium or an extension on it for smaller businesses, those with under 20 staff, to extend the time for them to comply with this legislation. Obviously, some of the larger stores will have the resources to do it.
We believe with the money raised through the licensing fees, I believe about $165 000 annually, the government should consider providing nicotine replacement therapy rebates for parents and expectant parents on referral by their doctor. We see this as a positive step towards stamping out smoking, and also would make good use of the money raised through the tobacco retail licensing fees. I know the federal government was considering a similar subsidy, but they are only at the consideration stage at this point.
Our recommendation was to cut the NRT, the nicotine replacement therapy, by $112 per month to around $33 per month for a non-pensioner, and approximately $5 for a pensioner. Based on these figures, subsiding one 12-week course within a 12-month period would cost the scheme about $336 per person. The $165 000 would provide approximately 490 people per year with more affordable access to nicotine replacement therapy. We have particularly targeted pensioners and parents in this proposal.
The Country Liberals also promised in the 2008 election campaign to provide healthy prescriptions from doctors. Of course, it is not the be-all and end-all but, certainly, we believe a step in the right direction. We know that the Territory has the highest prevalence of smoking in Australia, particularly amongst Indigenous Territorians. In 2008, the AMA ranked the Territory as the worst-performing jurisdiction with the annual Dirty Ashtray Award; and I think this year we have come second. The AMA said in a media release on 31 May 2008:
- The Northern Territory once again is the bottom of the scoreboard. The Territory’s lack of interest or action is particularly disturbing given the significant contribution tobacco makes to the Indigenous life expectancy gap. The Northern Territory’s record on tobacco control is an embarrassment in a country that is otherwise making good progress.
We are all responsible for this, all governments of all persuasions, but as the prevalence of smoking and the awareness of smoking has gained momentum, I believe we have been dragging the chain, particularly over the last couple of years. We believe by directing some of this money, or all of this money, raised through the licensing fees into a program which will clearly help those people who cannot afford NRTs - they are quite expensive - this will be a step in the right direction and demonstrate to the rest of the nation, and perhaps lead the way, that we are serious about stamping out nicotine use amongst all of us, and in particular those Indigenous communities which rely on it so much.
The Country Liberals did put in place a policy at the last election regarding doctors and prescriptions for this type of thing. We would like to see more of that in this bill but, essentially, we do support it. I suggest that if the minister would consider those proposals by the opposition then we would be a long way down the track to addressing nicotine addiction throughout the Northern Territory.
Ms LAWRIE (Racing, Gaming and Licensing): Madam Speaker, as Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing, I support the Health minister with this legislation. As he made very clear in his second reading speech smoking kills and he has pointed out that one in five Territorians die as a result of tobacco use. That is a pretty frightening statistic and is at the heart of what this legislation is about: making a safer environment, a safer entertainment environment, and a safer workplace for those people who work in the hospitality industry.
The types of controls being put in place in this legislation have existed throughout Australia. We are the last jurisdiction to put this in place and, for that, we have received the Dirty Ashtray Award. I note we got away from the Dirty Ashtray this year, albeit still towards the bottom of the pack. It took a Labor government to introduce tobacco reform. It did not happen in 27 years of CLP government. It has been hard and we have copped the political blows for this stance but, I believe, one in five Territorians dying as a result of tobacco use speaks for itself.
I understand the grief smokers have about the controls governments are progressively putting in which limit their ability to smoke when and how they choose. I have only been off the dreaded cigarettes for about seven weeks now, and every day is a struggle. As a smoker, I can understand how alcoholics must feel; you literally get up every day and tell yourself you are not going to have a cigarette that day. There are 1000 reasons that tempt you to have that cigarette, but I look at my children and I think there is every reason why I will not be having a cigarette.
As a very recent former smoker I have noticed that the controls government has put in place make it harder for a smoker to have that cigarette inside or outside. This legislation puts further controls in place and that is a good thing because it reduces your smoking intake. Tobacco is a highly addictive substance, and if there are external controls put in place that reduces your intake, it is a good thing.
Without these reforms to tobacco legislation in the Territory making us change, as smokers, our habits, I probably would not have reduced my smoking intake as dramatically as I have over the time, and it would have been much harder for me to have chosen the path of cold turkey and given up. As I said, I get it and I understand the grief smokers feel about this type of legislation. I also understand and have seen firsthand the grief a family experiences as they witness someone battling emphysema. It is a terrible way; it is a long, lingering, nasty death to go through. I get this debate at every level.
As Racing, Gaming and Licensing minister, I get the debate from a business perspective, from the venues that rely on a take over the bar and a take through the gaming machines in terms of their business bottom line. I understand the issues the industry has had. I put on the record my thanks to the Australian Hotels Association, and Clubs NT, for steadfastly returning to the negotiating table despite not really wanting this to happen - wanting to stop it from happening - but understanding it has happened everywhere else in Australia and they have really had two or three years reprieve. They have had two to three years of this impact not hitting their books and, as we all have seen from what has occurred elsewhere, it will have an impact on their financial take for a period of time but, over time, their revenues will return to a healthier position.
I am not discounting at all how tough it is for them to go through that early period, and they are going through it right here and right now; but as a government we are committed to continuing to work with them and listen to them and understand the venue-by-venue issues that arise with outside smoking area requirements, and work in an environment of consensus to ensure they meet the requirements of the legislation before us today.
You cannot get away from it; the reckoning time has arrived in the Territory. Fundamentally, it is about making venues safer for those people who use a venue for recreation and have had to endure passive smoking in the past. And let us not forget those members of the Miscellaneous Workers Union who were fairly voiceless in much of this debate; the ones who had no choice but to earn their dollar in a smoking environment.
I congratulate my colleagues for taking the tough stance in bringing this bill before the Chamber. We have found, after a difficult and tense debate with the AHA and Clubs NT, an outdoor smoking area agreement which suits the Territory, which puts us in the middle of the pack of what is occurring around our nation, and is a reasonable approach. The devil is always in the detail, which is why we have taken so long to crunch through the detail of this, particularly with the regulations for the industry.
No doubt more discussions will occur because we have recognised, due to the planning certainty around the design of outdoor smoking areas and all those logistics, we need to continue working with venues to ensure they get it right. Also, due to the construction of windows in the Top End, we need to have provisions to ensure industry can get reprieves with time lines if they have a genuine case to argue, a case backed up by the fact they have the designs and the building schedule to go ahead; they just need some extra time to finish off those building works.
That was a fair and reasonable point the government reached with industry, and with the close contact I have as Racing, Gaming and Licensing minister with industry, the majority get it. In relation to venues, the majority understood it was coming and it was always a case of when. They understood the devil was going to be in the detail, and was the government of the day prepared to work through in detail the issues each venue would confront with their outdoor smoking areas; and that is the approach government is taking.
I am aware the ban has affected the pubs’ and clubs’ bottom line, and we see that coming through with the gaming data. In the first quarter of this calendar year we saw gaming turnover in pubs and clubs was down around 20% from the same time last year. A 20% cut for any business is going to hurt significantly. They know as an industry, based on what we have seen interstate - we have no reason to think we will be dramatically different in the Territory - there will be a gradual rebound from this position. The reduction has been patchy. Some venues got in ahead and created outdoor smoking areas and introduced their patrons to the outdoor smoking areas before the bans commenced, and they saw less reduction in turnover than the venues which did not. It is interesting that you can train your clientele, your patrons, to deal with a change in habit and routine.
We have taken the position that health comes first – the health of patrons who visit these venues, and the health of those who work in these venues.
This bill gives industry the certainty it has been seeking, and I thank the opposition for its support. With its passage today, this bill has dotted the I’s and crossed the T’s, and industry knows exactly what it is dealing with. It is the certainty they want, and it is the certainty they have pursued, and we are delivering that certainty in this bill.
A great deal of work has occurred between the Health department, Racing, Gaming and Licensing, and the industry. I sincerely thank all officers of those departments, and the staff of the ministerial offices involved in working through the devil in the detail. It has been an arduous and difficult process. Everyone had a view, and it was very hard at times to find a view that lined up with someone else’s view. There were many different voices coming from different directions within the industry, and also from within government. This government pulled all that together and has landed at a point of certainty for everyone, and that certainty is within this bill before the Chamber today. I sincerely thank the opposition for its support.
As I said, we will continue to work venue by venue to ensure they get the details of outdoor smoking areas right. We are not going to be aggressive; we are going to be reasonable and fair. We have put structures in place to be reasonable and fair and have set down legislation and regulations with which their outdoor plans must comply.
We have also put in an exemption for high-roller rooms at the casino where a limited number of poker machines will be allowed for ancillary use by the companions of those people playing at high-roller tables. This is common practice in casinos around our nation, and we did not want to disadvantage SKYCITY, which has high-roller rooms, in the casino marketplace. This government took a fair and reasonable approach in understanding there is a place for high rollers in casinos in Australia. Our proximity to Asia gives SKYCITY some advantages to go after what we see as the middle bracket of wealth throughout South-East Asia. They are not going to go head-to-head in competing with Burswood in the top bracket of wealth thought South-East Asia. I have seen Burswood’s high-roller facilities, as have SKYCITY casino officials, and there is no way, in a market of this size, we can go head-to-head with the type of infrastructure available in Perth.
That being said, there is a middle wealth of South-East Asian travellers, tourists, gamblers, to attract to those high-roller rooms, but they come with an entourage. They come with their wives, their amahs, girlfriends - often several, all at the one time, which is interesting and a bit of a shock to those of us not quite used to that. Having lived and worked in Hong Kong for four-and-a-half years, I understand it, I have seen it. Wife No 1 puts up with concubines No 2, 3, 4, and 5. We are talking immense wealth here. However, the women in the entourage do not play the tables; the men do. The women play the poker machines quietly in a discreet area of the high-roller room. So, that is what we are providing for here …
Ms Purick: We are talking about smoking and tobacco.
Ms LAWRIE: I know the member for Goyder does not like to hear it, but I am simply just talking about the practice within the high-roller rooms in the industry.
Ms Purick: I thought you were talking about the tobacco bill?
Ms LAWRIE: It is contained within the bill, Kezia. Have a read of it.
Anyway, the reason why I am talking about the exemption for the high-roller room is because industry has been saying: ‘Why them, why not us? Okay, we have poker machines in a pub. Why do they get the exemption and why don’t we?’ This is why I am explaining it in the debate. There is a big difference between a middle wealthy Asian tourist in a high-roller room who will play for millions of dollars at those tables, and someone who is going to go down to the Casuarina Club on a Friday night with their family, have a buffet meal, and play some pokies - a completely different marketplace.
We are not pitching the high-roller room against the marketplace in pubs and clubs, and the people who are playing poker machines there. The regulations around this will have conditions put in place by the Director of Licensing.
The second aspect of this bill relates to the point of sale restrictions. Retailers will no longer be able to display tobacco products at the point of sale. This is consistent with the principle we do not support tobacco advertising. Retailers will also pay an annual $200 licensing fee. Revenue from this fee will support the Director of Licensing’s regulatory costs, and government’s initiatives to encourage people to quit smoking.
I will go back to where I started. Smoking kills! One in five Territorians die as a result of tobacco use. This is the right legislation to bring before this Chamber, and I am pleased to see it is attracting bipartisan support. I certainly hope it goes some way to making a safer entertainment environment for Territorians, and also a much safer workplace for those working in the hospitality industry
Madam Speaker, as a recently reformed smoker, I understand the harder it is for you to have a cigarette, the more you reduce your intake, and it helps you get off the dreaded tobacco. I congratulate the Minister for Health for this legislation.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I have to declare a long-standing interest in this legislation. It probably goes back long before I entered politics, when I was at the Menzies School of Health Research, and probably before that. I was an inaugural member of what was called the Tobacco Interest Group, or TIG, and there were four of us on that particular group. There was myself; Dr Tarun Weeramanthri, he is probably known to most people in the Chamber; Dr Joe Wright, who certainly was, and remains, very passionate in regard to this; and, representing the government was the former member for Port Darwin, Sue Carter. I can remember sitting in the hospital meeting rooms looking at the way ahead. I think we are talking in the mid-1990s and there was very little in the way of tobacco legislation in the Northern Territory. Today represents another major step along the way. You, Madam Speaker, when you were Minister for Health, I believe in 2002, introduced the first tranche of tobacco control legislation in the Northern Territory, so it is significant.
I would like to outline the reasons I have always been committed in this area before I entered politics, when I was with the National Heart Foundation which, of course, has a major agenda in tobacco control. Why? I am talking here not only about people smoking directly, but what is known as second-hand smoke, so the death risk increases from various tobacco-related causes. Respiratory ailments are caused and worsened; heart and vascular disease and conditions are caused and worsened; cancer - second-hand smoke is a proven carcinogenic risk; harm for workers and patrons result from their exposure; and a range of other health concerns - sexual, reproductive, prenatal harm - including diabetes, meningococcal disease, osteoporosis and other things. The US Surgeon-General’s report in 2006 is quite stark reading. It says in its conclusions:
- Secondhand smoke causes premature death and disease in children and in adults who do not smoke.
Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), acute respiratory infections, ear problems, and more severe asthma.
Exposure of adults to secondhand smoke has many adverse effects for the cardiovascular system and causes coronary heart disease and lung cancer.
Then it says:
- The scientific evidence indicates there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.
That is pretty stark reading and conclusions coming from an authority like the US Surgeon-General. He goes on to say, in a particular chapter, Conclusions of Toxicology of Secondhand Smoke:
- More than 50 carcinogens have been identified in sidestream and secondhand smoke.
He goes on identify that:
- The evidence is sufficient to refer that exposure of nonsmokers to secondhand smoke causes a significant increase in urinary levels of metabolites of the tobacco-specific lung carcinogen 4-methylnitrosamino-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK).
Then an epidemiological report, which includes author, Stanton Glantz, who is very well-known in this area, says in Background:
- Secondhand smoke increases the risk of coronary heart disease by approximately 30%. The effect is larger than one would expect on the basis of the risks associated with active smoking and the relative doses of tobacco smoke delivered to smokers and nonsmokers.
In the Conclusions, they say:
- The effects of secondhand smoke are substantial and rapid, explaining the relatively large risks that have been reported in epidemiological studies.
- Low levels of second-hand smoke increase heart death risk by an average of 16%, and a maximum of 32%.
That was a US study published in the very authoritative journal Circulation. Studies show increased asthma, lung cancer danger, and second-hand smoke kills by damaging lungs. In the workplace, very importantly, even brief exposure can increase workers’ cancer risk.
In 2007, in the American Journal of Public Health they found that brief exposure to second-hand smoke in bars and restaurants can increase workers’ risk of cancer. So this is significant for people working in these environments. Once again, in the workplace, 2004, it says:
- Smoky workplaces killing 70 NSW bar workers pa. A new study in NSW estimates more than 70 bar workers are dying in that state each year from smoky workplaces. The report, by international secondhand smoke expert Prof. James Repace for the Cancer Council NSW, is based on conservative risk assessment analysis of research on measured smoke content in licensed venues.
- Western Australian pub goers smoke intake comparable to smoking.
That is pretty scary, but I believe there are legal issues involved here which are very important for industry, because I believe industry has a duty of care to its workers. We know the tobacco industry for a long time has tried to deny the direct link between tobacco smoking and lung cancer, which dates back to the 1950s; they have certainly been obstructive of the message and the findings of second-hand smoke and they have fought every step along the way against this. Employers, amongst others, should take note of this: there have been at least 28 cases in Australia where compensation has been awarded to people affected by passive smoking.
This comes from the ASH website and it talks about the case Marlene Sharp v Port Kembla RSL and Port Kembla Hotel in 2001, and it says a former barmaid sued the RSL and hotel after contracting neck and throat cancer caused by years of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke during the course of her employment. She sued in common law negligence, a breach of duty of care, and was awarded $466 000 by a New South Wales Supreme Court jury.
So there you have it. In the workplace there is a duty of care, and I believe this legislation is another step to ensuring the safety of not only patrons, but also workers in these workplaces, and that is why it is significant.
Let us look at the efficacy of going smoke-free. We know about the health effects, but is this type of legislation effective in reducing the adverse health effects of second-hand tobacco smoke? The member for Brennan and I have discussed the Corcoran collaboration a number of times: in May 2010 a worldwide review released by the Corcoran collaboration finds that legislated smoking bans have achieved their primary objective of reducing exposure to second-hand smoke. The review of 50 studies examined the effects of clean air legislation in countries, states and regional areas. It found these laws: reduce exposure to second-hand smoke, especially for hospitality workers; reduce hospital admissions for heart attacks; reduce tobacco consumption; meet with increasing public approval over time, and the authors conclude that:
- Governments around the world have the responsibility to protect their citizens from the dangers of secondhand smoke by enacting comprehensive smoke-free laws …
… all indoor workplaces and public places, including restaurants and bar …
That is the very prestigious Corcoran collaboration reviewing, and peer reviewing a number of evidence-based studies.
The British Medical Journal in 2004 showed a study from Montana in the US that showed a 40% drop in heart attack rates in six months after state-wide smoke bans in public buildings. Sadly, the ban was later reversed and heart attack rates shot back up to their previous levels. So we have to show courage here as legislators. There is an onus on us as legislators and we have to keep moving forward.
In terms of pubs, everyone thinks of Irish pubs as places of gaiety and enjoyment. Irish heart attacks fell 11% after smoke-free pubs. In 2007, heart attacks in the Irish Republic fell by 11% in the year after a nationwide ban on smoking in workplaces, including pubs. The author of the study from Cork University Hospital said:
This should further encourage health authorities to look at more smoking bans around the world.
As the member for Karama said - and it is great to hear she is now a former smoker - she is quitting, and it is a hard road. I was a tobacco smoker 40 years ago, and I found it very difficult to give up. It is one of the hardest things to give up, and I commend the member for Karama.
These steps encourage people to quit, as she said. Here is a media release from the Cancer Council in 2008 which says:
- 4 of every 10 people who quit smoking say smokefree changes in pubs and clubs have helped them do it, says new research from the Cancer Council Victoria. For smokers under 30, the rate was even higher: 45%.
In 2007, Quit Victoria issued a press release saying:
- Calls to the Quitline rose by 27% in the month following Victoria's ban on smoking in totally enclosed areas of pubs and clubs on July 1. Quit Victoria says the smokefree changes have had a ‘significant impact’ on people's attempts to stop smoking.
Here is a positive knock-on effect of these legislative steps. You have to take into account the public view. A government report on adult health in New South Wales in 2008 showed people attracted to smoke-free dining outnumbered those deterred by more than seven to one. The Cancer Council in South Australia conducted a survey: it had 90% public approval - 86% managers in these areas and 72% smokers. These are important views, not only of the public but people who work in these environments. There was a Quit evaluation study from the Centre for Behavioural Research into Cancer, 1998. In 1997 only 3% of restaurant patrons in Melbourne supported no restrictions on smoking. Two-thirds of patrons always request smoke-free dining, and over 75% prefer to eat in the smoke-free area. That is a fairly important aspect.
The member for Karama, rightly, showed concern and understanding of the effects of this on industry. There is no doubt in the first 12, possibly 18, months after these changes are introduced; there is a downturn in revenue in the liquor and hospitality industry. I had the opportunity, when I had carriage of that portfolio, to visit the Hotels Association in Queensland where they had smoke-free areas for close to two years. I met with the President and some of the Executive Officers and they said they were quite comfortable with the changes a year or so on. There was an initial downturn after the changes were introduced but, with time, their takings returned to where they were. So, that is heartening.
We have to remember that where you have smoking in large areas there is much more expense in cleaning up and disinfecting air-conditioners; so there are savings associated with this. However, as the member for Karama said, we are sympathetic to the needs of industry and are very attentive to what they say.
Others have talked about the Northern Territory context of tobacco smoking. The member for Greatorex spoke about the very high rates of tobacco smoking in the Northern Territory. For non-Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, I believe it is about 50% higher than the Australian average. It is not only Indigenous people; we also have high rates of smoking in the non-Indigenous population. In the Indigenous population, it is over three times the Australian average, and research has shown in some remote areas smoking prevalence rates can be up to 70% of the entire community. The challenges are great.
I know there are a number of people working in this area; people from the Menzies School of Health Research, and my colleague and friend from James Cook University, Alan Clough, is working in a number of communities in the Northern Territory and Queensland to try to turn around this situation of tobacco smoking in Indigenous communities.
As the member for Karama pointed out, approximately 20% of all deaths in the Northern Territory are tobacco-related, and that equates to 180 people a year. The costs are enormous, conservatively estimated somewhere around $310m per year to the Northern Territory - probably much higher than that when you add it all up. This is the reason we are moving down this path. This is a step, it is not the solution by itself, but I certainly commend this bill to the House.
I turn to the bill and look at some of the measures. I have already mentioned we brought in the Tobacco Control Act in 2002 and I commend the Speaker, who was then Health minister. I know there was a lot of flack about it at that stage, and she was very resolute in introducing this legislation, just as our current Health minister is resolute in bringing this matter forward also. In his second reading speech, he talked about the Dirty Ashtray Award. There was a time when I thought we were going to get the Perpetual Dirty Ashtray Award, which is no commendation. I understand South Australia has it recently, so the challenge is in their court, and we have taken the steps we need to take.
The member for Karama has already talked about lifting the exemption on indoor smoking bans in licensed premises in January 2010, and some of the attendant effects of that. Nonetheless, I am approached almost on a weekly basis at the Rapid Creek markets; people ask: ‘When is it going to happen? You promised it’. Which I did – in the 2008 election I said we were going to take these steps – so people approach me and say: ‘You promised it, when is it going to happen?’ I acknowledge there has been a delay; I would have liked it happen sooner but, as the member for Karama said, there had to be a great deal of consultation, of discussion, and we have moved forward in a very positive way.
The main elements of the bill are smoke-free areas, with the introduction of a ban on smoking in all public outdoor eating and drinking areas, with some exempt areas for licensed venues. There will be areas where people will be able to have a smoke, and that is very well defined within the act. However, people will not be able to have a meal and smoke within the same area. It has been raised by some people that, somehow, this is not best practice for people to drink without having access to a meal. People can have a meal; they just cannot have a smoke while they are having that meal; and that is what it is all about.
It certainly seems to have worked in Queensland. I am not aware of any significant increase in road fatality rates in Queensland. I did ring a former colleague of mine, Mr Cameron Prout, Director of the National Heart Foundation in Queensland, and put this premise to him that this may have occurred. Cameron told me he believed road fatalities had actually decreased significantly in the last year in Queensland, although I have not had a chance to check that out myself. He did not seem to be of the opinion there had been any driver in the changes in Queensland in this particular aspect of the legislation over the last couple of years.
I commend smoke-free areas. As has been mentioned, there will be a prohibition on the display of tobacco products at the point of sale. I believe this is a very important aspect. Tobacco companies will not like this, and they certainly will not like the changes happening federally, as well, but it is a step in the right direction. Tobacco companies are very clever in the way that they market their product. Let us face it, this is a product that kills; this is a lethal product. If tobacco did not have the history it has, if it was introduced as a drug it just would not cut the grade. It certainly would not be able to be retailed, and it would not be able to be sold. But there has been a history of tobacco in the western world for centuries now, and that is where it all comes from. I watch this very carefully. Tobacco advertising has been prohibited in magazines, it has been prohibited on television, and it has been prohibited as sponsors at sporting venues.
If I could just digress: I was living in New South Wales in Armidale at the time, and I can remember John Laws talking about a footballer, I think he played for South Sydney, and he had been caught with drugs. John Laws said how terrible this was, and this guy should be banned and flogged. Well, he did not say that exactly, but he wanted this guy shamed and embarrassed, and run down in football and whatever, and we cannot have drug takers in sport. Well, one of the few times I have ever rung up talkback radio, I rang up John Laws and I said: ‘Isn’t this being a little hypocritical, John?’ He said: ‘What do you mean?’ I said: ‘When people were making this announcement, the higher-ups of the Rugby League had the Winfield logo behind them, and you are talking about drug-free sport. Come on!’ He cut me off when I asked him whether he received any consideration from tobacco companies. There was a two-second delay and I did not get an answer from John Laws about that. It was not too long after that he was in trouble with the broadcasting authority, but he did not want to answer that particular question.
Tobacco companies are very clever in the way they market. They do it in video clips and in movies, and they make it attractive. I know smoking is incidental in movies, but you can tell when it is being glamorised, and I think Hollywood has a lot to answer for in the connections there and recruiting new smokers. Let’s face it, the old smokers die so it is all about getting young people hooked on the drug. It is a very addictive substance and they are very canny the way they do it.
I fully applaud this step being taken in the legislation of licensing tobacco retailers, and there will be an introduction of the annual licence fees and greater powers to impose licence conditions on retailers. That is positive, and there have been discussions about the licence fee.
It will be brought in from 2 January 2011 and, as the member for Karama says, we will be working with industry in a cooperative, collaborative way to bring a sensible, flexible way forward on this. We are not out to punish industry, but from what I have said earlier in my speech to this House, it is clear that second-hand smoke is very toxic. I know the evidence is there, and that is why we are taking these steps and I believe industry realises that. No doubt there will be further steps and, no doubt, anomalies will arise. We have a very diverse Territory, we have very diverse licensed premises, and eating premises, and restaurants, etcetera, but we will deal with that flexibly. I know the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing will deal with it, and I know the Minister for Health will also deal with it.
As the member for Karama said, in order to assist industry make any required changes to their premises, the bill provides for exemptions from these restrictions until September 2011 where building modifications will not be possible prior to 2 January 2011. We realise, particularly with clubs, and this was the view put to me by a number of clubs across the Territory when I was Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing, that they actually have a process; they have to go to their board, build it into a budget, get building approval, and carry out the works. So, they have a process and we have recognised that, as government, and we respect that.
There is also the capacity for owner/occupiers of a building to voluntarily accelerate or otherwise implement outdoor smoke-free areas by designating all or part of the property to be a smoke-free area under the act. No doubt, there will be some businesses which will want to go faster and do it because their patrons demand it.
This is a very important act and I am very glad the opposition is supporting it. As I said, one of the foundation members of the Tobacco Interest Group was Sue Carter, the former member for Port Darwin. I am sure she will be very glad about these changes coming in. Many people work hard in the non-government sector: Healthy Living NT, and all the members of the various alliances, the Cancer Council, the Heart Foundation, Diabetes Australia, and a range of groups that are interested. The unions are interested and I know the LHMU, of which I am a member - I declare that interest as well - are very active because many of their workers work in these areas and they have mounted a number of national campaigns in this regard. I commend them for their efforts.
Madam Deputy Speaker, in closing, I commend the bill to the House. I am very glad there is bipartisan support across the Chamber for this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of this bill even though I have concerns in relation to some of the matters which will be discussed today.
I certainly do not support smoking although, I have to admit, at some time in my distant youth I was caught with a packet of cigarettes in my back pocket by my mother when she went through the washing. They do not sell those little packs anymore; that is a bit unfortunate. I probably saw the light and thought: what the heck am I smoking for because it is a fairly pointless thing.
Unfortunately, people do pick up the habit. I hope my daughter does not go crook at me, but she went out bush to be a ringer and she learnt a few things: one was to swear, one was to smoke, and one was to have a beer. Unfortunately, she still has the habit of smoking. I encourage her as much as I can to give it away. As you grow older it is so sad to see people pass away due to the effects of smoking. I do not say that as a preacher because I believe trying to get off the habit of tobacco is a very hard habit to kick. Some people have been known to stop it in one go, but it is not easy and we should not be judgmental of people. We should encourage people by all means to stop smoking, but we also have to be careful we are not being smarty pants because we do not smoke and start preaching to others about the dangers of smoking. By all means encourage people, but do not be holier-than-thou in these cases.
One of the good things happening today is we are introducing a series of amendments and, at the same time, the government has brought out this tobacco action plan. Whilst it is glossy - and I must admit I groan when I see pages of activity numbers and things – overall, I think its intended target, Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, is certainly very worthwhile. The figures suggest up to 70% of Indigenous people smoke and that should ring alarm bells, especially when we are doing our best to reduce death rates in Indigenous communities from other aspects of life that people in certain communities live with. If we can reduce smoking rates in those communities it would be good.
It is not easy to do because you have to convince people it is a bad thing. I do not know the history of smoking in the Northern Territory, but I do know people at Bathurst Island smoked out of a long bum shell. They did not need to roll their own; they just put tobacco in a long bum shell and lit it; it saved paper. Obviously, it had been around for a while. Chewing tobacco, which you do not see any more, was common at Daly River. When mixed with the ash of the stringy bark tree, it gave you a nice feeling for the rest of the day. You would see people with a lump of tobacco mixed with ash, which was called kungalung, which gave people a drowsy feeling, but they were, of course, absorbing nicotine.
When talking about Indigenous issues, it is not quite as simple as it may be from a non-Indigenous point of view, because to some extent there has been an acceptance that this is okay; it has been passed down. Maybe other forms of addictive substances were used by Indigenous people in years gone by. I do not doubt that is the case because if you look through a pharmacopeia you will see a range of uses for native plants for different reasons, for health, for food, etcetera.
When tackling Indigenous issues, the main drivers will be Indigenous people themselves, otherwise it is like preaching rather than bringing people along with change. In my time on Bathurst Island, when we were able to sit in the back of utes, I remember driving through the main street when the kids were going to school and they would yell out at the adults sitting in the back: ‘Cigarettes!’ And they would throw handfuls of cigarettes on the road and the kids would pick them up and it was like: who cares? That is the way things are.
Much work needs to be done to convince people, especially Indigenous people in remote communities, for their own sake and a healthier lifestyle they need to change something that has been around a long time which people have accepted as being okay. Somehow we have to turn that around to say: it is not good for you. It is a big task, and I welcome the government’s tobacco action plan, but Aboriginal people have to be the drivers behind this because that is the only way it will be successful.
Getting back to the amendment bill before us, as the minister said, it covers three areas: smoke-free areas, no displays at point of sale, and the licensing of tobacco retailers. There are a number of issues and if we go to the committee stage I will ask questions during that time.
At the Alice Springs sittings, the member for Sanderson and I were involved in discussions with the Hotels Association regarding timing of when the outdoor restrictions will come into place, and we were also involved with serving of meals in the smoking section of an outdoor area. I thank the government for giving people the right guidance to what is required, and the time to make the changes to those premises; many of the premises have already done their alterations.
There were some issues in relation to what was regarded as outdoor and not outdoor. I can cite the case of the Howard Springs Tavern, which was the Pub of the Year in the Northern Territory awards recently. It has a large area with plastic see-through blinds which can be pulled up or dropped down according to the weather. The question for those people is: when is it outdoor and when is it not outdoor? Maybe they have given up asking that question because they are now building an extension on the side, which is definitely outdoor. You have to be fair. You might say pubs make a lot of money, but pubs have actually lost some money when no smoking in pokies rooms came in. You do not have to give me statistics. I know when I walk through the pokies area at Howard Springs Tavern – it ain’t crowded anymore. In some ways, I am not that sad, because pokies are not the best thing for you either, but they have certainly lost revenue. With other additions required, such as putting on a new extension to fit in with the requirements of the outdoor smoking area, some hotels have lost revenue and have had to spend money to fit in with these conditions.
I am not complaining. I must admit I like our pubs without the smoking. It is much better and people are coming to accept it, but there are still some issues. There are issues of what you can eat in outdoor smoking areas. It is interesting because - I will try to put it nicely - I was hauled up before the ladies involved in, I believe it was the Northern Territory Tobacco Summit Steering Committee, and they were not happy with my idea that one should be able to eat in an outdoor smoking area where you are also allowed to drink. The argument I, and other people had, is if you are going to allow people to drink, you should allow them to eat because it is good policy to ensure people do not get drunk ...
Mr Chandler: It worked for me.
Mr WOOD: You have been in the outdoor area there often, member for Brennan, I can see that.
The argument from the committee was it should not happen at all and it does not happen in Queensland. In this case - I suppose you could call it compromise - you can have a pie, as long as it is in a plastic bag, and you can have a sandwich as long as it is marked with the right details by someone who makes sandwiches. That is fine but, in reality, it is not very practical. If I go to the bar in the pub, I am not going to get food served to me but, if ask them for a takeaway which they put in a polystyrene container, what difference is there in getting a meal in a takeaway pack to getting a pie in a sealed plastic bag, or some sandwiches? I am not sure too many people who drink beer and smoke cigarettes are really worried about salad sandwiches - they are watching the television to see who won the fourth race at Eagle Farm – but they should be entitled to more than just a pie. Are we encouraging healthy meals - a pie, a packet of chips? I am not sure.
I suppose this is a compromise between people who said: ‘No eating at all’, and people like me who said: You can have a meal’. It is something we can argue about. I must admit, I would hate to see someone prosecuted for eating a takeaway from Hungry Jacks in the pub down the road. Anyway, we will see what happens.
There are other areas of concern. One is exemption for high rollers at the casino. If I was to take the moral high ground, I could say: if you are wealthy, we make an exemption. The human beings in the casino are not as important, when it comes to a healthy lifestyle and no smoking, as the people in my pub. That is the message you are sending out: if you have the money, you can be exempted. I know there are exemptions for other places, which is probably practical, such as the V8s and places like that where it would be impractical to have a total smoke ban. But why should high rollers be exempted? Why should the casino have an exemption when it is not allowed in gaming areas in pubs? I do not believe there should be an exemption, and I do not believe the pubs will be happy about that. I believe high rollers should not be exempted.
In this section dealing with obtaining a certificate for outdoor smoking areas, I believe it is good that the government has funded an industry-based liaison officer for 18 months. That is a very good move, considering some of the argy-bargy going on for the last couple of years. The relationship between the government and the industry has been a bit touchy, and I believe the government funding a liaison officer to help with these changes is an excellent move.
I do not have a problem with disclosure at points of sale. It would be good if you can get the cigarettes away from behind the cash registers. It is my understanding that is where they normally have to be under existing legislation, but you still see them. You can see the packs, and the tobacco industry certainly knows the way, even in small spaces, of making their product look good.
I had an e-mail from a tobacco company this week and they were trying to convince me about the evil intent of this legislation although, I felt that that was not their great concern. Their concern is, under this legislation, they have very little way of promoting their product against another product. In other words, when it is put on the shelf, if you have the right connections, my product can be up here, and the competition’s product pushed down there. What is happening now is the product will hardly be seen. I understand there will be plain packs for all cigarettes so it will be very difficult to tell the difference between ‘Lungreach’ as I call it, and Holiday. That was their complaint, but I think it was more: ‘We are still in the business and we want a fair share of the market’. That is fair enough; they are still a legal business.
That is what concerns me - the fact that tobacco is still legal. How can tobacco companies actually compete against one another? Even though they are hidden, there will still be a sign to say what is for sale and the price.
As in the briefing papers here, I went to Coles on Mitchell Street, because in my briefing notes it says Coles have already put their cigarettes away. They have not quite put them behind the counter. You can actually see them but they are much lower down, about chest height, and they go right down to the floor now. That is a question I might ask in the committee stage. The writing on them is very tiny and you need a pair of binoculars to read it. I gather most of that is going to go anyway, but out the front is a list of all the cigarettes they sell, with the price per packet and the price per carton, and that is basically it. The only thing, in my reading of our legislation, is you are not supposed to see them at all. In this case, you can see them, although you would have to walk right up to the counter.
I asked the lady behind the counter if the changes have had any effect. It was good to talk to her because she knows about the changes, and this is obviously a national program by Coles to not display cigarettes. She said sales only dropped off for the first few days. The industry is saying if you put them behind the counter, you will create an illegal market, etcetera. But, from what that lady said, who deals with it, no, once people know the cigarettes are still there and still available, they do not have a problem. Smokers know where their smokes are.
Mr Chandler: Is it effective legislation?
Mr WOOD: So the question is, as the member for Brennan says, is it effective legislation? That is similar to what the Imperial Tobacco Company said to me when that was my argument. They said: ‘This has been shown not to work in Canada and Iceland’. Well, that was great.
But I do not regard this legislation as legislation you can judge on its own. It is part of a long-term package and if taken purely as a single piece of legislation not connected to any other activity that occurs, it may not have a huge effect. Overall, I believe it is part of a good campaign which does not say you cannot have cigarettes; it just does not promote them. I believe that is the key behind what we are trying to do. It does not say it is a good thing; it does not advertise ‘Holiday’ or ‘Longbeach’. I have always wanted to change that big notice board out at Holtze that used to have ‘Longbeach’ on it. If you changed it just a little you have ‘Lungreach’, and I thought that is more appropriate for a packet of cigarettes.
The idea is to stop promoting them, but you also have to balance that and that is why I had an argument with the ladies on the committee. You also have to be realistic; there are people who still smoke. We do not want them to smoke but they are doing something legal, they are citizens and they are entitled to smoke if they want to smoke - so give them a place to smoke – do not punish them anymore. We are not promoting it, but when they said you could not eat, I thought: come on, give me a break. They are still human beings; they are still people. I might not like them smoking but I am not going to starve them. We have to ensure when we are talking about this legislation that we are realistic. It is not difficult to hide cigarettes and make it harder for people to see them, that is fine, but when you are dealing with smokers, they are still human beings; you do not want them to smoke, but you still treat them as decent folk.
The other issue in relation to licensing tobacco retailers is the fee. I am not sure if it is correct, but the Imperial Tobacco people told me we are the only place that applies this fee. The minister says no, and that is fair enough, but that was the information they gave me. What worries me is it costs money to administer a fee, so although the government says it is going to return the figure, it is $200 per tobacco licence and there are 825 tobacco retailers, so that should generate $165 000. I hope that would not get eaten up in administration because the theory is this contributes to the provision of services to support smokers to quit smoking.
I will be interested to see that it does not go into internal revenue and disappear into the murky waters of the budget, but show it is doing something. Maybe we could use it to encourage people to get on to patches or other alternatives. If people say they want to go on patches maybe you could say: ‘If you sign up here, you can have them at a cheaper price’, or something like that. Use that money and show it is directly working to help people to stop smoking.
I support the amendments. As I said, I still have some concerns but, overall, the legislation does bring us in line with other states. I know there is always the Territory lifestyle issue and we cannot stop people smoking. What we are trying to do is not promote it. I hope we do not try to punish people who smoke. That is the feeling I got to some extent when talking to the committee; that people would become pariahs. I do not believe that is the way to go. When you are talking about adults, you do it sensibly and logically.
The last thing I would like to say, and it is something I mentioned at the briefing, for which I thank the minister, when you open up this book, Northern Territory Tobacco Action Plan, it says under your foreword, minister:
- Each year one in five deaths in the Northern Territory is the result of a smoking related illness, and tobacco is the single greatest contributor to the unacceptable difference in life expectancy between non-Indigenous and Indigenous Territorians.
That is fine, minister, but if we do not do something similar with an alcohol action plan and make a similar effort, then we are being discriminatory. Alcohol has many more social effects than tobacco. It also has health implications, yet, do we stop advertising alcohol? Do we stop advertising alcohol at sporting facilities? No. Do we produce an alcohol action plan? Are you planning to do it? Do we say drunkenness is not a good lifestyle? No, we talk about binge drinking, but do we talk about the other problems we should have concerns about regarding alcohol?
Alcohol is just as big a problem. Alcohol is the main reason most people, especially Indigenous people, are in prison. They might not have died; however, they are costing $160 a day in prison. There are other costs incurred by the abuse of alcohol, and we need to do just as much work, or more, than we have with tobacco.
I have always felt, to some extent, we picked on the industry which could not kick as much. You touch the alcohol industry, and you see the kicking. Look at the noise when the Police Commissioner said we were going to sell light beer at Marrara – Boom! That is what it is like - it is a very powerful industry. Many of our sporting facilities and groups depend on them, but that does not mean we should not say alcohol causes problems. It is a legal drug enjoyed by many people and it needs to be used in a moderate and mature manner.
Minister, I welcome what is before us today. I welcome the package. I also say if the government is serious about health it has to come up with a strategy as forceful as the tobacco legislation.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, my understanding is we are not going to committee, and I would like to answer as many questions as possible in my final speech.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that alcohol is as big a problem as cigarettes. The reality is if you smoke and drive it is not as dangerous as people drink-driving, and we are likely to see more people drink-driving than smoking. I agree it is a legal product but, as Minister for Health there is one area in my department I would not like to see last forever, and that is the oncology centre, because many people have cancer because of smoking. I will never forget looking at a person who had a tracheotomy and he lifted the flap up and was smoking through the hole in his larynx -I will never forget it.
Most of us smoked when we were young. In my culture when you smoked you became a man. I was 16-years old when I tried my first cigarette. At the time I enjoyed going out with my friends and smoking. I gave up when I was 21 because I realised it was a waste of time, a waste of money, and a waste of my health. I always bought Colts because they lasted longer, but the aftermath of the Colts was dreadful, and the cough was even worse.
Nicotine is highly addictive, and many people cannot give up. I know many people who have given up about 25 times in 10 years. It is very difficult to give up - but some people make the effort.
The other thing which does not help is advertising. If you want to see what the companies do, I suggest you watch the film Thank You for Smoking. It is very interesting to see what tricks the companies have been using to attract you to smoking. Remember the exotic visions? We all remember the Marlboro Man riding down the plains on his horse and stopping to light a cigarette. I wonder which company would be brave enough to show us the last days of the Marlboro Man’s life - he died from lung cancer.
It is a dreadful product. As my colleague, the member for Johnston said, if it was introduced for sale today it would not never be approved. It is a high cost to Australians - to Territorians. Some people will say we are killing the Territory lifestyle; no, we are saving Territorians’ lives by introducing it.
There are two elements in this. For people who smoke you can argue it is their choice, but people who go to work in a place where other people smoke, go there for employment, and no one has the right to jeopardise the health of other people. We have seen in the past people get sick, and what it takes for the industry to take some action is the fact these people took them to court and, all of a sudden, multimillion dollar compensation claims were launched, and people had to pay.
Instead of treating the problem, it is better to prevent it. These amendments today do exactly that - not only protect the workers in the entertainment industry, in the clubs and pubs and other places, but also gives the opportunity to people who want to give up smoking to be in a non-smoking environment; gives the opportunity for people who want to enjoy a meal without the smell of cigarettes hanging around them to do so; and, at the same time, gives the opportunity to people who want to smoke to have a place where they can smoke and drink their beer.
Of course, if it had been left to the industry, the industry would say: ‘Here is the non-smoking area - tables, places where we serve dinner; and this is the smoking area with a band and gaming facilities’ - and everything to try to make it more attractive. We are trying to make smoking unattractive, and I do not apologise for it. We have to make it unattractive, to take people out of that area and give them an opportunity to break the habit.
Many people tell me they have given up smoking, but they have started smoking again when they go out and their mates light up cigarettes and the smell of the tobacco hits their nose and, all of a sudden, they are hooked again. Some of my colleagues have said exactly the same; they light one cigarette, and the one becomes two, and the two becomes five and, then, a packet a day. We have to give them the opportunity and help them escape.
We have also given the opportunity to the industry to adjust. We have given them until 1 January next year to come up with modifications. Should they be unable to meet the modifications and the timetable, and they provide us with evidence why they cannot do it, there is another nine months until September 2010 to achieve it, which is very generous and very fair.
It is not true there are no annual licence fees in other jurisdictions. Western Australia, the ACT, South Australia, and Tasmania have an annual tobacco retail licence ranging from $185 to $215 a year. Ours is $200, and that money will generate about $165 000 per year, which will go back into the campaign. I like the suggestion from the member for Greatorex that we actually direct this money to something people can actually see, such as subsidising nicotine patches, or something like that. I will ask the department to model this to see how far this money can go, and if we can provide just the beginning of the treatment for tobacco - chewing gum or nicotine patches. However, I have seen people who have decided to give up smoking use a nicotine patch, then go out on the balcony and take it off; light a cigarette, then put it back on again. It is a terrible, terrible drug. So, money from the licensing program will go back.
What is really pleasing is to find out Coles New World has decided to take all the cigarettes from the front counter and put them behind the counter, and with the new legislation, they will not be able to display them at all. In other jurisdictions, they have become really tough and are banning specialist tobacconists from exhibiting cigarettes and tobacco, which is fair enough. Most of the specialist tobacconists now have diversified so much you can buy flasks, wallets, and all types of things and, incidentally, you can buy cigarettes. So they are not relying heavily on cigarettes to actually survive. Also, two of the large tobacco companies have agreed to work with my department, which is really pleasing, in order to modify and transfer from the current situation to the situation next year when they will not be able to display their products.
We have been very active. I have to say the department has prosecuted someone for selling cigarettes illegally to underage people. I congratulate them for that, and they will continue to do so. That underage kid could be my son, or your son - someone’s child. Do not start him because, if he continues, he is another statistic, unfortunately, thanks to cigarettes.
I heard the member for Johnston speaking analytically about the bill, and the member for Nelson also, so I will not go back and repeat the same things. It took so long to reach this stage today where we have a bipartisan approach and agreement to what we are going to do: we are going to ban tobacco and assist people to break away from tobacco, and I do not want to delay it anymore. Enough Dirty Ashtrays - the Territory has come of age. The Territory has decided this is the time to do it; we can do it, and we owe it to Territorians.
Our target now should turn to Indigenous Territorians who, unfortunately, smoke too much, five times more than the other Territorians in the cities, and many Indigenous Territorians start to smoke very early. We have to develop a campaign they understand, a campaign in language, a campaign to show Indigenous Territorians the damage they do to themselves and to their families and to their children, to try to get them away from it.
There is a very vicious plot by the tobacco companies; they know very well in western society smoking is now not trendy, so they start targeting the Third World countries. If you go to places like Africa or China, I have never seen so many people smoking in the streets and in the restaurants as I have seen in China. I would walk into a restaurant to have dinner, and people would sit at the next table and would light a cigarette, and every table would have an ashtray. I like Chinese food, it tastes terrific, but I cannot smell anything because of the smoke from tobacco. I do not mind people smoking, but, hey, not next to me while I am eating. This is one thing, besides them smoking, that really turns me off.
I mentioned before about the cost. We understand there is going to be a cost, and some people say there will be a decline in earnings. The indications we have from other states is, initially, there is a decline in earnings because people do not go to the pokies, and do not go to the pubs, but eventually people will go back. Why? Because their mates are there; they are not going to stay home by themselves and smoke. The attraction of entertainment outside of home is so great that people will go, even if they cannot smoke; they will walk out and smoke in another area and then go back in.
I remember a few years ago, I met a Malaysian person and when we asked him his impression of Darwin he said: ‘A very nice place, but too many prostitutes’. I said: ‘What are you talking about?’ He said: ‘All those women smoking outside’. So I had to explain that they could not smoke in the workplace anymore, so everyone was coming outside to have a cigarette. It was not what he thought it was; it was actually an effect of our banning cigarette smoking. He was very embarrassed because he had misunderstood the situation, but there can be no misunderstanding when we apply the legislation.
I thank the member for Nelson and the member for Greatorex for coming to a briefing and I hope the briefing eliminated the misinformation. This bill does not promote bad eating habits. I do not think a pie is bad nutritionally, especially if you do not eat them every day. We have a range of pies today, and some are so expensive it is like buying a meal at a restaurant. I have never seen some of the pies you buy at Woolworths or other supermarkets - different types from grain-fed animals from King Island from Tasmania. I mean, we are talking about gourmet pies, luxury pies, and venison pies. I do not think they could be declared junk food; I would say they are very nice luxury food. Again, it depends what you consider to be a snack. For you, a pie is a snack. For me, on Saturday morning, it is a meal, especially if I sit down and have a beer with it.
It is actually a choice people make; what is important is we give people a choice. People can have a meal without cigarette smoke, theirs or others, or they have the choice to go to a place physically separated by a non-smoking area, where they can sit down and have a cigarette, and a pie and have a beer. I think it is about choice.
Madam Speaker, as I said before, the Territory has come of age. It is very important we have a bipartisan approach on this issue because it affects everyone: it affects members of our family, it affects our friends. It is fantastic that we now have this situation in the Territory and, hopefully, we will not see anymore Dirty Ashtrays.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, Madam Chair. Minister, thank you for answering most of the questions I put before you earlier. One of the questions you did not mention is Regulation 8A on page 6. This is in relation to the casino licence. The concern I have is the reasoning behind the casino being able to declare an area as a high roller room and this room may be exempt from no smoking indoors conditions. Why are they allowed to have that condition and other gambling facilities not allowed to have that exemption?
Mr VATSKALIS: This is not unique to the Territory; it happens throughout Australia. As a matter of fact, the Licensing minister had a look at it before she advised me about the situation, and it is because of market forces. Many people using these gaming rooms are not walking in off the street but are there by invitation, and they are usually high rollers. These people come mainly from interstate and overseas where smoking is allowed in these areas. So, it is not unique to the Territory; it is common around Australia. There are exemptions in all states and territories around Australia because the market forces specifically request they be able to smoke in high roller rooms.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister, but regarding market forces, if I own a tavern, or I own the Casuarina Club, could I not say that market forces are also important for me, not just for the casino?
Mr VATSKALIS: The difference is in a pub or the general area of a casino, the number of people exposed to tobacco smoke is significantly larger than in the high roller’s room. The high roller’s room might have one, or two, or three people who smoke themselves and only expose themselves to smoking. It is not like you have 100, 200, 300 or 400 people as you have in other rooms at the casino or in pubs and clubs.
Mr WOOD: Minister, in your action plan you mentioned concerns about passive smoking. How does that sit with the staff who work in the high roller facility at the casino?
Mr VATSKALIS: The casino has to implement special measures to protect these people from passive smoking such as not being exposed for a significant period of time, and rotating regularly. Also, this does not happen every hour of every day. These people are flying in specifically for a particular period of time before they fly out. It is not a continuous event like SKYCITY starting at 7 am and going until 12 noon continuously.
Mr WOOD: Could I just go a little deeper on that? It says on page 7 of your action plan that:
- Passive smoking also has risks. Evidence now shows the exposure to second-hand smoke can lead to serious harm, such as lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. Passive smoking can also increase the risk of asthma onset in children and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.
How then do you protect staff who work in the high roller’s area when we have already said we need to protect staff in the local pub who are not allowed to serve meals in the outdoor smoking area? What actual preventative methods are you putting in place to protect the staff who work in the high roller area?
Mr VATSKALIS: The exposure of staff to passive smoking, because of the special conditions and plans the casino has put in place, is not long-term and cannot be long-term. In addition, casinos have to operate separate and different quality air-conditioners from the rest of the building in order to cope with the smoke and the smell in the high roller area. This is part of the plan the casino has put in place.
Mr WOOD: I will not continue in that area but I repeat: I believe casinos should not be exempt because small business is as important, when it comes to marketplace, as big business.
Section 20, Display of tobacco products, the clause says:
- (1) The occupier of premises in, on or from which tobacco products are sold must ensure the products cannot be seen from inside or outside the premises.
I looked at the display unit in Coles and it is obvious they have put some money into making a display unit which accords to some national guidelines. My notes are that Coles has done this as part of its national compliance program. Has Coles checked with you before installing those display cabinets to see if they fit the requirements of this new amendment?
Mr VATSKALIS: Coles does not have to comply yet; it has to comply by 1 January 2011. However, we have provided all retailers with information about how to display. We have made clear here - and I am happy to table this - to show people how to display or not display products, and how to stop their products being displayed openly to people. I would like to be clear; this is a document from Victoria which we will use to show people what to do.
Mr WOOD: Are our requirements part of a national compliance program? Is there such a thing?
Mr VATSKALIS: These are our requirements.
Mr WOOD: Do they match up with any other state, or is it something we thought up ourselves?
Mr VATSKALIS: They are probably slightly tougher than other states because we say they must be completely out of sight. Victoria is very similar to ours. We are not going to reinvent the wheel. If something works in other states, why would we not copy it if it is so effective?
Mr WOOD: If we have a retailer in the Northern Territory who has spent money on doing the right thing - maybe for a big company like Wesfarmers the money is not the end of the world - but it would be sad if they have set up cabinets obviously with legislation in mind and according to some national compliance program, and when this comes into being it does not fit. Would they be required to knock those cabinets down, or could they get an exemption if it was close enough to what you wanted?
Mr VATSKALIS: Coles is the only supermarket chain that has already done it. It has been inspected by the department and fully complies with our requirements. The others have not started yet but they have been working very closely with my department in order to comply with the requirements.
Mr WOOD: You said it fully complies. I can see it when I walk up to the counter so how does it fit within the definition that products cannot be seen from inside or outside the premises? Further down the bill it talks about:
- the display of tobacco products which can only be seen by the occupier of the premises or someone acting for the occupier of the premises;
That was the first thing that came to my mind when I visited Coles - I could see them. I know they are all going to have a similar pack, but you can see them. My concern is whether it fits within the legislation. If you are saying it does, it does not seem to match what is written here.
Mr VATSKALIS: I have been advised one of the windows to cover the top of this display will be modified to completely seal the products, so you will not be able to see them.
Mr WOOD: I must admit I do have a laugh when you talk about specialist tobacconists can sell other products - we are trying to get rid of cigarettes, but we can still sell bongs. I am wondering whether they might be part of some restrictions too, minister? Maybe I will leave that question for another day. I thank you for those answers, anyway.
The only other one - I have mentioned about pies being a healthy food. Well, some of this weight is caused by pies; I like pies too. There are various types and quality of pies but my feeling is there is some discrimination there. I cannot see why a person who is smoking at the pub, who is having a drink at the pub, cannot serve themselves with a takeaway meal, or bring in a Hungry Jack’s if that is their cup of tea, or bring a meal into that area, as long as they are not being served by staff.
One of the matters raised was that someone has to clean up the mess and has to enter that area. I say someone has to clean up the mess anyway, because if you are drinking, staff are going to collect the glasses. This is an area where I would have liked to see more leniency.
Mr VATSKALIS: Member for Nelson, first of all, Hungry Jacks is not a packaged food. It is takeaway. The way it is produced, it is not considered to be pre-packaged food. It does not comply with label requirements and everything else. Please do not start …
Mr WOOD: No, that is all right.
Mr VATSKALIS: As I said before, what we are trying to do is encourage people to give up. People make choices. If I eat chips while my mate has steak and kidney pie, or parmigiana, I am stuck there like a shag on a rock. I have to make my choice.
I know that there is the argument: ‘But where do we stop?’ The other thing is, if a person uses a plate someone, as you said, has to clean it up. I do not think the pubs would be very keen on closing that area for an hour or half-an-hour every three hours for someone to clean it up. The easy way out is, if you want to have a smoke you can have a pre-packaged pie, pre-packaged sandwiches, chips - something easy which is a quality snack rather than fast food.
Mr WOOD: As I said, if you are allowed to drink, and this is the difference we have with Queensland - you cannot only smoke, you can drink, and someone has to pick up the glasses, so the argument about staff having to pick up food containers - they still have to come up and pick up the glasses. So, I just make the point.
I know what you are saying, and the argument from those ladies from the committee who saw me was it must discourage people as much as possible. The point is we have done a great deal; we have shifted smokers. A few months ago they were at the bar. We have now shifted them out to the back corner. If that does not make them feel like pariahs, I do not know what will. I do not know whether we really have to kick them too hard while they are down. All I am saying is that they cannot have a decent meal. Lack of promotion, lack of advertising, and moving people out there somewhere certainly sends the message. But, as I said, they are still human beings. They are still friends of mine. If they have a smoking problem, I do not think we should restrict them too much on what they eat. That is all I have to say, Madam Chair.
Bill agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Paper – Council of Territory Cooperation - Second Report
Note Paper – Council of Territory Cooperation - Second Report
Continued from 9 June 2010.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I will continue from where I left off yesterday prior to the lunch recess. I was speaking about the Auditor-General’s report into SIHIP and the relationship this report will have and brings to bear upon the deliberation of the Council of Territory Cooperation.
- During the audit that is the subject of this report, it was found that there were and …
Importantly, Madam Speaker.
- … continue to be insufficient systems, processes, associated guidelines, and procedure manuals to assist management and the Joint Steering Committee to perform their responsibilities in relation to the capturing, storing, monitoring, management and reporting of the progress of SIHIP.
That is the End of Year Review 2009, some five or six months ago, and the situation has not got any better. The End of Year 2009 Review continues:
- The End of Year Review of the department also identified several breaches of process and a lack of supporting documentation in the respect of costs being claimed.
A lack of supporting documentation in respect to costs being claimed. The issues raised with the department included:
- Progress payment claims did not have a statutory declaration for each progress claim made by the alliance partners in respect to SIHIP as required by the Alliance Participation Agreement and the Construction Contracts (Security of Payments) Act. In addition, payments were made to the Alliance Partners without receiving the appropriate/sufficient documentation, resulting in non-compliance with the Alliance Participation Agreement, and the Construction Contracts (Security of Payments) Act.
This is singularly one of the important issues arising out of this report. It goes directly to the heart of the capacity of the department of Local Government and, by extension, the minister, to manage the financial operations of SIHIP.
There are a number of other points underneath that. Discrepancies we know of in the financials audit and review process, the cost control of positions had not been formally established to review and validate progress payments; appropriate performance and monitoring reports were unavailable in order to gauge the progress of SIHIP; corporate governance issues in relation to SIHIP needed to be addressed; the Alliance Management Plan did not appear to exist resulting in non-compliance with the SIHIP agreement, and it goes on.
Again, it comes back to the total lack of control that the minister, during 2009 and prior to that, and his department, and his government, had with respect to SIHIP. That is why we are seeing SIHIP becoming singularly the most monumental failure to deliver a program - any program - whatsoever with respect to Aboriginal people.
I will turn quickly to the conclusions of this report. It says, and quote in part:
- It seems clear, with hindsight, that the original timetable for the program posed a significant challenge and it is possible that the issues involved in establishing a development and construction program of the size that was necessary to achieve the SIHIP objectives may not have been appreciated fully at the time the program was instigated.
That simply goes to incompetence. It goes on:
- The initial timetable that was set for the project resulted in key management control and governance issues being neglected in the early stages of the program ...
That is quite clear from the other parts of this report I have read into Hansard, and I can also add that the key management control and governance issues still need to be addressed:
- The absence of a proper management control system left the Joint Steering Committee, and others, in a position where they were unable to exert full control over the program, and lacking the information that would have permitted timely, corrective action to be taken.
The report goes on:
- … financing constraints may present an impediment to achieving the SIHIP objectives.
In other words, both the Northern Territory government and the federal government got it wrong:
- The significant increases in the estimated costs of constructing new houses and the estimated costs of refurbishments when compared with the original estimates that formed a basis for determining amounts committed by the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments pose a risk. Without an increase in financial commitments by both governments funds provided under the National Partnerships Agreement will need to be diverted from other purposes to meet the costs of essential infrastructure.
That simply goes back to the incompetence of both the Northern Territory and federal governments in implementing SIHIP. They started with incorrect premises and the problems just compounded themselves on top of that.
I shall not delay with the report any further. My colleagues canvassed this for some time in parliament yesterday but, simply put, this review by the Auditor-General opens up a whole new line of inquiries for the Council of Territory Cooperation which I know we will attempt to pursue with a great fervour. SIHIP as a program cannot go unchallenged and we must get to the bottom of where the rot started. This report details some of that, but there is certainly more information that needs to be gathered and clearly not all the information about SIHIP was made available to the Auditor-General, and those are the types of issues we will need to canvass.
I will wind up there as I am almost out of time. In general terms, I feel the committee is on fairly positive ground. We seem to be moving forward on many issues and I am looking forward to spending time with my committee colleagues investigating particularly SIHIP. Notwithstanding the debacle with the shires, SIHIP probably now ranks as the single most important issue that needs to be canvassed by the committee. Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I very much look forward to working on that.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak on the second report of the Council of Territory Cooperation as was tabled in this House on the last day of the sittings in May.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! My understanding is the member for Nhulunbuy has already spoken on this.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, she has not.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I stand corrected.
Ms WALKER: As I am a new member to the Council of Territory Cooperation, having taken up the position vacated by the member for Fannie Bay in March. I attended my first meeting on Thursday, 25 March, and the contents of this second report have been compiled from public hearings and evidence provided by many witnesses, as well as information gathered from briefings and meetings during January, February and March, none of which I was present.
For me, personally, this represents an opportunity to step outside my electorate and examine how government policies and programs are unfolding in other parts of the Territory. This opportunity is there for all members of the CTC. I have heard much of what happens in other members’ electorates, from both sides of the House, and also through the print and electronic media. I might be so bold as to say these channels are not always reliable sources of information in terms of accuracy and the certain bias.
The other important channel through which I have heard about what is going on in other parts of the Territory has been through the Council of Territory Cooperation’s first report tabled in February, and this second report.
I am very fortunate to have stepped outside my electorate. Since becoming a member of CTC, I have travelled with members to Central Australia - to the electorate of Macdonnell where we had a very fruitful two-day visit; and to the communities of Alice Springs, Santa Teresa, and Ntaria or Hermannsburg. No doubt we will be talking about that more when we table the third report.
These reports have a good deal of credibility in that they contain information and findings gathered through public hearings and meetings. Many of these meetings are held in different and often remote locations around the Territory where members of the council have the opportunity to see and hear for themselves, firsthand, how government policy is travelling and how well it is or, in some cases is not, delivering programs. It is not only a chance to get out and kick the tyres, but to be at the coalface and talk to members of the public, residents, public servants, non-government organisations, and anyone else who chooses to attend and provide evidence at these public hearings.
I am fortunate as a backbencher and relatively new member to this parliament, to participate and, I hope, to contribute positively to the Council of Territory Cooperation. Possibly members of the opposition are considering rotating their members through the council. I am not sure if they, like us, have juggled workloads and interests, but I could recommend to the Leader of the Opposition he might want to consider other members within his party who may wish to take up a position and learn from the experience it provides. Not only to learn, but contribute to addressing some of the important issues in the Northern Territory.
The member for Nelson, as chair of the CTC, was very genuine when he said in his foreword to the very first CTC report tabled in February:
- I am sure this will help us all be better educated members of parliament leading to more informed debate and hopefully more effective solutions to some of the major issues that we presently face in the Territory.
I hope to be part of that education, and while I understand a good deal of what I will be involved in as a member of CTC is finding out and identifying the problems, I genuinely believe the CTC will play a pivotal role in finding solutions at a time when we see unprecedented activity and expenditure in the Northern Territory.
The member for Katherine, whilst he and the other opposition member, the member for Port Darwin, possess a certain degree of cynicism about the value of the Council of Territory Cooperation, I believe they are beginning to recognise the value. The member for Katherine said in response to the first report when it was tabled in February:
- We are certainly learning a lot. We have access to people we would not ordinarily have access to. We have been to places it is not common to visit.
That is a very positive thing for opposition members as well as the rest of the CTC.
It is unfortunate the member for Macdonnell sees very limited value in the Council of Territory Cooperation as indicated by her non-attendance at many meetings and visits. She has been to some, but since I have become a member in March, she has not been to one of them. I know she feels very passionately about SIHIP in particular, and I know that had everything to do with her decision to depart the government last year, which is most unfortunate. As members of parliament we all want to participate, contribute, and work to see things through, see programs delivered. So, it is disappointing she has the opportunity to be part of a council where we can effect change, where we have unique access to sites and to people to gather information, produce these reports, and put recommendations to government. It is a shame the member for Macdonnell, for whatever reason, chooses often not to so participate in the CTC - even when we were in her own electorate in Central Australia in May, and I am sure she has her reasons why she could not be there, but it was very unfortunate.
I take heed of some of the remarks made by my colleague, the minister for Housing, the other day in reference to the member for Braitling being able to throw out photographs and throw out what is wrong with everything. As the minister for Housing said, the hard part is when it comes to actually doing something. It is about working hard to try to make that change and I know so many members of this parliament are committed to that.
Of course, I had the advantage of joining the CTC after its initial start-up, there being no other council like this in any other Australian jurisdiction. It is, of course, all new territory - if you will pardon the pun. A good deal of hard work went into the first few months to work out the logistics and the forward planning, together with the staffing and resourcing. The hard work of the Secretariat certainly continues. As I said, there has also been the challenge of trying to bring the opposition members along for what they regard as a somewhat cynical exercise, which was certainly evidenced by the first report with a 22-page dissenting report tabled by the Country Liberal Party members.
I take some heart the second report has been agreed to by all members of the CTC and there is no dissenting report. As I said, I am a newcomer to the CTC and I did join at a pivotal time. On 25 March, our new secretary, Helen Campbell, came to her first meeting. It was a very successful planning meeting; each member of the council articulated what they were looking to gain from the CTC, and what we saw as to where the CTC needed to focus. I do not think any of us see the Council of Territory Cooperation as the fixer of problems, but rather as a committee which has the ability to provide close examination and scrutiny of government policy and programs, and get out to the coalface, have public servants before us, and speak to residents firsthand to be able to deliver that information via reports and recommendations to this parliament.
Going back to that initial meeting I attended on 25 March, we also developed a time line - quite a challenging one at that - to draft the second report we are talking about now to be delivered to members. The draft was circulated within just a week and thanks must go to the members of the Secretariat, in particular, Jan Whitehead, for her efforts.
At our next meeting on 14 April, we went through the report and recommendations and, with some give and take, some robust debate and a smattering of goodwill and grudging, we reached agreement. It made the member for Nelson’s day to have a report we all agreed upon with its recommendations and no dissenting report. I am not entirely confident it will be quite as straightforward with future reports or the Country Liberals will not choose to table dissenting reports in the future; however, that is the robust nature of the council and, of course, they are quite entitled to do so.
I now return to the report itself and reaffirm the 14 recommendations have been agreed to by the CTC members. The first three recommendations pertain to the matter of the power supply failure on 23 November 2009. I was not part of the meetings or hearings in relation to this issue. The reality is consumers, be they residents or businesses, need certainty of the reliability of power supply, and government needs assurances that its assets and taxpayer dollars are returning value for money. As to whether the minister, as per Recommendation 3, attends a hearing of the CTC, I have no doubt the members for Port Darwin and Nelson will seize the opportunity during the upcoming estimates to ask questions about this matter, which is the purpose of the estimates process.
As for Recommendations 4 and 5 regarding statistics gathered by the Department of Justice and Police about domestic violence and assaults statistics, the recommendations are straightforward and logical, even if the issue around the anomalies of how information is recorded, collated, analysed and reported across the two agencies is not. Domestic violence is a terrible issue in communities across the Territory, and one which the government takes a strong stand on, including legislating for mandatory reporting last year. The more robust the data we have from across the Territory, the better positioned we are to understand and continue to address this issue, which impacts on far too many Territory families, and women in particular.
Recommendation 6, 7 and 8 pertain to the A Working Future policy, and the responsibilities of both Australian and Territory governments to progress and accommodate the needs of residents of growth towns, as well as those involved in remote service delivery such as the shires and homeland resource agencies. There needs to be better coordination between the two levels of government, especially when calling upon the new third sphere of government in the Territory, our local governments or shires and, most definitely we must ensure housing standards meet existing agreed national standards for Indigenous community housing.
On my copy of the report which I have marked with notations, I put a triple tick alongside Recommendation No 7. The over-bureaucratisation of consultation, the duplication and layering of reference groups, consultative groups, boards, or whatever they might be called, is, quite simply, unproductive, unnecessary and the source of much angst in communities. This imposition on people’s lives is not acceptable. It causes headaches, it causes worry, and it causes leadership fatigue which was reaffirmed on our recent visit to Santa Teresa, where we met mainly women from that community.
The Council of Territory Cooperation has much more work to do and more evidence to take as it continues to evolve, but frustrations around the workability of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act have come up in discussions, and I am sure this is an issue we will continue to examine as we meet with people in communities and at public hearings. I know, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, that it is a subject you are very positive about and very familiar with.
The ninth recommendation is that the Northern Territory government permit shires to development an organisation without requiring approval from government. If there is one thing I do know, the one-size-fits-all approach to regions and how different organisations operate in those regions does not always work. Shires need to have some flexibility to make decisions about their organisational structure to best meet the needs of their service delivery model.
In that same part of the report is recorded concerns about the Tiwi Shire Council and difficulties for them in finding stability, and being able to move forward with constant changes in the senior executive, starting with their CEO position. I understand the Barkly Shire is having a few problems as well. For shires, it is also issues around their accounting system, which we have heard a great deal about, and difficulties in accessing adequate funding to deliver services as well as dealing with bureaucracies of the Australian and Northern Territory governments. Apart from what I read and hear, my experiences with local government reforms to date are largely limited to my electorate and the workings of the East Arnhem Shire, which is why it is all the more interesting to be a member of CTC and go out into the Territory and, most recently, meet with the MacDonnell Shire.
I do need to point out, the East Arnhem Shire stretches across my electorate and the electorate of the member for Arnhem, where the communities of Ramingining, Gapuwiyak, Milyakburra and Groote Eylandt sit, so I cannot speak for those places but, on a positive note, the East Arnhem Shire, apart from a rocky start-up period as was the case for all the shires on 1 July 2008, has achieved good stability thus far, no doubt helped by the fact they have the same CEO, the same CFO …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: A quorum is called. Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Ms WALKER: Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as I was saying, one of the reasons for stability within the East Arnhem Shire is since start-up on 1 July 2008 they have had the same CEO, the same CFO, the same Technical Services Manager, the same Community Services Manager and the same Shire Services Manager at Yirrkala, Galiwinku and Gunyangara, and the same elected president, Mr Banambi Wunungmurra, and, bar one, the same elected council members from each of the four wards that make up the East Arnhem Shire.
They have become a cohesive group because under strong leadership and with a determination to work together they are working as a true council should. As a regular attender at their council meetings either in person or on the phone, and the same for the member for Arnhem, I have been able to witness firsthand how the group and the shire has evolved and continues to evolve.
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the last East Arnhem Shire Council meeting held in May in Jabiru because I was in Central Australia with the CTC. That was a combined meeting of the East Arnhem and the West Arnhem Shires. It is the second time they have combined, and given their boundaries border one another and their clans cross over, it makes sense for shires to be working together to learn from what the other is doing. Whilst I could not get to that meeting in Jabiru, I know the member for Katherine was able to attend in his capacity as the shadow for Local Government, and I know council members appreciated his attendance and his interest.
It is very clear that shires are frustrated. They are frustrated with the Australian government, they are frustrated with Northern Territory government, and their funding arrangement responsibilities. The fact is they have inherited debt from the former community government councils, not all of them, but most of them; they have inherited old and unworkable equipment and assets; they have inherited decades of neglect, and acceptance of a workplace culture in some communities where it is regarded as okay not to be at work but still be paid as an employee.
They have frustrations around the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and working with the land councils as highlighted by the fact we have roads in dire need of repair and yet the whole process is complicated by the fact they are on Aboriginal Land Trust land. These findings emerged in the first report of the Council of Territory Corporation.
I do not want to go on about shires but rather look forward to members and the secretariat of CTC making a visit to Northeast Arnhem Land, noting that CTC has already visited Groote Eylandt and its three main communities in March. I hope they come to north-east Arnhem Land to Galiwinku on Elcho Island, to Nhulunbuy to Yirrkala, to Laynhapuy Homelands and Gunyangara or Ski Beach. I hope they get there on the ground and see for themselves how government policy and programs in areas like the shire of north East Arnhem Land are travelling.
The remaining recommendations of the second CTC report, recommendations 10 to 14, address aspects of SIHIP, and I agree with each one of them. These recommendations build on the recommendations of the first report tabled in February and ...
Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I seek an extension of time to allow the member to complete her speech, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker and thank you to my colleague, the member for Stuart.
These recommendations build on the recommendations of the first report tabled in February. Of the 21 recommendations in that report, half of them are regarding SIHIP. I appreciate this is the single, biggest, Indigenous housing project ever undertaken in the Territory trying to address decades of neglect in remote communities, and it will deliver all the promises over the life of the program. Working under the alliance contracting model clearly has had its challenges and drawbacks and, whilst I will not speak directly to the Auditor-General’s report tabled in the House this week, clearly the Auditor-General’s report recognised some of the issues the program has had, but recognises it is getting back on track and we are working towards this program being delivered.
One of the things the CTC offers which this parliament does not is the level of theatrics, grandstanding, chest thumping, and people out to grab headlines without any real substance. Members of the opposition, who want to knock the CTC, may pay heed to the CTC and what it can achieve.
In my own electorate, where Galiwinku and Yirrkala are part of the program, Galiwinku in particular has a substantial package including 19 new houses. I have had assurances Territory Alliance will have capacity to deliver on schedule even though they have now taken on the packages previously undertaken by Earth Connect. I welcome my colleagues of the CTC visiting the East Arnhem region and seeing and hearing for themselves how SIHIP is being delivered, and what the barriers are, or have been, in delivery to that community, including the delays caused by protracted negotiations around land use agreements.
I look forward to being part of the ongoing deliberations of the Council of Territory Cooperation and having the opportunity to travel to other parts of the Territory and electorates of other members to meet and talk with Territorians and learning, firsthand, not only what the issues are, but what the positives are. I know the member for Nelson is very focused on looking for those positives, and I know my colleague, the member for Arafura, is always looking for positives, and they are certainly are out there.
The member for Nelson, the member for Arafura and I take every opportunity in this House to share with members and put on the public record the many good things which happen in the bush which do not make the front page of the NT News, or any paper for that matter. I am determined to continue to promote the positives while also recognising there are areas of government policy and program delivery which need to be addressed, and see them delivered successfully for the benefit of Territorians. This government is about transparency and communication - elements which were sadly lacking under years of CLP leadership.
I believe the Council of Territory Cooperation has a strong and positive role to play in that area, and I look forward to contributing and being a part of it. Like the member for Nelson said when presenting the first report:
- I got into politics because I thought I could do some good.
Surely there would not be a member in this House who could disagree with that sentiment.
Madam Speaker, I commend the report to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank all speakers who are members of the CTC. I should note the member for Fannie Bay was a member of the CTC for a period, and his job was taken over by the member for Nhulunbuy.
I will not repeat what I said when I spoke to the second report; many of those issues have been raised in previous debates in parliament. In summary, I believe we are moving ahead. It is not an easy process because the concept of the CTC is a new one of trying to bring a different approach to parliament to bring all sides together for a common goal.
In the second report issues were raised about Power and Water, which highlights one of the significant differences between some other committees and this committee - its self-referral powers enabled the CTC to look at issues related to electricity problems which occurred in the Darwin region late last year. Through self-referral, the CTC was also able to look at some of the statistics used by the Department of Justice and the Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency in relation to what appeared to be inconsistencies in the way certain matters were reported. There were also responses to issues in relation to local government, and SIHIP took up quite a large part of the second report.
Some may ask what the CTC actually does in the type of actions and achievements it has on the ground. The CTC, in that sense, is the same as other committees in putting together serious recommendations to the government; and it will be up to the government to act on those recommendations. The CTC’s first report has had a response from the government and, so far, that is the response. The question is: can those actions be turned into something concrete? Again, that is the role of government. The CTC will continue to recommend changes to the government, and it will be on the government’s head if it does not accept or does not act on those recommendations it agrees to. Naturally, the government may not agree with every recommendation, and that is the right of the government when it comes to the operations of our committee system.
I remember when the Environment committee recommended we put a fence across the Cobourg Peninsula to try to stop the invasion by cane toads ...
Ms Scrymgour: I thought you had forgotten that.
Ms Lawrie: I have not.
Mr WOOD: I notice the member for Karama has a smile on her face. I thought that was a good recommendation but it was not taken up by the government at the time.
The CTC will continue to put forward recommendations to government and monitor the government’s response to those recommendations.
I heard the member for Nhulunbuy talking about Recommendation 7. I have a lot of sympathy with her in relation to Recommendation 7, which I will read:
- … the Australian and Northern Territory governments review the number of advisory boards and reference groups the governments are requiring growth towns to establish.
It has come to our attention - and we are very conscious that we could be part of that problem. It may be we have to have a different approach, perhaps a more informal approach sometimes. We may have to, as the member for Nhulunbuy said to me yesterday, fit in with the community’s requirements; that is, meetings will be held perhaps once a month in a community. So, instead of us trying to get the community to fit in with our requirements, we fit in with the community’s requirements and take pressure off those communities because they do have other work to do besides sitting down and talking endlessly. That may be something the CTC has to look at, bearing in mind it is actually one of its own recommendations.
A good aspect of the CTC is we get together, in contrast to some of the language and the debate held yesterday following the Auditor-General’s report. It is that contrast that disappoints me, to some extent; no doubt the government should be criticised; however, the Auditor-General’s report should be looked at with a certain amount of balance. There is no doubt there are issues out there which are concerning, otherwise the CTC would not have been putting out a series of recommendations in the first report and, in its second report, criticising a number of elements of SIHIP. I have publicly come out and criticised SIHIP, especially the method of funding and the quality of the houses being refurbished.
Criticism is fine, constructive criticism is even finer, and what is even finer is not getting engrossed in negativity for political purposes; you criticise but, at the same time, give positive alternatives. Issues such as SIHIP, growth towns, and the amalgamation of councils are all extremely important issues, especially to those people who live in our remote communities. I feel, from a personal perspective, regardless of my frustration at some things I see, I have to stick by it to ensure these programs actually work. We need Indigenous housing; it has run into problems, there is no doubt about it, but we have to work through it.
I note what the Auditor-General said in his conclusions about SIHIP - that he has doubts this program will be able to accomplish what it sets out to do unless more funds are made available. What appears to be happening with SIHIP is there is a goal, there is an objective, there is a timetable, and there is an amount of money to do all that. The problem is: will that be achieved? And if it is achieved, what will be the quality of those changes? I believe that is important and that is what has been missed.
This report highlights some of the facts about how this whole program started which is an issue that has been of concern to CTC. But I felt, in the end, judgment of the alliance system on which this program is run, fortunately or unfortunately, cannot be judged until the program comes to its end, and then there needs to be a proper audit of the system, which was actually decided by the Howard government in mid-2007 along with Northern Territory government public servants. I have made the point about the expertise of those public servants in making this decision, and the question I would like to ask at a later stage is why DPI was not involved in SIHIP? With a construction program as big as this you would have thought DPI would have taken control; but that did not happen. That is a question that could be put in estimates.
There have been many failings in the way it has been managed and the CTC has seen those failings, but it has been difficult to get a handle on them because of the alliance system. The Auditor-General, in his conclusions and in his report, gives quite a clear indication of why that happened: we have set up a program that had never been used in the Territory before, and it has been pushed forward for political reasons or otherwise, without the controls needed to be in place before it happened. That is what we are picking up now. We are picking up the legacy of a poor start to a program which could have been done much better.
There has been discussion in this parliament about some bad systems that have occurred, about the way expenditure has not been approved correctly, etcetera, and there is no excuse for that but, as the Auditor-General says, the systems are now coming into place. He says:
- While management control systems are still incomplete, work is well advanced towards rectifying this matter.
There has been mention of maladministration; there has even been a mention of my agreement, and my ears pricked up and I wondered whether there was another agenda in there, but maybe I am seeing something that is not the case. I say again: this document has been written by an independent person, the Auditor-General. And, as with any document, and I can give you a classic example: the Bible is often used by taking chunks out of it and quoting those chunks out of context. You can also take things out of here and on their own they can look disastrous, but taken in context of the history and what is happening, you can get a more considered opinion about SIHIP. That is where I believe the CTC does its job.
The CTC does not just look at a particular problem in one spot, it has tried to look at the issues overall. It has gone to communities; it has seen the good side as well as the bad side. Some of the houses I saw at Port Keats, at Wadeye, are excellent houses and we would not be doing our job if we just sat here and criticised everything that is happening and did not report the good things happening.
Ms Scrymgour: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD: Where is the praise for the many Indigenous people who are employed under this program? That in itself has some issues; I know there are some issues and the member for Arafura knows we have issues with Aboriginal employment on SIHIP in relation to what they will do after SIHIP finishes. But, as it is, there are large numbers of Aboriginal people being employed; should we not say that is something good? Should we not be saying that there are some houses happening and, even though it is a fact of life that the number of houses being built is pretty small compared to the target, to some extent we have to be cautious in our judgment because the target by the end of this year, I gather, is 150 new houses. Let us see whether they get to those 150 houses, because if you go out to the communities you will see the slabs have been poured, and houses are at different stages. To some extent what we are getting, we hope, is a snowballing effect and these numbers will move on. If they do not, if they are still well below this target then criticism of this program would be proper.
It is a big program done under a new concept of alliance, and I struggle with that concept. It is difficult for the CTC; it has asked a number of times for some indication of how much houses are costing. I believe, although I am not sure, that is partly due to reluctance within the alliance system, or it is the alliance system which makes that difficult to uncover. You would think that if the Commonwealth can set figures for houses and refurbishments and rebuilds, then it would be asking to see where we are in relation to those costs.
The CTC will continue to question SIHIP. It will continue to question the amalgamation of councils. It will put more emphasis on growth towns. I know it is also going to look at some matters in relation to Power and Water, and has the opportunity to look at other matters as well. Looking at some of the issues surrounding the growth towns in itself is a huge area, and it is good we have a bipartisan subcommittee made up of the member for Arafura and the member for Port Darwin who are hoping to look at issues related to the Land Rights Act. The Land Rights Act is the key to how these growth towns will be established in relation to leases, gazetting of roads, and a range of issues which have to be looked at if the government’s concept of growth towns is the normalisation of towns. They are expecting to have high schools and services you would expect in any other regional centre in Australia In those towns. It is good to see we have a bipartisan subcommittee looking at a very important part, the crux, of how these growth towns will operate.
I look positively towards the CTC. I know it has come under criticism, and I know why - I accept that, but I move on. It is good for the system of government because we are learning and there is much to learn about what happens out there in the Northern Territory. It is good for government to have a bipartisan body willing to say: these are issues you need to look at. We cannot force the government to do that; it is on the government’s own head, and if it ignores our recommendations, that is a decision of government.
We will continue to highlight the issues out there, and the reason for doing that should not be for political gain or political purposes. It should be because we, as a group of politicians in this parliament, want to bring in change, want to do the right thing by the constituents of the Northern Territory, so they, in remote areas, can achieve success in their own lives and improvements in their townships, and they can turn things around, especially in employment, health, education and lifestyle. The government always talks about lifestyle, but lifestyle in some parts of the Northern Territory is not crash hot. That is where we have a role to do our best to change things.
I hope the CTC will continue to work together. There is the opportunity for members to put in dissenting reports and that is the robustness of our democracy and the robustness of the system. People should be entitled to do so if they do not agree with others.
I thank all members of the CTC for their support and hard work because it does take up time for members. I thank very much our committee secretary, Ms Pat Hancock, and our new committee secretary, Ms Helen Campbell; our research officer, Ms Jan Whitehead; and our administrative assistants, Mrs Kay Parsons, Ms Karen Turner and Ms Kim Cowcher. I appreciate all the hard work they have done.
Motion agreed to; report noted.
TABLED PAPER
Pairing Arrangement – Members for
Arafura and Drysdale
Pairing Arrangement – Members for
Arafura and Drysdale
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have a document relating to pairs for the members for Arafura and Drysdale, for the period from 6.45 pm until the close of the evening. I table that document.
MOTION
Note Statement – Achievements in Developing and Progressing Women’s Policy in the Northern Territory
Note Statement – Achievements in Developing and Progressing Women’s Policy in the Northern Territory
Continued from 8 June 2010.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I support the Minister for Women’s Policy’s statement to the House on developing and progressing women’s policy in our Territory. Together with her ministerial colleagues from the Commonwealth, states and territories of Australia, and the New Zealand Minister’s Conference on the Status of Women, they identified four key national priorities for women: women’s economic security, women’s safety, women’s leadership, and women and social inclusion.
The Territory, in the time I have seen, has made a very strong contribution to the development of national policies as they apply to women, particularly women in our remote and regional settings.
In 2008, the then Minister for Women’s Policy, the member for Arafura, launched the NT road map for progressing issues important to women as a plan titled, Building on our Strengths: a Framework for Action for Women in the Northern Territory 2008-2012. If you want to look at areas of women’s economic security you need to go to policies which aim at greater economic security for women, including equal pay. Whilst the Territory government strongly supports these policies, I recognise, as an employer of a vast number of Territorians, we still have a way to go to ensure more women are encouraged to the most senior levels of management.
I am proud we have a female Under Treasurer. However, when I look across the chief executives and the very senior ranks of our public service, obviously, we have a long way to go in increasing the number of women in those very senior roles across government.
I know the better workplaces have in place programs and systems which include recognising flexible working hours and the needs of women, and focus on professional development and opportunities. I do not want to brag too much about Treasury, but I believe it is the better workplace in providing professional development for its employees; we have an extremely good training program, the FOIT program. Treasury not only has a female Under Treasurer, but the Deputy Under Treasurer is also a woman. Key management positions are taken up by women.
We have also effectively used the mechanisms within the EBAs to ensure we have in place conditions of employment which are attractive to women and make it a fairer playing field with flexible work arrangements, particularly for woman who have interruption to their careers when having children. That is an issue which confronts many women in our workforce, and being able to come back on flexible working arrangements – part-time, permanent part-time arrangements, and so on - is critical and essential. I ensured we inserted into the EBAs this time improvements in parental leave; originally there was a view it would be maternity leave only and I argued, successfully, it should be parental leave. Why should women be naturally burdened with extra leave to care for the new child, when there might be more men wanting to step into that role? It should be a decision made by both parents after personal consideration.
There are ways in which EBAs can be used to provide more grunt to policies by making it a fairer and more equitable workplace by increasing female participation in the workforce. We have seen the pay gap in the Territory fluctuate between 12% and 22% since 1994. It is currently sitting at 14% for ordinary time, but for total earnings the gap is closer to 9%. What does that suggest? As we know, men have the greater capacity to work longer hours than women, because women tend, more often than not, to take up the extra burden of family responsibility.
I feel and know all too well, being the most senior woman office holder as Deputy Chief Minister in our government, I, too, struggle with that work/life balance in caring for family. When you have three kids, I know how …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells, a quorum is required.
A quorum is present.
Ms LAWRIE: I recognise how real that issue for women in the workplace can be when you need to cater to the care requirements of a family, particularly when the family includes young children. Childcare centres close at 5.30 pm and, if you are not there on the knocker you have excessive payments in late fees and, obviously, you can only run your luck so far in how often you are late. The reality for women in the workforce is, particularly with young children and relying on childcare, they cannot work the longer hours often required in very senior positions. That puts the glass ceiling firmly and squarely in place when it comes to childcare.
The debate can rage forever about workplace childcare. I participated in various feasibility studies about workplace childcare systems, but I believe from a certain time it will not work because kids need to be home getting ready for dinner and bed and so on. Therefore, for those who have to work extended evening hours, work-based childcare is not going to be the solution to that problem either. Obviously, shift worker professions such as nursing, police, firefighters and so on, confront those issues in a very real way when working the night shift. Obviously, there is no childcare operating through the night hours.
These are real issues for women working longer hours to get into those important senior positions where long work is part and parcel of holding down a job with significant responsibility. Those issues are still there, and it is interesting to see the different ways in which people tackle them. I believe paying people commensurately with a significant level of pay for working those much longer hours is one way of addressing the cost of care for their children. I notice sometimes this packaging is more effective in the private sector than the public sector, maybe because we are more hamstrung at times with the flexibility of work packages we can provide for government employees.
I believe the federal government has taken an important first step in addressing a national Paid Parental Leave Scheme and what occurs in the private sector versus the public sector on the broader issue of parental leave. It is something the private sector has needed for a long time, and something which our nation has been sadly lacking for many years. I am very pleased to see the policy directions for paid parental leave happening at the federal level, and also the way we are leading through our EBA system in the Territory.
The critical importance of women’s safety cannot be overstated, particularly in the Northern Territory. We have an unacceptable level of domestic violence in the Territory, which is why we have taken some pretty strong steps in legislating for mandatory reporting of domestic violence and backing that up with resources - some $15m across a few years - into safe houses, accommodation, counselling and support, promotion and awareness, and support through a raft of different initiatives which was critically important. I congratulate my colleague, the member for Arnhem, for the work she did in leading the way in tackling domestic violence, getting down to the community level and focusing not only on community campaigns, but some very good and effective programs within the public service. The Family Violence Program is one where we are training people at community level to say no to violence. It is critical to the safety of women.
In the Department of Justice, measures are being taken to improve the way we provide support and assistance to vulnerable witnesses, such as the introduction of pre-recorded evidence. After an expert review of equipment in the Vulnerable Witness Room and the courtroom at Alice Springs Court House, the Department of Justice has upgraded the Vulnerable Witness Room, and there are now videoconferencing systems in those rooms. It sounds like small measures but, I can assure you, for the victims, they are incredibly significant measures.
Installing the up-to-the-minute videoconferencing facilities in the Alice Springs Magistrates Court No 2 is identified as a priority, and it is planned to roll out in mid-2010. It is also planned to upgrade the videoconferencing facilities in the Tennant Creek Court House. This government introduced vulnerable witness provisions in 2004. We recognised, for children and other vulnerable witnesses, the giving of evidence is often an extremely traumatic experience; and further reforms in 2007 made it easier for children and other vulnerable witnesses to give evidence in sexual and violent offender cases.
Some features of our provisions are extremely relevant to women. Women are often vulnerable witnesses and should be entitled to give their evidence in a room remote from the court room, or from behind the screen. They are entitled to have a support person with them while they give evidence, and the evidence of chief or vulnerable witnesses in sexual or serious violence offence proceedings can be given by way of a recorded statement so they do not have to tell their story over and over again, although, of course, they are cross-examined. The evidence of vulnerable witnesses, including their cross-examination, can be recorded before the trial which can alleviate the stress of waiting. This recorded evidence can then be used in further proceedings; for example, a mistrial. In other words, the vulnerable witness does not have to give evidence again. We are committed to protecting our vulnerable witnesses who, as I have said, far too often include women who, sadly, are the victims of sexual assault. I use these very stark examples to demonstrate the critical importance of safety for women.
I recognise we have a growing number of women in the police force, and I believe that is a good thing. I have been looking at ways to improve the awareness of incident operations where women are involved, and how, at the frontline level, people are responding appropriately to the victim and the victim’s needs. We have the victim support services available but often, sadly, when an incident occurs it is a legal law enforcement response that is first and foremost in people's minds. The more effective we are in understanding how to deal with women at that level, the better we will be as a society.
With regard to women’s leadership, it is good to see there has been some movement in women’s representation increasing on government boards in the Territory. Again, we have a way to go; 37% of elective representatives to local government are women - we are leading the nation, which is good to see. As a government, we target women for participation in leadership roles; for example, the Chief Minister’s study scholarship for women where we pay tribute to Northern Territory women and recognise notable recipients. We also have the International Women’s Day Grants to support local organisations to hold events. I am sure many women’s groups would want us to be doing more, and this government is open to ideas and suggestions.
Regarding women and social inclusion, it is an area where we could see a greater use of gender analysis in policy development. I believe we need to look at how all government departments undertake gender analysis. Advancing the interests of Territory women under the banner of A Working Future policy initiatives has been a key focus of our Minister for Women’s Policy, and I am pleased she has that focus in that important role to make a difference.
I am not nave enough to think we are ever going to have a society where access is equitable for women; I cannot imagine a society like that, sadly. What I can see is, as a Territory, we are open to advancing the status of women and the participation of women in our lives and in our society, whether it is in a professional way or by social inclusion. We have some very good pioneer women in our history; women who inspire women in the current era in the Territory to continue to make strides forward for the women who will follow us.
I also want to say I am incredibly impressed whenever I visit schools anywhere in the Territory, in my own electorate or elsewhere, at the huge strength and dynamic way in which the young women in our schools are developing. The girls of today in schools are far more strident and stronger than the girls of my era, and the senior female students are quite dynamic and, I find, inspirational. I have no doubt Women’s Policy will continue to strengthen and evolve and the women of the future, the leaders of tomorrow, I have seen in our community will be an incredibly exciting generation to continue the pursuit of equity for women.
Madam Speaker, I commend the ministerial statement on the achievements in developing and progressing women’s policy in the Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Women’s Policy for bringing this statement before the House and updating members on the current state of progress to date regarding women’s policy, which actively seeks to improve the lives of women in the Territory by specifically looking at the key areas of women’s economic security, women’s safety, women’s leadership, and women and social inclusion.
There have been some interesting and valuable contributions, and some fairly wide-ranging subjects associated with women’s issues across the House in all these areas. I acknowledge the work of previous ministers for Women’s Policy, including the former Chief Minister, Clare Martin, and my colleague, the member for Arafura, both of whom I first met at the women’s forum held in Nhulunbuy as part of Community Cabinet - I think it was in 2003; it might have been earlier.
I remember it quite vividly because, in the years I had been in Nhulunbuy, apart from perhaps the Education minister visiting the school when I was a school teacher, we did not see many ministers, certainly not under the CLP. On this particular day, we had the whole Labor Cabinet in Nhulunbuy. This was a pretty exciting day in our community and, what is more, there was a women’s forum. I can tell you, you only have to advertise a women’s event in Gove and you are packed to the rafters.
I registered to attend the event and there were 80 women present. The organisers were surprised by the number of people interested. I went with a particular agenda, as did some friends and colleagues of mine. We had childcare on the top of our agenda. Tables were set up in the red room at the Captain Cook Community Centre, which doubles as the foyer for our local theatre, and is also a little function room. It was a bit squeezy in there, because we had to set up extra tables for people who came.
The then Minister for Women’s Policy - was she Women’s Policy at that time? - the member for Arafura and the Chief Minister, Clare Martin, arrived to welcome everyone. They then left and went to another meeting and participants were in the care of officers from Women’s Policy. We were given butcher’s paper across every table and textas and, on a whiteboard, we were told: ‘This is what we would like to do in your group; these are the things we would like you to outline’. I and my good friend, Wendy Troe said: ‘We do not want to do that; we want to talk about childcare’. They said: ‘We want everyone to go through this list of issues and then we are going to have everyone report back’. We said: ‘Sorry, we do not want to do that, we want to talk about childcare at our table’. ‘Okay, if that is really what you want to do’. We looked around and said: ‘Does anyone else want to talk about childcare?’ The issue at that time - and I was on the management committee of our childcare centre - was we were desperate for additional places at our childcare centre. We had issues housing staff. It probably sounds familiar to the member for Karama because she was the next minister.
The good thing was we had the ear of the Chief Minister, the ear of the member for Arafura, and when our table spoke about childcare and our issues, they really sat up and listened. I remember vividly the member for Arafura saying: ‘We are going to fix this problem, even if it kills me’. She organised to meet with me and the women at the table later that afternoon at the Arnhem Club, where we had further discussion to detail our issues and concerns.
The good thing was, it worked. It took a while, as the member for Karama knows, but progress in childcare issues in our community worked, because we had the opportunity for face-to-face contact with a couple of key women in the government, including the Chief Minister, and issues were then picked up by our local member at the time, Syd Stirling.
I am all praise for women’s forums and Community Cabinet, and the fact this Labor government continues to get out and talk to the community. I went to the next women’s forum because I enjoyed the first one so much. I also managed, through my employer at the time, Rio Tinto Alcan, to convince them to put on a charter plane so I could take other key women from Nhulunbuy to participate in the women’s forum held at Galiwinku. That was also a fascinating forum and again, we had Chief Minister, Clare Martin, and the member for Arafura. Women in that community did not want to talk about childcare, they wanted to talk about housing, family matters, and looking after old people in their community. It was a fantastic forum and a perfect opportunity for people to get the ear of the Chief Minister. That is how this government operates; getting out and talking to people and finding out what their issues are, dealing with them face-to-face and taking them away and dealing with them. I cannot thank those people enough for conducting those forums.
Back to the document tabled by our Minister for Women’s Policy, Building on Our Strengths: a Framework for Action for Women in the Northern Territory 2008-2012. Part of this is based on information collected at those forums. It provides a snapshot as to where we are in May 2010 in the Territory and, importantly, how we are supporting policies, especially things like pay equity at national level. On the issue of pay equity, we have a long way to go, not just in the Territory but across Australia, to see equity for Australian women. Obviously, I am not alone in welcoming the House of Representatives Standing Committee’s report which examined closely and identified issues preventing greater participation of women in the workforce and seeing women on a more even keel with their male counterparts, and ensuring the 63 recommendations of that report are seriously addressed. It goes without saying these issues of equity - that is, pay and conditions, not just pay, also conditions - must address the needs of all women, irrespective of their ethnic background, whether they be Indigenous women or migrant women.
I have some concerns about how we address equity based on age of women, as well. The member for Goyder highlighted what she perceived as things missing from this report; she thought we had missed talking about young people. However, I see many young women - teenagers - employed in supermarkets, in fast food outlets with varying pay and conditions - keen to make a buck. They are less inclined to engage with their employer and ask the right questions about how they are being paid, the hours they are expected to work, and the conditions they might be expected to work in, especially when it comes to OHS matters. Like other areas of women’s policy, we need to continue looking at legislative reforms and the support of advocacy through bodies such as unions.
We could talk about any number of areas of employment where there are glaring gaps in equity, but I would like to single out the area of childcare workers, not just because it is currently in the media. It is an area covered under federal government but, obviously, the Territory government has a role to play as well. It is an industry which is dominated by women, who are more inclined to take on the traditional role of carer. For many, it is an extension of their mothering roles; and it is a really important role.
My husband and I were consumers of childcare services in Nhulunbuy raising our three children - in fact, we still engage in the school holiday program - especially before our children started school. Like many working families we juggled full-time jobs with a baby, a toddler, a pregnancy, and maternity leave in between. When we got through those childcare years with full-time childcare through our community-based childcare centre, we went to after-school care and vacation care. These services were absolutely critical to me. They are to any families who use childcare. I am eternally grateful to the women - and they were all women - who cared for and nurtured my children. We recognise these formative years for children are so critical in their development and the start of their lifelong journey of learning.
I could say probably everyone in this Chamber has had firsthand experience, or has seen what family and friends go through when a parent, particularly a mother, leaves their child for the first time at a childcare centre as a toddler or a baby. It is an awful moment, especially when they are crying their heart out watching you walk out the door, and you are feeling incredibly guilty you are not with your child and are going back to work. However, we do it and we place absolute faith in those caring for our children, and we discover kids are incredibly resilient and adaptable; my kids absolutely thrived in full-time care.
For such an important job childcare workers are, by and large, poorly paid; and for this reason it comes as no surprise the profession is often the domain of short-term employment. Childcare is such a difficult area of employment, sitting more and more in the private sector with the steady demise of community-based childcare, where income for a centre is based on fees paid by parents, and wage increases for staff impact directly on that.
Family Allowance paid by the federal government certainly helps, and this government is the only jurisdiction in Australia to subsidise childcare fees with a contribution per child. Forgive me, Madam Speaker, I do not have that figure to hand. It is getting harder now, but when my children were in care, I served for several years on the management committee of Nhulunbuy Community Childcare Centre and, in negotiating the EBA with staff, we endeavoured to offer as many incentives as we could, recognising the valuable contribution of our childcare workers, and our strong desire to retain staff but, at the same time, we wanted to see staff in training and reach qualifications, and that was all part of the deal. In the mid-1990s, we were able to offer our staff 22% above the award wage; however, I would say that would be increasingly difficult to maintain.
What made circumstances for me easier in those early days with my children was the fact I received paid maternity leave as a public servant, at least for my first two children. With my third child I was working for Alcan, which provided unpaid leave, for which I was grateful, especially as I was able to retain my company-supplied house during that period. I am pleased to see Alcan has now moved to a paid parental leave scheme, as many in the corporate world have.
While the government sector has long provided paid maternity leave, or parental leave, it is, as the minister explained, another key area where we continue to deliver policy for a national paid parental leave scheme which supports families and women in particular; and all women, irrespective of their residence or their ethnic background. This is an issue which has progressed well under the Rudd government, and I hope we will see the Rudd government returned to office because I shudder to think what would happen to progress in women’s policy issues under the ultra-conservative, right wing Tony Abbott. I shudder even more at the prospect of who on his front bench would take on the portfolio – Bronwyn Bishop or Julie Bishop.
Yesterday, I saw a federal media release from Senator Trish Crossin regarding the announcement of minister Julia Gillard’s support for the NT Working Women’s Centre. It says it delivers vital workplace services and advice for our most vulnerable workers, and it will receive a further two years funding. The NT Working Women’s Centre will receive, for the next two years, $207 000 per year out of a total funding pool, nationally, of $1.2m. It is good news irrespective of who we have at federal level after the next election – either government. We know Labor will and, hopefully, a Liberal government would continue that support.
Without doubt, progressing economic independence for women is inextricably linked to women’s capacity to participate in the workforce and their preparedness and readiness to do that, based on a solid and comprehensive education, irrespective of where they live in Australia, and of their language background. It sounds ideal, but we know the reality is far from this.
Women are under-represented as participants in our workforce, though I note the unemployment rate for women in the Territory has dropped from 4.9% in January 2000 to 3.5% in January 2010 and, of course, we would like to see that reduce even further. We know it is young women we need to target and, to this end, I welcome the establishment in the Northern Territory of the Young Women and Unemployed Reference Group, which works with government to develop effective strategies to improve equitable participation of young women in the workforce. I note this working group feeds into a national working group, and I look forward to hearing the national strategy which is being developed for presentation at the Minister for Women’s Policy conference in September this year.
The core issue of this is the basic imperative of getting children to school - girls and boys - and keep them at school from preschool through to completion of at least Year 11, and preferably Year 12, which is the critical springboard to further education and employment. Whilst it is not government’s sole responsibility to meet this challenge, we need to work with families and communities to ensure children are supported to get to school every day.
On the subject of women’s safety, I too applaud the progress which has been made to address violence against women and family violence, and highlight the legislation passed in this Chamber to make mandatory the reporting of domestic and family violence. Quite rightly, the focus has placed an onus of responsibility on individuals, on communities, not to turn our backs away from episodes of family violence when it occurs. This government is putting considerable funding commitment, $15m over three years, to support this legislative change by providing the necessary additional services, as well as dedicated information and advertising campaigns.
I attended an information session at Yirrkala in March which was run by the East Arnhem Shire Council and led by the shire’s Women’s and Children’s Services Coordinator, Diane Kearney. The session took women through the mandatory reporting and what it meant for them. Communication of this information was also supported by a DVD which had been made locally and provides dramatisations of situations women might find themselves in, and commentary or information for viewers about why this is not acceptable and what a woman’s rights are under the legislation.
Importantly, the information in the DVD was delivered in Yolngu Matha with English translation. Having been at the 10-year celebration of the Aboriginal Interpreter Service today - and what a fantastic service - it is employing, I believe, over 325 people who have acted as interpreters in the past 12 months and dedicated to over 6000 interpreting jobs. The capacity to put things in language for people, for women’s issues, for health issues, for legal issues, is absolutely critical.
The sad reality is while we are focused on reducing domestic and family violence, it does occur. I cannot speak highly enough of those services we have in Nhulunbuy to assist women in the region. Gove Crisis Accommodation has operated for 25 years to provide a safe haven to women and children and can take up to 18 clients at a time, who are escaping domestic and family violence. It offers 24-hour secure care, employs three people full-time, as well as four to five casuals to ensure coverage of the roster over a 24-hour period. They provide support and access to services with the aim to work with families to keep families together and get families back together. For the past three or so years it has employed a children’s worker, so children who so often come into crisis accommodation with their mothers can be cared for.
They were grateful for funding they received from the Northern Territory government to enable them to travel through the region to advise communities about mandatory reporting and why domestic and family violence cannot and must not be tolerated. I acknowledge the contribution of the RaypirriRom program based at Yirrkala under the umbrella of Miwatj Health, funded jointly by this government and federal government ...
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move the member for Nhulunbuy be given an extension of 10 minutes, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank you, member for Barkly.
The Raypirri team is headed by Fiona Djerrkura who is proud to be in this role and fulfilling the vision of her father, the late Mr Djerrkura, who was a prominent man from Yirrkala and former ATSIC Commissioner, whose vision was always to see Yolngu communities take responsibility for their own problems by reinforcing customary law, obligations and culture, and do this with the support of mainstream government agencies. Raypirri Rom workers, strong women and strong men, are quite literally the peacemakers in their communities.
Regarding women’s safety within my electorate, I want to highlight the enormous and positive role community Night Patrol has played for many years. The service is currently in the capable hands of the shire, and I have been able to see firsthand how the service works having accompanied night patrollers as an observer on several shifts between Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala. Employees of this service are dedicated and trained individuals; 21 of them across the region graduated with Certificate III in Community Night Patrol last November. The reality is most of the employees with Night Patrol are women. The service ensures people who need to get home safely will get home, but those who need to spend the night in the sobering-up shelter do so. It is important the Night Patrol have strict protocols around not returning those individuals to their homes at Yirrkala or Ski beach if they are under the influence of alcohol and, therefore, a real risk of causing trouble.
I would like to address the key issue contained within this report about women’s leadership. We all know women continue to be under-represented in their membership of government boards and committees, although figures quoted in the minister’s statement indicate we do have higher representation than any other jurisdiction in the government sector.
Before I mention some of the women from my electorate who make valuable contributions in leadership roles, I would like to share an observation. Speaking on the basis of my electorate - and perhaps I am not alone - I find it ironic while women are under-represented in formal roles of leadership, they are more often than not the ones to step up to the plate and lead the charge when there is a community issue to be addressed. It could be something like a family in our small, close-knit community facing a very difficult time, a sudden death, or a family member diagnosed with a life threatening illness - and I have seen our community dig deep into their pockets, hold fundraisers and raise thousands of dollars for those in need. I have a feeling those of us in this Chamber would probably say it is not unique to Nhulunbuy. I have seen women take on causes to rally, meet, fundraise, petition, and ensure their voices are heard. They certainly did it with Gove District Hospital last year when our maternity ward was closed for a period of five weeks, not because government wanted to close it, but because we went through a period where recruiting doctors was incredibly challenging. That said, I am sure the 300 women, both Yolngu and Ngapaki, who marched down the main street of Nhulunbuy to a public meeting at our town hall, certainly helped put pressure on the minister to expedite the recruitment process.
Late last year, one of our lovely local ladies, Trina O’Brien, approached me with concerns about changes to a school crossing near Nhulunbuy Primary School. She assured me she was not a rabblerouser and had never done anything like this, but felt really strongly and asked what suggestions I might have about raising this and obtaining community support. She made an incredible effort in getting publicity, getting the word out there, getting support, and getting 500 people to sign a petition asking Nhulunbuy Corporation to reverse the plans they had made on the pedestrian crossing - a crossing out the front of her house and very close to Nhulunbuy Primary School, where her children attend, along with about 500 others. The book has not closed on that; the petition was tabled with the Nhulunbuy Corporation - our town council. It remains a work in progress, and Trina, along with the primary school council and other concerned members of the community, will continue negotiating with Nhulunbuy Corporation to have this crossing changed to make it safer.
The Yolngu women of the region are well-known for their strength in rallying to drive change, one of the most significant being - I know I have mentioned it in the House several times - their efforts in driving a program to restrict alcohol, and the eventual development of a takeaway liquor permit system which has worked incredibly well in addressing alcohol-related issues in the community. It is not just for the Indigenous community; it is something which impacts on the non-Indigenous community. I take my hat off to that group of women who started that process several years ago.
The efforts of Yolngu women were highlighted at a wonderful International Women’s Day event, a very special day of celebration, held at Yirrkala, where the Chair of Laynhapuy Homelands, Mr Barayuwa Mununggurr, was invited along as the sole male in the room to do the official opening and welcome everyone. He brought the house down when he said he wanted to acknowledge the role the women in our community play. He said, and I remember it very vividly: ‘It is the women who lead the way in our community, and it is the men who are dragging the chain’. That admission from a strong man, a community leader in a hall full of Yolngu women, absolutely brought the house down. He was so right, because the Yolngu women so much lead the way out there.
Even so, on the Board of Laynhapuy Homelands - and I have just double-checked the newsletter I have - of the 15 places on the board, only four are women. However, I note Yananymul Mununggurr is very strong as their first and very successful Chief Executive Officer. A snapshot of where there are other women in leadership roles on boards and councils in my electorate is, amongst the 12 members who make up the East Arnhem Shire Council, there are just three women elected. Mind you, they are very vocal and very effective on council and also in representing their communities. Nhulunbuy Town Board has only four elected members, all of whom are men. I am not sure how many women, over the years, have been elected members; I was the last woman elected and, obviously, I had to resign in the lead-up to the election. However, with the elections coming up in February next year, I encourage many women in our community to put their hand up to ensure women and the views of women in the community, and families, are represented through the town board.
At Rio Tinto Alcan, where I worked for many years, their executive management team is overwhelmingly filled by men. Their entire workforce employs - and I think this is accurate - 8% women, which is reflective pretty much of mining companies being dominated by male employees. I acknowledge Rio Tinto, over the years, have had some women in key positions; a growing number of young female graduates and, over the years, female apprentices have taken up roles there and, though they are outnumbered, they have done an incredible job and have been well supported by their employer.
Going from a male dominated area, our school councils in the region are overwhelmingly dominated by women. I guess it comes down to the caring aspect that goes with schools.
I want to highlight some of the terrific Yolngu in my community who were noted at International Women’s Day. I have already mentioned Yananymul Mununggurr. I put on the record Dhangal Gurruwiwi, who is a very strong woman; she is an interpreter, an artist, a leader amongst women in her clan, and also part of the visiting elders program coming in regularly to the Don Dale Centre and Berrimah prison. I mention Dhalulu Ganambarr-Stubbs, who is a member of the Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council. I also mention Marrpalawuy Marika, who is currently Chair of Yambirrpa School Council, and I mention Phyllis Batambil from the community of Mutta Mutta.
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for presenting this statement. I have enjoyed listening to the contributions of other members of this House, the debate, and the things people see as important are wide-ranging. I congratulate our minister, and previous ministers, for work to date and look forward to seeing women’s issues in the Territory continue to progress and prosper.
Ms McCARTHY (Women’s Policy): Madam Speaker, I thank all members of the House for contributing to this statement. It has been terrific to hear member’s comments in regard to Women’s Policy in the Northern Territory. As I said in my opening statement, this is about taking on board comments by members of the House and women across the Northern Territory on how we can strengthen even more the role of the Women’s Policy Unit.
The parliamentary debate about Women's Policy which followed this statement has been extremely valuable. The Women's Policy portfolio, as its name implies, is a policy unit which sets important priorities for the Northern Territory government such as the Building on our Strengths action framework to progress the women’s equity agenda and advance the economic and social standing of Territory women.
The member for Goyder noted some concerns with this important policy framework. She commented our Women's Policy statement did not provide any information about outcomes achieved for women. In response; I would like to point out colleagues on this side of the House have described some significant outcomes delivered by our government for women which have flowed from our overarching Women's Policy, particularly the Building on our Strengths framework.
The Chief Minister explained how Women's Policy has informed his agencies, particularly the police. He spoke of a greater police focus on domestic violence, both strategically and in resources. There are now dedicated police domestic violence teams in Darwin, Katherine and Alice Springs, and these teams work in a proactive way to target repeat perpetrators of domestic violence. As the Chief Minister said in his response, this increased vigilance has resulted in a 36.8% increase in domestic violence orders. Rather than the increase in domestic violence orders being indicative of a failure by our government to address violence against women - and this was an important issue raised by the member for Araluen, which I take on board; the commitment by the member for Araluen in this area and the comments by the Chief Minister - suggests women are becoming more confident in reporting instances of domestic violence. Police have the resources to respond, and women are more confident to report domestic violence knowing police will respond. It is not the only reason but it certainly is helping, particularly in many places I travel across the regions and hear that type of feedback. As the Chief Minister put it, the light is being shone on domestic violence, hence our government’s commitment to ensuring children and families growing up today recognise domestic violence, or any kind of violence, is just not on.
The member for Goyder asked how many cases of domestic violence had been reported since the introduction of the mandatory reporting requirement. The Chief Minister, in his response, told the House while there is yet to be an analysis applied to determine what portion of the increase in domestic violence orders can be attributed to mandatory reporting, our government is certainly monitoring this.
The Minister for Health highlighted another important aspect of our government’s commitment to the safety of women, the family violence initiative. In particular, this initiative includes the establishment and operation of 20 safe places in 15 remote communities across the Territory, in partnership with the Australian government. These safe places employ 67 local people; 11 of the safe places are for women and nine are men’s cooling down centres. These are some of the significant initiatives and achievements of this government, in partnership with the Commonwealth, which have flowed from our Women's Policy. For these reasons, I can talk strongly about our government’s domestic and family violence strategies and resourcing the policy, and what we are doing to tackle it head on.
Other outcomes flowing from our Women's Policy were described by the Minister for Lands and Planning. Of the 67 recommendations in the Ombudsman’s 2007 report, 41 relate to Northern Territory Correctional Services. The minister told us 37 of these 41 recommendations have been completed, and four partially completed. The implementation of these recommendations has included: development of the Female Prisoners in Prison policy, which is a commitment under the Building on our Strengths framework; the establishment of female community service work parties in Darwin and Alice Springs, an initiative which allows women to give something back to the community and promotes rehabilitation and engenders new skills; and the construction of a new education program facility for female prisoners at Darwin Correctional Centre, in which seven women had hands-on involvement.
The implementation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations has also included the provision of improved infrastructure for women prisoners such as: accommodation for women who have achieved the lowest possible security rating at Darwin Correctional Centre; a new visiting facility at the women’s block at Darwin Correctional Centre; and a 25-bed women’s facility at Alice Springs Correctional Centre which addresses a previous shortage of beds for women prisoners at the centre. This shortage of beds had meant Alice Springs women prisoners would sometimes be transferred to Darwin Correctional Centre, away from their families. The provision of this new 25-bed facility means women prisoners in Alice Springs can remain close to their families.
In addition, the Northern Territory Correctional Services has established a Women’s Advisory Committee which monitors the achievement of priorities identified in the Building on Our Strengths action framework for women employees within correctional services, and provides a voice for these women.
The committee’s terms of reference are to progress the relevant themes and goals under the Building on Our Strengths framework, and provide advice to the Executive Director of Corrections through the executive management group on specific policy and program initiatives. The committee members reflect a cross-section of employees from Correctional Services, custodial and non-custodial, Indigenous and non-Indigenous. Meetings are held quarterly, with members outside Darwin participating via teleconference.
The member for Araluen asked about the Sex Offender Treatment Program, pointing out most sex offences in the Northern Territory are committed against women. The minister for Corrections told this House access to the Sex Offender Treatment Program is an important part of prisoner rehabilitation. The Sex Offender Treatment Program is currently under review to ensure it is better targeted to Territorians. The minister also mentioned the Indigenous Family Violence Program; as of 30 April 2010 the Indigenous Family Violence Program is being delivered in 12 Territory communities.
The Building on Our Strengths framework identified women’s health and wellbeing as one of the key areas for action. The Minister for Health described some of the initiatives which have been established by our government to address this key action area. The Core of Life is a program operating in the Northern Territory to improve women’s health, particularly young women. Core of Life is a hands-on life education program designed to improve young people's understanding about pregnancy, giving birth, parenting a newborn, nutrition, health care, and the impact of drugs and alcohol during pregnancy. Core of Life facilitators are providing training courses across the Top End of the Territory, and these courses will train community-based health staff, teachers and midwives to conduct Core of Life programs in schools across the Territory and with adolescent groups at camps.
The minister also told the House the NT Maternity Services Review and recommendations continue to be progressed. A Midwifery Group Practice in Darwin and Alice Springs has been established. During the first year of operation in Alice Springs, 162 babies were born through the Midwifery Group Practice, including 75 babies to remote Indigenous women, and nine home births. The Darwin Midwifery Group Practice commenced in September 2009, and 100 babies were born through the practice in the first six months. Five remote area midwife positions have been established and are based in communities in both Central Australia and the Top End.
The minister also pointed out the progress of the NT Maternity Services Review is seen in the development of a program for maternity care and community-based workers, the Strong Women, Strong Babies, Strong Culture program. This bi-cultural community development program respects and supports the cultural way of promoting good heath for women and babies during pregnancy and early parenting in Indigenous communities.
The minister also told the House the Strong Women worker for Wadeye divides her time between the community and Royal Darwin Hospital, where she supports women during labour, birth and the early postnatal period. Recruitment is also under way for community-based workers in Maningrida to undertake the Strong Women program.
The member for Goyder indicated she suspected the number of women in senior positions in the Northern Territory Public Service is not that great, yet the Minister for Lands and Planning spoke of a majority of women at the executive level in the department. Similarly, there is a majority of women at the executive level within the Local Government branch of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services. The Treasurer told the House this afternoon women occupy the key management positions in Treasury: the Under Treasurer and the Deputy Under Treasurer. In addition, the Minister for Health told the House in the department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources female employees currently represent 50% of department staff and, more significantly, they are extremely well represented in the professional and technical streams. Approximately 40% of professional positions and over 60% of technical positions are held by women.
Our government is committed to building on these numbers and is not about pandering to tokenism, as mentioned by the Opposition Leader in his reply. It is about increasing women’s participation and representation in leadership roles, and creating opportunities for developing and exercising women’s decision-making skills.
Accordingly, the Territory 2030 long-term strategic plan includes initiatives to increase the proportion of Territory women in senior public sector positions. As part of this government’s commitment, the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment has implemented a number of initiatives and programs to help do so. The Minister for Public Employment described these initiatives to the House, and they include: the Discovery Leadership Program held in Darwin and Alice Springs aimed at women in public service positions of AO4 and above; the Lookrukin Indigenous Women’s Leadership Program for Indigenous women employed in the Northern Territory Public Sector, designed to increase effectiveness in employee’s current positions and improve career progression; a public sector management program which is a joint venture between the Northern Territory government and Flinders University; and the Australian and New Zealand School of Government established in 2002 by a consortium of Australian and New Zealand governments. This school provides teaching programs for current and emerging public sector leaders to enhance the breadth and depth of their policy leadership and management skills.
Two highly regarded Territory women, Penny Fielding and Liz Morris have completed the Executive Masters in Public Administration. Liz Morris has since been appointed as magistrate in the Darwin Magistrates Court.
In addition, the Chief Minister spoke about initiatives being implemented in the police force. Importantly, the latest police recruitment TV advertisements feature women in a prominent role. The Northern Territory Police Force is focused upon improving policing for women, and as a result, 10 of the latest 27 police recruits are women, and women made up 29% of the Northern Territory Police Force as of June 2009.
Our government is committed to building on these initiatives to support a workforce which is equitable and fair, thereby engendering women’s leadership and participation and, ultimately, enhancing women’s economic security.
Another way our government is supporting a workforce that is equitable and fair is through our flexible maternity leave policy. The Minister for Public Employment explained this policy: it consists of 14 weeks maternity leave at full pay to public service employees of 12 months service, or 28 weeks of maternity leave at half pay, with the ability to combine this with other forms of pay such as recreational leave, up to a maximum of 52 weeks. Further, our government allows six years of leave without pay after birth or adoption. Adoption leave refers to leave given to an employee, male or female, in connection with the adoption of a child. I can clarify for the member for Goyder our government is accommodating working families and working women, and we can keep building on these initiatives.
Members have highlighted the important leadership roles of Territory women, as well as our government’s leadership initiatives for women which have flowed from our Women’s Policy. The Minister for Lands and Planning described key NT art dealers are women, and the pre-eminent Territory art fairs and awards are heavily driven by women in the arts sector. The minister for Business spoke about leaders in the communities who raise the bar for women, including women like Roslyn Frith who now heads the Katherine West Health Board and stands up for the rights of women in her region, Betty Daly who is encouraging and guiding leaders of the future in her area, and Regina Wilson, a matriarch and business leader in Peppimenarti.
The minister for Business also spoke about our government’s exciting A Working Future policy initiative which will provide 10 000 new apprenticeships and traineeships in regions across the Territory - a 50% increase since 2001. These apprenticeships and traineeships will advance the interests of Territory women by enabling more women across our regions to establish economic security. The Chief Minister and the minister for Business both spoke about the substantial contribution being made by women to our Caucus and Cabinet. There was also mention of the recent appointment of Justice Kelly and Justice Blokland to the Northern Territory Supreme Court. In addition, there are now more female Magistrates than ever before. As the Chief Minister said, the glass ceiling is well and truly being broken on the Bench.
The Chief Minister also commended the Northern Territory Women’s Register, more than just a website or a token gesture as the Opposition Leader has said. The Women’s Register is a practical initiative to encourage Territory women to nominate themselves for government boards and committees, and bring vacancies to the attention of interested women.
As the Member for Goyder indicated during this debate, women in agriculture and horticulture play a vital leadership role in the Territory. On 12 May this year, I was very pleased to announce Carmel McCaskill-Ball as the 2010 recipient of the Rural Industries and Research Development Corporation Rural Women’s Award. Ms McCaskill-Ball is the owner of the Darwin Fish Market; Board Member of the Northern Territory Seafood Council, and a consultant to the primary industries in the Northern Territory. As the NT Rural Women’s Award winner, Ms McCaskill-Ball received a $10 000 bursary which she plans to invest in furthering her leadership skills to raise awareness of locally caught produce, and local producers, to increase the viability and sustainability of the local seafood industry.
The Minister for Health highlighted another important leadership initiative for women: a collaboration between the Northern Territory department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources, Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, and the Australian government, to roll out a series of workshops in September last year, aimed at building capacity amongst the women in the pastoral industry. The minister described the response to these workshops was extremely positive, with over 100 women attending across the Territory. Further funding has been secured for this year, and planning is under way for the next series of workshops to be held in October this year. These are the initiatives and achievements of our government in relation to women in leadership roles.
The members for Araluen, Goyder, and Macdonnell raised concern about the need for face-to-face contact with women, and the Opposition Leader echoed this concern and suggested our community wants a women’s round table forum to bring together dynamic members representing diverse views and interests. As I said, I am looking forward to using the opportunity of this debate to review our directions and activities in the area of Women’s Policy, particularly in relation to community engagement.
In the meantime, I inform this House the Office of Women’s Policy has actively engaged with the community over the past year by establishing the Young Women and Unemployment Reference Group. This reference group has been set up to develop effective strategies to improve the equitable participation of young women in the workforce. This reference group has helped inform the National Young Women and Unemployment Working Group about specific issues from the Territory, and was instrumental in gaining support from all jurisdictions to include a specific target group of young Aboriginal women.
I note the member for Goyder, quite rightly, pointed out young women must be a focus of our women’s policy. The Office of Women’s Policy has been engaged in topic-focused community engagement such as: gender pay equity seminars in Darwin on a quarterly basis which provide an opportunity to work with the NT Working Women’s Centre and the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner to raise awareness among government, business and industry about gender pay equity, workplace harassment and discrimination; consultations with women in Darwin, Hermannsburg and Maningrida as part of a research project on micro-credit for Aboriginal women in remote communities; a women’s legal forum in Katherine, hosted by the Katherine Women’s Legal and Information Service; and engagement with migrant women and migrant support organisations in the Northern Territory as part of a discrete project to gain a picture of migrant and refugee women’s health issues and barriers to health service access in the Northern Territory.
My communication and contact with the women members of my Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council and Chair, Bess Price, is also making an important contribution to my thinking on Women’s Policy and this government’s broader work under the banner of A Working Future, to improve the day-to-day life of Indigenous Territorians. In addition, our four NT delegates to the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women’s Gathering: Joy Cardona, Ngaree Ah Kit, Moogie Patu and Susan Murray, have held forums in Darwin and Alice Springs with local women to discuss key issues relating to women and their communities. I look forward to continuing to work with our NATSIWG delegates to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women across the Territory a strong voice, and to tackle issues relating to women’s equal standing in society.
I take this opportunity to thank the staff in the Office of Women’s Policy under Janette Galton for the tremendous work they do, day-in-day-out over the years to ensure women across the Northern Territory are considered in every aspect of government policy.
I take note of the member for Macdonnell’s view that White Ribbon Ambassadors must go beyond just wearing the white ribbon. Part of the role of the 36 Northern Territory White Ribbon Ambassadors is talking with colleagues and friends to highlight the importance of respect for women and attitude change; attending events in their local community; hosting awareness-raising events and fundraising activities with their personal networks throughout the year; and encouraging community groups, local councils, workplaces, men’s organisations, sports and services clubs to buy and distribute white ribbons. I also spoke, during my statement, of the tremendous work of Charlie King within the community in relation to the No More initiative.
In conclusion, I can speak quite proudly about our government’s Women’s Policy. Our Women’s Policy is about setting priorities for the Territory government to progress the women’s equity agenda and advance the economic and social standing of Territory women. The positive outcomes for women, which colleagues on this side of the House have described, show these priorities are being achieved and our government is serious about Women’s Policy. This debate has presented us with an opportunity to review our directions, initiatives and actions in the area of Women’s Policy, and I am looking forward to doing so.
Madam Deputy Speaker, 2011 will be a special year for women; 8 March 2011 marks the Centenary of International Women’s Day. I have already begun talking to women across the Territory, at women’s meetings on Groote Island last week, and in Numbulwar, Yuendumu, Alice Springs and Borroloola last month. I have asked these women to start thinking about how they would like to be involved in celebrating our past and planning for our future as part of the Centenary of International Women’s Day.
Again, I thank all members of the House for their contribution to this statement, and I will certainly take on board each and every member’s contribution.
I commend this statement to the House.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Growing International Trade – 2009 to 2013
Growing International Trade – 2009 to 2013
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Deputy Speaker, we all recognise the unique geographical position Darwin enjoys in relation to access to Australia. Our location and our expanding infrastructure provide the Territory a wonderful opportunity to capture advantages in trade with our near neighbours. The Henderson government is focused on the development of productive and, importantly, enduring relationships and trade links with our northern neighbours.
To ensure Territory business is best placed to take advantage of our growing relationship with Asia, the Henderson government has developed a five-year trade plan which recognises the need for government to work closely with the private sector. It is also a plan which acknowledges the importance of people-to-people contact as integral to the development of ongoing and productive relationships with our neighbours.
I wish to report to the House on the progress of priority actions outlined under the Henderson government’s International Trade Strategy – Growing International Trade Priority Action Plan 2009-2013.
The Growing International Trade Strategy was launched in September 2009 to ensure a focused approach for the growth of the Territory’s international trade performance over the five years of the strategy. The Henderson government is targeting key activities to build on the Territory’s core strengths and capabilities, provide practical assistance, maintain a presence in selected markets, and work in partnerships with business and industry to achieve tangible, economic outcomes for the Territory.
I am pleased to report, since its launch, significant progress has been made and real and tangible outcomes have been achieved across a range of priority actions identified in the strategy. Target engagement plays a key role in establishing a platform for cooperation and productive outcomes across the range of issues. The enduring relationships which flow from personal engagement help underpin the efforts made by business and industry to establish commercial links in key and emerging markets.
In February this year, I travelled to Japan and was accompanied by representatives from the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce - namely the president, George Roussos - and the Northern Territory Industry Capability Network. During this visit I met with representatives from the Japanese government and promoted our local industry participation in the INPEX project with the relevant Japanese companies. My visit was well received and helped to reinforce the Territory’s relationship with the newly elected Japanese government and key stakeholders in Japan following the Chief Minister’s visit last November.
In March, I led a business delegation to Jakarta, Indonesia, to participate in the OZ Mine Expo and Conference. 27 people representing 10 companies participated in the delegation from the Northern Territory and, importantly, this included representatives from the NTICN. While in Jakarta, I delivered the opening address at the OZ Mine Conference and had a number of high level one-on-one meetings. These included meetings with the Indonesian Minister for Trade, Mari Pangestu, the Indonesian Minister for Transport, Freddy Numberi, and meetings with several provincial governors. Key Northern Territory events associated with the OZ Mine Expo were attended by a range of senior Indonesian mining executives. We were able to showcase the capabilities of the Northern Territory directly to key procurement and decision-makers in the mining industry. The OZ Mine Expo also provided an important opportunity to promote the third Indonesian Mining Procurement Forum which was held in Darwin on 29 April.
The Henderson government is proud to support Territory businesses through events like this forum to help promote their potential to export into important markets like Indonesia. Niche sector development, where there is real capacity to increase export revenue, is a key and clear focus under the growing international trade strategy. The forum provided an important opportunity for Northern Territory companies to promote themselves to the Indonesian mining sector. About 175 people attended the forum, including approximately 25 Indonesian visitors.
The Indonesian mining sector is vast and presents significant opportunities for Territory businesses. Indonesia is home to some of the world largest coal, copper, gold and nickel mines. The majority of these mines are within 2000 km of Darwin. This year’s mining procurement forum saw participation from a number of Indonesian companies including Weda Bay Nickel, Kideco Coal, Petrosea Contracting, KBU Contracting, Laing O’Rourke Indonesia, Worley Parsons - Kutai Coal, HHR Legal Services Indonesia, Kiroyan Partners Jakarta, Indonesia Customs and Excise, Meratus Shipping, Schenker Petrolog and PT Agility Logistics.
Recent forums involving Territory trade missions in both Jakarta and Balikpapan, in the province of East Kalimantan, have produced a number of investment results. Bridge Toyota secured contracts for vehicle parts to major mine sites in eastern Indonesia. Engine Engineering of Berrimah, and its Indonesian joint venture partner, PT Power Trains, established an income stream of $850 000 per year from a newly established Balikpapan engine overhaul operation. They expect that figure to grow to $1.5m per annum within the next three years.
Linetec of Darwin has also won $700 000 in export orders to Indonesian mines for their LT1000 hydraulic ladders. These ladders are designed and manufactured at Linetec’s Yarrawonga operations, and shipped to Kalimantan for fitting to large dozers and excavators in the coal mining sector.
Blackwoods Winnellie has developed significant opportunities in eastern Indonesia for industrial hardware products. Blackwoods new 5000 m2 automated warehouse and distribution facility in Winnellie is expected to be commissioned this month, with a key aim to supply projects to Indonesia from Darwin – a great new warehouse. Neddrill Drilling and Blasting of Humpty Doo are in discussions regarding supply of drilling rigs and personnel for a new project on the island of Sulawesi. This year’s forum will also draw discussions on the potential development of Darwin as a distribution centre for chemicals and petroleum products to mines in eastern Indonesia.
The Henderson government will continue to work with Territory business to assist them promote themselves in markets like Indonesia. Given the significant growth of mining operations in our near region, particularly across the South-East Asian area, the opportunity exists to continue to develop Darwin as a key mining supply and service centre for the Indonesian mining sector. To achieve this goal, the Henderson government has been working closely with business and industry to promote awareness of the Northern Territory’s capability and capacity to service and supply large-scale mining operations across the region with a clear focus on Indonesia. As I have highlighted, we are starting to see some real results.
The discovery of large oil and gas reserves within our region is emerging as a significant opportunity for Territory-based businesses to provide support to this rapidly growing industry. Highlighting the increased awareness of the opportunities occurring in our region, a 14-member delegation from the Energy Industry Council of the UK, US, Singapore and Perth visited Darwin last November. This visit was essentially a fact-finding mission, and a follow-up meeting with the council will occur later this year in conjunction with the Territory’s participation at the Offshore South-East Asian Conference, OSEA, and a planned investment seminar after that conference in Singapore in November 2010.
In March 2010, officers from the Northern Territory government led a business delegation of 26 people to the Australasian Oil and Gas Exhibition and Conference in Perth. Most delegates reported making significant connections and advised they wrote new business through the contacts they made at this event - again, real and tangible commercial outcomes for Territory businesses. This positive response has resulted in exhibition space booked for next year’s event. During this visit to Perth, the Wood Group outlined its strategy to expand in Australia, including a greater presence in Darwin.
The Northern Territory also participated in the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association conference in Brisbane in May. During this conference, the Chief Minister held a number of one-on-one meetings with key industry stakeholders important to the Northern Territory, and briefed some 85 industry executives about emerging opportunities in the Territory. Planning has also commenced for the South-East Asian Australian Offshore Conference which will be held at the Convention Centre, Darwin in September this year; the 16th year the event has been held in Darwin. Participation in OSEA is a partnership between the Northern Territory government and private enterprise, and continues to grow and promote opportunities for Territory businesses.
International education is one of Australia’s largest export earners and a positive generator of employment providing multiple benefits for our local economy. Barney Glover, the Vice Chancellor of the Charles Darwin University, is very focused on the potential for international education.
Under the auspices of the Charles Darwin University/Northern Territory government partnership agreement, a number of target markets have been identified for joint collaboration to increase international student enrolments in the Territory, including China, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, East Timor and Malaysia. My colleague, the minister for Education, will be speaking to this statement later, and will expand on the strides the Territory is making in relation to international education.
Indigenous art and craft is an important part of the Territory and is attracting increasing appreciation by international audiences. Indigenous arts and crafts are to be used extensively at the Australian Pavilion at the Shanghai World Expo. Earlier this year, Maningrida Arts Centre oversaw the installation of Indigenous artworks and paintings of the Bedrock theme at the Australian Pavilion. In March, Ms Gulumbu Yunupingu visited Shanghai for the launch of the Sisters theme on International Women’s Day at the Australian Pavilion. Under the Sisters theme, Ms Yunupingu’s achievements as an artist and a leader in her community will be showcased alongside her Chinese sister, who is also an acclaimed artist and influential leader in her in community in China. Additionally, artworks by Ms Yunupingu have recently been installed in the VIP reception area at the pavilion.
Complementing the strong Indigenous theme at the Australian Pavilion and coinciding with NT Week at the expo, a Northern Territory Indigenous art and craft exhibition will be staged at the public art gallery in Shanghai, external to the expo site, from August to October this year. This exhibition will showcase the works of five Indigenous artists from across the Northern Territory, and will provide a significant platform for this industry to gain entry into the Chinese market.
The pastoral industry is an important contributor to the Territory’s economy, particularly in regional areas. The value of this industry has also established the Port of Darwin as Australia’s largest live cattle export port. Currently, Indonesia is the receiver of approximately 90% of the Territory’s live cattle exports. We continue to support our existing markets, particularly Indonesia. I met with the Indonesian minister for Agriculture, His Excellency Suswono and his delegation in March this year, here at Parliament House, along with the minister for Primary Industry. Minister Suswono and the delegation of 25, accepted an invitation from the Northern Territory government to visit the Territory and attend the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association Conference at the same time. It was a positive step to discuss business opportunities and reaffirm the strong relationship between the Northern Territory and Indonesia. The Indonesian minister and his delegation also raised the general issue of investment in respective jurisdictions, and we committed to ensure regular discussions to facilitate trade.
New market development is a key focus of this industry to diversify and expand its market base. In October 2009 the NT Cattlemen’s Association, Khanh Hoa Trading and Investment Company and the Mid-Vietnam Live Cattle Breeding Corporation signed a purchase agreement which will see the first shipment of 1000 head of live cattle to Vietnam later this year. This agreement was an important milestone for the industry and the result of successful collaboration between industry and government.
Plans are being made to bring Indonesian feedlot industry members to Darwin as part of a development project to improve the management and welfare of Territory livestock in other countries. The Northern Territory government has, and will continue, to work closely to provide practical assistance for this industry to develop new markets and secure its future.
The business events sector is a lucrative market which offers multiple benefits across a range of industry sectors and provides an important platform for showcasing emerging opportunities to key decision-makers who ordinarily would not visit the Northern Territory.
There have been successful negotiations involving conference convenors to attract three new business events to the Territory. These are the Bulky Goods Retailers Association Annual Conference; the International Cargo Handling Coordination Association International Conference; and SKAL’s International Annual Conference. These three business events have confirmed Darwin will be the host venue for conferences throughout 2010. The Bulky Goods Retailers Association will hold their annual conference in Darwin in mid-July; and the International Cargo Handling Coordination Association will hold their international conference in August this year, and that conference will be opened by the Chief Minister.
This is a tremendous outcome which will provide the Territory economy with a significant additional injection. These conferences will also provide the Territory with an opportunity to showcase its capability and capacity directly to key investors and decision-makers who have not previously visited the Northern Territory, and will highlight Darwin’s strategic proximity to key mining, oil and gas developments in our region, including Indonesia and the rest of Asia.
The Shanghai World Expo will be the single largest event in 2010 to showcase the Northern Territory to a high level international audience. Particular focus in planning this has been given to NT Week, which will occur between 23 and 27 August, and will include five high level events, three of which will be held at the VIP lounge at the Australian Pavilion.
I am pleased to advise Mr George Roussos, President of the NT Chamber of Commerce, has accepted an invitation to accompany the Chief Minister to the Shanghai World Expo, and will be the MC for the five high-level events which will take place during NT Week. A range of complementary activities will also occur at the expo site, including performances by Gurrumul Yunupingu, resident Indigenous artist at the Australian Pavilion, and two youth basketball teams who will compete in international basketball exhibitions during the expo.
Consideration is also being given for a three province tour of China following the expo to further strengthen our physical presence and bilateral relationships with key provinces of strategic interest to the Northern Territory. A dedicated website has been launched to provide regular updates on the Territory’s involvement and participation at the expo. People can visit the website www.growingnt.nt.gov.au/shanghai.
Importantly, the Trade Support Scheme continues to be a key mechanism for supporting business and industry in its endeavours to pursue commercial opportunities in international markets. Officers of the scheme make regular trips to new and existing clients across the Territory, and regional centres, to ensure its accessibility. Three visits have been made to Alice Springs, and one each to Katherine and Tennant Creek.
The Henderson government has and will continue to work closely with Territory business and industry associations to ensure the goals of this trade strategy continue to be relevant to the priorities of Territory business and result in real and tangible outcomes that continue to drive the Territory’s economy into the future.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House, and move the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish tonight to comment on the minister’s statement, Growing International Trade. On reading the statement, the government has not had a plan involving international trade with real outcomes since 2005 when the portfolio moved from the then Business department to the Chief Minister’s Department under the previous Chief Minister, Clare Martin. Prior to that, the then minister had the Business department working on the international trade strategy and, whilst it was not perfect, it was a document with five clear, definable and measurable outcomes to deliver. Quarterly reports were required from the minister detailing the progress or otherwise against the targets, and the department worked towards the targets and was clear in what could not be measured or achieved, nor seen to be achieved.
As I recall the situation, the department worked in an environment without ambiguity. There was a focus on results, and expanding markets reached beyond a handful of standard targets. This was, in large part, due to the fact it was a business department they were working within, and the clear imperative of that department was increasing business - not a political department whose imperative was spin and glossy brochures.
The Territory had a strong relationship with the BIMP-EAGA region. Relations with this economic group were commenced by Shane Stone who established amazing and lasting relationships; he is mentioned even today amongst senior government officials. Under previous Country Liberal governments, robust relationships were developed in the region and continued in the early days of this government before they lost the plot. I can recall the staging of three dialogue meetings in Darwin which included senior ministers from around the region, but this activity appears to have all but disappeared off the international trade radar.
I ask the minister: why is there no reference at all to the BIMP-EAGA region and the associated benefits which could flow to the Territory especially in tourism, education, and knowledge exchange? Where is the minister’s reference to linkages with Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, the Middle East, India, Thailand and Korea? We once sought to establish trade ties and relationships very successfully with a number of countries and for many years punched well above our weight, and it was seen that way in these Asian countries. We seem to have lost that drive for success.
When the trade group moved into the Chief Minister’s Department the rot began to set in and the focus became blurry. The International Trade Strategy was all but forgotten and replaced with a document that did not do the Territory justice, nor did it promote or assist in providing real direction to developing trade and trade outcomes. I mean no disrespect to the hard-working government officials; however, they did not have the full support of the Chief Minister of the day, nor did they have a clear and concise plan to move the Territory forward in developing new trade markets for Territory businesses.
I turn my comments to the statement before the House today, which I find sadly lacking and containing nothing of real substance. Before I start, I pay a compliment to the minister which I would not normally do. However, since taking up the portfolio I have seen - and people have told me - he has worked hard at the job including trips to Japan to talk with the INPEX people and attending conferences and events in Indonesia. I hope he continues to work with the industry and travel to these countries for important events to achieve better trade outcomes for our small and medium business enterprises in Darwin and the Territory.
Page 2 of the statement mentions targeting key activities to build on core strengths and capability. My questions are: what are the key activities to be targeted - there is no reference - and what are the core strengths and capabilities? On page 2 there is reference to:
- … significant progress has been made and real and tangible outcomes have been achieved across a range of priority actions identified in the strategy. Target engagement plays a key role in establishing a platform for cooperation and positive outcomes across the range of issues.
What the hell do those two sentences mean? The author of the statement has put in a large level of fluff and jumbled up the words hoping they would sound intelligent. Big tip, minister: they do not. What is the significant progress, and where? Was it thought about? What benchmark started the milestones, minister? How can you judge progress if you do not know where you started? What are the real tangibles, and where? No details at all, just more gobbledegook. What is the targeted engagement, with whom, and where? What is the platform referred to? What are the intended outcomes, and what is the range of issues?
It seems to me the United Nations is alive and well in the Northern Territory and has solved the oil spill, the Palestinian question, the Iraqi issue, the Greek financial crisis, and the UK deficit; all that remains is to make Kevin Rudd popular. Simply put, many recourses used for non-committal of statement.
The statement talks about various events, conferences, visits, and educational opportunities, and I commend them; they are important planks in developing and improving trade outcomes. Participation in these events should be continued, along with encouraging Asian country events to be held in the Northern Territory. Engagement in these types of events is not new. There are references to two Darwin companies in the statement which secured contracts as a result of a visit to Balikpapan, Indonesia. Talks on these activities commenced in 2005, when the first trade mission went to Balikpapan; so I fear the minister may be fudging his success at this point. Do not get me wrong, all these missions and the trade they bring should be encouraged and supported, but I become offended when credit for success goes to the wrong people.
There are references in the statement to the livestock trade, which is an export commodity important to the Territory’s economy and employs between 1500 and 2000 people depending on varying conditions which can affect the industry, such as weather, lock-down or drought times.
The pastoral industry provides wonderful opportunities for employment in remote and regional areas. I congratulate the government and the industry on the recent signing of the memorandum of understanding with Vietnam; this is a good first step. However, there is a long way to go before the Territory truly reaps the full benefit of this arrangement, including working with the Vietnamese people and officials and the industry to ensure feedlots work well and provide a return for all parties. It is all too easy to muck up with animal management, including feedlots, and I would not like this to occur after so much hard work to get to the stage of signing the MOU.
In regard to the livestock export trade out of Darwin, there are some key problems the minister did not address in his statement and I ask him to address them. They are: cattle boats currently do not have priority at our port and, if a container ship comes in, the cattle boats have to wait. This situation is unacceptable and creates unnecessary cost increases and delays in offloading cattle from trucks onto ships when they can finally load. I ask the minister to work harder and further with the port corporation to resolve this impasse so loading can be undertaken efficiently and effectively. Also, I have been told by industry people access to the port is problematic because there is always merchandise on the ground which interferes with road trains accessing the port area. Again, I ask the minister to talk with the port corporation to ensure safe access for road trains so they can unload livestock safely.
The other issue in the export of cattle is the size and location of the holding yards. The loading yard on Wishart Road corner is far too small; it can hold approximately 3700 cattle, and needs to hold upwards of 10 000. I know the company involved has had discussions with the Land Development Corporation and I urge the minister to talk with the Planning minister to find an alternate site which can hold 10 000 cattle. My discussions with industry tell me they desperately need a bigger yard closer to the port.
Another important issue with the live export trade is the change occurring in Indonesia’s push for self-sufficiency which has created a backlog in permit allocation and trouble at some Australian ports. About three weeks ago, a boatload of cattle went from Broome to Indonesia - 1200 to 1500 cattle - and were seized by Indonesia authorities because they did not have the correct permit system; and those cattle were lost. I would not like that situation to occur with cattle going over from Darwin Port.
The ongoing restrictions on Indonesia’s beef import permits could cause price depressions in the Australian domestic market. As well as slowing down the issue of import permits, the Indonesian government recently enforced a 350 kg upper weight limit on cattle exported into the country. That is creating problems, not so much for the actual exporters, but for the producers on the ground. Understandably, Indonesia wants to promote growth in the feedstock industry; however, there is a danger if the restrictions are not lifted soon, export cattle would flood the domestic market and could cause a slump in beef prices across Australia. I call on the minister to work harder and assiduously with the Indonesian authorities so we can protect our live cattle export trade, particularly for the Northern Territory, and also other cattle that come through our yards and into the port.
Has the minister seriously explored alternative markets such as the Middle East, or returning to the Philippines, where we once had a vibrant export market?
On the last page of the statement there is reference to the Trade Support Scheme; I was disappointed it was only one paragraph, and I quote:
- … the Trade Support Scheme continues to be a key mechanism for supporting business and industry in its endeavours to pursue commercial opportunities in international markets.
When that scheme was originally set up, the export and trade people were located in the Business department, however since moving to the Chief Minister’s Department I have been told by industry people and others that, yes, it is an important mechanism, but accessing the scheme is way too difficult. The paperwork is burdensome, it is too costly and, sometimes, it is not worth the effort. So, I ask the minister to see if he can make that scheme more efficient. I am also curious to know how many businesses have accessed the scheme in the last 12 months - and that may be something I will pursue in the Estimates Committee.
The other subject I turn my attention to, which was overlooked completely in the minister’s statement, is two federally-funded schemes: the Export Market Development Grants Scheme which, in the recent federal budget, was severely slashed. It will fall short this year by an estimated $30m across the country, and will mean it could be up to $80m short next year. This will destroy the confidence of small and medium exporters who will stop spending on developing their overseas markets. Australia and the Territory may have escaped the full impact of the global financial crisis, but that is not the case for exporters; let us not forget the impact the dollar is having on remaining competition. With the scheme slashed at the national level, it will be slashed at the Northern Territory level.
Further, the Austrade new exporter development program called TradeStart also suffered severe slashing in the federal budget - it was cut by half. I cannot understand, and I know the Australian Institute of Export and the Australian Chamber of Commerce, and others, cannot understand either why, at a time we are trying to promote exports, it would be slashed.
These two programs are Commonwealth programs, but the TradeStart program is under contract to the Chamber of Commerce. The minister makes absolutely no reference in his statement to the Territory scheme, apart from the fact it is important. He does not talk about what has happened to it, how much it is funded, or whether funding and promotion is going to be increased. In the last round of the TradeStart scheme, $150 000 came into the Territory which enabled one person in Darwin and half a person in Alice Springs; 25 contracts were expected and 15 exports per annum. The TradeStart scheme has been cut to $80 000 for the Northern Territory, yet they expect 40 contracts and 25 exports. They have halved the money and doubled the workload. I do not see anything in the minister’s statement to indicate he has taken up with his federal colleagues that this is not acceptable, given the potential in the Northern Territory for small and medium business to enter into export markets and the cleverness we have in small and medium business across all industries.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I will leave my comments there for now. It is not a bad effort in regard to the statement; it is a little light on substance. I am disappointed it does not reference the Northern Territory trade incentive schemes, and makes absolutely no reference to the fact the federal Labor government has slashed both the export schemes they promote, which will mean a flow-on effect and a drop in funding to the Northern Territory. The minister does not address this at all, which is exceptionally disappointing.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the statement made by the Minister for Asian Relations and Minister for Trade. My statement will concentrate on the Northern Territory’s trade in international education services.
This government has education at the core of its Territory 2030 strategic plan. We recognise education is the key to achieving social and economic improvements and education, and education-related services, are a genuine trade commodity. Across the world more people than ever are undertaking international education and our nearest neighbour, Asia, is spearheading that demand.
Rapid economic growth in Asia has been the most important cause of growth in trade of education over the past 25 years. The rise in per capita income in Asian countries has resulted in a greater desire to access all forms of education through international education. The sector has experienced extraordinary growth in the past few years Australia-wide, from 228 119 in 2002 to 491 565 students in 2009. Those 491 565 students contributed $17.2bn to the Australian economy.
The Northern Territory government is working with the Australian government to implement initiatives to improve the Territory’s image as a study destination for overseas students, and support a high-quality education experience for international students.
The Council of Australian Governments announced last year an international student strategy for Australia would be developed. In April, COAG noted progress on the strategy, which contains 12 initiatives under four broad action areas: student wellbeing; quality of education; consumer protection; and better information. A website will be developed as a single source of authoritative, comprehensive, accurate and up-to-date information for international students. This will mean overseas students wanting to study in the Northern Territory will be better informed about their options.
Our efforts to attract overseas students are certainly paying dividends. International student numbers in the Northern Territory have nearly doubled in the past few years, increasing from 401 in 2007 to 790 in May this year. That figure of 790 is made up of 44 international students at government schools, 52 at non-government schools, 406 in higher education, 202 studying Vocational Education and Training, and 86 undertaking intensive English language courses. These students contribute more than $23m to the Northern Territory economy through the payment of tuition fees, accommodation, meals, return airfares, clothing, entertainment and other general expenses.
Education and training providers, including the Department of Education and Training and Charles Darwin University, regularly attend international trade fairs to recruit international students to study in Darwin. As my colleague, the member for Daly mentioned, a partnership between Charles Darwin University and the Northern Territory government has identified several countries as target markets to increase international student enrolments in the Territory. These countries include China, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, Timor-Leste and Malaysia.
Last year, I accompanied the Chief Minister to the inaugural Timor-Leste Northern Territory Ministerial Forum in Dili. We were joined by a 60-strong delegation, including the Vice Chancellor of Charles Darwin University, Barney Glover, and the Director of the Menzies School of Health Research, Dr Jonathon Carapetis. We met the Timor-Leste Secretary of State for Professional Training and Employment, Bendito Freitas which resulted in Charles Darwin University and Menzies jointly offering two PhD scholarships for Timorese students in the health field. The first scholar was recently welcomed at Charles Darwin University, and the second scholar is preparing to arrive shortly.
The Northern Territory also recently hosted visiting Research Fellow, Valentin Ximenes from the Universidade Nasionl Timr Lorosa'e, UNTL. He completed a 12-week visiting research fellowship in May, and his research focused mainly on the design and policy formulation on local government reform in Timor-Leste.
A Territory government and Charles Darwin University joint exploratory visit to southern Vietnam in December last year identified further educational exchange opportunity, in particular through partnership agreements with Vietnamese tertiary institutions. This included research opportunities and twinning arrangements to establish courses which acknowledge study at each institution. These opportunities were further explored by Charles Darwin University during a follow-up visit by the Vice Chancellor, Barney Glover, in March. As a result of this work, a service agreement was negotiated with Austrade to undertake an education sector study in Vietnam to identify future opportunities.
Participation in the Shanghai World Expo later this year is expected to provide the education sector with a significant platform for high-level engagement in China. The Department of Education and Training will be providing material for distribution at the expo promoting the Northern Territory as a study destination for international students. Students from Darwin High School will also be visiting the expo while undertaking an exchange program in Shanghai. This is reflective of the interest our high schools, and even our primary schools, have in taking advantage of this trade in education.
More sister school relationships are being established and more teacher exchanges are happening. Government and private schools host visiting study tour groups of students from countries such as Japan, China and Indonesia. During his last trip to Tokyo the Chief Minister visited Akabane Primary School, where students were very keen to set up a sister school relationship with a school in the Territory so they could learn about crocodiles …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. A quorum is required. Please ring the bells.
Thank you. We have a quorum.
Dr BURNS: In my capacity as Minister for Public Employment, I am very pleased to inform the House the Northern Territory Public Service is involved in international study exchanges. The first four participants in the Timor-Leste Civil Service Capacity Building Internship Scheme began an eight-week placement in human resource management in the NT Public Service in June last year. The participants found the exchange extremely useful and the next intake of three participants is expected to commence a six-week placement in the NT Public Service this month.
The three were selected by the Timor-Leste Civil Service, and are senior managers from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of State Administration and the Ministry of Economy and Development. They will be exposed to the public sector’s financial management practices and procedures and will be placed in the Department of the Chief Minister, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services and the Department of Business and Employment for the operational component.
I recently met with a delegation of seven members from the Timor-Leste Civil Service who were visiting Darwin as part of a number of planned study tours to gain a greater understanding of other public sector environments. They were very keen to learn all they could about our public service, and the Office of Public Employment was just as keen to share what knowledge they could.
I have outlined the educational and economic benefits to the Territory for trade and education and education-related services. There is another benefit: the opportunity to share our unique customs, culture and way of life with those who choose to study in the Northern Territory. Our students also have the opportunity to travel overseas, to learn a new language, a new culture and enhance their education beyond books - that is a wonderful and very special opportunity.
The trade in education and education-related services is one of our fastest-growing commodities. As outlined, the benefits to the Territory are numerous to our economy, our education system and our society. It is certainly a trade this government will continue to pursue and develop.
Debate adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move the House do now adjourn.
Tonight I would like to talk about the spectacular event my wife and I attended on behalf of the Chief Minister on Saturday, 29 May 2010, the 2010 Rose of Tralee Pageant Ball, held in the Ballroom of SKYCITY Casino, Darwin.
At the ball I had the great pleasure of meeting the Irish ambassador to Australia, his Excellency Mairtin O Fainin, and his wife Mrs Anne O Fainin. I also met the winner of the 2009 International Rose of Tralee, Charmaine Kenny, and the 2009 winner of Darwin Rose, Anne McNamee.
The Rose of Tralee Pageant is an annual event which offers young Territory ladies of Irish descent an excellent opportunity for personal growth and the chance to trace, rediscover and celebrate their Irish heritage and culture. For one lucky contestant, it also presents an opportunity to travel to Ireland and represent the Northern Territory at the distinguished international Rose of Tralee festival. The Rose of Tralee International Festival has its inspiration in the story of the ill-fated love between a servant girl and the son of wealthy merchant, made famous in the love song, The Rose of Tralee.
The festival is one of the pre-eminent festivals of Europe and attracts girls of Irish descent from all over the world, and the selection of the Rose of Tralee is shown on TV in over 30 countries across the globe. The winner is selected for her good character, qualities, personality, talent and charm. So far, Darwin has sent 25 representatives to Tralee, this year being the 26th, and each year the feedback on the performance of the representatives is most complimentary.
This year’s pageant attracted seven entrants, and I congratulate each and every one for their contribution to a successful event. Their efforts in organising extensive fundraising saw them raise a total of $8000; the pageant donated $5000 to the Starlight Foundation
Government House, Parliament House and the Lord Mayor’s office each had a reception for the entrants, which plays a very important role in the selection of the Darwin Rose of Tralee representative, providing the contestants with the opportunity to develop and improve their public speaking and networking skills, and fostering their confidence.
I congratulate Valerie O’Halloran. Valerie was the lucky winner of this year’s Rose of Tralee NT competition. I wish Valerie all the best for the Rose of Tralee international competition to be held in Ireland in August 2010.
There are a number of people who have made a worthy contribution to the pageant’s success and these people deserve to be acknowledged for their tireless efforts and hard work. I acknowledge the great work of the Irish Association committee members, including Julia Baxter, President; Mary McAlpine - what a character as Vice President; Kay Gargett, Secretary, and committee members Ray Willoughby and Pat Murray.
I also acknowledge the good work of the Rince na h’Eirean Darwin Irish Association committee members. Well done to Romola Sebastianpillai, Chairperson; Kerri Cramp, Vice Chairman/ Treasurer; Maree McLinden, Secretary; Mara Dobrini, Secretary; Lorraine Evans and Kylie Tune, committee members. The Rince na h’Eirean Darwin Irish Dance Association is an Irish dancing school which has served the people of Darwin and surrounding regions for over a decade. It has approximately 60 members ranging in age from four to over 60 years. The name Rince na h’Eirean means Dance of Ireland, and the association’s motto is ‘We Dance with our Hearts’; and this is how they encourage their dancers to perform - with a smile on their faces and a spring in their steps. The school performs regularly at community events, school fetes, and aged-care facilities.
The Rince na h’Eirean Darwin Irish Dance Association was privileged to perform at the Rose of Tralee ball this year. The dancers were Rosie O’Reilly, teacher; Alex Gotze, teacher; Michaela Blake, Rochelle Blake, Shannon McLinden, Kate Kenny, Tim Miles, Ellie Miles, Karen Spencer, Ashlyn Lans and Isobelle Lans. The dancers performed a lively selection of traditional Irish ceili and choreographed soft-shoe and hard-shoe dances. It really was spectacular, and heartily enjoyed by everyone who attended.
They performed the opening number with a hard-shoe choreographed dance which had the audience’s toes tapping and set the scene for the rest of the performance. The dances that followed were high energy, especially the three hands and jigs; and it was a delight to see two young dancers performs solos. The enthusiasm and skill level of the dancers made for a very enjoyable and polished performance.
I was particularly impressed at the way the dancers encouraged and supported each other; there really is a great spirit amongst that group. Well done for a fantastic and excellent performance and I look forward to attending the pageant again next year. It really is a highlight of the Darwin calendar and I commend it to members.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I recognise the outstanding service of the outgoing Deputy Clerk, Captain David Horton.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mrs AAGAARD: Captain Horton has had a long and distinguished career, first in the Royal Australian Navy where he spent 35 years rising from the junior sailor rank to Captain, a position which included Commanding Officer of HMAS Coonawarra from 1989 to 1992; followed by a period as Chief of Staff of the Naval Training Command. After leaving the Navy, he became the official Secretary to the Administrator and, from 1998, has been Deputy Clerk of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly.
I asked David for some reflections on his time as the Deputy Clerk, and he has provided me with some observations. I will be reading in the first person, so this is David speaking - unfortunately, he cannot speak on our floor. His introduction to the parliament was a phone call from the then Public Service Commissioner while he was on leave in the United Kingdom in 1988. He was asked if he interested in this job in the parliament and he said: ‘I know nothing about parliaments’; but he said: ‘I would learn, and learn I did’:
- On the first day after the polite introduction by the Speaker, the debate erupted with a degree of disorder, by which time I had completely lost the plot and wondered what I had got myself into. It has, however, been a privilege to serve the parliament for almost 12 years, during which time I have adopted what I believe to be a two dimensional approach. In that respect, I have applied traditional parliamentary practice, procedures and administration, but maintained a balance with possible political implications with both sides of the House on the information and advice given.
- There are many highlights, and perhaps even more challenges, in a parliamentary environment. For example, keeping a straight face at all times and not joining in the laughter during some frequently lighthearted moments. A good joke, but Clerks are not allowed to be amused …
Although I must say I believe the Clerks are sometimes amused:
- … staying calm when all around is in disarray and getting rather boisterous. My Navy training helped in this case by remaining cool under fire. Clerks do not get flustered, or at least they do not show it.
- In respect of highlights, planning and the conduct of the first and subsequent regional sittings in Alice Springs …
David, you put in a huge amount of work with the four sittings we have had in Alice Springs, and they are a testimony to you:
- … upgrading the security arrangements at Parliament House following 11 September and other national/international incidents; recognising and developing the need to maintain and upgrade the Parliament House facility with appropriate asset management arrangements for the next 20 years-plus; planning and coordination of the ICT cabling upgrade for Parliament House which involved a major logistical exercise in relocating members and staff over a long period of time …
- … participation each year with the Australian and New Zealand Association of Clerks at the Table (ANZACATT); and, in particular, as a member of the Education Committee which resulted in the professional training and recognition of parliamentary staff at the national level, including a number of students from this parliament with the completion of the Parliamentary Law Practice and Procedures Course with QUT in Brisbane.
Then he says:
- … and just being involved.
David, I am sure all honourable members join with me in wishing you a very happy time in the next part of your journey – I hope it is on some kind of a ship. Maybe we should be saying bon voyage. I hope the next part of your journey with Lorraine, your wife, is a very good one. I wish you all the best for your future.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I, too, pass on my thanks to our Deputy Clerk for his years of long and distinguished service to our Legislative Assembly.
The advice David has always provided, frank and fearless to all members, has assisted us in the work we do. I suppose much of the work we do here is unlike work conducted anywhere else, and it is a unique experience to participate and work in this parliament, and to have served all 25 sitting members with absolute grace, respect and diligence. To be around some of the big debates of the day and of the time must have been an interesting ride given your background, David.
I sincerely thank you for your advice, your support, the good grace and humour you have had in this role. I wish you well in the next phase of your life and career and, whatever you choose to do, I know you will do with distinction.
Thank you for your great contribution to a fabulous institution, the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Territory opposition, I also pass on our sincere best wishes, and thank you for the service you have provided this parliament.
I find it amazing the member for Wanguri and I are like the fathers of the House, but I feel we have not been here that long. You have been here longer and have observed people come and go; you have observed the activities of the Chamber - and I note the words spoken ‘maintaining courage under fire’ - quietly observing the behaviour of the Chamber and making your own quiet assessments. I would love to give you a penny for your thoughts and what you really think about what is going on in here. It is having that still space within the Chamber to look across, and is a reference point. I really appreciate the role played by officers of the parliament and, in this case, particularly you, Sir, for that still point in a storm which sometimes helps us to gain a reference point.
I know you have had an interesting journey, just by bearing the title Captain - I have a bit of an Army background; a Captain in the Army is quite different to a Captain in the Navy; I understand and respect that - and then to serve in this capacity with distinction.
It is a big decision to say farewell, but I am sure you will cherish the memories you take with you. And I still would not mind giving you a penny for your thoughts. Thank you, and all the very best.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I also add my thanks to those of my parliamentary colleagues who have spoken tonight to thank our outgoing Deputy Clerk, Captain David Horton. He is a man who brought a distinguished Naval career with the wealth of experience that brings, as well as the role with the Administrator of the Territory, to great use in serving our parliament and, therefore, the people of the Northern Territory.
From 1998 to today; what an incredible series of changes you have seen and the characters who have paraded through this parliament as politicians who are here to ultimately serve the people.
As we have heard in debate, you have been fair and frank with your advice, your support to all members of this Chamber, regardless of where they sit on the benches and of the roles they play. I have some very fond memories of the various tasks and challenges I have had to set for the officers of the Assembly. I remember when I had to test the Hansard equipment to see if my baby monitor would work in this Chamber, being the first parliamentarian to have a child in office. It was with good grace you ensured the staff of the Assembly worked with me so I could be at the sittings of parliament just after the birth of my youngest.
Sitting on the House Committee, which deals with the functioning of the parliament, was an opportunity to see at close quarters, Captain, the way you and the senior officers of this Assembly steered this ship through somewhat stormy seas, particularly through the stormiest of seas with the introduction of the broadcast of parliament - a significant change opening up parliament to broadcast.
The evolution of that was Question Time and all the work that went into it. Further evolution was through the Internet and now, ultimately, through not just audio but visuals that go right through the sittings. I commend you for the logistics, research, and effort that has gone into that. I know you have been diligent in the way you have applied yourself to those tasks on behalf of not just the parliamentarians, but the broader Territory community who benefit.
I echo the sentiments of the member for Nightcliff regarding the sheer logistics of getting parliament to sit in Alice Springs, albeit it just for three days every two years. Anyone who has glimpsed behind the scene knows the effort staff of the Assembly goes through to ensure it occurs seemingly without a glitch.
I know, Captain, your training in the Navy ensured everything you did was done thoroughly and diligently and we have seen the success of that with the sittings in Alice Springs. We could not have pulled off such a feat without the effort you made. As a Territorian, it is a great legacy you are leaving all officers of the Assembly in being able to take on fairly Herculean tasks and deliver them with great professionalism.
I have learnt from the way you approached your job in this Assembly that diligence and thoroughness, and sometimes being quiet when you are otherwise tempted to speak, is perhaps the best path.
I have seen this Assembly through its various ages and I have seen officers of the Assembly, Clerks and Deputy Clerks, and I will always have the fondest of memories of working with you in your time here, and the highest respect and regard for you, Captain Horton. Thank you.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate Captain David Horton for his many years of service to this parliament.
I want to share for a moment with the House some absolute fundamentals of democracy. What is essential is open and transparent processes so it is clear who is driving the agenda, and what that agenda is. What is also essential is economic empowering of the community, ensuring every citizen is truly equal before the law. It is also essential and most important, and comes at the forefront of everything we do, that government is the servant of the people, not their master. It is our job to listen, respond and deliver that which is demanded by the people. Let me share with you some basic points on democracy prepared for a civic education campaign in Iraq:
In a democracy the exercise of political power must respect the law, the constitution, and the will of the people through the decisions of their elected legislative representatives. In a democracy, government is based on the will of the people. The elected representatives at the national and local levels must listen to the people and be responsive to their needs. Democracy is a system of rule by laws, not individuals. All citizens are equal under the law.
I am emphasising these principles in the House today because this government is flagrantly undermining the democratic process. I will give you three glaring examples, and I wish there was a simple three strikes and you are out policy. Major causes behind the failure of democracy here include a lack of timely financial management, and a lack of transparency. As the member for Braitling noted last night regarding the Auditor-General’s report on SIHIP:
- This is a maladministered program, and it goes to the heart of the agreement between the Independent member for Nelson and the Chief Minister.
One of the items in the Attorney-General’s report stated:
- Incorrect calculation of expenditure, and the absence of adequate supporting documentation; lack of proper approval for expenditure incurred.
In the member for Nelson’s response to the censure motion he said, and I quote:
- The program of course, was supposed to produce efficiencies and I have yet to see any documentation which is outside of buying some stoves and some fridges that can show me whether those efficiencies have occurred. The alliance project has been, I believe, very difficult to obtain costings from. In fact, the Auditor-General has some costings which are probably the first that I have seen in relation to the total program.
And further:
… there have been issues in relation to the governance of this program.
The member for Macdonnell put a motion to the House for the establishment of a Territory Indigenous Expenditure Review Committee to: inquire into all areas of Indigenous expenditure, including allocations by the Territory government, and made by the federal government, which are both administered by the Territory and federal governments; and to match said related expenditure allocations with actual expenditure and evaluate the outcomes achieved. This Labor government’s response was in the negative.
The member for Macdonnell stated she was:
- … saddened at the decision to reject this worthwhile and necessary motion because I believed it was a significant opportunity missed by this parliament to introduce a higher level of scrutiny of where money allocated to Indigenous Territorians is expended.
It was of great concern the government’s response had been so negative, when the member for Arnhem’s own words in response to the motion were:
- … we … are very aware in our spending - be it on Indigenous people or otherwise – that we are accountable to the people of the Northern Territory, to the taxpayers across Australia. In that accountability, we have to be accountable to the parliament, in the very processes of the Westminster system we are governed by. Those processes are about the committees of the parliament, the parliament itself, and the estimates process, where each and every minister on this side of the House in government has an opportunity to be scrutinised, to express in detail the way money is spent, the way money is not spent, and the very activities of each agency. These are fundamental tools of our democracy - important instruments that allow Australians in this country to believe in a particular process.
I note the Indigenous Expenditure Review Steering Committee, under the auspice of the Council of Australian Governments, has developed a national framework for collecting and recording government expenditure on services to Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Its aim is to provide vital transparency, and we should be doing the same here. Not only with SIHIP, but across every other program.
There is the calamity we witnessed last night, when the member for Nelson’s carefully considered amendment to the motion on the establishment of an independent inquiry to report on breaches of environmental standards and related matters was completely overlooked. Let me remind you of this amendment:
- The Assembly requests that the EPA inquire into the following breach of environmental standards of the Port of Darwin including its operations at East Arm, and the Port of Gove and its operations, and the discharge of sewage from outfalls into the Darwin Harbour; the Northern Territory government provides the necessary resources to undertake this inquiry; the EPA to report to this parliament during the first sittings of 2001.
We did not support his amendment, we supported his intent. How little respect was he and those he represents shown? This process failed and the democratic process was undermined because the member for Nelson went to government seeking a change in a motion supported by government, but this Labor government took his good faith in very bad faith.
Wind the clock back to August 2009 when the member for Nelson had very serious concerns about the siting of a new prison. Let me remind you when, in April 2008, the government announced a new prison, the then Department of Planning and Infrastructure identified a number of potential sites, but ‘an important element of this consideration will be taking into account community concerns about the placement of a new prison’. Like the recent, non-existent secure care facility consultations in Alice Springs and Bees Creek, there were no public consultations for the new prison. As the member for Goyder said in a matter of public importance debate in February last year:
- There has been no consultation, no information, no public meetings; no ministers, no government officials even considering talking to the people …
In August 2009, the member for Nelson stated:
- Thankfully, in the agreement I made with the Chief Minister, the agreement states there will be an expert panel to review the location established.
- That the government reverse its decision to build a new prison at Weddell …
Let me remind you a majority of members in this Legislative Assembly represent the majority of people in the Northern Territory. In the case of the Carey Builders debacle, this House should have worked together, as required by the majority, to assist those affected in their time of need. Yet again, this government said no, and refused to establish the fund we suggested should be calculated by a relevant, qualified person to complete the unfinished homes. This, despite the fact the motion we proposed was supported by the two Independent MLAs.
The Alice Springs News summed up the local disgust:
- Braitling MLA Adam Giles orchestrated the defeat of government last week in a parliamentary vote on measures to assist people stung by Carey Builders and Framptons New Homes scandal. But because of parliamentary convention, the government is free to ignore that vote.
And the government has. This government has failed in every single way to be properly democratic. We saw it today where the Speaker failed to pass on the intent of this parliament to the federal parliament, and it makes me hang my head in shame at times.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will start by saying the Finke Desert Race is coming up this weekend, and I wish riders, drivers, and spectators all the best in safety. I thank the organisers of the Finke Desert Race, and I also wish my colleague, the member for Drysdale, good luck. When he drives past me when I am camping on the Finke track, I expect him to toot the horn, and I would like him to make it a little further past me this year. I wish spectators, drivers, and riders all the best and, hopefully, people get through safely. It will be another fantastic year, and Finke just gets bigger and better.
In relation to Carey Builders, my colleague, the member for Fong Lim, briefly spoke about that. Let me express my utmost disgust at the government going back on its decision to support those victims of Carey Builders. Let it be known people will lose their homes as part of the government’s reluctance to help victims of Carey Builders.
It is a complete breakdown in the democratic process when we try to get something through to help people. It is our role to advocate on behalf of our constituents. Parliament supported that motion; government will not do it. They are happy to pork-barrel their own electorates, happy to feather their own nest, happy to look after their own interests, but when people really need assistance, it is not good enough. The government is quite happy to spend $200m-plus to build 11 houses under SIHIP, quite happy to spend $95 000 buying tents for Alice Springs, quite happy to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on consultants, but cannot afford a couple of hundred thousand dollars as a loan to the victims of Carey Builders.
We heard the Treasurer say in the Chamber today the government does not give loans to individuals - they have the Homestart program and the Buildstart program where they take an equity stake. They have a loan to the waterfront of millions and millions of dollars, yet they cannot help people who are about to have their loan foreclosed and are going to be kicked out on the street. I believe that is devastating.
Before I go on, I would like to say it is not often unions reflect the views of the Liberals. What we see today is a very interesting piece by someone who has put up a blog on the Your Rights at Work Campaign, someone by the name of Kara Touchie. She has really come on board taking the views of the No More Sit Down Money Scheme. I would like to read a document she has written. I will read it really fast.
- The campaign to protect the rights of workers is an ongoing battle, and occasionally you come across a situation that makes you wonder what century you’re living in. That’s definitely the case for thousands of workers up here in the Northern Territory.
The fairness in Australian workplaces is now underpinned by 10 National Employment Standards (NES), a system of modern awards and the minimum wage which ensures a basic safety net for all Australian workers.
I will cut some out here to save time.
- But these minimum standards and basic entitlements are not afforded to thousand of workers in the Northern Territory.
Under the Community Development Employment Program (CDEP), a government ‘employment’ program which ties community development and work to income support, workers are being systematically ripped off by unscrupulous employers.
To be able to engage in this debate seriously we need to take all the trappings of wedge politics, values-based policy aimed at addressing social dysfunction and general misinformation provided by the mainstream media. In other words, this discussion is not about whether the Northern Territory Emergency Response (or intervention) is’ good’ or ‘bad’. What it is about is a fundamental abuse of Australian workers’ rights that has flown under the radar due the Northern Territory Emergency Response.
So what is CDEP and why are workers being ripped off? The AMWU organiser in the NT said to me that the way he explains CDEP employment is this:
‘If you are pushing a mower in an urban centre and you are paid like every other worker in Australia with access to a minimum wage and all of the bells and whistles. If you are pushing a mower in a regional/remote NT town you are being paid CDEP. This amounts to not much more than the basic income support payment of $257 a week’.
Scarily, many CDEP workers are working between 24 to 30 hours a week. Taken from the lower limit (24 hours) this means workers are earning around $11 per hour. From July, the National Minimum Wage will be $15 an hour.
- To add insult to injury, under the Northern Territory Emergency Response 50% of people’s income support/CDEP wages is quarantined on to a Basics Card. This literally means that for 24 hours work, people are paid in the hand around $128: which equates to $5.30 an hour.
Not since the time before the Wave Hill Walk Off has Australia seen government policy which allows this kind of abuse of workers’ rights.
In a remote town called Kalkarindji, Peter Inverway works on a construction site with 9 other blokes. He and his work mates do up to 30 hours a week. Recently, on a visit to Darwin he told me that he feels ‘it is like working for rations like our people done in the past. If we don’t work then they’ll cut our Centrelink’.
Another of the workers, Johnny, broke his arm 7 weeks ago and although he has a medical certificate saying that he shouldn’t be working, he has been forced to continue working performing construction work under the threat of receiving no income.
- So the question is: why and how has this been allowed to happen?
It is interesting to digress for a second and think about those 500 people who are taken off CDEP and put into real jobs as part of the transition program at the start of the intervention, in recognition of the liberal philosophy that people should be getting a fair day’s pay, with superannuation, maternity leave, sick leave, and long service leave.
Those 500 people were put through what thousands of others were put through due to federal government and Northern Territory government employment. The federal government said: ‘For three years we will pay the salary but give all the money to the local councils and shires. It is your job to come up with a model where you can keep those people employed after three years’.
What did the government do three weeks before 30 June after three years? Contacted the federal government and said: ‘Is that Jenny Macklin? We need some more money. We can’t do this ourselves’.
Those 500 people are even worse off than has been explained by Kara because they cannot go back onto CDEP; they have to go on the dole. We had all the huff and puff by the Minister for Indigenous Development and Local Government earlier in the week. These 500 people will go back on the dole. There is no other choice unless the federal government puts money in, which is not its responsibility. It is the responsibility of the Northern Territory government to design a local government model which enables the appropriate resource identifications, whether through the rate base or other fees and charges, to ensure it has enough money and resources to run the council and pay the workers.
What we will see now is an inadequate local government model which will force local shires to sack 500 Indigenous workers. We are trying to fix things in the Territory and the Labor government is trying to stuff it up, to put it bluntly. Kara writes this interesting article saying: ‘Why can’t we get equality for these workers?’ We cannot get equality because we have a Labor government. The previous Liberal federal government put 500 people into work and they are now going to be sacked because this government did not do the job.
We now hear reports about shire councils being so in debt the only way they can get out is to sack people. Ask the Barkly Shire how much in debt they are. Ask the Tiwi Shire how they are going, or how the management of their CDEP program is going. Go out there and see exactly what is going on. They do not have the rate base to attract the funds. They did not set up a model where the rate base would be increased so they could keep these people employed. We will see more people being sacked, and that is another sad indictment.
The member for Fong Lim spoke about the breakdown in democracy in the Northern Territory and you see it clearly in the role of the Speaker, and the Chief Minister, and the performance of some members who are clearly over-promoted and unable to do their job. We see the struggles with the Carey Builders’ motion; we see SIHIP where people cannot understand how, for some reason, you get value for money for $200m and 11 houses. They do not seem to get that.
We have this ‘council of Territory love’, the Council of Territory Cooperation which, for all intents and purposes, is supposed to bring about reform in the Territory, and all they do is talk and spend money. Now I hear they are going to have a stand at the show. What is this? A way they can get more travel allowance, more flights and more movement within the Territory so they can go to the shows? We have more flights, more TA, so people can talk to the CTC. That is what we, as politicians, are there to do; listen to the interests of constituents within our electorates and bring it to debate, and parliament come up with some concept, idea, or legislation, and you move forward with that. The motion on Carey Builders was a perfect example. Parliament said this and government chose not to do it. I believe the CTC needs to have a good hard look at it, and the Country Liberals need to have a good hard look at our role on the CTC.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is with great pride I speak tonight in the House about a hand-back ceremony I attended on Thursday, 13 May at the beautiful Jasper Gorge in the Jutpurra National Park, also known as Gregory National Park.
As the Minister for Parks and Wildlife, and the local member for Stuart, and as a proud Territorian who has travelled through the VRD on many occasions, the event was truly a special one. It was a bumpy ride out to the gorge from Timber Creek, but we eventually emerged from the dust to a clearing where there were hundreds of people who had arrived to take part in this historic occasion which will see a new agreement between Aboriginal people, the traditional owners, and the Northern Territory government working together to maintain this breathtakingly beautiful country.
If I say the mood at Jasper Gorge was very moving, I do not think I would be exaggerating. As everyone mingled waiting for the formalities to begin, there was a hint of sadness for all those who were no longer with us to see this important event become part of our history. There was dancing, music and speeches from many people including the old men from around the VRD, the lady dancers from the Gurindji lands at Kalkarindji, and many other local groups talking about their connection to country, and what an important day this was for the people of the region.
The hand-back was a significant and historic step forward in acknowledging and respecting the continuing cultural attachment the traditional owners have to that part of the country. I quote one of the senior men who spoke at the opening ceremony, Mr Larry Johns:
- The men and women here are the rightful owners of this place.
And:
- … this is a very important place for the people. It’s like the capital of the Victoria River Region, like Canberra is the capital of Australia. Jutpurra rhymes with Canberra, and Jutpurra, with all its dreaming sites, is pretty powerful country.
I acknowledge the presence of many people at the ceremony. Australia’s Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Jenny Macklin, the local member and federal member and Minister for Indigenous Health, Warren Snowdon, were all there to celebrate the handover.
I also acknowledge the elders who were there who have done so much work in discussions with Parks and Wildlife and the government about the joint management, including: Mr Peter Waterloo, Mr Jimmy Wavehill, Mr Jack Little, Bill Harney, Mae Rosas, David Ross, Kim Hill, and two park rangers from Bullita, Rhese and Derek.
A large contingent of media from across the country flocked to document this historic event, which added to the great sense of unity, reconciliation, and progress felt by all. It was a moment for all Australians, and a moment we can all be proud of.
The former Gregory National Park was first established in 1984, with the acquisition of Bullita Station and portions of adjoining pastoral stations. In 1990, it was formally declared Gregory National Park under the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act. In 1996, a further portion of Mount Sandford Station was included, bringing the total area of the park to around 1.3 million hectares. This is the Territory’s biggest park and, after nearly six years of negations, the Aboriginal rightful owners have an agreement with the Northern Territory government and a 99-year lease for joint management. The joint management plan involves the traditional owners having a say in the management and operations of the park, which will contribute to making the Northern Territory parks estate of world-class standard.
The underlying title to the land rests with the traditional owners, but the social, cultural, and environmental assets will be conserved using their knowledge and skills for the benefit of their country, their community, and all Australians. The agreement will allow Aboriginal people to keep their culture strong and create ongoing economic opportunities for their children through a range of industries, including both conservation and tourism industries.
I was humbled by the strength of culture and perseverance of the Aboriginal people in the VRD region. The magnificent gorges, escarpments, and plains are now to be jointly managed by Aboriginal owners and park rangers, and Jutpurra National Park marks the way forward for land management in Australia; looking after country together two ways.
I acknowledge the Northern and Central Land Councils and their personnel who, for many years, worked on this agreement, and many of whom were there on the day. I also acknowledge the senior members and members of the Nalipinkak, Bilinurra, Jutpurra and Winan Aboriginal Land Trusts.
It has been a privilege for me, as Minister for Parks and Wildlife, to attend a few of these handovers, including the ones at Jesse and Emily Gaps in Alice Springs. I look forward to signing more joint management agreements with traditional owners in the future, for the benefit of all Australians.
I inform the House tonight of the resignation of Mr Bill Konstandas, the Chief Executive Officer of Football Federation NT. Bill has done a fantastic job over a short period of time, and the management and promotion of football in the Territory has benefited greatly from his experience. He has also fostered great working relationships with Football Federation Timor-Leste, with the Timor Sea Cup, an Under 18 tournament between Timor-Leste, the Indonesian province of Nusa Tenggara Timur, and the NT. The second round of the Timor Sea Cup was played in Dili recently, and the third round will be held during the Arafura Games next year.
Bill has also worked hard in travelling around the Northern Territory, and it has been my privilege to catch up with him in the Alice where he has done a great deal of work with the Football in Central Australia group, and also a couple of times in Borroloola where we were both there promoting the game, along with the people from Adelaide United.
I wish Bill and his family all the best for the future, and again thank him for his endeavours and efforts during his short period here.
While on football or soccer, and on the eve of the World Cup, I update the House on football or soccer in the Northern Territory. This government is providing $225 000 over three years to the Football Federation of Australia for the Indigenous Football Festival to be held in Alice Springs in 2010, 2011, and 2012, further developing Alice Springs as the hub for Indigenous sport in Australia. Football is making big inroads across the community, and it was inspiring to see the support at last year’s Arafura Games for the talented Borroloola Cyclones who did their town and the Territory proud against teams including those from China, East Timor, and Macau.
This government is a strong supporter of football in Central Australia and, as the Minister for Central Australia, I was proud to recently open the $500 000 upgrade to Ross Park for their clubhouse and lighting; and also support football in Central Australia with $65 000 for the purchase of a portable football arena for the Street Soccer initiative. I also thank Paul Elliott and Mark Wakeling for their efforts in Central Australia in promoting soccer.
In 2009, the A League’s Adelaide United and North Queensland Fury played a pre-season match at Larrakia Park, with Paul Henderson in the goals for the Fury - that is not our Paul Henderson, it is the name of the goalie for the Fury. We are in serious negotiations to secure home and away matches in the A League for Territory football fans.
The Chief Minister and I recently met with representatives of Football Federation of Australia to discuss the Territory’s involvement in Australia’s World Cup bid for 2018 and 2022. We are proud to announce both Traeger Park in Alice Springs, my hometown, and Larrakia Park in Darwin were included in the list of possible training sites for the Football Federation of Australia World Cup bid. The fact we may now have the chance of seeing the Cahills, Messis, Ronaldinhos, Rooneys or Drogbas running around on our sporting venues is a testament to how far the world game has come in the Territory.
This government is proud to support football in the Territory and, once again, I wish Bill and his family all the best for the future.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I apologise in advance: my speech has ‘Madam Speaker’ written throughout and I will try not to refer to you as Madam Speaker; I know you are not a lady.
It is with absolute shame I highlight tonight what has been, for me, a sincere and bitter low since becoming a member of the Legislative Assembly. In politics I, as most people, appreciate a fair level of argy-bargy, passionate debate as the war of words cross paths in this Chamber. At times the debate turns heated, as one might expect, with different views and philosophies exchanged in the battle of wits, the battle of minds, and the battle, perhaps, designed to ensure tomorrow’s headline.
Yesterday, the minister for Environment, Karl Hampton, issued a media release indicating I had reached a new low for mentioning one single word contained in a question asked during Question Time yesterday - one word. What I find amazing is, from this one word he has been able to construct a full-page media release on the subject of all things ‘gutter politics’. A full page from one single word, at a time when our harbour and environment are under attack from some unknown and potentially devastating pathogen! We hear nought from the very minister charged with the responsibility of protecting our environment except for a media release on an unrelated issue I am passionate about.
Using children, particularly children with disabilities, to score a political point is about as low as a politician could go. The minister’s attack was personal in this case, and made worse considering one of my own children has a disability, and they are directly involved with tenpin bowling through Total Recreation, a program I have absolute admiration for, as well as the wonderful staff who provide this valuable service.
Given this, I now question my role in this House. I have, to date, thought I had been given the responsibilities of a shadow ministry and my role was to scrutinise the minister wherever and whenever necessary. This is the role of an opposition member, and of all members on this side. I have considered my input to date has been both firm and fair in my arguments and the manner in which I operate. I have always given credit where credit is due, congratulate ministers and government in general when they have provided our community with a genuine and decent service, but my role includes scrutinising the minister and criticising government whenever it is obvious things have gone terribly wrong. However, any attack needs to be fair and focused on the issue, not the member. What does this minister expect me to do? Stay silent? Hide, and not raise concerns in our community?
I appreciate the minister did not, perhaps, draft this media release; I certainly hope not. I certainly hope he spends his valuable time on more important issues, such as protecting our environment and managing his ministerial portfolios. However, I have concerns with the focus of his office if this is what they are paid for. If this is what they spend their time on, and if it is the instruction from this minister, then I feel deeply sorry for him; and I feel deeply sorry for Territorians. However, at the end of the day, the buck stops with him. It is his media release, his words, and his thoughts.
I was perplexed to some degree as to what to do; how to react to this unprovoked attack on my credibility; how to react to an unexpected charge by a minister, by a man I did have respect for; a man I honestly considered a decent man, a decent human being. Is this just a glimpse of who Karl Hampton is; of the Henderson government minister’s real self; of the quality of person minister Hampton is? If it is, as I said, I feel sorry for him - sincerely sorry.
Before considering how I react - should I react or just let it go through to the keeper? - I e-mailed the minister earlier today to detail how I felt about this low act hoping, I suppose, he might respond and pull me aside and speak with me and explain the logic of lowering his own standards - but nothing, no response, nothing. That is why I am raising this issue here tonight - not in a media release, here.
This is a sign of a minister in crisis, reacting like a scared, timid dog that has been backed into a corner and has no other option than to lash out and bite. It is not the reaction one might expect from a minister of the Crown, from a fair and decent human being. It is an absolute bloody insult that this minister used an organisation I have supported to score cheap, grubby political points. My comments about tenpin bowling were related to your failure to issue a media release on the environment, not an attack on disabled bowling; as you are well aware.
One of my boys has a disability, and he has been involved in disabled bowling for some time now. He enjoys the experience - actually loves the experience - of bowling. For you to try to score political capital using a service organisation I hold in the highest regard is a disgrace. You should hang your head in shame.
I want an apology, not to me, but to the volunteers and kids involved in disabled bowling for your self-serving, pathetic attempt to get at me in this Chamber. In the process, you have used the kids and volunteers associated with this terrific organisation. For that, you should hang your head in shame. My question was about the environment and your incapacity and incompetence in managing the Environment portfolio. This is an act of a useless minister.
My question was borne out by the question I asked on Wednesday: why did you or the Health Minister not issue a media release before the Channel 9 News announced the closure of Mindil and Vesteys Beaches? A decent minister, a good minister, a capable and competent minister, would have taken carriage of his portfolio. That is called leadership - damn leadership! You did not even know how often the water quality was checked at Darwin Harbour. This is pathetic. You, and others, do the work and make political capital out of disabled kids. That is a disgraceful act.
It is the same neglect of the Environment portfolio that has us in a situation tonight where our so-called environmental watchdog, whether NRETAS or the EPA, has no involvement in the investigation into a chemical spill at East Arm. A properly functioning environmental watchdog would be at the site of the spill right now, finding out what happened and how to stop it happening again. A proper minister would have convinced his Cabinet colleagues this was a job for the EPA. Minister, you will go down in the annals of Territory political history as a do-nothing, know-nothing loafer who amazed both his colleagues and opponents with his slothfulness.
Your actions, minister, are a disgrace.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk about a couple of things this evening but, first, I will talk about the AFL Grand Final which I attended at Galiwinku on Elcho Island on 15 May. I remember someone telling me the best way to make contact with people was through family, football, or fishing. He was certainly correct when I looked at the number of who attended the Grand Final game at Galiwinku.
It was a very hard-fought and close contest between the teams, Tigers and Eagles. For the Tigers it was their debut year on the football scene at Galiwinku, and they won by just two points; the final scores being 10.9.69 for the Tigers, and 10.7.67 for the Eagles. It was an incredible contest.
I had e-mail contact prior to the game from a fellow by the name of Tavis Perry, who is the AFLNT Development Officer based at Galiwinku. I think he has been there for 10 months or so. Tavis assured me, via e-mail, it would be a fantastic contest and such is the interest of the community in football that there are eight teams in that competition which, for a community of around 2000, is incredible. On the whole of the Gove Peninsula, we have five teams but, at Elcho in their competition, they have eight teams.
He also assured me they had successfully eliminated both on-field and off-field violence, which I found incredible, but I saw it for myself when I was there. Whilst in the excitement of any Grand Final there is always going to be a few flare-ups around the grounds, there was certainly no violence. People were extremely well behaved, both on-field and off-field. I am not very good at crowd estimation, but I reckon there would have been 800 to 1000 people gathered around the oval at Galiwinku watching this game. I took my husband and my two sons with me, and they found it a fantastic experience. They also enjoyed the night on the island; and the next day we returned to Gove.
Going back to the Grand Final results, I will list the best players for the Tiger’s team. Tyrese Dhurrkay, Nathan Yunupingu, Nathan Wunungmurra, Quinten Gurruwiwi, Alex Bukulaptji and Stephen Dhamarrandji.
From the Eagles side the best players were: Phillip Bukulaptji, Gabriel Dhamarrandji, Wayne Dhamarrandji, Andrew Bukulaptji, Ennis Dhamarrandji and Bruce Dhurrkay.
The winner of the Perkins Bravery Award - Perkins being one of the sponsors and, of course, we know Perkins contribute quite a bit to football in the Northern Territory - went to Quinten Gurruwiwi; and the Gary Dhurrkay Award for Best on Ground went to Phillip Bukulaptji. Congratulations to those players. Congratulations to those teams, and all the teams in the competition. What a fantastic result!
I also highlight one of the players from the Galiwinku competition, a fellow by the name of Lochlan Dhamarrandji, who has played the season for the Kangaroos at Galiwinku and was the joint winner of the Jacky Gumbula Player of the Year Award this year, has recently been selected to play in the NT Thunder team. I would like to quote from a write-up Tavis Perry sent through to me. It says:
- His selection came at a good time, with the team travelling to Brisbane to play against QAFL powerhouse, Labrador, who boast ex-AFL players Peter ‘Spider’ Everitt, Tim Notting, Aaron Shattock and Trent Knobel. It was the first time Lochlan has ventured outside the NT, but he loved every second of it and it showed in his performance. He collected 20 possessions playing across the half forward line, kicked one goal, was instrumental in setting up 3 goals and had 5 contested marks.
NT Thunder coach, Murray Davis, couldn’t have been higher in his praise for Lochlan’s performance:
‘For a guy who’s never flown on a big plane before to meet his team mates for the first time at the airport and play as well as he did proves how much talent there is remote communities’.
- Lochlan is the first player from Galiwinku to represent the NT Thunder at senior level, after Jermaine Wunungmurra played in their reserves side earlier in the year. He was thrilled to get the opportunity to represent his state and got to meet his favourite AFL player, Tim Notting, after the game. Lachlan will get another opportunity to play for Thunder when they take on Aspley Hornets at TIO stadium on 19 June and if the performance of his first game is anything to go by he has every chance to be a regular fixture in their senior side for the remainder of the season.
So, well done, Lochlan Dhamarrandji! We certainly wish him all the very best.
I would also like to highlight, again, some information Tavis Perry, AFLNT Development Officer at Galiwinku has sent me about some up and coming stars from Shepherdson College who have recently participated in a competition in Darwin. It was held over the weekend of 3 to 6 June, and were the AFL Kickstart Country Championships:
- Players were selected for this from their performance at the U 15 championships, which were held in Palmerston in April. Shepherdson College students, Raven Marika, Desmond Dhurrkay and Nathan Thorne played for the Top End Crocs during the Carnival. Nathan, who was previously going to school in Shepherdson College but has recently returned to Gove, was still selected after his performance for Shepherdson College at the U 15 Championships …
- … The Kickstart Country Championships were held for players from remote regions, with 10 from the 6 teams who participated getting the opportunity to represent the NT in a state carnival to be held in Melbourne.
Congratulations to these three young fellows from Galiwinku: Raven Marika, Nathan Thorne and Desmond Dhurrkay, and we certainly wish them every success with their football careers
I also acknowledge the contribution Skinnyfish Music is making to support football at Elcho Island - Skinnyfish being Mark Grose and Michael Hohnen. Whilst people might not recognise those names, they recognise the name Skinnyfish, which is a music production company working with Indigenous artists. Perhaps the most famous person it is dealing with is Geoffrey Gurrumul Yunupingu. It is fantastic to see Skinnyfish has broadened its horizons and is very generously supporting football at Elcho Island - obviously talent is not limited to music; there are football stars as well. That competition is now called the Skinnyfish Galiwinku Football Association. That is fantastic, and why would you not? That is what corporate sponsorship is all about; you get to have naming rights for the competition. I will not disclose what their contribution has been, because I do not know if it is public knowledge, but I can tell you what they are putting into the competition is considerable. So that is fantastic.
I also sing the praises, metaphorically, of a group of young fellows from Nhulunbuy in a band known as the Sleeveheads. Their claim to fame is they won the NT Battle of the School Bands Competition held in the Northern Territory, and played at the recent BassintheGrass concert, playing second fiddle to Silverchair, Jessica Mauboy, and a few others. What a fantastic opportunity for those young fellows: Reid Cooper, Roy Kellaway, Nelson Browne, Brandon Peckham, Wilson Lui, very ably supported by music teacher, Tim Webb, and Roy Kellaway’s dad, Stu, who has music in the genes because Stu, of course, is from the Yothu Yindi Foundation.
Here is the member for Nhulunbuy’s hit prediction: look out for Sleeveheads; they are absolutely incredible. They are having a fundraiser at the town hall tomorrow night because these guys are looking to get on the national scene, and I reckon they will do it. I wish them very well.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, briefly tonight I join in the chorus from the Chamber thanking Captain David Horton for his services to the Northern Territory parliament and, more importantly, the people of the Northern Territory this parliament represents. David, being of a salty dog by nature, understands the importance of setting a plan and, as salty dogs know, you do not go to sea without a good plan. You do not simply wander into the big blue without knowing what you are going to do, how you are going to do it, where you are heading, what course you need to take, and at what time.
I appreciate the direction David brings to such committees as the House Committee, on which I sit. His direction, planning, and his thoughts have gone into the continuance of this House into the future - as a salty dog, you do not make a journey without setting a plan. He has done that; he has laid out some plans for this great House, and I believe they will be there forever more because of his planning. It is an important thing, and is a lesson that can be learnt by many members of this parliament.
I, too, say thank you. Your advice, your knowledge, your friendship, and great personality have been very warming for someone so new to this House. It is great to see we have fantastic support services and staff within this House who work tirelessly
David, move on, enjoy yourself, get on with what you need to do, what you believe you should be doing. Good luck and best wishes.
I will move on. As mentioned earlier, the Finke Desert Race for 2010 will be held in Central Australia. I am competing this year. It is my fourth race in a row …
A member: Good luck to you.
Mr BOHLIN: Thank you. Hopefully, we will succeed. As many people do, I have an understanding when you go in such a large open desert race - the largest in the southern hemisphere and, without doubt, the toughest around; it is comparable to the Dakar, to the Baja 1000 and Baja 500 in Mexico - it is a tough race. It would put any machine from around the world to its limit. We have 500 entrants this year; 88 vehicle entrants - record numbers. I understand the pressures on the teams whether you are rider, driver, navigator or support crew, because you do not do this on your own. It is the support crew which will help you compete and, hopefully, complete the entire event.
All the crews, as we have seen on Facebook, have been travelling all over the country for over a week now. I see tags come up all the time: ‘We are on our way to Finke; we are on our way to Finke’. It is coming from all over the country. It is the big storm in the middle of the desert. Best of luck to all the crews; they are appreciated by all off-roaders. They are a great bunch of people, off-road racers; they have a humility I find very genuine. Whilst being competitive, they will still help each other. More importantly, they understand and respect all the volunteers who help make this event, and many other events similar to it around Australia, happen. They understand, as competitors, if you find yourself coming to grief on this long journey down to Finke, town of Aputula, there are many volunteers along the way including St John – who are tied up directly with the Finke Committee - who will be there to help you.
Spectators, please be safe when you camp along the track. Please ensure your kids, your mates, do not wander onto the track whilst racing is occurring. It is a dangerous sport at times, and everyone is going as hard as they can. Please look after each other so you, as a spectator, can enjoy this great sport and no one gets hurt. Thank you very much for watching all the competitors, because there is such an amazing feeling to even be coming last, in the middle, or at the front, and have the crowd cheering you, no matter how fast or how slow you are going. Also, if you break down, they are there to help you; they will give you some food, give you some shelter, and look after you. That is Australia for you - it is an amazing thing.
I move on to something I am not very happy with. Take ourselves back to Tuesday, 8 June 2010 in this Chamber. In my budget reply, I spoke about continual revoted works which is, in my opinion, where the government has failed to deliver for Territory people, and I pointed out some significant failures. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to swallow, but the public can read what I said in the Daily Hansard debate dated Tuesday, 8 June 2010, starting at page 16. I have a copy of my notes, which clearly state my argument.
I mentioned the Education budget and its $137m revote, and the failure by this government to spend. Then I spoke of the department of Housing, and its $17m revote and failure to spend. Then I spoke of the Health department, and its $149m spend. After health, I talked about services for those who have loved ones with Asperger’s, or autism, and the lack of direct funding for that support service.
Unfortunately, one of the members in this House, the member for Nhulunbuy - and I have had a personal conversation with that member about this - took it to mean something different. I will read from the Hansard dated Tuesday, 8 June 2010, page 20, the top paragraph. The member for Nhulunbuy states:
- You made reference, member for Drysdale, to autism, and the fact that you said it was shameful that government provides no support to people with children with autism in schools.
That is not an acceptable comment; they are not my words. They are a mismatch, an adjustment, to what was spoken in this House. People can get my drift. If you come into this House, hold your integrity high; do not create things people have said. This is in the Hansard, it is there to be read. Do not come into this House and say words that are not appropriate, correct or accurate. It is not acceptable - learn some manners and accept when you are wrong.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak tonight on an issue in relation to a visit recently by a wonderful group of young people, young Territorians, students from Wulagi Primary School from Year 5/6 Reardon and Year 5/6 Houghton.
These students were very excited to come to their Parliament House, to have a look and be shown around by a wonderful group of people who form our educational unit. Since I have come to this parliament, I have seen the staff of that unit provide a fabulous service in teaching our young people what their parliament is all about and showing them around this magnificent building.
It is with great pleasure that I have incorporated on the public record and into Hansard, a number of things; one is a list of the young people who visited, and in particular, a recount of their trip by one Corben York. Corben did a recount and it was chosen by the teachers and students to be the one they would supply to me as local member, member for Sanderson, to be read out in parliament and recorded on the public record. When they start to research these things on the Internet, they will find their recount and their names incorporated into the Parliamentary Record. I will read the recount by young Corben. It goes like this:
A day at parliament
One time 5/6 R and 5/6 H were going on a trip to Parliament House. Our teacher let us inside the school so we could pack our recess and lunch. After we packed our recess and lunch we were ready to go. The bus came at 8 am. The bus driver took a long time to go to Parliament House, although it was ok. The bus dropped us off near the old church. We had to walk from the old church to Parliament House.
When we walked through Parliament House we had to walk through an x-ray machine. Our teacher, Mr Reardon, walked through and it beeped so he had to get checked. Once we were in Melissa talked about the Sturts Desert Rose and why it has seven petals. After that we were talking about the bust of Mr Chan. We finished talking about the bust of Mr Chan then we walked into a room that had lots of flags hanging up. It was so colourful and terrific! We walked into a room which was the Old Post Office. It had a piece of shrapnel in it that looked like the Northern Territory and if you turned it sideways it would look like a crocodile.
We walked outside and saw a big water fountain, it looked so sparkly and clean. Melissa talked all about the fountain and showed us that Sturts Desert Rose was underneath the fountain. A person wanted to take a picture of us with Mr Styles but we waited for a little while because she took two pictures. We also went to the side of Parliament House and saw the most beautiful view, it had the ocean and lots of beautiful trees. After that we went back inside.
We looked at all the Chief Ministers of the past. They were all men and one lady. She was the first lady Chief Minister, her name was Clare Martin. The Chief Minister at the moment hasn’t got his portrait up because he still is a Minister
We walked into a room called the chamber. I was so cold I felt like wearing a snow jacket. There was a lady who talked about the chamber. There were microphones on every desk so if they didn’t turn it off other people would hear their little conversations. She also talked about the Mace and why there are two boxes on the table.
We walked back down the stairs and had a biscuit, a piece of fruit, and a cup of cordial. While we were eating and drinking someone from our class gave out a pencil and a Commonwealth quiz. We did it for about fifteen minutes and then we stopped I did about half of it until we stopped. Melissa gave us a box with lots of gift bags from Parliament House. After that we went back to school and had a big rest. Next time we would know what to do.
It is one of those honest and terrific recounts of a young person’s trip to their Parliament House. Now it is on the record, I hope young Corben, in a number of year’s time, will go back and have a look and be very proud of the recount of his visit. It is interesting what young people see. It is, obviously, different to what we see when we walk into this building; and a terrific recount it was. So Corben, congratulations on being chosen to have your recount read out in the parliament of the Northern Territory.
I put on the Parliamentary Record the names of those wonderful young people who came and had a terrific time. I was fortunate to attend their school assembly not long after, and also visit the classrooms. Those young people were so excited and talked about their trip and what they saw and their experiences. It is great to see such enthusiasm and excitement in our young people.
The students in Year 5/6 Reardon are: Erica Core, Zackary Derksen, Peter Gast, Marnie Hake, Kiara Hendy, Seth Kapser, Aisha Lay, Jaden Marsh, Yanni Mavromatis, Matthew Motlop, Anthony O’Brien, Sean Quinn-Byers, Lucas Schober, Vaughan Straughair, Joseph Tinoco, Elwin Vung, and Corben York.
From Year 5/6 Houghton students were: Courtney Allardice, Oceane-Kauri Bedggood, Rebecca Burke, Isaac Cammarano, Letisha Carter, Joshua Chugg, Rebecca Cotterill, Jaiden-John Cummings, Jordan Harris, Zachary Kirby, Talia Knights, Joseph Martin-Jard, Alasdair McGregor, Daniel Modoh, Vicki Nguyen, Shania Rego, Demi-Jo Roads, Sean Ruger, Paige Straughair, Shuan Trainor, Quentin Vanda, and Corey White-Johansen.
It was with great deal of pride I stood in the classrooms and listened to these young people recount their visit. It is great to see our schools are pleased to come to this House, and for our young people to receive an education about the very basis of our democracy and what it stands for, why we are here, and what people have fought to protect over the years. This is the epitome of democracy, where we do get up and have our say, and are able to hold each other -both opposition and government - accountable for our actions. To have young people come here and witness it, in all its glory, is a fabulous thing.
We should encourage all schools to participate, as often as they can, in the democratic process of our parliament, especially that of the Northern Territory.
I am very pleased to record these names in the Parliamentary Record. I congratulate them all and I hope, in the years to come, they will have very fond memories when they search the Parliamentary Record with their kids and their grandkids to show, they too, were part of the process of ensuring democracy continues in this fantastic Territory of ours.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016