2011-11-29
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from the Administrator Message No 30 notifying assent to bills passed in the October 2011 sittings of the Assembly.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have given leave for the Chief Minister to make a personal explanation. I remind you that personal explanations are not a debate and I ask you to listen to the Chief Minister in silence.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, today I clarify a statement I made in this House last week during the committee stages of the Kenbi Land Trust Bill.
In response to questions from the member for Fong Lim about the legislation, I said, on advice from departmental officials, the developer: ‘… is likely to be the Larrakia Development Corporation, but no final decision has been made’. I went on to point out it is a matter for the Northern Land Council to decide the identity of the developer after consultation with relevant traditional owners. Advice provided to me by departmental officials was the Larrakia Development Corporation was not named in the agreements. On that basis, I advised members accordingly.
Following the passage of the legislation, I was told the advice provided to me on that question was not correct. Although the agreements state the land will be granted to a body or corporation nominated by the NLC, the agreements name the Larrakia Development Corporation as the developer. As soon as I was made aware of this incorrect advice, I phoned the member for Fong Lim and told him. I also arranged for the member for Nelson and the Northern Land Council to be advised. I now take this opportunity to correct the public record.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question the Chief Minister was responding to would have been central to a substantial line of questioning, as I understand it, from the member for Fong Lim. As a consequence, this is not merely a misspeak or an oversight; it potentially changes the opinions of members of this House.
As a consequence of that and whilst there is no question before the Chair, I move that so much of standing orders be set aside as would prevent this House from recalling the Kenbi Land Trust Bill 2011 (Serial 175) on the grounds of invalidity caused by misinformation, and that debate on the bill be recommenced at the committee stages of the bill.
The reason I move this motion …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! We would not be accepting such a motion. It is unprecedented in the time I have been in this House …
Mr Elferink: Well, passing law …
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: … and it is a vain attempt by the opposition to run a spoiling campaign against the Kenbi Land Trust Bill which passed this House …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: … and the government will not be accepting this motion.
Mr Elferink: It passed on misinformation.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! There is another matter, which is a technical one. Member for Port Darwin, you stood on a point of order which was not a point of order. You did not have the call and you were making a point of order.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I seek the call now and will move the motion again.
Madam Speaker, I move - that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent this House from recalling the Kenbi Land Trust Bill 2011 (Serial 175) on the grounds of invalidity caused by misinformation, and that debate on the bill be recommenced at the committee stages of the bill.
The reason I move that motion today ...
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: He is moving a substantive motion ...
Mr HENDERSON: He needs to seek leave of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: No, he had the call on this occasion. Leader of Government Business or Chief Minister, is it the indication still that the government does not wish to accept the ...
Dr BURNS: We will not be supporting this motion, Madam Speaker ...
Mr Elferink: Have the debate and tell us why you are not supporting it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: Oh, arrogant!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! This is simply a motion about suspension of standing orders at this stage.
Mr ELFERINK: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The comments referred to by the Chief Minister - and I will remind honourable members what occurred here on Thursday. Mr Tollner, the member for Fong Lim said:
Madam Speaker, under normal circumstances I would not raise an issue, even if something like a simple error had occurred. However, this is not a simple error. This is an error that goes to the very heart of the issue under debate in the House last Thursday. In fact, it was not the only time this issue was dealt with in that debate because, earlier in the debate - and I remind honourable members of the Chief Minister’s statements:
It is clear that even the Chief Minister, at least during his comments in his final wrap up, was very sensitive to the issues surrounding this particular legislation. His answer to the member for Fong Lim’s question made it abundantly clear it was a serious component of this legislation. In fact, in relation to that specific answer, the passage of this legislation orbited around the very issue to which the information to this House was wrong.
It is not inconceivable - we have seen it in this House in the past - that members of this parliament have changed their mind as a result of what happens in debates. I am not arguing on a point of triviality, I am arguing on a point of centrality. A central component of the passage of this bill was based on that particular answer. If that answer had been otherwise, I am certain the member for Fong Lim would have spent a great deal more time on his feet prosecuting his argument, as well as trying to incorporate or investigate all the answers into the Parliamentary Record in relation to what the Chief Minister had to say on this matter.
An outright denial of an arrangement by the Chief Minister was not a mere oversight or a small technical problem; it changed the nature of the debate. The bill, as honourable members will recall, was to establish a trust instrument, but, once you start to pick winners in the fashion that a winner has been picked, it appears from the personal explanation of the Chief Minister today that the bill has not been legitimately passed by this House.
As a consequence, we argue this bill should be returned to this House and that the questions which would logically have followed from the arguments being run by the member for Fong Lim should be allowed to be asked and stand on the public record. It is not consistent with a democratic principle that where misinformation, whether it be deliberate or otherwise, comes before a parliament, the parliament then passes legislation based on the information the legislation should be legitimatised by simply saying: ‘No, it has passed through all the stages, you guys can get nicked’.
We on this side of the House do not accept that. The bill has not passed this House, in my opinion, because it was based on misinformation and, therefore, logically, the bill is invalid. As a consequence, we seek to have the bill returned to this House so members can hear all the appropriate information surrounding the circumstances of the passage of this bill, and members can then make up their mind structured around the correct information rather than incorrect information.
I reiterate: this is not a matter of just picking an issue on the periphery; this is at the heart of what the Kenbi Land Trust Bill is all about, and we have no other information to give us any indication it is otherwise.
One of the issues raised by the member for Fong Lim last Thursday was there was insufficient information for the bill to be sufficiently supported by this side of the House. Now it turns out not only was the information insufficient, it was also deficient. Any person standing on the outside of this parliament looking in at the moment could not but come to the conclusion a bill passed under misinformation is not a valid law of the Northern Territory.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, in speaking to this motion, this is nothing other than a stunt from the opposition. The opposition was very clear, in the second reading debate, it would not support the legislation because it had not been able to access a copy of the agreement. I explained, in regard to making that agreement available, all parties to the agreement had to agree to make that available. One, or a number of the parties, concluded until all the details were wrapped up in regard to the trust they were not going to make that agreement public, or would not approve the agreement being made public.
This issue of the LDC being named in the agreement was one small part of the overall debate being run by the opposition at the time. It would not support the agreement unless the agreement was made public. That was the stated position of the opposition. Regardless of whether the LDC is named in the agreement or not, the stated position in the second reading debate was the opposition would not support the agreement unless the agreement was made public and was open and transparent.
This is nothing other than a stunt today. As I said, I was acting on advice from officials. As soon as that advice changed I immediately rang the member for Fong Lim and apologised for the incorrect advice. I gave him the correct advice and the member for Fong Lim thanked me for contacting him so promptly and said it was not a major issue; he would not be making an issue of it. I advised the member for Fong Lim the first thing I would do on Tuesday morning, the first opportunity I had to correct the public record based on the wrong advice I was given in the box, was we would not make this an issue. We also contacted the member for Nelson and the Northern Land Council. This is nothing but a stunt today.
The fundamental reason the opposition stated it would not support passage of the bill was the agreement between the parties was not made public. This is an item of detail in that agreement and, as I said to the member for Fong Lim, given the way the second reading debate and the committee stage amendments were pursued, it is not about government having anything to hide. It is the first time I have been provided the wrong advice.
The fundamentals of this stunt are to recall the bill to parliament. I do not understand any procedure where that can happen anyway, but to recall parliament …
Mr Elferink: If you told the truth it would not be a problem.
Mr HENDERSON: … do the entire second reading debate and committee stage amendments again - where will we get to? The opposition still will not support it because the detail of the agreement is not public. So, regarding any possible changes to the legislation and whether it is valid or not - of course the legislation is valid.
The legislation is valid. There are no proposals to change the legislation. The legislation does not define what goes into the agreement between the parties. All it does is establish the vehicle, which is the trust. What is in the agreement has absolutely nothing to do with the legislation.
All the legislation does is create the vehicle - the trust to hold the land. All the issues of that trust - who the beneficiaries are, who is going to be on the board of the trust, what the details of the trust are - have nothing to do with the legislation - absolutely nothing to do with the legislation. That is an issue for the Northern Land Council and the traditional owners. The committee stage amendments we debated were, again, nothing to do with the detail of what is in the agreement. The committee stage amendments were all about ensuring this legislation was consistent in every detail with the operation of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act.
This is just a stunt today to drag out the opposition’s opposition to Kenbi, a land claim it has always opposed - spending millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money opposing it. Because the opposition does not like the fact Kenbi is going to be resolved to the beneficiaries - not only of the traditional owners, the Larrakia people, but also the broader population of Darwin and the Top End, showing respect for the traditional owners, providing certainty in the ability for traditional owners to develop land on the Cox Peninsula - it wants to drag this into further political conspiracies and slander today.
I was acting in good faith in the debate of that legislation. The opposition is, very clearly, on the record - regardless of whether the LDC was named in the agreement or not - because it has not able to see a copy of the agreement and have that made public, its stated position is it will not support the bill.
Even if we brought this back today, the opposition still would not support the legislation. It does not support Kenbi; it never has supported Kenbi.
The committee stage amendments had nothing to do with what was in the agreement; it was all in regard to ensuring the trust, the construct of that trust, and the language in the legislation was consistent with the Aboriginal Land Right (Northern Territory) Act. Therefore, we will not be supporting this procedural motion.
I again say to the opposition, if you have concerns in regard to the trust, how the trust operates, and who the beneficiaries are, you are as able to contact the Northern Land Council as I am, and take the issue up with them …
Mr Elferink: We passed a law on the information you gave to this House, which was wrong.
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, the law is valid; the debate in the House was valid. The legislation does not go to the detail of what is in the agreement between the parties. All the legislation does - the law we passed - is create the vehicle, which is the trust, to hold the land. This is nothing but a stunt from the opposition and we oppose the motion.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, before getting into all the reasons why I disagree with the Chief Minister, I first thank the Chief Minister for contacting me on Thursday night. I was, obviously, very concerned about the information I had received during the discussion in the committee stage of the bill. I understand, at first learning of his error - or the error in the advice he was given - he contacted me and clarified the situation. The Chief Minister will recall during that conversation I said it did put a different light on things because I had a significant number of questions regarding the commercial arrangements contained within the agreement that had been cooked up by Julia Gillard, the Chief Minister, the Northern Land Council, and the Larrakia Development Corporation.
In response to what the Chief Minister said about the opposition not supporting this bill; it is hardly the point whether we support it or not. The point is: do we want to be open and accountable? As the member for Port Darwin said, this parliament has just passed a bill not just with the absence of information - clearly over half the people in this House are uninformed about the nature of the agreements cooked up by the land council, the Northern Territory government, the federal Labor government, and the Larrakia Development Corporation - but the unintentional misleading of the parliament calls into question the whole nature of the agreement they have cooked up, and this legislation.
The Chief Minister’s own words were: ‘This is just to set up a trust’, but the whole reason for a trust being set up, I understand, is because of the agreement. The Commonwealth government, the Northern Territory government, the Northern Land Council, and the Larrakia Development Corporation, I would imagine, have all given undertakings of what each of them would do. Part of what the Northern Territory government says it will do in order to honour that agreement, or those agreements they have made, is set up this trust.
We want to know what is in those agreements. We always wanted to know that. As far as bringing this back, I have never heard of anything like this before; however, I have never heard of a Chief Minister, Premier, or Prime Minister anywhere in the country who accidently misled the House on such a crucial area. It is only fair, reasonable, and just; it is only being open and accountable to bring that legislation back into the parliament.
I want to know what the arrangement is with the Larrakia Development Corporation. What undertakings have been given to the Larrakia Development Corporation in relation to the 200 km of Territory freehold land? We are not talking about a housing block at the back of Palmerston or a small suburban development; we are talking about 200 km of Territory freehold land across the harbour from the Northern Territory’s capital city, and not an insignificant block of land. We are led to understand there is a preferred developer in the wings and that preferred developer is the Larrakia Development Corporation, a wholly-owned entity of the Northern Land Council. There are other groups set up. I am aware there is also a Kenbi Development Corporation which seems to be excluded from this arrangement. Why have they been excluded? I am led to understand the Kenbi Development Corporation is for the benefit of the Tommy Lyons group, the people who were named by the Land Commissioner as being the traditional owners of that land. Why have they been excluded? I do not have any of these answers and I am very keen to ask these questions.
A range of questions have to be asked in relation to this. I remember, when we were debating these things - you talk about things out there and what people have said - my friend, the member for Nelson, waxed lyrical about how some Indigenous people are excluded from agreements and others seem to do very well. I do not think he was pointing a finger at anyone in particular, but he raised the question as to whether certain people were being looked after at the expense of others.
I have the same concerns now in a much greater way, finding out that at the heart of this agreement is a preferred developer, being the Larrakia Development Corporation. I want some more detail on that, and am sure other members in this Chamber would like some more detail on it.
I find it absolutely bizarre that we are dragged into this House to pass legislation to create a land trust, but are excluded from the information on why this needs to be created. The whole thing has been shrouded in secrecy. I find it completely bizarre you have an elected Australian government in cahoots with an elected Northern Territory government, in cahoots with a statutory Commonwealth organisation, which are somehow cooking up deals the public is not allowed to see or understand. I find that extraordinarily strange.
There are many questions in relation to this bill. It is only fair this Territory Legislative Assembly is given the opportunity to resume questioning on it because it is completely wrong that the cover-up surrounding these agreements is allowed to continue in this Chamber where we cannot get information on legislation we passed under false pretences. That is completely wrong. The Chief Minister and the Leader of Government Business said: ‘This has never happened before’. I know it has never happened. I cannot think of a single instance where it has happened. This is an extraordinary circumstance, and under such an extraordinary circumstance we should come back into this House and re-debate it. Goodness me, it is not like we have any urgency on this bill or this legislation.
The federal parliament has finished for Christmas. It has not passed any legislation at all in relation to the Kenbi Land Claim. There are months and months and months to go. There is absolutely no urgency on this. The government is at a loss of what to do this week. It is putting out a bunch of useless statements when we could be discussing the real meat of this issue and finding out exactly what it is Julia Gillard, Paul Henderson and the NLC have cooked up. At the end of the day, that is what this is all about.
Territorians, Australians, have the right to know what their governments are doing on their behalf. That information should come out in this House. This is where we discuss and debate these things and whether or not the legislation passes is immaterial. What is important is things are open and accountable and people argue their position in an open way, laying all the cards on the table. That is what is important. That is the heart of democracy, Madam Speaker. The information that has come to light about the Larrakia Development Corporation is at the heart of all these agreements, and at the heart of why this legislation was passed on Thursday. It is only right the legislation is brought back for more discussion.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, what a good start for the week. I looked at this bill over a long period of time. In fact, it was deferred because I asked for it to be deferred, having read the letter given to me by the member for Port Darwin, which was a copy of a letter from Raylene Singh to the Leader of the Opposition in relation to deferment. The matter was deferred.
In that time of deferment, I took it on myself to visit Zoe, one of the traditional owners; Jason, who I rang because I did not have time to go to Port Keats; and Kathleen, who lives in Darwin. They all supported this bill. They are three of the traditional owners. In the meantime, I received confirmation from the Northern Land Council that Raylene Singh had attended many meetings in relation to this. They said they would be happy to defer it as well to ensure she understood what stage this bill was at and, as far as I know, they did that. Regardless, three out of the four traditional owners said they supported this bill.
We can wax lyrical, but I have issues about some of the land claim. The reality is the land has been decided by the Land Commissioner. He has decided that the Tommy Lyons’ group would be the owners of this land and said things about the other people who have attachment to the land, and I will not go into that. He also said on page xx, recommendation 48, that there should be a land trust set up, which is what this bill is about.
This bill is about a section of land which, I understand, is not part of the Larrakia Development Corporation land. It is a section, as the second reading said - I will read from the second reading because it is important we go back to the basis of this bill:
That is the map I was given which does not show the land the Larrakia Development Corporation has which is supposed to be part of some agreement. My belief is the heads of agreement issue, whilst it might be important and I am not trying to deride it, has nothing to do with the passing of this bill. It is very clear this bill is about a certain parcel of land that will not be developed for the time being. That is why this has been taken out and why this land is not to be developed. This sets up a land trust so that some time in the future an agreement will be made with the members of the trust appointed by the Northern Land Council. That is the way I see it.
I listened to the member for Fong Lim. I know there is another group pushing for a development corporation. Raylene Singh mentioned she is not happy with the Larrakia Development Corporation, and mentioned at the meeting with me that she is involved in a Kenbi development corporation. If there are various groups out there wanting to develop that other parcel - not the parcel of land we are talking about - let us debate that somewhere else, let them debate that somewhere else. Let them debate that with the Northern Land Council.
The member for Fong Lim thinks the heads of agreement is important. From my point of view, it does not affect this particular bill. This is a technical bill and that is how I have looked at it. I have looked at it over a long period of time, discussed it with many people, and that is the way I see it in the Land Commissioner’s report.
If we want to develop that, there is nothing in this parliament to stop an MPI coming forward; there is nothing to stop a censure motion coming forward to debate this. It does not exclude debate in this parliament about that agreement. The Chief Minister said these things happen, but it makes no difference to me because I never raised this heads of agreement as a matter which would have changed my mind. I have not looked at it from that point of view.
I have looked at it as a technical bill that sets up a land trust that, when you read the bill - and the bill is clear; under the establishment it says:
That is what this is about - that land trust. The trust will …
Mr TOLLNER : A point of order, Madam Speaker! Relevance. This motion is not about whether this bill will be passed or not. This motion is about information which should have been provided in relation to the committee stage of the bill which was not provided. We are not debating whether the motion is going to be supported or not, or the bill is going to be supported or not …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr TOLLNER: We want it to be recalled to the committee stage so we can ask questions. It is as simple as that. It is not to roll the bill or change it.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The matter before us is merely the suspension of standing orders, member for Nelson, so if you could just keep to the technical aspects of that, please.
Mr WOOD: Yes, I understand that, Madam Speaker. To argue my case as to why it would make no difference I had to explain this technical bill, from my perspective, is not beholden on whether people know what is in the heads of the agreement or not. If people want to discuss that, they can debate it at another time. I would be happy to hear that debate - and I heard a fair bit of that debate. Notwithstanding there was an error, it still would not have made any difference because I did not deal with that. That was not the basis on which I agreed with this particular bill.
My main agreement with this bill is based on three traditional landowners I spoke to. Surely, in the end, we believe Aboriginal people should have the right to have a say about their land. It has been shown to me that, of the three traditional owners, the one who had doubts at the beginning has been spoken to sufficiently about this issue. If they say they support this bill, I would have to have some pretty strong reasons to oppose them. I did not get those strong reasons to oppose them.
The standing orders are really saying bring this bill back because a certain part of this bill was not negotiated, the …
Mr Tollner: It was not discussed.
Mr WOOD: Hang on … the conclusion from that is this debate would make any difference. From my perspective …
Mr Tollner: It will put it on the public record.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Fong Lim!
Mr WOOD: From my perspective, it will not. Just taking up the interjection, the member said for the public record. Bring on an MPI on the heads of agreement; that will put it on the public record ...
Mr Tollner: You cannot have ...
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Fong Lim!
Mr WOOD: Madam Speaker, to put it in simple terms, this bill is a technical bill which I supported for that reason; having spoken to traditional owners about it, looked at the bill carefully, and listened to other people’s point of view. In fact, generally speaking, except for the letter from Raylene Singh, the issue being discussed at the moment was not raised. That was not one of the main concerns. There were other concerns and there will always be other concerns about this particular …
Mr Tollner interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, cease interjecting.
Mr WOOD: That is what people raised with me. You misunderstand. There will always be difficulties and people will not always agree, even now, about this particular land claim. It has been a difficult land claim and, as I said, from my wife’s point of view she has issues too. The commissioner made a decision and recommended a land trust. The bill is about setting up that land trust, and that is why I supported it and why I will not support this motion before us.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, both sides have enunciated their positions very clearly in this debate. I move that the motion be put.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 13 Noes 12
Mrs Aagaard Ms Anderson
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: The question now is that the motion to suspend standing orders be agreed to.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 12 Noes 13
Ms Anderson Mrs Aagaard
Mr Bohlin Dr Burns
Mr Chandler Mr Gunner
Mr Conlan Mr Hampton
Mr Elferink Mr Henderson
Mr Giles Mr Knight
Mrs Lambley Ms Lawrie
Mr Mills Mr McCarthy
Ms Purick Ms McCarthy
Mr Styles Ms Scrymgour
Mr Tollner Mr Vatskalis
Mr Westra van Holthe Ms Walker
Mr Wood
Motion negatived.
Continued from 26 October 2011.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, this Housing and Other Legislation Amendment Bill has, as described by government in its publicity, the purpose of improving safety in public housing. On the face of it, I am sure those who are in public housing or live around public housing want to see that improved. They want to see levels of safety improved, particularly those in some of our hot spots. However, the question for the opposition is: does this amendment provide for that? Does it achieve that? Does it live up to the expectations established in the community by the language describing this by government? It is the view of the opposition that it does not.
The primary purpose of this is to establish a legislative framework to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of public housing safety officers. The question is: how does this contribute to the public housing safety strategy when we recognised, in the first incarnation, we had enhanced powers for these public housing safety officers? It may have as a part of a strategy with the powers as described when this was originally introduced. We had concerns at that point for this reason, because we have a police force with those prescribed powers. To have another version, or the establishment of similar rights and responsibilities to public housing safety officers, concerned the opposition. The police were concerned, and expressed those concerns, and the government backed down. As a result, these security officers have no real powers of enforcement and can only call the police in the instance of a serious disturbance or other incident.
Is this an improvement on the existing situation? Perhaps, but remember the opposition has to consider whether it does, and how it contributes to a public housing safety strategy. The question is: how is this different from the private security officers that are currently employed? What is the difference? They can also call the police in the instance of a serious disturbance or other incident. This legislation did not serve a purpose in its original draft format released in May, where proposed public housing safety officers would have been issued with real powers of arrest and detention.
For the opposition, and those of us with high levels of public housing in our electorates, we are concerned. Obviously, government is responding, and the minister has taken an active interest in areas around public housing. To provide enhanced powers may have been arguably an appropriate response; however, the opposition still held the view police are the appropriate agency to deal with law and order issues wherever they occur, public housing or not.
What we now have is, basically, a situation where those powers which were once described no longer exist, and we have, effectively, the role carried out by private security now transferred to public housing officers with the same powers.
I understand there are no additional costs around this other than it is a displacement one for the other. For what effect? It does not serve the purpose which was described in the original draft, and we opposed it at that time for obvious reasons.
The real issue here is policy. This, as I am sure the minister recognises, can be achieved without any substantive changes in legislation. This does not need to come before the parliament. This is about a government getting on with the job it was elected to do. Legislation is not required to establish a coordinated strategy towards addressing antisocial behaviour. We do not need legislation to achieve that.
As a local member in an electorate with high public housing numbers, our activity in this space has created, from time to time, greater levels of coordination. With a good minister ensuring that happens on a regular basis, you do not need legislation to achieve that level of coordination; it just required the leadership and actions of government around good policy.
Legislation is not required for the implementation of a three strikes policy to categorise the nature and severity of antisocial behaviour incidents involving public housing tenants; we do not need legislation, we need to effectively use the law that already exists.
Legislation is not required for the development of a memorandum of understanding between the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services and NT Police to further develop and enhance existing working relationships with the aim of implementing joint approaches to addressing the problems with antisocial and criminal behaviour in Territory Housing properties. We do not need legislation. With appropriate leadership and the willingness of the good officers involved, these things occur. We have, effectively, an expectation raised - strong rhetoric. I am sure there will be some publicity around this, but citizens should know there is, effectively, no real change. That change could occur by implementing the laws that already exist and driving policy changes and directions rather than creating the impression that changes have occurred by a law in the parliament. There are plenty of existing laws which could be utilised to achieve the objective.
The fact is, this is a watered down bill the government is pushing on with to avoid embarrassment as a result of the dressing down it received from the Police Association and every submission it received in response to the initial exposure draft bill. My advice for the minister, and the government, is to let go of this bill and get on with implementing meaningful policy changes to address the real and rising issue of antisocial behaviour in public housing. Our community expects and deserves serious policy work in the area of public housing. I foreshadow this will be an area of considerable discussion - of particular interest of mine - in the new year.
Madam Speaker, this legislation does not live up to the expectations as described in the community. The government, and the minister, can utilise existing laws and ensure we have appropriate policies to achieve what is easily achieved with leadership; we do not need legislation to create this. Consequently, we will not support this bill.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I support the bill and am disappointed to hear the opposition is not supporting it.
The Leader of the Opposition must have heard a different second reading speech to me on a different bill. There are powers in this bill to allow officers to do things like seize alcohol. I will get to that later. The minister will definitely go to that. I agree with some of the things the Leader of the Opposition said - constantly finding ways to better manage our Territory housing properties, to manage our tenants, and to manage visitors to those tenancies. Our minister is constantly seeking to do that, and has done an excellent job since taking on the portfolio and getting into issues around management.
This is a step, though, that provides extra safety and extra powers. It is a step we have to take. You do not put all your eggs in one basket so, while the minister is working on improving management of Territory Housing properties, he is also bringing to this House a bill that provides extra powers for public housing safety officers. That is a good decision. I support a bill that will provide powers to officers which makes public housing safer for tenants, neighbours, and local businesses. I speak as a member of this House who grew up in Territory Housing properties - was ‘grown up’ to use Territory terms. It is not uncommon in Alice and Tennant to live in public housing. I understand the need for public housing and know other members have had similar experiences in growing up in public housing. One of the best speeches I heard in this Chamber this term was from the member for Stuart about his personal experiences with Territory Housing.
Madam Speaker, we have a responsibility to provide public housing. We have a responsibility to provide people who live in public housing a quality of housing that includes safety. Tenants, in turn, have a responsibility to respect that housing and their neighbours. Public housing is provided by the taxpayer and they have an expectation their dollar and their investment is respected and maintained. We believe that providing a safety net - in this case putting a public roof over someone’s head; a worker, a family or a senior Territorian - is something governments must and should do.
There are times when people are priced out of the private market of buying or renting. It can be personal circumstances; it can be the market not existing to serve them. We have seen that emerge in the Territory. Public housing was initially provided for workers and social needs and, over time, the market catered for workers and Territory Housing became more targeted to social demands. That has started to change again nationally, as well as locally, and we have seen a need for affordable housing rental companies to provide options for low-income workers.
An Affordable Housing Rental Company is being established in the Territory, and some of its first stock will be in Parap at the old Wirrina site. That development is also about finding a better way to provide Territory Housing - provide housing that is better for tenants, neighbours, and local businesses. It is a new model for the Territory and I believe it is a good model. It takes time, though, to find new homes for tenants, to go to tender, form private partnerships, go through the Development Consent Authority and, finally, build. It is a good model but not the only solution.
We need to manage Territory Housing better - which is what the Leader of the Opposition was saying – tenants, our property, and the people who visit our complexes, villages, and homes. Territory Housing managers can have a difficult time managing difficult tenants. Tenants can have a difficult time managing difficult guests. We know, in the vast majority of cases, issues in and around public housing are caused by visitors. These are not circumstances where police are necessary, but we have also found security guards do not have the powers to deal with problem guests or tenants.
We have a need for someone trained to deal with conflict situations who can handle drunk people and, importantly - something that has become clear as part of our suicide youth committee work in the recent months - someone who will be able to recognise someone with mental health issues. That goes to training. Public housing safety officers will have strong working relationships with Territory Housing property management, and police, and will be better equipped to deal with problem tenants and hot spots prone to antisocial behaviour issues. These are people with a high level of skills dedicated to dealing with antisocial behaviour on public housing property.
Police need to be able to respond quickly to a variety of situations across the Territory. That is why we have gone down the path of public housing safety officers. This bill creates powers for these officers. We will support those officers with significant and continual training. One of the important things they must know is when to call police. That is important as there are, and will always be, times police are needed. Police will always play an essential role in public safety. Only the police should have certain powers. Police go through significant training and testing. These officers do not replace police; these officers fill a need between what a security officer can provide and what police provide. Police and the public housing safety officers will work closely together, and there will be a memorandum of understanding between them.
Public housing safety officers do not have the power to arrest, detain, or frisk. They will have powers in certain circumstances to access and enter property, to seize dangerous items and alcohol, to instruct people to leave, and to ban people for up to 12 months. They have other powers in this bill to do more, which the minister spoke of in the second reading speech, and he may touch upon again in his response.
Importantly, they will also be able to act as witnesses. I am sure other members have had similar experiences where a tenant is scared of their visitor, or feels an obligation to their visitors. They need someone else to help them. They will sneak next door to call police and ask to remain anonymous, they will talk to Territory Housing or their tenancy officer, or they will talk to their local member. They need a hand, and our public housing safety officers will give them that hand. We have confidence our public housing safety officers will work, will make a difference, because we have done something similar with our transit security officers.
We recognise people do not always feel safe on public transport and people should feel safe. They should be able to catch a public bus and feel safe. We recognise that need and recognise we are addressing the same problems with public housing.
Police have a job to do which involves them doing many things in many different places. There are times when you need someone on hand, dedicated and trained to act in circumstances that do not quite require a police officer, or are not as critical to address as something the police are doing at the same time. That is why we have transit security officers. The Transit Safety Unit was a 2006 election commitment from this government and has grown from four officers to the current group of 11. They work across the Darwin and Palmerston bus network to provide a highly-visual deterrent to antisocial behaviour, patrolling buses along routes and at interchanges. They have built up a professional working relationship with the police, First Response, and Night Patrol. Police and Transit Officers in particular, work closely together and monitor the CCTV network both on buses and at interchanges. They are highly mobile, often the first to arrive at the scene of a disturbance, and provide support prior to the arrival of police and ambulances, if police and ambulance services are required.
The expansion of the unit to 11 has allowed the officers to be more active. They provide an important role in talking to and assisting the travelling public, raising awareness of the required passenger behaviour standards, as well as dealing with incidents. Between 2009-10 and 2010-11, the number of calls for assistance increased by more than 30% and, over the same period, the number of serious incidents declined by more than 40%, which is an excellent indication that this service is recognised and used. As a result of it being recognised and used, the need for it has also slumped.
This bill puts in sensible provisions that will provide a safer environment for our tenants to live in, for our neighbours, and for local businesses. I believe that because we have seen it work with transit security officers. We know the circumstances that need to be managed around our Territory Housing tenancies. We are taking steps through ongoing management of those tenancies, of those complexes, the villages, and the homes, and how people work in them, and we are also looking at creating officers with powers - and this bill gives them powers - to act in circumstances where police are not needed and where security officers were not able to fill that need.
This is a critical bill for filling an identified need to make public housing safer. Public housing should be safe not only for tenants - the majority of tenants are great people - but also for neighbours and local businesses in the area. All members have public housing in their electorates and understand the circumstances that exist and the needs this bill is filling.
Madam Speaker, it is an excellent bill and I commend it to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I agree, to some extent, with the member for Blain: the bill we have before us is a watered-down version of what was originally put forward. I understand most of that was to do with the powers in the draft legislation to search another person or enter a property, something the Police Association and a number of legal groups did not support. It would be fair to say the legislation is not as strong as government intended, but it has listened to concerns of different groups which felt those powers were excessive for what the government was trying to achieve.
Regarding the issue of whether public housing officers should be a special branch of police, we already have school-based constables, and fisheries officers, and we now pay for the cost of transport inspectors. We are going to have, I believe, 20 housing safety officers, 15 in Darwin and five in Alice Springs. I wonder if any consideration has been given by the government to look at bringing this under the umbrella of the police. There may be some difficulties doing that, but whichever department they are in, they are all paid by the government.
If we have transport inspectors they have motor cars and have to be paid; all the usual things that come with working for the government. If those jobs which have been created by government were created within the bounds of the police force, then you would have safety officers with the ability to do what the government wanted in the first place.
I wonder whether the government has looked at that as an option. One of the downsides is, being police officers, they could be called away at any time. That is where discussions with the Police Commissioner, through perhaps an MOU - these officers were trained for specific purposes. You have detectives who do specific work; the fingerprint section which does specific work. You do not see them on motorcycles checking the speed limit of people. There are specific sections within the police force. I wonder if the government wanted to - as stated in the second reading speech - improve the department’s operational effectiveness within a framework that provides an enhanced response to antisocial behaviour associated with public housing dwellings and complexes and contributes to safety across the Territory.
If there had been another way to do this, the government would have had a better chance of achieving what it wants. Be that as it may, this bill does not do that. It basically sets up a separate group of public servants with a specific job, paid for by the government, with vehicles, and with certain powers. They do not have the power to enter a premise to remove someone, which is going to make it hard. If there is antisocial behaviour within a house, they have to call the police. That is my argument. If they were part of the police that then gets around the disagreement with the Police Association, because they would be police in a special area of policing and be more effective in overcoming antisocial behaviour. Technically, you could do something about someone on the back lawn but nothing about someone inside the house. That weakness needs to be looked at.
I am interested to know if the government has considered housing safety officers within these complexes so action can be taken swiftly. You have 15 people on the list for Darwin. I am not sure how many Territory Housing houses and complexes there are in Darwin, but I imagine not all 15 people would be on standby at the one time. I wonder whether there needs to be more control in some of these complexes where there is a high level of management and surveillance happening.
I was talking to Vicki O’Halloran from Somerville Community Services this morning, who deals with people in housing. This was about another issue I will raise at another time. This was about having control over areas with fairly strict protocols so you can reduce the risks of antisocial behaviour developing. People get to know there is someone in the community managing it all the time – 24 hours a day. If you go to a caravan park you know there will be someone living on-site all the time. In some of the flats around Darwin there will be a caretaker or a manager. I wonder if a safety officer might be better stationed within these complexes so they can react quickly and people know there is someone all the time so they are not waiting for people to get in their car and disappear. Someone told me today that one of the tricks used to be to get all the beer and alcohol and bury it in the garden somewhere. The police come and pour out a couple of cans and then leave. They go to the garden, pull it out of the dirt and you are back to where you were in the first place. I put that as an area where there might be a better outcome.
NT Housing has many houses outside Alice Springs and Darwin. I am interested to know what is going to happen in remote communities. The biggest problem for the government will be the maintenance of houses constructed under SIHIP. It is one thing to build a house; it is another thing to maintain it for 30 or 40 years. This document does not mention whether safety officers will be stationed in communities. I heard at the briefing a senior person from Housing will be stationed at Wadeye; however, it is not a safety officer. I would have thought there was an opportunity to locally recruit people who could be safety officers. There is no use talking about antisocial behaviour in Darwin and Alice Springs if we have the same problem in communities where, for instance, at Port Keats 95 houses are being built. That is a big community that needs to be strictly maintained and managed so those houses last for the next 30 to 40 years. It would be good to find out from the minister why they are not looking for officers there.
We have police officers in the form of ACPOs with certain powers. Perhaps you could have ACPOs with some housing powers as well. Part of the philosophy I am looking at is to give people the powers to be more whole-of-government type people, not limited because they are not police officers. If you give them that power and they are given specific reasons to exist, there may be opportunities into the future to look at that. It does not matter if you put an officer into Wadeye or a safety officer, the government will still pay for that position. The only cost above that, if they were part of the police force, is training. You are still paying a wage and still have to provide accommodation and a vehicle. If you look at the bigger picture, there would not be a huge difference in cost but there might be a better outcome. That person would have the ability to do what this bill is attempting to achieve: to reduce antisocial behaviour and make it safer for people who want to live peacefully in their houses. That is one of the key things we need to look at.
There are many good people in Territory Housing homes whose lives are ruined by people who could not care two hoots. That is unfortunate because Territory Housing, when I came to the Territory, had a good name. Even now, not all Territory Housing properties have a bad name. Kurringal Flats was where public servants stayed when they first came to Darwin before they found a house. I used to stay there occasionally with people I knew. It was regarded as the upmarket section of Territory Housing at that stage. Now, sections have been pulled down because the government thought it was a home for antisocial behaviour. It got a bad name and, unfortunately, headed off into a different direction.
When I look at this legislation overall, the government needs some statistics to see whether this has made any difference. The member for Blain was saying because this legislation is much weaker, he does not believe it is worth passing, more or less, because it is not going to be very effective.
I am happy to support the bill but, at the same time, the government has to say, after six or 12 months, the number of complaints from residents in Territory Housing estates has reduced by a certain amount. There has to be some tangible proof this legislation has had some effect, otherwise you may as well dissolve it. There needs to be some way of measuring whether this legislation has been effective.
I am also interested to know if there will be safety officers in Katherine and Tennant Creek. I have heard the member for Katherine talk about some of the problems in public housing in Katherine. I imagine in Tennant Creek they would be no different than the rest of the Territory. Whilst I have said I will support the legislation, the government should rethink the way it looks at these issues because, theoretically, you can hire a security company to do this work and it would probably have as much power as one of these officers. If I am wrong, minister, you can tell me.
It would be good to look at the alternative. It may require some ongoing discussions with the Police Commissioner, the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services, and the Police Association. There is an opening to give these people more power, to bring them under the police and ensure their main job is to do what the government is trying to do, and that is have people operating within the public housing sector to make it much safer for people who require public housing, generally speaking, because they cannot afford to get into the private market. We need to ensure those people are protected; the government has a duty of care. It allows these housing developments to be used by people who, in many cases, are in the lower- to middle-income sphere. They still should be given protection from visitors who are unruly or bludging off the community, or just becoming a menace and causing vandalism or, in general, upsetting the people who live there. The government has a duty to try to fix that.
I am not getting too excited because I want to see the proof of the pudding in 12 month’s time; to see if this legislation is more than words and makes a difference. It would also be good to see how police react to the safety officers. My understanding is where there is violence or a requirement to remove someone from a house they will have to ring the police. I understand there is mention in some of the notes that that has been discussed with police. How quickly will the police turn up when there is an incident in a house? The whole idea of having safety officers was so they could react quickly. However, if they are now limited because they cannot enter a house where there is a fight - they have to ring the police - will that not achieve what it was trying to in the first place?
Madam Speaker, I am interested to hear the minister’s response. I understand they are trying to do something worthwhile. It is a case - and this is what the member for Blain was saying - of whether this type of legislation will really be effective. From my point of view, only time will tell.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I wish to briefly speak on the situation of public housing. In my electorate, public housing takes up 50% of my workload …
Dr Burns: How much? Sixty?
Mr GILES: It may be 60%, minister; it could be. It is a challenge, as a local member, to continually deal with derelict properties, public drunkenness, antisocial behaviour, and the crime spree that comes from that. The government has made efforts in several different areas, but has been unsuccessful to date, across a wide range of measures and areas.
I particularly speak about my electorate of Braitling in Alice Springs, an area where the Labor government does not take a great deal of responsibility and has taken its eye off the ball. I have a good working relationship with the minister, but, clearly, there is a disconnect somewhere.
I used to work in tenancy management in the private sector. I have also worked in public housing management, and have a fair understanding of the public and private housing sectors. It is the job of a member of parliament to be out there, know as many people as you can, know your area, know your houses, know your constituents, and the issues that are around. It is also the job of someone who works in Territory Housing, or a public housing role, to be well aware of all the issues in their complexes and to take on the role of a solution broker to try to resolve issues.
I can barely think of any complexes in my electorate that do not have antisocial behaviour issues. I stand in this Chamber on a regular basis ranting and raving about the concerns, seeking the minister to provide a response. I converse on a regular basis about various issues and I ask the minister to get back to me.
The issues are a level of under-resourcing of the Territory Housing office in Alice Springs, particularly around staffing, and also the antisocial behaviour elements and how they are addressed. Another area is the budget for repairs and maintenance to ensure Territory Housing assets, government assets, are adequately maintained. I have brought a couple of illustrations here today - the minister likes me bringing photographs into this Chamber so he can see the concerns I raise. They may seem trivial, but to represent the constituents in my electorate, I will present these illustrations.
I recently had several concerns about Wauchope flats on Dixon Road in Braitling. Wauchope flats used to be known as a good pensioner complex, now it is a haven for antisocial behaviour, public drunkenness and 15 to 20 people living in a two-bedroom unit complex. The antisocial behaviour from that complex spreads to the Erumba Street flats, the Head Street flats, Elliot Street flats and up to Northside shops and Hoppy’s Camp. It is just a cycle - almost a circle - of antisocial behaviour that spreads itself. All those people who live in between - the neighbours and the community - are all victims of the antisocial behaviour that emanates from those complexes. I have just read a transcript of an interview by the Treasurer on Julia Christensen’s show this morning where she spoke about drinking in public housing complexes.
My experience has been it does not matter if there is a sign on the front of a house, people will still get drunk and still cause trouble. Not in all circumstances, but in the majority. You have to question the relevance of the sign in the front of a house if people are still inside drinking and, if it is a case that the tenant wants the sign, it is the visitors causing the problems. What empowerment is Territory Housing giving to that tenant to kick people out?
It is like the recent issue of a violent situation just off Clarke Street in my electorate, which the minister well knows about. A family member not on the lease was present in this house and ended up attacking a neighbour’s house and property in a violent situation. I pleaded with the minister to take action and he did; his CEO was very good. Ken Davies did a fantastic job in trying to resolve the problem, but the fact remains that those tenants still live there and the problems are ongoing.
If you cannot resolve those issues and you have a whole neighbourhood being subjected to crime and antisocial behaviour - houses being broken into in the street because of that tenancy in that public housing house, houses being ransacked - that is what is happening in the broader community and it is a great problem.
I have an illustration of a – which does not seem much but is what brings about ghettos in public housing – derelict car sitting in the Wauchope flats. I have two illustrations. It has flat tyres, smashed windows, all those things, sitting at Wauchope Street flats. When I was in the job - I do not want to reflect on the way I operated, but I expect Territory Housing officers, if resourced properly with appropriate staff and tools to do the job, should be visiting these complexes and saying: ‘Well, here is a derelict car, let us get rid of it’, at the drop of a hat. You cannot create ghettos.
I have another illustration of a car sitting at the front of Lander Court; another derelict car making a street look bad. Lander Court, which runs off Saltwell Crescent, is an area known for low socioeconomic populations and a high element of public housing. You have old bomb cars sitting out in the street waiting to be repaired - they may still be an asset for those tenants, but we have to ensure we do not denigrate the community. There are potholes full of water in unit complex car parks. It is hard when you see an asset, because these are Territory Housing assets, whether it is the asphalt or the bitumen within the complex, or the buildings falling down and so forth, these things need to be fixed. I try to drive around every street in my electorate at least once a week to see what is happening. I am a visual person and I like to see it all. Here we have 32 Engoordina Drive sitting vacant for months on end. I have written to the minister about it. I believe that might have been the one where he wrote back saying it is not vacant. Well, I can tell you, minister, there is nothing inside that house. You have to start wondering exactly what is happening.
Here is an illustration of a private house - a group of residents were transferring between Head Street pensioner flats and Arunga Street, and the fence was kicked in. People got drunk at one complex and went to the next complex and caused trouble. The poor resident who owns the house, who has a mortgage and is paying it off, rang me upset: ‘Adam, what do I do about the crime that is coming from these public housing units?’ I like to provide people with an answer about how we can fix things and how we ensure these things do not occur again. The fact is the government has lost control of antisocial behaviour, crime and public nuisance in many of its public housing complexes that are now moving from a positive asset owned by the Northern Territory government to be somewhat of a ghetto.
These ghettos are manufacturing antisocial behaviour across a large part of the Braitling electorate, almost turning parts of Braitling into what can only be described as a community. Alice Springs is not a community in the sense of a bush community. We need to address concerns in bush communities to rectify their standards of living and their social concerns; however, in doing that, we do not have to bring the urban lifestyle of the electorate of Braitling down to those standards. We should be trying to lift everyone up, not bring everyone down, which is what you are doing. That is a great concern.
Moving to another area I occasionally speak about, SIHIP. Under the national partnership agreement there has been an enormous amount of money put aside for tenancy management services and tenancy management officers, and the government talks about employing people in the bush and in these communities. I have visited copious numbers of what I would call ex-SIHIP houses, ones that have been built or refurbished, reoccupied, and have now deteriorated to a point where they are worse than before SIHIP walked in. You have to ask: where is the $40m a year that is going into the Northern Territory government through Territory Housing to ensure appropriate tenancy management practices are put in place?
First, we saw officers from the urban centres sign people up to a lease to ensure they were paying rent and so forth, but we have not seen anything by way of appropriate tenancy management services to ensure these houses are not deteriorating and that the tenancies are not deteriorating. The fact remains in most cases they have. I have been through some horrendous houses that have had horrendous amounts of money spent on them that look like they have never had any work done.
That is a great shame for a project originally designed to protect children. It was put into a poorly administered program by the Northern Territory government and it seems we are now going back to the federal government asking for more money for a whole new SIHIP program, on top of what is already coming, because the housing stock with work done to date has already deteriorated to a deplorable level.
I have real concerns about the level of staffing and resources in the Territory Housing Alice Springs office, the level of repairs and maintenance budgets, and the cuts made. The follow-on from that is the ability for those officers and the good staff of Territory Housing to service both Territory Housing tenancies - those on the wait list and the communities which surround and are victims of antisocial behaviour.
On a final note, I would like the government to come forward with a greater socioeconomic plan for public housing tenancies; something that works around public tenancies into employment, and public tenancies into home ownership. In my previous occupation in New South Wales, some very good work was done in getting public housing tenants into employment, and there were partnerships across agencies to drive some really good initiatives which, while they were not all silver bullets, made some positive changes. I would also like to see the government work more towards selling public housing to good public housing tenants. I will not name any particular family, minister, but I know of quite a number of cases across the Territory where good public housing tenants have been kicked out because they have a job.
We all know public housing and that social safety net is there to help people get a leg up. It is unfortunate in many cases, particularly in public housing, where people utilise that safety net, get a leg up and are now being kicked out into an environment where it is difficult for someone to go from a maximum weekly rental amount in a Territory Housing property to the private sector rental amount required to live whether it is in Alice Springs, Palmerston, the northern suburbs of Darwin or otherwise.
A great amount of work needs to be done. There are some real positive economic opportunities, not just to support the local economy by getting people into home ownership, but also the reinvestment, which can continue into the private sector construction market and address the housing needs of many more people on the waiting list.
To summate, the government has under-resourced Territory Housing. It has pilfered some of the money designed to go into initiatives such as tenancy management services and SIHIP. Some of those houses are in a deplorable state and it is quite concerning. We all have public housing properties in our electorates, and we all know the difficulties in that environment. I encourage the minister, who I have a fair amount of respect for in this area, to wield a bit more weight for better resources and services provided to Territory Housing. This is not only to make our lives as parliamentarians easier, but the lives of people in the neighbourhoods and communities can be easier than having to put up with the disgraceful amount of antisocial behaviour and crime that is in our living environment across the Northern Territory.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contribution. If there is one unifying theme through what members from all sides have voiced today it is support for people to live in public housing in quiet enjoyment of their tenancy without harassment, violence, threats or nuisance and for neighbours to also enjoy what they should expect. If they buy or rent a house next to a public house or a set of units they should have quiet enjoyment of their property.
I have been Housing minister now for two years or thereabouts. What is before the House today and what members have spoken about has become a mission of mine because, speaking frankly, I become angry when I visit public housing complexes - whether they be in my electorate or in other electorates - and I find elderly people who are too scared to go out at night, who have to lock their doors at night because of the goings on, and housing complexes being terrorised by louts carrying on with threats and behaviour.
I remember the member for Fong Lim approaching me at a function at Ludmilla school saying: ‘Burnsie, can you come along to Shiers Street flats, there is a problem there?’ Right away, I jumped in his car - he is a pretty good driver, a safe driver - and we went there. What we found was absolutely appalling. We found three thugs in a unit - they were not even tenants, from memory - who were terrorising the whole set of units. Within a very short time, the CEO, and possibly the deputy CEO of Housing, joined us there and that situation was remedied, with the help of police. These characters had been involved, from my recollection, with a fairly serious crime at the BP Service Station along Bagot Road and were brought to task about that. From memory there was an eviction, or the people moved out of that unit within a very short time.
As a local member, I have public housing complexes in my electorate, also houses. I put on the record the majority of public housing tenants, as some members here have stated, are good people; they look after the property. In many cases, from my experiences of doorknocking, you can go into a public housing premise and the garden and the inside of the house - everything about it - is sometimes better than the house next door which might be privately owned. Let us not stigmatise people who live in public housing; that would be the wrong thing to do.
We have an obligation as a community, as a society, as a government, to provide housing for the most needy in our community. That is the obligation of government. However, conversely, there is an obligation on the part of tenants because this is subsidised housing - heavily subsidised housing. In the inner areas of Darwin such as Parap and Stuart Park, people pay $100 a week for a three-bedroom house. On the open market, you would be looking at $400 at least, possibly $500, for a three-bedroom house. So, each week the taxpayer is subsidising those tenants to the tune of $300, possibly $400. That works out to $15 000 a year, or thereabouts. That is a great deal of money. If you multiply that by 10, that is $150 000 over 10 years, $300 000 over 20 years, and so on and so forth. However, that is the obligation of the taxpayer to those who are most needy.
There is also an obligation for those people living in subsidised accommodation to behave, not make a nuisance of themselves to surrounding neighbours - whether they are in complexes or a residential neighbourhood.
I am so committed to seeing this happen to a greater degree, because I do not disagree with what the member for Braitling said about public housing properties in Alice Springs and some of the effects in his local neighbourhood. That makes me angry and determined to do something about it. This legislation brought into this parliament and debated today, hopefully, is evidence of that.
It is true, in the original bill I introduced into the parliament there were powers - more powers than exist within the act we are currently debating – and in the exposure draft that went out for public consultation. There were powers of arrest and detention, and powers to frisk.
I went out to consultation on that and we received several submissions. The Leader of the Opposition asked, during his briefing, whether he could have those submissions, and my instructions to the office were those submissions were made to me on a confidential basis, unless those people wanted to release those submissions. We gave the Leader of the Opposition the names of people who submitted, and it was up to him to approach those different organisations and ask for their submissions.
There was a common thread amongst many of those submissions, from fairly diverse groups, that they felt the powers of arrest and detention were a step too far. I also received legal advice on this from the Solicitor-General, who gave advice about potential liabilities for a range of issues relating to these powers. I thought about it, I looked at the submissions, I read each of them carefully and, on that basis, recommended to my Cabinet colleagues we remove the powers of arrest and detention and move to a model where we would have a memorandum of understanding with the police. I am pleased to say the Police Commissioner has been very accommodating and said he is prepared to position a Commander, a very senior rank, within the public housing safety officer area for a period of at least 12 months. There is a direct conduit, a very important link at a senior level, between the operations of the public housing safety officers and police.
The member for Blain was correct when he said much can be achieved through the work of a local member. I commend the member for Braitling; he has worked very hard. There are other members - I mentioned the member for Fong Lim. Much can be achieved through a local member getting together with housing and police, and people working together to reduce problems.
A recent example was in relation to Runge Street, where I was approached by residents who were experiencing problems. It was my pleasure to work with those residents on that issue and we had great support from the police. I commend Commander Jamie O’Brien who worked hard and attended the meetings, along with the advisor on police matters from the Chief Minister’s Office. The Chief Minister’s Office was taking a very active role in this. Ken Davies and deputy CEO, Mychelle Curran, also attended and there was much progress. Much of the discussion around the table at one house was: ‘We call police. We understand police have priorities, so if there is a road accident with fatalities or serious injury, they have to attend that. If there is a robbery or serious assaults, they must attend those incidents’. Residents are sensible; they recognise there are competing priorities for police officers in our community.
We are all aware in this Chamber of the problems and the magnitude of the issues that confront us. The residents, whether they are private residents living nearby or public housing tenants, also recognise the efforts of the private security firm were not sufficient. They did not have sufficient powers to address circumstances they confronted. Often, the complaint would be: ‘The private security officer comes along and tells people to go and they do not listen to them. They go around the block and within half-an-hour they come back - and we feel frustrated’. I took that on board and my response, and the legislative response, to these issues is to create public housing safety officers with statutory powers, excluding those removed which I have already spoken about, which many groups and submissions, and, I believe, members in this parliament - member for Nelson, I hope I am not verballing you, but I thought you said you felt those powers might have been one step too far for these officers. I am unsure, but there certainly was a theme in the submissions we received.
These officers have very important powers, as outlined by my colleague, the member for Fannie Bay. The powers to be conferred on these officers include: powers to direct individuals to stop antisocial behaviour conduct or direct them to leave public housing premises; powers to instruct individuals to leave for up to 12 months in certain circumstances; powers to seize dangerous articles and liquor; and powers to issue notices where required. So, they have powers, and if issues require it, they will be working very closely with police. Part of their training, as the member for Fannie Bay alluded to, is knowing exactly when to call police, the circumstances in which they need to call police, and they will be working with police on a call-out basis. They will be working with police and there will be lines of communication, just as there are with the transport Transit Officers.
I envisage part of this MOU will be about joint operations - trouble spots. I am advised there are 180-odd public housing complexes across the Northern Territory. Not all of those are problems, some are very quiet. In my electorate, until I doorknocked them I did not know they existed, particularly those for seniors. There are many where people have quiet enjoyment with a sense of community and they look after one another. However, there are definitely hot spots and those are the ones that need targeting.
As minister, as people have written to me, I have drawn attention to that. Opposition and government members have written to me and raised issues about hot spots. I endeavour to get action to focus on those hot spots. I would see this occurring at a much more operational level through the creation of public housing safety officers. As the member for Fannie Bay alluded to, because these people will be on-site - they will be based in Darwin, Palmerston and Alice Springs - when I say on-site, they will be available to be on-site and will be witnesses to many incidents that occur, and they will be able to appear in court cases. They will be able to feed information. They will be witnesses also, I would expect, in feeding information for prosecution of those who might be breaking the law, who might be damaging property, and also for tenants who are misbehaving. The ultimate consequence, of course, is three strikes and you are out.
I should clarify that policy. For people being evicted, the process will still need to go through the Commissioner of Tenancies. I am not proposing anything different there. Through the three-strikes policy, there will be a better framework around cataloguing the work that has gone on, the cooperative efforts to get people to behave and to adhere to their tenancy agreement, etcetera. If people do not, it will be noted. There will be evidence that, I would say, would be able to be placed before a court in relation to the efforts and the lack of cooperation, if you like, on the part of certain people in not adhering to their acceptable behaviour agreement.
There will be a clearer and more defined process around evictions, which is very important because it has been my observation, as minister, in several cases that have ultimately come before the courts, the courts put a higher bar against the CEO of Housing as the landlord. In other words, for public housing as opposed to private tenancies, the courts seemed to take a view that we are the landlord of last resort and there should be more latitude given in eviction of tenants who are not measuring up. What I am saying is we have to be more focused on the process.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you mind if we just acknowledge these young people. Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 9 Kormilda College students accompanied by Mr James Faraone and Mr Ashley Hutchings. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Dr BURNS: The member for Braitling mentioned people are not taking any notice of grog signs and there is much antisocial behaviour around grog. These public housing safety officers will be able to do something about that. They will be able to tell people who have come onto that property who are not tenants to leave and do not come back within 50 m of the property. They will be able to take action. I take what you say; it disturbs me that, in some cases where the grog signs are up, people do not take any notice. One of the missions of these officers will be to tell these people to leave, to go. If the grog is on the ground beside those people they have the right to pour the grog out in those circumstances. They do not have the power to frisk and detain.
I was interested in the member for Blain, as Opposition Leader, saying we have everything we need already: we have a police force and a Housing department; we do not need this legislation. Why not use existing policy, existing resources? I have already pointed out, member for Blain, this area falls between the police and a private security company that is needed. Residents of public housing dwellings, and their neighbours, recognise the need for this and the need for somewhere to ring and know someone will attend. It might not be to the level of a police issue, but is something that is troubling them and the neighbourhood. Often we can nip these problems in the bud before they become a serious police matter, and that is going to be another job of the public housing safety officers.
Paradoxically, member for Blain, you also said you would have some announcements in the new year around this. You say there is no need for amendments; we already have this and we already have that. You then foreshadowed announcements in the new year. We are nine months out from an election, so the public and those living in public housing complexes around them will be looking to you for policy and effort in this regard. I will be looking very closely at what you bring forward.
I should also mention the time frame of what is being proposed in this legislation because it is important. I need to put this squarely on the record in this parliament. We are in the last days of November now and the last day of sittings is 1 December. If parliament agrees to pass this legislation it will take a week or two for it to come before the Administrator, and I am hoping it will be signed off in this calendar year.
The proposed training period for public housing safety officers will be 12 weeks, not six weeks as foreshadowed in the media by some quarters. It will be a 12-week training package. I understand police trainees undergo a six-month training course, which is 24 weeks. These public housing safety officers will be undertaking approximately half the amount of training as sworn police officers.
Bearing in mind the length and breadth of what police officers have to do over and above what these officers are expected to do, 12 weeks is not too bad really. They will not be learning how to use firearms, etcetera. They do not have powers of arrest or detention so they will be doing quite a number of very important modules as people have alluded to, dealing with people with mental health issues and diffusing conflict situations. I have seen the transport Transit Officers handle a number of situations on my doorstep at the Rapid Creek shops very well.
It is going to take three months to train these officers. I envisage they will not be operating until after the first quarter of 2012. I could have hurried this process. I put this out as an exposure draft for consultation. I have listened to what people and organisations have said about this legislation. That was an important process and, from memory, we gave an extension to that process because people said they wanted more time. We have been very accommodating in the consultation process.
Also, as a result of the consultation many issues were raised, including important legal issues such as whether the amendment to the act breached the Anti-Discrimination Act. I needed to seek advice on a whole range of issues. I sought the advice of Michael Grant QC who, of course, is Solicitor-General for the Northern Territory. All of that takes time. However, I am glad I did that because, for instance, with regard to the Anti-Discrimination Act, it was asserted by some organisations that made submissions this would discriminate unfairly against Indigenous people, which was of great concern to me. I would not bring legislation forward to this House which had that result. I take assurance in the advice from Michael Grant QC that that is not the case.
There were also assertions that we would be in breach of our international human rights covenants. Once again, I am advised that is not the case. It is important we receive legal advice. I have tried to be very thorough about this legislation, and that is a positive. However, on the other side, I hope members realise this has taken time, and these officers will not be ready for duty until after the first quarter of 2012 ...
Mr Giles: Just in time for the election.
Dr BURNS: I would have liked them on duty about three months ago, member for Braitling.
I have explained I have tried to do this the right way. I have not pushed this in an inappropriate way. I have tried to do this the right way all along. I would like, a year on, in August 2012 - if it had been in August 2011 people would say: ‘Gee, that Chris Burns, when he was minister and brought in public housing safety officers, that was really fantastic and here are the evaluation results to prove it’. However, that will not be the case, although it will be evaluated, member for Nelson, after 12 months. That 12 months will start ticking after the first quarter of 2012. I would expect, anecdotally, once they hit the ground, they will have an immediate effect on those hot spots. That is my hope and desire in relation to that.
I have quite a deal more to say, Madam Speaker, and I am hoping someone might give me an extension of time when the time arrives.
Madam SPEAKER: The time has not come yet; however, it is almost the lunch break and there is …
Dr BURNS: I would like to continue my remarks after lunch.
Debate suspended.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, we have a pairing arrangement effective from 2 pm today until close of parliament this evening for the members for Nightcliff and Goyder. It has been signed by both Whips.
I table that document.
HOUSING AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 177)
Continued from earlier this day..
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Deputy Speaker, I see the clock has been wound back to five, but I will continue.
I addressed a number of issues raised by members as I was speaking to this bill, but there are a couple of outstanding issues, mostly raised by the member for Braitling. He talked about what he believed to be a lack of people or resources within the Housing department and a lack of dollars for repairs and maintenance.
Member for Braitling, I do not have my advisors in the box. I was expecting some hard figures in relation to this. In relation to repairs and maintenance, unfortunately, some damage done by tenants is quite substantial and eats into our repairs and maintenance budget, which I have been advised has been increasing with time. That type of wilful damage, allowing situations to escalate, is unacceptable, and our strategy regarding public housing safety officers will address that issue. I am also advised by the department that there have been increases, with time, regarding our people, particularly in the tenancy management area.
I have some data here in relation to expenditure by region. Repairs and maintenance: total expenditure in 2006-07 was $12.7m, rising to $13.4m in 2007-08. In 2008-09, it was $14.1m. In 2009-10, it was $14.9m, and in 2010-11, it was $15.5m. So, there have been increases over time for repairs and maintenance. Unfortunately, there has been damage to properties, some quite substantial, and some of it occurring, as you well know, in Alice Springs. That is unacceptable. What I am doing as part of these measures is to nip some of that trouble in the bud …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Do you have those figures on a regional basis?
Dr BURNS: Yes, I will table this if you like. For Alice Springs, it went from nearly $2.7m in 2006-07; $2.5m in 2007-08; 2008-09 was $3.1m; 2009-10 was $3.4m; and 2010-11 was $4.4m, nearly $4.5m. I will table this for the benefit of the member.
There are also some notes about removal of vehicles from public housing, which you mentioned. I will table this, member for Braitling, but 35 unworthy cars have been removed since the beginning of the year. Ten of these cars have been removed since June 2011. That was in Alice Springs. In Darwin, 15 have been removed and taken to storage, where required, since May 2011. A further 22 are currently in the process of being issued and receiving formal notices. Four vehicles have been removed and not taken to storage as they constituted a safety hazard.
One of the problems we have, member for Braitling, is - a bit of history here - I understand the department took away a vehicle very similar to the pictures you showed. Someone turned up later and said it was their vehicle and asked for the money. It might have even gone to court, or there was a settlement where the department had to pay this particular person some money. The advice is we need to go through the processes of the law with abandoned vehicles otherwise it might end up costing us more than the money to tow them away.
If you are in government it would be a brave new world - after you have been to the Northside shops to get your packet of smokes or six pack, you might jump in your tow truck and go around to all the public housing properties and tow all the vehicles to the dump. That is, if you have time in between being a minister, member for Braitling …
Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time to allow the minister to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: I thank colleagues. You mentioned a vacant property. I had a pretty busy lunch hour as I met with the Leader of the Opposition over a constituent matter, and have not had the chance to study some of these issues as best I can. The initial advice I had on the property you showed in that picture is that property has been vacant because it has major structural damage. The advice I have is that repairs in the vicinity of over $100 000 are required to restore that house. As we would say in SIHIP parlance, that is a rebuild …
Mr Giles: A lick of paint.
Dr BURNS: Yes, I am giving you the advice I have. I have no objection to you meeting with the Housing people in Alice Springs for a briefing on this issue - I will certainly be inquiring further. The department, through the CEO, has acknowledged it has stood vacant for too long …
Mr Giles: How long?
Dr BURNS: Probably as long as you said. However, over $130 000 is a significant amount of money and it has to be put into the budget cycle. I suspect that is part of the reason, but I understand there is action on that front and works will be carried out in due course.
I will go back to some of the issues. I tried to cover some of the issues raised by the member for Nelson. He asked a valid question: ‘These public housing safety officers will be located in Darwin, Palmerston and Alice Springs, what about the rest of the Territory? What about all the other properties in the bush, etcetera?’ Yes, we are starting in the urban centres. That is where most of our large public housing complexes are. That is where much of the antisocial behaviour is situated and much of the debate in this House has highlighted that fact, and I have acknowledged it. That is not to say we do not need some oversight in the remote regions. From my perspective, that is a role for police, particularly at a remote community level. The police have their finger on the pulse in those communities and can attend incidents and other problems. We have to roll out the model within the larger communities. There is an issue about budgets. We have converted about $1.7m we currently spend on security companies for the role they have had up to now. That will be converted into the public housing safety officers and will come from within existing resources. There is probably another $700 000 the department is finding from within for this measure.
To be quite frank with you, member for Nelson, I do not have the resources at this stage to roll that out further than Alice Springs, Darwin and Palmerston. However, there is a rationale as to why we are starting there, which I have outlined. You might not agree with that but, as minister, that is my perspective.
You talk about evaluation. I spoke about the time frame involved to implement this, but we will have an evaluation program over the first 12 months in particular, which is very important. I probably will not be around then, member for Nelson, but it is worthwhile me commenting on a few things. It is questionable whether the numbers of complaints will decrease. They could well increase once you start to advertise the fact there is a dedicated resource, that there is a number people can ring after hours to get some action. There is no doubt complaints could quite possibly rise in the short term, so I am willing to cop that one.
Evictions: some people will say it would be good if the numbers of evictions dramatically increase. I hope not. I hope we could head evictions off at the pass, so to speak, and we could work constructively with tenants who are at risk of losing their tenancies. It may well be as a result of this evictions could increase. My advice from South Australia, moving to the three-strikes policy, is in the longer term evictions have decreased because processes are clearer; people know where they stand and have a much clearer idea of the boundaries. My advice is in South Australia the number of evictions decreased with time.
I would be looking at what is happening with damage because if we can nip some of that in the bud it would be desirable - get some of these characters away from the premises and not returning to cause damage as that is how these situations escalate.
I hope I have covered most of the issues raised by members. I appreciate what members say. Members have a view there are already many tools in the toolkit, to use the vernacular others use. There are many options available, and this will be one more. I really wanted something that was within the Housing portfolio and under the Housing minister, both in the banning orders and the people themselves - the public housing safety officers. I appreciate what you say, member for Nelson, perhaps one model could be they are situated in the police force, etcetera. However, as you acknowledged, often police have other priorities and people are diverted into other areas.
My object was to have a group of men and women who would be absolutely focused on this whole issue of public housing safety and antisocial behaviour - a group dedicated to this particular area. That would be their bread and butter, their main task, working within the Housing portfolio. However, having said that, it is vitally important their work occurs across various portfolio areas. Police, of course, is a very important one.
As I said earlier, there will be a memorandum of understanding with the police. Also a police officer at commander level, which is quite senior, will be involved with setting up the training and the operational side of public housing safety officers. I hope the Police Association will take some comfort in the fact government has listened to what it has said, what other groups such as NT Shelter etcetera have had to say, and we have drawn back from powers of arrest and powers of detention. I hope they take comfort from the fact we want to work very closely with police. That cooperation is absolutely essential to success in this endeavour.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the bill to the House. I understand the member for Nelson, and possibly others, want to go into committee stage, and I welcome that. However, at this stage, I commend this bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
Mr WOOD: Madam Chair, I do not have too many questions, but I want to go back to the ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy.
The second reading says Territory Housing will have a new set of procedures to be followed to rectify antisocial behaviour, and it relates to remote housing. I have mixed messages over the life of SIHIP. My understanding is Territory Housing would not evict people from housing in remote communities or in growth towns, but you have said you will introduce a ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy. What is the policy for houses in remote or, in this case, growth towns?
Dr BURNS: I thank the member for Nelson for his question. We will be basing our ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy on what is already in existence in South Australia and Western Australia. I have the Western Australian departmental policy here. You have, as usual, asked a very difficult question in relation to remote housing. With remote housing, we are on a journey regarding people understanding tenancies and their rights and obligations as tenants. There has been a different regime and different system in remote housing, and we are still moving on a path with remote housing. Eventually, I would see this policy rolled out across the Territory but, at this stage, like the public housing safety officers, we would be rolling out that policy in our major urban centres.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. In relation to Territory Housing being developed under SIHIP - that is, in the town camps of Alice Springs and Tennant Creek - will you apply the ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy to those communities?
Dr BURNS: My advice is when properties are up to the Residential Tenancies Act standard individual tenancy agreements are signed at that stage. Those houses in Alice Springs you mentioned, to a large extent, are subject to the same rental regime - I am talking about the rental level - as general properties within Alice Springs, and I would be expecting the application of this rule, with time, on those properties.
We have to give people who may have been living under a different regime in some of those areas an opportunity to understand and be educated. It is a little different if people are moving into a house in Alice Springs and have not lived there before, that one of the conditions of them moving into that house is they will abide by Territory Housing policies, and one of them will be three strikes and you are out.
Mr WOOD: I am concerned that in a place like Alice Springs you are going to have town camps and Northern Territory government housing. Are you going to have two different policies? The person who lives in the Territory Housing house in the town is going to have this rule applied and would see it - because town camps are on the edge or in Alice Springs – as a different set of policies. Is it going to be the same policy for Territory Housing in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs regardless of whether they are in a town camp?
Dr BURNS: Ultimately, that will be the case, member for Nelson, but, as I said, there is history here. Historically, these have been two different systems and we need to - it is a journey for the department and a journey for the people and we need to work on people understanding their rights and obligations. Over the last five years particularly, there have been regimes dropped on people with little understanding and education, and that is a recipe for disaster. Ultimately, there will be one system, one regime, but we have to bring people with us and educate them. There may be, in the initial stages, a perception of being two systems, but we have to start somewhere. Our public housing complexes and some of the problem houses we have in urban areas are the best place to start. Alongside that, we will be endeavouring to educate people and bring people with us to understand their rights and obligations.
Already in the town camps, if there is damage done to houses, we expect those people to pay. If there is tenant damage over and above wear and tear, we expect people to pay for that. Already there are changes, and there have been fairly large changes for people in town camps. It is a journey, member for Nelson.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. I have one more question on this area. If someone is living at Wadeye or Maningrida and have three strikes against them, what will happen?
Dr BURNS: When we apply the three-strikes policy in those places people may well be evicted, but we want to avoid that situation. It is a journey. We are moving with those communities. People who have received new houses in Maningrida and Wadeye say there has been a change in attitude. People have become quite house proud. We have had our gardening competitions. There has been an expression of good cheer and goodwill. People realise the situation has changed. Whenever I am in the remote communities I talk about people’s obligations as well. It is a journey for all of us, just as we are not going to overcome overcrowding in a very short time. This is a long journey. The journey of people understanding their rights and obligations is going to take some time.
Mr WOOD: I will move to another focus. This issue is very important. The easiest thing, theoretically, was to build the houses; the difficult thing is to maintain them. My only question, and it is slightly left field in relation to this legislation, is there are town camps in Darwin - One Mile, Knuckeys Lagoon and the 15 Mile. Those houses are being built by the government. They are run by Yilli Rreung, although there are still several houses at Knuckeys that will be passed from the Larrakia Nation to Yilli Rreung. People who live in those houses are not in Territory Housing houses and, therefore, do not have access to the safety inspectors you are suggesting. Has there been any discussion by Territory Housing and Yilli Rreung to see if there could be a cooperative process so people in those houses, who sometimes suffer even worse antisocial behavior, could be part of the scheme you are putting forward?
Dr BURNS: That is a very good question. Like you, I have been to most of those places. Unfortunately, issues of land tenure, historical issues, and issues between various groups are difficult to solve regarding tenure and who is living there. In regard to future money, particularly Commonwealth investment in housing, places like Bagot, Knuckeys Lagoon and One Mile Dam should be part of that. Some of those entities, which will remain nameless, have become barriers in a way to further developments in those communities. It is about time they stepped aside in the best interests of the residents. There are complex legal issues as well. I have investigated them at various times and they have the potential to become bogged down in a serious way.
In regard to Yilli Rreung, it was my pleasure to meet with Colin Tidswell about two weeks ago. I have known Colin for many years. He is a great operator and has spent much time in eastern Arnhem Land in a number of Indigenous communities. Wherever I have seen him operate he has done a fantastic job and brought the community with him, particularly in decision-making and supporting Indigenous people. He is now the CEO of Yilli Rreung and has invited me and Ken Davies to some of the places you mentioned. Hopefully, with someone like Colin in the seat at Yilli Rreung and the committee of that organisation, we can find a way forward.
Specifically answering your question, I have to say, initially, it is no, member for Nelson. I want our public housing safety officers to focus on our properties. However, it will be a discussion I will have with the Commander who will be part of this MOU, part of this group, about the different ways we can interact with police, not only on our properties, but some of the areas you mentioned. I recognise there is a need, I am not disputing that. However, in the first instance, I want the public housing safety officers to focus on our properties. I acknowledge the need, and possibly with someone like Colin and his organisation, there may be a way to engage with police. That was something the member for Blain mentioned in his speech as being so important - that interaction, that cooperation across organisations and agencies to focus on problems and achieve a result.
The door is opened to those types of discussions. You are the local member for a number of those places and I have no problem in involving you in those discussions, member for Nelson.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. I would be happy to be in those discussions. Colin Tidswell has invited me to look at the SIL facility, which is now leased by Yilli Rreung. It is a discussion that needs to be had because these people are in no man’s land. They are funded by someone to build those houses, and Yilli Rreung is also funded by government money, but these people are not protected as well as they will be in public housing.
That is all the questions I have. The member for Braitling might have some further questions.
Mr GILES: Thank you, member for Nelson. You have asked most of the questions I wanted to. I wanted to go over a few areas, particularly the two-tiered system of implementation around urban public housing and town camp housing. Can I clarify the process of eviction will not be applied on town camps at all for Alice Springs and Tennant Creek? I understand Katherine and Darwin are probably different.
Dr BURNS: The answer is similar to the one I gave to the member for Nelson, but I will try to be specific to your question. For properties in the areas you mentioned that are subject to the RTA, there is always a potential for someone to be evicted and, in extreme cases, I expect the department to evict someone. Generally speaking, we want to bring people with us as being in separate regimes for some cases and, indeed, probably no regime in other cases. It is reasonable to bring people with us regarding their rights and responsibilities, to manage the tenancies, and to scrutinise those tenancies and make people aware of their obligations.
If you have a different policy agenda, that is up to you. The Leader of the Opposition announced he will be taking an interest in this issue in the new year. It will be interesting to hear what the CLP policy is in relation to evictions from these properties. We want to be reasonable. We do not want to evict people, we want to sustain tenancies - that is what we are all about. However, in extreme cases where people are not amenable and are recalcitrant, we would be justified in evicting those people.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister. Do you have the legal capacity to evict people in Alice Springs or Tennant Creek town camps from public housing areas?
Dr BURNS: The advice I have is, in any property under the RTA, the avenue is there for someone to be evicted. I have not sought specific legal advice about that; that is my initial advice. You have raised a deep issue, I acknowledge that. It would be a very contentious issue. Partly, that is why leases were sought over town camps, not just by Jenny Macklin but by Mal Brough, so the government - whether it be the federal government or the Northern Territory government - would have control over those properties.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister. Can you explain to me, in an area - whether it is a community or otherwise - where there are public housing assets and tenancies and no security of land tenure, how this application applies? For example, Hermannsburg does not have a lease. I might have picked the wrong community - possibly Yuendumu. How does it apply there as opposed to Wadeye?
Dr BURNS: The advice I have is if there is no lease they are not under the RTA. There are leases, as you know, which expire in August of next year. That issue will need to be negotiated with the land trust and the land councils. I am hopeful we will get a resolution on all those issues.
However, there is a question mark about those properties where the leases may not be renewed. There would also be a question mark about who would be responsible for the repairs and maintenance of those properties. I need to seek further advice on the issues you have raised. My advice is I do not have anything to add to what I have already said. I have covered most of the issues but, no doubt, you have further questions, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I am trying to understand the package. This is one piece of pie in a broader package which also takes in part of the intervention, aside from the urban area avenues you are pursuing. I am trying to understand whether or not this is a wholesome package or just a piecemeal approach. Will the two-tiered system work in urban areas and not in bush areas? For example, if someone is evicted at Wadeye, where does that person go? Can someone be evicted from Palumpa or Peppimenarti, which are not growth towns and have different leasing arrangements to a growth town? I am trying to understand it as a whole package.
Dr BURNS: If I could bring us back to the debate …
Mr GILES: Sorry, minister, also, where do people go if they are evicted?
Dr BURNS: We have drifted away from what this bill is about. This bill is about public housing safety officers. I have outlined to the House, and been very straightforward with the House, that these public housing safety officers would be based in Darwin and Alice Springs and those areas would be their focus. You have widened it to evictions in other areas.
Their primary task is not evictions; their primary task is antisocial behaviour and banning people from entering public housing properties in urban areas. I have said the focus is on the urban areas. The main reason for that is the majority of problems arise in our complexes or flats, and there are also houses in urban areas where there are problems. I have made it very plain that the focus initially is in the urban areas. The budget is applied to that particular area.
I said earlier the budget to fund this initiative has come from within; it has come from the existing security officers operating in Darwin, Palmerston, and Alice Springs - approximately $1.8m from memory, plus a reallocation of funding from within, bringing it up to about $2.5m. That is the extent of this initiative. I am not pretending to do everything at once right across the Territory. I am trying to address the issues within your electorate you raise with me, as a local member, on a very regular basis. I am trying to address issues the member for Blain raises with me on a regular basis through his electorate, and the member for Fong Lim.
Some of the issues in the bush are different and the way they can be governed are quite different. I have already mentioned the primary role with antisocial behaviour around housing areas within remote communities is something for police. They are situated there; they have a finger on the pulse and will address those issues, as appropriate. This is a debate about public housing safety officers. I have outlined the area where they will operate initially. There were legitimate questions about the Alice Springs town camps because that is within the orbit of Alice Springs, but we have expanded to areas far beyond that.
Mr GILES: Thanks, minister. It is important these questions are asked because, within my electorate, I have 10 town camps and, if you are going to kick people out of urban settings, they will move straight into the town camps and we will have more issues with overcrowding. It is important to identify whether you are going to apply these principles in town camps, first, in my electorate, second, in Alice Springs, and third, more broadly across the Territory. It is also important to note, as part of the intervention, it is about normalising the Northern Territory. The growth towns model you are pursuing is about having normalised services in those areas, so it is important to ask the question. Otherwise, we have a two-tiered system such as the one we are seeing rolled out right now. Albeit, there are some good initiatives here, you are being selective about where you are rolling them out, and people should not have second-class services in different locations.
I have not asked questions about outstations or homelands, and I will not, because I know you will not be able to answer them.
My next question relates to the $40m per annum being provided under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing. You spoke briefly about it in your summation speech. Where is that money going in relation to tenancy and management services, and how does that fit in with application of tenancy management services to town camps and some of those communities?
Dr BURNS: There is some advice in the paper I tabled previously. Luckily, there is a second copy, so I will go to that. Of that $40m expenditure in remote communities, member for Braitling, I am advised 60% is spent on the delivery of property management services, including repairs and maintenance; 20% is spent on tenancy management services; and 20% is spent on salaries and operational costs. Regarding functions and staff responsibility, as of 30 June 2011, a total of 137 staff were employed by the department to provide a range of property and tenancy management services, including asset inspections, allocations and handovers, policy development, data entry and involvement in housing reference groups. This includes staff based in regions, and central Remote Housing NT staff who assist the regions with asset and tenancy management priorities. They are in that table. I am unsure if that has been …
Mr Giles: I have a copy.
Dr BURNS: Well, you have the answer already, member for Braitling.
Mr Giles: It is all right, I am waiting for you to sit down for my next question.
Dr BURNS: All right, you are just getting a breather. The 137 is broken up as shown on this paper.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much, minister. I understand the $40m was to improve tenancy management services. I note in the paper you tabled that 60% was spent on the delivery of property management services, including repairs and maintenance. My understanding is that that money was not to go towards repairs and maintenance; there is a SIHIP budget for that allocation. Yet you have identified 60% as being spent on repairs and maintenance and only 20% on tenancy management services out of a $40m budget per annum for 10 years, that being $400m. There is a substantial amount of price gouging for repairs and maintenance.
Dr BURNS: My advice is to the contrary, member for Braitling. SIHIP is primarily about the construction and refurbishment of houses. I am interested for you to tell me, or point to where the agreement states it is not to be used for repairs and maintenance.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister. I am sure you said the reason for that allocation of $40m per annum for 10 years under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, NPA, was that $40m was to go to tenancy management services to improve the tenancies of people in growth towns and otherwise. The top line of this document you tabled - I appreciate you tabling it - shows me 60% of that money has been spent on repairs and maintenance. This may be an internal briefing I was not supposed to see, but I find it very interesting that 60% of that $40m for tenancy management is now being spent on repairs and maintenance, and it causes me great concern.
Dr BURNS: It is not exactly as you say, member for Braitling. It says 60% spent on delivery of property management services, including repairs and maintenance. You do not want me to get the file again, do you, member for Braitling?
Mr GILES: What file?
Dr BURNS: The file that shows you ran around saying there was $200m missing from the national partnership agreement, and how it really came down to - I am not going to accuse you of mischief, but you did not read the national partnership agreement and you had it all wrong. That is why I am asking you to point to some part of the agreement that confirms what you are saying because my advice is to the contrary, as it was when you talked about $200m missing from the national partnership agreement. While you are asking the next question, I will take the liberty of sliding out that file.
It is not only that, there is a range of things you have said over time. You will race out now and put out a media release talking about this, but I advise you, you have been wrong every other time. Resist the temptation, member for Braitling, because you are invariably wrong.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister, for your advice. I will not be issuing a media release. I am merely placing on the public record that you have price gouged $40m which was supposed to be for tenancy management services to spend on repairs and maintenance.
Those are all my questions, Madam Chair. We are putting in place a two-tiered system that does not address everything across a broad spectrum in the Northern Territory. That is a great concern, particularly for those bush members on the other side. I fear what this will do, albeit while trying to address delinquent tenancies, is drive people into town camps where the rule of law is not applied and, more broadly speaking, it will drive people into communities where the rules are also not applied.
Dr BURNS: I repeat, I have had emphatic advice, member for Braitling, that $40m from Ntaria is for property and tenancy management, which includes repairs and maintenance. I am more than happy to arrange a briefing for you – I am not being facetious here; it is a complex issue. If you want to speak with Mr Kirkman and others about that agreement I am more than happy for you to have access to those officers and discuss the matter with them. They are across the very fine detail of this agreement and I rely on their advice. It would be good for you to speak to them on this issue if you have some reservations.
Mr MILLS: Minister, my question relates to the powers the public safety officers have and the response to antisocial behaviour.
My understanding is three recorded incidents of antisocial behaviour – three strikes – and then there is a consequence. I assume a detail around the definition of antisocial behaviour. There are three elements listed describing what is understood as antisocial behaviour involving (a) abusive or violent behaviour directed to a person; (b) creates alarm or fear in, or annoyance to, neighbours or others in the vicinity; and the next one is the one of interest, (c) involves graffiti, littering or vandalism.
I ask for your clarification of what is meant by ‘vandalism’. Is there a definition? I do not see any definition of what constitutes vandalism.
Dr BURNS: Which part of the bill was that?
Mr MILLS: It is Part 5 clause 28A.
Dr BURNS: Member for Blain, I am advised there are definitions of vandalism in other acts, and under statutory interpretation of laws, surprisingly, sometimes in law words used within acts are taken at their common meaning. This is destructive – vandalism, in my book, is wanton, destructive behaviour.
Mr MILLS: I understand 234 properties have damage in excess of $5000. Would that fit the definition of being as a result of vandalism?
Dr BURNS: It depends on the circumstances of the damage. Anything over and above what you would call normal wear and tear and is wanton and wilful destruction of property I class as vandalism. In some of these cases, member for Blain, it is not the tenant who does the damage, it is the unwanted visitors. It is very difficult to hold tenants responsible for the damage that may be inflicted by unwanted visitors. That is why we are taking this view and this course of action.
Public housing safety officers can ban unwanted visitors from the property for various times, they can tell them to leave the property, and they can tell them to desist and stop their antisocial behaviour. My aim is to nip this behaviour in the bud.
Mr MILLS: I will go to the section which relates to the power to seize a dangerous article or a container of liquor. Will there be any specific penalties applied to the refusal to comply with an attempt to seize a container of alcohol, or will the general penalties apply?
Dr BURNS: We are starting to get into legal terrain here, member for Blain, and I will explain it as best I can. Because we did not go with the powers of arrest and detention and frisk, public housing safety officers can seize alcohol that is not in a person’s possession. If someone is sitting there with alcohol beside them, they can then pour that alcohol out or, if it is unopened alcohol, they can seize that alcohol. I hope that answers your question.
Mr MILLS: It does. However, if there is a refusal to comply what penalties apply?
Dr BURNS: There is a penalty for failing to comply with a direction, which is 20 penalty units. This, by my calculation, is somewhere near $3000, which is the maximum. There is a penalty, but if someone is being belligerent, threatening, etcetera, that is when we expect the public housing safety officers - because they do not have the powers of arrest and detention - to call the police. A person might refuse etcetera and, in my book, that ups the ante in their trouble and interaction with the law.
Mr MILLS: If a group of drinkers was sitting in the common area with alcohol clearly in view and an approach is made to tip it out, which is resisted but there is no belligerence, just the resistance of: ‘We want to protect that alcohol’ - what follows then? How is the penalty applied?
Dr BURNS: There is a course of action at that stage, member for Blain, acknowledging what you have said could well occur. The public housing safety officers have the statutory powers to tell the person to leave the property. The person should leave the property. If there is going to be a big confrontation over the alcohol they might say: ‘I want you to leave’. They would then be required to leave the property, and the penalty for disobeying that is, once again, 20 penalty units.
If people refuse to leave, it is up to the public housing safety officers to call police, who will enforce the law as it stands. Part of the training of the public housing safety officers will be to deal with these situations in an authoritative but non-aggressive way, and to handle the situation. In 80% of cases, people would desist one way or the other.
Mr MILLS: If there is passive resistance does the public safety housing officer reach for their ticket? Can they issue the penalty or is it referred to the police?
Dr BURNS: I am advised they can issue a written notice, member for Blain. I do not have one with me.
Mr MILLS: I do not want to see one. Can you explain what happens? I have been in this space for some time; measures are put in place, signs are placed on fences and the like. What is going to happen? I can see it happening now. The drinkers are in the common space; someone says: ‘Come on, you guys should be moving on and you should not be drinking there’, and they just ignore the person. The public safety housing officer has the authority to issue a ticket. What happens then?
Dr BURNS: I am advised that it is very similar to what happens with a parking fine.
Mr MILLS: They are required to give correct names, addresses, details and the like. Failure to do so?
Dr BURNS: Once again, that is 20 penalty units.
Madam CHAIR: Any other questions?
Mr MILLS: No, I can see it now; I am looking forward to seeing this in practice. I trust the training provided to these good folk will assist them because this is the nub of it; being able to affect any kind of consequence. No further questions.
Bill taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Madam Deputy Speaker, before we move on, I thank all officers involved in this undertaking. It has taken quite a while and I commend the department, those here today, and those behind the scenes, for all their hard work.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 21 November 2011.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Deputy Speaker, in what time I have left, I will finish my contribution. I was trying to recap where I got to. I reflect on the Henderson government’s track record in Indigenous affairs, and looking across our electorates, particularly mine, and what we have done in those electorates. I was having that conversation with you, minister, or it might have been a couple of our bush colleagues.
When I look across all the communities, one of the major issues we embarked on in 2001 was to ensure nearly all the communities had sealed airstrips and lighting appropriate to the standards in remote Aboriginal communities. That might not mean much to opposition members, but for residents of remote communities, having sealed airstrips with lighting is important infrastructure, particularly given the encroaching Wet Season where, in many communities, medical evacuations previously were a complete nightmare.
One undisputable matter of record for our government is the child protection system inherited in 2001. Members opposite have said we constantly go back; however, you have to put it in context of the last 10 years. In 2001, when we came to government, the child protection system was non-existent, particularly in the bush ...
Mr HAMPTON: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time to allow her to finish her statement, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Thank you, and I thank the minister and my colleagues.
Going back to 2001, the child protection system was operationally flawed and massively underfunded. We know, despite the many reforms and huge increases in funding - and we have increased funding in the child protection system hugely - there are still operational flaws to be addressed. That has been identified in a number of reviews undertaken by this government. We have been committed, as a government, to agreeing to every recommendation in those various reports. We continue to fix that system, and not just in our urban centres, but across the bush. In relation to Indigenous affairs, that is a major issue we have looked at moving forward in our A Working Future.
The underlying cause of the tsunami of need in the Territory is not government neglect, but the continuing change and unravelling of lifestyles and social values we have seen over the past 20 years. We have seen massive change across our remote communities. When we look at health and education, there has been a dramatic shift and change across many communities. We have added to the numbers of police and are seeing some fantastic numbers. In my electorate alone - and it has not just been since the intervention four years ago - our government has added substantial numbers of police and resources in many communities. Emergency services is another important key area our government has funded. When we look at the growth towns policy and A Working Future, emergency services is an important component, particularly with our growth towns. Across all our communities, though, we must have the capacity to respond to emergencies.
I pay particular tribute to an effective group in Maningrida, the Maningrida Emergency Response Group, a fantastic group of volunteers who work in that community and respond to many of the problems there. Fires often occur in some of the houses or around the community and that group has assisted police and worked quite effectively.
In the Indigenous Development statement, the minister outlined very clearly how government is going forward. Whilst members on the other side may criticise - the member for Fong Lim and all his bleating about Kenbi - the sad reality is this is the party which, for 26 years, fought every land claim in the Northern Territory; fought Aboriginal people every step of the way. Members opposite say: ‘We are not of that ilk. That was the old CLP. We are the new CLP and we embrace Indigenous affairs and Indigenous people differently from the old guard’. I am sorry, it is in your DNA.
Member for Fong Lim, I find it incredibly hypocritical that you stand here, hand on heart, pretending to care for Raylene Singh, her family and the issues of Kenbi. The CLP fought against that land claim for over 20 years. The Labor Party, on coming to government in 2001, said: ‘No further litigation, we will negotiate’. I urge Raylene, and the rest of her family members, to come back to the table and work with the government, the land council, and everyone to move that area forward and not be a pawn in this silly political game the member for Fong Lim wants to play.
There are many issues out there and I am not saying we have fixed them all. It is critical we work with the federal government and, whilst people like Senator Scullion and many others can say Labor’s intervention - this is what is happening – legislation and all those issues have been given to a parliamentary committee, people will have the opportunity to put their views to that committee and we will move forward.
It is completely different to Mal Brough and his intervention in 2007. Aboriginal people were left absolutely demoralised in 2007, and there is still much suspicion and feeling by many people in communities that there is a continuation of what we had in 2007. I am looking forward to finishing parliament on Thursday, visiting my electorate to talk to people, and engage them in looking at what we have, what the federal government has introduced in parliament, and the future for those communities. Let us do it in a productive way with the federal government where we have a partnership to continue the housing program, and education, and where there is a real commitment. We have acknowledged we cannot do this alone. It is not only putting money on the table or getting resources in communities, it is about getting families to value education. Until our families embrace and value education, we will not see things turn around. That can happen; not every family in communities is keeping their kids away from school.
In the media and nationally, it is convenient to say how many kids are not going to school. People have not looked at communities where schools have seen a huge increase in attendance. I applaud those schools. One is Gunbalanya, in my electorate, where there has been a huge increase in the number of kids going to school. I cannot wait to get out there after parliament finishes for the end-of-year Christmas party for those kids and to celebrate with that community, which has had its fair share of grief over the last 12 months with a number of deaths and the impact that has had on the school community. Nevertheless, that school community has been able to increase the number of children attending school.
Across all our electorates, we have been, and are, moving in the right direction. That has only happened by laying the structure and foundation.
Before I finish I have to put on record my congratulations. Recently, we saw the Walkley Awards. I congratulate Russell Skelton for his Walkley on King Brown Country. That book is a blueprint in Indigenous policy and what needs to happen in governance, and why local government reforms were so critical in the Northern Territory.
The other big issue in the Northern Territory was in relation to alcohol. I put on record in this statement my congratulations to Katrina Bolton. Anyone who listened to that would have been moved. I congratulate her because she highlighted a plight that affects Aboriginal people in Alice Springs particularly.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister for Indigenous Development for bringing this statement before the House. I am very pleased to participate in this very important debate representing, as I do, a bush electorate where just over half my constituents are Yolngu people living in the growth towns of Yirrkala and Galiwinku, and the surrounding Marthakal and Laynhapuy Homelands on their traditional clan estates.
As I said during the debate on this subject in February this year, the A Working Future policy document is at the heart of Indigenous policy. It is a living document which adopts a whole-of-government approach to looking after our remote areas, and the people who live, work and raise their families there.
I can only concur with the minister: this government does have a deep and abiding conviction to put in place the structures, systems, and partnerships required to assure the future of our remote towns, communities and homelands of the Northern Territory. We know decades of poor planning under an ad hoc approach at both the federal and Territory government level has left us with a considerable legacy in trying to turn around our remote communities. To improve the lives of the people who live out there in the bush, and the infrastructure they need to support their lives, is all key to building strong families and communities.
This government has also addressed the third tier of government through the introduction of local government reforms in 2008, just prior to my time of becoming the elected local member. It was an area of policy way too hard for the CLP to ever grapple with. It continued to work with the old community government council model, knowing so many of these councils were problematic, insolvent, and had lacked transparency and accountability as to how the funding dollars were spent and, ultimately, services to far too many communities were not delivered adequately. I would also like to highlight, as the member for Arafura mentioned, the work of journalist, Russell Skelton, in exposing through his book King Brown Country, Papunya, and a number of other remote communities in the Northern Territory.
Labor governments in the Territory since 2001 have driven, and continue to drive, a massive reform agenda across a whole raft of public policy areas. Local government reform is a key policy area for people living in our remote communities. This is unlike CLP governments over 27 years which shied away from reforms, not only because it was too hard but because, by definition, they are conservatives and not comfortable with change, but also because they were not interested in the bush. It was a case of if it was happening outside Darwin it was out of sight and out of mind.
There is no doubt that three years into the local government reforms and the newly created shires the path has not been an easy one, but major reform never is. It is challenging, and we do not walk away from it simply because it is too hard. I am, obviously, most familiar with the East Arnhem Shire, being the local government entity in my electorate, but I am also familiar with some of the other shires and the work they do through the public hearings and travel I have undertaken as a member of the Council of Territory Cooperation.
The East Arnhem Shire has had a key role to play in improving the lives of people in the region. This is evidenced in a number of service delivery areas, but perhaps best evidenced and captured in the local implementation plans which have been prepared in close collaboration with the three tiers of government and, most importantly, with close collaboration and consultation with the local reference groups. Local implementation plans literally map out a plan for the community’s vision based upon seven key areas or building blocks: childhood; economic participation; governance and leadership; health; healthy homes; safe communities; and schooling.
This whole-of-government approach with the local implementation plans, in partnership with community representatives, is all about planning and building for capacity in our remote communities and growth towns. As the minister mentioned, this is an important part of COAG’s National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery. The local implementation plans are very much live documents which map out the priorities, strategies and actions which are important to individual communities. They are developed from grassroots level and recognise a ‘one size fits all’ is not the best way to plan. What we see with the LIPs are the plans which reflect the needs and aspirations of individual communities.
It was a great honour for me to represent the minister and the Northern Territory government at the LIP signing at Yirrkala on 8 December last year, and then at Galiwinku on Elcho Island on 9 March this year. For Yirrkala people and the Gurru'tu Mirri Mala reference group, it was a very proud day to see the LIP signed. It captures things which have already become reality like the Gove Peninsula regional bus service and an upgrade to the school’s trade training centre to name just a couple. For the people at Galiwinku the LIP highlights a number of initiatives: construction of a multipurpose facility which would incorporate a cyclone shelter facility and which would also enable catering for sport and recreation; a women’s centre; a youth drop-in centre; and a playgroup. It also includes the commencement of Yolngu Matha classes. Those classes are not just for Indigenous children at the school, but in the 9 to 3, 3 to 9 program - those hours after the normal school day - there are Yolngu Matha classes presented by Indigenous members of the community for non-Indigenous members, and that is a fantastic thing.
We also see in the Galiwinku LIP the provision of business support and mentoring to assist viable businesses, and development of a plan that provides care to the aged through infrastructure and services. I acknowledge the amazing work Yvonne Sutherland does as the manager and coordinator of the aged and disability program at Galiwinku in infrastructure that is not as good as it might be. She is very ably assisted by some incredibly dedicated and skilful Yolngu employees, without whom Yvonne would not be able to do her job. We are delighted to see, with the announcement earlier this year in the federal budget, a new clinic being built at Galiwinku which is currently operated by Miwatj. With the construction of a new clinic, the plan is the old clinic will become the home of the aged and disability service.
Before East Arnhem Shire knew that news was coming, it had signed a memorandum of understanding that the shires aged and disability program would work in very close contact with Miwatj as the primary healthcare providers. I am sure when the time comes to move it will be very welcome. In the interim, there are some works happening at the aged and disability centre at Elcho Island simply to make it logistically a little easier for those who work there and utilise the service to operate.
These LIPs set time lines associated with specific actions to be taken by the responsible parties, including government agencies and the community. Plans will be reviewed, updated, amended and expanded annually for the life of the plan until June 2014.
The minister is quite right when she says we need to work hard to win back the trust and confidence of many Aboriginal people following Howard and Brough’s 2007 intervention. People want to be involved, they want to be consulted and respected, not simply told how to run their lives and their communities and be disempowered through those actions.
The Territory’s bid to become the seventh state is such an important path for us to walk down together in a spirit of bipartisanship so the Territory can be on an equal constitutional footing with the rest of Australia, to be able to speak up for our people and make our own laws which cannot be overturned by the parliament in Canberra. This is especially so for my Yolngu constituents who currently are the most constitutionally vulnerable. Next year’s Constitutional Convention planned for April – assuming the members opposite, or one in particular, are not successful in derailing this process - presents an exciting opportunity for people to have a say about what our constitution might look like.
I am especially pleased about the very democratic process which will allow, on 27 January 2012, candidates to nominate to be one of the three elected delegates in each of the Territory’s 25 electorates. There is certainly interest in the Nhulunbuy electorate in this process and, not surprisingly, there is strong interest among Indigenous people who are considering - and I am certainly encouraging them - to put their hand up and have a go. Nothing to lose and everything to gain, I say. It is only through statehood that Territorians can have any certainty about removing the interference of Canberra in our affairs and our right to make and uphold our own laws.
I mentioned the establishment of the Gove Peninsula Bus Service as an important initiative delivered under the A Working Future policy and the Yirrkala Local Implementation Plan. This service commenced in September of last year and is meeting the long-called-for need for an affordable transport service which enables residents on the Gove Peninsula to travel between Nhulunbuy, Yirrkala and Gunyangarra in order to get to work, to training, to shop, to appointments and for recreation.
This two-year bus trial is a collaboration between the Australian government, Northern Territory government, Rio Tinto Alcan and Indigenous-owned company, YBE, and is also supported by the East Arnhem Shire with the provision of a conductor - someone who collects the tickets and ensures everyone is okay on the bus so the driver can concentrate on driving. It is further supported by East Arnhem IGA, which generously offers, without any fee attached, the selling of tickets through the supermarket they operate at Yirrkala, the supermarket in Nhulunbuy, as well as the butcher shop in Nhulunbuy. The service runs Monday to Friday on a set timetable, with each run reasonably well patronised and passengers paying their $5 per ticket.
A trial such as this will pave the way for trials in other remote locations and, at the end of the two-year period, we will be in a position to examine what needs to be done to keep it going. The reality is vehicle ownership is low amongst Indigenous people, and a service such as this is imperative if we are serious about helping people get to work, training and other activities. The bus does special runs in the early morning and afternoon for people who work at Dhimurru, Rio Tinto’s Alert program, and YBE.
I heard our Minister for Transport quote figures last week when participating in this debate. We are talking about approximately 12 000 passengers who have utilised this service in a little over the 12 months it has been operating. Basically, that figure can be split evenly in half. Around 6000 workers are going to those places I mentioned, to and from work, and the remaining 6000 are passengers travelling for any other type of business. It is a fantastic thing.
Provision of public transport in a remote area is a real logistical challenge. I acknowledge the partners in this service who I have already mentioned, also public servants from the Department of Transport, as well as Regional Services, who have worked really hard and overcome the challenges and logistics in getting this service off the ground. This government is serious about supporting people to get to work, get to training and access other services, and it is trials like this which show it can be done.
I would like to talk about education and the critical and pivotal role it has to play in our remote communities. We know education is the foundation to providing children with opportunities for a future where they can be the master of their own destiny. It is what provides them with choices about how they will grow and prosper, and that is something which, by extension, sees families and communities grow and prosper.
It is what I want for my two boys, one at Nhulunbuy Primary School and one at Nhulunbuy High School. When I speak with parents throughout my electorate it is what they want for their kids too, whether those kids be in Nhulunbuy, Yirrkala, Galiwinku, or at one of the many homeland learning centres like the ones at Dhalinybuy, Burrawuy, GanGan or Warruwi - and so the list goes on.
This government recognises it faces many challenges in getting children to some of our remote and very remote schools, which is why we have introduced the Every Child, Every Day strategy. This provides all of us with a framework which spells out very explicit steps for schools to work with kids, families and their communities around getting kids to school. It involves some carrot-and-stick approaches, but it operates on the assumption getting a child to school every day is everyone’s responsibility. We know if a child goes to school every day they will receive a quality education and be armed with the skills to take up the opportunities on offer through the pathways of work and further training and education.
Additional resources by way of attendance and truancy officers have a role to play, as do community engagement officers. Where we see success happening with good attendance it is invariably because the school is regarded as a valuable place within the community. This comes only after the school has worked hard and collaboratively with senior men and women in the community, and other stakeholders who have a role to play in children’s lives, for instance those from the childcare centres, health clinics, the shires and from the police station. Indeed, it is that whole-of-community approach where we will see success.
Many people I speak with tell me their aspiration is for work and real jobs not welfare. I am sure the members opposite hold that view as well. However, there seems to be some differences of opinion as to what constitutes work. I was completely floored earlier this year when I was talking about one of my remote communities and the fantastic work our artists - in particular, our fibre artists - do. It is more than art; it is a living for many of these people. I was lambasted by members opposite for talking about basket weaving.
I held up a photo at that time. Today, I have brought in the real thing - just two from my collection. This basket is made by Mavis Ganambarr who is internationally recognised for her fibre art. She has been written about in publications, including The Australian. I note writer, Nicolas Rothwell, is quite a fan of hers and her work was recently exhibited in a Rebecca Hossack gallery in London in July. She is an incredible artist. Similarly, another basket from the community of Mapurru is made by my good friend, Roslyn. The main source of income for the community at Mapurru is through running fibre art workshops for paying visitors. It is much more than just learning the art of working with fibre; it is also about cultural awareness. That community has enormous success by taking tourists into their community. They were thrilled a few months ago; they purchased a four-wheel drive troop carrier to get in and out of the community. It has basically been purchased with savings from the work they have invested in their program and fibre art on their community.
When I talk about some of the amazing things I see happening in the schools in my electorate, I am especially heartened by what I see in the Families as First Teachers program. We heard the Minister for Education and Training, when talking in the debate last week around the Education and Care Services Bill, mention the crucial time of early childhood ensuring kids are school ready. This fact is identified by many researchers, not the least of whom is Professor Geoff Masters, who has been working with the Northern Territory government’s Department of Education and Training. The efforts and resources we put into early childhood and the Family as First Teachers program really pays dividends. It is a particularly important program because it is about assisting parents - working with parents to work with their children - and to help them develop and hone their skills to support and enhance the learning opportunities of their preschool-aged children so, when they start their formal schooling, they are school ready. I also acknowledge the dedicated Yolngu staff in my electorate who work side-by-side with the Family as First Teachers because, without them, the program would not see the success it does.
In the Laynhapuy Homelands, we have a mobile preschool teacher who rotates three days a week through the homeland learning centres. In fact, on my recent travels to homelands in my electorate, I came across Margaret, the mobile preschool teacher, at Burrawuy one week, and we bumped into one another the following week during an overnight visit to GanGan.
I see many great things happening in our remote schools - schools which were largely ignored before a Labor government came to power in 2001. Before then, secondary education in the bush simply did not exist - no graduates from secondary school or Year 12 in the bush. This government has invested heavily in education in the bush, with investment in infrastructure, programs, and quality teachers to deliver education. Places such as Dhalinybuy and GanGan have new school buildings and training centres, which also include teacher and visiting trainer accommodation. This will certainly be a welcome change for those dedicated teachers who have, basically, spent their nights in communities in swags in classrooms. These particular centres have been funded through the Building the Education Revolution program and there are more under way at Burrawuy, Garthalala and, very soon, Mirrnatja, which is in the member for Arnhem’s electorate ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I move that the member be given at extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you very much, and thank you, Leader of Government Business.
We know - we said it time and time again - the members opposite did not support the Building the Education Revolution; they did not see the value in it. They did not see the value in schools or investing in jobs. Mind you, that has not stopped them from attending most of the BER openings in their electorates whenever they can. Funny about that.
There are great things happening out there, and I highlight the Ralpa newsletter from Yirrkala Homelands School. This issue is from September. Ralpa has no equivalent word in English, but it does refer to someone who is energetic - I am reading from the cover - resilient, humble and motivated to be in community and cultural activities. This newsletter is a fantastic pictorial and written account of some of the amazing things happening in the Yirrkala Homelands School in the Laynhapuy Homelands. You will see, throughout these photographs, many Indigenous teachers working with kids.
No doubt, members opposite would probably disregard this as a puff piece, as they do with any kind of good news story. However, I am really heartened when I see this type of thing and hear about what is happening in our homelands and in our education system; to see our Indigenous kids involved and benefiting from a quality education.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table that document.
Leave granted.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. It is really important these things are put on the public record to counter some of the very negative stuff we hear.
The other forum showcasing great things going on in some of our remote schools was, of course, the Smart Schools Award night held in October. It is only the second year the awards night has been held, and it was the first one I was able to attend. Schools such as Baniyala, Shepherdson College from my electorate, as well as Ramingining, Maningrida, Angurugu, and Top End Group Schools, which takes in the Tiwi Islands, were all up there in the spotlight receiving due acknowledgement for the great programs and successes these schools and school communities are delivering for kids. I congratulate all schools that were nominated. Double congratulations to those who were winners and finalists. I thank the minister, and the Department of Education and Training, for the effort they put in to staging what was a fantastic night. There must have been around 500 people at that event. There is certainly much to celebrate.
Education is central to children’s lives and future, but so is delivery of health services. The minister, in her speech, highlighted some of the significant spends in health for remote communities. I also acknowledge the funding commitments in my electorate in northeast Arnhem Land.
I mentioned to our Health Minister this morning that the six new two-bedroom units for doctors and allied health professionals and nurses on the campus of Gove Hospital are now completed. I am hoping that he, or perhaps the Housing minister, may visit for the official opening before Christmas. These were a Northern Territory government funding commitment in the 2010-11 Budget. If we cannot house health professionals we are really challenged to deliver health services. These additional units of accommodation will be snapped up very quickly and will enable our region, through Gove hospital, to continue to deliver the fantastic health services our community sees.
Two years ago, Yirrkala Health Centre benefited from Northern Territory health funding in excess of $800 000 for a major upgrade to deliver a more contemporary facility with more space, a dental room and a self-care dialysis unit. I congratulate those who work hard at Yirrkala Health Centre: Sue Colquhoun, the clinic nurse manager; and Terence Guyula, one of our Aboriginal Health Workers. He was Aboriginal Health Worker of the Year, not this year but last year, and that recognition is well-deserved. He is a hard working man, very dedicated to his job and a wonderful role model to his community and the young men out there.
Ngalkanbuy Clinic, which I was talking about earlier, is run by Miwatj at Elcho Island and has been earmarked for a new clinic thanks to funding announced in the federal budget this year. That will allow the shire’s aged and disability service to relocate into the old building when the new one is constructed.
Further to this, Gove District Hospital has been earmarked to receive $13m for a new A&E department, and also additional funding for accommodation for people travelling into Nhulunbuy from remote communities for medical services to give accompanying family members somewhere to stay. We have the Aboriginal hostel in Nhulunbuy, which is fantastic, but it does not have the capacity to accommodate people with sick family members in hospital who want to be close by. Having those units of accommodation on the hospital campus will be very welcomed.
The trifecta for me, at Gove District Hospital, will be the construction of a multipurpose flexible care service facility for aged and disability clients from around the region. We have had in-principle funding earmarked by the federal government and I am very keen to see that facility delivered. Currently, capacity for respite is very limited. Anglicare does a good job in caring for people seeking respite. Gove District Hospital has several beds. However, the sad fact is there are occasions when the closest respite is for patients to fly to Royal Darwin Hospital, which is certainly not ideal for them.
While the health dollars have gone in, and continue to go into our clinics and hospitals, one of the most significant investments in health in our large remote communities is housing. I am referring, of course, to SIHIP. It has not been without its problems, and they have been acknowledged on the floor of this House and are very well-documented. I am also familiar with them as a member of the Council of Territory Cooperation. That said, we still have to acknowledge we have seen the biggest housing program in the history of the country. It is transformational and is addressing decades of neglect, which has seen chronic overcrowding and too many derelict and dysfunctional houses where the environmental health issues have all too often meant dysfunctional lives, dysfunctional communities, children not going to school, and so on.
There are 110 new houses for Maningrida and the first tranche has been handed over. The minister for Housing has held up lovely, colour photographs of the first families receiving keys to their houses in Galiwinku and Elcho Island in a new subdivision. We have many new houses going up there; a total of 90 new houses in that community with many refurbs and rebuilds as well. I look forward to visiting Elcho on 13 and 14 December to receive an update on how that program is rolling out and, hopefully, very soon see tenants moving into new houses.
I am pleased to hear the minister acknowledge the challenge of housing on our homelands and highlight the need for the Australian government to step up to the plate to assist with maintenance to key homeland assets, including houses, to fulfil what the minister terms the Australian government’s ongoing obligation to assist homelands. The reality is homelands, especially in my electorate, are places where people are strong physically and culturally, and populations on homelands will continue to grow as it does in our growth towns and every other place in the Northern Territory.
The A Working Future policy does more than outline and articulate a strong vision for the Territory’s remote areas. It is delivering better services, providing jobs and pathways, and strengthening lives, families and communities. I have said it before in this House, but will say it again: the A Working Future policy provides a vision and strategic map which recognises that strategic policy must be developed, implemented and delivered in close consultation with those who live in our remote areas. It is about delivering services, creating employment, generating economic opportunities and planning for now and 20 years time, so people can lead strong and healthy lives in tune with strong cultural values. It recognises populations in our remote areas continue to grow like the rest of the Territory, and that we need to plan, prepare and deliver for that growth in the same way other similar-sized towns in other regions of Australia work and grow, and that this takes a whole-of-government approach. This is not something government is going to do; we are doing it. It is not something the CLP ever did or contemplated in its 27 years.
We know we have a long way to go and will not always get it quite right but, importantly, this government is determined to address the decades of neglect in a bid to transform the lives of Territorians, their families and their communities, and to build capacity and resilience.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I especially acknowledge the vision, commitment and singular determination of our Minister for Indigenous Development in delivering on the commitments of the A Working Future policy. I thank her and commend her for bringing this statement before the House.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support this important statement delivered by the Minister for Indigenous Development. There has been a great deal of work to improve the lives of Indigenous Territorians, especially in the critical areas of health, education, safety and housing. The Territory government has been working hand in hand with the Australian government, land councils, shires, traditional owners and local people to ensure we are driving the significant investments to get results we all want to see.
We know there are many Indigenous Territorians doing it tough and faced with some immense challenges, but we also have many wonderful Indigenous people who are working to make a difference and improve the lives of the people around them.
I have been privileged over many years to work with many leaders. Unfortunately, a number are now deceased, but it was great for me to - I have told this House before - go to Maningrida a few weeks ago with the member for Arafura to hand over keys to quite a number of houses built under SIHIP. It was great to have Mr Reggie Wurridjal, now a senior traditional owner of Maningrida with us, and also Ms Helen Williams, who is very well-known to this House as well. I have known both of them since they were kids. I have seen them grow up and go through school and work, have families, have children and grandchildren, and become very involved with the community and become leaders, and step up to the plate. They are examples of people throughout the whole of the Territory.
As I go to East Arnhem I see many examples. In Wadeye, there are people who have worked over many years to benefit their communities. Sometimes we get messages of doom and gloom in this area, but we also have to commend those people who have worked so hard over so many decades to try to hold things together, to try to improve the lot of their people.
Education and housing are two of the key areas where we need to make a difference. We are heading in the right direction for long-lasting and effective change. The areas of education and training are at the centre of the A Working Future policy. This government is doing more than any government under the CLP reign ever did to improve education in the bush. No matter where a child lives, if they are going to have a bright future they must have an education and must go to school. The ability to read, write and be numerate is at the centre of being fully able to participate in today’s world, get a good job and have a prosperous life. However, we know how important culture is to people and community and we are not asking people to give up those important elements of their lives merely to receive an education.
There are many examples, some I have mentioned previously, where people can achieve in all realms whether it is the traditional, the ceremonial, the community, the political or simply looking after their family. That is the single most important thing. We want people to have whole, fulfilling and productive lives and we see many examples of that. I would not want anyone to misinterpret - when I talk about the importance of literacy and numeracy – that I am inferring in any way that people need to leave their culture behind. I acknowledge culture, the wisdom of culture, and that relationships through culture are absolutely essential and important to Indigenous people.
This government has not shied away from the challenges associated with delivering a first-class education in remote school settings: the establishment of preschools in communities where there previously were none; the delivery of Year 12 education to young Aboriginal kids in remote communities who have as much right to an education as any other Territorian; improvements in Indigenous education, including more teachers; and much of that has been in partnership with the Commonwealth - more schools and more targeted programs. Completing Year 12 is one of the most significant achievements a person can have in their life. For too long, young Indigenous Territorians were not able to complete school in their home communities. Under Labor, we have changed the education policy which existed for far too long under the CLP - Indigenous children wishing to go to high school and finish Year 12 needed to leave their homes and come into the urban areas.
That is not to say that might be so in some cases; parents and children may desire that. There may even be a tradition within that community or that family of people going to Kormilda, St John’s, or a public school. We are not standing in the way of that, we are all about giving people choice. However, students need to be able to complete their schooling in their own home community, and I have mentioned this many times. It is a real achievement of former Education minister, Syd Stirling. He had the fire in the belly to achieve this and, as Treasurer, was able to drive it. It was a difficult undertaking but there is more work to do; it is only a start.
Between 2003 and 2010, 176 remote Indigenous students have finished school in their home community, and this year we will see more. I am also pleased to inform the House of the great progress we are achieving through the Clontarf Football Academies.
I mentioned, as a result of a question in Question Time, the functions the Chief Minister and I have attended in recent times celebrating the success of Clontarf. Attending one, I looked around and saw 60 young men standing proud, confident and with a world of opportunity ahead of them because they had an education. They were proud and their parents were proud. Gradually, it has become fashionable to become part of Clontarf. People would rather be in the group than out of it; it is sending a very positive message. This year, Clontarf will see 64 participants in Year 12 finish the program. In 2009, there were 26 Year 12 graduates, and in 2010 there were 32. With time, this program is growing.
Since 2001, as a government we have added an extra 407 teachers across the Territory. We have worked with the Australian government to deliver an extra 200 teachers to remote schools. I commend the federal government for the extra teachers, two schools, and the infrastructure put forward to support that initiative.
We created the Remote Teaching Service, a very important step. Across northern Australia, there is a great deal of interest in the Remote Teaching Service and the initiative of the Northern Territory government in setting it up. It is no longer recruit people to the bush just to fill jobs; we want the right people who will make a commitment to their school and community for at least three years. We are now seeing improvements in remote teacher retention, which is partly because of the more rigorous recruitment process.
I attended an executive meeting of the Australian Education Union a couple of weeks ago. They raised quite a number of issues with me. I take the issues raised by the Australian Education Union very seriously. They raised issues in relation to the induction for teachers, particularly those living in remote areas. I have asked the department to look at that closely; to have a productive time so those teachers are well equipped for their time in the bush. We want to work with the Australian Education Union, schools, and school communities to ensure we get the best people.
We are also committed to developing more Indigenous educators and have a program to support Indigenous people obtain training qualifications so they can work as educators within their own community. This includes growing our own teachers through the Remote Indigenous Teachers Education program. At Galiwinku alone, there are five teachers in training. As I move throughout the Territory - I know the shadow minister, the member for Brennan, is moving around the Territory also. No doubt, he will meet many fine people who are part of this program, either as graduates now teaching or students coming through.
Infrastructure: we are building better schools across the Territory. I am pleased to see the great work done in the life of this government. Since 2001, we have built new schools at Emu Point, Manyallaluk, Mamaruni, Wugularr, Alparra and Ilparpa. As well, we have built specialist secondary education facilities at Ramingining, Maningrida, Papunya, Kalkaringi, Minyerri, Shepherdson and Wadeye. One case in point is Borroloola School. I visited there two or three months ago. Over the last past four to five years, that school has been completely rebuilt with more plans for a trade training centre as part of the MOU with the mine. From memory, we are spending about $1m on that trade training centre - I could be mistaken. The block of land has already been picked out, and there is much excitement, not only in the school community with the teachers and the students, but also in the wider community. This is a fantastic step forward. This is replicated in many places across the Territory where this government has focused on building infrastructure in the bush.
In talking about achievements of government, the opposition likes to beat its chest and say: ‘We built the Territory’. Governments do what governments do. In 27 years you did achieve, I am not going say you did not. However, I am saying, as a government right from Day 1, we were focused, to a large extent, with what was happening in the bush. We felt - you might say we were wrong in this - there had been a great deal of neglect there and a need for further infrastructure development in the bush across health clinics, schools, a whole range of things. We have made commitments over the years through our massive capital works expenditure - first, under Syd Stirling and now under the member for Karama - to put infrastructure in the bush. The works that go on in the bush are very important to this government. We have not neglected the town, but we have also seen that the Territory is a big place and there is room for infrastructure throughout the regions, not only to benefit those regions and the communities, but Territory companies that work in those regions building that infrastructure. We do not shy away from the fact we have purposely gone into deficit to support jobs and the economy in the Northern Territory.
I was very interested to hear Penny Wong this morning on AM putting the case so succinctly. Nationally, the federal government has invested in a similar way, and we have avoided many of the issues that have occurred in the Euro zone. That is not to say we do not have to watch our expenditure carefully and be prudent in that expenditure - of course we do. We believe this Labor government is a responsible fiscal manager, and reject the opposition’s suggestion we should move into surplus just because it is an ideology it holds. It would hurt Territorians, it would hurt Territory business, and we are certainly not going down that path ...
A member: You could have done it years ago.
Dr BURNS: We delivered eight surplus budgets and we significantly reduced debt. We are prudent financial managers …
A member: Reduced debt!
Dr BURNS: We know how you are going to do it. You are going to slash the capital works expenditure and slash staff numbers. That is how you are going to get back into surplus. It is a fairly simple equation, unless you have a printing press out the back, or a large gold magnet you are going to drag across the Territory and scoop up all the little nuggets and melt them down, or join the coins end to end, as said by the member for Port Darwin, so they stretch around the world or to the moon three times. We are not interested in these silly equations; we are interested in jobs, the economy and the health of business. But, I digress.
We certainly have strategies in place in education: Every Child, Every Day; early childhood; and training in remote communities.
In the remaining time, I would like to talk about public and affordable housing. There has been a great deal of criticism of SIHIP - $1.7bn in a national partnership agreement on remote Indigenous housing, NPARIH. That is the overall program and it will change the face of many communities forever.
I was heartened by the report from the Australian National Audit Office. It has been mentioned in passing by members opposite, but I believe that report endorses the efforts around the national partnership agreement. It certainly outlined the challenges remaining in delivery of the targets, but it also acknowledged we are substantially ahead of the targets we set ourselves.
We understand the delivery of the rest of the program will be tight, but we are in negotiations with the Commonwealth about flexibility in that regard. It was interesting to see the Australian National Audit Office comment that the administrative costs and other costs - I suppose you would call it ‘profit’ - going to the alliance partners was in line with industry standards. It is not excessive, as has been asserted by some media commentators and some members opposite, and within the bounds of what is acceptable and reasonable in similar types of projects.
I commend this program. There are 1818 refurbishments and rebuilds now completed with 25 refurbishments and rebuilds under way, 355 new homes completed, and another 275 new homes under construction. This means 2100 families are living in safe, healthy and functional homes.
I feel that opposition members are often overly critical beyond the bounds of reason here. It seems they dislike the fact that housing is being rolled out in remote communities for Indigenous people. Apart from difficulties earlier on in this program, it is now delivering, and that is a great thing to be able to say.
On the Tiwi Islands, we are building 90 new houses. We have handed over 56 already and another 34 are under way. Almost 200 refurbishments and rebuilds are also part of this package. Of the 90 new houses, 34 are being built in a brand new subdivision. The face of Nguiu is changing, I believe, for the better.
I mentioned Maningrida in Question Time last week. There are 110 new houses going up in Maningrida, plus 16 rebuilds and 79 refurbishments. It was fantastic to be out there to open a subdivision, which I mentioned in this House previously. There are many other communities: Umbakumba; Angurugu; Milyakburra; Wadeye; Peppimenarti; 29 southern region communities; Tennant Creek community living areas; Gunbalanya; Belyuen; Acacia Larrakia; Galiwinku; Ngukurr; and 18 Alice Springs town camps.
Local people are taking pride in their home, and there are certainly employment spin-offs. This is a very important area. This program has been more than just improved housing; it has also been about employment outcomes. As with all other aspects …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the minister to conclude his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, colleagues. I will not be too much longer.
The original target was 20% for Indigenous workforce numbers. At present, 228 workers are Indigenous, which equates to around 35% of the current workforce. The program has often been around the 30% mark. We are making significant progress in the areas of housing and employment, both of which are long journeys. It is a step at a time, and these have been very significant and positive steps.
As well as housing in the bush, there is more transitional short-term and supported accommodation, particularly in Alice Springs, where much work has been done. There is a 150-person visitor park, with over 60 spaces also available at South Terrace. In Bath Street, 35 rooms are now available for people coming to town for medical treatment, keeping them safe and in healthy homes. There has been much happening in Alice Springs and it has been very positive for the town.
We are working in the area of public employment. Our Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy was adopted in 2010. The aim of the strategy is to increase Indigenous public sector employment to improve Indigenous economic participation and work towards a workforce profile which reflects the Territory’s Indigenous working age population share.
COAG partnerships require all jurisdictions to review their public sector Indigenous employment and career development strategies. One of the key strategy areas was to reinvigorate both the men’s and women’s leadership programs - both accredited courses. It has been my pleasure to attend a number of graduations. The students study, or are engaged over a ninth-month period. That is made up of eight formal learning modules and individual and group assessments. At the end, participants receive a Diploma of Management upon successful completion.
As at March 2011, a total of 79 participants had completed both the men’s and women’s leadership program. Another cohort of 17 men are currently on the 2011 men’s leadership program. It is interesting that an alumni association has been formed amongst this group. They are very proud of their achievements and also very willing to support those going through the program.
In conclusion, A Working Future is one of the keys to overcoming Indigenous disadvantage in the Territory. In housing, I mentioned the 2100 families benefiting from the remote Indigenous housing program. We are endeavouring to address the key issue in education – attendance - and have changed legislation, and our attendance and truancy officers are very active. We have programs around quality teaching, attracting and retaining quality teachers, and we are in partnership with the Australian Council of Education and Research and the Menzies School in evaluation and feedback on what we are doing. I value the work of Professor Geoff Masters in that regard.
This is a challenge. If it was going to be easy it would have been done years ago. It is crucial to the future of the Northern Territory that we are successful. I have said a number of times today it is nine months out from an election. Indigenous economic development is a crucial area of activity and aspiration in the Northern Territory, and a crucial area where the opposition should be putting its policy on the table.
Similarly, with education, the shadow Education minister is busy writing his policy and, no doubt, consulting with many people. I repeat to him - I should not give him a tip but I will: in opposition in 2001, the then parliamentarians formed small groups which worked in a particular area. If it was health it was doctors, nurses, public health professionals, patient advocates, a whole range of people, including unions - I am unsure whether CLP would go to that length - but a whole range of people who had an interest in particular areas. In some cases, those people were not political. In fact, quite a number of them were not members of the Labor Party but were interested in putting policy alternatives forward.
Member for Brennan, I have given you a tip. You might be forming those working groups. I was part of one working group on health. We submitted some policy ideas to the group within the parliamentary party and further policy work was done. Those policies were printed and were readily available. People would say: ‘What is your policy on health?’ We would be able to supply that policy. ‘What is your policy on education? What is your policy on law and order? What is your policy on fishing? What is your policy on business?’ I can see the light has gone on for the member for Fong Lim; he will be working hard burning the midnight oil. They will not be seeing him around town. He will be at home working hard behind his desk developing policy, ready to submit it in the next month or so to enable the people of the Northern Territory to make an informed choice.
It is a bit bold. Clare Martin and her team were quite bold about it. Once you put out policy there is always the inevitable costing that goes along with it. However, with limited resources, as the member for Brennan said, she was able to do that and offer quite credible policy alternatives.
When I doorknocked as a candidate, people were interested. They were interested to read and ask further questions about these important issues because we were talking about the future of the Northern Territory.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will not speak any longer except to say that I commend the statement - it is an important area. I am disappointed the opposition has not engaged in this debate to the extent it should have, but then it is preoccupied with other things.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Development): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a great honour to offer concluding remarks on the ministerial statement on our headline Indigenous Development policy, A Working Future.
The theme of my ministerial statement was building strong families and strong communities through A Working Future. This is the essence of the Labor government’s work in the Northern Territory: supporting Territory families no matter where they live and where they wish to work. One of the great aspects of this work showcased by the many contributions from our side is how our whole-of-government and the public service have rallied to do this work, creating opportunities to transform from a history of neglect to a future of prosperity and wellbeing.
I digress a little on that. When we bring debates into this House, particularly on Indigenous issues, we recognise, as parliamentarians, it is important to want to persevere in improving the lives of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable in this country, in particular, the Indigenous people of the Northern Territory. If there is one comment - and I am sure all parliamentarians hear it at some stage; whether it is here or out on the hustings travelling across the Territory - it is that Indigenous people do not wish to be used as political footballs. The need is so great and the concern so vast we must ensure, when we bring debate into this House to improve the lives of Indigenous people, we do so in a very mature, responsible, and genuine way. It has been heartening to hear the contributions from my colleagues on this side of the House to this very important statement in the desire to improve the lives of Indigenous people.
Building the firm foundations for decades of prosperity is something every single parliamentarian needs to contribute to, because when we talk about A Working Future, we are talking about a large percentage of Territorians across the Northern Territory who need to have belief and hope in a better future. A Working Future is the very firm foundation to turn around the decades of neglect. None of us in this House can deny the decades of neglect. Every government across this country has tried, in its own way, to improve the lives of Indigenous people. We have to always consciously recognise we need to, as parliamentarians, work cooperatively to ensure we are not using Indigenous issues and Indigenous people as the footballs all parliamentarians are criticised of doing. We need to be genuine. This whole focus of wanting to turn the decades of neglect into building firm foundations for decades of prosperity is what A Working Future is all about.
As I said in my statement, the Chief Minister, along with my colleagues in the government, has a deep and abiding conviction to put in place the structures, systems, and partnerships required to assure the future of our remote towns, our communities, and our homelands. We have made much progress establishing building blocks for the vision outlined in the May 2009 announcement of A Working Future. However, it is the start of a journey. In order to turn around decades of neglect we have to ensure the fundamental principles and foundations of decades of prosperity are established in a fair and transparent way.
In May 2009, we set out, as a key objective, to see a fundamental shift in the delivery of services and infrastructure in remote communities. That change is happening, with all ministers and members of our government contributing to that objective. The member for Casuarina outlined some key progress being made in the health area - key achievements such as a boost of $50m per year through the enhanced health service delivery initiative, providing improved primary healthcare and community control in our remote areas; the roll-out in e-Health ensuring important health information is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week at one of the 110 participating health clinics; and the fantastic effort going into treatment and support for those suffering kidney disease. I cannot help but contrast the effort of taking treatment to people in the bush. We know that advancement of treatment in the bush was an incredible push in our regions.
We heard from the member for Casuarina of continuing progress in supporting strong families across the Territory, with over $130m provided to address child neglect and child protection, including employment and training of Indigenous family support workers in our remote regions.
I am proud that every one of the local implementation plans for our growth towns contains a commitment to implement the Families as First Teachers program, an early learning and family support program for remote Indigenous families with preschool-age children. Let me make it clear to the House, of the 29 remote service delivery sites across Australia, 15 of those are in the Northern Territory and 13 have already established local implementation plans. I appreciated the member for Johnston’s contribution.
Our focus as a government is clearly on the one thing I have heard consistently, even before my time in parliament, which is the critical need for housing. It is wonderful to see, as I travel across Arnhem, the improvements being made, in particular at Groote Eylandt. Groote Eylandt has been an outstanding example of the possible for all our regions. The Anindilyakwa people and their efforts to ensure that, not only were they going to receive housing, but they were very much going to be a part of building those houses, has been a vital asset and assistance in ensuring SIHIP has worked, as successfully as it can, on Groote. With all major programs being rolled out for housing there will always be problems, but the real challenge as we face any problem, especially in trying to overcome Indigenous disadvantage, is that people stay at the table to work through those critical problems. The Anindilyakwa people of Groote Eylandt have done that consistently.
From the first call by the ALC, the Anindilyakwa Land Council, when they were very concerned about the way houses were being constructed, about the way they were being involved or not involved - they highlighted from the outset the way they wanted to see things done. That critical active role of Indigenous people in the partnership with the Territory and federal governments is crucial across the Northern Territory. I highlight Groote Eylandt because I see it as an outstanding example for all regions. Many regions have a long way to go, but Groote Eylandt shows what is possible.
The Treasurer neatly summarised the bottom line resulting from investments in new housing. More than 200 families are already in new housing. Recently we saw one new homeowner in Maningrida on ABC TV news saying how he and his family would cherish their new house. ‘Cherish’. What a wonderful word, and a real reflection of how far we have come in the Northern Territory; a real reflection of how long some Territorians have waited for appropriate housing.
My colleague, the member for Stuart, gave a terrific outline of the change he is seeing across his expansive electorate; real change making a difference in infrastructure and services across communities, big and small, in his electorate. The member for Stuart also talked about the challenges and teamwork evident in the government as we navigate through those challenges. We have never said we have a perfect structure, but we are not afraid to roll up our sleeves and get the hard work done. We are not afraid to continue the hard work that needs to be done to navigate through challenging issues: the legacy of decades of neglect; the vast distances and infrastructure gaps; the need to negotiate meaningful partnerships across all levels of government and the private sector to kick-start and sustain investment to make a real and enduring difference.
The member for Stuart highlighted the fundamental importance of economic development and jobs for our young people and the work going into development of business and economic profile for each of our growth towns, such as Lajamanu. He also noted some new challenges: how to best connect our remote communities to the digital economy and e-learning opportunities; free public Internet access in libraries and learning centres in 40 remote communities; and the challenges presented by climate change and policy responses to climate change, as well as opportunities such as those linked to development of the carbon economy.
While we have an eye to these new industries, we are also continuing in our work maximising the involvement of local people in regional development. The member for Casuarina gave a good overview of progress in this area in his own portfolios: remote fisheries, monitoring services through Indigenous ranger groups; extension of the Indigenous Pastoral Program; development of agribusiness opportunities; and proposals to amend the Mining Management Act to now include for the provision of economic and social benefits to communities affected by mining activities in addition to environmental regulation.
Likewise, the member for Barkly, a man who well knows the joys and hardships of bush living. The member for Barkly is a great supporter of his ministerial responsibilities of Infrastructure, Planning, and Transport. He knows better than anyone that the ad hoc approach of the past did not work. The member for Barkly and his departmental staff are developing a very strategic approach for future investments supporting A Working Future, building and improving our strategic investments in transport infrastructure, roads, aerodromes, barge landings and bush bus services.
Let me give an example of the emphasis our government has placed on sealing airstrips. Member for Arafura, in discussions with you as we looked at airstrips in our electorates, one thing the Labor government has been very consistent on and dedicated to ensuring these airstrips, which were dirt airstrips and flooded many times of the year, are sealed. That has been a very driving commitment of this government since 2001. We are now focused on the capital investment of our barge landings and roads. We have a long way to go in pushing the Commonwealth for a much greater involvement in building those roads, but our government has been very firm and committed in ensuring transportation - for example, the bush bus has enabled all Territorians, particularly in places like Borroloola, Ngukurr, Numbulwar and that whole southern Katherine region, and the central Australian region. I saw several bush buses go past on my way back from Kintore. The focus of this government is yes, we need to work on the roads. We are continually pushing that relationship with the federal government. At the same time, we are not sitting back waiting for the money to come for the roads. We are ensuring we have transportation other than the airstrips we have been trying to seal, and that we have bush buses available so people can travel on the Stuart Highway to Alice Springs, Katherine or Tennant Creek.
The member for Nelson picked the mid-1980s as a time marker, then the focus and effort dropped off, the will to make a difference waned, and a malaise set in. As a government, we have shaken off that heavy cloak. We have made clear our support for all Territorians no matter where they live, and our confidence in the future of the Territory and our conviction about the importance of the bush towns in that future.
One of the member for Nelson’s key themes was the need for certainty around town planning and development. He quoted the reports of Bob Beadman and the need to secure long-term land tenure for Northern Territory and local government assets. The member for Nelson said:
Member for Nelson, we are getting on with that job, part of which relies on our historic announcement last week that we will pay the rent. That clearly defines the Northern Territory government’s decision to pay the rent to Aboriginal traditional landowners in return for long-term leases over parcels of Aboriginal land where sole possession by the government is required. This historic decision lays the foundation for a proper working relationship between land councils, Aboriginal traditional owners and the Northern Territory government.
I said in the debate on Indigenous affairs last Thursday, as Minister for Indigenous Development - our government is taking a real and genuine lead here. Imagine if, decades ago, there had been a concerted effort at partnership. Imagine if all those traditional owners across the Northern Territory had not had to prove, through decades of litigation and millions of dollars spent, where that relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australia could be today. That is what we talk about as well. The fairness required for just compensation under the Australian Constitution is an issue this government takes very seriously, especially as we work and walk together towards becoming the seventh state in the Australian Federation. In order to take that next step, the people of the Northern Territory have to have the confidence that we are ready to do that.
Another key issue the member for Nelson raised was the wellbeing of the smaller communities lying within the service regions of our growth towns, like Alpurrurulam, Santa Teresa, Kintore and Peppimenarti. I want to assure the member for Nelson that the wellbeing of all Territorians, no matter where they live, is ever present in the planning and budgeting for A Working Future. Our approach is a true hub-and-spoke model and our smaller remote communities are benefiting from a range of ongoing infrastructure and service improvements. It is not going to happen overnight, but it will happen. It is about the longevity of investment; not only the financial investment in the regions but the human investment as well.
Growing our people with confidence there is hope for their future - they have schools to attend, their children are going to school every day and we have jobs provided for them - are the building blocks of our government; this is the commitment by our government.
Services to homelands are not diminished by a commitment to growth towns. They are, in fact, enhanced by it, and we are determined to ensure that commitment is ongoing. We are very determined to ensure people can have the choice to be and live where they want. This is not about moving people from a homeland to a larger centre or a smaller community. This is about being responsible in the way we are growing the Northern Territory.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise some of the issues from your speech to the House, also other members. It was incredibly disappointing members opposite did not choose to respond to this statement. I take on board the issues raised by the member for Braitling. The member for Braitling has been on the road to Damascus. He has been out bush and kicked the dirt and to quote: ‘This led me to a position where I believe we should be supporting people in the bush’. That may well be true for the member for Braitling but, unfortunately, he travels the road to Damascus on his own. No other member opposite decided to have any input into improving the lives of Indigenous people across the Northern Territory.
The member for Braitling also spoke about A Working Future as a social engineering model to drive people into large urban centres and the government’s socialist policy that is failing and driving people into town. Some of the comments: ‘We support people to go back to country, to live in the community, to live on an outstation. It will be a long road, but we are reversing the approach Labor has been taking for some time of bringing people into town’. This is what differentiates the policies. The Northern Territory Labor government has a policy and a plan. It may have its faults; however, when we are given no policy from the members opposite to scrutinise and debate in a mature and responsible way it sends a negative message to the people of the Northern Territory of using Indigenous affairs as a political football. Until we can see that on the table, unfortunately, that is the way it will continue to be for members opposite.
I acknowledge the work of the Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council. It has been crucial, especially in the financial push for the almost $1bn investment by the Northern Territory government towards A Working Future. I commend each and every member of the council for their involvement. They are continually working with me on the language policy and the homelands policy. While we know there is always a way to go, I am proud, as the Minister for Indigenous Development in the Northern Territory, to be working on A Working Future, and proud of the team on the government benches who are working with all people on the ground to turn around decades of neglect, and build firm foundations for the decades of prosperity.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ANSWER TO QUESTION
Kenbi Land Claim – Heads of Agreement Signatories
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I respond to a question on notice from the member for Fong Lim. The member for Fong Lim sought to make much of the fact I will not agree to table two agreements concerning the settlement of the long-running Kenbi land claim. His questions and suggestions of a cover-up detract attention from the important issue: that my government has negotiated a practical resolution of this difficult land claim with outcomes that benefit both Indigenous interests and the interests of all Territorians.
Regardless of the agreements that have been signed since, the most important step was on 30 January 2009 when I jointly announced the proposed settlement with the Northern Land Council and traditional owners. Details of the settlement, including access to the intertidal waters and beaches without fee or permit, and arrangements for private business and individuals to continue their use of land at Kenbi were made public on that date. An in-principle agreement recording details of the settlement, including outstanding issues to be determined, was subsequently signed on behalf of the Northern Territory and NLC by their respective legal representatives in April 2009. This agreement proposed legislation to establish the Kenbi Land Trust. This was the agreement I had in mind when I responded to the member for Fong Lim’s initial question regarding the signature on the agreement.
Subsequent to that agreement, on 29 June 2011, a heads of agreement was signed by Hon Jenny Macklin on behalf of the Commonwealth, Kim Hill on behalf of the NLC, and by me on behalf of the Territory. This heads of agreement confirms the in-principle agreement between the legal representatives, and sets out the steps required for implementation of the principal agreement, including a time frame for introduction of the Kenbi Land Trust Bill by 31 August 2011.
I, therefore, respond to the question by the member for Fong Lim by saying the in-principle agreement was signed in 2009 on behalf of the Northern Territory government by a legal representative, and a subsequent heads of agreement was signed by me on behalf of the Territory government in 2011. As Chief Minister, I routinely sign many agreements. However, only once as Chief Minister have I had the privilege to announce the resolution of such a long-standing, complex land claim so close to Darwin. I hope that clears it up.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I highlight the programs across government to support Territorians and Territory families. The Territory is a great place to live, work, and raise a family, and we are working hard to make it even better with initiatives to support families to get ahead. We are proud of the fact we provide the most comprehensive range of subsidies in the nation to families. We are also proud of our efforts to create and support jobs with initiatives to support businesses …
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! We have all been circulated a copy of this speech. In the interests of time, perhaps the minister could table it and we can get on with some real business.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Fong Lim. The minister is on her feet and is speaking.
Ms LAWRIE: We are also proud of our efforts to create and support jobs with initiatives to support businesses to grow and train our own, providing opportunity through skills and employment. We recognise that families …
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I ask the minister, in the interests of time, if she would like to table this document. Every member in this parliament has seen …
Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker!
Mr TOLLNER: … and it can be incorporated into the Hansard as is, and we do not have to go through it for the next 30 minutes wasting valuable time in this House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Sit down, member for Fong Lim. If you keep calling frivolous points of order, you will be put on a warning. Please sit down. Treasurer, you have the call; proceed with the statement.
Ms LAWRIE: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. I know the member for Fong Lim is not interested in supporting Territory families; however, there are people who would like to hear, on the public record, which includes parliament, how support for families occurs.
We recognise families can sometimes do with a helping hand. Regardless of where you live in our great nation, families face day-to-day pressures. Raising a family brings challenges and rewards. The Territory government can proudly say it has the best range of subsidies in the nation and is the only jurisdiction to subsidise the cost of childcare for families. We recognise, in a young jurisdiction like the Territory, childcare is relied upon heavily by families who may not have the extended family network on hand. We invest over $4m per year to deliver a subsidy to every child in childcare in the Territory to ease the burden on families. This payment is made directly to childcare centres to offset childcare fees, and supports childcare placements around the Territory. For children under two years, this provides a $1433 annual break, or over $27 per week off the childcare bill. For a child over two, the annual subsidy amounts to $1050, or $20.20 per week.
We know this scheme is welcomed by families. In 2006, when I had the pleasure of announcing playground equipment grants to Mitchell Street Childcare Centre the Director, Louise De Bomford stated:
The initiative has now been in place since 2006 and I thank school administration staff who support the scheme every year. It is a real boost for families, helping with the cost of fitting out a child for school with new uniforms, school books and stationery. The scheme permits families to choose what to spend the voucher on through their school and can be used throughout the school year. This is practical support that brings a smile to parents at the start of the school year. We actively promote this scheme every year to let parents know it is available. Mother of three, Rebecca Riseley, endorsed the program stating to NT News:
Philip Wear, a dad of three kids said:
Christmas is a special time for families. For those doing it tough it can also be a particularly stressful time. The Henderson government values the work of the non-government sector in supporting families across the Territory whether it be the Meals on Wheels programs, mentoring programs for youth, or welfare programs. At Christmas, our government has stepped up the assistance provided to the non-government sector to directly support families doing it tough over the festive season. We provide $20 000 in Christmas welfare grants to a range of organisations that on-provide Christmas baskets of food, toys and shopping vouchers to those in need. It brings joy to Territorians who may otherwise have struggled through the festive season. The NGO sector welcomed this initiative and I am pleased to confirm it will continue this year.
We value the contributions of senior Territorians to our community. We are focused on keeping more seniors in the Territory and are proud we deliver the most generous concession scheme for pensioners in the nation. The NT Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme has over 23 000 members who range from carers, seniors, aged war service veterans, pensioners and low-income superannuants. In this budget, our government increased the funding to the scheme by over $1m to $16.6m. The scheme provides concessions and rebates across a range of services and needs for older people, and last year provided over 121 000 individual concessions. Assistance to ease cost of living pressures is a key focus of the scheme, with concessions of up to $585 off power bills, up to $265 off water bills, and up to $275 off sewerage bills annually. These discounts are the most generous in the nation. The scheme also subsidises local government rates providing a 62% discount, higher than Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia, and is worth up to $200 per year.
For those seniors and carers with a motor vehicle in the Territory, government provides an annual concession of over $150 for motor vehicle registration and provides free drivers licences. For seniors relying on public transport, we proudly provide free public bus transport to all seniors and carers. We are the only jurisdiction in Australia to provide this subsidy. Senior Territorians are a valued treasure in our community. That is why we offer the unique travel subsidies which encourage senior Territorians to stay in the Territory without foregoing contact with family and friends interstate.
Senior citizens, aged pensioners, totally and permanently incapacitated veterans, and aged war service veterans who have lived in the Territory for more than two years are eligible to receive a 50% concession on an airfare every two years. This grant can be accrued to provide a 100% concession on an airfare. There is much flexibility in the scheme, with private vehicle travel also eligible, and travel can be interstate or overseas. The entitlement clause can be transferred to enable a friend or relative to travel to the Territory to visit, particularly supportive for those seniors who prefer not to travel themselves. Around 2312 concessions were provided last year.
As one gets older, spectacles often become a necessary accessory. This scheme includes provision of free spectacles on a biannual basis. It is another popular element of this scheme, with over 10 000 spectacles provided last year. The scheme has many supporters, including the Council of the Ageing with Graeme Suckling, former manager, stating:
The Territory lifestyle is second to none. A key part of that is the infrastructure to support sport and recreation, whether it is boat ramps, pontoons and fishing platforms for fishos, to sports grounds and water parks for families. Taking relief from the heat is a big part of our lifestyle. We are proud of the investments we have made in this area. The Henderson government has delivered popular water and recreation parks in Darwin at Leanyer and the wave pool in the city. A new water park is under construction in Palmerston and, in the nearby rural area, a commitment has been given to build a swimming pool. In Alice Springs, we have invested in a water park and a heated pool. In the bush, we have funded swimming pools in a number of communities.
The Territory government knows not every family can afford a swimming pool in their back yard, and the health and social benefits of recreational facilities are important to families and communities. I am particularly proud of the water park initiative that saw the redevelopment of Leanyer into a first-class recreation zone with free entry. This is a great initiative and I cannot count the times families have expressed to me their support of this free initiative. Because it is free, it is more utilised, providing a great circuit breaker for families, particularly in the build-up, and a great venue for family and birthday barbecues. This is another example of government initiatives that support Territory families.
Buying a home is the most important investment decisions a family can make. To support Territorians in making that investment, the Territory government has developed a number of schemes and subsidies. HOMESTART is the NT government home loan scheme administered by TIO offering low deposit home loans to help low- to middle-income earners get into the housing market. The loan scheme assists low- to middle-income earners into their own home using no more than 30% of their income. There is a range of loan types, including shared equity loans. Under a shared equity loan, a homeowner can buy between 70% and 99% of their home with the remaining share owned by the Territory government and provided rent free. HOMESTART is regularly reviewed to ensure it keeps pace with property prices and continues to provide access to 40% of the marketplace.
In May, as part of Budget 2011-12, the income levels and price caps were lifted. Under the scheme, a family of three can earn up to $105 000 and purchase a home valued up to $530 000 in Darwin and Palmerston, up to $435 000 in Alice Springs, up to $300 000 in Katherine, and up to $210 000 in Tennant Creek. Since 2004, 1480 households have been assisted to buy their own home under this scheme, with over $324m in loans and shared equity purchases.
HOMESTART NT also includes interest-free loans of up to $10 000 for HOMESTART NT clients to assist with stamp duty and fees associated with buying a home. This loan allows up to $1500 of the total loan to be used for purchasing whitegoods. Over 98% of HOMESTART clients take advantage of this scheme, highlighting its effectiveness in helping people moving into their first home.
This government is also proud of our policy to quarantine 15% of new land release on government developments for affordable and social housing. This policy has seen land released at Bellamack and Johnston for $140 000 to eligible families, and affordable house and land packages like HomeFirst at Bellamack, and the units currently being marketed for between $320 000 to $390 000 at The Parks in Johnston. More affordable housing lots will become available in the next stages of Bellamack, and at Zuccoli and Muirhead. This government is also focused on driving investment in housing construction on existing land and supporting Territorians purchasing land through new land release into a home.
At a time of international uncertainty and changing credit markets, the Henderson government introduced the Buildstart scheme targeted at stimulating housing construction on existing land to provide more housing options. The $14 000 grant was open to non-first homebuyers and investors. It specifically provided a complementary scheme to the federal government’s First Home Owner Boost.
Buildstart incentivised new house and unit construction across the Territory, including off-the-plan purchases and owner-builder construction, and the scheme was varied to incorporate Bellamack purchasers awaiting land titles. In total, Buildstart supported 1060 new home constructions.
BuildBonus, a similar scheme to Buildstart, is targeted at the affordable end of the market and was released as part of Budget 2011-12. BuildBonus provides a stimulus for property purchases of up to $530 000 in value with a $10 000 grant towards the purchase. Schemes like this can make the difference between whether people choose to enter the housing market. The scheme, like Buildstart, is open to non-first homebuyers as a way to stimulate more housing stock. To date, 39 applications have been approved or are pending and it is expected that as owners purchase land and enter into contracts more grants will be made.
The Executive Director of the Master Builders Association of the NT, Graham Kemp, supported the BuildBonus scheme when announced stating the combination of land rolling off in Palmerston and the pipeline of land would work together with BuildBonus to see people getting their houses going.
As Treasurer, I announced significant stamp duty breaks last year as part of the budget, including a new concession of $8500 to assist senior Territorians and pensioners and carers enter the housing market or downsize their home. First homebuyers also received an additional stamp duty break of up to $11 215. This lifted the total stamp duty exemption to the first $540 000 of a new home - up from $385 000. In effect, first homebuyers purchasing a home at $540 000 or under would not pay stamp duty.
The Territory government also offers a Principal Place of Residence stamp duty break for non-first homebuyers, and we lifted the concessions by 40% last year to $350 000. To date, this financial year, 187 first homebuyers have received a stamp duty concession; 235 Territorians have received a Principal Place of Residence stamp duty rebate; 21 Territorians have taken advantage of the pensioner and carer stamp duty concession, and 85 since commencement of the scheme. These concessions are supporting Territorians into home ownership.
We are also proud of our record in backing Territory businesses and Territory jobs. Delivering jobs is a key economic indicator for our government, and there is no better way to support families than providing opportunity through employment. The Territory has the strongest business confidence in the nation; however, we continue to experience the most challenging and uncertain global economic conditions seen in the century. When the GFC hit, our government responded with a number of initiatives to protect jobs, to support Territory business, including record infrastructure spending and a Buy Territory campaign. Buy Territory was launched in 2009 during the GFC to actively support local enterprise and protect jobs.
All Territorians have a role to play in supporting local business, which is why our government has invested in the Buy Territory campaign to raise awareness of the importance of buying local. Territorians support Territorians, and we like to see each other succeed. The Buy Territory campaign is aimed to tap into that sentiment, showcasing Territory business and what it has to offer while, at the same time, driving home the message that buying local supports local business and jobs. Promoting the message to buy locally to support business and jobs to keep money in the Territory made good sense.
We call on Territorians to Buy Territory to support the community and local jobs which benefits all Territorians. Buying local supports local business and investment, providing more job opportunities and building a stronger economy. The alternative, buying products from overseas, interstate, or online takes money out of the Territory. It is estimated that for every dollar spent in the retail sector, another dollar of economic activity is generated as a flow-on effect. By using local businesses, that flow-on effect is generated in the Territory for the benefit of Territorians.
The Buy Territory campaign features press, television, and web advertisements and a dedicated webpage located on the Growing the Territory website. Businesses and the community can submit stories about their business and how they buy Territory. I encourage business to jump online and complete the questionnaire. Stories relevant to the campaign will be included on the website. The campaign has been well received and supported by the business community, and was relaunched in September 2011 featuring a number of businesses from around the Territory.
The Territory government also hosts October Business Month, a month-long event providing free access to business and opportunity for professional development for Territorians in business. This year was the best ever, with over 7500 Territorians participating, and the first time the event was live streamed to regional parts of the Territory.
We are proud of our record in backing Territory business, proud the Territory is the best place to do business in the nation. We have delivered consecutive tax breaks for business to the extent the Territory is the lowest taxing jurisdiction for small to medium business in the nation. This policy supports jobs; supporting jobs supports Territory families.
Since 2001, when Labor came to government, more than 28 000 new jobs have been created. We have keenly focused on growing our workforce to fill those job opportunities. To do this, we committed to supporting trainees and apprentices with a range of initiatives under a $312m Jobs Plan NT, including targeted support for business, employers, and job seekers. This includes financial support to businesses to employ trainees and apprentices. Our incentives focus on: supporting developing industries or industries where there are skill shortages; increasing training opportunities in remote areas; and providing pathways to training and employment for disadvantaged groups. These incentives have contributed to exceeding the targets ahead of time under the three-year Jobs Plan, including reaching the target of 3000 Indigenous Territorians commencing employment across the public and private sectors in the three years to 2012.
Another of those popular initiatives is the Workwear/Workgear Bonus subsidy. This grant was introduced by a Labor government to support trainees and apprentices with the cost of tooling or schooling up in their chosen field. Workwear/Workgear Bonus provides a $300 grant to apprentices and trainees to help with the cost of buying work wear and work gear during the first year. For those training in an identified skill shortage field, the grant increases to $1000. To date, the scheme has supported 3720 skill shortage apprentices with $1000 grants, and 6788 other apprentices/trainees with $300 grants. In total, more than 10 500 Territorians have benefited from this scheme.
Supporting business comes in many forms, including easing red tape and cost for business. In 2009, the Henderson government established ecoBiz, an initiative to help businesses become green by reducing their energy consumption and thereby their energy costs. The scheme incorporates site audits of energy consumption and grants of up to $20 000 on a dollar-for-dollar basis to assist with retrofitting premises and any operational improvements that can cut energy usage.
To date, almost 300 energy audits have been undertaken on Territory businesses, including regional and remote areas. The Henderson government has funded $785 000 in ecoBiz NT grants to 64 businesses. As a result of the program, it is also estimated approximately $1.8m in business trade has occurred. Important outcomes of the program include an estimated saving of $2.2m kilowatt hours of electricity, which equates to approximately $49m in savings to these business, and cutting 1850 tonnes of carbon missions equating to 411 cars permanently off the road, or the annual consumption of 267 households and saving almost 14 718 litres of water.
The Territory government is proud of its record in supporting Territory families. Recently, the Territory government undertook an advertising campaign to promote a range of initiatives to families. That campaign incorporated a one-stop shop type website to provide detailed information and application forms to make it easier for Territorians to take advantage of these schemes. Grants and subsidies can make a difference to people’s lives; to ease the pressure or provide an extra boost. For example, the housing initiatives can be the difference needed to make that decision to buy a home, or apprenticeship grants to support that career decision.
We have consistently delivered practical initiatives to ease the cost of living and practical incentives to deliver broader outcomes.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend this statement to the House. I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will make some comments on this statement about supporting Territorians. It strikes me it is providing what Territorians want, and they appreciate, as the Treasurer has described, the support they get at a whole range of levels, whether that be children at school, mothers pleased to receive some extra money, seniors with the free buses, playgrounds for the children so they do not have to pay, and childcare subsidies. All these things, without a doubt, citizens would appreciate. They like it; it is what they want. However, what I find, as we go through this, is what Territorians need, and those needs are not being addressed. It is an easy thing to provide these subsidies, but the harder thing to do is provide for the needs of Territorians.
I start with consideration of the approach the government has taken to fiscal management, which is misleading, to be kind. There has been a time, without a doubt, of an unprecedented boom. There has been more coming into the Territory and the nation has been particularly blessed by being rich in resources, and being in the Asian region. As a consequence, there has been a sustained period of boom. That boom resulted in - the story has been told umpteen times - unexpected high levels of revenue flowing into the Territory and to the states by courtesy of the GST, principally.
The fact that the Territory is like Queensland and Western Australia, particularly well-positioned with resources, the opportunity was there for us to be the beneficiaries. However, during that time, the Labor government took personal credit for the way it was handling things. It was handling things very well because it had all this money to spend and quite enjoyed that. It was taking personal credit for the boom times, as though it had managed to create this amazing international phenomena where Australia, being placed in this region, blessed with resources and so much investment money flowing - somehow this Labor government managed to pull that off, engineer the whole thing and take personal credit for it.
The language changed when the GFC came along. When a global financial crisis happens, there is no personal responsibility taken because you can blame the GFC. Any difficulty or any reduction in services, any decision that has to be made which may prove to be unpopular, can be blamed on the global financial crisis. However, the boom is a personal phenomenon - the sole responsibility of the Labor government. It can take personal responsibility and skite about the largesse. The difficult times is not them - it is the GFC. There is an inconsistency in that.
What comes from that is addressing the needs of Territorians. It strikes me this is all couched in terms which have government in the centre; it has government doing nice things so government will be popular. As the member for Johnston likes to provide advice to the opposition, I will provide advice to government, which I have done before: providing wants is one thing, but providing the needs of Territorians is another. Territorians will reward you for recognising their needs and responding to them. You talk about what is being done with affordable housing without drawing any attention to the challenges that are largely unmet. There are households of hardworking mums and dads across the Territory who have teenagers and, in fact, older children who are also working but living at home because they cannot find a place within their means within the Territory. It is very difficult for people, even on modest incomes with regular work, to afford a place to stay. That is a need; the need to have affordable housing you can get into. That has not been met.
Quite deceptively, the government points to the very high levels of employment in the Northern Territory, plainly ignoring if there is a squeeze on the housing market the capacity for people on modest incomes to get into the housing market, and because they have the capacity to do it they can choose to move away. So those who have good incomes or modest incomes and are already in a home, stay. Those on modest incomes with a capacity to get into a home, stay. The rest simply leave. To represent having a high level of employment as having done something phenomenal is not telling the whole story. There is a need for families and our community to be stable. Making it difficult for people to find a house here because it is too expensive so they leave, takes something away from our community; those who have built something here. They have gone to school here, they want to be part of the Territory story, but they cannot be a part of it because it costs too much.
It is not just the loss of a person. It is the loss of something much more than that. Families have to see their younger ones, who are Territorians, living in places outside the Territory because they cannot afford to live here. That security around social capital is being eroded by the approach the Labor government has taken - not taking responsibility, seeing itself at the centre, doing things to make it appear as the good guys and not attending to the core business. Housing, and the failure to deal with this - warning after warning to deal with this went unheeded - and now there is a rush and it is too late. The effect of this will be there for some time into the future and it will take much work to undo and correct the social and economic damage that has occurred by not getting ahead of the game.
The other issue is around security. What families need is security. We saw in today’s paper the story of 80 young people running amok. There would have been all manner of other citizens trying their best to keep their families together, reassured and told they have to do the right thing - to have that kind of disorder in their community. We do not often hear this, and certainly not from the government, but when there are assessments of how people feel about personal safety in the streets, in their homes, very high levels of anxiety are shown by respondents from the Northern Territory. We do not hear that; the other stories are told. You have to tell the whole story. The core business is to give your citizens security, build that social capital, hold families together, give families a reason to plan for the future and take risks and make big decisions for the future. However, they are being borne down on by pressures of the cost of living, which is largely due to the cost of housing. That is having a significant social and economic effect in the Northern Territory.
Closer to home, let us look at families. They want a place for their kids to go into childcare. It was not that long ago we were standing in front of a childcare facility in Palmerston that was perfectly well equipped just waiting for kids to occupy it, and time had slipped. It was built with federal money, but the decision for its opening rested with the Territory government and it had, for one reason or another, allowed those deadlines to slip. As a consequence, the decisions had not been made. While there were parents desperately looking for places to put their kids into care, the decisions of government had prevented them from having this fully-equipped facility in place and of use to support families.
These are the types of things families need. They need governments to put their mind on them and get to work and do the things necessary to benefit families in a real way. The other things are icing on the cake. The real business of security for families - having a place to put your kids - needs to be attended to. You do not hear the government talk about that kind of exposure – it is responsible for putting pressure on families. This is at the very time there were closures of childcare facilities in Palmerston for reasons not directly the responsibility of the government. There was the opportunity and, highlighted by the failure to make prompt decisions, there was closure of a facility. There was another facility ready to be occupied but they had not done the work and there was that slippage. That is around childcare places. We heard the reference about subsidies and the like. Well fine, but there is core business. There is more important business to attend to which would have been far more heartening and genuine to hear recognition of those types of matters and how you have responded to them.
I have mentioned schools and all the help you give families with subsidies. I know what parents need. They might want those things, but what they need to know is that there are effective and meaningful measures to deal with problem behaviour in our schools. They also need honest talk about what goes on in schools. You can have all the explanations you like about the NAPLAN results, but they want to see real progress being made. They want the facts not slogans around education reforms, education revolutions, the biggest reform or change to Territory education since whenever - all this big talk. Parents know that education is about curriculum and the strengthening of the teaching profession. Parents might want and like subsidies, but what they need is real leadership when it comes to our schools and education.
When it comes to recreational facilities, of course people like going to the Leanyer water park; they love it. Why would you not like something like that? What about the harder business of how councils and rate-payers have to work out how they are going to manage the local pool in Palmerston or in Darwin when it is a fully-funded, free to get into facility? Those matters are the harder work. Those needs require thought. I have not heard an adequate explanation of how that all works and where government is actually headed. To me, it looks very much as if government is always trying to position itself to be liked, and it is about the government. It is not about the government. Everything I have heard gives me, again, a shiver that we have a self-absorbed government preoccupied with itself which wants to talk about all the good things it does so people will give it a round of applause at functions and say: ‘You really are good guys’.
Parents, families and employers need things, and that is not being provided. The law and order issues do not really mean much. You can say all the things you like, and put glossy brochures until they are overflowing in letterboxes, but people want to see something that makes a noticeable difference. They see it constantly in our public housing spaces. We had a debate today which will create the impression there is going to be significant change in that space. Mark my words, there will not be significant change. It is not even a bandaid; it is a token gesture that does not need to be legislated. It just needs some decisive action and some leadership shown by government to create some movement in that space - the stuff that local members do. Now, we have legislation which is, effectively, not going to do very much at all. It has been dumbed down so all we have is the capacity for government to create some impression but make no difference.
What do people need around law and order? They want to see something really significant happening in the public housing space. You can talk about all these things that create the glossy impression, but people know, they have been around long enough. They have spotted you, and they know the character of this government. These things are not really going to impress because they are now starting to need some things. They need something significant to occur in the public housing space and we have not seen that. Notwithstanding that, I believe the minister tries very hard and recognises it too, but will not admit it because he is a good party man; a good man in government doing the best he can. But we need significant change.
We have worked very hard in Palmerston to have support for seniors with transport into the hospital, largely carried by the local members and their electorate officers for years, and volunteers in Palmerston. Then the pressure was put on you and you kicked in a bit of money to provide some service. Well, good on you for that, but it had been carried by volunteers for a very long time. However, that is not the point. The point is that seniors want certain things - and this is a list of the things they have been provided with, which I am sure they enjoy; all of them have merit. We have heard all about the good things the government does to make itself liked - and seniors are happy with that. However, we do not talk about what they really need.
My last newsletter had something on the front page which is probably a bit unusual - photographs of dentures. When I had three seniors come into my office in the space of a month telling me about the problems they had with their dentures, and with the dental support they were receiving, it made me stop and think. It is like a cult of youth: everyone is young and we seem to forget old people. I had three different senior citizens completely at a loss, trying to explain that their dentures had been broken for years and they cannot get them fixed. Everyone likes to have their teeth looking good. Some of these people would not open their mouths very far because they did not want me to see how ugly it was to have broken dentures. They then explained how hard it is to eat with broken dentures. They were talking about the level of service they were not getting, and how undignified, unloved and unsupported they felt in a system they had served for so long by paying their taxes. Now they find themselves in a situation where they are dependent upon government services and they cannot get that service. That was heartrending.
You look at your parents and realise some do not have such fortunate stories to tell and are left in need. They have made their contribution so there are other aspects of the seniors’ story that need to be told, but is not told here.
I add another element to this. Yes, when we had the boom you guys managed to pull it off but, when it was the GFC, someone else was responsible for that. I do not know how you are going to cope because with the GFC, which is not your responsibility, there was a reduction of money at your disposal, and you were able to display less largesse. It is going to be hard for you because you are accustomed to the boom times. You like flashing it around and you like the largesse. However, you are not accustomed to making the hard decisions. As a consequence, you are going to have to get over the idea it is not about the government any more. It is about what you do and about meeting real needs.
If we talk about what people need, it is security, law and order. They need a stable economy and a place to live - housing, a basic need in a community to raise a family. They also have to have a sense of purpose, to know where we are going. There has not been any clear, compelling, persuasive, narrative from the government about where the Northern Territory is going.
You almost hear the government talking about how we are well-positioned, and you hear it say how we are well-positioned politically going into the next election, when it is about how we, the people, the families, those who are trying to find a place for their young people, a place in the marketplace so they can be a part of the Territory rather than leave, are well-positioned. I do not hear that genuine conviction about the families of the Northern Territory. That goes to the long-term strategic planning which, after 10 years, has not convinced anyone that you have taken the job seriously. No one is convinced you have taken it seriously.
Your say Weddell is to solve a political problem because people are worried about where we are going. You cannot pull off Bellamack in the right time frame, yet we are expected to believe that you can pull off something big like a town on the other side of the river. There are so many big questions you have not answered, but it is easy to talk about something right over there. So, it is long-term planning.
I talked about this last week after the Obama visit. You have not convinced anyone, and that is one of the needs the people of the Territory have about their long-term view - someone has an idea of where we are going, where we are now, what our challenges are now, and how, together, we can get to a better place. You cannot do that if you are at the centre of it as the government puts itself; it is about the government.
I make these comments, Madam Deputy Speaker and I will leave it at that.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Blain for his discussion on this statement, especially that section mentioning dentures. I can fully understand where he is coming from, being a person who wears some. It might sound funny, but it is an issue that worries older people. They are costly, and if broken it makes it very difficult for people. The idea of some government assistance, as the member for Blain mentioned, should be considered.
I would like to mention affordable housing. We are not going to get affordable housing for that section of the community we would call low to middle income unless we look at other concepts. The price of land in Palmerston for a single person, or a family on a single income, is practically unreachable. There are many young people who simply cannot afford a mortgage. In the rural area, many are staying at home. Even in the city many are staying at home or having a granny flat built. Either they are living in the granny flat, or mum and dad are living in the granny flat. That is one option they have, but it does not give them their own land.
We have to look at developing alternatives. The government has an opportunity, with the amount of land it owns, to look at permanent caravan parks or long-term caravan parks. Maybe not a trailer park as such, but a place where someone can stay and live in a community, which long-term caravan parks are, with space around them, and some security because they live in a community. I have been doing some research today and some long-term caravan parks cost as little as $3500 per year to live in. They may have fairly basic facilities and some are off the beaten track. They may be holiday parks where the owners use that long-term income to help run the park in the off season.
I always mention a caravan park in Katherine called The Mill, a small permanent caravan park with rows of industrial sheds. You might think it is terrible, but the sheds are divided in two. They are divided by showers, toilets and a laundry. The caravan owner can park the caravan in the shed along with the vehicle. There is a lawn and a small garden separating the sheds with quite a few trees planted. It is run and managed very well, yet it is an ideal means of accommodation for a family, a couple, or a single person at a reasonable price.
Long-term caravan parks in the Territory are not necessarily something caravaners are interested in these days. With the demise of the Overlander and the Sundowner, there have not been too many single-use, long-term caravan parks in the Territory. The government could develop a park, especially for long-term use, as an alternative to affordable housing, yet we cannot get the government going in that area. That would be a positive approach to helping people on low to middle incomes.
I have mentioned several times that we should look at community land trusts. Although there are no community land trusts in Australia, there are in the United States, Canada, Wales, Scotland, and England. We could apply this to the Darwin region, and also on Indigenous communities. I will read a little about land trusts put together by Shelter New South Wales:
Further on the article says:
One of the things you look for when talking about affordable housing, which is very much applicable to the Northern Territory, is the cost of land. The document from Shelter New South Wales looked at the cost of land in New South Wales in 2007. For a house/land package, according to this, land is worth 21% of the total package price. Other land costs are 21% profit mark up and 12% on dwelling price - 46%. If you take 21% out of the price of the house/land package, you reduce the cost of that purchase by at least one-fifth.
If we have a house in Palmerston at $400 000, you could reduce that price by $80 000, bringing it down to a more affordable price. That is what land trusts are about. They are about people having enough money to build a house without having to pay for the cost of the land. That is something the government should consider.
I have mentioned the forestry land in Howard Springs and whether it could be developed in such a way. Perhaps there could be other land the government develops by giving it to an NGO which leases the land so people can build a house without the land cost. It is worth trying.
There are rules and regulations about how land is sold and who it can be sold to; however, that is all part of the land trust mechanism in the United States. There is no reason we cannot look at it as a way of doing things here. If we are talking about affordable housing for families, we need other options besides Buildstart - all the starts. That is fine; however, in many cases it is still not enough unless you want the government to share in your house. This, again, causes problems, especially if you do not have the money to pay the government out. There are some problems with that as well.
In particular, the government could also take over houses in Eaton. I am not sure what the latest on Eaton is; it was debated in this parliament for some time and then went quiet. The question is: if there are houses there, if we are not going to win the debate about Eaton and if the houses are going to be bulldozed, the government should purchase them. However, not like the ones at the naval base at Larrakeyah, which were taken away and sold from $150 000 up.
Why couldn’t the government take some of those houses from Eaton? I was talking to Vicki O’Halloran about what numbers you would want, put them in clusters of 15 to 20, and have them run by an NGO under strict protocols - they have to be well managed - and have them available for people who cannot afford a house at the present time. We are not talking about itinerants; we are talking about a part of the community that does not have enough money to get a mortgage or, if they could, are so far in debt life would be impossible.
We have houses at Eaton and land at Berrimah, near Pruen Road, where the government was considering a workers camp several years ago. It does not have to be on the highway; it is close to facilities. The bus is not far away. There is a school across the road. I am not saying this would be a permanent suburb, but it is an opportunity for land the government is not using to overcome some of the problems we have with affordable housing. We have houses at Eaton and the last thing we want is for them to be bulldozed. They could be handed over to Somerville or St Vincent de Paul, put in clusters where they were not too much out of society, and close to public transport. They have to be run properly; it cannot be anything goes. They would need amenities, and be run by someone who knows how to run an affordable housing facility.
I would hate to see those houses bulldozed. I hate what I see at the moment, which is houses taken from Larrakeyah we argued for - I argued for time and time again. Even after the government said you would not be able to move those houses they were moved and now sit at Holtze. I am unsure how many have been sold - not many. I would hate to see them sit there and go to waste. Again, talk to Somerville or organisations like that. How many people in our community would love to get a house but cannot afford one? Why can we not provide one, with certain conditions, and help those people?
We are talking about facts and figures which sound nice; however, the reality is people are struggling to get enough money for mortgages and we are not changing things much. The Commonwealth government has put money into organisations such as St Vincent de Paul and the Christian community near the RSPCA in Berrimah which also deals with housing. However, it is not keeping up with what is needed. There are opportunities here. Morally, we cannot allow houses to be destroyed when we know there are so many people who do not have one.
I say again: Labor is supposed to be about helping families. That is what I grew up with - helping workers, helping the poor, helping the single and helping the down and out. Here is an opportunity to do that. Be a bit adventurous. No one will criticise you if you take some houses, put them on Berrimah Farm, put someone in charge, ensure a bus service goes past, and give people a chance. You may limit how long people can live there. What you might be able to do in the interim is give that family stability, a chance to save some money, and a chance to learn how to save money because budgeting and education around financial matters is a problem for many people today. People have not been taught to save or be careful about how they spend their money. There are opportunities there to help as well.
A little closer to home is the rural area. The minister has spoken about the benefits for senior Territorians, and that is good. However, we are desperate for a retirement village; the time has come. We cannot keep talking about this all the time. I am hoping in next year’s budget land will be made available. I am hoping the government can put out a tender document encouraging businesses to say they are willing to put in affordable – I make that clear, ‘affordable’; it does not have to be a Fannie Bay version of a retirement village, but a retirement village which is suitable for people to remain in the rural area.
When you talk about supporting Territorians, rural Territorians do not want to be supported by being sent off to Tiwi Gardens Village. Even though it is nice, it is not rural and their friends are not there. They want to stay where their friends are in a place they are familiar with. There is definitely a need for retirement facilities in the rural area. You have nearly 20 000 people living in the rural area and, for some reason, they seem to escape the radar when it comes to facilities. That area needs looking at.
The other area is childcare. I have mentioned before I hope the government can sit down with the Churcher Estate and see if land could be released in the Girraween estate. I understand there is a desperate need for a childcare centre but the land is tied up with the requirement to have sewerage facilities because it is close to a bore. There are now limitations on where you can put sewerage facilities in relation to a Power and Water bore. I would like the government to see if we can solve this problem. Can we fix this? Can we make that land available for childcare? Girraween Primary School is probably the fastest growing primary school in the rural area. It is packed; it is getting extra classrooms and is really going places. Usually, when a primary school is going places, there is a need for a childcare centre nearby. This is desperately required. The government says it is supporting Territorians; I am giving positive ideas to the government in relation to what it can do.
The member for Blain mentioned a bus service in Palmerston. That bus is housed in the rural area. Would it not be great if we could use the same bus service Palmerston has, even once a week, to come into the rural area on a trial basis, because rural people do not have those facilities? Some do not need it. Many senior people in the rural area still drive. There are others who cannot, because they have become too frail or are concerned about driving in traffic these days. It would be good for the government to look at whether the service to Palmerston could be trialled once or twice a week to see if there is a demand for it. People in the rural area are getting older. The land was developed in the 1960s and there are quite a few people who still live on their blocks. That needs to be taken into account.
There are many other things I could talk about, but I wanted to focus on those things. I hope the minister takes some notice. On the second last page the minister said - and this is an aside:
Important outcomes of the program...
This is the program about saving energy …
Ms Lawrie: ecoBiz.
Mr WOOD: It said the total saving in water was 14 718 litres. That does not sound much. Was that right, because it is not a large amount of water? It is a couple of tanks. It did not sound correct. Perhaps you could find out whether it was more like 14 million litres of water because 14 000 does not sound like much. That is just an aside. I know the government is talking about reducing energy consumption.
If you really want to support families it is going to be hard. I was talking to people yesterday who quote their electricity bill every now and then and how much it has gone up. For sure, I have enough trouble when my dear granddaughter comes home and I find all the lights in the house on. It is like: ‘Would you mind turning on the lights you need’? On the positive side, it is trying to get people into the habit of reducing their energy consumption. However, on the other hand, families with kids should not be punished simply because they use more electricity and water. The price of power affects families, as does the price of water.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. I have moved away from the spin bits and tried to put forward practical proposals. We are not going to get anywhere with affordable housing unless we take the lead, do something different, do something positive, and not worry about the glossy brochures. Save those houses at Eaton or put in a long-term caravan park. We would certainly be doing something different if we did that.
Debate adjourned.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, the Speaker has received the following letter from the member for Port Darwin.
Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak about the concept of medical enduring powers of attorney. I start with the cherished hope the Northern Territory government will come into this debate tonight and offer to this House an assurance that a legislative instrument is soon to hit the table. The Northern Territory government is no stranger to this issue and, indeed, has looked into the matter from various directions several times in the past.
It is my understanding, as a result of inquiries I have made, that a legislative instrument found its way to the desk of the minister and, for some reason yet unexplained, found its way back into the department, which seems to be some type of oubliette for legislative changes of this sort. The quality of governance depends on, if you like, the quality of passion of the government. A passionate and dedicated minister seizes on ideas and pursues and drives them, not only through this House, through the Cabinet, but also through their own department.
The idea of medical enduring powers of attorney is not a new one, and some variant form of it exists in all jurisdictions within the Commonwealth, with the exception the Northern Territory. It is worth reading the introduction to the Law Reform Committee report on this issue. It is a long quote but it is worth it. It is in the introduction and refers to the terms of reference.
This is an important issue because people have a right to control over their own lives. Indeed, the observations are made by departmental notes. I am trying to lay my hands on them now because they are worthwhile quoting. They talk about advance directives and see them as an expression of individualism, something our system of government is supposed to support. Indeed, the background discussion paper on the End of Life Decision-making, Advanced Directive comments that the process considered in those circumstances is based on the idea of best interest. It goes on to say the concept of best interest has its origins in Hippocratic medicine and observes that:
That deals with the issues of advanced directives which enable certain actions to be taken under the Natural Death Act but does not extend itself to the concepts of medical enduring powers of attorney under the Natural Death Act and, in fact, it is one of the reasons we do not have a medical enduring power of attorney in the Northern Territory.
Without trawling through the Law Reform Committee’s report in detail, there are other observations worth making. This is where the current system of powers of attorney falls over and the capacity to direct how you are looked after, should you become at some point incapacitated due to some degenerative disease, even an accident. I will quote again from the Law Reform Committee document:
Members will be aware I have referred to the Adult Guardianship Act. The appointments under that legislation are made by a court and, sadly, cannot be made by the person who is being protected. Indeed, it stands to reason that such an approach is taken if you consider a person needs guardianship orders placed upon them to look after them, then it would be on the grounds, one would presume, they were incapable of making effective decisions for themselves.
What is required by so many people, and something the Country Liberals, as a party, support, is the idea that people can lay a course of action for themselves in the instance that incapacity is either around the corner or, in some instances, where it is not. Whilst we can presume the vast majority of people who would use this power of attorney would be attempting to deal with a problem they knew was coming down the road, therefore it would be presumable the vast majority of people who would have recourse to this approach would, essentially, be older people concerned about the encroaching reality of Alzheimer’s or other forms of dementia.
However, it is worthwhile pausing for a moment to point out other people may also choose to have a medical enduring power of attorney established - a living will, for a want of a better expression - in case they become incapacitated for some other reason. High-risk occupations and high-risk sportspeople may consider it. Head injuries are common in certain contact sports and motor sports. People find themselves suffering from a head injury where they hope they would be able to set the course for their treatment, or their choice to decline certain forms of treatment should those events occur.
It is clear the idea is not new to this House and the government. We, on this side of the House, are very concerned the medical enduring power of attorney legislation has become jammed somewhere in the department and not found its way back into this House. It is disappointing the government has not become excited about this issue sufficiently well to advance it. We, on this side of the House, have a different attitude.
If legislation was introduced to adopt this concept, not only would we be on foot with other jurisdictions, but we would be able to give reassurance to people who travel to the Northern Territory that their medical enduring powers of attorney made interstate will have some carriage in the Northern Territory. Reciprocal arrangements, as I understand it, exist in these legislative instruments in other jurisdictions. However, those reciprocal arrangements do not extend to the Northern Territory because we have no such legislative instrument in place. Consequently, a person travelling from another jurisdiction to the Northern Territory may well have the impression their medical enduring power of attorney has some carriage or weight in this jurisdiction, only to find, or their family to find, they are wrong. They discover application has to be made for adult guardianship, or under one of the other three legislative instruments in the Northern Territory which cover various forms of directive in relation to people who become incapacitated for whatever reason.
We implore the government to take a positive attitude in this debate today, and to cast a benevolent eye upon the desires of many Territorians who want to take advantage of legislation of this nature. The Law Reform Committee has reported on the matter, as has the department itself, and any other number of organisations have spoken to government. Indeed, letters were written - I will see if I can lay my hands on a copy - to Syd Stirling on 6 March 2007. As I understand it, the response from the minister was fairly positive, and the minister was giving comfort to the authors of the letter that some response would be given.
I note some interesting signatories on that letter include Ken Conway, Robyne Burridge, Sue Bradley, John Flynn and Hugh Bradley. It is my understanding the former Administrator and former Chief Justice of the Northern Territory Supreme Court, Austin Asche, has also indicated his approval for this legislative instrument to exist. These are not people whose advice you would dismiss quickly. These are people with weight and gravitas in our community, and who care about the appropriate advancement of this type of instrument. Ruth Leslie-Rose from Alzheimer’s Australia has also indicated her support for a legislative instrument to be brought to this House.
I am hoping the Attorney-General will indicate to this House that, sooner rather than later, the legislative instrument which has been - for lack of better words - constipated in the department, will be released and that bill will find its way into this House. Without having read the bill, in principle, we would indicate our support at this early stage. However, if the minister is going to say ‘no’ for whatever reason today, he had better come up with a pretty good excuse because of the names associated with the advancement of this concept.
In short, I look forward to a comforting response from the minister. I can indicate to this House now, and to Territorians, that if the minister is not agreeable to advancing this principle on a legislative instrument under the hand of government, then the opposition will go to the legislative draftsman and develop a bill based on a best practice model. That will require research and work and we are happy to do that. However, I would find it a much more comforting if the government would save us from that research and work we know it has done and bring the instruments it has prepared to this House or otherwise explain why it is not doing so.
If the government does not give satisfaction to members on this side of the House, we place the government on notice that we will have the instrument prepared ready for introduction in the February sittings. If we are forced to do that, I hope the government accepts our instrument and allows its passage or defeat before the next Territory election, rather than allowing it to languish on the bottom of the Notice Paper never to be seen again. This is not something we would do lightly, but we are prepared to do this because it is the necessary thing to do. It is the right and appropriate thing to do for the people of the Northern Territory. If the government wants to play politics with this - I am not suggesting it is - then it is on notice there are many people vitally interested in the government’s attitude and will be listening carefully to the government’s response.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I invite the minister to give comfort to my plea. Give succour to the people who want an instrument they can rely upon in relation to these forms of power of attorney and take the issue seriously rather than blowing it off - which is something it has a penchant for all too often in this House.
Mr KNIGHT (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome the MPI. I have been in this House for six, going on seven years now, and this is the first time it has been raised seriously by the opposition. I cannot recall it being raised before; however, it is a very important subject. It is something before my time as Attorney-General, perhaps several Attorneys-General, but a very important subject and something government takes extremely seriously. It has been moving through the Law Reform Committee and various departments. I will talk about that in my contribution this evening. I cannot comment on whether it has been moving at the correct pace or appropriately, but there is a need to have this legislation in place as quickly as possible.
I welcome the opportunity to reiterate our government’s commitment to life management legislation and updating adult guardianship. I am the Attorney-General, but I am also the Minister for Senior Territorians. I note Brian Hilder is in the House this evening. I thank him, and everyone who has come to this very important debate. Brian has been on my advisory council and this, as well as other subjects about seniors has come up. I have also received correspondence as the Minister for Senior Territorians about this very subject. In both portfolio capacities I take it very seriously.
I take on board the comments made by the member for Port Darwin and welcome your support, as given this evening, for legislation we will introduce and pass ...
Mr Elferink: Hallelujah!
Mr KNIGHT: You probably knew that, member for Port Darwin. The Northern Territory is a small place and you knew it was getting close and you thought you would jump in and gazump things. This has been moving at a steady pace; a correct and appropriate consultation has occurred.
Currently in the Northern Territory there is limited alternative decision-making available for adults. The primary objective of the Adult Guardianship Act is to provide a mechanism for adults with an intellectual disability to have their affairs managed by a guardian who can help operate their interests. This guardian is limited to defined areas of decision-making, including the accommodation that can be provided, work-related issues, healthcare and financial affairs, except in rare circumstances where the court can direct the guardian to have full decision-making powers.
Since completion of the legislative reviews of the Adult Guardianship Act, the Department of Health has been consulting with the Department of Justice and negotiating a way through that. It has also been consulting with other relevant authorities, including the Public Trustee, the courts, and organisations that provide legal representation to guardians. What has become clear through this process is the need for some very considered and comprehensive changes to the Adult Guardianship Act.
However, we are not going to go about this in a piecemeal way; it has to be done appropriately. We will not rush it through in three months as the opposition has put forward this evening. I accept what you are saying; however, you are talking about introducing your own legislation in three months. We are taking a considered approach, consulting widely and have reached this point now. The development of new provisions relating to those who are unable to manage their own affairs for medical reasons requires careful consideration. I am sure the member for Port Darwin would support that view.
The legislation we will be introducing to replace the Adult Guardianship Act is being drafted as we speak. It will provide for informal decision-making, advanced directives, enduring guardianship, recognition of interstate orders, as the member for Port Darwin mentioned, transfer of financial management of estates from the Public Guardian to the Public Trustee, the creation of a statutory authority of the public advocate, and the establishment of a guardianship tribunal.
The Department of Health prepared a discussion paper and commenced a comprehensive consultation process with key stakeholders in May last year. This involved targeted meetings with, and written submissions from, over 17 different organisations. A further consultation list for the draft bill was developed and included over 20 different stakeholders such as the Alzheimer’s Association of Australia NT, TEAMhealth, AMA NT, NAAJA, the Law Society, National Disability Services NT, Carers NT and AMSANT. We have also appointed a dedicated project officer within the Department of Health, who has been employed since April this year, to further oversee the work and coordinate this new legislation. Much activity and commitment has occurred regarding this legislation.
The Legislative Oversight Committee has also been established, which includes representatives from Parliamentary Counsel, the Public Guardian, the Executive Officer of Adult Guardianship, legal services, and the Department of Health to assist in commencement of drafts of the bill as sections were completed. All this quite extensive and thorough feedback is informing the development of this new draft legislation.
We are now at the stage where we intend to present the draft bill to stakeholders for consultation. This new bill will be known as the Adult Decision-Making Bill and will be introduced into parliament next year. The bill provides for ...
Mr Elferink: Which sittings?
Mr KNIGHT: It depends on how extensive the consultation period is, member for Port Darwin, but you have heard me tonight. I will try to get this bill in place, but this is extensive consultation. You will be consulted, and both sides of parliament can commit to passing this before or after the election. It does not really matter because it will be supported.
It will be introduced next year. The bill will provide the establishment of a tribunal for adult decision-making and will be appointed by the Administrator. We intend for the tribunal to deal with and determine all matters relating to guardianship, and there will be a review process established with the Supreme Court. The bill will provide for the establishment of an independent commissioner of adult decision-making and advocacy. The commissioner will have a number of functions, including advocating on behalf of adults with impaired decision-making capacity, providing advice and support for guardians, and acting as an alternative decision-maker if a person cannot nominate a suitable family member or friend to take on this role.
A significant feature of the new bill will be the capacity for a well person to nominate a guardian or alternative decision-maker for the future should the need arise. For example, if, in the future, a person becomes impaired in their mental capacity through illness or injury, this guardian will be in place to assume responsibilities. This will be achieved through the development of a life management document. Similarly, a well adult with decision-making capacity will be able to make a written advanced-care directive outlining how the adult wishes to be cared for in the future in the event of loss of their decision-making capacity or their ability to communicate, in line with the national framework for advanced care directives.
In summary, the new legislation will allow for a very comprehensive legal framework for three types of alternative decision-making:
direct decision-making by the tribunal may be appointed by the tribunal for an adult who has impaired decision-making capacity;
As I highlighted, my dual role in this …
Mr Elferink: That is not what is being asked for.
Mr KNIGHT: I am giving a response on behalf of the government. We are discussing where we are up to with this legislation. It has been …
Mr Elferink: It sounds like appointed guardian.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Port Darwin!
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Port Darwin, I remained quiet while you were giving your contribution, and we will all get our chance in the debate of this legislation. It has been widely consulted, and there will be further consultation as we move forward.
National Seniors is one of the organisations I have, in my role with senior Territorians, and they have written to me about this review. It is extremely important and we take it seriously. I envisage my role as Attorney-General would be to ensure this comes into this House as soon as it possibly can and people in our community are extremely comfortable with the legislation before it passes. As highlighted this evening, there will be extensive consultation.
In closing, we agree with the sentiment of the opposition and I welcome the debate this evening. I welcome its support for the legislation next year. However, we want to ensure it is done correctly. We do not want a piecemeal approach. We do not want a quick fix. If it has taken too long and I apologise for that on behalf of the government; however, it is a very important subject.
I thank the opposition for bringing forward this discussion. I thank members of our community and our legal profession for coming to hear this debate. I look forward to seeing you next year when we debate and pass this legislation.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will address some of the comments made by the Attorney-General in relation to this matter of public importance. The minister said this is the first time the opposition has raised these issues. I point out to the minister this has been happening in his government since 2008, where it seriously started to gather pace. In the middle of this year, a promise was made to bring this legislation before the House by October this year. That deadline has come and gone, and I will have more to say about that in a few minutes.
The minister said: ‘We will introduce legislation’, and suggested the member for Port Darwin was trying to gazump the legislation by bringing on this MPI. I remind the minister, his government has been doing something about this since 2008 and promising it would be here by October this year. The excuse for the government dragging its feet is the Department Health has been negotiating with the Department of Justice, and other people have been negotiating with other people. It seems like rhetoric to me, and some feeble excuse to give the government an out for dragging its feet on this very important matter.
The minister also said he does not want to do it piecemeal as the opposition is suggesting, or do it within three months. In July this year the government made a commitment to bring this to the October sittings. The minister now says it will be next year, perhaps after the election. That is not October 2011, that is October 2012, even beyond. All legislation on the Notice Paper ceases after an election.
The minister also pointed out a discussion paper went out in May 2010, is still being negotiated, and we are talking about things - we are still talking, we are still talking, and we are still talking. Unfortunately, there seems to be a history of the government talking and not taking much action. The minister also pointed out extensive consultation has occurred and he used the words ‘widely consulted’ – which has occurred over the last three years. It is a fairly poor outcome if, after a number of years and promises, we are still waiting for a commitment from your government on a date for this legislation to be introduced. It is all very well for the government to sit on its hands; but there are numbers of people waiting for this legislation.
The minister does not appear to be committed to a medical enduring power of attorney. He talked about guardianships, direct decision-making, alternatives, and healthcare decisions under certain circumstances. We still do not have a commitment from the minister that he will introduce medical powers of attorney as part of any proposed government legislation.
The Northern Territory is the only jurisdiction which does not provide a legislative base for seniors to feel confident their wishes relating to their final stages of life will be honoured. This also relates to people who have acquired brain injuries, who live in high-risk areas, who participate in high-risk sports such as motor sports, for example, motocrosse, or skiing - not that there is much skiing in the Northern Territory. There is a whole range of circumstances where people would consider utilising efficient and effective legislation, also known as living wills.
Before I go any further, I acknowledge the excellent report compiled by Professor Colleen Cartwright for Alzheimer’s Australia titled Planning for the End of Life for People with Dementia: Part One. I hope the minister has read it. If he has not, I encourage him to do so. I also thank the Council on the Ageing, in particular Robyn Lesley and Brian Hilder, for the free flowing information when I sought meetings with them. They really enlightened me regarding many issues surrounding this matter. Also, Ruth Leslie-Rose from Alzheimer’s Australia, and Sue and Hugh Bradley for educating me in some of the complexities and technicalities of the legislation the government is considering, and any legislation we will consider should the government not expedite this matter after such a long time of consultation.
There are three main areas this legislation needs to deal with - enduring financial powers of attorney; medical powers of attorney; and lifestyle powers of attorney - where all three issues can be dealt with under one piece of legislation and under one living will. That way, you give seniors, and anyone else who requires a living will, the legal protection that their wishes will be taken care of.
The Northern Territory is the only place in Australia with financial and property capacity and not medical and lifestyles. There are a number of tables in the document titled Planning for the End of Life for People with Dementia: Part One and I refer the minister to that document. Page 37, under the heading Northern Territory, mentions written instructional directive, and yes, we have an advanced directive. There is no provision for ‘patient-appointed agent/proxy’ and no provision under ‘if no one appointed by patient’. There is nothing there and, when you look at that table, the rest of Australia is well and truly covered by legislation.
Many seniors have written instructions lodged with aged care residential services, which, in the event of needing emergency services and transportation to hospital, do not follow them. It is a common complaint I have heard from seniors who have spoken to me about this, and in my consultations with stakeholders is a common thread. They make these things and think they are covered, but what happens is nobody bothers to take the documentation to hospital and nobody follows it anyway. They do not have the confidence these wishes would be respected anyway. This is what I did not hear in the Attorney-General’s response to the member for Port Darwin.
We do not have a commitment for medical enduring powers of attorney. People who make it clear they do not want to be resuscitated, for instance, can be overruled by family instructions in emergency circumstances. There are a number of occasions where people have made decisions not to be resuscitated. They do not want to go any further. Not everyone will take advantage of a legal mechanism to instruct medical intervention to sustain life not be provided. However, those who feel strongly about this issue, whether it be personal choice, cost of treatment, not wishing to deal with physical trauma, or the risk the by-product of resuscitation might be a very poor quality of life, should be respected. There are people who do not want to put their families through the agonising trauma of sitting around for months and months whilst they slowly die.
We need the legislative capacity so people can make decisions and a court can uphold those decisions; so other family members and other people cannot come along and interfere with a person’s wishes provided they had the capacity. I will get to capacity later, because the minister used the term a ‘well adult’ as opposed to what the United Nations definition of capacity might be.
Queensland and South Australia have workable and highly-regarded processes which put some control into the hands of people at the end of their life journey which allows them to die with some dignity. I do not know why the minister insists we need another 12 months, maybe two years, of consultation in this area. It is very clear there are some good working documents in this country he could refer to. In fact, I am sure if he rang the governments in South Australia and Queensland and asked to borrow their legislation they would say: ‘No problems at all. What can we do to help’? He does not have to reinvent the wheel. The government has to get on with the job and do what it said it was going to do.
The minister also said he had written to people and people had written to him. I can assure you some of the people I consulted have written to the minister and are still waiting for some result from the ideas and the requests they have given to government.
There is not much happening. People do not have confidence in the government at the moment that it will do anything. Hence, this matter of public importance: to bring it to the attention of the government and say: ‘Please, get on with the job. You have had three years to consult with people. Get on with the job and introduce the legislation as you said you were going to do by October 2011. Produce it by February, not after the election, not next year, the year after, or the year after that.
Dying is a very personal thing, and not to provide some input into the level of medical intervention is authoritative and arrogant. To not allow people that choice takes away some basic human rights. This is not about a living rule; it is not about euthanasia. It is recognising when the final stages of life are near and allowing the person to determine the value and quality of life that medical intervention may or may not produce. I can recall two examples, one of a very close friend of mine. When his father was in the process of dying he gave very clear instructions, in another state not the Northern Territory, about what he wanted to do. He did not want to be resuscitated. He spoke to his family and said: ‘Thank you very much; it has been a great ride. I do not want to be resuscitated. Just let me go peacefully and I will see you on the other side’. That is not quite the full story; that is it in a nutshell. He was quite prepared to die with dignity. He said goodbye to his family. He did not want to hang around for a long time. That was his will. We should be able to do that in the Northern Territory, and the examples should be like that.
Modern medicine has allowed us to save people. Let us put them on life support, let us do things against their wishes. I recall when my father was dying, he had endorsed on his chart ‘not for resuscitation’. It was not his decision. Someone said: ‘Let us give you a pacemaker’. Someone else said: ‘Sorry, you are probably not in any condition to get a pacemaker’. One hour they were going to do that, and the next hour he was not for resuscitation. My father was not in a position to make that decision; other people were making those decisions.
Why would anyone in the Northern Territory not make that decision before they get to a stage where they cannot? This goes to the very core of this legislation. We need to ensure the wishes of people are taken care of. To not allow someone, where capable, to determine whether medical intervention, resuscitation, etcetera, should be used to keep them alive makes no sense. Because the medical technology exists does not mean in all circumstances it should be used, particularly when it is against the will of the person concerned. Many seniors would argue why impose something on them they do not want and, in the process, incur costs which could be directed elsewhere. There are people who, for whatever reason, do not want to be resuscitated, especially when there is a likelihood of a major reduction in lifestyle choices.
Polling throughout the community conducted by various organisations suggests there is overwhelming support for this legislation. When you put this next to voluntary euthanasia - about 82% of people in the community support voluntary euthanasia provided there are checks and balances. In the Territory, we had that legislation; unfortunately, because of the Andrews Bill which overturned the rights of Territorians to make those decisions, we do not. We do have the ability to enact legislation to give people the choice to make a living will if they choose to, and the government seems to be dragging its feet. The promise to introduce the legislation by October 2011 has been breached, and it is not good enough. Many people in the community are waiting for this legislation.
I have said it before and I will say it again: people are waiting for this legislation so they can make a living will whilst they can still demonstrate, under the United Nations definition of capacity, they have the capacity to do so. There are people in the gallery tonight who know people who are deeply concerned about the dragging of the feet and the slowness of this legislation getting through, because they want to make their living will. These people, young people, people who may acquire brain injuries, and especially seniors, are asking that their views and wishes be heard and the government get on with the job and introduce the legislation quickly.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this MPI to the House and ask that the government note it.
Discussion concluded.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak briefly on one of my schools, a school which goes about its business quietly and people may not notice it in the hustle and bustle of everyday life. In the rural area we know about St Francis of Assisi Primary School and the good work of the teaching staff, council and students, and what they are achieving.
The school was officially opened on 3 August 1997 by Bishop Ted Collins, Bishop of the Diocese of Darwin. It was opened and developed to serve the needs of the growing rural population. The school currently has around 160 students who come from as far south as Batchelor, as far east as Corroboree and as far west as Berry Springs. The school’s mission is to develop in each child their unique qualities equipping them to enjoy a successful Christ-centred life through mentoring and education.
The school was named St Francis of Assisi Primary School because the local Catholic parish is St Francis of Assisi parish. Fr Milton Arias is the parish priest; a lovely man, very approachable, and the picture of a modern day religious man. I have been to the school regularly and Fr Milton is often there talking with the students, spreading the word of the church and the good ways of life and living.
Recently, I went to the school to participate in the Remembrance Day ceremony, an event I attended last year as well. The whole school participates in the ceremony with students taking the lead in the program and classes making art style wreaths which they place at the base of the school’s flagpole. This year I was asked to read The Ode, which I did with pleasure and honour. It was a lovely ceremony and a time to reflect and remember.
Tomorrow, the St Francis of Assisi Christmas Angels will be singing live on ABC radio at 10.30 am. I know their voices will be as heavenly as they are sweet, and I wish the students happy singing. I suggest to anyone listening they tune into the radio at that time as I know the students will do a terrific job.
Finally, I place on the record my congratulations to the Principal, Mel Bolwell, for her ongoing commitment and work whether it is a sports day, the fun fairs which I have attended, special events such as student excursions, or just teaching on a daily basis. St Francis of Assisi Primary School is to be commended as are the students, all the families, and all those associated with the school.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Deputy Speaker, you did a good job today. A fantastic effort you put in during Question Time with these naughty boys on the other side.
I will make a few comments about the Wadeye Magic, the Wadeye Division One football side playing in the NTFL. They have done a great job this year and I have some updates of their match played on 27 November. This update is provided by James McNamee, the great manager of the side who has done a fabulous job, and great credit goes to him. This week they played Tracy Village and, again, beat them quite comprehensively. They won 14 goals 6 points, 90, to 10 goals 9 points, 69 by Tracy Village.
The goals went to Jarrod James - five goals; Alex Lantjin, three goals; Louis Narndu, two goals; Francis Kinthari, Lawrence Warnier, Jeremiah Wilson and Mark Parmbuk each had single goals.
The best players on the field for the day were Warwick Fenner, Jarrod James, Alex Lantjin, Francis Kinthari, Mark Parmbuk and Louis Narndu. Again, a great effort from the boys. Many changes were made to the side this week, and they took on Tracy Village on Sunday.
Players making their debut were Jeremiah Wilson, Sylvester Nilco and Tim Francis. That makes a total of 50 players who have represented the Wadeye Magic, which is a great effort. They have some great players out there, and they are very eager to participate. I will read some comments James provided:
A great effort by all the players and James MacNamee as manager, and also Jock McLeod, the coach. I will give further updates to the House.
I also pay tribute to Trevor Allwright who has been with the Power and Water Corporation for some 40-odd years, since 1968.
I was at the new Allwright Training Centre at the 19 Mile near Freds Pass, and it is a great facility the development of which Trevor has overseen. Trevor is retiring very shortly, and I told him I was one year old when he started work at Power and Water. He worked on the road gangs on the Victoria River Highway for many years. He started his apprenticeship as a linesman in Katherine in the early 1970s and as a trades assistant with the Electricity Supply Undertaking (ESU), the Commonwealth agency which was then responsible for electricity in the Northern Territory. Trevor is passionate about training and getting young people skilled up in a very dangerous environment.
He is one of nine children; he was born in Alice Springs and moved with his family to Darwin for a time before settling in Katherine. His great-grandfather arrived in the Territory by ship in 1873 at the original port of Palmerston, now known as Southport, and he later established Darwin’s first brewery, which is a great honour, I guess, to have in your family. The Allwrights are one of the few non-Aboriginal Territory families to date back to the 1800s.
Trevor will be fondly remembered within the Power and Water Corporation. I wish him all the best in his retirement, and look forward to him drifting back to the Northern Territory in the cooler Dry Season months. I believe we will see more of him at the 19 Mile providing some advice on how to further develop what is a great facility out there.
Trevor is driving his brand new Nissan Patrol to Victoria to pick up his brand new caravan, and then he will be heading around Australia. Trevor, good luck on the road with your family
Well done, Trevor, and thank you for your dedicated service.
There are a few Christmas wishes. I thank my electorate officer, Sharon McAlear, for all the great work she has done – a fabulous job, as she always does for me. She certainly puts up with a great deal of stress from constituents of my electorate, and other electorates – and from me from time to time. Well done. I hope she has a really great break with her family over the Christmas period, and looks forward to being refreshed in the New Year and really turning it on through a very busy and interesting 2012.
I thank my ministerial staff for their ongoing support - both my current ministerial staff and the ministerial staff from my previous portfolios. I welcome their advice, efforts, and contributions. I look forward to the continuing working relationship in the future.
I thank my colleagues on this side of the House. I wish the members on the other side of the House a safe and happy Christmas and New Year with your families.
We all know as members in this Chamber this is a very demanding job on ourselves and our families, and this is a time to reconnect and really appreciate what is truly valuable in our lives - our friends and families. So, merry Christmas, have a good year, and I look forward to a very interesting 2012.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to thank a few people for a fantastic and fascinating 12 months.
First, to Madam Speaker, who is not here tonight, the Clerk, Chamber staff, Vicki Long and all the Legislative Assembly staff who all work hard to make our day-to-day operations appear seamless. Thank you very much.
I wish a happy and safe Christmas to all members of the House.
I thank the very hard-working staff in Hansard. To this day, I do not understand how they keep up with it all and why they do not fall asleep given the fascinating debates we are treated to on some occasions. Please note the sarcasm.
To members of the Country Liberals, please have a merry Christmas; and to all our electorate officers, a big thank you for all your support. To the Opposition Leader’s staff on the fourth floor, your guidance, support and damned hard work is very much appreciated. Although I will be speaking to Terry about at least one of his staff and his complete and utter disrespect for me, I thank him all the same. I am glad to work with a dedicated team who share my values and, of course, humour. To anyone who might read this, that was humour. I really do like him.
To our Palmerston team in particular, Marlise, Tasma, and Donna, a big thank you for your ongoing commitment to helping our Palmerston community. It is not an easy one. Marlise, my own EO, your work and commitment this year has astounded me. No job is too big or too small. You never complain; you just pull up your sleeves and find solutions to the many problems we face each and every day. Marlise, to you I say, ‘Baie dankie’, and I wish you, Henrique and Luke have a beautiful time with your family in South Africa. Please have a safe Christmas and get some rest; we have a busy year next year.
To my beautiful wife and children: I cannot do this without your support, your love, and your understanding. The fishbowl we live in is my fault; it is not your fault, but you all understand what I am trying to do, what I am trying to achieve for Territorians. I am sure all members understand what I am saying here. Without my family, I do not have a reason to do what I do. Without my family, I simply could not do what I do. I love you all dearly.
To mum and dad, my thoughts will be with you over the next few weeks. Dad, the most remarkable man I know, was due to have open-heart surgery a few weeks ago, but that surgery was postponed. The surgery will now take place next week and our thoughts will be with you on that day and every day during your recovery. It is not your time, mate. You have more to do, and I have more to learn from your wisdom and your good humour.
Madam Deputy Speaker, Merry Christmas and to all who may be listening to the broadcast tonight, please have a safe and Merry Christmas, and here’s to 2012.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk about an outstanding young Territorian who was educated in Tennant Creek and graduated in Year 12 in 2010 - Marcellus Ah Kit. As the member for Barkly in the Northern Territory representing the electorate Marcellus Ah Kit calls home, and as a former teacher in Tennant Creek and the Barkly, who had the good fortune of working with Marcellus in the Youth Performance Program and with his parents as respected health and education professionals, I am filled with pride and admiration by the news that Marcellus is graduating from the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts.
I am advised by Kristi Johansen, a former teaching colleague and great mentor/teacher of Marcellus at Tennant Creek High School, that Marcellus is graduating from the Academy and celebrates this milestone with a lead role in a play, Who’s Afraid of the Working Class. My e-mail of congratulations to Marcellus was sent to Mr Rick Brayford, who is a lecturer in the acting department at the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts and coordinator of the Aboriginal Theatre Course. The e-mail text read:
Who’s Afraid of the Working Class is a play created in the mid-1990s out of the Melbourne Worker’s Theatre during the reign of the Kennett government in Victoria. Four well-known writers created four interlocking stories that present the audience with a kaleidoscope of real-life influences on ordinary people relating to unemployment, job insecurity, family breakdown, racism and sexual abuse.
In the words of his lecturer, Mr Rick Brayford, Paddy, as he is known in Western Australia, auditions for the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts mainstream acting on Monday this week. He will graduate from his initial course in March 2012 with flying colours, and participates in his interview for Workshop and Props soon.
Closing night for Who’s Afraid of the Working Class was the biggest audience and probably the best overall performance. For photos, publicity and information, contact Anton at the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts marketing department at a.maz@ecu.edu.au.
I thank all the teachers and support staff from Tennant Creek who participated in Marcellus’ education over many years; and his parents who provided the supportive environment of love, care and nurturing that sustained his regular attendance, participation and engagement in a school education program. I make special mention of Kristi Johansen and Lawrie Cullen-Tait as two creative mentors for Marcellus in his performing arts education.
Kristi, as a teacher at the Tennant Creek High School, was instrumental in attracting the Bell Shakespeare company of New South Wales to Tennant Creek each year to support her creative arts initiative with her English as a Second Language classes, where a Shakespearean classic was studied, deconstructed and adapted to the real-life scenarios of the students’ lives growing up in the Barkly region. This creative arts program not only supported attendance and engagement, but also made the challenging task of teaching literacy to teenagers a dynamic, creative and meaningful experience. I bet if you ask any of Kristi’s former performing arts students to reflect on their school education, without a doubt they would cite their work in the Tennant Creek High School’s Shakespearean program as the most memorable of their school education program.
Lawrie Cullen-Tait was the professional creative director who would travel to Tennant Creek each year to share her extensive experience in the theatre as director, mentor and friend to the students who undertook the challenging curriculum project, and to support Kristi as a teacher pushing the boundaries of formal education delivery.
The Tennant Creek High School Shakespearean program was much loved by the community for its great educational outcomes, creative program content and spectacular performances. Kristi Johansen and Lawrie Cullen-Tait also supported Marcellus to apply and gain entry into the Western Australia Academy of Performing Arts, and continued to support his academic program and pastoral needs while he settled in and gained the necessary confidence to exercise his outstanding talents at a nationally recognised performing arts academy.
For Kristi and Lawrie, it seems to me that there is only one line left for you to workshop with Marcellus before he truly stretches his wings in the future and that is: ‘Marcellus, remember us when you are rich and famous’.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Deputy Speaker, although I appreciate everyone’s Christmas wishes and I will be wishing them a great Christmas soon, the problem I have is the Labor alcohol reform journey which, to the average person, does not seem to be working. The rivers of grog this Wet Season seem to be transformed into a sea of human antisocial behaviour.
In Palmerston, in my beautiful seat of Drysdale, which I love dearly, the flow of alcohol-impaired people from the local shopping centres has become concerning. During my lunch breaks at my local shopping centre I see people wandering through who are not necessarily extremely intoxicated, but definitely impaired from alcohol consumption, and it is very concerning. You see the same thing at the time the kids finish school when you step out of the shopping centres and pass the kids hanging out on the National Bank side. Amongst those kids are people hanging around the bank cash machines who are intoxicated and creating obstacles for people to step over, apart from any personal harm they may do to themselves. It is a journey, unfortunately, and I use it to highlight some problems.
As you step out of the shopping centre you go around the water tower, a place where too many people have been seriously hurt or lost their lives due to antisocial behaviour, alcoholism, or crimes committed upon them.
The beautiful memorial park developed by the Palmerston City Council and maintained by its contractors is a memorial place for Anzac Day parades, Remembrance Day parades, and where the Leopard tank now resides. However, to see people hanging their clothing and laundry over it in the mornings is a disgraceful sight; and to see people using the benches there for lawful business, and stuck into the remnants of grog from the night before is a disgrace, and it is directly across from the police station.
Reg Hillier Park is also a local community issue of concern which has been taken up as a concern of the Palmerston Regional Safer Communities. It is another park directly opposite the police station, unfortunately. To pre-empt any retort by the government, it is a park and it is the same for all those issues. We report those issues when we see the antisocial behaviour. I encourage people to continue to report that.
The myriad of camps scattered on our fringes is distressing to see. In 2006, when I left the Palmerston Police Station, we did not have any camps left. Approaches were taken and joint tasks were conducted to get rid of and break up the camps, move people on and return them home, or get them out of camping and out of the alcohol cycle. It is not good enough. We, as a community, must take back our parks and report all incidents of antisocial behaviour, drinkers and the like. I urge everyone in our communities to take action and ring the police and report these incidents of antisocial behaviour.
These drinkers have taken over and destroyed the freedom of our parks. It sounds simple, but many people we have been speaking with have reached the point where they think it is not worth ringing up anymore. I encourage and implore you all to ring the police because there is only one way the government will understand; that is, if we ring the police and let them know what is going on so they can report it. They have wound back the reporting of crime statistics, but we will continue to work on that. It is important you do that – for the people of Drysdale, Palmerston, and beyond.
As I said, this is a journey, and I am going to finish this journey by taking a quick trip down the Stuart Highway into Darwin. If you were to take this trip yourself, as I did last night and I have done many time before, this trip will enlighten you with sights of antisocial behaviour, starting as soon as you reach Dwyer Park - that is the park at The Narrows - following the highway to the roadside parks and open spaces on the Stuart Highway leading up to Parap Road, parallel with Hobbler Court - the member for Fannie Bay’s area - where, just last night, several groups of people were hanging around creating disturbances and lingering in the parks on the edge of the road.
Across the road - and people who regularly use the highway past there know they will often be interrupted by people crossing the road in various states – is the pipeline, and beyond the pipeline is where more people continue to carry out antisocial behaviour. Correct me if I am wrong, but it was only last week or the week before a man was stabbed there. It is a real problem. The government says it is not a problem and they have fixed it. It is a real problem. You only have to take that journey, that drive, to appreciate the work we have to come.
The land between the Stuart Highway and St John’s College – at the back of a school, for heaven’s sake - you will see untold amounts of antisocial behaviour. It is not acceptable. Make your way across the Daly Street Bridge to Harriet Place - Harriet Place is full of antisocial behaviour problems. It is not good enough.
The beautiful Esplanade in Darwin, just at our back door, is affected too regularly by antisocial behaviour - a place that, unfortunately, had to be barricaded for the recent visit by the United States President. Every day we go there and, sure, many people enjoy that facility, but the level of antisocial behaviour carried on there through the night is disgusting; less than acceptable. The park that takes the cake is Tamarind Park at the corner of Mitchell Street and Knuckey Street, directly opposite the Darwin City Police Station and watch house.
It is a short journey, and a journey to be considered and questioned, and it ends at the watch house which is responsible for taking all those drunks from the various parks in Palmerston and all the way into town. The perpetuation of offences occur directly opposite the police station - smack bang in the middle of Darwin city. There are traffic lights there for you to stop and have a look. It is a disgrace to see. It is a disgrace to hear this government come into this Chamber and say their alcohol policy is working. All you have to do is the same as every other Territorian does, and get out your little white cars, go for a drive, and see the problems.
Like alcoholism itself, you must admit there is a problem before you can fix it. This government has to admit they have a problem before any of the Territory’s problems can be fixed. Unfortunately, it does not seem they will admit their solutions are not working, and that is a shame.
I said it was a short journey, but a journey I ask ministers on the other side to take, as the rest of us do: get off your tailbone, go for a drive and see these problem places. They are right at our front door. Coming up to Christmas, I would like to see some change so all Territorians can have a beautiful, safe Christmas - all those in Drysdale and Blain and Brennan, my friends and colleagues, can have a safe Christmas with their families and constituents.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak on a letter I have received from the Save Eaton group. I will not read the whole letter into the Hansard, in fact I will read nearly nothing of it into Hansard except this:
It is signed by Toni Vine-Bromley, Ruth Snodgrass, Mick Purcell, Wayne Morris and Mark Wynn.
I place on the record now, and I will forward this on to the authors of this letter, that I thoroughly support saving the suburb of Eaton.
I have to declare an interest here. The interest is that I share a common boundary with the suburb of Eaton. So, before any allegations are made about anything of that nature, I place on the record that I have a common boundary with the RAAF gate fence. Having said that, my interest in Eaton goes far beyond my personal interest; it goes well into the zone of good common sense.
I was mystified, disappointed and shocked to see a briefing at the Darwin City Council recently by the RAAF. The RAAF talked about what they were planning to do with the base and, to my astonishment, they briefed the Darwin City Council with a PowerPoint display on what they were also planning to do with the suburb of Eaton. My concern is this: as part of that briefing, the RAAF advised the Darwin City Council they are planning to knock over all but about 130 to 140 of the houses, and the rest would be reserved for military purposes.
I found that astonishing at the time, so I took the time out to contact the officers involved and asked them to forward me their full briefing. Unfortunately, they were unable to do so, and I was advised by the RAAF officers involved that no finalised decisions had been made and, therefore, they had no reason to forward this material on to me.
I have no recollection of them speaking in anything other than fairly determinant terms as to what was proposed for the land upon which these 400-odd houses stand – 395 houses, if memory serves me. I was sitting in the public gallery of the Darwin City Council when the briefing was made to the Darwin City Council, and I am distressed to discover that, what was essentially a public briefing, will not be forwarded to me as a member of parliament and a person in the Northern Territory, on the grounds that it is not yet a finalised decision.
There are nearly 400 houses in question here. They are serviceable homes. I have heard every excuse under the sun as to why the RAAF does not want to offload these houses. I accept none of them, other than the fact that the RAAF, or the Australian Defence Force, is acting in a churlish fashion and simply does not want to release this property into the public domain and into the Northern Territory freehold.
The member for Nelson today referred to it as a moral duty. We have some of the highest house prices in this country, and we are a town of around 130 000 people. It is simply beyond the scope of understanding as to why these houses will not be released into the marketplace. Calculating at a value of $600 000 each, which is just a guesstimate, I believe you would end up with just over $200m worth of property that could be sold into the public marketplace here in the Northern Territory. If people are worried about swamping the marketplace, then you stagger the release but, for God’s sake, release these houses into the property marketplace in the Northern Territory and allow the suburb to grow as a normal suburb. It is a normal suburb for all intents and purposes.
If I want to drive into the suburb of Eaton, do I get stopped at a checkpoint? No, I do not; I simply drive through. I can walk from my back fence right through the RAAF houses and out to Bagot Road without being challenged by anyone. I have had cause in the past to drive past those houses and not once have I been challenged by any individual. There is no gate; there is nothing to suggest that I am unwelcome there.
Essentially, these houses are a suburb in their own right. Yet, over my back fence, there is a perfectly good, serviceable and in a state of good repair, three-bedroom elevated home which I would move into tomorrow if I could. But no, this home remains abandoned and unoccupied, as it has for at least the past six months. There are many other houses that fit that description, and I find it incomprehensible that we live in a jurisdiction where we can have unoccupied houses and yet some of the worst rental prices and house prices in the nation.
I also thank the Legislative Assembly staff this evening for their support over the last year. From Christmas to Christmas, I see the amount of work they do; they are rarely acknowledged, and I acknowledge them now, particularly the Russells and the Michaels and the Stokesies of the world who might be listening at the moment, but also the ladies in Hansard …
A member: Stokesie is not listening.
Mr ELFERINK: I would be surprised if he ever does.
I also extend a very special expression of my gratitude to Linda Coulter, my electorate officer, who has been with me for 18 months or so. Having come into the job from a completely different field which had nothing to do with anything political - and I suspect she does not have many political bones in her body - she nevertheless works in a dedicated and diligent fashion for the member for Port Darwin. She puts up with me not being in the office for many hours a week, and yet dutifully we put on our walking shoes and go delivering pamphlets together nearly every month. I am delighted with her performance, and I place that on the record today. I extend my thanks to her, her husband, Geoff, and her two kids, Mary and Julian. My very warm regards to her and her family, and I thank them for what I force their mother and wife to do.
I also place on the record my thanks to my wife, the darling, lovely Dee, who puts up with me all the time, and my two beautiful daughters. All three say they love me, which only goes to prove that they have no taste in men, but I am grateful for that. I thank them for their support, particularly my wife; my two little girls are probably too young, but it is lovely to walk down the driveway and they are still enthusiastic to see me. I wonder if that will be true in a couple of years time, but we will see. My thanks to my wife who has been a great support to me in the last 12 months.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish everyone in this House, members ALP, members Independent and members CLP, a very Merry Christmas and a safe and prosperous new year.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to talk about the ongoing crime and antisocial behaviour targeted in a specific area of Alice Springs known as Billy Goat Hill. Billy Goat Hill is a small rugged outcrop in central Alice Springs, between Stott Terrace, Stuart Terrace, Telegraph Terrace and Bath Street. It is too rugged for habitation, but affords a lovely view over the town. Billy Goat Hill also has spiritual associations through the Aboriginal sacred sites. It takes its name from the goats which were once herded there and contained by a fence. Billy Goat Hill is, for the most part, an attractive precinct.
The specific area of Billy Goat Hill I am referring to in this adjournment speech is the Stuart Terrace side which consists of a row of businesses and residential premises. Billy Goat Hill does not have any fencing or mechanical barriers controlling access and the site is accessible to the public from every side. It is a haven for antisocial behaviour, including alcohol consumption, illegal camping, criminal damage, and graffiti.
For this reason, in July of this year, the Alice Springs police, in consultation with the various landowners, tenants and stakeholders, put together a strategic plan specifically to tackle and reduce antisocial behaviour in the Billy Goat Hill area. The vision for this strategic plan was to implement strategies to reduce antisocial behaviour. The mission was to reduce antisocial behaviour at Billy Goat Hill in consultation with stakeholders, and implement crime prevention through environmental design strategies. The strategy was to consult with the various stakeholders to identify risks and need for improvement, and to develop a workable security plan.
The stakeholders they identified included Rex Neindorf, owner of the Alice Springs Reptile Centre, Alice Springs Town Council, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, the Northern Territory government, and the whole of the heritage precinct in that area. In summary, they identified in the previous two years there had been 49 reports of antisocial behaviour in the area, 17 for consuming liquor in a public place, nine for general disturbances, three for general patrol issues, and one traffic offence.
The Alice Springs Reptile Centre is a regular victim of rock throwing. The reptile centre, located at the base of Billy Goat Hill on the southeastern corner of Bath Street and Stuart Terrace, Alice Springs, is often targeted by criminals and people who are intent on making misery for the reptile centre. Unfortunately, Billy Goat Hill has a ready supply of loose rocks which can be thrown at passing vehicles and pedestrians on all surrounding roads; this is a common problem for the police.
Billy Goat Hill is also used by itinerants as a camping and drinking location. There is always evidence of campfires, abandoned bedding, graffiti, food, alcohol, rubbish and human excrement. There is an unofficial walking path on the southern boundary of Billy Goat Hill which predominately attracts those involved in antisocial behaviour. This is caused by the concealment and lack of natural surveillance. The path is accessed via Bath Street behind the reptile centre, and via Stuart Terrace by walking along the Girl Guides western fence line. The path goes behind the back of the reptile centre and the Girl Guides hall. The path currently serves no legitimate purpose apart from enabling antisocial behaviour. I walked along this path and it is a cesspit, littered with rubbish and smelling of human excrement. Large groups of itinerant drinkers frequent this area, particularly behind the guide hall and the reptile centre. There is usually rubbish scattered all over the path, and you can observe excrement and extensive graffiti in this area.
The strategic plan states:
They came up with a number of plans; however, the one that is not being acted on at the moment is regarding the installation of fencing in the Billy Goat Hill area. The report recommended fencing is installed at both entry points to the path that runs from Bath Street behind the reptile centre through to the Girl Guides building. This would make access to Billy Goat Hill much more difficult. To meet crime prevention through environmental design standards, the fence would need to be transparent. Chain mesh fences are an example of this type of fencing. The transparency increases natural surveillance, which would also prevent any installed fence becoming a cover for non-legitimate users of the site.
This report has recommended two partial fences be built, one at the Girl Guides end of the path and the other one at the reptile centre. The report comes to the conclusion that this would be quite effective at stemming antisocial behaviour in the area.
The report suggests the Northern Territory government is now required to provide funding to install a partial fence at the southern boundary walking path, as I just mentioned, and the time frame from when the report was released in July 2011 was six months for the recommendations to be implemented.
I received a letter from Rex Neindorf, the owner and operator of the Alice Springs Reptile Centre yesterday. He said - and this is a typical weekend for Rex, particularly during the summer months:
Which he owns and leases out:
He went on to say:
The problem encountered by the Girl Guides and Rex Neindorf from the reptile centre needs to be addressed. They cannot afford to have another summer as they have had in recent times.
I request the Northern Territory government immediately respond to this key recommendation of this strategic plan for Billy Goat Hill; that is, to erect the two partial fences in this area. I implore they take immediate action and provide an update to the reptile centre and the Girl Guides particularly, and other tenants in the area, and how they plan to proceed with implementing this recommendation.
I take this opportunity to thank all my constituents in Araluen for their generosity and support over the last 12 months. I have truly embraced the opportunity to engage with many people who live in Araluen, and I really appreciate their openness and honesty.
I thank my Country Liberals colleagues. This last 12 months has been extremely challenging for us all, particularly for me being my first 14 months in the job. I thank the members of the government for being fair and always reliable when it comes to providing stimulating debate in the House.
I thank the members of the Legislative Assembly, Madam Speaker, Mr Clerk, and the Chamber staff, and also the wonderful workers in Hansard who plod away silently in the background.
I particularly thank my electorate officer, Carley Plume for her tireless work; she is absolutely fantastic. I thank my friends and my team of supporters.
Most of all, I thank my family, Alice and Harry Lambley and my incredible husband, Craig Lambley, who have been a wonderful support to me. I wish you all a happy and safe Christmas.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I focus on an issue of significant concern to do with the governance and the leadership of the Northern Territory. What I see before me, as someone who has been in this Chamber for 12 years, is clear evidence of a cover-up - or is it incompetence? Worse than that, it could well be a dangerous combination of two things: a cover-up and incompetence. Allow me to tell this story. I will start with immediate events and conclude with a reflection of what I have observed over a number of years.
Earlier in these sessions, the last week, with all the resources of government and a department, there was a delayed report - a police annual report. We had waited for that. Why do we wait for that? Because we want to have more information regarding the crime statistics in the Northern Territory, which have been withheld. When we finally got a copy of that report, having passed through many hands and sat the Chief Minister’s desk, I daresay, for a period of time with all those resources. It took a short time for the limited resources of the opposition to discover there were quite serious problems with aspects of the police annual report.
Notwithstanding its lateness which was brought to the attention of the Chief Minister, who is also the Police minister, he arrogantly dismissed the concerns of the opposition and then, by way of explanation, too quickly pointed out that this is a report of the Police Commissioner. He went on, effectively, to say: ‘Do not look at me. I do not accept responsibility’. He concludes with the words: ‘The Police Commissioner is obviously very disappointed and apologises to the parliament’. So, the Chief Minister does not accept a skerrick of responsibility and appears to be delighted that he can find an explanation that excludes him from being in the frame.
Then we move to Thursday night, and we had the member for Fong Lim in an important debate to which there had been a significant lead-up, with all the posturing and rhetoric from the other side trying to paint the opposition with tired old paint from way back. All we are seeking is clarity. We want to take these matters very seriously and we can only proceed if we believe we have an adequate understanding of the matters we have been asked to consider and decide on.
So, a legitimate question was asked by my shadow Planning minister, the member for Fong Lim. He asked the Chief Minster: ‘Is the Larrakia Development Corporation named in the Kenbi in-principle agreement or heads of agreement’? This was important to us; we wanted information. We had sought these documents so at least we could see them. We had a number of briefings, and the information was not made available. The interesting thing when asked that question, not having seen anything, was how emphatically the Chief Minister denied and said: ‘The answer is no. They are not named in any documentation’. It is the way in which it is responded to – what the emphasis was placed on, and the arrogant denial. However, we then had the personal explanation. Granted, we had the acknowledgement there had been a phone call made when it was realised. But, tellingly, in the explanation are these words from the Chief Minister: ‘I was told that the advice provided to me on that question was not correct’.
So, even though the emphatic denial is provided, arrogantly, in the Chamber, once caught out and acknowledged that this is actually a very serious trespass, he said: ‘I was told that the advice provided to me was incorrect’. Once again, we see the same thread of ‘I am not responsible’. It is a very serious issue nonetheless because, once again, we are trying to determine whether there is, in fact, a cover-up. We need to know these things so we can, with good conscience, provide support for something essentially, and in principle, we support. We want to see that progress but we want to know some details which have been assiduously denied us. Or is it incompetence? Well, we had that same thread here: ‘It is someone else’s responsibility. Someone gave me the wrong information that was not correct’.
Then today, we wanted to know is it incompetence, a cover-up, or both. Once again, there is a further attack on the opposition, painting these tired old stories from the past, endeavouring to create and sustain an impression which has sustained the Labor Party for a long time. We were still trying to determine whether the Chief Minister knew at the time if the Larrakia Development Incorporation had been included or not. We can explore the significance of that at a later stage. Did the Chief Minster know or not? One way of determining was whether the Chief Minister signed the heads of agreement. I asked the question: ‘Is your signature on the document that you are referring to’? The answer from the Chief Minister was: ‘I am not aware of which document the Leader of the Opposition is referring to’. I said, by way of the supplementary question: ‘The heads of agreement’. The Chief Minister then said: ‘No, my signature is not on the heads of agreement’.
Today, we had the second personal explanation and it is now looking more like incompetence rather than a cover-up. There is still the question of cover-up to be answered. Now we have: ‘Yes, the heads of agreement was signed by Hon Jenny Macklin on behalf of the Commonwealth; Kim Hill on behalf of the NLC, and by me on behalf of the Territory’. Does that mean the issue which was the point of contention today was that there was a commercial interest established with the Larrakia Development Corporation, which I assume would be enshrined in the heads of agreement document that the Chief Minister, in fact, signed? Did he not read what he signed, or was he just going along for the ride? Therefore, if we are talking about it being a cover-up, then perhaps we have an incompetent Chief Minister who is being used. I am wondering, as I am reading and considering all that has played out in the last few days, what we actually have here.
Allow me to reflect. I know the Chief Minister is the Chief Minister by virtue of a coup against the former Chief Minister, the former member for Fannie Bay, Clare Martin, and the former Deputy Chief Minister, Syd Stirling, the former member for Nhulunbuy. I know that the Chief Minister was prevailed upon constantly, in the lead-up to that coup, to take the reins. I suspect he did not have the ticker to do so. Once the pressure mounted he still resisted and was reluctant to do so. It was other forces that put the motion into play; it was only when the former Prime Minister, Mr Kevin Rudd, became the Prime Minister that he then had the ticker to take the move forward.
I understand, and I assume from what I am reading, with all the pressure of dissatisfaction on the former member for Fannie Bay, that the member for Wanguri, reluctantly, after the change of government and Howard was beaten, decided he would then move in shortly afterwards. He was not there too long and he took the 11-month early option and went to the polls 11 months early. Look what happened - we ended up with an opposition that matched the size of the government.
What do we have here? We have a government in trouble because the Chief Minister’s incompetence, I believe, gives us the situation where he is controlled by other forces. He does not quite know what he is signing or what the implications of what he is signing are for the Northern Territory. He appears to be out of his depth, and covers up by arrogance, denial or shifting the blame to other places. And, we have pressure on members here, I believe, who would retire, but have been required by the organisation to stay in their positions because they have an enterprise to protect, and that is the Labor Party.
There is much more at stake here than the Labor Party. It is the good interests of the people of the Northern Territory, and the Chief Minister says: ‘If you cannot trust the words of the Chief Minister, who can you?’ They are the words that were put in Hansard, and I believe they are going to haunt him. We now have grave concerns about the capacity of this Chief Minister, and the integrity of this government. Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, who the hell is in charge of this place?
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk on a number of things. One is a great initiative in my electorate of the Community Garden at Sanderson Middle School. I quote a piece from my electorate newsletter, and I believe it should go on the record. It says:
The first one was me, Peter Styles, member for Sanderson, for fundraising and support donations. Also:
I have to say the lady who is the driving force behind this is a young teacher at Sanderson who came to my office. Her name is Emily Corso and she is a dynamo. She came in full of enthusiasm, and when people come into your office who are so keen and full of enthusiasm you cannot help but be enriched by their presence, you want to help them do what they do, which is to teach our young people and help them establish fine community things like the community garden at Sanderson Middle School. I take this opportunity to put on the public record the good work done by Emily. Together, we were able to organise donations so the students did not have to dig into their pockets to get their community garden going. I congratulate not only Emily, but those at the school who supported her such as Iolanthe Sutton - and there are a number of students involved whose names I do not have at this time.
Another fabulous event I was very fortunate to attend and as keynote speaker, was the 30th anniversary gala dinner of the Blue Light Disco conference which was attended by a number of local people. It was a great honour to be invited to give the keynote presentation at what was the International Blue Light PCYC Conference hosted in Darwin commencing on 28 October. The conference was attended by over 100 police and civilian Blue Light members from every state and territory of Australia and New Zealand. The conference was followed by the NT Blue Light 30th Anniversary gala dinner which included a charity auction with proceeds donated to that great cause, the Variety Club.
The disco started in Melbourne in 1970, and was brought to the Northern Territory in 1981. I recall the arrival of the Blue Light Disco because it was the same year I arrived in the Northern Territory to commence work with the Northern Territory Police. The whole idea of Blue Light Discos was to provide a safe place for teenagers to have a night out without the risk of alcohol or other drugs.
This conference focused on police programs to engage young people and prevent crime, and to continue with that ethos of giving young people the opportunity to have a night out without being harassed by drug dealers, pushers, or anyone else under the influence of any of those drugs.
I have to give credit to someone who worked for the Blue Light Disco all those years ago and continues to support the Blue Light Disco program, that is current Alderman Allan Mitchell, Darwin City Council, and former senior sergeant in charge of the Crime Prevention Unit of the Northern Territory Police. Allan did a great job for years working hard to promote Blue Light Disco. He gave up an enormous amount of his own time to work for the young people of the Northern Territory and ensured the Blue Light Disco went far and wide across the Territory, out to bush communities, remote areas, suburban schools. He worked hard to ensure all kids had the same opportunity. I congratulate Allan Mitchell for that.
The conference was a raging success and there were an enormous number of people from around the Territory. I was the keynote speaker. Congratulations to First Class Constable Ward Tucker who runs the Blue Light Disco in the Northern Territory. Ward is one of those people who gets an enormous amount of satisfaction out of ensuring young people have the opportunities to have a good time in a safe environment. I congratulate Ward on the fantastic effort. It is a huge success which does not come unless someone does a great deal of work. I congratulate Ward and his team for putting on a fabulous event. I wish you well in the future with the Blue Light Discos.
I can assure the people from the Blue Light Discos, both in the Territory and around Australia, whilst I am in this House, I will do everything I can to ensure Blue Light Discos are supported and pushed around the Territory far and wide to even the remotest part of the Northern Territory, so all our young people get the opportunity to enjoy the fabulous experience that can come from being in a safe environment where they can really enjoy themselves.
I now mention someone who is a regular visitor to my electorate office, a young lady by the name of Karen Close. Karen needs to be congratulated for her outstanding efforts at Dancing with the Celebrities held in October. The 2011 Dancing with the Celebrities Annual Gala Ball showcased the dancing skills of Total Recreation members and their celebrity dance partners. Total Recreation is a Territory-based organisation which provides opportunities for people with disabilities to become active in the community through sport and recreation. Couples attend dance classes over a nine-week period, working towards their public performance at the ball, where they compete to become the Dancing with the Celebrities Grand Champion. It is as much about a chance to display their talents as it is about fundraising. Karen was runner-up on the night, and is rightly very proud of her achievements. We sincerely congratulate Karen.
It was interesting in the lead-up to this because, unfortunately, due to other long-standing commitments, I was unable to attend the ball or perform as one of the partners. However, I certainly was part of the journey, as was my electorate officer, Dee Davies. Almost on a daily basis we would chat with Karen and she would give us detailed up-to-date reports on what was happening with her dancing with her dance partner, and where she believed she ranked in the competition.
It was a fabulous event, and we have some wonderful photographs on show in the electorate office of Karen wearing her sash, with the magnificent trophy she received for her efforts on the night.
It is great to see organisations like Dancing with the Celebrities not only fundraise, but give people the opportunity to exhibit the talents they have, and we all have. My understanding was they raised a terrific amount of money, they had a great time, and Karen, of course, has the sash and the trophy to display to all.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, we congratulate Karen on a fabulous effort. I am sure she is not only proud of herself, but her family is very proud of her achievements.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I commemorate the life of Barbara Baggley from two perspectives: one as I, and others who are close to me knew her in a public sense; and also of her family. I will draw from a couple of sources.
First, Barbara was one of those incredible people who gave her all to the community by her support for many groups and organisations. There was not a fundraiser she was not collecting monies for, a committee she had not been on, a function she was not involved in either by organising or cooking, or a needy person she was not helping. I know, through getting out and about, that Barbara could be found at Alliance Francaise balls, Probus outings, the Historical Society meetings, Cancer Council fundraisings all over Darwin, U3A meetings, Labor Party functions, meetings and elections - she was a true party stalwart - but much more.
She was at the Darwin Entertainment Centre’s performances, a very great love of hers, and many sessions of both the Darwin Bridge Club and the Arafura Bridge Club. I am sure there are many other groups Barbara was involved in before and following her retirement from nursing. She had a long and distinguished career as a nurse here in the Northern Territory.
I am told that Barbara came from a very distinguished English legal family in the United Kingdom, and she learnt to play bridge at an early age. In later life, bridge gave Barbara a great deal of joy, and she last fronted the bridge table late last month despite a healing broken leg. During her many decades of bridge, Barbara was twice President of the Darwin Bridge Club, Secretary, and many times a committee member, ensuring the smooth running of the club to which she gave her all. She was also a great mentor to new players, and won the Northern Region Sponsored Pair with her partner, Val Fletcher, in 2010, which also gave her a lot of joy. Barbara also personally sponsored the hotly contested rubber bridge pairs by donating a trophy in her mother’s name to the Darwin Bridge Club.
I was aware of Barbara’s many bouts of illness, only through hearsay. She was absolutely stoic when it came to her health, and I was not aware of any complaints - she was very brave.
If there was a party, Barbara would be cooking up a storm. I believe she was a Cordon Bleu cook - no doubt an accomplishment she picked up during her years in France - and she was a very accomplished francophone. I have already mentioned her long association with Alliance Francaise. People in Alliance Francaise say how adept she was at speaking French; it came so naturally, so fluently to her. She produced many wonderful dishes, which she brought to my electorate Christmas party, and those dishes will be sorely missed. I will greatly miss her this year.
Barbara could always be counted upon to lend support to my colleagues and me in times of campaigning handing out how to votes; again, she gave so generously of her time and her efforts never flagged. When her daughter, Claudia, was at Moil Primary School, she would often pop into my office when it was at Moil, or simply help network; she was great at networking.
Barbara was very well respected in the wider Darwin community, and I acknowledge her.
I was also privileged to be at the ceremony commemorating Barbara’s life at Thorak Regional Cemetery. Many people from diverse areas of Darwin attended. In many ways, you would call it old Darwin, a range of people who had been in the Territory most of their lives, who had known Barbara and were there to pay their respects. I draw from parts of the eulogy delivered by her family.
She was born in London in 1923, and spent much of her childhood in Tring in the Hertfordshire countryside, where she also went to boarding school. She married at a relatively early age and went to Strasbourg, where the first of her three children, Mary-Lou, Beatrice and Renee, were born. Unfortunately, the marriage did not work out, and Barbara returned to England. Later she met Richard Baggley, and they were married in 1954, and Jenny, Sarah and Chris were born in London.
In 1965, they migrated to Australia, making a short stay in Adelaide before settling in Darwin in 1967. Darwin was somewhere Barbara really loved. The family said they were never bored; Barbara always had activities and games for them. She had a passion for the stage and drama and she dragged the kids along to the Darwin Amateur Musical Comedy Society where they had a lot of fun together at the theatre.
She was a strong feminist and her strong sense of social justice was really given force by her volunteering at Dawn House and Crisis Line, as well as campaigning for a crche at the hospital.
She had a profound and playful passion for words, and was a very eloquent person. Penguins was a organisation where she made many firm friends and exercised her impressive oratory skill. She was in U3A, where she made a massive contribution; and she was also involved with the Plain English Speaking Awards, coaching Miss NT entrants. She was always volunteering. She was always in committees, always involved in social activities. She started work at the old Darwin Hospital in 1967, and kept on working and forging many lifelong friendships. I have already mentioned her commitment and part in the Australian Labor Party.
I was very fond of Barbara. She could get a bit cranky at times, but I had a great deal of respect for her because usually she was right when she got cranky. That was all there was about it. There was no argument - and who was I to ever argue with Barbara about anything!
I have mentioned her associations with Alliance Francaise, and she also had involvement in the Portrait of a Senior Territorian Art Award, the Historical Society of the Northern Territory, and the Government House Foundation Board. I have mentioned her association with bridge, and the family put it this way: when she started playing bridge, she was hooked. She was a founding member and a life member of the Darwin Bridge Club.
Her health deteriorated over the last three years and, according to the family, she was frustrated in her limited ability to pursue her interests and engage in her community activities. A family member said: ‘Mum remained sharp and battled to maintain her physical independence’. That was Barbara to a T; she had a tenacious spirit, and she always wanted to recover her mobility. She was always organising things. Even to the last, she organised a Melbourne Cup lunch for patients at Darwin Private Hospital. The family really wish to thank all those people who gave support and comfort to their mother over the last months of her life - in particular, Nancy, David and Bob.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I pass my sincere condolences to Barbara’s family, and the myriad of her friends, far and wide. Rest in peace, Barbara Baggley.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Message No 30
Message No 30
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from the Administrator Message No 30 notifying assent to bills passed in the October 2011 sittings of the Assembly.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Member for Wanguri
Member for Wanguri
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have given leave for the Chief Minister to make a personal explanation. I remind you that personal explanations are not a debate and I ask you to listen to the Chief Minister in silence.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, today I clarify a statement I made in this House last week during the committee stages of the Kenbi Land Trust Bill.
In response to questions from the member for Fong Lim about the legislation, I said, on advice from departmental officials, the developer: ‘… is likely to be the Larrakia Development Corporation, but no final decision has been made’. I went on to point out it is a matter for the Northern Land Council to decide the identity of the developer after consultation with relevant traditional owners. Advice provided to me by departmental officials was the Larrakia Development Corporation was not named in the agreements. On that basis, I advised members accordingly.
Following the passage of the legislation, I was told the advice provided to me on that question was not correct. Although the agreements state the land will be granted to a body or corporation nominated by the NLC, the agreements name the Larrakia Development Corporation as the developer. As soon as I was made aware of this incorrect advice, I phoned the member for Fong Lim and told him. I also arranged for the member for Nelson and the Northern Land Council to be advised. I now take this opportunity to correct the public record.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The question the Chief Minister was responding to would have been central to a substantial line of questioning, as I understand it, from the member for Fong Lim. As a consequence, this is not merely a misspeak or an oversight; it potentially changes the opinions of members of this House.
As a consequence of that and whilst there is no question before the Chair, I move that so much of standing orders be set aside as would prevent this House from recalling the Kenbi Land Trust Bill 2011 (Serial 175) on the grounds of invalidity caused by misinformation, and that debate on the bill be recommenced at the committee stages of the bill.
The reason I move this motion …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! We would not be accepting such a motion. It is unprecedented in the time I have been in this House …
Mr Elferink: Well, passing law …
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: … and it is a vain attempt by the opposition to run a spoiling campaign against the Kenbi Land Trust Bill which passed this House …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: … and the government will not be accepting this motion.
Mr Elferink: It passed on misinformation.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! There is another matter, which is a technical one. Member for Port Darwin, you stood on a point of order which was not a point of order. You did not have the call and you were making a point of order.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Proposed Recommittal of Bill before the Assembly – Kenbi Land Trust Bill (Serial 175)
Proposed Recommittal of Bill before the Assembly – Kenbi Land Trust Bill (Serial 175)
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I seek the call now and will move the motion again.
Madam Speaker, I move - that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent this House from recalling the Kenbi Land Trust Bill 2011 (Serial 175) on the grounds of invalidity caused by misinformation, and that debate on the bill be recommenced at the committee stages of the bill.
The reason I move that motion today ...
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: He is moving a substantive motion ...
Mr HENDERSON: He needs to seek leave of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: No, he had the call on this occasion. Leader of Government Business or Chief Minister, is it the indication still that the government does not wish to accept the ...
Dr BURNS: We will not be supporting this motion, Madam Speaker ...
Mr Elferink: Have the debate and tell us why you are not supporting it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: Oh, arrogant!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! This is simply a motion about suspension of standing orders at this stage.
Mr ELFERINK: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The comments referred to by the Chief Minister - and I will remind honourable members what occurred here on Thursday. Mr Tollner, the member for Fong Lim said:
- Given the fact that the member for Daly did name the Larrakia Development Corporation, are they named in the principal agreement as a possible developer or the heads of agreement?
- No. The answer is no, they are not named in the documentation.
Madam Speaker, under normal circumstances I would not raise an issue, even if something like a simple error had occurred. However, this is not a simple error. This is an error that goes to the very heart of the issue under debate in the House last Thursday. In fact, it was not the only time this issue was dealt with in that debate because, earlier in the debate - and I remind honourable members of the Chief Minister’s statements:
- Let us put that on the record. There is no cash windfall; there is no secret deal with any group of traditional owners to get agreement.
- If my word on the Parliamentary Record is not good enough, I do not know what is.
It is clear that even the Chief Minister, at least during his comments in his final wrap up, was very sensitive to the issues surrounding this particular legislation. His answer to the member for Fong Lim’s question made it abundantly clear it was a serious component of this legislation. In fact, in relation to that specific answer, the passage of this legislation orbited around the very issue to which the information to this House was wrong.
It is not inconceivable - we have seen it in this House in the past - that members of this parliament have changed their mind as a result of what happens in debates. I am not arguing on a point of triviality, I am arguing on a point of centrality. A central component of the passage of this bill was based on that particular answer. If that answer had been otherwise, I am certain the member for Fong Lim would have spent a great deal more time on his feet prosecuting his argument, as well as trying to incorporate or investigate all the answers into the Parliamentary Record in relation to what the Chief Minister had to say on this matter.
An outright denial of an arrangement by the Chief Minister was not a mere oversight or a small technical problem; it changed the nature of the debate. The bill, as honourable members will recall, was to establish a trust instrument, but, once you start to pick winners in the fashion that a winner has been picked, it appears from the personal explanation of the Chief Minister today that the bill has not been legitimately passed by this House.
As a consequence, we argue this bill should be returned to this House and that the questions which would logically have followed from the arguments being run by the member for Fong Lim should be allowed to be asked and stand on the public record. It is not consistent with a democratic principle that where misinformation, whether it be deliberate or otherwise, comes before a parliament, the parliament then passes legislation based on the information the legislation should be legitimatised by simply saying: ‘No, it has passed through all the stages, you guys can get nicked’.
We on this side of the House do not accept that. The bill has not passed this House, in my opinion, because it was based on misinformation and, therefore, logically, the bill is invalid. As a consequence, we seek to have the bill returned to this House so members can hear all the appropriate information surrounding the circumstances of the passage of this bill, and members can then make up their mind structured around the correct information rather than incorrect information.
I reiterate: this is not a matter of just picking an issue on the periphery; this is at the heart of what the Kenbi Land Trust Bill is all about, and we have no other information to give us any indication it is otherwise.
One of the issues raised by the member for Fong Lim last Thursday was there was insufficient information for the bill to be sufficiently supported by this side of the House. Now it turns out not only was the information insufficient, it was also deficient. Any person standing on the outside of this parliament looking in at the moment could not but come to the conclusion a bill passed under misinformation is not a valid law of the Northern Territory.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, in speaking to this motion, this is nothing other than a stunt from the opposition. The opposition was very clear, in the second reading debate, it would not support the legislation because it had not been able to access a copy of the agreement. I explained, in regard to making that agreement available, all parties to the agreement had to agree to make that available. One, or a number of the parties, concluded until all the details were wrapped up in regard to the trust they were not going to make that agreement public, or would not approve the agreement being made public.
This issue of the LDC being named in the agreement was one small part of the overall debate being run by the opposition at the time. It would not support the agreement unless the agreement was made public. That was the stated position of the opposition. Regardless of whether the LDC is named in the agreement or not, the stated position in the second reading debate was the opposition would not support the agreement unless the agreement was made public and was open and transparent.
This is nothing other than a stunt today. As I said, I was acting on advice from officials. As soon as that advice changed I immediately rang the member for Fong Lim and apologised for the incorrect advice. I gave him the correct advice and the member for Fong Lim thanked me for contacting him so promptly and said it was not a major issue; he would not be making an issue of it. I advised the member for Fong Lim the first thing I would do on Tuesday morning, the first opportunity I had to correct the public record based on the wrong advice I was given in the box, was we would not make this an issue. We also contacted the member for Nelson and the Northern Land Council. This is nothing but a stunt today.
The fundamental reason the opposition stated it would not support passage of the bill was the agreement between the parties was not made public. This is an item of detail in that agreement and, as I said to the member for Fong Lim, given the way the second reading debate and the committee stage amendments were pursued, it is not about government having anything to hide. It is the first time I have been provided the wrong advice.
The fundamentals of this stunt are to recall the bill to parliament. I do not understand any procedure where that can happen anyway, but to recall parliament …
Mr Elferink: If you told the truth it would not be a problem.
Mr HENDERSON: … do the entire second reading debate and committee stage amendments again - where will we get to? The opposition still will not support it because the detail of the agreement is not public. So, regarding any possible changes to the legislation and whether it is valid or not - of course the legislation is valid.
The legislation is valid. There are no proposals to change the legislation. The legislation does not define what goes into the agreement between the parties. All it does is establish the vehicle, which is the trust. What is in the agreement has absolutely nothing to do with the legislation.
All the legislation does is create the vehicle - the trust to hold the land. All the issues of that trust - who the beneficiaries are, who is going to be on the board of the trust, what the details of the trust are - have nothing to do with the legislation - absolutely nothing to do with the legislation. That is an issue for the Northern Land Council and the traditional owners. The committee stage amendments we debated were, again, nothing to do with the detail of what is in the agreement. The committee stage amendments were all about ensuring this legislation was consistent in every detail with the operation of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act.
This is just a stunt today to drag out the opposition’s opposition to Kenbi, a land claim it has always opposed - spending millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money opposing it. Because the opposition does not like the fact Kenbi is going to be resolved to the beneficiaries - not only of the traditional owners, the Larrakia people, but also the broader population of Darwin and the Top End, showing respect for the traditional owners, providing certainty in the ability for traditional owners to develop land on the Cox Peninsula - it wants to drag this into further political conspiracies and slander today.
I was acting in good faith in the debate of that legislation. The opposition is, very clearly, on the record - regardless of whether the LDC was named in the agreement or not - because it has not able to see a copy of the agreement and have that made public, its stated position is it will not support the bill.
Even if we brought this back today, the opposition still would not support the legislation. It does not support Kenbi; it never has supported Kenbi.
The committee stage amendments had nothing to do with what was in the agreement; it was all in regard to ensuring the trust, the construct of that trust, and the language in the legislation was consistent with the Aboriginal Land Right (Northern Territory) Act. Therefore, we will not be supporting this procedural motion.
I again say to the opposition, if you have concerns in regard to the trust, how the trust operates, and who the beneficiaries are, you are as able to contact the Northern Land Council as I am, and take the issue up with them …
Mr Elferink: We passed a law on the information you gave to this House, which was wrong.
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, the law is valid; the debate in the House was valid. The legislation does not go to the detail of what is in the agreement between the parties. All the legislation does - the law we passed - is create the vehicle, which is the trust, to hold the land. This is nothing but a stunt from the opposition and we oppose the motion.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, before getting into all the reasons why I disagree with the Chief Minister, I first thank the Chief Minister for contacting me on Thursday night. I was, obviously, very concerned about the information I had received during the discussion in the committee stage of the bill. I understand, at first learning of his error - or the error in the advice he was given - he contacted me and clarified the situation. The Chief Minister will recall during that conversation I said it did put a different light on things because I had a significant number of questions regarding the commercial arrangements contained within the agreement that had been cooked up by Julia Gillard, the Chief Minister, the Northern Land Council, and the Larrakia Development Corporation.
In response to what the Chief Minister said about the opposition not supporting this bill; it is hardly the point whether we support it or not. The point is: do we want to be open and accountable? As the member for Port Darwin said, this parliament has just passed a bill not just with the absence of information - clearly over half the people in this House are uninformed about the nature of the agreements cooked up by the land council, the Northern Territory government, the federal Labor government, and the Larrakia Development Corporation - but the unintentional misleading of the parliament calls into question the whole nature of the agreement they have cooked up, and this legislation.
The Chief Minister’s own words were: ‘This is just to set up a trust’, but the whole reason for a trust being set up, I understand, is because of the agreement. The Commonwealth government, the Northern Territory government, the Northern Land Council, and the Larrakia Development Corporation, I would imagine, have all given undertakings of what each of them would do. Part of what the Northern Territory government says it will do in order to honour that agreement, or those agreements they have made, is set up this trust.
We want to know what is in those agreements. We always wanted to know that. As far as bringing this back, I have never heard of anything like this before; however, I have never heard of a Chief Minister, Premier, or Prime Minister anywhere in the country who accidently misled the House on such a crucial area. It is only fair, reasonable, and just; it is only being open and accountable to bring that legislation back into the parliament.
I want to know what the arrangement is with the Larrakia Development Corporation. What undertakings have been given to the Larrakia Development Corporation in relation to the 200 km of Territory freehold land? We are not talking about a housing block at the back of Palmerston or a small suburban development; we are talking about 200 km of Territory freehold land across the harbour from the Northern Territory’s capital city, and not an insignificant block of land. We are led to understand there is a preferred developer in the wings and that preferred developer is the Larrakia Development Corporation, a wholly-owned entity of the Northern Land Council. There are other groups set up. I am aware there is also a Kenbi Development Corporation which seems to be excluded from this arrangement. Why have they been excluded? I am led to understand the Kenbi Development Corporation is for the benefit of the Tommy Lyons group, the people who were named by the Land Commissioner as being the traditional owners of that land. Why have they been excluded? I do not have any of these answers and I am very keen to ask these questions.
A range of questions have to be asked in relation to this. I remember, when we were debating these things - you talk about things out there and what people have said - my friend, the member for Nelson, waxed lyrical about how some Indigenous people are excluded from agreements and others seem to do very well. I do not think he was pointing a finger at anyone in particular, but he raised the question as to whether certain people were being looked after at the expense of others.
I have the same concerns now in a much greater way, finding out that at the heart of this agreement is a preferred developer, being the Larrakia Development Corporation. I want some more detail on that, and am sure other members in this Chamber would like some more detail on it.
I find it absolutely bizarre that we are dragged into this House to pass legislation to create a land trust, but are excluded from the information on why this needs to be created. The whole thing has been shrouded in secrecy. I find it completely bizarre you have an elected Australian government in cahoots with an elected Northern Territory government, in cahoots with a statutory Commonwealth organisation, which are somehow cooking up deals the public is not allowed to see or understand. I find that extraordinarily strange.
There are many questions in relation to this bill. It is only fair this Territory Legislative Assembly is given the opportunity to resume questioning on it because it is completely wrong that the cover-up surrounding these agreements is allowed to continue in this Chamber where we cannot get information on legislation we passed under false pretences. That is completely wrong. The Chief Minister and the Leader of Government Business said: ‘This has never happened before’. I know it has never happened. I cannot think of a single instance where it has happened. This is an extraordinary circumstance, and under such an extraordinary circumstance we should come back into this House and re-debate it. Goodness me, it is not like we have any urgency on this bill or this legislation.
The federal parliament has finished for Christmas. It has not passed any legislation at all in relation to the Kenbi Land Claim. There are months and months and months to go. There is absolutely no urgency on this. The government is at a loss of what to do this week. It is putting out a bunch of useless statements when we could be discussing the real meat of this issue and finding out exactly what it is Julia Gillard, Paul Henderson and the NLC have cooked up. At the end of the day, that is what this is all about.
Territorians, Australians, have the right to know what their governments are doing on their behalf. That information should come out in this House. This is where we discuss and debate these things and whether or not the legislation passes is immaterial. What is important is things are open and accountable and people argue their position in an open way, laying all the cards on the table. That is what is important. That is the heart of democracy, Madam Speaker. The information that has come to light about the Larrakia Development Corporation is at the heart of all these agreements, and at the heart of why this legislation was passed on Thursday. It is only right the legislation is brought back for more discussion.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, what a good start for the week. I looked at this bill over a long period of time. In fact, it was deferred because I asked for it to be deferred, having read the letter given to me by the member for Port Darwin, which was a copy of a letter from Raylene Singh to the Leader of the Opposition in relation to deferment. The matter was deferred.
In that time of deferment, I took it on myself to visit Zoe, one of the traditional owners; Jason, who I rang because I did not have time to go to Port Keats; and Kathleen, who lives in Darwin. They all supported this bill. They are three of the traditional owners. In the meantime, I received confirmation from the Northern Land Council that Raylene Singh had attended many meetings in relation to this. They said they would be happy to defer it as well to ensure she understood what stage this bill was at and, as far as I know, they did that. Regardless, three out of the four traditional owners said they supported this bill.
We can wax lyrical, but I have issues about some of the land claim. The reality is the land has been decided by the Land Commissioner. He has decided that the Tommy Lyons’ group would be the owners of this land and said things about the other people who have attachment to the land, and I will not go into that. He also said on page xx, recommendation 48, that there should be a land trust set up, which is what this bill is about.
This bill is about a section of land which, I understand, is not part of the Larrakia Development Corporation land. It is a section, as the second reading said - I will read from the second reading because it is important we go back to the basis of this bill:
- This bill facilitates the grant of a third category of land to a newly-established land trust, the Kenbi Land Trust. It enables land in the north west of the Cox Peninsula to be held by the Kenbi Land Trust without extinguishment of native title until such time as the land is required for development.
That is the map I was given which does not show the land the Larrakia Development Corporation has which is supposed to be part of some agreement. My belief is the heads of agreement issue, whilst it might be important and I am not trying to deride it, has nothing to do with the passing of this bill. It is very clear this bill is about a certain parcel of land that will not be developed for the time being. That is why this has been taken out and why this land is not to be developed. This sets up a land trust so that some time in the future an agreement will be made with the members of the trust appointed by the Northern Land Council. That is the way I see it.
I listened to the member for Fong Lim. I know there is another group pushing for a development corporation. Raylene Singh mentioned she is not happy with the Larrakia Development Corporation, and mentioned at the meeting with me that she is involved in a Kenbi development corporation. If there are various groups out there wanting to develop that other parcel - not the parcel of land we are talking about - let us debate that somewhere else, let them debate that somewhere else. Let them debate that with the Northern Land Council.
The member for Fong Lim thinks the heads of agreement is important. From my point of view, it does not affect this particular bill. This is a technical bill and that is how I have looked at it. I have looked at it over a long period of time, discussed it with many people, and that is the way I see it in the Land Commissioner’s report.
If we want to develop that, there is nothing in this parliament to stop an MPI coming forward; there is nothing to stop a censure motion coming forward to debate this. It does not exclude debate in this parliament about that agreement. The Chief Minister said these things happen, but it makes no difference to me because I never raised this heads of agreement as a matter which would have changed my mind. I have not looked at it from that point of view.
I have looked at it as a technical bill that sets up a land trust that, when you read the bill - and the bill is clear; under the establishment it says:
- The Kenbi Land Trust is established to hold title to the prescribed land …
… vested in it under this act for the benefit of Aboriginals entitled by Aboriginal tradition to the use or occupation of the prescribed land, whether or not the traditional entitlement is qualified as to place, time, circumstance, purpose or permission.
That is what this is about - that land trust. The trust will …
Mr TOLLNER : A point of order, Madam Speaker! Relevance. This motion is not about whether this bill will be passed or not. This motion is about information which should have been provided in relation to the committee stage of the bill which was not provided. We are not debating whether the motion is going to be supported or not, or the bill is going to be supported or not …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr TOLLNER: We want it to be recalled to the committee stage so we can ask questions. It is as simple as that. It is not to roll the bill or change it.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The matter before us is merely the suspension of standing orders, member for Nelson, so if you could just keep to the technical aspects of that, please.
Mr WOOD: Yes, I understand that, Madam Speaker. To argue my case as to why it would make no difference I had to explain this technical bill, from my perspective, is not beholden on whether people know what is in the heads of the agreement or not. If people want to discuss that, they can debate it at another time. I would be happy to hear that debate - and I heard a fair bit of that debate. Notwithstanding there was an error, it still would not have made any difference because I did not deal with that. That was not the basis on which I agreed with this particular bill.
My main agreement with this bill is based on three traditional landowners I spoke to. Surely, in the end, we believe Aboriginal people should have the right to have a say about their land. It has been shown to me that, of the three traditional owners, the one who had doubts at the beginning has been spoken to sufficiently about this issue. If they say they support this bill, I would have to have some pretty strong reasons to oppose them. I did not get those strong reasons to oppose them.
The standing orders are really saying bring this bill back because a certain part of this bill was not negotiated, the …
Mr Tollner: It was not discussed.
Mr WOOD: Hang on … the conclusion from that is this debate would make any difference. From my perspective …
Mr Tollner: It will put it on the public record.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Fong Lim!
Mr WOOD: From my perspective, it will not. Just taking up the interjection, the member said for the public record. Bring on an MPI on the heads of agreement; that will put it on the public record ...
Mr Tollner: You cannot have ...
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Fong Lim!
Mr WOOD: Madam Speaker, to put it in simple terms, this bill is a technical bill which I supported for that reason; having spoken to traditional owners about it, looked at the bill carefully, and listened to other people’s point of view. In fact, generally speaking, except for the letter from Raylene Singh, the issue being discussed at the moment was not raised. That was not one of the main concerns. There were other concerns and there will always be other concerns about this particular …
Mr Tollner interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, cease interjecting.
Mr WOOD: That is what people raised with me. You misunderstand. There will always be difficulties and people will not always agree, even now, about this particular land claim. It has been a difficult land claim and, as I said, from my wife’s point of view she has issues too. The commissioner made a decision and recommended a land trust. The bill is about setting up that land trust, and that is why I supported it and why I will not support this motion before us.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, both sides have enunciated their positions very clearly in this debate. I move that the motion be put.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 13 Noes 12
Mrs Aagaard Ms Anderson
- Dr Burns Mr Bohlin
Mr Gunner Mr Chandler
Mr Hampton Mr Conlan
Mr Henderson Mr Elferink
Mr Knight Mr Giles
Ms Lawrie Mrs Lambley
Mr McCarthy Mr Mills
Ms McCarthy Ms Purick
Ms Scrymgour Mr Styles
Mr Vatskalis Mr Tollner
Ms Walker Mr Westra van Holthe
Mr Wood
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: The question now is that the motion to suspend standing orders be agreed to.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 12 Noes 13
Ms Anderson Mrs Aagaard
Mr Bohlin Dr Burns
Mr Chandler Mr Gunner
Mr Conlan Mr Hampton
Mr Elferink Mr Henderson
Mr Giles Mr Knight
Mrs Lambley Ms Lawrie
Mr Mills Mr McCarthy
Ms Purick Ms McCarthy
Mr Styles Ms Scrymgour
Mr Tollner Mr Vatskalis
Mr Westra van Holthe Ms Walker
Mr Wood
Motion negatived.
HOUSING AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 177)
(Serial 177)
Continued from 26 October 2011.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, this Housing and Other Legislation Amendment Bill has, as described by government in its publicity, the purpose of improving safety in public housing. On the face of it, I am sure those who are in public housing or live around public housing want to see that improved. They want to see levels of safety improved, particularly those in some of our hot spots. However, the question for the opposition is: does this amendment provide for that? Does it achieve that? Does it live up to the expectations established in the community by the language describing this by government? It is the view of the opposition that it does not.
The primary purpose of this is to establish a legislative framework to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of public housing safety officers. The question is: how does this contribute to the public housing safety strategy when we recognised, in the first incarnation, we had enhanced powers for these public housing safety officers? It may have as a part of a strategy with the powers as described when this was originally introduced. We had concerns at that point for this reason, because we have a police force with those prescribed powers. To have another version, or the establishment of similar rights and responsibilities to public housing safety officers, concerned the opposition. The police were concerned, and expressed those concerns, and the government backed down. As a result, these security officers have no real powers of enforcement and can only call the police in the instance of a serious disturbance or other incident.
Is this an improvement on the existing situation? Perhaps, but remember the opposition has to consider whether it does, and how it contributes to a public housing safety strategy. The question is: how is this different from the private security officers that are currently employed? What is the difference? They can also call the police in the instance of a serious disturbance or other incident. This legislation did not serve a purpose in its original draft format released in May, where proposed public housing safety officers would have been issued with real powers of arrest and detention.
For the opposition, and those of us with high levels of public housing in our electorates, we are concerned. Obviously, government is responding, and the minister has taken an active interest in areas around public housing. To provide enhanced powers may have been arguably an appropriate response; however, the opposition still held the view police are the appropriate agency to deal with law and order issues wherever they occur, public housing or not.
What we now have is, basically, a situation where those powers which were once described no longer exist, and we have, effectively, the role carried out by private security now transferred to public housing officers with the same powers.
I understand there are no additional costs around this other than it is a displacement one for the other. For what effect? It does not serve the purpose which was described in the original draft, and we opposed it at that time for obvious reasons.
The real issue here is policy. This, as I am sure the minister recognises, can be achieved without any substantive changes in legislation. This does not need to come before the parliament. This is about a government getting on with the job it was elected to do. Legislation is not required to establish a coordinated strategy towards addressing antisocial behaviour. We do not need legislation to achieve that.
As a local member in an electorate with high public housing numbers, our activity in this space has created, from time to time, greater levels of coordination. With a good minister ensuring that happens on a regular basis, you do not need legislation to achieve that level of coordination; it just required the leadership and actions of government around good policy.
Legislation is not required for the implementation of a three strikes policy to categorise the nature and severity of antisocial behaviour incidents involving public housing tenants; we do not need legislation, we need to effectively use the law that already exists.
Legislation is not required for the development of a memorandum of understanding between the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services and NT Police to further develop and enhance existing working relationships with the aim of implementing joint approaches to addressing the problems with antisocial and criminal behaviour in Territory Housing properties. We do not need legislation. With appropriate leadership and the willingness of the good officers involved, these things occur. We have, effectively, an expectation raised - strong rhetoric. I am sure there will be some publicity around this, but citizens should know there is, effectively, no real change. That change could occur by implementing the laws that already exist and driving policy changes and directions rather than creating the impression that changes have occurred by a law in the parliament. There are plenty of existing laws which could be utilised to achieve the objective.
The fact is, this is a watered down bill the government is pushing on with to avoid embarrassment as a result of the dressing down it received from the Police Association and every submission it received in response to the initial exposure draft bill. My advice for the minister, and the government, is to let go of this bill and get on with implementing meaningful policy changes to address the real and rising issue of antisocial behaviour in public housing. Our community expects and deserves serious policy work in the area of public housing. I foreshadow this will be an area of considerable discussion - of particular interest of mine - in the new year.
Madam Speaker, this legislation does not live up to the expectations as described in the community. The government, and the minister, can utilise existing laws and ensure we have appropriate policies to achieve what is easily achieved with leadership; we do not need legislation to create this. Consequently, we will not support this bill.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I support the bill and am disappointed to hear the opposition is not supporting it.
The Leader of the Opposition must have heard a different second reading speech to me on a different bill. There are powers in this bill to allow officers to do things like seize alcohol. I will get to that later. The minister will definitely go to that. I agree with some of the things the Leader of the Opposition said - constantly finding ways to better manage our Territory housing properties, to manage our tenants, and to manage visitors to those tenancies. Our minister is constantly seeking to do that, and has done an excellent job since taking on the portfolio and getting into issues around management.
This is a step, though, that provides extra safety and extra powers. It is a step we have to take. You do not put all your eggs in one basket so, while the minister is working on improving management of Territory Housing properties, he is also bringing to this House a bill that provides extra powers for public housing safety officers. That is a good decision. I support a bill that will provide powers to officers which makes public housing safer for tenants, neighbours, and local businesses. I speak as a member of this House who grew up in Territory Housing properties - was ‘grown up’ to use Territory terms. It is not uncommon in Alice and Tennant to live in public housing. I understand the need for public housing and know other members have had similar experiences in growing up in public housing. One of the best speeches I heard in this Chamber this term was from the member for Stuart about his personal experiences with Territory Housing.
Madam Speaker, we have a responsibility to provide public housing. We have a responsibility to provide people who live in public housing a quality of housing that includes safety. Tenants, in turn, have a responsibility to respect that housing and their neighbours. Public housing is provided by the taxpayer and they have an expectation their dollar and their investment is respected and maintained. We believe that providing a safety net - in this case putting a public roof over someone’s head; a worker, a family or a senior Territorian - is something governments must and should do.
There are times when people are priced out of the private market of buying or renting. It can be personal circumstances; it can be the market not existing to serve them. We have seen that emerge in the Territory. Public housing was initially provided for workers and social needs and, over time, the market catered for workers and Territory Housing became more targeted to social demands. That has started to change again nationally, as well as locally, and we have seen a need for affordable housing rental companies to provide options for low-income workers.
An Affordable Housing Rental Company is being established in the Territory, and some of its first stock will be in Parap at the old Wirrina site. That development is also about finding a better way to provide Territory Housing - provide housing that is better for tenants, neighbours, and local businesses. It is a new model for the Territory and I believe it is a good model. It takes time, though, to find new homes for tenants, to go to tender, form private partnerships, go through the Development Consent Authority and, finally, build. It is a good model but not the only solution.
We need to manage Territory Housing better - which is what the Leader of the Opposition was saying – tenants, our property, and the people who visit our complexes, villages, and homes. Territory Housing managers can have a difficult time managing difficult tenants. Tenants can have a difficult time managing difficult guests. We know, in the vast majority of cases, issues in and around public housing are caused by visitors. These are not circumstances where police are necessary, but we have also found security guards do not have the powers to deal with problem guests or tenants.
We have a need for someone trained to deal with conflict situations who can handle drunk people and, importantly - something that has become clear as part of our suicide youth committee work in the recent months - someone who will be able to recognise someone with mental health issues. That goes to training. Public housing safety officers will have strong working relationships with Territory Housing property management, and police, and will be better equipped to deal with problem tenants and hot spots prone to antisocial behaviour issues. These are people with a high level of skills dedicated to dealing with antisocial behaviour on public housing property.
Police need to be able to respond quickly to a variety of situations across the Territory. That is why we have gone down the path of public housing safety officers. This bill creates powers for these officers. We will support those officers with significant and continual training. One of the important things they must know is when to call police. That is important as there are, and will always be, times police are needed. Police will always play an essential role in public safety. Only the police should have certain powers. Police go through significant training and testing. These officers do not replace police; these officers fill a need between what a security officer can provide and what police provide. Police and the public housing safety officers will work closely together, and there will be a memorandum of understanding between them.
Public housing safety officers do not have the power to arrest, detain, or frisk. They will have powers in certain circumstances to access and enter property, to seize dangerous items and alcohol, to instruct people to leave, and to ban people for up to 12 months. They have other powers in this bill to do more, which the minister spoke of in the second reading speech, and he may touch upon again in his response.
Importantly, they will also be able to act as witnesses. I am sure other members have had similar experiences where a tenant is scared of their visitor, or feels an obligation to their visitors. They need someone else to help them. They will sneak next door to call police and ask to remain anonymous, they will talk to Territory Housing or their tenancy officer, or they will talk to their local member. They need a hand, and our public housing safety officers will give them that hand. We have confidence our public housing safety officers will work, will make a difference, because we have done something similar with our transit security officers.
We recognise people do not always feel safe on public transport and people should feel safe. They should be able to catch a public bus and feel safe. We recognise that need and recognise we are addressing the same problems with public housing.
Police have a job to do which involves them doing many things in many different places. There are times when you need someone on hand, dedicated and trained to act in circumstances that do not quite require a police officer, or are not as critical to address as something the police are doing at the same time. That is why we have transit security officers. The Transit Safety Unit was a 2006 election commitment from this government and has grown from four officers to the current group of 11. They work across the Darwin and Palmerston bus network to provide a highly-visual deterrent to antisocial behaviour, patrolling buses along routes and at interchanges. They have built up a professional working relationship with the police, First Response, and Night Patrol. Police and Transit Officers in particular, work closely together and monitor the CCTV network both on buses and at interchanges. They are highly mobile, often the first to arrive at the scene of a disturbance, and provide support prior to the arrival of police and ambulances, if police and ambulance services are required.
The expansion of the unit to 11 has allowed the officers to be more active. They provide an important role in talking to and assisting the travelling public, raising awareness of the required passenger behaviour standards, as well as dealing with incidents. Between 2009-10 and 2010-11, the number of calls for assistance increased by more than 30% and, over the same period, the number of serious incidents declined by more than 40%, which is an excellent indication that this service is recognised and used. As a result of it being recognised and used, the need for it has also slumped.
This bill puts in sensible provisions that will provide a safer environment for our tenants to live in, for our neighbours, and for local businesses. I believe that because we have seen it work with transit security officers. We know the circumstances that need to be managed around our Territory Housing tenancies. We are taking steps through ongoing management of those tenancies, of those complexes, the villages, and the homes, and how people work in them, and we are also looking at creating officers with powers - and this bill gives them powers - to act in circumstances where police are not needed and where security officers were not able to fill that need.
This is a critical bill for filling an identified need to make public housing safer. Public housing should be safe not only for tenants - the majority of tenants are great people - but also for neighbours and local businesses in the area. All members have public housing in their electorates and understand the circumstances that exist and the needs this bill is filling.
Madam Speaker, it is an excellent bill and I commend it to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I agree, to some extent, with the member for Blain: the bill we have before us is a watered-down version of what was originally put forward. I understand most of that was to do with the powers in the draft legislation to search another person or enter a property, something the Police Association and a number of legal groups did not support. It would be fair to say the legislation is not as strong as government intended, but it has listened to concerns of different groups which felt those powers were excessive for what the government was trying to achieve.
Regarding the issue of whether public housing officers should be a special branch of police, we already have school-based constables, and fisheries officers, and we now pay for the cost of transport inspectors. We are going to have, I believe, 20 housing safety officers, 15 in Darwin and five in Alice Springs. I wonder if any consideration has been given by the government to look at bringing this under the umbrella of the police. There may be some difficulties doing that, but whichever department they are in, they are all paid by the government.
If we have transport inspectors they have motor cars and have to be paid; all the usual things that come with working for the government. If those jobs which have been created by government were created within the bounds of the police force, then you would have safety officers with the ability to do what the government wanted in the first place.
I wonder whether the government has looked at that as an option. One of the downsides is, being police officers, they could be called away at any time. That is where discussions with the Police Commissioner, through perhaps an MOU - these officers were trained for specific purposes. You have detectives who do specific work; the fingerprint section which does specific work. You do not see them on motorcycles checking the speed limit of people. There are specific sections within the police force. I wonder if the government wanted to - as stated in the second reading speech - improve the department’s operational effectiveness within a framework that provides an enhanced response to antisocial behaviour associated with public housing dwellings and complexes and contributes to safety across the Territory.
If there had been another way to do this, the government would have had a better chance of achieving what it wants. Be that as it may, this bill does not do that. It basically sets up a separate group of public servants with a specific job, paid for by the government, with vehicles, and with certain powers. They do not have the power to enter a premise to remove someone, which is going to make it hard. If there is antisocial behaviour within a house, they have to call the police. That is my argument. If they were part of the police that then gets around the disagreement with the Police Association, because they would be police in a special area of policing and be more effective in overcoming antisocial behaviour. Technically, you could do something about someone on the back lawn but nothing about someone inside the house. That weakness needs to be looked at.
I am interested to know if the government has considered housing safety officers within these complexes so action can be taken swiftly. You have 15 people on the list for Darwin. I am not sure how many Territory Housing houses and complexes there are in Darwin, but I imagine not all 15 people would be on standby at the one time. I wonder whether there needs to be more control in some of these complexes where there is a high level of management and surveillance happening.
I was talking to Vicki O’Halloran from Somerville Community Services this morning, who deals with people in housing. This was about another issue I will raise at another time. This was about having control over areas with fairly strict protocols so you can reduce the risks of antisocial behaviour developing. People get to know there is someone in the community managing it all the time – 24 hours a day. If you go to a caravan park you know there will be someone living on-site all the time. In some of the flats around Darwin there will be a caretaker or a manager. I wonder if a safety officer might be better stationed within these complexes so they can react quickly and people know there is someone all the time so they are not waiting for people to get in their car and disappear. Someone told me today that one of the tricks used to be to get all the beer and alcohol and bury it in the garden somewhere. The police come and pour out a couple of cans and then leave. They go to the garden, pull it out of the dirt and you are back to where you were in the first place. I put that as an area where there might be a better outcome.
NT Housing has many houses outside Alice Springs and Darwin. I am interested to know what is going to happen in remote communities. The biggest problem for the government will be the maintenance of houses constructed under SIHIP. It is one thing to build a house; it is another thing to maintain it for 30 or 40 years. This document does not mention whether safety officers will be stationed in communities. I heard at the briefing a senior person from Housing will be stationed at Wadeye; however, it is not a safety officer. I would have thought there was an opportunity to locally recruit people who could be safety officers. There is no use talking about antisocial behaviour in Darwin and Alice Springs if we have the same problem in communities where, for instance, at Port Keats 95 houses are being built. That is a big community that needs to be strictly maintained and managed so those houses last for the next 30 to 40 years. It would be good to find out from the minister why they are not looking for officers there.
We have police officers in the form of ACPOs with certain powers. Perhaps you could have ACPOs with some housing powers as well. Part of the philosophy I am looking at is to give people the powers to be more whole-of-government type people, not limited because they are not police officers. If you give them that power and they are given specific reasons to exist, there may be opportunities into the future to look at that. It does not matter if you put an officer into Wadeye or a safety officer, the government will still pay for that position. The only cost above that, if they were part of the police force, is training. You are still paying a wage and still have to provide accommodation and a vehicle. If you look at the bigger picture, there would not be a huge difference in cost but there might be a better outcome. That person would have the ability to do what this bill is attempting to achieve: to reduce antisocial behaviour and make it safer for people who want to live peacefully in their houses. That is one of the key things we need to look at.
There are many good people in Territory Housing homes whose lives are ruined by people who could not care two hoots. That is unfortunate because Territory Housing, when I came to the Territory, had a good name. Even now, not all Territory Housing properties have a bad name. Kurringal Flats was where public servants stayed when they first came to Darwin before they found a house. I used to stay there occasionally with people I knew. It was regarded as the upmarket section of Territory Housing at that stage. Now, sections have been pulled down because the government thought it was a home for antisocial behaviour. It got a bad name and, unfortunately, headed off into a different direction.
When I look at this legislation overall, the government needs some statistics to see whether this has made any difference. The member for Blain was saying because this legislation is much weaker, he does not believe it is worth passing, more or less, because it is not going to be very effective.
I am happy to support the bill but, at the same time, the government has to say, after six or 12 months, the number of complaints from residents in Territory Housing estates has reduced by a certain amount. There has to be some tangible proof this legislation has had some effect, otherwise you may as well dissolve it. There needs to be some way of measuring whether this legislation has been effective.
I am also interested to know if there will be safety officers in Katherine and Tennant Creek. I have heard the member for Katherine talk about some of the problems in public housing in Katherine. I imagine in Tennant Creek they would be no different than the rest of the Territory. Whilst I have said I will support the legislation, the government should rethink the way it looks at these issues because, theoretically, you can hire a security company to do this work and it would probably have as much power as one of these officers. If I am wrong, minister, you can tell me.
It would be good to look at the alternative. It may require some ongoing discussions with the Police Commissioner, the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services, and the Police Association. There is an opening to give these people more power, to bring them under the police and ensure their main job is to do what the government is trying to do, and that is have people operating within the public housing sector to make it much safer for people who require public housing, generally speaking, because they cannot afford to get into the private market. We need to ensure those people are protected; the government has a duty of care. It allows these housing developments to be used by people who, in many cases, are in the lower- to middle-income sphere. They still should be given protection from visitors who are unruly or bludging off the community, or just becoming a menace and causing vandalism or, in general, upsetting the people who live there. The government has a duty to try to fix that.
I am not getting too excited because I want to see the proof of the pudding in 12 month’s time; to see if this legislation is more than words and makes a difference. It would also be good to see how police react to the safety officers. My understanding is where there is violence or a requirement to remove someone from a house they will have to ring the police. I understand there is mention in some of the notes that that has been discussed with police. How quickly will the police turn up when there is an incident in a house? The whole idea of having safety officers was so they could react quickly. However, if they are now limited because they cannot enter a house where there is a fight - they have to ring the police - will that not achieve what it was trying to in the first place?
Madam Speaker, I am interested to hear the minister’s response. I understand they are trying to do something worthwhile. It is a case - and this is what the member for Blain was saying - of whether this type of legislation will really be effective. From my point of view, only time will tell.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I wish to briefly speak on the situation of public housing. In my electorate, public housing takes up 50% of my workload …
Dr Burns: How much? Sixty?
Mr GILES: It may be 60%, minister; it could be. It is a challenge, as a local member, to continually deal with derelict properties, public drunkenness, antisocial behaviour, and the crime spree that comes from that. The government has made efforts in several different areas, but has been unsuccessful to date, across a wide range of measures and areas.
I particularly speak about my electorate of Braitling in Alice Springs, an area where the Labor government does not take a great deal of responsibility and has taken its eye off the ball. I have a good working relationship with the minister, but, clearly, there is a disconnect somewhere.
I used to work in tenancy management in the private sector. I have also worked in public housing management, and have a fair understanding of the public and private housing sectors. It is the job of a member of parliament to be out there, know as many people as you can, know your area, know your houses, know your constituents, and the issues that are around. It is also the job of someone who works in Territory Housing, or a public housing role, to be well aware of all the issues in their complexes and to take on the role of a solution broker to try to resolve issues.
I can barely think of any complexes in my electorate that do not have antisocial behaviour issues. I stand in this Chamber on a regular basis ranting and raving about the concerns, seeking the minister to provide a response. I converse on a regular basis about various issues and I ask the minister to get back to me.
The issues are a level of under-resourcing of the Territory Housing office in Alice Springs, particularly around staffing, and also the antisocial behaviour elements and how they are addressed. Another area is the budget for repairs and maintenance to ensure Territory Housing assets, government assets, are adequately maintained. I have brought a couple of illustrations here today - the minister likes me bringing photographs into this Chamber so he can see the concerns I raise. They may seem trivial, but to represent the constituents in my electorate, I will present these illustrations.
I recently had several concerns about Wauchope flats on Dixon Road in Braitling. Wauchope flats used to be known as a good pensioner complex, now it is a haven for antisocial behaviour, public drunkenness and 15 to 20 people living in a two-bedroom unit complex. The antisocial behaviour from that complex spreads to the Erumba Street flats, the Head Street flats, Elliot Street flats and up to Northside shops and Hoppy’s Camp. It is just a cycle - almost a circle - of antisocial behaviour that spreads itself. All those people who live in between - the neighbours and the community - are all victims of the antisocial behaviour that emanates from those complexes. I have just read a transcript of an interview by the Treasurer on Julia Christensen’s show this morning where she spoke about drinking in public housing complexes.
My experience has been it does not matter if there is a sign on the front of a house, people will still get drunk and still cause trouble. Not in all circumstances, but in the majority. You have to question the relevance of the sign in the front of a house if people are still inside drinking and, if it is a case that the tenant wants the sign, it is the visitors causing the problems. What empowerment is Territory Housing giving to that tenant to kick people out?
It is like the recent issue of a violent situation just off Clarke Street in my electorate, which the minister well knows about. A family member not on the lease was present in this house and ended up attacking a neighbour’s house and property in a violent situation. I pleaded with the minister to take action and he did; his CEO was very good. Ken Davies did a fantastic job in trying to resolve the problem, but the fact remains that those tenants still live there and the problems are ongoing.
If you cannot resolve those issues and you have a whole neighbourhood being subjected to crime and antisocial behaviour - houses being broken into in the street because of that tenancy in that public housing house, houses being ransacked - that is what is happening in the broader community and it is a great problem.
I have an illustration of a – which does not seem much but is what brings about ghettos in public housing – derelict car sitting in the Wauchope flats. I have two illustrations. It has flat tyres, smashed windows, all those things, sitting at Wauchope Street flats. When I was in the job - I do not want to reflect on the way I operated, but I expect Territory Housing officers, if resourced properly with appropriate staff and tools to do the job, should be visiting these complexes and saying: ‘Well, here is a derelict car, let us get rid of it’, at the drop of a hat. You cannot create ghettos.
I have another illustration of a car sitting at the front of Lander Court; another derelict car making a street look bad. Lander Court, which runs off Saltwell Crescent, is an area known for low socioeconomic populations and a high element of public housing. You have old bomb cars sitting out in the street waiting to be repaired - they may still be an asset for those tenants, but we have to ensure we do not denigrate the community. There are potholes full of water in unit complex car parks. It is hard when you see an asset, because these are Territory Housing assets, whether it is the asphalt or the bitumen within the complex, or the buildings falling down and so forth, these things need to be fixed. I try to drive around every street in my electorate at least once a week to see what is happening. I am a visual person and I like to see it all. Here we have 32 Engoordina Drive sitting vacant for months on end. I have written to the minister about it. I believe that might have been the one where he wrote back saying it is not vacant. Well, I can tell you, minister, there is nothing inside that house. You have to start wondering exactly what is happening.
Here is an illustration of a private house - a group of residents were transferring between Head Street pensioner flats and Arunga Street, and the fence was kicked in. People got drunk at one complex and went to the next complex and caused trouble. The poor resident who owns the house, who has a mortgage and is paying it off, rang me upset: ‘Adam, what do I do about the crime that is coming from these public housing units?’ I like to provide people with an answer about how we can fix things and how we ensure these things do not occur again. The fact is the government has lost control of antisocial behaviour, crime and public nuisance in many of its public housing complexes that are now moving from a positive asset owned by the Northern Territory government to be somewhat of a ghetto.
These ghettos are manufacturing antisocial behaviour across a large part of the Braitling electorate, almost turning parts of Braitling into what can only be described as a community. Alice Springs is not a community in the sense of a bush community. We need to address concerns in bush communities to rectify their standards of living and their social concerns; however, in doing that, we do not have to bring the urban lifestyle of the electorate of Braitling down to those standards. We should be trying to lift everyone up, not bring everyone down, which is what you are doing. That is a great concern.
Moving to another area I occasionally speak about, SIHIP. Under the national partnership agreement there has been an enormous amount of money put aside for tenancy management services and tenancy management officers, and the government talks about employing people in the bush and in these communities. I have visited copious numbers of what I would call ex-SIHIP houses, ones that have been built or refurbished, reoccupied, and have now deteriorated to a point where they are worse than before SIHIP walked in. You have to ask: where is the $40m a year that is going into the Northern Territory government through Territory Housing to ensure appropriate tenancy management practices are put in place?
First, we saw officers from the urban centres sign people up to a lease to ensure they were paying rent and so forth, but we have not seen anything by way of appropriate tenancy management services to ensure these houses are not deteriorating and that the tenancies are not deteriorating. The fact remains in most cases they have. I have been through some horrendous houses that have had horrendous amounts of money spent on them that look like they have never had any work done.
That is a great shame for a project originally designed to protect children. It was put into a poorly administered program by the Northern Territory government and it seems we are now going back to the federal government asking for more money for a whole new SIHIP program, on top of what is already coming, because the housing stock with work done to date has already deteriorated to a deplorable level.
I have real concerns about the level of staffing and resources in the Territory Housing Alice Springs office, the level of repairs and maintenance budgets, and the cuts made. The follow-on from that is the ability for those officers and the good staff of Territory Housing to service both Territory Housing tenancies - those on the wait list and the communities which surround and are victims of antisocial behaviour.
On a final note, I would like the government to come forward with a greater socioeconomic plan for public housing tenancies; something that works around public tenancies into employment, and public tenancies into home ownership. In my previous occupation in New South Wales, some very good work was done in getting public housing tenants into employment, and there were partnerships across agencies to drive some really good initiatives which, while they were not all silver bullets, made some positive changes. I would also like to see the government work more towards selling public housing to good public housing tenants. I will not name any particular family, minister, but I know of quite a number of cases across the Territory where good public housing tenants have been kicked out because they have a job.
We all know public housing and that social safety net is there to help people get a leg up. It is unfortunate in many cases, particularly in public housing, where people utilise that safety net, get a leg up and are now being kicked out into an environment where it is difficult for someone to go from a maximum weekly rental amount in a Territory Housing property to the private sector rental amount required to live whether it is in Alice Springs, Palmerston, the northern suburbs of Darwin or otherwise.
A great amount of work needs to be done. There are some real positive economic opportunities, not just to support the local economy by getting people into home ownership, but also the reinvestment, which can continue into the private sector construction market and address the housing needs of many more people on the waiting list.
To summate, the government has under-resourced Territory Housing. It has pilfered some of the money designed to go into initiatives such as tenancy management services and SIHIP. Some of those houses are in a deplorable state and it is quite concerning. We all have public housing properties in our electorates, and we all know the difficulties in that environment. I encourage the minister, who I have a fair amount of respect for in this area, to wield a bit more weight for better resources and services provided to Territory Housing. This is not only to make our lives as parliamentarians easier, but the lives of people in the neighbourhoods and communities can be easier than having to put up with the disgraceful amount of antisocial behaviour and crime that is in our living environment across the Northern Territory.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contribution. If there is one unifying theme through what members from all sides have voiced today it is support for people to live in public housing in quiet enjoyment of their tenancy without harassment, violence, threats or nuisance and for neighbours to also enjoy what they should expect. If they buy or rent a house next to a public house or a set of units they should have quiet enjoyment of their property.
I have been Housing minister now for two years or thereabouts. What is before the House today and what members have spoken about has become a mission of mine because, speaking frankly, I become angry when I visit public housing complexes - whether they be in my electorate or in other electorates - and I find elderly people who are too scared to go out at night, who have to lock their doors at night because of the goings on, and housing complexes being terrorised by louts carrying on with threats and behaviour.
I remember the member for Fong Lim approaching me at a function at Ludmilla school saying: ‘Burnsie, can you come along to Shiers Street flats, there is a problem there?’ Right away, I jumped in his car - he is a pretty good driver, a safe driver - and we went there. What we found was absolutely appalling. We found three thugs in a unit - they were not even tenants, from memory - who were terrorising the whole set of units. Within a very short time, the CEO, and possibly the deputy CEO of Housing, joined us there and that situation was remedied, with the help of police. These characters had been involved, from my recollection, with a fairly serious crime at the BP Service Station along Bagot Road and were brought to task about that. From memory there was an eviction, or the people moved out of that unit within a very short time.
As a local member, I have public housing complexes in my electorate, also houses. I put on the record the majority of public housing tenants, as some members here have stated, are good people; they look after the property. In many cases, from my experiences of doorknocking, you can go into a public housing premise and the garden and the inside of the house - everything about it - is sometimes better than the house next door which might be privately owned. Let us not stigmatise people who live in public housing; that would be the wrong thing to do.
We have an obligation as a community, as a society, as a government, to provide housing for the most needy in our community. That is the obligation of government. However, conversely, there is an obligation on the part of tenants because this is subsidised housing - heavily subsidised housing. In the inner areas of Darwin such as Parap and Stuart Park, people pay $100 a week for a three-bedroom house. On the open market, you would be looking at $400 at least, possibly $500, for a three-bedroom house. So, each week the taxpayer is subsidising those tenants to the tune of $300, possibly $400. That works out to $15 000 a year, or thereabouts. That is a great deal of money. If you multiply that by 10, that is $150 000 over 10 years, $300 000 over 20 years, and so on and so forth. However, that is the obligation of the taxpayer to those who are most needy.
There is also an obligation for those people living in subsidised accommodation to behave, not make a nuisance of themselves to surrounding neighbours - whether they are in complexes or a residential neighbourhood.
I am so committed to seeing this happen to a greater degree, because I do not disagree with what the member for Braitling said about public housing properties in Alice Springs and some of the effects in his local neighbourhood. That makes me angry and determined to do something about it. This legislation brought into this parliament and debated today, hopefully, is evidence of that.
It is true, in the original bill I introduced into the parliament there were powers - more powers than exist within the act we are currently debating – and in the exposure draft that went out for public consultation. There were powers of arrest and detention, and powers to frisk.
I went out to consultation on that and we received several submissions. The Leader of the Opposition asked, during his briefing, whether he could have those submissions, and my instructions to the office were those submissions were made to me on a confidential basis, unless those people wanted to release those submissions. We gave the Leader of the Opposition the names of people who submitted, and it was up to him to approach those different organisations and ask for their submissions.
There was a common thread amongst many of those submissions, from fairly diverse groups, that they felt the powers of arrest and detention were a step too far. I also received legal advice on this from the Solicitor-General, who gave advice about potential liabilities for a range of issues relating to these powers. I thought about it, I looked at the submissions, I read each of them carefully and, on that basis, recommended to my Cabinet colleagues we remove the powers of arrest and detention and move to a model where we would have a memorandum of understanding with the police. I am pleased to say the Police Commissioner has been very accommodating and said he is prepared to position a Commander, a very senior rank, within the public housing safety officer area for a period of at least 12 months. There is a direct conduit, a very important link at a senior level, between the operations of the public housing safety officers and police.
The member for Blain was correct when he said much can be achieved through the work of a local member. I commend the member for Braitling; he has worked very hard. There are other members - I mentioned the member for Fong Lim. Much can be achieved through a local member getting together with housing and police, and people working together to reduce problems.
A recent example was in relation to Runge Street, where I was approached by residents who were experiencing problems. It was my pleasure to work with those residents on that issue and we had great support from the police. I commend Commander Jamie O’Brien who worked hard and attended the meetings, along with the advisor on police matters from the Chief Minister’s Office. The Chief Minister’s Office was taking a very active role in this. Ken Davies and deputy CEO, Mychelle Curran, also attended and there was much progress. Much of the discussion around the table at one house was: ‘We call police. We understand police have priorities, so if there is a road accident with fatalities or serious injury, they have to attend that. If there is a robbery or serious assaults, they must attend those incidents’. Residents are sensible; they recognise there are competing priorities for police officers in our community.
We are all aware in this Chamber of the problems and the magnitude of the issues that confront us. The residents, whether they are private residents living nearby or public housing tenants, also recognise the efforts of the private security firm were not sufficient. They did not have sufficient powers to address circumstances they confronted. Often, the complaint would be: ‘The private security officer comes along and tells people to go and they do not listen to them. They go around the block and within half-an-hour they come back - and we feel frustrated’. I took that on board and my response, and the legislative response, to these issues is to create public housing safety officers with statutory powers, excluding those removed which I have already spoken about, which many groups and submissions, and, I believe, members in this parliament - member for Nelson, I hope I am not verballing you, but I thought you said you felt those powers might have been one step too far for these officers. I am unsure, but there certainly was a theme in the submissions we received.
These officers have very important powers, as outlined by my colleague, the member for Fannie Bay. The powers to be conferred on these officers include: powers to direct individuals to stop antisocial behaviour conduct or direct them to leave public housing premises; powers to instruct individuals to leave for up to 12 months in certain circumstances; powers to seize dangerous articles and liquor; and powers to issue notices where required. So, they have powers, and if issues require it, they will be working very closely with police. Part of their training, as the member for Fannie Bay alluded to, is knowing exactly when to call police, the circumstances in which they need to call police, and they will be working with police on a call-out basis. They will be working with police and there will be lines of communication, just as there are with the transport Transit Officers.
I envisage part of this MOU will be about joint operations - trouble spots. I am advised there are 180-odd public housing complexes across the Northern Territory. Not all of those are problems, some are very quiet. In my electorate, until I doorknocked them I did not know they existed, particularly those for seniors. There are many where people have quiet enjoyment with a sense of community and they look after one another. However, there are definitely hot spots and those are the ones that need targeting.
As minister, as people have written to me, I have drawn attention to that. Opposition and government members have written to me and raised issues about hot spots. I endeavour to get action to focus on those hot spots. I would see this occurring at a much more operational level through the creation of public housing safety officers. As the member for Fannie Bay alluded to, because these people will be on-site - they will be based in Darwin, Palmerston and Alice Springs - when I say on-site, they will be available to be on-site and will be witnesses to many incidents that occur, and they will be able to appear in court cases. They will be able to feed information. They will be witnesses also, I would expect, in feeding information for prosecution of those who might be breaking the law, who might be damaging property, and also for tenants who are misbehaving. The ultimate consequence, of course, is three strikes and you are out.
I should clarify that policy. For people being evicted, the process will still need to go through the Commissioner of Tenancies. I am not proposing anything different there. Through the three-strikes policy, there will be a better framework around cataloguing the work that has gone on, the cooperative efforts to get people to behave and to adhere to their tenancy agreement, etcetera. If people do not, it will be noted. There will be evidence that, I would say, would be able to be placed before a court in relation to the efforts and the lack of cooperation, if you like, on the part of certain people in not adhering to their acceptable behaviour agreement.
There will be a clearer and more defined process around evictions, which is very important because it has been my observation, as minister, in several cases that have ultimately come before the courts, the courts put a higher bar against the CEO of Housing as the landlord. In other words, for public housing as opposed to private tenancies, the courts seemed to take a view that we are the landlord of last resort and there should be more latitude given in eviction of tenants who are not measuring up. What I am saying is we have to be more focused on the process.
_________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you mind if we just acknowledge these young people. Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 9 Kormilda College students accompanied by Mr James Faraone and Mr Ashley Hutchings. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_________________
Dr BURNS: The member for Braitling mentioned people are not taking any notice of grog signs and there is much antisocial behaviour around grog. These public housing safety officers will be able to do something about that. They will be able to tell people who have come onto that property who are not tenants to leave and do not come back within 50 m of the property. They will be able to take action. I take what you say; it disturbs me that, in some cases where the grog signs are up, people do not take any notice. One of the missions of these officers will be to tell these people to leave, to go. If the grog is on the ground beside those people they have the right to pour the grog out in those circumstances. They do not have the power to frisk and detain.
I was interested in the member for Blain, as Opposition Leader, saying we have everything we need already: we have a police force and a Housing department; we do not need this legislation. Why not use existing policy, existing resources? I have already pointed out, member for Blain, this area falls between the police and a private security company that is needed. Residents of public housing dwellings, and their neighbours, recognise the need for this and the need for somewhere to ring and know someone will attend. It might not be to the level of a police issue, but is something that is troubling them and the neighbourhood. Often we can nip these problems in the bud before they become a serious police matter, and that is going to be another job of the public housing safety officers.
Paradoxically, member for Blain, you also said you would have some announcements in the new year around this. You say there is no need for amendments; we already have this and we already have that. You then foreshadowed announcements in the new year. We are nine months out from an election, so the public and those living in public housing complexes around them will be looking to you for policy and effort in this regard. I will be looking very closely at what you bring forward.
I should also mention the time frame of what is being proposed in this legislation because it is important. I need to put this squarely on the record in this parliament. We are in the last days of November now and the last day of sittings is 1 December. If parliament agrees to pass this legislation it will take a week or two for it to come before the Administrator, and I am hoping it will be signed off in this calendar year.
The proposed training period for public housing safety officers will be 12 weeks, not six weeks as foreshadowed in the media by some quarters. It will be a 12-week training package. I understand police trainees undergo a six-month training course, which is 24 weeks. These public housing safety officers will be undertaking approximately half the amount of training as sworn police officers.
Bearing in mind the length and breadth of what police officers have to do over and above what these officers are expected to do, 12 weeks is not too bad really. They will not be learning how to use firearms, etcetera. They do not have powers of arrest or detention so they will be doing quite a number of very important modules as people have alluded to, dealing with people with mental health issues and diffusing conflict situations. I have seen the transport Transit Officers handle a number of situations on my doorstep at the Rapid Creek shops very well.
It is going to take three months to train these officers. I envisage they will not be operating until after the first quarter of 2012. I could have hurried this process. I put this out as an exposure draft for consultation. I have listened to what people and organisations have said about this legislation. That was an important process and, from memory, we gave an extension to that process because people said they wanted more time. We have been very accommodating in the consultation process.
Also, as a result of the consultation many issues were raised, including important legal issues such as whether the amendment to the act breached the Anti-Discrimination Act. I needed to seek advice on a whole range of issues. I sought the advice of Michael Grant QC who, of course, is Solicitor-General for the Northern Territory. All of that takes time. However, I am glad I did that because, for instance, with regard to the Anti-Discrimination Act, it was asserted by some organisations that made submissions this would discriminate unfairly against Indigenous people, which was of great concern to me. I would not bring legislation forward to this House which had that result. I take assurance in the advice from Michael Grant QC that that is not the case.
There were also assertions that we would be in breach of our international human rights covenants. Once again, I am advised that is not the case. It is important we receive legal advice. I have tried to be very thorough about this legislation, and that is a positive. However, on the other side, I hope members realise this has taken time, and these officers will not be ready for duty until after the first quarter of 2012 ...
Mr Giles: Just in time for the election.
Dr BURNS: I would have liked them on duty about three months ago, member for Braitling.
I have explained I have tried to do this the right way. I have not pushed this in an inappropriate way. I have tried to do this the right way all along. I would like, a year on, in August 2012 - if it had been in August 2011 people would say: ‘Gee, that Chris Burns, when he was minister and brought in public housing safety officers, that was really fantastic and here are the evaluation results to prove it’. However, that will not be the case, although it will be evaluated, member for Nelson, after 12 months. That 12 months will start ticking after the first quarter of 2012. I would expect, anecdotally, once they hit the ground, they will have an immediate effect on those hot spots. That is my hope and desire in relation to that.
I have quite a deal more to say, Madam Speaker, and I am hoping someone might give me an extension of time when the time arrives.
Madam SPEAKER: The time has not come yet; however, it is almost the lunch break and there is …
Dr BURNS: I would like to continue my remarks after lunch.
Debate suspended.
TABLED PAPER
Pairing Arrangement –
Members for Nightcliff and Goyder
Pairing Arrangement –
Members for Nightcliff and Goyder
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, we have a pairing arrangement effective from 2 pm today until close of parliament this evening for the members for Nightcliff and Goyder. It has been signed by both Whips.
I table that document.
HOUSING AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 177)
Continued from earlier this day..
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Deputy Speaker, I see the clock has been wound back to five, but I will continue.
I addressed a number of issues raised by members as I was speaking to this bill, but there are a couple of outstanding issues, mostly raised by the member for Braitling. He talked about what he believed to be a lack of people or resources within the Housing department and a lack of dollars for repairs and maintenance.
Member for Braitling, I do not have my advisors in the box. I was expecting some hard figures in relation to this. In relation to repairs and maintenance, unfortunately, some damage done by tenants is quite substantial and eats into our repairs and maintenance budget, which I have been advised has been increasing with time. That type of wilful damage, allowing situations to escalate, is unacceptable, and our strategy regarding public housing safety officers will address that issue. I am also advised by the department that there have been increases, with time, regarding our people, particularly in the tenancy management area.
I have some data here in relation to expenditure by region. Repairs and maintenance: total expenditure in 2006-07 was $12.7m, rising to $13.4m in 2007-08. In 2008-09, it was $14.1m. In 2009-10, it was $14.9m, and in 2010-11, it was $15.5m. So, there have been increases over time for repairs and maintenance. Unfortunately, there has been damage to properties, some quite substantial, and some of it occurring, as you well know, in Alice Springs. That is unacceptable. What I am doing as part of these measures is to nip some of that trouble in the bud …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Do you have those figures on a regional basis?
Dr BURNS: Yes, I will table this if you like. For Alice Springs, it went from nearly $2.7m in 2006-07; $2.5m in 2007-08; 2008-09 was $3.1m; 2009-10 was $3.4m; and 2010-11 was $4.4m, nearly $4.5m. I will table this for the benefit of the member.
There are also some notes about removal of vehicles from public housing, which you mentioned. I will table this, member for Braitling, but 35 unworthy cars have been removed since the beginning of the year. Ten of these cars have been removed since June 2011. That was in Alice Springs. In Darwin, 15 have been removed and taken to storage, where required, since May 2011. A further 22 are currently in the process of being issued and receiving formal notices. Four vehicles have been removed and not taken to storage as they constituted a safety hazard.
One of the problems we have, member for Braitling, is - a bit of history here - I understand the department took away a vehicle very similar to the pictures you showed. Someone turned up later and said it was their vehicle and asked for the money. It might have even gone to court, or there was a settlement where the department had to pay this particular person some money. The advice is we need to go through the processes of the law with abandoned vehicles otherwise it might end up costing us more than the money to tow them away.
If you are in government it would be a brave new world - after you have been to the Northside shops to get your packet of smokes or six pack, you might jump in your tow truck and go around to all the public housing properties and tow all the vehicles to the dump. That is, if you have time in between being a minister, member for Braitling …
Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time to allow the minister to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: I thank colleagues. You mentioned a vacant property. I had a pretty busy lunch hour as I met with the Leader of the Opposition over a constituent matter, and have not had the chance to study some of these issues as best I can. The initial advice I had on the property you showed in that picture is that property has been vacant because it has major structural damage. The advice I have is that repairs in the vicinity of over $100 000 are required to restore that house. As we would say in SIHIP parlance, that is a rebuild …
Mr Giles: A lick of paint.
Dr BURNS: Yes, I am giving you the advice I have. I have no objection to you meeting with the Housing people in Alice Springs for a briefing on this issue - I will certainly be inquiring further. The department, through the CEO, has acknowledged it has stood vacant for too long …
Mr Giles: How long?
Dr BURNS: Probably as long as you said. However, over $130 000 is a significant amount of money and it has to be put into the budget cycle. I suspect that is part of the reason, but I understand there is action on that front and works will be carried out in due course.
I will go back to some of the issues. I tried to cover some of the issues raised by the member for Nelson. He asked a valid question: ‘These public housing safety officers will be located in Darwin, Palmerston and Alice Springs, what about the rest of the Territory? What about all the other properties in the bush, etcetera?’ Yes, we are starting in the urban centres. That is where most of our large public housing complexes are. That is where much of the antisocial behaviour is situated and much of the debate in this House has highlighted that fact, and I have acknowledged it. That is not to say we do not need some oversight in the remote regions. From my perspective, that is a role for police, particularly at a remote community level. The police have their finger on the pulse in those communities and can attend incidents and other problems. We have to roll out the model within the larger communities. There is an issue about budgets. We have converted about $1.7m we currently spend on security companies for the role they have had up to now. That will be converted into the public housing safety officers and will come from within existing resources. There is probably another $700 000 the department is finding from within for this measure.
To be quite frank with you, member for Nelson, I do not have the resources at this stage to roll that out further than Alice Springs, Darwin and Palmerston. However, there is a rationale as to why we are starting there, which I have outlined. You might not agree with that but, as minister, that is my perspective.
You talk about evaluation. I spoke about the time frame involved to implement this, but we will have an evaluation program over the first 12 months in particular, which is very important. I probably will not be around then, member for Nelson, but it is worthwhile me commenting on a few things. It is questionable whether the numbers of complaints will decrease. They could well increase once you start to advertise the fact there is a dedicated resource, that there is a number people can ring after hours to get some action. There is no doubt complaints could quite possibly rise in the short term, so I am willing to cop that one.
Evictions: some people will say it would be good if the numbers of evictions dramatically increase. I hope not. I hope we could head evictions off at the pass, so to speak, and we could work constructively with tenants who are at risk of losing their tenancies. It may well be as a result of this evictions could increase. My advice from South Australia, moving to the three-strikes policy, is in the longer term evictions have decreased because processes are clearer; people know where they stand and have a much clearer idea of the boundaries. My advice is in South Australia the number of evictions decreased with time.
I would be looking at what is happening with damage because if we can nip some of that in the bud it would be desirable - get some of these characters away from the premises and not returning to cause damage as that is how these situations escalate.
I hope I have covered most of the issues raised by members. I appreciate what members say. Members have a view there are already many tools in the toolkit, to use the vernacular others use. There are many options available, and this will be one more. I really wanted something that was within the Housing portfolio and under the Housing minister, both in the banning orders and the people themselves - the public housing safety officers. I appreciate what you say, member for Nelson, perhaps one model could be they are situated in the police force, etcetera. However, as you acknowledged, often police have other priorities and people are diverted into other areas.
My object was to have a group of men and women who would be absolutely focused on this whole issue of public housing safety and antisocial behaviour - a group dedicated to this particular area. That would be their bread and butter, their main task, working within the Housing portfolio. However, having said that, it is vitally important their work occurs across various portfolio areas. Police, of course, is a very important one.
As I said earlier, there will be a memorandum of understanding with the police. Also a police officer at commander level, which is quite senior, will be involved with setting up the training and the operational side of public housing safety officers. I hope the Police Association will take some comfort in the fact government has listened to what it has said, what other groups such as NT Shelter etcetera have had to say, and we have drawn back from powers of arrest and powers of detention. I hope they take comfort from the fact we want to work very closely with police. That cooperation is absolutely essential to success in this endeavour.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the bill to the House. I understand the member for Nelson, and possibly others, want to go into committee stage, and I welcome that. However, at this stage, I commend this bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
Mr WOOD: Madam Chair, I do not have too many questions, but I want to go back to the ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy.
The second reading says Territory Housing will have a new set of procedures to be followed to rectify antisocial behaviour, and it relates to remote housing. I have mixed messages over the life of SIHIP. My understanding is Territory Housing would not evict people from housing in remote communities or in growth towns, but you have said you will introduce a ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy. What is the policy for houses in remote or, in this case, growth towns?
Dr BURNS: I thank the member for Nelson for his question. We will be basing our ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy on what is already in existence in South Australia and Western Australia. I have the Western Australian departmental policy here. You have, as usual, asked a very difficult question in relation to remote housing. With remote housing, we are on a journey regarding people understanding tenancies and their rights and obligations as tenants. There has been a different regime and different system in remote housing, and we are still moving on a path with remote housing. Eventually, I would see this policy rolled out across the Territory but, at this stage, like the public housing safety officers, we would be rolling out that policy in our major urban centres.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. In relation to Territory Housing being developed under SIHIP - that is, in the town camps of Alice Springs and Tennant Creek - will you apply the ‘three strikes and you are out’ policy to those communities?
Dr BURNS: My advice is when properties are up to the Residential Tenancies Act standard individual tenancy agreements are signed at that stage. Those houses in Alice Springs you mentioned, to a large extent, are subject to the same rental regime - I am talking about the rental level - as general properties within Alice Springs, and I would be expecting the application of this rule, with time, on those properties.
We have to give people who may have been living under a different regime in some of those areas an opportunity to understand and be educated. It is a little different if people are moving into a house in Alice Springs and have not lived there before, that one of the conditions of them moving into that house is they will abide by Territory Housing policies, and one of them will be three strikes and you are out.
Mr WOOD: I am concerned that in a place like Alice Springs you are going to have town camps and Northern Territory government housing. Are you going to have two different policies? The person who lives in the Territory Housing house in the town is going to have this rule applied and would see it - because town camps are on the edge or in Alice Springs – as a different set of policies. Is it going to be the same policy for Territory Housing in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs regardless of whether they are in a town camp?
Dr BURNS: Ultimately, that will be the case, member for Nelson, but, as I said, there is history here. Historically, these have been two different systems and we need to - it is a journey for the department and a journey for the people and we need to work on people understanding their rights and obligations. Over the last five years particularly, there have been regimes dropped on people with little understanding and education, and that is a recipe for disaster. Ultimately, there will be one system, one regime, but we have to bring people with us and educate them. There may be, in the initial stages, a perception of being two systems, but we have to start somewhere. Our public housing complexes and some of the problem houses we have in urban areas are the best place to start. Alongside that, we will be endeavouring to educate people and bring people with us to understand their rights and obligations.
Already in the town camps, if there is damage done to houses, we expect those people to pay. If there is tenant damage over and above wear and tear, we expect people to pay for that. Already there are changes, and there have been fairly large changes for people in town camps. It is a journey, member for Nelson.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. I have one more question on this area. If someone is living at Wadeye or Maningrida and have three strikes against them, what will happen?
Dr BURNS: When we apply the three-strikes policy in those places people may well be evicted, but we want to avoid that situation. It is a journey. We are moving with those communities. People who have received new houses in Maningrida and Wadeye say there has been a change in attitude. People have become quite house proud. We have had our gardening competitions. There has been an expression of good cheer and goodwill. People realise the situation has changed. Whenever I am in the remote communities I talk about people’s obligations as well. It is a journey for all of us, just as we are not going to overcome overcrowding in a very short time. This is a long journey. The journey of people understanding their rights and obligations is going to take some time.
Mr WOOD: I will move to another focus. This issue is very important. The easiest thing, theoretically, was to build the houses; the difficult thing is to maintain them. My only question, and it is slightly left field in relation to this legislation, is there are town camps in Darwin - One Mile, Knuckeys Lagoon and the 15 Mile. Those houses are being built by the government. They are run by Yilli Rreung, although there are still several houses at Knuckeys that will be passed from the Larrakia Nation to Yilli Rreung. People who live in those houses are not in Territory Housing houses and, therefore, do not have access to the safety inspectors you are suggesting. Has there been any discussion by Territory Housing and Yilli Rreung to see if there could be a cooperative process so people in those houses, who sometimes suffer even worse antisocial behavior, could be part of the scheme you are putting forward?
Dr BURNS: That is a very good question. Like you, I have been to most of those places. Unfortunately, issues of land tenure, historical issues, and issues between various groups are difficult to solve regarding tenure and who is living there. In regard to future money, particularly Commonwealth investment in housing, places like Bagot, Knuckeys Lagoon and One Mile Dam should be part of that. Some of those entities, which will remain nameless, have become barriers in a way to further developments in those communities. It is about time they stepped aside in the best interests of the residents. There are complex legal issues as well. I have investigated them at various times and they have the potential to become bogged down in a serious way.
In regard to Yilli Rreung, it was my pleasure to meet with Colin Tidswell about two weeks ago. I have known Colin for many years. He is a great operator and has spent much time in eastern Arnhem Land in a number of Indigenous communities. Wherever I have seen him operate he has done a fantastic job and brought the community with him, particularly in decision-making and supporting Indigenous people. He is now the CEO of Yilli Rreung and has invited me and Ken Davies to some of the places you mentioned. Hopefully, with someone like Colin in the seat at Yilli Rreung and the committee of that organisation, we can find a way forward.
Specifically answering your question, I have to say, initially, it is no, member for Nelson. I want our public housing safety officers to focus on our properties. However, it will be a discussion I will have with the Commander who will be part of this MOU, part of this group, about the different ways we can interact with police, not only on our properties, but some of the areas you mentioned. I recognise there is a need, I am not disputing that. However, in the first instance, I want the public housing safety officers to focus on our properties. I acknowledge the need, and possibly with someone like Colin and his organisation, there may be a way to engage with police. That was something the member for Blain mentioned in his speech as being so important - that interaction, that cooperation across organisations and agencies to focus on problems and achieve a result.
The door is opened to those types of discussions. You are the local member for a number of those places and I have no problem in involving you in those discussions, member for Nelson.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, minister. I would be happy to be in those discussions. Colin Tidswell has invited me to look at the SIL facility, which is now leased by Yilli Rreung. It is a discussion that needs to be had because these people are in no man’s land. They are funded by someone to build those houses, and Yilli Rreung is also funded by government money, but these people are not protected as well as they will be in public housing.
That is all the questions I have. The member for Braitling might have some further questions.
Mr GILES: Thank you, member for Nelson. You have asked most of the questions I wanted to. I wanted to go over a few areas, particularly the two-tiered system of implementation around urban public housing and town camp housing. Can I clarify the process of eviction will not be applied on town camps at all for Alice Springs and Tennant Creek? I understand Katherine and Darwin are probably different.
Dr BURNS: The answer is similar to the one I gave to the member for Nelson, but I will try to be specific to your question. For properties in the areas you mentioned that are subject to the RTA, there is always a potential for someone to be evicted and, in extreme cases, I expect the department to evict someone. Generally speaking, we want to bring people with us as being in separate regimes for some cases and, indeed, probably no regime in other cases. It is reasonable to bring people with us regarding their rights and responsibilities, to manage the tenancies, and to scrutinise those tenancies and make people aware of their obligations.
If you have a different policy agenda, that is up to you. The Leader of the Opposition announced he will be taking an interest in this issue in the new year. It will be interesting to hear what the CLP policy is in relation to evictions from these properties. We want to be reasonable. We do not want to evict people, we want to sustain tenancies - that is what we are all about. However, in extreme cases where people are not amenable and are recalcitrant, we would be justified in evicting those people.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister. Do you have the legal capacity to evict people in Alice Springs or Tennant Creek town camps from public housing areas?
Dr BURNS: The advice I have is, in any property under the RTA, the avenue is there for someone to be evicted. I have not sought specific legal advice about that; that is my initial advice. You have raised a deep issue, I acknowledge that. It would be a very contentious issue. Partly, that is why leases were sought over town camps, not just by Jenny Macklin but by Mal Brough, so the government - whether it be the federal government or the Northern Territory government - would have control over those properties.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister. Can you explain to me, in an area - whether it is a community or otherwise - where there are public housing assets and tenancies and no security of land tenure, how this application applies? For example, Hermannsburg does not have a lease. I might have picked the wrong community - possibly Yuendumu. How does it apply there as opposed to Wadeye?
Dr BURNS: The advice I have is if there is no lease they are not under the RTA. There are leases, as you know, which expire in August of next year. That issue will need to be negotiated with the land trust and the land councils. I am hopeful we will get a resolution on all those issues.
However, there is a question mark about those properties where the leases may not be renewed. There would also be a question mark about who would be responsible for the repairs and maintenance of those properties. I need to seek further advice on the issues you have raised. My advice is I do not have anything to add to what I have already said. I have covered most of the issues but, no doubt, you have further questions, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I am trying to understand the package. This is one piece of pie in a broader package which also takes in part of the intervention, aside from the urban area avenues you are pursuing. I am trying to understand whether or not this is a wholesome package or just a piecemeal approach. Will the two-tiered system work in urban areas and not in bush areas? For example, if someone is evicted at Wadeye, where does that person go? Can someone be evicted from Palumpa or Peppimenarti, which are not growth towns and have different leasing arrangements to a growth town? I am trying to understand it as a whole package.
Dr BURNS: If I could bring us back to the debate …
Mr GILES: Sorry, minister, also, where do people go if they are evicted?
Dr BURNS: We have drifted away from what this bill is about. This bill is about public housing safety officers. I have outlined to the House, and been very straightforward with the House, that these public housing safety officers would be based in Darwin and Alice Springs and those areas would be their focus. You have widened it to evictions in other areas.
Their primary task is not evictions; their primary task is antisocial behaviour and banning people from entering public housing properties in urban areas. I have said the focus is on the urban areas. The main reason for that is the majority of problems arise in our complexes or flats, and there are also houses in urban areas where there are problems. I have made it very plain that the focus initially is in the urban areas. The budget is applied to that particular area.
I said earlier the budget to fund this initiative has come from within; it has come from the existing security officers operating in Darwin, Palmerston, and Alice Springs - approximately $1.8m from memory, plus a reallocation of funding from within, bringing it up to about $2.5m. That is the extent of this initiative. I am not pretending to do everything at once right across the Territory. I am trying to address the issues within your electorate you raise with me, as a local member, on a very regular basis. I am trying to address issues the member for Blain raises with me on a regular basis through his electorate, and the member for Fong Lim.
Some of the issues in the bush are different and the way they can be governed are quite different. I have already mentioned the primary role with antisocial behaviour around housing areas within remote communities is something for police. They are situated there; they have a finger on the pulse and will address those issues, as appropriate. This is a debate about public housing safety officers. I have outlined the area where they will operate initially. There were legitimate questions about the Alice Springs town camps because that is within the orbit of Alice Springs, but we have expanded to areas far beyond that.
Mr GILES: Thanks, minister. It is important these questions are asked because, within my electorate, I have 10 town camps and, if you are going to kick people out of urban settings, they will move straight into the town camps and we will have more issues with overcrowding. It is important to identify whether you are going to apply these principles in town camps, first, in my electorate, second, in Alice Springs, and third, more broadly across the Territory. It is also important to note, as part of the intervention, it is about normalising the Northern Territory. The growth towns model you are pursuing is about having normalised services in those areas, so it is important to ask the question. Otherwise, we have a two-tiered system such as the one we are seeing rolled out right now. Albeit, there are some good initiatives here, you are being selective about where you are rolling them out, and people should not have second-class services in different locations.
I have not asked questions about outstations or homelands, and I will not, because I know you will not be able to answer them.
My next question relates to the $40m per annum being provided under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing. You spoke briefly about it in your summation speech. Where is that money going in relation to tenancy and management services, and how does that fit in with application of tenancy management services to town camps and some of those communities?
Dr BURNS: There is some advice in the paper I tabled previously. Luckily, there is a second copy, so I will go to that. Of that $40m expenditure in remote communities, member for Braitling, I am advised 60% is spent on the delivery of property management services, including repairs and maintenance; 20% is spent on tenancy management services; and 20% is spent on salaries and operational costs. Regarding functions and staff responsibility, as of 30 June 2011, a total of 137 staff were employed by the department to provide a range of property and tenancy management services, including asset inspections, allocations and handovers, policy development, data entry and involvement in housing reference groups. This includes staff based in regions, and central Remote Housing NT staff who assist the regions with asset and tenancy management priorities. They are in that table. I am unsure if that has been …
Mr Giles: I have a copy.
Dr BURNS: Well, you have the answer already, member for Braitling.
Mr Giles: It is all right, I am waiting for you to sit down for my next question.
Dr BURNS: All right, you are just getting a breather. The 137 is broken up as shown on this paper.
Mr GILES: Thank you very much, minister. I understand the $40m was to improve tenancy management services. I note in the paper you tabled that 60% was spent on the delivery of property management services, including repairs and maintenance. My understanding is that that money was not to go towards repairs and maintenance; there is a SIHIP budget for that allocation. Yet you have identified 60% as being spent on repairs and maintenance and only 20% on tenancy management services out of a $40m budget per annum for 10 years, that being $400m. There is a substantial amount of price gouging for repairs and maintenance.
Dr BURNS: My advice is to the contrary, member for Braitling. SIHIP is primarily about the construction and refurbishment of houses. I am interested for you to tell me, or point to where the agreement states it is not to be used for repairs and maintenance.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister. I am sure you said the reason for that allocation of $40m per annum for 10 years under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, NPA, was that $40m was to go to tenancy management services to improve the tenancies of people in growth towns and otherwise. The top line of this document you tabled - I appreciate you tabling it - shows me 60% of that money has been spent on repairs and maintenance. This may be an internal briefing I was not supposed to see, but I find it very interesting that 60% of that $40m for tenancy management is now being spent on repairs and maintenance, and it causes me great concern.
Dr BURNS: It is not exactly as you say, member for Braitling. It says 60% spent on delivery of property management services, including repairs and maintenance. You do not want me to get the file again, do you, member for Braitling?
Mr GILES: What file?
Dr BURNS: The file that shows you ran around saying there was $200m missing from the national partnership agreement, and how it really came down to - I am not going to accuse you of mischief, but you did not read the national partnership agreement and you had it all wrong. That is why I am asking you to point to some part of the agreement that confirms what you are saying because my advice is to the contrary, as it was when you talked about $200m missing from the national partnership agreement. While you are asking the next question, I will take the liberty of sliding out that file.
It is not only that, there is a range of things you have said over time. You will race out now and put out a media release talking about this, but I advise you, you have been wrong every other time. Resist the temptation, member for Braitling, because you are invariably wrong.
Mr GILES: Thank you, minister, for your advice. I will not be issuing a media release. I am merely placing on the public record that you have price gouged $40m which was supposed to be for tenancy management services to spend on repairs and maintenance.
Those are all my questions, Madam Chair. We are putting in place a two-tiered system that does not address everything across a broad spectrum in the Northern Territory. That is a great concern, particularly for those bush members on the other side. I fear what this will do, albeit while trying to address delinquent tenancies, is drive people into town camps where the rule of law is not applied and, more broadly speaking, it will drive people into communities where the rules are also not applied.
Dr BURNS: I repeat, I have had emphatic advice, member for Braitling, that $40m from Ntaria is for property and tenancy management, which includes repairs and maintenance. I am more than happy to arrange a briefing for you – I am not being facetious here; it is a complex issue. If you want to speak with Mr Kirkman and others about that agreement I am more than happy for you to have access to those officers and discuss the matter with them. They are across the very fine detail of this agreement and I rely on their advice. It would be good for you to speak to them on this issue if you have some reservations.
Mr MILLS: Minister, my question relates to the powers the public safety officers have and the response to antisocial behaviour.
My understanding is three recorded incidents of antisocial behaviour – three strikes – and then there is a consequence. I assume a detail around the definition of antisocial behaviour. There are three elements listed describing what is understood as antisocial behaviour involving (a) abusive or violent behaviour directed to a person; (b) creates alarm or fear in, or annoyance to, neighbours or others in the vicinity; and the next one is the one of interest, (c) involves graffiti, littering or vandalism.
I ask for your clarification of what is meant by ‘vandalism’. Is there a definition? I do not see any definition of what constitutes vandalism.
Dr BURNS: Which part of the bill was that?
Mr MILLS: It is Part 5 clause 28A.
Dr BURNS: Member for Blain, I am advised there are definitions of vandalism in other acts, and under statutory interpretation of laws, surprisingly, sometimes in law words used within acts are taken at their common meaning. This is destructive – vandalism, in my book, is wanton, destructive behaviour.
Mr MILLS: I understand 234 properties have damage in excess of $5000. Would that fit the definition of being as a result of vandalism?
Dr BURNS: It depends on the circumstances of the damage. Anything over and above what you would call normal wear and tear and is wanton and wilful destruction of property I class as vandalism. In some of these cases, member for Blain, it is not the tenant who does the damage, it is the unwanted visitors. It is very difficult to hold tenants responsible for the damage that may be inflicted by unwanted visitors. That is why we are taking this view and this course of action.
Public housing safety officers can ban unwanted visitors from the property for various times, they can tell them to leave the property, and they can tell them to desist and stop their antisocial behaviour. My aim is to nip this behaviour in the bud.
Mr MILLS: I will go to the section which relates to the power to seize a dangerous article or a container of liquor. Will there be any specific penalties applied to the refusal to comply with an attempt to seize a container of alcohol, or will the general penalties apply?
Dr BURNS: We are starting to get into legal terrain here, member for Blain, and I will explain it as best I can. Because we did not go with the powers of arrest and detention and frisk, public housing safety officers can seize alcohol that is not in a person’s possession. If someone is sitting there with alcohol beside them, they can then pour that alcohol out or, if it is unopened alcohol, they can seize that alcohol. I hope that answers your question.
Mr MILLS: It does. However, if there is a refusal to comply what penalties apply?
Dr BURNS: There is a penalty for failing to comply with a direction, which is 20 penalty units. This, by my calculation, is somewhere near $3000, which is the maximum. There is a penalty, but if someone is being belligerent, threatening, etcetera, that is when we expect the public housing safety officers - because they do not have the powers of arrest and detention - to call the police. A person might refuse etcetera and, in my book, that ups the ante in their trouble and interaction with the law.
Mr MILLS: If a group of drinkers was sitting in the common area with alcohol clearly in view and an approach is made to tip it out, which is resisted but there is no belligerence, just the resistance of: ‘We want to protect that alcohol’ - what follows then? How is the penalty applied?
Dr BURNS: There is a course of action at that stage, member for Blain, acknowledging what you have said could well occur. The public housing safety officers have the statutory powers to tell the person to leave the property. The person should leave the property. If there is going to be a big confrontation over the alcohol they might say: ‘I want you to leave’. They would then be required to leave the property, and the penalty for disobeying that is, once again, 20 penalty units.
If people refuse to leave, it is up to the public housing safety officers to call police, who will enforce the law as it stands. Part of the training of the public housing safety officers will be to deal with these situations in an authoritative but non-aggressive way, and to handle the situation. In 80% of cases, people would desist one way or the other.
Mr MILLS: If there is passive resistance does the public safety housing officer reach for their ticket? Can they issue the penalty or is it referred to the police?
Dr BURNS: I am advised they can issue a written notice, member for Blain. I do not have one with me.
Mr MILLS: I do not want to see one. Can you explain what happens? I have been in this space for some time; measures are put in place, signs are placed on fences and the like. What is going to happen? I can see it happening now. The drinkers are in the common space; someone says: ‘Come on, you guys should be moving on and you should not be drinking there’, and they just ignore the person. The public safety housing officer has the authority to issue a ticket. What happens then?
Dr BURNS: I am advised that it is very similar to what happens with a parking fine.
Mr MILLS: They are required to give correct names, addresses, details and the like. Failure to do so?
Dr BURNS: Once again, that is 20 penalty units.
Madam CHAIR: Any other questions?
Mr MILLS: No, I can see it now; I am looking forward to seeing this in practice. I trust the training provided to these good folk will assist them because this is the nub of it; being able to affect any kind of consequence. No further questions.
Bill taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Madam Deputy Speaker, before we move on, I thank all officers involved in this undertaking. It has taken quite a while and I commend the department, those here today, and those behind the scenes, for all their hard work.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Statement – Building Strong Families and Strong Communities Through
A Working Future
Note Statement – Building Strong Families and Strong Communities Through
A Working Future
Continued from 21 November 2011.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Deputy Speaker, in what time I have left, I will finish my contribution. I was trying to recap where I got to. I reflect on the Henderson government’s track record in Indigenous affairs, and looking across our electorates, particularly mine, and what we have done in those electorates. I was having that conversation with you, minister, or it might have been a couple of our bush colleagues.
When I look across all the communities, one of the major issues we embarked on in 2001 was to ensure nearly all the communities had sealed airstrips and lighting appropriate to the standards in remote Aboriginal communities. That might not mean much to opposition members, but for residents of remote communities, having sealed airstrips with lighting is important infrastructure, particularly given the encroaching Wet Season where, in many communities, medical evacuations previously were a complete nightmare.
One undisputable matter of record for our government is the child protection system inherited in 2001. Members opposite have said we constantly go back; however, you have to put it in context of the last 10 years. In 2001, when we came to government, the child protection system was non-existent, particularly in the bush ...
Mr HAMPTON: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time to allow her to finish her statement, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Thank you, and I thank the minister and my colleagues.
Going back to 2001, the child protection system was operationally flawed and massively underfunded. We know, despite the many reforms and huge increases in funding - and we have increased funding in the child protection system hugely - there are still operational flaws to be addressed. That has been identified in a number of reviews undertaken by this government. We have been committed, as a government, to agreeing to every recommendation in those various reports. We continue to fix that system, and not just in our urban centres, but across the bush. In relation to Indigenous affairs, that is a major issue we have looked at moving forward in our A Working Future.
The underlying cause of the tsunami of need in the Territory is not government neglect, but the continuing change and unravelling of lifestyles and social values we have seen over the past 20 years. We have seen massive change across our remote communities. When we look at health and education, there has been a dramatic shift and change across many communities. We have added to the numbers of police and are seeing some fantastic numbers. In my electorate alone - and it has not just been since the intervention four years ago - our government has added substantial numbers of police and resources in many communities. Emergency services is another important key area our government has funded. When we look at the growth towns policy and A Working Future, emergency services is an important component, particularly with our growth towns. Across all our communities, though, we must have the capacity to respond to emergencies.
I pay particular tribute to an effective group in Maningrida, the Maningrida Emergency Response Group, a fantastic group of volunteers who work in that community and respond to many of the problems there. Fires often occur in some of the houses or around the community and that group has assisted police and worked quite effectively.
In the Indigenous Development statement, the minister outlined very clearly how government is going forward. Whilst members on the other side may criticise - the member for Fong Lim and all his bleating about Kenbi - the sad reality is this is the party which, for 26 years, fought every land claim in the Northern Territory; fought Aboriginal people every step of the way. Members opposite say: ‘We are not of that ilk. That was the old CLP. We are the new CLP and we embrace Indigenous affairs and Indigenous people differently from the old guard’. I am sorry, it is in your DNA.
Member for Fong Lim, I find it incredibly hypocritical that you stand here, hand on heart, pretending to care for Raylene Singh, her family and the issues of Kenbi. The CLP fought against that land claim for over 20 years. The Labor Party, on coming to government in 2001, said: ‘No further litigation, we will negotiate’. I urge Raylene, and the rest of her family members, to come back to the table and work with the government, the land council, and everyone to move that area forward and not be a pawn in this silly political game the member for Fong Lim wants to play.
There are many issues out there and I am not saying we have fixed them all. It is critical we work with the federal government and, whilst people like Senator Scullion and many others can say Labor’s intervention - this is what is happening – legislation and all those issues have been given to a parliamentary committee, people will have the opportunity to put their views to that committee and we will move forward.
It is completely different to Mal Brough and his intervention in 2007. Aboriginal people were left absolutely demoralised in 2007, and there is still much suspicion and feeling by many people in communities that there is a continuation of what we had in 2007. I am looking forward to finishing parliament on Thursday, visiting my electorate to talk to people, and engage them in looking at what we have, what the federal government has introduced in parliament, and the future for those communities. Let us do it in a productive way with the federal government where we have a partnership to continue the housing program, and education, and where there is a real commitment. We have acknowledged we cannot do this alone. It is not only putting money on the table or getting resources in communities, it is about getting families to value education. Until our families embrace and value education, we will not see things turn around. That can happen; not every family in communities is keeping their kids away from school.
In the media and nationally, it is convenient to say how many kids are not going to school. People have not looked at communities where schools have seen a huge increase in attendance. I applaud those schools. One is Gunbalanya, in my electorate, where there has been a huge increase in the number of kids going to school. I cannot wait to get out there after parliament finishes for the end-of-year Christmas party for those kids and to celebrate with that community, which has had its fair share of grief over the last 12 months with a number of deaths and the impact that has had on the school community. Nevertheless, that school community has been able to increase the number of children attending school.
Across all our electorates, we have been, and are, moving in the right direction. That has only happened by laying the structure and foundation.
Before I finish I have to put on record my congratulations. Recently, we saw the Walkley Awards. I congratulate Russell Skelton for his Walkley on King Brown Country. That book is a blueprint in Indigenous policy and what needs to happen in governance, and why local government reforms were so critical in the Northern Territory.
The other big issue in the Northern Territory was in relation to alcohol. I put on record in this statement my congratulations to Katrina Bolton. Anyone who listened to that would have been moved. I congratulate her because she highlighted a plight that affects Aboriginal people in Alice Springs particularly.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister for Indigenous Development for bringing this statement before the House. I am very pleased to participate in this very important debate representing, as I do, a bush electorate where just over half my constituents are Yolngu people living in the growth towns of Yirrkala and Galiwinku, and the surrounding Marthakal and Laynhapuy Homelands on their traditional clan estates.
As I said during the debate on this subject in February this year, the A Working Future policy document is at the heart of Indigenous policy. It is a living document which adopts a whole-of-government approach to looking after our remote areas, and the people who live, work and raise their families there.
I can only concur with the minister: this government does have a deep and abiding conviction to put in place the structures, systems, and partnerships required to assure the future of our remote towns, communities and homelands of the Northern Territory. We know decades of poor planning under an ad hoc approach at both the federal and Territory government level has left us with a considerable legacy in trying to turn around our remote communities. To improve the lives of the people who live out there in the bush, and the infrastructure they need to support their lives, is all key to building strong families and communities.
This government has also addressed the third tier of government through the introduction of local government reforms in 2008, just prior to my time of becoming the elected local member. It was an area of policy way too hard for the CLP to ever grapple with. It continued to work with the old community government council model, knowing so many of these councils were problematic, insolvent, and had lacked transparency and accountability as to how the funding dollars were spent and, ultimately, services to far too many communities were not delivered adequately. I would also like to highlight, as the member for Arafura mentioned, the work of journalist, Russell Skelton, in exposing through his book King Brown Country, Papunya, and a number of other remote communities in the Northern Territory.
Labor governments in the Territory since 2001 have driven, and continue to drive, a massive reform agenda across a whole raft of public policy areas. Local government reform is a key policy area for people living in our remote communities. This is unlike CLP governments over 27 years which shied away from reforms, not only because it was too hard but because, by definition, they are conservatives and not comfortable with change, but also because they were not interested in the bush. It was a case of if it was happening outside Darwin it was out of sight and out of mind.
There is no doubt that three years into the local government reforms and the newly created shires the path has not been an easy one, but major reform never is. It is challenging, and we do not walk away from it simply because it is too hard. I am, obviously, most familiar with the East Arnhem Shire, being the local government entity in my electorate, but I am also familiar with some of the other shires and the work they do through the public hearings and travel I have undertaken as a member of the Council of Territory Cooperation.
The East Arnhem Shire has had a key role to play in improving the lives of people in the region. This is evidenced in a number of service delivery areas, but perhaps best evidenced and captured in the local implementation plans which have been prepared in close collaboration with the three tiers of government and, most importantly, with close collaboration and consultation with the local reference groups. Local implementation plans literally map out a plan for the community’s vision based upon seven key areas or building blocks: childhood; economic participation; governance and leadership; health; healthy homes; safe communities; and schooling.
This whole-of-government approach with the local implementation plans, in partnership with community representatives, is all about planning and building for capacity in our remote communities and growth towns. As the minister mentioned, this is an important part of COAG’s National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery. The local implementation plans are very much live documents which map out the priorities, strategies and actions which are important to individual communities. They are developed from grassroots level and recognise a ‘one size fits all’ is not the best way to plan. What we see with the LIPs are the plans which reflect the needs and aspirations of individual communities.
It was a great honour for me to represent the minister and the Northern Territory government at the LIP signing at Yirrkala on 8 December last year, and then at Galiwinku on Elcho Island on 9 March this year. For Yirrkala people and the Gurru'tu Mirri Mala reference group, it was a very proud day to see the LIP signed. It captures things which have already become reality like the Gove Peninsula regional bus service and an upgrade to the school’s trade training centre to name just a couple. For the people at Galiwinku the LIP highlights a number of initiatives: construction of a multipurpose facility which would incorporate a cyclone shelter facility and which would also enable catering for sport and recreation; a women’s centre; a youth drop-in centre; and a playgroup. It also includes the commencement of Yolngu Matha classes. Those classes are not just for Indigenous children at the school, but in the 9 to 3, 3 to 9 program - those hours after the normal school day - there are Yolngu Matha classes presented by Indigenous members of the community for non-Indigenous members, and that is a fantastic thing.
We also see in the Galiwinku LIP the provision of business support and mentoring to assist viable businesses, and development of a plan that provides care to the aged through infrastructure and services. I acknowledge the amazing work Yvonne Sutherland does as the manager and coordinator of the aged and disability program at Galiwinku in infrastructure that is not as good as it might be. She is very ably assisted by some incredibly dedicated and skilful Yolngu employees, without whom Yvonne would not be able to do her job. We are delighted to see, with the announcement earlier this year in the federal budget, a new clinic being built at Galiwinku which is currently operated by Miwatj. With the construction of a new clinic, the plan is the old clinic will become the home of the aged and disability service.
Before East Arnhem Shire knew that news was coming, it had signed a memorandum of understanding that the shires aged and disability program would work in very close contact with Miwatj as the primary healthcare providers. I am sure when the time comes to move it will be very welcome. In the interim, there are some works happening at the aged and disability centre at Elcho Island simply to make it logistically a little easier for those who work there and utilise the service to operate.
These LIPs set time lines associated with specific actions to be taken by the responsible parties, including government agencies and the community. Plans will be reviewed, updated, amended and expanded annually for the life of the plan until June 2014.
The minister is quite right when she says we need to work hard to win back the trust and confidence of many Aboriginal people following Howard and Brough’s 2007 intervention. People want to be involved, they want to be consulted and respected, not simply told how to run their lives and their communities and be disempowered through those actions.
The Territory’s bid to become the seventh state is such an important path for us to walk down together in a spirit of bipartisanship so the Territory can be on an equal constitutional footing with the rest of Australia, to be able to speak up for our people and make our own laws which cannot be overturned by the parliament in Canberra. This is especially so for my Yolngu constituents who currently are the most constitutionally vulnerable. Next year’s Constitutional Convention planned for April – assuming the members opposite, or one in particular, are not successful in derailing this process - presents an exciting opportunity for people to have a say about what our constitution might look like.
I am especially pleased about the very democratic process which will allow, on 27 January 2012, candidates to nominate to be one of the three elected delegates in each of the Territory’s 25 electorates. There is certainly interest in the Nhulunbuy electorate in this process and, not surprisingly, there is strong interest among Indigenous people who are considering - and I am certainly encouraging them - to put their hand up and have a go. Nothing to lose and everything to gain, I say. It is only through statehood that Territorians can have any certainty about removing the interference of Canberra in our affairs and our right to make and uphold our own laws.
I mentioned the establishment of the Gove Peninsula Bus Service as an important initiative delivered under the A Working Future policy and the Yirrkala Local Implementation Plan. This service commenced in September of last year and is meeting the long-called-for need for an affordable transport service which enables residents on the Gove Peninsula to travel between Nhulunbuy, Yirrkala and Gunyangarra in order to get to work, to training, to shop, to appointments and for recreation.
This two-year bus trial is a collaboration between the Australian government, Northern Territory government, Rio Tinto Alcan and Indigenous-owned company, YBE, and is also supported by the East Arnhem Shire with the provision of a conductor - someone who collects the tickets and ensures everyone is okay on the bus so the driver can concentrate on driving. It is further supported by East Arnhem IGA, which generously offers, without any fee attached, the selling of tickets through the supermarket they operate at Yirrkala, the supermarket in Nhulunbuy, as well as the butcher shop in Nhulunbuy. The service runs Monday to Friday on a set timetable, with each run reasonably well patronised and passengers paying their $5 per ticket.
A trial such as this will pave the way for trials in other remote locations and, at the end of the two-year period, we will be in a position to examine what needs to be done to keep it going. The reality is vehicle ownership is low amongst Indigenous people, and a service such as this is imperative if we are serious about helping people get to work, training and other activities. The bus does special runs in the early morning and afternoon for people who work at Dhimurru, Rio Tinto’s Alert program, and YBE.
I heard our Minister for Transport quote figures last week when participating in this debate. We are talking about approximately 12 000 passengers who have utilised this service in a little over the 12 months it has been operating. Basically, that figure can be split evenly in half. Around 6000 workers are going to those places I mentioned, to and from work, and the remaining 6000 are passengers travelling for any other type of business. It is a fantastic thing.
Provision of public transport in a remote area is a real logistical challenge. I acknowledge the partners in this service who I have already mentioned, also public servants from the Department of Transport, as well as Regional Services, who have worked really hard and overcome the challenges and logistics in getting this service off the ground. This government is serious about supporting people to get to work, get to training and access other services, and it is trials like this which show it can be done.
I would like to talk about education and the critical and pivotal role it has to play in our remote communities. We know education is the foundation to providing children with opportunities for a future where they can be the master of their own destiny. It is what provides them with choices about how they will grow and prosper, and that is something which, by extension, sees families and communities grow and prosper.
It is what I want for my two boys, one at Nhulunbuy Primary School and one at Nhulunbuy High School. When I speak with parents throughout my electorate it is what they want for their kids too, whether those kids be in Nhulunbuy, Yirrkala, Galiwinku, or at one of the many homeland learning centres like the ones at Dhalinybuy, Burrawuy, GanGan or Warruwi - and so the list goes on.
This government recognises it faces many challenges in getting children to some of our remote and very remote schools, which is why we have introduced the Every Child, Every Day strategy. This provides all of us with a framework which spells out very explicit steps for schools to work with kids, families and their communities around getting kids to school. It involves some carrot-and-stick approaches, but it operates on the assumption getting a child to school every day is everyone’s responsibility. We know if a child goes to school every day they will receive a quality education and be armed with the skills to take up the opportunities on offer through the pathways of work and further training and education.
Additional resources by way of attendance and truancy officers have a role to play, as do community engagement officers. Where we see success happening with good attendance it is invariably because the school is regarded as a valuable place within the community. This comes only after the school has worked hard and collaboratively with senior men and women in the community, and other stakeholders who have a role to play in children’s lives, for instance those from the childcare centres, health clinics, the shires and from the police station. Indeed, it is that whole-of-community approach where we will see success.
Many people I speak with tell me their aspiration is for work and real jobs not welfare. I am sure the members opposite hold that view as well. However, there seems to be some differences of opinion as to what constitutes work. I was completely floored earlier this year when I was talking about one of my remote communities and the fantastic work our artists - in particular, our fibre artists - do. It is more than art; it is a living for many of these people. I was lambasted by members opposite for talking about basket weaving.
I held up a photo at that time. Today, I have brought in the real thing - just two from my collection. This basket is made by Mavis Ganambarr who is internationally recognised for her fibre art. She has been written about in publications, including The Australian. I note writer, Nicolas Rothwell, is quite a fan of hers and her work was recently exhibited in a Rebecca Hossack gallery in London in July. She is an incredible artist. Similarly, another basket from the community of Mapurru is made by my good friend, Roslyn. The main source of income for the community at Mapurru is through running fibre art workshops for paying visitors. It is much more than just learning the art of working with fibre; it is also about cultural awareness. That community has enormous success by taking tourists into their community. They were thrilled a few months ago; they purchased a four-wheel drive troop carrier to get in and out of the community. It has basically been purchased with savings from the work they have invested in their program and fibre art on their community.
When I talk about some of the amazing things I see happening in the schools in my electorate, I am especially heartened by what I see in the Families as First Teachers program. We heard the Minister for Education and Training, when talking in the debate last week around the Education and Care Services Bill, mention the crucial time of early childhood ensuring kids are school ready. This fact is identified by many researchers, not the least of whom is Professor Geoff Masters, who has been working with the Northern Territory government’s Department of Education and Training. The efforts and resources we put into early childhood and the Family as First Teachers program really pays dividends. It is a particularly important program because it is about assisting parents - working with parents to work with their children - and to help them develop and hone their skills to support and enhance the learning opportunities of their preschool-aged children so, when they start their formal schooling, they are school ready. I also acknowledge the dedicated Yolngu staff in my electorate who work side-by-side with the Family as First Teachers because, without them, the program would not see the success it does.
In the Laynhapuy Homelands, we have a mobile preschool teacher who rotates three days a week through the homeland learning centres. In fact, on my recent travels to homelands in my electorate, I came across Margaret, the mobile preschool teacher, at Burrawuy one week, and we bumped into one another the following week during an overnight visit to GanGan.
I see many great things happening in our remote schools - schools which were largely ignored before a Labor government came to power in 2001. Before then, secondary education in the bush simply did not exist - no graduates from secondary school or Year 12 in the bush. This government has invested heavily in education in the bush, with investment in infrastructure, programs, and quality teachers to deliver education. Places such as Dhalinybuy and GanGan have new school buildings and training centres, which also include teacher and visiting trainer accommodation. This will certainly be a welcome change for those dedicated teachers who have, basically, spent their nights in communities in swags in classrooms. These particular centres have been funded through the Building the Education Revolution program and there are more under way at Burrawuy, Garthalala and, very soon, Mirrnatja, which is in the member for Arnhem’s electorate ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I move that the member be given at extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you very much, and thank you, Leader of Government Business.
We know - we said it time and time again - the members opposite did not support the Building the Education Revolution; they did not see the value in it. They did not see the value in schools or investing in jobs. Mind you, that has not stopped them from attending most of the BER openings in their electorates whenever they can. Funny about that.
There are great things happening out there, and I highlight the Ralpa newsletter from Yirrkala Homelands School. This issue is from September. Ralpa has no equivalent word in English, but it does refer to someone who is energetic - I am reading from the cover - resilient, humble and motivated to be in community and cultural activities. This newsletter is a fantastic pictorial and written account of some of the amazing things happening in the Yirrkala Homelands School in the Laynhapuy Homelands. You will see, throughout these photographs, many Indigenous teachers working with kids.
No doubt, members opposite would probably disregard this as a puff piece, as they do with any kind of good news story. However, I am really heartened when I see this type of thing and hear about what is happening in our homelands and in our education system; to see our Indigenous kids involved and benefiting from a quality education.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table that document.
Leave granted.
Ms WALKER: Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. It is really important these things are put on the public record to counter some of the very negative stuff we hear.
The other forum showcasing great things going on in some of our remote schools was, of course, the Smart Schools Award night held in October. It is only the second year the awards night has been held, and it was the first one I was able to attend. Schools such as Baniyala, Shepherdson College from my electorate, as well as Ramingining, Maningrida, Angurugu, and Top End Group Schools, which takes in the Tiwi Islands, were all up there in the spotlight receiving due acknowledgement for the great programs and successes these schools and school communities are delivering for kids. I congratulate all schools that were nominated. Double congratulations to those who were winners and finalists. I thank the minister, and the Department of Education and Training, for the effort they put in to staging what was a fantastic night. There must have been around 500 people at that event. There is certainly much to celebrate.
Education is central to children’s lives and future, but so is delivery of health services. The minister, in her speech, highlighted some of the significant spends in health for remote communities. I also acknowledge the funding commitments in my electorate in northeast Arnhem Land.
I mentioned to our Health Minister this morning that the six new two-bedroom units for doctors and allied health professionals and nurses on the campus of Gove Hospital are now completed. I am hoping that he, or perhaps the Housing minister, may visit for the official opening before Christmas. These were a Northern Territory government funding commitment in the 2010-11 Budget. If we cannot house health professionals we are really challenged to deliver health services. These additional units of accommodation will be snapped up very quickly and will enable our region, through Gove hospital, to continue to deliver the fantastic health services our community sees.
Two years ago, Yirrkala Health Centre benefited from Northern Territory health funding in excess of $800 000 for a major upgrade to deliver a more contemporary facility with more space, a dental room and a self-care dialysis unit. I congratulate those who work hard at Yirrkala Health Centre: Sue Colquhoun, the clinic nurse manager; and Terence Guyula, one of our Aboriginal Health Workers. He was Aboriginal Health Worker of the Year, not this year but last year, and that recognition is well-deserved. He is a hard working man, very dedicated to his job and a wonderful role model to his community and the young men out there.
Ngalkanbuy Clinic, which I was talking about earlier, is run by Miwatj at Elcho Island and has been earmarked for a new clinic thanks to funding announced in the federal budget this year. That will allow the shire’s aged and disability service to relocate into the old building when the new one is constructed.
Further to this, Gove District Hospital has been earmarked to receive $13m for a new A&E department, and also additional funding for accommodation for people travelling into Nhulunbuy from remote communities for medical services to give accompanying family members somewhere to stay. We have the Aboriginal hostel in Nhulunbuy, which is fantastic, but it does not have the capacity to accommodate people with sick family members in hospital who want to be close by. Having those units of accommodation on the hospital campus will be very welcomed.
The trifecta for me, at Gove District Hospital, will be the construction of a multipurpose flexible care service facility for aged and disability clients from around the region. We have had in-principle funding earmarked by the federal government and I am very keen to see that facility delivered. Currently, capacity for respite is very limited. Anglicare does a good job in caring for people seeking respite. Gove District Hospital has several beds. However, the sad fact is there are occasions when the closest respite is for patients to fly to Royal Darwin Hospital, which is certainly not ideal for them.
While the health dollars have gone in, and continue to go into our clinics and hospitals, one of the most significant investments in health in our large remote communities is housing. I am referring, of course, to SIHIP. It has not been without its problems, and they have been acknowledged on the floor of this House and are very well-documented. I am also familiar with them as a member of the Council of Territory Cooperation. That said, we still have to acknowledge we have seen the biggest housing program in the history of the country. It is transformational and is addressing decades of neglect, which has seen chronic overcrowding and too many derelict and dysfunctional houses where the environmental health issues have all too often meant dysfunctional lives, dysfunctional communities, children not going to school, and so on.
There are 110 new houses for Maningrida and the first tranche has been handed over. The minister for Housing has held up lovely, colour photographs of the first families receiving keys to their houses in Galiwinku and Elcho Island in a new subdivision. We have many new houses going up there; a total of 90 new houses in that community with many refurbs and rebuilds as well. I look forward to visiting Elcho on 13 and 14 December to receive an update on how that program is rolling out and, hopefully, very soon see tenants moving into new houses.
I am pleased to hear the minister acknowledge the challenge of housing on our homelands and highlight the need for the Australian government to step up to the plate to assist with maintenance to key homeland assets, including houses, to fulfil what the minister terms the Australian government’s ongoing obligation to assist homelands. The reality is homelands, especially in my electorate, are places where people are strong physically and culturally, and populations on homelands will continue to grow as it does in our growth towns and every other place in the Northern Territory.
The A Working Future policy does more than outline and articulate a strong vision for the Territory’s remote areas. It is delivering better services, providing jobs and pathways, and strengthening lives, families and communities. I have said it before in this House, but will say it again: the A Working Future policy provides a vision and strategic map which recognises that strategic policy must be developed, implemented and delivered in close consultation with those who live in our remote areas. It is about delivering services, creating employment, generating economic opportunities and planning for now and 20 years time, so people can lead strong and healthy lives in tune with strong cultural values. It recognises populations in our remote areas continue to grow like the rest of the Territory, and that we need to plan, prepare and deliver for that growth in the same way other similar-sized towns in other regions of Australia work and grow, and that this takes a whole-of-government approach. This is not something government is going to do; we are doing it. It is not something the CLP ever did or contemplated in its 27 years.
We know we have a long way to go and will not always get it quite right but, importantly, this government is determined to address the decades of neglect in a bid to transform the lives of Territorians, their families and their communities, and to build capacity and resilience.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I especially acknowledge the vision, commitment and singular determination of our Minister for Indigenous Development in delivering on the commitments of the A Working Future policy. I thank her and commend her for bringing this statement before the House.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support this important statement delivered by the Minister for Indigenous Development. There has been a great deal of work to improve the lives of Indigenous Territorians, especially in the critical areas of health, education, safety and housing. The Territory government has been working hand in hand with the Australian government, land councils, shires, traditional owners and local people to ensure we are driving the significant investments to get results we all want to see.
We know there are many Indigenous Territorians doing it tough and faced with some immense challenges, but we also have many wonderful Indigenous people who are working to make a difference and improve the lives of the people around them.
I have been privileged over many years to work with many leaders. Unfortunately, a number are now deceased, but it was great for me to - I have told this House before - go to Maningrida a few weeks ago with the member for Arafura to hand over keys to quite a number of houses built under SIHIP. It was great to have Mr Reggie Wurridjal, now a senior traditional owner of Maningrida with us, and also Ms Helen Williams, who is very well-known to this House as well. I have known both of them since they were kids. I have seen them grow up and go through school and work, have families, have children and grandchildren, and become very involved with the community and become leaders, and step up to the plate. They are examples of people throughout the whole of the Territory.
As I go to East Arnhem I see many examples. In Wadeye, there are people who have worked over many years to benefit their communities. Sometimes we get messages of doom and gloom in this area, but we also have to commend those people who have worked so hard over so many decades to try to hold things together, to try to improve the lot of their people.
Education and housing are two of the key areas where we need to make a difference. We are heading in the right direction for long-lasting and effective change. The areas of education and training are at the centre of the A Working Future policy. This government is doing more than any government under the CLP reign ever did to improve education in the bush. No matter where a child lives, if they are going to have a bright future they must have an education and must go to school. The ability to read, write and be numerate is at the centre of being fully able to participate in today’s world, get a good job and have a prosperous life. However, we know how important culture is to people and community and we are not asking people to give up those important elements of their lives merely to receive an education.
There are many examples, some I have mentioned previously, where people can achieve in all realms whether it is the traditional, the ceremonial, the community, the political or simply looking after their family. That is the single most important thing. We want people to have whole, fulfilling and productive lives and we see many examples of that. I would not want anyone to misinterpret - when I talk about the importance of literacy and numeracy – that I am inferring in any way that people need to leave their culture behind. I acknowledge culture, the wisdom of culture, and that relationships through culture are absolutely essential and important to Indigenous people.
This government has not shied away from the challenges associated with delivering a first-class education in remote school settings: the establishment of preschools in communities where there previously were none; the delivery of Year 12 education to young Aboriginal kids in remote communities who have as much right to an education as any other Territorian; improvements in Indigenous education, including more teachers; and much of that has been in partnership with the Commonwealth - more schools and more targeted programs. Completing Year 12 is one of the most significant achievements a person can have in their life. For too long, young Indigenous Territorians were not able to complete school in their home communities. Under Labor, we have changed the education policy which existed for far too long under the CLP - Indigenous children wishing to go to high school and finish Year 12 needed to leave their homes and come into the urban areas.
That is not to say that might be so in some cases; parents and children may desire that. There may even be a tradition within that community or that family of people going to Kormilda, St John’s, or a public school. We are not standing in the way of that, we are all about giving people choice. However, students need to be able to complete their schooling in their own home community, and I have mentioned this many times. It is a real achievement of former Education minister, Syd Stirling. He had the fire in the belly to achieve this and, as Treasurer, was able to drive it. It was a difficult undertaking but there is more work to do; it is only a start.
Between 2003 and 2010, 176 remote Indigenous students have finished school in their home community, and this year we will see more. I am also pleased to inform the House of the great progress we are achieving through the Clontarf Football Academies.
I mentioned, as a result of a question in Question Time, the functions the Chief Minister and I have attended in recent times celebrating the success of Clontarf. Attending one, I looked around and saw 60 young men standing proud, confident and with a world of opportunity ahead of them because they had an education. They were proud and their parents were proud. Gradually, it has become fashionable to become part of Clontarf. People would rather be in the group than out of it; it is sending a very positive message. This year, Clontarf will see 64 participants in Year 12 finish the program. In 2009, there were 26 Year 12 graduates, and in 2010 there were 32. With time, this program is growing.
Since 2001, as a government we have added an extra 407 teachers across the Territory. We have worked with the Australian government to deliver an extra 200 teachers to remote schools. I commend the federal government for the extra teachers, two schools, and the infrastructure put forward to support that initiative.
We created the Remote Teaching Service, a very important step. Across northern Australia, there is a great deal of interest in the Remote Teaching Service and the initiative of the Northern Territory government in setting it up. It is no longer recruit people to the bush just to fill jobs; we want the right people who will make a commitment to their school and community for at least three years. We are now seeing improvements in remote teacher retention, which is partly because of the more rigorous recruitment process.
I attended an executive meeting of the Australian Education Union a couple of weeks ago. They raised quite a number of issues with me. I take the issues raised by the Australian Education Union very seriously. They raised issues in relation to the induction for teachers, particularly those living in remote areas. I have asked the department to look at that closely; to have a productive time so those teachers are well equipped for their time in the bush. We want to work with the Australian Education Union, schools, and school communities to ensure we get the best people.
We are also committed to developing more Indigenous educators and have a program to support Indigenous people obtain training qualifications so they can work as educators within their own community. This includes growing our own teachers through the Remote Indigenous Teachers Education program. At Galiwinku alone, there are five teachers in training. As I move throughout the Territory - I know the shadow minister, the member for Brennan, is moving around the Territory also. No doubt, he will meet many fine people who are part of this program, either as graduates now teaching or students coming through.
Infrastructure: we are building better schools across the Territory. I am pleased to see the great work done in the life of this government. Since 2001, we have built new schools at Emu Point, Manyallaluk, Mamaruni, Wugularr, Alparra and Ilparpa. As well, we have built specialist secondary education facilities at Ramingining, Maningrida, Papunya, Kalkaringi, Minyerri, Shepherdson and Wadeye. One case in point is Borroloola School. I visited there two or three months ago. Over the last past four to five years, that school has been completely rebuilt with more plans for a trade training centre as part of the MOU with the mine. From memory, we are spending about $1m on that trade training centre - I could be mistaken. The block of land has already been picked out, and there is much excitement, not only in the school community with the teachers and the students, but also in the wider community. This is a fantastic step forward. This is replicated in many places across the Territory where this government has focused on building infrastructure in the bush.
In talking about achievements of government, the opposition likes to beat its chest and say: ‘We built the Territory’. Governments do what governments do. In 27 years you did achieve, I am not going say you did not. However, I am saying, as a government right from Day 1, we were focused, to a large extent, with what was happening in the bush. We felt - you might say we were wrong in this - there had been a great deal of neglect there and a need for further infrastructure development in the bush across health clinics, schools, a whole range of things. We have made commitments over the years through our massive capital works expenditure - first, under Syd Stirling and now under the member for Karama - to put infrastructure in the bush. The works that go on in the bush are very important to this government. We have not neglected the town, but we have also seen that the Territory is a big place and there is room for infrastructure throughout the regions, not only to benefit those regions and the communities, but Territory companies that work in those regions building that infrastructure. We do not shy away from the fact we have purposely gone into deficit to support jobs and the economy in the Northern Territory.
I was very interested to hear Penny Wong this morning on AM putting the case so succinctly. Nationally, the federal government has invested in a similar way, and we have avoided many of the issues that have occurred in the Euro zone. That is not to say we do not have to watch our expenditure carefully and be prudent in that expenditure - of course we do. We believe this Labor government is a responsible fiscal manager, and reject the opposition’s suggestion we should move into surplus just because it is an ideology it holds. It would hurt Territorians, it would hurt Territory business, and we are certainly not going down that path ...
A member: You could have done it years ago.
Dr BURNS: We delivered eight surplus budgets and we significantly reduced debt. We are prudent financial managers …
A member: Reduced debt!
Dr BURNS: We know how you are going to do it. You are going to slash the capital works expenditure and slash staff numbers. That is how you are going to get back into surplus. It is a fairly simple equation, unless you have a printing press out the back, or a large gold magnet you are going to drag across the Territory and scoop up all the little nuggets and melt them down, or join the coins end to end, as said by the member for Port Darwin, so they stretch around the world or to the moon three times. We are not interested in these silly equations; we are interested in jobs, the economy and the health of business. But, I digress.
We certainly have strategies in place in education: Every Child, Every Day; early childhood; and training in remote communities.
In the remaining time, I would like to talk about public and affordable housing. There has been a great deal of criticism of SIHIP - $1.7bn in a national partnership agreement on remote Indigenous housing, NPARIH. That is the overall program and it will change the face of many communities forever.
I was heartened by the report from the Australian National Audit Office. It has been mentioned in passing by members opposite, but I believe that report endorses the efforts around the national partnership agreement. It certainly outlined the challenges remaining in delivery of the targets, but it also acknowledged we are substantially ahead of the targets we set ourselves.
We understand the delivery of the rest of the program will be tight, but we are in negotiations with the Commonwealth about flexibility in that regard. It was interesting to see the Australian National Audit Office comment that the administrative costs and other costs - I suppose you would call it ‘profit’ - going to the alliance partners was in line with industry standards. It is not excessive, as has been asserted by some media commentators and some members opposite, and within the bounds of what is acceptable and reasonable in similar types of projects.
I commend this program. There are 1818 refurbishments and rebuilds now completed with 25 refurbishments and rebuilds under way, 355 new homes completed, and another 275 new homes under construction. This means 2100 families are living in safe, healthy and functional homes.
I feel that opposition members are often overly critical beyond the bounds of reason here. It seems they dislike the fact that housing is being rolled out in remote communities for Indigenous people. Apart from difficulties earlier on in this program, it is now delivering, and that is a great thing to be able to say.
On the Tiwi Islands, we are building 90 new houses. We have handed over 56 already and another 34 are under way. Almost 200 refurbishments and rebuilds are also part of this package. Of the 90 new houses, 34 are being built in a brand new subdivision. The face of Nguiu is changing, I believe, for the better.
I mentioned Maningrida in Question Time last week. There are 110 new houses going up in Maningrida, plus 16 rebuilds and 79 refurbishments. It was fantastic to be out there to open a subdivision, which I mentioned in this House previously. There are many other communities: Umbakumba; Angurugu; Milyakburra; Wadeye; Peppimenarti; 29 southern region communities; Tennant Creek community living areas; Gunbalanya; Belyuen; Acacia Larrakia; Galiwinku; Ngukurr; and 18 Alice Springs town camps.
Local people are taking pride in their home, and there are certainly employment spin-offs. This is a very important area. This program has been more than just improved housing; it has also been about employment outcomes. As with all other aspects …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the minister to conclude his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, colleagues. I will not be too much longer.
The original target was 20% for Indigenous workforce numbers. At present, 228 workers are Indigenous, which equates to around 35% of the current workforce. The program has often been around the 30% mark. We are making significant progress in the areas of housing and employment, both of which are long journeys. It is a step at a time, and these have been very significant and positive steps.
As well as housing in the bush, there is more transitional short-term and supported accommodation, particularly in Alice Springs, where much work has been done. There is a 150-person visitor park, with over 60 spaces also available at South Terrace. In Bath Street, 35 rooms are now available for people coming to town for medical treatment, keeping them safe and in healthy homes. There has been much happening in Alice Springs and it has been very positive for the town.
We are working in the area of public employment. Our Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy was adopted in 2010. The aim of the strategy is to increase Indigenous public sector employment to improve Indigenous economic participation and work towards a workforce profile which reflects the Territory’s Indigenous working age population share.
COAG partnerships require all jurisdictions to review their public sector Indigenous employment and career development strategies. One of the key strategy areas was to reinvigorate both the men’s and women’s leadership programs - both accredited courses. It has been my pleasure to attend a number of graduations. The students study, or are engaged over a ninth-month period. That is made up of eight formal learning modules and individual and group assessments. At the end, participants receive a Diploma of Management upon successful completion.
As at March 2011, a total of 79 participants had completed both the men’s and women’s leadership program. Another cohort of 17 men are currently on the 2011 men’s leadership program. It is interesting that an alumni association has been formed amongst this group. They are very proud of their achievements and also very willing to support those going through the program.
In conclusion, A Working Future is one of the keys to overcoming Indigenous disadvantage in the Territory. In housing, I mentioned the 2100 families benefiting from the remote Indigenous housing program. We are endeavouring to address the key issue in education – attendance - and have changed legislation, and our attendance and truancy officers are very active. We have programs around quality teaching, attracting and retaining quality teachers, and we are in partnership with the Australian Council of Education and Research and the Menzies School in evaluation and feedback on what we are doing. I value the work of Professor Geoff Masters in that regard.
This is a challenge. If it was going to be easy it would have been done years ago. It is crucial to the future of the Northern Territory that we are successful. I have said a number of times today it is nine months out from an election. Indigenous economic development is a crucial area of activity and aspiration in the Northern Territory, and a crucial area where the opposition should be putting its policy on the table.
Similarly, with education, the shadow Education minister is busy writing his policy and, no doubt, consulting with many people. I repeat to him - I should not give him a tip but I will: in opposition in 2001, the then parliamentarians formed small groups which worked in a particular area. If it was health it was doctors, nurses, public health professionals, patient advocates, a whole range of people, including unions - I am unsure whether CLP would go to that length - but a whole range of people who had an interest in particular areas. In some cases, those people were not political. In fact, quite a number of them were not members of the Labor Party but were interested in putting policy alternatives forward.
Member for Brennan, I have given you a tip. You might be forming those working groups. I was part of one working group on health. We submitted some policy ideas to the group within the parliamentary party and further policy work was done. Those policies were printed and were readily available. People would say: ‘What is your policy on health?’ We would be able to supply that policy. ‘What is your policy on education? What is your policy on law and order? What is your policy on fishing? What is your policy on business?’ I can see the light has gone on for the member for Fong Lim; he will be working hard burning the midnight oil. They will not be seeing him around town. He will be at home working hard behind his desk developing policy, ready to submit it in the next month or so to enable the people of the Northern Territory to make an informed choice.
It is a bit bold. Clare Martin and her team were quite bold about it. Once you put out policy there is always the inevitable costing that goes along with it. However, with limited resources, as the member for Brennan said, she was able to do that and offer quite credible policy alternatives.
When I doorknocked as a candidate, people were interested. They were interested to read and ask further questions about these important issues because we were talking about the future of the Northern Territory.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will not speak any longer except to say that I commend the statement - it is an important area. I am disappointed the opposition has not engaged in this debate to the extent it should have, but then it is preoccupied with other things.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Development): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a great honour to offer concluding remarks on the ministerial statement on our headline Indigenous Development policy, A Working Future.
The theme of my ministerial statement was building strong families and strong communities through A Working Future. This is the essence of the Labor government’s work in the Northern Territory: supporting Territory families no matter where they live and where they wish to work. One of the great aspects of this work showcased by the many contributions from our side is how our whole-of-government and the public service have rallied to do this work, creating opportunities to transform from a history of neglect to a future of prosperity and wellbeing.
I digress a little on that. When we bring debates into this House, particularly on Indigenous issues, we recognise, as parliamentarians, it is important to want to persevere in improving the lives of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable in this country, in particular, the Indigenous people of the Northern Territory. If there is one comment - and I am sure all parliamentarians hear it at some stage; whether it is here or out on the hustings travelling across the Territory - it is that Indigenous people do not wish to be used as political footballs. The need is so great and the concern so vast we must ensure, when we bring debate into this House to improve the lives of Indigenous people, we do so in a very mature, responsible, and genuine way. It has been heartening to hear the contributions from my colleagues on this side of the House to this very important statement in the desire to improve the lives of Indigenous people.
Building the firm foundations for decades of prosperity is something every single parliamentarian needs to contribute to, because when we talk about A Working Future, we are talking about a large percentage of Territorians across the Northern Territory who need to have belief and hope in a better future. A Working Future is the very firm foundation to turn around the decades of neglect. None of us in this House can deny the decades of neglect. Every government across this country has tried, in its own way, to improve the lives of Indigenous people. We have to always consciously recognise we need to, as parliamentarians, work cooperatively to ensure we are not using Indigenous issues and Indigenous people as the footballs all parliamentarians are criticised of doing. We need to be genuine. This whole focus of wanting to turn the decades of neglect into building firm foundations for decades of prosperity is what A Working Future is all about.
As I said in my statement, the Chief Minister, along with my colleagues in the government, has a deep and abiding conviction to put in place the structures, systems, and partnerships required to assure the future of our remote towns, our communities, and our homelands. We have made much progress establishing building blocks for the vision outlined in the May 2009 announcement of A Working Future. However, it is the start of a journey. In order to turn around decades of neglect we have to ensure the fundamental principles and foundations of decades of prosperity are established in a fair and transparent way.
In May 2009, we set out, as a key objective, to see a fundamental shift in the delivery of services and infrastructure in remote communities. That change is happening, with all ministers and members of our government contributing to that objective. The member for Casuarina outlined some key progress being made in the health area - key achievements such as a boost of $50m per year through the enhanced health service delivery initiative, providing improved primary healthcare and community control in our remote areas; the roll-out in e-Health ensuring important health information is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week at one of the 110 participating health clinics; and the fantastic effort going into treatment and support for those suffering kidney disease. I cannot help but contrast the effort of taking treatment to people in the bush. We know that advancement of treatment in the bush was an incredible push in our regions.
We heard from the member for Casuarina of continuing progress in supporting strong families across the Territory, with over $130m provided to address child neglect and child protection, including employment and training of Indigenous family support workers in our remote regions.
I am proud that every one of the local implementation plans for our growth towns contains a commitment to implement the Families as First Teachers program, an early learning and family support program for remote Indigenous families with preschool-age children. Let me make it clear to the House, of the 29 remote service delivery sites across Australia, 15 of those are in the Northern Territory and 13 have already established local implementation plans. I appreciated the member for Johnston’s contribution.
Our focus as a government is clearly on the one thing I have heard consistently, even before my time in parliament, which is the critical need for housing. It is wonderful to see, as I travel across Arnhem, the improvements being made, in particular at Groote Eylandt. Groote Eylandt has been an outstanding example of the possible for all our regions. The Anindilyakwa people and their efforts to ensure that, not only were they going to receive housing, but they were very much going to be a part of building those houses, has been a vital asset and assistance in ensuring SIHIP has worked, as successfully as it can, on Groote. With all major programs being rolled out for housing there will always be problems, but the real challenge as we face any problem, especially in trying to overcome Indigenous disadvantage, is that people stay at the table to work through those critical problems. The Anindilyakwa people of Groote Eylandt have done that consistently.
From the first call by the ALC, the Anindilyakwa Land Council, when they were very concerned about the way houses were being constructed, about the way they were being involved or not involved - they highlighted from the outset the way they wanted to see things done. That critical active role of Indigenous people in the partnership with the Territory and federal governments is crucial across the Northern Territory. I highlight Groote Eylandt because I see it as an outstanding example for all regions. Many regions have a long way to go, but Groote Eylandt shows what is possible.
The Treasurer neatly summarised the bottom line resulting from investments in new housing. More than 200 families are already in new housing. Recently we saw one new homeowner in Maningrida on ABC TV news saying how he and his family would cherish their new house. ‘Cherish’. What a wonderful word, and a real reflection of how far we have come in the Northern Territory; a real reflection of how long some Territorians have waited for appropriate housing.
My colleague, the member for Stuart, gave a terrific outline of the change he is seeing across his expansive electorate; real change making a difference in infrastructure and services across communities, big and small, in his electorate. The member for Stuart also talked about the challenges and teamwork evident in the government as we navigate through those challenges. We have never said we have a perfect structure, but we are not afraid to roll up our sleeves and get the hard work done. We are not afraid to continue the hard work that needs to be done to navigate through challenging issues: the legacy of decades of neglect; the vast distances and infrastructure gaps; the need to negotiate meaningful partnerships across all levels of government and the private sector to kick-start and sustain investment to make a real and enduring difference.
The member for Stuart highlighted the fundamental importance of economic development and jobs for our young people and the work going into development of business and economic profile for each of our growth towns, such as Lajamanu. He also noted some new challenges: how to best connect our remote communities to the digital economy and e-learning opportunities; free public Internet access in libraries and learning centres in 40 remote communities; and the challenges presented by climate change and policy responses to climate change, as well as opportunities such as those linked to development of the carbon economy.
While we have an eye to these new industries, we are also continuing in our work maximising the involvement of local people in regional development. The member for Casuarina gave a good overview of progress in this area in his own portfolios: remote fisheries, monitoring services through Indigenous ranger groups; extension of the Indigenous Pastoral Program; development of agribusiness opportunities; and proposals to amend the Mining Management Act to now include for the provision of economic and social benefits to communities affected by mining activities in addition to environmental regulation.
Likewise, the member for Barkly, a man who well knows the joys and hardships of bush living. The member for Barkly is a great supporter of his ministerial responsibilities of Infrastructure, Planning, and Transport. He knows better than anyone that the ad hoc approach of the past did not work. The member for Barkly and his departmental staff are developing a very strategic approach for future investments supporting A Working Future, building and improving our strategic investments in transport infrastructure, roads, aerodromes, barge landings and bush bus services.
Let me give an example of the emphasis our government has placed on sealing airstrips. Member for Arafura, in discussions with you as we looked at airstrips in our electorates, one thing the Labor government has been very consistent on and dedicated to ensuring these airstrips, which were dirt airstrips and flooded many times of the year, are sealed. That has been a very driving commitment of this government since 2001. We are now focused on the capital investment of our barge landings and roads. We have a long way to go in pushing the Commonwealth for a much greater involvement in building those roads, but our government has been very firm and committed in ensuring transportation - for example, the bush bus has enabled all Territorians, particularly in places like Borroloola, Ngukurr, Numbulwar and that whole southern Katherine region, and the central Australian region. I saw several bush buses go past on my way back from Kintore. The focus of this government is yes, we need to work on the roads. We are continually pushing that relationship with the federal government. At the same time, we are not sitting back waiting for the money to come for the roads. We are ensuring we have transportation other than the airstrips we have been trying to seal, and that we have bush buses available so people can travel on the Stuart Highway to Alice Springs, Katherine or Tennant Creek.
The member for Nelson picked the mid-1980s as a time marker, then the focus and effort dropped off, the will to make a difference waned, and a malaise set in. As a government, we have shaken off that heavy cloak. We have made clear our support for all Territorians no matter where they live, and our confidence in the future of the Territory and our conviction about the importance of the bush towns in that future.
One of the member for Nelson’s key themes was the need for certainty around town planning and development. He quoted the reports of Bob Beadman and the need to secure long-term land tenure for Northern Territory and local government assets. The member for Nelson said:
- Until you get this sorted out, we are not going to progress anywhere in relation to growth towns. The whole concept of leases, for instance, was to allow people to buy their own house. The whole idea of leases was to allow business to come into communities. The whole idea of leases was to free up the development within a community.
Member for Nelson, we are getting on with that job, part of which relies on our historic announcement last week that we will pay the rent. That clearly defines the Northern Territory government’s decision to pay the rent to Aboriginal traditional landowners in return for long-term leases over parcels of Aboriginal land where sole possession by the government is required. This historic decision lays the foundation for a proper working relationship between land councils, Aboriginal traditional owners and the Northern Territory government.
I said in the debate on Indigenous affairs last Thursday, as Minister for Indigenous Development - our government is taking a real and genuine lead here. Imagine if, decades ago, there had been a concerted effort at partnership. Imagine if all those traditional owners across the Northern Territory had not had to prove, through decades of litigation and millions of dollars spent, where that relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australia could be today. That is what we talk about as well. The fairness required for just compensation under the Australian Constitution is an issue this government takes very seriously, especially as we work and walk together towards becoming the seventh state in the Australian Federation. In order to take that next step, the people of the Northern Territory have to have the confidence that we are ready to do that.
Another key issue the member for Nelson raised was the wellbeing of the smaller communities lying within the service regions of our growth towns, like Alpurrurulam, Santa Teresa, Kintore and Peppimenarti. I want to assure the member for Nelson that the wellbeing of all Territorians, no matter where they live, is ever present in the planning and budgeting for A Working Future. Our approach is a true hub-and-spoke model and our smaller remote communities are benefiting from a range of ongoing infrastructure and service improvements. It is not going to happen overnight, but it will happen. It is about the longevity of investment; not only the financial investment in the regions but the human investment as well.
Growing our people with confidence there is hope for their future - they have schools to attend, their children are going to school every day and we have jobs provided for them - are the building blocks of our government; this is the commitment by our government.
Services to homelands are not diminished by a commitment to growth towns. They are, in fact, enhanced by it, and we are determined to ensure that commitment is ongoing. We are very determined to ensure people can have the choice to be and live where they want. This is not about moving people from a homeland to a larger centre or a smaller community. This is about being responsible in the way we are growing the Northern Territory.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise some of the issues from your speech to the House, also other members. It was incredibly disappointing members opposite did not choose to respond to this statement. I take on board the issues raised by the member for Braitling. The member for Braitling has been on the road to Damascus. He has been out bush and kicked the dirt and to quote: ‘This led me to a position where I believe we should be supporting people in the bush’. That may well be true for the member for Braitling but, unfortunately, he travels the road to Damascus on his own. No other member opposite decided to have any input into improving the lives of Indigenous people across the Northern Territory.
The member for Braitling also spoke about A Working Future as a social engineering model to drive people into large urban centres and the government’s socialist policy that is failing and driving people into town. Some of the comments: ‘We support people to go back to country, to live in the community, to live on an outstation. It will be a long road, but we are reversing the approach Labor has been taking for some time of bringing people into town’. This is what differentiates the policies. The Northern Territory Labor government has a policy and a plan. It may have its faults; however, when we are given no policy from the members opposite to scrutinise and debate in a mature and responsible way it sends a negative message to the people of the Northern Territory of using Indigenous affairs as a political football. Until we can see that on the table, unfortunately, that is the way it will continue to be for members opposite.
I acknowledge the work of the Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council. It has been crucial, especially in the financial push for the almost $1bn investment by the Northern Territory government towards A Working Future. I commend each and every member of the council for their involvement. They are continually working with me on the language policy and the homelands policy. While we know there is always a way to go, I am proud, as the Minister for Indigenous Development in the Northern Territory, to be working on A Working Future, and proud of the team on the government benches who are working with all people on the ground to turn around decades of neglect, and build firm foundations for the decades of prosperity.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ANSWER TO QUESTION
Kenbi Land Claim – Heads of Agreement Signatories
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I respond to a question on notice from the member for Fong Lim. The member for Fong Lim sought to make much of the fact I will not agree to table two agreements concerning the settlement of the long-running Kenbi land claim. His questions and suggestions of a cover-up detract attention from the important issue: that my government has negotiated a practical resolution of this difficult land claim with outcomes that benefit both Indigenous interests and the interests of all Territorians.
Regardless of the agreements that have been signed since, the most important step was on 30 January 2009 when I jointly announced the proposed settlement with the Northern Land Council and traditional owners. Details of the settlement, including access to the intertidal waters and beaches without fee or permit, and arrangements for private business and individuals to continue their use of land at Kenbi were made public on that date. An in-principle agreement recording details of the settlement, including outstanding issues to be determined, was subsequently signed on behalf of the Northern Territory and NLC by their respective legal representatives in April 2009. This agreement proposed legislation to establish the Kenbi Land Trust. This was the agreement I had in mind when I responded to the member for Fong Lim’s initial question regarding the signature on the agreement.
Subsequent to that agreement, on 29 June 2011, a heads of agreement was signed by Hon Jenny Macklin on behalf of the Commonwealth, Kim Hill on behalf of the NLC, and by me on behalf of the Territory. This heads of agreement confirms the in-principle agreement between the legal representatives, and sets out the steps required for implementation of the principal agreement, including a time frame for introduction of the Kenbi Land Trust Bill by 31 August 2011.
I, therefore, respond to the question by the member for Fong Lim by saying the in-principle agreement was signed in 2009 on behalf of the Northern Territory government by a legal representative, and a subsequent heads of agreement was signed by me on behalf of the Territory government in 2011. As Chief Minister, I routinely sign many agreements. However, only once as Chief Minister have I had the privilege to announce the resolution of such a long-standing, complex land claim so close to Darwin. I hope that clears it up.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Supporting Territorians
Supporting Territorians
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I highlight the programs across government to support Territorians and Territory families. The Territory is a great place to live, work, and raise a family, and we are working hard to make it even better with initiatives to support families to get ahead. We are proud of the fact we provide the most comprehensive range of subsidies in the nation to families. We are also proud of our efforts to create and support jobs with initiatives to support businesses …
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! We have all been circulated a copy of this speech. In the interests of time, perhaps the minister could table it and we can get on with some real business.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Fong Lim. The minister is on her feet and is speaking.
Ms LAWRIE: We are also proud of our efforts to create and support jobs with initiatives to support businesses to grow and train our own, providing opportunity through skills and employment. We recognise that families …
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I ask the minister, in the interests of time, if she would like to table this document. Every member in this parliament has seen …
Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker!
Mr TOLLNER: … and it can be incorporated into the Hansard as is, and we do not have to go through it for the next 30 minutes wasting valuable time in this House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Sit down, member for Fong Lim. If you keep calling frivolous points of order, you will be put on a warning. Please sit down. Treasurer, you have the call; proceed with the statement.
Ms LAWRIE: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. I know the member for Fong Lim is not interested in supporting Territory families; however, there are people who would like to hear, on the public record, which includes parliament, how support for families occurs.
We recognise families can sometimes do with a helping hand. Regardless of where you live in our great nation, families face day-to-day pressures. Raising a family brings challenges and rewards. The Territory government can proudly say it has the best range of subsidies in the nation and is the only jurisdiction to subsidise the cost of childcare for families. We recognise, in a young jurisdiction like the Territory, childcare is relied upon heavily by families who may not have the extended family network on hand. We invest over $4m per year to deliver a subsidy to every child in childcare in the Territory to ease the burden on families. This payment is made directly to childcare centres to offset childcare fees, and supports childcare placements around the Territory. For children under two years, this provides a $1433 annual break, or over $27 per week off the childcare bill. For a child over two, the annual subsidy amounts to $1050, or $20.20 per week.
We know this scheme is welcomed by families. In 2006, when I had the pleasure of announcing playground equipment grants to Mitchell Street Childcare Centre the Director, Louise De Bomford stated:
- With this program and the childcare subsidy all centres get from the government we have not had to increase fees since 2002 which keeps parents happy.
The initiative has now been in place since 2006 and I thank school administration staff who support the scheme every year. It is a real boost for families, helping with the cost of fitting out a child for school with new uniforms, school books and stationery. The scheme permits families to choose what to spend the voucher on through their school and can be used throughout the school year. This is practical support that brings a smile to parents at the start of the school year. We actively promote this scheme every year to let parents know it is available. Mother of three, Rebecca Riseley, endorsed the program stating to NT News:
- It helped buy uniforms and stationery for the kids. It really eases the financial burden for parents after Christmas.
Philip Wear, a dad of three kids said:
- It’s a real added bonus. The voucher pretty much covers most of the costs for uniforms.
Christmas is a special time for families. For those doing it tough it can also be a particularly stressful time. The Henderson government values the work of the non-government sector in supporting families across the Territory whether it be the Meals on Wheels programs, mentoring programs for youth, or welfare programs. At Christmas, our government has stepped up the assistance provided to the non-government sector to directly support families doing it tough over the festive season. We provide $20 000 in Christmas welfare grants to a range of organisations that on-provide Christmas baskets of food, toys and shopping vouchers to those in need. It brings joy to Territorians who may otherwise have struggled through the festive season. The NGO sector welcomed this initiative and I am pleased to confirm it will continue this year.
We value the contributions of senior Territorians to our community. We are focused on keeping more seniors in the Territory and are proud we deliver the most generous concession scheme for pensioners in the nation. The NT Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme has over 23 000 members who range from carers, seniors, aged war service veterans, pensioners and low-income superannuants. In this budget, our government increased the funding to the scheme by over $1m to $16.6m. The scheme provides concessions and rebates across a range of services and needs for older people, and last year provided over 121 000 individual concessions. Assistance to ease cost of living pressures is a key focus of the scheme, with concessions of up to $585 off power bills, up to $265 off water bills, and up to $275 off sewerage bills annually. These discounts are the most generous in the nation. The scheme also subsidises local government rates providing a 62% discount, higher than Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia, and is worth up to $200 per year.
For those seniors and carers with a motor vehicle in the Territory, government provides an annual concession of over $150 for motor vehicle registration and provides free drivers licences. For seniors relying on public transport, we proudly provide free public bus transport to all seniors and carers. We are the only jurisdiction in Australia to provide this subsidy. Senior Territorians are a valued treasure in our community. That is why we offer the unique travel subsidies which encourage senior Territorians to stay in the Territory without foregoing contact with family and friends interstate.
Senior citizens, aged pensioners, totally and permanently incapacitated veterans, and aged war service veterans who have lived in the Territory for more than two years are eligible to receive a 50% concession on an airfare every two years. This grant can be accrued to provide a 100% concession on an airfare. There is much flexibility in the scheme, with private vehicle travel also eligible, and travel can be interstate or overseas. The entitlement clause can be transferred to enable a friend or relative to travel to the Territory to visit, particularly supportive for those seniors who prefer not to travel themselves. Around 2312 concessions were provided last year.
As one gets older, spectacles often become a necessary accessory. This scheme includes provision of free spectacles on a biannual basis. It is another popular element of this scheme, with over 10 000 spectacles provided last year. The scheme has many supporters, including the Council of the Ageing with Graeme Suckling, former manager, stating:
- I think the NT scheme is among the best if not the best in the country in terms of concessions for people who reach 60 years of age for the ladies, or 65 for men, so it is pretty good news.
The Territory lifestyle is second to none. A key part of that is the infrastructure to support sport and recreation, whether it is boat ramps, pontoons and fishing platforms for fishos, to sports grounds and water parks for families. Taking relief from the heat is a big part of our lifestyle. We are proud of the investments we have made in this area. The Henderson government has delivered popular water and recreation parks in Darwin at Leanyer and the wave pool in the city. A new water park is under construction in Palmerston and, in the nearby rural area, a commitment has been given to build a swimming pool. In Alice Springs, we have invested in a water park and a heated pool. In the bush, we have funded swimming pools in a number of communities.
The Territory government knows not every family can afford a swimming pool in their back yard, and the health and social benefits of recreational facilities are important to families and communities. I am particularly proud of the water park initiative that saw the redevelopment of Leanyer into a first-class recreation zone with free entry. This is a great initiative and I cannot count the times families have expressed to me their support of this free initiative. Because it is free, it is more utilised, providing a great circuit breaker for families, particularly in the build-up, and a great venue for family and birthday barbecues. This is another example of government initiatives that support Territory families.
Buying a home is the most important investment decisions a family can make. To support Territorians in making that investment, the Territory government has developed a number of schemes and subsidies. HOMESTART is the NT government home loan scheme administered by TIO offering low deposit home loans to help low- to middle-income earners get into the housing market. The loan scheme assists low- to middle-income earners into their own home using no more than 30% of their income. There is a range of loan types, including shared equity loans. Under a shared equity loan, a homeowner can buy between 70% and 99% of their home with the remaining share owned by the Territory government and provided rent free. HOMESTART is regularly reviewed to ensure it keeps pace with property prices and continues to provide access to 40% of the marketplace.
In May, as part of Budget 2011-12, the income levels and price caps were lifted. Under the scheme, a family of three can earn up to $105 000 and purchase a home valued up to $530 000 in Darwin and Palmerston, up to $435 000 in Alice Springs, up to $300 000 in Katherine, and up to $210 000 in Tennant Creek. Since 2004, 1480 households have been assisted to buy their own home under this scheme, with over $324m in loans and shared equity purchases.
HOMESTART NT also includes interest-free loans of up to $10 000 for HOMESTART NT clients to assist with stamp duty and fees associated with buying a home. This loan allows up to $1500 of the total loan to be used for purchasing whitegoods. Over 98% of HOMESTART clients take advantage of this scheme, highlighting its effectiveness in helping people moving into their first home.
This government is also proud of our policy to quarantine 15% of new land release on government developments for affordable and social housing. This policy has seen land released at Bellamack and Johnston for $140 000 to eligible families, and affordable house and land packages like HomeFirst at Bellamack, and the units currently being marketed for between $320 000 to $390 000 at The Parks in Johnston. More affordable housing lots will become available in the next stages of Bellamack, and at Zuccoli and Muirhead. This government is also focused on driving investment in housing construction on existing land and supporting Territorians purchasing land through new land release into a home.
At a time of international uncertainty and changing credit markets, the Henderson government introduced the Buildstart scheme targeted at stimulating housing construction on existing land to provide more housing options. The $14 000 grant was open to non-first homebuyers and investors. It specifically provided a complementary scheme to the federal government’s First Home Owner Boost.
Buildstart incentivised new house and unit construction across the Territory, including off-the-plan purchases and owner-builder construction, and the scheme was varied to incorporate Bellamack purchasers awaiting land titles. In total, Buildstart supported 1060 new home constructions.
BuildBonus, a similar scheme to Buildstart, is targeted at the affordable end of the market and was released as part of Budget 2011-12. BuildBonus provides a stimulus for property purchases of up to $530 000 in value with a $10 000 grant towards the purchase. Schemes like this can make the difference between whether people choose to enter the housing market. The scheme, like Buildstart, is open to non-first homebuyers as a way to stimulate more housing stock. To date, 39 applications have been approved or are pending and it is expected that as owners purchase land and enter into contracts more grants will be made.
The Executive Director of the Master Builders Association of the NT, Graham Kemp, supported the BuildBonus scheme when announced stating the combination of land rolling off in Palmerston and the pipeline of land would work together with BuildBonus to see people getting their houses going.
As Treasurer, I announced significant stamp duty breaks last year as part of the budget, including a new concession of $8500 to assist senior Territorians and pensioners and carers enter the housing market or downsize their home. First homebuyers also received an additional stamp duty break of up to $11 215. This lifted the total stamp duty exemption to the first $540 000 of a new home - up from $385 000. In effect, first homebuyers purchasing a home at $540 000 or under would not pay stamp duty.
The Territory government also offers a Principal Place of Residence stamp duty break for non-first homebuyers, and we lifted the concessions by 40% last year to $350 000. To date, this financial year, 187 first homebuyers have received a stamp duty concession; 235 Territorians have received a Principal Place of Residence stamp duty rebate; 21 Territorians have taken advantage of the pensioner and carer stamp duty concession, and 85 since commencement of the scheme. These concessions are supporting Territorians into home ownership.
We are also proud of our record in backing Territory businesses and Territory jobs. Delivering jobs is a key economic indicator for our government, and there is no better way to support families than providing opportunity through employment. The Territory has the strongest business confidence in the nation; however, we continue to experience the most challenging and uncertain global economic conditions seen in the century. When the GFC hit, our government responded with a number of initiatives to protect jobs, to support Territory business, including record infrastructure spending and a Buy Territory campaign. Buy Territory was launched in 2009 during the GFC to actively support local enterprise and protect jobs.
All Territorians have a role to play in supporting local business, which is why our government has invested in the Buy Territory campaign to raise awareness of the importance of buying local. Territorians support Territorians, and we like to see each other succeed. The Buy Territory campaign is aimed to tap into that sentiment, showcasing Territory business and what it has to offer while, at the same time, driving home the message that buying local supports local business and jobs. Promoting the message to buy locally to support business and jobs to keep money in the Territory made good sense.
We call on Territorians to Buy Territory to support the community and local jobs which benefits all Territorians. Buying local supports local business and investment, providing more job opportunities and building a stronger economy. The alternative, buying products from overseas, interstate, or online takes money out of the Territory. It is estimated that for every dollar spent in the retail sector, another dollar of economic activity is generated as a flow-on effect. By using local businesses, that flow-on effect is generated in the Territory for the benefit of Territorians.
The Buy Territory campaign features press, television, and web advertisements and a dedicated webpage located on the Growing the Territory website. Businesses and the community can submit stories about their business and how they buy Territory. I encourage business to jump online and complete the questionnaire. Stories relevant to the campaign will be included on the website. The campaign has been well received and supported by the business community, and was relaunched in September 2011 featuring a number of businesses from around the Territory.
The Territory government also hosts October Business Month, a month-long event providing free access to business and opportunity for professional development for Territorians in business. This year was the best ever, with over 7500 Territorians participating, and the first time the event was live streamed to regional parts of the Territory.
We are proud of our record in backing Territory business, proud the Territory is the best place to do business in the nation. We have delivered consecutive tax breaks for business to the extent the Territory is the lowest taxing jurisdiction for small to medium business in the nation. This policy supports jobs; supporting jobs supports Territory families.
Since 2001, when Labor came to government, more than 28 000 new jobs have been created. We have keenly focused on growing our workforce to fill those job opportunities. To do this, we committed to supporting trainees and apprentices with a range of initiatives under a $312m Jobs Plan NT, including targeted support for business, employers, and job seekers. This includes financial support to businesses to employ trainees and apprentices. Our incentives focus on: supporting developing industries or industries where there are skill shortages; increasing training opportunities in remote areas; and providing pathways to training and employment for disadvantaged groups. These incentives have contributed to exceeding the targets ahead of time under the three-year Jobs Plan, including reaching the target of 3000 Indigenous Territorians commencing employment across the public and private sectors in the three years to 2012.
Another of those popular initiatives is the Workwear/Workgear Bonus subsidy. This grant was introduced by a Labor government to support trainees and apprentices with the cost of tooling or schooling up in their chosen field. Workwear/Workgear Bonus provides a $300 grant to apprentices and trainees to help with the cost of buying work wear and work gear during the first year. For those training in an identified skill shortage field, the grant increases to $1000. To date, the scheme has supported 3720 skill shortage apprentices with $1000 grants, and 6788 other apprentices/trainees with $300 grants. In total, more than 10 500 Territorians have benefited from this scheme.
Supporting business comes in many forms, including easing red tape and cost for business. In 2009, the Henderson government established ecoBiz, an initiative to help businesses become green by reducing their energy consumption and thereby their energy costs. The scheme incorporates site audits of energy consumption and grants of up to $20 000 on a dollar-for-dollar basis to assist with retrofitting premises and any operational improvements that can cut energy usage.
To date, almost 300 energy audits have been undertaken on Territory businesses, including regional and remote areas. The Henderson government has funded $785 000 in ecoBiz NT grants to 64 businesses. As a result of the program, it is also estimated approximately $1.8m in business trade has occurred. Important outcomes of the program include an estimated saving of $2.2m kilowatt hours of electricity, which equates to approximately $49m in savings to these business, and cutting 1850 tonnes of carbon missions equating to 411 cars permanently off the road, or the annual consumption of 267 households and saving almost 14 718 litres of water.
The Territory government is proud of its record in supporting Territory families. Recently, the Territory government undertook an advertising campaign to promote a range of initiatives to families. That campaign incorporated a one-stop shop type website to provide detailed information and application forms to make it easier for Territorians to take advantage of these schemes. Grants and subsidies can make a difference to people’s lives; to ease the pressure or provide an extra boost. For example, the housing initiatives can be the difference needed to make that decision to buy a home, or apprenticeship grants to support that career decision.
We have consistently delivered practical initiatives to ease the cost of living and practical incentives to deliver broader outcomes.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend this statement to the House. I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will make some comments on this statement about supporting Territorians. It strikes me it is providing what Territorians want, and they appreciate, as the Treasurer has described, the support they get at a whole range of levels, whether that be children at school, mothers pleased to receive some extra money, seniors with the free buses, playgrounds for the children so they do not have to pay, and childcare subsidies. All these things, without a doubt, citizens would appreciate. They like it; it is what they want. However, what I find, as we go through this, is what Territorians need, and those needs are not being addressed. It is an easy thing to provide these subsidies, but the harder thing to do is provide for the needs of Territorians.
I start with consideration of the approach the government has taken to fiscal management, which is misleading, to be kind. There has been a time, without a doubt, of an unprecedented boom. There has been more coming into the Territory and the nation has been particularly blessed by being rich in resources, and being in the Asian region. As a consequence, there has been a sustained period of boom. That boom resulted in - the story has been told umpteen times - unexpected high levels of revenue flowing into the Territory and to the states by courtesy of the GST, principally.
The fact that the Territory is like Queensland and Western Australia, particularly well-positioned with resources, the opportunity was there for us to be the beneficiaries. However, during that time, the Labor government took personal credit for the way it was handling things. It was handling things very well because it had all this money to spend and quite enjoyed that. It was taking personal credit for the boom times, as though it had managed to create this amazing international phenomena where Australia, being placed in this region, blessed with resources and so much investment money flowing - somehow this Labor government managed to pull that off, engineer the whole thing and take personal credit for it.
The language changed when the GFC came along. When a global financial crisis happens, there is no personal responsibility taken because you can blame the GFC. Any difficulty or any reduction in services, any decision that has to be made which may prove to be unpopular, can be blamed on the global financial crisis. However, the boom is a personal phenomenon - the sole responsibility of the Labor government. It can take personal responsibility and skite about the largesse. The difficult times is not them - it is the GFC. There is an inconsistency in that.
What comes from that is addressing the needs of Territorians. It strikes me this is all couched in terms which have government in the centre; it has government doing nice things so government will be popular. As the member for Johnston likes to provide advice to the opposition, I will provide advice to government, which I have done before: providing wants is one thing, but providing the needs of Territorians is another. Territorians will reward you for recognising their needs and responding to them. You talk about what is being done with affordable housing without drawing any attention to the challenges that are largely unmet. There are households of hardworking mums and dads across the Territory who have teenagers and, in fact, older children who are also working but living at home because they cannot find a place within their means within the Territory. It is very difficult for people, even on modest incomes with regular work, to afford a place to stay. That is a need; the need to have affordable housing you can get into. That has not been met.
Quite deceptively, the government points to the very high levels of employment in the Northern Territory, plainly ignoring if there is a squeeze on the housing market the capacity for people on modest incomes to get into the housing market, and because they have the capacity to do it they can choose to move away. So those who have good incomes or modest incomes and are already in a home, stay. Those on modest incomes with a capacity to get into a home, stay. The rest simply leave. To represent having a high level of employment as having done something phenomenal is not telling the whole story. There is a need for families and our community to be stable. Making it difficult for people to find a house here because it is too expensive so they leave, takes something away from our community; those who have built something here. They have gone to school here, they want to be part of the Territory story, but they cannot be a part of it because it costs too much.
It is not just the loss of a person. It is the loss of something much more than that. Families have to see their younger ones, who are Territorians, living in places outside the Territory because they cannot afford to live here. That security around social capital is being eroded by the approach the Labor government has taken - not taking responsibility, seeing itself at the centre, doing things to make it appear as the good guys and not attending to the core business. Housing, and the failure to deal with this - warning after warning to deal with this went unheeded - and now there is a rush and it is too late. The effect of this will be there for some time into the future and it will take much work to undo and correct the social and economic damage that has occurred by not getting ahead of the game.
The other issue is around security. What families need is security. We saw in today’s paper the story of 80 young people running amok. There would have been all manner of other citizens trying their best to keep their families together, reassured and told they have to do the right thing - to have that kind of disorder in their community. We do not often hear this, and certainly not from the government, but when there are assessments of how people feel about personal safety in the streets, in their homes, very high levels of anxiety are shown by respondents from the Northern Territory. We do not hear that; the other stories are told. You have to tell the whole story. The core business is to give your citizens security, build that social capital, hold families together, give families a reason to plan for the future and take risks and make big decisions for the future. However, they are being borne down on by pressures of the cost of living, which is largely due to the cost of housing. That is having a significant social and economic effect in the Northern Territory.
Closer to home, let us look at families. They want a place for their kids to go into childcare. It was not that long ago we were standing in front of a childcare facility in Palmerston that was perfectly well equipped just waiting for kids to occupy it, and time had slipped. It was built with federal money, but the decision for its opening rested with the Territory government and it had, for one reason or another, allowed those deadlines to slip. As a consequence, the decisions had not been made. While there were parents desperately looking for places to put their kids into care, the decisions of government had prevented them from having this fully-equipped facility in place and of use to support families.
These are the types of things families need. They need governments to put their mind on them and get to work and do the things necessary to benefit families in a real way. The other things are icing on the cake. The real business of security for families - having a place to put your kids - needs to be attended to. You do not hear the government talk about that kind of exposure – it is responsible for putting pressure on families. This is at the very time there were closures of childcare facilities in Palmerston for reasons not directly the responsibility of the government. There was the opportunity and, highlighted by the failure to make prompt decisions, there was closure of a facility. There was another facility ready to be occupied but they had not done the work and there was that slippage. That is around childcare places. We heard the reference about subsidies and the like. Well fine, but there is core business. There is more important business to attend to which would have been far more heartening and genuine to hear recognition of those types of matters and how you have responded to them.
I have mentioned schools and all the help you give families with subsidies. I know what parents need. They might want those things, but what they need to know is that there are effective and meaningful measures to deal with problem behaviour in our schools. They also need honest talk about what goes on in schools. You can have all the explanations you like about the NAPLAN results, but they want to see real progress being made. They want the facts not slogans around education reforms, education revolutions, the biggest reform or change to Territory education since whenever - all this big talk. Parents know that education is about curriculum and the strengthening of the teaching profession. Parents might want and like subsidies, but what they need is real leadership when it comes to our schools and education.
When it comes to recreational facilities, of course people like going to the Leanyer water park; they love it. Why would you not like something like that? What about the harder business of how councils and rate-payers have to work out how they are going to manage the local pool in Palmerston or in Darwin when it is a fully-funded, free to get into facility? Those matters are the harder work. Those needs require thought. I have not heard an adequate explanation of how that all works and where government is actually headed. To me, it looks very much as if government is always trying to position itself to be liked, and it is about the government. It is not about the government. Everything I have heard gives me, again, a shiver that we have a self-absorbed government preoccupied with itself which wants to talk about all the good things it does so people will give it a round of applause at functions and say: ‘You really are good guys’.
Parents, families and employers need things, and that is not being provided. The law and order issues do not really mean much. You can say all the things you like, and put glossy brochures until they are overflowing in letterboxes, but people want to see something that makes a noticeable difference. They see it constantly in our public housing spaces. We had a debate today which will create the impression there is going to be significant change in that space. Mark my words, there will not be significant change. It is not even a bandaid; it is a token gesture that does not need to be legislated. It just needs some decisive action and some leadership shown by government to create some movement in that space - the stuff that local members do. Now, we have legislation which is, effectively, not going to do very much at all. It has been dumbed down so all we have is the capacity for government to create some impression but make no difference.
What do people need around law and order? They want to see something really significant happening in the public housing space. You can talk about all these things that create the glossy impression, but people know, they have been around long enough. They have spotted you, and they know the character of this government. These things are not really going to impress because they are now starting to need some things. They need something significant to occur in the public housing space and we have not seen that. Notwithstanding that, I believe the minister tries very hard and recognises it too, but will not admit it because he is a good party man; a good man in government doing the best he can. But we need significant change.
We have worked very hard in Palmerston to have support for seniors with transport into the hospital, largely carried by the local members and their electorate officers for years, and volunteers in Palmerston. Then the pressure was put on you and you kicked in a bit of money to provide some service. Well, good on you for that, but it had been carried by volunteers for a very long time. However, that is not the point. The point is that seniors want certain things - and this is a list of the things they have been provided with, which I am sure they enjoy; all of them have merit. We have heard all about the good things the government does to make itself liked - and seniors are happy with that. However, we do not talk about what they really need.
My last newsletter had something on the front page which is probably a bit unusual - photographs of dentures. When I had three seniors come into my office in the space of a month telling me about the problems they had with their dentures, and with the dental support they were receiving, it made me stop and think. It is like a cult of youth: everyone is young and we seem to forget old people. I had three different senior citizens completely at a loss, trying to explain that their dentures had been broken for years and they cannot get them fixed. Everyone likes to have their teeth looking good. Some of these people would not open their mouths very far because they did not want me to see how ugly it was to have broken dentures. They then explained how hard it is to eat with broken dentures. They were talking about the level of service they were not getting, and how undignified, unloved and unsupported they felt in a system they had served for so long by paying their taxes. Now they find themselves in a situation where they are dependent upon government services and they cannot get that service. That was heartrending.
You look at your parents and realise some do not have such fortunate stories to tell and are left in need. They have made their contribution so there are other aspects of the seniors’ story that need to be told, but is not told here.
I add another element to this. Yes, when we had the boom you guys managed to pull it off but, when it was the GFC, someone else was responsible for that. I do not know how you are going to cope because with the GFC, which is not your responsibility, there was a reduction of money at your disposal, and you were able to display less largesse. It is going to be hard for you because you are accustomed to the boom times. You like flashing it around and you like the largesse. However, you are not accustomed to making the hard decisions. As a consequence, you are going to have to get over the idea it is not about the government any more. It is about what you do and about meeting real needs.
If we talk about what people need, it is security, law and order. They need a stable economy and a place to live - housing, a basic need in a community to raise a family. They also have to have a sense of purpose, to know where we are going. There has not been any clear, compelling, persuasive, narrative from the government about where the Northern Territory is going.
You almost hear the government talking about how we are well-positioned, and you hear it say how we are well-positioned politically going into the next election, when it is about how we, the people, the families, those who are trying to find a place for their young people, a place in the marketplace so they can be a part of the Territory rather than leave, are well-positioned. I do not hear that genuine conviction about the families of the Northern Territory. That goes to the long-term strategic planning which, after 10 years, has not convinced anyone that you have taken the job seriously. No one is convinced you have taken it seriously.
Your say Weddell is to solve a political problem because people are worried about where we are going. You cannot pull off Bellamack in the right time frame, yet we are expected to believe that you can pull off something big like a town on the other side of the river. There are so many big questions you have not answered, but it is easy to talk about something right over there. So, it is long-term planning.
I talked about this last week after the Obama visit. You have not convinced anyone, and that is one of the needs the people of the Territory have about their long-term view - someone has an idea of where we are going, where we are now, what our challenges are now, and how, together, we can get to a better place. You cannot do that if you are at the centre of it as the government puts itself; it is about the government.
I make these comments, Madam Deputy Speaker and I will leave it at that.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Blain for his discussion on this statement, especially that section mentioning dentures. I can fully understand where he is coming from, being a person who wears some. It might sound funny, but it is an issue that worries older people. They are costly, and if broken it makes it very difficult for people. The idea of some government assistance, as the member for Blain mentioned, should be considered.
I would like to mention affordable housing. We are not going to get affordable housing for that section of the community we would call low to middle income unless we look at other concepts. The price of land in Palmerston for a single person, or a family on a single income, is practically unreachable. There are many young people who simply cannot afford a mortgage. In the rural area, many are staying at home. Even in the city many are staying at home or having a granny flat built. Either they are living in the granny flat, or mum and dad are living in the granny flat. That is one option they have, but it does not give them their own land.
We have to look at developing alternatives. The government has an opportunity, with the amount of land it owns, to look at permanent caravan parks or long-term caravan parks. Maybe not a trailer park as such, but a place where someone can stay and live in a community, which long-term caravan parks are, with space around them, and some security because they live in a community. I have been doing some research today and some long-term caravan parks cost as little as $3500 per year to live in. They may have fairly basic facilities and some are off the beaten track. They may be holiday parks where the owners use that long-term income to help run the park in the off season.
I always mention a caravan park in Katherine called The Mill, a small permanent caravan park with rows of industrial sheds. You might think it is terrible, but the sheds are divided in two. They are divided by showers, toilets and a laundry. The caravan owner can park the caravan in the shed along with the vehicle. There is a lawn and a small garden separating the sheds with quite a few trees planted. It is run and managed very well, yet it is an ideal means of accommodation for a family, a couple, or a single person at a reasonable price.
Long-term caravan parks in the Territory are not necessarily something caravaners are interested in these days. With the demise of the Overlander and the Sundowner, there have not been too many single-use, long-term caravan parks in the Territory. The government could develop a park, especially for long-term use, as an alternative to affordable housing, yet we cannot get the government going in that area. That would be a positive approach to helping people on low to middle incomes.
I have mentioned several times that we should look at community land trusts. Although there are no community land trusts in Australia, there are in the United States, Canada, Wales, Scotland, and England. We could apply this to the Darwin region, and also on Indigenous communities. I will read a little about land trusts put together by Shelter New South Wales:
- This brief is about community land trusts, a type of non-profit organisation that acquires, owns and stewards land so that it is used for welfare purposes, such as affordable housing and related community facilities and amenities, and so that the cost of the land is effectively taken out of the cost of using that housing in community services by consumers. The organisation takes the land out of the market economy and into the social economy, by not participating in normal profit-driven processes of land ownership and development. It undertakes development of affordable housing and related community facilities and amenities on that land, or it leases the land to other non-profit organisations to develop affordable housing or related community facilities and amenities on the land. In the latter case, the lease conditions provide for a peppercorn rent, but provide for the dwellings to remain ‘perpetually affordable’ through conditions on resale - in the case of affordable owner-occupied housing - and conditions on tenancy allocation and rent setting - in the case of affordable rental housing. There do not seem to be any community land trusts in Australia in the sense that the concept is used in North America and Britain, though there are some models of hybrid ownership of land and dwellings for mutual benefit, and this is certainly the case with rental housing on land owned collectively by some Aboriginal groups in New South Wales through Aboriginal land councils.
Further on the article says:
- The primary focus of a community land trust is to acquire, own and never sell, and steward land for particular social purposes, but not to own buildings on the land (whether existing or new-build). Those buildings are sold to or provided by another party, such as a provider of affordable rentable housing or an owner-occupier of a dwelling. The relation between the owner of the land, the community land trust, and the owner of the building on the land, the housing provider ... is regulated through a ground lease. This is a legal document that sets out the rights and responsibilities of both parties. The ground lease gives the owner of a building the exclusive use of the land on which the building sits.
In the USA, the lease is typically for 99 years. It is inheritable, and the inheritor of a building begins a new 99-year term, if they wish to live there.
One of the things you look for when talking about affordable housing, which is very much applicable to the Northern Territory, is the cost of land. The document from Shelter New South Wales looked at the cost of land in New South Wales in 2007. For a house/land package, according to this, land is worth 21% of the total package price. Other land costs are 21% profit mark up and 12% on dwelling price - 46%. If you take 21% out of the price of the house/land package, you reduce the cost of that purchase by at least one-fifth.
If we have a house in Palmerston at $400 000, you could reduce that price by $80 000, bringing it down to a more affordable price. That is what land trusts are about. They are about people having enough money to build a house without having to pay for the cost of the land. That is something the government should consider.
I have mentioned the forestry land in Howard Springs and whether it could be developed in such a way. Perhaps there could be other land the government develops by giving it to an NGO which leases the land so people can build a house without the land cost. It is worth trying.
There are rules and regulations about how land is sold and who it can be sold to; however, that is all part of the land trust mechanism in the United States. There is no reason we cannot look at it as a way of doing things here. If we are talking about affordable housing for families, we need other options besides Buildstart - all the starts. That is fine; however, in many cases it is still not enough unless you want the government to share in your house. This, again, causes problems, especially if you do not have the money to pay the government out. There are some problems with that as well.
In particular, the government could also take over houses in Eaton. I am not sure what the latest on Eaton is; it was debated in this parliament for some time and then went quiet. The question is: if there are houses there, if we are not going to win the debate about Eaton and if the houses are going to be bulldozed, the government should purchase them. However, not like the ones at the naval base at Larrakeyah, which were taken away and sold from $150 000 up.
Why couldn’t the government take some of those houses from Eaton? I was talking to Vicki O’Halloran about what numbers you would want, put them in clusters of 15 to 20, and have them run by an NGO under strict protocols - they have to be well managed - and have them available for people who cannot afford a house at the present time. We are not talking about itinerants; we are talking about a part of the community that does not have enough money to get a mortgage or, if they could, are so far in debt life would be impossible.
We have houses at Eaton and land at Berrimah, near Pruen Road, where the government was considering a workers camp several years ago. It does not have to be on the highway; it is close to facilities. The bus is not far away. There is a school across the road. I am not saying this would be a permanent suburb, but it is an opportunity for land the government is not using to overcome some of the problems we have with affordable housing. We have houses at Eaton and the last thing we want is for them to be bulldozed. They could be handed over to Somerville or St Vincent de Paul, put in clusters where they were not too much out of society, and close to public transport. They have to be run properly; it cannot be anything goes. They would need amenities, and be run by someone who knows how to run an affordable housing facility.
I would hate to see those houses bulldozed. I hate what I see at the moment, which is houses taken from Larrakeyah we argued for - I argued for time and time again. Even after the government said you would not be able to move those houses they were moved and now sit at Holtze. I am unsure how many have been sold - not many. I would hate to see them sit there and go to waste. Again, talk to Somerville or organisations like that. How many people in our community would love to get a house but cannot afford one? Why can we not provide one, with certain conditions, and help those people?
We are talking about facts and figures which sound nice; however, the reality is people are struggling to get enough money for mortgages and we are not changing things much. The Commonwealth government has put money into organisations such as St Vincent de Paul and the Christian community near the RSPCA in Berrimah which also deals with housing. However, it is not keeping up with what is needed. There are opportunities here. Morally, we cannot allow houses to be destroyed when we know there are so many people who do not have one.
I say again: Labor is supposed to be about helping families. That is what I grew up with - helping workers, helping the poor, helping the single and helping the down and out. Here is an opportunity to do that. Be a bit adventurous. No one will criticise you if you take some houses, put them on Berrimah Farm, put someone in charge, ensure a bus service goes past, and give people a chance. You may limit how long people can live there. What you might be able to do in the interim is give that family stability, a chance to save some money, and a chance to learn how to save money because budgeting and education around financial matters is a problem for many people today. People have not been taught to save or be careful about how they spend their money. There are opportunities there to help as well.
A little closer to home is the rural area. The minister has spoken about the benefits for senior Territorians, and that is good. However, we are desperate for a retirement village; the time has come. We cannot keep talking about this all the time. I am hoping in next year’s budget land will be made available. I am hoping the government can put out a tender document encouraging businesses to say they are willing to put in affordable – I make that clear, ‘affordable’; it does not have to be a Fannie Bay version of a retirement village, but a retirement village which is suitable for people to remain in the rural area.
When you talk about supporting Territorians, rural Territorians do not want to be supported by being sent off to Tiwi Gardens Village. Even though it is nice, it is not rural and their friends are not there. They want to stay where their friends are in a place they are familiar with. There is definitely a need for retirement facilities in the rural area. You have nearly 20 000 people living in the rural area and, for some reason, they seem to escape the radar when it comes to facilities. That area needs looking at.
The other area is childcare. I have mentioned before I hope the government can sit down with the Churcher Estate and see if land could be released in the Girraween estate. I understand there is a desperate need for a childcare centre but the land is tied up with the requirement to have sewerage facilities because it is close to a bore. There are now limitations on where you can put sewerage facilities in relation to a Power and Water bore. I would like the government to see if we can solve this problem. Can we fix this? Can we make that land available for childcare? Girraween Primary School is probably the fastest growing primary school in the rural area. It is packed; it is getting extra classrooms and is really going places. Usually, when a primary school is going places, there is a need for a childcare centre nearby. This is desperately required. The government says it is supporting Territorians; I am giving positive ideas to the government in relation to what it can do.
The member for Blain mentioned a bus service in Palmerston. That bus is housed in the rural area. Would it not be great if we could use the same bus service Palmerston has, even once a week, to come into the rural area on a trial basis, because rural people do not have those facilities? Some do not need it. Many senior people in the rural area still drive. There are others who cannot, because they have become too frail or are concerned about driving in traffic these days. It would be good for the government to look at whether the service to Palmerston could be trialled once or twice a week to see if there is a demand for it. People in the rural area are getting older. The land was developed in the 1960s and there are quite a few people who still live on their blocks. That needs to be taken into account.
There are many other things I could talk about, but I wanted to focus on those things. I hope the minister takes some notice. On the second last page the minister said - and this is an aside:
Important outcomes of the program...
This is the program about saving energy …
Ms Lawrie: ecoBiz.
Mr WOOD: It said the total saving in water was 14 718 litres. That does not sound much. Was that right, because it is not a large amount of water? It is a couple of tanks. It did not sound correct. Perhaps you could find out whether it was more like 14 million litres of water because 14 000 does not sound like much. That is just an aside. I know the government is talking about reducing energy consumption.
If you really want to support families it is going to be hard. I was talking to people yesterday who quote their electricity bill every now and then and how much it has gone up. For sure, I have enough trouble when my dear granddaughter comes home and I find all the lights in the house on. It is like: ‘Would you mind turning on the lights you need’? On the positive side, it is trying to get people into the habit of reducing their energy consumption. However, on the other hand, families with kids should not be punished simply because they use more electricity and water. The price of power affects families, as does the price of water.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. I have moved away from the spin bits and tried to put forward practical proposals. We are not going to get anywhere with affordable housing unless we take the lead, do something different, do something positive, and not worry about the glossy brochures. Save those houses at Eaton or put in a long-term caravan park. We would certainly be doing something different if we did that.
Debate adjourned.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Medical Enduring Power of Attorney
Medical Enduring Power of Attorney
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, the Speaker has received the following letter from the member for Port Darwin.
- Madam Speaker,
I propose for discussion this day the following definite matter of public importance: the need for legislative change in the Northern Territory to create the legal powers necessary to allow for medical enduring powers of attorney.
Yours sincerely,
John Elferink MLA
Member for Port Darwin.
Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak about the concept of medical enduring powers of attorney. I start with the cherished hope the Northern Territory government will come into this debate tonight and offer to this House an assurance that a legislative instrument is soon to hit the table. The Northern Territory government is no stranger to this issue and, indeed, has looked into the matter from various directions several times in the past.
It is my understanding, as a result of inquiries I have made, that a legislative instrument found its way to the desk of the minister and, for some reason yet unexplained, found its way back into the department, which seems to be some type of oubliette for legislative changes of this sort. The quality of governance depends on, if you like, the quality of passion of the government. A passionate and dedicated minister seizes on ideas and pursues and drives them, not only through this House, through the Cabinet, but also through their own department.
The idea of medical enduring powers of attorney is not a new one, and some variant form of it exists in all jurisdictions within the Commonwealth, with the exception the Northern Territory. It is worth reading the introduction to the Law Reform Committee report on this issue. It is a long quote but it is worth it. It is in the introduction and refers to the terms of reference.
- The inquiry of the Attorney-General is to report on possible amendments to the NT Powers of Attorney Act, taking into consideration that the NT does not presently have legislation which allows a person to make a Medical Enduring Power of Attorney (MEPA). In the Northern Territory, enduring powers of attorney are limited to financial and property matters. Issues of health and welfare decisions cannot be directed in this way and must be dealt with (by the court) by appointment of a guardian under the Adult Guardianship Act.
Other than the limited provisions of the Natural Death Act, there is currently no legislative capacity for individuals to make medical directives which have binding power on others or to appoint substitute decision-makers of their own choice to look after their future medical needs when they are not able to do so themselves.
Substituted decision-makers may be appointed by the court under the Adult Guardianship Act but that act does not allow for competent individuals to appoint substitute decision-makers of their own choice. When a guardian is appointed by the court, the guardian may be granted capacity to make financial, medical and general welfare decisions.
This is an important issue because people have a right to control over their own lives. Indeed, the observations are made by departmental notes. I am trying to lay my hands on them now because they are worthwhile quoting. They talk about advance directives and see them as an expression of individualism, something our system of government is supposed to support. Indeed, the background discussion paper on the End of Life Decision-making, Advanced Directive comments that the process considered in those circumstances is based on the idea of best interest. It goes on to say the concept of best interest has its origins in Hippocratic medicine and observes that:
- Individualism and individual rights began to emerge as a dominant force in countries such as the United States of America and Australia.
That deals with the issues of advanced directives which enable certain actions to be taken under the Natural Death Act but does not extend itself to the concepts of medical enduring powers of attorney under the Natural Death Act and, in fact, it is one of the reasons we do not have a medical enduring power of attorney in the Northern Territory.
Without trawling through the Law Reform Committee’s report in detail, there are other observations worth making. This is where the current system of powers of attorney falls over and the capacity to direct how you are looked after, should you become at some point incapacitated due to some degenerative disease, even an accident. I will quote again from the Law Reform Committee document:
- The medical practitioner responsible for that person’s treatment is bound to act in pursuance of that direction (s.4(3)). But a person ‘of sound mind’ always has the right to revoke any such a direction. Hence, if he becomes incompetent no presumption can be made whether he would continue the direction or revoke it.
Only the individual can give the direction, and only with respect to a terminal illness. In borderline cases, and where the patient has become incompetent, the doctor may properly consider that he has no authority to proceed, and no authority to withdraw measures, extraordinary or otherwise, to enable death to occur more simply or more peaceably. In other words there remain areas where a decision must be made on behalf of the patient by someone else. In some other jurisdictions an alternate substitute decision-maker can be appointed, but this does not apply in the NT save by recourse to the Adult Guardianship Act.
Members will be aware I have referred to the Adult Guardianship Act. The appointments under that legislation are made by a court and, sadly, cannot be made by the person who is being protected. Indeed, it stands to reason that such an approach is taken if you consider a person needs guardianship orders placed upon them to look after them, then it would be on the grounds, one would presume, they were incapable of making effective decisions for themselves.
What is required by so many people, and something the Country Liberals, as a party, support, is the idea that people can lay a course of action for themselves in the instance that incapacity is either around the corner or, in some instances, where it is not. Whilst we can presume the vast majority of people who would use this power of attorney would be attempting to deal with a problem they knew was coming down the road, therefore it would be presumable the vast majority of people who would have recourse to this approach would, essentially, be older people concerned about the encroaching reality of Alzheimer’s or other forms of dementia.
However, it is worthwhile pausing for a moment to point out other people may also choose to have a medical enduring power of attorney established - a living will, for a want of a better expression - in case they become incapacitated for some other reason. High-risk occupations and high-risk sportspeople may consider it. Head injuries are common in certain contact sports and motor sports. People find themselves suffering from a head injury where they hope they would be able to set the course for their treatment, or their choice to decline certain forms of treatment should those events occur.
It is clear the idea is not new to this House and the government. We, on this side of the House, are very concerned the medical enduring power of attorney legislation has become jammed somewhere in the department and not found its way back into this House. It is disappointing the government has not become excited about this issue sufficiently well to advance it. We, on this side of the House, have a different attitude.
If legislation was introduced to adopt this concept, not only would we be on foot with other jurisdictions, but we would be able to give reassurance to people who travel to the Northern Territory that their medical enduring powers of attorney made interstate will have some carriage in the Northern Territory. Reciprocal arrangements, as I understand it, exist in these legislative instruments in other jurisdictions. However, those reciprocal arrangements do not extend to the Northern Territory because we have no such legislative instrument in place. Consequently, a person travelling from another jurisdiction to the Northern Territory may well have the impression their medical enduring power of attorney has some carriage or weight in this jurisdiction, only to find, or their family to find, they are wrong. They discover application has to be made for adult guardianship, or under one of the other three legislative instruments in the Northern Territory which cover various forms of directive in relation to people who become incapacitated for whatever reason.
We implore the government to take a positive attitude in this debate today, and to cast a benevolent eye upon the desires of many Territorians who want to take advantage of legislation of this nature. The Law Reform Committee has reported on the matter, as has the department itself, and any other number of organisations have spoken to government. Indeed, letters were written - I will see if I can lay my hands on a copy - to Syd Stirling on 6 March 2007. As I understand it, the response from the minister was fairly positive, and the minister was giving comfort to the authors of the letter that some response would be given.
I note some interesting signatories on that letter include Ken Conway, Robyne Burridge, Sue Bradley, John Flynn and Hugh Bradley. It is my understanding the former Administrator and former Chief Justice of the Northern Territory Supreme Court, Austin Asche, has also indicated his approval for this legislative instrument to exist. These are not people whose advice you would dismiss quickly. These are people with weight and gravitas in our community, and who care about the appropriate advancement of this type of instrument. Ruth Leslie-Rose from Alzheimer’s Australia has also indicated her support for a legislative instrument to be brought to this House.
I am hoping the Attorney-General will indicate to this House that, sooner rather than later, the legislative instrument which has been - for lack of better words - constipated in the department, will be released and that bill will find its way into this House. Without having read the bill, in principle, we would indicate our support at this early stage. However, if the minister is going to say ‘no’ for whatever reason today, he had better come up with a pretty good excuse because of the names associated with the advancement of this concept.
In short, I look forward to a comforting response from the minister. I can indicate to this House now, and to Territorians, that if the minister is not agreeable to advancing this principle on a legislative instrument under the hand of government, then the opposition will go to the legislative draftsman and develop a bill based on a best practice model. That will require research and work and we are happy to do that. However, I would find it a much more comforting if the government would save us from that research and work we know it has done and bring the instruments it has prepared to this House or otherwise explain why it is not doing so.
If the government does not give satisfaction to members on this side of the House, we place the government on notice that we will have the instrument prepared ready for introduction in the February sittings. If we are forced to do that, I hope the government accepts our instrument and allows its passage or defeat before the next Territory election, rather than allowing it to languish on the bottom of the Notice Paper never to be seen again. This is not something we would do lightly, but we are prepared to do this because it is the necessary thing to do. It is the right and appropriate thing to do for the people of the Northern Territory. If the government wants to play politics with this - I am not suggesting it is - then it is on notice there are many people vitally interested in the government’s attitude and will be listening carefully to the government’s response.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I invite the minister to give comfort to my plea. Give succour to the people who want an instrument they can rely upon in relation to these forms of power of attorney and take the issue seriously rather than blowing it off - which is something it has a penchant for all too often in this House.
Mr KNIGHT (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome the MPI. I have been in this House for six, going on seven years now, and this is the first time it has been raised seriously by the opposition. I cannot recall it being raised before; however, it is a very important subject. It is something before my time as Attorney-General, perhaps several Attorneys-General, but a very important subject and something government takes extremely seriously. It has been moving through the Law Reform Committee and various departments. I will talk about that in my contribution this evening. I cannot comment on whether it has been moving at the correct pace or appropriately, but there is a need to have this legislation in place as quickly as possible.
I welcome the opportunity to reiterate our government’s commitment to life management legislation and updating adult guardianship. I am the Attorney-General, but I am also the Minister for Senior Territorians. I note Brian Hilder is in the House this evening. I thank him, and everyone who has come to this very important debate. Brian has been on my advisory council and this, as well as other subjects about seniors has come up. I have also received correspondence as the Minister for Senior Territorians about this very subject. In both portfolio capacities I take it very seriously.
I take on board the comments made by the member for Port Darwin and welcome your support, as given this evening, for legislation we will introduce and pass ...
Mr Elferink: Hallelujah!
Mr KNIGHT: You probably knew that, member for Port Darwin. The Northern Territory is a small place and you knew it was getting close and you thought you would jump in and gazump things. This has been moving at a steady pace; a correct and appropriate consultation has occurred.
Currently in the Northern Territory there is limited alternative decision-making available for adults. The primary objective of the Adult Guardianship Act is to provide a mechanism for adults with an intellectual disability to have their affairs managed by a guardian who can help operate their interests. This guardian is limited to defined areas of decision-making, including the accommodation that can be provided, work-related issues, healthcare and financial affairs, except in rare circumstances where the court can direct the guardian to have full decision-making powers.
Since completion of the legislative reviews of the Adult Guardianship Act, the Department of Health has been consulting with the Department of Justice and negotiating a way through that. It has also been consulting with other relevant authorities, including the Public Trustee, the courts, and organisations that provide legal representation to guardians. What has become clear through this process is the need for some very considered and comprehensive changes to the Adult Guardianship Act.
However, we are not going to go about this in a piecemeal way; it has to be done appropriately. We will not rush it through in three months as the opposition has put forward this evening. I accept what you are saying; however, you are talking about introducing your own legislation in three months. We are taking a considered approach, consulting widely and have reached this point now. The development of new provisions relating to those who are unable to manage their own affairs for medical reasons requires careful consideration. I am sure the member for Port Darwin would support that view.
The legislation we will be introducing to replace the Adult Guardianship Act is being drafted as we speak. It will provide for informal decision-making, advanced directives, enduring guardianship, recognition of interstate orders, as the member for Port Darwin mentioned, transfer of financial management of estates from the Public Guardian to the Public Trustee, the creation of a statutory authority of the public advocate, and the establishment of a guardianship tribunal.
The Department of Health prepared a discussion paper and commenced a comprehensive consultation process with key stakeholders in May last year. This involved targeted meetings with, and written submissions from, over 17 different organisations. A further consultation list for the draft bill was developed and included over 20 different stakeholders such as the Alzheimer’s Association of Australia NT, TEAMhealth, AMA NT, NAAJA, the Law Society, National Disability Services NT, Carers NT and AMSANT. We have also appointed a dedicated project officer within the Department of Health, who has been employed since April this year, to further oversee the work and coordinate this new legislation. Much activity and commitment has occurred regarding this legislation.
The Legislative Oversight Committee has also been established, which includes representatives from Parliamentary Counsel, the Public Guardian, the Executive Officer of Adult Guardianship, legal services, and the Department of Health to assist in commencement of drafts of the bill as sections were completed. All this quite extensive and thorough feedback is informing the development of this new draft legislation.
We are now at the stage where we intend to present the draft bill to stakeholders for consultation. This new bill will be known as the Adult Decision-Making Bill and will be introduced into parliament next year. The bill provides for ...
Mr Elferink: Which sittings?
Mr KNIGHT: It depends on how extensive the consultation period is, member for Port Darwin, but you have heard me tonight. I will try to get this bill in place, but this is extensive consultation. You will be consulted, and both sides of parliament can commit to passing this before or after the election. It does not really matter because it will be supported.
It will be introduced next year. The bill will provide the establishment of a tribunal for adult decision-making and will be appointed by the Administrator. We intend for the tribunal to deal with and determine all matters relating to guardianship, and there will be a review process established with the Supreme Court. The bill will provide for the establishment of an independent commissioner of adult decision-making and advocacy. The commissioner will have a number of functions, including advocating on behalf of adults with impaired decision-making capacity, providing advice and support for guardians, and acting as an alternative decision-maker if a person cannot nominate a suitable family member or friend to take on this role.
A significant feature of the new bill will be the capacity for a well person to nominate a guardian or alternative decision-maker for the future should the need arise. For example, if, in the future, a person becomes impaired in their mental capacity through illness or injury, this guardian will be in place to assume responsibilities. This will be achieved through the development of a life management document. Similarly, a well adult with decision-making capacity will be able to make a written advanced-care directive outlining how the adult wishes to be cared for in the future in the event of loss of their decision-making capacity or their ability to communicate, in line with the national framework for advanced care directives.
In summary, the new legislation will allow for a very comprehensive legal framework for three types of alternative decision-making:
direct decision-making by the tribunal may be appointed by the tribunal for an adult who has impaired decision-making capacity;
As I highlighted, my dual role in this …
Mr Elferink: That is not what is being asked for.
Mr KNIGHT: I am giving a response on behalf of the government. We are discussing where we are up to with this legislation. It has been …
Mr Elferink: It sounds like appointed guardian.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Port Darwin!
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Port Darwin, I remained quiet while you were giving your contribution, and we will all get our chance in the debate of this legislation. It has been widely consulted, and there will be further consultation as we move forward.
National Seniors is one of the organisations I have, in my role with senior Territorians, and they have written to me about this review. It is extremely important and we take it seriously. I envisage my role as Attorney-General would be to ensure this comes into this House as soon as it possibly can and people in our community are extremely comfortable with the legislation before it passes. As highlighted this evening, there will be extensive consultation.
In closing, we agree with the sentiment of the opposition and I welcome the debate this evening. I welcome its support for the legislation next year. However, we want to ensure it is done correctly. We do not want a piecemeal approach. We do not want a quick fix. If it has taken too long and I apologise for that on behalf of the government; however, it is a very important subject.
I thank the opposition for bringing forward this discussion. I thank members of our community and our legal profession for coming to hear this debate. I look forward to seeing you next year when we debate and pass this legislation.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will address some of the comments made by the Attorney-General in relation to this matter of public importance. The minister said this is the first time the opposition has raised these issues. I point out to the minister this has been happening in his government since 2008, where it seriously started to gather pace. In the middle of this year, a promise was made to bring this legislation before the House by October this year. That deadline has come and gone, and I will have more to say about that in a few minutes.
The minister said: ‘We will introduce legislation’, and suggested the member for Port Darwin was trying to gazump the legislation by bringing on this MPI. I remind the minister, his government has been doing something about this since 2008 and promising it would be here by October this year. The excuse for the government dragging its feet is the Department Health has been negotiating with the Department of Justice, and other people have been negotiating with other people. It seems like rhetoric to me, and some feeble excuse to give the government an out for dragging its feet on this very important matter.
The minister also said he does not want to do it piecemeal as the opposition is suggesting, or do it within three months. In July this year the government made a commitment to bring this to the October sittings. The minister now says it will be next year, perhaps after the election. That is not October 2011, that is October 2012, even beyond. All legislation on the Notice Paper ceases after an election.
The minister also pointed out a discussion paper went out in May 2010, is still being negotiated, and we are talking about things - we are still talking, we are still talking, and we are still talking. Unfortunately, there seems to be a history of the government talking and not taking much action. The minister also pointed out extensive consultation has occurred and he used the words ‘widely consulted’ – which has occurred over the last three years. It is a fairly poor outcome if, after a number of years and promises, we are still waiting for a commitment from your government on a date for this legislation to be introduced. It is all very well for the government to sit on its hands; but there are numbers of people waiting for this legislation.
The minister does not appear to be committed to a medical enduring power of attorney. He talked about guardianships, direct decision-making, alternatives, and healthcare decisions under certain circumstances. We still do not have a commitment from the minister that he will introduce medical powers of attorney as part of any proposed government legislation.
The Northern Territory is the only jurisdiction which does not provide a legislative base for seniors to feel confident their wishes relating to their final stages of life will be honoured. This also relates to people who have acquired brain injuries, who live in high-risk areas, who participate in high-risk sports such as motor sports, for example, motocrosse, or skiing - not that there is much skiing in the Northern Territory. There is a whole range of circumstances where people would consider utilising efficient and effective legislation, also known as living wills.
Before I go any further, I acknowledge the excellent report compiled by Professor Colleen Cartwright for Alzheimer’s Australia titled Planning for the End of Life for People with Dementia: Part One. I hope the minister has read it. If he has not, I encourage him to do so. I also thank the Council on the Ageing, in particular Robyn Lesley and Brian Hilder, for the free flowing information when I sought meetings with them. They really enlightened me regarding many issues surrounding this matter. Also, Ruth Leslie-Rose from Alzheimer’s Australia, and Sue and Hugh Bradley for educating me in some of the complexities and technicalities of the legislation the government is considering, and any legislation we will consider should the government not expedite this matter after such a long time of consultation.
There are three main areas this legislation needs to deal with - enduring financial powers of attorney; medical powers of attorney; and lifestyle powers of attorney - where all three issues can be dealt with under one piece of legislation and under one living will. That way, you give seniors, and anyone else who requires a living will, the legal protection that their wishes will be taken care of.
The Northern Territory is the only place in Australia with financial and property capacity and not medical and lifestyles. There are a number of tables in the document titled Planning for the End of Life for People with Dementia: Part One and I refer the minister to that document. Page 37, under the heading Northern Territory, mentions written instructional directive, and yes, we have an advanced directive. There is no provision for ‘patient-appointed agent/proxy’ and no provision under ‘if no one appointed by patient’. There is nothing there and, when you look at that table, the rest of Australia is well and truly covered by legislation.
Many seniors have written instructions lodged with aged care residential services, which, in the event of needing emergency services and transportation to hospital, do not follow them. It is a common complaint I have heard from seniors who have spoken to me about this, and in my consultations with stakeholders is a common thread. They make these things and think they are covered, but what happens is nobody bothers to take the documentation to hospital and nobody follows it anyway. They do not have the confidence these wishes would be respected anyway. This is what I did not hear in the Attorney-General’s response to the member for Port Darwin.
We do not have a commitment for medical enduring powers of attorney. People who make it clear they do not want to be resuscitated, for instance, can be overruled by family instructions in emergency circumstances. There are a number of occasions where people have made decisions not to be resuscitated. They do not want to go any further. Not everyone will take advantage of a legal mechanism to instruct medical intervention to sustain life not be provided. However, those who feel strongly about this issue, whether it be personal choice, cost of treatment, not wishing to deal with physical trauma, or the risk the by-product of resuscitation might be a very poor quality of life, should be respected. There are people who do not want to put their families through the agonising trauma of sitting around for months and months whilst they slowly die.
We need the legislative capacity so people can make decisions and a court can uphold those decisions; so other family members and other people cannot come along and interfere with a person’s wishes provided they had the capacity. I will get to capacity later, because the minister used the term a ‘well adult’ as opposed to what the United Nations definition of capacity might be.
Queensland and South Australia have workable and highly-regarded processes which put some control into the hands of people at the end of their life journey which allows them to die with some dignity. I do not know why the minister insists we need another 12 months, maybe two years, of consultation in this area. It is very clear there are some good working documents in this country he could refer to. In fact, I am sure if he rang the governments in South Australia and Queensland and asked to borrow their legislation they would say: ‘No problems at all. What can we do to help’? He does not have to reinvent the wheel. The government has to get on with the job and do what it said it was going to do.
The minister also said he had written to people and people had written to him. I can assure you some of the people I consulted have written to the minister and are still waiting for some result from the ideas and the requests they have given to government.
There is not much happening. People do not have confidence in the government at the moment that it will do anything. Hence, this matter of public importance: to bring it to the attention of the government and say: ‘Please, get on with the job. You have had three years to consult with people. Get on with the job and introduce the legislation as you said you were going to do by October 2011. Produce it by February, not after the election, not next year, the year after, or the year after that.
Dying is a very personal thing, and not to provide some input into the level of medical intervention is authoritative and arrogant. To not allow people that choice takes away some basic human rights. This is not about a living rule; it is not about euthanasia. It is recognising when the final stages of life are near and allowing the person to determine the value and quality of life that medical intervention may or may not produce. I can recall two examples, one of a very close friend of mine. When his father was in the process of dying he gave very clear instructions, in another state not the Northern Territory, about what he wanted to do. He did not want to be resuscitated. He spoke to his family and said: ‘Thank you very much; it has been a great ride. I do not want to be resuscitated. Just let me go peacefully and I will see you on the other side’. That is not quite the full story; that is it in a nutshell. He was quite prepared to die with dignity. He said goodbye to his family. He did not want to hang around for a long time. That was his will. We should be able to do that in the Northern Territory, and the examples should be like that.
Modern medicine has allowed us to save people. Let us put them on life support, let us do things against their wishes. I recall when my father was dying, he had endorsed on his chart ‘not for resuscitation’. It was not his decision. Someone said: ‘Let us give you a pacemaker’. Someone else said: ‘Sorry, you are probably not in any condition to get a pacemaker’. One hour they were going to do that, and the next hour he was not for resuscitation. My father was not in a position to make that decision; other people were making those decisions.
Why would anyone in the Northern Territory not make that decision before they get to a stage where they cannot? This goes to the very core of this legislation. We need to ensure the wishes of people are taken care of. To not allow someone, where capable, to determine whether medical intervention, resuscitation, etcetera, should be used to keep them alive makes no sense. Because the medical technology exists does not mean in all circumstances it should be used, particularly when it is against the will of the person concerned. Many seniors would argue why impose something on them they do not want and, in the process, incur costs which could be directed elsewhere. There are people who, for whatever reason, do not want to be resuscitated, especially when there is a likelihood of a major reduction in lifestyle choices.
Polling throughout the community conducted by various organisations suggests there is overwhelming support for this legislation. When you put this next to voluntary euthanasia - about 82% of people in the community support voluntary euthanasia provided there are checks and balances. In the Territory, we had that legislation; unfortunately, because of the Andrews Bill which overturned the rights of Territorians to make those decisions, we do not. We do have the ability to enact legislation to give people the choice to make a living will if they choose to, and the government seems to be dragging its feet. The promise to introduce the legislation by October 2011 has been breached, and it is not good enough. Many people in the community are waiting for this legislation.
I have said it before and I will say it again: people are waiting for this legislation so they can make a living will whilst they can still demonstrate, under the United Nations definition of capacity, they have the capacity to do so. There are people in the gallery tonight who know people who are deeply concerned about the dragging of the feet and the slowness of this legislation getting through, because they want to make their living will. These people, young people, people who may acquire brain injuries, and especially seniors, are asking that their views and wishes be heard and the government get on with the job and introduce the legislation quickly.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this MPI to the House and ask that the government note it.
Discussion concluded.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak briefly on one of my schools, a school which goes about its business quietly and people may not notice it in the hustle and bustle of everyday life. In the rural area we know about St Francis of Assisi Primary School and the good work of the teaching staff, council and students, and what they are achieving.
The school was officially opened on 3 August 1997 by Bishop Ted Collins, Bishop of the Diocese of Darwin. It was opened and developed to serve the needs of the growing rural population. The school currently has around 160 students who come from as far south as Batchelor, as far east as Corroboree and as far west as Berry Springs. The school’s mission is to develop in each child their unique qualities equipping them to enjoy a successful Christ-centred life through mentoring and education.
The school was named St Francis of Assisi Primary School because the local Catholic parish is St Francis of Assisi parish. Fr Milton Arias is the parish priest; a lovely man, very approachable, and the picture of a modern day religious man. I have been to the school regularly and Fr Milton is often there talking with the students, spreading the word of the church and the good ways of life and living.
Recently, I went to the school to participate in the Remembrance Day ceremony, an event I attended last year as well. The whole school participates in the ceremony with students taking the lead in the program and classes making art style wreaths which they place at the base of the school’s flagpole. This year I was asked to read The Ode, which I did with pleasure and honour. It was a lovely ceremony and a time to reflect and remember.
Tomorrow, the St Francis of Assisi Christmas Angels will be singing live on ABC radio at 10.30 am. I know their voices will be as heavenly as they are sweet, and I wish the students happy singing. I suggest to anyone listening they tune into the radio at that time as I know the students will do a terrific job.
Finally, I place on the record my congratulations to the Principal, Mel Bolwell, for her ongoing commitment and work whether it is a sports day, the fun fairs which I have attended, special events such as student excursions, or just teaching on a daily basis. St Francis of Assisi Primary School is to be commended as are the students, all the families, and all those associated with the school.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Deputy Speaker, you did a good job today. A fantastic effort you put in during Question Time with these naughty boys on the other side.
I will make a few comments about the Wadeye Magic, the Wadeye Division One football side playing in the NTFL. They have done a great job this year and I have some updates of their match played on 27 November. This update is provided by James McNamee, the great manager of the side who has done a fabulous job, and great credit goes to him. This week they played Tracy Village and, again, beat them quite comprehensively. They won 14 goals 6 points, 90, to 10 goals 9 points, 69 by Tracy Village.
The goals went to Jarrod James - five goals; Alex Lantjin, three goals; Louis Narndu, two goals; Francis Kinthari, Lawrence Warnier, Jeremiah Wilson and Mark Parmbuk each had single goals.
The best players on the field for the day were Warwick Fenner, Jarrod James, Alex Lantjin, Francis Kinthari, Mark Parmbuk and Louis Narndu. Again, a great effort from the boys. Many changes were made to the side this week, and they took on Tracy Village on Sunday.
Players making their debut were Jeremiah Wilson, Sylvester Nilco and Tim Francis. That makes a total of 50 players who have represented the Wadeye Magic, which is a great effort. They have some great players out there, and they are very eager to participate. I will read some comments James provided:
- In what is becoming trademark fashion the Magic started the game like a house on fire. Mark Parmbuk was giving the on ballers first use of the ball with some fantastic ruckwork and the addition of Jarrod James up forward, was providing a great target.
Louie Narndu and Francis Kinthari continued to provide plenty of drive from the wings and Jeremiah Wilson added some pace through the midfield in his first game as well. At half time it looked like it was going to be another big win to the Magic.
The second half was a much more competitive affair though. Tracy Village utilised the breeze in the third quarter to their advantage and their much bigger bodies were proving hard to stop. The margin was narrowed to one goal and things didn’t look good for the Magic despite kicking with the breeze in the final quarter.
In the final quarter it was a genuine arm wrestle with both sides going goal for goal. Alex Lantjin had other ideas in the dying stages as he took the game by the scruff of the neck as he grabbed the ball from a centre bounce and kicked one of the goals of the year to lift the side. The goal lifted the Magic crowd and went on to win the match by 21 points.
The victory sees Wadeye Magic currently sitting on top position of the NTFL Division One ladder, a game clear of BANKS and Waratahs respectively.
A great effort by all the players and James MacNamee as manager, and also Jock McLeod, the coach. I will give further updates to the House.
I also pay tribute to Trevor Allwright who has been with the Power and Water Corporation for some 40-odd years, since 1968.
I was at the new Allwright Training Centre at the 19 Mile near Freds Pass, and it is a great facility the development of which Trevor has overseen. Trevor is retiring very shortly, and I told him I was one year old when he started work at Power and Water. He worked on the road gangs on the Victoria River Highway for many years. He started his apprenticeship as a linesman in Katherine in the early 1970s and as a trades assistant with the Electricity Supply Undertaking (ESU), the Commonwealth agency which was then responsible for electricity in the Northern Territory. Trevor is passionate about training and getting young people skilled up in a very dangerous environment.
He is one of nine children; he was born in Alice Springs and moved with his family to Darwin for a time before settling in Katherine. His great-grandfather arrived in the Territory by ship in 1873 at the original port of Palmerston, now known as Southport, and he later established Darwin’s first brewery, which is a great honour, I guess, to have in your family. The Allwrights are one of the few non-Aboriginal Territory families to date back to the 1800s.
Trevor will be fondly remembered within the Power and Water Corporation. I wish him all the best in his retirement, and look forward to him drifting back to the Northern Territory in the cooler Dry Season months. I believe we will see more of him at the 19 Mile providing some advice on how to further develop what is a great facility out there.
Trevor is driving his brand new Nissan Patrol to Victoria to pick up his brand new caravan, and then he will be heading around Australia. Trevor, good luck on the road with your family
Well done, Trevor, and thank you for your dedicated service.
There are a few Christmas wishes. I thank my electorate officer, Sharon McAlear, for all the great work she has done – a fabulous job, as she always does for me. She certainly puts up with a great deal of stress from constituents of my electorate, and other electorates – and from me from time to time. Well done. I hope she has a really great break with her family over the Christmas period, and looks forward to being refreshed in the New Year and really turning it on through a very busy and interesting 2012.
I thank my ministerial staff for their ongoing support - both my current ministerial staff and the ministerial staff from my previous portfolios. I welcome their advice, efforts, and contributions. I look forward to the continuing working relationship in the future.
I thank my colleagues on this side of the House. I wish the members on the other side of the House a safe and happy Christmas and New Year with your families.
We all know as members in this Chamber this is a very demanding job on ourselves and our families, and this is a time to reconnect and really appreciate what is truly valuable in our lives - our friends and families. So, merry Christmas, have a good year, and I look forward to a very interesting 2012.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to thank a few people for a fantastic and fascinating 12 months.
First, to Madam Speaker, who is not here tonight, the Clerk, Chamber staff, Vicki Long and all the Legislative Assembly staff who all work hard to make our day-to-day operations appear seamless. Thank you very much.
I wish a happy and safe Christmas to all members of the House.
I thank the very hard-working staff in Hansard. To this day, I do not understand how they keep up with it all and why they do not fall asleep given the fascinating debates we are treated to on some occasions. Please note the sarcasm.
To members of the Country Liberals, please have a merry Christmas; and to all our electorate officers, a big thank you for all your support. To the Opposition Leader’s staff on the fourth floor, your guidance, support and damned hard work is very much appreciated. Although I will be speaking to Terry about at least one of his staff and his complete and utter disrespect for me, I thank him all the same. I am glad to work with a dedicated team who share my values and, of course, humour. To anyone who might read this, that was humour. I really do like him.
To our Palmerston team in particular, Marlise, Tasma, and Donna, a big thank you for your ongoing commitment to helping our Palmerston community. It is not an easy one. Marlise, my own EO, your work and commitment this year has astounded me. No job is too big or too small. You never complain; you just pull up your sleeves and find solutions to the many problems we face each and every day. Marlise, to you I say, ‘Baie dankie’, and I wish you, Henrique and Luke have a beautiful time with your family in South Africa. Please have a safe Christmas and get some rest; we have a busy year next year.
To my beautiful wife and children: I cannot do this without your support, your love, and your understanding. The fishbowl we live in is my fault; it is not your fault, but you all understand what I am trying to do, what I am trying to achieve for Territorians. I am sure all members understand what I am saying here. Without my family, I do not have a reason to do what I do. Without my family, I simply could not do what I do. I love you all dearly.
To mum and dad, my thoughts will be with you over the next few weeks. Dad, the most remarkable man I know, was due to have open-heart surgery a few weeks ago, but that surgery was postponed. The surgery will now take place next week and our thoughts will be with you on that day and every day during your recovery. It is not your time, mate. You have more to do, and I have more to learn from your wisdom and your good humour.
Madam Deputy Speaker, Merry Christmas and to all who may be listening to the broadcast tonight, please have a safe and Merry Christmas, and here’s to 2012.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk about an outstanding young Territorian who was educated in Tennant Creek and graduated in Year 12 in 2010 - Marcellus Ah Kit. As the member for Barkly in the Northern Territory representing the electorate Marcellus Ah Kit calls home, and as a former teacher in Tennant Creek and the Barkly, who had the good fortune of working with Marcellus in the Youth Performance Program and with his parents as respected health and education professionals, I am filled with pride and admiration by the news that Marcellus is graduating from the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts.
I am advised by Kristi Johansen, a former teaching colleague and great mentor/teacher of Marcellus at Tennant Creek High School, that Marcellus is graduating from the Academy and celebrates this milestone with a lead role in a play, Who’s Afraid of the Working Class. My e-mail of congratulations to Marcellus was sent to Mr Rick Brayford, who is a lecturer in the acting department at the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts and coordinator of the Aboriginal Theatre Course. The e-mail text read:
- Dear Rick,
Please pass on my regards to Marcellus with a traditional, ‘break a leg’ for opening night and heartfelt congratulations on graduating from a premier performing arts academy.
Marcellus should be aware that not only has he achieved a fantastic personal goal in education and his performing arts but also presents as a dynamic role model for young Territorians and especially young Indigenous Territorians.
I would also like to thank you and the staff of the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts for the incredible support you have provided for Marcellus in the course of his studies and creative arts practice.
Keep up the good work.
Yours sincerely
Gerry McCarthy.
Who’s Afraid of the Working Class is a play created in the mid-1990s out of the Melbourne Worker’s Theatre during the reign of the Kennett government in Victoria. Four well-known writers created four interlocking stories that present the audience with a kaleidoscope of real-life influences on ordinary people relating to unemployment, job insecurity, family breakdown, racism and sexual abuse.
In the words of his lecturer, Mr Rick Brayford, Paddy, as he is known in Western Australia, auditions for the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts mainstream acting on Monday this week. He will graduate from his initial course in March 2012 with flying colours, and participates in his interview for Workshop and Props soon.
Closing night for Who’s Afraid of the Working Class was the biggest audience and probably the best overall performance. For photos, publicity and information, contact Anton at the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts marketing department at a.maz@ecu.edu.au.
I thank all the teachers and support staff from Tennant Creek who participated in Marcellus’ education over many years; and his parents who provided the supportive environment of love, care and nurturing that sustained his regular attendance, participation and engagement in a school education program. I make special mention of Kristi Johansen and Lawrie Cullen-Tait as two creative mentors for Marcellus in his performing arts education.
Kristi, as a teacher at the Tennant Creek High School, was instrumental in attracting the Bell Shakespeare company of New South Wales to Tennant Creek each year to support her creative arts initiative with her English as a Second Language classes, where a Shakespearean classic was studied, deconstructed and adapted to the real-life scenarios of the students’ lives growing up in the Barkly region. This creative arts program not only supported attendance and engagement, but also made the challenging task of teaching literacy to teenagers a dynamic, creative and meaningful experience. I bet if you ask any of Kristi’s former performing arts students to reflect on their school education, without a doubt they would cite their work in the Tennant Creek High School’s Shakespearean program as the most memorable of their school education program.
Lawrie Cullen-Tait was the professional creative director who would travel to Tennant Creek each year to share her extensive experience in the theatre as director, mentor and friend to the students who undertook the challenging curriculum project, and to support Kristi as a teacher pushing the boundaries of formal education delivery.
The Tennant Creek High School Shakespearean program was much loved by the community for its great educational outcomes, creative program content and spectacular performances. Kristi Johansen and Lawrie Cullen-Tait also supported Marcellus to apply and gain entry into the Western Australia Academy of Performing Arts, and continued to support his academic program and pastoral needs while he settled in and gained the necessary confidence to exercise his outstanding talents at a nationally recognised performing arts academy.
For Kristi and Lawrie, it seems to me that there is only one line left for you to workshop with Marcellus before he truly stretches his wings in the future and that is: ‘Marcellus, remember us when you are rich and famous’.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Deputy Speaker, although I appreciate everyone’s Christmas wishes and I will be wishing them a great Christmas soon, the problem I have is the Labor alcohol reform journey which, to the average person, does not seem to be working. The rivers of grog this Wet Season seem to be transformed into a sea of human antisocial behaviour.
In Palmerston, in my beautiful seat of Drysdale, which I love dearly, the flow of alcohol-impaired people from the local shopping centres has become concerning. During my lunch breaks at my local shopping centre I see people wandering through who are not necessarily extremely intoxicated, but definitely impaired from alcohol consumption, and it is very concerning. You see the same thing at the time the kids finish school when you step out of the shopping centres and pass the kids hanging out on the National Bank side. Amongst those kids are people hanging around the bank cash machines who are intoxicated and creating obstacles for people to step over, apart from any personal harm they may do to themselves. It is a journey, unfortunately, and I use it to highlight some problems.
As you step out of the shopping centre you go around the water tower, a place where too many people have been seriously hurt or lost their lives due to antisocial behaviour, alcoholism, or crimes committed upon them.
The beautiful memorial park developed by the Palmerston City Council and maintained by its contractors is a memorial place for Anzac Day parades, Remembrance Day parades, and where the Leopard tank now resides. However, to see people hanging their clothing and laundry over it in the mornings is a disgraceful sight; and to see people using the benches there for lawful business, and stuck into the remnants of grog from the night before is a disgrace, and it is directly across from the police station.
Reg Hillier Park is also a local community issue of concern which has been taken up as a concern of the Palmerston Regional Safer Communities. It is another park directly opposite the police station, unfortunately. To pre-empt any retort by the government, it is a park and it is the same for all those issues. We report those issues when we see the antisocial behaviour. I encourage people to continue to report that.
The myriad of camps scattered on our fringes is distressing to see. In 2006, when I left the Palmerston Police Station, we did not have any camps left. Approaches were taken and joint tasks were conducted to get rid of and break up the camps, move people on and return them home, or get them out of camping and out of the alcohol cycle. It is not good enough. We, as a community, must take back our parks and report all incidents of antisocial behaviour, drinkers and the like. I urge everyone in our communities to take action and ring the police and report these incidents of antisocial behaviour.
These drinkers have taken over and destroyed the freedom of our parks. It sounds simple, but many people we have been speaking with have reached the point where they think it is not worth ringing up anymore. I encourage and implore you all to ring the police because there is only one way the government will understand; that is, if we ring the police and let them know what is going on so they can report it. They have wound back the reporting of crime statistics, but we will continue to work on that. It is important you do that – for the people of Drysdale, Palmerston, and beyond.
As I said, this is a journey, and I am going to finish this journey by taking a quick trip down the Stuart Highway into Darwin. If you were to take this trip yourself, as I did last night and I have done many time before, this trip will enlighten you with sights of antisocial behaviour, starting as soon as you reach Dwyer Park - that is the park at The Narrows - following the highway to the roadside parks and open spaces on the Stuart Highway leading up to Parap Road, parallel with Hobbler Court - the member for Fannie Bay’s area - where, just last night, several groups of people were hanging around creating disturbances and lingering in the parks on the edge of the road.
Across the road - and people who regularly use the highway past there know they will often be interrupted by people crossing the road in various states – is the pipeline, and beyond the pipeline is where more people continue to carry out antisocial behaviour. Correct me if I am wrong, but it was only last week or the week before a man was stabbed there. It is a real problem. The government says it is not a problem and they have fixed it. It is a real problem. You only have to take that journey, that drive, to appreciate the work we have to come.
The land between the Stuart Highway and St John’s College – at the back of a school, for heaven’s sake - you will see untold amounts of antisocial behaviour. It is not acceptable. Make your way across the Daly Street Bridge to Harriet Place - Harriet Place is full of antisocial behaviour problems. It is not good enough.
The beautiful Esplanade in Darwin, just at our back door, is affected too regularly by antisocial behaviour - a place that, unfortunately, had to be barricaded for the recent visit by the United States President. Every day we go there and, sure, many people enjoy that facility, but the level of antisocial behaviour carried on there through the night is disgusting; less than acceptable. The park that takes the cake is Tamarind Park at the corner of Mitchell Street and Knuckey Street, directly opposite the Darwin City Police Station and watch house.
It is a short journey, and a journey to be considered and questioned, and it ends at the watch house which is responsible for taking all those drunks from the various parks in Palmerston and all the way into town. The perpetuation of offences occur directly opposite the police station - smack bang in the middle of Darwin city. There are traffic lights there for you to stop and have a look. It is a disgrace to see. It is a disgrace to hear this government come into this Chamber and say their alcohol policy is working. All you have to do is the same as every other Territorian does, and get out your little white cars, go for a drive, and see the problems.
Like alcoholism itself, you must admit there is a problem before you can fix it. This government has to admit they have a problem before any of the Territory’s problems can be fixed. Unfortunately, it does not seem they will admit their solutions are not working, and that is a shame.
I said it was a short journey, but a journey I ask ministers on the other side to take, as the rest of us do: get off your tailbone, go for a drive and see these problem places. They are right at our front door. Coming up to Christmas, I would like to see some change so all Territorians can have a beautiful, safe Christmas - all those in Drysdale and Blain and Brennan, my friends and colleagues, can have a safe Christmas with their families and constituents.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak on a letter I have received from the Save Eaton group. I will not read the whole letter into the Hansard, in fact I will read nearly nothing of it into Hansard except this:
- Please note if we receive no response to this letter it will be taken that you support plans to demolish the suburb of Eaton.
It is signed by Toni Vine-Bromley, Ruth Snodgrass, Mick Purcell, Wayne Morris and Mark Wynn.
I place on the record now, and I will forward this on to the authors of this letter, that I thoroughly support saving the suburb of Eaton.
I have to declare an interest here. The interest is that I share a common boundary with the suburb of Eaton. So, before any allegations are made about anything of that nature, I place on the record that I have a common boundary with the RAAF gate fence. Having said that, my interest in Eaton goes far beyond my personal interest; it goes well into the zone of good common sense.
I was mystified, disappointed and shocked to see a briefing at the Darwin City Council recently by the RAAF. The RAAF talked about what they were planning to do with the base and, to my astonishment, they briefed the Darwin City Council with a PowerPoint display on what they were also planning to do with the suburb of Eaton. My concern is this: as part of that briefing, the RAAF advised the Darwin City Council they are planning to knock over all but about 130 to 140 of the houses, and the rest would be reserved for military purposes.
I found that astonishing at the time, so I took the time out to contact the officers involved and asked them to forward me their full briefing. Unfortunately, they were unable to do so, and I was advised by the RAAF officers involved that no finalised decisions had been made and, therefore, they had no reason to forward this material on to me.
I have no recollection of them speaking in anything other than fairly determinant terms as to what was proposed for the land upon which these 400-odd houses stand – 395 houses, if memory serves me. I was sitting in the public gallery of the Darwin City Council when the briefing was made to the Darwin City Council, and I am distressed to discover that, what was essentially a public briefing, will not be forwarded to me as a member of parliament and a person in the Northern Territory, on the grounds that it is not yet a finalised decision.
There are nearly 400 houses in question here. They are serviceable homes. I have heard every excuse under the sun as to why the RAAF does not want to offload these houses. I accept none of them, other than the fact that the RAAF, or the Australian Defence Force, is acting in a churlish fashion and simply does not want to release this property into the public domain and into the Northern Territory freehold.
The member for Nelson today referred to it as a moral duty. We have some of the highest house prices in this country, and we are a town of around 130 000 people. It is simply beyond the scope of understanding as to why these houses will not be released into the marketplace. Calculating at a value of $600 000 each, which is just a guesstimate, I believe you would end up with just over $200m worth of property that could be sold into the public marketplace here in the Northern Territory. If people are worried about swamping the marketplace, then you stagger the release but, for God’s sake, release these houses into the property marketplace in the Northern Territory and allow the suburb to grow as a normal suburb. It is a normal suburb for all intents and purposes.
If I want to drive into the suburb of Eaton, do I get stopped at a checkpoint? No, I do not; I simply drive through. I can walk from my back fence right through the RAAF houses and out to Bagot Road without being challenged by anyone. I have had cause in the past to drive past those houses and not once have I been challenged by any individual. There is no gate; there is nothing to suggest that I am unwelcome there.
Essentially, these houses are a suburb in their own right. Yet, over my back fence, there is a perfectly good, serviceable and in a state of good repair, three-bedroom elevated home which I would move into tomorrow if I could. But no, this home remains abandoned and unoccupied, as it has for at least the past six months. There are many other houses that fit that description, and I find it incomprehensible that we live in a jurisdiction where we can have unoccupied houses and yet some of the worst rental prices and house prices in the nation.
I also thank the Legislative Assembly staff this evening for their support over the last year. From Christmas to Christmas, I see the amount of work they do; they are rarely acknowledged, and I acknowledge them now, particularly the Russells and the Michaels and the Stokesies of the world who might be listening at the moment, but also the ladies in Hansard …
A member: Stokesie is not listening.
Mr ELFERINK: I would be surprised if he ever does.
I also extend a very special expression of my gratitude to Linda Coulter, my electorate officer, who has been with me for 18 months or so. Having come into the job from a completely different field which had nothing to do with anything political - and I suspect she does not have many political bones in her body - she nevertheless works in a dedicated and diligent fashion for the member for Port Darwin. She puts up with me not being in the office for many hours a week, and yet dutifully we put on our walking shoes and go delivering pamphlets together nearly every month. I am delighted with her performance, and I place that on the record today. I extend my thanks to her, her husband, Geoff, and her two kids, Mary and Julian. My very warm regards to her and her family, and I thank them for what I force their mother and wife to do.
I also place on the record my thanks to my wife, the darling, lovely Dee, who puts up with me all the time, and my two beautiful daughters. All three say they love me, which only goes to prove that they have no taste in men, but I am grateful for that. I thank them for their support, particularly my wife; my two little girls are probably too young, but it is lovely to walk down the driveway and they are still enthusiastic to see me. I wonder if that will be true in a couple of years time, but we will see. My thanks to my wife who has been a great support to me in the last 12 months.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish everyone in this House, members ALP, members Independent and members CLP, a very Merry Christmas and a safe and prosperous new year.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to talk about the ongoing crime and antisocial behaviour targeted in a specific area of Alice Springs known as Billy Goat Hill. Billy Goat Hill is a small rugged outcrop in central Alice Springs, between Stott Terrace, Stuart Terrace, Telegraph Terrace and Bath Street. It is too rugged for habitation, but affords a lovely view over the town. Billy Goat Hill also has spiritual associations through the Aboriginal sacred sites. It takes its name from the goats which were once herded there and contained by a fence. Billy Goat Hill is, for the most part, an attractive precinct.
The specific area of Billy Goat Hill I am referring to in this adjournment speech is the Stuart Terrace side which consists of a row of businesses and residential premises. Billy Goat Hill does not have any fencing or mechanical barriers controlling access and the site is accessible to the public from every side. It is a haven for antisocial behaviour, including alcohol consumption, illegal camping, criminal damage, and graffiti.
For this reason, in July of this year, the Alice Springs police, in consultation with the various landowners, tenants and stakeholders, put together a strategic plan specifically to tackle and reduce antisocial behaviour in the Billy Goat Hill area. The vision for this strategic plan was to implement strategies to reduce antisocial behaviour. The mission was to reduce antisocial behaviour at Billy Goat Hill in consultation with stakeholders, and implement crime prevention through environmental design strategies. The strategy was to consult with the various stakeholders to identify risks and need for improvement, and to develop a workable security plan.
The stakeholders they identified included Rex Neindorf, owner of the Alice Springs Reptile Centre, Alice Springs Town Council, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, the Northern Territory government, and the whole of the heritage precinct in that area. In summary, they identified in the previous two years there had been 49 reports of antisocial behaviour in the area, 17 for consuming liquor in a public place, nine for general disturbances, three for general patrol issues, and one traffic offence.
The Alice Springs Reptile Centre is a regular victim of rock throwing. The reptile centre, located at the base of Billy Goat Hill on the southeastern corner of Bath Street and Stuart Terrace, Alice Springs, is often targeted by criminals and people who are intent on making misery for the reptile centre. Unfortunately, Billy Goat Hill has a ready supply of loose rocks which can be thrown at passing vehicles and pedestrians on all surrounding roads; this is a common problem for the police.
Billy Goat Hill is also used by itinerants as a camping and drinking location. There is always evidence of campfires, abandoned bedding, graffiti, food, alcohol, rubbish and human excrement. There is an unofficial walking path on the southern boundary of Billy Goat Hill which predominately attracts those involved in antisocial behaviour. This is caused by the concealment and lack of natural surveillance. The path is accessed via Bath Street behind the reptile centre, and via Stuart Terrace by walking along the Girl Guides western fence line. The path goes behind the back of the reptile centre and the Girl Guides hall. The path currently serves no legitimate purpose apart from enabling antisocial behaviour. I walked along this path and it is a cesspit, littered with rubbish and smelling of human excrement. Large groups of itinerant drinkers frequent this area, particularly behind the guide hall and the reptile centre. There is usually rubbish scattered all over the path, and you can observe excrement and extensive graffiti in this area.
The strategic plan states:
- A drinking camp behind the Girl Guides building exists. Antisocial behaviour occurs at any time of the day or night. The aim of this analysis is to consider cost-effective options to improve the current situation through the implementation of crime prevention through environmental design principals.
They came up with a number of plans; however, the one that is not being acted on at the moment is regarding the installation of fencing in the Billy Goat Hill area. The report recommended fencing is installed at both entry points to the path that runs from Bath Street behind the reptile centre through to the Girl Guides building. This would make access to Billy Goat Hill much more difficult. To meet crime prevention through environmental design standards, the fence would need to be transparent. Chain mesh fences are an example of this type of fencing. The transparency increases natural surveillance, which would also prevent any installed fence becoming a cover for non-legitimate users of the site.
This report has recommended two partial fences be built, one at the Girl Guides end of the path and the other one at the reptile centre. The report comes to the conclusion that this would be quite effective at stemming antisocial behaviour in the area.
The report suggests the Northern Territory government is now required to provide funding to install a partial fence at the southern boundary walking path, as I just mentioned, and the time frame from when the report was released in July 2011 was six months for the recommendations to be implemented.
I received a letter from Rex Neindorf, the owner and operator of the Alice Springs Reptile Centre yesterday. He said - and this is a typical weekend for Rex, particularly during the summer months:
- Hi Robyn, it was a manic weekend here. Rocked up to work Saturday morning and spent the first two hours or so with the police - nice way to start the day. A person had entered 7 Stuart Terrace ...
Which he owns and leases out:
- … by jumping the rear of the fence from Billy Goat Hill. He ran through the property, obviously trying to escape someone, and left a big trail of blood which we now have to clean up. The amount of broken glass around the place is incredible. So much for ‘reducing harm’ by removing two litre casks.
In the last few weeks, we have had two murders and numerous other stabbings in Alice Springs. Obviously, whatever measures are in place to reduce violence caused by excessive alcohol consumption are completely useless. I have attached a few photos for you, more evidence to fence Billy Goat Hill.
He went on to say:
- No real damage was done, however, it was a massive waste of time, several hours with the police and then another several hours cleaning up. As a struggling small business owner, we cannot afford this to happen all the time and it has been happening for over 10 years now.
Cheers,
Rex Neindorf.
The problem encountered by the Girl Guides and Rex Neindorf from the reptile centre needs to be addressed. They cannot afford to have another summer as they have had in recent times.
I request the Northern Territory government immediately respond to this key recommendation of this strategic plan for Billy Goat Hill; that is, to erect the two partial fences in this area. I implore they take immediate action and provide an update to the reptile centre and the Girl Guides particularly, and other tenants in the area, and how they plan to proceed with implementing this recommendation.
I take this opportunity to thank all my constituents in Araluen for their generosity and support over the last 12 months. I have truly embraced the opportunity to engage with many people who live in Araluen, and I really appreciate their openness and honesty.
I thank my Country Liberals colleagues. This last 12 months has been extremely challenging for us all, particularly for me being my first 14 months in the job. I thank the members of the government for being fair and always reliable when it comes to providing stimulating debate in the House.
I thank the members of the Legislative Assembly, Madam Speaker, Mr Clerk, and the Chamber staff, and also the wonderful workers in Hansard who plod away silently in the background.
I particularly thank my electorate officer, Carley Plume for her tireless work; she is absolutely fantastic. I thank my friends and my team of supporters.
Most of all, I thank my family, Alice and Harry Lambley and my incredible husband, Craig Lambley, who have been a wonderful support to me. I wish you all a happy and safe Christmas.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I focus on an issue of significant concern to do with the governance and the leadership of the Northern Territory. What I see before me, as someone who has been in this Chamber for 12 years, is clear evidence of a cover-up - or is it incompetence? Worse than that, it could well be a dangerous combination of two things: a cover-up and incompetence. Allow me to tell this story. I will start with immediate events and conclude with a reflection of what I have observed over a number of years.
Earlier in these sessions, the last week, with all the resources of government and a department, there was a delayed report - a police annual report. We had waited for that. Why do we wait for that? Because we want to have more information regarding the crime statistics in the Northern Territory, which have been withheld. When we finally got a copy of that report, having passed through many hands and sat the Chief Minister’s desk, I daresay, for a period of time with all those resources. It took a short time for the limited resources of the opposition to discover there were quite serious problems with aspects of the police annual report.
Notwithstanding its lateness which was brought to the attention of the Chief Minister, who is also the Police minister, he arrogantly dismissed the concerns of the opposition and then, by way of explanation, too quickly pointed out that this is a report of the Police Commissioner. He went on, effectively, to say: ‘Do not look at me. I do not accept responsibility’. He concludes with the words: ‘The Police Commissioner is obviously very disappointed and apologises to the parliament’. So, the Chief Minister does not accept a skerrick of responsibility and appears to be delighted that he can find an explanation that excludes him from being in the frame.
Then we move to Thursday night, and we had the member for Fong Lim in an important debate to which there had been a significant lead-up, with all the posturing and rhetoric from the other side trying to paint the opposition with tired old paint from way back. All we are seeking is clarity. We want to take these matters very seriously and we can only proceed if we believe we have an adequate understanding of the matters we have been asked to consider and decide on.
So, a legitimate question was asked by my shadow Planning minister, the member for Fong Lim. He asked the Chief Minster: ‘Is the Larrakia Development Corporation named in the Kenbi in-principle agreement or heads of agreement’? This was important to us; we wanted information. We had sought these documents so at least we could see them. We had a number of briefings, and the information was not made available. The interesting thing when asked that question, not having seen anything, was how emphatically the Chief Minister denied and said: ‘The answer is no. They are not named in any documentation’. It is the way in which it is responded to – what the emphasis was placed on, and the arrogant denial. However, we then had the personal explanation. Granted, we had the acknowledgement there had been a phone call made when it was realised. But, tellingly, in the explanation are these words from the Chief Minister: ‘I was told that the advice provided to me on that question was not correct’.
So, even though the emphatic denial is provided, arrogantly, in the Chamber, once caught out and acknowledged that this is actually a very serious trespass, he said: ‘I was told that the advice provided to me was incorrect’. Once again, we see the same thread of ‘I am not responsible’. It is a very serious issue nonetheless because, once again, we are trying to determine whether there is, in fact, a cover-up. We need to know these things so we can, with good conscience, provide support for something essentially, and in principle, we support. We want to see that progress but we want to know some details which have been assiduously denied us. Or is it incompetence? Well, we had that same thread here: ‘It is someone else’s responsibility. Someone gave me the wrong information that was not correct’.
Then today, we wanted to know is it incompetence, a cover-up, or both. Once again, there is a further attack on the opposition, painting these tired old stories from the past, endeavouring to create and sustain an impression which has sustained the Labor Party for a long time. We were still trying to determine whether the Chief Minister knew at the time if the Larrakia Development Incorporation had been included or not. We can explore the significance of that at a later stage. Did the Chief Minster know or not? One way of determining was whether the Chief Minister signed the heads of agreement. I asked the question: ‘Is your signature on the document that you are referring to’? The answer from the Chief Minister was: ‘I am not aware of which document the Leader of the Opposition is referring to’. I said, by way of the supplementary question: ‘The heads of agreement’. The Chief Minister then said: ‘No, my signature is not on the heads of agreement’.
Today, we had the second personal explanation and it is now looking more like incompetence rather than a cover-up. There is still the question of cover-up to be answered. Now we have: ‘Yes, the heads of agreement was signed by Hon Jenny Macklin on behalf of the Commonwealth; Kim Hill on behalf of the NLC, and by me on behalf of the Territory’. Does that mean the issue which was the point of contention today was that there was a commercial interest established with the Larrakia Development Corporation, which I assume would be enshrined in the heads of agreement document that the Chief Minister, in fact, signed? Did he not read what he signed, or was he just going along for the ride? Therefore, if we are talking about it being a cover-up, then perhaps we have an incompetent Chief Minister who is being used. I am wondering, as I am reading and considering all that has played out in the last few days, what we actually have here.
Allow me to reflect. I know the Chief Minister is the Chief Minister by virtue of a coup against the former Chief Minister, the former member for Fannie Bay, Clare Martin, and the former Deputy Chief Minister, Syd Stirling, the former member for Nhulunbuy. I know that the Chief Minister was prevailed upon constantly, in the lead-up to that coup, to take the reins. I suspect he did not have the ticker to do so. Once the pressure mounted he still resisted and was reluctant to do so. It was other forces that put the motion into play; it was only when the former Prime Minister, Mr Kevin Rudd, became the Prime Minister that he then had the ticker to take the move forward.
I understand, and I assume from what I am reading, with all the pressure of dissatisfaction on the former member for Fannie Bay, that the member for Wanguri, reluctantly, after the change of government and Howard was beaten, decided he would then move in shortly afterwards. He was not there too long and he took the 11-month early option and went to the polls 11 months early. Look what happened - we ended up with an opposition that matched the size of the government.
What do we have here? We have a government in trouble because the Chief Minister’s incompetence, I believe, gives us the situation where he is controlled by other forces. He does not quite know what he is signing or what the implications of what he is signing are for the Northern Territory. He appears to be out of his depth, and covers up by arrogance, denial or shifting the blame to other places. And, we have pressure on members here, I believe, who would retire, but have been required by the organisation to stay in their positions because they have an enterprise to protect, and that is the Labor Party.
There is much more at stake here than the Labor Party. It is the good interests of the people of the Northern Territory, and the Chief Minister says: ‘If you cannot trust the words of the Chief Minister, who can you?’ They are the words that were put in Hansard, and I believe they are going to haunt him. We now have grave concerns about the capacity of this Chief Minister, and the integrity of this government. Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, who the hell is in charge of this place?
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk on a number of things. One is a great initiative in my electorate of the Community Garden at Sanderson Middle School. I quote a piece from my electorate newsletter, and I believe it should go on the record. It says:
- A few years ago we had a wonderful garden at Sanderson. Then one night someone came into the garden and burned and destroyed as much of it as they could. Staff who had been involved in this garden were distraught at this wanton destruction, and slowly the area fell into disrepair. Recently, a group of staff and students have been working hard to get our garden back into production. It is intended for use in a range of programs to learn about sustainable resource use, including food production and land care in the school environment. A recycling centre will be set up to support the revitalised school-wide recycling process.
In the future, students will work with a range of community groups, including CSIRO, Australian Conservation Volunteers, Bushfires NT and Greening Australia to ensure sustainable environmentally friendly practices and products are used. Changes in community perception and behaviour are possible through education of our youth. This program will raise awareness on issues related to resource use, civic responsibility and minimising resource use, and methods available to take action to improve sustainability and reduce our footprint.
All of this would not be possible without the support of many people and organisations in our community who have donated equipment and resources to get the project up and running. We would like to take this opportunity to thank these people ...
The first one was me, Peter Styles, member for Sanderson, for fundraising and support donations. Also:
- Brenda Jarrett for donations; the Australian Conservation Volunteers NT for their expertise and support; Bushfires NT for providing equipment; Ed Organic Gardener at Anula, expertise and support; Danilo Sales, expertise and support; Bunnings Palmerston for donations, in particular, Ken Williams the Operations Manager who facilitated the donations; and Ausblok from Winnellie who donated blocks to build retaining walls etcetera that had fallen into disrepair.
I have to say the lady who is the driving force behind this is a young teacher at Sanderson who came to my office. Her name is Emily Corso and she is a dynamo. She came in full of enthusiasm, and when people come into your office who are so keen and full of enthusiasm you cannot help but be enriched by their presence, you want to help them do what they do, which is to teach our young people and help them establish fine community things like the community garden at Sanderson Middle School. I take this opportunity to put on the public record the good work done by Emily. Together, we were able to organise donations so the students did not have to dig into their pockets to get their community garden going. I congratulate not only Emily, but those at the school who supported her such as Iolanthe Sutton - and there are a number of students involved whose names I do not have at this time.
Another fabulous event I was very fortunate to attend and as keynote speaker, was the 30th anniversary gala dinner of the Blue Light Disco conference which was attended by a number of local people. It was a great honour to be invited to give the keynote presentation at what was the International Blue Light PCYC Conference hosted in Darwin commencing on 28 October. The conference was attended by over 100 police and civilian Blue Light members from every state and territory of Australia and New Zealand. The conference was followed by the NT Blue Light 30th Anniversary gala dinner which included a charity auction with proceeds donated to that great cause, the Variety Club.
The disco started in Melbourne in 1970, and was brought to the Northern Territory in 1981. I recall the arrival of the Blue Light Disco because it was the same year I arrived in the Northern Territory to commence work with the Northern Territory Police. The whole idea of Blue Light Discos was to provide a safe place for teenagers to have a night out without the risk of alcohol or other drugs.
This conference focused on police programs to engage young people and prevent crime, and to continue with that ethos of giving young people the opportunity to have a night out without being harassed by drug dealers, pushers, or anyone else under the influence of any of those drugs.
I have to give credit to someone who worked for the Blue Light Disco all those years ago and continues to support the Blue Light Disco program, that is current Alderman Allan Mitchell, Darwin City Council, and former senior sergeant in charge of the Crime Prevention Unit of the Northern Territory Police. Allan did a great job for years working hard to promote Blue Light Disco. He gave up an enormous amount of his own time to work for the young people of the Northern Territory and ensured the Blue Light Disco went far and wide across the Territory, out to bush communities, remote areas, suburban schools. He worked hard to ensure all kids had the same opportunity. I congratulate Allan Mitchell for that.
The conference was a raging success and there were an enormous number of people from around the Territory. I was the keynote speaker. Congratulations to First Class Constable Ward Tucker who runs the Blue Light Disco in the Northern Territory. Ward is one of those people who gets an enormous amount of satisfaction out of ensuring young people have the opportunities to have a good time in a safe environment. I congratulate Ward on the fantastic effort. It is a huge success which does not come unless someone does a great deal of work. I congratulate Ward and his team for putting on a fabulous event. I wish you well in the future with the Blue Light Discos.
I can assure the people from the Blue Light Discos, both in the Territory and around Australia, whilst I am in this House, I will do everything I can to ensure Blue Light Discos are supported and pushed around the Territory far and wide to even the remotest part of the Northern Territory, so all our young people get the opportunity to enjoy the fabulous experience that can come from being in a safe environment where they can really enjoy themselves.
I now mention someone who is a regular visitor to my electorate office, a young lady by the name of Karen Close. Karen needs to be congratulated for her outstanding efforts at Dancing with the Celebrities held in October. The 2011 Dancing with the Celebrities Annual Gala Ball showcased the dancing skills of Total Recreation members and their celebrity dance partners. Total Recreation is a Territory-based organisation which provides opportunities for people with disabilities to become active in the community through sport and recreation. Couples attend dance classes over a nine-week period, working towards their public performance at the ball, where they compete to become the Dancing with the Celebrities Grand Champion. It is as much about a chance to display their talents as it is about fundraising. Karen was runner-up on the night, and is rightly very proud of her achievements. We sincerely congratulate Karen.
It was interesting in the lead-up to this because, unfortunately, due to other long-standing commitments, I was unable to attend the ball or perform as one of the partners. However, I certainly was part of the journey, as was my electorate officer, Dee Davies. Almost on a daily basis we would chat with Karen and she would give us detailed up-to-date reports on what was happening with her dancing with her dance partner, and where she believed she ranked in the competition.
It was a fabulous event, and we have some wonderful photographs on show in the electorate office of Karen wearing her sash, with the magnificent trophy she received for her efforts on the night.
It is great to see organisations like Dancing with the Celebrities not only fundraise, but give people the opportunity to exhibit the talents they have, and we all have. My understanding was they raised a terrific amount of money, they had a great time, and Karen, of course, has the sash and the trophy to display to all.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, we congratulate Karen on a fabulous effort. I am sure she is not only proud of herself, but her family is very proud of her achievements.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I commemorate the life of Barbara Baggley from two perspectives: one as I, and others who are close to me knew her in a public sense; and also of her family. I will draw from a couple of sources.
First, Barbara was one of those incredible people who gave her all to the community by her support for many groups and organisations. There was not a fundraiser she was not collecting monies for, a committee she had not been on, a function she was not involved in either by organising or cooking, or a needy person she was not helping. I know, through getting out and about, that Barbara could be found at Alliance Francaise balls, Probus outings, the Historical Society meetings, Cancer Council fundraisings all over Darwin, U3A meetings, Labor Party functions, meetings and elections - she was a true party stalwart - but much more.
She was at the Darwin Entertainment Centre’s performances, a very great love of hers, and many sessions of both the Darwin Bridge Club and the Arafura Bridge Club. I am sure there are many other groups Barbara was involved in before and following her retirement from nursing. She had a long and distinguished career as a nurse here in the Northern Territory.
I am told that Barbara came from a very distinguished English legal family in the United Kingdom, and she learnt to play bridge at an early age. In later life, bridge gave Barbara a great deal of joy, and she last fronted the bridge table late last month despite a healing broken leg. During her many decades of bridge, Barbara was twice President of the Darwin Bridge Club, Secretary, and many times a committee member, ensuring the smooth running of the club to which she gave her all. She was also a great mentor to new players, and won the Northern Region Sponsored Pair with her partner, Val Fletcher, in 2010, which also gave her a lot of joy. Barbara also personally sponsored the hotly contested rubber bridge pairs by donating a trophy in her mother’s name to the Darwin Bridge Club.
I was aware of Barbara’s many bouts of illness, only through hearsay. She was absolutely stoic when it came to her health, and I was not aware of any complaints - she was very brave.
If there was a party, Barbara would be cooking up a storm. I believe she was a Cordon Bleu cook - no doubt an accomplishment she picked up during her years in France - and she was a very accomplished francophone. I have already mentioned her long association with Alliance Francaise. People in Alliance Francaise say how adept she was at speaking French; it came so naturally, so fluently to her. She produced many wonderful dishes, which she brought to my electorate Christmas party, and those dishes will be sorely missed. I will greatly miss her this year.
Barbara could always be counted upon to lend support to my colleagues and me in times of campaigning handing out how to votes; again, she gave so generously of her time and her efforts never flagged. When her daughter, Claudia, was at Moil Primary School, she would often pop into my office when it was at Moil, or simply help network; she was great at networking.
Barbara was very well respected in the wider Darwin community, and I acknowledge her.
I was also privileged to be at the ceremony commemorating Barbara’s life at Thorak Regional Cemetery. Many people from diverse areas of Darwin attended. In many ways, you would call it old Darwin, a range of people who had been in the Territory most of their lives, who had known Barbara and were there to pay their respects. I draw from parts of the eulogy delivered by her family.
She was born in London in 1923, and spent much of her childhood in Tring in the Hertfordshire countryside, where she also went to boarding school. She married at a relatively early age and went to Strasbourg, where the first of her three children, Mary-Lou, Beatrice and Renee, were born. Unfortunately, the marriage did not work out, and Barbara returned to England. Later she met Richard Baggley, and they were married in 1954, and Jenny, Sarah and Chris were born in London.
In 1965, they migrated to Australia, making a short stay in Adelaide before settling in Darwin in 1967. Darwin was somewhere Barbara really loved. The family said they were never bored; Barbara always had activities and games for them. She had a passion for the stage and drama and she dragged the kids along to the Darwin Amateur Musical Comedy Society where they had a lot of fun together at the theatre.
She was a strong feminist and her strong sense of social justice was really given force by her volunteering at Dawn House and Crisis Line, as well as campaigning for a crche at the hospital.
She had a profound and playful passion for words, and was a very eloquent person. Penguins was a organisation where she made many firm friends and exercised her impressive oratory skill. She was in U3A, where she made a massive contribution; and she was also involved with the Plain English Speaking Awards, coaching Miss NT entrants. She was always volunteering. She was always in committees, always involved in social activities. She started work at the old Darwin Hospital in 1967, and kept on working and forging many lifelong friendships. I have already mentioned her commitment and part in the Australian Labor Party.
I was very fond of Barbara. She could get a bit cranky at times, but I had a great deal of respect for her because usually she was right when she got cranky. That was all there was about it. There was no argument - and who was I to ever argue with Barbara about anything!
I have mentioned her associations with Alliance Francaise, and she also had involvement in the Portrait of a Senior Territorian Art Award, the Historical Society of the Northern Territory, and the Government House Foundation Board. I have mentioned her association with bridge, and the family put it this way: when she started playing bridge, she was hooked. She was a founding member and a life member of the Darwin Bridge Club.
Her health deteriorated over the last three years and, according to the family, she was frustrated in her limited ability to pursue her interests and engage in her community activities. A family member said: ‘Mum remained sharp and battled to maintain her physical independence’. That was Barbara to a T; she had a tenacious spirit, and she always wanted to recover her mobility. She was always organising things. Even to the last, she organised a Melbourne Cup lunch for patients at Darwin Private Hospital. The family really wish to thank all those people who gave support and comfort to their mother over the last months of her life - in particular, Nancy, David and Bob.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I pass my sincere condolences to Barbara’s family, and the myriad of her friends, far and wide. Rest in peace, Barbara Baggley.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016