2010-04-27
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, it is with deep regret that I advise of the death, on 13 April 2010, of Mr Bern Kilgariff, AM JP KStJ, the first Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, one of the first two Senators for the Northern Territory, and a proud Territorian and Centralian who fought for the rights and interests of Territorians for many decades.
He was a much loved husband for 62 years of Aileen and the father of 11 children: Daniel, Andrew, Frances, Helen, Claire, Brian, Anne, Michael, Kathryn, John, and the late Marie.
I received apologies from the direct family who are, unfortunately, unable to travel today. However, I understand many family members are listening to the Internet, and we extend our best wishes to you.
Madam SPEAKER: I advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of His Honour, the Administrator of the Northern Territory, Mr Tom Pauling, AO QC and Mrs Tessa Pauling. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Representing the family of Mr Kilgariff are his granddaughters, Ms Bridie Roditis and Ms Kay Blakeman, with Mr Kane Penley and Mr Kim Jenkinson, the husband of Claire Kilgariff. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
I also acknowledge former Administrator of the Northern Territory, the Honourable Austin Asche, AC QC and Dr Valerie Asche; former Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Mr Terry McCarthy and Mrs Mary McCarthy; former Senator for the Northern Territory, Mr Grant Tambling and Mrs Sandy Tambling; former members of the Legislative Assembly, Mr Tim Baldwin and Mrs Sandy Baldwin; Mr Rick Setter and Mrs Angela Setter; Ms Dawn Lawrie; Mr Neville Perkins, OAM; and Mr Fred Finch and Mrs Lyn Finch.
Also present are the Catholic Bishop of Darwin, Bishop Eugene Hurley, DD, and Father John Kelliher, MSC; Ms Eileen Hoosan, Deputy Chair of CAAPU Aboriginal Corporation; Mr Ray Chin, OAM, former Clerk of the Legislative Assembly; and Mr Peter and Mrs Sheila Forrest, biographers of Mr Kilgariff.
On behalf on honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: I remind honourable members that on completion of the debate I will ask members to stand in silence for one minute as a mark of respect. I call the Chief Minister.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move - That the Assembly –
Bern Kilgariff passed away on 13 April 2010 at the age of 86 at the Old Timers Home in Alice Springs after 81 years in the Territory. Bern was a great Territorian and a true gentleman. He witnessed remarkable changes in his lifetime, but Bern was not just a witness; he was often a key driver and figure in those changes.
I was honoured to speak at Bern Kilgariff’s funeral last week in Alice Springs where hundreds of townspeople came to pay their respects to a man who became one of the town’s patriarchs, a leader, a pioneer, but mostly a man they knew as a good bloke. It is great to see so many of Bern’s family and friends here in the gallery today.
Bern was a proud Territorian and a very proud Central Australian. He was a quiet man with a quiet dignity who always had an interest in people. When Bern asked how you were, he really did want to know. He was a proud family man who, together with his wife and life’s partner, Aileen - 62 years, Madam Speaker; that is just an extraordinary amount of time to be married - between them and with them they had 11 children: Daniel, John, Kathryn, Michael, Anne, Marie, Brian, Claire, Andrew, Helen and Frances. Bern was also a grandpa to 30 grandchildren and 12 great-grandchildren. What a family, what a legacy!
Bern Kilgariff leaves an enduring legacy. The biography of Bern and Aileen written by Peter and Sheila Forrest is called They Started Something, a very apt title. At the state funeral last week in Alice Springs, one of Bern’s sons, Michael, read an extraordinary eulogy about Bern’s life.
I spoke to Michael and asked if I could quote from some of his eulogy for the public record about Bern’s life, and Michael has sent me a copy of his speech. I will quote some of it here today for this condolence debate, for future generations who want to learn more about this wonderful man:
What Bern and Aileen started in many different areas will continue. He genuinely wanted to make the Territory a better place to live. Bern was involved in so many aspects of Central Australia and the Territory’s development of tourism, primary industry, health, the arts, education and politics. As a passionate and dedicated representative of the Territory, Senator Bern Kilgariff forged a reputation as a man to respect when it came to standing up for the issues he believed in.
He sometimes told the story of when he arrived in Canberra as the first Senator representing the Northern Territory. There was a cartoon at the time depicting six crows as the original states sitting on the branch of the Senate in Canberra, and how those six crows were determined not to make room for a seventh crow to come and sit on the branch with them. He says that pretty much sums up how he was treated back then; however, the Canberra crows were soon forced to make room for the tough Senator from the Territory.
His passionate support for the Territory is demonstrated by his involvement in the 1962 Remonstrance. This document outlined the grievances of the Territory concerning its constitutional position, and lack of representation and voice in national and local affairs. Bern was one of those who signed the Remonstrance even though he was an appointed member of the Legislative Council - probably the first lesson for Canberra that here was a man who was not going to toe their line. The Remonstrance is now on permanent display in Parliament House, and Bern was instrumental in getting the document out of the Archives in Canberra and bringing it home.
During his time in the Assembly, and then the federal parliament, Bern never failed to push the cause of the Northern Territory and Territorians. As Michael said, at the first election for the Legislative Assembly in October 1974 he won 72.2% of the primary vote with the memorable campaign slogan: ‘A Centralian for the Centre’. He gave the Territory a very strong voice in Canberra, particularly when it came to his work on parliamentary committees, the engine room of government. During his time in the Senate, he served on a number of Senate and joint committees including those involving social welfare, public works, foreign affairs, defence and, importantly, Aboriginal land rights in the Northern Territory. He also gave back to his home town, Alice Springs, serving on numerous committees and working to advance the town economically and socially.
During the past few weeks there have been many tributes paid to Bern Kilgariff, but one in particular sticks in my mind. Neville Chalmers, a former stock agent, said Bern was to Alice Springs like water is to a garden, and this rings very true.
Bern and his life partner, Aileen, helped to give life to what was then a tiny outpost and helped the town grow into the thriving centre it is today. He worked tirelessly for the Northern Territory, but was very self-effacing when it came to his achievements. I can remember hearing him on the ABC talking about his accomplishments, and he said: ‘I suppose there are a lot of achievements, but then, I have been in Alice Springs for 75 years and if you can’t fit a few things into 75 years, you should give up’.
Bern Kilgariff, we owe you our thanks for never giving up.
I also pay tribute to Aileen Kilgariff, Bern’s wife of 62 years, and a truly remarkable woman. It is not easy being the partner of a politician. For all those years in the Senate, Bern was away from home quite a bit as you can imagine. Aileen was Bern’s rock, biggest supporter, and wise counsel. Our condolences go to her and Bern’s children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, other family and friends on the passing of a true gentleman and a great Territorian who leaves us with an enduring legacy.
Madam Speaker, to mark that legacy, I am very pleased to inform the House that the future new suburb in Alice Springs that this government will be fast-tracking at the current Arid Zone Research Institute will be known as Kilgariff.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON: This new residential area, the future home for hundreds of Centralian families, will be a fitting commemoration for Bern Kilgariff, a man who worked tirelessly to grow and develop the town he loved, Alice Springs.
As a member of parliament and Chief Minister, I had the opportunity, on a number of occasions, to sit and speak with Bern at social functions and official functions around the Northern Territory. He really was a gentleman; he always had a smile; he always had a twinkle in his eye, and he also had words of advice. When I listened to Michael’s eulogy at the state funeral, and contemplated the enormous contribution that one man has made to the Northern Territory, I am very humbled to speak in this Condolence Motion today. All of us in public life come into public life wanting to make a difference. We are all passionate about the Territory. We all love the Territory. We all want to make the Territory a better place. Bern Kilgariff certainly did do that. He certainly made a very big difference and touched the lives of many thousands of people.
The Territory has lost a great Territorian and a true gentleman. His legacy of achievements will live on through his very extensive family - a true pioneer of the more recent history of the Northern Territory. Bern Kilgariff, AM, may he rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of former Chief Justice of the Northern Territory, Mr Brian Martin, and Mrs Lorraine Martin; and also the Solicitor-General for the Northern Territory, Mr Michael Grant QC. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, it is an honour to pay my respects, as the Opposition Leader, on the passing of Mr Bern Kilgariff. It was also was a great privilege last week to give a eulogy for Bern Kilgariff at the very moving state funeral held at Alice Springs, and to be able to acknowledge Centralians, almost another group within the Territory, who are fiercely proud of their place in the Territory story, and central to that is Bern Kilgariff.
Bern has been the very heart of Alice Springs for many decades. He has been in people’s hearts, at the heart of history, particularly in Central Australia. There are those among us who command respect through academic learning, physical presence, prowess, but Bern earned the respect of every Territorian through his humble, enduring passion for the Northern Territory as a whole.
Bern was a man who experienced many facets of Territory life: tourism, hotels such as the well-known Oasis, agriculture and politics. But a story is written in his life’s work. There is a legacy that remains, from which we can observe and learn.
The former Administrator, Ted Egan, referred to the family: the trademark Kilgariff look. You know who is a Kilgariff and who is not by the look - the trademark look - the legacy that is left in that family; to have so many people in attendance was an example to everyone, as family people. The Chief Minister has referred to Bern’s marriage of 62 years. Once again, a legacy and an example for all of us to aspire to: a long, fruitful, and blessed marriage - it is a challenge for each of us.
His story has been written in many places, and it is important to note with some gratitude that it has. I thank our local Territory historians, Peter and Sheila Forrest, for tracing the life and times of the Kilgariffs in their beautiful book titled They Started Something, a book I have shared with my own family in Western Australia, who love Australia and Australian stories. It is a story that is spread widely, not just for the interesting events, but for the example that has been set by a life lived and a contribution made. It is my genuine hope that future Territory students have this publication included as part of their studies. It is a wonderful depiction of the journey taken by this renowned Territorian over the past eight decades.
On 4 August 1929, the first Ghan passenger train left Adelaide for Alice Springs, then known as Stuart. The following year, Bern and his mother and sister set off on a three-day trip to join his father in their new home in Alice - population 100 - with supplies delivered by camel train. It was apt that Bern arrived aged seven on The Ghan.
I recall him describing the time when the Northern Territory was starting to gain an awareness of its potential and opportunities, and its responsibilities. This train story was referred to on a number of occasions at the state funeral: his family got on a train that commenced a journey that continued on in Alice Springs. That quite significant metaphor of getting on a train to see where it will take you kept coming up. He gets on trains to see where they will take him, because he sees a significant movement and gets on board and plays his part.
If one traces the history of Alice Springs, one traces the history of the Kilgariffs. I am pleased to hear that the name will be given to a suburb. From the colourful days of the Stuart Arms, run in the 1920s and 1930s by Uncle Joe Kilgariff; Father James Long, the first resident priest of Alice Springs, had his initial home there. As Peg Nelson remembered, Alice Springs at that time was, essentially, the Stuart Arms pub, a police station, a couple of stores, and three or four private homes - how it has changed.
Bern accompanied his father delivering building materials to fledgling family businesses in Barrow Creek, Tennant Creek, and Aileron, and to gold mining enterprises at Winnecke and The Granites. On 28 February 1938, the Catholic school opened with Bern Kilgariff one of the first students enrolled. His father had helped with the construction of this first convent school.
Leaving school, Bern’s first job was with the pioneering Connellan Airways. When the older men left to join up, including the renowned Sam Calder, Bern swiftly became a jack-of-all-trades.
His mother passed away in 1941 when Bern was only 18 years of age.
In 1942, having witnessed the transformation of Alice by the military and refugees following the bombing of Darwin, and the arrival of the Administrator, Aubrey Abbott, Bern insisted on joining up. He trained with the Armed Cavalry Division and, eventually, embarked on the Duntroon as reinforcement with the 2/5 Infantry Battalion in the 17th Brigade heading north to New Guinea. Following rigorous patrols clearing the Japanese from their village bases, Bern contracted scrub typhus and was air lifted to Aitape.
He later discovered it may well have been Fred Chaney, the tenth Administrator of the Northern Territory, who was the pilot on that day. At his own request, Bern returned north and was present as part of the guard when Lieutenant-General Adachi, Japanese Commander in New Guinea, surrendered at Wewak.
Happier times were restored back in Alice, especially when Bern could be seen on his Harley-Davidson with Aileen as pillion passenger, and his dog called Paddy. They married in 1948 and their 60-plus years are more than a testament to mutual, caring devotion, not just to each other, but to those they have met along the way. Daughter Fran probably describes it best: ‘Dad is the public face of the family, and Mum is its backbone’.
Organisations that benefited from Kilgariff contributions in the early days, especially of time, included the Memorial Club, which started life in 1947 as two Sidney Williams huts at the foot of Anzac Hill. In 1959, Bern became one of the foundation members of the Northern Territory Housing Commission, an entity established to tackle the challenges of the very necessary provision of homes – nothing has changed.
This proved the precursor to appointment, initially, as non-official councillor of the Legislative Council just over 40 years ago on 12 April 1960. In late 1960, the Alice Springs Town Planning Advisory Committee was set up in Darwin as an advisory body with local representatives, Neil Hargrave and Bern Kilgariff. The committee’s aim was to ensure that regional advice on the development of the town be recognised. And, in 1961, Bern joined the new organisation, the Central Australian Travel Association, and went on to become Chairman of Directors. He was very well qualified as his business venture at the time, the Oasis Motel, was, according to Administrator, Roger Knott: ‘The equal of any motel I have seen anywhere in Australia’. Son, Brian’s comment is perceptive: ‘I never really noticed Dad getting into public life; he was always in it as far as I recall it. We always felt that he was a non-politician in a political environment. I thought he was just trying to do the best that he could do for the Territory. He was not really a man with ambitions for high political office, and when high office came to him, he was a bit surprised’.
Bern’s own comment about the motivation for public office was: ‘We all did it because of the dream we had that one day the Territory might achieve constitutional equality with the rest of Australia; that is why we did it’.
The days were certainly dynamic and Bern’s membership lasted from the Seventh Council through to the last sitting in 1974. As an aside, on the very first day of the Legislative Council in 1960, Bern joined with the elected members to defeat a government motion that precedence should be given to government business. This was a gentleman who knew his own mind and, in 1968, his slogan said it all: ‘Centralian for the Centre – put Kilgariff back in the Council’.
In 1970, his position was that the government’s response was completely unacceptable regarding the adequacy of the constitutional and political arrangements for the Northern Territory. He therefore moved that a delegation of three Councillors be sent to Canberra to confer on the subject of the grievances of the people of the Northern Territory. The motion was carried. The delegation, comprising Bern, Tony Greatorex and Joe Fisher, set off and returned with notable support, including progress toward a fully-elected legislature – which we have now – and the transfer of state-type functions to a Northern Territory Public Service, a notable achievement. He got on a train to see where it would take him – and we arrived at that destination.
The Northern Territory Country Liberal Party was officially launched at the inaugural annual conference in Alice Springs on 20 July 1974. Bern, together with Roger Vale, had overseen its gestation from the Country Party, formed in Central Australia in 1956 to support the election of Sam Calder to the House of Representatives, through to the fusion of the Country Party with the Liberal Party.
The Legislative Council was finally replaced by a fully-elected Legislative Assembly. At the first election for the Legislative Assembly held in October 1974, Bern won 72.2% of the primary vote, the strongest result of any candidate and a tribute to his integrity, his hard work, and his ability.
On 20 November 1974, he was sworn in as the Speaker of the new fully-elected Assembly. Less than five weeks later, Darwin was devastated by Cyclone Tracy. Bern flew back from Alice to Darwin to find that the Assembly building had sustained serious damage. Emergency legislation had to be passed as soon as possible, so emergency sittings were convened to begin just eight days after the cyclone. He remembered: ‘When we sat there, there was about an inch of water over the floor of the Chamber’ – just imagine that – ‘a lot of the roof had gone’ – imagine that – ‘and some of the walls had been blown in’.
There was drama of a different type in November 1975 when the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, dismissed Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister and appointed Malcolm Fraser as caretaker Prime Minister. A double dissolution election was held on 13 December 1974, at which the Whitlam government was soundly defeated, and Bern overwhelmingly won election to the Senate. He continued as a Senator for the Northern Territory until 1987.
The Territory’s progression to self-government remained an absolute priority for Bern, and he was not alone. Another champion for the cause was one Harold ‘Tiger’ Brennan – I travelled on that road this morning, named after Tiger Brennan. Bern, no doubt, smiled when he remembered the first time he met Tiger; Tiger had helped the Kilgariffs make bricks for a period when he was a simple swaggie camped by the Todd River.
Darwin changed rapidly in the first three years after Tracy; however, after self-government in 1978, change was consolidated and accelerated Territory-wide. Fortunately, we had a highly able ambassador in Canberra, who also seized on the opportunity to raise humanitarian issues such as the plight of Timorese refugees, and Aboriginal affairs. Bern served as a highly effective Government Whip, and then Opposition Whip in the Senate from 1981 to 1987.
Bern’s history in the Northern Territory underlines just how important he was to the founding of the Country Liberal Party. An Internet definition of the word ‘architect’ is ‘someone who creates plans to be used in making something’. That is exactly what Bern was – the architect.
His awards and appointments are a measure of the man, and include a Centenary Medal for service to Australian society through parliament; a Medal of the Order of Australia in 1989; and appointment as a Member of the Order of Australia in the Queen’s Birthday honours list in 1996 for continued service to the Northern Territory through the Northern Territory Landcare Council, the Anti-Rabbit Research Foundation, the Cattlemen's Association, the Australia Day Council and St John Ambulance.
In conclusion, I stress the scope of contribution the entire family has made to the Northern Territory at every level. Bern led by example, and that outstanding example has been followed.
Returning to the metaphor Bern often referred to - and I can clearly recall a conversation I had with him early on about getting on the train to see where it would take him - that train was to take us to constitutional equality in the Northern Territory so we had that status. That was the movement – he got on that train to see where it would take him.
It strikes me that Bern has left that train. It has passed through one station – that is self-government – but the train is continuing on. Although Bern has left the train, it is left to us to continue the journey which motivated and inspired Bern to make that contribution. We need to continue that work. I did hear it said that when he passed he would not see statehood – it is up to us to continue on that journey.
Today, in this House, we bid Bern farewell. We note, for posterity, his embodiment as a remarkable spirit - a quiet imprint and a strong, lasting legacy remains. His life was spent building a peaceful and better world, requiring a spirit of friendship, honour, solidarity and fair play.
May he rest in peace.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is with great sadness I speak in debate on the Motion of Condolence for the late Mr Bern Kilgariff AM JP KStJ, the first Speaker of this parliament, and the first Senator of the Northern Territory.
It is fair to say I only knew Bern in the latter years of his life; mainly since becoming the Speaker of this parliament five years ago. Being Speaker, you become part of a relatively small group of people who preside over, or who have presided over, parliaments. In the case of Bern, when I became Speaker he wrote me a very lovely letter congratulating me on the position, and making a few suggestions on the best way to deal with recalcitrant members. This started a warm telephone acquaintance which lasted until late last year. I kept up with his health after this through his daughter, Frances, or Fran, as I call her. He would ring me occasionally, and send me a note if he had read about particular behaviour in the Chamber and offer commiserations and suggestions on how to urge members to behave in a more suitable way. In my turn, I would ring and tell him of condolence motions in our parliament of many of his old friends. In particular, I remember the conversations relating to the deaths of his good friends, Sam Calder, Joe Fisher and Reverend Jim Downing, all great Territorians who were pioneers of the Territory.
In late 2005, I had the pleasure of hosting the Darwin launch of his and Aileen’s biography They Started Something by Peter and Sheila Forrest, in Parliament House. Those members who were elected at the time will recall that Bern and Aileen attended and regaled us with the most marvellous stories of life in the early days of the Assembly.
I particularly liked the story relating to the first sittings of the parliament after Cyclone Tracy, which the Leader of the Opposition referred to, when Bern had to recall parliament in order to pass urgent legislation to allow the reconstruction to commence. I read an extract from Peter and Sheila Forrest’s book:
Bern went on to become one of our first two Senators, together with Senator Ted Robertson. In his maiden speech in the Senate on 18 February 1976, he spoke about his dreams and visions for the Northern Territory and particularly of his hope that the Territory would become a state. I read from part of his maiden speech:
A little later he said:
Bern was a fierce advocate of statehood for the Northern Territory. When I became the Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee early last year, he spoke to me about the need for us to become a state and how proud he was that his daughter, Frances, was carrying on that work as the Co-Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee. It is, perhaps then, not surprising that one of the first things Aileen said after he died was: ‘Now Bernie won’t get to see the Territory become a state’.
Perhaps the most distinctive thing about Bern and Aileen was their devout Catholic faith. This was so evident in the state funeral last week when the Bishop of Darwin, Eugene Hurley, and the Bishop of Broome, Christopher Saunders, together with 12 other priests concelebrated the Mass that Bern and Aileen love so much. In many ways the funeral was, as Bishop Eugene said to me later: ‘a celebration of the best of the Catholic faith’.
His was a life of love, faith, and compassion. In the family home, every night before dinner, the whole family would kneel and say the Rosary - which takes about 12 minutes. Apparently, Bern and Aileen would say: ‘The family that prays together stays together’. They always attended Mass on Sundays and frequently at other times. The devotion to his faith started early in life as his father had built the first Catholic Church in Alice Springs. However, this was not a false piety but rather something that was central to his life, and could be seen playing out in other parts of his life.
In 1956, Bern and Aileen adopted Andrew, an orphan who had come to stay during the holidays from a Catholic orphanage in Adelaide. He came for a holiday, but never left, and was accepted as if he were naturally born to Bern and Aileen. In the 1980s, Bern and Aileen became involved, through the Catholic Church, with the refugee intake from Vietnam, and adopted a Vietnamese family, Thuong and Thung Phan, who remain very close to the whole Kilgariff family, and always refer to Bern and Aileen as Mum and Dad.
Bern was also a very keen advocate for East Timor and the debt he saw Australia had to their people because of the death of thousands of East Timorese who helped to shelter Australian soldiers during World War II, to their own detriment. He was quite vocal on this matter, even when it was not politically popular, either with his own colleagues or others. I quote again from both his maiden speech and parts of Peter and Sheila Forrest’s book. Bern said:
He also had great respect for Aboriginal people, and was friends with some of the great figures of recent Aboriginal history - the Rubuntja brothers, and Vincent Lingiari - and the testament given by the Deputy of the Administrator, Mrs Pat Miller, at the funeral, and the moving tribute by the Tangentyere Council, is a testimony to this. I would like to read the tribute which was in the Centralian Advocate on 16 April from Tangentyere Council, from William Tilmouth, the Director:
He served his country in New Guinea, and with honour, in the 2/5 Infantry Battalion of the 6th Division AIF in World War II.
He was a man who made friends easily and listened carefully. He was highly respected by many who worked with him, from Sir John Carrick, the Leader of the House in the Senate, who said he was utterly honest and reliable; to his good friend, former President of the Senate, Margaret Reid, who spoke warmly of her friend and fellow Senator at the funeral, who, she said would never tell you what to do but rather would suggest that you might want to do something. She told the delightful story of visiting Aileen and Bern in Alice Springs. Bern asked her if she would like some mandarins because they had a beautiful mandarin tree in full fruit, and would she like to take some with her when she went. She said she would be delighted. About 10 minutes later, he said: ‘I will go and get those mandarins’. It was clearly time to go.
I do have a short note, which I received from Margaret Reid last night, and she asked me to read this into the Hansard:
Former Administrator and great friend, Ted Egan, also spoke at the funeral and referred to Bern as the top achiever ever, and said what set him apart was not that he did so much; it is the way he did it. He had no ulterior motives in life.
It is worth noting that the parliamentary staff who worked with him were also very devoted to him. Our Clerk, Mr Ian McNeill, worked with Bern in the Senate in the 1970s and 1980s, and said he was very grateful for his friendship and respect. He and Kit add their condolences to the family.
He has left a wonderful legacy with his family and friends, and especially in a dream lived out for a better Northern Territory. Undoubtedly, he is on that tram now, looking for new friends and meeting up with old friends and family.
Vale Bern Kilgariff; God’s speed on that tram.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to express in this parliamentary forum, as I have done personally to members of the Kilgariff family, my heartfelt condolences. I also express my thanks to them for sharing their husband, father and grandfather with the residents of Alice Springs and the Northern Territory for so many years. His contribution speaks for itself, and members have already spoken this morning about the length and breadth of his contributions.
I agree with Ted Egan when he said Bern was the Territory’s ‘top achiever ever’. I agree with Bishop Eugene Hurley when he said Bern was a ‘truly great human being’. He was, as we know, self-effacing, gracious, generous, humble, a man of integrity, and a man with a strong moral and ethical code.
He was not driven by ego or ambition; he was driven by a desire to serve his community and to make a contribution to it, and what an outstanding contribution he made. As I said recently, Bern wrote the book on public service; he was the quintessential public servant and he did it with style and grace. He was, for me, the best example of how politicians could do good work and could make a contribution.
Bern Kilgariff made politicians look good. There should be more Bern Kilgariffs; and I am hopeful there will be. He was a constant reminder to me, and I am sure to many others, that politicians could do good things for people, often quietly and behind the scenes. He was a great humanitarian, and was respected and admired by people on both sides of politics; and that was the mark of the man.
I spent some time with him at Old Timers just before Christmas, and I am very glad I did. He was a friend, a mentor and an inspiration. As a young politician in Alice Springs, I was very grateful for his friendship, his wise counsel, and his support. I learned much from him. He would call into my office regularly in the early years offering guidance and support. Sometimes his advice was about quite minor things. However, he knew, as all good politicians know, often it is the smaller things which are important to people, and you do not necessarily have to scream from the rooftops to make a point or to get things done.
Actually serving the community, as well as being seen to serve the community, are vital ingredients for any member of parliament, and Bern Kilgariff set the bar. I do not believe anyone in this House will ever get close to his contribution to his community, or public life.
One finds in politics many pretenders - people who pretend to get things done when they actually do not; people who say they care when they really do not; and people who say they want to make a difference but, who are, in fact, driven by ego and ambition. That was not Bern Kilgariff. He was the real deal. He cared about his community, he cared about people and, importantly, he really liked them.
Despite being a founding father of our Party, I do not believe Bern was ever driven by what, sadly, consumes many modern day politicians - a sometimes irrational and unquestioning devotion to one’s political Party. He just wanted politicians to do their jobs and to make their community better.
It has been said when his daughter, Fran, decided to run for the Labor Party in Alice Springs in 2005, it must have been a difficult time for Bern. I am not sure that it was. I remember how some people in the CLP were appalled and shocked that he would support his daughter. Frankly, I would have been appalled and shocked had he done anything other than support his daughter. When many people around me at the time were asking how he could support his Labor daughter, I asked how could he not, and why should he not.
For Bern, it seemed to me, politics was about representing people and working hard for them. I suspect he always backed the candidate who he thought would do the best job. Despite being a founding father of the CLP, I do not believe he was wedded to ‘the Party line’ or, indeed, any Party line. He followed his own conscience, had his own ethical and moral code about politicians and, for that matter, budding politicians, and he looked at and assessed what they were capable of achieving.
Bishop Hurley called Bern ‘a man of his time’. I believe his approach to politics and representative democracy makes him a man for all seasons.
Interestingly, last week a friend rang me about Bern. She has lived in Alice Springs for a long time, and is a woman in her mid-30s. She had never met him, but said she had read and heard so much about him since his death she wondered if it was all true. She rang me because, as she said: ‘You will give me a straight answer’. I said: ‘Yes, everything you have read and heard about Bern Kilgariff is true’. She was amazed. Our conversation started me thinking about those people in our community, particularly in Alice Springs, who had not met Bern and, in particular, younger people who perhaps did not fully appreciate his contribution to the Territory and Alice Springs, and even those who had not heard of him.
I am pleased to hear a new suburb in Alice Springs will be named Kilgariff; it is a great idea. I would like to add something - and I have not spoken to the family, or the Chief Minister, or my colleagues about this. I believe, in addition, it would be an entirely appropriate and fitting tribute to Bern if we as a parliament, or perhaps the government, funded a Bern Kilgariff Scholarship to be awarded to a school student from Alice Springs each year. I know, as we all do, that Bern’s name and legacy will live on regardless; however, I believe it is important we do what we can to educate young people about him, his values, and his contribution. I believe we should and can get together to create a scholarship that bears his name.
In the same way that he shared with us his values and was an outstanding example of public service, I believe we have a responsibility to share his legacy with others, particularly younger people, and a scholarship will be a wonderful way for us, his successors, to carry the baton and pass it on.
On that hopeful note I will conclude. Again, I pass on my heartfelt condolences to Aileen and all members of the family
I thank Bern for his outstanding and truly marvelous contribution to the Territory and, in particular, my town of Alice Springs.
Ms LAWRIE (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, my deepest condolences to the Kilgariff family. I did not have the opportunity to attend the state funeral on Thursday of last week, but caught up with Aileen and members of the family in Alice Springs on Saturday. That was a very special morning.
I made the mistake of saying on Saturday I had known Bern since I was five years old. Subsequently, I received a contribution to the condolence motion from my mother, and on reading that I realised I first met him when I was two years old.
I will start of with the contribution from Dawn, who served with Bern in the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly, and is here today. This is from Dawn:
I have a few favourite Bern Kilgariff tales, which I shared with the family on the weekend. Due to the nature of some of them, I cannot repeat them in this Chamber on the public record, because he was truly, in my experience, extremely mischievous. That being said, as a child growing up around the old Legislative Council building and the old Assembly building in the days before after-school care, I got to judge the politicians of the day, not by their politics but by their character.
Bern Kilgariff was an exceptional man of exceptional stature. I saw the way he treated my mother with kindness, and the way in which he embraced her three children as we played around the halls of the then Assembly. He was a generous man, a truly kind man; he was, above and foremost, a family man. He cared very deeply about his children, his grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
We have heard of the exceptional contribution Bern Kilgariff has made to the development of the Territory, particularly and especially the development of Central Australia. He was passionate about the Territory and about the Centre.
I recall the condition of the building of the old Assembly, post-Cyclone Tracy, and the way in which, with his strength and demeanour, he ensured there was a smooth operation of government here in the Territory in those horror days.
Politics in the Territory sometimes transcends political parties, and Bern was very generous with his time when I was elected to office. I recall his mischievous sense of humour again at play when we had our first sittings as a parliament in Alice Springs. We were having the official function in the forecourt of the Convention Centre, and you could have cut the air with a knife; there was some tension there because it was post-election of the first Labor government in the history of the Territory and, there we were, in CLP heartland of the time.
Speeches were about to get under way and everyone was quite hushed as I entered the crowd and scurried in because I had been delayed doing some work in preparation for sittings. Bern happened to be standing there surrounded by people from Alice Springs. I scooted in trying not to be noticed, but Bern noticed me, called me to his side, gave me the usual hug and kiss that he always greeted me with and, with a mischievous twinkle in his eye, loudly announced to everyone within earshot – which was quite a number of people: ‘This is Delia. She is the member for Karama; she is like my granddaughter’. There was a shocked gasp from many people, and enormous embarrassment for me, but that was Bern’s way. He was highly politically mischievous when the occasion took him.
We will miss this great Territorian, but he has left an enormous legacy. He has a tremendous family. Aileen is a very special woman, and you have heard contributions about her in the Chamber today. But, his children and, I believe, his grandchildren and great-grandchildren will all go on in some way to make their mark in the Territory. They are a large family, scattered around our great nation, but there are many Kilgariffs who have continued living in the Territory and call the Territory home.
Bern Kilgariff was a stand-out, exceptional Territorian in a very heady and challenging era of politics in the Territory. Of the politicians of the time, from my view, looking at them as a child where I did not see politics but I saw simply character, Bern Kilgariff, Dick Ward, Tiger Brennan and Ron Withnall were the stand-out gentlemen of their day, and truly did carve a significant legacy for the Territory and Territorians; men of exceptional stature.
Bern will be long remembered by many Territorians. I acknowledge the book, by Sheila and Peter Forrest - a good book. I certainly acknowledge the great suggestion by the member for Araluen for a Bern Kilgariff scholarship. I had a quick chat to the Chief Minister, and I can say we will be picking up on that suggestion. The Chief Minister is pleased to say it is something this government would be happy to put in place. So, well done for that suggestion.
My condolences to the family. He was a tremendous man, and we were all very well served by the great Bern Kilgariff.
May he rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, Bern Kilgariff is a man I knew over many years, not as well as others, but I knew him and knew of him because of his long life in the Territory.
My first contact with anything Kilgariff was when I went to the movies at the Kilgariff Oasis Motel in Alice Springs in mid-1964, on a school geography excursion.
I was married in the church at Daly River, which Bern’s father, Steve, and John D’Arcy built in the early 1950s.
I first met Bern when he travelled to various places, such as Bathurst Island and Daly River, on his rounds as an NT politician or as a Senator. When I started in local government and when I became a member of parliament, he supported my endeavours, encouraged me and gave me advice, especially when I caught up with him when the parliamentary sittings were held in Alice Springs. Reading some of his adjournment debates when he was in Canberra, I would say that his politics were similar to mine, which perhaps had something to do with that Irish Catholic background.
He was a man in touch with the common man, no matter where that person lived in the Territory or the colour of their skin. That is what I believe Bern saw as the founding principle of the CLP when he helped form that party: it represented his ideals.
But it is not the politics that is necessarily important, but how a person lives their life and what influence that person had on others. If I could be half as good a man as Bern, I would be happy. If I had half the influence on others that Bern had, I would be happy. Bern affected me, not because I met him a few times, but because of what he said and did. He affected many others, as you will see if you read the biography, They Started Something by Peter and Sheila Forrest.
Bern was a great Territorian, a fine politician, a family man, a worker, a pastoralist and an environmentalist; a friend of Aboriginal people and refugees from Vietnam and Timor. And, of course, he was an amazing chook farmer - perhaps that is where we should use the scholarship. Most of all, he was a good man – isn’t that the most important thing?
In 1520, the poet, Robert Whittington, wrote an epitaph about Sir Thomas More, whose head King Henry VIII had chopped off. Since then, Sir Thomas More has become the Patron Saint of politicians and large families – isn’t that interesting? Sir Robert Whittington wrote:
Thomas More was the Englishman for all seasons, and although, thankfully, Bern did not suffer the same fate as Sir Thomas More, there was no doubt Bern Kilgariff was our Territory man for all seasons.
Rest in peace, Bern, and may the angels lead you into paradise.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, my condolences to the family.
It is a great honour to be able to speak today about Bern Kilgariff. There is a sense of irony that someone like me, who has only spent 10 years in the Northern Territory, is standing in parliament speaking about someone who has spent 80 years contributing to the Territory. In fact, when I was born in 1968, he was already 42 - which made him older than I am today. He had managed to squeeze so much into his life by that stage already.
Before I met Bern, his legacy was already enormous. Our paths did not cross until a few years after I arrived in Alice Springs, and it was a brief encounter; however, I was struck by his demeanour and his presence. When I was elected, my association with Bern took on another dimension. Bern’s political contribution to the Northern Territory is without question; much of which has been highlighted today, and at his state funeral last Thursday.
The electorate I represent is Greatorex, and is named after Tony Greatorex. On the few occasions Bern and I were able to sit down and have lengthy chats, he would regale me with stories about his great mate, Tony Greatorex. I was very grateful for that, because his knowledge of Tony and the times they shared together were hard to come by back in those days. In fact, there were not too many people who had intimate knowledge of Tony Greatorex and the times Tony and Bern spent together throughout those early pioneering days in Central Australia and the Northern Territory.
An 80-year commitment to the NT and, in particular, Central Australia, is nothing short of incredible. He managed to fit so much into that time, not just in politics - which was considerable - but to the business community, the pastoral industry and St John Ambulance - for which he was knighted, and I had the fortune to attend that ceremony in 2008 - and also the Indigenous community. We heard from you, Madam Speaker, about a letter in The Centralian Advocate regarding his contribution to, and his relationship with, Aboriginal people at the time, not only in Central Australia but right across the Northern Territory. He was a big contributor to the church, and the Alice Springs community in general.
While Bern’s generation and mine are decades apart, and our relationship was not one forged in war, politics, or grazing, it was one of a young, newly elected politician in awe of a man with such experience. Rather than the ‘know-it-all, do-not-bother-me-son’ attitude, it was quite the contrary. He was quite prepared to offer the benefit of his experience not just to me, but to everyone, as we have heard today.
I am happy to say I am good friends with the newer generation of the Kilgariff family - some of them I know quite well. There are many, and I am good friends with some of them, which will ensure his legacy and memory will live on with my family, as my son and his great-grandchildren play together today.
To Aileen, and all of Bern’s family, thank you for sharing such a great guy with all of us in so many ways, in so many aspects of life. My deepest sympathies to the family.
To Bern, may you rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms McCARTHY (Local Government): Madam Speaker, it is a great honour, as a member of the Northern Territory parliament, to pay tribute to a great Centralian and Territorian, and to express my condolences to the family and friends of the late Bern Kilgariff.
Listening today to the many achievements of Bern Kilgariff, it gives me a chance to reflect on growing up between Borroloola and Alice Springs. I recall, in my time at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School in Alice Springs, times with the Kilgariff family, growing up with many of the grandchildren of the Kilgariff family, and also knowing Bern Kilgariff as someone who was a very kindly and friendly, and very important, person in government.
As you grow up you meet very important people who have an impact on your life, and maybe at the time, as an eight-, nine-, or 10-year-old, you do not quite understand the significance of that person. As you get older you certainly come to realise that Bern Kilgariff had a tremendous impact, not only on Central Australia, but on all the Territory.
Bern Kilgariff led the way at a national level, and his focus on constitutional equality and his desire to see an equal and fair society for all people across the Northern Territory represented in the federal parliament is a passion that lives on through his family; certainly through Fran as Co-chair of the Statehood Steering Committee. Across the Northern Territory, those people who today, as members of the Statehood Steering Committee, carry out the beliefs and firm determination and values of people like Bern Kilgariff, have inspired the generations behind them. Bern Kilgariff showed us a way. He helped create a path for all of us to walk; a path for all of us who seek to make a difference through our work as elected representatives of the people of the Northern Territory.
He was a hard-working and principled man with many wonderful achievements, both for his family and the people he represented in our parliament and in Canberra. He left us a wonderful legacy, for he not only exemplified the idea of community service, but he also set a great standard for others to aim for. He showed through his actions and words a dignified and honourable way to practice the art of politics.
As we have heard throughout the condolence motion this morning, he truly was a man for all people and a political representative of all the people of the Northern Territory, deeply committed to providing and developing good governance. He laid out a blueprint for our generation of how hard work, new opportunities, diligence and fairness will provide us with family wellbeing, good governance and economic progress for our community. He had a knack for recognising opportunity and knowing what needed to be done. Much of his life was dedicated to developing infrastructure to improve life in the bush; pioneering work that has made life easier for all of us today.
I reflect on travelling from Borroloola to Alice Springs. Years before we could catch the coach that went through Daly Waters and Highway Inn, people would get on horseback for a couple of weeks to ride from Borroloola to the highway to catch the coach to school in Alice Springs. Today, we see the massive infrastructure that has come about and people like Bern Kilgariff pioneered the way for the people of the Northern Territory.
It is not until we reflect on a life such as Bern’s that we appreciate the changes that have brought us to the present day. Such reflection also reminds us of the power of one, both in family and community life, and how with focus, hard work and an attitude that we can do anything, great things are possible. His contributions to the development of Alice Springs, Central Australia and the Northern Territory are truly legendary. He saw what could be done and he took the risks and acted on his faith in making the impossible possible. It is this reflection that makes us appreciate the wonderful opportunities that the Northern Territory has to offer for those who, like Bern, take nothing for granted, work hard and seize every opportunity that comes our way.
It is important, as suggested by the member for Araluen, that current Territorians, and Territorians to come, appreciate and understand and acknowledge the work of pioneers like Bern Kilgariff.
He was a wonderful advocate and practitioner. He held fast to his leadership dream of a Northern Territory evolving as a self-governing Territory, and committed himself to this knowing it was an important first step towards statehood.
In my time working as the Co-Chair with Fran in Alice Springs, I had a good chance to talk with Bern – now as an older person in the Northern Territory, and not through the eyes of a 10-year-old – and discuss with him the future of the Northern Territory, and to learn about his passion for constitutional equality for all people across the Northern Territory. No matter how hard it gets, we must persevere and keep believing in that dream, and the rest of Australia needs to see we want to be equal to them. Today, citizens of the Northern Territory continue to walk that path and to work for recognition of the Territory as a full, equal state of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Bern’s other great skill was to inspire and to rally people together to create linkages between like-minded people, and leading by example through his volunteering work with many community groups and committees.
As the Northern Territory’s Minister for Tourism, I acknowledge his pioneering contributions to the development of our tourism industry. He played a huge role in the early days of tourism in Central Australia, both with his labour in building tourism infrastructure such as airstrips, but also in helping to establish an industry association to steer the development of the industry.
His tireless interest in the possible, and his passion for the Territory, naturally led him to community committees, to the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly and, thereafter, the federal parliament. Rightfully, he received much recognition during his life for his work, including the Order of Australia and Investiture as a Knight in the Order of St John. No doubt, like most men of Mr Kilgariff’s ilk, he would have unassumingly accepted these awards.
Even in his 80s, he continued to inspire young Territorians by teaching St John cadets about the history of the St John Ambulance Service and its links to ANZAC traditions. Whilst managing his property, Erldunda, in his retirement years, he and Mrs Kilgariff – Aileen - took management of their property to a new level, developing a property plan to not only ensure sustainability for their cattle business, but also to maintain biodiversity and protect the natural resources of the land. The Kilgariffs were awarded a Landcare Award for his work in 2001.
We have heard today the importance of Bern’s contribution to Aboriginal people in the central region, but also here in the Top End. I acknowledge and pay tribute to Bern on behalf of the people of Arnhem, and my families in the Gulf region. He was an amazing man. I know his passion for the people of the Northern Territory does live on in his people and his family, and the people around him.
Madam Speaker, there is one other area of his life that people have touched on, but I would like to add to as well - his incredible faith and his love for the Lord, and his love for his family that provided his strength through every task he carried out in his life. When we look at his achievements, there can be no greater achievement than that of the love of your family, and the incredible amount of respect and friendship he built amongst his children and grandchildren, nieces and nephews, and friends of the family. The fact he was able to take in so many other people with Aileen: people who became a part of their lives - Aboriginal families, and those families who needed refuge when they came to Australia and sought refuge in Alice Springs. The Kilgariffs made their home open to these people.
That, to me, is a very important part of what Bern Kilgariff is all about, and the wonderful legacy that lives on through his faith, his family, and the people around him.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I start by passing on my condolences to Aileen and the Kilgariff family, and friends of Bern. I also thank the Chief Minister for bringing forward this motion which I support.
It has often been said over the past months and weeks that Bern Kilgariff was a forefather of the Northern Territory. If one takes the meaning of the word as someone who originated a tradition, then it is absolutely correct. His legacy is something that is a huge example to me.
The renowned Benjamin Franklin had only one year of formal schooling, but thrived on work. He had his own interest in printing and inventing, but became focused on formulating the Declaration of Independence from England. One of Franklin’s last public acts was writing the anti-slavery treaty which he finished when he was 83. Throughout his public service much of what Franklin did was directed at improving his city and the lives of Philadelphians. It is as the member for Braitling that I can proudly say that our own Bern Kilgariff was also a man of many interests and capacities. He was a businessman who understood the commercial world and the sheer effort required to build an enterprise from the bottom up.
He left school at age 16, beaten by only one mark for the single available scholarship to complete secondary education - so it is a very timely recommendation by the member for Araluen who recommended a higher education scholarship fund be established in the name of Bern - and he noted: ‘Had I gone to college in Adelaide, I would probably have travelled quite a different road through life, probably not even Central Australian roads’. Bern’s vision focused on many fields including pastoral, mining, Indigenous affairs, statehood, and other areas.
He had an overriding care and concern for the community of Alice Springs and for the broader Northern Territory, working hard and long to progress the Territory towards statehood. It is apt the baton has been passed to one of his daughters, Fran, who not only served as the Mayor of Alice Springs, but now acts as Co-Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee.
Just like Franklin, Bern’s humanitarian work never ceased. Having been Secretary of the Senate’s opposition Immigration and Ethnic Affairs Committee, he went on to serve on the Australian Citizenship Council, established in 1998, which recognised the importance and significance of citizenship issues reflecting the inclusive nature of our society and our unity as a nation.
From a personal point of view, I found Bern’s political career to be truly inspiring: the role he played in forming the CLP and creating the party which has given me the opportunity I have today. I personally owe him a great deal, both in political terms, and also as someone who was born interstate but has come to live in the Northern Territory with my family and enjoy the benefits that Bern so clearly developed.
Bern’s parliamentary service came about at first by a form of osmosis as his support for Alice Springs community issues burgeoned into a far wider understanding and promotion of the way forward for the Northern Territory. Within three years of his appointment to the Northern Territory’s Legislative Council, he was on five committees, including Social Welfare. He worked on Aboriginal land rights, chaired the NT Housing Commission, and also found time to chair the Alice Springs Hospital Advisory Board, the YMCA Southern Region, and the Royal Flying Doctor Alice Springs base. He served as President of the Centralian Children’s Holiday Scheme, the Alice Springs Heart Foundation, and the Community College, amongst many others.
On behalf of the people of Alice Springs, I thank him, and the family who supported him, from the bottom of my heart.
I know that Bern’s outstanding qualities included patience, tenacity and strength of character, but also compassion. All of us in this House should take note of his example.
His maiden speech in the Senate on 18 February 1976 included, in its early stages, the observation:
This set the scene for Bern’s summary of our gas, oil and mineral potential, the pastoral industry, Defence and tourism. He pointed out that we cannot afford the luxury of an operation that is continually hampered by fragmentation, overlapping authority and red tape, and called for greater autonomy and investment in infrastructure. Ironically, in my own maiden speech within this House only two years ago, I found myself noting that our economic growth should be supported by sealing roads, building bridges, installing telecommunications access, and asking: why can’t we do these things?
I, like Bern, emphasise that the only way forward is to grow, not at the cost of the environment or loss of culture, but to grow as a state, to grow as a people, re-investing in the lands, protecting our environment, and enriching our culture.
It was highly appropriate that Bern and Aileen Kilgariff were both given the rare honour of Honorary Life Membership in the Country Liberal Party. In all, Bern gave 26 years of service to the Territory and federal parliaments.
In conclusion, I look back at the last few weeks. We have celebrated Anzac Day, and Bern continued the finest traditions of the ANZACs through his World War II service; and we have celebrated the anniversary of John McDouall Stuart’s first expedition through Central Australia. The Kilgariff family were an integral part of the centenary celebrations in Alice Springs in 1960, when a ball was held at the local Memo Club coinciding with the official opening of a new hall. The ANZAC spirit has done more for building Australia’s patriotism than almost anything else. McDouall Stuart made it possible to build our Territory. Bern took over the mantle and, I believe, put in place the embryonic process of patriotism in the Northern Territory by its constituents, especially in the Centre.
We honour his memory.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, I support the motion of condolence in the House today, and pass on my deepest sympathy and condolences from the tribes in Central Australia; the tribes of the Anmatjere people, the Warlpiri people, the Luritja Pintubi, the Central Arrernte people, and Western Arrernte people to the Kilgariff family.
I take this opportunity not to be repetitive of the things other people have said, but talk about the love and passion Bern and his whole family showed for Central Australia and Aboriginal people, in particular. As a child growing up, and talking to people like the Aboriginal Ted Egan - not the former Administrator - and people like Wenten and Eli Rubuntja, who grew up dancing in the town of Alice Springs along with Bern Kilgariff, these people truly admired the love, the forgiveness and the softness of Bern Kilgariff.
I support the condolence motion; and offer my sympathies to the Kilgariff family, friends, and wider community, on the passing of Bern Kilgariff.
The Alice Springs community struck it lucky when Bern Kilgariff stepped off the train in 1929. In an even greater stroke of good fortune, Bern made a home in Central Australia, not just for himself, but also for his family and, as a true Central Australian, there his home remained until the end of his days.
Bern came to the Territory and stayed because he had passion for Central Australia and a passion for its people. This passion drove him to assisting the community in any way he could, beyond politics and beyond race. He was devoted to helping people in so many sectors of the community, through so many different avenues, it is hard to believe he has not influenced all Central Australians in some way.
Bern believed in making a contribution to the place in which he lived. His contribution was not a small one; he was a dynamic personality, taking the opportunities the Territory offered him and making the most of them. The industries he worked in were transportation, tourism and pastoralism, just to name a few. He was dominant in all these industries in Central Australia, and the fact he is recognised in each for his significant contribution is a testament to the energy and determination of the man.
Bern’s love for Alice Springs and Central Australia shone through his political life as well. He tirelessly fought for resources for Central Australia, and believed the best about the Central Australian community. When he spent time in the Centre, he spent time with all of us. We did not think of him as Bern the politician, we thought of him as Bern our friend, our mate.
He was an uncut diamond, and the depth of his character is demonstrated through the depth of his friendship in and around Alice Springs with both black and white people. Central Australians are grateful we had the chance to know Bern Kilgariff, and share time with him. We are grateful he stayed and made a lasting mark on our community. His leadership, in all aspects of life, will be missed and not forgotten. Bern’s legacy will live on through his family and through the community of Alice Springs, which he touched and made his own. Certainly, it was his own.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HAMPTON (Central Australia): Madam Speaker, I offer my condolences today to Aileen and the family and friends of Mr Bern Kilgariff, as the Minister for Central Australia, the member for Stuart, and as someone who was born in Alice Springs.
It was a great honour and privilege to attend the state funeral, to be part of Bern’s journey on the tram, as it was called during the service. It was a time of reflection as we all thought about our own families. I reflected on the similarities of the journey of the Kilgariff family and the journey of the Hampton family in the Northern Territory over many years. It was a journey which has much in common with my grandparents, Tim and Sarah Hampton: having 11 children, albeit all boys, and very similar to the Kilgariff family in our involvement in building the Territory whether through the mining industry, through building towns such as Tennant Creek, or supplying produce to the Army as my grandparents did in Hatches Creek in the 1940s. For me, it brought back much of my own family’s journey, and also complete acknowledgement of the life of Mr Kilgariff and his achievements over many years.
Similar to the member for Greatorex, being born in 1968, and hearing from parliamentary colleagues in the House this morning about what he achieved up to 1968, it is unbelievable to think how many achievements Mr Kilgariff made before I was even born, and to think what he has done after that time. It is an amazing journey.
Over the weekend I was speaking to my father, Robert, who is the last remaining in his family of 11 boys and his parents. I asked him about the stories of respect for Mr Kilgariff. He made the comment that Mr Kilgariff was a man who talked to everyone; he knew everyone in Alice Springs. I know it is a small town, but he knew everyone in Alice Springs at that time, and he talked to everyone. He never walked past anyone without saying something and treating them all the same, no matter their backgrounds.
He was also very much a motivator for the Alice Springs residents despite their backgrounds; he was someone people looked up to; and you knew he was in there doing his best for Centralians. My father’s words sums it all up: he was a complete Territorian. As colleagues have pointed out today, he was a man who has done so much, a man for all people – a complete Territorian.
He was a man who was very generous with his time, as we have heard, and with his wisdom. My uncle, Mr Ted Hampton, stood in two Legislative Assembly elections in 1980 and 1983, and I know Mr Kilgariff provided him with a great deal of advice during those two elections. He was very supportive and, most of all, he will be remembered as a true gentleman.
It has been said Mr Kilgariff’s passing will see the end of an era in Alice Springs. I believe his legacy is so enduring that his memory and influence, and the Kilgariff name, will continue to resonate in Alice Springs not least because of the contribution of Bern’s children and grandchildren due to their continued contribution to our town and to the Northern Territory. His life was one of service, and he seems to have passed this gene on. I am sure the Kilgariff name will continue to feature strongly in the history of the Northern Territory and, as we have heard today, it will certainly continue on in the name of the newest suburb of Alice Springs.
His was a family with strong Catholic faith, which Bern adhered to during his life, with a proud Irish tradition and, apparently, some Spanish thrown in as well. In 1927, Bern’s uncle and aunt, Joe and Eileen Kilgariff arrived in Alice Springs to run the Stuart Arms Hotel. In 1929, Bern’s parents and family arrived in Alice Springs on one of the first trains to the town of Stuart, a small outpost. He, with his sister, Marion, attended the Hartley Street school with most of the kids of the town. Bern struck up firm friendships which lasted his lifetime in those early days. Two of his playmates were the Rubuntja brothers, who went on to become respected elders and leaders in Central Australia. In his book, The Town Grew Up Dancing, Wenten Rubuntja talked about playing with Bern in the dry creek just up past Middle Park, riding push bikes and donkeys and, in his words: ‘Everybody mixed up together just like spiders and ants and flies’. Bern honoured and respected Aboriginal traditional ways and lived the spirit of reconciliation through his life - it was part of who he was as a person.
When Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School opened in 1938, Bern attended and was the first person to complete Intermediate schooling in 1939. One of his first jobs was to walk around the town with a sandwich board promoting the movies that were playing at the local theatre, as the Chief Minister has already mentioned.
In 1942, 19-year-old Bern enlisted and fought in New Guinea, a member of the 2/5 Infantry Battalion of 6th Division AIF. He returned home to Alice Springs after the war and began working with his uncle, Mick Heenan, on Mick’s farm on the site of the current Oasis Motel. Bern said he had really just come back to Alice to see his family and agreed to help out on the farm for a few weeks but, to his surprise, he enjoyed the work. Mick Heenan had made a good living supplying the Army during the war, and developed the farm with about 1000 laying hens and a large market garden. Bern said he was enjoying life after discharge from the Army and his return to Alice Springs.
He recalled an active social life and a town where there were many young people and new people were coming to make their homes and take up work. He described simple, enjoyable social occasions with people gathering around home pianos for regular singsongs. Not long after, Bern met the woman who was to be the love of his life and his partner in all his future endeavours. Aileen Canny arrived in Alice Springs in October 1946 to visit her sister and brother-in-law, and met Bern not long after arriving. They became a fixture around town, I am told, riding on Bern’s Harley-Davidson motorbike with his dog in the sidecar.
Bern and Aileen married in April 1948 and, having decided to take up the offer of his Uncle Mick to buy the farm, headed off to learn about the practical and theoretical side of poultry farming. The poultry farm thrived and supplied the growing town and region with fresh eggs and meat for many years. According to a couple of stories I have heard over the last week, including from my father, the Kilgariffs also became the first chicken takeaway in Alice, with a few hens mysteriously disappearing at times as well.
Bern had been observing the growing number of visitors to Alice Springs and the Central Australia region - people who wanted to take a firsthand look at the remote town and spectacular country. In 1955, he built a few motel rooms on the farm block and began the Oasis Motel, an establishment still going strong today.
Bern was one of the pioneers of the tourism industry in the Centre, seeing the potential of the region long before many others, and blazing a pathway where there is now a thriving industry. He founded the Central Australian Tourism Association, which later became CATIA, and is now the TCA. He was also closely involved in the formation and building of the Memorial Club, was involved as an umpire in the local footy competition, and supported the YMCA, Legacy, Landcare, and a host of other community organisations.
He was a Knight of St John for his support of the St John Ambulance organisation, and was awarded an OAM and, later, was recognised with an AM for his services to the Northern Territory.
I will leave it to others to pay tribute to Bern’s long and distinguished political career. But, as an Alice Springs boy myself, I want to pay tribute to his invaluable contribution to the social and economic development of our town. It is because of people like Bern and Aileen Kilgariff that Alice Springs is the thriving, dynamic community it is today. Their hard work, dedication to public service, humour, and resilience is an example to us all and something we all should honour.
My condolences, again, to Aileen and the family of Bern on behalf of the Hampton family, the people of Stuart, particularly the Warlpiri people with whom Bern had a close affiliation and, in particular, Barney Kilgariff, who was also at the state funeral.
Bern truly was, in the words of his old campaign slogan: ‘A Centralian for the Centre’.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I cannot imagine I have much to add to what has already been said in this place, so my contribution today will be as much a self-indulgence as to add to anything we have heard.
Whilst I have known of Bern Kilgariff for as long as I can recall, my father, who lived in Darwin, the city I grew up in, would often speak of the political leaders of our community. I did not come to know Bern until after I was preselected to stand for my former seat, the seat of Macdonnell. When I was preselected for the seat of Macdonnell, one of the first people who contacted me was Bern Kilgariff. He said: ‘Come down to the cattle station and we will have a quick chat, John, about some of the things you need to do’.
Dutifully, I went down. I walked into the cattle station and I was invited in through the kitchen door, which I thought may have been the tradesmen’s entrance but, I have since discovered, was the door used by family, and the door I was always encouraged to use. It was considered to be such a formal arrangement to come in via the front door, and invariably, of course, being a working cattle station, the kitchen was probably the most important and functional room, and the dining area, to add to that, the most important and functional room in the whole place.
When I spoke with Bern, I was introduced to a man who was the very essence of a quiet disposition but, nevertheless, determined, and he offered me, through the course of my early political life, help, transport and those types of things. I will never forget the influence he has had on me. I am also a Catholic. I am a Catholic not by birth, but because I adopted the faith, or the faith adopted me, and I came to Christ to be baptised in the Catholic Church in Alice Springs partially because of the example Bern Kilgariff gave me as to what a Catholic could be. I suspect I will never become the Christian and the Catholic that Bern was but, nevertheless, I can strive for spiritual advancement whilst I have such glorious examples to follow. I had him in my mind the day I was baptised.
From that kitchen table, we spoke on many issues, and he guided my mind to many thoughts. What struck me most of all, was the relationship he had with Aileen. As I mentioned, he took me on trips in his aircraft. He and Aileen would fly together, and I recall sitting in the back of, I believe it was a Cessna 210, or a Cessna of some sort, and heading off in the direction of an Aboriginal community. As I looked at the two sitting in front of me, I thought: how quaint; the quintessential old English couple going for a drive in the country; and I thought to myself: isn’t it great!
Then I looked out of the window of the aircraft, and I saw some of the most inhospitable country you could ever see. All of a sudden there was a communication between Bern and Aileen, and they were passing maps back and forth, and I thought to myself: my goodness, they are like an English couple who have taken a wrong turn in an English country lane and are lost. The only problem is, this not an English country lane, we are over a desert. And I thought to myself: goodness, what have I got myself into?
After that, I had cause to ponder it, and I realised we were never lost; we were never in any peril whatsoever. It was just the nature of the relationship of that couple, when a decision had to be taken or some advice had to be given, the communication between those two people was absolute. If there was a decision to be made at 10 000 feet over the most inhospitable country in the world, then that decision would be shared. Such was the quality of their relationship that they shared those decisions no matter how minor, no matter how insignificant they appeared because their relationship demanded that communication take place. The level of their intimacy invaded and percolated through every aspect of their consciousness and their life - a fine example of what a marriage should be, and what marriage vows intend when they are taken.
I have heard stories, and we heard from the Chief Minister today what sounded like the aggressive defence of the chicken farm on those occasions when Bern had visitors in the night removing chickens. I have not shared this story with anyone up until now. He and I were walking through an Aboriginal community one day when an old Aboriginal man suddenly sparked up and screamed out: ‘Cookalook, cookalook’. I wondered what it was. It turned out the old man remembered Bern from a time when he would provide some of the local Aboriginal people with chickens from his poultry farm – for free. The natural charity, which percolated through Bern’s veins, and was suggested to him by his faith, was also practiced. While he may have been the defender of his chickens, he certainly was not above allowing charity to see some of those chickens depart. That old fellow remembered Bern 30 or 40 years after the occasion and he ran over to thank Bern and they embraced as old friends. I do not know who this old Aboriginal man was but I remember the community. However, it goes to show the impact Bern could have on people high, and on people we would classify as low. We were all children of God in Bern’s eyes.
The self-effacing nature of the man is also something we have spoken of, and his continued use of the word ‘fancy’. I believe someone could explode into a room and announce World War III had just started, and the typical response from Bern would have been to place his hand under his chin, consider the implications, and say: ‘Fancy!’ That was the type of guy he was. In all the years I had known Bern, and the time I spent with him, I only ever heard him utter one word which might pass as an expletive. In fact, I suggest if I repeated it in this House, Hansard would print it. However, I shall not.
What I will say, on the one occasion I heard it, we were at the Finke community, we were literally 200 yards from any other living human being, and Bern was speaking on a matter he felt particularly strongly about. Such was his strength of emotion that he paused, looked over his right shoulder, looked over his left shoulder, to be sure no other person would hear it, and then conspiratorially lent over to me and uttered the word which, if it had been a curry, it would be so mild it would find its way into English fare without any resistance. That is how mild it was. Such was his concern about being overheard uttering it, the whole conspiracy had to be fulfilled in his demeanour before he uttered it. I certainly will not sully his memory by repeating it in this House. Suffice to say, if I did, this House would probably not object, so mild was it.
I had cause to think about what I was going to say here today. We have heard other people rely on quotes, and I would also seek that indulgence. I quote Adam Smith, from The Theory on Moral Sentiments, sixth edition:
Members: Hear, hear!
Motion agreed to.
Members observed one minute’s silence.
Madam SPEAKER: I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the motion. I invite family and friends and interested members to join us in the main hall for refreshments.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from His Honour the Administrator Message No 17 notifying assent to bills passed in the February 2010 sittings of the Assembly. I table that document.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a letter from the Government Whip dated 22 March 2010 notifying the discharge of the member for Fannie Bay from the Council of Territory Cooperation, and appointing the member for Nhulunbuy.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly ratify the appointment of Ms Walker as a member of the Council of Territory Cooperation Committee.
Motion agreed to.
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to petition Nos 26 and 29 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website. A copy of the responses will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to the petitioners.
Response:
Response:
Continued from 25 February 2010.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I indicate, at this stage, our qualified support for the passage of this legislation. Basically, this is the result of a July 2008 COAG agreement to see the responsibility for trustee companies transfer from the state and territories to the federal government for its management.
In this age of high-speed communications, we realise the nature of management and business management transcends state lines to a greater degree than it ever has, in fact, over international boundaries as well. As time passes, I believe you will see a greater centralisation of these things for the purposes of making business run more efficiently, and this is only a small component of it.
The appropriate legislation in the federal arena has already passed. It is my understanding it passed without opposition from the conservative side of government and, basically, it does make sense.
However, I did mention at the outset the word ‘qualification’. What I would like to know from the Treasurer in her response today is how many of these companies exist in the Northern Territory; how much taxation revenue is generated by those companies - I suspect it is not going to be a great deal - and how the government will make up for the shortfall, if there is a shortfall, or whether it is of any significant amount. I suspect the answer will be: it is not going to be a great deal at all. I note the Treasurer is sitting there shaking her head. I certainly hope that in the process of making this decision at the COAG, she relied on more than a PowerPoint presentation that her Chief Minister relied on when it came to the passage of the health agreement.
If she could attend to that particular matter, if she can indicate to me now if there is any detail she would like to go into we can go into committee. If not, I am happy to take her on her word in her summation.
Madam Speaker, we support the bill.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, I support the Credit (National Uniform Legislation) Implementation Bill 2010.
In October 2009, the Commonwealth National Consumer Credit Protection Act was passed to establish …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I believe the minister is actually referring to legislation which is not currently under debate. I suggest that he reads the cover of the document he has been given.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you wish to speak in this debate.
Mr KNIGHT: No, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Any further speakers in debate?
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the opposition for their qualified support for what is a COAG reform designed to continue to make a more seamless national economy. We have seen a new era of federal cooperation occurring whereby states are signing up to what is the appropriate handing over of regulation to the Commonwealth where they step into the fray and reduces red tape for companies.
At the outset, I advise the member for Port Darwin we have four companies in the Territory affected, and there are no tax revenue implications ...
Mr Elferink: That is what I thought. Thank you.
Ms LAWRIE: We were happy to sign up to ensure we repeal the licensing and regulation provisions of the Companies, Trustees and Personal Representatives Act as a consequence of the Commonwealth assuming these responsibilities under the Corporations Legislation Amendment (Financial Services Modernisation) Act 2009, which is the Commonwealth act.
State and territory legislation will be amended to remove all provisions dealing with licensing and regulation of trustee companies leaving provisions which deal with such matters as allowing a licensed company to act as a trustee, being appointed as an executor, and acting under a power of attorney. State and territory legislation will also be amended to make provisions for the transfer of the trustee companies’ business to another licensed trustee if the trustee company licence is cancelled.
The proposed legislation will ensure uniformity across the states and territories is consistent with the Territory’s commitments at COAG under the National Partnerships Agreement. Given the support for this, I do not propose to go into the detail I went into in the second reading speech.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Madam SPEAKER: Is it the will of the Assembly that we go into committee?
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): No, Madam Speaker, I am well satisfied with the answer received.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 18 February 2010.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I wish to speak on the credit implementation bill (Serial 90). I certainly hope the minister for – what is he the minister for at the moment? Whatever it is, I hope he enjoys his contribution to the debate, because I suspect the notes he has in front of him, which have been pre-prepared and has the title written on the cover, will be the correct ones when he stands up and reads whatever was given to him before he walked into the Chamber today.
This particular bill deals with a national consumer credit policy which has already been published. I have read sections of it in the last 12 months in different places; it is easily obtained on the Internet. I believe the comments I made in the prior debate stand true in this particular debate, inasmuch as the uniformity of our credit legislation will assist greasing the wheels of our businesses and credit environment.
This was signed up until, I believe, March 2008 as a part of the COAG agreement. I note that even the federal government has thrown some money - I believe approximately $70m - at the process of implementing the package in the Territory. I presume the Commonwealth will be paying that $70m for the implementation of the package nationally. I am curious to know how much will be spent in the Territory. However, I foresee a day when this type of legislation will become standard legislation, not only within the Federation which is our country, but will start to spread - has already started to spread - to the whole of the OECD. I believe the more we make this type of financial legislation as uniform as possible, both in the national and international environment, the better it is for business.
Madam Speaker, we have no problems with the passage of this legislation; it just makes - what did Sam Kekovich say? ‘It just makes sense’.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, I speak in support of the Consumer Credit (National Uniform Legislation) Implementation Bill 2010.
In October 2009, the Commonwealth National Consumer Credit Protection Act was passed to establish a national scheme for the regulation of credit providers. The act aims to provide Australian consumers with improved and uniform protection. The national scheme transfers to the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, ASIC, the regulatory and enforcement roles traditionally undertaken by the states and territories. This national legislation was agreed to by the Council of Australian Governments in 2008.
The move towards national consumer credit laws is part of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s agenda to improve efficiencies in Australia through greater uniformity in areas where it is needed. COAG, in March 2008, accepted the need for a comprehensive, national, regulatory reform agenda as a way of improving Australia’s productivity and competitiveness. This bill is consistent with that agenda. As part of the move towards the implementation of uniform national consumer credit protection, the bill before the House will repeal the Consumer Credit (Northern Territory) Act and, in addition, parts of the Consumer Affairs and Fair Trading Act will also be repealed.
I believe this is timely legislation. Australia has just escaped the worst of the global financial crisis, during which the Territory fared better than other parts of Australia. All indications are that the restraint which was demonstrated by Australians during the crisis has now effectively evaporated and, as a consequence, householders across Australia are showing a willingness to take on bigger loans than ever before.
The Reserve Bank estimates the total mortgage debt in Australia is currently 38.2% larger than national household income. According to the Reserve Bank, by the beginning of this year, the combined worth of mortgage, credit cards, and personal loan debts stood at $1.2 trillion. This is equivalent to $57 000 for every man, woman, and child in Australia. I believe it is both timely and appropriate for governments to cooperate and ensure all Australians are protected by uniform and enhanced laws when borrowing money.
Apart from the improved enforcement powers contained in the act, consumers will also gain greater access to information concerning their loans. In the future, consumers will have a greater ability to get a clear picture of the commissions, charges and fees associated with the loans. Importantly, the new responsible lending component of the act means, when lenders are offering services, they must take into account the repayment capacity of the consumers.
We are all aware of instances where consumers have committed to loans only to find out that they do not have the ability to meet the repayments. The global financial crisis certainly shone a light on particular lending practices that have left consumers totally exposed. It is, as I have said, timely that we accept the need for uniformity and enhanced protection for borrowers.
For that reason, I support the bill my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General, has put before the House.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the members opposite for their support of this bill, which was referred to as ‘simply making sense’ by the member for Port Darwin.
The Territory was happy to sign up in March 2008 to this COAG reform giving the Commonwealth responsibility for the regulation of consumer credit and finance broking and, as the minister for Business said, there is no starker reminder as to the importance of this than the events of the global financial crisis. While our regulatory environment within Australia stood the test, we became the only developed jurisdiction on the globe that did not go into recession. In large part, the highly regulative aspect of our financial institutions, our banking industry, obviously held us in good stead. That being said, we are certainly not in a position to rest on our laurels. And I noticed announcements yesterday coming from the federal government in relation to financial advice and commissions, putting in more protections for the mums and dads of Australia to ensure that they are not at the mercy of any unscrupulous financial operators.
We have a good, sound and robust financial planning system in Australia, and I am pleased with yesterday’s announcements. I know some financial planners in the Territory, whom I have met as Treasurer, are organised and, I believe, are a group of very worthy operators, and I am sure they are paying close attention to the Commonwealth’s reforms. I welcome ASIC taking on the regulatory and enforcement role for consumer credit previously undertaken by the states and territories.
Essentially, what we are doing is repealing the Territory’s legislation dealing with the regulation of consumer credit to allow for transitional provisions with respect to the transfer of the regulation to the Commonwealth under their National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009, and meeting that COAG commitment.
We undertook consultation in relation to this. We consulted with key stakeholders, including the Law Society of the Northern Territory, the Financial Planning Association and the Chamber of Commerce. No major responses were received so we took the ‘no significant news’ as good news regarding their acceptance of these reforms. We recognise ASIC is developing information packs and fact sheets, as well as conducting a range of consultations in the information sessions across the nation, including the Northern Territory.
The new regulatory regime comes into effect as of 1 July 2010, and the legislation repeals the former regulatory provisions we had, and also puts in place important provisional transfer provisions as well - so sensible, and all worked hard to step towards a national seamless economy. Through those COAG reforms a significant amount of work is being undertaken by mainly the Department of Justice, NT WorkSafe which has a great deal on their plate regarding the national reform process and, of course, the Northern Territory Treasury.
These reforms will hold us in good stead as a nation, but as a Territory we are playing a not insignificant role. At public service officer level we are undertaking the commitments that we have signed up to. A great deal of work went into the legislation we have before us, and I thank the officers involved for the work they have undertaken.
We have a way to go in fulfilling all the COAG commitments with regard to a national seamless economy. It is interesting to engage with key stakeholders and, on the whole, I have to say business embraces and recognises the benefits in these COAG reforms.
Madam Speaker, I commend this legislation to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, today I provide advice to the House on the recent Council of Australian Governments’ meeting in Canberra, and the subsequent agreement for substantial reform which has been agreed to by the majority of states and territories.
COAG was held over Monday, 19 April and Tuesday, 20 April. Prior to that, there were several rounds of meetings held between the Prime Minister, states and territories, and between states and territories on their own. My position was clear from the outset. I was prepared to sign this major reform; however, it had to do two things: (1) take into account the unique Territory health circumstances and, (2) provide additional resources to improve health in the Territory. On Tuesday afternoon, after many hours of negotiation, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement was finalised. I am pleased to advise the House this agreement fulfils both my preconditions.
Australia has one of the best health systems in the world. However, we know in regional Australia that health standards are generally poorer than the health of our fellow citizens in the big cities. The reason for this is simple: in regional areas, access to health services lags well behind what is available in the big cities. Since 2001, we have increased health spending by 117% to $1.05bn. Despite spending almost a quarter of the Territory budget on health, waiting times to see a GP still need to be cut, we need to cut waiting times in emergency departments, and we need to cut waiting times to see a surgeon. This is a complex problem; however, it is clear that to solve access to health services additional resources are needed in the current health system, and long-term structural change is needed. That is why I signed the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement.
The Prime Minister put on the table a plan which will lead to long-term reform of the Australian health system. The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement includes a clear plan to make hospitals more efficient and more responsive to patient needs; people will be seen more quickly in emergency departments, and waiting times for elective surgery will be reduced. The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement will lead to the reform of aged care, protecting the health of older citizens in the community, and ensuring an increased supply of residential aged care for our seniors who need high levels of care.
Importantly, the Commonwealth government has recognised the need to prioritise the needs of older patients who get stuck in the hospital system because of a lack of more suitable options in care. The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement provides a bold plan to fully integrate primary care services. This is especially critical to the Northern Territory where we are heavily reliant on primary healthcare. Comprehensive primary healthcare services are the key to closing the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. Readily accessible primary healthcare services, especially GPs, are essential in providing the services families need.
The agreement places the future financing of healthcare in Australia on a sustainable footing. It is inevitable health costs will grow as a proportion of expenditure as our population ages. The states and territories need the Commonwealth to meet its fair share of the costs of health services. Over time, the agreement we have struck will achieve this. Without this agreement, the proportion of Territory budget expenditure on health will continue to grow rapidly.
Within the National Health and Hospitals Network we have obtained concessions in the agreement to provide for equity of access to health services for people living in regional Australia. The Commonwealth has agreed to work bilaterally with the Territory to ensure future primary care services suit the characteristics of the Territory. A number of the funding initiatives announced will be implemented to maximise the benefits to the people of the Territory. This agreement will strengthen the promotion of social inclusion and reduce disadvantage, especially for Indigenous Australians, so we can continue to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage.
At the core of the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is the Commonwealth commitment to provide 60% of the national efficient price for public hospital services. This commitment achieves two objectives: it encourages efficiency; and it ensures that as the levels of service provided in our hospitals increase, the Territory can be assured the Commonwealth funding will also increase. We will no longer need to haggle on funding levels or indexation. The Commonwealth will be locked into long-term, sustained support for our hospital network.
The Commonwealth has also agreed to fund 60% of recurrent expenditure on research and training in public hospitals, and 60% of capital expenditure. We have also negotiated agreement with the Commonwealth to provide 60% of block funding for agreed functions and services and Community Service Obligations required to support small regional and rural public hospitals. This was a critical requirement for the Territory and will ensure that we can continue to provide hospital services in Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Katherine.
The states and territories will retain the key responsibility of managing the hospital system independent of the Commonwealth. In the Territory we plan to establish a single local hospital network improving the linkages between each of our five hospitals. We will establish a single board of governance to oversight the operation of the local hospital network. The Department of Health and Families will be responsible for negotiating annual service agreements with the local hospital network which reflect the needs of the community. The department will also be responsible for service planning and policy, and the planning and management of capital projects.
The local hospital network will be established as a separate legal entity under Northern Territory legislation, and will be responsible for the operational management of our hospitals. The hospital network will provide an effective means of engaging with the local community, and local clinicians, to incorporate their views into the day-to-day operation of hospitals, especially regarding the quality and safety of patient care.
The hospital network will have a governing council comprised of members with an appropriate mix of skills and expertise to oversee it and provide guidance, including health management, business management and financial management; clinical expertise external to the local hospital network, wherever practical; cross-membership with local primary healthcare organisations, wherever possible; where appropriate, representative of universities, clinical schools and research centres; and, where appropriate, other skills and experience ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I heard the Chief Minister say today that this is the most important issue, health, but I …
Madam SPEAKER: What is the point of order?
Mr GILES: … call a quorum; the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is already present.
Mr HENDERSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The agreement will introduce transparent purchasing arrangements between the Department of Health and Families and the local hospital network. Funding contributions from the Commonwealth, the 60% of the efficient price, and the Territory government will flow in accordance with the levels of service set out in the agreement. The current entitlements of staff will be retained under the new arrangements, and the department will continue to be responsible for industrial relations including the negotiation of awards. This will ensure that staff conditions will be protected during the transition process and into the future.
As part of building a unified health system all governments have agreed to improve outcomes in aged care services. For the first time, the Commonwealth will take full funding and program responsibility for a consistent and unified aged care system covering basic home care through to residential care. There are a number of initiatives which will improve the service system for Territory seniors.
Under the new primary care arrangements, primary healthcare organisations will work with hospitals to identify the best pathways between services, and to assist with patients’ transitions out of hospital and, where appropriate, into aged care. The Territory anticipates receiving $7.7m to increase the number of aged care places. This package includes access to zero interest loans to fund residential care. The Prime Minister has requested that the Territory take a role in facilitating access to land, and I have undertaken to do this consistent with similar assistance we provide to aged care providers in recent years.
The Commonwealth will also, for the first time, fund long-term-stay older patients in hospital. These are patients who could be better cared for in residential care, or in their own home, if support services were available. This initiative will provide incentives to quickly assist these patients to access the most appropriate level of care. In addition, when the jointly funded home and community care program ceases on 30 June 2011, a transfer of funds and responsibilities between governments will be made so the Commonwealth is responsible for the aged components of the program, and the Territory will retain responsibility for the disability service elements to the program.
The Territory will be responsible for funding and regulating basic community care services currently delivered under HACC for people under the age of 65, and under 50 for Indigenous Australians; and funding packaged community and residential care services delivered on behalf of the Commonwealth for people under the age of 65, or under 50 for Indigenous Australians.
The Commonwealth will assume funding and program responsibility for basic community care services currently provided under HACC for people 65 years and over, and 50 years and over for Indigenous Australians; and funding responsibility for specialist disability services provided under the National Disability Agreement for people aged 65 years and over, and 50 years and over for Indigenous Australians. These changes will improve client services in community aged care and disability services by enabling the creation of integrated and coordinated care systems which are easier for clients to access and navigate, and respond more flexibly to clients’ changing care needs.
The Commonwealth and states will share program responsibility for community care and residential care services for Indigenous Australian clients aged 50 to 64 years. Indigenous Australians in this age group will be able to receive services from an appropriate provider under programs on either level of government. This will ensure there will be no ‘wrong door’ for Indigenous Australians with a functional limitation age 50 to 64 years seeking community or residential care services. Where care services are provided under a state and territory-funded program to an Indigenous person 50 years or older, the Commonwealth will meet the cost of that service.
The implementation of the new arrangements for basic community care maintenance and support services will be carefully managed to ensure continuity of care for clients. It is expected basic level community care services will continue to be delivered through a mix of local government, state agency, and non-government providers and individual providers will continue to deliver both community disability and community aged care services during the implementation period and beyond, as many do now. This is an especially important element to the program in the Territory where there are many small services in remote locations. These changes have been designed to have little or no direct impact on service providers and clients.
All governments agree that GP and primary healthcare services are integral to an effective and efficient Australian health system. GP and primary healthcare services are essential to meeting the healthcare needs of Australians in the community and keeping people healthy and out of hospital. In the Territory, we have had a mixed system of primary care, with the Commonwealth primarily responsible for GP services, and the Territory responsible for a broad range of primary care services. Under this agreement, the Commonwealth government will take full funding and policy responsibility for Australia’s GP and primary healthcare services commencing in July 2011.
Locating responsibility for improving the GP and primary healthcare system with one level of government will improve the efficiency of the health system and reduce pressure on hospital services, and reduce cost shifting and blame shifting. This change will make it easier for patients to receive the services they need, improve patient outcomes, and drive diversity and innovation in service provision. The agreement will improve services in the community, address gaps in access to GP and primary care services, and take pressure off hospitals. In formulating GP and primary healthcare policy, the Commonwealth has agreed to ongoing engagement and collaboration with the Territory. The Territory will continue to operate services funded by the Commonwealth, unless there is an agreement with the Commonwealth to divest this responsibility.
Whilst there are minor variations in some states and territories, the Commonwealth will take full funding and policy responsibility for the following categories of GP and primary healthcare services currently funded by state governments from 1 July 2011:
(a) community health centre primary healthcare services such as generalist counselling, integrated care, GP and primary care coordination programs, including Indigenous and rural; and remote primary healthcare services;
(b) primary mental healthcare services which target the more common mild to moderate mental illnesses;
(c) hospital avoidance programs which do not relate specifically to patients who are predominantly being treated in acute care;
(d) primary and secondary prevention programs for early intervention and care coordination which focus on the management of patients with chronic disease in the community;
(e) screening programs for cancer delivered in a primary healthcare setting; and
(f) immunisation.
In addition to maximising integration of primary care services, the Territory is proposing to bilaterally negotiate to transfer child and maternal health services to the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth will be responsible for maintaining funding levels and indexation for transferred GP and primary healthcare services, as agreed with the states, unless they choose to divest responsibility as outlined in the provision.
The Commonwealth and states will work together on system-wide GP and primary healthcare policy. This will facilitate improved integration between hospital and primary healthcare services. These changes will place the patient at the centre of the healthcare system.
The new primary healthcare organisations to be established by the Commonwealth will work with local healthcare professionals to ensure services cooperate and collaborate with each other so patients can easily and conveniently access the full range of services they need. This will include facilitating allied healthcare and other support for people with chronic conditions, as identified in personalised care plans prepared by GPs. Mechanisms will be developed to identify groups of people missing out on GP and primary healthcare, or services that a local area needs, and better target services to respond to these gaps; for example, targeting gaps in GP services for aged care recipients.
Primary healthcare organisations will be independent organisations with strong links to local communities and health professionals. They will improve access to services and drive integration across GP and primary healthcare services by coordinating services and working closely with our hospitals to identify and address local needs.
The key to this reform is the Commonwealth government’s commitment to ensuring the future sustainability of health funding. During the first four years of this agreement, Australia will transition to a new national approach to health funding. In the new arrangement, each state and Territory will agree to a dedicated amount of GST being used to fund hospital and primary healthcare services.
For the Northern Territory, it is estimated that approximately 14% of our current GST allocation - that is, the proportion of GST we currently spend on health services - will be paid into the fund. That funding will then be provided to the Territory in a mix of block, community service obligation, and activity-based allocations.
During the first four years of the agreement, the Territory will also receive additional funding for a range of initiatives, including $16.9m for additional sub-acute care beds; $6.1m to reduce elective surgery waiting times; $7.2m to reduce emergency department waiting times; $1.2m for a multipurpose service; and $2.9m of funding for long-stay, older patients in hospitals. I should add - and this was inadvertently omitted from members’ copy of the statement - that a further minimum of $5.9m will be provided for capital purposes.
From 2014, the agreement will be well established and the Commonwealth has guaranteed to provide a minimum of an additional $15.6bn between 2014-15 and 2019-20. The minimum benefit to the Northern Territory from this additional injection of funding is at least $167m. This additional allocation will bridge the gap between the rate of health funding, including GST growth, and the rate of growth of hospital costs. This additional allocation reflects the Commonwealth’s greater responsibility for financing health and hospital expenditure growth under this agreement.
Two key reforms under this agreement are the establishment of an independent, national health and hospitals network funding authority, the National Funding Authority; and an independent hospital pricing authority, the Pricing Authority.
The National Funding Authority will oversee the National Health and Hospitals Network Fund, and the distribution of Commonwealth funding contributions through this fund. The Commonwealth government will pay the Territory 60% of the national efficient price of every public hospital service provided to public patients, including minor capital, into a jointly managed fund for on-passing to the Territory’s local hospital network for research, training and block hospital funding paid against the Council of Australian Government’s agreed funding model, including for agreed functions and services and Community Service Obligations required to support small regional and rural public hospitals; for Commonwealth-funded GP and primary healthcare services to the extent that they continue to provide relevant services on behalf of the Commonwealth; and a capital funding stream to be paid on a user cost of capital basis, where possible, to fund new planned investment in hospital infrastructure.
Creating equitable access to public hospitals for Australians is a core design intention of the National Health and Hospitals Network Funding approach, particularly in regional and remote areas, and particularly for disadvantaged groups such as Indigenous Australians. In order to deliver on this intention, the new funding model will include states specific prices during transition, and a national efficient price based on activity-based funding, cost weights, loadings and block funding.
The Pricing Authority will determine a national efficient price for the purpose of calculating Commonwealth funding for public hospital services and determine the Commonwealth’s payments for block funding paid against the funding model. The Pricing Authority will be established from 1 July 2011 as an independent Commonwealth statutory authority and have provisions for board members to be appointed by COAG, including at least one member having regional and rural expertise. The Pricing Authority will provide advice to COAG on the definition of public hospitals eligible for either block funding only, or a mix of activity-based and block funding, or activity-based funding only.
The Pricing Authority will determine adjustments to the national efficient price to reflect variation in wage costs, and other legitimate and unavoidable inputs which affect the cost of service delivery. This will include hospital type and size, hospital location, including regional and remote stations, and patient complexity, including Indigenous status. There will be provision for the Territory and other governments to make submissions to the pricing authority, at any time, to inform its findings on pricing.
The National Health and Hospitals Agreement will be implemented in such a way to ensure the Territory will not be worse off in respect of Commonwealth transfers in the short term, and will be better off in the long term.
In conclusion, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is a good deal for the Territory. It fulfils my two major criteria. It will mean more resources for healthcare in the Territory; and it recognises the special needs of regional and remote Australia. Changes to primary care will provide a real opportunity to push ahead, in partnership with the Commonwealth, to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. The administrative arrangements negotiated with the Commonwealth mean we are well placed to ensure the pricing authority identifies a fair approach to funding rural and remote health services. Over the coming months, we will finalise the details associated with the new funding for more sub-acute hospital beds, reductions in elective surgery wait times, reduced wait times in emergency departments, and improved access to aged care and GP services. Most important of all, this agreement will make a substantial difference to the lives of Territorians.
I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, the Chief Minister has now had the opportunity to convince Territorians that this is a good deal for the Territory. Perhaps it is. The Health minister, in an earnest voice, offered this slogan: this is about health, it is not about politics; it is about people, it is not about politics. I smell politics around this, and I sense an overwhelming lack of genuineness in the way the Chief Minister has dealt with this issue.
We asked for Treasury analysis so there could be a weighing and testing of the nature of this deal which has been signed on our behalf. We know health is an issue of great concern to Territorians, and they want to see reform, they want to see improvement; they want to see a system change. Of course, politicians in the lead-up to an election would sense that and think: ‘We have the credentials here so we can start to move out and create this impression’.
Undoubtedly, there is structural change. There has been an increase in money, albeit through the breaking, fundamentally, of the intergovernmental agreement, and a top-up from the Commonwealth. That, in itself, warrants some detailed analysis. Is this the thin end of the wedge, or not? We need some convincing, and some explanation from the Chief Minister.
During Question Time we had accusations: shallow, disingenuous and, sometimes, frankly, incorrect allegations put across the Chamber which completely exposed the sentiment expressed that this is about health, it is about people; it is not about politics. Bunkum! If you are genuine about this you would pay respect to this parliament, at the very least, by providing something more than a PowerPoint presentation as a masquerade for analysis - this is the type of material you would provide to a high school class. To allow an explanation of a most historic - we heard that word - the most significant change since Medicare, and this parliament, the Territory opposition, the people of the Northern Territory and their representatives here get a PowerPoint presentation. That is a disgrace!
It is not that there is politics being played here. It is the disservice, the dishonesty, and the requirement for leadership at a critical time to stand up and let us understand what it is you have signed up to. It could well be the Chief Minister does not understand what he has signed up to. In fact, that was revealed by his own statements indicating in the media that he agrees to this, though he has not yet had the opportunity to read it all.
Ms Lawrie: Not at all.
Mr MILLS: Go and check the Hansard.
Ms Lawrie: He made it very clear. He liked the principle of the reform; he was looking for the details.
Mr MILLS: Go and check the Hansard. This is a comprehensive, very complex area and yet - ‘Yes, we agree, of course, because Kevin is behind it’ - because it is about politics, it is about structure and change and moving pictures, and an opportunity to say something. But, at the bottom of this, if you are genuine about your desire to improve health systems in the Northern Territory, you have to (1) show you are a leader; and (2) show you are leading by understanding and explaining and demonstrating to the wider community that you have their best interests at heart, because you are explaining the significance of all the different lines of this significant change.
Make no mistake - and I say this very deliberately - we are required to respond; and respond we are. When you are only provided with a PowerPoint presentation as the substance of your analysis, that is a juvenile and weak attempt at covering up that which needs to be made open and plain so that the Territory opposition, at the very least, has a greater insight. Instead, we are provided with an insult.
This is not an analysis. This is the type of presentation you would make to a senior high school class. This is key points - this is not analysis. There is no insight into the structural changes to the intergovernmental agreement. There are no signed assurances that can be presented to us because it is not just about the future of this Territory opposition, or this Territory government and this Chief Minister, or Kevin Rudd for that matter. It is about ensuring we deliver on the expectation that resides out there that they want a better health system. But we do not have that detail.
To give you an insight, if you even have your head around the sorts of details you need, these are questions that need answers. Twelve months ago, almost to the day, we had a budget and we had a reply from the opposition. In the opposition’s reply, at that time, was an announcement that we needed to move to an activity-based model in the Territory, and that was described at the time. This is the very same model now being applied to the two major hospitals in the Territory under this arrangement. Yet, for 12 whole months, there was the opportunity to provide some greater detail, or at least a sensible response to that which was put out there by the Territory opposition over 12 months ago, which would have given an indication, if you are fair dinkum, that at least the opposition knows a little about this. In order to get the model right – because it is not about politics, is it? - and make sure the whole thing works well to produce a better system, you need to provide better answers to more complex questions.
This is the type of detail I would have expected, rather than the disservice that we have been presented with today. What is the defined activity-based funding cost model for Australians? What is the model, and how is that apportioned for the nation? Why would you want to know that? To ensure the Territory’s capacity and Territory’s structure, how it measures against the national model, and how that is arrived at. It is important to contrast the two models and how they will apply in the Territory, both now and into the future, and compared against a national model, when you consider that delivering services in Echuca in remote Victoria is slightly different to delivering services remote from Darwin in the Northern Territory.
To give that a sharper focus, the day this was announced, I was with the federal Opposition Leader in a health clinic at Ukaka. This is the question that needs to be answered – in that health clinic there were questions, good questions, questions about governance. The problem they had was a fairly basic, stark and quite horrible problem. We had been there about six months before, or thereabouts; the same problem but it had become worse. What was that? They had asked whether this clinic could have locks fitted on the door. They had not been entrusted with the keys to the clinic - someone else was supposed to be looking after the keys …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. We are lacking a quorum. Ring the bells, please. Thank you, we have a quorum.
Mr MILLS: Thank you. This is the level of analysis required so there are satisfactory answers provided to the people who will be served by this announcement. After all, it is not about politics. In this clinic at Ukaka, the local people were not entrusted with the keys; someone else had to look after that. The lock was broken. It is a cool place that attracts the local dogs which camp in the clinic. The local dogs bring in dead animals and defecate in the health clinic. The solution is out of the hands of the people in the community. Someone comes and looks into the clinic and says: ‘I cannot do anything here’. There are two old ladies on dialysis there. There is a stench coming out of the clinic, but they cannot fix it - frankly, there is dog shit everywhere. This is a clinic! I have never seen anything as appalling! And on the very day the announcement was made. I thought: here is the test.
It is a genuine question, because it is not about politics, it is about people: how will this announcement bear a beneficial response and extend to the people in that clinic? How will it work? I wanted to see the dots joined together because, if I were the Chief Minister, I would ponder on that so I could give that explanation. If you can give the explanation to that - and there possibly is an explanation – but we get a PowerPoint presentation as a level of analysis. What is the explanation you provide to the people of Ukaka? In their situation they are not even entrusted with the key to prevent dogs from crapping in their clinic. How do you explain to them the announcement that has been described in scant detail? How will it improve service to those people? That is just one clinic.
That is the thing we need to be talking about. It is not about politics, it is about people. Well, make an explanation. Go out there, stand in that clinic and say something meaningful to them. Explain to them how it is going to change things. How you are going to keep the dogs out of the clinic? How you are going to ensure those ladies are able to get their dialysis? How it is that now there will be someone who will visit regularly. Maybe there is an answer, but those people need to have it explained to them in terms they can understand that actually means something - because it is not about politics, it is about people. Explain it to them.
That is a genuine response, and you need to have that explanation available, not a PowerPoint presentation. If it truly is that monumental, that comprehensive, you would certainly get something more than this. You would certainly get something more from a Chief Minister who says, basically: ‘Do not worry, I agree with in principle. Of course, I will seek political advice, it is important; it is Kevin Rudd, after all. And off I go, with my white flag in hand, to negotiate’. After all, it is about people, and not politics. Well, every action and every response we have seen shows that statement, that slogan, could well be completely wrong.
We need more detail; it is certainly not contained in the PowerPoint representation. I almost get the impression the Chief Minister got a colouring-in book with some crayons, provided by Kev - just join the dots or something like that, so that we can all get together because, after all, this comprehensive, complex, monumental change which has come to the health system, you do not need to be across the details; here is an executive summary, here are some talking points, and away you go. And we heard the talking points coming out again - it is not about politics, it is about people. Well, you could have fooled me.
Can the Chief Minister explain, in terms people can understand, how this activity-based funding formula will actually work in the Northern Territory? If you are seeing this completely as a political thing, do not assume I am asking because I believe I know the answer and I do not believe you know the answer. The point is, if you are leading this, signing us up to this, you need to explain this. You are expecting us to provide a wholesome and robust counter to this, in some way or other, but it is very hard in the absence of information. If the sum total of it is something you give to a high school class as high class analysis, well, you put in a nickel and you are expecting something you are not going to get. You need to put in a more effort and provide that kind of detail.
How does the Northern Territory currently determine funding for our hospitals? How does it currently work? How does the new system improve things in practical terms? Practical terms - one model versus the other model - these are the details that need to be provided. Define where each activity starts and ends, and what exactly is encompassed in the funding agreement and in this activity-based model. How do you determine it? What type of detail? That is the sort of material.
Now, do not say: ‘Oh, you should have sought a briefing’. I understand briefings were sought, but not provided. You can make these grand statements – false statements – here in the Chamber in front of the cameras, but the truth is something quite different! And you say it is about people, and it is not about politics. Bull! You be honest about this. Start providing the detail that is necessary so there can be a genuine debate, and an understanding of a complex and comprehensive change, so you say - and all indications are that it is. However, what do we have to go on? Executive summaries, PowerPoint presentations, and slogans. It may well be a significant change, and it may well be positive changes that are required, and not just political benefits that flow behind this agenda, but we do not know, because the detail is not there. Make the record clear.
The shadow Health minister sought a briefing on activity-based funding. What did your minister’s office provide? Gobbledygook. My shadow Health minister sought a COAG briefing, ahead of COAG, on the detail of the financial benefit the Prime Minister had offered. What happened? No briefing was provided. The Chief Minister can well stand here in front of the cameras and make false statements, saying that we have been silent on this; nothing could be further from the truth. We have endeavoured to play a constructive and proactive role in this, giving the benefit of the doubt to this Labor administration to back its slogans and statements with some hard evidence.
Nothing has been provided. A PowerPoint presentation - that is all we get. The accusations can stand in front of the cameras, but we have to stand in front of the people, after this Labor government has signed up to something we do not know what the heck it is, or the detail of it, or the nature of it, or the intricate detail. I would not mind betting the Chief Minister does not know, or does not care. I would not mind betting the Health minister is across the slogans, and he is good at talking but, in terms of the details, completely captured by those around him. They are not taking responsibility for this. They are selling a message. And there is a world of difference.
If you want to effect change in health, you have to know a little more than the slogans. I see a structure, which has often been referred to: there is structural change, significant structural change, and then they talk about the amounts of money. Once again, the Labor confusion continues to be presented. They believe the spending of money is an outcome. You know what the outcome is? It is a healthier population; it is improved health of the community. It is not more money. That is not a result; it is an input. A new structure is just another form. Will that form produce what we want, which is improvement in the health of the people? That is the discussion which needs to take place. Why is there such a level of sickness in our community? What system do we have in place, and what are the flaws in the system? We would agree that we need more doctors. However, that does not answer the deeper question: why is there such a level of sickness? Does this model go anywhere towards answering that? If you just recount yes, because that is what you are meant to say, that is one of the talking points, explain yourself.
This deal was offered by the Prime Minister and is based on activity-based funding. Last year this was announced - in fact, it was announced three times - three components to establish an enhanced activity-based funding model for the Territory. I saw, as the health professional sees, the need to understand the costs of providing procedures in the Territory. What has the government done? It has not done a thing. The Chief Minister has gone off to COAG and has rolled over. Kevin has rubbed his tummy and he has accepted a deal - that appears to be quite clear - of which he does not have any idea of the complexity, or …
Ms Lawrie: Not true.
Mr MILLS: If the best you can do is: ‘Not true’, well, have a look at this.
Ms Lawrie: You do not have a clue.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: You would stand behind this as the most comprehensive response …
Ms Lawrie: I was there for three days, mate. You were not.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … a responsible government would provide this in terms of detailed analysis.
Ms Lawrie: You do not know what you are talking about.
Mr MILLS: You have had 12 months to provide some sensible response …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … to that which was put up by the opposition …
Members interjecting.
Ms Lawrie: You do not know what you are talking about.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … and you have no detail, you have no analysis, you have no credibility. You hide behind slogans and you are conning people. You are conning people and they are going to see right through you. They know that you do not care. They have given up on you. The challenge is ours now to ensure there is an alternative, because they are desperate for an alternative and they found you wanting. They have found you wanting because you have provided no leadership. You had the opportunity to talk to your community and explain what change will occur that will benefit them. You do not care. You know the slogans, you know what you can say to create an impression, but you have no care about making any kind of difference …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: No interest in making a difference that benefits other people, because you are at the centre of it. You are at the centre of it; it is actually about you. You told us something which is completely false. It is about politics, it is not about people, the way you have treated this. There could well be benefit for Territorians, but it is going to happen with or without you. You have provided no leadership, and the Chief Minister has jumped on an aeroplane and flown off with a happy grin and a white flag flying.
We seem to have reports which show a mismatch between what the other states have received and what the Territory has received. We do not have an explanation; we just have the Treasurer saying: ‘Not true. Here is a PowerPoint presentation’. That is all you get in a comprehensive debate on this matter ...
A member: Government by PowerPoint.
Mr MILLS: Government by PowerPoint. That is the best you can get.
There are questions on notice; opportunities have been provided to government to provide some detail and lift the level of debate. I do not believe they have any more than an executive summary from Kevin Rudd. That is all they received yet they come into the marketplace and bang out slogans and provide a monumental disservice to this parliament, reduce the tone of debate and then expect a very comprehensive engagement from the opposition. We have done the best we can, and little has been offered. In fact, what has been offered today is an absolute insult. You can sit there with a smirk on your face and think butter would not melt in your mouth. Well, I can tell you, the community has seen right through you.
We would like to give this a fair go but on the absence of detail, how can we? We have to deal with the slogans that are provided. There is any number of questions on notice, and we wait for those responses but, bet your bottom dollar, it is not going to be the Chief Minister who will be even remotely interested, or able to understand, the nature of these questions.
We want to ask questions about - and this is just one aspect of it - the activity-based funding models. It is really quite important, and I always think: how will this bring change? Explain it to me. What level of analysis? I do not believe the Chief Minister is going to be too interested in these questions, and probably would not grasp the significance of them. It is just that the opposition is more interested in ensuring that these things actually work. You buy in something; we do not know whether we have a good deal or not.
The bloke who is selling it to us does not know how it works. You ask him some details about this, that or the other, and he does not really know. He just hits you with a slogan or tells a lie about it, and you think: is it a good car or not? It could well be. Can you explain how it works? He hits you with a slogan, or: ‘The bloke who has told me to sell this car reckons it is a real good one’. ‘Well, is it? How does it work? What kind of engine does it have? What is the fuel economy?’ You do not know. ‘Here is a PowerPoint presentation; it tells you all about the car’. ‘Can you explain it to me? What does it do?’ ‘It is a good car, that is all we know. It is a good car because Kevin says it is a good car’. ‘But how does it work? Is it better than the other car?’ ‘Yes, of course. Kevin said it was’. ‘How much did it cost you?’ ‘Don’t you worry about that’. ‘How are you going to fund it?’ ‘Well, they have taken money off us, and then they have given it back to us with their badge on it, and said: “There you go”’. ‘That is how you are going to run the car, but has the car changed?’ ‘Yes, we have just moved the tyres around’. ‘What is it going to do?’ ‘It is a good car’. ‘How do you know?’ ‘Geoff told me’.
That is all we get. Then: ‘Look, we want some manufacturer’s specifications on this so we have some kind of grasp on how the thing all hangs together’. So, calls are made and then we all wait; and what do we get? We get a PowerPoint presentation, the type of thing you would give to sales representatives. The sales representatives would say: ‘Yes, it is a good car’. ‘How do you know?’ ‘Geoff told us’.
That is all you get. It is a vicious circle. You do not get anything. This bloke is not actually serious about the car; he just wants to sell it. He does not care about what it is going to do, because that is not what it is about. It is actually about politics as far as this bloke can see. He goes off to get the best deal possible, indicating before he even heads towards the airport that he will take anything. I suspect then that it leaves this possibility: he probably had to wave the white flag because why would he bother giving a good deal to this Northern Territory government? Why would he want to lavish money on this mob?
They cannot build a house; they cannot manage SIHIP. So why would you give this extraordinary deal to this Northern Territory Labor government? Because they would be spinning their wheels forever, and poor Kev is still worried about what happened with the pink batt scheme and the education revolution. That has not gone as well as they expected. Good heavens, we are coming close to an election. So why give a lot of money to this Labor government in the Northern Territory? Then, of course, we have some important things to manage, and we do not want anyone stuffing it up, so we will give them a little: ‘You go back with this sales pitch and bang on about this. Do not forget to mention Tony Abbott a few times, that line I told you, remember that? What was it again? “1, 2, 3 ripped a billion dollars out”’. Bull! ‘Just give those blokes over there a PowerPoint presentation and say: “Kev said it is a good car”’.
We need to do better than that if you are serious government. There are questions which are complex in nature that need answers. I will just tell you some basic ones.
You need a governmental agreement; tell us how that is going to work - 10 years? 15 years? Hey, it is not about you guys, it is about the system you put in place and you sign up to, and how it is going to affect now and into the future. Do you have an assurance - an absolute assurance? Of course, the Territory Treasurer is going to say: ‘Of course, because they are Labor people and they are real good, and they told me this and I believe it’. However, do we have anything that is binding beyond the term of this government and a Labor government, or the Rudd government, which is going to ensure there is not going to be money carved out of the GST to give to education, for example, or Indigenous housing in another form, or enterprise or something? Is this a once-off, and what assurances have we been provided that it is not?
What about the funding arrangement for the Northern Territory? What about now, in terms of its parity, and how does it match in 10 years time? I understand the way in which we calculate how expensive it is in the Northern Territory to deliver health services to Ukaka, for example, the community I mentioned before; is that model going to stay the same if you …
Mr HAMPTON: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Opposition Leader be given an extension of time to finish his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr MILLS: You are very kind, thank you. I was just closing. However, I have to say these are just questions that have troubled me. I would not mind if we had a different forum, perhaps - maybe this does not work - where the Chief Minister could get us together and we can just have a talk about it - I thought that was what parliaments were about - and explain the money story in a comprehensive way; explain how the governance will effectively change to deliver benefit to remote communities, in real terms, not the slogans and not with the scant information that has been provided.
Convince us, win your argument. It is not a political argument, this is about health. So, win the argument. The argument has not been put, so what do we have to work with? Emotions and slogans, and a PowerPoint presentation. Seriously, you need more than that, and I expected better than what we have received today and to date.
Do not think for a moment what has been contributed by the opposition shows we are disengaged? Quite the opposite. We spent our time working to read what is there, to see the implications that are there. We have been provided with nothing of any substance, expect these two blokes who fly down to Canberra and say they have not really read it all, but: ‘It looks okay, and we agree with it in principle’. Good heavens, it is huge. I expect a higher level of leadership which has some confidence, not in a political sense, but in community leadership; there would be a confidence given. It has been betrayed by the activities of today - the statement which talks about structure, change, and money, but no coherent argument about how the dots are joined to effect real change that is sustainable now and into the future, or any assurance that this is where the intergovernmental agreement stops, or whether the GST will be tinkered with in other ways. After an election, of course, you would not dare talk about that; you might scare people, because it is actually about politics, perhaps.
You have not convinced us in your argument. We only hope this will benefit Territorians who seem to be getting along in spite of you guys. You have done a very poor job today in acquitting yourselves in an explanation of this.
I do not believe, for a moment, the Health minister is genuine when he looked in his quizzical way at the Chief Minister and said: ‘This is about people; it is not about politics’. Well, I am seeing too much politics, not enough substance and an insult that has been provided today by way of an analysis - the Treasury analysis - to the opposition. It is a joke.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for the statement today, and I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this.
The gratuitous political spin that just came from the Leader of the Opposition shows they genuinely have not followed the comprehensive process that has occurred in regard to the National Health Reform. They genuinely do not understand the essential elements of the reform; they have not bothered to read the statement the Chief Minister provided them with last night, or listened to the statement today in the Chamber. They do not want to know. They just want to run these political platitudes of ‘you do not care’. What a lot of nonsense for them to truly believe they can walk in here and say: ‘You do not care because you are a Labor government, and therefore you just do not care’.
And that is it. That is the strength of the argument that comes from the Leader of the Opposition. It is purely superficial, political spin coming from the CLP. They cannot be convinced; they will not be convinced. ‘Labor does not care’ is the essence of the contribution – what a lack of leadership and what a disgrace. It does not get more critical for the Territory and the outcomes for Territorians than health and major health reform.
There is a reason why we genuinely went to COAG with a view that, in principle, we accept the reform and we were calling for the detail. Also, the Chief Minister made it very clear he would only sign up if it was a better deal for the Territory and our unique circumstances were taken into account. Both of those things he said repeatedly and publicly prior to COAG. But, no, no, the Leader of the Opposition wants to spin it the other way and say he went there pre-signed. Not at all. He went there with a very clear, in-principle position following conversations with the Prime Minister, following my attendance at a Treasurers’ conference where the detail of the structural reform and the dollars was gone through to the extent it could, knowing things would be put on the table at COAG, as they were. Improvements went on the table at COAG for the three days.
The ACT, the Northern Territory, South Australia, Tasmania, and Queensland all went to COAG, after the Treasurer’s conference had gone through in detail, on 26 March, the aspects of the reform, knowing that more dollars were going to come to the table at COAG itself. We are meant to believe that all of those jurisdictions were wrong, and the CLP in the Territory is right! They are the fount of all knowledge on this. What nonsense! And all the major states, and this is a classic, do not understand federal financial relations …
Mr Bohlin: Well, explain it to us. Supply us with another PowerPoint.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, order!
Ms LAWRIE: … where you get any deal on offer when the smaller jurisdictions are going into that deal saying: ‘This is looking like a good deal’ after a Treasurers’ conference. They have gone through the numbers; they know the deal is good for them. When you get the larger jurisdictions holding off on it, such as New South Wales and Victoria, it means the fundamentals of horizontal fiscal equalisation have been signed up to; the unique circumstances have been recognised. It is never a great thing for the larger states when that happens. It is always a win for the smaller jurisdictions, including the Territory, when that happens.
That happens at the Treasurers’ conference. We went into COAG knowing that horizontal fiscal equalisation would be recognised within this health reform – a fundamental need because the Territory is unique. We have challenges to meet here in health service delivery that are unique in our nation; we have complex cases coming through the hospital presentations. The 100% pick-up for funding in primary healthcare is a critical breakthrough to end the blame game and to get the important preventative health outcomes that we need to bring down the serious hospital admission rates we have amongst disadvantaged, Indigenous Territorians.
All of that was understood; all of that was raked through at the Treasurers’ conference and through senior government officials representing the departments of Premiers and Chief Ministers, and the Prime Minister and Cabinet. But no - all those officials, and all that work, and all that analysis, and all that detail does not match with the picture the Leader of the Opposition wants to paint for himself. What a lot of nonsense!
This is significant structural reform. The Leader of the Opposition wants to think it is just political spin to say $1bn was ripped out of the health system by the now federal Leader of the Opposition, a former Health minister. It is not. For those of us who watched the Australian Health Care Agreement, the AHCA, being pared down, and pared down, agreement after agreement by the former Howard government - we recognised, and we saw the dollars deserting our health system as a result of this screwing down by the Howard government, pursued by Abbott. $1bn was ripped out. The dollars, the facts, all stack up to $1bn ripped out of hospital funding around our nation.
In real terms, what did that mean for the Territory? Over a decade ago in the 1990s, the Health Care Agreement, the AHCA, was 50:50 in percentage of shares, funding from the Commonwealth, funding from the state or territory governments. In real terms, the screwing down of AHCA agreement after AHCA agreement, which occurred through the decade of the Howard government, meant the Commonwealth was only funding, in the end, about 30% of Territory hospitals, and about 50% of our community health. In real terms, we were going backwards.
As a Territory, we had to pick up more and more of the health funding, both for hospitals and the all-important preventative community health area. So, when the federal government of the day undertakes a national consultative process, as they did, the Prime Minister and his federal Health minister came to Darwin. I attended that forum for a short while at the hospital to hear from people in the health service delivery system what they needed to do and how they needed to do it differently. They embarked upon national health reform. At the end of that, they said: ‘We will take on 60% of the hospital’s funding, going forward’. That is called ‘skin’ in the game; that is called the Commonwealth stepping up to its funding responsibilities, ending the blame game.
Leading into COAG there were significant question marks around whether that 60% included 60% of the growth, because there is always an argument in health dollars about growth. In the Howard era, the AHCA had indexation at 5.3% when, in real terms, states and territories, which are the service deliverers, would argue it is more around 12%; the Commonwealth government itself would recognise 8.25% in terms of indexation. In real terms, we were losing out at state and territory level thanks to the misery perpetrated by the Howard government, by Abbott as Health minister, onto the health system. As a result, that caused misery as health became a bigger and bigger slice out of state and territory budgets. We had to lift the funding into our systems to provide for the important patient care which was justifiably required.
That was the scenario we used to labour under. Yes, the November 2008 SPP reforms under the new Rudd government gave us a better slice of the health funding in indexation; it gave us indexation at 7.3%, therefore getting closer to the real growth needs coming through health funding requirements. None of the states and territories thought, at that time, we were quite at the point we wanted to be, which is why we were all very interested in the Rudd government health reform agenda, watching it closely and analysing it as it went along.
With regard to the 60% of the hospital share at COAG, our Chief Minister and the Premiers pushed for that to be a guaranteed 60% of growth going forward. The Prime Minister made that guarantee which went into writing, and that was a critical breakthrough at COAG. With regard to the amount of GST to be dedicated, that will vary for each state. The aggregate amount of GST, tied, is 30%. The buffoon over there, the member for Fong Lim, did not understand what the word ‘aggregate’ meant, so he went out with a false figure on his Facebook, which is constantly being shut down by his leader. The reality is, the tied GST …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: The reality is that the tied GST for the Territory will be about 14% which reflects our Territory’s high reliance on GST revenue. There are two tranches of funding arrangements in the national health reforms. There is what we call the transitional arrangements, which occur from the period of 2010-11 to 2013-14, and then there is the post-transition period, 2014-15 through to 2019-20.
There were some significant breakthroughs that occurred at COAG, and I was appalled at the nonsense spoken by the Leader of the Opposition today. I sat through the COAG processes and I saw the way in which our Chief Minister was in there working very hard for the Territory to make sure that every step of the way we received our fair slice of any offers that were going around; there were no side deals done with the states without the Territory having a slice of the action. The opposition referred earlier today to $800m coming out of the work of New South Wales. That $800m was actually a global amount shared per capita across all the jurisdictions. So, we received our slice of the extra $800m that went on the table for sub-acute beds; one of the breakthroughs in the last session of COAG.
Every step of the way we were in there fighting for our slice. In fact, we made some suggestions how the funding could be packaged to be flexible and to ensure that funding across appropriation and capital could be mixed depending on whether there were unique circumstances. For example, whether in some jurisdictions brand new sub-acute beds had to be brought on, and whether you had some capacity in the system to refurbish beds, and how that changed your capital requirement anywhere from a $400 000-odd sub-acute bed cost up to an $850 000 new sub-acute bed cost, and how you could put more into operational staffing of those sub-acute beds. They were the type of details the Territory was particularly interested in negotiating, and we got our way.
Critically important were the issues the Chief Minister was pursuing in general practitioner places. There seems to be a lack of understanding about the impact made on the health system by a lack of general practitioners in the Territory when it comes to members opposite. There is no lack of understanding by this government about the critical nature of needing to get more general practitioners into the Territory to provide primary healthcare and to reduce the ultimate impost on our hospital funding. The Prime Minister’s commitment at COAG to quarantine the new general practitioner places, 50% for remote and regional Australia, was again a significant provision for the Territory. It will make very real changes in people’s access to appropriate healthcare, and also, ultimately, bringing forward the initiative of a training school occurring in the Territory which will provide real opportunities for doctors here, trained in the Territory and services delivered in the Territory and, hopefully, the doctors staying in the Territory.
These are all improvements to create a better health reform package recognising our ageing Indigenous population and recognising the unique circumstances of our Indigenous ageing factor being 50 years of age, which goes to the elements of health reform dealing with what we refer to, colloquially, as bed block; but it is essentially the aged services component within hospitals which have been put within the transitional period, and other health services, on the table.
Important for us are ongoing cost pressures. Why this is a very good deal for us is the need for improvement in primary care in the bush, particularly the rural and remote areas. The Commonwealth’s recognition it has 100% funding responsibility simply ends the blame game. They will take funding responsibility but, at a state level, we will continue to be the operators of the system, so there will still be the vibrancy of our health clinics, and the AMSANT health clinic. We certainly recognise the $222.7m, at this stage, for the Territory is a significant gain for the health system. As I said, the fundamentals are extremely important. Instead of the Commonwealth providing approximately 30% of the funding for hospitals, that will rise to 60% of funding. Instead of approximately 50% in primary healthcare, that will rise to 100% of funding. These are all critical gains for our financial sustainability and our healthcare going forward.
The reforms are complex. The efficient pricing authority is yet to be established but there has been a breakthrough in negotiations between states and territories and the Commonwealth. The states and territories will be represented on the efficient pricing authority with regional representation which is, obviously, what the Territory was looking for. There will be a quality and standards authority which will ensure activity-based funding is understood and what complex analysis has to be done in working out where activity-based funding should be pegged, and that it will be different. What they will do in the transition period is start with recognising efficient pricing at each state and territory level, ensure that is right and then transition, over a period of time, to a national efficient pricing benchmark. Our unique challenges are recognised every step of the way: you cannot compare the activity at Royal Darwin Hospital to the activity at the Alfred Hospital. People in the health system who undertake this work all the time know and understand that, and our needs are being recognised at every level there.
To be so dismissive of the breakthroughs we have had with additional sub-acute care beds; the reduction in elective surgery waiting times; reducing the emergency department waiting times; the flexible funding arrangements we have put in place for the Commonwealth in this package; the increased number of aged care places and primary care services for aged people; the health workforce training; the coordinated care for patients with diabetes; and the first step, as the Prime Minister called it, in mental health funding which was brokered at COAG, is truly a disgrace.
They do not understand at the heart of these reforms the federal government is genuinely providing for a sustainable health system for the future and, importantly, real results now in the transition period for patients who need access to improved care. This deal at COAG delivers real results in this transition period. Prior to COAG, the transition period results were not there, they were brokered at COAG. I was there and I know the extent to which the Chief Minister was involved in those negotiations - not just with the Premiers, but also in discussions with the Prime Minister.
Similarly, I was having discussions with the Treasurer, and we were having discussions with the Health minister. It is nonsense to believe any Chief Minister or Treasurer of the Northern Territory would go into national reforms without fighting for the case the Territory has, because we have unique circumstances which must be taken into account, which have been taken into account, in this national reform. What this would do is ensure the health budgets going forward are sustainable.
The carve-up we lost to former AHCA agreements with the 5.3% indexation rate – as low as it was - those days have gone; they are behind us. The additional dollars the Commonwealth put on the table through COAG regarding the transitional period brings that indexation rate up to approximately 9.3%, when there is a broad recognition through the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare it is around 8.25%. Is this sustainable? Yes, it is. As I said, at the COAG negotiation the Prime Minister gave a commitment in writing that the Commonwealth would not just sign up to 60% of the hospital funding going forward, and 100% of the primary healthcare, but they would also sign up to the growth as well. The growth will, ultimately, be determined by the efficient pricing authority. In that, we will put all our complex and unique circumstances which have already been recognised and enshrined in all the discussions, all the commitments, and all the details.
Madam Deputy Speaker, we are confident that this will bring real improvements to the patients and to the people who rely on the health system in the Northern Territory and, critically important, it is sustainable, and we needed sustainable reforms. We have achieved it.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will quote from Professor Ian Hickie, a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Sydney:
These are real questions, and questions that are unable to be answered in any specific way by the government. We keep hearing how great it is going to be, without any real detail as to exactly what it is going to mean for the people of the Northern Territory; that is, the patients in our hospitals.
I believe it is all agreed that our health system does need some serious attention; there is no doubt about it. We just do not have the money to deal with our circumstances. Since 1984, we have been funded in the same capacity as all other states. It simply is not enough to cover the vast distances we have here in the Northern Territory, and our exceptional circumstances.
While it is difficult for any Northern Territory government to deliver comprehensive health services with very little money to such a dispersed population, it is more difficult to discuss the pros and cons of this plan when the Chief Minister has released very little detail of what it means for the Northern Territory. How can he answer questions such as these? How will a 19-year-old man who has recently attempted suicide receive the ongoing help he desperately needs under this new plan? How will a 50-year-old Indigenous woman with diabetes, arthritis and dental decay actually get access to the primary care, dental and other allied health services that she needs?
We had the PowerPoint presentation. This was tabled today during Question Time as some attempt to say: ‘Well, here is the Treasury analysis’. I really hope this is not the Treasury analysis. The Chief Minister did say he would release that departmental analysis to Territorians, and he would make it public. I hope, for the sake of Territorians, this is not the document he intends to table. I hope this is not the departmental analysis that he was talking about at the time.
There are more questions than there are answers at this stage. Questions such as: what is the defined activity-based funding cost model for Australia? We need to know some of that detail. What has the Northern Territory government done to develop an activity-based funding model, definitions and projections for each activity in the Northern Territory? This is very important, particularly if the Alice Springs and Royal Darwin Hospitals will become activity-based funded hospitals. We do not have an activity-based funding model here in the Northern Territory. How does the Department of Health demonstrate activity-based funding using case mix classifications, explicitly linking funding to the actual services provided?
These are questions that need to be answered, not the motherhood statements prepared in the Chief Minister’s statement today, which is really nothing but an admission of failure. It clearly highlights all the problems with our health system in the Northern Territory. It does not provide any answers, or any detail, and, as I say, it is little more than an admission of the Northern Territory government’s failure to address issues in health.
If we have a look at page 3:
Yes, we do, and you have had nine years to do that.
Yes, they do need high levels of care. Again, you have had nine years to do this.
Exactly right. This is, again, an admission of failure by the Northern Territory government. In fact, there are about 29 pages highlighting problems with the current health system, and how Kevin Rudd is now going to fix all these problems with this new system. It is hardly reform.
The system is not the problem. The problem is long-term, successive Labor governments which have rolled out the red carpet for Kevin Rudd. Due to the extreme failures of the Northern Territory government to provide adequate health services for the Northern Territory, or at least attempt to provide adequate health services for Territorians and, indeed, long-term, successive Labor state governments over the past 10 or more years, the federal government really was left with no choice except to come in and address this issue. Left in the hands of responsible governments we might not be in this position, and we should not be in this position. Our health system does not need fundamental reform. We need local autonomy in our local hospitals. We need hospital boards with clout which are able to take up the fight to head office - which is the department and the minister.
There is very little detail in this proposed propaganda puff piece by the Chief Minister. Alarmingly, I note he is committed to a single local hospital network. This is concerning. This will see the evolution, I guess, of the current hospital boards; there has been no real mention of that. I am guessing we will see a rewrite of the Hospital Boards Act 2009, after the long debate we had last year regarding hospital boards, where the Country Liberals tried to strengthen those hospital boards while the Northern Territory government simply wanted to water down the role of the hospital boards after the embarrassment the former Minister for Health suffered the previous year. So, this is a great concern that everything the government opposed during the boards’ debate last year - that is strengthening the local hospital boards, particularly relating to governance, management and remuneration - you now say is the greatest thing since Medicare; the greatest reform, it is fantastic.
Clearly, that is what is going to happen if we look at the model relating to hospital boards. It says in the Chief Minister’s statement:
That is alarming; how is that going to work in Northern Territory? This is the Country Liberals greatest fear being realised. This is why we fought so hard last year in the debate to protect the hospital boards, to protect the autonomy of the hospitals, to create champions at our local hospitals to win the argument against head office.
We fought hard and we had some successes to put in protections for those hospital boards to remain but, now, this plan has been signed off by the Chief Minister. I do not know what you were thinking when the local hospital networks proposal came up. How will one local hospital - and perhaps the Minister for Health could answer this - network work in the Northern Territory with such large distances and unique circumstances particularly between Alice, Darwin and Gove, in particular?
If we have a look at page 60 of the National Health and Hospital Network document, and I will quote from that. It says:
How can one hospital network, which is separated by some 1200 km, provide such assurances and involve hospitals in making decisions about the delivery of these services to their communities to improve clinical safety and quality? How will it increase ownership and the ability to drive change at that hospital if we have one super board, one super local hospital network - hardly local here in the Northern Territory - run out of Darwin? You can bet your bottom dollar that is where the local hospital network will be.
This is of great concern. I hope the Chief Minister and the Health minister are able to shed some light on this and how this will improve the already watered down autonomy that these hospitals have. In fact, this is going to empower a local hospital network, a super network with, and I quote again:
That is a far cry from what this government wanted when they re-wrote the Hospital Boards Act of the 1980s to the current legislation. In fact, they diminished the powers and the management ability of these hospital boards:
That sounds quite good, but how will one super board - which is really all this is going to be in the guise of in the Northern Territory – empower Tennant Creek, Katherine and Gove - in particular those three smaller hospitals which are already lacking in clout because of the watered down hospital boards legislation that came through late last year - to provide exactly what the Prime Minister has said it will in the National Health and Hospitals Network for Australia’s Future document? I quote again:
How will it bring them closer to making decisions about improving the delivery of health services in their communities? How will it improve the effective clinical governance of that hospital? In other words, how will it bring the patient and the clinician closer together, particularly at Gove, Tennant Creek and Katherine? You can put Alice Springs Hospital in this scenario because it will be under the local hospital network, no doubt based out of Darwin. As I said before, how will it improve the patient and clinician relationship for the 50-year-old Indigenous woman with diabetes and arthritis, or the 60-year-old man needing cataract surgery if the management of that hospital is run by a super board 1200 miles away, or 700 miles away, if you are in Tennant Creek, and similar for Katherine and Gove?
The former head of the AMA, Dr Rosanna Capolingua, said:
It is of great concern to me that the autonomy and the clout of these hospitals will diminish significantly - diminish further than they already have - under the watered down Hospital Boards Act introduced last year. As I have said many times, I will say again: our hospitals need hospital boards with clout. There needs to be a move to remuneration. Will these local hospital networks be remunerated? There is no detail of that whatsoever. This is fundamental to the service delivery of our hospitals. It is fundamental to the reform - or the so-called reform - pushed by the Prime Minister. Local hospital networks are fundamental; a key plank to this whole thing. Again, we are very light on detail as to how these will operate. How will Alice Springs Hospital be better off with one single local hospital network?
There has been a lot of criticism about New South Wales and the local area health services they currently operate. I do not know if this is going to be much better. As far as the Territory goes, with its vast distances and its small number of hospitals - five hospitals - it really is like an area health service, as it is called in New South Wales. That is a governing council, a governing hospital, or a governing board running a number of hospitals. I do not see how this is going to strengthen the doctor/patient relationship; how it is going to bring the clinician and the patient closer. Head office will be - that is, the department - a huge stumbling block, particularly for those that champion better services for their community.
If I was the member for Barkly or the member for Nhulunbuy, I would be concerned about this. I have said before, particularly during that debate, that this is a great concern.
There is so much more in this statement we can talk about, and I know this debate will go on and on. We have touched on the funding; the Leader of the Opposition spoke about the funding. Other members will talk about other parts of this statement, but I need to speak today about the local hospital networks. I am very concerned about that. I am concerned that it will not bring that patient/doctor relationship much closer.
Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I thank you for listening. I believe I am out of time, or I can keep going?
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired. I am sorry.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement, and congratulate the Chief Minister and the Council of Australian Governments in signing up to this health reform package which delivers more doctors and health professionals, more funding to deliver our services, and a reform package that will be better integrated to deliver primary care services.
Health is everything. We all want a health system which is accessible and affordable, when and where we need it: from childbirth to needing a GP in the middle of the night, to needing specialist care as a young person with the onset of mental illness, to the needs of an older Australian with greater aged care problems. We need a healthcare system which is responsive to our needs, and nowhere is this more acutely felt than in the Northern Territory.
The Northern Territory health system is a good health system, despite what the member for Greatorex said. Our health system is one of the best in the country. It is so good that the Liberal Minister for Health in Western Australia believes it is a good system, and that is why he has decided to have an agreement with us to send all people east of Warburton to be treated for renal dialysis in Alice Springs. Our health system is good, and this is the proof. In 1990 through to the beginning of 2000, people who had renal disease and undergoing dialysis had a 66% increased mortality compared with other Australians. Today, people in Alice Springs, in southern Australia, or the Territory undergoing renal dialysis have exactly the same life expectancy as the rest of Australia.
Our primary healthcare is good. That is proven by the increase in the life expectancy of Aboriginal women, the reduction of infant mortality in Indigenous kids, and the reduction of anaemia in kids in remote communities. This cannot be achieved unless you have a good health system.
In 2001, when we came to government, we had 1200 nurses; now we have 1975 nurses. When we came to government we had about 220 doctors; now we have exceeded 400 - we have doubled the number of doctors and specialists in the Northern Territory. Our system is a good system; it is a good health system and I will always support it. It operates under very difficult circumstances, not only the tyranny of distance; it is the fact that 30% of our population uses 70% of our services. We have one admission every 10 minutes at our emergency departments - the reason for that is the lack of GPs. We have 52 GPs per 100 000 population in the Northern Territory, compared with 95 GPs per 100 000 population in New South Wales. We have half the number of GPs in the Territory than in southern states. The result is people who cannot access a GP turn up at emergency departments, clogging the system.
Our hospitals are very good. Last year, the Alice Springs Hospital had 36 000 hospitalisations, a higher number than the actual population of Alice Springs; and the Royal Darwin Hospital, in one year hospitalised every single citizen in the Northern Territory; in excess of 200 000 hospitalisations last year. We have a small population, we have a massive geographic reach, and we have significant Indigenous health disadvantage. The lack of GPs makes delivering service in the Territory particularly difficult.
The Chief Minister took these concerns to Canberra and successfully negotiated an additional $222m in funding for our health system. The Northern Territory is well placed to take advantage of the health reform package, and we will waste no time in doing so. A dedicated cross-agency task force is being established so we can start discussions immediately with the Commonwealth to ensure that we get the best possible outcomes for our patients.
Our work is cut out for us: by the end of this year we will need to have in place the proposed structure of the local hospital network. Clinically speaking, and for efficiency reasons, it is logical the Northern Territory would have one local hospital network. Our small hospitals, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy, will maintain their community obligation status due to the vital service they provide to our remote communities. These hospitals are already networked with Alice Springs and Royal Darwin Hospitals, with well established clinical referral pathways. We have also established state-wide services, such as the trauma centre at Royal Darwin Hospital and the Alan Walker Cancer Centre that provides specialist services to all Territorians.
It is important all our hospital and health services are planned for on a population basis, and having one network will improve the Territory’s capacity to plan for growth in the health and aged care sector. The local hospital network will have a CEO, a professional governing council, and associated support staff.
I note the member for Greatorex mentioned the local hospital boards. It is very unfortunate that the only places where we have seen a total unwillingness of people to nominate for boards is in Alice Springs and Katherine. In Alice Springs, we received only one nomination …
Mr Conlan: It does not say much for your local members.
Mr VATSKALIS: … and in Katherine we received three. All the others, Nhulunbuy, Darwin and Tennant Creek received a number of nominations …
Mr Conlan interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: …. and we have written to these people appointing them to the board. I know the member for Greatorex wrote to my colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, encouraging her to get people for the hospital board – and they have a hospital board. Your own town has only one nomination because people from the board encouraged that person to apply; so now they have three people. The local hospital network …
Mr Conlan interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The minister has the call.
Mr VATSKALIS: No one applied and board members had to go out themselves to encourage someone to apply. We have a different story in Nhulunbuy, in Tennant Creek and in Darwin.
The aim of the reform package is to reduce administration so we can get on with the job of providing services, which the Northern Territory government supports wholeheartedly, and which is why we support one local hospital network. The reform also allows us to continue to address cross-border patient flows and healthcare arrangements, and we will do this as we have done in Central Australia with rental dialysis services.
All states and territories have patients from other jurisdictions, and there are already mechanisms in place for this to occur and be funded. By the end of 2010, the Commonwealth will be establishing the number and boundaries of primary healthcare organisations in consultation with the Northern Territory government. This includes the commencement of discussions about determining the scope of GP and primary healthcare services to be transferred to the Commonwealth.
There are a number of services provided by the Northern Territory government for which funding and policy responsibility will transfer to the Commonwealth, including remote health centres, urban community health centres, super clinics, population cancer screening, health promotion and immunisation services. It is likely for a number of these services the Territory will continue to be the service provider, and funding and policy arrangements will be transferred to the Commonwealth. This is ideal, because the Northern Territory already provides a greater role in primary care provision and primary care planning than other states and territories due to the historical absence of other providers, including GPs in remote communities. We will gladly work with the Commonwealth to share that expertise, and ensure continuity of service provision.
We also have a very good working relationship with Aboriginal Medical Services, working closely to deliver services in remote communities which are integrated with hospital services. We are keen to maintain that integration of planning and service delivery, and we will be working with the Commonwealth to ensure these unique service delivery arrangements, and quality of service, are maintained.
The reform process works well with the pre-existing tripartite Indigenous health reform already under way in the Territory, driven by our NT Aboriginal Health Forum, and involving the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance (AMSANT), the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, and our Department of Health and Families. This NT reform will see a gradual devolution of Department of Health and Families managed services to regionalised community controlled organisations, which will be well served by the new national primary care reforms.
The Territory government will continue providing a range of health services which do not fall within the hospital network and primary community healthcare organisation framework. This includes: the ambulance services and Patient Assisted Travel Scheme (PATS); existing public dental services; healthcare for prisoners; school and workplace primary care programs; hospital avoidance programs which relate specifically to acute care patients; and general sexual health services.
There is also a range of areas which require continued discussion with the Commonwealth about who will be the appropriate service provider. They include: specialist community mental health services; drug and alcohol services; community health promotion and population health services; child and maternal services; and community palliative care services. It is, therefore, important, as stated in the agreement, that the Territory remains responsible for system management, service planning and capital planning due to the array of services we will continue to provide either as Territory funded or Commonwealth funded services.
National work will also commence immediately on the establishment of the Independent Health Pricing Authority to start determining the efficient price for each type of service provided, both in hospitals and the primary care sector. The Chief Minister was successful in pushing the point that states and territories need to be represented on that authority; and now they are.
It is critical for the Northern Territory that our disadvantages related to GP shortages, remoteness and Indigenous health status are properly factored into any cost modelling. We do have diseconomies of scale for the delivery of specialist, low-volume services as a service provider, and transport and coordination of care costs are significant. We have significant community service obligations, we have poor population health status, and complex and often co-morbid patient needs. The funding formula needs to be spot on and the states and territories now have representation not only on the authority, but have a say on the terms of reference for that authority. The Northern Territory government will be up-front in advocating for our unique needs during that process.
Madam Speaker, excitingly, the Commonwealth’s significant funding boost will commence from next financial year to deliver improved outcomes in elective surgery, the time patients spend in emergency departments and an increase in sub-acute beds. The Department of Health and Families is rapidly working out how we can best utilise this funding to ease access block pressure so patients can be treated faster and wait less time to have elective surgery done. The targets are ambitious, but we will work to make sure that our patients are seen in clinically appropriate times. It is about being able to access a service when a patient needs it, which is not an unreasonable request.
The sub-acute beds and long-stay patient funding will undoubtedly ease the burden on our hospitals, particularly for those people needing access to home and community care services. The department will be reviewing this where these sub-acute beds would be most appropriately located to ease the pressure points in the acute system. The most significant reform by the Commonwealth is their ironclad commitment to boosting GP training places, 50% in rural and remote areas. The Commonwealth announced $632m funding to train more doctors and roll out a $134m rural workforce strategy which will deliver to 500 communities and 2400 more doctors to move to and stay in rural and remote areas.
This is more than Tony Abbott ever did for the health system. He is a former Health minister who entirely neglected his duty of ensuring we had a workforce that met the growth in demand for health services as our population ages. He was also the Health minister responsible for slashing billions of dollars from the health system without any care or comprehension of the impact upon services to our patients.
The Northern Territory will not miss out on opportunities to advocate and work with the Commonwealth to deliver more doctors and health professionals to live and work in the Territory. We will shamelessly be fighting for more than our fair share of doctors in order to deliver the massive reforms ahead.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, it seems the other side is not too interested in the health area. It is certainly an important area and much has been said today about what has and has not happened in this particular area. As I said on radio not so long ago, I know the Chief Minister is the most competent politician in this Chamber, and together with the most professional and highly qualified Treasury staff who went down there with the Chief Minister and …
Mr Mills: And the best they could come up with was a PowerPoint presentation.
Mr KNIGHT: What are you saying about Jennifer Prince, Leader of the Opposition?
Mr Mills: I said the best you could provide us with is a PowerPoint presentation. That is what I said.
Mr KNIGHT: I believe you are mocking Jennifer Prince. It seems you are taking the lead from your so-called Leader of Opposition Business. It is a bit disingenuous to the lady; she is the most experienced, qualified and knowledgeable person in the Treasury area in the Territory.
I will move on to the statement. Last week’s decision on the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is very good news for the Northern Territory and for Territorians. There has been much said in recent years about the shortcomings of Australia’s health system, and most of us have grown tired of that talk.
Last week, Australians had some real action happening in that particular area. Australians have an expectation they should be able to access first-class treatment through their public hospital systems. Most Australians also have the expectation they should be able to see a GP when they need to, and they also expect they should be able to see a specialist if that is warranted. However, those expectations are not being met. The truth is, particularly when it comes to accessing GPs and specialists, the further away from state capital cities Australians live, the more difficult it is to get those particular outcomes. Because Australians have grown up with the expectations they can access first-class healthcare, they are asking their governments to ensure our hospitals are responsive to their needs. People expect our hospitals to operate effectively and efficiently.
What Australians received last week was an agreement which will help our systems start to meet public expectations. This is an agreement that puts patients first. Dr Chris Mitchell of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners has described the agreement as one which will make a difference in our health for our nation. This is also an agreement which will relieve the growing pressure healthcare was exerting on the Territory’s budget. This will be achieved by the Commonwealth committing to the future stability and sustainability of our health funding.
Last week’s agreement means more money to health in the Northern Territory. As part of the agreement, the Territory will have an extra $200m directed into our health system over the next 10 years. In practical terms, that means more money for operations, more hospital beds, and more doctors across the Northern Territory. The tangible outcomes of the agreement over the next four years include 14 extra hospital beds, 350 additional elective surgery procedures each year, improvements in emergency departments to reduce the time Territorians spend in the ED, and more GPs for the Northern Territory, which is a vital point.
As a bush member, I am heartened to hear there is now a real prospect of more doctors working in remote areas. The benefit of increased general practitioner care is that it is associated with higher patient satisfaction, improved health outcomes, and reduced healthcare spending. Clearly, health outcomes in the Territory can only improve if more GPs are available to work in the regions, where so many of our poorest health outcomes exist. The historic shortage of GPs in the Territory has also meant that public hospital emergency departments have been under mounting pressure. With too few GPs, Territorians have been forced into emergency departments of our public hospitals. Territorians will be the winners if we can ease that pressure on those emergency services areas.
Another positive from the agreement is the introduction of a four-hour emergency department waiting time. The Territory government will immediately start planning to use additional funding to allow us to achieve this target from 1 July next year.
Over time, there has been a steady slippage in the level of Commonwealth healthcare funding to the states and territories. The former Howard government was totally unwilling to do anything to reverse the trend which saw the states and territories digging ever deeper into their budgets to fund the provision of health services. Until last week, the Commonwealth was funding approximately 30% of hospital costs, and 50% of the Territory’s community healthcare costs. As part of the National Health Reform Agenda, the Commonwealth will pick up the tab for 60% of the health services into the future, and 100% of the cost of the primary healthcare.
The Territory and Commonwealth will work together to establish a primary healthcare organisation with the aim of improving the integration of health services, GP, primary healthcare services and aged care services. As of 1 July next year, the Commonwealth will assume total responsibility for primary healthcare services. At that time, the Commonwealth will also assume responsibility for primary and secondary chronic disease management, mild to moderate mental health services, and screening programs for cancer and immunisation.
The Territory has high levels of chronic disease, and we also suffer significant gaps in health services. The primary healthcare organisation will facilitate services for chronic disease patients, identify service gaps, find solutions, and also deliver health promotion and prevention programs.
Last week, my colleague, the Health Minister, talked about the increased focus on training Australia’s health workforce as part of the national health reforms. The National Health Agreement will see an effective doubling of the number of places available for medical graduates to train to become GPs. By 2014, this will mean 1200 places a year will be offered for general practice training. The Territory Health Minister has received an assurance that 50% of the graduates will be dedicated to rural and remote areas. I know the Chief Minister has already had discussions with the Prime Minister about the Territory getting its fair share of this number. There will also be more than a doubling of training places available in private, community, and rural settings for medical graduates aiming to become specialists. The reform agenda also provides for a doubling of the places to allow junior doctors to gain all-important experience before they move on to becoming fully-fledged doctors.
Another of the important initiatives included in the agreement related to aged care. As the Minister for Senior Territorians, I was pleased to learn that the Commonwealth will assume full responsibility for aged components currently provided under the Home and Community Care Program. This relates to non-Indigenous people aged 65 years and over, and Indigenous people 50 years and over. This commitment comes at a time when more seniors than ever before are choosing to spend their retirement years in the Northern Territory. The Commonwealth will also accept responsibility for long-stay, older patients in our hospitals. As part of the initiative for aged care, there will be incentives to help accelerate their transition from hospital to more appropriate places of care.
As we know, one of the Territory’s biggest healthcare challenges is diabetes. The increase in diabetes in the Territory has become a significant challenge for our health budget and projections on the number of cases in the future are, sadly, alarming. As part of the health reform package, the Commonwealth will provide significant assistance with funding for case management of diabetes patients. This includes payments of around $1200 a year for every enrolled patient, and payments of around $1100 a year for the average general practice paid, in part, on the basis of performance in providing better care and improved health outcomes. While this initiative is reliant on GP availability, it has the potential to have a significant and positive impact on acute public services.
It is now a matter of the Commonwealth and the Territory government reaching an agreement on the practical application of these initiatives. While there is further discussion required to iron out some of the detail, the Territory has done well from the Health Reform Agreement. I am pleased with the changes to primary care; I see them as working to help close the gap on health disadvantage for many Aboriginal Territorians living across the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, importantly for the Territory, the reform agenda recognises the special health needs of Australians in regional and remote parts of our nation. All too often, the focus of health is fixed on our major population centres. This is an agreement which recognises that people living in places like the Northern Territory have a right to improved levels of access to our health system. It is an agreement that ends the blame shifting which has dogged the national health debate for far too long. Ultimately, this is an agreement which puts patients first.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to talk on the Chief Minister’s ministerial statement on the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement; very interesting indeed.
I was quite taken aback when the Chief Minister, before he entered the meeting in Canberra, decided we were going to sign up to this momentous deal which will change the face of health right across Australia; it caught me completely by surprise. As the Opposition Leader said during Question Time, the Premier of New South Wales was not so quick to sign up and she extracted many hundreds of millions of dollars more out of the deal by negotiating with the Prime Minister, rather than rolling over a few days before the meeting started – quite a bizarre situation for the Chief Minister to take.
But the Chief Minister seems to believe the Territory has ended up with a good deal out of this, and something to be applauded by all Territorians. Based on this Labor government’s history in health it probably it is a good deal, because you have to scratch your head and wonder who could possibly do a worse job of health than the current Labor government in the Northern Territory.
So, why not just hand the whole system over, holus-bolus, to Canberra? Hand it to them and they can have the headache of wondering what to do with our health system. In fact, this is a clear admission by the Chief Minister and the Labor government that they have stuffed up health and it is time for the feds to step in and fix it. Clearly, it is beyond their ability. They have acknowledged this by acknowledging, even before the meeting started, that they were going to sign up, and their government had failed in health and could not deliver to Territorians.
I have to ask why any government in Australia would trust Kevin Rudd and the federal Labor government to run Health. You only have to take a snapshot over the last couple of years, without going into great lengths, of the failures of the Rudd government. There are a few. Probably the most extreme and biggest failure of the Rudd Labor government would have to be the home insulation scheme ...
A member: Be careful, there have been a few.
Mr TOLLNER: There have been many. The home insulation scheme has resulted in four deaths, at least 120 houses burning down, and hundreds of thousands of people hurt throughout the process. We see the Rudd Labor government allocated $2.5bn of taxpayers’ money to install free insulation in homes where people thought it was not worth doing with their own cash. If you were not prepared to put up your own money to insulate your home because you did not believe it was such a good investment, never mind. Kevin decided you were going to have it anyhow, and he was going to use your taxpayer dollars to pay for something you did not believe was a benefit using your own money.
The result, as I said, was 120 homes set on fire, and 300 000 houses fitted with potentially lethal, incomplete, and near useless junk as a result - a terrible situation. If you think that is crazy; it has become crazier. The National Electrical Contractors Association has estimated repairs alone will cost up to $450m, and the federal government suggests around $1bn to fix what they have stuffed up.
The government said it would now give insulation manufacturers $15m to help them stockpile all the batts and foil they cannot sell anymore. Here is a government that, to stimulate the economy, said they were going to insulate all the houses in Australia for free. Now, the whole system has gone crazy. All of a sudden, they have to bail out people who supplied batts with a $15m rescue package. These are once healthy businesses that now need government support to prop them up.
Kevin Rudd, at the outset, said this wonderful insulation program would create 4000 jobs but, since its failure, we have seen the collapse of almost 6000 jobs right around Australia. I notice there is an insulation company which says it could be closer to 8000 jobs that have been wiped out. That is why Kevin Rudd has spent another $41m of taxpayers’ money to help retrain people who were sacked from the industry that he had spent billions to stimulate. Kevin Rudd has made a complete mess of this program. To fix the mess, he has now moved his entire emissions trading team; the 154 public servants he originally hired to work on what he then called ‘the greatest moral economic and social challenge of our time’. They have now been transferred to save Kevin Rudd from the pink batt scandal to try to pull him out of trouble before the next federal election.
This is probably the biggest monumental stuff-up Kevin Rudd has made but, as my good friend next to me tells me, it is not the only one. Others certainly do not pale into insignificance next to it. Something close to home is SIHIP. I do not think there is a member in this place who does not understand SIHIP has been a complete, utter and total disaster - nearly three years, nearly $0.75bn and nearly three houses. What a shame - what an absolute scam! You would think some members opposite would be jumping up and down complaining about the absolute rort that is SIHIP.
For instance, member for Arafura, I note the federal Indigenous Affairs Minister was at the Tiwi Islands a couple of weeks ago to check out the marvellous SIHIP houses, but refused to visit the Indigenous Business Australian houses, of which three are completed ...
Dr Burns: The ones you cannot stand up in?
Mr TOLLNER: ‘The ones you cannot stand up in’, I hear the minister say. The Housing minister has just interjected and says you cannot stand up in the three IBA houses. That will be an interesting one to take over to the Tiwi Islanders and ask them what they think of those three IBA houses ...
Dr Burns interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr TOLLNER: The feedback I have received from over there is those three IBA houses were completed at about half the cost, in half the time and at twice the quality of the three near complete SIHIP houses, and the federal minister was too embarrassed to inspect the three IBA houses. If they were such a disaster, as the minister here claims, I am sure the federal minister could have gone to the IBA houses and said: ‘They are terrible, the fans hit you in the head when you walk in the door, and SIHIP is delivering much better houses’. But, no, she refused to do that. Why? Because those houses showed up exactly how incompetent they and this government have been in the delivery of SIHIP - nearly three years, nearly $0.75bn, and nearly three houses.
Any way you look at it - spot it, cut it, or whatever - any way you dissect it, it is a disaster. It would take a brave politician to stand up and say: ‘It is not a disaster, it is doing well’, because it is out there for all to see. We have read 1000 articles on it in newspapers all across the country, and seen it on all types of documentaries and news programs. This thing is a disaster, and it has been stuffed up by Kevin Rudd and the Henderson government - simple as that.
What happened to ‘every child in Australia would get a computer’? I have often asked my kids coming home from school: ‘Hey, boys, where is this computer Kevin has promised? You should have one each, because every child in every school in Australia was to get a computer’. So far, no one has spotted a computer - certainly not in my household. I am keen to know whether there are other members in this place who have school-aged children who have come home with their new computer that Kevin Rudd has made available for them. Another Rudd promise that has just disappeared into the ether.
What happened to FuelWatch - the great FuelWatch that was going to drag the price of petrol down? FuelWatch seems to have disappeared along with the other one …
A member: GroceryWatch.
Mr TOLLNER: … GroceryWatch. What has happened to GroceryWatch? Another total, utter, failure. $70m Green Loans - a mess – people gave up their jobs, paid $3000 for qualifications and insurance to be trained as assessors, only to find the demand for Green Loans had been grossly exaggerated - a complete failure.
Who has turned a good budget surplus into a huge debt? Who turned the good federal budget, government surplus, into a debt? Was it Peter Costello? No, he actually got a debt and turned it into a surplus. No, it was Kevin Rudd. How did he do it? He has done it by throwing money around crazily. Do we see any new …
Dr Burns: You do not like BER.
Mr TOLLER: BER? Building the Education Revolution? The minister has dragged up BER. My God! Let me address the issue of BER. I went to the Nemarluk School the other day - a special school. The minister was there, and we saw a beautiful new building. I am not certain how much that beautiful new classroom cost but, goodness knows, they needed it, and they have needed it for a long time now.
I was talking to one of the parents at the opening of this wonderful new classroom and I said: ‘How good is this?’ This guy looked at me and said: ‘These guys have to be joking!’ I said: ‘Why is that?’ He said: ‘Have you looked around this school? The whole place is falling down around their ears. Go to the boys toilets on your way out; just have a look’. All right. I went into the boy’s toilets on the way out and there, right in the middle of the boy’s toilet is a shower stall - nothing unusual about that. What do you think is right in the middle of the shower stall in the boy’s toilets? A urinal! A urinal is right in the middle of the shower stall in the boy’s toilets in the Nemarluk special school. Why is that?
When I got my office done, Madam Speaker - and you will be aware of this - I have an absolutely fantastic toilet and bathroom in my office. It is there by government regulations because we need wheelchair access to our offices so people in wheelchairs are able to get to my toilet and, if they want to have a shower, there are handrails so they can get themselves out of the wheelchair and clean up, and whatever. I do not envisage, although it could happen at some stage in the future, I get a wheelchair-bound person in my office. In any case, if I do, I can direct them to the toilet where all of the mod cons are there so they can safely navigate themselves around the toilet.
At the Nemarluk School, there are numerous children - children in wheelchairs, children who are being sick on themselves, children who have, in some cases, very little control of their bodily functions - who actually will need to use a shower, and will need to try to get into that boy’s toilet. There is practically no way a child in a wheelchair could possibly get into these toilets and use the urinals or the shower if they needed to. What does this government do? What does Kevin Rudd do? No, they do not have money to fix toilets, but they will give you a couple of classrooms. Mind you, the whole school really needs bulldozing, a complete rethink, and starting all over again. Such has been the neglect of their needs for such a long period that it needs a great deal more than a couple of classrooms.
But, the minister is quite prepared to come in here and jump up and down and talk about BER and say what a wonderful initiative it is. I will not say much more on BER, because I know the member for Braitling wants to speak on this issue. Maybe he will mention some areas of the BER which have equally failed. Right across Australia we see these cost blowouts in schools. It has been suggested many hundreds of millions, if not billions, have been wasted through the BER funds ...
Dr Burns: Not in my electorate; they love it.
Mr TOLLNER: You talk about the stimulus package, about Kevin Rudd’s fantastic stimulus package. What has he done, apart from give people back some of the money they have paid in taxes to buy wide screen televisions, bet at the races or, simply, bank? What has he done apart from that? We have not seen a massive expansion of our port; we have not seen massive expansions or improvements in our roads. Practically all of that money has been washed down the drain, or flushed down the toilet, so to speak.
There is a mile of other things that this federal government has failed on: the Emissions Trading Scheme, the greatest moral challenge of our times, as Kevin Rudd explained it. What has happened to it? It has been a complete failure, a complete farce to the point that, very recently, Kevin Rudd said he is putting it off to 2013 or 2014. It is something we have to act on now, so dreadfully important we have to do something now; but he has thrown in the towel. Then when everything is going bad, when everything is turning to custard, the Prime Minister comes up with another one of these crazy ideas - well, possibly a reasonable idea in the hands of a good government but, in the hands of Kevin Rudd, there is nothing but disaster waiting for us. That is his idea to take over the Australian health system.
We have got into this state because failed Labor governments right around the country could not manage their budgets. This nonsense we constantly hear about the previous federal government stripping $1bn out of the health system is complete nonsense. It is arrant, utter nonsense. These guys across the other side know it, as well. In fact, if time was not running out on me …
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, under Standing Order 77, I move the member have an additional 10 minutes to conclude his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank the member for Braitling for that small extension. I promise I will not keep people waiting too long ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I call your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells, a quorum is required.
There is a quorum.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I said, the member for Johnston mentioned the Commonwealth stripping $1bn from the health system. I cannot dig it up now, however I do have the transcript of a year or two ago where the minister, when he was Minister for Health, acknowledged that health spending had increased at a far greater rate than federal government indexes had increased. That is not a reduction in spending. That is not stripping $1bn out of the system. It is not that at all. To say here that Howard and Abbott stripped $1bn out of the system is completely wrong. What happened was the Territory’s health costs grew at a far greater rate than the indexed amount of the COAG agreement said it would. That is what happened. Why had that happened? Because this government, along with other Labor governments around Australia, did not contain their health spending. They blew that money on bureaucrats, time-wasters, and red tape rather than actually putting the money directly into health service delivery - into doctors, nurses, beds and infrastructure. That is what happened. We saw this government, in 2001, promise an oncology unit which they were going to pay for completely by themselves ...
Dr Burns: Do not go there.
Mr TOLLNER: What happened? Here we are in 2010 and it has finally been opened. How much has the Northern Territory government put into it? Zip, zero, nothing …
Dr Burns. No!
Mr TOLLNER: Sorry, minister, you did put up the land. That is right; you did put up the land.
Dr Burns: More than that.
Mr TOLLNER: More than that? Well, it would be good to see where more than that is because almost the entire cost has been funded by the federal government when, 10 years ago, this government said it did not need any help from anyone. In fact, they budgeted for it, put it in the budget and said it was going ahead. What has happened? Killed it, the way they have killed our health system. They have thrown good money after bad.
They have failed to manage the health system adequately to the point where they cannot manage the health system, and they have surrendered. That is what they have done; they have surrendered. They have thrown their hands up with exasperation and said: ‘It is all too much for us. Thank God, Kev has turned up. Thank God, we have a federal Labor government which is not scared of throwing money around, not scared of debt, and quite prepared to throw taxpayers’ money around willy-nilly and get us out of this mess because we cannot do it ourselves any longer’.
Basically, that is what this agreement is. It is an acknowledgement the Territory Labor government has failed on health. It is an acknowledgement the Queensland Labor government and the New South Wales government have failed on health. The only one who is holding out is the WA Premier, because he believes he can actually fix the system - and good on him, I hope he has a go. I bet he has more chance of doing it than all the Labor governments around Australia. The one who amazed me was the Victorian fellow. He said they run the best health system, and he is glad the Prime Minister has modelled his system on the Victorian health system, so now he is in.
However, this has nothing to do with health. There is no health outcome here Labor is interested in. What they are interested in is covering Kevin Rudd’s bum before the next election. That is what they are interested in; making Kev look good - give him a win; give him something he can take to the people and say: ‘Look, I have done something. I have all the states and territories, except for Western Australia, to agree on handing over the health system’. If he treats the health system like he treats the insulation batts scheme, the greatest moral challenge of our time, global warming, the BER scheme, the stimulus package, FuelWatch or GroceryWatch, or any of these other myriad of failures he has to his name - goodness me, the guy has only been in the job for two-and-a-half years, and he has a list of failure as long as your arm. In fact, everything he has touched has been a failure - every single thing!
There is nothing he can hold his hand up for and say: ‘I have done a good job here’. There is not one promise Kevin Rudd has delivered on, but we are prepared to hand over 30% of our GST money to this complete and utter failure, without even looking at it. These guys have to be joking. How desperate are you to get rid of health? How desperate are you to get it off your plate and give it to someone else? This is just appalling. I feel embarrassed at times to be a Territorian and see this useless government just handing things over.
The next thing is they will stand up and talk about statehood, like they can actually manage something. You have to be joking! This government has put the Northern Territory back 100 years as far as statehood is concerned. It is just appalling. First, we had the intervention where Clare Martin tried to sweep all these bloody child abuse cases under the carpet. Then we get this, where the Territory government said: ‘We do not want health; take it. We are going to agree to it’. They were the first ones to stick up their hands and say: ‘Yes, we want it’. How absolutely pathetic! We asked for the Treasury modelling, and we got a PowerPoint presentation chucked across at us saying: ‘That is it. Look at it. This is what Treasury gave us’. Is that what you based your decision on? This is what the Chief Minister is prepared to disclose? How absolutely and utterly appalling!
I cannot understand how anyone in this country could trust Kevin Rudd to do anything he says he will do …
A member: Dug another hole, Dave.
Mr TOLLNER: Yes, dug another hole. Well, he has just jumped into a very deep one now. The trouble is with this nonsense, future governments and Territorians are going to have to dig us out of this hole, get us out of this mess. This guy has only been in the job for two-and-a-half years. He has blown a surplus budget, put the country into debt, wiped out 8000 jobs in the insulation industry; killed four people, burned down 120 homes; and built almost three houses in three years with $.75bn. What else can you stuff up?
There is one other thing he will stuff up, and that is health. But, at the end of the day, this government will be happy because they have washed their hands of it and will say: ‘It is nothing to do with us. That is the federal government’s problem’.
I believe it is shameful, and I encourage all Territorians to get out there and ask our Health Minister, if you can understand a word he says, or the Chief Minister: ‘What is in this for us?’ Because there is nothing.
I will tell you another thing. I saw an interview with our federal member, the member for Solomon. Nowhere near as good as the previous member, obviously; he certainly does not have the pizzazz or the work ethic. Last Wednesday he had an interview on Drive with Vicki Kerrigan at the ABC. Vicki Kerrigan said to him:
The federal member for Solomon knows this is nothing to do with Indigenous health, yet, we have a Chief Minister who devoted probably a third of his statement to talking about Indigenous health, and the federal member of his own party saying this is nothing to do with Indigenous health. This mob is a rabble ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, your time has expired.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I have listened carefully to what has been said by the member for Solomon. It is important issue, and important to realise one of the planks that Kevin Rudd went to the last federal election and to the Australian people on was stopping the blame game and making progress in health reform in Australia. The agreement which has been agreed to by most states and territories, all bar one, in the last week or so, has been a long time coming. There has been a great deal of public debate, and a commission by the federal government to ascertain what needs to be done, particularly in the hospital system, but healthcare generally.
Why did the Australian people obviously believe there needed to be reform in this area? Why did there need to be reform? It is plain the health system was struggling right around Australia, not just in the Northern Territory but in other jurisdictions - and had been doing so for some time - in waiting times in emergency departments, elective surgery waiting lists - a whole range of issues that were long-standing. Basically, people wanted the blame game to end. What was wrong with the system?
The member for Fong Lim said he does not believe $1bn was stripped out of the health system by the previous federal government. I refer to a report that was commissioned by the state and territory Health ministers in June 2007, utilising data predominantly from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, looking at the major issues within the health system. It is called Caring for our Health? A Report Card on the Australian Government’s Performance on Healthcare. I am quite prepared to table this when I am finished, and the member for Fong Lim, if he is interested, can read it.
On page 22, is a graph that clearly shows how, in relative terms, the share of hospital funding by the federal government for public hospitals had diminished with time. Then we see crocodile jaws or scissors - whatever you want to call it - opening up. In other words, the federal government, through their relativity, were not prepared to fund hospitals in our hospital care system at the rate of indexation required to do their job. That is why the arrears had arisen over 10 years under the Howard government. It started off at 50:50 and, on average, it ratcheted down to somewhere between 30% and 40% they were contributing towards the cost of our hospitals. It is not good enough, member for Fong Lim, to say, ‘Well, it was through the employment of bureaucrats and red tape’, and all the rest. The hospital system was, and still is, in need of reform.
I will read what is said here in relation to that $1bn. It talks about the trend in hospital spending:
Then it goes on to say:
Mr Tollner: Rubbish!
Dr BURNS: He was not prepared to put up his 50%, his fair share.
Mr Tollner: Absolute rubbish! It was in the budget.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: What else were they doing? Figure 10 on page 18 shows - if you would just listen; you have had your go, member for Fong Lim - the gap between out-of-pocket expenses of a visit to the specialist for a non-bulkbilled patient. There is a similar diagram for general practice also. So what were they doing? The price of GP or specialist consultations was rising, but what was the federal government doing? It was letting the taxpayer put their hand in their pocket a second time to fund that gap in services. I call that stripping out of the taxpayers’ pocket, and shame on the former federal government.
Also, what was happening during the Howard years was the federal government was increasing the private health insurance rebate - a good thing, I am not decrying that - and investing and supporting those with private health insurance. I am one of those people, and probably everyone in this room has private health insurance. But, what was happening was they were funding the private system to the detriment of the public system ...
Mr Tollner: Rubbish!
Dr BURNS: I have just shown you how they were stripping money out of the public system and investing it in the private system, but where is all the weight in terms of operations and presentations to emergency departments in the public system? It says …
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! The minister carries on about the lack of GPs and private operators here, and now he is decrying the fact that the federal government is trying to assist them. Is this guy real, or what?
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Fong Lim.
Dr BURNS: Here it says:
Mr Tollner: We just had the Chief Minister stand up in Question Time and talk about …
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, you had your chance; you have had your opportunity. Please let the minister continue.
Dr BURNS: Thank you.
So the weight was coming on the public system. The Commonwealth was not keeping the relative funding up, so the states and territories were funding that and, by the same token, the federal government was pouring more money into the private health insurance rebate. As I have said, and I am saying it again on the record: not a bad thing, but they were doing it to the detriment of the public system.
The member for Fong Lim mentioned all these different projects that he says are failures under the federal government, including the BER. Well, let me tell you, member for Fong Lim, the school councils in my electorate love the BER. You must not be attending any school council meetings lately because the schools in my electorate are really chuffed about the BER money and the investment they have made. If people opposite were being honest, they would be saying the same things generally about their schools. Sure, there will be problems in any contract, in any construction program there are problems, but the schools in my electorate are very happy.
Let us look at the member for Fong Lim. He gave a speech here that really focused, I believe, on federal issues and the federal government and the upcoming federal election. To quote the member for Fong Lim, he often says: ‘Do not judge them on what they say, judge them on what they do‘. Well, there we go again. The Palmerston Health Clinic …
Mr Tollner: You shut it down, the Farrar health clinic.
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Cease interjecting, please.
Mr Tollner: Wrong example, Burnsie.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Fong Lim!
Dr BURNS: ‘As the member for Solomon, I recently announced the Australian government will be offering a $100 000 start-up grant to the Palmerston Medical Clinic to provide after-hours GP services’. Did it happen? No.
Mr Tollner: You shut it down. Which part of the evidence …
Dr BURNS: No, no. What has happened is the Rudd Labor government had made a significant investment in a 24-hour urgent care clinic at Palmerston, and the people love it - not only the people in Palmerston, but also the people in Darwin ...
Mr Tollner: You shut it down, you goose.
Dr BURNS: You did not deliver, and this is what you said. You were put on the spot, you said …
Mr Tollner: Pull this reckless fool in.
Dr BURNS: He tried to explain why it was not happening, he said: ‘What we said is we have committed to 50 family emergency medical centres around Australia. The Prime Minister says that we will very thoroughly investigate putting one of these centres in Palmerston’. That is different to what you said in the media.
You have also mentioned the radiation oncology unit, and here is a question you have never answered, member for Fong Lim, and I will reiterate it: ‘Did you know, during the 2007 federal election, the tender process had failed for the second time on the radiation oncology unit?’ I say you did. You did not come clean with voters. You knew. I know that you knew, and yet you have never confessed that publicly. You went through the charade of saying he was going to deliver it ...
Mr Tollner: Madam Deputy Speaker, would it be possible for you to ask the minister to direct his comments through the Chair?
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, could you please direct your comments through me in the Chair.
Dr BURNS: Here he is, Dave Tollner, doing what is right for the Territory. He said he has delivered a new oncology centre at the Royal Darwin Hospital.
When the Howard government left office, one of the first people I spoke to was Nicola Roxon about getting the radiation oncology unit up and running, getting it moving again, and also a super clinic at Palmerston. To her credit, and to the Rudd Labor government’s credit, both of those things have now been delivered. I can say they have because people know they have. But, we have the member for Fong Lim in his election literature saying he had already delivered it when, during that election, not only did he know the tender process had failed, he was not going to come clean with the people of the Northern Territory. It had failed not once, but twice.
It was not until I said to Nicola Roxon she needed to separate the building of the clinic from the provision of the specialist medical services - under Abbott, that is all they did; wrap it all up into one project. They failed once and - what do mad people do? - they keep repeating the same things. They repeated it, and it failed again.
Here is someone who is a failure trying to point the finger at Kevin Rudd, who is reforming our health system ...
Mr Tollner: Who closed the Palmerston health clinic down?
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: It was always the Commonwealth’s responsibility. That is the nub of this particular argument, because primary healthcare is a Commonwealth responsibility and GP services, front and centre, are a Commonwealth responsibility. That is why the Commonwealth is funding the GP services through the Palmerston health precinct, and that is why the Commonwealth - I am very pleased to say, and reiterate what the Chief Minister said – is coming to take responsibility for funding primary healthcare in the Northern Territory, because in our remote communities it is a different model, and it has been.
We want the Commonwealth to be taking a greater share of responsibility for primary healthcare, and also for our hospitals. I welcome it because it makes more of a commitment by the Commonwealth to these very essential services. However, there is more. I suppose, as Education minister, it is not only about health funding; it is about growing our own doctors, nurses and pharmacists. I commend Charles Darwin University for the steps they have taken in pharmacy, and the way they have grown that program. It has become a very popular program and is producing a number of pharmacists; as is nursing, which has been a profession taught at Charles Darwin University for some time.
It was my pleasure, with the Chief Minister and the Health Minister, to attend a sod-turning at Charles Darwin University about three weeks ago for the new medical school. It will not only be a facility for the medical school, but also for pharmacy, and this will offer Northern Territory students the ability to study medicine from Year 1 right through to the completion of their degree. This is essential. This is how we will grow our medical, nursing and pharmacy workforce, and it is how we will retain them because we know people who have grown up in the Territory and gone to the school in the Territory, really want to stay here.
In addition, there will be clinical education facilities built at Royal Darwin Hospital, at a cost of approximately $13m. That is also very important. We are a government that is working with the Commonwealth government in a very fruitful partnership on projects, and I will mention them again. Tiger Brennan Drive, what a great initiative that is! It is on budget and it is on time. It is something you could not deliver, member for Fong Lim. The after-hours urgent care is a wonderful thing; that is another example of a successful partnership between this government and the federal government. Also, the radiation oncology unit ...
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: I welcome the initiative which has come out of COAG. In response to the opposition saying, ‘The document the Chief Minister has tabled here today does not contain enough detail’, I remind them of the equation e=mc. There is a profound equation that is very simple, but there is a lot underneath it. So it is with the document the Chief Minister tabled here today - short but profound.
If members opposite took the opportunity to get a very detailed briefing from Treasury, I know that detail underneath will be presented to members of the opposition. I do not have a problem at all with the Northern Territory being part of this agreement and, as the Treasurer said, this agreement was hammered out over some time. We have had all the Treasurers and the Treasuries from every jurisdiction in Australia, and, let me tell you, the Northern Territory Treasury in particular, look at every cent, every service that is offered by the Territory as their own. They scrutinise every detail and they give very frank and fearless advice to the government.
To say the Northern Territory has entered into this agreement, stumbled into it, and we do not understand what it is all about, I believe, shows that members opposite do not understand the processes of government. They certainly do not understand Treasury and the rigorous examination Treasury puts into every proposal that comes before our Cabinet in this government and, particularly, our funding relationships with the Commonwealth. I believe it is nave of people opposite to suggest that. Just because something appears simple on the outside, such as e=mc, does not mean to say that there is not a great deal of solid detail and solid work underneath it.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister’s statement on this issue to the House.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Development): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the Chief Minister and our negotiating team for supporting the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement. I especially look forward to reforms under this agreement leading to substantial improvement in healthcare services for people living outside our major urban centres and, in particular, more support for addressing health issues affecting Indigenous Territorians.
No one in this place needs to be reminded of the pressing national priority of closing the gap in health outcomes for Indigenous Australians, whether that is life expectancy, early childhood development or primary healthcare, or addressing the many chronic, but treatable, diseases affecting families across the Northern Territory. The recent national focus on these issues, and hard work by many in the health sector, is leading to some gains: improvements in life expectancy, improvements in infant mortality rates, and reductions in some cancers.
One key aspect of our improved national focus on this pressing public health and governance issue is the strong Commonwealth and Territory commitment to cooperative work, new investments, development of a strong national evidence base on what is working and what is not, and regular reporting of outcomes. We have seen many important initiatives introduced by the Rudd Labor government since it came to office, including commitment to the National Indigenous Reform Agreement and a raft of national partnership agreements to address disadvantage, whether it be in improved health, education, or housing.
In the Northern Territory we have our own initiative of A Working Future, taking the important step of working with the Australian government, local government, the NGO sector, and business community, to develop infrastructure and services in our growth towns. I am pleased because I can see how this new health agreement and shared government commitment to improving health services in the Territory will complement and build on this work.
One of our key measures of how we are closing the gap is the regular Productivity Commission reports on overcoming Indigenous disadvantage. In the most recent 2009 Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report, the Chairman of the Productivity Commission not only reported on how we are going in progressing this work, but he also commented on the things that work in delivering improvements. The four key elements of successful programs were identified as: cooperative action, community involvement in program design, good governance, and ongoing government support.
I am pleased to support the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement because this agreement embodies those key elements. At first glance, one might think the agreement mostly benefits hospitals. When we think hospitals, we think largely of Darwin and Alice Springs. We have heard today how, in the Northern Territory, this new agreement will lead to one local hospital network integrating all the hospital services across the Territory.
We have also heard the Chief Minister explain that we have won, through our negotiations, recognition of the unique circumstances of the Territory, and special arrangements under this new agreement to address our particular needs. We are not being dumbed down to fit a funding model suitable for the more developed and populous parts of Australia. Within our hospitals, we will see new initiatives to reduce waiting times in accident and emergency and elective surgery. These are important outcomes for all Territorians, wherever they live, with most remote patients in need of acute care arriving at our hospitals through accident and emergency departments. Reduced waiting times for elective surgery will also be of great benefit for Territorians living in the regions. Patients will know with greater certainty when they will be able to receive treatment, and see less risk of delays and disruptions to family life.
Another exciting aspect of this plan is the new focus and investment in health-related research and training opportunities, whether this is respective research in disease and treatments, or in developing and maintaining a skilled health workforce here in the Territory. I am mindful that our health needs, whether in respect of tropical health issues or diseases less known in other parts of Australia, need continuing focused research. It is great to see support for this important work as part of the new package.
Likewise, I am heartened to see the commitment, both in training and growing our own, but also in improving training opportunities for all health professionals, helping to push the boundaries of our knowledge and skills in addressing health issues in the Territory.
I am certainly conscious of the special needs of all of our elders - all the Territorians who have given so much to their families and have special care requirements in their later years. I congratulate the Chief Minister for negotiating improvements in aged-care services, and recognition of the critical years in adult Indigenous health. The 50 to 64 years age group is another example of how the Chief Minister has successfully worked to tailor the agreement to meet our specific needs.
The agreement also provides for new support for disability services in the Territory. I am very conscious of the need to improve access to disability services across the Territory. This will be a focus of my own work to work with the Minister for Health to improve these services as a part of A Working Future.
In my own electorate of Arnhem, support for families and treatment of people with the debilitating Machado Joseph Disease is a major issue. I will be keen to see how growth in the area of disability support and integration with primary care can help the wonderful work of the MJD Foundation on Groote Eylandt.
I mentioned earlier that a key lesson from the most recent report on overcoming Indigenous disadvantage is cooperative action. A key element of this new National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is that it focuses on integration of effort and, in particular, better integration of primary care and acute care services.
The agreement also provides for the Commonwealth to take full responsibility for general practice and primary health services from July 2011. This will be good for the Territory. We all know the challenges facing the Territory with a relatively small population and tax base, but with huge challenges in service delivery in not just meeting, but sustaining and growing our health support networks, especially in a time of rapid population growth, particularly in the regions.
Full commitment by the Commonwealth to supporting these critical services in the Territory, coupled with the national Closing the Gap targets and reporting mechanisms, will ensure the resources of the Commonwealth can be brought to bear to meet long-term commitments to improve Indigenous health.
A second critical success factor is community involvement in program design. We have a strong Indigenous community health sector and the new framework will support the continuing good work of those organisations such as Sunrise, Congress, and Katherine West Health Board, just to name a few. Our A Working Future and development of local implementation plans will provide one mechanism for community involvement in setting community priorities and addressing service gaps through a new integrated health services model.
Other key success factors identified by the Productivity Commission include good governance and ongoing government support. New arrangements for a national funding authority and opportunities for future negotiation around the implementation of the reform package will present new opportunities for improved governance, targeted investments and ongoing support, especially around shortfalls in service gaps which become apparent over time. This is an important initiative and I am heartened by all the collaborative work under way under the umbrella of the COAG reform agenda to address decades of under-investment in services for people in the bush. The health area is critical to the wellbeing of families, and good health services are a fundamental service government is required to provide to all its citizens.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is another important example of cooperative federalism, especially for the Territory where the challenges are many. I congratulate the Chief Minister for working through this reform with Prime Minister Rudd and his state and territory counterparts.
Mr HAMPTON (Central Australia): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s ministerial statement on the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement. I also congratulate the Chief Minister on securing this important outcome for Territorians and the Rudd Labor government on this visionary, long-term, structural reform of the Australian health system.
The outcome is a sustainable health system for the Territory for today and the future. I applaud the initiative and the leadership which will see reduced emergency department and elective surgery wait times. I am extremely pleased to see that the needs of older patients who get stuck in the hospital system will be getting better care options under this agreement.
These are issues all Territorians will appreciate, particularly those in Central Australia and in my electorate of Stuart, who are so often affected by how the health system has worked to date. The Chief Minister has worked hard in negotiating an agreement which will strengthen the promotion of social inclusion and reduced disadvantage, especially for Indigenous Australians, so that we can continue to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. Comprehensive primary care services are the key to closing the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage, and it is very pleasing to see this agreement take this issue seriously. The agreement, in particular these primary healthcare services, will complement this government’s A Working Future policy in particular
It is a great outcome that this agreement has secured concessions from the federal government to provide for equity of access to health services for people living in remote and regional Australia. As the Minister for Central Australia, and the member for Stuart, I know these concessions the Chief Minister has won will be most welcome in the bush.
As Minister for Information, Communications and Technology, I know how hard Territorians have worked to develop Australia’s leading e-Health system to meet our access and equity needs in remote communities, particularly through organisations such as Katherine West Health Board, the Warlpiri, Yuendumu and Nyirripi Health Board, and the Sunrise Health Board. They should all be acknowledged for the great work they have done in remote communities. This concession the Chief Minister has won should dovetail with our efforts in regard to e-Health; our ICT policy and infrastructure we have worked hard and lobbied hard for over many years, such as the 800 km optical fibre through Arnhem Land and the Digital Regions Initiative will greatly enhance our reputation as leaders in e-Health technology.
Turning to the Digital Regions Initiative, it was great for me to announce last year we had won a big slice of the cake, $15.5m, under joint Territory and federal government funding. This is one of the largest ICT milestones in the Territory’s history, and will help deliver life-changing services for thousands of remote Territorians. Part of the Digital Regions Initiative is not only about improved health service delivery in remote Territory towns such as Lajamanu, Daguragu and Papunya but, as I said, it is going a long way in closing the gap in Indigenous disadvantage. This $15.5m package will enable e-Health services at 17 remote Territory towns, including services such as mobile clinical videoconferencing units with digital clinical equipment, enabling some remote digital diagnostics and care monitoring and specialist clinical work to be done. It also includes providing a web-based interface for health clinical information and decision support systems, as well as an interactive videoconferencing facility for small group training and professional development.
One of the great outcomes of this agreement is the Commonwealth will be locked into sustained support for our hospital network, which means as the levels of service provided in our hospital increases, the Territory can be assured funding will also increase. This is a long overdue and most welcome development, and one the Rudd federal government can quietly be proud of. It is good the Commonwealth has also agreed to fund 60% of the recurrent expenditure on research and training in public hospitals, and 60% of capital expenditure.
Another innovative and leading initiative happening in Central Australia, in particular, which I would like to mention in this statement is the new research centre at Alice Springs Hospital; the Flinders University’s Northern Territory Rural Clinical School, and the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute in the new W & E Rubuntja Research and Medical Education Building at the Alice Springs Hospital. The Northern Territory Rural Clinical School and the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute is where Flinders University will teach its NT medical program, and Baker IDI will have its cardiovascular and diabetes research institute based there as well. In total, the Australian government provided some $2.4m in funds to Baker IDI and Flinders University for these facilities in Alice Springs in the new W & E Rubuntja Centre at the hospital. The building will provide teaching facilities and support for administration and students for Flinders University through the Northern Territory Rural Clinical School. It has capacity for 23 staff including medical educators, researchers and administration staff. The centre will also provide support for more than 100 medical students throughout the year. It is fantastic we are doing this in the heart of Australia and, hopefully, many of those students will stay on.
It will also provide support for research and implementation of preventative health programs for Indigenous communities in Central Australia through Baker IDI. The focus, which is great news, will be on diagnosis, prevention and treatment of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. As the father of a child who has Type 1 diabetes, I certainly look forward to the great work this research centre will deliver in the years to come.
I also know the agreement will also provide for a hospital network that delivers an effective means of engaging with the local community and local clinicians to incorporate their views on the day-to-day operation of hospitals, especially regarding the quality and safety of patient care. This is a critical step forward in healthcare that the government should be proud of, and one I know worries families when loved ones go into care.
Similarly, it is great news that the Commonwealth, for the first time, will take full funding and program responsibility for a consistent and unified aged care system, covering basic home care through to residential care. The Commonwealth will also, for the first time, fund long-stay older patients. This is a great win for senior Territorians and I am confident these changes will be more than welcome in Central Australia and the bush where such initiatives have long been overdue. I congratulate the Chief Minister and the Prime Minister for bringing this reform forward.
These changes will improve client services in community aged-care and disability services by enabling the creation of integrated and coordinated care systems which are easier for clients to access and navigate and respond more flexibly to clients’ changing care needs. It is very encouraging to see this agreement recognises GP and primary healthcare services are integral to an effective and efficient Australian health system. GP and primary healthcare services are essential to meeting the healthcare needs of Territorians in the community and keeping people healthy and out of our hospitals.
The announcement that under the National Health and Hospitals Agreement the Commonwealth government will take full funding and policy responsibility for Australia’s GP and primary healthcare services commencing in July 2011 is similarly good news. By locating responsibility for improving the GP and primary healthcare system with one level of government, this reform will improve the efficiency of the health system and reduce pressures on hospital services and reduce cost shifting and blame shifting.
This is the type of leadership Territorians and all Australians deserve. The agreement will improve services in the community, address gaps in access to GP and primary care services and take pressures off hospitals, something Central Australians have been waiting for, for a long time. Delivering change will make it easier for patients to receive the services they need, improving patient outcomes and driving diversity and innovation in service provision, such as the examples I have given of IT and the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute.
I will repeat the categories of GP and primary healthcare services which, under this agreement, the Commonwealth is taking responsibility for, because they are critical areas for people in Central Australia and the bush, and this will be great news for us as well. These services include: a community healthcare centre; primary healthcare services such as generalist counselling, integrated care, GP and primary care coordination programs, including Indigenous and rural and remote primary healthcare services; primary mental healthcare services which target mild to moderate mental illnesses; hospital avoidance programs which do not relate specifically to patients who are predominantly being treated in acute care; primary and secondary prevention programs for early intervention; care coordination focusing on the management of patients with chronic disease in the community; screening programs for cancer delivered in a primary healthcare setting; and immunisation.
When you add the future transfer of child and maternal health services to the Commonwealth, the overall outcome for Central Australians is extremely positive. This will facilitate improved integration between hospital and primary healthcare services. These changes will place the patient at the centre of the health system.
I am excited about the new primary healthcare organisations to be established by the Commonwealth. As independent organisations with strong links to local communities and health professionals, primary healthcare organisations will improve access to services and drive integration across GP and primary healthcare services by coordinating services and working closely with our hospitals to identify and address local needs, and identify groups of people missing out on GP and primary healthcare or services a local area needs. It will also better target services to respond to these gaps; for example, targeting gaps in GP services for aged care recipients.
These reforms really hit the nail on the head; they are exactly what we need in Central Australia. By securing the agreement, new funding for more sub-acute hospital beds, reduction in elective surgery wait times, reducing wait times in emergency departments and improved access to aged-care and GP services, the Chief Minister and the Prime Minister have accomplished major improvements in the healthcare services and the lives of many Territorians. This is also done by delivering more resources for healthcare in the Northern Territory, and recognises the special needs of regional and remote Australia.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wonder whether the member for Stuart could understand this statement without having someone write his speech for him, because I find it is a fairly complex statement. I cannot see, from reading the statement, some of the issues you raised. I am not saying they will not happen but, from the statement given by the Chief Minister, and after going through it word by word, I am left with many uncertainties about the agreement. If I was speaking to the average lay person in the street, and I handed them this agreement and said, ‘Do you think this will improve health in the Northern Territory?’, I believe they would get through about four pages and get lost. What I am attempting to do tonight is to look at the positives, but also look at the negatives in what has been put forward.
From reading this it appears that the Chief Minister is saying the main issues which have to be recognised because the Northern Territory is unique and requires additional services and long-term structural change, is waiting times need to be cut to see a GP, go the emergency department, or see a surgeon. How are they going to make that happen? They are going to make hospitals more efficient and more responsive to patient needs. They are nice words, but I will get into whether that is the case. They also say there will be an increase in the supply of residential aged care, there will be fewer older people stuck in hospitals, and there will be readily accessible primary care services, especially GPs. They are certainly fine things that everyone who is concerned about health in the Northern Territory would agree are great goals.
As a lay person, the question I have, because health is a complicated department with many branches, is: where in this statement does it actually say that is going to happen? I will go through some of the areas the Chief Minister has spoken about.
First, he said: ‘We will create more efficient hospitals’ and ‘The Commonwealth will provide 60% of the national efficient price for public hospital service’. Straightaway, I ask: what does the ‘efficient price’ mean? I have never heard of the efficient price in my life, and there is no explanation to say what that means. The government should certainly explain what the efficient price means. ‘As levels of services go up, so does Commonwealth funding’. I am interested to know what levels of services the government expects to go up. ‘The Commonwealth will provide 60% of recurrent spending on research and training in public hospitals’. If we are winning in this case with this agreement, it would have been good to put down how much we already spend, from the Northern Territory government’s point of view, on research and training in public hospitals, and tell us whether this agreement means we are actually financially any better off. We just have a statement that ‘the Commonwealth will provide 60% of recurrent spending on research and training’. Last year, they might have provided 70%; I do not know. I have nothing to compare it to, to say it is a benefit.
‘The hospitals will still be managed by the Territory’. One could ask: was that not one of the problems? Part of this debate is: should the Commonwealth take over the whole lot? I see a conflict. We are going to have a Health department with some sections funded totally by the Commonwealth when, you would think if they are totally funding, they would take over the control. But they are not; they are funding them, but some sections are still retained in the Northern Territory government’s control. I wonder whether this is efficient. This is what the key was to the agreement.
Then, it says: ‘There will be a single board of governance to oversight our local hospital network’. I thought that was the department of Health’s job. Will this not just add to the bureaucracy? What will happen to the existing hospital boards? We have just had the debate about boards. We have just brought in new legislation in relation to boards and it appears they are going to disappear. But I will get back to the bureaucracy issue later.
When the Chief Minister talks about more efficient hospitals, I believe there needs to be much more information to show and to prove these changes mentioned in the agreement will actually make the hospitals more efficient. We need to see more proof.
We talk about reform of aged care; the Commonwealth is to take control of all aged care, from basic home care through to residential care. I ask: who will run aged care in the shires? Part of the amalgamation of the councils set out that aged care is a function of the shire council. How will they fit into this reform where it says the Commonwealth will take over control? Will they fund them completely, or will the shires still have to look after aged care? The Commonwealth says they are going to put in funds for long-stay older patients. I would like an explanation as to who are the long-stay older patients, where are they presently staying, and does this include long-stay younger people who may be sick from an early age and are in hospital for a long period?
It also talks about an initiative to provide incentives to patients to find access to appropriate care. It does not explain what those incentives will be or how quickly they will assist, because if it is an incentive, then you would hope what they are trying to do will happen quickly.
One area I believe certainly needs looking at more closely is the Territory government will control basic community care services for non-Indigenous people under 65 years, and for Indigenous people under 50 years, then the Commonwealth will control basic community care for non-Indigenous people over 65 years, and Indigenous people over 50 years. I ask: why? What makes it even more confusing is that they make a statement here that the Commonwealth and states will share programs and responsibility for community care and residential care services for Indigenous Australian clients aged 50 to 64 years:
It seems again we have made life complicated. We have the Commonwealth looking after people at a certain age. We have the Territory looking after people at another age, and there is an in between group of people, Indigenous people, who are between 50 and 64 years who can be looked after by either. It does not seem to be helping when it comes to a structure that is efficient and uses money wisely. I put that out as a question because, to me, that stood out last night as an obvious inefficiency. People might have a better understanding than I have. It also says here at page 50:
Is that trying to minimise bureaucracy, or keeping the bureaucracy as it is or, maybe, worse? I believe this is an important part of what an agreement should be about: it should be trying to make the system more efficient, reduce bureaucracy and get the money where it is required.
There are integrated primary care services and the Commonwealth will take full funding of GP and primary healthcare services. As I have said, if you are taking over control of those with full funding, do we have one government organising it and one government funding it? Is that an efficient way to operate a GP and an integrated primary care services system? It is supposed to improve the efficiency of the health system, so I would like to see how it does it. I am happy for the federal government to provide the money, but let us see how it improves the efficiency. Who will the doctors work for? Will they work for the Commonwealth, or will they work for the Territory? Will the hospital become a Commonwealth hospital?
Another area is improving patient outcomes and driving innovation and diversity. How is that going to happen? How are we going to drive innovation and diversity? There are no examples of that; it is a statement. I believe if the government and Chief Minister are to convince people this is a good thing, we need some concrete examples of where these changes will actually occur. It says on page 17:
That sounds like quite a loose arrangement. I am interested to know why that arrangement is not set in concrete. Can the Commonwealth change its mind and say: ‘It is yours regardless of what you think’?
We move on to the primary healthcare organisations, and these will be established by the Commonwealth. Is this another level of bureaucracy? I will get back to the bureaucratic issue later.
Then we go on to the sustainable funding for healthcare. It says 14% of our current GST is allocated and paid into the fund. Are there any other payments, and how much do we get back? It does not explain these things. Over four years, there are various allocations for various matters. I believe the Chief Minister puts those down as $16.9m for additional sub-acute care beds, etcetera. The questions I ask are: how will that funding achieve outcomes? What are these figures based on? What is the basis behind these figures? What will they actually show in reality? It says $6.1m to reduce elective surgery waiting times. Elective surgery waiting times is a bugbear for every government, so someone has pulled out a figure of $6.1m. Can someone explain how $6.1m will actually reduce waiting times? Do we have more doctors, more nurses? Do we have a bigger hospital with more beds for people? Where will that money go to, to do what it says? It says there will be $7.2m to reduce emergency department waiting times. How will that $7.2m actually do it? It is a nice figure, but could someone explain where the $7.2m will go? And it goes on and on.
It also says after 2014-15 we are set to receive an additional $167m. Over what period will we receive that $167m? Is that not a fair way off? It is a fairly long distance statement. It sounds good on paper, but we are in 2010 and in four to five years from now we could receive an extra $167m, and that would be spread over what time period? We are not going to receive it in the one year. It does not explain that; it just says we will receive that money. Of course, you might not have the same government; you might have had a different government, and then you might have had another government because of the three-year terms for the Commonwealth.
In relation to primary healthcare organisations, what exactly are they, and do they replace any existing structures? Again, it is not entirely clear.
We also have the key reforms the Chief Minister has written about. He spoke about the National Health and Hospital Network Funding Authority distributing funds to the Territory local hospital network. The new funding model includes state-specific prices and a national efficient price based on activity-based funding, cost weights and loadings and block funding. That needs an explanation. What is block funding? What is activity-based funding? What are cost weights? All would be worthy of explanation in a statement like this. I know people have been making grand statements about the bigger picture, but I certainly cannot understand the specifics without a far better explanation of what all these things are about. It talks about an independent pricing authority to provide advice on funding which will determine adjustments to the national efficient price - there is that ‘efficient price’ again. That could do with more explanation.
My concern regarding this particular statement is if we are to create a better system of health, then we need to change areas where there is wastage. I cannot see where that change is occurring, and I am concerned we have actually set up new layers of bureaucracy. It might have replaced some of the old layers, but what I would have expected is a more efficient system, because it says here we want to make hospitals more efficient.
I would have thought the bureaucracy has to be more streamlined and more efficient, yet we have a local hospital network which replaces hospital boards and will be responsible for operational management of NT hospitals. I believe the local government hospital network will also have a council overriding it as well - the board of governance - which will oversight the local hospital network. We will have the primary healthcare organisations that will be independent organisations established by the Commonwealth to coordinate services and work closely with the hospitals to identify and address local needs.
We also have the National Health and Hospital Network Funding Authority and the independent Hospital Pricing Authority. When you look at what is being put forward, you are not sure whether you are getting a more efficient process or whether existing bureaucracy is being replaced with new names. I know, having been around government for a fair amount of time, there are always new names. We almost have a department for making new names because we tend to just move the deckchairs around from time to time.
The Chief Minister needed to show us in his statement where the efficiencies are going to occur, and where the Northern Territory is going to benefit financially. I know there was a document tabled today which was used as part of a PowerPoint presentation. I must admit, on its own, I find it fairly difficult to understand, but I will try to put it in layman’s terms. We get X amount of dollars from the Commonwealth at the present time, say we get $100 000m in GST. The government says $14m of that is going to go back into a pool of funds which the Commonwealth will take and, from there, the Commonwealth will then take over a number of the responsibilities of health, and we will actually get more money.
What I would like to see clearly written is that we are handing over to the Commonwealth $14m, or whatever the exact amount is; we are handing over responsibility for GPs and integrated primary care and, in return for that, we are receiving X amount of dollars into Health, and then they can convince people we are better off. That is not easily seen in this document, but that is what people out on the street will want to know. They will want to know that this agreement - the one Mr Rudd has been saying will improve matters in Australia in regard to health - has a benefit to the Territory, not a loss. We do not want to hear we have actually lost GST and we have had to cut other programs because of the federal government’s new agreement.
It is hard not to be slightly cynical, regardless of where you come from in politics. The present federal government has made some fairly disastrous decisions in relation to public policy. The insulation program would be the classic one; a great deal of money has gone down the drain. I cannot say it has all gone down the drain; obviously, there have been people who have benefited by the insulation program. However, the downside is it is going to cost $1bn or something to check out all these houses and ensure they are safe, because the program was not thought through correctly.
I even hear the promise about childcare centres is not going to happen. The government has decided that program they promised is not going to occur.
I have to raise SIHIP. I know I am on the Council of Territory Cooperation and we have been looking at SIHIP but, I must admit, I have worries about who thought up the process of an alliance methodology to deliver housing to Aboriginal communities. From what I have seen so far in my travels and what I have heard, it seems to be a system yet to be proven to be successful and efficient; and it is a system thought up by the Commonwealth government.
Even the 15 growth towns were picked out by the Commonwealth government with, as far as I know, no consultation with people from the Territory. I am concerned some of those growth towns are not the real places for growth towns. Again, this is a Commonwealth idea. I worry when I see the record of some of the Commonwealth ideas and policies.
They have now put forward what is, for the average person, a fairly complex agreement with many ideas and percentages, but not many real figures, real facts and real explanations for me to be confident we are winners out of this agreement. I hope we are, because health is one of the most important things for all Territorians. I suppose the proof will be in the pudding.
Madam Deputy Speaker, if, in the end, we cut the waiting times to a GP, the emergency department, or a surgeon, and if we have more beds for residential aged care, then I will believe it is a success. However, I am not convinced from reading this that there is any proof that will actually happen.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I take note of the statement presented today by the Chief Minister and, listening intently to the member for Nelson, I too have questions - questions, questions, questions. Today, the Chief Minister promised to provide detailed material, but all we got was this little Year 11/Year 12 PowerPoint document which spelled out absolutely nothing.
Questions: where is the analysis of the activity-based funding? Where is the analysis of block funding? Where is the analysis of long-term effects of the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement? Questions: where is the analysis of the 14 beds, and how do only 14 beds answer our needs? Where is the analysis of the changes to elective surgery? In the Northern Territory, the real cost of hospital funding is higher than anywhere else in Australia - nothing new. In 2006-07, the cost was $1700 per person in the NT, the average figure for the rest of Australia was $1260. How is the difference accommodated in an activity-based funding model? I would like the Chief Minister to answer this in his summary.
Of course, it is not just the cost of treatment; it is the frequency and the complexity. The Northern Territory has the highest hospital separation rate of 486.4 per 1000 people compared to 217 per 1000 for the rest of Australia. How is this difference accommodated in activity-based funding? Does activity-based funding completely encompass the diversity of services which are provided through the Northern Territory’s hospitals? When we talk of complex needs, we need to be having a health funding model that delivers for chronic health problems for years of poor health conditions.
I ask the Chief Minister: for Gove, for Katherine, for Tennant Creek and for Alice Springs hospitals, would moving to case-mixed base funding with Australian-based weightings be disadvantageous? Do the risks of activity-based funding include classification and sensitivity, lack of consistency, and a focus only on hospital-based activity? This might be too much for the Chief Minister, I am sure. Does the Northern Territory have the ability of benchmarking comparison? Where is the Treasurer’s analysis - the real analysis - or is this all they have? Is this what the Chief Minister went to Canberra with? Have we been sold a pup? What does it cost the Northern Territory consolidating and entering data into a national database? How many more bureaucrats do we need? Will the activity-based funding include community home care? Will the activity-based funding include nursing homes? Will the activity-based funding include screened immunisation and promotional programs? Will activity-based funding include non-inpatient mental health and oral health? Too many questions.
Let us have a look at the interview between Leon Compton and the Chief Minister during those very shady negotiations last week. I say shady negotiations because the Chief Minister really showed that he must not watch that world poker tour show and he must not play poker, because anyone who has a dud hand would not show everyone their hand and go and have a game. That is exactly what the Chief Minister has done - signed up to this agreement without seeing the content of it - walked in to see big brother, Kevin Rudd, who has a stick over the back of the Chief Minister at the moment over a number of issues, not the least being the poor roll-out of BER in the Territory, the poor management of SIHIP, problems with the port spillage, and problems with the Montara oil rig. These are the reasons I believe the Chief Minster rolled over like a little puppy dog and got tickled on the belly, because he was told. He was told: ‘Sign up or lose SIHIP, sign up or lose the port, sign up or we will do you over the Montara. Sign up, sign up, sign up or there will not be a Northern Territory government’. That is were this was at, this is why we got 14 beds for $20m.
Let us have a look at the interview between Leon Compton and the Chief Minister during negotiations last week. It is quite compelling and, I have to say, it is quite funny. ‘Why are you prepared to give up your share of the GST?’ asked interviewer, Leon Compton, on ABC. What do you think the Chief Minister had to say? A very complex answer, I would have thought, that would have blown people away. But no, no details about why he is giving up our share of the GST, no details on the deal, but more of that political spin you might give if you were a little puppy dog being tickled on the belly. He said: ‘It is not about the niceties of accounting principles; and that is why I am backing the deal’.
What about the health of Territorians? What about how we put the patient first? What about how we might be able to get birthing services back for Tennant Creek? We have not heard about that in a while from the member for the Barkly. We have heard a lot about the nuclear waste and how fast you can go down the highway, but we have heard nothing about birthing services for Tennant Creek. I do not believe this new great, big puppy dog plan solves any of those problems.
Next, Compton asked: ‘Is this a situation, Chief Minister, where because we are a territory rather than a state with a state’s rights, we have to do what we are told?’ And this is where it got quite funny. What did the Chief Minister say out of Kevin Rudd’s spin central to Paul Henderson’s spin central? Is there a substantive answer to the question? No. The Chief Minister’s response was: ‘I am not going to fight on accounting principle’.
Let us move on to the next question. Compton asked, quite rightly: ‘Why are the other Premiers not prepared to go for this deal when you are?’ You have held up the white flag, you have rolled over, been tickled on the belly, you have shown your hand of cards, and what does the Chief Minister focus on? Here we go again, and I quote: ‘Let us not die in a ditch on an accounting principle’. That is all he had to say. Why are you not fighting like Brumby? Why are you not fighting like Barnett or Keneally? Why are you not fighting? Oh, come on: ‘Let us not die in a ditch over an accounting principle’. I never knew the Chief Minister was an accountant before he came to parliament. I doubt he would have the ability to understand accounting principles.
Compton asked a fairly reasonable question: ‘What would happen to people seeking health treatment in the Northern Territory if this deal did not get done? What would happen if the status quo continued; you have the GST revenue you wanted, and the Northern Territory government continued to provide health?’ This is getting a bit tired, wearing a bit thin, I know, but where did the Chief Minister go? You will never guess - back to, as at estimates last year, the 109 central spin doctors. He said: ‘To lose all of that for a debate about an accounting principle would be a tragedy for the Northern Territory and Australia’. So, he could not even say if Kevin Rudd gave all that GST money and you could do whatever you want. He did not even say this is how it would work better, because he does not have any idea. He just went back to his accounting principles.
First, there is an apparent lack of understanding of the detail of what has been put on the table by the Chief Minister. I will pose plenty of questions here and I would like him to answer in his response. I doubt he can; I doubt he understands those questions. Second, there is a sincere lack of understanding of accounting principles by the Chief Minister.
For your assistance in the future, Chief Minister, the following are some of the key principles which are fundamental concept of accounting. Money measurement: financial statements show only a limited picture. A commitment of a bucket of money does not actually result in better health outcomes if you have under-invested in health like this government which has failed to renew and replace. Cost: just saying how much is going to be spent on health has no relation to success, because the worth of that asset changes over time and it would be impossible to accurately record the long-term financial burden by just focusing on cost. Another accounting principle is objectivity: making sure objective evidence leads to making investment decisions. How does this government’s objectivity look when it agrees to a system which gets 14 beds for a system that apparently needs 80? Conservatism: understanding rather than overstating revenue and expenses. Where is the Treasury forecast to say what this will this cost the Territory? How can we, as the public, know this is a deal if you have failed, until today, to make the process transparent, and not some dodgy backroom deal when you come out with a little kid’s PowerPoint presentation. Consistency: use that same method for all subsequent events. Do we expect future national partnership payments and future investment in closing the gap to be consistent? Materiality: we have some material changes, a movement of tens of millions of dollars, but we have traded off hundred of millions of dollars. Has this government applied the concept of account materiality when measuring if this was a good deal or not?
Yes, we care a great deal about health, but all we have is questions; the general public has questions. No one understands this system; it is complex. We have a new deal, but we cannot understand why we get $20m a year for 14 beds. Even SIHIP is not that bad. You can get 80-plus beds for $20m at $700 000 a house for a three-bedroom house under SIHIP.
The National Health and Hospital Network Agreement may seem like a good deal for the Northern Territory; however, the devil is in the detail. The deal was never going to be any better than this. You did not even try, as you, Chief Minister, had already announced your public support. Is it a case of spin and spend, or will we see real improvements in the Territory’s health services? We only get 14 more beds, but the Chief Minister says waiting times for elective surgery will be reduced. How do we get more badly needed surgeons to make this possible? How do we get a doctor to Tennant Creek? How do we get birthing services to Tennant Creek?
The Chief Minister says long-term structural change is needed. Where is the structural change in the urgently needed literal sense? I refer to our Country Liberals’ policy commitment to a new hospital in Palmerston - real action. On 18 May 2000 your precious words in this Chamber were: ‘Royal Darwin Hospital is a facility that was almost outdated by the time it was built’. Recognising this, why has it taken 26 years for this to be a priority? Why did spending $120m or $180m on this mausoleum assume a higher priority for government capital works money than a new hospital for our capital city? A decade later, what is the state of our hospitals Territorians urgently require?
The Minister for Health, minister Vatskalis, said on Top FM on 4 March:
Seven days later, on 11 March, on radio the Chief Minister said:
What detail did they work through? Where were their advisors? Or is it this? This PowerPoint presentation a child could do - is that it? You said time and again there was an accounting principle here. How on earth did you get all the detail collated, fully understood and accepted in a matter of weeks? You contributed nothing, and have yet to provide any detail. We are still waiting in parliament, and the general public is still waiting, for what we signed up to, little puppy dog.
I am not sure what contribution you made to the debate in Canberra. All I can see is you must have had one of the biggest delegations per capita, although why bother when you have already waved the white flag? It was actually quite interesting on television when the Prime Minister came out of those intense health debates, and he came up to the camera and was talking. Behind him was a tough John Brumby, a tough Colin Barnett, Keneally was there, and who was hanging out the back? The Chief Minister, the Queensland Premier and the South Australian Premier, like little puppy dogs, had nothing to say; they had already committed, sold out, did not negotiate on behalf of their constituents; just like the Chief Minister, Nigel No Friends.
The National Health and Hospital Network Agreement says there will be residential aged care for those who need high levels of care. What framework in the Northern Territory is ready to be activated to relieve the needs of older patients stuck in the old hospital system? Will the National Health and Hospital Network Agreement include funding for completion of residential and respite services in communities in areas such as East Arnhem and Belyuen?
How can the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement encourage efficiencies when there are still ineffective paymasters in the Territory and the Commonwealth? The centrepiece of the reform is a single local government hospital network the Chief Minister proposed will be put in place in the Northern Territory. Again, where is the detailed proposal the Territory government will put to the Commonwealth for our local hospital network?
The reality is, while this funding will go direct from the Commonwealth to the local hospital network, the great worry is that this will create yet another strata of bureaucrats. The Chief Minister states the Commonwealth is responsible for aged components of the program and the Territory will retain responsibility for disability services elements of the program. The Northern Territory Department of Health and Community Services, Aged and Disability’s program’s submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on ageing on 3 February 2004 contradicts this, where they say:
It goes further:
The Chief Minister states in his spin:
What a rant! What exactly does he mean? What are the precise aims and targets and how will outcomes to be measured? He further states these changes will place the patient at the centre of the health system. I am sure the shadow minister - I would be greatly concerned; I am horrified that the patient may not always be at the centre of the health system. If this is his wish for the future? Where is the patient placed at the current time?
I will help you out here, Chief Minister. The definition of patient heath care is: the prevention, treatment and management of illness and the preservation of mental and physical wellbeing through the services offered by the medical and allied health professionals. It is a vital template at all times.
The Country Liberals signalled a long way out that we were onside regarding health reform, but there is a great concern amongst both health professionals and patients that this is a sorry case of act in haste, repent at leisure, politics big and small. Reference is made of personalised care plans prepared by GPs. As I understand it, GPs are paid an annual amount for every single one of their patient’s enrolled for a PCP with bonuses paid to GP practices where a personalised care plan is on offer. There are examples of those personalised care plans happening in the Northern Territory. How are their successes being measured?
Gove, Tennant Creek and Katherine hospitals will continue with block funding, but Alice Springs and Darwin moved to activity-based funding. There are many outstanding questions with regard to activity-based funding. It is no good if the Chief Minister claims: ‘Changes to primary care will provide a real opportunity to push ahead in partnership with the Commonwealth to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage’. Where is the evidence from Indigenous community health services that any progress is being made at all?
The rate of hospitalisation in Australia is one of the highest in the world. Why are we throwing such a huge amount of money at curing ill health rather than prevention? Where are the funds for the integration of hospital primary care communication Australia-wide? The electronic data interchange reduced time for reports to reach GPs, for instance, say, from two days to the same day delivery. Surely there is a fundamental need within reforms? Is this another Kevin Rudd/Paul Henderson knee-jerk reform? Have they and their advisors really listened to what the experts recommended be put in place in the next 10, 20, or 50 years - not just designed to get Kevin Rudd with his little wagging tail dog, the Chief Minister, across the line at the next election? What single thing did you do, Chief Minister, which made this deal a better deal for the Northern Territory?
I am also well aware that in the Northern Territory there is an additional health impact resulting from the NTER. The Australian Indigenous Doctors Association Health Impact Assessment predicts that the intended health outcomes of the Northern Territory Emergency Response - that being improved health and wellbeing and, ultimately, life expectancy - are unlikely to be fully achieved. I cannot see where the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is going to answer the hard questions and the pressing need for action.
The Australia government’s National Health and Hospitals Reform Committee, in their final report dated June 2009, titled A Healthier Future for all Australians, noted:
Did this essential priority list disappear somewhere else we are not quite sure of? Did the Chief Minister stand up and advocate for this in his discussions with the highly effective, or ineffective, Prime Minister? The Chief Minister has gone to COAG as a little lap dog, on his back, being tickled on the belly by Kevin Rudd, if he is strong enough to hold him. He rolled over and accepted a deal that he has no idea of. If this represents the detail the Chief Minister has made his decision on supporting Kevin Rudd’s plan, then God help the Territory, because Paul Henderson certainly cannot.
Let us go back to the activity-based funding you may want to consider. What does a defined activity-based funding model cost for Australia? What has the Northern Territory government done to develop an activity-based funding model, definitions, and projections for each activity in the Northern Territory? How does the department of Health demonstrate activity-based funding using a case mix …
Ms PURICK: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of 10 minutes for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you for your indulgence, and I thank the member for Goyder.
How does the department of Health demonstrate activity-based funding, using case mix classifications, explicitly link funding to the actual services provided? How does an activity-based funding formula work in the Northern Territory? How is the Northern Territory currently determining funding for our hospitals? Is the Northern Territory now using activity-based funding for all costing rather than the previous block funding model? Define where each activity starts and ends, and what exactly is encompassed. What has changed for the Northern Territory, as it was previously noted the case mix model is actually more appropriate for larger jurisdictions with significantly larger hospitals and populations?
How will the Northern Territory’s high number of patients requiring public care and chronic disease management and the unique Indigenous percentage of patients with multiple illnesses be recognised under activity-based funding? How will the negative and positive results of activity-based funding in the Northern Territory be measured? How will the Northern Territory government ensure activity-based funding does not result in greater output being emphasised ahead of better outcomes? Does the department of Health have suitable activity-based funding data-tracking technology in place? Is the necessary modelling work on activity-based funding in the Northern Territory driven by the Health Gains Funding Unit? Exactly how much does each activity cost in the Northern Territory compared with the national cost?
Can you give examples, Chief Minister, for straightforward maternal hospital development, hip replacements and dialysis in each of the five NT hospitals? What is the basis of future activity-based funding, infrastructure and investment for primary and primary healthcare allocations? How are future costs estimated? What does the Heart Foundation’s report on the modelling of current usage of services in the Northern Territory and the comparison to interstate usage show, in detail, Chief Minister? What updated demographics of the Northern Territory are currently being used? How will activity-based funding impact on the Northern Territory waiting lists and occupancy levels? Will there be opportunity for Northern Territorians to be transferred interstate for procedures? Will activity-based funding include 24-hour mental healthcare for the Northern Territory? I doubt that - it is off their radar.
How much is the remote service delivery component of activity-based funding? Is the Hospital Services Planning Project produced by Ernst & Young available? What is the annual growth of hospital costs in percentage terms and dollar terms in the Northern Territory? What is the annual growth of costs in percentage terms and dollar terms for hospitals in the Northern Territory? I think I have said that one twice. Oh no, I did not. What other projections …
Mr Knight: You need to speak faster.
Mr GILES: Steady on, Clark Kent.
What are the projections for basing the annual cost of hospitals in the Northern Territory and percentage in dollar terms for each of the next 15 years? What are the projections of growth in annual cost to each Northern Territory hospital in percentage and dollars for the next 15 years? What is the projected growth in GST revenue in the Northern Territory in percentage terms and dollar terms for each of the next 15 years?
How will a new hospital at Palmerston be funded? Will the federal government fund 60% of its construction and setup costs? Will the bottom line for activity-based funding be additional funding for health in the Northern Territory? What will be the cost of the Northern Territory activity-based funding regarding the loss of GST income?
Too many questions, and we know sweet nothing about what is actually happening. We have a PowerPoint presentation that tells us nothing. Territorians do not know what this new health plan the lapdog has signed up to means. We need to get answers. We need to know if $20m for 14 beds is a sound investment. Would we be better tackling this from an environmental health perspective?
We know about the failures of SIHIP. There are plenty of reports: the NATSISS reports, the AMA, doctors’ associations, we have summaries of Indigenous health, Australian Indigenous Health implementation reports. We have everything that says the determinants of health relate to other factors such as housing, education, transport, diet - and none of this is included in this health package, and it is very important. That is why the importance of SIHIP is relevant to this debate because, as a determinant of health - and we heard the Chief Minister today talk about 70% of people turning up at hospitals are Indigenous clients - we have a key program which was designed, that was deliberately announced by the previous federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Mal Brough, to tackle issues around housing that would have had an outcome to support improved health outcomes for Indigenous Territorians. Now the government has dropped the ball on it. What are they doing? We can get the CHINS report - the Community Housing and Infrastructure Needs Survey report - which talks about the need for infrastructure to be put into communities to improve the health outcomes for Indigenous Territorians.
What do we see happen with SIHIP? The infrastructure component blown out the door so badly that house 206 at Ali Curung, Jimmy Friday and Nancy Martin’s daughter’s house, had the house handed back with no lid on the septic tank - so kids can fall in there. I am quite sure if kids fall in the septic tank, they would have to use the health service because they got sick. This is where environmental health comes into the whole argument. This is something that has not been part of this health plan because Kevin Rudd does not understand it, and I am sure the Chief Minister is nowhere near Kevin Rudd.
Then we see the Housing minister, or the previous Housing minister for SIHIP, and these guys are even worse. How do you hand houses over that have had $75 000 or more spent on them without a lid on a septic tank? So Jimmy and Nancy have given this house to their daughter, and there are 10 or 15 people living in there because there is not enough housing. Even though this is a growth town, we cannot give them any new houses; we do not work like that. We want everyone to move into Darwin or Palmerston and be overcrowded and participate in antisocial behaviour and the things that happen in overcrowded situations. So Jimmy and Nancy are living in a little tin shed out the back, one room. They asked the SIHIP officials when they came round: ‘Will you fix up our house?’ The officials said: ‘Hang on a minute, these houses, these refurbishments are costing too much, there is no money for tin sheds. You have to live in your tin shed’.
I noticed in the member for Barkly’s electorate - I have not heard him talk about, it but he would have to be quite devastated that Jimmy and Nancy continue to live in a tin shed. Their health outcomes are not improving, I can tell you. And these are good people who are trying to do the right thing. Jimmy is a famous gospel singer. Good people, Madam Speaker.
Then we hear reports about houses out at Willowra where money has been paid from SIHIP to the Central Desert Shire - $138 000 - as leaked in an e-mail displayed in The Australian newspaper on 16 April, reported by Patricia Karvelas said: ‘Oh no, we can do it, we have been doing them for $16 000 12 months ago’. Then there is an interview by Alice Brennan to the Housing Minister, the member for Johnston, where he said: ‘I doubt that. I doubt that. There are a lot of people in Darwin or Alice Springs who would like to see their house refurbished for that price, between $16 000 and $25 000’, or words to that effect. I understand the Housing minister knows about that e-mail and he is all over the top of it. I have not heard any explanation as to how SIHIP can cost $75 000, and these guys down there can do it for $25 000 ...
Dr Burns: Why don’t you ask the question? You will get an answer.
Mr GILES: I find that very hard to see. I inspected all these houses and I know the condition of the places. And I know …
Dr Burns: You would not get a kitchen in Darwin for $25 000.
A member: Yes, you would.
Dr Burns: I do not know what sort of kitchen you live in.
Mr GILES: The standard in Willowra is better than the standard in Ali Curung ...
Members interjecting.
Mr GILES: Do the sums. $672m divided by $25 000. Work out how many houses you can get refurbished in the Northern Territory. Every one of them …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr GILES: Every house in the Northern Territory. This is the failure of this alliance. You can have every house refurbished for that money. You can get change in building new houses; use your calculator. $672m divided by $25 000 and see how many thousands of houses you can refurbish ...
Mr Knight interjecting.
Mr GILES: Do not talk, Clark Kent over there, dumber man. You are the bloke who has time for his electorate, but you cannot even stop the kids from having to swim across sewage-infested and crocodile-infested water to get to school. Let us tell a story about how incompetent both the Northern Territory and federal government are when it comes to managing these things. This is environmental health; you have kids swimming through sewage water. They go to hospital, and there is another person turning up at hospital, which affects your figures, which affects the funding model.
There is a tender out at the moment to build a 6 m wide bridge with a walking lane at Palumpa, so the kids can go across in the Wet Season without having to fight off the crocodiles and the turds coming past - you have to be really careful there. The Victoria Daly Shire has a figure of $1.5m to do this work. The SIHIP alliance contractor has a figure of $2.3m for exactly the same work - $800 000 difference; same work, same standards, same regulations, same bridge! That is why they are hopeless.
I will leave BER for another time. There is a list this long of failures in that too, member for Barkly, on BER things. The member for Barkly is the minister for pain, who runs these things; he is the bloke stuffing up, not the Education minister. This is the bloke whose department is building classrooms with no electricity because they forgot to upgrade the power. This is the bloke who cannot open a school hall because they forget to assess how much water pressure there is for fire hydrants to put fires out. But we will get to that one later; there are plenty of those around.
You cannot run SIHIP, you cannot run insulation, you cannot run BER, you cannot run Health ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, your time has expired, resume your seat.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I just wish to make some observations about how this government and this Chief Minister choose to advance the Northern Territory, and the techniques they use.
I have picked up from some of the speakers what would have passed as diversions from the main debate; after all, we are talking about the health funding arrangements at a federal level. It is worthwhile turning your mind to those arguments, because I would really like to believe this debate was about improving health services for the people of the Northern Territory.
I am concerned - especially now the greatest moral dilemma of our age has been sidelined - the Prime Minister, being particularly mindful of a election looming in the current year, needs to have a win, because he has not had many in recent times. I would hate to think this was nothing more than a cynical exercise to demonstrate the fact the Prime Minister has some capacity to lead in light of some of the failures in other areas, not least of which was the failed ETS, and also the matter of the pink batts scheme debacle, and those types of things.
I really do hope this debate is about improving healthcare outcomes. It is worth revisiting some history here, and I turn to the Ros Kelly memorial PowerPoint presentation, page 3 ...
Mr Tollner: You mean the Treasury analysis?
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, I am going to get to that. It is interesting to go back to page 3, because there is actually a track between the crocodile jaws - and I know this is an expression the current Education minister loves, the old ‘crocodile jaws’. He spent the first several months in parliament walking around like that, because he was so taken with the idea of crocodile jaws. This is, indeed, a graph showing crocodile jaws which demonstrates the changing proportionality of expenditure in the area of health between the Commonwealth and the states. I draw members’ attention particularly to the two dotted lines because they deal with the all states’ share and the Commonwealth/states arrangement.
You have to be mindful there was an agreement struck which was, ultimately, intended to be a 50:50 share arrangement, many years ago - 10 years ago, and I believe it dates back well into the Howard government era - between the states and the Commonwealth to share the cost expenditure on a 50:50 basis.
What happened after the time the GST came along? State governments realised they had much more cash than they ever believed. You can go back and look at the projections; the Northern Territory budget is a good example of it. If you go back through those budgets you can see, year after year, the projection falls well short of the actual outcome which is achieved at the end of the year, largely due to the fact there was much more GST in the tin. So, those state governments then had a choice to save the money and make prudent fiscal decisions within the arrangements we have with the Commonwealth. If we take a little of that GST and pop it into the health bucket because we want to improve health services. I genuinely believe that is what they intend to do; they want to improve health services.
However, as time passed, that bucket got deeper and deeper and started to draw down more completely on the expenditure of the GST by the states, so each state jurisdiction continued to roll out these new health programs. We saw it here. The introduction of renal dialysis services to Tennant Creek is an example of that type of expenditure; those choices that governments make. Whilst the federal government continued to pay money in accordance with the original agreement into the health arrangements, the states chose to spend more. That produces crocodile jaws because, if you express your crocodile jaws in terms of proportionality, if one group is spending more as a proportion of the overall money spent, then the other group must be spending less. The fact is they are not. They were still providing income in accordance with the original agreement.
The states were choosing to expend their GST in this fashion, and so these government decisions made along the way created the crocodile jaws. There may well have been good reasons for those government decisions to be taken along the way. I well understand the urge of governments, both Labor and Liberal, to do the best they possibly can for the community they serve. I understand that urge.
The issue is not about the motive; the issue is about capacity. What actually happens is, eventually, the state governments are spending so much – and you can see that on the graph – that the Commonwealth was being pushed down to about 40% because of the states’ decision to spend more and more. So, as this projection tracked up, the Commonwealth did their CPI increases, but that is all they did, and they made the payments in accordance with the agreement. The states kept on spending more and, then, they started anticipating how much more they would have to spend.
This is where the Chief Minister gets his $1bn figure from - they ripped $1bn out of the system. No, not quite. The difference between the projected expenditure and the actual expenditure is the difference to which the Chief Minister refers as $1bn being ripped out of the health system.
It goes to the integrity of how this argument is run, and that really is the issue I have the most concern with. I listened carefully to the member for Nelson in relation to this because this does throw up many more questions than it provides answers. The Chief Minister had time to spare; when he finished his statement he had more to report. I am curious about how other elements in this whole package are being presented to us for our consumption. If you believe the information which has been made available - and I do believe it - then the whole deal is worth $222m over 10 years, which is about $22m per year, which is not an insubstantial amount of money. However, you have to ask yourself what else we are giving away in the process of gaining that $20m per year, bearing in mind we are talking about a budget which will be in the order of $4.5bn next week, I suspect.
I am concerned we would trade away some of our sovereignty, some of our capacity, possibly even our flexibility in budgetary management, for this particular outcome. That is not to say I do not believe, in essence, it is wrong, but it needs a critical eye.
For that, I turn to a Chief Minister who I look to for integrity in the way the message is conveyed. I then place my trust, as Territorians must have to place their trust, on what we are being asked to believe by the Chief Minister. If the Chief Minister wants to display his honorificabilitudinitatibus to us in this House, then he must take the necessary steps to convince us of his integrity. This is where I start to have some concerns.
We have been calling for the Treasury advice, and the Chief Minister came in here and said: ‘I have the Treasury briefing; I will table it for you’. I am sure other members have raised this. This is not a Treasury advice, and I suspect this is not a Treasury briefing; this is a PowerPoint presentation to which a Treasury official would speak if they were addressing a minister, so it would flash up on the wall and the briefing would be provided by the official. So, this is not a briefing; this is a PowerPoint presentation. The advice is conspicuous, and continues to be conspicuous, by it absence.
This is not the first time the government has clammed up in what it is doing. I remind honourable members about the submissions to the Henry tax review which was finally leaked to the media, I imagine, by a very concerned public servant, because of its content.
The Chief Minister also went on to talk about this 14% in the agreement, as I understand it. Well, having cast an eye over that agreement, I would like the Chief Minister to point out where in that agreement it refers to the 14% of the tied GST money. It is in the PowerPoint presentation, but it is actually not in the agreement. I imagine there is a formula attached, which would come up with that figure of 14%. But, for goodness sake, take the time out in your presentation to this House, as Chief Minister, to demonstrate how you come up with that figure of 14%.
The other thing we heard the Chief Minister say: ‘Oh, the Leader of the Opposition has not asked for a briefing’. That is not true. It is only true in the essential component that the Leader of the Opposition did not ask for a briefing; the shadow minister for Health certainly did. But the Chief Minister is too busy trying to demonstrate the opposition has shown no interest in this - which is arrant nonsense! He is prepared to project it in such a fashion that it colours the story in a particular way to his advantage - this from the Chief Minister who says the politics should be removed from this particular argument. I listened with great interest to the Chief Minister say: ‘The politics should be removed from this argument, but that so-and-so Tony Abbott ripped $1bn out of it; what a nasty pasty he is’. Arrant nonsense! He is not interested in removing politics from this matter; he is simply interested in the spin machine that surrounds this particular deal.
I have also heard all types of assertions that this is going to work better. Why? How? How is this going to work better? We have different streams through which the money comes down the funnel in a different way. How does that actually produce a better outcome when the money comes down the funnel in a different way? We have $1bn Health budget, of which we are going to add $22m next year. Okay, that is good, but by what means does that improve health outcomes? Fourteen more sub-acute care beds - which are not acute care beds, by the way - they are just sub-acute care beds. So how does 14 more of those produce outcomes?
We have heard the complaints from the AMA; they say we need 40 more hospital beds. Does this now relieve the government of its last election promise to introduce new hospital beds? Are they going to count the new hospital beds provided by this deal as part of the hospital beds they promised they would deliver at the last Territory election? Are we just swapping one promise for another? None of this is explained. For the government to maintain its integrity, particularly where they claim this is about patient outcomes, then do not just tell me the system is going to be run better to give me comfort, as a Territorian, that is how it is going to be.
If we rely on the assertion by this government that things are gong to run better as a result of more expenditure, then we would have to take comfort in the fact we have almost no crime, and our hospitals are efficient machines which run seamlessly without any problems, and that our elective waiting lists are very short.
If we believe the assertion we are going to run things better - for argument’s sake, land release - then the problem prices we have at the moment would not exist. But the fact is, in regard to land release, a few years ago there was an assertion on 27 April 2007 by the now Treasurer that they would only have to turn off 300 blocks a year in the Top End of the Northern Territory to meet demand. So, we hear any number of promises and assertions, and comfortable words about how all of this is going to be achieved, but if they stand on their record, and if you factor in these little political barbs and misleading statements, then you cannot get comfort at the other end.
I point out to the Chief Minister that he also was quite errant - and I hope it was mere error - in relation to his assertion that the Northern Territory had no accredited hospitals when they came to power. Wrong, not true, and I interjected that at the time. I draw the minister’s attention to page 28 of the annual report of the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards financial year 2000-01. At the end of that report in year to 30 June 2001, before the Northern Territory government changed to a Labor government, the Royal Darwin Hospital is listed as having received accreditation. So, unless he is talking about accreditation from some other organisation - and maybe he would like to describe which other organisation - I do not know. The Tobacco Council of Australia may not have accredited any of the hospitals in the Northern Territory, but I am curious to hear what he has to say.
Because he is so anxious to spin the story, he is prepared to use language which suggests that the opposition has taken no interest in this particular debate by not asking for a briefing, when they have. He is prepared to call this a Treasury briefing, when it is not. He is prepared to say no hospitals had accreditation, when they had. And he is then prepared to say there is 14% outlined in the agreement, when it is not. It is all this fudging around the edge; he is constantly stepping around the edge of things to try to paint a picture. The picture he is trying to paint is that we are all bad and he is all good, and everything is wonderful. But the point is, if you continue fudging around the edge like that, eventually you are going to overstep the mark. I could argue that he has already with his accreditation comments. The fact is, constantly taking it to the edge is demonstrative of a desperate Chief Minister who is clutching on to a government which is falling apart in its capacity.
Today, we had the spectacle of a minister start to contribute to a debate, only to discover he was talking on the wrong debate because his pre-prepared notes was all he had to rely on - nothing else. We had the spectacle of other ministers coming into this place and simply reading stuff out, because that is what the department shoves into their hands. The capacity to critically think is critically absent from this government. That is the real flaw I am concerned about with this government. All of that contributes to a Chief Minister who is becoming increasingly desperate and, in the process of doing so, is becoming increasingly dishonest with Northern Territorians. You cannot do that and then walk into this House and say: ‘Have I got a deal for you’, when you have the reputation of a used car salesman.
Madam Speaker, I urge the Chief Minister to reconsider his approach, particularly how he deals with the truth, so he may restore his integrity to the point where I, and Territorians, can trust him when he talks about these things.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, I have had a number of constituents come to my electorate office to discuss their concerns about what the current federal government and the Prime Minister of this country want to do in regarding the health system.
At the outset, I would like to make comment on my understanding of the hospital setup in relation to the staff who work in these hospitals - not only the clinical staff, but the non-clinical staff who support those people, and the public servants who support both the clinical and non-clinical staff in our hospitals and healthcare system. I heard today the Chief Minister making comments in relation to the statement, and also during Question Time, where he claimed we, on this side of the House, only want to criticise public servants, we do not have any respect, we have offended them, and other terms I cannot recall. He made all those statements, and I find that offensive.
We, on our side of the House, live in this place, we use these hospital services and, in the main, the people who man our hospitals and look after us and provide our healthcare services are very fine, upstanding people in our community. To assert we do not admire those people, nor would we respect them for the type of people they are, I believe is quite absurd. However, that is the way the Chief Minister reads it. I believe he is misinformed and he totally misjudges the people who come into this House and the people who actually work for the Northern Territory government and provide us with all our health services.
I find it amazing, and so do some of the constituents who come to my office. In fact, I get people from the northern suburbs who are government members’ constituents who come to my office to have conversations because they cannot seem to get the message through to their local members on the Labor side of politics.
It is quite interesting that the Chief Minister would want to sign up to this particular agreement with such speed and so little information. If he was on the open highway, he would probably be travelling in excess of 160 km/h towards signing this agreement. I find if you ask for Treasury estimates, this is what you get. I have had a brief look through this document called the National Health Reform from the Northern Territory Treasury, and I find it appalling you would actually give this to a parliament and say: ‘Here is a briefing’. I know there are some fine public servants who work for the Northern Territory government, and you could probably produce this in a number of hours if you are competent, and if it is your area of expertise in Treasury.
The detailed analysis of the impact of this agreement on the Northern Territory is still a mystery, and will probably stay a mystery, because I do not believe the Chief Minister really is interested in finding out what the bottom line is and the impact, both short-term and long-term, this agreement is going to have on the Northern Territory. It is appalling that he comes into this House and treats the Northern Territory, and the constituents of the Northern Territory, with contempt and tries to get this document through as a briefing.
I believe that some of the problems which occur in our system are the result of systemic policy failures across the board in the current Labor government in trying to manage the Northern Territory. I say try, because I do not believe they are succeeding. We would not be in this situation in the Territory if we had better management of the resources available to the Northern Territory government. In fact, across Australia, Labor governments have been in charge for quite some years, and the health system is in an appalling state because of the total mismanagement of the resources provided to them locally, and by the Commonwealth.
At Royal Darwin Hospital we cannot even seem to get the fridges and the milk right there. It recently came to my attention that the milk fridges are not working and have not been working for some time. So they are all drinking long life milk and, in some cases, may even be drinking powdered milk.
Caseloads in our hospitals have gone through the roof, so staff have to manage horrendous caseloads. Although I hear the government say the waiting lists have gone down, I talk to people who come into my office and say they are going up. Who does one believe? Do you believe the people who are coming into my office saying: ‘I have had this cancelled, I have had that cancelled’? There are many them; it is not just one. Many people come in to complain about waiting lists getting longer, and people cannot get the services they need. The old saying of ‘when in pain get on a plane’ appears to be coming back to the Northern Territory.
I have been here heading towards 30 years, and, when I first came to the Territory, the health services were excellent. There were some services we did not have and we had to go south for some, but we were a fledging Territory; three years after self-government I arrived. The services then, I would suggest, were probably better than they are now judging by people I talk to who have come here recently and are trying to use the health system as often as I did when I had young children.
We have some appalling conditions in our hospitals. People come in and ask, ‘Have you been to the hospital lately?’, and I say I have been recently. They talk about paint peeling off walls; cockroaches; cleanliness; and rubbish. I have recently spoken to some cleaners from the hospital and I gather there are just not enough of them; they are constrained in the number of hours they can work and what they can do. We have some really heavy duty issues just with Royal Darwin Hospital. They are people who live in the northern suburbs of Darwin who come in to me on a regular basis expressing extreme concern as to what is happening. I am not even going to go near mental health at this point, because I would probably spend the next half hour talking about some of the mental health issues and some of the problems the health system has in looking after those people.
The ministerial statement given to us by the Chief Minister is titled National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement and dated Tuesday, 27 April 2010. The Chief Minister spoke about it in the House today. From my time in this House we see these statements and they seem to give plenty of ammunition about what we can do to actually talk to the government about some of the failings. They seem to write the failings down here. I go to page 2, for instance, and quote the Chief Minister:
The current government has allowed the health system to deteriorate to a point where it is bandaid stuff. They are desperately trying to get things fixed and are relying on really dedicated staff to try to pull rabbits out of the hat. These particular staff members who work for our system - dedicated people with hearts of gold - are being required to do more and more for less and less. I have had nurses say to me: ‘I come up here from time to time, maybe for a year or six months, and then I go somewhere else’. They say the situation they face on a daily basis in our hospitals is atrocious. They cannot believe the hospitals in the Northern Territory have deteriorated to the point they have today in how they are run and the policy failures that are occurring.
These nurses come from southern states and they might spend winter up here. When we have an increase in population, an increase of tourists up here, obviously, we have extra demand on our hospitals. These wonderful people come to the Territory, work here for six months, go back, spend time with their families, work down south and then they do it again the next year. I have run into a number of them who have said: ‘Sorry, Pete, we are not going to come here again. We spend way too much money trying to get accommodation, if you can get accommodation; the workloads at the hospital are astronomical in what is expected of us; and the condition of the hospital means we are not going to come here again’.
Where do we get people to fill those gaps, short-term people? Where do we get long-term people? They talk to their colleagues interstate and say: ‘You do not want to go to the Territory, you cannot afford to live there, you cannot even get a house and, if you can get a house, it is going to cost an absolute fortune, and if you are going to rent one, it is probably going to cost even more’. We have situations where some of these people have to live four, five or six to a house and share bedrooms. That is an appalling situation.
The other situation we find in point 2, which says: ‘provide additional resources to improving health in the Territory’. How do you determine that when you do not have a proper analysis of the impact this agreement is going to have in the Territory? We have this document called The National Health Reform, Northern Territory Treasury Presentation, and I agree with my colleagues; it is nothing more than a PowerPoint presentation you would give people to show them what this is roughly about. There is no detail here; there is no analysis.
Moving further through the document to page 3 it says:
I go back to this document. Where is the analysis? Where is the impact analysis on the Northern Territory? How do you determine that it has actually met both of those pre-conditions? I quote again:
I do not know how you do that, because there is no proof. The Chief Minister has been asked to provide us with some indication and some information in relation to that, yet he comes in here and makes this statement. What are we to do? Believe him and just say: ‘That is great, tremendous’? But where is the detail? There is no detail, and I do not think there is a plan. I believe the Chief Minister has rolled over because of the centralised system Labor works. All their Premiers, even though they jacked up in the beginning, have rolled over and gone into this. The only one who has not rolled over because his future or his job does not depend on it is the Western Australian Premier, because there is a Liberal government in Western Australia. The rest have appeared to roll over and go with what the Prime Minister requested.
Further down that page, to quote the Chief Minister talking about regional health standards:
It is interesting the words used here. I hear the Treasurer stating, from time and time: ‘We spend way more money than the CLP did’. That is because they have more money from the rivers of gold that have flowed in from the GST. Courtesy of a Liberal federal government which brought this good system in, they have all this extra money. If I give my neighbour $1000, of course, the neighbour is going to be able to spend more money than he or she did last week, because they have more money. It is not rocket science.
The main problem is the Treasurer continually espouses ‘We spend more money’. On this side of the House we continually say to the Treasurer: ‘Money is an input, not an outcome’, yet I hear them saying: ‘We have done this and we have done that.’ Well, cash is an input not an outcome; that is a very basic accounting principle. Yet, the Treasurer still does not seem to get it, still tries to convince us, the media, the press gallery and anyone listening to these broadcasts that it is an input, and that is an output. It would be nice if she could get that right and acknowledge that many of the inputs have not actually been able to achieve a decent output.
Let us look at page 4 of what the Chief Minister said. Here we go again, and I quote, last paragraph, page 4:
That takes me straight to seniors housing and the link between housing and health. There is so much one can talk about, and I will come back to seniors housing. Let us just talk about the health of people in general when they cannot get a house, when they actually have to live in a car or in a tent. Some people do not choose to live in the long grass - they have to due to circumstances. When you look at housing waiting lists, you have 3500-plus families on the housing waiting list. When we in the electorate office contact Housing and ask how long it is going to be, they say: ‘Have a look on the website.’ You look on the website and it says ‘indeterminable’. The reason being - they do not know. The reason being, they are the ones who sold approximately 2016 - it could be 2019, I stand to be corrected ...
Dr Burns: Oh, you will be corrected.
Mr STYLES: The other day I heard that you just have to look at the annual reports and actually look at the figures …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr STYLES: Those figures are on the public record because that is where I got them from, and that is where we on our side got them from …
A member: You did not read it properly, did you?
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: I read it the other day: the government said the CLP sold 2000 homes, the CLP sold 780; and we will accept that we sold them.
Dr Burns: Either you are dumb or you are misleading the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: We sold them because we gave low-income families a hand up. We did not do it in the middle of a housing crisis because we had not released enough land. We had plenty of land releases, we had plenty of houses …
A member: No, you did not.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: … and because of good management we actually had the ability to help these people into owning their own homes. We will do that again because this government has failed the Northern Territory people in a miserable fashion, where kids have to leave town.
Members interjecting.
Mr STYLES: Out there people are talking about …
Members interjecting.
Mr STYLES: … capital city where the people in Coles cannot get young people because young people cannot afford to stay here ...
A member: Four thousand people a year are coming here.
Mr STYLES: A friend of mine’s kids have moved to Adelaide because they cannot afford to buy a home here, because this government has failed so dramatically to release sufficient land. Our children cannot afford to buy homes in this Territory. If the government members do not know that then they are very out of touch with what is going on in the community; they need to get out there and find out and talk to some of these people ...
A member interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: Madam Speaker, people do not have to believe me, they can go out and talk to the people who are the constituents of the Northern Territory who are having desperate troubles to try to find their kids homes. Kids have to move back into their parents’ homes. You have kids with eight people living in the house to pay the rent. You have apprentices who cannot buy a house, cannot do anything, because the prices are through the roof. Who is responsible for that? The current Labor government ...
A member: Shame. Shameful.
Mr STYLES: Yes, shame. So let us go back to …
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: We talk about health and overcrowding in homes. We know the terrible situation in some of the communities outside our urban areas with overcrowding problems and that is on the public record. What we have now in the suburbs, in middle class families, is overcrowding is starting because the kids cannot move out and buy a home. They are living at home and they have kids. You have parents with grandkids in homes which are not really designed to have so many people in them.
The infrastructure situation: without good infrastructure, how do people get to hospitals? How do we have all the facilities we need at hospitals if you are not spending enough on infrastructure?
Let us go back to senior’s housing. I heard recently the minister for Housing is going to build some nice seniors’ villages ...
A member: No, he made an announcement.
Mr STYLES: Yes, he made an announcement, and we have heard those announcements time and time again. We hear it in SIHIP; every day we talk about SIHIP. You would think the government would say they have an issue because the opposition hammers them every day they can - because they are failing on SIHIP. Now, we are arguing over whether, in two-and-a-half years, they have actually built four homes or six. That is the argument, four or six. Do we have this figure of four, or is a 50% increase in the number of homes built, which takes you from four to six? I believe it is appalling. In two-and-a-half years, with all the money which has been spent on consultants, people driving around out there, and flying around looking at things, and they have not done very much at all. Everyone on that side seems to do a great deal of looking, talking, and announcing, but we do not seem to see things on the ground. We do not see bricks and mortar going up.
Seniors villages: seniors come in and say they rang Housing and were told it is indeterminable. They say: ‘What does that mean?’ I say: ‘I do not know; when you find out, can you e-mail me, because we have been trying to find out and they will not tell us. So, we cannot, unfortunately, tell you’.
Mental health, I believe there could be an entire debate on the problems with mental health, but I will move on. On page 5:
I do not quite know what that means, but I am going to take a stab at it. The Council on the Ageing has been a great advocate for the needs of seniors and in retaining seniors in the Northern Territory. The problem is with the cost of living, the cost of renting, all that type of thing, it all adds to the fact we are starting to lose people. I know we have a good number of births in the Northern Territory, but the fact is we appear to be losing people, and we are losing our attractiveness for people to move here. I am wondering when it will get to the stage where we have negative population growth because people go down south.
I was at Wulagi Supermarket last Saturday morning and some people come over and said their kids had just left town because they cannot afford to stay here. It is sad because they are going to finish what they are doing here and they are moving too. They are long-term Territorians who would love to have stayed here, but they said come retirement, they will not be able to afford to live here.
Instead of building the fabric of our community, it is being torn apart at the moment. I ask who is responsible; who is in government? Who has the ability to put out policy which will help these people and will get things done? The answer is obvious: the government has the ability to do that. They are the ones who control what happens; they control planning; they control how much land is released. Yet, we see time and time again- -it is like a state of paralysis - nothing seems to be happening. Across the board we have major problems. Can you fail at everything? I believe the answer is yes, because that is where we are headed at the moment. In health, in law and order, in education - these are the pillars of our community. The three pillars are health, education, law and order. There are so many problems in infrastructure, planning, and all kind of other issues I will not bring into this particular debate, but we have major issues in those three areas. The one we are talking about at the moment is, of course, health.
We are looking at trying to keep people here. We are trying to encourage the grey nomads to come to town. COTA advised me that if we keep some of these senior people here and get some grey nomads up here they estimated those people are putting in excess of $200m into our local economy. That is a large amount of money. When you start pulling out that sort of money, millions of dollars per week which has been spent in this town keeping our kids in jobs, creating business, creating jobs for our kids, creating jobs for every Territorian. If we keep going in the direction we are going, we will find we will have negative growth, and that is going to be a disaster ...
Dr Burns: Like when you were in power – a flatline economy.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: Who is in government? You have had more money …
Dr Burns: And look at the economy …
Mr STYLES: I will pick up on the interjection. Member for Johnston, your government has had more money than we ever dreamed of. The rivers of gold, the increase in the budget, and you sit there and say: ‘You people were flatline’. Well, we were trying to recover from a number of things. The federal Labor government, last time they were in and were voted out in 1996, left a debt of $96bn. The Liberal federal government was left to clean up that particular mess. Then you say the GST - well, you never agreed with it anyway. However, you are the recipients of the largesse of the GST system which has given you people more money than you ever dreamed about in 2001 when you came into office, and you sit over there and you accuse us of all kinds of things. I would hang my head in shame and I would not be able to sleep at night if I sat on that side of the House.
This document is rich and there are pages and pages of notes I have here of how the government has these systemic policy failures at the moment. Of course, they would say it is all great, it is all well. I do not know where they are, but they are not on the same planet I am. I have to deal with people who come into my office every day, some of them in tears, because of the situations that have been created and the mess that the place is in, courtesy of the current Northern Territory government.
Let us look at page 6:
I thought we already worked bilaterally with the Commonwealth government, or is this something new? It would appear the Chief Minister wants us to believe this is a new thing he has been able to get for the Northern Territory. I continue with the quote:
I believe the whole government seems to be suffering from systemic policy failure. All the Labor Premiers, I believe, were forced to agree because of the situation they find themselves in and the way their party works. The only one who stood up to them was our colleague in Western Australia.
Under the heading More Efficient Hospitals:
I do not know whether that is going to be the case. What happens when the needs change? Who is in charge? We have all seen and heard, if you have read history, some of the problems we had when the Territory was governed from Canberra. On either side of politics, when they are in charge, the Territory missed out to a large degree and I do not believe it will be long before the Territory misses out, not only in this, but in so many other areas.
The last thing I would like to point out is the establishment of what we call local hospital networks. They are going to create a single entity to run all the hospitals in the Territory. All we are doing is going back to someone sitting in Darwin telling people in Alice Springs what is good for them, when they may not even have been there. That is exactly what used to happen when Canberra controlled the health services here; and that is exactly where this government is going to take us. I find that appalling. We are going back to management from afar, and that will have disastrous results for people in the Territory.
Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, ode to the opposition! The irony in the health debate is: I do not know whether to prescribe antidepressants or medication for hypertension.
I will say one thing about primary healthcare, which I will refer to later: primary healthcare is about prevention, not cure. One of the Department of Health and Families’ great programs is about hand washing and I caution any member who lifts their fingers to turn the pages of their notes because cross-infection can be a very dangerous outcome.
I go to the member for Braitling’s contribution to the debate. You certainly know the member for Braitling has hit rock bottom when he enters into name calling. His infantile anecdotes and name calling as a contribution to the debate, once again, sums up the ode of the opposition. I am not sure which neighbourhood he comes from, but I know the member for Braitling blows in and out of the Barkly quite regularly. I have heard talk from constituents and I say to them: ‘You have a choice, this is a democracy; you can vote for the member for Braitling because he certainly makes some big promises’. He makes big promises on every subject he chooses to bang on about. I remind people to question the member for Braitling’s big plans and big promises. Ask him how he will cost it; ask him how he will fund it; ask him how he will deliver obstetrics to the Barkly on his one-line, one-hit wonder show through the electorate.
People do stop to think about the role of the opposition, and they are now starting to think about questioning the actual substance of what opposition members are saying. If you have a plan, an alternative, or costing, then bring it on and we can have a serious debate. It is very easy to just focus on one-liners and everything is down in the dumps and nothing works. I suppose it is a way of doing business, but certainly not the way I am interested in doing it.
We are relating our own examples and our own anecdotes. I have anecdotes from the Territory that go back 30 years, but I will concentrate on the last six months. I have had the fortune of not attending the hospital yet. But, I have been taking people to attend the hospitals in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Darwin - both the Royal Darwin and the Darwin Private Hospitals - and I have had nothing but very positive experiences. However, all I have heard recently, and the judgments on our hospitals, does not concur with the experiences I have had when I have taken patients to present. I have dealt with very professional staff, with very professional outcomes in clean and well-organised, professional environments. I cannot say enough.
I will not go into rural and remote areas issues with emergency evacuations and the incredible health professionals you deal with who are all about Territorians, positive outcomes, and doing the best they possibly can.
What I am interested in today in supporting the Chief Minister’s statement regarding the National Health and Hospital Network Agreement is the big picture. What we are talking about is national health reforms never entered into in this country before. This is a very important subject and I can be questioned straight up. What is your alternative? Well, we have a good alternative, a Liberal government alternative under the Howard years where there were subtractions out of the health budget, if that is an alternative.
We are looking at national health reform; we are looking at the future; we are looking at reform that has never been seen on this scale before. We are looking at an agreement for the Northern Territory which recognises our special needs, the issues of regional and remote health, and acknowledges the issues of Indigenous health.
The Henderson government has been working hard for Territorians and the Chief Minister, at COAG level, has been working extremely hard at a very high-level, complex set of negotiations to deliver for Territorians. It is easy to carve it up and run it down with a one-line anecdote; it is easy to paint a picture that the Territory is falling apart, but I do not see it that way. I see that this move into national health reform is building government strategies to continue to grow the Territory, particularly in closing the gap of Indigenous disadvantage.
I find this exciting. I find this very challenging. I find it a place where we have to go; where we go with goodwill and we look to do things better. We have strong plans and a clear vision for the future, and a healthy Territory is a vital policy initiative of this government.
I am very proud of the Chief Minister for the extremely complex work he has done and his articulation of the unique Territory health circumstances. The Barkly is a good example of that. People living in the bush and in regional areas do not have the same access to health services as those in major centres. The member for Braitling clicks his fingers and delivers an obstetrician and a paediatrician into a regional area. This government is working hard to deliver health services through creative measures; no finger clicking, no idle promises, and no cheap one-liners. We are doing the hard yards to deliver sustainable health outcomes and services. It is easy to call people names, and it is easy to run people down, but it is much harder …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr McCARTHY: … if you want to work in delivery. You can bang on all you like with the interjections, because all it says is that talk is cheap. The business of government is very hard, indeed.
I am particularly interested in the national reform focusing on improved primary healthcare, and I heard it said in debate that this does not mean anything. What does it mean? I tell you what primary healthcare means, and the bottom line is prevention is better than cure. The Northern Territory is well versed to focus on primary healthcare as a way forward in delivering better health outcomes for Territorians and closing the gap on Indigenous health.
We are also focused, through national reform, on improved hospital care, region by region. There is no doubt the Territory faces complicated and unique issues. Solutions are generally not easy and they are usually very expensive.
An example is Territory Budget 2010-11, which I am very excited about, where we talk about a real need for Territorians - particularly in my electorate of the Barkly, and others - for delivering better facilities and more resources, with $12.5m for the Tennant Creek Hospital. We are talking about a contrast in increasing expenditure, budget by budget. We are talking about work started on expanding the eight station renal dialysis into a 16 station dialysis unit, with the ability to manage 64 patients, and it is expected the facility will be operational by January 2011. So there is a combination of dollars and outcomes. There is the combination of inputs that deliver outcomes. The delivery for renal patients in the Barkly is superb; the quality of life this provides constituents from the Barkly region is incredible. It is hard to put a price on it, but you do not get very far without a price, and that price is delivering for renal dialysis patients in the Barkly. I am very proud to be part of a government which has delivered that.
In addition, extra staff have been provided to the unit to expand existing services, including an administration officer and dialysis nurse to expand and support renal patients to remain in Tennant Creek. That is good news for Tennant Creek and the Barkly. However, what was agreed to last week was even more significant; it was historic. This historic agreement has committed to an unprecedented doubling of GP training places, 50% of which will be dedicated to regional and rural areas. This is how we deliver our obstetricians; this is how we deliver our health professionals - we grow our own. This is a major initiative which will set the Territory up for the future.
There is a young woman in the Barkly electorate who I had the fortune to employ as a casual in the electorate office. She is busy at university in Newcastle studying medicine. She was born and bred in Tennant Creek and she has an ambition to come back to Tennant Creek to work in Indigenous health; she is a shining star. What this agreement does is start to make that easier, and start to multiply that effect which will deliver real outcomes. That is real future planning. This is not a one-liner, knee-jerk reaction, this is planning for regional and remote areas which will sustain our health professionals into the future.
We also see the new Flinders University NT medical program with Charles Darwin University, which will mean 40 doctors graduating in the Territory every year from 2015. Well done, Charles Darwin University! That is a great outcome for Territory kids. And, of course, I want to see extra doctors in the Barkly. Locally trained doctors in the Territory will be fantastic for young Territorians.
The member for Braitling, when he blows in and out of Tennant Creek with his promises …
Mr Conlan interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! Member for Greatorex!
Mr McCARTHY: He neglects any sustainability in his plans. He neglects a plan which will actually deliver, and he ignores the important part of growing our own Territorians …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Greatorex! Order, Leader of Government Business!
Mr McCARTHY: Locally trained doctors in the Territory will be fantastic. The added benefit is locally trained staff are more likely to stay in the Territory and to work to help Territorians ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, resume your seat. Honourable members, there is only 20 minutes until we adjourn the House and the minister has the call. At the moment there has been a debate between two members which is completely unparliamentary. I ask both of you to cease interjecting. Member for Greatorex, you are on a warning. Minister, you have the call
Mr McCARTHY: We know our health system is unique, with many Territorians living remotely with services being delivered in the bush, and Indigenous health issues challenging. I welcome the federal government having the courage to take an active role in helping all Territorians and providing additional funds to the Territory. $208m injected into the Territory’s health system over 10 years means more money for Territorians health - more operations, more beds, more doctors - reducing disadvantage and closing the gap.
I would like to touch on block funding mentioned in the debate. Within this agreement the Commonwealth has also agreed to provide 60% of block funding for agreed functions and services and community service obligations required to support small, regional and rural public hospitals like Tennant Creek. This is a critical requirement for the Territory, and will ensure we can continue to provide and boost hospital services, not just in my electorate, but in Katherine and Nhulunbuy as well. The Commonwealth government will also heavily invest in research and training. Creating equitable access to public hospitals for Australians is the core design intention of this national health and hospital agreement. This funding approach will be of particular benefit in regional and remote areas, particularly for disadvantaged groups.
I will also comment on local involvement. Importantly, in regional areas we will retain the responsibility of managing the hospital system independent from the Commonwealth. We want to do this in partnership with industry experts, local people and hospital staff. I welcome the Chief Minister’s commitment to the establishment of a single local hospital network. In regional areas, we do not see that as people from outside running our system; we look at it from a positive perspective - unusual coming from this side of the House, eh?
Members interjecting.
Mr McCARTHY: We look at it from a positive perspective; how to learn from others. It is a pity I cannot learn much from over there.
We focus on learning from each other industry best practice. People who know how to do this work can help people like us living in regional and remote areas. Likewise, we can demonstrate initiatives and good operational procedures. We can demonstrate good outcomes which can be shared up the line as well as down the line; so it is about Territorians sharing. It is new, it is innovative, it is a national reform; it is big; it is bold. It is something this side of the House has had the courage to take on and the determination to drive through.
I believe our hospitals will benefit from improving the linkages between each of our five hospitals with a single board of governance to oversight the operation of the local hospital network. This will ensure that hospitals are able to benefit from the successful programs and trials delivered by other institutions. The hospital network will also provide an effective means of engaging with the local community and locals to improve the day-to-day operations of our regional hospitals.
Madam Speaker, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is a good agreement for the Territory, an agreement which will mean more resources for healthcare in the Territory, and recognition of the special needs of regional and remote Australia. Most important to all of this is this agreement will make a substantial difference to the lives of Territorians.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, tonight I wish to speak about the Chief Minister’s statement and to provide some level of debate in regard to health services in Australia.
No one anywhere would ever deny that we would like to provide health services better. I have heard it said from time to time - even the previous Health Minister said that health can be an endless bucket - you could throw as much money at it as you want and still not achieve all the services that people may want or need.
However, the point here is about money. Something we have heard time and time again is this government feels if you continue to throw money at it you will get the outcomes. That is certainly not true; it is how it is spent that is important. I had a recent debate with my father about a number of issues and, for the record, my father is a devout Labor supporter so our debates are quite interesting, as you might appreciate. The reality is, as I said to Dad, it is not how much money you spend, it is how it is spent that is important as well as looking at the goals and the purpose for which you want to spend that money.
I have seen recently, with a number of people who have talked to me about their health issues, how we need to fix things, how we need to make things better. Again, I stress the point, I do not think there is anyone in this room, probably no one in Australia, who does not believe in the ideology that we would like to improve health services; no one is going to disagree with that.
I suppose what we find difficult to understand is how we are supposed to make an informed decision with so little detail. We have seen it here today where a PowerPoint presentation is provided as enough detail to make an informed decision. I am truly hoping the Labor government in the Northern Territory has been given far more information than we have been provided with on this side of the House. I would hate to think a decision which signs so many of our rights away has been made on so little information or no more than a handshake. Perhaps if it was shaking the hand of someone on this side of the House, you may trust it; however, the record shows the federal Labor government and many of the policies of this Labor government have not been very successful.
To go one step further, we have all perhaps, in our lifetimes, bought a house, a car, a motorbike, or something where a contract was signed. We have all heard, time and time again: ‘read the fine line, read the fine print, read the document’. A contract is something that binds many people for a long time; if it is a mortgage it could be 20, 25 years, or even longer. This contract seems to bind the Territory, and other states, for just as long, if not longer. I would hate to think a decision has been made on something which can have an impact for so long with so little detail.
It is also sad to see our own Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd - I must admit, the only time I have seen Mr Rudd recently has been in a television frame at a hospital talking to elderly patients and to other patients. It is sad the reforms he is talking about will, perhaps, take longer to implement than some of these people may live. That is a sad situation to have.
How can you seriously expect any fair-minded person to make a decision, given the information provided so far? I cannot help but be cynical because of the demonstration I have seen from federal governments and from this Northern Territory Labor government. I cannot understand - and perhaps this is the elephant in the room - how people do not understand if you are, basically, taking 30% of what we already get and, then, have it given back to us in health services, it is no different. It is a money change, or exchange, rather than new money for new and improved services - you give with one hand, and you take with the other.
I have heard it mentioned here before. The member for Sanderson talked about the billions which have flowed into the Territory since the GST was introduced, and this government has had more money than any previous government in the Northern Territory. I have also heard the argument that, under the Howard government, billions were stripped from health services across the country. Directly, that may have been the case but, indirectly it is not correct because, if you have an increase in GST funding, it is then up to the local administration to manage that money, and to manage it well. From what we have witnessed and from what we hear from people who talk to us every single day, it is not managed well. Therefore, the services, the outcomes being provided, perhaps are not good value for money.
What really worries me is the federal administration expects us to believe they can do better than local jurisdictions can or will do. I have heard it said in the past that local government is out of touch, state and territory governments have no idea, and federal governments, well, they are right off this planet.
We have seen a demonstration from the federal government in recent times, from the federal intervention and initiatives such as laptops for every student in schools, fail. We found so many holes in the education revolution program which really only achieved about 50% real improvement in the infrastructure at 100% cost. There is one Sydney media personality, Ray Hadley, who has been on to this for some time now, and every single day there are more and more terrible examples of wasted money. It is important. I know as a chair of a primary school council that fought for a long time to get additional resources and infrastructure for schools in Palmerston, to hear of what is no less than wanton waste or a basic rip-off around the country is very sad, because you know what you could do with proper administration; you know what you could achieve with proper management. That was a hell of a lot of money, and it could have done so much more.
The Deputy Prime Minister talked about an education revolution. No one is going to deny any school does not love new equipment, does not love new infrastructure such as a cover over a basketball court but, you know, it does not make someone spell better, it does not make someone count better. How they can call that an education revolution is bizarre - absolutely bizarre. It is great, you can play basketball when it is raining, and there are perhaps some new classrooms being built, but it was such a quickly rolled out program that I believe it has created far more problems, and will leave us with a debt for many years. In fact, some of these children who are in primary schools today will be paying this debt back for years to come in taxes and so forth, just to get this country back where it should be in regard to finances.
The insulation story: another example that I know others have talked of here today, but I am repeating this as an example of federal administration failing. We are to believe if the feds take over health, we are going to get a better service at the local level. I just cannot subscribe to that kind of thinking. I know if you have someone who is in touch, who knows what is going on at the Alice Springs Hospital, who is in touch and knows what is happening at Tennant Creek, and knows what is happening here in Darwin, they are going to be far closer to the situation than some bureaucrat sitting in Canberra.
SIHIP is another story and, as I said before, the insulation program, again, has cost millions. I only learned last week in one of the debates I had with my father that the next door neighbour had been approached by a company to put insulation in their home. It was a rented property and they said: ‘It is okay, you can just sign here and we will go ahead and put the insulation in’. The person renting the property signed the information, the batts were dropped off and, basically, the owner came along and said: ‘I do not want them in my house’. So the batts stayed there and the batts are still there; they have not been put into a home, but the company would have signed off on the $1200 and they would have their money. To have no checks and balances is just a remarkable situation. It is sad that people have been killed in the course of their duties, and we do not know for many years we could still have house fires. We could have so many issues because of that one program - that ill-thought out program, mismanaged, which goes to the highest level - another bad reflection and another bad example of federal administration.
Childcare centres: we have just had another backflip from the federal government that is no longer going to provide these much-needed childcare centres. I know here in the Northern Territory we are fortunate enough to get an additional two, but around the country well over 200 childcare centres will not be built now because of a change of thinking, if you like, from the federal Labor government.
And now, of course, we have climate change - the greatest moral dilemma of our time, the Prime Minister said. I do not know about you …
A member: Immediate action is what is required.
Mr CHANDLER: Right - immediate action. But something that affects you at that level and you believe is a moral obligation, is not something you put off for two or three years. It is something you actually have to focus on; if it is something that affects you at the core, something that is morally wrong. Again, if that has not been done for political purposes, I do not know what has. I sincerely believe this health reform is nothing but a political ploy to remove the focus of a failed administration, not only from the federal level, but many states around Australia. This is the administration that we have been asked, as residents of this great nation, to trust. The great moral dilemma: we will put it back a few years. Insulation was a sad story, along with SIHIP, childcare centres, education revolution, laptops, greener energy, GroceryWatch, FuelWatch - a media cycle of 24 hours, time for a new story.
As I said, over the last couple of weeks all I have seen of our Prime Minister is in hospitals talking to people. I will say it again: there would not be a person in this room or anywhere who would not like to see medical services provided at a higher level than they are today. If this has the potential to deliver that, I do not believe, again, there would be a person who would not welcome it. But, where is the detail? Have faith. A religious person has faith, and that is what you are asking us to have here, but you have not shown or demonstrated anywhere near the level of confidence one would expect - just to go along blindly and follow faithfully. I believe you are asking this side of the House, and the residents of Australia, too much.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: We need to adjourn the debate first.
Mr ELFERINK: Has the question been put, or is the debate being adjourned?
Madam SPEAKER: No. Are you moving the debate be adjourned?
Mr ELFERINK: Someone should move debate be adjourned.
Dr BURNS: I apologise, Madam Speaker, I move that debate be adjourned.
Debate adjourned.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
I would like to mention the great people who invest their time and efforts into their children by nominating for school councils, and going to meetings to ensure they are aware of what is happening in the schools their children attend. I congratulate the members of the school councils for their commitment to the running of their local school or college.
At Casuarina Senior College, Ms Julie Donohoe was again elected as Chairman for the 2010 council, together with Adam Walding, Deputy Chair; Elise Dungey, Treasurer; and Louise Manhire as Secretary. The members of the council are Cindy Impelmans, Sigrid Evans, Dorothee Williams, Janet Schmidt, Lisa Rothwell, Roslyn Ther, Marilyn Galt, as well as Carly Donohue and Lindsey Albion as teacher representatives, with student representatives Alastair Scott, Irini Pikoulos and Michelle Sa Pereira.
Representing the Jingili School community, I congratulate Mrs Tracy Rowlands on her election as Chair, along with Mrs Tracey Mehonoshen, Deputy Chair; Miss Leisa Sjaardema, Treasurer; Ms Ambrie Tracy, Secretary, Mrs Brigitte Grahl, Mrs Rhianna Suttie-Gunson, Mrs Jane Fryar, Mrs Sue Hunt, Ms Jo Townsend, Ms Claudia Sepulveda, Mr Michael De Luca, Dr Jo Walsh, Dr Josh Davis, Ms Tara Metcalf and Mrs Kate Worden as parent representatives.
The Moil School Council’s AGM saw the election of Mr Michael McRostie as Chairperson; Tim Cross as Vice Chairperson; Matthew Peachey as Secretary, Jodi-Anne Williamson as Treasurer, with parent representatives Sandra Papandonakis, Rebecca and Damian Worley, Christa Bollman and Felicity and Phillip Hargrave.
At Millner Primary School, Cathy Spurr continues to chair, with support from Sam Wells as Secretary, Julie Frazer as Treasurer, Tanya Sloan, fundraising officer, and Jessica McCaul is the teacher representative.
Wagaman school council is this year chaired by Rose McKenzie, with Sylvia Mavros as the Vice Chairperson; Annie Boast, Secretary; Marie Porta, Treasurer; Katie Karamanakis, Suvi Higlett, Effie Nowlan and Gemma Hunter as parent representatives.
There is no doubt all these people will do a fantastic job running their respective school councils, fundraising, guiding, planning and ensuring the wellbeing of the school community. I wish them well.
Harmony Day events in March are always among my favourites, and I was able to spend this year’s events with kids at both Jingili and Wagaman Primary Schools. The Jingili School Community International Markets were extremely well attended by students, teachers and parents. The general Jingili community always turns up in great numbers to enjoy the great variety of food and beverages, and to enjoy the great entertainment provided by the kids. There were many activities for everyone to enjoy in the spirit of harmony, fun and wellbeing. It was a great evening to be involved in and, as a major fundraiser for the school, it was deemed a great success. Congratulations to the organisers and everyone who participated.
Wagaman also had an evening of food, crafts, entertainment and family activities with everyone wearing orange as a symbol of their support and community spirit. It was great to go along there. I was slightly late because I had already been to Jingili, but it was really good to see the kids running around, enjoying their school facilities in this exciting and different environment.
I had the great opportunity of presenting badges to the student leaders at Millner Primary School, and wish to congratulate the SRC members on their election. Congratulations go to Nicki Pastrikos and Cameron Croker voted in as the School Captains, Mai Rose as Vice School Captain, and the body of the Representative Council comprising Moe Min, Tylyn Hudson, Shaine Taborada, Rhyan Lee, Akeem Millar, Jessica Nelson, Ryan Beltran, Kyla Fang, Samantha Woodbridge and Annelise Kowcun.
Also to be congratulated are the House and Vice Captains selected for 2010. Jabiru House Captains, Jessica Powell and Moran Sailor, with Vice Captains, Jade Devery and Samantha Woodbridge; Dingo House Captains, Sean Hopkins and Hayden Jones, with Vice Captains, Marcus Kirkman and Annie Jones; Crocodile House elected Emily Stephenson and Tahlina Chilcott as Captains, and Sarah Kirwan and Adam Thomas as their Vice Captains. Well done, and enjoy your year.
At Moil Primary School congratulations went to Sean Johnston and Minette Sarsaba as the Byrne Barras Captains; Yazmine Kilmartin and Kelly Makrylos in Linde Lorikeets; Kailin Rae and Xavier Cubillo of the Wilson Wallabies; and Taylor Finn and Bryan Elivera of the Greenwood Greenants. I am sure these captains will also have an enjoyable and successful year.
Elected to the Student Representative Council for Moil in 2010 were Tori Cubillo, Matthew Chapman, Jason O’Meara, Ruby Hargrave, Isha Ampeloquio, Dannika Walsh, Aimee Manulid and Bless Santos.
At Wagaman Primary School on the executive, elected members are: President, Samantha Martin; Vice President, Joshua Kelleher; Treasurer, Cecilia Bernadino; and Secretary, Maria Korfias. The Class Representatives are Year 3/4 Ramsay, Jennifer Ashton and Denzel Parnell; Year 3/4 McLean, Akaydia Austral and Tory Kiely-Leger; Year 4/5 McCrie/Higgins, Alisa Mai, Oliver Markey, Olga Santos and Kobe Greenoff; Year 5/6 Fox-Woodford, Ben Jackson and Ricki Agapito; and Year 5/6 Van Den Elzen, Ashlee Munday and Zac Nurton.
Finally, the Jingili School Community Student Representative Council is ably served by Marrisa Higgins, Shayala Carne, Michelle Lu, Jasmine Ristevski, Saun Franklin, Chelsea Taylor, Melanie Lu, Jackson Dempster, Ackbar Sunderland, Bella Davis, Nicholas Lee, Sam Schofield-Flynn, Ophelia Muslin-Mathers and Leonie Higgins.
I also mention those students who were awarded my Quiet Achievers book vouchers for Term 1: Aidan Cotton and Bethany White of Moil; Te-Leah Pollard and Myles Turner of Millner; Grace Lewers and Damien Williams Year 2/3C of Wagaman; and Samantha Hunt and Malik Taylor of Jingili. So, a lot of fantastic students who are all contributing to the school community.
Out in the community, I have had the pleasure of attending many events during the week and on weekends. Over the last couple of months these have included the International Women’s Day at the Cyprus Community Centre; National Greek Day on 20 March; the Irish Association’s St Patrick’s Day celebration; the Kalymnian Brotherhood Easter lunch for seniors at the Kalymnian Hall; the Harmony Day Soiree put on by the Darwin City Council; the Greek Easter Festival at East Point; the fantastic Superbikes; and the Coconut Grove Seniors sausage sizzle for Anzac Day last week, which was a great event and we all had a great sing-along. I also had the pleasure of joining the Australia-Burma Friendship Association of the NT at the Thingyan Water Festival at the Jingili Water Gardens. I will have more detail on that last event at the next adjournment.
Madam Deputy Speaker, once again, it is great to be the member for Johnston; I enjoy all the functions in my electorate, in the schools and out in the community, and it is really great to get into the swing of things again, come the Dry Season.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, a tear welled in my eye as the Last Post and Reveille sounded at the morning service at the 2010 Anzac Day commemoration in Katherine. It was the second time that day I heard the bugler calling for the end of the day’s military activities, and then for the troops to awaken at sunrise. I am sure it was the same tear that welled at the Dawn Service, and when I heard the crowd clapping as our soldiers marched down the main street. I have to admit, I find it hard not to get a little emotional on Anzac Day. In fact, the older I get, the more strongly I feel about what Anzac Day means to me. I know why; and it is called perspective.
On 25 April 1915, and in the following days, some 20 000 Australian and New Zealand troops landed at what has been named Anzac Cove as a part of the military campaign to try to take the Gallipoli Peninsula from Turkey. Mistakes were made in the planning of the operation and the troops found themselves landed in the wrong location facing steep cliffs instead of flat beaches. There was a constant barrage of enemy fire and shelling, and thousands died. Our Diggers held firm and advanced where they could in a campaign that lasted until 20 December 1915, some eight months.
Reinforcements arrived, only to suffer at the hands of overwhelming disadvantage. At the end of the stalemate, when troops were withdrawn, some 8700 Australians had died, plus a further 2721 New Zealanders, which made up almost a quarter of all those killed. A further 18 000 troops were wounded. It is the courage, the strength, the tenacity of our ANZAC soldiers which sets the standard to which we should all aspire - not just as soldiers, but in all aspects of our lives.
Of course, the security and preservation of our freedom rests not solely on the backs of the ANZACs. Australian troops and the tri-forces of the ADF have fought and died in many military conflicts around the globe: World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, and Afghanistan - the list goes on. I acknowledge the Australian troops, including some from the RAAF Base at Tindal, and those posted to Darwin regiments who are currently either serving, or on exercise, on foreign soil. We remember them also for their contribution. On Anzac Day, we remember them all and pay our deepest thanks and gratitude for fighting and dying for our great country.
I have been attending Anzac Day in Katherine for the past seven years or so, and have noticed a wonderful trend - that more and more people are coming to join the commemoration each and every year; and I know this is a trend right across the country. This year, the Dawn Service in Katherine was incredibly well-attended - more, I believe, than in any year I have been going to services in Katherine. The mid-morning service was the same; there were at least 600 people, maybe more. I estimate that to be around 6% of the town’s population coming to remember the fallen. That is an outstanding effort, and so nice to see many children and young people taking an interest in those, past and present, who protect our freedom and our way of life.
As a leader in our community, I felt an enormous sense of pride in our town as we rolled out in those numbers. Yet, there are still a few who would see Anzac Day as a glorification of war. There are others who would debase the men and women who fought and died in defence of our great nation, and for our freedom and way of life - only for the reason that they disagree with the political decisions of the day to send our troops into conflicts around the globe.
As recently as last night, I was watching an ABC program, Q & A, where a panel of recognised people field and answer questions on a variety of topics. Last night’s program was centred on Anzac Day and the involvement of Australians in other armed conflicts since World War I. I was appalled to hear a number of the panellists engaged in the debasement of our brave men and women members of the Australian Defence Forces. Yet, these people who would attack our troops and sully the Anzac legend, still live in a country under a regime of safety and security the very people they choose to vilify fought for and died to maintain. Fortunately, the number of people who feel that way are just a few.
My thanks to the Katherine RSL Sub-Branch, particularly Mark Hagar, John Raynor and Barbara Morthorpe, for making the day such a success. Thanks also to RAAF Base Tindal, particularly Wing Commanders Phil Arms and Rohan Gaskill, and the men and women who participated in the march and both of the services. Thanks also to the schoolchildren who did a beautiful job in laying wreaths; and thanks to the Katherine Lodge for the respect you have shown to the men and women of our armed services.
I mentioned before that I thought around 60% of Katherine’s population attended the services this year. I would now like to add the perspective of which I spoke earlier. I quote from the Australian War Memorial website:
If I put that into percentages, more than 8% of Australia’s population at the time was enlisted to fight in the war. More than 1% of our entire population was killed, and around 3% of the entire population of Australia at the time was wounded. With a current population of around 23 million, would you ever imagine 1% of our population dying in a single military conflict? I will let you do the math; it would come to a number greater than the number of people who live in the entire Northern Territory.
I am sure we all hope for a time when there are no wars to fight but, in the meantime, our servicemen and women continue to risk their lives so we can continue to live in this great land. They deserve our ongoing praise and support.
In military tradition, the Last Post is the bugle call which signifies the end of the day’s military activities, but it is also sounded at military funerals to indicate that the soldier has gone to his final rest. Lest we forget.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Deputy Speaker, I too would like to speak about Anzac Day in the adjournment debate tonight. I thank the member for Katherine for speaking to this House about how Katherine commemorated Anzac Day this year. I am sure in all of our towns across the Territory there were similar numbers of people who turned out, because Anzac Day is one of Australia’s most important and treasured national occasions.
Anzac Day goes beyond the anniversary of the landing on Gallipoli in 1915. It is the day we remember all Australians who served and died in all wars and conflicts. Like the member for Katherine, I have been thinking about it a lot. At the moment, I am reading a biography on John Monash, the first Australian Commander in World War I, after Gallipoli, who managed to talk the British generals and the Australian Prime Minister of the day into commanding an entire division of Australian forces for the first time on the battlefields on the Western Front in France.
As a man 47 years of age whose father and great grandfather served and fought in World War II and World War I - my great grandfather did not fight in Gallipoli; he was in the British Army and was a tailor behind the lines fixing up uniforms - the older I get, the more I read about conflicts and thank the Lord that I have never been called upon to serve. In reading Monash’s biography at the moment, trying to put yourself into the shoes of those men, not only in Gallipoli, but in the Western Front in France and the horror, the insanity, the madness, and the tragedy of it all, is really quite remarkable.
In the space of the history of time 95 years is not a great deal of time and we, as Australians, should never ever forget the sacrifices people made, not only in World War I, but all conflicts that have come since then. You only have to look at the thousands of Territorians who turned out on Sunday to realise the ANZAC spirit is gaining strength and is stronger then ever. I am sure, like many people, I am always impressed to see our young people turning out more and more; our students in school uniforms coming together as school groups, family groups of different generations coming together. It is an inspiration to see.
I attended and laid the first wreath at the Darwin Dawn Service and I then attended the service after the march in Palmerston. During Sunday’s ceremony in Palmerston, I announced the inaugural Chief Minister’s Spirit of Anzac Study Tour. This will become an annual award, the aim which is to encourage young Territorians to explore the role our Defence Forces have played in our history. The tour will provide an opportunity for three young Territory high school students to visit the battlefields in France. The winners of the 2010 Spirit of Anzac Study Tour Award will visit Villers-Bretonneux in France to learn more about the sacrifices made by our veterans, and keep their memories alive in our communities. This was a war we remember was to be the war that ended all wars and, tragically, it did not.
Villers-Bretonneux holds a special bond for Australia. Plaques at the school and town hall proudly declare: ‘Never forget Australia’. As I am reading John Monash’s biography, I am learning it really was the Australian troops who turned the tide on those battlefields on the Western Front in France. They were the crack troops that went above and beyond the call of duty to push the Germans back and, ultimately, defeat them and liberate France, and France today still proudly acknowledges our ANZAC heroes as well. The names of some 11 000 Australian soldiers who died in France during World War I are listed at the town’s war memorial. We heard the member for Katherine talk about the 60 000 who lost their lives; 11 000 names on one war memorial wall in a small town in France is an extraordinary number.
The students will participate in an Anzac Day Dawn Service in Villers-Bretonneux, followed by visits to other significant sites. On their return to the Territory, the students will be required to make presentations to community groups of the impact on themselves, as students, and what they have learned from the study tour. The students who have the opportunity to go to Villers-Bretonneux will see parts of the world they have never seen and develop a more personal understanding of our history and the sacrifices made by our people who have gone before us.
The students will be invited to submit an essay, a poem, a video or a website project to address the question: what inspiration does the legend of ANZAC provide for young people in the 21st century? The award will be open to all Year 9 and 10 students currently enrolled in a Territory school, and those nominations close on 31 August 2010. The winning students will be announced by 30 September 2010, and the winning students will be chaperoned by a teacher, and a member of the Australian Defence Forces.
I have written to the Commander of NORCOM, David Gwyther, and also Lofty Plane, from the RSL, to ask for nominations from both our Defence Forces and the RSL to be on the judging panel for this award as well as, hopefully, trying to find – I have a name in mind - a great history teacher from the Northern Territory to be on the judging panel. The Spirit of Anzac prize is both a fantastic opportunity and a great responsibility for our young Territorians who will receive this award. I encourage all Territory high school students to apply. Further information and application forms are available at the www.anzacspirit.nt.gov.au website.
In conclusion, it was inspirational to hear from the member for Katherine. I am sure members in other regional communities around the Territory talk about the thousands of Territorians who have turned out. I believe it is incumbent on all of us, as leaders in our community and also as parents, to ensure that future generations never forget the ultimate sacrifice so many hundreds of thousands of Australians have made over many conflicts, in all wars, the ultimate sacrifice of laying down their lives for their country and for what they believe. Lest we forget.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk about a group in the rural area and the good work they do in caring for their community. The Gathering Incorporated is a not-for-profit Christian organisation or, as it is also called, the Bush Baptist Church. All the people who help support the organisation are volunteers and there are about 30 people in total. These people work tirelessly and long hours and, on occasion, late into the night, when their help is required. The main service is handing out food parcels to those in need; however, they also do counselling, mediation, perform a variety of social work activities, network with relevant organisations and hand out clothes and furniture when possible, when they receive these much-needed donations.
They have a strong focus on young people and operate a boxing club for youth, a craft group for young people, and a youth drop-in centre. The Bush Church has a holistic approach to their clientele. Last financial year, they catered for 1112 clients, which were mostly families - over 1000 families in need - and this year to date they have already exceeded last year’s numbers and we still have three months or so to go.
The number of families in need is alarming and should make alarm bells ring and the government notice the general health and wellbeing of our rural community people. To gather these numbers the organisation does keep records of the people they help and to whom they hand parcels; hence, the figures are accurate and, sadly, they are increasing. Apart from clients coming for food, there has been an increase in people needing shelter, homeless people sleeping under the centre’s patio area, clients needing budgeting help, and a steep increase in domestic violence evidenced by women coming to the centre for refuge and for help.
The Bush Church now services families in need in the Berry Springs area and also Corroboree and Marrakai areas. Berry Springs had around 10 families coming for food each week. Lately, this has increased to 20-plus families and the church has not had enough food to meet the demand. Sadly, there are people who have been knocked back or turned away for food parcels who are not people on unemployment benefits or pensions necessarily, just ordinary people and families who cannot make ends meet. Being more isolated, their counselling and social welfare needs are much higher in the Humpty Doo area per client.
Corroboree has only been operating for a month, and now that it is established the church will promote the support and assistance to people. The reason the church was asked to start operating in Corroboree was because there were no social services there, and there are high levels of domestic violence and social upheaval with many families. Given that there are around 1000 people living in the Corroboree and Marrakai area, few services and support are provided by government, hence, these groups take it on themselves to step up to try to deliver some services and support. Recently, the volunteer staff are under increasing pressure. They are using their private vehicles for food delivery, and are now having to travel longer distances and take more time to get there. It is a full-time job doing the social work and networking clients to appropriate services and mediation.
At the centre in Humpty Doo, they have a large shed and patio area and some storage facilities. This is inadequate given the demand on their services and their supplies, organising accommodation, and being concerned for the clients who are sleeping under the patio, as such accommodation is not suitable and the clients are often scared and feeling insecure as the area is totally open.
The group, the church, is overburdened with administration as the organisation is now networking and coordinating four outlets, including a long grass food service in the Parap area and in Palmerston. There is a growing lack of affordable accommodation in the rural area, resulting in single people, men, youths, and domestic violence victims sleeping in the church’s open patio area, using the shower and toilet. They have been able to offer some of these people food, clothing and, perhaps, a frying pan to cook on and a couch to sleep on, albeit very temporary. This has not been advertised at all, and they have many people desperate for immediate and temporary accommodation. There is also a growing need for youth accommodation, even though many of the young people are reluctant to ask for help because they have some fear of the authorities, that they may be turned in and taken away from their homes or the rural area.
A big and growing part of the organisation’s program is their youth activities, including their boxing program which is carefully run under the guidance of James Swan, who travels a few times a week from his home in Malak to work with young people in the Humpty Doo and Noonamah areas. For all this work in the community and provision of key health and community services, The Gathering Incorporated receives the small, paltry sum of $10 000 a year from government emergency service funds - they receive no other government assistance - to aid over 2513 clients. And remember, clients are a family unit.
If you work on an average of 100 clients per week, the total number of predicted clients by the end of the financial year, 1 July, will be at least 3713. A client usually represents a family group, so that is approximately 14 852 people. Government assistance per person is around 67 per person - which is very sad.
The church is currently preparing submissions to government, the Health department and others, to seek funding support to continue and to expand their services and support, particularly in the area of young people. I urge the minister, when they receive the submissions and the request, to not only consider their request favourably, but to take time to really understand what this Bush Baptist Church does and to look at their facilities in Humpty Doo and see firsthand what this amazing group does - what can only be called running their operations on the sniff of an oily rag. I do not believe that is acceptable or good enough. They deserve better and more, and the government needs to talk with them about exactly what is happening underneath life in the rural area. We need to address it, and we need to make it better, and we need to make it better quickly.
Finally, I pay tribute to one of the main coordinators of the Bush Baptist Church, a woman, Sharon Crook, and her family, for their tireless work and commitment to helping others always and continuously. She and her family are truly inspirational. They do this work just as they go about their daily business, in addition to running a business so she can support herself and her family. Well done to them.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask the government to seriously consider their request when they receive it in the very near future.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Deputy Speaker, I attended the Palmerston Dawn Service on Anzac Day and I would like to read an address given by Lieutenant-Colonel Scott Watkins DFC, Chief of Staff, 1st Brigade, at Robertson Barracks - a very moving speech:
Lest we forget.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I also wish to speak to the House in relation to Anzac Day. Anzac Day is a day I enjoy to go along and to remember. It is the reason I am able to stand in this House and speak freely.
I enjoy being able to have a solemn day where I can remember my own journey on Anzac Day from a child of two years of age, just short of my third birthday. That was the first Anzac Day Dawn Service I went to. It was in King’s Park in Perth, Western Australia, and I recall very fondly sitting on my dad’s shoulder walking up King’s Park Road to the war memorial and not quite knowing what it was all about, but hanging on for dear life.
My dad was a big man, taller than me, and sitting on his shoulders I had one of the finest views you could have of a large ex-soldier who went away and fought so we, to this day, can be free. He went to war after his own father had been to war only two decades earlier. It is with this I grew up; a grandfather who was severely injured in the war, came back, got together again but, unfortunately, his war injuries prevented him from living the sort of life I have been very privileged to live.
As a child I watched the thousands of returned servicemen and women from World War I who would gather on the Esplanade in Perth. Quite a bit further down the Esplanade, because there were thousands of ex-Diggers gathered there, my grandfather was with them; and further down my own father was with the World War II veterans. Every Anzac Day we would go to the Dawn Service, and it is a tradition I have been proud to have kept up all my life. I have only missed probably three or four Anzac Day Dawn Services either through illness, through shift work or the one year we had a cyclone. In 2007, I missed the Dawn Service in Darwin because I was actually in Gallipoli at the Dawn Service there on Anzac Day.
When you grow up with these things you come to understand it is not the glorification of war; it is the celebration of peace. I recall my father, on numerous occasions when I asked him about the war, was reluctant to talk about it. What he did talk about was the freedom we enjoyed, not the horrors of war. In his last six months of life he handed me photographs in a little grey box which was tucked away where no one would ever find them. They were not of the horrors of war; they were of the mateship of war. Many were taken in Darwin prior to leaving Darwin to go to the islands to fight the Japanese.
It is quite interesting when you look at some of these photos because they are of old Darwin, old Adelaide River, Coomalie Creek, the airfields down there and the jungle camps that he and his engineer mates built so the troops could be well trained prior to leaving Darwin and heading off for the islands of New Guinea, New Britain and similar islands within the area occupied by the Japanese at that stage.
I was very proud again this year to turn up at the Dawn Service. Unfortunately, both my grandfather and my father have passed, but I was able to wear their medals. I promised my father that I would carry them for as long as I could and then I would pass them on to my children. When I turned up at the Dawn Service it was quite early but, as I looked around, I could see so many people at the Darwin Dawn Service and, I am reliably informed by my colleagues, that at Alice Springs, Palmerston, and Adelaide River the crowds there are actually increasing, not decreasing.
When I first came to Darwin, my first Dawn Service was in the early 1980s - 1982 I believe - and there were probably about 500 or 600 people at the Dawn Service in Darwin. The official figure this year was 8000 people. When I went to Gallipoli in 2007, there were 10 000 at Gallipoli. And here in Darwin, little old Darwin, we have 8000 people turn up at dawn to remember those who stood up for what they believed in and went and fought ...
Mr Mills: 7999.
Mr STYLES: The official figure is 7999. Well, there you go. Perhaps next year we can drag a few more along and push that figure towards the 10 000 mark.
It is fabulous, and it only happens because of the dedication of the people who make up the RSL, and courtesy of the Northern Territory governments of both persuasions over the years, and lots of volunteers who come along to create an environment where old Diggers, young Diggers and the cadets, who are the future Defence Forces of this country, can proudly walk down the street in their Anzac Day march.
I marched this Anzac Day, and I have not marched for a number of years. The last time I marched was when I was the commanding officer of the Darwin Air Cadets and it was a great pleasure and privilege to be able to lead those air cadets in the Anzac Day march. This year, the first in a number of years, a dear friend of mine, John Moyle, who is a World War II veteran, marched. He has a bit of a gammy knee, but he said that he wanted to march so I agreed I would walk behind him in case he started to stumble. He was the right marker of the march, strangely enough, and it was interesting that he set a cracking pace.
The band was playing and John, who is 91 years, was out there. I have to say that I had to put a bit of pace on, as we all did, to keep up with him. The man next to him was the same age as John and, between these two old Diggers, they set a cracking pace. He said he would like to march again next year, and one would hope that for years to come he still has that capacity to march. Such is the determination of the Diggers. I am sure they learned that self-discipline and the ability to keep going that was forged by the ANZAC tradition.
After the Dawn Service, we all gathered in town and listened to some stories and then, at the end of the march, gathered at the Darwin RSL. The crowds are a bit of an issue but, I am reliably informed, the RSL is very pleased they have the problem of not being able to fit sufficient people into Cavenagh Street or, in fact, into the RSL. It would be a terrible problem if they actually had spare room there, and it is great to see; and more so in my particular electorate.
From town, we moved out to the North Darwin RSL run by some fantastic people. The President, Merv Doyle, does a great job inspiring and leading others at the North Darwin RSL to keep that fledgling club going. It has been opened but it needs a bit of attention; it needs some assistance and all the support that we, as a community, can give. It is these people who provide a service to some of the old Diggers, the Vietnam Vets, and to quite a number of World War II vets who are still around. It is these people who need to be able to go somewhere where they are understood, where they have mates they can share stories with - people of like minds. It is to Merv Doyle and people who help him - Eve Sommich, and Wayne Kessell who runs the raffles and does so much in relation to recruiting members. It is fine to see some of these outstanding citizens of Darwin providing such a great service.
It is very important that we recall the sacrifices made by those. It reminds me of the old saying: we need to be forever vigilant. There is another saying that is universal which I once saw on the side of the bridge of an aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise, and I have never forgotten it. It says: In Strength there is Peace.
Madam Deputy Speaker, in this country we need to remain strong, because it really is true that in strength there is peace. I am very grateful to those who have given us the ability to be free and to have peace.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I congratulate a group of Centralian Middle School students, parents, and educators who are involved in an innovative program, Girls at the Centre.
The program began in 2008 when the Alice Springs Indigenous Education and Employment Task Force asked the Smith Family to design a program that would motivate young Indigenous girls to stay at school and boost their achievements. It began with around 37 girls and their families participating. Today, 49 girls at the Centralian Middle School have signed on to the program, with many more young women accessing the program on an informal basis.
Girls at the Centre conducts a range of activities which encourage the young women to achieve at school, build confidence, and develop goals for their future. The community is also encouraged to support the girls through activities like a breakfast with a mentor program, which I was very pleased to be able to participate in last year. I had a very enjoyable time meeting the girls and talking to them about their hopes and goals for the future.
I had the pleasure a month or two ago to be invited to the new Girls at the Centre facility at Centralian Middle School. It was great to see so many girls and their families there at the new room to not only take a look at the new facility, but to celebrate the achievements of the program and the young women. The Girls’ Room has been fully refurbished to suit the needs of the program, and is a safe place for the girls to gather and meet with one of the two full-time girl coaches who offer guidance and mentorship.
I acknowledge the great work done by the girls’ coaches, Shelly Caspani and Jodie Lennox. I also congratulate the Smith Family for their commitment to the Girls at the Centre program.
There were about 20 very excited girls at the recent celebratory barbecue, which was to celebrate the second anniversary of the program, when the Smith Family Regional Programs Manager, Catherine Phillips, announced the successful students for an upcoming mentor trip to Melbourne. The young women will leave for Melbourne in May, where they will be hosted by families from the Ruyton Girls’ School and the Korowa Anglican Girls’ School. This will be an amazing trip for many of the girls who were chosen on the basis of their commitment, efforts and behaviour at school. I look forward to visiting the girls at the Centre when they return, and hearing about the Melbourne trip which I am sure will inspire many of the young girls to further outstanding achievements. I also acknowledge the member for Braitling, who was also in attendance at the event.
I recently had the pleasure of attending the launch of the Centralian Girls Academy at the Centralian Senior Secondary College on Grevillea Drive in Alice Springs. The academy offers Indigenous and non-Indigenous girls aged between 12 and 17 opportunities to develop their sporting interests and encourage them to stay at school. As we have heard before in the House, the Clontarf programs have been very successful in assisting young Indigenous men reach these goals and I am very excited by the prospects of the academy and what it will offer young women.
The Centralian Girls Academy is one of four sporting academies to be created in the Northern Territory under a joint partnership between the Northern Territory government, the federal government, and private enterprise. Girls will be provided with specialist coaching in their chosen sport, as well as support and mentoring in life skills. The academy is auspiced by the Role Models WA organisation, under former Boomer, Ricky Grace, and Program Director, Terry Boland, who were both at the launch, and has had a positive impact in Western Australian schools.
While acknowledging the achievements of fellow Central Australians, I pass on my congratulations to a fellow Centralian whom members of this House would well know; that is, Alice Springs green thumb, Mr Geoff Miers. Geoff has taken out a significant national horticultural award at the recent Nursery and Garden Industries Australian Awards. Geoff and his team at Garden Solutions in Alice Springs, on Lindsay Avenue, have taken out the National Community Award, which shows their outstanding commitment to the local community. As a regular visitor to Geoff’s business, I know firsthand the great service and advice Geoff and his team give, particularly in relation to keeping the rose bush alive. Geoff is very well-known and respected as the local ABC talkback gardener, gives freely of his horticultural experience, and also assists with fundraising for community groups. Big congratulations to Geoff and the team at Garden Solutions.
Turning to my electorate of Stuart, first I bring to members’ attention a petition I am tabling on behalf of the Mataranka community. I will give members some background on Mataranka, which lies 100 km south of Katherine on the Stuart Highway, and is in my electorate of Stuart.
Mataranka is a thriving community of around 300 people with a number of economic industries, including tourism, a lime mine, and a pastoral and horticulture industry. One of those great tourism ventures is that of Claire and Mick O’Brien at Coodardie Station. Last year I had the pleasure of staying there and enjoying their great hospitality. Mataranka boasts a school of around 50 students, has its own Never Never Festival, which is coming up on 14 to 16 May, and a fantastic gymkhana and rodeo every year. There is also a Barra Bash, not to mention the Better Half Club which fundraises for a multitude of community organisations and individuals. As you can see with all these events, Mataranka is truly a strong community.
With the growth of Mataranka the community sees a need to access childcare, so it has taken the initiative of getting the process started with a petition to the Roper Gulf Shire with the end result of trying to acquire a childcare facility for the families in the town. Accessing adequate childcare is often an obstacle directly affecting a family’s ability to take part in employment, education and training. Childcare also allows the community to attract qualified professionals, and is often the issue that stops newcomers from choosing to work in regional areas such as Mataranka. Quality childcare benefits children with valuable early learning experiences which can contribute to the development of healthy intellectual and social skills.
While childcare is a responsibility of the federal government, the Northern Territory government realises it is a priority and plays an important part in the lifestyle of Territory residents. With young families moving to the Territory to take advantage of our great lifestyle and employment opportunities, particularly in the regions, they are often leaving their extended family support networks, making access to childcare even more a necessity. In support of childcare, the NT government is the only jurisdiction in Australia which pays a childcare subsidy directly to the operators of childcare centres.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I will table this petition from the residents of Mataranka, and with it my recognition and support that the development of a childcare facility is essential for the future development of the Mataranka community. As the local member, I have written to the federal government to ask for a childcare facility to be built at Mataranka, providing the township with this essential service to families. I table the petition.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak tonight on another occasion of the Treasurer’s rubbery figures.
We heard the Treasurer of the Northern Territory waxing lyrical today about the great and wonderful numbers which have come from Access Economics. It is what she did not say which is important, and should be important to members in this House, rather than what she did say. What she did not say was that the Gross State Product identified for the financial year 2009-10 by Access Economics is 0.3%. This is not what she forecast for Territorians, and it demonstrates her incapacity to effectively deal with her portfolio area.
I remind honourable members at page 12 of the document marked Northern Territory Economy from the 2009-10 Budget, where the predictor for this year’s forecast growth was 2%; we have not reached 2% forecast growth, we have barely scratched over zero. Whilst we heard the rather selective quote from the Treasurer today in relation to growth rates in the year 2000-01, and whilst she ignored all those other growth rates prior to that period, she neglected to tell Territorians that her performance was no better than that particular time which she lambasted as some great time of economic peril for the Northern Territory. It is dishonest, in the extreme, to deal with Territorians in that fashion.
Private equipment investment is down by 17.1% according to the Access Economic figures. I draw members’ attention to private investment in that budget paper I referred to before, where there was an anticipated shift, but nowhere near the 17% which has been identified in the Access Economics report. Private construction investment in the Northern Territory is down by a whopping 40.1%.
Whilst the government is prepared to stand here and tell Territorians at length what a great job they do as economic managers, what they have not been honest with Territorians about is not only were their predictions at the beginning of the financial year out, and the assertion they are doing a wonderful job when, in fact, they claim that the economy is their doing and their doing alone, the Treasurer needs to explain why she did not tell Territorians about a growth rate of 0.3%, and why she was only prepared to release those figures which suited her. It is not until you actually drill into the details of the Access Economics’ briefing, which has now been posted, that you get to see exactly where the Territory is positioned. It does not make for comfortable reading at all.
I am deeply disappointed the Treasurer of the Northern Territory, upon whom so many people rely for guidance in the economic performance of the Northern Territory, is prepared to be so disingenuous in the way she presents herself and the Northern Territory to them. Our reputation as honest and decent people as a government depends on the quality of the statements made by government.
Whilst it may, from time to time, be a bitter pill to swallow, we have to tell the truth, and sometimes the truth is not what we want it to be. To do what she did today was dishonest. It was dishonest with Territorians, and it was dishonest with other people who want to come to the Territory. Whilst one set of numbers may be annoying for government, it is better to be honest and swallow the occasional bitter pill, than to cast our reputation as honest governors of the Northern Territory to the four winds for the sake of a media release.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the Treasurer should be held to account by the people of the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk on several issues tonight. One is in relation to a book I was kindly asked to launch recently by Greening Australia called The Bush Book - A manual for managing native vegetation across northern Australia edited by Maria Kraatz, Peter Jacklyn and Mike Clark. It has contributions from about 70 people who have a love of native vegetation and who have lived in the Northern Territory for a long time. This is one of the best books I have ever seen printed in the Northern Territory because it covers nearly every aspect of the management of native vegetation in the north of Australia.
I gather it has taken 10 years to put this book together, so it is it is not something that has just occurred overnight. It talks about the climate we live in; how to get a plan of action together if you want to revegetate or manage your block; how to manage fire; the importance of fire and the importance of blanket fire; managing weeds, which of course, can be the downfall of native vegetation, especially when associated with fire; revegetating and regeneration of plants; the commercial benefits of native vegetation; and habitat and the importance of native vegetation to many of our animals.
This book has a mountain of information. It has fantastic photographs; practical ideas and practical knowledge for those people who want to grow their own plants and the type of plants you should grow. It has great photographs of the main weeds people see in the Top End such as mission grass, snake weed, calopo - some of these are pasture species - things like salvinia which is taking over some of our wonderful wetlands in the north, and even olive hymenachne which is a pasture species. However, one of the downfalls of this species is it wipes out native grass, and native grass is important for some of our wildlife such as the geese.
It has a huge amount of information that even someone with no interest in native plants would find easy to read. I would like to promote this book. It does not cover just the Northern Territory; it covers the top of Western Australia and North Queensland, and I would recommend it to anyone. You can pick up a copy from Greening Australia on Thorak Road, and I am not sure whether you can pick it up from their office on Dinah Beach Road as well.
If you are out at the Thorak Road Nursery, at Knuckeys Lagoon, you can also buy some plants. I have a stack of plants at home which should have been planted during the Wet Season. I bought some at the Katherine Field Day a few weeks back and I was given some by my daughter for Christmas when they had their $200 plant special on. They are still sitting in boxes at the moment so, when I get a chance, I will plant them.
People should recognise the importance of maintaining our native vegetation. Exotic plants are okay. I have no problems with hibiscus and ixora and all those sorts of things in their right place, but we should learn to appreciate what wonderful native vegetation we have in this part of the world.
The member for Drysdale might be interested in my second topic which is our recent Anzac Day cricket match which was the 9th or the 10th - I cannot quite remember. Once again, the faithful trotted down to the Strauss Cricket Ground on Cox Peninsula Road, which is a World War II cricket pitch. The Army was there, Rotary was there, Southern Districts Cricket Club was there disguised as the Litchfield Shire Council, St John and Legacy were there and all got together to have a 30 overs per side cricket match which happens every year on Anzac Day to recognise the importance of the Army in the Litchfield Shire. As I say to people, Litchfield Shire does not have a town as such as Palmerston or Darwin where the soldiers can march and be given the keys to the city, so this is one way to recognise the Army in the Litchfield Shire.
It is also to highlight the importance of the World War II heritage, which is something the government needs to ramp up because, from a tourist point of view, the one unique area you will not find in other parts of Australia is World War II heritage. Unfortunately, some of it has disappeared but there is much still there and, if we managed and promoted it properly, it would certainly do a lot for the economy of the Northern Territory.
We also recognise those people who died during the war, especially Captain Strauss, who was an American Air Force pilot who was shot down and killed over Darwin Harbour at a place called Squires Bluff. He had only arrived in the Northern Territory a couple weeks after the first bombing of Darwin and his plane took off from an emergency landing strip - which was only a temporary place for his squadron - at Adelaide River and, sadly, he was killed. The 27 Mile Airstrip was named after him - Strauss Airstrip - and we have named the cricket pitch the Strauss Cricket Ground – the SCG.
A small, but vocal, crowd turned up. The Litchfield President’s XI went out first. Probably for the first time in the history of this match rain stopped play, but we did not know how to work out the Duckworth/Lewis system of recalculating the runs, so we kept going even though the temperature was 100C and the humidity was about 200% after the rain passed and the sun came out.
Litchfield were all out. They used their 30 overs, put it that way, because you are never all out in this game, and made 195 runs. The Army then came back in and their innings was also interrupted by a bit of rain. They knocked off the 195 runs with two overs to spare. They had a couple of bring-ins; one is actually sitting in front of me here - the member for Drysdale. I believe they paid him because he belted the living daylights out of the poor Litchfield President’s XI bowling, and it got to a point where he reached his maximum of 30 runs and had to retire. No one bothered to pay him to go back in because we raise money for Legacy by paying people to stay in, go out, come back in, or override poor umpire’s decisions, etcetera.
Also, the member for Drysdale hit the only sign where you scored $100. Gusher, which is a home maintenance company, gives us $500 to put up a series of signs around the oval - also surrounded by chooks which have numbers on the back deducting runs from your score - and the member for Drysdale hit one of them. He kindly donated all the money to Legacy, which was very generous of him. Since he got a plug, I thought I would give myself a plug - I got three runs. I came in for the last over and did not go out - that is a miracle - and got three runs.
Brigadier Gus McLachlan came and tossed the coin; we appreciate he had a busy day, so it was good of him to come. All the soldiers enjoyed themselves. It is one of those days people ask: ‘Where are we going?’ But when they get there, they find there is a great barbecue, plenty of cold beer and soft drinks courtesy of Rotary, and it is a fantastic day. You really feel like you are playing in the bush; you get a feeling about the importance of this particular cricket ground as a heritage site, and you get a feeling of what it would have been like in 1942 when the soldiers were stationed there.
I thank all the people involved. I thank the council for helping out as well, and the Thompson family who live just over the road and always mow the grass for us every year, and maintain the oval in good condition.
Once again, it was a good day. We raised nearly $1000 for Legacy - well worth it - a lot of good fun and, hopefully, we will be back again next year.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Deputy Speaker, as has been a tradition tonight, I wish to discuss Anzac Day. As a former soldier of the Australian Army, a 45th class apprentice, it is been something I have been involved in for a very long time, and have a direct affiliation with. Although I never served overseas - we were very lucky to serve during a time of peace - there are many soldiers today amongst our families and our constituents who have not been so lucky. They have served their country extremely proudly and continue to do so, and they are now being recognised at such events as Anzac Day around Australia. They become our future remembrance, and we should be rightly proud of the men and women, the mums and dads, the brothers and sisters, who go and serve our country.
I am a committee member of the Palmerston RSL, and we are currently working as a committee on expanding the R and SL’s role, because often the ‘and’ is missed out - it is the Returned and Services League. There is now a big push towards those new soldiers, those new Diggers who have returned from their service, so they become part of it and they get the support the R and SL offers.
Anzac Day morning started very early as it always has done. In Palmerston, we had a Dawn Service and a 10 am service. The Dawn Service was, as has been in years past, a fantastic event, with around 400-plus people there, about 100 more compared with the previous year. At the Dawn Service was the Leader of the Opposition, Terry Mills; two SRC representatives from the Palmerston High School; the member for Brennan, Mr Peter Chandler; our Palmerston Mayor, Mr Robert Macleod, in his regalia; and the member for Arnhem representing the government. I appreciated her presence there; it is always welcome and she handles herself so well in public. I was there but I do not believe I saw any other government people at the morning service.
Those who were there were greatly appreciated, I know, from the R and SL’s point of view and, of course, the military had great representation. The member for Arnhem read out the speech from Scott, and he did a fantastic job. I believe that was the first time he has had the opportunity to represent the Defence Force at a lead speech, and he did a fantastic job.
After the service where, as I said, there were some 400 Palmerston residents, the people were asked to go back to the RSL at the Hub complex, and we all had breakfast there. The breakfast is fantastic. For a small fee you can certainly get your fill and have the first beers of the day. That has always been, in my time, a very busy venue, and the staff at the Hub, on behalf of the RSL, do a great job. We hung around there talking to old Diggers, talking to some who are shy and some not so shy, and some of the new and some of the old; and talking to Diggers who were prisoners of war. One gentleman I was speaking to moved to Darwin simply because of his treatment during World War II and the cold climates where he was kept, and he never wished to go again to a cold climate.
At 10 am we were back for the march past and the ceremony which followed that. It was great to see Terry come back to Palmerston away from the Darwin service where his duty had called earlier, and we had a great service. It was great to see the current member for Solomon join us there at the 10 am service, and after that service was over.
It was starting to get a little hot by that stage, and we returned again to the RSL, as tradition would suggest. We had more talks with many of the Diggers before I made a quick change and headed out to the SCG, as mentioned by the member for Nelson.
Scott and his team did a fantastic job; they welcomed me on board to help out with their batting side. I was lucky to have missed out on the fielding part of it. I got to talk to a lot of the people who were there and all the volunteers who helped out. It was a great afternoon. I have to say my match fitness was probably a bit slow towards the end; I was getting a bit tired, but the guys on the sidelines, including the member for Nelson, ensured I continued to bat, and they did a great job.
As we heard the member for Nelson say, about $1000 was raised for Legacy. I enjoyed having the ability to chip in to do that; it is something I have not done for a long time: get out there and enjoy yourself with people and just do what you love doing; that is, having a bit of sport. Those are the sort of things the Diggers did at Anzac Cove. They made use of their spare time; they played rugby and other forms of sport on the beaches.
From memory of stories told, there were various benefits if you got struck by shrapnel whilst playing a sport. A bizarre way of looking at it, but some of the ways I believe Australian soldiers looked at the adversities of battle. I suppose it is a bit like betting on a fly climbing up the wall. It was a great day out there, very hot - the Army did come out on top, thankfully - and it was well received. Southern Districts did some great batting, and they had some fantastic bowlers. I tell you, the Army team bowlers did not deserve it, they were pretty slow.
After, we went back and got changed and went on to the Palmerston Hub to catch up with more Diggers, have dinner, and met up with some former police colleagues who have also served in the armed services. We chatted for some time before moving on to another venue in Palmerston, the Arch Rival.
For the number of Diggers floating around in their suits and their ties, dressed pretty much as I am here today, they were out having a great time and, during the time we were there, they were all well behaved. They were out there and people understood who they were, where they were, and what they represented, and they did a great job. They behaved themselves whilst we were there, and credit goes to those young soldiers, because sometimes it can get untidy. They did a great job.
We finished up the night taking home one former solider. We had actually only had a couple of beers for the entire day, but I enjoyed mainly speaking to people and listening to their stories and exchanging similar stories of my service time. It is a great day to remember so we do not, hopefully, make those same mistakes.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Mr Bernard Francis Kilgariff AM JP KStJ –
Death of
Mr Bernard Francis Kilgariff AM JP KStJ –
Death of
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, it is with deep regret that I advise of the death, on 13 April 2010, of Mr Bern Kilgariff, AM JP KStJ, the first Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, one of the first two Senators for the Northern Territory, and a proud Territorian and Centralian who fought for the rights and interests of Territorians for many decades.
He was a much loved husband for 62 years of Aileen and the father of 11 children: Daniel, Andrew, Frances, Helen, Claire, Brian, Anne, Michael, Kathryn, John, and the late Marie.
I received apologies from the direct family who are, unfortunately, unable to travel today. However, I understand many family members are listening to the Internet, and we extend our best wishes to you.
DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: I advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of His Honour, the Administrator of the Northern Territory, Mr Tom Pauling, AO QC and Mrs Tessa Pauling. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Representing the family of Mr Kilgariff are his granddaughters, Ms Bridie Roditis and Ms Kay Blakeman, with Mr Kane Penley and Mr Kim Jenkinson, the husband of Claire Kilgariff. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
I also acknowledge former Administrator of the Northern Territory, the Honourable Austin Asche, AC QC and Dr Valerie Asche; former Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Mr Terry McCarthy and Mrs Mary McCarthy; former Senator for the Northern Territory, Mr Grant Tambling and Mrs Sandy Tambling; former members of the Legislative Assembly, Mr Tim Baldwin and Mrs Sandy Baldwin; Mr Rick Setter and Mrs Angela Setter; Ms Dawn Lawrie; Mr Neville Perkins, OAM; and Mr Fred Finch and Mrs Lyn Finch.
Also present are the Catholic Bishop of Darwin, Bishop Eugene Hurley, DD, and Father John Kelliher, MSC; Ms Eileen Hoosan, Deputy Chair of CAAPU Aboriginal Corporation; Mr Ray Chin, OAM, former Clerk of the Legislative Assembly; and Mr Peter and Mrs Sheila Forrest, biographers of Mr Kilgariff.
On behalf on honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
CONDOLENCE MOTION
Mr Bernard Francis Kilgariff AM JP KStJ
Mr Bernard Francis Kilgariff AM JP KStJ
Madam SPEAKER: I remind honourable members that on completion of the debate I will ask members to stand in silence for one minute as a mark of respect. I call the Chief Minister.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move - That the Assembly –
(a) express its deep regret at the passing of Mr Bern Kilgariff AM JP KStJ, former Northern Territory Senator, a former Member of the Legislative Council, and former Member and Speaker of the Legislative Assembly; and
(b) tender its profound sympathy to his family and friends.
Bern Kilgariff passed away on 13 April 2010 at the age of 86 at the Old Timers Home in Alice Springs after 81 years in the Territory. Bern was a great Territorian and a true gentleman. He witnessed remarkable changes in his lifetime, but Bern was not just a witness; he was often a key driver and figure in those changes.
I was honoured to speak at Bern Kilgariff’s funeral last week in Alice Springs where hundreds of townspeople came to pay their respects to a man who became one of the town’s patriarchs, a leader, a pioneer, but mostly a man they knew as a good bloke. It is great to see so many of Bern’s family and friends here in the gallery today.
Bern was a proud Territorian and a very proud Central Australian. He was a quiet man with a quiet dignity who always had an interest in people. When Bern asked how you were, he really did want to know. He was a proud family man who, together with his wife and life’s partner, Aileen - 62 years, Madam Speaker; that is just an extraordinary amount of time to be married - between them and with them they had 11 children: Daniel, John, Kathryn, Michael, Anne, Marie, Brian, Claire, Andrew, Helen and Frances. Bern was also a grandpa to 30 grandchildren and 12 great-grandchildren. What a family, what a legacy!
Bern Kilgariff leaves an enduring legacy. The biography of Bern and Aileen written by Peter and Sheila Forrest is called They Started Something, a very apt title. At the state funeral last week in Alice Springs, one of Bern’s sons, Michael, read an extraordinary eulogy about Bern’s life.
I spoke to Michael and asked if I could quote from some of his eulogy for the public record about Bern’s life, and Michael has sent me a copy of his speech. I will quote some of it here today for this condolence debate, for future generations who want to learn more about this wonderful man:
- Dad was born at Mile End in Adelaide on 30 September 1923. His father, Stephen Kilgariff, and his mother, Mary Egar, were both from Irish Catholic families who had settled in Adelaide the previous century. Dad was particularly proud of his Spanish heritage, and the Egar/Figeroa connection to the American Civil War.
The Kilgariff connection with Central Australia began in 1927, when Dad’s uncle and aunt, Joe and Eileen Kilgariff, arrived in Alice Springs to take over the lease of the Stuart Arms Hotel in Todd Street, of what was then the town of Stuart.
The Kilgariffs were a family of builders. You can still see a number of their buildings around town. A lovely example is the little Catholic Church which still stands today next to the Presbytery in Hartley Street.
….
Dad had a deep belief and love of education, which he retained all his life. He read widely and had a great love of history. He completed all of his school education here in the Northern Territory. Dad was one of the first students at the Hartley Street School, which opened in 1930. Then, early in 1938, Sisters of the OLSH Order arrived. Dad was amongst the first students at the Convent school, and was the first person to complete his Intermediate Certificate in 1939.
Dad was an adventurer and an entrepreneur, traits that were fostered by his early life. In the early 1930s, Dad accompanied his father and uncle whilst they pioneered and built their way across the Territory, including such places as Daly River, Barrow Creek, Tennant Creek, Winnecke, Aileron, and The Granites.
Dad’s first job was to wander the streets of Alice Springs with a sandwich board promoting the movies which were shown in the Buff Hall by Uncle Joe Kilgariff.
Dad’s larrikin sense of humour developed early and lasted his whole life. After one big cowboy movie session at Uncle Joe’s, Dad and Ted Smith decided to re-enact the iconic Wild West cattle drive. They caught some donkeys, mustered some cattle out in the hills to the north, and drove them into Todd Street. As Dad told us the story: ‘A dog flew for a bull we had in the mob and the bull charged into Mona Minehan's gift shop causing havoc. Ted and I fled, but there was hell to pay for that antic’.
As a young man, Dad grasped the opportunities which presented themselves, starting his first business when, as a teenager, he built a courier business delivering all the accounts for town businesses. He developed characteristics that he then displayed for the rest of his life. He was confident, resourceful, determined, and seemed without fear.
In 1939, Dad secured a job with Eddie Connellan as an apprentice aircraft mechanic, which extended to a jack-of-all-trades - freight handler, builder’s handyman, mechanic, and airstrip builder. At 16 years old, Dad was out in the Tanami building airstrips, where he made friendships with local Warlpiri people that were to last his whole life. He drove the 1920 Rolls Royce Silver Ghost, which is now on display at Alice Springs Airport. Dad made one particularly large strip at The Granites by dragging three large wagon rims up and down the strip. Over 40 years later, Mum and Dad were to land their own plane on that same airstrip.
- Dad had a great sense of national responsibility and, in 1942 at the age of 19, enlisted in the Army in the 2/5 Infantry Battalion of the 6th Division and went to Queensland. In later life, he rarely spoke of his time as a soldier in New Guinea, but the few times he did he conveyed both his devotion to his country and his abhorrence of war and its impact on people’s lives.
Whilst war was serious, Dad still managed to have a lot of fun. On one night, Dad was put on guard over a man who had gone AWOL. A two-up game was on and the prisoner and Dad made a deal that they would go and at the slightest sign of the Sergeant-Major they would run back to the tent. It was a great game. Dad won 60, which was an absolute fortune. The Sergeant-Major saw him, so Dad gave the signal to the prisoner. They both raced back to the tent. The Sergeant-Major was hot on their heels. By the time he arrived both men were as they should be. The Sergeant-Major knew he was right but couldn’t prove anything.
Dad was part of a bitter war in New Guinea, facing the 18th Japanese Army, which had been fighting continuously since China in 1937. Of the few anecdotes Dad told us of the war, he recounted the air drops to supply the battalion were via drops from DC3 aircraft. Dad recalls that: ‘The planes would come in very low to try to drop the supplies along a ridge line. We would be waiting, dodging the falling supplies, and sometimes we would have to fight the Japanese who would come out of the jungle to try to grab the supplies’. It was the only way to survive.
In New Guinea, Dad formed part of the guard when the Japanese General, Adachi, signed the surrender at Wewak.
After being discharged in late 1946, he returned to Alice Springs for what was meant to be a quick visit to see his father, Steve, and sisters, Marion and Margaret, before he went off to begin his education as an aviation engineer.
It was at this time Dad was introduced to Aileen Canny, who had arrived in Alice Springs in October 1946 to visit her sister, Joan, and brother-in-law, John Roberts, who was the manager of the Alice Springs Post Office.
Dad became a fixture in Alice, riding around on his Harley-Davidson with Mum as a pillion passenger and his dog, Paddy, in the sidecar. They were married in Burra in South Australia on 10 April 1948.
Not long after he got back to Alice Springs, Dad started working for his uncle, Mick Heenan, at his farm. Dad loved working on the farm and could see the potential of local produce for Central Australia and further. He bought the farm from Uncle Mick and decided to focus on poultry. He never resumed his aviation career; however, he did fulfil his lifelong dream of becoming a pilot at the age of 57, shortly after our mother achieved her pilot’s licence.
Straight after their honeymoon, Mum and Dad travelled to Melbourne so Mum could learn chicken sexing and Dad would learn all about general poultry husbandry. Within a decade, the farm had 8000 hens producing up to 6000 eggs each day.
It was at this time that Mum and Dad, also inadvertently, started the first chicken takeaway in Alice Springs. We Kilgariffs grew up with people telling us about the times they went to Kilgariff’s farm in the middle of the night to secure a chook for next day’s dinner. The story goes something like this: One night, Dad heard a ruckus in the chook pens and went down to investigate, shouting: ‘Who’s there?’ There was silence and then a voice: ‘Just us chooks here, Bernie’.
About this time, Dad met up with a proud, traditional Warlpiri man who became Dad’s enduring friend and work colleague on the farm. He took the English name, Tommy Kilgariff, and he and Dad were considered as brothers. Tommy later named his own son, Barney Kilgariff, in honour of Dad. Barney is here with us today as a member of our extended family.
Throughout his life, Dad was closely connected to many of the Aboriginal peoples of the Northern Territory. He honoured and respected traditional life and was deeply involved in ensuring Aboriginal people received the rights, acknowledgement and respect due to them as traditional owners and citizens of the Northern Territory. He made enduring friendships with people like Wenten and Eli Rubuntja, Nanna Costello, and the Liddle, Miller and Ross families, just to name a few of many.
In the late 1950s, Dad began noticing the interest in Alice Springs by travellers. He decided his next project was to start building some motel units at the northern end of the farm. He and his father, Steve, got to work, opening with 10 units and a service station in 1959. It did not stop there. Dad would take bookings from tour operating groups a year or 18 months ahead, and then would set about building the rooms to accommodate them, and eventually the motel took over the farm completely.
As our oldest brother, Danny, says: ‘The older kids grew up on a chook farm, amongst chooks; the younger ones grew up in a motel with takeaway chook’. Times had changed.
Dad was to get involved in a number of ventures in Alice Springs, including the Oasis and Shell Mount Gillen service stations, as well as the squash courts.
Along with others, such as Keith Castle, Mum and Dad were drivers behind the establishment in 1959 of the Central Australian Travel Association, the forerunner of the Central Australian Tourism Industry Association. In 1965, Dad became Chairman of CATA and held that position until March 1976.
Dad was a very busy man through the 1950s, but he did find time to make a very considerable contribution to the RSL, and to the Memorial Club of which he was President during major expansions, and for which he was later awarded life membership.
Dad’s public life was also becoming more active and he was appointed to the Northern Territory Housing Commission when that body was formed in 1959, becoming Chairman in 1967 for 12 years. He had a passion for affordable housing for all.
Dad’s life was to take another direction when he was appointed to the Legislative Council on 12 April 1960. He didn’t seek that position but it was offered and, keeping with his philosophy, he jumped on the tram to see where it would take him. This began a 27-year career in representative politics, which included membership of a group of Territorians who were entitled to be called the Northern Territory’s Founding Fathers.
Over his political career, Dad was to be a member of the Territory’s first embryonic Cabinet, the Executive Council; a founder of the Country Liberal Party; elected as the first Speaker of the first fully-elected Legislative Assembly; elected Deputy Leader of the majority party in the Assembly; elected as one the first Senators to represent the Territory, and then being the first Territorian to speak in the Senate; and then holding senior offices in the coalition federal parliamentary parties. A testament to Dad’s representation is reflected by the fact that through those 27 years he never lost an election. What drove Dad was his experience in building a business, and the struggle of Territorians to secure a reasonable say in the decisions of government which affected them.
In 1968, the appointed positions in the Council were abolished and in the subsequent elections Dad won the seat of Alice Springs. He campaigned on the slogan: ‘A Centralian for the Centre - put Kilgariff back in the Council’.
In 1974, Dad was instrumental in the formation of the Country Liberal Party, and a fully elected Legislative Assembly in 1974. This was followed by the establishment of a timetable for the transfer of most functions of government to the control of the Assembly from 1977.
Self-government was awarded to the Territory on 1 July 1978. Dad was deeply proud of this moment; however, he saw it as a step on the journey to statehood, not the final destination.
Perhaps one of the most poignant and funny stories about Dad and the life we led in South Terrace after Dad had moved into political life was when our brother, Brian, answered the phone and responded to a query about whether Dad was available by saying: ‘Sorry, Dad’s not here. I think he’s in Canberra. No, Adelaide. No, he’s in Darwin. Hang on, he’s just sung out to say he’s on the toilet’.
Dad retired from the Senate in 1987 and jumped on another tram with the purchase of Erldunda Station 200 km south of Alice Springs, where he and Mum stayed for 15 years.
Dad maintained his commitment to public life by joining the Council of St John, and was later appointed a Knight of St John in 2008. He was awarded the Order of Australia in 1989, and later appointed a Member of the Order of Australia in 1996. In 2001, he won a Landcare Award for his work in the eradication of rabbits, which he regarded as his most implacable foe.
In June 2001, Mum and Dad retired from Erldunda and moved to Alice Springs, where they remained until his death at the Old Timers at 6.45 pm on Tuesday, 13 April.
What Bern and Aileen started in many different areas will continue. He genuinely wanted to make the Territory a better place to live. Bern was involved in so many aspects of Central Australia and the Territory’s development of tourism, primary industry, health, the arts, education and politics. As a passionate and dedicated representative of the Territory, Senator Bern Kilgariff forged a reputation as a man to respect when it came to standing up for the issues he believed in.
He sometimes told the story of when he arrived in Canberra as the first Senator representing the Northern Territory. There was a cartoon at the time depicting six crows as the original states sitting on the branch of the Senate in Canberra, and how those six crows were determined not to make room for a seventh crow to come and sit on the branch with them. He says that pretty much sums up how he was treated back then; however, the Canberra crows were soon forced to make room for the tough Senator from the Territory.
His passionate support for the Territory is demonstrated by his involvement in the 1962 Remonstrance. This document outlined the grievances of the Territory concerning its constitutional position, and lack of representation and voice in national and local affairs. Bern was one of those who signed the Remonstrance even though he was an appointed member of the Legislative Council - probably the first lesson for Canberra that here was a man who was not going to toe their line. The Remonstrance is now on permanent display in Parliament House, and Bern was instrumental in getting the document out of the Archives in Canberra and bringing it home.
During his time in the Assembly, and then the federal parliament, Bern never failed to push the cause of the Northern Territory and Territorians. As Michael said, at the first election for the Legislative Assembly in October 1974 he won 72.2% of the primary vote with the memorable campaign slogan: ‘A Centralian for the Centre’. He gave the Territory a very strong voice in Canberra, particularly when it came to his work on parliamentary committees, the engine room of government. During his time in the Senate, he served on a number of Senate and joint committees including those involving social welfare, public works, foreign affairs, defence and, importantly, Aboriginal land rights in the Northern Territory. He also gave back to his home town, Alice Springs, serving on numerous committees and working to advance the town economically and socially.
During the past few weeks there have been many tributes paid to Bern Kilgariff, but one in particular sticks in my mind. Neville Chalmers, a former stock agent, said Bern was to Alice Springs like water is to a garden, and this rings very true.
Bern and his life partner, Aileen, helped to give life to what was then a tiny outpost and helped the town grow into the thriving centre it is today. He worked tirelessly for the Northern Territory, but was very self-effacing when it came to his achievements. I can remember hearing him on the ABC talking about his accomplishments, and he said: ‘I suppose there are a lot of achievements, but then, I have been in Alice Springs for 75 years and if you can’t fit a few things into 75 years, you should give up’.
Bern Kilgariff, we owe you our thanks for never giving up.
I also pay tribute to Aileen Kilgariff, Bern’s wife of 62 years, and a truly remarkable woman. It is not easy being the partner of a politician. For all those years in the Senate, Bern was away from home quite a bit as you can imagine. Aileen was Bern’s rock, biggest supporter, and wise counsel. Our condolences go to her and Bern’s children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, other family and friends on the passing of a true gentleman and a great Territorian who leaves us with an enduring legacy.
Madam Speaker, to mark that legacy, I am very pleased to inform the House that the future new suburb in Alice Springs that this government will be fast-tracking at the current Arid Zone Research Institute will be known as Kilgariff.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON: This new residential area, the future home for hundreds of Centralian families, will be a fitting commemoration for Bern Kilgariff, a man who worked tirelessly to grow and develop the town he loved, Alice Springs.
As a member of parliament and Chief Minister, I had the opportunity, on a number of occasions, to sit and speak with Bern at social functions and official functions around the Northern Territory. He really was a gentleman; he always had a smile; he always had a twinkle in his eye, and he also had words of advice. When I listened to Michael’s eulogy at the state funeral, and contemplated the enormous contribution that one man has made to the Northern Territory, I am very humbled to speak in this Condolence Motion today. All of us in public life come into public life wanting to make a difference. We are all passionate about the Territory. We all love the Territory. We all want to make the Territory a better place. Bern Kilgariff certainly did do that. He certainly made a very big difference and touched the lives of many thousands of people.
The Territory has lost a great Territorian and a true gentleman. His legacy of achievements will live on through his very extensive family - a true pioneer of the more recent history of the Northern Territory. Bern Kilgariff, AM, may he rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
_________________________
Distinguished Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of former Chief Justice of the Northern Territory, Mr Brian Martin, and Mrs Lorraine Martin; and also the Solicitor-General for the Northern Territory, Mr Michael Grant QC. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_________________________
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, it is an honour to pay my respects, as the Opposition Leader, on the passing of Mr Bern Kilgariff. It was also was a great privilege last week to give a eulogy for Bern Kilgariff at the very moving state funeral held at Alice Springs, and to be able to acknowledge Centralians, almost another group within the Territory, who are fiercely proud of their place in the Territory story, and central to that is Bern Kilgariff.
Bern has been the very heart of Alice Springs for many decades. He has been in people’s hearts, at the heart of history, particularly in Central Australia. There are those among us who command respect through academic learning, physical presence, prowess, but Bern earned the respect of every Territorian through his humble, enduring passion for the Northern Territory as a whole.
Bern was a man who experienced many facets of Territory life: tourism, hotels such as the well-known Oasis, agriculture and politics. But a story is written in his life’s work. There is a legacy that remains, from which we can observe and learn.
The former Administrator, Ted Egan, referred to the family: the trademark Kilgariff look. You know who is a Kilgariff and who is not by the look - the trademark look - the legacy that is left in that family; to have so many people in attendance was an example to everyone, as family people. The Chief Minister has referred to Bern’s marriage of 62 years. Once again, a legacy and an example for all of us to aspire to: a long, fruitful, and blessed marriage - it is a challenge for each of us.
His story has been written in many places, and it is important to note with some gratitude that it has. I thank our local Territory historians, Peter and Sheila Forrest, for tracing the life and times of the Kilgariffs in their beautiful book titled They Started Something, a book I have shared with my own family in Western Australia, who love Australia and Australian stories. It is a story that is spread widely, not just for the interesting events, but for the example that has been set by a life lived and a contribution made. It is my genuine hope that future Territory students have this publication included as part of their studies. It is a wonderful depiction of the journey taken by this renowned Territorian over the past eight decades.
On 4 August 1929, the first Ghan passenger train left Adelaide for Alice Springs, then known as Stuart. The following year, Bern and his mother and sister set off on a three-day trip to join his father in their new home in Alice - population 100 - with supplies delivered by camel train. It was apt that Bern arrived aged seven on The Ghan.
I recall him describing the time when the Northern Territory was starting to gain an awareness of its potential and opportunities, and its responsibilities. This train story was referred to on a number of occasions at the state funeral: his family got on a train that commenced a journey that continued on in Alice Springs. That quite significant metaphor of getting on a train to see where it will take you kept coming up. He gets on trains to see where they will take him, because he sees a significant movement and gets on board and plays his part.
If one traces the history of Alice Springs, one traces the history of the Kilgariffs. I am pleased to hear that the name will be given to a suburb. From the colourful days of the Stuart Arms, run in the 1920s and 1930s by Uncle Joe Kilgariff; Father James Long, the first resident priest of Alice Springs, had his initial home there. As Peg Nelson remembered, Alice Springs at that time was, essentially, the Stuart Arms pub, a police station, a couple of stores, and three or four private homes - how it has changed.
Bern accompanied his father delivering building materials to fledgling family businesses in Barrow Creek, Tennant Creek, and Aileron, and to gold mining enterprises at Winnecke and The Granites. On 28 February 1938, the Catholic school opened with Bern Kilgariff one of the first students enrolled. His father had helped with the construction of this first convent school.
Leaving school, Bern’s first job was with the pioneering Connellan Airways. When the older men left to join up, including the renowned Sam Calder, Bern swiftly became a jack-of-all-trades.
His mother passed away in 1941 when Bern was only 18 years of age.
In 1942, having witnessed the transformation of Alice by the military and refugees following the bombing of Darwin, and the arrival of the Administrator, Aubrey Abbott, Bern insisted on joining up. He trained with the Armed Cavalry Division and, eventually, embarked on the Duntroon as reinforcement with the 2/5 Infantry Battalion in the 17th Brigade heading north to New Guinea. Following rigorous patrols clearing the Japanese from their village bases, Bern contracted scrub typhus and was air lifted to Aitape.
He later discovered it may well have been Fred Chaney, the tenth Administrator of the Northern Territory, who was the pilot on that day. At his own request, Bern returned north and was present as part of the guard when Lieutenant-General Adachi, Japanese Commander in New Guinea, surrendered at Wewak.
Happier times were restored back in Alice, especially when Bern could be seen on his Harley-Davidson with Aileen as pillion passenger, and his dog called Paddy. They married in 1948 and their 60-plus years are more than a testament to mutual, caring devotion, not just to each other, but to those they have met along the way. Daughter Fran probably describes it best: ‘Dad is the public face of the family, and Mum is its backbone’.
Organisations that benefited from Kilgariff contributions in the early days, especially of time, included the Memorial Club, which started life in 1947 as two Sidney Williams huts at the foot of Anzac Hill. In 1959, Bern became one of the foundation members of the Northern Territory Housing Commission, an entity established to tackle the challenges of the very necessary provision of homes – nothing has changed.
This proved the precursor to appointment, initially, as non-official councillor of the Legislative Council just over 40 years ago on 12 April 1960. In late 1960, the Alice Springs Town Planning Advisory Committee was set up in Darwin as an advisory body with local representatives, Neil Hargrave and Bern Kilgariff. The committee’s aim was to ensure that regional advice on the development of the town be recognised. And, in 1961, Bern joined the new organisation, the Central Australian Travel Association, and went on to become Chairman of Directors. He was very well qualified as his business venture at the time, the Oasis Motel, was, according to Administrator, Roger Knott: ‘The equal of any motel I have seen anywhere in Australia’. Son, Brian’s comment is perceptive: ‘I never really noticed Dad getting into public life; he was always in it as far as I recall it. We always felt that he was a non-politician in a political environment. I thought he was just trying to do the best that he could do for the Territory. He was not really a man with ambitions for high political office, and when high office came to him, he was a bit surprised’.
Bern’s own comment about the motivation for public office was: ‘We all did it because of the dream we had that one day the Territory might achieve constitutional equality with the rest of Australia; that is why we did it’.
The days were certainly dynamic and Bern’s membership lasted from the Seventh Council through to the last sitting in 1974. As an aside, on the very first day of the Legislative Council in 1960, Bern joined with the elected members to defeat a government motion that precedence should be given to government business. This was a gentleman who knew his own mind and, in 1968, his slogan said it all: ‘Centralian for the Centre – put Kilgariff back in the Council’.
In 1970, his position was that the government’s response was completely unacceptable regarding the adequacy of the constitutional and political arrangements for the Northern Territory. He therefore moved that a delegation of three Councillors be sent to Canberra to confer on the subject of the grievances of the people of the Northern Territory. The motion was carried. The delegation, comprising Bern, Tony Greatorex and Joe Fisher, set off and returned with notable support, including progress toward a fully-elected legislature – which we have now – and the transfer of state-type functions to a Northern Territory Public Service, a notable achievement. He got on a train to see where it would take him – and we arrived at that destination.
The Northern Territory Country Liberal Party was officially launched at the inaugural annual conference in Alice Springs on 20 July 1974. Bern, together with Roger Vale, had overseen its gestation from the Country Party, formed in Central Australia in 1956 to support the election of Sam Calder to the House of Representatives, through to the fusion of the Country Party with the Liberal Party.
The Legislative Council was finally replaced by a fully-elected Legislative Assembly. At the first election for the Legislative Assembly held in October 1974, Bern won 72.2% of the primary vote, the strongest result of any candidate and a tribute to his integrity, his hard work, and his ability.
On 20 November 1974, he was sworn in as the Speaker of the new fully-elected Assembly. Less than five weeks later, Darwin was devastated by Cyclone Tracy. Bern flew back from Alice to Darwin to find that the Assembly building had sustained serious damage. Emergency legislation had to be passed as soon as possible, so emergency sittings were convened to begin just eight days after the cyclone. He remembered: ‘When we sat there, there was about an inch of water over the floor of the Chamber’ – just imagine that – ‘a lot of the roof had gone’ – imagine that – ‘and some of the walls had been blown in’.
There was drama of a different type in November 1975 when the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, dismissed Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister and appointed Malcolm Fraser as caretaker Prime Minister. A double dissolution election was held on 13 December 1974, at which the Whitlam government was soundly defeated, and Bern overwhelmingly won election to the Senate. He continued as a Senator for the Northern Territory until 1987.
The Territory’s progression to self-government remained an absolute priority for Bern, and he was not alone. Another champion for the cause was one Harold ‘Tiger’ Brennan – I travelled on that road this morning, named after Tiger Brennan. Bern, no doubt, smiled when he remembered the first time he met Tiger; Tiger had helped the Kilgariffs make bricks for a period when he was a simple swaggie camped by the Todd River.
Darwin changed rapidly in the first three years after Tracy; however, after self-government in 1978, change was consolidated and accelerated Territory-wide. Fortunately, we had a highly able ambassador in Canberra, who also seized on the opportunity to raise humanitarian issues such as the plight of Timorese refugees, and Aboriginal affairs. Bern served as a highly effective Government Whip, and then Opposition Whip in the Senate from 1981 to 1987.
Bern’s history in the Northern Territory underlines just how important he was to the founding of the Country Liberal Party. An Internet definition of the word ‘architect’ is ‘someone who creates plans to be used in making something’. That is exactly what Bern was – the architect.
His awards and appointments are a measure of the man, and include a Centenary Medal for service to Australian society through parliament; a Medal of the Order of Australia in 1989; and appointment as a Member of the Order of Australia in the Queen’s Birthday honours list in 1996 for continued service to the Northern Territory through the Northern Territory Landcare Council, the Anti-Rabbit Research Foundation, the Cattlemen's Association, the Australia Day Council and St John Ambulance.
In conclusion, I stress the scope of contribution the entire family has made to the Northern Territory at every level. Bern led by example, and that outstanding example has been followed.
Returning to the metaphor Bern often referred to - and I can clearly recall a conversation I had with him early on about getting on the train to see where it would take him - that train was to take us to constitutional equality in the Northern Territory so we had that status. That was the movement – he got on that train to see where it would take him.
It strikes me that Bern has left that train. It has passed through one station – that is self-government – but the train is continuing on. Although Bern has left the train, it is left to us to continue the journey which motivated and inspired Bern to make that contribution. We need to continue that work. I did hear it said that when he passed he would not see statehood – it is up to us to continue on that journey.
Today, in this House, we bid Bern farewell. We note, for posterity, his embodiment as a remarkable spirit - a quiet imprint and a strong, lasting legacy remains. His life was spent building a peaceful and better world, requiring a spirit of friendship, honour, solidarity and fair play.
May he rest in peace.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is with great sadness I speak in debate on the Motion of Condolence for the late Mr Bern Kilgariff AM JP KStJ, the first Speaker of this parliament, and the first Senator of the Northern Territory.
It is fair to say I only knew Bern in the latter years of his life; mainly since becoming the Speaker of this parliament five years ago. Being Speaker, you become part of a relatively small group of people who preside over, or who have presided over, parliaments. In the case of Bern, when I became Speaker he wrote me a very lovely letter congratulating me on the position, and making a few suggestions on the best way to deal with recalcitrant members. This started a warm telephone acquaintance which lasted until late last year. I kept up with his health after this through his daughter, Frances, or Fran, as I call her. He would ring me occasionally, and send me a note if he had read about particular behaviour in the Chamber and offer commiserations and suggestions on how to urge members to behave in a more suitable way. In my turn, I would ring and tell him of condolence motions in our parliament of many of his old friends. In particular, I remember the conversations relating to the deaths of his good friends, Sam Calder, Joe Fisher and Reverend Jim Downing, all great Territorians who were pioneers of the Territory.
In late 2005, I had the pleasure of hosting the Darwin launch of his and Aileen’s biography They Started Something by Peter and Sheila Forrest, in Parliament House. Those members who were elected at the time will recall that Bern and Aileen attended and regaled us with the most marvellous stories of life in the early days of the Assembly.
I particularly liked the story relating to the first sittings of the parliament after Cyclone Tracy, which the Leader of the Opposition referred to, when Bern had to recall parliament in order to pass urgent legislation to allow the reconstruction to commence. I read an extract from Peter and Sheila Forrest’s book:
- Then I went to the Assembly to see what had to be done there. There was serious damage, no power, leaking roof, fallen trees everywhere. But we had to do something about it quickly because it would be necessary for the Assembly to convene as soon as possible, to pass emergency legislation.
I organised a place to sleep, to camp, in one of the Qantas flats in Wood Street. There was no water but there was a fire hydrant outside and we used to bath out in the open there. We left a cake of soap on top of the hydrant, it was quite a friendly arrangement.
I remember that there were a lot of parties in the streets in the first few days. There was a lot of food left but there was no power, so people decided to get together and eat as much as they could before everything went rotten.
The ABC radio was broadcasting on a makeshift basis and I put out an appeal for all male staff of the Assembly to report in for work, to help get the place into a condition where it could function. The next thing I got a very indignant message: ‘What about us women? Why aren’t you calling us in?’ So I put out an amended message calling all staff back in.
Everyone came in, except for two people. Assembly Clerk, Fred Walker, was on holidays in South America at the time. Eventually I got a message to him while he was on safari up in the Andes somewhere. He did get back after a few weeks.
And there was one male staff member who was over in Queensland. He got back as far as Mt Isa but he was stopped there and he was not allowed to proceed into the Territory. So he didn’t make it, but it was not his fault.
There was tremendous morale and everyone hopped in and did what they could. The first thing was to clear the surrounds of the building. The men had saws and axes. I found a fellow wandering around the street with a chainsaw so I asked him to come and give us a hand. He did, he was a very willing worker.
The Deputy Clerk, Keith Thompson, asked me: ‘Where did you find him?’ I said: ‘Well, I don’t know. He was wandering along the street and I said: “Can you bring your saw along, we’ve got a bit of a job for you to do”. He said: “Oh, sure”. I said: “We haven’t got any money”. He said: “Oh, that’s nothing”. So I paid him in two bottles of claret’. That was the way things were.
Then we convened emergency sittings of the Assembly, to begin on January 2, 1975, just eight days after the blow. We had to pass emergency legislation to allow so many things to be done in a hurry.
I’ll never forget it. Where we sat there was about an inch of water over the floor of the Chamber. A lot of the roof had gone and some of the walls had been blown in. There was still no electricity, so there was no airconditioning or anything like that.
There was broken guttering hanging down from the ceiling, with water running down into the committee room. It was very humid, so I used to call things off every half-an-hour or so, so everyone could go out and cool off.
No one complained about that under the conditions. So I said to everybody: ‘You can wear what you wish. We will sit for an hour or a half-an-hour and we will go out for a ten minute break and we will then continue’.
You wouldn’t want to wear white shirts and ties under those conditions, people probably didn’t have them anyway. So, members turned up in everything, including thongs and stubby shorts. I remember that the laminate on the tops of the desks in the Chamber was starting to curl up and roll off.
Hansard was actually Ray Chin …
… one of the Clerks, carrying around a tape recorder. One speaker would get up and Ray would paddle and splash through the water and hand the microphone to him. When the speech was finished he would dash back and retrieve it for the next fellow on his feet. If anyone wanted to interject they put up their hand and Ray would paddle over, record what they wanted to say, and then go back to the member who had the floor.
A little later, the Council Chamber was condemned because of structural damage.
Bern went on to become one of our first two Senators, together with Senator Ted Robertson. In his maiden speech in the Senate on 18 February 1976, he spoke about his dreams and visions for the Northern Territory and particularly of his hope that the Territory would become a state. I read from part of his maiden speech:
- Today it is a great honour for me to speak because, for the first time, the Northern Territory is represented in the Senate. We have had many constitutional changes over the years but I think that representation in the Senate is probably one of our major milestones. I could say many things regarding the Governor-General’s Speech, which was delivered yesterday. I could advert to many things which affect the Northern Territory. Today I devote my comments to the Northern Territory because many of the comments made yesterday referred to the Northern Territory. As honourable senators know, it is still a territory. Its authority stems from the Northern Territory Administration Act, which is a Federal Act. Many of the policies pursued by Federal governments control our wellbeing and our future. So I take a few minutes to speak on this matter because it is important that I do so.
I shall give to honourable senators what I consider is the situation in the Northern Territory which is dependant on the Parliament of Australia and on the Commonwealth Government. Being a Territorian, and particularly an honourable senator for the Northern Territory, I believe it is appropriate today that I devote my thoughts to the Northern Territory.
A little later he said:
- Before enlarging on that theme I say that in the 1970s and beyond I see the Northern Territory as a teenager who is coming into adulthood. When I say ‘adulthood’ I mean that, as the Governor-General announced yesterday, in the near future it will come to statehood. That is something which I and my colleagues in the Northern Territory, as well as many other people in the Northern Territory, have over the years worked to bring about.
Bern was a fierce advocate of statehood for the Northern Territory. When I became the Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee early last year, he spoke to me about the need for us to become a state and how proud he was that his daughter, Frances, was carrying on that work as the Co-Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee. It is, perhaps then, not surprising that one of the first things Aileen said after he died was: ‘Now Bernie won’t get to see the Territory become a state’.
Perhaps the most distinctive thing about Bern and Aileen was their devout Catholic faith. This was so evident in the state funeral last week when the Bishop of Darwin, Eugene Hurley, and the Bishop of Broome, Christopher Saunders, together with 12 other priests concelebrated the Mass that Bern and Aileen love so much. In many ways the funeral was, as Bishop Eugene said to me later: ‘a celebration of the best of the Catholic faith’.
His was a life of love, faith, and compassion. In the family home, every night before dinner, the whole family would kneel and say the Rosary - which takes about 12 minutes. Apparently, Bern and Aileen would say: ‘The family that prays together stays together’. They always attended Mass on Sundays and frequently at other times. The devotion to his faith started early in life as his father had built the first Catholic Church in Alice Springs. However, this was not a false piety but rather something that was central to his life, and could be seen playing out in other parts of his life.
In 1956, Bern and Aileen adopted Andrew, an orphan who had come to stay during the holidays from a Catholic orphanage in Adelaide. He came for a holiday, but never left, and was accepted as if he were naturally born to Bern and Aileen. In the 1980s, Bern and Aileen became involved, through the Catholic Church, with the refugee intake from Vietnam, and adopted a Vietnamese family, Thuong and Thung Phan, who remain very close to the whole Kilgariff family, and always refer to Bern and Aileen as Mum and Dad.
Bern was also a very keen advocate for East Timor and the debt he saw Australia had to their people because of the death of thousands of East Timorese who helped to shelter Australian soldiers during World War II, to their own detriment. He was quite vocal on this matter, even when it was not politically popular, either with his own colleagues or others. I quote again from both his maiden speech and parts of Peter and Sheila Forrest’s book. Bern said:
- I and many other people in the outback of Australia who are so close to Timor - a fighter plane takes 15 minutes to fly from the mainland to Timor - have a sense of shame and feel that we have let down those allies of ours who supported and assisted Australian troops with loss of life to themselves. I will have more to say about that later. And he did.
- He repeatedly returned to this theme, in the media as well as in the Senate. In November 1976, the Northern Territory News noted: ‘he has tirelessly campaigned for Timorese refugees to be allowed into Australia’. He was scathing about reports the Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser had told Indonesia’s President Suharto that Australia accepted the ‘status quo’ in East Timor.
‘That’s not good enough’, Senator Kilgariff said. ‘There are only 2000 or so East Timorese refugees in Australia. Surely, we can find room for them here’. The newspaper continued: Senator Kilgariff describes Australia’s involvement, or lack of it, in the East Timorese drama as one giant foul-up. ‘The whole thing is one mess. Portugal pulled out far too soon, and we pulled out our representatives too soon’.
- Two decades later, Senator Kilgariff was proved tragically prescient in his assessment of the East Timorese situation and Australia’s response to it in 1976.
He also had great respect for Aboriginal people, and was friends with some of the great figures of recent Aboriginal history - the Rubuntja brothers, and Vincent Lingiari - and the testament given by the Deputy of the Administrator, Mrs Pat Miller, at the funeral, and the moving tribute by the Tangentyere Council, is a testimony to this. I would like to read the tribute which was in the Centralian Advocate on 16 April from Tangentyere Council, from William Tilmouth, the Director:
- Tangentyere Executive and staff offer our sincere condolences to the Kilgariff family on the passing of Bernie, who was known to and respected by all in the Alice Springs Community, in both his personal life and his political life.
In his young days Bernie was a personal friend of two of our most respected founders and Executive members, the Rubuntja brothers. They spent many happy hours together as boys playing in the Todd River together (and, according to Bernie, getting up to mischief!) The Town Grew Up Dancing, the book written by the late Mr W Rubuntja, described those days.
Bernie was a true gentleman, a man of principle, a true icon of Territory life and a supporter of Reconciliation, which he practised in his everyday life from an early age. His support of the Aboriginal cause will never be forgotten.
His family’s loss is a loss to the whole of the Alice Springs and Northern Territory Community and he will be remembered by all of us for a long time to come.
Our thoughts go with the Kilgariff family on this sad occasion, and especially to Bernie’s wife, Aileen, who was a tower of strength and support for Bernie throughout their life together.
He served his country in New Guinea, and with honour, in the 2/5 Infantry Battalion of the 6th Division AIF in World War II.
He was a man who made friends easily and listened carefully. He was highly respected by many who worked with him, from Sir John Carrick, the Leader of the House in the Senate, who said he was utterly honest and reliable; to his good friend, former President of the Senate, Margaret Reid, who spoke warmly of her friend and fellow Senator at the funeral, who, she said would never tell you what to do but rather would suggest that you might want to do something. She told the delightful story of visiting Aileen and Bern in Alice Springs. Bern asked her if she would like some mandarins because they had a beautiful mandarin tree in full fruit, and would she like to take some with her when she went. She said she would be delighted. About 10 minutes later, he said: ‘I will go and get those mandarins’. It was clearly time to go.
I do have a short note, which I received from Margaret Reid last night, and she asked me to read this into the Hansard:
- Bern and I met when I entered the Senate in May 1981 after the untimely death of the ACT Senator John Knight. We became friends and I came to know him as a man of great integrity and reliability. He was deeply committed to the people of the Northern Territory, and from him I learned much about the Territory.
From March 1981, Bern was the Government Whip in the Senate, and Opposition Whip from 1983. From October 1982, I had the privilege of being Deputy Whip. He never missed an opportunity to speak up for the Territory. He served on parliamentary committees, he participated in bipartisan parliamentary activities, such as the Parliamentary Christian Fellowship and activities associated with visiting parliamentary delegations, particularly from the Commonwealth Pacific countries.
He made a great contribution to the life of this country and was respected by all sides of politics. Long may his life be an example to others.
Former Administrator and great friend, Ted Egan, also spoke at the funeral and referred to Bern as the top achiever ever, and said what set him apart was not that he did so much; it is the way he did it. He had no ulterior motives in life.
It is worth noting that the parliamentary staff who worked with him were also very devoted to him. Our Clerk, Mr Ian McNeill, worked with Bern in the Senate in the 1970s and 1980s, and said he was very grateful for his friendship and respect. He and Kit add their condolences to the family.
He has left a wonderful legacy with his family and friends, and especially in a dream lived out for a better Northern Territory. Undoubtedly, he is on that tram now, looking for new friends and meeting up with old friends and family.
Vale Bern Kilgariff; God’s speed on that tram.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to express in this parliamentary forum, as I have done personally to members of the Kilgariff family, my heartfelt condolences. I also express my thanks to them for sharing their husband, father and grandfather with the residents of Alice Springs and the Northern Territory for so many years. His contribution speaks for itself, and members have already spoken this morning about the length and breadth of his contributions.
I agree with Ted Egan when he said Bern was the Territory’s ‘top achiever ever’. I agree with Bishop Eugene Hurley when he said Bern was a ‘truly great human being’. He was, as we know, self-effacing, gracious, generous, humble, a man of integrity, and a man with a strong moral and ethical code.
He was not driven by ego or ambition; he was driven by a desire to serve his community and to make a contribution to it, and what an outstanding contribution he made. As I said recently, Bern wrote the book on public service; he was the quintessential public servant and he did it with style and grace. He was, for me, the best example of how politicians could do good work and could make a contribution.
Bern Kilgariff made politicians look good. There should be more Bern Kilgariffs; and I am hopeful there will be. He was a constant reminder to me, and I am sure to many others, that politicians could do good things for people, often quietly and behind the scenes. He was a great humanitarian, and was respected and admired by people on both sides of politics; and that was the mark of the man.
I spent some time with him at Old Timers just before Christmas, and I am very glad I did. He was a friend, a mentor and an inspiration. As a young politician in Alice Springs, I was very grateful for his friendship, his wise counsel, and his support. I learned much from him. He would call into my office regularly in the early years offering guidance and support. Sometimes his advice was about quite minor things. However, he knew, as all good politicians know, often it is the smaller things which are important to people, and you do not necessarily have to scream from the rooftops to make a point or to get things done.
Actually serving the community, as well as being seen to serve the community, are vital ingredients for any member of parliament, and Bern Kilgariff set the bar. I do not believe anyone in this House will ever get close to his contribution to his community, or public life.
One finds in politics many pretenders - people who pretend to get things done when they actually do not; people who say they care when they really do not; and people who say they want to make a difference but, who are, in fact, driven by ego and ambition. That was not Bern Kilgariff. He was the real deal. He cared about his community, he cared about people and, importantly, he really liked them.
Despite being a founding father of our Party, I do not believe Bern was ever driven by what, sadly, consumes many modern day politicians - a sometimes irrational and unquestioning devotion to one’s political Party. He just wanted politicians to do their jobs and to make their community better.
It has been said when his daughter, Fran, decided to run for the Labor Party in Alice Springs in 2005, it must have been a difficult time for Bern. I am not sure that it was. I remember how some people in the CLP were appalled and shocked that he would support his daughter. Frankly, I would have been appalled and shocked had he done anything other than support his daughter. When many people around me at the time were asking how he could support his Labor daughter, I asked how could he not, and why should he not.
For Bern, it seemed to me, politics was about representing people and working hard for them. I suspect he always backed the candidate who he thought would do the best job. Despite being a founding father of the CLP, I do not believe he was wedded to ‘the Party line’ or, indeed, any Party line. He followed his own conscience, had his own ethical and moral code about politicians and, for that matter, budding politicians, and he looked at and assessed what they were capable of achieving.
Bishop Hurley called Bern ‘a man of his time’. I believe his approach to politics and representative democracy makes him a man for all seasons.
Interestingly, last week a friend rang me about Bern. She has lived in Alice Springs for a long time, and is a woman in her mid-30s. She had never met him, but said she had read and heard so much about him since his death she wondered if it was all true. She rang me because, as she said: ‘You will give me a straight answer’. I said: ‘Yes, everything you have read and heard about Bern Kilgariff is true’. She was amazed. Our conversation started me thinking about those people in our community, particularly in Alice Springs, who had not met Bern and, in particular, younger people who perhaps did not fully appreciate his contribution to the Territory and Alice Springs, and even those who had not heard of him.
I am pleased to hear a new suburb in Alice Springs will be named Kilgariff; it is a great idea. I would like to add something - and I have not spoken to the family, or the Chief Minister, or my colleagues about this. I believe, in addition, it would be an entirely appropriate and fitting tribute to Bern if we as a parliament, or perhaps the government, funded a Bern Kilgariff Scholarship to be awarded to a school student from Alice Springs each year. I know, as we all do, that Bern’s name and legacy will live on regardless; however, I believe it is important we do what we can to educate young people about him, his values, and his contribution. I believe we should and can get together to create a scholarship that bears his name.
In the same way that he shared with us his values and was an outstanding example of public service, I believe we have a responsibility to share his legacy with others, particularly younger people, and a scholarship will be a wonderful way for us, his successors, to carry the baton and pass it on.
On that hopeful note I will conclude. Again, I pass on my heartfelt condolences to Aileen and all members of the family
I thank Bern for his outstanding and truly marvelous contribution to the Territory and, in particular, my town of Alice Springs.
Ms LAWRIE (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, my deepest condolences to the Kilgariff family. I did not have the opportunity to attend the state funeral on Thursday of last week, but caught up with Aileen and members of the family in Alice Springs on Saturday. That was a very special morning.
I made the mistake of saying on Saturday I had known Bern since I was five years old. Subsequently, I received a contribution to the condolence motion from my mother, and on reading that I realised I first met him when I was two years old.
I will start of with the contribution from Dawn, who served with Bern in the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly, and is here today. This is from Dawn:
- I first met Bernie Kilgariff when he was a member of the Northern Territory Housing Commission. I think he may have been Chair, and my first husband was also a member of that Commission. This is well before I entered politics, and I was a bit overwhelmed when, on one of his trips to Darwin, I was advised that Mr Kilgariff was coming home to dinner.
I prepared the roast dinner, but before we could sit down to eat, I heard a horrible bang and looked out the window to see my boxer dog, Sheba, had been hit by a car. All thought of the dinner went out of my mind, and my husband was left to carve the roast while I tended to the dog. Bernie was kind and understanding.
Only a couple of weeks later, he was again invited home for dinner. But this time just as he reached the top of the stairs, Delia, aged two, slipped and cut her eyebrow open on a coffee table. Bernie walked into another dinner catastrophe with me holding Delia, who had blood streaming down her face, and all thought of an elegant dinner vanished.
He was, again, kind and helpful - two characteristics I soon began to recognise as an essential part of his character.
Notwithstanding the two dinner disasters, Bernie and Aileen allowed one of his sons, Brian, to come to Darwin for a holiday with us. He probably told Brian not to expect too much in the way of catering. We decided to take Brian for a bush trip to the old Muirella Park tourist site. Needless to say we got bogged in the sand and poor Brian and my son, John, spent an hour or so digging us out after which they cooled off in the Muirella Park billabong with me standing guard to watch for crocodiles. We heard the crocs barking that night but somehow Brian assured us he had the time of his life.
It was also at this time that I met Bernie’s lovely wife, Aileen, a strong, compassionate, wonderful woman who I came to love and admire. When I was elected to the Legislative Council in 1971, Bernie Kilgariff went out of his way to make me, the lone woman, feel welcome and would not allow any discourtesy to be shown to me.
Following the first Legislative Assembly in 1974, he was elected the first Speaker of the new Assembly, a position he served with his characteristic good humour and distinction. It should be remembered that he was Speaker during the dark days immediately following Cyclone Tracy, and his calm and dignified demeanour, once again, stood out amid the chaos of those difficult days.
It came as no surprise that Bern was elected to the Senate when the Northern Territory was finally given two Senate seats, an honour he richly deserved because he was every inch a representative of all that is good in Territorians. Behind his courteous and warm manner, there was a keen political brain and a strong conviction of the right for the Northern Territory to advance and take its rightful place as a self-governing state; for which I, and many others, admire him. We recognise his unwavering contribution to our constitutional development.
Above all, I remember Bern Kilgariff for his warmth, kindness, strength of character, and wonderful sense of humour. It was a privilege to have known him, and I send my love and best wishes to the lovely Aileen and his great family of whom he was so justly proud.
Dawn Lawrie.
I have a few favourite Bern Kilgariff tales, which I shared with the family on the weekend. Due to the nature of some of them, I cannot repeat them in this Chamber on the public record, because he was truly, in my experience, extremely mischievous. That being said, as a child growing up around the old Legislative Council building and the old Assembly building in the days before after-school care, I got to judge the politicians of the day, not by their politics but by their character.
Bern Kilgariff was an exceptional man of exceptional stature. I saw the way he treated my mother with kindness, and the way in which he embraced her three children as we played around the halls of the then Assembly. He was a generous man, a truly kind man; he was, above and foremost, a family man. He cared very deeply about his children, his grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
We have heard of the exceptional contribution Bern Kilgariff has made to the development of the Territory, particularly and especially the development of Central Australia. He was passionate about the Territory and about the Centre.
I recall the condition of the building of the old Assembly, post-Cyclone Tracy, and the way in which, with his strength and demeanour, he ensured there was a smooth operation of government here in the Territory in those horror days.
Politics in the Territory sometimes transcends political parties, and Bern was very generous with his time when I was elected to office. I recall his mischievous sense of humour again at play when we had our first sittings as a parliament in Alice Springs. We were having the official function in the forecourt of the Convention Centre, and you could have cut the air with a knife; there was some tension there because it was post-election of the first Labor government in the history of the Territory and, there we were, in CLP heartland of the time.
Speeches were about to get under way and everyone was quite hushed as I entered the crowd and scurried in because I had been delayed doing some work in preparation for sittings. Bern happened to be standing there surrounded by people from Alice Springs. I scooted in trying not to be noticed, but Bern noticed me, called me to his side, gave me the usual hug and kiss that he always greeted me with and, with a mischievous twinkle in his eye, loudly announced to everyone within earshot – which was quite a number of people: ‘This is Delia. She is the member for Karama; she is like my granddaughter’. There was a shocked gasp from many people, and enormous embarrassment for me, but that was Bern’s way. He was highly politically mischievous when the occasion took him.
We will miss this great Territorian, but he has left an enormous legacy. He has a tremendous family. Aileen is a very special woman, and you have heard contributions about her in the Chamber today. But, his children and, I believe, his grandchildren and great-grandchildren will all go on in some way to make their mark in the Territory. They are a large family, scattered around our great nation, but there are many Kilgariffs who have continued living in the Territory and call the Territory home.
Bern Kilgariff was a stand-out, exceptional Territorian in a very heady and challenging era of politics in the Territory. Of the politicians of the time, from my view, looking at them as a child where I did not see politics but I saw simply character, Bern Kilgariff, Dick Ward, Tiger Brennan and Ron Withnall were the stand-out gentlemen of their day, and truly did carve a significant legacy for the Territory and Territorians; men of exceptional stature.
Bern will be long remembered by many Territorians. I acknowledge the book, by Sheila and Peter Forrest - a good book. I certainly acknowledge the great suggestion by the member for Araluen for a Bern Kilgariff scholarship. I had a quick chat to the Chief Minister, and I can say we will be picking up on that suggestion. The Chief Minister is pleased to say it is something this government would be happy to put in place. So, well done for that suggestion.
My condolences to the family. He was a tremendous man, and we were all very well served by the great Bern Kilgariff.
May he rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, Bern Kilgariff is a man I knew over many years, not as well as others, but I knew him and knew of him because of his long life in the Territory.
My first contact with anything Kilgariff was when I went to the movies at the Kilgariff Oasis Motel in Alice Springs in mid-1964, on a school geography excursion.
I was married in the church at Daly River, which Bern’s father, Steve, and John D’Arcy built in the early 1950s.
I first met Bern when he travelled to various places, such as Bathurst Island and Daly River, on his rounds as an NT politician or as a Senator. When I started in local government and when I became a member of parliament, he supported my endeavours, encouraged me and gave me advice, especially when I caught up with him when the parliamentary sittings were held in Alice Springs. Reading some of his adjournment debates when he was in Canberra, I would say that his politics were similar to mine, which perhaps had something to do with that Irish Catholic background.
He was a man in touch with the common man, no matter where that person lived in the Territory or the colour of their skin. That is what I believe Bern saw as the founding principle of the CLP when he helped form that party: it represented his ideals.
But it is not the politics that is necessarily important, but how a person lives their life and what influence that person had on others. If I could be half as good a man as Bern, I would be happy. If I had half the influence on others that Bern had, I would be happy. Bern affected me, not because I met him a few times, but because of what he said and did. He affected many others, as you will see if you read the biography, They Started Something by Peter and Sheila Forrest.
Bern was a great Territorian, a fine politician, a family man, a worker, a pastoralist and an environmentalist; a friend of Aboriginal people and refugees from Vietnam and Timor. And, of course, he was an amazing chook farmer - perhaps that is where we should use the scholarship. Most of all, he was a good man – isn’t that the most important thing?
In 1520, the poet, Robert Whittington, wrote an epitaph about Sir Thomas More, whose head King Henry VIII had chopped off. Since then, Sir Thomas More has become the Patron Saint of politicians and large families – isn’t that interesting? Sir Robert Whittington wrote:
- More is a man of an angel’s wit and singular learning. He is a man of many excellent virtues; I know not his fellow. For where is the man (in whom is so many goodly virtues) of that gentleness, lowliness, and affability, and as time requires, a man of marvellous mirth and pastimes and sometime of steadfast gravity — a man for all seasons.
Thomas More was the Englishman for all seasons, and although, thankfully, Bern did not suffer the same fate as Sir Thomas More, there was no doubt Bern Kilgariff was our Territory man for all seasons.
Rest in peace, Bern, and may the angels lead you into paradise.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, my condolences to the family.
It is a great honour to be able to speak today about Bern Kilgariff. There is a sense of irony that someone like me, who has only spent 10 years in the Northern Territory, is standing in parliament speaking about someone who has spent 80 years contributing to the Territory. In fact, when I was born in 1968, he was already 42 - which made him older than I am today. He had managed to squeeze so much into his life by that stage already.
Before I met Bern, his legacy was already enormous. Our paths did not cross until a few years after I arrived in Alice Springs, and it was a brief encounter; however, I was struck by his demeanour and his presence. When I was elected, my association with Bern took on another dimension. Bern’s political contribution to the Northern Territory is without question; much of which has been highlighted today, and at his state funeral last Thursday.
The electorate I represent is Greatorex, and is named after Tony Greatorex. On the few occasions Bern and I were able to sit down and have lengthy chats, he would regale me with stories about his great mate, Tony Greatorex. I was very grateful for that, because his knowledge of Tony and the times they shared together were hard to come by back in those days. In fact, there were not too many people who had intimate knowledge of Tony Greatorex and the times Tony and Bern spent together throughout those early pioneering days in Central Australia and the Northern Territory.
An 80-year commitment to the NT and, in particular, Central Australia, is nothing short of incredible. He managed to fit so much into that time, not just in politics - which was considerable - but to the business community, the pastoral industry and St John Ambulance - for which he was knighted, and I had the fortune to attend that ceremony in 2008 - and also the Indigenous community. We heard from you, Madam Speaker, about a letter in The Centralian Advocate regarding his contribution to, and his relationship with, Aboriginal people at the time, not only in Central Australia but right across the Northern Territory. He was a big contributor to the church, and the Alice Springs community in general.
While Bern’s generation and mine are decades apart, and our relationship was not one forged in war, politics, or grazing, it was one of a young, newly elected politician in awe of a man with such experience. Rather than the ‘know-it-all, do-not-bother-me-son’ attitude, it was quite the contrary. He was quite prepared to offer the benefit of his experience not just to me, but to everyone, as we have heard today.
I am happy to say I am good friends with the newer generation of the Kilgariff family - some of them I know quite well. There are many, and I am good friends with some of them, which will ensure his legacy and memory will live on with my family, as my son and his great-grandchildren play together today.
To Aileen, and all of Bern’s family, thank you for sharing such a great guy with all of us in so many ways, in so many aspects of life. My deepest sympathies to the family.
To Bern, may you rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms McCARTHY (Local Government): Madam Speaker, it is a great honour, as a member of the Northern Territory parliament, to pay tribute to a great Centralian and Territorian, and to express my condolences to the family and friends of the late Bern Kilgariff.
Listening today to the many achievements of Bern Kilgariff, it gives me a chance to reflect on growing up between Borroloola and Alice Springs. I recall, in my time at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School in Alice Springs, times with the Kilgariff family, growing up with many of the grandchildren of the Kilgariff family, and also knowing Bern Kilgariff as someone who was a very kindly and friendly, and very important, person in government.
As you grow up you meet very important people who have an impact on your life, and maybe at the time, as an eight-, nine-, or 10-year-old, you do not quite understand the significance of that person. As you get older you certainly come to realise that Bern Kilgariff had a tremendous impact, not only on Central Australia, but on all the Territory.
Bern Kilgariff led the way at a national level, and his focus on constitutional equality and his desire to see an equal and fair society for all people across the Northern Territory represented in the federal parliament is a passion that lives on through his family; certainly through Fran as Co-chair of the Statehood Steering Committee. Across the Northern Territory, those people who today, as members of the Statehood Steering Committee, carry out the beliefs and firm determination and values of people like Bern Kilgariff, have inspired the generations behind them. Bern Kilgariff showed us a way. He helped create a path for all of us to walk; a path for all of us who seek to make a difference through our work as elected representatives of the people of the Northern Territory.
He was a hard-working and principled man with many wonderful achievements, both for his family and the people he represented in our parliament and in Canberra. He left us a wonderful legacy, for he not only exemplified the idea of community service, but he also set a great standard for others to aim for. He showed through his actions and words a dignified and honourable way to practice the art of politics.
As we have heard throughout the condolence motion this morning, he truly was a man for all people and a political representative of all the people of the Northern Territory, deeply committed to providing and developing good governance. He laid out a blueprint for our generation of how hard work, new opportunities, diligence and fairness will provide us with family wellbeing, good governance and economic progress for our community. He had a knack for recognising opportunity and knowing what needed to be done. Much of his life was dedicated to developing infrastructure to improve life in the bush; pioneering work that has made life easier for all of us today.
I reflect on travelling from Borroloola to Alice Springs. Years before we could catch the coach that went through Daly Waters and Highway Inn, people would get on horseback for a couple of weeks to ride from Borroloola to the highway to catch the coach to school in Alice Springs. Today, we see the massive infrastructure that has come about and people like Bern Kilgariff pioneered the way for the people of the Northern Territory.
It is not until we reflect on a life such as Bern’s that we appreciate the changes that have brought us to the present day. Such reflection also reminds us of the power of one, both in family and community life, and how with focus, hard work and an attitude that we can do anything, great things are possible. His contributions to the development of Alice Springs, Central Australia and the Northern Territory are truly legendary. He saw what could be done and he took the risks and acted on his faith in making the impossible possible. It is this reflection that makes us appreciate the wonderful opportunities that the Northern Territory has to offer for those who, like Bern, take nothing for granted, work hard and seize every opportunity that comes our way.
It is important, as suggested by the member for Araluen, that current Territorians, and Territorians to come, appreciate and understand and acknowledge the work of pioneers like Bern Kilgariff.
He was a wonderful advocate and practitioner. He held fast to his leadership dream of a Northern Territory evolving as a self-governing Territory, and committed himself to this knowing it was an important first step towards statehood.
In my time working as the Co-Chair with Fran in Alice Springs, I had a good chance to talk with Bern – now as an older person in the Northern Territory, and not through the eyes of a 10-year-old – and discuss with him the future of the Northern Territory, and to learn about his passion for constitutional equality for all people across the Northern Territory. No matter how hard it gets, we must persevere and keep believing in that dream, and the rest of Australia needs to see we want to be equal to them. Today, citizens of the Northern Territory continue to walk that path and to work for recognition of the Territory as a full, equal state of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Bern’s other great skill was to inspire and to rally people together to create linkages between like-minded people, and leading by example through his volunteering work with many community groups and committees.
As the Northern Territory’s Minister for Tourism, I acknowledge his pioneering contributions to the development of our tourism industry. He played a huge role in the early days of tourism in Central Australia, both with his labour in building tourism infrastructure such as airstrips, but also in helping to establish an industry association to steer the development of the industry.
His tireless interest in the possible, and his passion for the Territory, naturally led him to community committees, to the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly and, thereafter, the federal parliament. Rightfully, he received much recognition during his life for his work, including the Order of Australia and Investiture as a Knight in the Order of St John. No doubt, like most men of Mr Kilgariff’s ilk, he would have unassumingly accepted these awards.
Even in his 80s, he continued to inspire young Territorians by teaching St John cadets about the history of the St John Ambulance Service and its links to ANZAC traditions. Whilst managing his property, Erldunda, in his retirement years, he and Mrs Kilgariff – Aileen - took management of their property to a new level, developing a property plan to not only ensure sustainability for their cattle business, but also to maintain biodiversity and protect the natural resources of the land. The Kilgariffs were awarded a Landcare Award for his work in 2001.
We have heard today the importance of Bern’s contribution to Aboriginal people in the central region, but also here in the Top End. I acknowledge and pay tribute to Bern on behalf of the people of Arnhem, and my families in the Gulf region. He was an amazing man. I know his passion for the people of the Northern Territory does live on in his people and his family, and the people around him.
Madam Speaker, there is one other area of his life that people have touched on, but I would like to add to as well - his incredible faith and his love for the Lord, and his love for his family that provided his strength through every task he carried out in his life. When we look at his achievements, there can be no greater achievement than that of the love of your family, and the incredible amount of respect and friendship he built amongst his children and grandchildren, nieces and nephews, and friends of the family. The fact he was able to take in so many other people with Aileen: people who became a part of their lives - Aboriginal families, and those families who needed refuge when they came to Australia and sought refuge in Alice Springs. The Kilgariffs made their home open to these people.
That, to me, is a very important part of what Bern Kilgariff is all about, and the wonderful legacy that lives on through his faith, his family, and the people around him.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I start by passing on my condolences to Aileen and the Kilgariff family, and friends of Bern. I also thank the Chief Minister for bringing forward this motion which I support.
It has often been said over the past months and weeks that Bern Kilgariff was a forefather of the Northern Territory. If one takes the meaning of the word as someone who originated a tradition, then it is absolutely correct. His legacy is something that is a huge example to me.
The renowned Benjamin Franklin had only one year of formal schooling, but thrived on work. He had his own interest in printing and inventing, but became focused on formulating the Declaration of Independence from England. One of Franklin’s last public acts was writing the anti-slavery treaty which he finished when he was 83. Throughout his public service much of what Franklin did was directed at improving his city and the lives of Philadelphians. It is as the member for Braitling that I can proudly say that our own Bern Kilgariff was also a man of many interests and capacities. He was a businessman who understood the commercial world and the sheer effort required to build an enterprise from the bottom up.
He left school at age 16, beaten by only one mark for the single available scholarship to complete secondary education - so it is a very timely recommendation by the member for Araluen who recommended a higher education scholarship fund be established in the name of Bern - and he noted: ‘Had I gone to college in Adelaide, I would probably have travelled quite a different road through life, probably not even Central Australian roads’. Bern’s vision focused on many fields including pastoral, mining, Indigenous affairs, statehood, and other areas.
He had an overriding care and concern for the community of Alice Springs and for the broader Northern Territory, working hard and long to progress the Territory towards statehood. It is apt the baton has been passed to one of his daughters, Fran, who not only served as the Mayor of Alice Springs, but now acts as Co-Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee.
Just like Franklin, Bern’s humanitarian work never ceased. Having been Secretary of the Senate’s opposition Immigration and Ethnic Affairs Committee, he went on to serve on the Australian Citizenship Council, established in 1998, which recognised the importance and significance of citizenship issues reflecting the inclusive nature of our society and our unity as a nation.
From a personal point of view, I found Bern’s political career to be truly inspiring: the role he played in forming the CLP and creating the party which has given me the opportunity I have today. I personally owe him a great deal, both in political terms, and also as someone who was born interstate but has come to live in the Northern Territory with my family and enjoy the benefits that Bern so clearly developed.
Bern’s parliamentary service came about at first by a form of osmosis as his support for Alice Springs community issues burgeoned into a far wider understanding and promotion of the way forward for the Northern Territory. Within three years of his appointment to the Northern Territory’s Legislative Council, he was on five committees, including Social Welfare. He worked on Aboriginal land rights, chaired the NT Housing Commission, and also found time to chair the Alice Springs Hospital Advisory Board, the YMCA Southern Region, and the Royal Flying Doctor Alice Springs base. He served as President of the Centralian Children’s Holiday Scheme, the Alice Springs Heart Foundation, and the Community College, amongst many others.
On behalf of the people of Alice Springs, I thank him, and the family who supported him, from the bottom of my heart.
I know that Bern’s outstanding qualities included patience, tenacity and strength of character, but also compassion. All of us in this House should take note of his example.
His maiden speech in the Senate on 18 February 1976 included, in its early stages, the observation:
- In these days of economic struggle and restraint, the average Territorian has extended his horizon dramatically. He has done so because although he is aware that he is a member of a community which sprawls over a vast area, he prefers to look upon himself as a person who is making a solid contribution not only to the Territory, but to Australia as a whole.
This set the scene for Bern’s summary of our gas, oil and mineral potential, the pastoral industry, Defence and tourism. He pointed out that we cannot afford the luxury of an operation that is continually hampered by fragmentation, overlapping authority and red tape, and called for greater autonomy and investment in infrastructure. Ironically, in my own maiden speech within this House only two years ago, I found myself noting that our economic growth should be supported by sealing roads, building bridges, installing telecommunications access, and asking: why can’t we do these things?
I, like Bern, emphasise that the only way forward is to grow, not at the cost of the environment or loss of culture, but to grow as a state, to grow as a people, re-investing in the lands, protecting our environment, and enriching our culture.
It was highly appropriate that Bern and Aileen Kilgariff were both given the rare honour of Honorary Life Membership in the Country Liberal Party. In all, Bern gave 26 years of service to the Territory and federal parliaments.
In conclusion, I look back at the last few weeks. We have celebrated Anzac Day, and Bern continued the finest traditions of the ANZACs through his World War II service; and we have celebrated the anniversary of John McDouall Stuart’s first expedition through Central Australia. The Kilgariff family were an integral part of the centenary celebrations in Alice Springs in 1960, when a ball was held at the local Memo Club coinciding with the official opening of a new hall. The ANZAC spirit has done more for building Australia’s patriotism than almost anything else. McDouall Stuart made it possible to build our Territory. Bern took over the mantle and, I believe, put in place the embryonic process of patriotism in the Northern Territory by its constituents, especially in the Centre.
We honour his memory.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, I support the motion of condolence in the House today, and pass on my deepest sympathy and condolences from the tribes in Central Australia; the tribes of the Anmatjere people, the Warlpiri people, the Luritja Pintubi, the Central Arrernte people, and Western Arrernte people to the Kilgariff family.
I take this opportunity not to be repetitive of the things other people have said, but talk about the love and passion Bern and his whole family showed for Central Australia and Aboriginal people, in particular. As a child growing up, and talking to people like the Aboriginal Ted Egan - not the former Administrator - and people like Wenten and Eli Rubuntja, who grew up dancing in the town of Alice Springs along with Bern Kilgariff, these people truly admired the love, the forgiveness and the softness of Bern Kilgariff.
I support the condolence motion; and offer my sympathies to the Kilgariff family, friends, and wider community, on the passing of Bern Kilgariff.
The Alice Springs community struck it lucky when Bern Kilgariff stepped off the train in 1929. In an even greater stroke of good fortune, Bern made a home in Central Australia, not just for himself, but also for his family and, as a true Central Australian, there his home remained until the end of his days.
Bern came to the Territory and stayed because he had passion for Central Australia and a passion for its people. This passion drove him to assisting the community in any way he could, beyond politics and beyond race. He was devoted to helping people in so many sectors of the community, through so many different avenues, it is hard to believe he has not influenced all Central Australians in some way.
Bern believed in making a contribution to the place in which he lived. His contribution was not a small one; he was a dynamic personality, taking the opportunities the Territory offered him and making the most of them. The industries he worked in were transportation, tourism and pastoralism, just to name a few. He was dominant in all these industries in Central Australia, and the fact he is recognised in each for his significant contribution is a testament to the energy and determination of the man.
Bern’s love for Alice Springs and Central Australia shone through his political life as well. He tirelessly fought for resources for Central Australia, and believed the best about the Central Australian community. When he spent time in the Centre, he spent time with all of us. We did not think of him as Bern the politician, we thought of him as Bern our friend, our mate.
He was an uncut diamond, and the depth of his character is demonstrated through the depth of his friendship in and around Alice Springs with both black and white people. Central Australians are grateful we had the chance to know Bern Kilgariff, and share time with him. We are grateful he stayed and made a lasting mark on our community. His leadership, in all aspects of life, will be missed and not forgotten. Bern’s legacy will live on through his family and through the community of Alice Springs, which he touched and made his own. Certainly, it was his own.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HAMPTON (Central Australia): Madam Speaker, I offer my condolences today to Aileen and the family and friends of Mr Bern Kilgariff, as the Minister for Central Australia, the member for Stuart, and as someone who was born in Alice Springs.
It was a great honour and privilege to attend the state funeral, to be part of Bern’s journey on the tram, as it was called during the service. It was a time of reflection as we all thought about our own families. I reflected on the similarities of the journey of the Kilgariff family and the journey of the Hampton family in the Northern Territory over many years. It was a journey which has much in common with my grandparents, Tim and Sarah Hampton: having 11 children, albeit all boys, and very similar to the Kilgariff family in our involvement in building the Territory whether through the mining industry, through building towns such as Tennant Creek, or supplying produce to the Army as my grandparents did in Hatches Creek in the 1940s. For me, it brought back much of my own family’s journey, and also complete acknowledgement of the life of Mr Kilgariff and his achievements over many years.
Similar to the member for Greatorex, being born in 1968, and hearing from parliamentary colleagues in the House this morning about what he achieved up to 1968, it is unbelievable to think how many achievements Mr Kilgariff made before I was even born, and to think what he has done after that time. It is an amazing journey.
Over the weekend I was speaking to my father, Robert, who is the last remaining in his family of 11 boys and his parents. I asked him about the stories of respect for Mr Kilgariff. He made the comment that Mr Kilgariff was a man who talked to everyone; he knew everyone in Alice Springs. I know it is a small town, but he knew everyone in Alice Springs at that time, and he talked to everyone. He never walked past anyone without saying something and treating them all the same, no matter their backgrounds.
He was also very much a motivator for the Alice Springs residents despite their backgrounds; he was someone people looked up to; and you knew he was in there doing his best for Centralians. My father’s words sums it all up: he was a complete Territorian. As colleagues have pointed out today, he was a man who has done so much, a man for all people – a complete Territorian.
He was a man who was very generous with his time, as we have heard, and with his wisdom. My uncle, Mr Ted Hampton, stood in two Legislative Assembly elections in 1980 and 1983, and I know Mr Kilgariff provided him with a great deal of advice during those two elections. He was very supportive and, most of all, he will be remembered as a true gentleman.
It has been said Mr Kilgariff’s passing will see the end of an era in Alice Springs. I believe his legacy is so enduring that his memory and influence, and the Kilgariff name, will continue to resonate in Alice Springs not least because of the contribution of Bern’s children and grandchildren due to their continued contribution to our town and to the Northern Territory. His life was one of service, and he seems to have passed this gene on. I am sure the Kilgariff name will continue to feature strongly in the history of the Northern Territory and, as we have heard today, it will certainly continue on in the name of the newest suburb of Alice Springs.
His was a family with strong Catholic faith, which Bern adhered to during his life, with a proud Irish tradition and, apparently, some Spanish thrown in as well. In 1927, Bern’s uncle and aunt, Joe and Eileen Kilgariff arrived in Alice Springs to run the Stuart Arms Hotel. In 1929, Bern’s parents and family arrived in Alice Springs on one of the first trains to the town of Stuart, a small outpost. He, with his sister, Marion, attended the Hartley Street school with most of the kids of the town. Bern struck up firm friendships which lasted his lifetime in those early days. Two of his playmates were the Rubuntja brothers, who went on to become respected elders and leaders in Central Australia. In his book, The Town Grew Up Dancing, Wenten Rubuntja talked about playing with Bern in the dry creek just up past Middle Park, riding push bikes and donkeys and, in his words: ‘Everybody mixed up together just like spiders and ants and flies’. Bern honoured and respected Aboriginal traditional ways and lived the spirit of reconciliation through his life - it was part of who he was as a person.
When Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School opened in 1938, Bern attended and was the first person to complete Intermediate schooling in 1939. One of his first jobs was to walk around the town with a sandwich board promoting the movies that were playing at the local theatre, as the Chief Minister has already mentioned.
In 1942, 19-year-old Bern enlisted and fought in New Guinea, a member of the 2/5 Infantry Battalion of 6th Division AIF. He returned home to Alice Springs after the war and began working with his uncle, Mick Heenan, on Mick’s farm on the site of the current Oasis Motel. Bern said he had really just come back to Alice to see his family and agreed to help out on the farm for a few weeks but, to his surprise, he enjoyed the work. Mick Heenan had made a good living supplying the Army during the war, and developed the farm with about 1000 laying hens and a large market garden. Bern said he was enjoying life after discharge from the Army and his return to Alice Springs.
He recalled an active social life and a town where there were many young people and new people were coming to make their homes and take up work. He described simple, enjoyable social occasions with people gathering around home pianos for regular singsongs. Not long after, Bern met the woman who was to be the love of his life and his partner in all his future endeavours. Aileen Canny arrived in Alice Springs in October 1946 to visit her sister and brother-in-law, and met Bern not long after arriving. They became a fixture around town, I am told, riding on Bern’s Harley-Davidson motorbike with his dog in the sidecar.
Bern and Aileen married in April 1948 and, having decided to take up the offer of his Uncle Mick to buy the farm, headed off to learn about the practical and theoretical side of poultry farming. The poultry farm thrived and supplied the growing town and region with fresh eggs and meat for many years. According to a couple of stories I have heard over the last week, including from my father, the Kilgariffs also became the first chicken takeaway in Alice, with a few hens mysteriously disappearing at times as well.
Bern had been observing the growing number of visitors to Alice Springs and the Central Australia region - people who wanted to take a firsthand look at the remote town and spectacular country. In 1955, he built a few motel rooms on the farm block and began the Oasis Motel, an establishment still going strong today.
Bern was one of the pioneers of the tourism industry in the Centre, seeing the potential of the region long before many others, and blazing a pathway where there is now a thriving industry. He founded the Central Australian Tourism Association, which later became CATIA, and is now the TCA. He was also closely involved in the formation and building of the Memorial Club, was involved as an umpire in the local footy competition, and supported the YMCA, Legacy, Landcare, and a host of other community organisations.
He was a Knight of St John for his support of the St John Ambulance organisation, and was awarded an OAM and, later, was recognised with an AM for his services to the Northern Territory.
I will leave it to others to pay tribute to Bern’s long and distinguished political career. But, as an Alice Springs boy myself, I want to pay tribute to his invaluable contribution to the social and economic development of our town. It is because of people like Bern and Aileen Kilgariff that Alice Springs is the thriving, dynamic community it is today. Their hard work, dedication to public service, humour, and resilience is an example to us all and something we all should honour.
My condolences, again, to Aileen and the family of Bern on behalf of the Hampton family, the people of Stuart, particularly the Warlpiri people with whom Bern had a close affiliation and, in particular, Barney Kilgariff, who was also at the state funeral.
Bern truly was, in the words of his old campaign slogan: ‘A Centralian for the Centre’.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I cannot imagine I have much to add to what has already been said in this place, so my contribution today will be as much a self-indulgence as to add to anything we have heard.
Whilst I have known of Bern Kilgariff for as long as I can recall, my father, who lived in Darwin, the city I grew up in, would often speak of the political leaders of our community. I did not come to know Bern until after I was preselected to stand for my former seat, the seat of Macdonnell. When I was preselected for the seat of Macdonnell, one of the first people who contacted me was Bern Kilgariff. He said: ‘Come down to the cattle station and we will have a quick chat, John, about some of the things you need to do’.
Dutifully, I went down. I walked into the cattle station and I was invited in through the kitchen door, which I thought may have been the tradesmen’s entrance but, I have since discovered, was the door used by family, and the door I was always encouraged to use. It was considered to be such a formal arrangement to come in via the front door, and invariably, of course, being a working cattle station, the kitchen was probably the most important and functional room, and the dining area, to add to that, the most important and functional room in the whole place.
When I spoke with Bern, I was introduced to a man who was the very essence of a quiet disposition but, nevertheless, determined, and he offered me, through the course of my early political life, help, transport and those types of things. I will never forget the influence he has had on me. I am also a Catholic. I am a Catholic not by birth, but because I adopted the faith, or the faith adopted me, and I came to Christ to be baptised in the Catholic Church in Alice Springs partially because of the example Bern Kilgariff gave me as to what a Catholic could be. I suspect I will never become the Christian and the Catholic that Bern was but, nevertheless, I can strive for spiritual advancement whilst I have such glorious examples to follow. I had him in my mind the day I was baptised.
From that kitchen table, we spoke on many issues, and he guided my mind to many thoughts. What struck me most of all, was the relationship he had with Aileen. As I mentioned, he took me on trips in his aircraft. He and Aileen would fly together, and I recall sitting in the back of, I believe it was a Cessna 210, or a Cessna of some sort, and heading off in the direction of an Aboriginal community. As I looked at the two sitting in front of me, I thought: how quaint; the quintessential old English couple going for a drive in the country; and I thought to myself: isn’t it great!
Then I looked out of the window of the aircraft, and I saw some of the most inhospitable country you could ever see. All of a sudden there was a communication between Bern and Aileen, and they were passing maps back and forth, and I thought to myself: my goodness, they are like an English couple who have taken a wrong turn in an English country lane and are lost. The only problem is, this not an English country lane, we are over a desert. And I thought to myself: goodness, what have I got myself into?
After that, I had cause to ponder it, and I realised we were never lost; we were never in any peril whatsoever. It was just the nature of the relationship of that couple, when a decision had to be taken or some advice had to be given, the communication between those two people was absolute. If there was a decision to be made at 10 000 feet over the most inhospitable country in the world, then that decision would be shared. Such was the quality of their relationship that they shared those decisions no matter how minor, no matter how insignificant they appeared because their relationship demanded that communication take place. The level of their intimacy invaded and percolated through every aspect of their consciousness and their life - a fine example of what a marriage should be, and what marriage vows intend when they are taken.
I have heard stories, and we heard from the Chief Minister today what sounded like the aggressive defence of the chicken farm on those occasions when Bern had visitors in the night removing chickens. I have not shared this story with anyone up until now. He and I were walking through an Aboriginal community one day when an old Aboriginal man suddenly sparked up and screamed out: ‘Cookalook, cookalook’. I wondered what it was. It turned out the old man remembered Bern from a time when he would provide some of the local Aboriginal people with chickens from his poultry farm – for free. The natural charity, which percolated through Bern’s veins, and was suggested to him by his faith, was also practiced. While he may have been the defender of his chickens, he certainly was not above allowing charity to see some of those chickens depart. That old fellow remembered Bern 30 or 40 years after the occasion and he ran over to thank Bern and they embraced as old friends. I do not know who this old Aboriginal man was but I remember the community. However, it goes to show the impact Bern could have on people high, and on people we would classify as low. We were all children of God in Bern’s eyes.
The self-effacing nature of the man is also something we have spoken of, and his continued use of the word ‘fancy’. I believe someone could explode into a room and announce World War III had just started, and the typical response from Bern would have been to place his hand under his chin, consider the implications, and say: ‘Fancy!’ That was the type of guy he was. In all the years I had known Bern, and the time I spent with him, I only ever heard him utter one word which might pass as an expletive. In fact, I suggest if I repeated it in this House, Hansard would print it. However, I shall not.
What I will say, on the one occasion I heard it, we were at the Finke community, we were literally 200 yards from any other living human being, and Bern was speaking on a matter he felt particularly strongly about. Such was his strength of emotion that he paused, looked over his right shoulder, looked over his left shoulder, to be sure no other person would hear it, and then conspiratorially lent over to me and uttered the word which, if it had been a curry, it would be so mild it would find its way into English fare without any resistance. That is how mild it was. Such was his concern about being overheard uttering it, the whole conspiracy had to be fulfilled in his demeanour before he uttered it. I certainly will not sully his memory by repeating it in this House. Suffice to say, if I did, this House would probably not object, so mild was it.
I had cause to think about what I was going to say here today. We have heard other people rely on quotes, and I would also seek that indulgence. I quote Adam Smith, from The Theory on Moral Sentiments, sixth edition:
- As taste and good judgment, when they are considered as qualities which deserve praise and admiration, we are supposed to imply a delicacy of sentiment and acuteness of understanding not commonly to be met with; so the virtues of sensibility and self-command are not apprehended to consist in the ordinary, but in the uncommon degrees of those qualities. The amiable virtue of humanity requires, surely, a sensibility much beyond what is possessed by the rude and vulgar of mankind. The great and exulted virtue of magnanimity undoubtedly demands much more than that degree of self-command, which the weakest of mortals is capable of exerting. As in the common degree of the intellectual qualities, there are no abilities; so in the common degree of the moral, there is no virtue. Virtue is excellence, something uncommonly great and beautiful.
Members: Hear, hear!
Motion agreed to.
Members observed one minute’s silence.
Madam SPEAKER: I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the motion. I invite family and friends and interested members to join us in the main hall for refreshments.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Message No 17
Message No 17
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from His Honour the Administrator Message No 17 notifying assent to bills passed in the February 2010 sittings of the Assembly. I table that document.
TABLED PAPER
Council of Territory Cooperation –
Change of Membership
Council of Territory Cooperation –
Change of Membership
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a letter from the Government Whip dated 22 March 2010 notifying the discharge of the member for Fannie Bay from the Council of Territory Cooperation, and appointing the member for Nhulunbuy.
MOTION
Council of Territory Cooperation –
Change of Membership
Council of Territory Cooperation –
Change of Membership
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly ratify the appointment of Ms Walker as a member of the Council of Territory Cooperation Committee.
Motion agreed to.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to petition Nos 26 and 29 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website. A copy of the responses will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to the petitioners.
- Petition No 26
Changes of Direction at Araluen Galleries
Date Presented: 21 October 2009
Presented by: Ms Carney
Referred to: Minister for Arts and Museums
Date response due: 29 April 2010
Date response received: 4 February 2010
Response:
- Recent policy decisions in regards to the Araluen Art Centre and its galleries are integral to the Northern Territory government’s Moving Alice Ahead initiative, which aims to make Alice Springs a better place to live, work and raise a family, while building a strong, safe and secure future for Alice Springs.
Community involvement in the planning and decision-making processes across the Araluen Cultural Precinct is currently in place in the form of a number of committees, the Museums and Art Galleries Board of the Northern Territory and the Strehlow Research Centre Board.
Further consideration of the issues raised in the petition will be considered in relation to the community consultation process associated with the draft Araluen Cultural Precinct Development Plan 2009-2015.
- Petition No 29
Katherine Aeromedical Service
Date Presented: 25 November 2009
Presented by: Mr Westra van Holthe
Referred to: Minister for Health
Date response due: 5 May 2010
Date response received: 25 March 2010
Response:
- I write to inform you of the significant progress that has been made, as safe, reliable air retrieval services are of critical concern for this government.
Last December, I announced the advertising of the Top End Aeromedical Service tender, closing 31 March 2010. I also confirmed that the Top End Aeromedical service will continue operating from the Katherine base with additional services provided by Careflight Helicopter and a fully medically equipped spectrum aircraft from Pearl Aviation.
From 1 July 2010, Careflight will provide the Top End Aeromedical service from Darwin, Katherine and Gove bases on an interim basis until the new service contract commences. Careflight is a highly experienced and skilled provider of these services and has been operating in the Northern Territory for several years.
Aeromedical Services is a specialised field of operation. Medical practitioners capable of undertaking aero medical retrievals are specially trained and experienced in critical care and emergency medicine, including advanced airway skills. Given the national critical workforce supply issues in this specialist field, it has proven most reliable to support the Katherine region with expert retrieval doctors from Darwin.
Significant effort to remove the wildlife risk at the Tindal airstrip has been undertaken by Defence Tindal with the installation of an airstrip fence and an ongoing Wildlife Management Plan for wallaby removal and culling strategies.
I understand the aviation providers continue to conduct safety assessments of the airstrip for night time retrievals. Air medical services will resume to 24 hour use of the Tindal airstrip as soon as it is assessed safe to do so.
Thank you for raising these matters with me. I wish to assure you that every effort is being made to ensure these services are of high standards for quality and safety for the entire community.
COMPANIES (TRUSTEES AND PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES) (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) IMPLEMENTATION BILL
(Serial 92)
(Serial 92)
Continued from 25 February 2010.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I indicate, at this stage, our qualified support for the passage of this legislation. Basically, this is the result of a July 2008 COAG agreement to see the responsibility for trustee companies transfer from the state and territories to the federal government for its management.
In this age of high-speed communications, we realise the nature of management and business management transcends state lines to a greater degree than it ever has, in fact, over international boundaries as well. As time passes, I believe you will see a greater centralisation of these things for the purposes of making business run more efficiently, and this is only a small component of it.
The appropriate legislation in the federal arena has already passed. It is my understanding it passed without opposition from the conservative side of government and, basically, it does make sense.
However, I did mention at the outset the word ‘qualification’. What I would like to know from the Treasurer in her response today is how many of these companies exist in the Northern Territory; how much taxation revenue is generated by those companies - I suspect it is not going to be a great deal - and how the government will make up for the shortfall, if there is a shortfall, or whether it is of any significant amount. I suspect the answer will be: it is not going to be a great deal at all. I note the Treasurer is sitting there shaking her head. I certainly hope that in the process of making this decision at the COAG, she relied on more than a PowerPoint presentation that her Chief Minister relied on when it came to the passage of the health agreement.
If she could attend to that particular matter, if she can indicate to me now if there is any detail she would like to go into we can go into committee. If not, I am happy to take her on her word in her summation.
Madam Speaker, we support the bill.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, I support the Credit (National Uniform Legislation) Implementation Bill 2010.
In October 2009, the Commonwealth National Consumer Credit Protection Act was passed to establish …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I believe the minister is actually referring to legislation which is not currently under debate. I suggest that he reads the cover of the document he has been given.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you wish to speak in this debate.
Mr KNIGHT: No, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Any further speakers in debate?
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the opposition for their qualified support for what is a COAG reform designed to continue to make a more seamless national economy. We have seen a new era of federal cooperation occurring whereby states are signing up to what is the appropriate handing over of regulation to the Commonwealth where they step into the fray and reduces red tape for companies.
At the outset, I advise the member for Port Darwin we have four companies in the Territory affected, and there are no tax revenue implications ...
Mr Elferink: That is what I thought. Thank you.
Ms LAWRIE: We were happy to sign up to ensure we repeal the licensing and regulation provisions of the Companies, Trustees and Personal Representatives Act as a consequence of the Commonwealth assuming these responsibilities under the Corporations Legislation Amendment (Financial Services Modernisation) Act 2009, which is the Commonwealth act.
State and territory legislation will be amended to remove all provisions dealing with licensing and regulation of trustee companies leaving provisions which deal with such matters as allowing a licensed company to act as a trustee, being appointed as an executor, and acting under a power of attorney. State and territory legislation will also be amended to make provisions for the transfer of the trustee companies’ business to another licensed trustee if the trustee company licence is cancelled.
The proposed legislation will ensure uniformity across the states and territories is consistent with the Territory’s commitments at COAG under the National Partnerships Agreement. Given the support for this, I do not propose to go into the detail I went into in the second reading speech.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Madam SPEAKER: Is it the will of the Assembly that we go into committee?
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): No, Madam Speaker, I am well satisfied with the answer received.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
CONSUMER CREDIT (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) IMPLEMENTATION BILL
(Serial 90)
(Serial 90)
Continued from 18 February 2010.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I wish to speak on the credit implementation bill (Serial 90). I certainly hope the minister for – what is he the minister for at the moment? Whatever it is, I hope he enjoys his contribution to the debate, because I suspect the notes he has in front of him, which have been pre-prepared and has the title written on the cover, will be the correct ones when he stands up and reads whatever was given to him before he walked into the Chamber today.
This particular bill deals with a national consumer credit policy which has already been published. I have read sections of it in the last 12 months in different places; it is easily obtained on the Internet. I believe the comments I made in the prior debate stand true in this particular debate, inasmuch as the uniformity of our credit legislation will assist greasing the wheels of our businesses and credit environment.
This was signed up until, I believe, March 2008 as a part of the COAG agreement. I note that even the federal government has thrown some money - I believe approximately $70m - at the process of implementing the package in the Territory. I presume the Commonwealth will be paying that $70m for the implementation of the package nationally. I am curious to know how much will be spent in the Territory. However, I foresee a day when this type of legislation will become standard legislation, not only within the Federation which is our country, but will start to spread - has already started to spread - to the whole of the OECD. I believe the more we make this type of financial legislation as uniform as possible, both in the national and international environment, the better it is for business.
Madam Speaker, we have no problems with the passage of this legislation; it just makes - what did Sam Kekovich say? ‘It just makes sense’.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, I speak in support of the Consumer Credit (National Uniform Legislation) Implementation Bill 2010.
In October 2009, the Commonwealth National Consumer Credit Protection Act was passed to establish a national scheme for the regulation of credit providers. The act aims to provide Australian consumers with improved and uniform protection. The national scheme transfers to the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, ASIC, the regulatory and enforcement roles traditionally undertaken by the states and territories. This national legislation was agreed to by the Council of Australian Governments in 2008.
The move towards national consumer credit laws is part of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s agenda to improve efficiencies in Australia through greater uniformity in areas where it is needed. COAG, in March 2008, accepted the need for a comprehensive, national, regulatory reform agenda as a way of improving Australia’s productivity and competitiveness. This bill is consistent with that agenda. As part of the move towards the implementation of uniform national consumer credit protection, the bill before the House will repeal the Consumer Credit (Northern Territory) Act and, in addition, parts of the Consumer Affairs and Fair Trading Act will also be repealed.
I believe this is timely legislation. Australia has just escaped the worst of the global financial crisis, during which the Territory fared better than other parts of Australia. All indications are that the restraint which was demonstrated by Australians during the crisis has now effectively evaporated and, as a consequence, householders across Australia are showing a willingness to take on bigger loans than ever before.
The Reserve Bank estimates the total mortgage debt in Australia is currently 38.2% larger than national household income. According to the Reserve Bank, by the beginning of this year, the combined worth of mortgage, credit cards, and personal loan debts stood at $1.2 trillion. This is equivalent to $57 000 for every man, woman, and child in Australia. I believe it is both timely and appropriate for governments to cooperate and ensure all Australians are protected by uniform and enhanced laws when borrowing money.
Apart from the improved enforcement powers contained in the act, consumers will also gain greater access to information concerning their loans. In the future, consumers will have a greater ability to get a clear picture of the commissions, charges and fees associated with the loans. Importantly, the new responsible lending component of the act means, when lenders are offering services, they must take into account the repayment capacity of the consumers.
We are all aware of instances where consumers have committed to loans only to find out that they do not have the ability to meet the repayments. The global financial crisis certainly shone a light on particular lending practices that have left consumers totally exposed. It is, as I have said, timely that we accept the need for uniformity and enhanced protection for borrowers.
For that reason, I support the bill my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General, has put before the House.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the members opposite for their support of this bill, which was referred to as ‘simply making sense’ by the member for Port Darwin.
The Territory was happy to sign up in March 2008 to this COAG reform giving the Commonwealth responsibility for the regulation of consumer credit and finance broking and, as the minister for Business said, there is no starker reminder as to the importance of this than the events of the global financial crisis. While our regulatory environment within Australia stood the test, we became the only developed jurisdiction on the globe that did not go into recession. In large part, the highly regulative aspect of our financial institutions, our banking industry, obviously held us in good stead. That being said, we are certainly not in a position to rest on our laurels. And I noticed announcements yesterday coming from the federal government in relation to financial advice and commissions, putting in more protections for the mums and dads of Australia to ensure that they are not at the mercy of any unscrupulous financial operators.
We have a good, sound and robust financial planning system in Australia, and I am pleased with yesterday’s announcements. I know some financial planners in the Territory, whom I have met as Treasurer, are organised and, I believe, are a group of very worthy operators, and I am sure they are paying close attention to the Commonwealth’s reforms. I welcome ASIC taking on the regulatory and enforcement role for consumer credit previously undertaken by the states and territories.
Essentially, what we are doing is repealing the Territory’s legislation dealing with the regulation of consumer credit to allow for transitional provisions with respect to the transfer of the regulation to the Commonwealth under their National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009, and meeting that COAG commitment.
We undertook consultation in relation to this. We consulted with key stakeholders, including the Law Society of the Northern Territory, the Financial Planning Association and the Chamber of Commerce. No major responses were received so we took the ‘no significant news’ as good news regarding their acceptance of these reforms. We recognise ASIC is developing information packs and fact sheets, as well as conducting a range of consultations in the information sessions across the nation, including the Northern Territory.
The new regulatory regime comes into effect as of 1 July 2010, and the legislation repeals the former regulatory provisions we had, and also puts in place important provisional transfer provisions as well - so sensible, and all worked hard to step towards a national seamless economy. Through those COAG reforms a significant amount of work is being undertaken by mainly the Department of Justice, NT WorkSafe which has a great deal on their plate regarding the national reform process and, of course, the Northern Territory Treasury.
These reforms will hold us in good stead as a nation, but as a Territory we are playing a not insignificant role. At public service officer level we are undertaking the commitments that we have signed up to. A great deal of work went into the legislation we have before us, and I thank the officers involved for the work they have undertaken.
We have a way to go in fulfilling all the COAG commitments with regard to a national seamless economy. It is interesting to engage with key stakeholders and, on the whole, I have to say business embraces and recognises the benefits in these COAG reforms.
Madam Speaker, I commend this legislation to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
National Health Reform and National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement
National Health Reform and National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, today I provide advice to the House on the recent Council of Australian Governments’ meeting in Canberra, and the subsequent agreement for substantial reform which has been agreed to by the majority of states and territories.
COAG was held over Monday, 19 April and Tuesday, 20 April. Prior to that, there were several rounds of meetings held between the Prime Minister, states and territories, and between states and territories on their own. My position was clear from the outset. I was prepared to sign this major reform; however, it had to do two things: (1) take into account the unique Territory health circumstances and, (2) provide additional resources to improve health in the Territory. On Tuesday afternoon, after many hours of negotiation, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement was finalised. I am pleased to advise the House this agreement fulfils both my preconditions.
Australia has one of the best health systems in the world. However, we know in regional Australia that health standards are generally poorer than the health of our fellow citizens in the big cities. The reason for this is simple: in regional areas, access to health services lags well behind what is available in the big cities. Since 2001, we have increased health spending by 117% to $1.05bn. Despite spending almost a quarter of the Territory budget on health, waiting times to see a GP still need to be cut, we need to cut waiting times in emergency departments, and we need to cut waiting times to see a surgeon. This is a complex problem; however, it is clear that to solve access to health services additional resources are needed in the current health system, and long-term structural change is needed. That is why I signed the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement.
The Prime Minister put on the table a plan which will lead to long-term reform of the Australian health system. The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement includes a clear plan to make hospitals more efficient and more responsive to patient needs; people will be seen more quickly in emergency departments, and waiting times for elective surgery will be reduced. The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement will lead to the reform of aged care, protecting the health of older citizens in the community, and ensuring an increased supply of residential aged care for our seniors who need high levels of care.
Importantly, the Commonwealth government has recognised the need to prioritise the needs of older patients who get stuck in the hospital system because of a lack of more suitable options in care. The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement provides a bold plan to fully integrate primary care services. This is especially critical to the Northern Territory where we are heavily reliant on primary healthcare. Comprehensive primary healthcare services are the key to closing the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. Readily accessible primary healthcare services, especially GPs, are essential in providing the services families need.
The agreement places the future financing of healthcare in Australia on a sustainable footing. It is inevitable health costs will grow as a proportion of expenditure as our population ages. The states and territories need the Commonwealth to meet its fair share of the costs of health services. Over time, the agreement we have struck will achieve this. Without this agreement, the proportion of Territory budget expenditure on health will continue to grow rapidly.
Within the National Health and Hospitals Network we have obtained concessions in the agreement to provide for equity of access to health services for people living in regional Australia. The Commonwealth has agreed to work bilaterally with the Territory to ensure future primary care services suit the characteristics of the Territory. A number of the funding initiatives announced will be implemented to maximise the benefits to the people of the Territory. This agreement will strengthen the promotion of social inclusion and reduce disadvantage, especially for Indigenous Australians, so we can continue to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage.
At the core of the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is the Commonwealth commitment to provide 60% of the national efficient price for public hospital services. This commitment achieves two objectives: it encourages efficiency; and it ensures that as the levels of service provided in our hospitals increase, the Territory can be assured the Commonwealth funding will also increase. We will no longer need to haggle on funding levels or indexation. The Commonwealth will be locked into long-term, sustained support for our hospital network.
The Commonwealth has also agreed to fund 60% of recurrent expenditure on research and training in public hospitals, and 60% of capital expenditure. We have also negotiated agreement with the Commonwealth to provide 60% of block funding for agreed functions and services and Community Service Obligations required to support small regional and rural public hospitals. This was a critical requirement for the Territory and will ensure that we can continue to provide hospital services in Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Katherine.
The states and territories will retain the key responsibility of managing the hospital system independent of the Commonwealth. In the Territory we plan to establish a single local hospital network improving the linkages between each of our five hospitals. We will establish a single board of governance to oversight the operation of the local hospital network. The Department of Health and Families will be responsible for negotiating annual service agreements with the local hospital network which reflect the needs of the community. The department will also be responsible for service planning and policy, and the planning and management of capital projects.
The local hospital network will be established as a separate legal entity under Northern Territory legislation, and will be responsible for the operational management of our hospitals. The hospital network will provide an effective means of engaging with the local community, and local clinicians, to incorporate their views into the day-to-day operation of hospitals, especially regarding the quality and safety of patient care.
The hospital network will have a governing council comprised of members with an appropriate mix of skills and expertise to oversee it and provide guidance, including health management, business management and financial management; clinical expertise external to the local hospital network, wherever practical; cross-membership with local primary healthcare organisations, wherever possible; where appropriate, representative of universities, clinical schools and research centres; and, where appropriate, other skills and experience ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I heard the Chief Minister say today that this is the most important issue, health, but I …
Madam SPEAKER: What is the point of order?
Mr GILES: … call a quorum; the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is already present.
Mr HENDERSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The agreement will introduce transparent purchasing arrangements between the Department of Health and Families and the local hospital network. Funding contributions from the Commonwealth, the 60% of the efficient price, and the Territory government will flow in accordance with the levels of service set out in the agreement. The current entitlements of staff will be retained under the new arrangements, and the department will continue to be responsible for industrial relations including the negotiation of awards. This will ensure that staff conditions will be protected during the transition process and into the future.
As part of building a unified health system all governments have agreed to improve outcomes in aged care services. For the first time, the Commonwealth will take full funding and program responsibility for a consistent and unified aged care system covering basic home care through to residential care. There are a number of initiatives which will improve the service system for Territory seniors.
Under the new primary care arrangements, primary healthcare organisations will work with hospitals to identify the best pathways between services, and to assist with patients’ transitions out of hospital and, where appropriate, into aged care. The Territory anticipates receiving $7.7m to increase the number of aged care places. This package includes access to zero interest loans to fund residential care. The Prime Minister has requested that the Territory take a role in facilitating access to land, and I have undertaken to do this consistent with similar assistance we provide to aged care providers in recent years.
The Commonwealth will also, for the first time, fund long-term-stay older patients in hospital. These are patients who could be better cared for in residential care, or in their own home, if support services were available. This initiative will provide incentives to quickly assist these patients to access the most appropriate level of care. In addition, when the jointly funded home and community care program ceases on 30 June 2011, a transfer of funds and responsibilities between governments will be made so the Commonwealth is responsible for the aged components of the program, and the Territory will retain responsibility for the disability service elements to the program.
The Territory will be responsible for funding and regulating basic community care services currently delivered under HACC for people under the age of 65, and under 50 for Indigenous Australians; and funding packaged community and residential care services delivered on behalf of the Commonwealth for people under the age of 65, or under 50 for Indigenous Australians.
The Commonwealth will assume funding and program responsibility for basic community care services currently provided under HACC for people 65 years and over, and 50 years and over for Indigenous Australians; and funding responsibility for specialist disability services provided under the National Disability Agreement for people aged 65 years and over, and 50 years and over for Indigenous Australians. These changes will improve client services in community aged care and disability services by enabling the creation of integrated and coordinated care systems which are easier for clients to access and navigate, and respond more flexibly to clients’ changing care needs.
The Commonwealth and states will share program responsibility for community care and residential care services for Indigenous Australian clients aged 50 to 64 years. Indigenous Australians in this age group will be able to receive services from an appropriate provider under programs on either level of government. This will ensure there will be no ‘wrong door’ for Indigenous Australians with a functional limitation age 50 to 64 years seeking community or residential care services. Where care services are provided under a state and territory-funded program to an Indigenous person 50 years or older, the Commonwealth will meet the cost of that service.
The implementation of the new arrangements for basic community care maintenance and support services will be carefully managed to ensure continuity of care for clients. It is expected basic level community care services will continue to be delivered through a mix of local government, state agency, and non-government providers and individual providers will continue to deliver both community disability and community aged care services during the implementation period and beyond, as many do now. This is an especially important element to the program in the Territory where there are many small services in remote locations. These changes have been designed to have little or no direct impact on service providers and clients.
All governments agree that GP and primary healthcare services are integral to an effective and efficient Australian health system. GP and primary healthcare services are essential to meeting the healthcare needs of Australians in the community and keeping people healthy and out of hospital. In the Territory, we have had a mixed system of primary care, with the Commonwealth primarily responsible for GP services, and the Territory responsible for a broad range of primary care services. Under this agreement, the Commonwealth government will take full funding and policy responsibility for Australia’s GP and primary healthcare services commencing in July 2011.
Locating responsibility for improving the GP and primary healthcare system with one level of government will improve the efficiency of the health system and reduce pressure on hospital services, and reduce cost shifting and blame shifting. This change will make it easier for patients to receive the services they need, improve patient outcomes, and drive diversity and innovation in service provision. The agreement will improve services in the community, address gaps in access to GP and primary care services, and take pressure off hospitals. In formulating GP and primary healthcare policy, the Commonwealth has agreed to ongoing engagement and collaboration with the Territory. The Territory will continue to operate services funded by the Commonwealth, unless there is an agreement with the Commonwealth to divest this responsibility.
Whilst there are minor variations in some states and territories, the Commonwealth will take full funding and policy responsibility for the following categories of GP and primary healthcare services currently funded by state governments from 1 July 2011:
(a) community health centre primary healthcare services such as generalist counselling, integrated care, GP and primary care coordination programs, including Indigenous and rural; and remote primary healthcare services;
(b) primary mental healthcare services which target the more common mild to moderate mental illnesses;
(c) hospital avoidance programs which do not relate specifically to patients who are predominantly being treated in acute care;
(d) primary and secondary prevention programs for early intervention and care coordination which focus on the management of patients with chronic disease in the community;
(e) screening programs for cancer delivered in a primary healthcare setting; and
(f) immunisation.
In addition to maximising integration of primary care services, the Territory is proposing to bilaterally negotiate to transfer child and maternal health services to the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth will be responsible for maintaining funding levels and indexation for transferred GP and primary healthcare services, as agreed with the states, unless they choose to divest responsibility as outlined in the provision.
The Commonwealth and states will work together on system-wide GP and primary healthcare policy. This will facilitate improved integration between hospital and primary healthcare services. These changes will place the patient at the centre of the healthcare system.
The new primary healthcare organisations to be established by the Commonwealth will work with local healthcare professionals to ensure services cooperate and collaborate with each other so patients can easily and conveniently access the full range of services they need. This will include facilitating allied healthcare and other support for people with chronic conditions, as identified in personalised care plans prepared by GPs. Mechanisms will be developed to identify groups of people missing out on GP and primary healthcare, or services that a local area needs, and better target services to respond to these gaps; for example, targeting gaps in GP services for aged care recipients.
Primary healthcare organisations will be independent organisations with strong links to local communities and health professionals. They will improve access to services and drive integration across GP and primary healthcare services by coordinating services and working closely with our hospitals to identify and address local needs.
The key to this reform is the Commonwealth government’s commitment to ensuring the future sustainability of health funding. During the first four years of this agreement, Australia will transition to a new national approach to health funding. In the new arrangement, each state and Territory will agree to a dedicated amount of GST being used to fund hospital and primary healthcare services.
For the Northern Territory, it is estimated that approximately 14% of our current GST allocation - that is, the proportion of GST we currently spend on health services - will be paid into the fund. That funding will then be provided to the Territory in a mix of block, community service obligation, and activity-based allocations.
During the first four years of the agreement, the Territory will also receive additional funding for a range of initiatives, including $16.9m for additional sub-acute care beds; $6.1m to reduce elective surgery waiting times; $7.2m to reduce emergency department waiting times; $1.2m for a multipurpose service; and $2.9m of funding for long-stay, older patients in hospitals. I should add - and this was inadvertently omitted from members’ copy of the statement - that a further minimum of $5.9m will be provided for capital purposes.
From 2014, the agreement will be well established and the Commonwealth has guaranteed to provide a minimum of an additional $15.6bn between 2014-15 and 2019-20. The minimum benefit to the Northern Territory from this additional injection of funding is at least $167m. This additional allocation will bridge the gap between the rate of health funding, including GST growth, and the rate of growth of hospital costs. This additional allocation reflects the Commonwealth’s greater responsibility for financing health and hospital expenditure growth under this agreement.
Two key reforms under this agreement are the establishment of an independent, national health and hospitals network funding authority, the National Funding Authority; and an independent hospital pricing authority, the Pricing Authority.
The National Funding Authority will oversee the National Health and Hospitals Network Fund, and the distribution of Commonwealth funding contributions through this fund. The Commonwealth government will pay the Territory 60% of the national efficient price of every public hospital service provided to public patients, including minor capital, into a jointly managed fund for on-passing to the Territory’s local hospital network for research, training and block hospital funding paid against the Council of Australian Government’s agreed funding model, including for agreed functions and services and Community Service Obligations required to support small regional and rural public hospitals; for Commonwealth-funded GP and primary healthcare services to the extent that they continue to provide relevant services on behalf of the Commonwealth; and a capital funding stream to be paid on a user cost of capital basis, where possible, to fund new planned investment in hospital infrastructure.
Creating equitable access to public hospitals for Australians is a core design intention of the National Health and Hospitals Network Funding approach, particularly in regional and remote areas, and particularly for disadvantaged groups such as Indigenous Australians. In order to deliver on this intention, the new funding model will include states specific prices during transition, and a national efficient price based on activity-based funding, cost weights, loadings and block funding.
The Pricing Authority will determine a national efficient price for the purpose of calculating Commonwealth funding for public hospital services and determine the Commonwealth’s payments for block funding paid against the funding model. The Pricing Authority will be established from 1 July 2011 as an independent Commonwealth statutory authority and have provisions for board members to be appointed by COAG, including at least one member having regional and rural expertise. The Pricing Authority will provide advice to COAG on the definition of public hospitals eligible for either block funding only, or a mix of activity-based and block funding, or activity-based funding only.
The Pricing Authority will determine adjustments to the national efficient price to reflect variation in wage costs, and other legitimate and unavoidable inputs which affect the cost of service delivery. This will include hospital type and size, hospital location, including regional and remote stations, and patient complexity, including Indigenous status. There will be provision for the Territory and other governments to make submissions to the pricing authority, at any time, to inform its findings on pricing.
The National Health and Hospitals Agreement will be implemented in such a way to ensure the Territory will not be worse off in respect of Commonwealth transfers in the short term, and will be better off in the long term.
In conclusion, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is a good deal for the Territory. It fulfils my two major criteria. It will mean more resources for healthcare in the Territory; and it recognises the special needs of regional and remote Australia. Changes to primary care will provide a real opportunity to push ahead, in partnership with the Commonwealth, to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. The administrative arrangements negotiated with the Commonwealth mean we are well placed to ensure the pricing authority identifies a fair approach to funding rural and remote health services. Over the coming months, we will finalise the details associated with the new funding for more sub-acute hospital beds, reductions in elective surgery wait times, reduced wait times in emergency departments, and improved access to aged care and GP services. Most important of all, this agreement will make a substantial difference to the lives of Territorians.
I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, the Chief Minister has now had the opportunity to convince Territorians that this is a good deal for the Territory. Perhaps it is. The Health minister, in an earnest voice, offered this slogan: this is about health, it is not about politics; it is about people, it is not about politics. I smell politics around this, and I sense an overwhelming lack of genuineness in the way the Chief Minister has dealt with this issue.
We asked for Treasury analysis so there could be a weighing and testing of the nature of this deal which has been signed on our behalf. We know health is an issue of great concern to Territorians, and they want to see reform, they want to see improvement; they want to see a system change. Of course, politicians in the lead-up to an election would sense that and think: ‘We have the credentials here so we can start to move out and create this impression’.
Undoubtedly, there is structural change. There has been an increase in money, albeit through the breaking, fundamentally, of the intergovernmental agreement, and a top-up from the Commonwealth. That, in itself, warrants some detailed analysis. Is this the thin end of the wedge, or not? We need some convincing, and some explanation from the Chief Minister.
During Question Time we had accusations: shallow, disingenuous and, sometimes, frankly, incorrect allegations put across the Chamber which completely exposed the sentiment expressed that this is about health, it is about people; it is not about politics. Bunkum! If you are genuine about this you would pay respect to this parliament, at the very least, by providing something more than a PowerPoint presentation as a masquerade for analysis - this is the type of material you would provide to a high school class. To allow an explanation of a most historic - we heard that word - the most significant change since Medicare, and this parliament, the Territory opposition, the people of the Northern Territory and their representatives here get a PowerPoint presentation. That is a disgrace!
It is not that there is politics being played here. It is the disservice, the dishonesty, and the requirement for leadership at a critical time to stand up and let us understand what it is you have signed up to. It could well be the Chief Minister does not understand what he has signed up to. In fact, that was revealed by his own statements indicating in the media that he agrees to this, though he has not yet had the opportunity to read it all.
Ms Lawrie: Not at all.
Mr MILLS: Go and check the Hansard.
Ms Lawrie: He made it very clear. He liked the principle of the reform; he was looking for the details.
Mr MILLS: Go and check the Hansard. This is a comprehensive, very complex area and yet - ‘Yes, we agree, of course, because Kevin is behind it’ - because it is about politics, it is about structure and change and moving pictures, and an opportunity to say something. But, at the bottom of this, if you are genuine about your desire to improve health systems in the Northern Territory, you have to (1) show you are a leader; and (2) show you are leading by understanding and explaining and demonstrating to the wider community that you have their best interests at heart, because you are explaining the significance of all the different lines of this significant change.
Make no mistake - and I say this very deliberately - we are required to respond; and respond we are. When you are only provided with a PowerPoint presentation as the substance of your analysis, that is a juvenile and weak attempt at covering up that which needs to be made open and plain so that the Territory opposition, at the very least, has a greater insight. Instead, we are provided with an insult.
This is not an analysis. This is the type of presentation you would make to a senior high school class. This is key points - this is not analysis. There is no insight into the structural changes to the intergovernmental agreement. There are no signed assurances that can be presented to us because it is not just about the future of this Territory opposition, or this Territory government and this Chief Minister, or Kevin Rudd for that matter. It is about ensuring we deliver on the expectation that resides out there that they want a better health system. But we do not have that detail.
To give you an insight, if you even have your head around the sorts of details you need, these are questions that need answers. Twelve months ago, almost to the day, we had a budget and we had a reply from the opposition. In the opposition’s reply, at that time, was an announcement that we needed to move to an activity-based model in the Territory, and that was described at the time. This is the very same model now being applied to the two major hospitals in the Territory under this arrangement. Yet, for 12 whole months, there was the opportunity to provide some greater detail, or at least a sensible response to that which was put out there by the Territory opposition over 12 months ago, which would have given an indication, if you are fair dinkum, that at least the opposition knows a little about this. In order to get the model right – because it is not about politics, is it? - and make sure the whole thing works well to produce a better system, you need to provide better answers to more complex questions.
This is the type of detail I would have expected, rather than the disservice that we have been presented with today. What is the defined activity-based funding cost model for Australians? What is the model, and how is that apportioned for the nation? Why would you want to know that? To ensure the Territory’s capacity and Territory’s structure, how it measures against the national model, and how that is arrived at. It is important to contrast the two models and how they will apply in the Territory, both now and into the future, and compared against a national model, when you consider that delivering services in Echuca in remote Victoria is slightly different to delivering services remote from Darwin in the Northern Territory.
To give that a sharper focus, the day this was announced, I was with the federal Opposition Leader in a health clinic at Ukaka. This is the question that needs to be answered – in that health clinic there were questions, good questions, questions about governance. The problem they had was a fairly basic, stark and quite horrible problem. We had been there about six months before, or thereabouts; the same problem but it had become worse. What was that? They had asked whether this clinic could have locks fitted on the door. They had not been entrusted with the keys to the clinic - someone else was supposed to be looking after the keys …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. We are lacking a quorum. Ring the bells, please. Thank you, we have a quorum.
Mr MILLS: Thank you. This is the level of analysis required so there are satisfactory answers provided to the people who will be served by this announcement. After all, it is not about politics. In this clinic at Ukaka, the local people were not entrusted with the keys; someone else had to look after that. The lock was broken. It is a cool place that attracts the local dogs which camp in the clinic. The local dogs bring in dead animals and defecate in the health clinic. The solution is out of the hands of the people in the community. Someone comes and looks into the clinic and says: ‘I cannot do anything here’. There are two old ladies on dialysis there. There is a stench coming out of the clinic, but they cannot fix it - frankly, there is dog shit everywhere. This is a clinic! I have never seen anything as appalling! And on the very day the announcement was made. I thought: here is the test.
It is a genuine question, because it is not about politics, it is about people: how will this announcement bear a beneficial response and extend to the people in that clinic? How will it work? I wanted to see the dots joined together because, if I were the Chief Minister, I would ponder on that so I could give that explanation. If you can give the explanation to that - and there possibly is an explanation – but we get a PowerPoint presentation as a level of analysis. What is the explanation you provide to the people of Ukaka? In their situation they are not even entrusted with the key to prevent dogs from crapping in their clinic. How do you explain to them the announcement that has been described in scant detail? How will it improve service to those people? That is just one clinic.
That is the thing we need to be talking about. It is not about politics, it is about people. Well, make an explanation. Go out there, stand in that clinic and say something meaningful to them. Explain to them how it is going to change things. How you are going to keep the dogs out of the clinic? How you are going to ensure those ladies are able to get their dialysis? How it is that now there will be someone who will visit regularly. Maybe there is an answer, but those people need to have it explained to them in terms they can understand that actually means something - because it is not about politics, it is about people. Explain it to them.
That is a genuine response, and you need to have that explanation available, not a PowerPoint presentation. If it truly is that monumental, that comprehensive, you would certainly get something more than this. You would certainly get something more from a Chief Minister who says, basically: ‘Do not worry, I agree with in principle. Of course, I will seek political advice, it is important; it is Kevin Rudd, after all. And off I go, with my white flag in hand, to negotiate’. After all, it is about people, and not politics. Well, every action and every response we have seen shows that statement, that slogan, could well be completely wrong.
We need more detail; it is certainly not contained in the PowerPoint representation. I almost get the impression the Chief Minister got a colouring-in book with some crayons, provided by Kev - just join the dots or something like that, so that we can all get together because, after all, this comprehensive, complex, monumental change which has come to the health system, you do not need to be across the details; here is an executive summary, here are some talking points, and away you go. And we heard the talking points coming out again - it is not about politics, it is about people. Well, you could have fooled me.
Can the Chief Minister explain, in terms people can understand, how this activity-based funding formula will actually work in the Northern Territory? If you are seeing this completely as a political thing, do not assume I am asking because I believe I know the answer and I do not believe you know the answer. The point is, if you are leading this, signing us up to this, you need to explain this. You are expecting us to provide a wholesome and robust counter to this, in some way or other, but it is very hard in the absence of information. If the sum total of it is something you give to a high school class as high class analysis, well, you put in a nickel and you are expecting something you are not going to get. You need to put in a more effort and provide that kind of detail.
How does the Northern Territory currently determine funding for our hospitals? How does it currently work? How does the new system improve things in practical terms? Practical terms - one model versus the other model - these are the details that need to be provided. Define where each activity starts and ends, and what exactly is encompassed in the funding agreement and in this activity-based model. How do you determine it? What type of detail? That is the sort of material.
Now, do not say: ‘Oh, you should have sought a briefing’. I understand briefings were sought, but not provided. You can make these grand statements – false statements – here in the Chamber in front of the cameras, but the truth is something quite different! And you say it is about people, and it is not about politics. Bull! You be honest about this. Start providing the detail that is necessary so there can be a genuine debate, and an understanding of a complex and comprehensive change, so you say - and all indications are that it is. However, what do we have to go on? Executive summaries, PowerPoint presentations, and slogans. It may well be a significant change, and it may well be positive changes that are required, and not just political benefits that flow behind this agenda, but we do not know, because the detail is not there. Make the record clear.
The shadow Health minister sought a briefing on activity-based funding. What did your minister’s office provide? Gobbledygook. My shadow Health minister sought a COAG briefing, ahead of COAG, on the detail of the financial benefit the Prime Minister had offered. What happened? No briefing was provided. The Chief Minister can well stand here in front of the cameras and make false statements, saying that we have been silent on this; nothing could be further from the truth. We have endeavoured to play a constructive and proactive role in this, giving the benefit of the doubt to this Labor administration to back its slogans and statements with some hard evidence.
Nothing has been provided. A PowerPoint presentation - that is all we get. The accusations can stand in front of the cameras, but we have to stand in front of the people, after this Labor government has signed up to something we do not know what the heck it is, or the detail of it, or the nature of it, or the intricate detail. I would not mind betting the Chief Minister does not know, or does not care. I would not mind betting the Health minister is across the slogans, and he is good at talking but, in terms of the details, completely captured by those around him. They are not taking responsibility for this. They are selling a message. And there is a world of difference.
If you want to effect change in health, you have to know a little more than the slogans. I see a structure, which has often been referred to: there is structural change, significant structural change, and then they talk about the amounts of money. Once again, the Labor confusion continues to be presented. They believe the spending of money is an outcome. You know what the outcome is? It is a healthier population; it is improved health of the community. It is not more money. That is not a result; it is an input. A new structure is just another form. Will that form produce what we want, which is improvement in the health of the people? That is the discussion which needs to take place. Why is there such a level of sickness in our community? What system do we have in place, and what are the flaws in the system? We would agree that we need more doctors. However, that does not answer the deeper question: why is there such a level of sickness? Does this model go anywhere towards answering that? If you just recount yes, because that is what you are meant to say, that is one of the talking points, explain yourself.
This deal was offered by the Prime Minister and is based on activity-based funding. Last year this was announced - in fact, it was announced three times - three components to establish an enhanced activity-based funding model for the Territory. I saw, as the health professional sees, the need to understand the costs of providing procedures in the Territory. What has the government done? It has not done a thing. The Chief Minister has gone off to COAG and has rolled over. Kevin has rubbed his tummy and he has accepted a deal - that appears to be quite clear - of which he does not have any idea of the complexity, or …
Ms Lawrie: Not true.
Mr MILLS: If the best you can do is: ‘Not true’, well, have a look at this.
Ms Lawrie: You do not have a clue.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: You would stand behind this as the most comprehensive response …
Ms Lawrie: I was there for three days, mate. You were not.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … a responsible government would provide this in terms of detailed analysis.
Ms Lawrie: You do not know what you are talking about.
Mr MILLS: You have had 12 months to provide some sensible response …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … to that which was put up by the opposition …
Members interjecting.
Ms Lawrie: You do not know what you are talking about.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … and you have no detail, you have no analysis, you have no credibility. You hide behind slogans and you are conning people. You are conning people and they are going to see right through you. They know that you do not care. They have given up on you. The challenge is ours now to ensure there is an alternative, because they are desperate for an alternative and they found you wanting. They have found you wanting because you have provided no leadership. You had the opportunity to talk to your community and explain what change will occur that will benefit them. You do not care. You know the slogans, you know what you can say to create an impression, but you have no care about making any kind of difference …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: No interest in making a difference that benefits other people, because you are at the centre of it. You are at the centre of it; it is actually about you. You told us something which is completely false. It is about politics, it is not about people, the way you have treated this. There could well be benefit for Territorians, but it is going to happen with or without you. You have provided no leadership, and the Chief Minister has jumped on an aeroplane and flown off with a happy grin and a white flag flying.
We seem to have reports which show a mismatch between what the other states have received and what the Territory has received. We do not have an explanation; we just have the Treasurer saying: ‘Not true. Here is a PowerPoint presentation’. That is all you get in a comprehensive debate on this matter ...
A member: Government by PowerPoint.
Mr MILLS: Government by PowerPoint. That is the best you can get.
There are questions on notice; opportunities have been provided to government to provide some detail and lift the level of debate. I do not believe they have any more than an executive summary from Kevin Rudd. That is all they received yet they come into the marketplace and bang out slogans and provide a monumental disservice to this parliament, reduce the tone of debate and then expect a very comprehensive engagement from the opposition. We have done the best we can, and little has been offered. In fact, what has been offered today is an absolute insult. You can sit there with a smirk on your face and think butter would not melt in your mouth. Well, I can tell you, the community has seen right through you.
We would like to give this a fair go but on the absence of detail, how can we? We have to deal with the slogans that are provided. There is any number of questions on notice, and we wait for those responses but, bet your bottom dollar, it is not going to be the Chief Minister who will be even remotely interested, or able to understand, the nature of these questions.
We want to ask questions about - and this is just one aspect of it - the activity-based funding models. It is really quite important, and I always think: how will this bring change? Explain it to me. What level of analysis? I do not believe the Chief Minister is going to be too interested in these questions, and probably would not grasp the significance of them. It is just that the opposition is more interested in ensuring that these things actually work. You buy in something; we do not know whether we have a good deal or not.
The bloke who is selling it to us does not know how it works. You ask him some details about this, that or the other, and he does not really know. He just hits you with a slogan or tells a lie about it, and you think: is it a good car or not? It could well be. Can you explain how it works? He hits you with a slogan, or: ‘The bloke who has told me to sell this car reckons it is a real good one’. ‘Well, is it? How does it work? What kind of engine does it have? What is the fuel economy?’ You do not know. ‘Here is a PowerPoint presentation; it tells you all about the car’. ‘Can you explain it to me? What does it do?’ ‘It is a good car, that is all we know. It is a good car because Kevin says it is a good car’. ‘But how does it work? Is it better than the other car?’ ‘Yes, of course. Kevin said it was’. ‘How much did it cost you?’ ‘Don’t you worry about that’. ‘How are you going to fund it?’ ‘Well, they have taken money off us, and then they have given it back to us with their badge on it, and said: “There you go”’. ‘That is how you are going to run the car, but has the car changed?’ ‘Yes, we have just moved the tyres around’. ‘What is it going to do?’ ‘It is a good car’. ‘How do you know?’ ‘Geoff told me’.
That is all we get. Then: ‘Look, we want some manufacturer’s specifications on this so we have some kind of grasp on how the thing all hangs together’. So, calls are made and then we all wait; and what do we get? We get a PowerPoint presentation, the type of thing you would give to sales representatives. The sales representatives would say: ‘Yes, it is a good car’. ‘How do you know?’ ‘Geoff told us’.
That is all you get. It is a vicious circle. You do not get anything. This bloke is not actually serious about the car; he just wants to sell it. He does not care about what it is going to do, because that is not what it is about. It is actually about politics as far as this bloke can see. He goes off to get the best deal possible, indicating before he even heads towards the airport that he will take anything. I suspect then that it leaves this possibility: he probably had to wave the white flag because why would he bother giving a good deal to this Northern Territory government? Why would he want to lavish money on this mob?
They cannot build a house; they cannot manage SIHIP. So why would you give this extraordinary deal to this Northern Territory Labor government? Because they would be spinning their wheels forever, and poor Kev is still worried about what happened with the pink batt scheme and the education revolution. That has not gone as well as they expected. Good heavens, we are coming close to an election. So why give a lot of money to this Labor government in the Northern Territory? Then, of course, we have some important things to manage, and we do not want anyone stuffing it up, so we will give them a little: ‘You go back with this sales pitch and bang on about this. Do not forget to mention Tony Abbott a few times, that line I told you, remember that? What was it again? “1, 2, 3 ripped a billion dollars out”’. Bull! ‘Just give those blokes over there a PowerPoint presentation and say: “Kev said it is a good car”’.
We need to do better than that if you are serious government. There are questions which are complex in nature that need answers. I will just tell you some basic ones.
You need a governmental agreement; tell us how that is going to work - 10 years? 15 years? Hey, it is not about you guys, it is about the system you put in place and you sign up to, and how it is going to affect now and into the future. Do you have an assurance - an absolute assurance? Of course, the Territory Treasurer is going to say: ‘Of course, because they are Labor people and they are real good, and they told me this and I believe it’. However, do we have anything that is binding beyond the term of this government and a Labor government, or the Rudd government, which is going to ensure there is not going to be money carved out of the GST to give to education, for example, or Indigenous housing in another form, or enterprise or something? Is this a once-off, and what assurances have we been provided that it is not?
What about the funding arrangement for the Northern Territory? What about now, in terms of its parity, and how does it match in 10 years time? I understand the way in which we calculate how expensive it is in the Northern Territory to deliver health services to Ukaka, for example, the community I mentioned before; is that model going to stay the same if you …
Mr HAMPTON: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Opposition Leader be given an extension of time to finish his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr MILLS: You are very kind, thank you. I was just closing. However, I have to say these are just questions that have troubled me. I would not mind if we had a different forum, perhaps - maybe this does not work - where the Chief Minister could get us together and we can just have a talk about it - I thought that was what parliaments were about - and explain the money story in a comprehensive way; explain how the governance will effectively change to deliver benefit to remote communities, in real terms, not the slogans and not with the scant information that has been provided.
Convince us, win your argument. It is not a political argument, this is about health. So, win the argument. The argument has not been put, so what do we have to work with? Emotions and slogans, and a PowerPoint presentation. Seriously, you need more than that, and I expected better than what we have received today and to date.
Do not think for a moment what has been contributed by the opposition shows we are disengaged? Quite the opposite. We spent our time working to read what is there, to see the implications that are there. We have been provided with nothing of any substance, expect these two blokes who fly down to Canberra and say they have not really read it all, but: ‘It looks okay, and we agree with it in principle’. Good heavens, it is huge. I expect a higher level of leadership which has some confidence, not in a political sense, but in community leadership; there would be a confidence given. It has been betrayed by the activities of today - the statement which talks about structure, change, and money, but no coherent argument about how the dots are joined to effect real change that is sustainable now and into the future, or any assurance that this is where the intergovernmental agreement stops, or whether the GST will be tinkered with in other ways. After an election, of course, you would not dare talk about that; you might scare people, because it is actually about politics, perhaps.
You have not convinced us in your argument. We only hope this will benefit Territorians who seem to be getting along in spite of you guys. You have done a very poor job today in acquitting yourselves in an explanation of this.
I do not believe, for a moment, the Health minister is genuine when he looked in his quizzical way at the Chief Minister and said: ‘This is about people; it is not about politics’. Well, I am seeing too much politics, not enough substance and an insult that has been provided today by way of an analysis - the Treasury analysis - to the opposition. It is a joke.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for the statement today, and I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this.
The gratuitous political spin that just came from the Leader of the Opposition shows they genuinely have not followed the comprehensive process that has occurred in regard to the National Health Reform. They genuinely do not understand the essential elements of the reform; they have not bothered to read the statement the Chief Minister provided them with last night, or listened to the statement today in the Chamber. They do not want to know. They just want to run these political platitudes of ‘you do not care’. What a lot of nonsense for them to truly believe they can walk in here and say: ‘You do not care because you are a Labor government, and therefore you just do not care’.
And that is it. That is the strength of the argument that comes from the Leader of the Opposition. It is purely superficial, political spin coming from the CLP. They cannot be convinced; they will not be convinced. ‘Labor does not care’ is the essence of the contribution – what a lack of leadership and what a disgrace. It does not get more critical for the Territory and the outcomes for Territorians than health and major health reform.
There is a reason why we genuinely went to COAG with a view that, in principle, we accept the reform and we were calling for the detail. Also, the Chief Minister made it very clear he would only sign up if it was a better deal for the Territory and our unique circumstances were taken into account. Both of those things he said repeatedly and publicly prior to COAG. But, no, no, the Leader of the Opposition wants to spin it the other way and say he went there pre-signed. Not at all. He went there with a very clear, in-principle position following conversations with the Prime Minister, following my attendance at a Treasurers’ conference where the detail of the structural reform and the dollars was gone through to the extent it could, knowing things would be put on the table at COAG, as they were. Improvements went on the table at COAG for the three days.
The ACT, the Northern Territory, South Australia, Tasmania, and Queensland all went to COAG, after the Treasurer’s conference had gone through in detail, on 26 March, the aspects of the reform, knowing that more dollars were going to come to the table at COAG itself. We are meant to believe that all of those jurisdictions were wrong, and the CLP in the Territory is right! They are the fount of all knowledge on this. What nonsense! And all the major states, and this is a classic, do not understand federal financial relations …
Mr Bohlin: Well, explain it to us. Supply us with another PowerPoint.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, order!
Ms LAWRIE: … where you get any deal on offer when the smaller jurisdictions are going into that deal saying: ‘This is looking like a good deal’ after a Treasurers’ conference. They have gone through the numbers; they know the deal is good for them. When you get the larger jurisdictions holding off on it, such as New South Wales and Victoria, it means the fundamentals of horizontal fiscal equalisation have been signed up to; the unique circumstances have been recognised. It is never a great thing for the larger states when that happens. It is always a win for the smaller jurisdictions, including the Territory, when that happens.
That happens at the Treasurers’ conference. We went into COAG knowing that horizontal fiscal equalisation would be recognised within this health reform – a fundamental need because the Territory is unique. We have challenges to meet here in health service delivery that are unique in our nation; we have complex cases coming through the hospital presentations. The 100% pick-up for funding in primary healthcare is a critical breakthrough to end the blame game and to get the important preventative health outcomes that we need to bring down the serious hospital admission rates we have amongst disadvantaged, Indigenous Territorians.
All of that was understood; all of that was raked through at the Treasurers’ conference and through senior government officials representing the departments of Premiers and Chief Ministers, and the Prime Minister and Cabinet. But no - all those officials, and all that work, and all that analysis, and all that detail does not match with the picture the Leader of the Opposition wants to paint for himself. What a lot of nonsense!
This is significant structural reform. The Leader of the Opposition wants to think it is just political spin to say $1bn was ripped out of the health system by the now federal Leader of the Opposition, a former Health minister. It is not. For those of us who watched the Australian Health Care Agreement, the AHCA, being pared down, and pared down, agreement after agreement by the former Howard government - we recognised, and we saw the dollars deserting our health system as a result of this screwing down by the Howard government, pursued by Abbott. $1bn was ripped out. The dollars, the facts, all stack up to $1bn ripped out of hospital funding around our nation.
In real terms, what did that mean for the Territory? Over a decade ago in the 1990s, the Health Care Agreement, the AHCA, was 50:50 in percentage of shares, funding from the Commonwealth, funding from the state or territory governments. In real terms, the screwing down of AHCA agreement after AHCA agreement, which occurred through the decade of the Howard government, meant the Commonwealth was only funding, in the end, about 30% of Territory hospitals, and about 50% of our community health. In real terms, we were going backwards.
As a Territory, we had to pick up more and more of the health funding, both for hospitals and the all-important preventative community health area. So, when the federal government of the day undertakes a national consultative process, as they did, the Prime Minister and his federal Health minister came to Darwin. I attended that forum for a short while at the hospital to hear from people in the health service delivery system what they needed to do and how they needed to do it differently. They embarked upon national health reform. At the end of that, they said: ‘We will take on 60% of the hospital’s funding, going forward’. That is called ‘skin’ in the game; that is called the Commonwealth stepping up to its funding responsibilities, ending the blame game.
Leading into COAG there were significant question marks around whether that 60% included 60% of the growth, because there is always an argument in health dollars about growth. In the Howard era, the AHCA had indexation at 5.3% when, in real terms, states and territories, which are the service deliverers, would argue it is more around 12%; the Commonwealth government itself would recognise 8.25% in terms of indexation. In real terms, we were losing out at state and territory level thanks to the misery perpetrated by the Howard government, by Abbott as Health minister, onto the health system. As a result, that caused misery as health became a bigger and bigger slice out of state and territory budgets. We had to lift the funding into our systems to provide for the important patient care which was justifiably required.
That was the scenario we used to labour under. Yes, the November 2008 SPP reforms under the new Rudd government gave us a better slice of the health funding in indexation; it gave us indexation at 7.3%, therefore getting closer to the real growth needs coming through health funding requirements. None of the states and territories thought, at that time, we were quite at the point we wanted to be, which is why we were all very interested in the Rudd government health reform agenda, watching it closely and analysing it as it went along.
With regard to the 60% of the hospital share at COAG, our Chief Minister and the Premiers pushed for that to be a guaranteed 60% of growth going forward. The Prime Minister made that guarantee which went into writing, and that was a critical breakthrough at COAG. With regard to the amount of GST to be dedicated, that will vary for each state. The aggregate amount of GST, tied, is 30%. The buffoon over there, the member for Fong Lim, did not understand what the word ‘aggregate’ meant, so he went out with a false figure on his Facebook, which is constantly being shut down by his leader. The reality is, the tied GST …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: The reality is that the tied GST for the Territory will be about 14% which reflects our Territory’s high reliance on GST revenue. There are two tranches of funding arrangements in the national health reforms. There is what we call the transitional arrangements, which occur from the period of 2010-11 to 2013-14, and then there is the post-transition period, 2014-15 through to 2019-20.
There were some significant breakthroughs that occurred at COAG, and I was appalled at the nonsense spoken by the Leader of the Opposition today. I sat through the COAG processes and I saw the way in which our Chief Minister was in there working very hard for the Territory to make sure that every step of the way we received our fair slice of any offers that were going around; there were no side deals done with the states without the Territory having a slice of the action. The opposition referred earlier today to $800m coming out of the work of New South Wales. That $800m was actually a global amount shared per capita across all the jurisdictions. So, we received our slice of the extra $800m that went on the table for sub-acute beds; one of the breakthroughs in the last session of COAG.
Every step of the way we were in there fighting for our slice. In fact, we made some suggestions how the funding could be packaged to be flexible and to ensure that funding across appropriation and capital could be mixed depending on whether there were unique circumstances. For example, whether in some jurisdictions brand new sub-acute beds had to be brought on, and whether you had some capacity in the system to refurbish beds, and how that changed your capital requirement anywhere from a $400 000-odd sub-acute bed cost up to an $850 000 new sub-acute bed cost, and how you could put more into operational staffing of those sub-acute beds. They were the type of details the Territory was particularly interested in negotiating, and we got our way.
Critically important were the issues the Chief Minister was pursuing in general practitioner places. There seems to be a lack of understanding about the impact made on the health system by a lack of general practitioners in the Territory when it comes to members opposite. There is no lack of understanding by this government about the critical nature of needing to get more general practitioners into the Territory to provide primary healthcare and to reduce the ultimate impost on our hospital funding. The Prime Minister’s commitment at COAG to quarantine the new general practitioner places, 50% for remote and regional Australia, was again a significant provision for the Territory. It will make very real changes in people’s access to appropriate healthcare, and also, ultimately, bringing forward the initiative of a training school occurring in the Territory which will provide real opportunities for doctors here, trained in the Territory and services delivered in the Territory and, hopefully, the doctors staying in the Territory.
These are all improvements to create a better health reform package recognising our ageing Indigenous population and recognising the unique circumstances of our Indigenous ageing factor being 50 years of age, which goes to the elements of health reform dealing with what we refer to, colloquially, as bed block; but it is essentially the aged services component within hospitals which have been put within the transitional period, and other health services, on the table.
Important for us are ongoing cost pressures. Why this is a very good deal for us is the need for improvement in primary care in the bush, particularly the rural and remote areas. The Commonwealth’s recognition it has 100% funding responsibility simply ends the blame game. They will take funding responsibility but, at a state level, we will continue to be the operators of the system, so there will still be the vibrancy of our health clinics, and the AMSANT health clinic. We certainly recognise the $222.7m, at this stage, for the Territory is a significant gain for the health system. As I said, the fundamentals are extremely important. Instead of the Commonwealth providing approximately 30% of the funding for hospitals, that will rise to 60% of funding. Instead of approximately 50% in primary healthcare, that will rise to 100% of funding. These are all critical gains for our financial sustainability and our healthcare going forward.
The reforms are complex. The efficient pricing authority is yet to be established but there has been a breakthrough in negotiations between states and territories and the Commonwealth. The states and territories will be represented on the efficient pricing authority with regional representation which is, obviously, what the Territory was looking for. There will be a quality and standards authority which will ensure activity-based funding is understood and what complex analysis has to be done in working out where activity-based funding should be pegged, and that it will be different. What they will do in the transition period is start with recognising efficient pricing at each state and territory level, ensure that is right and then transition, over a period of time, to a national efficient pricing benchmark. Our unique challenges are recognised every step of the way: you cannot compare the activity at Royal Darwin Hospital to the activity at the Alfred Hospital. People in the health system who undertake this work all the time know and understand that, and our needs are being recognised at every level there.
To be so dismissive of the breakthroughs we have had with additional sub-acute care beds; the reduction in elective surgery waiting times; reducing the emergency department waiting times; the flexible funding arrangements we have put in place for the Commonwealth in this package; the increased number of aged care places and primary care services for aged people; the health workforce training; the coordinated care for patients with diabetes; and the first step, as the Prime Minister called it, in mental health funding which was brokered at COAG, is truly a disgrace.
They do not understand at the heart of these reforms the federal government is genuinely providing for a sustainable health system for the future and, importantly, real results now in the transition period for patients who need access to improved care. This deal at COAG delivers real results in this transition period. Prior to COAG, the transition period results were not there, they were brokered at COAG. I was there and I know the extent to which the Chief Minister was involved in those negotiations - not just with the Premiers, but also in discussions with the Prime Minister.
Similarly, I was having discussions with the Treasurer, and we were having discussions with the Health minister. It is nonsense to believe any Chief Minister or Treasurer of the Northern Territory would go into national reforms without fighting for the case the Territory has, because we have unique circumstances which must be taken into account, which have been taken into account, in this national reform. What this would do is ensure the health budgets going forward are sustainable.
The carve-up we lost to former AHCA agreements with the 5.3% indexation rate – as low as it was - those days have gone; they are behind us. The additional dollars the Commonwealth put on the table through COAG regarding the transitional period brings that indexation rate up to approximately 9.3%, when there is a broad recognition through the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare it is around 8.25%. Is this sustainable? Yes, it is. As I said, at the COAG negotiation the Prime Minister gave a commitment in writing that the Commonwealth would not just sign up to 60% of the hospital funding going forward, and 100% of the primary healthcare, but they would also sign up to the growth as well. The growth will, ultimately, be determined by the efficient pricing authority. In that, we will put all our complex and unique circumstances which have already been recognised and enshrined in all the discussions, all the commitments, and all the details.
Madam Deputy Speaker, we are confident that this will bring real improvements to the patients and to the people who rely on the health system in the Northern Territory and, critically important, it is sustainable, and we needed sustainable reforms. We have achieved it.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will quote from Professor Ian Hickie, a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Sydney:
- For the Rudd plan to achieve real credibility, it needs to explain how a 60-year-old man in rural Australia without private health insurance will now get a timely hip replacement or affordable cataract surgery. Even more challenging are questions such as: how will a 50-year-old Indigenous woman with diabetes, arthritis and dental decay get access to the primary care, dental and other allied health services that she really deserves; or how will a 19-year-old man who has recently attempted suicide receive the ongoing help he desperately needs?
These are real questions, and questions that are unable to be answered in any specific way by the government. We keep hearing how great it is going to be, without any real detail as to exactly what it is going to mean for the people of the Northern Territory; that is, the patients in our hospitals.
I believe it is all agreed that our health system does need some serious attention; there is no doubt about it. We just do not have the money to deal with our circumstances. Since 1984, we have been funded in the same capacity as all other states. It simply is not enough to cover the vast distances we have here in the Northern Territory, and our exceptional circumstances.
While it is difficult for any Northern Territory government to deliver comprehensive health services with very little money to such a dispersed population, it is more difficult to discuss the pros and cons of this plan when the Chief Minister has released very little detail of what it means for the Northern Territory. How can he answer questions such as these? How will a 19-year-old man who has recently attempted suicide receive the ongoing help he desperately needs under this new plan? How will a 50-year-old Indigenous woman with diabetes, arthritis and dental decay actually get access to the primary care, dental and other allied health services that she needs?
We had the PowerPoint presentation. This was tabled today during Question Time as some attempt to say: ‘Well, here is the Treasury analysis’. I really hope this is not the Treasury analysis. The Chief Minister did say he would release that departmental analysis to Territorians, and he would make it public. I hope, for the sake of Territorians, this is not the document he intends to table. I hope this is not the departmental analysis that he was talking about at the time.
There are more questions than there are answers at this stage. Questions such as: what is the defined activity-based funding cost model for Australia? We need to know some of that detail. What has the Northern Territory government done to develop an activity-based funding model, definitions and projections for each activity in the Northern Territory? This is very important, particularly if the Alice Springs and Royal Darwin Hospitals will become activity-based funded hospitals. We do not have an activity-based funding model here in the Northern Territory. How does the Department of Health demonstrate activity-based funding using case mix classifications, explicitly linking funding to the actual services provided?
These are questions that need to be answered, not the motherhood statements prepared in the Chief Minister’s statement today, which is really nothing but an admission of failure. It clearly highlights all the problems with our health system in the Northern Territory. It does not provide any answers, or any detail, and, as I say, it is little more than an admission of the Northern Territory government’s failure to address issues in health.
If we have a look at page 3:
- Despite spending almost a quarter of the Territory budget on health, waiting times to see a GP still need to be cut, we need to cut waiting times in emergency departments, and we need to cut waiting times to see a surgeon.
Yes, we do, and you have had nine years to do that.
- The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement will lead to the reform of aged care, protecting the health of older citizens in the community, and ensuring an increased supply of residential aged care for our seniors who need high levels of care.
Yes, they do need high levels of care. Again, you have had nine years to do this.
- The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement provides a bold plan to fully integrate primary care services. This is especially critical to the Northern Territory where we are heavily reliant on primary health care. Comprehensive primary health care services are the key to closing the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. Readily accessible primary health care services, especially GPs, are essential in providing the services families need.
Exactly right. This is, again, an admission of failure by the Northern Territory government. In fact, there are about 29 pages highlighting problems with the current health system, and how Kevin Rudd is now going to fix all these problems with this new system. It is hardly reform.
The system is not the problem. The problem is long-term, successive Labor governments which have rolled out the red carpet for Kevin Rudd. Due to the extreme failures of the Northern Territory government to provide adequate health services for the Northern Territory, or at least attempt to provide adequate health services for Territorians and, indeed, long-term, successive Labor state governments over the past 10 or more years, the federal government really was left with no choice except to come in and address this issue. Left in the hands of responsible governments we might not be in this position, and we should not be in this position. Our health system does not need fundamental reform. We need local autonomy in our local hospitals. We need hospital boards with clout which are able to take up the fight to head office - which is the department and the minister.
There is very little detail in this proposed propaganda puff piece by the Chief Minister. Alarmingly, I note he is committed to a single local hospital network. This is concerning. This will see the evolution, I guess, of the current hospital boards; there has been no real mention of that. I am guessing we will see a rewrite of the Hospital Boards Act 2009, after the long debate we had last year regarding hospital boards, where the Country Liberals tried to strengthen those hospital boards while the Northern Territory government simply wanted to water down the role of the hospital boards after the embarrassment the former Minister for Health suffered the previous year. So, this is a great concern that everything the government opposed during the boards’ debate last year - that is strengthening the local hospital boards, particularly relating to governance, management and remuneration - you now say is the greatest thing since Medicare; the greatest reform, it is fantastic.
Clearly, that is what is going to happen if we look at the model relating to hospital boards. It says in the Chief Minister’s statement:
- In the Territory we plan to establish a single local hospital network improving the linkages between each of our five hospitals. We will establish a single board of governance to oversight the operation of the local hospital network.
That is alarming; how is that going to work in Northern Territory? This is the Country Liberals greatest fear being realised. This is why we fought so hard last year in the debate to protect the hospital boards, to protect the autonomy of the hospitals, to create champions at our local hospitals to win the argument against head office.
We fought hard and we had some successes to put in protections for those hospital boards to remain but, now, this plan has been signed off by the Chief Minister. I do not know what you were thinking when the local hospital networks proposal came up. How will one local hospital - and perhaps the Minister for Health could answer this - network work in the Northern Territory with such large distances and unique circumstances particularly between Alice, Darwin and Gove, in particular?
If we have a look at page 60 of the National Health and Hospital Network document, and I will quote from that. It says:
- In the Government’s consultations, many clinicians and local communities made it clear they do not feel they have the opportunity to be involved in decisions about delivery of health services in their communities. This is a particular issue in rural and regional communities. The result is that services are not responsive to local needs and opportunities to improve clinical safety and quality are lost.
A lack of ownership and ability to drive change at the hospital level can lead to low staff morale. The NHHRC concluded that effective clinical governance is a vital element in retaining our health workforce. Clinicians need to be closely linked to decision-making processes to contribute knowledge, advice, leadership and guidance on clinical issues and service planning. This will result in real improvements in care quality and safety.
How can one hospital network, which is separated by some 1200 km, provide such assurances and involve hospitals in making decisions about the delivery of these services to their communities to improve clinical safety and quality? How will it increase ownership and the ability to drive change at that hospital if we have one super board, one super local hospital network - hardly local here in the Northern Territory - run out of Darwin? You can bet your bottom dollar that is where the local hospital network will be.
This is of great concern. I hope the Chief Minister and the Health minister are able to shed some light on this and how this will improve the already watered down autonomy that these hospitals have. In fact, this is going to empower a local hospital network, a super network with, and I quote again:
- The local hospital network will be established as a separate legal entity under Northern Territory legislation, and will be responsible for the operational management of our hospitals.
That is a far cry from what this government wanted when they re-wrote the Hospital Boards Act of the 1980s to the current legislation. In fact, they diminished the powers and the management ability of these hospital boards:
- LHNs (Local Hospital Network) will provide an effective means of engaging with the local community and local clinicians to incorporate their views in the day-to-day operation of hospitals, especially regarding the quality and safety of patient care.
The hospital network will have a governing council comprised of members with an appropriate mix of skills and expertise to oversee and provide guidance …
That sounds quite good, but how will one super board - which is really all this is going to be in the guise of in the Northern Territory – empower Tennant Creek, Katherine and Gove - in particular those three smaller hospitals which are already lacking in clout because of the watered down hospital boards legislation that came through late last year - to provide exactly what the Prime Minister has said it will in the National Health and Hospitals Network for Australia’s Future document? I quote again:
- … clinicians and local communities made it clear they do not feel they have the opportunity to be involved in decisions …
How will it bring them closer to making decisions about improving the delivery of health services in their communities? How will it improve the effective clinical governance of that hospital? In other words, how will it bring the patient and the clinician closer together, particularly at Gove, Tennant Creek and Katherine? You can put Alice Springs Hospital in this scenario because it will be under the local hospital network, no doubt based out of Darwin. As I said before, how will it improve the patient and clinician relationship for the 50-year-old Indigenous woman with diabetes and arthritis, or the 60-year-old man needing cataract surgery if the management of that hospital is run by a super board 1200 miles away, or 700 miles away, if you are in Tennant Creek, and similar for Katherine and Gove?
The former head of the AMA, Dr Rosanna Capolingua, said:
- The different geographic and demographic needs of this nation must be taken into account. Rural Australia and Indigenous Australians have their specific requirements, best understood by those in the communities and states in which they reside. Even in capital cities, there are some likes to be compared with likes, but some hospitals can hardly be benchmarked with any other in this diverse country.
That is why the argument for local hospital boards and state accountability is still pushed by many. The remoteness of Canberra is not the real world of Western Australia or far north Queensland.
It is of great concern to me that the autonomy and the clout of these hospitals will diminish significantly - diminish further than they already have - under the watered down Hospital Boards Act introduced last year. As I have said many times, I will say again: our hospitals need hospital boards with clout. There needs to be a move to remuneration. Will these local hospital networks be remunerated? There is no detail of that whatsoever. This is fundamental to the service delivery of our hospitals. It is fundamental to the reform - or the so-called reform - pushed by the Prime Minister. Local hospital networks are fundamental; a key plank to this whole thing. Again, we are very light on detail as to how these will operate. How will Alice Springs Hospital be better off with one single local hospital network?
There has been a lot of criticism about New South Wales and the local area health services they currently operate. I do not know if this is going to be much better. As far as the Territory goes, with its vast distances and its small number of hospitals - five hospitals - it really is like an area health service, as it is called in New South Wales. That is a governing council, a governing hospital, or a governing board running a number of hospitals. I do not see how this is going to strengthen the doctor/patient relationship; how it is going to bring the clinician and the patient closer. Head office will be - that is, the department - a huge stumbling block, particularly for those that champion better services for their community.
If I was the member for Barkly or the member for Nhulunbuy, I would be concerned about this. I have said before, particularly during that debate, that this is a great concern.
There is so much more in this statement we can talk about, and I know this debate will go on and on. We have touched on the funding; the Leader of the Opposition spoke about the funding. Other members will talk about other parts of this statement, but I need to speak today about the local hospital networks. I am very concerned about that. I am concerned that it will not bring that patient/doctor relationship much closer.
Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I thank you for listening. I believe I am out of time, or I can keep going?
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired. I am sorry.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement, and congratulate the Chief Minister and the Council of Australian Governments in signing up to this health reform package which delivers more doctors and health professionals, more funding to deliver our services, and a reform package that will be better integrated to deliver primary care services.
Health is everything. We all want a health system which is accessible and affordable, when and where we need it: from childbirth to needing a GP in the middle of the night, to needing specialist care as a young person with the onset of mental illness, to the needs of an older Australian with greater aged care problems. We need a healthcare system which is responsive to our needs, and nowhere is this more acutely felt than in the Northern Territory.
The Northern Territory health system is a good health system, despite what the member for Greatorex said. Our health system is one of the best in the country. It is so good that the Liberal Minister for Health in Western Australia believes it is a good system, and that is why he has decided to have an agreement with us to send all people east of Warburton to be treated for renal dialysis in Alice Springs. Our health system is good, and this is the proof. In 1990 through to the beginning of 2000, people who had renal disease and undergoing dialysis had a 66% increased mortality compared with other Australians. Today, people in Alice Springs, in southern Australia, or the Territory undergoing renal dialysis have exactly the same life expectancy as the rest of Australia.
Our primary healthcare is good. That is proven by the increase in the life expectancy of Aboriginal women, the reduction of infant mortality in Indigenous kids, and the reduction of anaemia in kids in remote communities. This cannot be achieved unless you have a good health system.
In 2001, when we came to government, we had 1200 nurses; now we have 1975 nurses. When we came to government we had about 220 doctors; now we have exceeded 400 - we have doubled the number of doctors and specialists in the Northern Territory. Our system is a good system; it is a good health system and I will always support it. It operates under very difficult circumstances, not only the tyranny of distance; it is the fact that 30% of our population uses 70% of our services. We have one admission every 10 minutes at our emergency departments - the reason for that is the lack of GPs. We have 52 GPs per 100 000 population in the Northern Territory, compared with 95 GPs per 100 000 population in New South Wales. We have half the number of GPs in the Territory than in southern states. The result is people who cannot access a GP turn up at emergency departments, clogging the system.
Our hospitals are very good. Last year, the Alice Springs Hospital had 36 000 hospitalisations, a higher number than the actual population of Alice Springs; and the Royal Darwin Hospital, in one year hospitalised every single citizen in the Northern Territory; in excess of 200 000 hospitalisations last year. We have a small population, we have a massive geographic reach, and we have significant Indigenous health disadvantage. The lack of GPs makes delivering service in the Territory particularly difficult.
The Chief Minister took these concerns to Canberra and successfully negotiated an additional $222m in funding for our health system. The Northern Territory is well placed to take advantage of the health reform package, and we will waste no time in doing so. A dedicated cross-agency task force is being established so we can start discussions immediately with the Commonwealth to ensure that we get the best possible outcomes for our patients.
Our work is cut out for us: by the end of this year we will need to have in place the proposed structure of the local hospital network. Clinically speaking, and for efficiency reasons, it is logical the Northern Territory would have one local hospital network. Our small hospitals, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy, will maintain their community obligation status due to the vital service they provide to our remote communities. These hospitals are already networked with Alice Springs and Royal Darwin Hospitals, with well established clinical referral pathways. We have also established state-wide services, such as the trauma centre at Royal Darwin Hospital and the Alan Walker Cancer Centre that provides specialist services to all Territorians.
It is important all our hospital and health services are planned for on a population basis, and having one network will improve the Territory’s capacity to plan for growth in the health and aged care sector. The local hospital network will have a CEO, a professional governing council, and associated support staff.
I note the member for Greatorex mentioned the local hospital boards. It is very unfortunate that the only places where we have seen a total unwillingness of people to nominate for boards is in Alice Springs and Katherine. In Alice Springs, we received only one nomination …
Mr Conlan: It does not say much for your local members.
Mr VATSKALIS: … and in Katherine we received three. All the others, Nhulunbuy, Darwin and Tennant Creek received a number of nominations …
Mr Conlan interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: …. and we have written to these people appointing them to the board. I know the member for Greatorex wrote to my colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, encouraging her to get people for the hospital board – and they have a hospital board. Your own town has only one nomination because people from the board encouraged that person to apply; so now they have three people. The local hospital network …
Mr Conlan interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The minister has the call.
Mr VATSKALIS: No one applied and board members had to go out themselves to encourage someone to apply. We have a different story in Nhulunbuy, in Tennant Creek and in Darwin.
The aim of the reform package is to reduce administration so we can get on with the job of providing services, which the Northern Territory government supports wholeheartedly, and which is why we support one local hospital network. The reform also allows us to continue to address cross-border patient flows and healthcare arrangements, and we will do this as we have done in Central Australia with rental dialysis services.
All states and territories have patients from other jurisdictions, and there are already mechanisms in place for this to occur and be funded. By the end of 2010, the Commonwealth will be establishing the number and boundaries of primary healthcare organisations in consultation with the Northern Territory government. This includes the commencement of discussions about determining the scope of GP and primary healthcare services to be transferred to the Commonwealth.
There are a number of services provided by the Northern Territory government for which funding and policy responsibility will transfer to the Commonwealth, including remote health centres, urban community health centres, super clinics, population cancer screening, health promotion and immunisation services. It is likely for a number of these services the Territory will continue to be the service provider, and funding and policy arrangements will be transferred to the Commonwealth. This is ideal, because the Northern Territory already provides a greater role in primary care provision and primary care planning than other states and territories due to the historical absence of other providers, including GPs in remote communities. We will gladly work with the Commonwealth to share that expertise, and ensure continuity of service provision.
We also have a very good working relationship with Aboriginal Medical Services, working closely to deliver services in remote communities which are integrated with hospital services. We are keen to maintain that integration of planning and service delivery, and we will be working with the Commonwealth to ensure these unique service delivery arrangements, and quality of service, are maintained.
The reform process works well with the pre-existing tripartite Indigenous health reform already under way in the Territory, driven by our NT Aboriginal Health Forum, and involving the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance (AMSANT), the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, and our Department of Health and Families. This NT reform will see a gradual devolution of Department of Health and Families managed services to regionalised community controlled organisations, which will be well served by the new national primary care reforms.
The Territory government will continue providing a range of health services which do not fall within the hospital network and primary community healthcare organisation framework. This includes: the ambulance services and Patient Assisted Travel Scheme (PATS); existing public dental services; healthcare for prisoners; school and workplace primary care programs; hospital avoidance programs which relate specifically to acute care patients; and general sexual health services.
There is also a range of areas which require continued discussion with the Commonwealth about who will be the appropriate service provider. They include: specialist community mental health services; drug and alcohol services; community health promotion and population health services; child and maternal services; and community palliative care services. It is, therefore, important, as stated in the agreement, that the Territory remains responsible for system management, service planning and capital planning due to the array of services we will continue to provide either as Territory funded or Commonwealth funded services.
National work will also commence immediately on the establishment of the Independent Health Pricing Authority to start determining the efficient price for each type of service provided, both in hospitals and the primary care sector. The Chief Minister was successful in pushing the point that states and territories need to be represented on that authority; and now they are.
It is critical for the Northern Territory that our disadvantages related to GP shortages, remoteness and Indigenous health status are properly factored into any cost modelling. We do have diseconomies of scale for the delivery of specialist, low-volume services as a service provider, and transport and coordination of care costs are significant. We have significant community service obligations, we have poor population health status, and complex and often co-morbid patient needs. The funding formula needs to be spot on and the states and territories now have representation not only on the authority, but have a say on the terms of reference for that authority. The Northern Territory government will be up-front in advocating for our unique needs during that process.
Madam Speaker, excitingly, the Commonwealth’s significant funding boost will commence from next financial year to deliver improved outcomes in elective surgery, the time patients spend in emergency departments and an increase in sub-acute beds. The Department of Health and Families is rapidly working out how we can best utilise this funding to ease access block pressure so patients can be treated faster and wait less time to have elective surgery done. The targets are ambitious, but we will work to make sure that our patients are seen in clinically appropriate times. It is about being able to access a service when a patient needs it, which is not an unreasonable request.
The sub-acute beds and long-stay patient funding will undoubtedly ease the burden on our hospitals, particularly for those people needing access to home and community care services. The department will be reviewing this where these sub-acute beds would be most appropriately located to ease the pressure points in the acute system. The most significant reform by the Commonwealth is their ironclad commitment to boosting GP training places, 50% in rural and remote areas. The Commonwealth announced $632m funding to train more doctors and roll out a $134m rural workforce strategy which will deliver to 500 communities and 2400 more doctors to move to and stay in rural and remote areas.
This is more than Tony Abbott ever did for the health system. He is a former Health minister who entirely neglected his duty of ensuring we had a workforce that met the growth in demand for health services as our population ages. He was also the Health minister responsible for slashing billions of dollars from the health system without any care or comprehension of the impact upon services to our patients.
The Northern Territory will not miss out on opportunities to advocate and work with the Commonwealth to deliver more doctors and health professionals to live and work in the Territory. We will shamelessly be fighting for more than our fair share of doctors in order to deliver the massive reforms ahead.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, it seems the other side is not too interested in the health area. It is certainly an important area and much has been said today about what has and has not happened in this particular area. As I said on radio not so long ago, I know the Chief Minister is the most competent politician in this Chamber, and together with the most professional and highly qualified Treasury staff who went down there with the Chief Minister and …
Mr Mills: And the best they could come up with was a PowerPoint presentation.
Mr KNIGHT: What are you saying about Jennifer Prince, Leader of the Opposition?
Mr Mills: I said the best you could provide us with is a PowerPoint presentation. That is what I said.
Mr KNIGHT: I believe you are mocking Jennifer Prince. It seems you are taking the lead from your so-called Leader of Opposition Business. It is a bit disingenuous to the lady; she is the most experienced, qualified and knowledgeable person in the Treasury area in the Territory.
I will move on to the statement. Last week’s decision on the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is very good news for the Northern Territory and for Territorians. There has been much said in recent years about the shortcomings of Australia’s health system, and most of us have grown tired of that talk.
Last week, Australians had some real action happening in that particular area. Australians have an expectation they should be able to access first-class treatment through their public hospital systems. Most Australians also have the expectation they should be able to see a GP when they need to, and they also expect they should be able to see a specialist if that is warranted. However, those expectations are not being met. The truth is, particularly when it comes to accessing GPs and specialists, the further away from state capital cities Australians live, the more difficult it is to get those particular outcomes. Because Australians have grown up with the expectations they can access first-class healthcare, they are asking their governments to ensure our hospitals are responsive to their needs. People expect our hospitals to operate effectively and efficiently.
What Australians received last week was an agreement which will help our systems start to meet public expectations. This is an agreement that puts patients first. Dr Chris Mitchell of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners has described the agreement as one which will make a difference in our health for our nation. This is also an agreement which will relieve the growing pressure healthcare was exerting on the Territory’s budget. This will be achieved by the Commonwealth committing to the future stability and sustainability of our health funding.
Last week’s agreement means more money to health in the Northern Territory. As part of the agreement, the Territory will have an extra $200m directed into our health system over the next 10 years. In practical terms, that means more money for operations, more hospital beds, and more doctors across the Northern Territory. The tangible outcomes of the agreement over the next four years include 14 extra hospital beds, 350 additional elective surgery procedures each year, improvements in emergency departments to reduce the time Territorians spend in the ED, and more GPs for the Northern Territory, which is a vital point.
As a bush member, I am heartened to hear there is now a real prospect of more doctors working in remote areas. The benefit of increased general practitioner care is that it is associated with higher patient satisfaction, improved health outcomes, and reduced healthcare spending. Clearly, health outcomes in the Territory can only improve if more GPs are available to work in the regions, where so many of our poorest health outcomes exist. The historic shortage of GPs in the Territory has also meant that public hospital emergency departments have been under mounting pressure. With too few GPs, Territorians have been forced into emergency departments of our public hospitals. Territorians will be the winners if we can ease that pressure on those emergency services areas.
Another positive from the agreement is the introduction of a four-hour emergency department waiting time. The Territory government will immediately start planning to use additional funding to allow us to achieve this target from 1 July next year.
Over time, there has been a steady slippage in the level of Commonwealth healthcare funding to the states and territories. The former Howard government was totally unwilling to do anything to reverse the trend which saw the states and territories digging ever deeper into their budgets to fund the provision of health services. Until last week, the Commonwealth was funding approximately 30% of hospital costs, and 50% of the Territory’s community healthcare costs. As part of the National Health Reform Agenda, the Commonwealth will pick up the tab for 60% of the health services into the future, and 100% of the cost of the primary healthcare.
The Territory and Commonwealth will work together to establish a primary healthcare organisation with the aim of improving the integration of health services, GP, primary healthcare services and aged care services. As of 1 July next year, the Commonwealth will assume total responsibility for primary healthcare services. At that time, the Commonwealth will also assume responsibility for primary and secondary chronic disease management, mild to moderate mental health services, and screening programs for cancer and immunisation.
The Territory has high levels of chronic disease, and we also suffer significant gaps in health services. The primary healthcare organisation will facilitate services for chronic disease patients, identify service gaps, find solutions, and also deliver health promotion and prevention programs.
Last week, my colleague, the Health Minister, talked about the increased focus on training Australia’s health workforce as part of the national health reforms. The National Health Agreement will see an effective doubling of the number of places available for medical graduates to train to become GPs. By 2014, this will mean 1200 places a year will be offered for general practice training. The Territory Health Minister has received an assurance that 50% of the graduates will be dedicated to rural and remote areas. I know the Chief Minister has already had discussions with the Prime Minister about the Territory getting its fair share of this number. There will also be more than a doubling of training places available in private, community, and rural settings for medical graduates aiming to become specialists. The reform agenda also provides for a doubling of the places to allow junior doctors to gain all-important experience before they move on to becoming fully-fledged doctors.
Another of the important initiatives included in the agreement related to aged care. As the Minister for Senior Territorians, I was pleased to learn that the Commonwealth will assume full responsibility for aged components currently provided under the Home and Community Care Program. This relates to non-Indigenous people aged 65 years and over, and Indigenous people 50 years and over. This commitment comes at a time when more seniors than ever before are choosing to spend their retirement years in the Northern Territory. The Commonwealth will also accept responsibility for long-stay, older patients in our hospitals. As part of the initiative for aged care, there will be incentives to help accelerate their transition from hospital to more appropriate places of care.
As we know, one of the Territory’s biggest healthcare challenges is diabetes. The increase in diabetes in the Territory has become a significant challenge for our health budget and projections on the number of cases in the future are, sadly, alarming. As part of the health reform package, the Commonwealth will provide significant assistance with funding for case management of diabetes patients. This includes payments of around $1200 a year for every enrolled patient, and payments of around $1100 a year for the average general practice paid, in part, on the basis of performance in providing better care and improved health outcomes. While this initiative is reliant on GP availability, it has the potential to have a significant and positive impact on acute public services.
It is now a matter of the Commonwealth and the Territory government reaching an agreement on the practical application of these initiatives. While there is further discussion required to iron out some of the detail, the Territory has done well from the Health Reform Agreement. I am pleased with the changes to primary care; I see them as working to help close the gap on health disadvantage for many Aboriginal Territorians living across the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, importantly for the Territory, the reform agenda recognises the special health needs of Australians in regional and remote parts of our nation. All too often, the focus of health is fixed on our major population centres. This is an agreement which recognises that people living in places like the Northern Territory have a right to improved levels of access to our health system. It is an agreement that ends the blame shifting which has dogged the national health debate for far too long. Ultimately, this is an agreement which puts patients first.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to talk on the Chief Minister’s ministerial statement on the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement; very interesting indeed.
I was quite taken aback when the Chief Minister, before he entered the meeting in Canberra, decided we were going to sign up to this momentous deal which will change the face of health right across Australia; it caught me completely by surprise. As the Opposition Leader said during Question Time, the Premier of New South Wales was not so quick to sign up and she extracted many hundreds of millions of dollars more out of the deal by negotiating with the Prime Minister, rather than rolling over a few days before the meeting started – quite a bizarre situation for the Chief Minister to take.
But the Chief Minister seems to believe the Territory has ended up with a good deal out of this, and something to be applauded by all Territorians. Based on this Labor government’s history in health it probably it is a good deal, because you have to scratch your head and wonder who could possibly do a worse job of health than the current Labor government in the Northern Territory.
So, why not just hand the whole system over, holus-bolus, to Canberra? Hand it to them and they can have the headache of wondering what to do with our health system. In fact, this is a clear admission by the Chief Minister and the Labor government that they have stuffed up health and it is time for the feds to step in and fix it. Clearly, it is beyond their ability. They have acknowledged this by acknowledging, even before the meeting started, that they were going to sign up, and their government had failed in health and could not deliver to Territorians.
I have to ask why any government in Australia would trust Kevin Rudd and the federal Labor government to run Health. You only have to take a snapshot over the last couple of years, without going into great lengths, of the failures of the Rudd government. There are a few. Probably the most extreme and biggest failure of the Rudd Labor government would have to be the home insulation scheme ...
A member: Be careful, there have been a few.
Mr TOLLNER: There have been many. The home insulation scheme has resulted in four deaths, at least 120 houses burning down, and hundreds of thousands of people hurt throughout the process. We see the Rudd Labor government allocated $2.5bn of taxpayers’ money to install free insulation in homes where people thought it was not worth doing with their own cash. If you were not prepared to put up your own money to insulate your home because you did not believe it was such a good investment, never mind. Kevin decided you were going to have it anyhow, and he was going to use your taxpayer dollars to pay for something you did not believe was a benefit using your own money.
The result, as I said, was 120 homes set on fire, and 300 000 houses fitted with potentially lethal, incomplete, and near useless junk as a result - a terrible situation. If you think that is crazy; it has become crazier. The National Electrical Contractors Association has estimated repairs alone will cost up to $450m, and the federal government suggests around $1bn to fix what they have stuffed up.
The government said it would now give insulation manufacturers $15m to help them stockpile all the batts and foil they cannot sell anymore. Here is a government that, to stimulate the economy, said they were going to insulate all the houses in Australia for free. Now, the whole system has gone crazy. All of a sudden, they have to bail out people who supplied batts with a $15m rescue package. These are once healthy businesses that now need government support to prop them up.
Kevin Rudd, at the outset, said this wonderful insulation program would create 4000 jobs but, since its failure, we have seen the collapse of almost 6000 jobs right around Australia. I notice there is an insulation company which says it could be closer to 8000 jobs that have been wiped out. That is why Kevin Rudd has spent another $41m of taxpayers’ money to help retrain people who were sacked from the industry that he had spent billions to stimulate. Kevin Rudd has made a complete mess of this program. To fix the mess, he has now moved his entire emissions trading team; the 154 public servants he originally hired to work on what he then called ‘the greatest moral economic and social challenge of our time’. They have now been transferred to save Kevin Rudd from the pink batt scandal to try to pull him out of trouble before the next federal election.
This is probably the biggest monumental stuff-up Kevin Rudd has made but, as my good friend next to me tells me, it is not the only one. Others certainly do not pale into insignificance next to it. Something close to home is SIHIP. I do not think there is a member in this place who does not understand SIHIP has been a complete, utter and total disaster - nearly three years, nearly $0.75bn and nearly three houses. What a shame - what an absolute scam! You would think some members opposite would be jumping up and down complaining about the absolute rort that is SIHIP.
For instance, member for Arafura, I note the federal Indigenous Affairs Minister was at the Tiwi Islands a couple of weeks ago to check out the marvellous SIHIP houses, but refused to visit the Indigenous Business Australian houses, of which three are completed ...
Dr Burns: The ones you cannot stand up in?
Mr TOLLNER: ‘The ones you cannot stand up in’, I hear the minister say. The Housing minister has just interjected and says you cannot stand up in the three IBA houses. That will be an interesting one to take over to the Tiwi Islanders and ask them what they think of those three IBA houses ...
Dr Burns interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr TOLLNER: The feedback I have received from over there is those three IBA houses were completed at about half the cost, in half the time and at twice the quality of the three near complete SIHIP houses, and the federal minister was too embarrassed to inspect the three IBA houses. If they were such a disaster, as the minister here claims, I am sure the federal minister could have gone to the IBA houses and said: ‘They are terrible, the fans hit you in the head when you walk in the door, and SIHIP is delivering much better houses’. But, no, she refused to do that. Why? Because those houses showed up exactly how incompetent they and this government have been in the delivery of SIHIP - nearly three years, nearly $0.75bn, and nearly three houses.
Any way you look at it - spot it, cut it, or whatever - any way you dissect it, it is a disaster. It would take a brave politician to stand up and say: ‘It is not a disaster, it is doing well’, because it is out there for all to see. We have read 1000 articles on it in newspapers all across the country, and seen it on all types of documentaries and news programs. This thing is a disaster, and it has been stuffed up by Kevin Rudd and the Henderson government - simple as that.
What happened to ‘every child in Australia would get a computer’? I have often asked my kids coming home from school: ‘Hey, boys, where is this computer Kevin has promised? You should have one each, because every child in every school in Australia was to get a computer’. So far, no one has spotted a computer - certainly not in my household. I am keen to know whether there are other members in this place who have school-aged children who have come home with their new computer that Kevin Rudd has made available for them. Another Rudd promise that has just disappeared into the ether.
What happened to FuelWatch - the great FuelWatch that was going to drag the price of petrol down? FuelWatch seems to have disappeared along with the other one …
A member: GroceryWatch.
Mr TOLLNER: … GroceryWatch. What has happened to GroceryWatch? Another total, utter, failure. $70m Green Loans - a mess – people gave up their jobs, paid $3000 for qualifications and insurance to be trained as assessors, only to find the demand for Green Loans had been grossly exaggerated - a complete failure.
Who has turned a good budget surplus into a huge debt? Who turned the good federal budget, government surplus, into a debt? Was it Peter Costello? No, he actually got a debt and turned it into a surplus. No, it was Kevin Rudd. How did he do it? He has done it by throwing money around crazily. Do we see any new …
Dr Burns: You do not like BER.
Mr TOLLER: BER? Building the Education Revolution? The minister has dragged up BER. My God! Let me address the issue of BER. I went to the Nemarluk School the other day - a special school. The minister was there, and we saw a beautiful new building. I am not certain how much that beautiful new classroom cost but, goodness knows, they needed it, and they have needed it for a long time now.
I was talking to one of the parents at the opening of this wonderful new classroom and I said: ‘How good is this?’ This guy looked at me and said: ‘These guys have to be joking!’ I said: ‘Why is that?’ He said: ‘Have you looked around this school? The whole place is falling down around their ears. Go to the boys toilets on your way out; just have a look’. All right. I went into the boy’s toilets on the way out and there, right in the middle of the boy’s toilet is a shower stall - nothing unusual about that. What do you think is right in the middle of the shower stall in the boy’s toilets? A urinal! A urinal is right in the middle of the shower stall in the boy’s toilets in the Nemarluk special school. Why is that?
When I got my office done, Madam Speaker - and you will be aware of this - I have an absolutely fantastic toilet and bathroom in my office. It is there by government regulations because we need wheelchair access to our offices so people in wheelchairs are able to get to my toilet and, if they want to have a shower, there are handrails so they can get themselves out of the wheelchair and clean up, and whatever. I do not envisage, although it could happen at some stage in the future, I get a wheelchair-bound person in my office. In any case, if I do, I can direct them to the toilet where all of the mod cons are there so they can safely navigate themselves around the toilet.
At the Nemarluk School, there are numerous children - children in wheelchairs, children who are being sick on themselves, children who have, in some cases, very little control of their bodily functions - who actually will need to use a shower, and will need to try to get into that boy’s toilet. There is practically no way a child in a wheelchair could possibly get into these toilets and use the urinals or the shower if they needed to. What does this government do? What does Kevin Rudd do? No, they do not have money to fix toilets, but they will give you a couple of classrooms. Mind you, the whole school really needs bulldozing, a complete rethink, and starting all over again. Such has been the neglect of their needs for such a long period that it needs a great deal more than a couple of classrooms.
But, the minister is quite prepared to come in here and jump up and down and talk about BER and say what a wonderful initiative it is. I will not say much more on BER, because I know the member for Braitling wants to speak on this issue. Maybe he will mention some areas of the BER which have equally failed. Right across Australia we see these cost blowouts in schools. It has been suggested many hundreds of millions, if not billions, have been wasted through the BER funds ...
Dr Burns: Not in my electorate; they love it.
Mr TOLLNER: You talk about the stimulus package, about Kevin Rudd’s fantastic stimulus package. What has he done, apart from give people back some of the money they have paid in taxes to buy wide screen televisions, bet at the races or, simply, bank? What has he done apart from that? We have not seen a massive expansion of our port; we have not seen massive expansions or improvements in our roads. Practically all of that money has been washed down the drain, or flushed down the toilet, so to speak.
There is a mile of other things that this federal government has failed on: the Emissions Trading Scheme, the greatest moral challenge of our times, as Kevin Rudd explained it. What has happened to it? It has been a complete failure, a complete farce to the point that, very recently, Kevin Rudd said he is putting it off to 2013 or 2014. It is something we have to act on now, so dreadfully important we have to do something now; but he has thrown in the towel. Then when everything is going bad, when everything is turning to custard, the Prime Minister comes up with another one of these crazy ideas - well, possibly a reasonable idea in the hands of a good government but, in the hands of Kevin Rudd, there is nothing but disaster waiting for us. That is his idea to take over the Australian health system.
We have got into this state because failed Labor governments right around the country could not manage their budgets. This nonsense we constantly hear about the previous federal government stripping $1bn out of the health system is complete nonsense. It is arrant, utter nonsense. These guys across the other side know it, as well. In fact, if time was not running out on me …
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, under Standing Order 77, I move the member have an additional 10 minutes to conclude his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank the member for Braitling for that small extension. I promise I will not keep people waiting too long ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I call your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells, a quorum is required.
There is a quorum.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I said, the member for Johnston mentioned the Commonwealth stripping $1bn from the health system. I cannot dig it up now, however I do have the transcript of a year or two ago where the minister, when he was Minister for Health, acknowledged that health spending had increased at a far greater rate than federal government indexes had increased. That is not a reduction in spending. That is not stripping $1bn out of the system. It is not that at all. To say here that Howard and Abbott stripped $1bn out of the system is completely wrong. What happened was the Territory’s health costs grew at a far greater rate than the indexed amount of the COAG agreement said it would. That is what happened. Why had that happened? Because this government, along with other Labor governments around Australia, did not contain their health spending. They blew that money on bureaucrats, time-wasters, and red tape rather than actually putting the money directly into health service delivery - into doctors, nurses, beds and infrastructure. That is what happened. We saw this government, in 2001, promise an oncology unit which they were going to pay for completely by themselves ...
Dr Burns: Do not go there.
Mr TOLLNER: What happened? Here we are in 2010 and it has finally been opened. How much has the Northern Territory government put into it? Zip, zero, nothing …
Dr Burns. No!
Mr TOLLNER: Sorry, minister, you did put up the land. That is right; you did put up the land.
Dr Burns: More than that.
Mr TOLLNER: More than that? Well, it would be good to see where more than that is because almost the entire cost has been funded by the federal government when, 10 years ago, this government said it did not need any help from anyone. In fact, they budgeted for it, put it in the budget and said it was going ahead. What has happened? Killed it, the way they have killed our health system. They have thrown good money after bad.
They have failed to manage the health system adequately to the point where they cannot manage the health system, and they have surrendered. That is what they have done; they have surrendered. They have thrown their hands up with exasperation and said: ‘It is all too much for us. Thank God, Kev has turned up. Thank God, we have a federal Labor government which is not scared of throwing money around, not scared of debt, and quite prepared to throw taxpayers’ money around willy-nilly and get us out of this mess because we cannot do it ourselves any longer’.
Basically, that is what this agreement is. It is an acknowledgement the Territory Labor government has failed on health. It is an acknowledgement the Queensland Labor government and the New South Wales government have failed on health. The only one who is holding out is the WA Premier, because he believes he can actually fix the system - and good on him, I hope he has a go. I bet he has more chance of doing it than all the Labor governments around Australia. The one who amazed me was the Victorian fellow. He said they run the best health system, and he is glad the Prime Minister has modelled his system on the Victorian health system, so now he is in.
However, this has nothing to do with health. There is no health outcome here Labor is interested in. What they are interested in is covering Kevin Rudd’s bum before the next election. That is what they are interested in; making Kev look good - give him a win; give him something he can take to the people and say: ‘Look, I have done something. I have all the states and territories, except for Western Australia, to agree on handing over the health system’. If he treats the health system like he treats the insulation batts scheme, the greatest moral challenge of our time, global warming, the BER scheme, the stimulus package, FuelWatch or GroceryWatch, or any of these other myriad of failures he has to his name - goodness me, the guy has only been in the job for two-and-a-half years, and he has a list of failure as long as your arm. In fact, everything he has touched has been a failure - every single thing!
There is nothing he can hold his hand up for and say: ‘I have done a good job here’. There is not one promise Kevin Rudd has delivered on, but we are prepared to hand over 30% of our GST money to this complete and utter failure, without even looking at it. These guys have to be joking. How desperate are you to get rid of health? How desperate are you to get it off your plate and give it to someone else? This is just appalling. I feel embarrassed at times to be a Territorian and see this useless government just handing things over.
The next thing is they will stand up and talk about statehood, like they can actually manage something. You have to be joking! This government has put the Northern Territory back 100 years as far as statehood is concerned. It is just appalling. First, we had the intervention where Clare Martin tried to sweep all these bloody child abuse cases under the carpet. Then we get this, where the Territory government said: ‘We do not want health; take it. We are going to agree to it’. They were the first ones to stick up their hands and say: ‘Yes, we want it’. How absolutely pathetic! We asked for the Treasury modelling, and we got a PowerPoint presentation chucked across at us saying: ‘That is it. Look at it. This is what Treasury gave us’. Is that what you based your decision on? This is what the Chief Minister is prepared to disclose? How absolutely and utterly appalling!
I cannot understand how anyone in this country could trust Kevin Rudd to do anything he says he will do …
A member: Dug another hole, Dave.
Mr TOLLNER: Yes, dug another hole. Well, he has just jumped into a very deep one now. The trouble is with this nonsense, future governments and Territorians are going to have to dig us out of this hole, get us out of this mess. This guy has only been in the job for two-and-a-half years. He has blown a surplus budget, put the country into debt, wiped out 8000 jobs in the insulation industry; killed four people, burned down 120 homes; and built almost three houses in three years with $.75bn. What else can you stuff up?
There is one other thing he will stuff up, and that is health. But, at the end of the day, this government will be happy because they have washed their hands of it and will say: ‘It is nothing to do with us. That is the federal government’s problem’.
I believe it is shameful, and I encourage all Territorians to get out there and ask our Health Minister, if you can understand a word he says, or the Chief Minister: ‘What is in this for us?’ Because there is nothing.
I will tell you another thing. I saw an interview with our federal member, the member for Solomon. Nowhere near as good as the previous member, obviously; he certainly does not have the pizzazz or the work ethic. Last Wednesday he had an interview on Drive with Vicki Kerrigan at the ABC. Vicki Kerrigan said to him:
- Considering the unique circumstances of the Northern Territory and the massive issues we have with Indigenous health per head of population, is it really the best way to calculate how many extra hospital beds we need?
- Well, we also get a lot of Closing the Gap funding, so this is new money. This is not money allocated in the budget. It is not money that has been taken out of Closing the Gap programs and we get a lot of money put into the Northern Territory focusing on Indigenous disadvantage whether it be in the health sector or whether it is in education and that is all funding that comes under Closing the Gap.
The federal member for Solomon knows this is nothing to do with Indigenous health, yet, we have a Chief Minister who devoted probably a third of his statement to talking about Indigenous health, and the federal member of his own party saying this is nothing to do with Indigenous health. This mob is a rabble ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, your time has expired.
Dr BURNS (Public and Affordable Housing): Madam Speaker, I have listened carefully to what has been said by the member for Solomon. It is important issue, and important to realise one of the planks that Kevin Rudd went to the last federal election and to the Australian people on was stopping the blame game and making progress in health reform in Australia. The agreement which has been agreed to by most states and territories, all bar one, in the last week or so, has been a long time coming. There has been a great deal of public debate, and a commission by the federal government to ascertain what needs to be done, particularly in the hospital system, but healthcare generally.
Why did the Australian people obviously believe there needed to be reform in this area? Why did there need to be reform? It is plain the health system was struggling right around Australia, not just in the Northern Territory but in other jurisdictions - and had been doing so for some time - in waiting times in emergency departments, elective surgery waiting lists - a whole range of issues that were long-standing. Basically, people wanted the blame game to end. What was wrong with the system?
The member for Fong Lim said he does not believe $1bn was stripped out of the health system by the previous federal government. I refer to a report that was commissioned by the state and territory Health ministers in June 2007, utilising data predominantly from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, looking at the major issues within the health system. It is called Caring for our Health? A Report Card on the Australian Government’s Performance on Healthcare. I am quite prepared to table this when I am finished, and the member for Fong Lim, if he is interested, can read it.
On page 22, is a graph that clearly shows how, in relative terms, the share of hospital funding by the federal government for public hospitals had diminished with time. Then we see crocodile jaws or scissors - whatever you want to call it - opening up. In other words, the federal government, through their relativity, were not prepared to fund hospitals in our hospital care system at the rate of indexation required to do their job. That is why the arrears had arisen over 10 years under the Howard government. It started off at 50:50 and, on average, it ratcheted down to somewhere between 30% and 40% they were contributing towards the cost of our hospitals. It is not good enough, member for Fong Lim, to say, ‘Well, it was through the employment of bureaucrats and red tape’, and all the rest. The hospital system was, and still is, in need of reform.
I will read what is said here in relation to that $1bn. It talks about the trend in hospital spending:
- If this trend continues, then in 20 years’ time the Australian government’s share of public hospital funding will have declined to about 25%, and the states’ and territories’ share will have risen to about 75%. This would affect the states’ and territories’ ability to look after other essential services such as schools, police, public transport and roads.
Then it goes on to say:
- In 1998 the Australian government negotiated, with the states and territories, a new round of funding for public hospital services. There was a disagreement over the figures used to adjust funding for annual price rises. The parties agreed to use an independent arbiter.
The arbiter recommended that, as prices in healthcare rise faster than inflation, the Australian government’s contribution to public hospital funding should be increased by 0.5% more than the inflation rate.
The Australian government ignored that recommendation. It also ignored statements made by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, an expert body funded by the Australian government, that health prices should be adjusted by a figure higher than the inflation rate.
Instead, the Australian government has adjusted funding by a figure lower than the inflation rate. The result is that it contributed far less to the Australian public hospitals than the arbiter recommended, and than the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare would expect. That shortfall is now $1.1bn per year (see figure 13) and growing.
Mr Tollner: Rubbish!
Dr BURNS: He was not prepared to put up his 50%, his fair share.
Mr Tollner: Absolute rubbish! It was in the budget.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: What else were they doing? Figure 10 on page 18 shows - if you would just listen; you have had your go, member for Fong Lim - the gap between out-of-pocket expenses of a visit to the specialist for a non-bulkbilled patient. There is a similar diagram for general practice also. So what were they doing? The price of GP or specialist consultations was rising, but what was the federal government doing? It was letting the taxpayer put their hand in their pocket a second time to fund that gap in services. I call that stripping out of the taxpayers’ pocket, and shame on the former federal government.
Also, what was happening during the Howard years was the federal government was increasing the private health insurance rebate - a good thing, I am not decrying that - and investing and supporting those with private health insurance. I am one of those people, and probably everyone in this room has private health insurance. But, what was happening was they were funding the private system to the detriment of the public system ...
Mr Tollner: Rubbish!
Dr BURNS: I have just shown you how they were stripping money out of the public system and investing it in the private system, but where is all the weight in terms of operations and presentations to emergency departments in the public system? It says …
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! The minister carries on about the lack of GPs and private operators here, and now he is decrying the fact that the federal government is trying to assist them. Is this guy real, or what?
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Fong Lim.
Dr BURNS: Here it says:
- Public hospitals still admit 61% of all patients …
Mr Tollner: We just had the Chief Minister stand up in Question Time and talk about …
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, you had your chance; you have had your opportunity. Please let the minister continue.
Dr BURNS: Thank you.
- Public hospitals still admit 61% of all patients, and care for most of the seriously ill people. Public hospitals still care for 95% of emergency admissions.
So the weight was coming on the public system. The Commonwealth was not keeping the relative funding up, so the states and territories were funding that and, by the same token, the federal government was pouring more money into the private health insurance rebate. As I have said, and I am saying it again on the record: not a bad thing, but they were doing it to the detriment of the public system.
The member for Fong Lim mentioned all these different projects that he says are failures under the federal government, including the BER. Well, let me tell you, member for Fong Lim, the school councils in my electorate love the BER. You must not be attending any school council meetings lately because the schools in my electorate are really chuffed about the BER money and the investment they have made. If people opposite were being honest, they would be saying the same things generally about their schools. Sure, there will be problems in any contract, in any construction program there are problems, but the schools in my electorate are very happy.
Let us look at the member for Fong Lim. He gave a speech here that really focused, I believe, on federal issues and the federal government and the upcoming federal election. To quote the member for Fong Lim, he often says: ‘Do not judge them on what they say, judge them on what they do‘. Well, there we go again. The Palmerston Health Clinic …
Mr Tollner: You shut it down, the Farrar health clinic.
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Cease interjecting, please.
Mr Tollner: Wrong example, Burnsie.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Fong Lim!
Dr BURNS: ‘As the member for Solomon, I recently announced the Australian government will be offering a $100 000 start-up grant to the Palmerston Medical Clinic to provide after-hours GP services’. Did it happen? No.
Mr Tollner: You shut it down. Which part of the evidence …
Dr BURNS: No, no. What has happened is the Rudd Labor government had made a significant investment in a 24-hour urgent care clinic at Palmerston, and the people love it - not only the people in Palmerston, but also the people in Darwin ...
Mr Tollner: You shut it down, you goose.
Dr BURNS: You did not deliver, and this is what you said. You were put on the spot, you said …
Mr Tollner: Pull this reckless fool in.
Dr BURNS: He tried to explain why it was not happening, he said: ‘What we said is we have committed to 50 family emergency medical centres around Australia. The Prime Minister says that we will very thoroughly investigate putting one of these centres in Palmerston’. That is different to what you said in the media.
You have also mentioned the radiation oncology unit, and here is a question you have never answered, member for Fong Lim, and I will reiterate it: ‘Did you know, during the 2007 federal election, the tender process had failed for the second time on the radiation oncology unit?’ I say you did. You did not come clean with voters. You knew. I know that you knew, and yet you have never confessed that publicly. You went through the charade of saying he was going to deliver it ...
Mr Tollner: Madam Deputy Speaker, would it be possible for you to ask the minister to direct his comments through the Chair?
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, could you please direct your comments through me in the Chair.
Dr BURNS: Here he is, Dave Tollner, doing what is right for the Territory. He said he has delivered a new oncology centre at the Royal Darwin Hospital.
When the Howard government left office, one of the first people I spoke to was Nicola Roxon about getting the radiation oncology unit up and running, getting it moving again, and also a super clinic at Palmerston. To her credit, and to the Rudd Labor government’s credit, both of those things have now been delivered. I can say they have because people know they have. But, we have the member for Fong Lim in his election literature saying he had already delivered it when, during that election, not only did he know the tender process had failed, he was not going to come clean with the people of the Northern Territory. It had failed not once, but twice.
It was not until I said to Nicola Roxon she needed to separate the building of the clinic from the provision of the specialist medical services - under Abbott, that is all they did; wrap it all up into one project. They failed once and - what do mad people do? - they keep repeating the same things. They repeated it, and it failed again.
Here is someone who is a failure trying to point the finger at Kevin Rudd, who is reforming our health system ...
Mr Tollner: Who closed the Palmerston health clinic down?
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: It was always the Commonwealth’s responsibility. That is the nub of this particular argument, because primary healthcare is a Commonwealth responsibility and GP services, front and centre, are a Commonwealth responsibility. That is why the Commonwealth is funding the GP services through the Palmerston health precinct, and that is why the Commonwealth - I am very pleased to say, and reiterate what the Chief Minister said – is coming to take responsibility for funding primary healthcare in the Northern Territory, because in our remote communities it is a different model, and it has been.
We want the Commonwealth to be taking a greater share of responsibility for primary healthcare, and also for our hospitals. I welcome it because it makes more of a commitment by the Commonwealth to these very essential services. However, there is more. I suppose, as Education minister, it is not only about health funding; it is about growing our own doctors, nurses and pharmacists. I commend Charles Darwin University for the steps they have taken in pharmacy, and the way they have grown that program. It has become a very popular program and is producing a number of pharmacists; as is nursing, which has been a profession taught at Charles Darwin University for some time.
It was my pleasure, with the Chief Minister and the Health Minister, to attend a sod-turning at Charles Darwin University about three weeks ago for the new medical school. It will not only be a facility for the medical school, but also for pharmacy, and this will offer Northern Territory students the ability to study medicine from Year 1 right through to the completion of their degree. This is essential. This is how we will grow our medical, nursing and pharmacy workforce, and it is how we will retain them because we know people who have grown up in the Territory and gone to the school in the Territory, really want to stay here.
In addition, there will be clinical education facilities built at Royal Darwin Hospital, at a cost of approximately $13m. That is also very important. We are a government that is working with the Commonwealth government in a very fruitful partnership on projects, and I will mention them again. Tiger Brennan Drive, what a great initiative that is! It is on budget and it is on time. It is something you could not deliver, member for Fong Lim. The after-hours urgent care is a wonderful thing; that is another example of a successful partnership between this government and the federal government. Also, the radiation oncology unit ...
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: I welcome the initiative which has come out of COAG. In response to the opposition saying, ‘The document the Chief Minister has tabled here today does not contain enough detail’, I remind them of the equation e=mc. There is a profound equation that is very simple, but there is a lot underneath it. So it is with the document the Chief Minister tabled here today - short but profound.
If members opposite took the opportunity to get a very detailed briefing from Treasury, I know that detail underneath will be presented to members of the opposition. I do not have a problem at all with the Northern Territory being part of this agreement and, as the Treasurer said, this agreement was hammered out over some time. We have had all the Treasurers and the Treasuries from every jurisdiction in Australia, and, let me tell you, the Northern Territory Treasury in particular, look at every cent, every service that is offered by the Territory as their own. They scrutinise every detail and they give very frank and fearless advice to the government.
To say the Northern Territory has entered into this agreement, stumbled into it, and we do not understand what it is all about, I believe, shows that members opposite do not understand the processes of government. They certainly do not understand Treasury and the rigorous examination Treasury puts into every proposal that comes before our Cabinet in this government and, particularly, our funding relationships with the Commonwealth. I believe it is nave of people opposite to suggest that. Just because something appears simple on the outside, such as e=mc, does not mean to say that there is not a great deal of solid detail and solid work underneath it.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister’s statement on this issue to the House.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Development): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the Chief Minister and our negotiating team for supporting the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement. I especially look forward to reforms under this agreement leading to substantial improvement in healthcare services for people living outside our major urban centres and, in particular, more support for addressing health issues affecting Indigenous Territorians.
No one in this place needs to be reminded of the pressing national priority of closing the gap in health outcomes for Indigenous Australians, whether that is life expectancy, early childhood development or primary healthcare, or addressing the many chronic, but treatable, diseases affecting families across the Northern Territory. The recent national focus on these issues, and hard work by many in the health sector, is leading to some gains: improvements in life expectancy, improvements in infant mortality rates, and reductions in some cancers.
One key aspect of our improved national focus on this pressing public health and governance issue is the strong Commonwealth and Territory commitment to cooperative work, new investments, development of a strong national evidence base on what is working and what is not, and regular reporting of outcomes. We have seen many important initiatives introduced by the Rudd Labor government since it came to office, including commitment to the National Indigenous Reform Agreement and a raft of national partnership agreements to address disadvantage, whether it be in improved health, education, or housing.
In the Northern Territory we have our own initiative of A Working Future, taking the important step of working with the Australian government, local government, the NGO sector, and business community, to develop infrastructure and services in our growth towns. I am pleased because I can see how this new health agreement and shared government commitment to improving health services in the Territory will complement and build on this work.
One of our key measures of how we are closing the gap is the regular Productivity Commission reports on overcoming Indigenous disadvantage. In the most recent 2009 Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report, the Chairman of the Productivity Commission not only reported on how we are going in progressing this work, but he also commented on the things that work in delivering improvements. The four key elements of successful programs were identified as: cooperative action, community involvement in program design, good governance, and ongoing government support.
I am pleased to support the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement because this agreement embodies those key elements. At first glance, one might think the agreement mostly benefits hospitals. When we think hospitals, we think largely of Darwin and Alice Springs. We have heard today how, in the Northern Territory, this new agreement will lead to one local hospital network integrating all the hospital services across the Territory.
We have also heard the Chief Minister explain that we have won, through our negotiations, recognition of the unique circumstances of the Territory, and special arrangements under this new agreement to address our particular needs. We are not being dumbed down to fit a funding model suitable for the more developed and populous parts of Australia. Within our hospitals, we will see new initiatives to reduce waiting times in accident and emergency and elective surgery. These are important outcomes for all Territorians, wherever they live, with most remote patients in need of acute care arriving at our hospitals through accident and emergency departments. Reduced waiting times for elective surgery will also be of great benefit for Territorians living in the regions. Patients will know with greater certainty when they will be able to receive treatment, and see less risk of delays and disruptions to family life.
Another exciting aspect of this plan is the new focus and investment in health-related research and training opportunities, whether this is respective research in disease and treatments, or in developing and maintaining a skilled health workforce here in the Territory. I am mindful that our health needs, whether in respect of tropical health issues or diseases less known in other parts of Australia, need continuing focused research. It is great to see support for this important work as part of the new package.
Likewise, I am heartened to see the commitment, both in training and growing our own, but also in improving training opportunities for all health professionals, helping to push the boundaries of our knowledge and skills in addressing health issues in the Territory.
I am certainly conscious of the special needs of all of our elders - all the Territorians who have given so much to their families and have special care requirements in their later years. I congratulate the Chief Minister for negotiating improvements in aged-care services, and recognition of the critical years in adult Indigenous health. The 50 to 64 years age group is another example of how the Chief Minister has successfully worked to tailor the agreement to meet our specific needs.
The agreement also provides for new support for disability services in the Territory. I am very conscious of the need to improve access to disability services across the Territory. This will be a focus of my own work to work with the Minister for Health to improve these services as a part of A Working Future.
In my own electorate of Arnhem, support for families and treatment of people with the debilitating Machado Joseph Disease is a major issue. I will be keen to see how growth in the area of disability support and integration with primary care can help the wonderful work of the MJD Foundation on Groote Eylandt.
I mentioned earlier that a key lesson from the most recent report on overcoming Indigenous disadvantage is cooperative action. A key element of this new National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is that it focuses on integration of effort and, in particular, better integration of primary care and acute care services.
The agreement also provides for the Commonwealth to take full responsibility for general practice and primary health services from July 2011. This will be good for the Territory. We all know the challenges facing the Territory with a relatively small population and tax base, but with huge challenges in service delivery in not just meeting, but sustaining and growing our health support networks, especially in a time of rapid population growth, particularly in the regions.
Full commitment by the Commonwealth to supporting these critical services in the Territory, coupled with the national Closing the Gap targets and reporting mechanisms, will ensure the resources of the Commonwealth can be brought to bear to meet long-term commitments to improve Indigenous health.
A second critical success factor is community involvement in program design. We have a strong Indigenous community health sector and the new framework will support the continuing good work of those organisations such as Sunrise, Congress, and Katherine West Health Board, just to name a few. Our A Working Future and development of local implementation plans will provide one mechanism for community involvement in setting community priorities and addressing service gaps through a new integrated health services model.
Other key success factors identified by the Productivity Commission include good governance and ongoing government support. New arrangements for a national funding authority and opportunities for future negotiation around the implementation of the reform package will present new opportunities for improved governance, targeted investments and ongoing support, especially around shortfalls in service gaps which become apparent over time. This is an important initiative and I am heartened by all the collaborative work under way under the umbrella of the COAG reform agenda to address decades of under-investment in services for people in the bush. The health area is critical to the wellbeing of families, and good health services are a fundamental service government is required to provide to all its citizens.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is another important example of cooperative federalism, especially for the Territory where the challenges are many. I congratulate the Chief Minister for working through this reform with Prime Minister Rudd and his state and territory counterparts.
Mr HAMPTON (Central Australia): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s ministerial statement on the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement. I also congratulate the Chief Minister on securing this important outcome for Territorians and the Rudd Labor government on this visionary, long-term, structural reform of the Australian health system.
The outcome is a sustainable health system for the Territory for today and the future. I applaud the initiative and the leadership which will see reduced emergency department and elective surgery wait times. I am extremely pleased to see that the needs of older patients who get stuck in the hospital system will be getting better care options under this agreement.
These are issues all Territorians will appreciate, particularly those in Central Australia and in my electorate of Stuart, who are so often affected by how the health system has worked to date. The Chief Minister has worked hard in negotiating an agreement which will strengthen the promotion of social inclusion and reduced disadvantage, especially for Indigenous Australians, so that we can continue to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage. Comprehensive primary care services are the key to closing the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage, and it is very pleasing to see this agreement take this issue seriously. The agreement, in particular these primary healthcare services, will complement this government’s A Working Future policy in particular
It is a great outcome that this agreement has secured concessions from the federal government to provide for equity of access to health services for people living in remote and regional Australia. As the Minister for Central Australia, and the member for Stuart, I know these concessions the Chief Minister has won will be most welcome in the bush.
As Minister for Information, Communications and Technology, I know how hard Territorians have worked to develop Australia’s leading e-Health system to meet our access and equity needs in remote communities, particularly through organisations such as Katherine West Health Board, the Warlpiri, Yuendumu and Nyirripi Health Board, and the Sunrise Health Board. They should all be acknowledged for the great work they have done in remote communities. This concession the Chief Minister has won should dovetail with our efforts in regard to e-Health; our ICT policy and infrastructure we have worked hard and lobbied hard for over many years, such as the 800 km optical fibre through Arnhem Land and the Digital Regions Initiative will greatly enhance our reputation as leaders in e-Health technology.
Turning to the Digital Regions Initiative, it was great for me to announce last year we had won a big slice of the cake, $15.5m, under joint Territory and federal government funding. This is one of the largest ICT milestones in the Territory’s history, and will help deliver life-changing services for thousands of remote Territorians. Part of the Digital Regions Initiative is not only about improved health service delivery in remote Territory towns such as Lajamanu, Daguragu and Papunya but, as I said, it is going a long way in closing the gap in Indigenous disadvantage. This $15.5m package will enable e-Health services at 17 remote Territory towns, including services such as mobile clinical videoconferencing units with digital clinical equipment, enabling some remote digital diagnostics and care monitoring and specialist clinical work to be done. It also includes providing a web-based interface for health clinical information and decision support systems, as well as an interactive videoconferencing facility for small group training and professional development.
One of the great outcomes of this agreement is the Commonwealth will be locked into sustained support for our hospital network, which means as the levels of service provided in our hospital increases, the Territory can be assured funding will also increase. This is a long overdue and most welcome development, and one the Rudd federal government can quietly be proud of. It is good the Commonwealth has also agreed to fund 60% of the recurrent expenditure on research and training in public hospitals, and 60% of capital expenditure.
Another innovative and leading initiative happening in Central Australia, in particular, which I would like to mention in this statement is the new research centre at Alice Springs Hospital; the Flinders University’s Northern Territory Rural Clinical School, and the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute in the new W & E Rubuntja Research and Medical Education Building at the Alice Springs Hospital. The Northern Territory Rural Clinical School and the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute is where Flinders University will teach its NT medical program, and Baker IDI will have its cardiovascular and diabetes research institute based there as well. In total, the Australian government provided some $2.4m in funds to Baker IDI and Flinders University for these facilities in Alice Springs in the new W & E Rubuntja Centre at the hospital. The building will provide teaching facilities and support for administration and students for Flinders University through the Northern Territory Rural Clinical School. It has capacity for 23 staff including medical educators, researchers and administration staff. The centre will also provide support for more than 100 medical students throughout the year. It is fantastic we are doing this in the heart of Australia and, hopefully, many of those students will stay on.
It will also provide support for research and implementation of preventative health programs for Indigenous communities in Central Australia through Baker IDI. The focus, which is great news, will be on diagnosis, prevention and treatment of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. As the father of a child who has Type 1 diabetes, I certainly look forward to the great work this research centre will deliver in the years to come.
I also know the agreement will also provide for a hospital network that delivers an effective means of engaging with the local community and local clinicians to incorporate their views on the day-to-day operation of hospitals, especially regarding the quality and safety of patient care. This is a critical step forward in healthcare that the government should be proud of, and one I know worries families when loved ones go into care.
Similarly, it is great news that the Commonwealth, for the first time, will take full funding and program responsibility for a consistent and unified aged care system, covering basic home care through to residential care. The Commonwealth will also, for the first time, fund long-stay older patients. This is a great win for senior Territorians and I am confident these changes will be more than welcome in Central Australia and the bush where such initiatives have long been overdue. I congratulate the Chief Minister and the Prime Minister for bringing this reform forward.
These changes will improve client services in community aged-care and disability services by enabling the creation of integrated and coordinated care systems which are easier for clients to access and navigate and respond more flexibly to clients’ changing care needs. It is very encouraging to see this agreement recognises GP and primary healthcare services are integral to an effective and efficient Australian health system. GP and primary healthcare services are essential to meeting the healthcare needs of Territorians in the community and keeping people healthy and out of our hospitals.
The announcement that under the National Health and Hospitals Agreement the Commonwealth government will take full funding and policy responsibility for Australia’s GP and primary healthcare services commencing in July 2011 is similarly good news. By locating responsibility for improving the GP and primary healthcare system with one level of government, this reform will improve the efficiency of the health system and reduce pressures on hospital services and reduce cost shifting and blame shifting.
This is the type of leadership Territorians and all Australians deserve. The agreement will improve services in the community, address gaps in access to GP and primary care services and take pressures off hospitals, something Central Australians have been waiting for, for a long time. Delivering change will make it easier for patients to receive the services they need, improving patient outcomes and driving diversity and innovation in service provision, such as the examples I have given of IT and the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute.
I will repeat the categories of GP and primary healthcare services which, under this agreement, the Commonwealth is taking responsibility for, because they are critical areas for people in Central Australia and the bush, and this will be great news for us as well. These services include: a community healthcare centre; primary healthcare services such as generalist counselling, integrated care, GP and primary care coordination programs, including Indigenous and rural and remote primary healthcare services; primary mental healthcare services which target mild to moderate mental illnesses; hospital avoidance programs which do not relate specifically to patients who are predominantly being treated in acute care; primary and secondary prevention programs for early intervention; care coordination focusing on the management of patients with chronic disease in the community; screening programs for cancer delivered in a primary healthcare setting; and immunisation.
When you add the future transfer of child and maternal health services to the Commonwealth, the overall outcome for Central Australians is extremely positive. This will facilitate improved integration between hospital and primary healthcare services. These changes will place the patient at the centre of the health system.
I am excited about the new primary healthcare organisations to be established by the Commonwealth. As independent organisations with strong links to local communities and health professionals, primary healthcare organisations will improve access to services and drive integration across GP and primary healthcare services by coordinating services and working closely with our hospitals to identify and address local needs, and identify groups of people missing out on GP and primary healthcare or services a local area needs. It will also better target services to respond to these gaps; for example, targeting gaps in GP services for aged care recipients.
These reforms really hit the nail on the head; they are exactly what we need in Central Australia. By securing the agreement, new funding for more sub-acute hospital beds, reduction in elective surgery wait times, reducing wait times in emergency departments and improved access to aged-care and GP services, the Chief Minister and the Prime Minister have accomplished major improvements in the healthcare services and the lives of many Territorians. This is also done by delivering more resources for healthcare in the Northern Territory, and recognises the special needs of regional and remote Australia.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wonder whether the member for Stuart could understand this statement without having someone write his speech for him, because I find it is a fairly complex statement. I cannot see, from reading the statement, some of the issues you raised. I am not saying they will not happen but, from the statement given by the Chief Minister, and after going through it word by word, I am left with many uncertainties about the agreement. If I was speaking to the average lay person in the street, and I handed them this agreement and said, ‘Do you think this will improve health in the Northern Territory?’, I believe they would get through about four pages and get lost. What I am attempting to do tonight is to look at the positives, but also look at the negatives in what has been put forward.
From reading this it appears that the Chief Minister is saying the main issues which have to be recognised because the Northern Territory is unique and requires additional services and long-term structural change, is waiting times need to be cut to see a GP, go the emergency department, or see a surgeon. How are they going to make that happen? They are going to make hospitals more efficient and more responsive to patient needs. They are nice words, but I will get into whether that is the case. They also say there will be an increase in the supply of residential aged care, there will be fewer older people stuck in hospitals, and there will be readily accessible primary care services, especially GPs. They are certainly fine things that everyone who is concerned about health in the Northern Territory would agree are great goals.
As a lay person, the question I have, because health is a complicated department with many branches, is: where in this statement does it actually say that is going to happen? I will go through some of the areas the Chief Minister has spoken about.
First, he said: ‘We will create more efficient hospitals’ and ‘The Commonwealth will provide 60% of the national efficient price for public hospital service’. Straightaway, I ask: what does the ‘efficient price’ mean? I have never heard of the efficient price in my life, and there is no explanation to say what that means. The government should certainly explain what the efficient price means. ‘As levels of services go up, so does Commonwealth funding’. I am interested to know what levels of services the government expects to go up. ‘The Commonwealth will provide 60% of recurrent spending on research and training in public hospitals’. If we are winning in this case with this agreement, it would have been good to put down how much we already spend, from the Northern Territory government’s point of view, on research and training in public hospitals, and tell us whether this agreement means we are actually financially any better off. We just have a statement that ‘the Commonwealth will provide 60% of recurrent spending on research and training’. Last year, they might have provided 70%; I do not know. I have nothing to compare it to, to say it is a benefit.
‘The hospitals will still be managed by the Territory’. One could ask: was that not one of the problems? Part of this debate is: should the Commonwealth take over the whole lot? I see a conflict. We are going to have a Health department with some sections funded totally by the Commonwealth when, you would think if they are totally funding, they would take over the control. But they are not; they are funding them, but some sections are still retained in the Northern Territory government’s control. I wonder whether this is efficient. This is what the key was to the agreement.
Then, it says: ‘There will be a single board of governance to oversight our local hospital network’. I thought that was the department of Health’s job. Will this not just add to the bureaucracy? What will happen to the existing hospital boards? We have just had the debate about boards. We have just brought in new legislation in relation to boards and it appears they are going to disappear. But I will get back to the bureaucracy issue later.
When the Chief Minister talks about more efficient hospitals, I believe there needs to be much more information to show and to prove these changes mentioned in the agreement will actually make the hospitals more efficient. We need to see more proof.
We talk about reform of aged care; the Commonwealth is to take control of all aged care, from basic home care through to residential care. I ask: who will run aged care in the shires? Part of the amalgamation of the councils set out that aged care is a function of the shire council. How will they fit into this reform where it says the Commonwealth will take over control? Will they fund them completely, or will the shires still have to look after aged care? The Commonwealth says they are going to put in funds for long-stay older patients. I would like an explanation as to who are the long-stay older patients, where are they presently staying, and does this include long-stay younger people who may be sick from an early age and are in hospital for a long period?
It also talks about an initiative to provide incentives to patients to find access to appropriate care. It does not explain what those incentives will be or how quickly they will assist, because if it is an incentive, then you would hope what they are trying to do will happen quickly.
One area I believe certainly needs looking at more closely is the Territory government will control basic community care services for non-Indigenous people under 65 years, and for Indigenous people under 50 years, then the Commonwealth will control basic community care for non-Indigenous people over 65 years, and Indigenous people over 50 years. I ask: why? What makes it even more confusing is that they make a statement here that the Commonwealth and states will share programs and responsibility for community care and residential care services for Indigenous Australian clients aged 50 to 64 years:
- Indigenous Australians in this age group will be able to receive services from an appropriate provider under programs on either level of government. This will ensure there will be no ‘wrong door’ for Indigenous Australians with a functional limitation age 50 to 64 years seeking community or residential care services.
It seems again we have made life complicated. We have the Commonwealth looking after people at a certain age. We have the Territory looking after people at another age, and there is an in between group of people, Indigenous people, who are between 50 and 64 years who can be looked after by either. It does not seem to be helping when it comes to a structure that is efficient and uses money wisely. I put that out as a question because, to me, that stood out last night as an obvious inefficiency. People might have a better understanding than I have. It also says here at page 50:
- It is expected that basic level community care services will continue to be delivered through a mix of local government, State agency and non-government providers, and an individual providers will continue to be able to deliver both community disability and community aged care services both during the implementation period and beyond, as many do now.
Is that trying to minimise bureaucracy, or keeping the bureaucracy as it is or, maybe, worse? I believe this is an important part of what an agreement should be about: it should be trying to make the system more efficient, reduce bureaucracy and get the money where it is required.
There are integrated primary care services and the Commonwealth will take full funding of GP and primary healthcare services. As I have said, if you are taking over control of those with full funding, do we have one government organising it and one government funding it? Is that an efficient way to operate a GP and an integrated primary care services system? It is supposed to improve the efficiency of the health system, so I would like to see how it does it. I am happy for the federal government to provide the money, but let us see how it improves the efficiency. Who will the doctors work for? Will they work for the Commonwealth, or will they work for the Territory? Will the hospital become a Commonwealth hospital?
Another area is improving patient outcomes and driving innovation and diversity. How is that going to happen? How are we going to drive innovation and diversity? There are no examples of that; it is a statement. I believe if the government and Chief Minister are to convince people this is a good thing, we need some concrete examples of where these changes will actually occur. It says on page 17:
- In formulating GP and primary healthcare policy the Commonwealth has agreed to ongoing engagement and collaboration with the Territory. The Territory will continue to operate services funded by Commonwealth, unless there is an agreement with the Commonwealth to divest this responsibility.
That sounds like quite a loose arrangement. I am interested to know why that arrangement is not set in concrete. Can the Commonwealth change its mind and say: ‘It is yours regardless of what you think’?
We move on to the primary healthcare organisations, and these will be established by the Commonwealth. Is this another level of bureaucracy? I will get back to the bureaucratic issue later.
Then we go on to the sustainable funding for healthcare. It says 14% of our current GST is allocated and paid into the fund. Are there any other payments, and how much do we get back? It does not explain these things. Over four years, there are various allocations for various matters. I believe the Chief Minister puts those down as $16.9m for additional sub-acute care beds, etcetera. The questions I ask are: how will that funding achieve outcomes? What are these figures based on? What is the basis behind these figures? What will they actually show in reality? It says $6.1m to reduce elective surgery waiting times. Elective surgery waiting times is a bugbear for every government, so someone has pulled out a figure of $6.1m. Can someone explain how $6.1m will actually reduce waiting times? Do we have more doctors, more nurses? Do we have a bigger hospital with more beds for people? Where will that money go to, to do what it says? It says there will be $7.2m to reduce emergency department waiting times. How will that $7.2m actually do it? It is a nice figure, but could someone explain where the $7.2m will go? And it goes on and on.
It also says after 2014-15 we are set to receive an additional $167m. Over what period will we receive that $167m? Is that not a fair way off? It is a fairly long distance statement. It sounds good on paper, but we are in 2010 and in four to five years from now we could receive an extra $167m, and that would be spread over what time period? We are not going to receive it in the one year. It does not explain that; it just says we will receive that money. Of course, you might not have the same government; you might have had a different government, and then you might have had another government because of the three-year terms for the Commonwealth.
In relation to primary healthcare organisations, what exactly are they, and do they replace any existing structures? Again, it is not entirely clear.
We also have the key reforms the Chief Minister has written about. He spoke about the National Health and Hospital Network Funding Authority distributing funds to the Territory local hospital network. The new funding model includes state-specific prices and a national efficient price based on activity-based funding, cost weights and loadings and block funding. That needs an explanation. What is block funding? What is activity-based funding? What are cost weights? All would be worthy of explanation in a statement like this. I know people have been making grand statements about the bigger picture, but I certainly cannot understand the specifics without a far better explanation of what all these things are about. It talks about an independent pricing authority to provide advice on funding which will determine adjustments to the national efficient price - there is that ‘efficient price’ again. That could do with more explanation.
My concern regarding this particular statement is if we are to create a better system of health, then we need to change areas where there is wastage. I cannot see where that change is occurring, and I am concerned we have actually set up new layers of bureaucracy. It might have replaced some of the old layers, but what I would have expected is a more efficient system, because it says here we want to make hospitals more efficient.
I would have thought the bureaucracy has to be more streamlined and more efficient, yet we have a local hospital network which replaces hospital boards and will be responsible for operational management of NT hospitals. I believe the local government hospital network will also have a council overriding it as well - the board of governance - which will oversight the local hospital network. We will have the primary healthcare organisations that will be independent organisations established by the Commonwealth to coordinate services and work closely with the hospitals to identify and address local needs.
We also have the National Health and Hospital Network Funding Authority and the independent Hospital Pricing Authority. When you look at what is being put forward, you are not sure whether you are getting a more efficient process or whether existing bureaucracy is being replaced with new names. I know, having been around government for a fair amount of time, there are always new names. We almost have a department for making new names because we tend to just move the deckchairs around from time to time.
The Chief Minister needed to show us in his statement where the efficiencies are going to occur, and where the Northern Territory is going to benefit financially. I know there was a document tabled today which was used as part of a PowerPoint presentation. I must admit, on its own, I find it fairly difficult to understand, but I will try to put it in layman’s terms. We get X amount of dollars from the Commonwealth at the present time, say we get $100 000m in GST. The government says $14m of that is going to go back into a pool of funds which the Commonwealth will take and, from there, the Commonwealth will then take over a number of the responsibilities of health, and we will actually get more money.
What I would like to see clearly written is that we are handing over to the Commonwealth $14m, or whatever the exact amount is; we are handing over responsibility for GPs and integrated primary care and, in return for that, we are receiving X amount of dollars into Health, and then they can convince people we are better off. That is not easily seen in this document, but that is what people out on the street will want to know. They will want to know that this agreement - the one Mr Rudd has been saying will improve matters in Australia in regard to health - has a benefit to the Territory, not a loss. We do not want to hear we have actually lost GST and we have had to cut other programs because of the federal government’s new agreement.
It is hard not to be slightly cynical, regardless of where you come from in politics. The present federal government has made some fairly disastrous decisions in relation to public policy. The insulation program would be the classic one; a great deal of money has gone down the drain. I cannot say it has all gone down the drain; obviously, there have been people who have benefited by the insulation program. However, the downside is it is going to cost $1bn or something to check out all these houses and ensure they are safe, because the program was not thought through correctly.
I even hear the promise about childcare centres is not going to happen. The government has decided that program they promised is not going to occur.
I have to raise SIHIP. I know I am on the Council of Territory Cooperation and we have been looking at SIHIP but, I must admit, I have worries about who thought up the process of an alliance methodology to deliver housing to Aboriginal communities. From what I have seen so far in my travels and what I have heard, it seems to be a system yet to be proven to be successful and efficient; and it is a system thought up by the Commonwealth government.
Even the 15 growth towns were picked out by the Commonwealth government with, as far as I know, no consultation with people from the Territory. I am concerned some of those growth towns are not the real places for growth towns. Again, this is a Commonwealth idea. I worry when I see the record of some of the Commonwealth ideas and policies.
They have now put forward what is, for the average person, a fairly complex agreement with many ideas and percentages, but not many real figures, real facts and real explanations for me to be confident we are winners out of this agreement. I hope we are, because health is one of the most important things for all Territorians. I suppose the proof will be in the pudding.
Madam Deputy Speaker, if, in the end, we cut the waiting times to a GP, the emergency department, or a surgeon, and if we have more beds for residential aged care, then I will believe it is a success. However, I am not convinced from reading this that there is any proof that will actually happen.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I take note of the statement presented today by the Chief Minister and, listening intently to the member for Nelson, I too have questions - questions, questions, questions. Today, the Chief Minister promised to provide detailed material, but all we got was this little Year 11/Year 12 PowerPoint document which spelled out absolutely nothing.
Questions: where is the analysis of the activity-based funding? Where is the analysis of block funding? Where is the analysis of long-term effects of the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement? Questions: where is the analysis of the 14 beds, and how do only 14 beds answer our needs? Where is the analysis of the changes to elective surgery? In the Northern Territory, the real cost of hospital funding is higher than anywhere else in Australia - nothing new. In 2006-07, the cost was $1700 per person in the NT, the average figure for the rest of Australia was $1260. How is the difference accommodated in an activity-based funding model? I would like the Chief Minister to answer this in his summary.
Of course, it is not just the cost of treatment; it is the frequency and the complexity. The Northern Territory has the highest hospital separation rate of 486.4 per 1000 people compared to 217 per 1000 for the rest of Australia. How is this difference accommodated in activity-based funding? Does activity-based funding completely encompass the diversity of services which are provided through the Northern Territory’s hospitals? When we talk of complex needs, we need to be having a health funding model that delivers for chronic health problems for years of poor health conditions.
I ask the Chief Minister: for Gove, for Katherine, for Tennant Creek and for Alice Springs hospitals, would moving to case-mixed base funding with Australian-based weightings be disadvantageous? Do the risks of activity-based funding include classification and sensitivity, lack of consistency, and a focus only on hospital-based activity? This might be too much for the Chief Minister, I am sure. Does the Northern Territory have the ability of benchmarking comparison? Where is the Treasurer’s analysis - the real analysis - or is this all they have? Is this what the Chief Minister went to Canberra with? Have we been sold a pup? What does it cost the Northern Territory consolidating and entering data into a national database? How many more bureaucrats do we need? Will the activity-based funding include community home care? Will the activity-based funding include nursing homes? Will the activity-based funding include screened immunisation and promotional programs? Will activity-based funding include non-inpatient mental health and oral health? Too many questions.
Let us have a look at the interview between Leon Compton and the Chief Minister during those very shady negotiations last week. I say shady negotiations because the Chief Minister really showed that he must not watch that world poker tour show and he must not play poker, because anyone who has a dud hand would not show everyone their hand and go and have a game. That is exactly what the Chief Minister has done - signed up to this agreement without seeing the content of it - walked in to see big brother, Kevin Rudd, who has a stick over the back of the Chief Minister at the moment over a number of issues, not the least being the poor roll-out of BER in the Territory, the poor management of SIHIP, problems with the port spillage, and problems with the Montara oil rig. These are the reasons I believe the Chief Minster rolled over like a little puppy dog and got tickled on the belly, because he was told. He was told: ‘Sign up or lose SIHIP, sign up or lose the port, sign up or we will do you over the Montara. Sign up, sign up, sign up or there will not be a Northern Territory government’. That is were this was at, this is why we got 14 beds for $20m.
Let us have a look at the interview between Leon Compton and the Chief Minister during negotiations last week. It is quite compelling and, I have to say, it is quite funny. ‘Why are you prepared to give up your share of the GST?’ asked interviewer, Leon Compton, on ABC. What do you think the Chief Minister had to say? A very complex answer, I would have thought, that would have blown people away. But no, no details about why he is giving up our share of the GST, no details on the deal, but more of that political spin you might give if you were a little puppy dog being tickled on the belly. He said: ‘It is not about the niceties of accounting principles; and that is why I am backing the deal’.
What about the health of Territorians? What about how we put the patient first? What about how we might be able to get birthing services back for Tennant Creek? We have not heard about that in a while from the member for the Barkly. We have heard a lot about the nuclear waste and how fast you can go down the highway, but we have heard nothing about birthing services for Tennant Creek. I do not believe this new great, big puppy dog plan solves any of those problems.
Next, Compton asked: ‘Is this a situation, Chief Minister, where because we are a territory rather than a state with a state’s rights, we have to do what we are told?’ And this is where it got quite funny. What did the Chief Minister say out of Kevin Rudd’s spin central to Paul Henderson’s spin central? Is there a substantive answer to the question? No. The Chief Minister’s response was: ‘I am not going to fight on accounting principle’.
Let us move on to the next question. Compton asked, quite rightly: ‘Why are the other Premiers not prepared to go for this deal when you are?’ You have held up the white flag, you have rolled over, been tickled on the belly, you have shown your hand of cards, and what does the Chief Minister focus on? Here we go again, and I quote: ‘Let us not die in a ditch on an accounting principle’. That is all he had to say. Why are you not fighting like Brumby? Why are you not fighting like Barnett or Keneally? Why are you not fighting? Oh, come on: ‘Let us not die in a ditch over an accounting principle’. I never knew the Chief Minister was an accountant before he came to parliament. I doubt he would have the ability to understand accounting principles.
Compton asked a fairly reasonable question: ‘What would happen to people seeking health treatment in the Northern Territory if this deal did not get done? What would happen if the status quo continued; you have the GST revenue you wanted, and the Northern Territory government continued to provide health?’ This is getting a bit tired, wearing a bit thin, I know, but where did the Chief Minister go? You will never guess - back to, as at estimates last year, the 109 central spin doctors. He said: ‘To lose all of that for a debate about an accounting principle would be a tragedy for the Northern Territory and Australia’. So, he could not even say if Kevin Rudd gave all that GST money and you could do whatever you want. He did not even say this is how it would work better, because he does not have any idea. He just went back to his accounting principles.
First, there is an apparent lack of understanding of the detail of what has been put on the table by the Chief Minister. I will pose plenty of questions here and I would like him to answer in his response. I doubt he can; I doubt he understands those questions. Second, there is a sincere lack of understanding of accounting principles by the Chief Minister.
For your assistance in the future, Chief Minister, the following are some of the key principles which are fundamental concept of accounting. Money measurement: financial statements show only a limited picture. A commitment of a bucket of money does not actually result in better health outcomes if you have under-invested in health like this government which has failed to renew and replace. Cost: just saying how much is going to be spent on health has no relation to success, because the worth of that asset changes over time and it would be impossible to accurately record the long-term financial burden by just focusing on cost. Another accounting principle is objectivity: making sure objective evidence leads to making investment decisions. How does this government’s objectivity look when it agrees to a system which gets 14 beds for a system that apparently needs 80? Conservatism: understanding rather than overstating revenue and expenses. Where is the Treasury forecast to say what this will this cost the Territory? How can we, as the public, know this is a deal if you have failed, until today, to make the process transparent, and not some dodgy backroom deal when you come out with a little kid’s PowerPoint presentation. Consistency: use that same method for all subsequent events. Do we expect future national partnership payments and future investment in closing the gap to be consistent? Materiality: we have some material changes, a movement of tens of millions of dollars, but we have traded off hundred of millions of dollars. Has this government applied the concept of account materiality when measuring if this was a good deal or not?
Yes, we care a great deal about health, but all we have is questions; the general public has questions. No one understands this system; it is complex. We have a new deal, but we cannot understand why we get $20m a year for 14 beds. Even SIHIP is not that bad. You can get 80-plus beds for $20m at $700 000 a house for a three-bedroom house under SIHIP.
The National Health and Hospital Network Agreement may seem like a good deal for the Northern Territory; however, the devil is in the detail. The deal was never going to be any better than this. You did not even try, as you, Chief Minister, had already announced your public support. Is it a case of spin and spend, or will we see real improvements in the Territory’s health services? We only get 14 more beds, but the Chief Minister says waiting times for elective surgery will be reduced. How do we get more badly needed surgeons to make this possible? How do we get a doctor to Tennant Creek? How do we get birthing services to Tennant Creek?
The Chief Minister says long-term structural change is needed. Where is the structural change in the urgently needed literal sense? I refer to our Country Liberals’ policy commitment to a new hospital in Palmerston - real action. On 18 May 2000 your precious words in this Chamber were: ‘Royal Darwin Hospital is a facility that was almost outdated by the time it was built’. Recognising this, why has it taken 26 years for this to be a priority? Why did spending $120m or $180m on this mausoleum assume a higher priority for government capital works money than a new hospital for our capital city? A decade later, what is the state of our hospitals Territorians urgently require?
The Minister for Health, minister Vatskalis, said on Top FM on 4 March:
- A lot of discussion has to take place before we find out how it is going to affect the Territory and, of course, we should not agree to something that will take more money from the Territory than giving it back. At the same time we have to sit down and have a long, long discussion how it is going to be implemented.
Seven days later, on 11 March, on radio the Chief Minister said:
- The Territory’s unique circumstances will be taken into account, and I suppose our Treasury officials have a lot of detail to work through.
What detail did they work through? Where were their advisors? Or is it this? This PowerPoint presentation a child could do - is that it? You said time and again there was an accounting principle here. How on earth did you get all the detail collated, fully understood and accepted in a matter of weeks? You contributed nothing, and have yet to provide any detail. We are still waiting in parliament, and the general public is still waiting, for what we signed up to, little puppy dog.
I am not sure what contribution you made to the debate in Canberra. All I can see is you must have had one of the biggest delegations per capita, although why bother when you have already waved the white flag? It was actually quite interesting on television when the Prime Minister came out of those intense health debates, and he came up to the camera and was talking. Behind him was a tough John Brumby, a tough Colin Barnett, Keneally was there, and who was hanging out the back? The Chief Minister, the Queensland Premier and the South Australian Premier, like little puppy dogs, had nothing to say; they had already committed, sold out, did not negotiate on behalf of their constituents; just like the Chief Minister, Nigel No Friends.
The National Health and Hospital Network Agreement says there will be residential aged care for those who need high levels of care. What framework in the Northern Territory is ready to be activated to relieve the needs of older patients stuck in the old hospital system? Will the National Health and Hospital Network Agreement include funding for completion of residential and respite services in communities in areas such as East Arnhem and Belyuen?
How can the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement encourage efficiencies when there are still ineffective paymasters in the Territory and the Commonwealth? The centrepiece of the reform is a single local government hospital network the Chief Minister proposed will be put in place in the Northern Territory. Again, where is the detailed proposal the Territory government will put to the Commonwealth for our local hospital network?
The reality is, while this funding will go direct from the Commonwealth to the local hospital network, the great worry is that this will create yet another strata of bureaucrats. The Chief Minister states the Commonwealth is responsible for aged components of the program and the Territory will retain responsibility for disability services elements of the program. The Northern Territory Department of Health and Community Services, Aged and Disability’s program’s submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on ageing on 3 February 2004 contradicts this, where they say:
- The separation between services for the aged, people with disability and chronic disease is not meaningful in the NT and impacts on sustainability of services.
It goes further:
- Economies of scale and infrastructure issues frequently make it necessary to integrate services, particularly in rural and remote areas.
There are a limited number of organisations with capacity to manage service provision …
The Chief Minister states in his spin:
- This change makes it easier for patients to receive the services they need, in furthering patient outcomes and driving diversity, innovation in service division.
What a rant! What exactly does he mean? What are the precise aims and targets and how will outcomes to be measured? He further states these changes will place the patient at the centre of the health system. I am sure the shadow minister - I would be greatly concerned; I am horrified that the patient may not always be at the centre of the health system. If this is his wish for the future? Where is the patient placed at the current time?
I will help you out here, Chief Minister. The definition of patient heath care is: the prevention, treatment and management of illness and the preservation of mental and physical wellbeing through the services offered by the medical and allied health professionals. It is a vital template at all times.
The Country Liberals signalled a long way out that we were onside regarding health reform, but there is a great concern amongst both health professionals and patients that this is a sorry case of act in haste, repent at leisure, politics big and small. Reference is made of personalised care plans prepared by GPs. As I understand it, GPs are paid an annual amount for every single one of their patient’s enrolled for a PCP with bonuses paid to GP practices where a personalised care plan is on offer. There are examples of those personalised care plans happening in the Northern Territory. How are their successes being measured?
Gove, Tennant Creek and Katherine hospitals will continue with block funding, but Alice Springs and Darwin moved to activity-based funding. There are many outstanding questions with regard to activity-based funding. It is no good if the Chief Minister claims: ‘Changes to primary care will provide a real opportunity to push ahead in partnership with the Commonwealth to close the gap in Aboriginal health disadvantage’. Where is the evidence from Indigenous community health services that any progress is being made at all?
The rate of hospitalisation in Australia is one of the highest in the world. Why are we throwing such a huge amount of money at curing ill health rather than prevention? Where are the funds for the integration of hospital primary care communication Australia-wide? The electronic data interchange reduced time for reports to reach GPs, for instance, say, from two days to the same day delivery. Surely there is a fundamental need within reforms? Is this another Kevin Rudd/Paul Henderson knee-jerk reform? Have they and their advisors really listened to what the experts recommended be put in place in the next 10, 20, or 50 years - not just designed to get Kevin Rudd with his little wagging tail dog, the Chief Minister, across the line at the next election? What single thing did you do, Chief Minister, which made this deal a better deal for the Northern Territory?
I am also well aware that in the Northern Territory there is an additional health impact resulting from the NTER. The Australian Indigenous Doctors Association Health Impact Assessment predicts that the intended health outcomes of the Northern Territory Emergency Response - that being improved health and wellbeing and, ultimately, life expectancy - are unlikely to be fully achieved. I cannot see where the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is going to answer the hard questions and the pressing need for action.
The Australia government’s National Health and Hospitals Reform Committee, in their final report dated June 2009, titled A Healthier Future for all Australians, noted:
- Our first priority acknowledges the unacceptable health outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. To address this, we are recommending a radical change to how we take responsibility for improving the health of our first Australians. We want all the funding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to be aggregated. We want a new National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Authority (NATSIHA) to take this funding and actively purchase and commission the very best health services - services that are effective, high quality, culturally appropriate and meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, their families and their commitments.
Did this essential priority list disappear somewhere else we are not quite sure of? Did the Chief Minister stand up and advocate for this in his discussions with the highly effective, or ineffective, Prime Minister? The Chief Minister has gone to COAG as a little lap dog, on his back, being tickled on the belly by Kevin Rudd, if he is strong enough to hold him. He rolled over and accepted a deal that he has no idea of. If this represents the detail the Chief Minister has made his decision on supporting Kevin Rudd’s plan, then God help the Territory, because Paul Henderson certainly cannot.
Let us go back to the activity-based funding you may want to consider. What does a defined activity-based funding model cost for Australia? What has the Northern Territory government done to develop an activity-based funding model, definitions, and projections for each activity in the Northern Territory? How does the department of Health demonstrate activity-based funding using a case mix …
Ms PURICK: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of 10 minutes for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you for your indulgence, and I thank the member for Goyder.
How does the department of Health demonstrate activity-based funding, using case mix classifications, explicitly link funding to the actual services provided? How does an activity-based funding formula work in the Northern Territory? How is the Northern Territory currently determining funding for our hospitals? Is the Northern Territory now using activity-based funding for all costing rather than the previous block funding model? Define where each activity starts and ends, and what exactly is encompassed. What has changed for the Northern Territory, as it was previously noted the case mix model is actually more appropriate for larger jurisdictions with significantly larger hospitals and populations?
How will the Northern Territory’s high number of patients requiring public care and chronic disease management and the unique Indigenous percentage of patients with multiple illnesses be recognised under activity-based funding? How will the negative and positive results of activity-based funding in the Northern Territory be measured? How will the Northern Territory government ensure activity-based funding does not result in greater output being emphasised ahead of better outcomes? Does the department of Health have suitable activity-based funding data-tracking technology in place? Is the necessary modelling work on activity-based funding in the Northern Territory driven by the Health Gains Funding Unit? Exactly how much does each activity cost in the Northern Territory compared with the national cost?
Can you give examples, Chief Minister, for straightforward maternal hospital development, hip replacements and dialysis in each of the five NT hospitals? What is the basis of future activity-based funding, infrastructure and investment for primary and primary healthcare allocations? How are future costs estimated? What does the Heart Foundation’s report on the modelling of current usage of services in the Northern Territory and the comparison to interstate usage show, in detail, Chief Minister? What updated demographics of the Northern Territory are currently being used? How will activity-based funding impact on the Northern Territory waiting lists and occupancy levels? Will there be opportunity for Northern Territorians to be transferred interstate for procedures? Will activity-based funding include 24-hour mental healthcare for the Northern Territory? I doubt that - it is off their radar.
How much is the remote service delivery component of activity-based funding? Is the Hospital Services Planning Project produced by Ernst & Young available? What is the annual growth of hospital costs in percentage terms and dollar terms in the Northern Territory? What is the annual growth of costs in percentage terms and dollar terms for hospitals in the Northern Territory? I think I have said that one twice. Oh no, I did not. What other projections …
Mr Knight: You need to speak faster.
Mr GILES: Steady on, Clark Kent.
What are the projections for basing the annual cost of hospitals in the Northern Territory and percentage in dollar terms for each of the next 15 years? What are the projections of growth in annual cost to each Northern Territory hospital in percentage and dollars for the next 15 years? What is the projected growth in GST revenue in the Northern Territory in percentage terms and dollar terms for each of the next 15 years?
How will a new hospital at Palmerston be funded? Will the federal government fund 60% of its construction and setup costs? Will the bottom line for activity-based funding be additional funding for health in the Northern Territory? What will be the cost of the Northern Territory activity-based funding regarding the loss of GST income?
Too many questions, and we know sweet nothing about what is actually happening. We have a PowerPoint presentation that tells us nothing. Territorians do not know what this new health plan the lapdog has signed up to means. We need to get answers. We need to know if $20m for 14 beds is a sound investment. Would we be better tackling this from an environmental health perspective?
We know about the failures of SIHIP. There are plenty of reports: the NATSISS reports, the AMA, doctors’ associations, we have summaries of Indigenous health, Australian Indigenous Health implementation reports. We have everything that says the determinants of health relate to other factors such as housing, education, transport, diet - and none of this is included in this health package, and it is very important. That is why the importance of SIHIP is relevant to this debate because, as a determinant of health - and we heard the Chief Minister today talk about 70% of people turning up at hospitals are Indigenous clients - we have a key program which was designed, that was deliberately announced by the previous federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Mal Brough, to tackle issues around housing that would have had an outcome to support improved health outcomes for Indigenous Territorians. Now the government has dropped the ball on it. What are they doing? We can get the CHINS report - the Community Housing and Infrastructure Needs Survey report - which talks about the need for infrastructure to be put into communities to improve the health outcomes for Indigenous Territorians.
What do we see happen with SIHIP? The infrastructure component blown out the door so badly that house 206 at Ali Curung, Jimmy Friday and Nancy Martin’s daughter’s house, had the house handed back with no lid on the septic tank - so kids can fall in there. I am quite sure if kids fall in the septic tank, they would have to use the health service because they got sick. This is where environmental health comes into the whole argument. This is something that has not been part of this health plan because Kevin Rudd does not understand it, and I am sure the Chief Minister is nowhere near Kevin Rudd.
Then we see the Housing minister, or the previous Housing minister for SIHIP, and these guys are even worse. How do you hand houses over that have had $75 000 or more spent on them without a lid on a septic tank? So Jimmy and Nancy have given this house to their daughter, and there are 10 or 15 people living in there because there is not enough housing. Even though this is a growth town, we cannot give them any new houses; we do not work like that. We want everyone to move into Darwin or Palmerston and be overcrowded and participate in antisocial behaviour and the things that happen in overcrowded situations. So Jimmy and Nancy are living in a little tin shed out the back, one room. They asked the SIHIP officials when they came round: ‘Will you fix up our house?’ The officials said: ‘Hang on a minute, these houses, these refurbishments are costing too much, there is no money for tin sheds. You have to live in your tin shed’.
I noticed in the member for Barkly’s electorate - I have not heard him talk about, it but he would have to be quite devastated that Jimmy and Nancy continue to live in a tin shed. Their health outcomes are not improving, I can tell you. And these are good people who are trying to do the right thing. Jimmy is a famous gospel singer. Good people, Madam Speaker.
Then we hear reports about houses out at Willowra where money has been paid from SIHIP to the Central Desert Shire - $138 000 - as leaked in an e-mail displayed in The Australian newspaper on 16 April, reported by Patricia Karvelas said: ‘Oh no, we can do it, we have been doing them for $16 000 12 months ago’. Then there is an interview by Alice Brennan to the Housing Minister, the member for Johnston, where he said: ‘I doubt that. I doubt that. There are a lot of people in Darwin or Alice Springs who would like to see their house refurbished for that price, between $16 000 and $25 000’, or words to that effect. I understand the Housing minister knows about that e-mail and he is all over the top of it. I have not heard any explanation as to how SIHIP can cost $75 000, and these guys down there can do it for $25 000 ...
Dr Burns: Why don’t you ask the question? You will get an answer.
Mr GILES: I find that very hard to see. I inspected all these houses and I know the condition of the places. And I know …
Dr Burns: You would not get a kitchen in Darwin for $25 000.
A member: Yes, you would.
Dr Burns: I do not know what sort of kitchen you live in.
Mr GILES: The standard in Willowra is better than the standard in Ali Curung ...
Members interjecting.
Mr GILES: Do the sums. $672m divided by $25 000. Work out how many houses you can get refurbished in the Northern Territory. Every one of them …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr GILES: Every house in the Northern Territory. This is the failure of this alliance. You can have every house refurbished for that money. You can get change in building new houses; use your calculator. $672m divided by $25 000 and see how many thousands of houses you can refurbish ...
Mr Knight interjecting.
Mr GILES: Do not talk, Clark Kent over there, dumber man. You are the bloke who has time for his electorate, but you cannot even stop the kids from having to swim across sewage-infested and crocodile-infested water to get to school. Let us tell a story about how incompetent both the Northern Territory and federal government are when it comes to managing these things. This is environmental health; you have kids swimming through sewage water. They go to hospital, and there is another person turning up at hospital, which affects your figures, which affects the funding model.
There is a tender out at the moment to build a 6 m wide bridge with a walking lane at Palumpa, so the kids can go across in the Wet Season without having to fight off the crocodiles and the turds coming past - you have to be really careful there. The Victoria Daly Shire has a figure of $1.5m to do this work. The SIHIP alliance contractor has a figure of $2.3m for exactly the same work - $800 000 difference; same work, same standards, same regulations, same bridge! That is why they are hopeless.
I will leave BER for another time. There is a list this long of failures in that too, member for Barkly, on BER things. The member for Barkly is the minister for pain, who runs these things; he is the bloke stuffing up, not the Education minister. This is the bloke whose department is building classrooms with no electricity because they forgot to upgrade the power. This is the bloke who cannot open a school hall because they forget to assess how much water pressure there is for fire hydrants to put fires out. But we will get to that one later; there are plenty of those around.
You cannot run SIHIP, you cannot run insulation, you cannot run BER, you cannot run Health ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, your time has expired, resume your seat.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I just wish to make some observations about how this government and this Chief Minister choose to advance the Northern Territory, and the techniques they use.
I have picked up from some of the speakers what would have passed as diversions from the main debate; after all, we are talking about the health funding arrangements at a federal level. It is worthwhile turning your mind to those arguments, because I would really like to believe this debate was about improving health services for the people of the Northern Territory.
I am concerned - especially now the greatest moral dilemma of our age has been sidelined - the Prime Minister, being particularly mindful of a election looming in the current year, needs to have a win, because he has not had many in recent times. I would hate to think this was nothing more than a cynical exercise to demonstrate the fact the Prime Minister has some capacity to lead in light of some of the failures in other areas, not least of which was the failed ETS, and also the matter of the pink batts scheme debacle, and those types of things.
I really do hope this debate is about improving healthcare outcomes. It is worth revisiting some history here, and I turn to the Ros Kelly memorial PowerPoint presentation, page 3 ...
Mr Tollner: You mean the Treasury analysis?
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, I am going to get to that. It is interesting to go back to page 3, because there is actually a track between the crocodile jaws - and I know this is an expression the current Education minister loves, the old ‘crocodile jaws’. He spent the first several months in parliament walking around like that, because he was so taken with the idea of crocodile jaws. This is, indeed, a graph showing crocodile jaws which demonstrates the changing proportionality of expenditure in the area of health between the Commonwealth and the states. I draw members’ attention particularly to the two dotted lines because they deal with the all states’ share and the Commonwealth/states arrangement.
You have to be mindful there was an agreement struck which was, ultimately, intended to be a 50:50 share arrangement, many years ago - 10 years ago, and I believe it dates back well into the Howard government era - between the states and the Commonwealth to share the cost expenditure on a 50:50 basis.
What happened after the time the GST came along? State governments realised they had much more cash than they ever believed. You can go back and look at the projections; the Northern Territory budget is a good example of it. If you go back through those budgets you can see, year after year, the projection falls well short of the actual outcome which is achieved at the end of the year, largely due to the fact there was much more GST in the tin. So, those state governments then had a choice to save the money and make prudent fiscal decisions within the arrangements we have with the Commonwealth. If we take a little of that GST and pop it into the health bucket because we want to improve health services. I genuinely believe that is what they intend to do; they want to improve health services.
However, as time passed, that bucket got deeper and deeper and started to draw down more completely on the expenditure of the GST by the states, so each state jurisdiction continued to roll out these new health programs. We saw it here. The introduction of renal dialysis services to Tennant Creek is an example of that type of expenditure; those choices that governments make. Whilst the federal government continued to pay money in accordance with the original agreement into the health arrangements, the states chose to spend more. That produces crocodile jaws because, if you express your crocodile jaws in terms of proportionality, if one group is spending more as a proportion of the overall money spent, then the other group must be spending less. The fact is they are not. They were still providing income in accordance with the original agreement.
The states were choosing to expend their GST in this fashion, and so these government decisions made along the way created the crocodile jaws. There may well have been good reasons for those government decisions to be taken along the way. I well understand the urge of governments, both Labor and Liberal, to do the best they possibly can for the community they serve. I understand that urge.
The issue is not about the motive; the issue is about capacity. What actually happens is, eventually, the state governments are spending so much – and you can see that on the graph – that the Commonwealth was being pushed down to about 40% because of the states’ decision to spend more and more. So, as this projection tracked up, the Commonwealth did their CPI increases, but that is all they did, and they made the payments in accordance with the agreement. The states kept on spending more and, then, they started anticipating how much more they would have to spend.
This is where the Chief Minister gets his $1bn figure from - they ripped $1bn out of the system. No, not quite. The difference between the projected expenditure and the actual expenditure is the difference to which the Chief Minister refers as $1bn being ripped out of the health system.
It goes to the integrity of how this argument is run, and that really is the issue I have the most concern with. I listened carefully to the member for Nelson in relation to this because this does throw up many more questions than it provides answers. The Chief Minister had time to spare; when he finished his statement he had more to report. I am curious about how other elements in this whole package are being presented to us for our consumption. If you believe the information which has been made available - and I do believe it - then the whole deal is worth $222m over 10 years, which is about $22m per year, which is not an insubstantial amount of money. However, you have to ask yourself what else we are giving away in the process of gaining that $20m per year, bearing in mind we are talking about a budget which will be in the order of $4.5bn next week, I suspect.
I am concerned we would trade away some of our sovereignty, some of our capacity, possibly even our flexibility in budgetary management, for this particular outcome. That is not to say I do not believe, in essence, it is wrong, but it needs a critical eye.
For that, I turn to a Chief Minister who I look to for integrity in the way the message is conveyed. I then place my trust, as Territorians must have to place their trust, on what we are being asked to believe by the Chief Minister. If the Chief Minister wants to display his honorificabilitudinitatibus to us in this House, then he must take the necessary steps to convince us of his integrity. This is where I start to have some concerns.
We have been calling for the Treasury advice, and the Chief Minister came in here and said: ‘I have the Treasury briefing; I will table it for you’. I am sure other members have raised this. This is not a Treasury advice, and I suspect this is not a Treasury briefing; this is a PowerPoint presentation to which a Treasury official would speak if they were addressing a minister, so it would flash up on the wall and the briefing would be provided by the official. So, this is not a briefing; this is a PowerPoint presentation. The advice is conspicuous, and continues to be conspicuous, by it absence.
This is not the first time the government has clammed up in what it is doing. I remind honourable members about the submissions to the Henry tax review which was finally leaked to the media, I imagine, by a very concerned public servant, because of its content.
The Chief Minister also went on to talk about this 14% in the agreement, as I understand it. Well, having cast an eye over that agreement, I would like the Chief Minister to point out where in that agreement it refers to the 14% of the tied GST money. It is in the PowerPoint presentation, but it is actually not in the agreement. I imagine there is a formula attached, which would come up with that figure of 14%. But, for goodness sake, take the time out in your presentation to this House, as Chief Minister, to demonstrate how you come up with that figure of 14%.
The other thing we heard the Chief Minister say: ‘Oh, the Leader of the Opposition has not asked for a briefing’. That is not true. It is only true in the essential component that the Leader of the Opposition did not ask for a briefing; the shadow minister for Health certainly did. But the Chief Minister is too busy trying to demonstrate the opposition has shown no interest in this - which is arrant nonsense! He is prepared to project it in such a fashion that it colours the story in a particular way to his advantage - this from the Chief Minister who says the politics should be removed from this particular argument. I listened with great interest to the Chief Minister say: ‘The politics should be removed from this argument, but that so-and-so Tony Abbott ripped $1bn out of it; what a nasty pasty he is’. Arrant nonsense! He is not interested in removing politics from this matter; he is simply interested in the spin machine that surrounds this particular deal.
I have also heard all types of assertions that this is going to work better. Why? How? How is this going to work better? We have different streams through which the money comes down the funnel in a different way. How does that actually produce a better outcome when the money comes down the funnel in a different way? We have $1bn Health budget, of which we are going to add $22m next year. Okay, that is good, but by what means does that improve health outcomes? Fourteen more sub-acute care beds - which are not acute care beds, by the way - they are just sub-acute care beds. So how does 14 more of those produce outcomes?
We have heard the complaints from the AMA; they say we need 40 more hospital beds. Does this now relieve the government of its last election promise to introduce new hospital beds? Are they going to count the new hospital beds provided by this deal as part of the hospital beds they promised they would deliver at the last Territory election? Are we just swapping one promise for another? None of this is explained. For the government to maintain its integrity, particularly where they claim this is about patient outcomes, then do not just tell me the system is going to be run better to give me comfort, as a Territorian, that is how it is going to be.
If we rely on the assertion by this government that things are gong to run better as a result of more expenditure, then we would have to take comfort in the fact we have almost no crime, and our hospitals are efficient machines which run seamlessly without any problems, and that our elective waiting lists are very short.
If we believe the assertion we are going to run things better - for argument’s sake, land release - then the problem prices we have at the moment would not exist. But the fact is, in regard to land release, a few years ago there was an assertion on 27 April 2007 by the now Treasurer that they would only have to turn off 300 blocks a year in the Top End of the Northern Territory to meet demand. So, we hear any number of promises and assertions, and comfortable words about how all of this is going to be achieved, but if they stand on their record, and if you factor in these little political barbs and misleading statements, then you cannot get comfort at the other end.
I point out to the Chief Minister that he also was quite errant - and I hope it was mere error - in relation to his assertion that the Northern Territory had no accredited hospitals when they came to power. Wrong, not true, and I interjected that at the time. I draw the minister’s attention to page 28 of the annual report of the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards financial year 2000-01. At the end of that report in year to 30 June 2001, before the Northern Territory government changed to a Labor government, the Royal Darwin Hospital is listed as having received accreditation. So, unless he is talking about accreditation from some other organisation - and maybe he would like to describe which other organisation - I do not know. The Tobacco Council of Australia may not have accredited any of the hospitals in the Northern Territory, but I am curious to hear what he has to say.
Because he is so anxious to spin the story, he is prepared to use language which suggests that the opposition has taken no interest in this particular debate by not asking for a briefing, when they have. He is prepared to call this a Treasury briefing, when it is not. He is prepared to say no hospitals had accreditation, when they had. And he is then prepared to say there is 14% outlined in the agreement, when it is not. It is all this fudging around the edge; he is constantly stepping around the edge of things to try to paint a picture. The picture he is trying to paint is that we are all bad and he is all good, and everything is wonderful. But the point is, if you continue fudging around the edge like that, eventually you are going to overstep the mark. I could argue that he has already with his accreditation comments. The fact is, constantly taking it to the edge is demonstrative of a desperate Chief Minister who is clutching on to a government which is falling apart in its capacity.
Today, we had the spectacle of a minister start to contribute to a debate, only to discover he was talking on the wrong debate because his pre-prepared notes was all he had to rely on - nothing else. We had the spectacle of other ministers coming into this place and simply reading stuff out, because that is what the department shoves into their hands. The capacity to critically think is critically absent from this government. That is the real flaw I am concerned about with this government. All of that contributes to a Chief Minister who is becoming increasingly desperate and, in the process of doing so, is becoming increasingly dishonest with Northern Territorians. You cannot do that and then walk into this House and say: ‘Have I got a deal for you’, when you have the reputation of a used car salesman.
Madam Speaker, I urge the Chief Minister to reconsider his approach, particularly how he deals with the truth, so he may restore his integrity to the point where I, and Territorians, can trust him when he talks about these things.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, I have had a number of constituents come to my electorate office to discuss their concerns about what the current federal government and the Prime Minister of this country want to do in regarding the health system.
At the outset, I would like to make comment on my understanding of the hospital setup in relation to the staff who work in these hospitals - not only the clinical staff, but the non-clinical staff who support those people, and the public servants who support both the clinical and non-clinical staff in our hospitals and healthcare system. I heard today the Chief Minister making comments in relation to the statement, and also during Question Time, where he claimed we, on this side of the House, only want to criticise public servants, we do not have any respect, we have offended them, and other terms I cannot recall. He made all those statements, and I find that offensive.
We, on our side of the House, live in this place, we use these hospital services and, in the main, the people who man our hospitals and look after us and provide our healthcare services are very fine, upstanding people in our community. To assert we do not admire those people, nor would we respect them for the type of people they are, I believe is quite absurd. However, that is the way the Chief Minister reads it. I believe he is misinformed and he totally misjudges the people who come into this House and the people who actually work for the Northern Territory government and provide us with all our health services.
I find it amazing, and so do some of the constituents who come to my office. In fact, I get people from the northern suburbs who are government members’ constituents who come to my office to have conversations because they cannot seem to get the message through to their local members on the Labor side of politics.
It is quite interesting that the Chief Minister would want to sign up to this particular agreement with such speed and so little information. If he was on the open highway, he would probably be travelling in excess of 160 km/h towards signing this agreement. I find if you ask for Treasury estimates, this is what you get. I have had a brief look through this document called the National Health Reform from the Northern Territory Treasury, and I find it appalling you would actually give this to a parliament and say: ‘Here is a briefing’. I know there are some fine public servants who work for the Northern Territory government, and you could probably produce this in a number of hours if you are competent, and if it is your area of expertise in Treasury.
The detailed analysis of the impact of this agreement on the Northern Territory is still a mystery, and will probably stay a mystery, because I do not believe the Chief Minister really is interested in finding out what the bottom line is and the impact, both short-term and long-term, this agreement is going to have on the Northern Territory. It is appalling that he comes into this House and treats the Northern Territory, and the constituents of the Northern Territory, with contempt and tries to get this document through as a briefing.
I believe that some of the problems which occur in our system are the result of systemic policy failures across the board in the current Labor government in trying to manage the Northern Territory. I say try, because I do not believe they are succeeding. We would not be in this situation in the Territory if we had better management of the resources available to the Northern Territory government. In fact, across Australia, Labor governments have been in charge for quite some years, and the health system is in an appalling state because of the total mismanagement of the resources provided to them locally, and by the Commonwealth.
At Royal Darwin Hospital we cannot even seem to get the fridges and the milk right there. It recently came to my attention that the milk fridges are not working and have not been working for some time. So they are all drinking long life milk and, in some cases, may even be drinking powdered milk.
Caseloads in our hospitals have gone through the roof, so staff have to manage horrendous caseloads. Although I hear the government say the waiting lists have gone down, I talk to people who come into my office and say they are going up. Who does one believe? Do you believe the people who are coming into my office saying: ‘I have had this cancelled, I have had that cancelled’? There are many them; it is not just one. Many people come in to complain about waiting lists getting longer, and people cannot get the services they need. The old saying of ‘when in pain get on a plane’ appears to be coming back to the Northern Territory.
I have been here heading towards 30 years, and, when I first came to the Territory, the health services were excellent. There were some services we did not have and we had to go south for some, but we were a fledging Territory; three years after self-government I arrived. The services then, I would suggest, were probably better than they are now judging by people I talk to who have come here recently and are trying to use the health system as often as I did when I had young children.
We have some appalling conditions in our hospitals. People come in and ask, ‘Have you been to the hospital lately?’, and I say I have been recently. They talk about paint peeling off walls; cockroaches; cleanliness; and rubbish. I have recently spoken to some cleaners from the hospital and I gather there are just not enough of them; they are constrained in the number of hours they can work and what they can do. We have some really heavy duty issues just with Royal Darwin Hospital. They are people who live in the northern suburbs of Darwin who come in to me on a regular basis expressing extreme concern as to what is happening. I am not even going to go near mental health at this point, because I would probably spend the next half hour talking about some of the mental health issues and some of the problems the health system has in looking after those people.
The ministerial statement given to us by the Chief Minister is titled National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement and dated Tuesday, 27 April 2010. The Chief Minister spoke about it in the House today. From my time in this House we see these statements and they seem to give plenty of ammunition about what we can do to actually talk to the government about some of the failings. They seem to write the failings down here. I go to page 2, for instance, and quote the Chief Minister:
- My position was clear from the outset. I was prepared to sign this major reform, however it had to do two things. One, take into account the unique Territory health circumstances …
The current government has allowed the health system to deteriorate to a point where it is bandaid stuff. They are desperately trying to get things fixed and are relying on really dedicated staff to try to pull rabbits out of the hat. These particular staff members who work for our system - dedicated people with hearts of gold - are being required to do more and more for less and less. I have had nurses say to me: ‘I come up here from time to time, maybe for a year or six months, and then I go somewhere else’. They say the situation they face on a daily basis in our hospitals is atrocious. They cannot believe the hospitals in the Northern Territory have deteriorated to the point they have today in how they are run and the policy failures that are occurring.
These nurses come from southern states and they might spend winter up here. When we have an increase in population, an increase of tourists up here, obviously, we have extra demand on our hospitals. These wonderful people come to the Territory, work here for six months, go back, spend time with their families, work down south and then they do it again the next year. I have run into a number of them who have said: ‘Sorry, Pete, we are not going to come here again. We spend way too much money trying to get accommodation, if you can get accommodation; the workloads at the hospital are astronomical in what is expected of us; and the condition of the hospital means we are not going to come here again’.
Where do we get people to fill those gaps, short-term people? Where do we get long-term people? They talk to their colleagues interstate and say: ‘You do not want to go to the Territory, you cannot afford to live there, you cannot even get a house and, if you can get a house, it is going to cost an absolute fortune, and if you are going to rent one, it is probably going to cost even more’. We have situations where some of these people have to live four, five or six to a house and share bedrooms. That is an appalling situation.
The other situation we find in point 2, which says: ‘provide additional resources to improving health in the Territory’. How do you determine that when you do not have a proper analysis of the impact this agreement is going to have in the Territory? We have this document called The National Health Reform, Northern Territory Treasury Presentation, and I agree with my colleagues; it is nothing more than a PowerPoint presentation you would give people to show them what this is roughly about. There is no detail here; there is no analysis.
Moving further through the document to page 3 it says:
- On Tuesday afternoon, after many hours of negotiation, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement was finalised. I am pleased to advise the House that this agreement fulfils both of my pre-conditions.
I go back to this document. Where is the analysis? Where is the impact analysis on the Northern Territory? How do you determine that it has actually met both of those pre-conditions? I quote again:
- One, take into account the unique Territory health circumstances and, two; provide additional resources to improve health in the Territory.
I do not know how you do that, because there is no proof. The Chief Minister has been asked to provide us with some indication and some information in relation to that, yet he comes in here and makes this statement. What are we to do? Believe him and just say: ‘That is great, tremendous’? But where is the detail? There is no detail, and I do not think there is a plan. I believe the Chief Minister has rolled over because of the centralised system Labor works. All their Premiers, even though they jacked up in the beginning, have rolled over and gone into this. The only one who has not rolled over because his future or his job does not depend on it is the Western Australian Premier, because there is a Liberal government in Western Australia. The rest have appeared to roll over and go with what the Prime Minister requested.
Further down that page, to quote the Chief Minister talking about regional health standards:
- … in regional areas, access to health services lag well behind what is available in the big cities. Since 2001 we have increased health spending by 117% to $1.05bn. Despite spending almost a quarter of the Territory budget on health, waiting times to see a GP still need to be cut …
It is interesting the words used here. I hear the Treasurer stating, from time and time: ‘We spend way more money than the CLP did’. That is because they have more money from the rivers of gold that have flowed in from the GST. Courtesy of a Liberal federal government which brought this good system in, they have all this extra money. If I give my neighbour $1000, of course, the neighbour is going to be able to spend more money than he or she did last week, because they have more money. It is not rocket science.
The main problem is the Treasurer continually espouses ‘We spend more money’. On this side of the House we continually say to the Treasurer: ‘Money is an input, not an outcome’, yet I hear them saying: ‘We have done this and we have done that.’ Well, cash is an input not an outcome; that is a very basic accounting principle. Yet, the Treasurer still does not seem to get it, still tries to convince us, the media, the press gallery and anyone listening to these broadcasts that it is an input, and that is an output. It would be nice if she could get that right and acknowledge that many of the inputs have not actually been able to achieve a decent output.
Let us look at page 4 of what the Chief Minister said. Here we go again, and I quote, last paragraph, page 4:
- The National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement will lead to the reform of aged care, protecting the health of older citizens in the community, and ensuring an increased supply of residential aged care for our seniors who need high levels of care.
That takes me straight to seniors housing and the link between housing and health. There is so much one can talk about, and I will come back to seniors housing. Let us just talk about the health of people in general when they cannot get a house, when they actually have to live in a car or in a tent. Some people do not choose to live in the long grass - they have to due to circumstances. When you look at housing waiting lists, you have 3500-plus families on the housing waiting list. When we in the electorate office contact Housing and ask how long it is going to be, they say: ‘Have a look on the website.’ You look on the website and it says ‘indeterminable’. The reason being - they do not know. The reason being, they are the ones who sold approximately 2016 - it could be 2019, I stand to be corrected ...
Dr Burns: Oh, you will be corrected.
Mr STYLES: The other day I heard that you just have to look at the annual reports and actually look at the figures …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr STYLES: Those figures are on the public record because that is where I got them from, and that is where we on our side got them from …
A member: You did not read it properly, did you?
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: I read it the other day: the government said the CLP sold 2000 homes, the CLP sold 780; and we will accept that we sold them.
Dr Burns: Either you are dumb or you are misleading the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: We sold them because we gave low-income families a hand up. We did not do it in the middle of a housing crisis because we had not released enough land. We had plenty of land releases, we had plenty of houses …
A member: No, you did not.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: … and because of good management we actually had the ability to help these people into owning their own homes. We will do that again because this government has failed the Northern Territory people in a miserable fashion, where kids have to leave town.
Members interjecting.
Mr STYLES: Out there people are talking about …
Members interjecting.
Mr STYLES: … capital city where the people in Coles cannot get young people because young people cannot afford to stay here ...
A member: Four thousand people a year are coming here.
Mr STYLES: A friend of mine’s kids have moved to Adelaide because they cannot afford to buy a home here, because this government has failed so dramatically to release sufficient land. Our children cannot afford to buy homes in this Territory. If the government members do not know that then they are very out of touch with what is going on in the community; they need to get out there and find out and talk to some of these people ...
A member interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: Madam Speaker, people do not have to believe me, they can go out and talk to the people who are the constituents of the Northern Territory who are having desperate troubles to try to find their kids homes. Kids have to move back into their parents’ homes. You have kids with eight people living in the house to pay the rent. You have apprentices who cannot buy a house, cannot do anything, because the prices are through the roof. Who is responsible for that? The current Labor government ...
A member: Shame. Shameful.
Mr STYLES: Yes, shame. So let us go back to …
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: We talk about health and overcrowding in homes. We know the terrible situation in some of the communities outside our urban areas with overcrowding problems and that is on the public record. What we have now in the suburbs, in middle class families, is overcrowding is starting because the kids cannot move out and buy a home. They are living at home and they have kids. You have parents with grandkids in homes which are not really designed to have so many people in them.
The infrastructure situation: without good infrastructure, how do people get to hospitals? How do we have all the facilities we need at hospitals if you are not spending enough on infrastructure?
Let us go back to senior’s housing. I heard recently the minister for Housing is going to build some nice seniors’ villages ...
A member: No, he made an announcement.
Mr STYLES: Yes, he made an announcement, and we have heard those announcements time and time again. We hear it in SIHIP; every day we talk about SIHIP. You would think the government would say they have an issue because the opposition hammers them every day they can - because they are failing on SIHIP. Now, we are arguing over whether, in two-and-a-half years, they have actually built four homes or six. That is the argument, four or six. Do we have this figure of four, or is a 50% increase in the number of homes built, which takes you from four to six? I believe it is appalling. In two-and-a-half years, with all the money which has been spent on consultants, people driving around out there, and flying around looking at things, and they have not done very much at all. Everyone on that side seems to do a great deal of looking, talking, and announcing, but we do not seem to see things on the ground. We do not see bricks and mortar going up.
Seniors villages: seniors come in and say they rang Housing and were told it is indeterminable. They say: ‘What does that mean?’ I say: ‘I do not know; when you find out, can you e-mail me, because we have been trying to find out and they will not tell us. So, we cannot, unfortunately, tell you’.
Mental health, I believe there could be an entire debate on the problems with mental health, but I will move on. On page 5:
- Importantly, the Commonwealth government has recognised the need to prioritise the needs of older patients who get stuck in the hospital system because of a lack of more suitable care options.
I do not quite know what that means, but I am going to take a stab at it. The Council on the Ageing has been a great advocate for the needs of seniors and in retaining seniors in the Northern Territory. The problem is with the cost of living, the cost of renting, all that type of thing, it all adds to the fact we are starting to lose people. I know we have a good number of births in the Northern Territory, but the fact is we appear to be losing people, and we are losing our attractiveness for people to move here. I am wondering when it will get to the stage where we have negative population growth because people go down south.
I was at Wulagi Supermarket last Saturday morning and some people come over and said their kids had just left town because they cannot afford to stay here. It is sad because they are going to finish what they are doing here and they are moving too. They are long-term Territorians who would love to have stayed here, but they said come retirement, they will not be able to afford to live here.
Instead of building the fabric of our community, it is being torn apart at the moment. I ask who is responsible; who is in government? Who has the ability to put out policy which will help these people and will get things done? The answer is obvious: the government has the ability to do that. They are the ones who control what happens; they control planning; they control how much land is released. Yet, we see time and time again- -it is like a state of paralysis - nothing seems to be happening. Across the board we have major problems. Can you fail at everything? I believe the answer is yes, because that is where we are headed at the moment. In health, in law and order, in education - these are the pillars of our community. The three pillars are health, education, law and order. There are so many problems in infrastructure, planning, and all kind of other issues I will not bring into this particular debate, but we have major issues in those three areas. The one we are talking about at the moment is, of course, health.
We are looking at trying to keep people here. We are trying to encourage the grey nomads to come to town. COTA advised me that if we keep some of these senior people here and get some grey nomads up here they estimated those people are putting in excess of $200m into our local economy. That is a large amount of money. When you start pulling out that sort of money, millions of dollars per week which has been spent in this town keeping our kids in jobs, creating business, creating jobs for our kids, creating jobs for every Territorian. If we keep going in the direction we are going, we will find we will have negative growth, and that is going to be a disaster ...
Dr Burns: Like when you were in power – a flatline economy.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STYLES: Who is in government? You have had more money …
Dr Burns: And look at the economy …
Mr STYLES: I will pick up on the interjection. Member for Johnston, your government has had more money than we ever dreamed of. The rivers of gold, the increase in the budget, and you sit there and say: ‘You people were flatline’. Well, we were trying to recover from a number of things. The federal Labor government, last time they were in and were voted out in 1996, left a debt of $96bn. The Liberal federal government was left to clean up that particular mess. Then you say the GST - well, you never agreed with it anyway. However, you are the recipients of the largesse of the GST system which has given you people more money than you ever dreamed about in 2001 when you came into office, and you sit over there and you accuse us of all kinds of things. I would hang my head in shame and I would not be able to sleep at night if I sat on that side of the House.
This document is rich and there are pages and pages of notes I have here of how the government has these systemic policy failures at the moment. Of course, they would say it is all great, it is all well. I do not know where they are, but they are not on the same planet I am. I have to deal with people who come into my office every day, some of them in tears, because of the situations that have been created and the mess that the place is in, courtesy of the current Northern Territory government.
Let us look at page 6:
- The Commonwealth has agreed to work bilaterally with the Territory …
I thought we already worked bilaterally with the Commonwealth government, or is this something new? It would appear the Chief Minister wants us to believe this is a new thing he has been able to get for the Northern Territory. I continue with the quote:
- … work bilaterally with the Territory to ensure future primary care services suit the characteristics of the Territory. A number of the funding initiatives announced will be implemented to maximise the benefits to the people of the Territory.
I believe the whole government seems to be suffering from systemic policy failure. All the Labor Premiers, I believe, were forced to agree because of the situation they find themselves in and the way their party works. The only one who stood up to them was our colleague in Western Australia.
Under the heading More Efficient Hospitals:
- We will no longer need to haggle on funding levels or indexation. The Commonwealth will be locked into long-term sustained support for our hospital network.
I do not know whether that is going to be the case. What happens when the needs change? Who is in charge? We have all seen and heard, if you have read history, some of the problems we had when the Territory was governed from Canberra. On either side of politics, when they are in charge, the Territory missed out to a large degree and I do not believe it will be long before the Territory misses out, not only in this, but in so many other areas.
The last thing I would like to point out is the establishment of what we call local hospital networks. They are going to create a single entity to run all the hospitals in the Territory. All we are doing is going back to someone sitting in Darwin telling people in Alice Springs what is good for them, when they may not even have been there. That is exactly what used to happen when Canberra controlled the health services here; and that is exactly where this government is going to take us. I find that appalling. We are going back to management from afar, and that will have disastrous results for people in the Territory.
Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, ode to the opposition! The irony in the health debate is: I do not know whether to prescribe antidepressants or medication for hypertension.
I will say one thing about primary healthcare, which I will refer to later: primary healthcare is about prevention, not cure. One of the Department of Health and Families’ great programs is about hand washing and I caution any member who lifts their fingers to turn the pages of their notes because cross-infection can be a very dangerous outcome.
I go to the member for Braitling’s contribution to the debate. You certainly know the member for Braitling has hit rock bottom when he enters into name calling. His infantile anecdotes and name calling as a contribution to the debate, once again, sums up the ode of the opposition. I am not sure which neighbourhood he comes from, but I know the member for Braitling blows in and out of the Barkly quite regularly. I have heard talk from constituents and I say to them: ‘You have a choice, this is a democracy; you can vote for the member for Braitling because he certainly makes some big promises’. He makes big promises on every subject he chooses to bang on about. I remind people to question the member for Braitling’s big plans and big promises. Ask him how he will cost it; ask him how he will fund it; ask him how he will deliver obstetrics to the Barkly on his one-line, one-hit wonder show through the electorate.
People do stop to think about the role of the opposition, and they are now starting to think about questioning the actual substance of what opposition members are saying. If you have a plan, an alternative, or costing, then bring it on and we can have a serious debate. It is very easy to just focus on one-liners and everything is down in the dumps and nothing works. I suppose it is a way of doing business, but certainly not the way I am interested in doing it.
We are relating our own examples and our own anecdotes. I have anecdotes from the Territory that go back 30 years, but I will concentrate on the last six months. I have had the fortune of not attending the hospital yet. But, I have been taking people to attend the hospitals in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Darwin - both the Royal Darwin and the Darwin Private Hospitals - and I have had nothing but very positive experiences. However, all I have heard recently, and the judgments on our hospitals, does not concur with the experiences I have had when I have taken patients to present. I have dealt with very professional staff, with very professional outcomes in clean and well-organised, professional environments. I cannot say enough.
I will not go into rural and remote areas issues with emergency evacuations and the incredible health professionals you deal with who are all about Territorians, positive outcomes, and doing the best they possibly can.
What I am interested in today in supporting the Chief Minister’s statement regarding the National Health and Hospital Network Agreement is the big picture. What we are talking about is national health reforms never entered into in this country before. This is a very important subject and I can be questioned straight up. What is your alternative? Well, we have a good alternative, a Liberal government alternative under the Howard years where there were subtractions out of the health budget, if that is an alternative.
We are looking at national health reform; we are looking at the future; we are looking at reform that has never been seen on this scale before. We are looking at an agreement for the Northern Territory which recognises our special needs, the issues of regional and remote health, and acknowledges the issues of Indigenous health.
The Henderson government has been working hard for Territorians and the Chief Minister, at COAG level, has been working extremely hard at a very high-level, complex set of negotiations to deliver for Territorians. It is easy to carve it up and run it down with a one-line anecdote; it is easy to paint a picture that the Territory is falling apart, but I do not see it that way. I see that this move into national health reform is building government strategies to continue to grow the Territory, particularly in closing the gap of Indigenous disadvantage.
I find this exciting. I find this very challenging. I find it a place where we have to go; where we go with goodwill and we look to do things better. We have strong plans and a clear vision for the future, and a healthy Territory is a vital policy initiative of this government.
I am very proud of the Chief Minister for the extremely complex work he has done and his articulation of the unique Territory health circumstances. The Barkly is a good example of that. People living in the bush and in regional areas do not have the same access to health services as those in major centres. The member for Braitling clicks his fingers and delivers an obstetrician and a paediatrician into a regional area. This government is working hard to deliver health services through creative measures; no finger clicking, no idle promises, and no cheap one-liners. We are doing the hard yards to deliver sustainable health outcomes and services. It is easy to call people names, and it is easy to run people down, but it is much harder …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr McCARTHY: … if you want to work in delivery. You can bang on all you like with the interjections, because all it says is that talk is cheap. The business of government is very hard, indeed.
I am particularly interested in the national reform focusing on improved primary healthcare, and I heard it said in debate that this does not mean anything. What does it mean? I tell you what primary healthcare means, and the bottom line is prevention is better than cure. The Northern Territory is well versed to focus on primary healthcare as a way forward in delivering better health outcomes for Territorians and closing the gap on Indigenous health.
We are also focused, through national reform, on improved hospital care, region by region. There is no doubt the Territory faces complicated and unique issues. Solutions are generally not easy and they are usually very expensive.
An example is Territory Budget 2010-11, which I am very excited about, where we talk about a real need for Territorians - particularly in my electorate of the Barkly, and others - for delivering better facilities and more resources, with $12.5m for the Tennant Creek Hospital. We are talking about a contrast in increasing expenditure, budget by budget. We are talking about work started on expanding the eight station renal dialysis into a 16 station dialysis unit, with the ability to manage 64 patients, and it is expected the facility will be operational by January 2011. So there is a combination of dollars and outcomes. There is the combination of inputs that deliver outcomes. The delivery for renal patients in the Barkly is superb; the quality of life this provides constituents from the Barkly region is incredible. It is hard to put a price on it, but you do not get very far without a price, and that price is delivering for renal dialysis patients in the Barkly. I am very proud to be part of a government which has delivered that.
In addition, extra staff have been provided to the unit to expand existing services, including an administration officer and dialysis nurse to expand and support renal patients to remain in Tennant Creek. That is good news for Tennant Creek and the Barkly. However, what was agreed to last week was even more significant; it was historic. This historic agreement has committed to an unprecedented doubling of GP training places, 50% of which will be dedicated to regional and rural areas. This is how we deliver our obstetricians; this is how we deliver our health professionals - we grow our own. This is a major initiative which will set the Territory up for the future.
There is a young woman in the Barkly electorate who I had the fortune to employ as a casual in the electorate office. She is busy at university in Newcastle studying medicine. She was born and bred in Tennant Creek and she has an ambition to come back to Tennant Creek to work in Indigenous health; she is a shining star. What this agreement does is start to make that easier, and start to multiply that effect which will deliver real outcomes. That is real future planning. This is not a one-liner, knee-jerk reaction, this is planning for regional and remote areas which will sustain our health professionals into the future.
We also see the new Flinders University NT medical program with Charles Darwin University, which will mean 40 doctors graduating in the Territory every year from 2015. Well done, Charles Darwin University! That is a great outcome for Territory kids. And, of course, I want to see extra doctors in the Barkly. Locally trained doctors in the Territory will be fantastic for young Territorians.
The member for Braitling, when he blows in and out of Tennant Creek with his promises …
Mr Conlan interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! Member for Greatorex!
Mr McCARTHY: He neglects any sustainability in his plans. He neglects a plan which will actually deliver, and he ignores the important part of growing our own Territorians …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Greatorex! Order, Leader of Government Business!
Mr McCARTHY: Locally trained doctors in the Territory will be fantastic. The added benefit is locally trained staff are more likely to stay in the Territory and to work to help Territorians ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, resume your seat. Honourable members, there is only 20 minutes until we adjourn the House and the minister has the call. At the moment there has been a debate between two members which is completely unparliamentary. I ask both of you to cease interjecting. Member for Greatorex, you are on a warning. Minister, you have the call
Mr McCARTHY: We know our health system is unique, with many Territorians living remotely with services being delivered in the bush, and Indigenous health issues challenging. I welcome the federal government having the courage to take an active role in helping all Territorians and providing additional funds to the Territory. $208m injected into the Territory’s health system over 10 years means more money for Territorians health - more operations, more beds, more doctors - reducing disadvantage and closing the gap.
I would like to touch on block funding mentioned in the debate. Within this agreement the Commonwealth has also agreed to provide 60% of block funding for agreed functions and services and community service obligations required to support small, regional and rural public hospitals like Tennant Creek. This is a critical requirement for the Territory, and will ensure we can continue to provide and boost hospital services, not just in my electorate, but in Katherine and Nhulunbuy as well. The Commonwealth government will also heavily invest in research and training. Creating equitable access to public hospitals for Australians is the core design intention of this national health and hospital agreement. This funding approach will be of particular benefit in regional and remote areas, particularly for disadvantaged groups.
I will also comment on local involvement. Importantly, in regional areas we will retain the responsibility of managing the hospital system independent from the Commonwealth. We want to do this in partnership with industry experts, local people and hospital staff. I welcome the Chief Minister’s commitment to the establishment of a single local hospital network. In regional areas, we do not see that as people from outside running our system; we look at it from a positive perspective - unusual coming from this side of the House, eh?
Members interjecting.
Mr McCARTHY: We look at it from a positive perspective; how to learn from others. It is a pity I cannot learn much from over there.
We focus on learning from each other industry best practice. People who know how to do this work can help people like us living in regional and remote areas. Likewise, we can demonstrate initiatives and good operational procedures. We can demonstrate good outcomes which can be shared up the line as well as down the line; so it is about Territorians sharing. It is new, it is innovative, it is a national reform; it is big; it is bold. It is something this side of the House has had the courage to take on and the determination to drive through.
I believe our hospitals will benefit from improving the linkages between each of our five hospitals with a single board of governance to oversight the operation of the local hospital network. This will ensure that hospitals are able to benefit from the successful programs and trials delivered by other institutions. The hospital network will also provide an effective means of engaging with the local community and locals to improve the day-to-day operations of our regional hospitals.
Madam Speaker, the National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement is a good agreement for the Territory, an agreement which will mean more resources for healthcare in the Territory, and recognition of the special needs of regional and remote Australia. Most important to all of this is this agreement will make a substantial difference to the lives of Territorians.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, tonight I wish to speak about the Chief Minister’s statement and to provide some level of debate in regard to health services in Australia.
No one anywhere would ever deny that we would like to provide health services better. I have heard it said from time to time - even the previous Health Minister said that health can be an endless bucket - you could throw as much money at it as you want and still not achieve all the services that people may want or need.
However, the point here is about money. Something we have heard time and time again is this government feels if you continue to throw money at it you will get the outcomes. That is certainly not true; it is how it is spent that is important. I had a recent debate with my father about a number of issues and, for the record, my father is a devout Labor supporter so our debates are quite interesting, as you might appreciate. The reality is, as I said to Dad, it is not how much money you spend, it is how it is spent that is important as well as looking at the goals and the purpose for which you want to spend that money.
I have seen recently, with a number of people who have talked to me about their health issues, how we need to fix things, how we need to make things better. Again, I stress the point, I do not think there is anyone in this room, probably no one in Australia, who does not believe in the ideology that we would like to improve health services; no one is going to disagree with that.
I suppose what we find difficult to understand is how we are supposed to make an informed decision with so little detail. We have seen it here today where a PowerPoint presentation is provided as enough detail to make an informed decision. I am truly hoping the Labor government in the Northern Territory has been given far more information than we have been provided with on this side of the House. I would hate to think a decision which signs so many of our rights away has been made on so little information or no more than a handshake. Perhaps if it was shaking the hand of someone on this side of the House, you may trust it; however, the record shows the federal Labor government and many of the policies of this Labor government have not been very successful.
To go one step further, we have all perhaps, in our lifetimes, bought a house, a car, a motorbike, or something where a contract was signed. We have all heard, time and time again: ‘read the fine line, read the fine print, read the document’. A contract is something that binds many people for a long time; if it is a mortgage it could be 20, 25 years, or even longer. This contract seems to bind the Territory, and other states, for just as long, if not longer. I would hate to think a decision has been made on something which can have an impact for so long with so little detail.
It is also sad to see our own Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd - I must admit, the only time I have seen Mr Rudd recently has been in a television frame at a hospital talking to elderly patients and to other patients. It is sad the reforms he is talking about will, perhaps, take longer to implement than some of these people may live. That is a sad situation to have.
How can you seriously expect any fair-minded person to make a decision, given the information provided so far? I cannot help but be cynical because of the demonstration I have seen from federal governments and from this Northern Territory Labor government. I cannot understand - and perhaps this is the elephant in the room - how people do not understand if you are, basically, taking 30% of what we already get and, then, have it given back to us in health services, it is no different. It is a money change, or exchange, rather than new money for new and improved services - you give with one hand, and you take with the other.
I have heard it mentioned here before. The member for Sanderson talked about the billions which have flowed into the Territory since the GST was introduced, and this government has had more money than any previous government in the Northern Territory. I have also heard the argument that, under the Howard government, billions were stripped from health services across the country. Directly, that may have been the case but, indirectly it is not correct because, if you have an increase in GST funding, it is then up to the local administration to manage that money, and to manage it well. From what we have witnessed and from what we hear from people who talk to us every single day, it is not managed well. Therefore, the services, the outcomes being provided, perhaps are not good value for money.
What really worries me is the federal administration expects us to believe they can do better than local jurisdictions can or will do. I have heard it said in the past that local government is out of touch, state and territory governments have no idea, and federal governments, well, they are right off this planet.
We have seen a demonstration from the federal government in recent times, from the federal intervention and initiatives such as laptops for every student in schools, fail. We found so many holes in the education revolution program which really only achieved about 50% real improvement in the infrastructure at 100% cost. There is one Sydney media personality, Ray Hadley, who has been on to this for some time now, and every single day there are more and more terrible examples of wasted money. It is important. I know as a chair of a primary school council that fought for a long time to get additional resources and infrastructure for schools in Palmerston, to hear of what is no less than wanton waste or a basic rip-off around the country is very sad, because you know what you could do with proper administration; you know what you could achieve with proper management. That was a hell of a lot of money, and it could have done so much more.
The Deputy Prime Minister talked about an education revolution. No one is going to deny any school does not love new equipment, does not love new infrastructure such as a cover over a basketball court but, you know, it does not make someone spell better, it does not make someone count better. How they can call that an education revolution is bizarre - absolutely bizarre. It is great, you can play basketball when it is raining, and there are perhaps some new classrooms being built, but it was such a quickly rolled out program that I believe it has created far more problems, and will leave us with a debt for many years. In fact, some of these children who are in primary schools today will be paying this debt back for years to come in taxes and so forth, just to get this country back where it should be in regard to finances.
The insulation story: another example that I know others have talked of here today, but I am repeating this as an example of federal administration failing. We are to believe if the feds take over health, we are going to get a better service at the local level. I just cannot subscribe to that kind of thinking. I know if you have someone who is in touch, who knows what is going on at the Alice Springs Hospital, who is in touch and knows what is happening at Tennant Creek, and knows what is happening here in Darwin, they are going to be far closer to the situation than some bureaucrat sitting in Canberra.
SIHIP is another story and, as I said before, the insulation program, again, has cost millions. I only learned last week in one of the debates I had with my father that the next door neighbour had been approached by a company to put insulation in their home. It was a rented property and they said: ‘It is okay, you can just sign here and we will go ahead and put the insulation in’. The person renting the property signed the information, the batts were dropped off and, basically, the owner came along and said: ‘I do not want them in my house’. So the batts stayed there and the batts are still there; they have not been put into a home, but the company would have signed off on the $1200 and they would have their money. To have no checks and balances is just a remarkable situation. It is sad that people have been killed in the course of their duties, and we do not know for many years we could still have house fires. We could have so many issues because of that one program - that ill-thought out program, mismanaged, which goes to the highest level - another bad reflection and another bad example of federal administration.
Childcare centres: we have just had another backflip from the federal government that is no longer going to provide these much-needed childcare centres. I know here in the Northern Territory we are fortunate enough to get an additional two, but around the country well over 200 childcare centres will not be built now because of a change of thinking, if you like, from the federal Labor government.
And now, of course, we have climate change - the greatest moral dilemma of our time, the Prime Minister said. I do not know about you …
A member: Immediate action is what is required.
Mr CHANDLER: Right - immediate action. But something that affects you at that level and you believe is a moral obligation, is not something you put off for two or three years. It is something you actually have to focus on; if it is something that affects you at the core, something that is morally wrong. Again, if that has not been done for political purposes, I do not know what has. I sincerely believe this health reform is nothing but a political ploy to remove the focus of a failed administration, not only from the federal level, but many states around Australia. This is the administration that we have been asked, as residents of this great nation, to trust. The great moral dilemma: we will put it back a few years. Insulation was a sad story, along with SIHIP, childcare centres, education revolution, laptops, greener energy, GroceryWatch, FuelWatch - a media cycle of 24 hours, time for a new story.
As I said, over the last couple of weeks all I have seen of our Prime Minister is in hospitals talking to people. I will say it again: there would not be a person in this room or anywhere who would not like to see medical services provided at a higher level than they are today. If this has the potential to deliver that, I do not believe, again, there would be a person who would not welcome it. But, where is the detail? Have faith. A religious person has faith, and that is what you are asking us to have here, but you have not shown or demonstrated anywhere near the level of confidence one would expect - just to go along blindly and follow faithfully. I believe you are asking this side of the House, and the residents of Australia, too much.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: We need to adjourn the debate first.
Mr ELFERINK: Has the question been put, or is the debate being adjourned?
Madam SPEAKER: No. Are you moving the debate be adjourned?
Mr ELFERINK: Someone should move debate be adjourned.
Dr BURNS: I apologise, Madam Speaker, I move that debate be adjourned.
Debate adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
I would like to mention the great people who invest their time and efforts into their children by nominating for school councils, and going to meetings to ensure they are aware of what is happening in the schools their children attend. I congratulate the members of the school councils for their commitment to the running of their local school or college.
At Casuarina Senior College, Ms Julie Donohoe was again elected as Chairman for the 2010 council, together with Adam Walding, Deputy Chair; Elise Dungey, Treasurer; and Louise Manhire as Secretary. The members of the council are Cindy Impelmans, Sigrid Evans, Dorothee Williams, Janet Schmidt, Lisa Rothwell, Roslyn Ther, Marilyn Galt, as well as Carly Donohue and Lindsey Albion as teacher representatives, with student representatives Alastair Scott, Irini Pikoulos and Michelle Sa Pereira.
Representing the Jingili School community, I congratulate Mrs Tracy Rowlands on her election as Chair, along with Mrs Tracey Mehonoshen, Deputy Chair; Miss Leisa Sjaardema, Treasurer; Ms Ambrie Tracy, Secretary, Mrs Brigitte Grahl, Mrs Rhianna Suttie-Gunson, Mrs Jane Fryar, Mrs Sue Hunt, Ms Jo Townsend, Ms Claudia Sepulveda, Mr Michael De Luca, Dr Jo Walsh, Dr Josh Davis, Ms Tara Metcalf and Mrs Kate Worden as parent representatives.
The Moil School Council’s AGM saw the election of Mr Michael McRostie as Chairperson; Tim Cross as Vice Chairperson; Matthew Peachey as Secretary, Jodi-Anne Williamson as Treasurer, with parent representatives Sandra Papandonakis, Rebecca and Damian Worley, Christa Bollman and Felicity and Phillip Hargrave.
At Millner Primary School, Cathy Spurr continues to chair, with support from Sam Wells as Secretary, Julie Frazer as Treasurer, Tanya Sloan, fundraising officer, and Jessica McCaul is the teacher representative.
Wagaman school council is this year chaired by Rose McKenzie, with Sylvia Mavros as the Vice Chairperson; Annie Boast, Secretary; Marie Porta, Treasurer; Katie Karamanakis, Suvi Higlett, Effie Nowlan and Gemma Hunter as parent representatives.
There is no doubt all these people will do a fantastic job running their respective school councils, fundraising, guiding, planning and ensuring the wellbeing of the school community. I wish them well.
Harmony Day events in March are always among my favourites, and I was able to spend this year’s events with kids at both Jingili and Wagaman Primary Schools. The Jingili School Community International Markets were extremely well attended by students, teachers and parents. The general Jingili community always turns up in great numbers to enjoy the great variety of food and beverages, and to enjoy the great entertainment provided by the kids. There were many activities for everyone to enjoy in the spirit of harmony, fun and wellbeing. It was a great evening to be involved in and, as a major fundraiser for the school, it was deemed a great success. Congratulations to the organisers and everyone who participated.
Wagaman also had an evening of food, crafts, entertainment and family activities with everyone wearing orange as a symbol of their support and community spirit. It was great to go along there. I was slightly late because I had already been to Jingili, but it was really good to see the kids running around, enjoying their school facilities in this exciting and different environment.
I had the great opportunity of presenting badges to the student leaders at Millner Primary School, and wish to congratulate the SRC members on their election. Congratulations go to Nicki Pastrikos and Cameron Croker voted in as the School Captains, Mai Rose as Vice School Captain, and the body of the Representative Council comprising Moe Min, Tylyn Hudson, Shaine Taborada, Rhyan Lee, Akeem Millar, Jessica Nelson, Ryan Beltran, Kyla Fang, Samantha Woodbridge and Annelise Kowcun.
Also to be congratulated are the House and Vice Captains selected for 2010. Jabiru House Captains, Jessica Powell and Moran Sailor, with Vice Captains, Jade Devery and Samantha Woodbridge; Dingo House Captains, Sean Hopkins and Hayden Jones, with Vice Captains, Marcus Kirkman and Annie Jones; Crocodile House elected Emily Stephenson and Tahlina Chilcott as Captains, and Sarah Kirwan and Adam Thomas as their Vice Captains. Well done, and enjoy your year.
At Moil Primary School congratulations went to Sean Johnston and Minette Sarsaba as the Byrne Barras Captains; Yazmine Kilmartin and Kelly Makrylos in Linde Lorikeets; Kailin Rae and Xavier Cubillo of the Wilson Wallabies; and Taylor Finn and Bryan Elivera of the Greenwood Greenants. I am sure these captains will also have an enjoyable and successful year.
Elected to the Student Representative Council for Moil in 2010 were Tori Cubillo, Matthew Chapman, Jason O’Meara, Ruby Hargrave, Isha Ampeloquio, Dannika Walsh, Aimee Manulid and Bless Santos.
At Wagaman Primary School on the executive, elected members are: President, Samantha Martin; Vice President, Joshua Kelleher; Treasurer, Cecilia Bernadino; and Secretary, Maria Korfias. The Class Representatives are Year 3/4 Ramsay, Jennifer Ashton and Denzel Parnell; Year 3/4 McLean, Akaydia Austral and Tory Kiely-Leger; Year 4/5 McCrie/Higgins, Alisa Mai, Oliver Markey, Olga Santos and Kobe Greenoff; Year 5/6 Fox-Woodford, Ben Jackson and Ricki Agapito; and Year 5/6 Van Den Elzen, Ashlee Munday and Zac Nurton.
Finally, the Jingili School Community Student Representative Council is ably served by Marrisa Higgins, Shayala Carne, Michelle Lu, Jasmine Ristevski, Saun Franklin, Chelsea Taylor, Melanie Lu, Jackson Dempster, Ackbar Sunderland, Bella Davis, Nicholas Lee, Sam Schofield-Flynn, Ophelia Muslin-Mathers and Leonie Higgins.
I also mention those students who were awarded my Quiet Achievers book vouchers for Term 1: Aidan Cotton and Bethany White of Moil; Te-Leah Pollard and Myles Turner of Millner; Grace Lewers and Damien Williams Year 2/3C of Wagaman; and Samantha Hunt and Malik Taylor of Jingili. So, a lot of fantastic students who are all contributing to the school community.
Out in the community, I have had the pleasure of attending many events during the week and on weekends. Over the last couple of months these have included the International Women’s Day at the Cyprus Community Centre; National Greek Day on 20 March; the Irish Association’s St Patrick’s Day celebration; the Kalymnian Brotherhood Easter lunch for seniors at the Kalymnian Hall; the Harmony Day Soiree put on by the Darwin City Council; the Greek Easter Festival at East Point; the fantastic Superbikes; and the Coconut Grove Seniors sausage sizzle for Anzac Day last week, which was a great event and we all had a great sing-along. I also had the pleasure of joining the Australia-Burma Friendship Association of the NT at the Thingyan Water Festival at the Jingili Water Gardens. I will have more detail on that last event at the next adjournment.
Madam Deputy Speaker, once again, it is great to be the member for Johnston; I enjoy all the functions in my electorate, in the schools and out in the community, and it is really great to get into the swing of things again, come the Dry Season.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, a tear welled in my eye as the Last Post and Reveille sounded at the morning service at the 2010 Anzac Day commemoration in Katherine. It was the second time that day I heard the bugler calling for the end of the day’s military activities, and then for the troops to awaken at sunrise. I am sure it was the same tear that welled at the Dawn Service, and when I heard the crowd clapping as our soldiers marched down the main street. I have to admit, I find it hard not to get a little emotional on Anzac Day. In fact, the older I get, the more strongly I feel about what Anzac Day means to me. I know why; and it is called perspective.
On 25 April 1915, and in the following days, some 20 000 Australian and New Zealand troops landed at what has been named Anzac Cove as a part of the military campaign to try to take the Gallipoli Peninsula from Turkey. Mistakes were made in the planning of the operation and the troops found themselves landed in the wrong location facing steep cliffs instead of flat beaches. There was a constant barrage of enemy fire and shelling, and thousands died. Our Diggers held firm and advanced where they could in a campaign that lasted until 20 December 1915, some eight months.
Reinforcements arrived, only to suffer at the hands of overwhelming disadvantage. At the end of the stalemate, when troops were withdrawn, some 8700 Australians had died, plus a further 2721 New Zealanders, which made up almost a quarter of all those killed. A further 18 000 troops were wounded. It is the courage, the strength, the tenacity of our ANZAC soldiers which sets the standard to which we should all aspire - not just as soldiers, but in all aspects of our lives.
Of course, the security and preservation of our freedom rests not solely on the backs of the ANZACs. Australian troops and the tri-forces of the ADF have fought and died in many military conflicts around the globe: World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, and Afghanistan - the list goes on. I acknowledge the Australian troops, including some from the RAAF Base at Tindal, and those posted to Darwin regiments who are currently either serving, or on exercise, on foreign soil. We remember them also for their contribution. On Anzac Day, we remember them all and pay our deepest thanks and gratitude for fighting and dying for our great country.
I have been attending Anzac Day in Katherine for the past seven years or so, and have noticed a wonderful trend - that more and more people are coming to join the commemoration each and every year; and I know this is a trend right across the country. This year, the Dawn Service in Katherine was incredibly well-attended - more, I believe, than in any year I have been going to services in Katherine. The mid-morning service was the same; there were at least 600 people, maybe more. I estimate that to be around 6% of the town’s population coming to remember the fallen. That is an outstanding effort, and so nice to see many children and young people taking an interest in those, past and present, who protect our freedom and our way of life.
As a leader in our community, I felt an enormous sense of pride in our town as we rolled out in those numbers. Yet, there are still a few who would see Anzac Day as a glorification of war. There are others who would debase the men and women who fought and died in defence of our great nation, and for our freedom and way of life - only for the reason that they disagree with the political decisions of the day to send our troops into conflicts around the globe.
As recently as last night, I was watching an ABC program, Q & A, where a panel of recognised people field and answer questions on a variety of topics. Last night’s program was centred on Anzac Day and the involvement of Australians in other armed conflicts since World War I. I was appalled to hear a number of the panellists engaged in the debasement of our brave men and women members of the Australian Defence Forces. Yet, these people who would attack our troops and sully the Anzac legend, still live in a country under a regime of safety and security the very people they choose to vilify fought for and died to maintain. Fortunately, the number of people who feel that way are just a few.
My thanks to the Katherine RSL Sub-Branch, particularly Mark Hagar, John Raynor and Barbara Morthorpe, for making the day such a success. Thanks also to RAAF Base Tindal, particularly Wing Commanders Phil Arms and Rohan Gaskill, and the men and women who participated in the march and both of the services. Thanks also to the schoolchildren who did a beautiful job in laying wreaths; and thanks to the Katherine Lodge for the respect you have shown to the men and women of our armed services.
I mentioned before that I thought around 60% of Katherine’s population attended the services this year. I would now like to add the perspective of which I spoke earlier. I quote from the Australian War Memorial website:
- For Australia, as for many nations, the First World War remains the most costly conflict in terms of deaths and casualties. From a population of fewer than five million, 416 809 men enlisted, of which over 60 000 were killed and 156 000 wounded, gassed, or taken prisoner.
If I put that into percentages, more than 8% of Australia’s population at the time was enlisted to fight in the war. More than 1% of our entire population was killed, and around 3% of the entire population of Australia at the time was wounded. With a current population of around 23 million, would you ever imagine 1% of our population dying in a single military conflict? I will let you do the math; it would come to a number greater than the number of people who live in the entire Northern Territory.
I am sure we all hope for a time when there are no wars to fight but, in the meantime, our servicemen and women continue to risk their lives so we can continue to live in this great land. They deserve our ongoing praise and support.
In military tradition, the Last Post is the bugle call which signifies the end of the day’s military activities, but it is also sounded at military funerals to indicate that the soldier has gone to his final rest. Lest we forget.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Deputy Speaker, I too would like to speak about Anzac Day in the adjournment debate tonight. I thank the member for Katherine for speaking to this House about how Katherine commemorated Anzac Day this year. I am sure in all of our towns across the Territory there were similar numbers of people who turned out, because Anzac Day is one of Australia’s most important and treasured national occasions.
Anzac Day goes beyond the anniversary of the landing on Gallipoli in 1915. It is the day we remember all Australians who served and died in all wars and conflicts. Like the member for Katherine, I have been thinking about it a lot. At the moment, I am reading a biography on John Monash, the first Australian Commander in World War I, after Gallipoli, who managed to talk the British generals and the Australian Prime Minister of the day into commanding an entire division of Australian forces for the first time on the battlefields on the Western Front in France.
As a man 47 years of age whose father and great grandfather served and fought in World War II and World War I - my great grandfather did not fight in Gallipoli; he was in the British Army and was a tailor behind the lines fixing up uniforms - the older I get, the more I read about conflicts and thank the Lord that I have never been called upon to serve. In reading Monash’s biography at the moment, trying to put yourself into the shoes of those men, not only in Gallipoli, but in the Western Front in France and the horror, the insanity, the madness, and the tragedy of it all, is really quite remarkable.
In the space of the history of time 95 years is not a great deal of time and we, as Australians, should never ever forget the sacrifices people made, not only in World War I, but all conflicts that have come since then. You only have to look at the thousands of Territorians who turned out on Sunday to realise the ANZAC spirit is gaining strength and is stronger then ever. I am sure, like many people, I am always impressed to see our young people turning out more and more; our students in school uniforms coming together as school groups, family groups of different generations coming together. It is an inspiration to see.
I attended and laid the first wreath at the Darwin Dawn Service and I then attended the service after the march in Palmerston. During Sunday’s ceremony in Palmerston, I announced the inaugural Chief Minister’s Spirit of Anzac Study Tour. This will become an annual award, the aim which is to encourage young Territorians to explore the role our Defence Forces have played in our history. The tour will provide an opportunity for three young Territory high school students to visit the battlefields in France. The winners of the 2010 Spirit of Anzac Study Tour Award will visit Villers-Bretonneux in France to learn more about the sacrifices made by our veterans, and keep their memories alive in our communities. This was a war we remember was to be the war that ended all wars and, tragically, it did not.
Villers-Bretonneux holds a special bond for Australia. Plaques at the school and town hall proudly declare: ‘Never forget Australia’. As I am reading John Monash’s biography, I am learning it really was the Australian troops who turned the tide on those battlefields on the Western Front in France. They were the crack troops that went above and beyond the call of duty to push the Germans back and, ultimately, defeat them and liberate France, and France today still proudly acknowledges our ANZAC heroes as well. The names of some 11 000 Australian soldiers who died in France during World War I are listed at the town’s war memorial. We heard the member for Katherine talk about the 60 000 who lost their lives; 11 000 names on one war memorial wall in a small town in France is an extraordinary number.
The students will participate in an Anzac Day Dawn Service in Villers-Bretonneux, followed by visits to other significant sites. On their return to the Territory, the students will be required to make presentations to community groups of the impact on themselves, as students, and what they have learned from the study tour. The students who have the opportunity to go to Villers-Bretonneux will see parts of the world they have never seen and develop a more personal understanding of our history and the sacrifices made by our people who have gone before us.
The students will be invited to submit an essay, a poem, a video or a website project to address the question: what inspiration does the legend of ANZAC provide for young people in the 21st century? The award will be open to all Year 9 and 10 students currently enrolled in a Territory school, and those nominations close on 31 August 2010. The winning students will be announced by 30 September 2010, and the winning students will be chaperoned by a teacher, and a member of the Australian Defence Forces.
I have written to the Commander of NORCOM, David Gwyther, and also Lofty Plane, from the RSL, to ask for nominations from both our Defence Forces and the RSL to be on the judging panel for this award as well as, hopefully, trying to find – I have a name in mind - a great history teacher from the Northern Territory to be on the judging panel. The Spirit of Anzac prize is both a fantastic opportunity and a great responsibility for our young Territorians who will receive this award. I encourage all Territory high school students to apply. Further information and application forms are available at the www.anzacspirit.nt.gov.au website.
In conclusion, it was inspirational to hear from the member for Katherine. I am sure members in other regional communities around the Territory talk about the thousands of Territorians who have turned out. I believe it is incumbent on all of us, as leaders in our community and also as parents, to ensure that future generations never forget the ultimate sacrifice so many hundreds of thousands of Australians have made over many conflicts, in all wars, the ultimate sacrifice of laying down their lives for their country and for what they believe. Lest we forget.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk about a group in the rural area and the good work they do in caring for their community. The Gathering Incorporated is a not-for-profit Christian organisation or, as it is also called, the Bush Baptist Church. All the people who help support the organisation are volunteers and there are about 30 people in total. These people work tirelessly and long hours and, on occasion, late into the night, when their help is required. The main service is handing out food parcels to those in need; however, they also do counselling, mediation, perform a variety of social work activities, network with relevant organisations and hand out clothes and furniture when possible, when they receive these much-needed donations.
They have a strong focus on young people and operate a boxing club for youth, a craft group for young people, and a youth drop-in centre. The Bush Church has a holistic approach to their clientele. Last financial year, they catered for 1112 clients, which were mostly families - over 1000 families in need - and this year to date they have already exceeded last year’s numbers and we still have three months or so to go.
The number of families in need is alarming and should make alarm bells ring and the government notice the general health and wellbeing of our rural community people. To gather these numbers the organisation does keep records of the people they help and to whom they hand parcels; hence, the figures are accurate and, sadly, they are increasing. Apart from clients coming for food, there has been an increase in people needing shelter, homeless people sleeping under the centre’s patio area, clients needing budgeting help, and a steep increase in domestic violence evidenced by women coming to the centre for refuge and for help.
The Bush Church now services families in need in the Berry Springs area and also Corroboree and Marrakai areas. Berry Springs had around 10 families coming for food each week. Lately, this has increased to 20-plus families and the church has not had enough food to meet the demand. Sadly, there are people who have been knocked back or turned away for food parcels who are not people on unemployment benefits or pensions necessarily, just ordinary people and families who cannot make ends meet. Being more isolated, their counselling and social welfare needs are much higher in the Humpty Doo area per client.
Corroboree has only been operating for a month, and now that it is established the church will promote the support and assistance to people. The reason the church was asked to start operating in Corroboree was because there were no social services there, and there are high levels of domestic violence and social upheaval with many families. Given that there are around 1000 people living in the Corroboree and Marrakai area, few services and support are provided by government, hence, these groups take it on themselves to step up to try to deliver some services and support. Recently, the volunteer staff are under increasing pressure. They are using their private vehicles for food delivery, and are now having to travel longer distances and take more time to get there. It is a full-time job doing the social work and networking clients to appropriate services and mediation.
At the centre in Humpty Doo, they have a large shed and patio area and some storage facilities. This is inadequate given the demand on their services and their supplies, organising accommodation, and being concerned for the clients who are sleeping under the patio, as such accommodation is not suitable and the clients are often scared and feeling insecure as the area is totally open.
The group, the church, is overburdened with administration as the organisation is now networking and coordinating four outlets, including a long grass food service in the Parap area and in Palmerston. There is a growing lack of affordable accommodation in the rural area, resulting in single people, men, youths, and domestic violence victims sleeping in the church’s open patio area, using the shower and toilet. They have been able to offer some of these people food, clothing and, perhaps, a frying pan to cook on and a couch to sleep on, albeit very temporary. This has not been advertised at all, and they have many people desperate for immediate and temporary accommodation. There is also a growing need for youth accommodation, even though many of the young people are reluctant to ask for help because they have some fear of the authorities, that they may be turned in and taken away from their homes or the rural area.
A big and growing part of the organisation’s program is their youth activities, including their boxing program which is carefully run under the guidance of James Swan, who travels a few times a week from his home in Malak to work with young people in the Humpty Doo and Noonamah areas. For all this work in the community and provision of key health and community services, The Gathering Incorporated receives the small, paltry sum of $10 000 a year from government emergency service funds - they receive no other government assistance - to aid over 2513 clients. And remember, clients are a family unit.
If you work on an average of 100 clients per week, the total number of predicted clients by the end of the financial year, 1 July, will be at least 3713. A client usually represents a family group, so that is approximately 14 852 people. Government assistance per person is around 67 per person - which is very sad.
The church is currently preparing submissions to government, the Health department and others, to seek funding support to continue and to expand their services and support, particularly in the area of young people. I urge the minister, when they receive the submissions and the request, to not only consider their request favourably, but to take time to really understand what this Bush Baptist Church does and to look at their facilities in Humpty Doo and see firsthand what this amazing group does - what can only be called running their operations on the sniff of an oily rag. I do not believe that is acceptable or good enough. They deserve better and more, and the government needs to talk with them about exactly what is happening underneath life in the rural area. We need to address it, and we need to make it better, and we need to make it better quickly.
Finally, I pay tribute to one of the main coordinators of the Bush Baptist Church, a woman, Sharon Crook, and her family, for their tireless work and commitment to helping others always and continuously. She and her family are truly inspirational. They do this work just as they go about their daily business, in addition to running a business so she can support herself and her family. Well done to them.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask the government to seriously consider their request when they receive it in the very near future.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Deputy Speaker, I attended the Palmerston Dawn Service on Anzac Day and I would like to read an address given by Lieutenant-Colonel Scott Watkins DFC, Chief of Staff, 1st Brigade, at Robertson Barracks - a very moving speech:
- Today, Anzac Day marks the anniversary of the first Australian and New Zealand landing on the Gallipoli Peninsula at dawn on 25 April 1915, and it is the day that we choose to honour the dead from all wars in which Australia has participated.
Anzac Day is not a day on which to glorify the act of war itself, but a day on which to remember those Australians who gave their lives in the service of their country.
It is a big responsibility to give an address on this, the most Australian of all days. I am honoured to have that responsibility this morning and to stand here today with other veterans of conflicts, both past and present.
The heavy toll that Australians sustained in each of the World Wars was out of proportion to the size of our country, with the consequence that few Australian families would not have known loss in the years following each of the conflicts.
Maybe for some people here today, the realities of major conflict seem a little more remote. No veterans of the First World War are left alive in this country now, and as each year passes, there is inevitably fewer veterans of the Second. Yet Australians have served with bravery and distinction in theatres of war since World War Two, notably in Korea, Malaya, Borneo, and Vietnam. At this very moment, Australian troops are serving on 13 operations and UN missions around the world, from Solomons to Sudan, Timor Sea to Iraq and Afghanistan.
The reality of wartime is that ordinary people are called upon to perform extraordinary deeds. To try to understand the extent of sacrifice in time of war, you have to go beyond the Rolls of Honour to discover a little of the men themselves. This morning, I would like to tell the story of an Australian soldier from the Gallipoli campaign. His name was Pte Jim Charles Martin.
When news of the first ANZAC landings was spread across the Australian papers, the recruiting depots were swamped with eager men ready to stand side by side with those already in action.
In country Victoria, a father arrived home and sadly announced to his family that he had attempted to enlist in the Australian Imperial Force only to be turned down as medically unfit. As he sat with his head in his hands he felt his son’s hand on his shoulder and heard the words: ‘Never mind, Dad, I’ll go’.
His mother pleaded with Jim that he was too young. Jim said that if his parents did not let him go he would join under another name. Armed with a letter of consent from his parents, young Jim Martin was the fittest man seen by the recruiting officer on the day he enlisted in early April 1915.
- Jim Martin was allocated to the first reinforcement of the newly formed 21 Battalion, who went into extensive training at Broadmeadows and Seymour Camps in Victoria. On embarkation day, 27 June 1915, they went by train to the docks at Port Melbourne and boarded the troop ship Berrima. As the Berrima glided silently down the still waters of Port Phillip Bay, Jim Martin had time to reflect on his family, glancing occasionally at the streamer in his hand - the one he had caught from his mother as the ship pulled away from the quay. For many of the soldiers on board, the fading lights of Melbourne were to be their last sight of Australia.
The reinforcements landed in Egypt in late August and were immediately absorbed by the Battalion. In the shadows of the pyramids, young Jim Martin honed his fighting skills as his battalion’s day of reckoning approached. On August 29, the battalion entrained for Alexandria. Awaiting them there was their transport - a ship named Southland. The men of 21 BN were joined by their mates from the other Battalions - in all about 1600 men.
At 9.50 am on 2 September, as the troops were mustering for the 10 am parade, a torpedo struck just forward of the ship’s bridge, tearing a massive hole in the side of the Southland. As there were insufficient lifeboats, many, including Jim Martin, were forced to jump overboard. He was to spend the next four hours in the choppy sea. On their pickup by the attending boats, young Jim Martin was dragged on deck but shunned attention with the cry of: ‘I’m all right’. Of those on board, casualties were relatively light – 33 in total. So as not to miss his landing at Anzac Cove, Jim Martin never reported sick, but maintained his commitment to his mates and to his battalion. Just before midnight on 8 September, 1915, that battalion set foot on a stony beach known as Anzac Cove. The next day the battalion occupied the line from Courtney’s Post to Wire Gully, a distance of around 400 m, and young Jim Martin settled into life in the trenches.
In a letter home on 4 October, Jim wrote: ‘Don’t worry about me; I’m doing OK over here’. These were brave words, because the effects of the Southland incident, poor food and the stress of Gallipoli were running rife through young Jim’s body. On 25 October, Jim Martin reported sick and was evacuated to a hospital ship lying off Gallipoli, where he arrived about 5 pm. He settled down to get some sleep but died of heart failure at 6.40 pm.
The next day, 26 October 1915, the body of Private Jim Charles Martin slid from the platform beneath his country’s flag as his body was buried at sea.
In a letter to Jim’s mother, a member of his platoon wrote:
- am writing to you to express our great sorrow at your late bereavement. Jim was in the firing line with us and stuck to his post till the last. Like the brave lad that he was, he made the greatest and noblest of sacrifices for his country. Sergeant Coates speaks very highly of him and says he never had a man in his platoon who paid more attention to his duty.
In February 1916, Amelia Martin opened a box sent by General Headquarters. It contained her son’s personal effects - his ID disc, Bible, notebook, letters, belt, and the torn and battered streamer she threw to him on his departure.
So why was Jim Martin so special and why does his story deserve to be told? The fact is, Jim Martin was only 14 years of age when he died. He was our youngest ANZAC.
We remember Jim Martin, who by his example showed not only great bravery, but also the acceptance of those principles of life we in today’s society should be striving to emulate:
1. Courage - both moral and physical
2. Selflessness
3. Loyalty, and
4. Mateship
Regardless of whether you have a history of service or not, application of these principles in our own lives brings with it great integrity and honour.
Jim Martin’s story is a fitting tribute to the spirit of ANZAC - a spirit that is not just applied during times of war. It is a spirit embodied in our efforts to overcome adversity, to work through problems, to do what is morally right and to test ourselves every day - and to come out the other side sharper, stronger and more capable. It represents the very finest attributes of what it is to be called an Australian.
You show, through your presence here this morning, that the over 100 000 Australians who had been killed and the many more badly wounded since Australia’s Federation, did not act in vain.
You show your commitment to carry on the ANZAC name and the ideals that they fought and died for. And you show your willingness to fulfil the dreams and aspirations that they, through their ultimate sacrifice, were never able to fulfil.
Lest we forget.
Lest we forget.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I also wish to speak to the House in relation to Anzac Day. Anzac Day is a day I enjoy to go along and to remember. It is the reason I am able to stand in this House and speak freely.
I enjoy being able to have a solemn day where I can remember my own journey on Anzac Day from a child of two years of age, just short of my third birthday. That was the first Anzac Day Dawn Service I went to. It was in King’s Park in Perth, Western Australia, and I recall very fondly sitting on my dad’s shoulder walking up King’s Park Road to the war memorial and not quite knowing what it was all about, but hanging on for dear life.
My dad was a big man, taller than me, and sitting on his shoulders I had one of the finest views you could have of a large ex-soldier who went away and fought so we, to this day, can be free. He went to war after his own father had been to war only two decades earlier. It is with this I grew up; a grandfather who was severely injured in the war, came back, got together again but, unfortunately, his war injuries prevented him from living the sort of life I have been very privileged to live.
As a child I watched the thousands of returned servicemen and women from World War I who would gather on the Esplanade in Perth. Quite a bit further down the Esplanade, because there were thousands of ex-Diggers gathered there, my grandfather was with them; and further down my own father was with the World War II veterans. Every Anzac Day we would go to the Dawn Service, and it is a tradition I have been proud to have kept up all my life. I have only missed probably three or four Anzac Day Dawn Services either through illness, through shift work or the one year we had a cyclone. In 2007, I missed the Dawn Service in Darwin because I was actually in Gallipoli at the Dawn Service there on Anzac Day.
When you grow up with these things you come to understand it is not the glorification of war; it is the celebration of peace. I recall my father, on numerous occasions when I asked him about the war, was reluctant to talk about it. What he did talk about was the freedom we enjoyed, not the horrors of war. In his last six months of life he handed me photographs in a little grey box which was tucked away where no one would ever find them. They were not of the horrors of war; they were of the mateship of war. Many were taken in Darwin prior to leaving Darwin to go to the islands to fight the Japanese.
It is quite interesting when you look at some of these photos because they are of old Darwin, old Adelaide River, Coomalie Creek, the airfields down there and the jungle camps that he and his engineer mates built so the troops could be well trained prior to leaving Darwin and heading off for the islands of New Guinea, New Britain and similar islands within the area occupied by the Japanese at that stage.
I was very proud again this year to turn up at the Dawn Service. Unfortunately, both my grandfather and my father have passed, but I was able to wear their medals. I promised my father that I would carry them for as long as I could and then I would pass them on to my children. When I turned up at the Dawn Service it was quite early but, as I looked around, I could see so many people at the Darwin Dawn Service and, I am reliably informed by my colleagues, that at Alice Springs, Palmerston, and Adelaide River the crowds there are actually increasing, not decreasing.
When I first came to Darwin, my first Dawn Service was in the early 1980s - 1982 I believe - and there were probably about 500 or 600 people at the Dawn Service in Darwin. The official figure this year was 8000 people. When I went to Gallipoli in 2007, there were 10 000 at Gallipoli. And here in Darwin, little old Darwin, we have 8000 people turn up at dawn to remember those who stood up for what they believed in and went and fought ...
Mr Mills: 7999.
Mr STYLES: The official figure is 7999. Well, there you go. Perhaps next year we can drag a few more along and push that figure towards the 10 000 mark.
It is fabulous, and it only happens because of the dedication of the people who make up the RSL, and courtesy of the Northern Territory governments of both persuasions over the years, and lots of volunteers who come along to create an environment where old Diggers, young Diggers and the cadets, who are the future Defence Forces of this country, can proudly walk down the street in their Anzac Day march.
I marched this Anzac Day, and I have not marched for a number of years. The last time I marched was when I was the commanding officer of the Darwin Air Cadets and it was a great pleasure and privilege to be able to lead those air cadets in the Anzac Day march. This year, the first in a number of years, a dear friend of mine, John Moyle, who is a World War II veteran, marched. He has a bit of a gammy knee, but he said that he wanted to march so I agreed I would walk behind him in case he started to stumble. He was the right marker of the march, strangely enough, and it was interesting that he set a cracking pace.
The band was playing and John, who is 91 years, was out there. I have to say that I had to put a bit of pace on, as we all did, to keep up with him. The man next to him was the same age as John and, between these two old Diggers, they set a cracking pace. He said he would like to march again next year, and one would hope that for years to come he still has that capacity to march. Such is the determination of the Diggers. I am sure they learned that self-discipline and the ability to keep going that was forged by the ANZAC tradition.
After the Dawn Service, we all gathered in town and listened to some stories and then, at the end of the march, gathered at the Darwin RSL. The crowds are a bit of an issue but, I am reliably informed, the RSL is very pleased they have the problem of not being able to fit sufficient people into Cavenagh Street or, in fact, into the RSL. It would be a terrible problem if they actually had spare room there, and it is great to see; and more so in my particular electorate.
From town, we moved out to the North Darwin RSL run by some fantastic people. The President, Merv Doyle, does a great job inspiring and leading others at the North Darwin RSL to keep that fledgling club going. It has been opened but it needs a bit of attention; it needs some assistance and all the support that we, as a community, can give. It is these people who provide a service to some of the old Diggers, the Vietnam Vets, and to quite a number of World War II vets who are still around. It is these people who need to be able to go somewhere where they are understood, where they have mates they can share stories with - people of like minds. It is to Merv Doyle and people who help him - Eve Sommich, and Wayne Kessell who runs the raffles and does so much in relation to recruiting members. It is fine to see some of these outstanding citizens of Darwin providing such a great service.
It is very important that we recall the sacrifices made by those. It reminds me of the old saying: we need to be forever vigilant. There is another saying that is universal which I once saw on the side of the bridge of an aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise, and I have never forgotten it. It says: In Strength there is Peace.
Madam Deputy Speaker, in this country we need to remain strong, because it really is true that in strength there is peace. I am very grateful to those who have given us the ability to be free and to have peace.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I congratulate a group of Centralian Middle School students, parents, and educators who are involved in an innovative program, Girls at the Centre.
The program began in 2008 when the Alice Springs Indigenous Education and Employment Task Force asked the Smith Family to design a program that would motivate young Indigenous girls to stay at school and boost their achievements. It began with around 37 girls and their families participating. Today, 49 girls at the Centralian Middle School have signed on to the program, with many more young women accessing the program on an informal basis.
Girls at the Centre conducts a range of activities which encourage the young women to achieve at school, build confidence, and develop goals for their future. The community is also encouraged to support the girls through activities like a breakfast with a mentor program, which I was very pleased to be able to participate in last year. I had a very enjoyable time meeting the girls and talking to them about their hopes and goals for the future.
I had the pleasure a month or two ago to be invited to the new Girls at the Centre facility at Centralian Middle School. It was great to see so many girls and their families there at the new room to not only take a look at the new facility, but to celebrate the achievements of the program and the young women. The Girls’ Room has been fully refurbished to suit the needs of the program, and is a safe place for the girls to gather and meet with one of the two full-time girl coaches who offer guidance and mentorship.
I acknowledge the great work done by the girls’ coaches, Shelly Caspani and Jodie Lennox. I also congratulate the Smith Family for their commitment to the Girls at the Centre program.
There were about 20 very excited girls at the recent celebratory barbecue, which was to celebrate the second anniversary of the program, when the Smith Family Regional Programs Manager, Catherine Phillips, announced the successful students for an upcoming mentor trip to Melbourne. The young women will leave for Melbourne in May, where they will be hosted by families from the Ruyton Girls’ School and the Korowa Anglican Girls’ School. This will be an amazing trip for many of the girls who were chosen on the basis of their commitment, efforts and behaviour at school. I look forward to visiting the girls at the Centre when they return, and hearing about the Melbourne trip which I am sure will inspire many of the young girls to further outstanding achievements. I also acknowledge the member for Braitling, who was also in attendance at the event.
I recently had the pleasure of attending the launch of the Centralian Girls Academy at the Centralian Senior Secondary College on Grevillea Drive in Alice Springs. The academy offers Indigenous and non-Indigenous girls aged between 12 and 17 opportunities to develop their sporting interests and encourage them to stay at school. As we have heard before in the House, the Clontarf programs have been very successful in assisting young Indigenous men reach these goals and I am very excited by the prospects of the academy and what it will offer young women.
The Centralian Girls Academy is one of four sporting academies to be created in the Northern Territory under a joint partnership between the Northern Territory government, the federal government, and private enterprise. Girls will be provided with specialist coaching in their chosen sport, as well as support and mentoring in life skills. The academy is auspiced by the Role Models WA organisation, under former Boomer, Ricky Grace, and Program Director, Terry Boland, who were both at the launch, and has had a positive impact in Western Australian schools.
While acknowledging the achievements of fellow Central Australians, I pass on my congratulations to a fellow Centralian whom members of this House would well know; that is, Alice Springs green thumb, Mr Geoff Miers. Geoff has taken out a significant national horticultural award at the recent Nursery and Garden Industries Australian Awards. Geoff and his team at Garden Solutions in Alice Springs, on Lindsay Avenue, have taken out the National Community Award, which shows their outstanding commitment to the local community. As a regular visitor to Geoff’s business, I know firsthand the great service and advice Geoff and his team give, particularly in relation to keeping the rose bush alive. Geoff is very well-known and respected as the local ABC talkback gardener, gives freely of his horticultural experience, and also assists with fundraising for community groups. Big congratulations to Geoff and the team at Garden Solutions.
Turning to my electorate of Stuart, first I bring to members’ attention a petition I am tabling on behalf of the Mataranka community. I will give members some background on Mataranka, which lies 100 km south of Katherine on the Stuart Highway, and is in my electorate of Stuart.
Mataranka is a thriving community of around 300 people with a number of economic industries, including tourism, a lime mine, and a pastoral and horticulture industry. One of those great tourism ventures is that of Claire and Mick O’Brien at Coodardie Station. Last year I had the pleasure of staying there and enjoying their great hospitality. Mataranka boasts a school of around 50 students, has its own Never Never Festival, which is coming up on 14 to 16 May, and a fantastic gymkhana and rodeo every year. There is also a Barra Bash, not to mention the Better Half Club which fundraises for a multitude of community organisations and individuals. As you can see with all these events, Mataranka is truly a strong community.
With the growth of Mataranka the community sees a need to access childcare, so it has taken the initiative of getting the process started with a petition to the Roper Gulf Shire with the end result of trying to acquire a childcare facility for the families in the town. Accessing adequate childcare is often an obstacle directly affecting a family’s ability to take part in employment, education and training. Childcare also allows the community to attract qualified professionals, and is often the issue that stops newcomers from choosing to work in regional areas such as Mataranka. Quality childcare benefits children with valuable early learning experiences which can contribute to the development of healthy intellectual and social skills.
While childcare is a responsibility of the federal government, the Northern Territory government realises it is a priority and plays an important part in the lifestyle of Territory residents. With young families moving to the Territory to take advantage of our great lifestyle and employment opportunities, particularly in the regions, they are often leaving their extended family support networks, making access to childcare even more a necessity. In support of childcare, the NT government is the only jurisdiction in Australia which pays a childcare subsidy directly to the operators of childcare centres.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I will table this petition from the residents of Mataranka, and with it my recognition and support that the development of a childcare facility is essential for the future development of the Mataranka community. As the local member, I have written to the federal government to ask for a childcare facility to be built at Mataranka, providing the township with this essential service to families. I table the petition.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak tonight on another occasion of the Treasurer’s rubbery figures.
We heard the Treasurer of the Northern Territory waxing lyrical today about the great and wonderful numbers which have come from Access Economics. It is what she did not say which is important, and should be important to members in this House, rather than what she did say. What she did not say was that the Gross State Product identified for the financial year 2009-10 by Access Economics is 0.3%. This is not what she forecast for Territorians, and it demonstrates her incapacity to effectively deal with her portfolio area.
I remind honourable members at page 12 of the document marked Northern Territory Economy from the 2009-10 Budget, where the predictor for this year’s forecast growth was 2%; we have not reached 2% forecast growth, we have barely scratched over zero. Whilst we heard the rather selective quote from the Treasurer today in relation to growth rates in the year 2000-01, and whilst she ignored all those other growth rates prior to that period, she neglected to tell Territorians that her performance was no better than that particular time which she lambasted as some great time of economic peril for the Northern Territory. It is dishonest, in the extreme, to deal with Territorians in that fashion.
Private equipment investment is down by 17.1% according to the Access Economic figures. I draw members’ attention to private investment in that budget paper I referred to before, where there was an anticipated shift, but nowhere near the 17% which has been identified in the Access Economics report. Private construction investment in the Northern Territory is down by a whopping 40.1%.
Whilst the government is prepared to stand here and tell Territorians at length what a great job they do as economic managers, what they have not been honest with Territorians about is not only were their predictions at the beginning of the financial year out, and the assertion they are doing a wonderful job when, in fact, they claim that the economy is their doing and their doing alone, the Treasurer needs to explain why she did not tell Territorians about a growth rate of 0.3%, and why she was only prepared to release those figures which suited her. It is not until you actually drill into the details of the Access Economics’ briefing, which has now been posted, that you get to see exactly where the Territory is positioned. It does not make for comfortable reading at all.
I am deeply disappointed the Treasurer of the Northern Territory, upon whom so many people rely for guidance in the economic performance of the Northern Territory, is prepared to be so disingenuous in the way she presents herself and the Northern Territory to them. Our reputation as honest and decent people as a government depends on the quality of the statements made by government.
Whilst it may, from time to time, be a bitter pill to swallow, we have to tell the truth, and sometimes the truth is not what we want it to be. To do what she did today was dishonest. It was dishonest with Territorians, and it was dishonest with other people who want to come to the Territory. Whilst one set of numbers may be annoying for government, it is better to be honest and swallow the occasional bitter pill, than to cast our reputation as honest governors of the Northern Territory to the four winds for the sake of a media release.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the Treasurer should be held to account by the people of the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk on several issues tonight. One is in relation to a book I was kindly asked to launch recently by Greening Australia called The Bush Book - A manual for managing native vegetation across northern Australia edited by Maria Kraatz, Peter Jacklyn and Mike Clark. It has contributions from about 70 people who have a love of native vegetation and who have lived in the Northern Territory for a long time. This is one of the best books I have ever seen printed in the Northern Territory because it covers nearly every aspect of the management of native vegetation in the north of Australia.
I gather it has taken 10 years to put this book together, so it is it is not something that has just occurred overnight. It talks about the climate we live in; how to get a plan of action together if you want to revegetate or manage your block; how to manage fire; the importance of fire and the importance of blanket fire; managing weeds, which of course, can be the downfall of native vegetation, especially when associated with fire; revegetating and regeneration of plants; the commercial benefits of native vegetation; and habitat and the importance of native vegetation to many of our animals.
This book has a mountain of information. It has fantastic photographs; practical ideas and practical knowledge for those people who want to grow their own plants and the type of plants you should grow. It has great photographs of the main weeds people see in the Top End such as mission grass, snake weed, calopo - some of these are pasture species - things like salvinia which is taking over some of our wonderful wetlands in the north, and even olive hymenachne which is a pasture species. However, one of the downfalls of this species is it wipes out native grass, and native grass is important for some of our wildlife such as the geese.
It has a huge amount of information that even someone with no interest in native plants would find easy to read. I would like to promote this book. It does not cover just the Northern Territory; it covers the top of Western Australia and North Queensland, and I would recommend it to anyone. You can pick up a copy from Greening Australia on Thorak Road, and I am not sure whether you can pick it up from their office on Dinah Beach Road as well.
If you are out at the Thorak Road Nursery, at Knuckeys Lagoon, you can also buy some plants. I have a stack of plants at home which should have been planted during the Wet Season. I bought some at the Katherine Field Day a few weeks back and I was given some by my daughter for Christmas when they had their $200 plant special on. They are still sitting in boxes at the moment so, when I get a chance, I will plant them.
People should recognise the importance of maintaining our native vegetation. Exotic plants are okay. I have no problems with hibiscus and ixora and all those sorts of things in their right place, but we should learn to appreciate what wonderful native vegetation we have in this part of the world.
The member for Drysdale might be interested in my second topic which is our recent Anzac Day cricket match which was the 9th or the 10th - I cannot quite remember. Once again, the faithful trotted down to the Strauss Cricket Ground on Cox Peninsula Road, which is a World War II cricket pitch. The Army was there, Rotary was there, Southern Districts Cricket Club was there disguised as the Litchfield Shire Council, St John and Legacy were there and all got together to have a 30 overs per side cricket match which happens every year on Anzac Day to recognise the importance of the Army in the Litchfield Shire. As I say to people, Litchfield Shire does not have a town as such as Palmerston or Darwin where the soldiers can march and be given the keys to the city, so this is one way to recognise the Army in the Litchfield Shire.
It is also to highlight the importance of the World War II heritage, which is something the government needs to ramp up because, from a tourist point of view, the one unique area you will not find in other parts of Australia is World War II heritage. Unfortunately, some of it has disappeared but there is much still there and, if we managed and promoted it properly, it would certainly do a lot for the economy of the Northern Territory.
We also recognise those people who died during the war, especially Captain Strauss, who was an American Air Force pilot who was shot down and killed over Darwin Harbour at a place called Squires Bluff. He had only arrived in the Northern Territory a couple weeks after the first bombing of Darwin and his plane took off from an emergency landing strip - which was only a temporary place for his squadron - at Adelaide River and, sadly, he was killed. The 27 Mile Airstrip was named after him - Strauss Airstrip - and we have named the cricket pitch the Strauss Cricket Ground – the SCG.
A small, but vocal, crowd turned up. The Litchfield President’s XI went out first. Probably for the first time in the history of this match rain stopped play, but we did not know how to work out the Duckworth/Lewis system of recalculating the runs, so we kept going even though the temperature was 100C and the humidity was about 200% after the rain passed and the sun came out.
Litchfield were all out. They used their 30 overs, put it that way, because you are never all out in this game, and made 195 runs. The Army then came back in and their innings was also interrupted by a bit of rain. They knocked off the 195 runs with two overs to spare. They had a couple of bring-ins; one is actually sitting in front of me here - the member for Drysdale. I believe they paid him because he belted the living daylights out of the poor Litchfield President’s XI bowling, and it got to a point where he reached his maximum of 30 runs and had to retire. No one bothered to pay him to go back in because we raise money for Legacy by paying people to stay in, go out, come back in, or override poor umpire’s decisions, etcetera.
Also, the member for Drysdale hit the only sign where you scored $100. Gusher, which is a home maintenance company, gives us $500 to put up a series of signs around the oval - also surrounded by chooks which have numbers on the back deducting runs from your score - and the member for Drysdale hit one of them. He kindly donated all the money to Legacy, which was very generous of him. Since he got a plug, I thought I would give myself a plug - I got three runs. I came in for the last over and did not go out - that is a miracle - and got three runs.
Brigadier Gus McLachlan came and tossed the coin; we appreciate he had a busy day, so it was good of him to come. All the soldiers enjoyed themselves. It is one of those days people ask: ‘Where are we going?’ But when they get there, they find there is a great barbecue, plenty of cold beer and soft drinks courtesy of Rotary, and it is a fantastic day. You really feel like you are playing in the bush; you get a feeling about the importance of this particular cricket ground as a heritage site, and you get a feeling of what it would have been like in 1942 when the soldiers were stationed there.
I thank all the people involved. I thank the council for helping out as well, and the Thompson family who live just over the road and always mow the grass for us every year, and maintain the oval in good condition.
Once again, it was a good day. We raised nearly $1000 for Legacy - well worth it - a lot of good fun and, hopefully, we will be back again next year.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Deputy Speaker, as has been a tradition tonight, I wish to discuss Anzac Day. As a former soldier of the Australian Army, a 45th class apprentice, it is been something I have been involved in for a very long time, and have a direct affiliation with. Although I never served overseas - we were very lucky to serve during a time of peace - there are many soldiers today amongst our families and our constituents who have not been so lucky. They have served their country extremely proudly and continue to do so, and they are now being recognised at such events as Anzac Day around Australia. They become our future remembrance, and we should be rightly proud of the men and women, the mums and dads, the brothers and sisters, who go and serve our country.
I am a committee member of the Palmerston RSL, and we are currently working as a committee on expanding the R and SL’s role, because often the ‘and’ is missed out - it is the Returned and Services League. There is now a big push towards those new soldiers, those new Diggers who have returned from their service, so they become part of it and they get the support the R and SL offers.
Anzac Day morning started very early as it always has done. In Palmerston, we had a Dawn Service and a 10 am service. The Dawn Service was, as has been in years past, a fantastic event, with around 400-plus people there, about 100 more compared with the previous year. At the Dawn Service was the Leader of the Opposition, Terry Mills; two SRC representatives from the Palmerston High School; the member for Brennan, Mr Peter Chandler; our Palmerston Mayor, Mr Robert Macleod, in his regalia; and the member for Arnhem representing the government. I appreciated her presence there; it is always welcome and she handles herself so well in public. I was there but I do not believe I saw any other government people at the morning service.
Those who were there were greatly appreciated, I know, from the R and SL’s point of view and, of course, the military had great representation. The member for Arnhem read out the speech from Scott, and he did a fantastic job. I believe that was the first time he has had the opportunity to represent the Defence Force at a lead speech, and he did a fantastic job.
After the service where, as I said, there were some 400 Palmerston residents, the people were asked to go back to the RSL at the Hub complex, and we all had breakfast there. The breakfast is fantastic. For a small fee you can certainly get your fill and have the first beers of the day. That has always been, in my time, a very busy venue, and the staff at the Hub, on behalf of the RSL, do a great job. We hung around there talking to old Diggers, talking to some who are shy and some not so shy, and some of the new and some of the old; and talking to Diggers who were prisoners of war. One gentleman I was speaking to moved to Darwin simply because of his treatment during World War II and the cold climates where he was kept, and he never wished to go again to a cold climate.
At 10 am we were back for the march past and the ceremony which followed that. It was great to see Terry come back to Palmerston away from the Darwin service where his duty had called earlier, and we had a great service. It was great to see the current member for Solomon join us there at the 10 am service, and after that service was over.
It was starting to get a little hot by that stage, and we returned again to the RSL, as tradition would suggest. We had more talks with many of the Diggers before I made a quick change and headed out to the SCG, as mentioned by the member for Nelson.
Scott and his team did a fantastic job; they welcomed me on board to help out with their batting side. I was lucky to have missed out on the fielding part of it. I got to talk to a lot of the people who were there and all the volunteers who helped out. It was a great afternoon. I have to say my match fitness was probably a bit slow towards the end; I was getting a bit tired, but the guys on the sidelines, including the member for Nelson, ensured I continued to bat, and they did a great job.
As we heard the member for Nelson say, about $1000 was raised for Legacy. I enjoyed having the ability to chip in to do that; it is something I have not done for a long time: get out there and enjoy yourself with people and just do what you love doing; that is, having a bit of sport. Those are the sort of things the Diggers did at Anzac Cove. They made use of their spare time; they played rugby and other forms of sport on the beaches.
From memory of stories told, there were various benefits if you got struck by shrapnel whilst playing a sport. A bizarre way of looking at it, but some of the ways I believe Australian soldiers looked at the adversities of battle. I suppose it is a bit like betting on a fly climbing up the wall. It was a great day out there, very hot - the Army did come out on top, thankfully - and it was well received. Southern Districts did some great batting, and they had some fantastic bowlers. I tell you, the Army team bowlers did not deserve it, they were pretty slow.
After, we went back and got changed and went on to the Palmerston Hub to catch up with more Diggers, have dinner, and met up with some former police colleagues who have also served in the armed services. We chatted for some time before moving on to another venue in Palmerston, the Arch Rival.
For the number of Diggers floating around in their suits and their ties, dressed pretty much as I am here today, they were out having a great time and, during the time we were there, they were all well behaved. They were out there and people understood who they were, where they were, and what they represented, and they did a great job. They behaved themselves whilst we were there, and credit goes to those young soldiers, because sometimes it can get untidy. They did a great job.
We finished up the night taking home one former solider. We had actually only had a couple of beers for the entire day, but I enjoyed mainly speaking to people and listening to their stories and exchanging similar stories of my service time. It is a great day to remember so we do not, hopefully, make those same mistakes.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016