2009-10-12
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise video and audio streaming of the parliamentary proceedings has commenced today. The rules and guidelines for media coverage of the parliamentary proceedings are determined by Speaker’s Determination, pursuant to the resolution of the Assembly on 25 February 1985.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table Speaker’s Determination No 5 of 2009 setting out the guidelines for media coverage of parliamentary sittings.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from His Honour the Administrator Message No 12 notifying the assent to bills passed in August 2009 sittings of parliament.
PETITION
Independent Environment Protection Agency
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 306 petitioners praying that the Environment Protection Agency of the Northern Territory be independent. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members the responses to petitions No 15, 17, 19, 22 and 23 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website. A copy of the response will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to petitioners.
Petition No 15
Response:
Response:
Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) Governance Review;
Nursing House per Patient Day implementation (Professor Christine Duffield);
Complaints Management Review (Mr Ray Norman); and
Security Audit Stage 1.
Petition No 19
Petition No 22
Response:
Petition No 23
Response:
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to the provision of Standing Order 12, I lay on the Table my Warrant nominating members to be Deputy Chairmen of Committees:
MOTION
Extension of Adjournment Debate
Speech Time Limit
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, this is a very popular motion.
Madam Speaker, I move that Standing Order 77, Motion for adjournment of the Assembly to close the business of the day, be amended to read: ‘Each member 10 minutes’.
As a government, we have undertaken to embark on a whole range of parliamentary reforms …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: There are actually three motions I will be moving - and everyone is aware of what those motions are. Two of them relate to the adjournment debate, which is part of the reform; and the other relates to the removal of ministerial reports.
I believe these are very positive moves. There are further matters before the Standing Orders Committee which has been asked to report to the Assembly in November. I am very confident we will have more reforms to the way this parliament does business.
We are a government interested in openness and transparency of government; that is why we have embarked on a whole range of reforms, including the establishment of an Estimates Committee, where previously there was not one; opening up a discrete Estimates Committee along the lines of those operating in other parliaments; and also allowing cameras in the Chamber for Question Time.
This latest innovation of having streaming of both video and audio directly to the Internet is something this government supports in parliamentary reform.
Shifting the time limits from five minutes to 10 minutes for adjournment speeches is a positive move. Once this motion is passed, members from all sides will have the opportunity tonight of adjourning for 10 minutes. I appreciate the support of the opposition and the Independents in this matter. It is good we have been able to bring it on sooner rather than wait for the final report of the Standing Orders Committee into a whole range of issues.
Madam Speaker, as a government, we are demonstrating we are keen to take steps - this is evidence of those steps - to reform the way in which our parliament does business.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, listening to the minister, one could be forgiven for thinking this government is, indeed, a reform-minded institution which seeks to bring unto the people of the Northern Territory a world of openness, honesty, and accountability. One only needs to look briefly at the history of how we find ourselves in this situation, and this motion brought before the House, and we can see what a tissue thin, transparent, and enfeebled position the Leader of Government Business has taken - as he well knows.
I heard the Leader of Government Business say this was part of the positive moves of the Northern Territory government. Let us speak of the positive moves of this government in relation to its conduct inside this House. It is this government which reduced the speaking time of the adjournment debate from 15 minutes to five. Whilst we are going back to 10, we are not returning to 15, which might be a matter for some debate in the future. However, going back to 10 is at least a reasonable compromise. From the very moment this government sought to introduce the institution of the five-minute adjournment debate, I, for one - and other members in this House - railed against what this government was doing: bringing its dead hand upon the breathing orifices of this parliament - its nose, its mouth - and laying it straight across our faces trying to prevent us from speaking and raising issues in this place.
The government found its road to Damascus conversion - unlike Saul on the original road to Damascus who suddenly saw the light - because they had a gun put to their head - a gun which meant they could lose power. This government did not introduce the five-minute adjournment debate for the sake of the enhancing the quality of parliamentary debate; they did it because they had spite in their hearts and they wanted to silence their critics. That is the motivator for the introduction of the five-minute adjournment debate. If they had their will, they would have expunged the five-minute adjournment debate in its entirety. They would have made this parliament nothing more than a puppet of their own will.
It is only because of the ructions inside their own parliamentary team and Caucus - with members leaping in and out of the Caucus, jumping ship then rejoining, or leaving the ship entirely because of corruption within - this situation has been brought about. Their disillusion in the face of their critics internally and externally has now found this parliament in a situation where it can resist the will of this government and its Chief Minister to silence people in this place.
The Leader of Government Business talked about the interests of open and transparency - arrant nonsense! This government has not been interested in open and transparency at any stage. It has sought to smother, to smudge, to spin, to obfuscate and obnubilate. As far as I am concerned, this government has not changed its spots for any other reason than there is a gun to its head. Be warned, the moment the situation changes - or if the situation changes - and this government finds itself with an absolute majority again, its dead hand will again be visited upon the democracy we call the Northern Territory and woe betide them if they should try in such circumstances.
Madam Speaker, this is a positive step. It is one we supported from day one. I have railed against – as I know other members in this place have - what this government was doing. Finally, not through any choice exerted by this government, but something that was foisted upon them, they have seen the light of day. This does not cover them in glory. It simply means they have been forced into a position that, in the truth, they really did not want to take.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I do not want to be classified as a gun at the head of the government because I do not think that is the case regarding this motion. This motion actually came forward before the issues of last August. I had this as one of my motions for General Business Day at that time. It related to my concerns about the cutting back of time from 15 minutes to five minutes. Madam Speaker, I recall you were giving a eulogy about a good friend of mine at the time. The eulogy went longer than five minutes. I believe that was a classic example of why five minutes was definitely too short for an adjournment speech.
I also understand there was some research done into the average time adjournment debates went for, and that was around just a fraction less than 10 minutes. It seems, overall, people do want longer than five minutes but, on average, do not particularly need to speak for 15 minutes. With that in mind, I thought this was at least a reasonable compromise. Five minutes was certainly not enough for someone - as you found yourself, Madam Speaker - to be able to give a eulogy about a very important person who had lived most of their life in the Northern Territory. To have that eulogy cut off part way simply because the rules said you are restricted to five minutes was, to some extent, insulting to that person’s reputation and also to you, Madam Speaker, speaking of the life and the times of that person to parliament.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion. It is a motion I raised, and has come forward. It may have come forward a bit quicker simply because of the happenings …
Mr Elferink: It would not have happened, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: Well, it may or may not, but it was there before the issues of August arose.
Mr Elferink: I have been complaining for a year, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: We can argue whether that is or is not the case. However, the point is, at least the government has accepted the change has been required. I believe the 10 minutes will be a good compromise.
Adjournment debates are important. It allows all members of parliament to raise an issue, especially about their electorate, as many members of parliament do. You have seen, at times, what you might say is a farcical situation where members have had a prepared speech and realised they have five minutes to jam it in. It reminds me of Mr Jack Ah Kit, one time, when he was asked if he could speed up his speech because it was too long. Well, he rattled it off literally at 78 rpm - when you think about the old records. No one could understand him. We all had a bit of a laugh, but it did actually make a mockery of why you were standing in parliament to discuss issues. It also will remove the requirement by members of parliament to, literally, rattle off their adjournment debate, when they really need adequate time to put forward matters concerning their own electorate, and to do it in a proper way.
I also raise the issue that there has been a lot of discussion about the length of time we are in parliament, etcetera. I put myself down as one of those people who occasionally waffle. However, if we are looking at the way we use our time in parliament, we should also reflect on whether we are concise in what we say - whether we use our time well, like to waffle on, fill the day up with padding, or are doing parliament an injustice by not being more precise and coming to the point - so we are not just seen to be standing here blowing into the wind and making pronouncements which would be regarded as a lot of hot air; that we are being precise, putting our arguments to parliament in a concise and relevant manner so people do not go to sleep, especially now we are on television 24 hours a day, seven days a week ...
Mr Chandler: It is a reality show.
Mr WOOD: Well, it is a reality show. We need to be putting our arguments to the public so they understand what they are, and they do not fall asleep working out what we are trying to say.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the opposition supports this motion.
It is an argument that has been put on many fronts to this government. It is an argument which was run through the committee, I understand. It is a position that has been maintained in the face of a government which made a decision to restrict the capacity for members in the Chamber to speak - perhaps with the intention, on one front, to go home early. We have seen that as one of the results of this change brought about by government.
However, let us not be nave. Let us not conceal what is, in fact, revealed for all to see; that being, a government member can describe this as a reform. That is simply an adaptation in order to survive. Charles Darwin has identified this behaviour: you either adapt or you perish. That is the motivation behind this, which is quite plain to see. The arguments were strong before, the arguments are strong now. Why the change of behaviour? It is a reaction to a near-death experience which has been the only motivation - not in the interest of reform, openness in debate, ensuring Territorians get a fair deal and have a sense of increased integrity over the parliament, and an enhanced view of the operation of its members. It is simply a matter in order to survive politically.
It would be nave in the extreme to think this is only arrived at because they have dwelt on it for a period of time and it is just coincidental we are now in the Chamber with a government which has survived a political crisis as a result of a certain amount of pressure being placed upon it through the political process.
The member for Port Darwin referred to the phrase ‘leopard’ and ‘changing spots’. The member for Nelson would well recall the Ninth Assembly. This is the Eleventh. During the Tenth Assembly, there were only four opposition members and government could, effectively, do whatever it wanted. They would stand and read from media releases in the morning so they could maximise their take in the media and get their message out. It did not matter so much because you only had an opposition of four. The arguments were the same and put again and again: this was an abuse of parliamentary process. They were deaf to those calls. Why? It did not matter; the objective was a political one to ensure they could use the platform of this parliament to enlarge their message in the public domain.
Now, they have hearing restored as a result of what they would spuriously describe as a change of heart; a reform agenda. Nonsense! Absolute nonsense! In fact, I call that a dishonest representation of a new position taken and adopted by government. I am talking about the Tenth Assembly when there were only four of us and a couple of Independents. You were at your heyday. What did you do during the heyday? Maximised your opportunity to promote yourselves.
Go back to the Ninth Assembly; you were not in such a dominant position. At that time, you needed the numbers to secure a Speaker. You put the member for Braitling in the Chair, an Independent. Anyone could see you needed that. Did you admit that was why you put an Independent member of the Chamber in the Chair, with the Deputy being the member for Nelson, who is also an Independent? Did you describe that in terms of ‘We have to do this because we do not have the numbers on the floor’? No, you dressed it up by saying: ‘This is a demonstration of how noble we are and how truly we value the independent status of the Speaker and the Speaker’s Chair’. You dressed it up and promoted it as a virtue when, in fact, it was a response to your political survival - you dressed it up dishonestly.
When it came to the Tenth Assembly, you no longer needed that virtuous position and deception, so you abandoned it and put a Labor member in the Chair. Where was the much-vaunted position of independence and how virtuous you were when the fact was it was a dishonest position and was only to do with your political survival? You changed your spots. In fact, you have not changed at all, because what we have now, although it is all dressed up in fine words, is only an adaptation in order to survive. The arguments have been maintained and sustained, but you will only move when there is political pressure brought to bear upon a vulnerable government.
I only hope there is a lesson here which is sent out across the Northern Territory. I say: ‘Citizens, wake up and exert pressure on this government, because they are susceptible to change if pressure is applied. Continue applying pressure on this government because they will say one thing or another, but the fact is they are now vulnerable to pressure, and pressure must be brought upon this government’. That is the fact of this. Dress it up whatever way you like to make yourselves look good, but it is not about you; it is about delivering genuine change for the Northern Territory.
Of course, Madam Speaker, we support this motion, but not for a moment can I ignore what sits behind this.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Darwin Middle School Year 7 students, together with teachers, Tara Kapoor and Carly Doyle. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, I also acknowledge the students of Darwin Middle School. I am trying to peel my eyes to look for my son; I thought he might be one of them. I see a whole range of his best friends there, but I cannot actually see him. Maybe he has been kicked out. It is great to see Darwin Middle School here today.
In relation to this motion, as the Leader of the Opposition said, we support it for a number of reasons. As has been quite rightly outlined, we railed against the motion to reduce and remove openness and accountability from the parliament; debates which only happened a few months ago in this Chamber. At that time we were told - I believe it was by the then Leader of Government Business, the Treasurer - that parliamentarians work too hard; people could not be expected to work past 9 pm, even though we start at 10 am, we have a two-hour lunch break, have an hour for dinner; it is not rational people should be working past 9 pm. All of a sudden we had to reduce the amount of debate we could have in adjournment, and in a range of other areas.
Now, lo and behold, a couple of months later, we are finding, no, the government wants to be more open and accountable. That is what they tell us. In the intervening period, of course, government almost keeled over from infighting. The infighting was not infighting anymore; it became very public. Everyone knew exactly what was going on. The member for Karama was sharpening the knives, waiting to despatch the Chief Minister, and the member for Macdonnell resigned from the Labor Party and left a great gulf. Prior to that, of course, the member for Arafura had resigned from the Labor Party, could not work with them, had a change of heart and, miraculously, came back.
Then, we came into this bizarre little scenario where the member for Nelson cooked up his grubby little deal that allowed the Labor Party to cling on to power. Now, because of this grubby little deal, the member for Nelson, in effect, holds a gun at the head of the government ...
Mr Wood: What was your deal? Did you go to China recently?
Mr TOLLNER: Do not go red in the face, mate.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Direct your comments through the Chair, member for Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: Certainly, Madam Speaker. I am dealing with interjections from my left, appropriately so. However, the member for Nelson, in effect, holds a very real gun to the head of the government. What the member for Nelson says in many cases goes because, the government knows if they upset the member for Nelson, they will fall over and be run out of office.
The member for Nelson not only holds a gun to the head of the government, but he has now become an apologist for government. The member for Nelson stood a couple of the minutes ago and told us it was part of the government’s plan to do this anyhow, and it was not really him holding a gun to their heads - they wanted to do this and he had this motion on the books long before we came to this place. Well, I did not see government acting on it then …
Mr Wood: They were. What you see and what you know are two different things.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Fong Lim well knows that he needs to direct his comments through the Speaker.
Mr TOLLNER: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker. I was directing my comments through you, and I am sure the Leader of Government Business realises that.
Madam SPEAKER: Just continue and direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr TOLLNER: Certainly, Madam Speaker. What we have here now is a situation where the member for Nelson feels it is his obligation to defend government. He said he had this motion on the books for months. I did not see, a couple of months ago when we were debating in the Chamber whether we should have reduced sitting times, the government taking a whole lot of notice of the member for Nelson at that particular point in time. However, the member for Nelson now has decided to jump into bed with the Labor Party in a very public way. Read his media pronouncements and the like. He talks about ‘we will do this’, ‘we will do that’. The member for Nelson clearly puts himself inside the government team in respect of his protestations suggesting he is not part of the Labor Party.
This motion demonstrates how far the Labor Party has come down the road, and now understands their own political survival depends on the member for Nelson. They came in and threw this motion on the Table; in effect running away from what they did only a few months ago - tails between their legs, run away from it. All of a sudden, they are saying no, they are doing this now to open up the parliament to make it more accountable and more transparent.
It is good to see we have cameras here. That was something I talked about in my maiden speech. I am very keen and glad to see we have cameras. Whilst we are talking about this, maybe when the Leader of Government Business sums up, he might be able to tell me whether we will now have access to archived footage, because we all know it exists. In fact, I have asked for footage in the past and been flatly rejected. However, I would like to know, in this new era - this wonderful new era, this dawn of accountability, transparency and openness - whether we will actually be able to access archived footage of past sittings ...
Mr Wood: We could have the history of the member for Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: Now what? The member for Nelson does not want it? I will respond to that interjection, Madam Speaker. The member for Nelson does not sound as though he wants access to archived footage ….
Mr Wood: No, you are just making it up again, Dave, as you go along. Keep going.
Mr TOLLNER: Maybe you can explain exactly what your position is in relation to this …
Mr Wood: No, you are just making it up as you go along, Dave.
Mr TOLLNER: In any case, it would be good if the Leader of Government Business could explain to the parliament whether we will be able to access the footage of the past.
Madam Speaker, I am quite happy that this motion has been put. It has taken a lot to get the government to do this, and I thank the member for Nelson for applying the required pressure to government to get this motion before the House.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank all sides for their support of this motion. As the member for Fong Lim stated, there are cameras here and members of the public have seen for themselves what has just happened in this little interchange over a fairly simple and positive change to a standing order regarding the length of adjournment debates.
People could see the over-dramatisation which occurred with the opposition, and the attacks which have become quite personal against the member for Nelson. This has become a hallmark of the opposition with their personal attacks on the member for Nelson, who is widely recognised in our community as someone with a lot of integrity and honesty. I do not think it does the opposition any good whatsoever to be attacking the member for Nelson on a personal level. This is a place of debate where we debate issues, ideas and policies. To personally attack the member for Nelson is counterproductive to the opposition’s cause.
What has unfolded here with the last speaker from the opposition really tells the story about the opposition. The member for Port Darwin, rightly so in his job as my equivalent on the other side, the Leader of Opposition Business, takes a lead in his role. I enjoy our discussions. He is quite knowledgeable in relation to standing orders and the operation of parliament. Then, the Leader of the Opposition spoke and, rightfully so. He wanted to make his political points, which he did. Then we had the member for Fong Lim trying to get in the limelight as well. It tells a story about what is going on in the opposition. Those who are watching can be very interested in the colour coordination on the other side. We have the member for Fong Lim with a lovely purple tie, and the Deputy Leader - they are well colour coordinated today. One wonders whether there is a bit of a conversation going on there not only about dress but other things as well.
People who are watching this broadcast really see how the opposition attends to its business; how it debates. I was particularly interested in the Leader of the Opposition relying on Darwinian theories to attack the government. I would have thought, given his background, he is probably a creationist. But, there you go! I suppose all is fair in love and war in debate within this parliament ...
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I have just heard a diatribe about personal attacks. Attacking a member’s faith, I believe, is disgraceful, quite frankly. He should be pulled into line.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Leader of the Opposition, are you offended by that comment?
Mr MILLS: No, Madam Speaker, that is fine.
Madam SPEAKER: Okay. Please continue, Leader of Government Business.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the spirit of robust debate, I will continue.
The best contribution was, indeed, from the member for Nelson. He gave quite a balanced view of this and its history. He was quite correct in his comments. One of the most important things he alluded to was the efficiency of debate within this place. In previous times, there was 15 minutes of adjournment debate. I was here for two Assemblies when that was the case. I have to say members on all sides, probably including me at various times, wandered within that 15 minutes. I believe 15 minutes was definitely too long. Some members used up their 15 minutes repeating themselves, or wandering off into some sidetrack of debate. With five minutes, as the member for Nelson alluded to, there were instances where members could not complete their adjournment debate. Allowing 10 minutes, given the fact - also alluded to by the member for Nelson - the average is just a little under 10 minutes, will give all members an opportunity to compile their adjournment debates and be quite efficient in the use of their time. We also have to remember, whilst there is freedom of speech, we cannot waste those opportunities.
Madam Speaker, without any further comments from me, I commend this motion to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move to extend the overall debate on adjournment of the Assembly for Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays. I move - That Standing Order 41A(a) be amended by omitting 10 pm and inserting in its stead 10.30 pm.
Those are on every day except for Wednesday, where there is unlimited time and all members of this Assembly can speak. It will provide a capacity for members to adjourn at least once, and even more, during sittings. It is a positive move which accommodates the needs of members. We know members adjourn on a whole range of issues, some of which are directly political, many relate to work in our electorate, or celebrating people who have made a fantastic contribution to the life of the Northern Territory.
It is opportune to say, generally, even when there was 15 minutes or even five minutes, not all members would avail themselves of the opportunity to adjourn every night. There were often times when there were a few adjournments every night, and the time was not exhausted. This is a step in keeping with the 10 minutes.
Madam, Speaker, I commend this motion to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I will do nothing more than to say to people who read future Parliamentary Records: read the previous motion for my comments in relation to this motion; they are inextricably linked. Once again, I am entirely supportive - in fact, we on this side of the House are entirely supportive - of the restoration of one of the great hallmarks of our democracy.
One of the things we enjoy in this Chamber, because of our physical size, is the capacity to use our time to speak more fully on issues before us. A parliament such as the federal parliament has many members. Whilst they have many more sitting days, there is rarely an opportunity to do anything other than the Government Business of the Day. This parliament affords us a different opportunity, particularly through the adjournment debates. That opportunity should be taken.
I state on the record I have always opposed the shortening of the adjournment debates. It is one of those rare occasions afforded to very few parliamentarians anywhere in the world to speak wholly and fully about the issues of particular concern to us - not often enjoyed in other jurisdictions. I can tell members in this House, if you are a member of the House of Commons, it is quite possible to sit in that Chamber for many decades and never get an opportunity to utter a single syllable.
This small Chamber of this small jurisdiction gives us a much broader scope in which to speak, and only the dead hand of government can reduce that if the dead hand of government so chooses.
I have spoken before in the past, and reiterate on this occasion; the parliament is the superior organ of the three separated powers. It is the superior organ by virtue of the fact a government cannot form until the members of this House, essentially, give life to it. That is why governments seek a majority, or at least a working minority, so desperately because without it and the support of this House any such government is doomed to failure.
It behoves the government to show some discipline, particularly in the unicameral system where they have an absolute majority, and use their power wisely, particularly in this House. There is a danger in a unicameral system that a government which is in absolute majority will seek to exert its authority over the parliament, using its numbers - and we have seen this government do this. It is only at the time - irrespective of what the member for Nelson might say he had proposed - they see the imperilled minority government they currently have, weakening by the hour, they suddenly find it within their capacity to show some grace and discipline towards this House.
Grace given under duress is not grace at all; it is an instinctive response. Discipline demands, when you do not have to do something, you do it anyhow for a better government of the Northern Territory. That has not occurred in this place. There is no grace being shown here today; the gossamer thin arguments from the members opposite - in fact, one member opposite; the rest are clearly too embarrassed to speak in relation to this motion because of the way they have conducted themselves in this place - means we finally get some oxygen. However, not oxygen given through good grace and discipline, and an appreciation of the system of government we operate under but, rather, because of fear.
I will accept this motion under the terms it has been offered; that is, a government with a gun to its head. In truth, what should have occurred in the first instance is a government showing discipline, grace and appreciation of the separation of powers we have - something this government has assiduously sought to avoid and, moreover, actively pursued to undermine.
I am grateful for the current situation for no other reason than, at least as a member of parliament - someone who carries the mandate of the majority of voters in the electorate I am fortunate enough to serve - I am in this place. No government, no public servant, enjoys that mandate - only members of parliament, not even judges. That is what gives us the ascendancy; that is what gives us the power. They may be ministers, but that is a warrant granted them under powers exercised by the Queen. However, there is another power we have been given; that is, the power given to us by the voters of the Northern Territory.
I urge the government in its future considerations to turn its mind to this important issue and act with grace and discipline, rather than with fear.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, it is lucky I actually have a shooter’s licence because that is the second time I have been told I am the gun being held to the head of the Labor Party ...
Members: It is true.
Mr WOOD: People might think it is true, but I do not think it is true; it is just a fact of life that I have an opportunity, and I hope to bring some change to parliament. I take very much into consideration what the Leader of the Opposition said. I believe he is dead right; it is time we had independent Speakers and the principle behind that. You might recall, Madam Speaker, I spoke at the opening of the second sittings I was elected to, and raised that very matter. It seemed when it was convenient there was a particular philosophy, a particular belief this is something which should happen and, when circumstances changed by the numbers on the floor, the philosophy went out the door.
I also have a long history in the Northern Territory, especially in relation to watching politics. I used to come to this House regularly to watch Question Time, and listen to the radio. Much of my work was on the back of a tractor, and I would always listen to Question Time. I can tell you - listening to the member for Port Darwin - when the CLP was in power some of the answers given by ministers were absolutely woeful; they were meant to fill up time. I believe the member for Port Darwin is right; when you have unicameral system it is a big temptation for the party in power to abuse that. I have seen it on both sides of parliament. I have spoken before about the importance of the committee stages. The reason I believe the committee stage should be given as much scope as possible is it is the only time one can actually question the government over its legislation thoroughly, because we do not have a second house in this parliament.
I am not nave enough to say some of what is happening today is not because of the circumstances the government finds itself in. However, I am happy to use that opportunity to bring in some reform. It might not be everything I support or agree with. This is not gun-to-the-head stuff; this is trying to get some changes one is going to have to mediate through ...
Mr Elferink: Would they have done if this had been otherwise?
Mr WOOD: That is right; I am not disagreeing. However, the point is the circumstances we have now allow me to influence the government. As I said, not everything I would like will I actually obtain, because it is a two-way street working through some of these issues. It is important we now have this extra time. It is very important for people on this side of parliament be given the opportunity to speak - again because of the unicameral system both crossbenches and opposition have the opportunity during adjournment to raise important issues.
The member for Port Darwin is a person who has raised many important issues during the adjournment debate. In fact, I recall him running downstairs in a hurry when there was something said in an adjournment debate which might have upset him. He came down and used his adjournment debate time to put forward his argument for or against what was being said at that time. That is really important.
The lengthening of time, obviously, reflects the maximum time one can speak. I reiterate this is a good change back to what it used to be. It may not be exactly what it was. I did not agree with what happened previously but, when you look at the average time people have spoken, this is probably a good commonsense, balanced response to the debate. Yes, I agree with the member for Port Darwin; it should not have happened in the first place. It was done in circumstances where the government thought it had the numbers so it did not really matter. The government really has to show in the coming months and years that it really believes in openness and transparency, and will not go back on some of these things.
After the next election - whatever happens - if Labor is voted in again, will it guarantee it will not go back and change this? Will these things stay and not be again debated and changed? The proof of the pudding will be whether these are genuine changes, or are just done because of the circumstances. I accept the Chief Minister has said he wants these changes. I believe he was genuine when he said that. However, I keep in mind exactly what the Leader of the Opposition said in relation to his leadership. I remember a quote from the Chief Minister in the Adelaide Advertiser about the importance of the independence of the Speaker and how this was a new era. When the numbers changed, this particular philosophy died. I am fully aware of the politics of parliament, but I also believe one has to have a little faith people of goodwill will try to do things, not simply because the members of the opposition believe it is a gun to their head or purely because of the circumstances the government finds itself in. Only time will tell.
I have to have faith to say there is genuine belief some changes should occur. They may be pushed into this corner but, in the end, if we get some good results and changes for this parliament and for the Territory, I welcome these changes.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their support for this motion, and I commend it to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that Standing Order 96A, Ministerial Reports, be rescinded.
Ministerial reports became a feature of parliamentary business after the election of 2001. The opposition and Independents had many reservations about ministerial reports so, as part of the parliamentary reforms which have been moved, government is removing the ministerial reports.
I add briefly that approximately 35 minutes per sitting day was allocated to ministerial reports. I announce to the House approximately 35 minutes per sitting day is now in the mix, if you like, in the rest of time in our parliamentary day. It comes back to the issue of efficiency raised by the member for Nelson before. It is incumbent on all of us to use our time in this place efficiently, whether it is in debate or in committee. I am not suggesting we curtail debate in any way, but we all know in this place sometimes debate in some areas becomes quite repetitive and unproductive, long after people have made their point about a particular issue. It is incumbent on us, whether it is within parliament or estimates, to use our time wisely.
Parliament is a resource - opposition has its job, Independents have their job, and government has its job. We have to try to work better together to get efficiencies in the time we have, knowing the operation of this parliament is a very costly enterprise but, at the same time balancing that. In no way do we want to see debate curtailed.
We are omitting the ministerial reports with nothing specifically in its stead, except an exhortation to this parliament that we use the 35 minutes per day wisely.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, of course, the opposition supports this decision of the government.
I am particularly interested in the choice of the language which said government is aware opposition and Independent members had some ‘reservations’ about this particular practice employed by the Labor government after coming to office in 2001. I challenge the honourable member to enlarge upon what he means by ‘reservations’. What would be the nature of reservations other members of this Chamber who are not in government would have with employing such a strategy? I challenge you, honourable member, to describe what those reservations may be. Do you recall the arguments that have been put to you, again and again, about the abuse of parliamentary process; the opportunities taken by a rampant government to enlarge a space within the Chamber to promote themselves; and to reduce the opportunity for reasonable debate and response because there was no forewarning of the topics to be presented, or read out from a media release? No, none of those things are given any kind of articulation, just the vague term of ‘reservations’.
Madam Speaker, this is another astonishing reversal, and a new position by government. Clearly, for any person who has come to this point of discussion in the Parliamentary Record, I urge them to refer to my previous comments. It reflects quite badly upon the motivations and intent of the government which, finding itself in a precarious position, now proposes and supposes we can ignore the only reason there has been a change of heart. It is because of a desire to survive, rather than they have now come to their senses. How many times when there were four opposition members in here was this matter raised and they were completely deaf? Now, they can hear. Amazing, Madam Speaker!
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, in this case I concur with the Leader of the Opposition. I believe this whole process was set up for the government to promote itself - not always but, in general. I will repeat some of the things with which I had concerns. We did not know, generally speaking, what was going to happen. A statement was made on the floor and you had to scramble to write something down in a hurry so as to respond. From a parliamentary process point of view, that is not good. People want to hear alternative points of view across the floor of this House. If the government makes a statement on something, then you would expect the people on this side of the House had a fair time to absorb what was put forward and to speak on it. Of course, you then had the imbalance of five minutes for the government to speak, and two minutes for the opposition or the Independents.
This has now been removed, and it has been removed for good reasons. Sometimes, the government put forward matters that required urgent attention. However, it is something we should look at in the next year, perhaps in a different format altogether, perhaps a mini-statement.
For instance, we have issues about the port at the moment. That would be a good issue for debate, first of all for the government to tell the people - do not forget we are not just talking to one another here – and give a report on the port. Is it sinking? What is the story? Who will fix it? Tell the other side of parliament you are going to talk about it. Even if you give an hour’s notice, at least it gives this side of parliament some notice, and gives the opposition equal time to respond. I am not saying Independents need to have the same time to respond, but at least they should have the opportunity to speak on the subject. If we really believe in openness and transparency, and we are talking to the people - people will be interested in whether the port is sinking, and to know what the government is doing about it.
The government might want to talk about, for instance, the vine leaf rust outbreak. It was urgent at the time. It would be good if the minister for Primary Industry was able to speak on that issue, and notify this side of parliament he is going to speak so we can ring up some farmers, the department, or we can check some of the facts ourselves. You then get a much better quality debate. The minister would make a statement and, if you did not have much to talk about, you certainly could go off on a tangent and speak about something else, which might be irrelevant to what the minister was talking about.
Surely, we could do something good for parliament, and good for the Territory, and allow good debate in this parliament. I believe there is a need for something, and I would be happy to talk with the Leader of the Opposition and put something to the government about whether there is room to move on something like a mini-statement, as long as this side of parliament is informed of what is going on. I understand things can change and maybe just say: ‘We are not bringing that forward today because something has happened’. If you are flexible enough, both sides of parliament would understand that.
Madam Speaker, I am pleased it is gone, because the way it was used was political. Not all the time; there were times when the government had to make statements. However, there were a lot of little statements made that were just nice statements and meant to be feel good. We can use this better. We can produce a better quality statement, and we can produce better quality debate. I say to the government perhaps next year, let us look at that again and see if we can come up with some changes. It would make it better for parliamentary debate if we did.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, once again, it is nice to have a bit of history in this House. The ministerial report is singularly one of the most profound abuses of this parliamentary system I have ever seen. We must cast our mind back to the original organ which was the ministerial report. On that occasion, it was only possible for a minister to stand up, speak about an issue, and sit down. The standing order, as rammed through by the new government of the day - was only interested in hearing its voice. It was not until the opposition of the day was in a position to tell the government there was no point or they were not going to turn up for the first half hour of the day because they were not allowed to speak, the government suddenly realised how silly ministerial reports had become.
The minister would walk in here and expect to have a pliant and compliant parliament sitting there, listening to what they were doing and how good it was, without any right of reply. You only have to go to the word ‘parliament’ to discover how ridiculous the situation was where that was forced upon this House. So, finally, the opposition of the day said: ‘Well, we just will not go. There is no point being there. You guys are going to ride roughshod and we have no right of reply. We are not going to be a bloody – sorry, Madam Speaker, pardon the French; I withdraw that - cheer squad for the government of the day’.
It was only then the government thought: ‘Oh, goodness gracious me. Yes, we have to make it look like a debate’. What did they do? They said the opposition could have two minutes in reply and the minister, if they so chose, could climb to their feet and have a spray around the room for one minute. What we finally got was a situation where, because of those rules, the minister would spruik on for about five minutes to tell the House what the media release of the day was going to be, and what the spin doctors were planning for the day and, then finally, an opposition member would have a quick spray around the room and say what a pack of morons the government was, based on nothing other than preparation time of the five minutes the minister was on his or her feet. Finally, the minister would stand up and have a quick slag-off at the opposition member.
There was no informed debate whatsoever and, yet, despite the fact I and other members on this side of the House railed against this abuse of the parliamentary system, we have steadfastly adhered to it in the way chewing gum sticks to a blanket. Why? Because this government would decide, as a matter of pride - and we all know pride comes before a fall - would steadfastly stick to this ridiculous situation where even the press were not interested. This is something designed to attract the press to the press gallery - they were not coming. Therefore, towards the end of the reign of the ministerial reports, all we saw was ministers with a five minute blurb they would mouth off in a half-hearted fashion and, then, there would be this slanging match across the room - there was nothing parliamentary about it.
I have heard the defence of this system: ‘Well, questions without notice are without any form of warning’. That is true, but each minister should know their portfolio sufficiently well to be able to answer the question which is put to them. They have the support of entire departments around them. It is hardly appropriate to turn around and say: ‘We can spring things on the opposition’. We do not have whole departments around us and have to educate ourselves as to how the Territory is governed. To, essentially, create a situation which is a reverse Question Time, except have all the ammunition in your own hands, is bizarre.
That is what this government was doing to the first half hour of every sitting day - creating a bizarre situation which was not designed for the edification and advancement of the people of the Northern Territory; it was designed to capture the people who occupied the media boxes, except they turned off and were not interested. Therefore, the media releases went out and half-an-hour of every day was occupied with this farcical situation.
I also turn to the comments by the member for Nelson about not being a gun to the government’s head. If memory serves me, the agreement he struck with the government was some 18 pages long - 15, 18 pages, something like that. The Magna Carta was only one page long, yet it changed the way we are governed.
How many of those 18 pages would the member for Nelson have been prepared to trade away before he signed up to this arrangement with the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory? One page, two pages, five pages? The fact is we have heard him say here today that he came to an agreement with the government. He may not consider that as holding a metaphorical gun to the government’s head, but it could not but be otherwise because, unless the government has, and had, his acquiescence in relation to these issues, we would have gone to the polls. That is the gun to the government’s head no matter how the member for Nelson may choose to phrase it. It is the truth, and what is perceived to be happening out there. One only has to open the NT News and flick to Wicking’s cartoons to see the Chief Minister dressed up in a pinafore serving the interests of the member for Nelson to realise that is the way it is perceived out there.
The member for Nelson may wish to engage in semantics, but the fact is when we enter into an agreement which is conditional, those conditions must be enforced by some mechanism, otherwise it is not an agreement. In contract law, for example, there are the sanctions provided by the court system; in this agreement, this contract between the member for Nelson and government, there is a sanction: ‘I am not going to play ball unless I get these things’ - 18 pages worth. Whether the member for Nelson likes it or not, that is a gun to the government’s head.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contributions for this, the last of the three motions being brought forward.
The Leader of the Opposition articulated the reservations the opposition had in relation to ministerial reports. There was one reservation he did not mention which was, to some degree in some cases, ministerial reports pushed the opposition into a position where they had to articulate their position about something - either there were conflicting reports by various members of the opposition, or the opposition was lying quiet on a particular issue. Part of his and the opposition’s discomfort with ministerial reports - apart from the other areas he articulated - was the fact, in some cases, the opposition was called upon - and did not always respond - to articulate their position on a particular issue.
The opposition’s job is to draw attention and to criticise; I understand that. However, the opposition’s job is to articulate alternate policies over a whole range of things. I have been in this parliament eight years and I have seen very little in the way of policy substance from the opposition …
Mr Mills: You steal it all the time; you are using it. You took it into Cabinet the other day.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: They have the opportunity, over the next few years, to articulate their position on a whole range of issues. I am not saying they did not have any policy on any issue. However, over a whole range of portfolio areas, there was a policy vacuum from the opposition. The opposition needs to take some responsibility in articulating their position on issues.
It is fair enough, as the member for Port Darwin said, there are unequal questions without notice, and ministers should know their portfolio area well enough to be able to respond and answer questions. Yes, we accept that. By the same token, I would have thought shadow ministers should be in a position, particularly in relation to important issues, to articulate a policy position of the opposition. That is not always the case.
Much was made by both the member for Nelson and the Opposition Leader about the use of ministerial reports to promote government and the work of government. Yes, it was certainly true. However, I ask this House to remember - and put aside partisan politics for a while - there are good things governments do. There are good things, good policies, good achievements, and good outcomes for the people of the Northern Territory. I acknowledge, or try to acknowledge, some of the important things the CLP government did when it was in power, particularly in relation to the work Barry Coulter did for the port, which was built and developed initially under the CLP - a great project; a nation-building project, which the railway was also. There are achievements of government that stand the test of time.
It does not matter which party the government is or who the minister is, there are things the government achieves. Within this parliament, the opposition has an avenue to criticise and debate. I also think government should rightly have an opportunity and avenue to present positive issues it has achieved. It is unwise for any opposition, particularly one which wants to be the next government of the Northern Territory, to believe parliament should not be a place where a government cannot put forward its achievements. The ministerial reports were one avenue; obviously, Question Time is another. Given that - and I mentioned before about efficiencies of time within this parliament - members on the other side of the Chamber should not be so negative when a question is asked by a member on this side - a local member who has the interests of the Territory at heart - of a minister of such achievements.
The opposition should not be churlish about it, but should accept it is part of what governments do. Governments are keen to highlight their achievements just as oppositions are keen to point to flaws in policy, action or inaction, or whatever it is. It is a two-way street and all sides of parliament need to recognise that.
Finally, I was interested to hear what the member for Nelson had to say about a possible alternative to ministerial reports being looked at, possibly by the Standing Orders Committee. I believe I saw the Leader of the Opposition nodding in agreement. Government would be willing to enter into conversation and address some of the issues such as notice being given about the topic, the times, and the way in which such matters are conducted. For the time being, this motion rescinds ministerial reports and is part of the parliamentary reforms mooted by this government.
Madam Speaker, I commend the motion to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Continued from 19 August 2009.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, from the outset, I indicate the opposition will be supporting this bill. Having said that, there are some comments to be made on the way through, noting the history of debate in this place about changes to legislation relating to bushfires, and also noting some federal matters.
As highlighted in the Attorney-General’s second reading speech, this bill is based on the 2001 - let me say that again, the 2001 - model Criminal Code. In the model Criminal Code, bushfire arson is defined by ‘the creation of risk, rather than the infliction of harm’.
The current Northern Territory provisions for arson and attempted arson in the code focus on the intent to damage someone’s property through fire rather than the recklessness of the act. What this bill proposes, by picking up the 2001 proposal in the model Criminal Code, is it provides a penalty for, or relating to, the creation of a risk and someone recklessly causing a fire.
It is interesting to the point of being remarkable that it has taken the government some eight years to introduce this change. The government’s amendments introduced penalties to apply to the reckless lighting of a fire, regardless of a person’s intention to inflict damage on private or public property as a result of that fire. I ask the Attorney-General - and I am sure all members would be interested to know - why it has taken eight years to implement or introduce something suggested in the model Criminal Code in 2001.
The second point I make, for those who were here from 2001, members will recall - in particular the member for Casuarina will because he was the then relevant minister - this bill has some similarities to an opposition bill which was brought in around 2003. The member for Casuarina will recall, in response to the bill brought in by the opposition, some months later, government produced its own amendments and introduced its own legislation.
A part of the bill we introduced in 2003 was to increase the penalty under section 241 of the Criminal Code for setting fire to crops and growing plants. The proposal was to increase the penalty from a maximum of 14 years to 20 years. The government did not agree to that part of the opposition’s bill. Why is this relevant today? It is relevant because, true to form, the current Attorney-General and aspiring Chief Minister, the member for Karama, issued a media release on 19 August with a bold headline, ‘Tough new bushfire penalties introduced to parliament’. This is a government which did not, in 2003, have the stomach for an increase of penalty from 14 years to 20 years, and it has ducked it again on this occasion, notwithstanding its potentially and, I suggest, deliberately, misleading headline in the media release of 19 August.
In this current bill, which is a belated attempt to implement a bushfire offence as produced in the model Criminal Code, the government has chosen to overlook other arson-related offences contained in the model Criminal Code, such as the threat to cause arson or bushfire which carries a maximum penalty of seven years. Why do I make this point? Because it shows the government has just run out of puff; it has been out of puff for some time now. Since the last election, its performance has been abysmal. This is a government which is very good at producing snappy little headlines but, in fact, cannot motivate itself to come up with wholesale detailed reform of legislation. It has taken a long time to implement a particular suggestion as per the model Criminal Code.
It has missed entirely another part of the model Criminal Code. It has not taken up the opportunity to further amend the Criminal Code, or the Bushfires Act for that matter, so those who set fire to crops and growing plants could face a maximum penalty of 20 years. This government thinks 14 years is fair enough. Ask those people whose crops and growing plants were destroyed by arsonists and fire bugs what they think about this particular penalty.
It just gets worse. Also, I have the federal Attorney-General’s media release of 17 April here. In it, he stated state and territory Attorneys-General will be considering introducing new offences to the model Criminal Code for the offence of bushfire or arson causing death, and bushfire or arson causing serious harm. He went on to say the penalties for those offences would be 25 years and 20 years respectively.
Yet, in this bill before us, when the government had an opportunity to lead, to punch above its weight, and this Attorney-General to say to other Attorneys-General: ‘This what we have done in our jurisdiction’, it was an opportunity lost as the Attorney-General just could not be bothered coming up with detailed wholesale reform. It is a lazy government; a government which has lost the plot. That is demonstrated by recent events, and the ongoing infighting within the Cabinet and the Caucus.
I have to say, whilst we are supportive of this part of overall reform, we are incredibly disappointed and dismayed the government has adopted such a piecemeal approach; it has delayed so much and has missed so many other opportunities. I ask the Attorney-General, in her reply, to comment on these things. Why did the government not attempt to improve to reform sections 240 and 241 of the Criminal Code in this amendment, or related to this amendment? Why has the government not introduced an offence in line with the model Criminal Code for threat to cause arson or bushfire? Why did the government not introduce in this bill a new offence for bushfire arson causing death and serious harm, as with the penalties suggested by the Commonwealth Attorney-General?
I ask the Attorney-General to comment on those three matters in particular. She may also - or perhaps one of her colleagues may wish to - enlighten us and, if my memory serves me correctly, the member for Nelson talked in 2003, or possibly since, about the Bushfires Council in the Northern Territory. I did not look at the recent budget for an allocation to the Bushfires Council, but I know the member and, indeed, members of the opposition have been concerned about the funding to the Bushfires Council over some period of time. In fact, I was approached several years ago by a relevant person at a Bushfires Council because his advice to me was that there was a concern about funding, if not being diminished then certainly not being increased. Perhaps the Attorney-General or one of her colleagues would consider that.
Finally, Madam Speaker, there is an interesting part of this bill which I would also like the Attorney-General to comment on and explain. I do not indicate at this stage we will be going to committee, but I feel certain the member for Nelson will contribute to this debate, and he may go to committee and, subject to the Attorney-General’s response, I may go into committee.
One of the other interesting parts is an exemption from liability for some people. It is referred to in the bill, and also in the Territory Attorney-General’s media release of 19 August. She was keen to make the point: t
She went on to say:
The issue the opposition would like to raise is, given the purpose of this bill is to provide a provision or an offence as to the creation of risk and a reckless act - that is, to come up with a bill that specifically targets someone who is reckless in the lighting of a fire - then why is it people or organisations would be exempt? Why has that exemption from liability been included? Surely, the Attorney-General does not assert an individual or an organisation which causes a fire in the process of hazard reduction might not be reckless as to the lighting the fire? In other words, why are they exempted from liability? Surely, everyone should be included in a provision which is all about the reckless lighting of a fire? I do not know whether the Attorney-General is able to answer the question, but I look forward to her answer.
Having outlined those matters, Madam Speaker, we look forward to what the Attorney-General has to say in reply. With those remarks, I will conclude.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, this legislation is very important across my electorate and the rural area. As my colleague said, we will be supporting the amendments albeit they are well behind the game and a long way from having been brought into this parliament.
The destruction and loss from bushfires in the Territory, if not everywhere, is overwhelming and it is important this legislation comes into being, so that if there are illegal acts creating fires, then the people are caught and are severely penalised.
One of the biggest challenges with this legislation is not that the legislation is coming into existence. It is they actually have to be caught. The perpetrators have to be caught, and that is probably one of the more difficult parts which will flow from this legislation. It is also inspired partly from the tragedy of the Victorian bushfires. It is a sad situation we bring legislation to this parliament out of a tragedy. However, that is the way it is. Hopefully, when these penalties are implemented and we catch people, it might send a clear message to the community.
In my electorate, there are two regimes, mostly through the NT Fire Service, and the volunteer units across Lambells Lagoon, Koolpinyah, Humpty Doo and Virginia areas. Also, there is some overlap with the Bushfires Council. As my colleague from Araluen said, it is very important this Bushfires Council is adequately resourced to meet the challenges they confront across the rest of the Northern Territory, not just the Top End.
In bringing the amendments and this legislation forward, I urge the government to also look at ways to improve and assist the NT Fire Service and police, and perhaps the Bushfires Council, to apprehend the people who start these illegal fires in the rural area and elsewhere in the Territory. There seems to be a casual regard by many people in the Territory to wildfires, and we have to change this attitude. We have to get people to understand it is not acceptable to start fires, given the damage it does to the environment, and also the criminal consequences.
Many people who live in my electorate have a parcel of land and they might have a partially constructed house. Some of those people have lost their property through illegal lighting of bushfires. Whilst the volunteers and the paid NT Fire Service people do their very best to get these fires under control, sadly, much of the time we lose property, and a lot of livestock, not to mention the native animals which are destroyed in the bushfires.
We have to change the collective psyche of people that lighting fires, for whatever reason, is no longer acceptable. We also have to understand the damage this can do to the environment. I recall, some 10 years ago, there was a wildfire in the Arafura Swamp area of Arnhem Land which was the size of the state of Victoria. No one knew the fire was going through that part of the Northern Territory let alone what damage it may have done to the environment.
This year, the Fire Service had a campaign to investigate all illegally lit fires in the rural area, along with the police investigation. The public were asked to come forward to assist in the investigations. Regrettably, no one was apprehended, or has been apprehended to this day, in regard to the illegal lighting of bushfires.
One of the concerns I have - apart from actually catching the people and bringing them to justice - is this legislation does not impinge in any way on the NT Fire Service’s work in regard to their mottle burning, as I call it, or their right to burn in controlled burning, because it is a very important aspect of the rural area, trying to keep it a safe place, given we have the issues of gamba grass, mission grass and a whole lot of other grasses which contribute to our fuel load.
I place on the record and commend the work of the volunteer fire units in the rural area, both in my electorate and, obviously, the member for Nelson’s electorate. I also commend the work of the volunteers on the Bushfires Council. Somewhere in the future we need to work towards having a more cohesive and consistent working arrangement between the NT Fire Service and the Bushfires Council, because they are pretty much doing the same thing. As Darwin and surrounds get bigger and bigger, we are going to have to come up with a better system to meet the challenges of these fires. I place on the record their professionalism and the enormous amount of work and time they put in to responding, not only to bushfires, but also to road and vehicle accidents, because they do this as part of their voluntary work as well.
Mr KNIGHT (Local Government): Madam Speaker, I also, as a rural and bush member, thank the volunteer bushfire brigades in my electorate for the contribution they make. I support these amendments to the Criminal Code, and thank the minister for Justice for bringing them forward. It is an important bill which gives some strength to combating bushfires deliberately lit and reckless behaviour when people are lighting any type of fire.
This is not just a Territory issue; it is also a national issue. We have seen that recently with the bushfires in Sydney and the Victorian bushfires. Recently, there was quite moving debate in this Chamber about individual members’ knowledge of different people involved in the Victorian bushfires, either as CFA workers or people who lived in the area. More recently, on the Australian Story program, there was a story of twins who had lost their parents and brother in these bushfires. It was very moving, and the scars caused by the bushfires will go on for a very long time. The bush will regrow, but the people will be scarred for much longer.
However, bushfires are a part of our landscape. The member for Goyder talked about how bushfires have shaped the landscape in the Northern Territory for many thousands of years. It is about civilisation coming into contact with the bush and where those fires should and should not occur.
This bill ensures the gravity of the danger of lighting fires is understood by the average person, and there is appropriate enforcement. The introduction of a specific offence will act as a deterrent and a tool for authorities to use. I will be widely publicising these amendments throughout my electorate. The bushfires brigades are happy with the amendment, and every member of the public, in both the rural area and the bush, need to be made aware of the gravity of the offences which can be applied to anybody in the rural area.
As we heard in the second reading speech, the Northern Territory has a range of offences covering the destruction of property by fire, and offences under the Bushfires Act and the Fire and Emergency Act designed to prevent the occurrence of bushfires. However, there is no serious criminal offence dealing with the lighting of bushfires.
The bill before us today proposes to introduce the model bushfires offence, the same as those which form the basis of the bushfires offences in Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and South Australia. This bill targets people who intentionally or recklessly cause a fire and who then create the risk of the spread of fire.
I will give you one recent example from my electorate where we had 36 bushfires around the Berry Springs area. The fire raged for several days, and threatened many properties through the area. In that example, we had the volunteer Bushfires Council units not only from Berry Springs, but from Livingstone, Darwin River, Labasheeda, Lambells Lagoon, Manton, Elizabeth Valley, plus Bushfires NT. When there is a big fire, everyone comes together. Remember most of these people have jobs and they leave their jobs to fight these fires. Much of the time, they contribute their own vehicles; they may pull a water trailer with their own vehicle. There are bushfire units there but these people give a lot of themselves and they understand the situation of people in the rural area. Luckily, it did not threaten any houses, which I attribute to the quick response of the bushfire volunteers getting around the houses. It did take in a lot of the country around Cox Peninsula Road and also threatened the Territory Wildlife Park, and the Berry Springs Nature Park was closed because of the fire.
A few years ago, a major fire came up through Acacia Hills. It started further down through Manton and came through the Larrakia/Acacia area. By the time it reached Acacia Hills, moving up to the back of Humpty Doo, it had a fair head of steam. There were green mango orchards with very little debris under the trees which caught on fire. During that particular incident, one of the bushfire brigade captain’s property was destroyed, including his home. That was extremely regrettable. It is amazing there has not been any greater loss of life than there has been from these fires.
There is a changing aspect of the rural area; there are many people moving to the rural area. It is certainly a great place to live. They are building very valuable properties and they are taking their families out there with them. There is the change in the rural which is very significant. It is something we will have to keep a handle on and monitor. We have the volunteer brigades from Elizabeth River south. North of that, we have the red truck, a more permanent brigade. With 17 000 people living in the rural area now, and the number growing every day, it is something this government has to consider for the future.
We have increased their budget and there was a significant injection of protective equipment only a year or so ago. Those brigades are very grateful for that. We now have the air tractor permanently stationed at Batchelor airstrip. That aided the region with the fire at Berry Springs. We have the use of helicopters and large mobile tankers. Water is an integral part, and getting the watering point is quite significant.
This bill introduces a serious criminal offence which could be relied upon to prosecute the arsonist who lit the Berry Springs fire – a reckless act, and one which, under today’s regulatory regime, would be unlikely to attract significant legal ramifications. Even if we did fine that person, they would not worry about it. Now, it is something the firebugs think about.
As I said, this act targets intentional and reckless lighting of fire. It will not impede on normal uses of fire, whether it be for cultural use, camping, back-burning operations, and the like. People need to be made responsible for their actions and, if a person is aware of the substantial risk the fire they cause could spread to vegetation on another property, they need to be held accountable.
I get many reports about blocks in the rural area which have a lot of fuel load on them, which could be very dangerous, and people need to be very cautious about the way they go about bringing those fuel loads down, because a 5 m break does not stop a fire. All a 5 m break does is give access to the bushfire vehicles – that is all they do. In the incident I mentioned in Acacia Hills, the fire was leaping 500 m or more, advancing from the fire at Manton. People who are living there - and there are many new people – need to understand fire breaks are not actually going to stop a fire; they are there to allow the brigades to get in and, hopefully, start a back-burn.
However, we need to keep people accountable for their actions as they go about any fire activity. The bill provides the necessary tools to prosecute, and it is a difficult exercise in prosecuting with the large land mass we have in the Territory. Obviously, you cannot have a policeman on every block.
I was at Channel Island one day, talking to a gentleman who was recounting a story about – I think it was - Kerry Packer around the time there was much conflict occurring with Gulgul about the access road and the pastoralists on La Belle Downs Station. His comment was: ‘Why would you want to piss somebody off …
Madam SPEAKER: Order, minister! That comment is unparliamentary.
Mr KNIGHT: ‘Why would you want to upset somebody who could afford to buy a 20 box of matches and destroy millions of dollars worth of countryside?’ Destroying the country, and people’s livelihoods and properties is a very cheap exercise. There is a lot of country out there and sometimes it takes a long time for a fire to get going and you could be out of there in a matter of hours. We have to ramp up the knowledge that, if you are caught, you will have a fairly significant penalty applied to you.
As I said, this bill targets the intentional reckless lighting of fires. Obviously, people who go out camping need to be mindful of what they do, and I agree. Also, for cultural practices, you might travel through the bush. People are tracking throughout the Dry Season, burning off in a patchwork burning, which is something these people have done for many thousands of years, and is something which really should not change; it reduces the fuel load so you do not get the big, hot fires.
As I said, I thank the bushfire brigades for their actions. I have 12 brigades in my electorate. I acknowledge those at Acacia Hills, Batchelor, Berry Springs, Cox Peninsula, Darwin River, Daly River, Douglas Daly, Dundee, Livingstone, Manton, Milne, and Beatrice Hill. I acknowledge, in particular, members of the local bushfires brigade in the place I live on the Cox Peninsula.
It was only a few weeks ago, I was travelling home and received a phone call saying there was a fire near my house. Travelling back across the harbour, seeing the smoke, I did not know what I was going see when I arrived home. It was only the quick action of those volunteers who, in some cases, had left work early, and others who had retired to the community, had raced there. The fire came within metres of my house. They were able to put it out by mid-afternoon. They were still there mopping up – not only them, but another brigade came from Darwin River to fight the fire - at 10 pm to ensure the fire did not spread any further. I thank Ray and Ronnie for the work they do on Cox Peninsula and the Darwin River brigade. Much of the time, their work goes unappreciated. They not only give their time, but from the time they leave their families to inspect the situation, they put their lives on the line. That is one aspect which does not get a great deal of acknowledgement. Fighting fires is a very dangerous occupation. The fire brigade members in town receive intensive training and have years of experience to fight the fires in the urban area. In the bush, they receive training. They were working very recently in a very volatile environment they cannot necessarily control, and they did it on a shoestring. I thank them for all their efforts.
Wherever I can, I try to assist them with their Community Benefit Fund application, and it is good to see they have been successful and have the funds. They have the skills and I like to see them successful. Recently, we gave Acacia Hills $80 000 to establish themselves. They have a block but they needed water and power on the block. They are appreciative of that and look forward to opening the facility.
As members would be aware, the bushfire brigades become a community centre for many of the local communities, where people come along and perhaps have a drink. It brings the community together. There are times people are working in town and a fire starts, and the camaraderie may be a contribution – it certainly is helpful.
Our bushfires appear to be burning a lot hotter, with gamba grass spreading throughout our rural areas. Where gamba grass is and where the fires go through, it has certainly changed our environment. Where you get a really hot fire going through, the only thing which seems to survive and regrow is gamba grass. Therefore, you are creating monocultures there. I was recently in Batchelor and they have some money for a weed strategy for combating gamba grass. It is a huge challenge for those people. I am not sure if they actually have started planting gamba grass on Camp Creek Station. There are massive areas which have gamba grass. They are looking at a whole range of measures such as introducing cattle on smaller properties to get the gamba grass down so they can control it. Herbicides are expensive, and using herbicides on full-grown plants is very expensive. They are looking at a whole range of issues.
It was great to see gamba grass declared as an invasive weed in late 2008 - this was long overdue. It put many landholders on notice to try to remedy the situation. The heat of a bushfire when it comes on to dry gamba grass is incredible. Studies have shown that where a fire reaches gamba grass the intensity of the blaze is similar to an oxy torch, which is just incredible. Hopefully, we will see that addressed.
Madam Speaker, in conclusion, this is great news. Hopefully, it will make people think twice if they, for some reason, think lighting fires on a very hot day when the wind is up, it is dry, and there is a lot of fuel load is a good thing. It might make people think now that there are penalties and the police are gathering information to prosecute people. People can take the risk of lighting fires and trying to get away with it, but there are larger penalties through the courts nowadays. I will certainly be promoting this around my electorate.
Mr HAMPTON (Regional Development): Madam Speaker, there is a saying ‘it is an ill wind that blows no one any good’. It is hard to imagine that the baking hot winds that fanned the Victorian bushfires this year could bring any good to anyone.
Today, we see one element of a national response galvanised by this tragedy – the creation across Australia of uniform bushfire arson offences in the Criminal Code. This is a timely and appropriate amendment for the Territory. As the member for Daly said, in his electorate, we have recently seen a week where deliberately lit fires threatened homes, orchards, stock and iconic Territory tourism infrastructure.
On 27 September, a fire started before 6.30 am on Hopewell Road near Berry Springs. It quickly grew beyond the control of the first volunteer crews which attended and, within two hours, had become a major blaze. By lunchtime, a major mango plantation and the Territory Wildlife Park were under threat. Dozens of volunteer bushfire brigade crews, Bushfires NT staff, three aircraft, tankers, and loaders were called upon to contain the fire within the unmanaged bushland. The Cox Peninsula Road was closed because of heavy smoke, and visitors to the Wildlife Park and Berry Springs Nature Park were evacuated.
The strong south-easterly winds pushed embers over the Cox Peninsula Road and threatened to ignite the bushland in which the Wildlife Park is set. Prompt action by volunteers and the water bombing aircraft operating from Hughes Airfield managed to put these spot fires out. Wildlife Park staff implemented their fire plan and placed their crews on high alert. The fire was contained by late afternoon, with no loss of property or injury but, throughout the day, many hundreds of people were threatened by the fire. In the end, the multimillion dollar assets, including mango trees and the Wildlife Park, were saved by the skill and teamwork of our firefighters.
However, we need to keep firmly in mind this fire was deliberately lit. It was unnecessary, dangerous, and malicious. It was a typical of hundreds of fires which start in the Territory every year.
The following day, Monday, 28 September, four more fires were started in the catchment area. Volunteers, many of whom had helped with the fire on Sunday, stepped up again to protect lives and property. I am sure all members will join me in applauding the magnificent work undertaken by volunteer firefighters, some 450 of them in the Northern Territory through our 21 volunteer bushfire brigades.
In my own electorate, there have been large fires in the past few weeks on Mt Sanford Station, Limbunya Station and Gregory National Park. These were brought under control by staff from the stations, Bushfires NT, and Parks and Wildlife staff. Two fires at Newry Station and Rosewood Station are under control thanks to the station staff and, again Bushfires NT staff.
This morning, a fire at Keep River National Park has been brought under control, thanks to rain in the area, while Parks and Wildlife staff are currently fighting a new fire at Gregory National Park.
In the Katherine region, the fire status has been high due to the strong winds experienced over the last week. Our volunteer firefighters were kept busy tackling the blaze at Landsdowne Road where they saved houses, sheds, machinery, and a mango plantation. They were also called out to Ironwood Station where the fire extended from the Katherine River right up to Power Play Stud north of Katherine.
I pay tribute to the Katherine volunteers, especially some of our long-standing members in Katherine, Captain Bob Wright, Jan Murphy, John Munford, Jarrad De Vries, and Ron and Anne Humphries.
We have used the provisions of the Bushfires Act, which includes fines of up to $25 000 and five years imprisonment for setting fire to the bush, to prosecute people who start fires. We have had convictions, with substantial fines being levied by the courts. The bushfire arson provision within the Criminal Code ups the ante and sends a clear message that the people of Australia will not tolerate the selfish, stupid, and dangerous act of bushfire arson.
This amendment to the Criminal Code is one of 11 proposed actions being advanced by the Australian government as part of the national action plan to reduce bushfire arson. While still a draft, the actions are already being progressed because the issue is so important. The actions are:
1. utilise fuel reduction and community education programs in high-risk fire and arson areas at the urban/rural interface consistent with land management objectives;
4. develop programs targeting known arsonists and recidivist arsonists;
5. update the nationally accredited training programs for fire agency and police personnel to include bushfire arson prevention strategies;
6. encourage collaboration and information sharing regarding latest bushfire arson investigative techniques and technologies;
7. develop national strategies to raise community awareness of bushfire arson, and incorporate arson prevention messages into existing community awareness programs;
8. develop targeted awareness and prevention programs to arson-prone communities, including greater collaboration with education and welfare agencies;
9. investigate the viability of a nationally consistent framework for data collection on bushfire arson;
10. research socioeconomic and demographic factors indicating a propensity for bushfire arson; and
11. develop two-way information flow on arson prevention between practitioners, researchers and policy makers.
My department, through Bushfires NT, is working through these actions. I want to draw members’ attention to the first action: ‘utilise fuel reduction and community education programs in high-risk fire and arson areas at the urban/rural interface consistent with land management objectives’. It is our view this is crucial to the long-term management of fire, and maintenance of a safe and sustainable rural and semi-rural lifestyle.
This government increased funding for fuel management in the last budget and, in 2008-09, increased funding by some $2m. This funding has led to substantial increases in prescribed burns in the rural area in 2009, and a marked decrease in dangerous wildfires. We are also embarking on new community education programs. Last Sunday, Bushfires NT hosted the first of a series of individual property planning seminars at Adelaide River. Thirty residents of the Silkwood subdivision came along and, over breakfast, made fire plans for their properties. The participants went away with a plan that established where fire breaks, prescribed burns, and asset protection zones would be located. They also had a clear idea about their neighbour’s property, where fires have come from in the past, and how they can access support and resources to manage fires in the future.
Stiffer penalties and a strong deterrent to arsonists is a strong first step in protecting the community from this persistent evil. Together with a well-informed community undertaking fuel management, the impact of arson can be reduced.
In adding my support to this bill, I ask every member of this Chamber, particularly those whose electorates lie on the edge or outside the urban areas, to do everything in their power to help educate the community on fire management, and to ensure something good emerges from the Victorian tragedy.
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to support this bill.
Debate suspended.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I also support the amendment to the Criminal Code. Until you see the effects of fire firsthand, you do not realise how devastating very large bushfires can be. My brother was lucky to survive the Marysville fires. He has a house in Buxton which is just out of Marysville. Everything in the region was burnt down except his house - and him luckily. Until you see the effects of those fires, you do not understand what devastation they caused, and you get a better understanding of why so many people died in them.
What makes it worse is that you knew some of those fires were deliberately lit. Someone has been charged in relation to one of the fires in Gippsland. The introduction of this bill into parliament reinforces the lighting of fires, in a reckless manner, is more than just an offence against the Bushfires Act or the Fire and Emergency Act; it is a crime and that is a good reason to support this legislation.
This year we have had some major fires in the rural area. About two Saturdays ago, there was a fire, believed to have been deliberately lit, on the corner of Stow Road and Howard Springs Road, part of the forestry land. Not only was it set on fire, but the fire threatened houses in the Langton Road/Dutchies Lagoon area. It required large numbers of volunteers and regular firefighters to extinguish this fire. There have been fires at the back of the Lutheran school at Howard Springs, and major fires at Coolalinga at the rear of the stockfeed suppliers.
Although we talk about the effect of fires and the penalties, the reality is you can put as big a penalty as you like but, if you do not catch anyone, then it is just window dressing.
I know the local volunteers in my area are very frustrated at the number of fires which have been deliberately lit. The general feeling is it is someone on a motorbike who is flying past the area, throws out a few matches, and continues on their way. It is very hard to locate those people. We need to make an effort to see whether, through technology, we can bring some people to justice because once you have caught someone, and given them a decent fine or sent them to gaol for a period of time, you, at last, send out a message that this sort of behaviour is unacceptable. In the rural area the members for Goyder and Daly and I represent, people know full well the number of fires which have occurred this year, at times of the year when you know there is no lightning around, and these fires did not happen by magic - they were deliberately lit.
I ask the government to look at - and I have raised this before in regard to the hoon legislation - where there are areas which are known to be regular places for fire bugs - perhaps some technology, as in portable CCTV cameras, can be installed. They can operate through wireless access these days. I cannot guarantee they will stand up to a fire, but the reality is they may record what happened before the fire and we may be able to find out who lit the fire. Even if you do get visual information, the problem in relation to a lot of these off-road bikes is they are not registered and people wear helmets and it is very hard to get the information you need for a prosecution.
Legislation like this is good. However, if I come back in a couple of years time and say we have had 20 fires in the rural area and a couple of houses were burnt down, etcetera, and ask how many people were prosecuted, and the answer was none, then it is fair to ask what the point of legislation was. It is no good having legislation with big penalties if we do not put the effort into trying to catch people who cause this problem.
When the member for Araluen was speaking on this issue she raised some very important questions. One is about the exemptions. I am interested to know, for instance - and I am not putting anyone down here - if there might be someone working for the Bushfires Council or the Northern Territory Fire Service who lights the fire recklessly. I am interested to know whether the exemptions written in here cover someone for doing something that was reckless - they actually should not have lit a fire on the day; should have known it was not the opportune day to light, but went ahead and did it.
Whilst I understand why the exemptions need to be there, I am not sure the exemption would, therefore, be a substitute for careless behaviour just because a person works for one of those groups. It is the same dealing with people who are being exempted under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. Perhaps there is land which backs on to pastoral properties, and a person may say: ‘I thought it was my right to burn off some land here’ yet, they wiped out the entire pastoral property. Even though they may have had the right to burn off, I am not sure they should be exempted from burning off on a particular day in a particular place, when they know it will, more than likely, burn out a neighbouring property.
It could be the reverse. You might get someone who is burning their land as part of pastoral management. Again, if they do the wrong thing and burn off, say, the local national park, even though they might be permitted under their land management scheme, we need to find a balance, ensuring it is not used as an excuse.
The other area the member for Araluen raised - and it is an area I have mentioned before, but it needs raising again - is to ensure our volunteer fire brigades have adequate funding. I know the government every year gives funding to a number of these volunteer fire brigades. However, they are becoming more professional. I especially note the professionalism of the Northern Territory Fire Service volunteers, and, specifically, the captain of the Howard Springs volunteer group, Maxine Way, who has done an enormous amount of training, and also expects her volunteers to be trained in firefighting. Some of them are not only just involved in firefighting; they are involved in accident and rescue, which is part of their duties as local volunteers. We need to ensure they are equipped with the latest equipment, and are able to do their jobs and continue to be well trained.
It probably begs the question whether, in the rural areas as they are growing more and more, we should be looking at some permanence; that is, professional firefighters in those areas where the volunteers are now stationed. Perhaps the volunteers could be offered a more permanent job. We certainly are growing. The rural area has about 20 000 people now, many of whom are now well trained. However, to encourage younger people, we need to ensure they are attracted by the job. Maybe one way to attract people into the job in the rural area is to pay them - whether they are paid on a part-time basis, I am not sure. We need to encourage more people into the volunteer programs.
We have to realise those volunteers are sometimes our eyes and ears. If we are trying to catch these people who are lighting fires deliberately, sometimes the only people who have an idea of what is going on are the volunteers in the area. Word sometimes does get around that there is a fire bug in the area, and they try their best to keep their ear to the ground to find out what is going on.
Madam Speaker, I support the legislation. I reiterate it is all very well to bring in tough legislation, with tough maximum penalties but, if you do not catch anyone you might ask: what is the point? We have to do more work in producing techniques which enable us to catch these people who cause so much damage, not only to property, but to the environment, the quality of the air - which can be very annoying to people, especially those who have asthmatic problems. It is just the general destruction of the local area - it is all blackened off - people also find disappointing.
Madam Speaker, I support this legislation.
Mr McCARTHY (Transport): Madam Speaker, I also support the amendments to the Criminal Code Amendment (Bushfires) Bill introduced by the Attorney-General.
Like all other Australians, I was horrified by the damage caused by the Victorian bushfires in February this year; the loss of life and property is hard to comprehend. My personal experience with bushfires is both interstate and the Territory. In over 30 years in the Barkly, I have had to face and fight the ferocity of bushfires far too often. Across remote regions of the Territory it is often impractical for fire rescue service to travel the vast distance to the front of the bushfire. Instead, fighting bushfires in remote areas is more often than not coordinated by volunteers of Bushfires NT, with the help of local communities.
I have been inspired by the way Territorians pull together in tough times. I have seen stations under threat from bushfires, with livestock at risk, when neighbours rally together to do all they can to minimise the damage. I think it was in 2006, it seemed the whole of the Territory was burning. From the South Australian border right to the Gulf country fires were raging, and it was local volunteers who fought day after day to save property and protect lives. Communities pulled together and businesses volunteered whatever they could, including plant and equipment. Even local school teachers joined the ranks of volunteers fighting the fires. It was these groups of volunteers who put their lives at risk day after day, as they fought against the ferocity of the bushfires.
I have seen volunteers horribly burnt as they tried to save the property of someone else. In the bush, fires are part of Territory life, and fighting fires is accepted as something which must be done. However, it is hard to comprehend some of these fires are deliberately lit by people who intend to cause damage. Putting the lives of Territorians at risk like this is unacceptable.
Of course, fires in the Territory can also be started by accident, by people with the best intentions. I am pleased the bill recognises the difference between these circumstances. However, when someone deliberately lights a bushfire, knowing the potential damage they may cause, there is no excuse. I support this legislation which recognises the seriousness of deliberately lighting a bushfire. Across our bush communities, people must already contend with the many forces of nature. To put further stress on these communities by deliberately lighting a bushfire is totally unacceptable. It is appropriate the Criminal Code recognises lighting a bushfire is a serious criminal offence. The message must be clear: deliberately putting property and lives at risk by lighting a bushfire will not be tolerated.
The members of the Territory Fire and Rescue Service do a great job, as do many volunteers of Bushfires NT. All Territorians must work together to minimise the damage caused by bushfires across the Territory. The best way to do this is to prevent bushfires by being particularly careful with any fire in the dry months. As Territorians, we must work together to reduce the risk and damage caused by bushfires. This bill will provide appropriate punishment for anyone caught deliberately lighting a bushfire and putting Territory lives at risk.
Madam Speaker, I support the amendments to the bill.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I support the Criminal Code Amendment (Bushfires) Bill.
I, with all members of this House, witnessed and remember the devastation of the recent fires in Victoria. One can recall many other incidences in South Australia and, the year before in New South Wales and Queensland, where we saw the destructive nature of fires and what can happen when fires gather momentum, particularly in areas where the fire sweeps unspent fuel loads. As my colleague, the Minister for Correctional Services, was just saying, when fires are deliberately lit by the act of one or a number of individuals, all those individuals should suffer the full consequences of the law.
We all know, and have seen, it is not only infrastructure which has been destroyed, but people have lost their lives. When people lose their lives because of the reckless act of individuals, it is unforgivable. We all know buildings and infrastructure can be rebuilt, and we have seen that happening in Victoria. When the fires occurred, we saw on television the utter devastation where fires had gone through community after community. Then, seeing the rebuilding effort now happening in Victoria, it highlights the courage and conviction of people; where communities will bounce back and be rebuilt, which is very important.
When that destruction happens - and, as I said, infrastructure can be rebuilt - something which cannot be put back or a value put on is a human life. Because of the fragility and the valuable asset of a family, nothing can compensate that loss.
Uncontrolled fires or wildfires, as we know in the Northern Territory, cause about 40% of our greenhouse gas emissions. I was pleased to see, and I fully support the Attorney-General’s amendments which have been presented, because those amendments go to the heart of the West Arnhem Land. The Attorney-General, in her second reading speech said:
That is really important.
I was recently up on the escarpment country, part of which the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement covers. It is not just within the vicinity of my electorate; the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement covers an area which goes to and past the southern boundaries of Kakadu National Park and into Jawoyn country. It is really important the commercial agreement to offset ConocoPhillips’s greenhouse gases in Darwin allows this fire management project to go over such a big area. The West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement provides both the Wardekken Rangers, the Djelk Rangers, and those ranger groups in and around Jawoyn, nearly $20m of private investor funding to carry out this program. Recently, the Commonwealth government invested a further $3m under the Indigenous Protected Area Agreement, which will be additional funding for those rangers to continue that fantastic work.
I was listening to the member for Nelson’s contribution, and I know of his commitment to the Bushfires Council. He has previously raised in this parliament the wildfires and the pastoral properties where incidences of fire management practices have encroached or gone onto those pastoral properties. That is going to have to be looked at. In the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement, 100 000 tonnes was part of that agreement, as I understand it. What the project and those rangers have achieved has actually been better than what the Australian Greenhouse Office set, which means those fuel loads have actually decreased. So, that is good news. I fully support the amendments which included part of that commercial arrangement, particularly for those ranger groups carrying out the important work in my electorate.
I take this opportunity, as have other members of this parliament, to acknowledge the work of the Volunteer Bushfire Brigades. When I was the minister for Natural Resources, I went across the Northern Territory meeting these different volunteer brigades. The men and women who serve in these volunteer brigades have thankless work. They work tirelessly to save homes. Often, at times, it could be the place of these volunteers which is in danger or in the fire zone, and they are off trying to save someone else’s property from the devastation of fire. It is very important we continually recognise and support the men and women who work in these brigades. They do it tough, and government has increased its resourcing to those brigades. However, they continue to need support, particularly for their equipment. Without the support and the continual turnover of water trucks and other equipment they might need, it is going to pose a real danger.
I acknowledge the work of Stephen Sutton and his team within the department. They have done a fantastic job remodelling, working, and turning around the structures within Bushfires NT. Bushfires NT continues to play an important role in combating and preventing fires from becoming the destructive force we all know wildfires can be.
Madam Speaker, to sum up, people who deliberately light fires that can destroy property should suffer the consequences of the law. I thank the Attorney-General for bringing in the amendment. It is also important to recognise the work of West Arnhem Fire Management and what those rangers are doing.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contribution to this important debate. I am grateful for the spirit of bipartisan support we are seeing in the Chamber with this legislation. I want to step through the questions raised by the shadow Attorney-General, the member for Araluen.
Essentially, we are not adopting all of the model code provisions, and there is a reason for that. The Northern Territory, as I no doubt she appreciates, is a very different situation in relation to bushfires than other jurisdictions. Fire is a significant serious concern in the Territory, in the savannah regions in the north but, also the dry conditions in Central Australia. We are actually dealing with bushfires most of the time. We have the Top End season, which is countercyclical to the Central Australian seasons, so the reality and the nature of bushfires in land management is critical. That is the reason, for many years, we chose not to bring forward and adopt those Criminal Code amendments because we had to seriously consider how they could be adapted to meet the Territory’s circumstances.
When I became Attorney-General, which coincided with the tragedy in Victoria, I made the decision to bring forward one element of the model code provisions - which is what we have before us today - ahead of a broader review and discussion paper which would go out publicly on the raft of model code provisions. There was a body of work being done by the Department of Justice, working closely with the other agencies involved in this area - Police, Fire and Emergency Services but, equally, with Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage - in what they do for land management and Bushfires Council. While there was a broader review process under way of the model code provisions, I chose to pull this particular aspect of it forward out of that review to send a very clear message - in the context of the horrific Victorian bushfires we saw - the Territory equally viewed arson of this nature very seriously and people will face very harsh penalties.
We very much intend to continue with introducing a range of other provisions which sit in the model code. Because bushfires, by their nature, and by the nature of the Territory geographically and biologically, are so different, we want to have a robust review, and then a discussion paper and public debate on those other model Criminal Code provisions. A good issue raised by the shadow. However, as the incoming Attorney-General, I considered this aspect of the broader model Criminal Code provisions of arson and bushfires bring forward this aspect, because we wanted to say, very strongly, arson of this nature needs harsh penalties in light of what we saw of the tragedy in Victoria. We considered this aspect a priority. I took it out of that broader process which was occurring, and brought it forward, which is why it is was introduced last sittings and being debated today.
I am not discounting the importance of the other provisions, but I believe those provisions were less urgent than this one. That is why we are continuing with the broader review of the arson provisions in the code. I am advised by the Department of Justice the discussion paper will be due for release soon. They have been doing the work across the government agencies to get that ready. That really encapsulates the issue of the timing, and why we are proceeding with part but not all of the model Criminal Code provisions.
The members for Goyder, Araluen and Nelson, and others, raised the issue of having provisions sitting in your legislation, but what the reality is, on the ground, in the ability to tackle the bushfires and support not just our Police, Fire and Emergency Services personnel but, importantly, those bushfire volunteer brigades we so significantly rely on. It was the 2008-09 Budget which started the most significant increase in funding to the Bushfires Council NT, and that was continued through in the 2009-10 Budget this year, with an initiative of additional fire services. We have put an additional $3.44m into bushfire mitigation and wildfire suppression strategies; $3.5m over two years to boost fire services with an extra nine firefighters in Alice Springs and 11 in Darwin; $200 000 extra per year to fast-track the upgrade and replacement of fire and rescue trucks; and $280 000 for more training to support our firefighters.
When I was formerly minister for the Environment, the Bushfires Council spoke to me about these elements, and the critical importance of them. We have put $750 000 in increased support to our volunteer bushfire brigades which, as we have heard from all speakers in this debate, do an outstanding job for their community and neighbours.
The member for Araluen also asked why we have not proceeded with the proposal referred to in the media release of the Commonwealth Attorney-General. The proposal was considered by SCAG, and I can report it was abandoned. No other jurisdiction supported the proposal. The proposal would have reintroduced constructive murder and/or dangerous act, which were repealed as part of government reforms in 2006. There are already provisions, I am advised, which allow a person to be charged for causing a death.
There were questions regarding why, if the purpose of the bill is the creation of an offence which covers risk and recklessness, there are exemptions. This is an issue raised not only by the member for Araluen but also touched on by the member for Nelson. The provision recognises there are circumstances where people do create a substantial risk of fire spreading, but they have a legitimate reason for doing so. We need to ensure these people are not liable under this provision. The circumstances in which people are exempted from liability reflect these unique land management practices in our Territory. The geographical conditions here, particularly as I said, those expanses of subtropical savannah, do not exist in the southern states of Australia. This creates a need for us to recognise how a model Criminal Code becomes workable for the Territory, which is why we looked at the exemptions.
Northern Territory land management practices, such as savannah burning, are designed to save lives. They are designed to decrease the risk of catastrophic fire. The report I recently received from the Bushfires Council executive is the additional funding for the extra burn-offs they have been able to do in preparation for the Dry, has certainly seen a reduction in threatening fires.
Without the exemptions, people lighting fires in such circumstances could find themselves criminally responsible, which would be contrary to the intent of the legislation. Persons who cause a fire for the purposes of fire management or land management are exempted from liability, where the activity was done in accordance with a law in force in the Territory, or in accordance with an agreement entered into by the Territory. For example, persons causing fires in the course of activities such as firefighting or hazard reduction operations would fall within the exemptions. Persons acting under a commercial agreement, such as the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement, which we heard the member for Arafura talk about - which is a greenhouse gas offset agreement between the NT government, ConocoPhillips, the Northern Land Council and traditional owners in West Arnhem Land - will also be exempt.
Further on the issue of exemptions - a legitimate issue raised about the exemptions by both the members for Araluen and Nelson - I am advised if anyone falling within the category of these exemptions, lights a fire which they should not have, in a manner which is criminally reckless - we think it would be highly unlikely if they were acting in accordance with the law - the exemption only applies if it was for the purpose of land or fire management. If recklessly or capriciously lit in circumstances where the risk of harm of fire would be likely to outweigh the good of fire management or containment practices, the person would be unlikely to be able to rely on the exemption. This will be tested in a determination by the court.
I have gone to the issues which have been raised during the debate. I sincerely thank members for their support of this legislation. As I said, I brought forward this one aspect, given the seriousness of the Victorian bushfires we witnessed. There is, as the shadow has indicated, a raft of other provisions in the model Criminal Code provisions relating to arson. They have been under review with a cross-agency body of work, and they will soon be released for a public discussion paper. I am anticipating, potentially, further amendments.
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, I update the House today on the growth of the Territory, the opportunities it provides, the challenges it presents, and the strategies, policies and actions the government is employing to grow the Territory.
I have indicated in the past the government would be reporting to parliament on this issue from time to time to keep all members informed on growth issues. I reject utterly the half-glass-empty view of growth of the Territory. Some people look at the growth we are experiencing and see problems at every turn. I see challenges but, more importantly, opportunities. The government is grasping those opportunities to make our Territory a dynamic place for our children and future generations.
This is a timely update because, in September, the nation’s population figures were released by the ABS. Those figures showed the Territory is growing at a rate of 2.2% year on year, the third highest in Australia, and considerably higher than any population growth rates in the late 1990s and in the first five years of this decade. These figures alone do not reflect the reality of population growth in the Territory and, in fact, it is a trap for planning to assume that growth is consistent throughout the Territory. A review of the makeup of this growth shows a number of trends which impact on the way we have to respond to this growth.
There is a strong trend of population gain from interstate migration. Since the late 1980s, interstate migration has been more often negative than it has been positive, with the exception of the period when the military presence in the north was being rapidly expanded by the federal Labor government; there have been more negative quarters than positive quarters of interstate migration. In fact, since 1990 there have been 53 quarters of negative interstate migration, compared to 23 positive figures. Of those 23 quarters of growth, five, at least, are directly attributable to movements of the Army and other military forces. However, there have been seven quarters of growth in the last two-and-a-quarter years that can be attributed to the strength of the Territory’s economy and the Territory’s lifestyle appeal. The last four quarters of population statistics have all recorded positive growth from interstate migration; the first time this has occurred since 1983.
The Territory economy went into decline and then recession from around December 1997, with 1998 recording a nett loss of 688 people interstate; a loss of 817 people interstate in 1999; 1621 people lost interstate in 2000; 1751 lost in 2001, rising to a nett loss of 2283 in 2003 before the figures started to be turned around.
I am pleased to report, in 2008, the nett population gain from interstate was 691, with that figure, hopefully, to be surpassed this year. The importance of gaining population through interstate migration is straightforward. These migrants usually come as adults bringing skills a stressed Territory workforce desperately needs. Nonetheless, the Territory still needs to grow its own, and a strong, sustained natural increase from within the Territory population has been evident over the last 20 years. In the most recent figures, growth was recorded at 2805 in the year up to the March 2009 quarter.
International migration has always been a variable element of Territory growth. The March figures reveal that in the year to March 2009, the migration figure stands at growth of 1211, but with very strong growth figures in the March quarter which might indicate a higher than average growth this year.
A further breakdown of the figures focused on where the population growing is also important. Research indicates there is a significant population increase occurring in the greater Darwin and Palmerston areas. There is further significant population increase occurring in remote communities. In February, I presented the community and this House with some details on this. Darwin and Palmerston data has been collated from the 2006 Census and subsequent ABS Territory Growth Planning Unit, Treasury, and Charles Darwin University work. Current population projections suggest, from a base of 114 000 people in 2006, the greater Darwin and Palmerston population is likely to increase by 19 000 to 133 000 in 2013, and by 39 000 to 154 000 by 2021 - an increase of 34%. A straight-line forecast to 2030 will take the population to 177 000, an increase of 63 000 from 2006, or 55%.
Important in this is the type of population growth. Growth in Palmerston is at both ends of the age spectrum. The number of young people, particularly school-aged or to be school-aged children younger than 14 years old, will grow possibly as high as 60% during the period 2006 to 2021, from approximately 7500 to approximately 12 000. People aged over 65 are expected to grow in number, with the current 950 people jumping to around 3000 in 2021. The Indigenous population will remain at around 13% of the overall Palmerston population.
The second clear growth hot spot in the Territory is in remote communities. Here, the population growth has been trending upwards for some time. As I said in previous statements to this House, unlike the spectre of rural decline faced in so many other parts of Australia, towns in the bush are growing. I will preface my comments about growth in particular towns by stressing the figures are extremely volatile and hard to finally pin down. This is purely as a result of statistical size.
However, of the 20 identified growth towns contained in A Working Future, 16 will experience population growth rates of greater than 19% over the period 2006 to 2021. It is anticipated towns such as Yirrkala, Numbulwar and Gapuwiyak will grow by 35.4%, 29.7% and 24.8% respectively. In this period, the growth in 15- to 64-year-olds will be substantial, but the growth in those 65 and over will be phenomenal. Whilst the numbers are not high in numerical terms, the impact of trebling the aged population level in, for example Gapuwiyak, from 20 to above 60 cannot be underestimated. In our regional towns such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine, growth is expected to be between 6.4% in Tennant, 18% in Katherine, with Alice Springs sitting around 12% growth over the 2006 to 2021 period. In each of these communities, the growth is characterised by an increase in the Indigenous population and a significant increase in the aged population in all centres.
What do these numbers tell us and, more importantly, how are we planning to meet the challenges and maximise the opportunities presented by growth? The challenges are evident. The three I wish to focus on today are: the need to continue to invest heavily in infrastructure; be more effective in engaging the Indigenous community across the Territory in education, training and employment; and ensuring services for the aged are increasing. Ministers and other speakers will focus on other challenges faced by government and the responses to those challenges.
Investment in infrastructure: in the 2009-10 Budget, the Territory government invested $1.3bn in infrastructure. This investment is spread across the Territory; it is the highest investment in the Territory’s history. It comes on the back of a series of increasing infrastructure budgets since 2001. In our first budget, we invested $334m; this has now trebled in just eight years. It is evident that further large investment levels in infrastructure will remain as a priority for government for some time to come, to manage the growth in population which is being achieved.
The focus of infrastructure expenditure is going to continue to be on: housing Territorians; economic and community development infrastructure, such as roads and essential services; making up the infrastructure deficit in remote towns and surrounding communities; and matching growth needs, particularly in Palmerston and the rural areas.
Housing Territorians is a matter of ongoing high-level debate and action. The government has in place a strategy, Housing the Territory, which forms the basis of our response to this issue. Our actions are: we have brought forward around $50m-worth of headworks on Palmerston East; we have started the preliminary planning for a new city at Weddell; and we settled the Kenbi land claim so the Cox Peninsula can be used for development over the medium to longer term.
By 2013, on present calculations, Darwin and Palmerston will have around 6000 lots released for building, including private developments at Muirhead and Lyons, and on the university site of the Palmerston Campus. The Bellamack suburb is under way and selling. Johnston Stage 1 will start selling from the plan late this year, and service, headworks and planning are under way on Mitchell and Zuccoli. In five years time, Weddell will be under way, and that opens up space for 40 000 people. Combined with Cox Peninsula, we now have plans in place for the next 20 years worth of land release around this rapidly growing area.
We have also sold land in Katherine for a 40-lot development. We have settled the Mt John Valley development in Alice Springs, and have plans in place for further land release. We have released nine lots for development in Tennant Creek, and plans are under way for land release in Nhulunbuy. In our growth towns we are working overtime to make land available for housing and infrastructure developments.
We are also accelerating land release and development by internal process changes including: the DCA now meets fortnightly in Darwin instead of monthly; a one-stop shop for developers with Darwin City Council is in place; longer-term planning for headworks; parallel processing of approvals and design; master planning of subdivisions to incorporate community services, infrastructure and mandatory sustainability features; auction of subdivisions with design and development approvals in place; and, lots available off the plan.
We are also planning areas with higher density living, such as duplexes and triplexes, as well as high-rise zoning. We have expanded the role of the Land Development Corporation from industrial land only to include urban projects such as residential land and affordable housing development. Bellamack Gardens is the first of these projects. We are also examining options for infill housing. The OTC site is an example of this.
The majority of Territorians rent. There are not enough rental places available at an affordable level, and the public housing system is now reserved for welfare and social housing. To lift affordable rental property numbers, we have approved in principle the establishment of an affordable housing rental company, and work is nearing completion on options for going forward with this. This will be a non-government-run entity which will provide quality and affordable rental to those on more modest means. It will fit between the public and private housing markets, and it will utilise the National Rental Affordability Scheme as part of its operations.
The first project which will be assigned to the affordable housing rental company will be the Parap Gateway development. This project will be delivered as a medium-density, public/private housing development. It is the first part of a program to reinvigorate public housing estates across the Territory.
The Territory government currently operates public housing across the Territory. More public housing is needed. To achieve this, the government has undertaken several courses of action. The Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program, SIHIP, working with the federal government will deliver 750 new homes; 250 rebuilt homes; and 2500 upgraded homes. This is the most expansive housing program ever for the bush, and is aimed at turning around a generation of neglect in housing infrastructure, particularly in our growth towns.
More seniors housing: a new 44-unit seniors village is being worked on at Bellamack, and part of the Parap redevelopment will be for seniors. With an ageing population in Territory Housing houses, we will be offering seniors more appropriate housing options, which will have a knock-on effect of freeing up three-bedroom dwellings.
We are also working with the federal government and the stimulus program. Using federal stimulus money, we are refurbishing dwellings to get them back into use. Currently, around 289 are being refurbished. We are building 22 new Territory Housing dwellings through Stage 1 of the stimulus package, including the building of four-bedroom houses and 18 two-bedroom units. Through the second stimulus package round, and with non-government organisations, we are building 186 dwellings for crisis and transitional housing across the Territory, 50% of which must be completed by the end of next year.
We are also examining the development of a workers village. I welcome the suggestion from both the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Nelson, and these are all part of developing a plan for short-term workers accommodation, the details of which will be forthcoming in the near future. The Yarrawonga site nominated by the Leader of the Opposition is not viable as it is only available for a limited period of time.
The government has also called for expressions of interest from the non-government sector for some quick crisis accommodation solutions utilising their own land. We will bring forward funding to help support some solutions to crisis needs. The response to date has been strong, and we are soon closing those expressions of interest for assessment.
I will now talk about economic and community development infrastructure. The government is tackling this infrastructure requirement in a three-pronged way: we are proceeding at pace with investment; we are undertaking longer-term strategic planning for future investment; and we are working with the federal government, especially through Infrastructure Australia, to bring their funding capacity to focus on our needs.
Investment in roads and economic infrastructure has been an important part of our budget strategy for the last eight years. In Budget 2009-10, record levels of investment in our roads of $322m is matched by investment in our port of $100m from Territory sources, and a further $50m from the federal government. High levels of investment also occur in other economic infrastructure such as the multiuser complex.
The future planning for investment is focused on a 10-year road strategy and a 15-year infrastructure plan. Members will also be aware of the comprehensive essential services investment program being rolled out - over $1.2bn, with hundreds of millions already spent. This program has seen the building of a new power station at Weddell; major power infrastructure upgrades in Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek; new and improved substations right throughout Palmerston and Darwin; a major town-by-town infrastructure spending in the bush; together with heightened dam wall levels, the closing down of harbour outfalls and other works, and making up the infrastructure deficit in remote towns and surrounding communities.
No one in this House would dispute the fact infrastructure to remote towns and their surrounding areas was neglected for decades and allowed to backlog. We have been urgently working to reverse that problem for the last eight years. The Territory does not have the budget capacity to do this on its own, and we have been working with the federal government to address these needs. Since the election of the Rudd government, the task of obtaining federal infrastructure money has been much easier. The government saw the need to address these issues; it took the Howard government nine of their 11 years before they paid any attention at all.
Our strategy for overcoming this neglect is articulated in A Working Future, a comprehensive policy framework for infrastructure and service delivery to the bush which has been acknowledged nationally. Within that policy is the development of 20 growth areas into fully-fledged towns to operate as service hubs for surrounding communities. Each of these towns in their hub regions will be assessed for their infrastructure needs, and plans put in place over the short-, medium- and long-term to prioritise the needs and fund them accordingly. No one should be in any doubt about the size and cost of this task, but it is a task which has government focus. It is backed up by a structure for delivery within the public sector, and a very strict reporting and monitoring process. It is enmeshed with the Commonwealth’s infrastructure delivery plans through the national partnership arrangements, and places us well ahead of the rest of the nation in our organisation and delivery. Reporting through our own budget processes will also occur.
Matching growth needs will require ongoing planning and investment and infrastructure. Work is under way at finalising growth models which will allow the government to predict the consequent infrastructure needs in growth areas. In the case of Darwin and Palmerston, this modelling is backed up by an across-agency group, headed up by the Chief Minister’s Department, which effectively plans for managing growth. We already know we will need to build more schools. We also have work under way, nearing completion, on the future health needs for this area and Darwin as a whole. That work will come to government next year and will steer thinking on the developments of future hospital requirements.
In the meantime, we will continue to work with the federal government to deliver the super clinic. Work is also under way at the major transport corridor of Tiger Brennan Drive, with the completion of this road making a major difference to traffic flow.
I will now talk about engaging the Indigenous community. The second challenge facing the government arising from the Territory’s massive growth lies in the engagement of the entire Indigenous community, and the economic and social development of the Territory. This is not a new challenge but one which did not receive much attention or policy focus for many decades. This government has made this issue a priority and we have in place a number of strategies, plans, and actions to ensure we are able to close the gap in Indigenous disadvantage.
We should never ignore the successes occurring across the Territory. I was pleased the Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, in a major national speech, recently singled out Shepherdson College and Ntaria school as two leading national examples of significant educational improvement.
I wish to highlight three plans and strategies the government has in place for improving the economic and social development of Indigenous Territorians. Other ministers will highlight other plans. They are: a Smart Territory, the government’s education and training strategic plan; A Working Future; and the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy announced by my colleague, the minister, last week in Alice Springs.
A Smart Territory is a comprehensive and strategic plan aimed at delivering a real outcome for all students in the Territory. For the government, real outcomes mean students participating in senior secondary schooling and moving to real jobs and/or further education and training. Students who participate in senior secondary schools are immeasurably advantaged in life outcomes. Whilst students in our schools and major provincial centres do as well as anyone in the country, our very real challenge is to deliver real outcomes to students, in particular, our Indigenous students in our remote and very remote centres. It is this area of the plan I want to address.
To lift Indigenous education outcomes, the government has prioritised the development of education and training plans for each of the 20 growth towns and their surrounding communities, as well as areas not close to a growth town. The development of six of these plans is now under way with Jabiru and Gunbalanya the most advanced at this stage. Plans are also being developed for Maningrida, Umbakumba and Angurugu on Groote Eylandt, Ngukurr, Lajamanu and Ntaria.
In each case, we are beginning where we wish to end; that is, with the students and young people of the region having access to real jobs - jobs in the community and access to jobs beyond the community. The message is: ‘Education and training will lead to jobs. If you come to school regularly, participate in learning and behave, then we will ensure there is a pathway to a real job’. In fact, we will guarantee it. We have to give our young people a reason to engage in schooling and a reason for communities to see the school as the centre of their community. The ability for kids to have a choice about their future is the key. Access to jobs is the answer.
To ensure this is achievable, we are identifying jobs in each area. We are working with local employers to get guarantees they will employ young people who successfully complete their education and training. ERA has led the way in this by agreeing to take 30 students a year into their employment from the Jabiru/Gunbalanya area. I congratulate them on their willingness to be part of this important strategy, and also in leading the way in the Territory in this regard. That end point will determine what education and training we deliver in each location. In many cases and for many students, vocational education and training will be the answer, and this focused training may need to start as early as the middle schooling years. We need to be clever about ensuring our investment in training is focused on delivering a pathway to a real job and/or further training and education.
As we begin this process, I have asked my Department of Education and Training to provide me with real options for getting students to the point where they are able to begin on one of these pathways, and be assured of success. I have asked them to challenge existing models of service delivery where it is evident these have not worked. We are rethinking some of our existing strategies. Some of the solutions may involve making some of our homeland centres into schools, supplementing the face-to-face delivery in some centres and schools using virtual schooling technology; the introduction of term boarding and homestay arrangements; and the creation of hubs.
Last week, I opened a new high school at Alpara. This school is catering for students from Years 6 to 12. Over 70 students are being bussed into the school from all directions, and receiving access to real pathways amongst a substantial number of peers. These students talked to me about their frustration with having to try to learn middle and senior subjects while being surrounded by young children in their former homeland learning centres. They and their parents also talked with me about their absolute desire to have it all. They want our schools to prepare them to be global citizens, proficient in English and ready for work or further study, but they also want our schools to work with communities to support, acknowledge and value their unique culture, heritage and language.
We will build and refresh schools so they become places the community can use and access outside hours of schooling. Adult training, recreational activities, and community-led culture and language growth should have their base in our schools; after all, they are a community asset. The best delivery models in the world will not work if we cannot get families to engage in our schools, send their kids along regularly, and have students healthy and ready to start their education journey.
This plan addresses this in a number of ways. It focuses on engaging with parents at the earliest possible moment. The creation of early childhood hubs will support young families in developing their parenting, using in-reach and outreach models. Mobile preschools, culturally appropriate transition to school strategies, and an unrelenting focus on the explicit teaching of literacy and numeracy will characterise the early childhood years of schooling.
The plan will also focus on ensuring these students and parents have access to quality teachers and school leaders. There will be a huge emphasis on attracting and retaining committed professionals. This will ensure turnover is driven down and the average length of stay is driven up. We want our teachers and leaders to be part of the A Team. We want them to commit to us for three years and, in return, we will commit to them. They will get A class treatment. They will get the best induction, the best support, access to recall opportunities, and access to mentoring, networking and career planning, as well as the already generous salary and incentive packages on offer. This planning has now been extensively discussed with the Commonwealth as key partners, and will be made public for discussion and debate in the Territory when it is in the final stages.
A Smart Territory also contains major work to other areas which impact on Indigenous education. I urge members to look closely at the strategic plan.
I have already spoken about A Working Future and the importance of this plan in delivering for the bush. The Indigenous Economic Development Strategy launched by the Minister for Regional Development in Alice Springs last week also provides a strong basis for action in planning and delivering a better future for Indigenous Territorians. This strategy will be spoken of in greater detail by the minister, but includes a number of key initiatives to support the development of Indigenous enterprises on Aboriginal land; to work with land councils to negotiate secure leases for the development of local business; improve numeracy and literacy and offer students real pathways to employment; promote joint ventures and commercial partnerships; continue to support Indigenous entrepreneurs through the Indigenous Business Development Program; and develop and deliver work readiness programs.
By 2012, we are committed to seeing 3000 more Indigenous Territorians start employment across the private and public sectors - 10% Indigenous employment in the public sector, and 200 new Indigenous businesses.
I will also speak about increasing services to the aged. I wish to address this issue which arises from the growth and demographics of our ageing population. This growth is occurring right across the Territory. Not only is it a result of vastly improving health outcomes in Indigenous people, but it is also the result of more and more Territorians staying in the Territory, choosing to live here rather than travel elsewhere in the latter part of their life. This is a welcome outcome for all of us. The family unit is more complete with grandparents nearby and ageing Territorians make a significant contribution to our way of life.
In addressing the needs of ageing Territorians, we have a number of strategies in place - an extensive suite of pensioner concessions which work to reduce the cost of living for pensioners. These have been improved in recent times through free bus travel available to senior citizens. A housing plan will provide an increasing number of pensioner public housing units, and encourages the private sector to develop affordable housing. Work is being done to encourage the development of seniors villages through the private sector. There is health support through increasing health expenditure, effective hospitals, and an Active Ageing Strategy.
There is no doubt more will need to be done to ensure health facilities, in particular, are able to cope with an ageing Territory population. This is made even more complex in the Territory because of the deleterious health effects of substance abuse, particularly alcohol abuse which plays a critical role in dementia and other ageing problems. The challenge for government is to keep ahead of this service need, and the Minister for Senior Territorians will speak at greater length on this issue.
This has been an outline only of some of the major challenges facing government as a result of our rapid growth, the nature of that rapid growth, population growth, and economic growth, and the response that government is making to these challenges. I welcome the contribution of all members on these matters and any ideas they wish to contribute. There is no question that in all of our responses the need for effective planning is evident. I am now more convinced than ever the significant growth in people we have invested in as a government in key policy and planning areas is paying dividends in our ability, as a system, to predict and meet these challenges.
What is also evident is, to respond to this growth, the Territory is going to have to heavily invest in both infrastructure and expanding services into the future. Our policy position has been to enter into temporary deficit to ensure we can continue to fund the growth needs in both infrastructure and services. That remains our policy, priority, and position. The government is convinced the task of managing and dealing with growth is of such importance this is the only sensible policy option to take.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the challenges are real, but we also recognise these challenges are good things to have - get it right and the Territory will continue to boom, grow and develop as a modern leading-edge, innovative community with a lifestyle the envy of the nation. That is the task facing all of us in this House today; a task that this government is embracing eagerly.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, this is an important statement, and comes at a time when, clearly, the mind of our community is upon the effects of growth in quite painful ways. I only hope honourable members, particularly those on the other side, have genuinely heard the cry of those who are suffering as a result of the failure to plan; those who feel hope has evaporated in this time where most of us have had children and desire nothing more than to have a stable home life in which to raise those kids.
I spend Saturday in my office with constituents coming in, not just from my electorate, since my mobile number was placed in the headline of the NT News - my mobile number was never hidden in any event. The number of calls I received from people who simply told me their story, and were pleased to be able to tell me their story, is enough to move anyone to tears, when you recognise what it has come to. If you take their story on board and consider what the implications forward are of this, we really have to respond in a way which gives urgency to our actions.
In this context, when we are speaking of growth, we can speak into the disconnected and abstract terms of that growth. Of course, growth is good, but you must plan for growth. The failure to plan is evident in the stories which are being told again and again, some of them very painful to hear.
Yes, there is a positive aspect to growth. It is interesting that government, always with its eye on itself, will then describe this growth phenomena, and imply quite directly it is as a result of their own extraordinary achievement growth has occurred under the watch of the Labor administration in the Northern Territory. That is clearly implied in the way in which they construct their argument. However, they are completely negligent when it comes to any substantiating elements to their argument. Look at what has happened globally. The Territory government, at the time of the increase in population during a discrete period of time when the Defence build-up occurred as a result of a decision of the nation to relocate its Defence forces, probably skited about it and said: ‘Oh, we achieved that’. However, it was a reorientation of Defence thinking.
The time when people left the Territory was a time of national economic downturn across the board. In recent times, of course, there has been a return; people are coming back to the Territory. Always, all of us have believed the Territory has a great future; there have been documents, plans, and strategies of all kinds over the years. However, we were led to believe this growth has arisen as a result of the effects of the wondrous Labor administration, with complete disregard for the international phenomena of a resource boom. Is it no coincidence Queensland, which is resource rich; Western Australia, which is resource rich; and the Northern Territory, which is resource rich, have also benefited? Have those other two administrations also benefited from this Territory Labor administration which, single-handedly, created this marvellous opportunity of which Queensland and Western Australia are beneficiaries as well? Of course, that is a ridiculous proposition, but is the subliminal assertion.
The fact is there are elements which drive growth. Growth occurs, but the responsibility of a government is to respond to the growth, prepare for the growth. Therefore, the fundamental would be making land available upon which growth could expand. You cannot respond to growth by releasing land without having a plan.
We were at a forum the other day and I was making reference to the need for some deeper strategic thinking, over-the-horizon planning; visionary exercises to create a narrative so we feel we are all a part of something exciting and we are actually going somewhere. I was very curious to hear the Chief Minister respond by saying: ‘I know where Terry is going with this’ and, then, further revealed what he thought I was thinking by saying: ‘I have never been a supporter of a planned economy’. That betrays a complete misunderstanding of the need to establish a central idea - a plan and a vision.
If you do not have a direction or a plan which is being worked on at a deep level - which has occurred in the past - you do not end up with things like railways and ports. Following through the Chief Minister’s logic, just let people decide what they want to do; government does not really have an effective role in creating a vision and a direction - let people just decide.
How is it you end up with this coordination in response to a plan, a vision, or a grand narrative? You end up with railways connecting with ports, which are part of an engagement into the region. At the very same time, you have students of the schools learning Indonesian, and you have cross-cultural work so people in the public sector can understand how to engage in the region. That does not happen by accident; it is part of the leadership role of a government to set the agenda. If the agenda and the direction are incorrect, let the people decide. But, for goodness sake, occupy that space and establish a vision and a direction.
This was revealed on Friday where, clearly, it is a position the government does not want to occupy. They want to allow all these other things to occur around them and, if it turns out okay, take the credit. If it does not turn out okay, well, then someone else is responsible.
It was the private sector, in this case, which did not get those applications in on time, which is a damn shame. Hopefully, they will get it right next round. On the other hand, we have land being released - the private sector is doing all that and they are taking credit for it. There is, clearly, a complete abrogation of the central role of leadership by this government.
Growth occurs and, sometimes, it occurs dramatically. It has been referred to again and again in this Chamber. However, Labor came to office in 2001, and they came with a grand mandate: there was going to be significant change. The margin was not as they wished, so there was a concession made by the Labor Party to just attend to political business in the first cycle - 2001 to the next election. ‘Let us make sure we hold our political ground and extend upon it’. They played that game quite well and let go of some of their social obligations they had espoused so strongly and for such a long period of time. They put them on the backburner in 2001 until the next election.
When it came to the next election, they had a massive majority. The Chief Minister, at the time, holding Indigenous Affairs closely as a badge of honour, then had the opportunity to implement serious reform and deliver on the expectations. They could have burned up political capital; they could have been ahead of the game. Instead, no, they continued running the political agenda, playing the political game, to use the instrument of the parliament to promote themselves. They had the opportunity to do some deeper thinking and some longer-term planning and make a decisive move. They did not act.
As a result, there was a response from the federal government and outrage in the nation that there had been severe neglect and tragic disappointment for those who had their hopes raised. There was going to be something quite different - and there was not.
That is where we are at today. We now have a weakened government, in a situation where they failed to attend to basic business, such as simply release the land and ensure the processes work. They still cannot get out of the cycle of talk, and thinking talk is the result and achievement. I draw members’ attention to one example. In the last Assembly, which was the Tenth Assembly, make no mistake, the issue of land release was on the agenda again and again as a matter of urgency. The member for Nelson recognised this right from the beginning. Although the opposition was small, members ran these arguments.
There are some serious social consequences of failing to attend to the planning issues - just of housing, let alone industrial development, getting ahead of the game, and creating space in response to a vision. However, there was no vision other than a political one. Today, we reap the consequences of their attention to a political agenda. It is in the faces, in the stories, in the lives of families. If this proud Labor government would like to spend the time with me on a Saturday and listen to those people’s stories, and not feel aggrieved, for their fellow citizens there is no clear resolution in the short term of something very tragic.
If young teachers cannot find a place to stay in Darwin or Palmerston, even with their incomes, and are required to make very difficult decisions such as leave the Territory - think forward, where does that take us? Think of the teaching profession across the northern suburbs. I have visited over 20 schools in the last little while. One thing members would note is teaching, by and large, is an ageing profession. There has been planning on this, but the planning usually takes the place of just recognising this is the case. The planning should take us to the next stage; it has some pretty serious implications.
Those who are teaching in the northern suburbs schools, for example, generally are at the halfway of the latter stages of their career. Some of my colleagues are saying so how many more years? They love their vocation, they love their profession, but there is going to come a time when they will retire. Most of them own their houses not far from where they work. They bought them some time ago because they have been in the profession for 20 years or more. They are fortunate enough to have a place in the market. Let us just move forward, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight years; a number of them will make the decision, as they age, they want to downsize, and move into a unit. Some of them already have an investment property in other places, and they leave. Who can afford to move into that place? Which teacher on which salary can move into the place which has been occupied by a retiring teacher? Think about that. That is the grist we need to put into this mill.
I am pleased the Chief Minister said he is open to ideas. Well, for God’s sake, have a look at that. There has been an assessment done - called the key worker index, used as a measure. If you cannot find space in your community for teachers, nurses, firefighters and police, if you look at their salaries, and match that against the cost of servicing a mortgage. The index they use is, if the cost of the mortgage is five times their annual salary, it is deemed to be unaffordable. That judgment has been passed upon the Northern Territory quite savagely by this report, which was only released in June or July this year. It nominates Darwin as being unaffordable for key workers. Think of the social consequences of that!
Palmerston is unaffordable in all categories. Alice Springs is unaffordable in all categories. Project forward: if we are serious about planning, think about what that means. Do not tell me you have a plan, as though that is the solution because, not so long ago, in the last Assembly, the Tenth Assembly in 2007, this matter was raised yet again as a matter of public importance. Oh yes, in 2007, it was a matter of public importance in August.
The response by the Minister for Planning and Lands contained ideas such as ‘beware of flooding the market’. When being pressured to respond to this problem in 2007, it was ‘beware of flooding the market’ and ‘they are going to threaten a person’s wealth, a person’s asset if you flood the market’. Read that as, ‘if we make a decision and release land’. Under sustained pressure, there was another comment made by the minister for Housing at the time, the member for Karama: ‘You want us to completely distort the whole housing loan market and devalue people’s properties’. That was the argument against releasing land. Tell that to the people in my office on a Saturday morning. Tell that to the people who e-mail me, and the people who have phoned and told me their tragic stories.
However, it gets worse. In a final concession there needs to be some kind of action made by government - bear in mind there have been responses made through this statement and assertions made during Question Time of ‘Do not worry, we recognise that there is a problem and we have a plan – all rest’. In 2007, we also had the same language. The problem today is worse. The member for Karama said in 2007:
She boasted …
Mr Tollner: When was that? When did she say that?
Mr MILLS: In 2007: ‘I brought it forward by a year’ - a whole year in response to the nature of this problem, ‘I acted decisively’ - all rest:
It is 2009, just shy of 2010, and you have shoe boxes ...
Ms Lawrie: Not shoe boxes. Have you been out there?
Mr MILLS: It is hardly a robust defence of this appalling record. You are telling us this is all about growth, it is all about ‘Do not worry about that, we have plans in place’. We have a whole list of them – a whole list of plans. The thing is, plan or no plan, there has been no result and no action - there have just been words.
When this was announced with accompanying glossy brochures and big-paged ads in the paper, guess what happened? People came into my office excited there was going to be land available in Bellamack. Palmerston residents who are growing up there, sharing cramped accommodation said: ‘Here is our chance to get in’. I said: ‘Well, just hang on. I certainly hope this is the case’. They responded to the glossy brochures, the big ads and, still, there is nothing there. Today, most of those people who came in at that time have lost hope, and they really have no chance of getting in to these properties which are still to be made available in real terms.
Then, the member for Karama went on - in condescending terms, quite surprising I suppose for some - describing how complicated these matters are and the level of ignorance of certain four members on the other side: ‘You have to understand these things’. Then she said:
This is in 2007:
I interjected and said:
There is an interesting little paragraph in here - in fact, it is a couple of sentences. The member for Karama said:
No, not us:
You are bloody not, believe me. No one can get in - no one can get it. People with a qualification cannot get in.
Are you talking about social housing? That is another aspect altogether. You talk about the great potential of the Northern Territory. If people invest in the Territory they are going to want to employ people with qualifications. They cannot get in. They cannot get into the marketplace, and we have this rubbish, these carefree assertions made in the Chamber in the face of a serious issue - but it was only a small opposition. ‘We were playing politics, after all. It is all about the glossy brochure. It is all about the plan, the task force, the action and this stuff, to allow us to create an impression’, but no difference other than a political one.
Well, to the great credit of the Territory community, they made their judgment at the last Territory election, and you are now in the hot seat. They are looking to see whether you are actually going to change. You are changing only because of the pressure. However, they do not care about this. They actually want to see a result. The things you have described in this plan are the very things which can be talked about and glossed over, but they have to be engaged in a very genuine way. It is far more than about plans, programs and amounts of money being spent; it is, ultimately, about decision-making. There have been very few real decisions made. The resolve to back up and drive through an outcome is as a result of strong leadership from a government because you are required to, because the citizens are demanding some kind of action.
Today, we should, in fact, be talking about the hospitals. There are forward plans and general thinking which may be on some book somewhere. If you really believe in the Territory, we should be talking about the hospitals. How is it, Palmerston - which is probably a microcosm of the Territory - for eight years, with overcrowded schools, expanded? I arrived when there were 6000 people; there are nearly 30 000 people now. Labor was elected in 2001. Not a single school was built as the population expanded and continued to expand, and kids were occupying spaces on stage and in withdrawal rooms. Now, reluctantly, when the money is slowing down - and it slowed with the GST - there has to be a response, although not until government was painted into a corner, because their preoccupation was largely on presentation purposes rather than genuine delivery for citizens in the longer term - the level of fire service delivery, and the police numbers in real terms for growing communities. I am pleased to see there has been a reference to health and a recognition education is critical. However, education, without a sound economic base, is really just going to be another exercise.
I am pleased to see in the report there is some further thinking around the regional towns as we are expanding this idea. However, if we look at the track record of the last eight years, I fear for what lies ahead because, in travelling through a number of these outstations, remote communities out of Alice Springs last week, it seems to be Labor’s enthusiasm for bureaucracy and layer upon layer of decision-making serve only as roadblocks rather than bridges. There are people out in some communities – I will not mention their communities by name – who had quite a clear grasp of what was going on and decided they have had enough. Four-wheel drive after four-wheel drive of people asking the same bloody questions - they have had enough of it. However, there are others who did not quite understand what was going on. People were continually arriving asking all sorts of questions. They are lovely. They are trying to engage, and they are just confused.
I went to one school which only had six kids. Out the back, there were two big four-wheel drives and three senior departmental people having a chat in the staffroom - probably chatting about the six kids in the classroom. We had an interesting chat. The community was concerned about matters related to kids who were short-term stay in the community; could they actually come into the classroom? Apparently, they were not allowed to come in. Hopefully, we found some resolution to that.
I will go into that, but there were more senior bods there than the six kids and three highly-paid folk. As we walked out, we noted in the playground there is a wall. It is one of those walls built some time ago. Probably someone had a bit of money around to build this wall so the kids could hit balls at it or something, have a bit of a target on there. It was built a long time ago. There was no internal reinforcing in this wall. If you push it, it shakes. Someone there said: ‘Here is the opportunity. I have to say, 18 months ago, I asked for that wall to be knocked down because it is dangerous’. The person’s response was: ‘Yes, we are going to let a tender to have this wall knocked down’. About a stone’s throw away were seven stockmen hoping someone will do something to give them some work to do.
I could have called those seven stockmen over and said: ‘Put your shoulder to this wall’, because there were two of us there. Tony Abbott will probably tell the same story. We could have pushed the wall over. You could have called those seven stockmen over and said: ‘We are going to bowl this wall over, pick up those besser blocks and throw them in the gully over there’. Eighteen months have passed; people with four-wheel drives are scooting around the place, and I bet today the wall is still up, because they are processing through some tortuous, convoluted process. Some request goes into Alice Springs and some bods will come out there in a ute and get rid of the wall.
Mr Elferink: Inspect the wall first and then get rid of it.
Mr MILLS: Oh, they would probably have a few consultants to ask everyone in the community what they think about the wall. In a very small way, that reveals the things going on. It seems to be happening at all levels, rather than someone on the ground making the decision in the best interests of those this whole exercise is about. It seems to be the enlargement of the process, the enlargement of the system, has then turned in on itself, and is serving itself. There are many people out there wondering what is going on, and they want some kind of action. They want someone to make a decision and do the right thing in their interest, right at the grassroots level.
You can talk about grand strategies, grand programs, and great responses to serious problems but, when it does not affect people in practical ways on the ground, we are dreaming. I do not want to go through the Eleventh Assembly and go into the Twelfth Assembly, and we still have the same thing.
If we are talking to the Council of Territory Cooperation, I want to see this vehicle actually fixes these problems. Otherwise, we are involved in the same kind of process. We all might feel a bit enhanced by being involved in something, but what about the people we are here to serve? What difference does it make to someone in Santa Teresa who, for 18 months, has been looking up and there is no roof on the house? Eighteen months! Not a roof. Where have they gone? To live at other houses already overcrowded. How can it take 18 months? If that was in Karama, how long do you reckon it would take before a roof of public housing was put back on? Pretty quick! Not 18 months - it would be an outrage. It would possibly be in the Northern Territory News, and there would be swift and decisive action. But not in Santa Teresa. They can wait 18 months while they have no roof on their house. There are stories the money is there and not spent. There is probably a process. We will have to send a few other people in there with clipboards to ask a few questions to find out what is going on. What sort of roof do they want after all? There seems to be the absence of decisive action rather than involvement in process.
If we are talking about growth, that is fine. Growth is occurring as though it was not to occur, yet it has occurred and that is fantastic. There are plans and strategies, but the deficiency is strategic thinking, the capacity to make decisions, and to provide leadership and direction. Otherwise, we will be talking about this in the Twelfth Assembly and many of those people who have come into my office or phoned me, will not be coming to my office because they will be going because they cannot find a place in the market. These are people who can make a contribution.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased the statement has been made. It gives us something to talk about. I hope it is just not talk. There has to be some kind of response to this which is meaningful to those who most need our leadership.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for bringing forward the statement. While we have enormous opportunities in the Territory, the growth also brings with it the challenges. The statement sets in detail what this government is doing to address those challenges.
We have seen significant population and economic growth in the Territory in recent years. This was not by accident. According to the ABS figures, since September 2002 when we look back, the Territory was the only jurisdiction in Australia with negative population growth. Our population had declined by 0.1% over the previous year and sat at 197 924. Our nett intrastate migration sat at negative 1025 over the previous quarter, and the government was naturally concerned. We wanted our population growth figures to turn the corner, so the government developed and launched a population strategy. It was a comprehensive strategy which covered everything from building the economy through to more entertainment and elite sporting fixtures.
Has it worked? Well, let us look at where we are seven years later. The latest ABS figures have our population growth at 2.2% above the national average. We now have 223 100 and our nett interstate migration is at 691 for last year. It has been in positive territory for the last two-and-a-half years. This is a very different picture than what we inherited seven years ago. Our population has grown by around 13%; an extra 26 000 people. We actually believe the 691 nett interstate migration figure from the ABS is lower than reality. The ABS uses Medicare change-of-address information, with adjustments for Defence personnel not covered by Medicare. This works well in other jurisdictions, but the Territory has a much higher level of population transience compared to other states. Many people moving to the Territory are young and, as such, they are less inclined to use medical services. They do not often update their Medicare address. Conversely, far more retired people leave rather than move to the Territory, but they are all counted because they update their Medicare address.
Of course, there was a reason we had negative population growth seven years ago. It was because the government had inherited an economy with zero growth and unemployment up over 7%. Under the Henderson government, we have been experiencing very strong economic and employment growth for several years now. Economic growth is at around 4%, employment growth at 3.5%, and unemployment holding steady at 4.2%. All these figures have been consistently strong and stable in recent years. Labour force figures released last week show that during the last year, despite the global financial crisis, more than 4000 new jobs were created in the Territory. Such strong economic, employment and population growth puts pressures on a range of government services. Population forecasts have been at and around 1% so, to have growth at double the rate forecast creates these pressures. Put simply, we are providing services for an extra 26 000 people.
This is why the Henderson government is planning across the board for the significant growth. Planning for significant growth requires a detailed demographic assessment of growth patterns the Chief Minister has outlined in his statement. The Territory has very complicated demographics, from our capital city of Darwin to some of the most remote communities in the world. Appropriate core services such as health, education, transport, and community safety can only be provided if there is a thorough understanding of growth patterns across the different regions of the Territory. All of these areas now have record budgets and we are building our infrastructure with an unprecedented $1.3bn budget this year.
We are also working critically with the Commonwealth. We are rolling out the stimulus packages to save jobs, and we are continuing to work with the Commonwealth on delivering infrastructure. We had a very good series of days with minister Albanese, showing him just what the economic stimulus is doing to the Territory.
We are acknowledging our rapid growth, and the Chief Minister has established Territory 2030 to look forward in casting the vision for the Territory to 2030. He has the stewardship and the co-chairs, Vicki O’Halloran and Bill Moss. The Territory 2030 Steering Committee released their draft strategy earlier this year. I have had a series of key industry figures talk to me about 2030 and the importance of it. With key focus areas on education, society, prosperity, health and wellbeing, environment, and knowledge, this strategy, we hope, will be owned by the community and will guide our growth.
As the Chief Minister mentioned, the government’s Housing the Territory Strategy is one of the core aspects of accommodating our growth. The ABS still rates Darwin as the second most affordable capital city in Australia for housing, but the government acknowledges the cost of housing is a burden to many families. As part of our strategy, as Lands minister, I am overseeing our expansive land release strategy. There are more than 6000 lots coming on to the market in coming years in the Darwin/Palmerston regions as a result of the turn-off of government-owned land. Just to name a few: Lyons, 230; Muirhead, 1000; Bellamack, around 700; Johnston, 850; Zuccoli, 1750; and Mitchell, 400. There are many more if you include the turn-off of private land. Of course, we will have the city of Weddell to follow. We are also releasing land in Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek.
In addition to land release, there is Homestart, administered by Territory Housing, and Buildstart, administered by Treasury - two initiatives which directly address the critical issue of affordability and availability of housing in the Territory. Importantly, there is a new aspect of the affordable housing rental company, which will be a semi-commercial operation, operating at arm’s length from government providing rental housing to low- to moderate-income households at an affordable level.
The Chief Minister has highlighted the rapid growth of Palmerston. With our land release strategy, the growth of Palmerston has only just begun to take off. This is why the government has such a range of initiatives for Palmerston: new schools, a hospital, Police Beat, sporting complex, and water park. We will have the Tiger Brennan Drive extension, and I invite people to attend that open day this Saturday.
Last week, I announced the first large-scale accommodation development for Palmerston, Quest Apartments being built by the Tomazos Group. This is a milestone for Palmerston because it will help establish the city as a tourist destination. It is becoming more than just a residential city.
In planning for significant growth, A Working Future policy is such a significant policy for addressing growth needs in the bush, where we already face a deficit of services and infrastructure. Our A Working Future outlines a strong vision for our remote and regional areas. It is about the government and local people working together to make our towns and communities better places to live.
A Working Future has six critical elements: the establishment of 20 towns across our Territory; a clear path for outstations and homelands; delivering remote services in a targeted and coordinated way with the Australian government; employment and economic development; a remote transport strategy; and Closing the Gap targets and evaluation.
In providing better education and training, it is one of the biggest challenges, but also one of our greatest opportunities for growth. Our Smart Territory Strategy is all about moving forward with education and training in our Territory. The Chief Minister’s statement gave details on this program, and I commend him for his work as Education minister, in this area which is just so important. The challenges of education are significant, but so are the opportunities. In our growing economy, the Territory is the best place in Australia to find a job. It is critically important as many Territorians as possible have the opportunity for education, to acquire the skills and training to fill the workforce capacity we will have with this growth.
I have mentioned how a growing economy and growing population puts pressure on housing, health, education, and infrastructure, but it also puts pressure on our environment. The Territory has a fairly pristine environment and we need to ensure, despite our growth, it remains that way. The government’s Greening the Territory Strategy will help ensure our unique Territory lifestyle and environment is protected as we grow.
While the Henderson government’s development credentials are proven, we have also proven we will not develop at any cost. The Arafura Harbour decision is, perhaps, the best evidence of this. The Territory’s growth in recent years has been outstanding. We have more challenges but, also importantly, more opportunities to come.
The major project of INPEX is a key opportunity and challenge. The government has a range of strategies and initiatives which will help ensure our growth continues to the benefit of all Territorians. We embrace the challenges the Territory confronts through strong economic and population growth. Equally, we embrace its opportunities.
It is interesting when, as Treasurer, I meet with other Treasurers, and as Planning and Lands Minister, I meet with other ministers. I have had the opportunity to meet with key industry groups. I recently talked about the opportunities of the Territory to the Australian Industry Group at a meeting in Sydney. All of them are blown away by the strong economic data and the opportunities we have in the Territory, particularly in the area of resources such as LNG. We talk about the opportunities for regional economic development, particularly in the resources base, and of working to the north in the LNG space. We have a government, I believe, is open for debate and discussion with industry, and working with the public sector to see how we can more innovatively address these challenges to create the opportunities Territorians can, quite rightly, enjoy into our future.
We are the growth centre going forward, I believe, for our nation. That is why it is critically important to have such a strong and collegiate working relationship with the federal government of the day. It is welcome, as an Infrastructure minister, to have a federal government which is prepared to be in the infrastructure space. They have moved boldly into it and they are truly about nation building. In that sense, the Territory is lobbying hard to be in the forefront of their considerations of infrastructure spending, and the nation building opportunities it brings our nation but, critically important, opens up opportunities here in the Territory for Territorians.
A stark example of this was having the opportunity to take minister Albanese to the Douglas Daly region, where he met with cattlemen, saw firsthand the challenges confronted by our underdeveloped road network, and heard the need for improvement in roads funding to help deliver produce to market, particularly in the live cattle export trade. It is good to see industry working with both tiers of government and talking about how we meet those challenges to provide for the opportunity of expansion of the livestock trade. I commend our minister for Primary Industry, because he has worked very closely with the industry to not only ensure we have seen significant growth in Indonesia in the livestock trade, but to open up that new market of Vietnam, with the very timely announcement last week. Given the federal minister was in town, I have been talking to him and getting him to meet the cattle station owners in the Douglas Daly to talk about the opportunities, but also the nation building opportunities of infrastructure the federal minister has responsibility of.
That being said, the work the government is doing to engage with new markets, to drive regional economic development, is critically important. I commend the work being done by the Chief Minister in steering through and securing the INPEX project but, also, following up and having a good working relationship with INPEX in delivering on that vital major project for the Territory. I also commend the Mining minister for his continued frequent trips to China. We cannot underestimate the importance of China in our resources base. The strength of the relationship between our Resources minister and China is tremendous. It is in the business sector in the Asian region. He not only has opportunities to explain the resources which are available here, but also create those personal relationships with the key traders. Our minister is doing this very well.
We have put together a master plan and a significant bid into Infrastructure Australia for the port expansion. The government has put its own investment into the port expansion of $100m. That being said, we have secured $50m from the federal government to put with that for the port expansion. Also, we are going after additional funding in subsequent rounds of Infrastructure Australia.
We have worked very closely to provide the appropriate level of economic analysis to mount the argument for the port expansion. It was a good opportunity, while minister Albanese was in town, to fly him over the port, explain what we were doing with the expansion, and land him in a chopper at the port. Through a quirk of timing, while he was in town the NT News decided to sensationalise the subsidence at the port and the tie rods issue, which we have been managing for years - an issue we inherited, but we are managing it well. We have spared no expense in that. We have had Professor Littlejohn in place and working well in ensuring the tie rods are dealt with in a comprehensive way. Much work has been done and the port is in sound condition. Contrary to the article, it will not be closing for two years. We regularly maintain and ensure the port is in good condition.
We have had significant expansion under Labor at the port in the bulk mineral loader and the conveyor belt facilities. We have been increasing the conveyor facilities. We are reclaiming land. We are putting in additional hard stand, and we are continuing to grow the port facilities. Why? Because bulk mineral exports will continue to grow. We know which mines are, potentially, coming online and what their volumes would provide for, so we are ahead of the game in that respect. We also know the projections on the livestock export trade. All that is scoped into the master plan and the work that has been done.
I want to take this opportunity, when talking about challenges and opportunities, to say it is good to be able to work with the board of the port. I acknowledge the passion and commitment of those port board members working with my Executive Officer, Robert Ritchie, at the port.
I know we are well placed in the planning we have undertaken to meet the challenges of growth the port will see. They are challenges we embrace. In fact, we have ensured key people in the port have gone to trade shows to talk up the port, have gone to ports around the world to look at how they are run, and to see the opportunities and best practices which occur in ports around the world. We will be, and continue to be, competitive with ports in the north of Australia. We have always matched our pricing rates on needing to be competitive.
Much work has been done at the port on restructuring and making it a more efficient business. That, of course, brings with it workplace angst. I believe we have seen some of that angst come to the fore in public comments from unnamed sources. Everything being done at the port has been fully tested in whether or not it is robust restructuring and efficient business. I am very confident of the work being done.
We now have contemporary pilotage practices occurring in our harbour which needed to occur. We have contemporary management structures for the onshore side of the port business. Why am I spending time focusing on the port? Because, at the end of the day, regarding economic growth, the port is critical in ensuring we can get produce to market, and can shift the produce across our port - be that bulk minerals or livestock and we are also looking at growing the freight business as well. We have Mariano Express providing a very good service - a new service following the closure of Hai Win – and the feedback I am getting from customers has been very positive.
I do not shy away from the fact, with an extra 26 000 people following strong economic and population growth, there are challenges. We do not shy away from the fact we inherited significant challenges, particularly in the bush. We embrace the opportunities of the Territory. I enjoy the opportunity of being in a government with a very close and collaborative working relationship with industry and business, and which has an eye on the ball of the environment so we ensure we take care of the environment while we provide for growth and development as well. We recognise the critical importance of education within this picture of growth - education linked to training, skills, and real jobs.
Growing our own and giving Territorians’ opportunities to pick up the jobs we are creating is significant, and industry recognises it as well. Government cannot do it on its own. Working collaboratively with industry is critical to it. I thank all the key industries I work with on a regular basis for their recognition of the role they play in training.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the Chamber. It is a good opportunity to have a look at the challenges confronting the Territory but, equally, the opportunities those challenges bring. We are a government which has shown we are open to business, to working with all industry sectors, and to ensuring we recognise the great work done by our public service in delivering services for Territorians. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I hope to bring a Treasury perspective to this debate. At the outset, before I actually attend to the matters in this statement, I, with some curiosity, heard during Question Time today - and continue to hear today from the Treasurer - the relationship the Northern Territory government has developed with the new Rudd government in Canberra, and how all this borrowed money will be good in expenditure here in the Northern Territory. I heard during Question Time today the comment that the stimulus spending was so vitally important to the people of the Northern Territory and, indeed, to the people in this nation, and Ken Henry, the head of the federal Treasury, made comments in support - which were widely reported, I might add - of the stimulus expenditure. What Ken Henry has not explained and no one else seems to be able to explain - and I look forward to a comment from the Treasurer on this - is why the Reserve Bank of Australia does not agree with Ken Henry.
I base this comment on this simple observation: we have currently large amounts of money - billions of dollars - flowing into the Australian economy from borrowed money from the federal government. That is, indeed, supporting jobs - and I would not doubt it - but we are propping up an economy which is not in recession. The added observation I make is the Reserve Bank has chosen to raise interest rates because the economy is starting to show signs of warming up again.
You have a rather interesting situation where the Reserve Bank on one hand feels the economy is starting to show signs of needing some sort of restraint being brought to bear, whilst the federal government - at the suggestion, I suspect, of the federal Treasury - is busy trying to warm up the economy. You seem to have monetarist policy on one hand, and an interventionist policy on the other, working at odds with each other. No one seems to be able to explain why this is occurring. I look forward to any explanation which could shed some light on this, because there is currently a dislocation between the position of the Federal Reserve and the federal Treasury, which I find difficult to reconcile.
Turning to this particular statement, one could be forgiven for thinking the Northern Territory, prior to the arrival of the Labor Party, was a desolate wasteland where people were sent bereft of hope, without any ambition for the future, like some tropical Siberia, because it was clearly such a horrible place to live. People were running away in their thousands according to the Chief Minister - could not stand the place; leaving.
I find that this statement is diminished because even this Labor government’s own budget paperwork said in 2001 with their first mini-budget on page 3 of the Budget Paper No 3, Chapter 1, Overview:
Why would the government be so focused on trying to spin things to their advantage they totally lose sight of their role, which is to govern for the good order and for the people of the Northern Territory? It has now become so much about message it has nothing to do with reality. Even their own budget papers in 2001 clearly demonstrated that during the late to mid-1990s the Territory economy was outperforming.
There were years of strong growth. Yes, in 2000-01 as part of the natural cycles which have been following the Territory economy for decades, there was a downturn. This happens. It will continue to happen into the future; economies all over the world do it. The Chief Minister does not bother to mention any of this because it is all about how we make the story look. However, in Chapter 1 of that overview on page 1, there is an interesting comment that belies a little as to the priorities of this government. This is the comment:
In the 2001 mini-budget, the Northern Territory government determined it would reduce capital works expenditure. Part of the capital works expenditure process includes doing things - as was done at the time; I know the system has changed now – such as completing headworks, when the rapacious and evil CLP government would go around releasing land to developers. Shock, horror! Awful, dreadful things! We heard the quote the Leader of the Opposition used. In fact, it is worth visiting once again:
I could not think of a more satisfying way to distort a marketplace than withholding necessary capital works expenditure as described in the 2001 mini-budget, as well as compounding short-term world view with an approach of ‘We are not going to release land, therefore, we do not have to spend money on capital works expenditure’. Whilst I realise there is a five-year space between those two particular comments, you can see a consistent philosophy operating: ‘We are not going to do that’. The given excuse was because ‘We did not want to distort the marketplace’. The fact is ‘We wanted to engage in those things which are more important to us as lefties’; that is, ‘We wanted to expend the money on social expenditure’.
They had a mandate to do so. When they were elected to office, they had a mandate to make these determinations. It is not that they lied about it; they put it in their 2001 mini-budget. However, they did so in the face of multiple warnings from this side of the House and other areas. Those warnings were saying: ‘You need to start preparing yourself to release land. You need to start preparing yourself to have headworks and capital infrastructure in place’. Added to that: ‘You need to position yourself in such a fashion which leaves large amounts of GST revenue - which is coming through in amounts much greater than your own Treasury even dared, in its wildest dreams, suggest - to position yourself in such a way so you can meet the upturn when the upturn comes’.
A sensible government would have said: ‘Let us rein in on the social expenditure a little’. I am not saying they should not have done it; I am saying rein in on the social expenditure. Or even: ‘Let us just keep the windfalls. Let us actually stick to our budgets and not spend the windfalls when they come in’. That alone would have freed $1.2bn over the first seven years of this particular government. However, they did not choose to do that; they chose to spend every dollar as it came in.
I note the Chief Minister said: ‘In the 2009-10 Budget, the Territory government invested $1.3bn in infrastructure’. True. The vast majority of it - no, a large slice of it, to be more correct – is federal money and another part of it is borrowings. Despite the fact this government has received a huge amount of extra money our budget currently is about twice – in fact, more than twice – the amount of the last CLP budget in expenditure. They could have squirreled a bit of it away, actually aimed to reduce debt to zero - as the federal government has done in the period following from 1996 - and positioned themselves so, if they had to go back and borrow - shock, horror, actually saved some money; become a little firmer and saved some money - they would be in a much better position than to have had to rack it all up on the credit card, which is what they are doing now.
I visit this quote again from the government, because the Chief Minister said he has invested $1.3bn - and I am sure that I heard him and the Treasurer say this was the biggest expenditure in history of the Northern Territory. It is an interesting figure, $1.3bn. From the 2001 mini-budget, I quote from page 4 of Budget Paper No 3, Economic And Fiscal Outlook:
Yet, the minister is claiming this $1.3bn on infrastructure is the big spend. I am curious to find out what they classify the railway to be, if it was not an infrastructure project? Maybe it was a social project of some sort. I realise, of course, the truth is the railway expenditure was over a couple of budgets. Nevertheless, it is all about dressing it up and making it appear like something it is not.
The government claims Bellamack is this great result. It is not a good result for government. Even during the election campaign, I heard the Planning minister, the now Treasurer, claim on at least one occasion, Bellamack would be turning off blocks by early 2009. It did not happen. The goal was not achieved. We heard from the Leader of the Opposition who pointed out the Treasurer was talking about Bellamack land releases in 2007. The problem for this government is they have now exhausted their credibility in the public mind. Every utterance, everything which is jammed into the letterboxes, everything they see on television presented by this government, even if it is true, is now met with a level of cynicism. People are indifferent to the capacity of this government to provide them with good leadership. The reason they are indifferent is because they have become so used to having expectations developed, only to have them dashed because the capacity to deliver does not live up to the spin. It has led Territorians to a place where, after hearing this government, or watching this government’s lips move, they no longer think to themselves: ‘Yes, I believe what I am being told’.
When you create a chasm between announcement and result, which becomes increasingly wide as the level of spin becomes increasingly hysterical, it soon becomes impossible to bridge the credibility gap. This government has presented itself, particularly in the last few months, as a government barely capable of keeping itself together, with members jumping in and out of government, members leaving, and all sorts of things occurring. It is all about management - how we manage this, how do we manage our way through this? It is all about how we can get the message managed so the actual results have failed to matter at all. Well, the real results are not being felt by anybody in this Chamber. The real results are being felt by those people who have to sleep in cars, who have to sleep in friends’ spare rooms because, as employees in a jurisdiction where they are the highest average full-time weekly earners in the country, they still are unable to meet the basic necessities of life, such as food and shelter.
This government has prided itself on its social programs. The assumption amongst the left in this country continues to be that social programs are something you do through various departments and service delivery. I argue the best social program you can engage in is one which provides shelter for people and the capacity to make a living. This government mouths platitudes about being able to provide a living to Territorians, but does nothing to address the fundamentals.
I heard the Chief Minister talk about Aboriginal employment and education and, whilst I accept education is an important component of employment, it is not the only component. You can get as many people educated as you like in Ntaria or Hermannsburg, and it will not make one jot of difference if the jobs are not there. This means there needs to be fundamental reform of the land ownership and management systems which currently exist on land trusts. I have said this now 1000 times in this House, and I will continue to say it. Whilst we continually talk about leases, lease arrangements, and those things, for goodness sake, make it happen. If it is not within your capacity as a government to make it happen, then bring pressure to bear on those governments in whose area of authority it is to make this happen. So, when people get an education in Ntaria, there is a job at the other end because - shock, horror! - some company, not even an Aboriginal company, takes the time to invest in building a business in Ntaria.
I would love to see Aboriginal people become part of the general economy of this country. It was the comment I made in 1997 when I came into this House, and started saying we cannot afford to lower this glass dome over Aboriginal people. Yet, we continue to do so by isolating them with a system of land management and ownership which is designed to prevent effective investment on their land. People forget this is a product of the 1970s. This is a product of Justice Woodward’s Royal Commission where he tried to build a fence around Aboriginal people and protect them. That fence has now become their prison. We can bleat and talk about all these great opportunities we are giving Aboriginal people but, you will not start to see some developments unless we allow them some form of private property ownership rights - albeit if it is just leases; some sort of proprietary right over access and egress from property. Aboriginal people should not be isolated from the world of investment as they currently are. We are fiddling; we continue to fiddle while Rome burns.
SIHIP has just brought into sharp relief Aboriginal degradation in the bush. We have to build them houses. How much better would it be if they just built their own houses because they had a job and they could actually get a bank loan to fund this house because there was a 99-year lease or a perpetual lease underneath the house they were trying to build, supported by the job? That is how economies work. I often find myself fascinated by the debate about the redistribution of wealth - who has wealth and who has not when it pertains to Aboriginal people. It is a pointless conversation to have until such time as you generate some wealth. It is purely academic. Until Aboriginal land starts to generate wealth for Aboriginal people, whether you want to redistribute that wealth or not, you are not going to get anywhere. We pour billions of dollars into these remote communities - for no result.
Bureaucracies and private businesses on government funds and contracts who receive grants to do something, just soak up all this money, and it gets pissed up against a wall. I am wholly sick of just watching this same circular argument go forward. I note the Chief Minister said he has settled the Kenbi land claim so the Cox Peninsula can be used for development over the medium to longer term. Why not the short term? Why can they not get the thing signed off by the federal minister - I understand it is sitting in her in-tray at the moment; has been there for a while - and start releasing some of that land? Get it involved …
Mr Knight: It has been in your in-tray for eight years. It sat in the federal Coalition’s in-tray for eight years.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, and what a stupid idea that was. I will pick up on this interjection. You are absolutely right. What a disgrace it was! What an absolute disgrace and it continues to be a disgrace! And what are you doing about it? You are just sitting on your bum doing nothing, mate!
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, I would like you to withdraw that comment, and direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, Madam Speaker, I withdraw the comment. It is incredible this minister has the audacity to play with these issues. He sits there as the member who wants to see housing in places like Wadeye and he wants to play the blame game. I agree: the federal government buggered it up! I absolutely agree. I can tell you something: unless people like him, with his ministerial commission, get off his backside and go down and make these things happen, they will continue to fail. It is this minister’s job. I do not care about the politics of it, I care about the results. I wish this minister would do the same.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, interesting outburst! I enjoy it when John gets a fire in his belly!
Of the many factors that underpin our capacity to deal with future challenges such as developing the policies needed to promote the growth of the Territory, perhaps the most important is the health of our people. Our government has an unshakeable commitment to a healthy Territory. That is why we are working on the demands of today by developing workable plans to best meet the challenges of the future. It is well documented we have already invested heavily in providing more doctors, nurses, hospital beds and infrastructure. Having the right number of technical staff and the latest medical equipment in our five hospitals is vital to support people who require acute care; to provide the wide range of surgery now available in the Northern Territory.
Supporting the health care needs of people in remote communities will continue to be a special priority for our government. Aboriginal people have an unacceptably high burden of disease and my department continues to work closely with partner organisations and communities to deliver primary health care support in a timely manner. At this historic time in the Australian health care debate – indeed, the debate which has been heard in all developed nations - the purpose is as much in planning for people’s wellness as of treating illness. Of course, both areas are important but it is the field of illness prevention I wish to focus on today.
Planning for the future is not just about allocating more resources and developing more facilities. It is also about ensuring we get the mix of services and facilities right, and maintaining the correct balance into the future in order to provide Territorians with quality health services which are both safe and sustainable. Getting future planning right always entails making tough decisions around the best allocation and mix of resources. This can only be done whilst using the best possible evidence and information. Health can be an emotive area, and we must, as a government, understand people’s needs and have an empathy for what they feel. Yet, it is important to make decisions based on the facts and around proper planning, and to explain why we are acting the way we are. That is the reason for my words in this place today. No services, however urgently required, can be delivered effectively without developing the right framework.
Of our many and varied challenges the greatest is the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Territorians. While Aboriginal Territorians make up about 30% of our population, they use about 50% of our medical resources. We must continue our work around bridging the gap in health outcomes and life expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Territorians. By further closing this gap, we will ensure more Indigenous Territorians can fulfil their true potential and, in so doing, we will improve the capacity for more Indigenous Territorians to actively participate in the Territory economy.
Central to this aim is a requirement to shape a framework which gives Aboriginal people a greater say in development and management of primary health care and community care services. We have to do this in a way which not only meets the aspirations of Indigenous Territorians, but is consistent with the delivery of effective and efficient health systems. One of the partnerships we have developed to assist this end is between the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance of the Northern Territory (AMSANT), the Australian government, and ourselves.
I am pleased to say we are already beginning to see the benefits of planning around Indigenous health outcomes. This is, in part, because the Territory spends three times more on preventative health than the rest of the country on a per capita basis. Life expectancy has improved for Aboriginal women by three years. Infant mortality has improved for Aboriginal children by 35%. Anaemia in Aboriginal children living in remote communities has fallen from almost 50% in 1999 to the most recent reports of below 30%. Many of these achievements may be out of sight for the general population, even the media, but they are firmly on this government’s radar. We will continue to closely monitor all the good work which has been done and the positive outcomes that have been achieved.
Another example is cervical cancer. The rate of this disease has declined in Territory women by 61%. There has been an even more dramatic decline in mortality from cervical cancer, falling by 64% in non-Aboriginal women, and by 92% for Aboriginal women between 1991 and 2003. While we are experiencing success in tackling Aboriginal health challenges, we recognise we have a long way to go. Future success requires solid, ongoing work and the development of further strategic alliances and investment.
I am also pleased to note, for the first time, we have seen the life expectancy of Aboriginal Territorians on dialysis equate with that of other Australians with end-stage renal failure. Just a few years ago, there was a seven-year difference in the life expectancy between Territorians on dialysis and those of other Australians on dialysis. This success is in no small part due to the significant investment of this government in renal dialysis over the last eight years. As part of ongoing planning around renal dialysis, in Budget 2007-08 we announced a major new investment in renal services, with $24.4m over four years to 2011 to provide improved services. While we continue to plan for further growth in renal dialysis demand in coming years, it is vital we also work with Aboriginal Territorians to develop preventative health strategies which will ensure, in time, we will turn around the Territory’s renal dialysis challenge.
Proper planning and delivery of health services requires that a solid base be established. The work this government has done since 2001 in regard to health service delivery ensures our plans for the future are based on solid foundations. In Budget 2009-10, the Labor government delivered the Territory’s first billion-dollar Health and Families budget. At $1.05bn, Health and Families funding has more than doubled; it is up by 117% from when we came to government. The extra funding has translated to real investment in frontline staff and resources. This includes an extra 179 doctors, an extra 632 nurses, an extra 127 fully-funded hospital beds, and significant reduction of overdue elective surgery waiting lists.
We heard the Chief Minister talk about the Territory’s remarkable growth - particularly that experienced in the Top End in recent years. Of course, growth can come with costs and, in the field of health, this cost can be high, so it is even more important to get the planning right. This growth demands health planning to provide better prevention measures, better primary health care, better health facilities, better specialist care, better clinical workforce, and better health technology.
As you would know, each year the Australian government publishes a report on the performance of hospitals across Australia called The State of Our Public Hospitals. The latest such report, published in June this year, again highlights how the Territory’s hospitals have further expanded the level of care provided to manage the acute health needs of Territorians. We have the most public hospital beds per weighted population. In 2007-08, the Northern Territory had an average of 3.6 public hospital beds per 1000 population – well above the national average of 2.5 beds. Northern Territory hospitals have the busiest emergency departments in Australia, with 740 presentations per 1000 weighted population, which is more than double the national average of 321. This means Royal Darwin Hospital’s emergency department is even busier than the biggest hospitals in Sydney or Melbourne. The Northern Territory is well ahead of other jurisdictions, with 510 hospital patient admissions per 1000 population. This is nearly three times the national average of 184 admissions per 1000 population. This level of demand, coupled with our strong population growth, presents genuine challenges into the future.
The Territory employs the most hospital doctors and nurses in Australia per weighted population. In Budget 2009-10, a record $421m investment has been made in our hospitals. The government is preparing to undertake a project to plan the model and proposed implementation and delivery of hospital services across the Northern Territory for the next 20 years. This will take into account demographic, morbidity, burden of disease, technology, and workforce projections over the next 20 years.
The blueprint will need to clearly identify links with health and community services provided outside the Northern Territory hospital network, including non-hospital service provision and non-government organisations delivering health and community services. A tender process has been concluded, and I will soon be able to announce the name of a highly-regarded company which will be undertaking this important study. The blueprint will provide us with a strategic and systematic approach to the development of hospital services in the Territory for the next 20 years. I am expecting the blueprint for hospital services to be on my desk by the middle of next year.
This future blueprint for ongoing delivery of hospital services will consider a series of priorities including:
projected population demographics;
consideration of the status of the Northern Territory’s public hospitals;
estimates of the projected volume, speciality, type and level of hospital service required by region;
identification of hospital services and specialities which should be provided in the Territory and those which should be referred to larger jurisdictions;
identifying links and potential streamlining of hospital services with government and non-government health and community services;
the changing nature and composition of our hospital workforce; and
One key priority of the project will be an analysis and consideration of the scope and range of services for the proposed Palmerston hospital. While speaking about hospitals, I want to make it plain, as Health Minister, I do not believe it is in the interests of Territorians for Canberra bureaucrats to be running our hospitals in the future. It has happened before, and Territorians who have been around for a while will recall it was not a success. Territorians can do the job more effectively, and I want to warn federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, through the National Health Reform Agenda, to ensure Territory hospitals will continue to be run by Territorians into the future. I will again discuss this issue, together with other important health topics, when minister Roxon visits the Territory early next month.
We have heard the Chief Minister speak about the population growth projections for Palmerston. Importantly, the construction process for the new facility for the Palmerston GP Super Clinic is under way, with Norbuilt being awarded the tender in July. Planning approval process is now under way, and we expect the facility to be operational mid-2010. Once operational, the super clinic will provide important health services in the region: 24-hour medical services; outpatient medical specialist services from Royal Darwin Hospital; coordinated care for people with chronic diseases and complex care needs; more allied health services for children and aged or disabled people; and dental services.
As I have said, along with ensuring health service delivery and system improvement which focuses on patient welfare, we must develop plans around health promotion and health prevention strategies. To promote, protect and improve the wellbeing of Territorians into the future, we must work in partnership with individuals, families and the community to get the best possible results in this area. That means working in key areas such as tobacco and alcohol control, as well as system-wide safety and quality protocols. Tobacco and alcohol-related hospital admissions place an unnecessary burden on our health system, and our planning around the future of health services must, and will, take into account ways of reducing this demand. In short, we have to plan to keep more Territorians out of hospital, and to work with Territorians to ensure a successful partnership which can make this happen.
The key to improving health outcomes into the future is dependent on a strong focus on the promotion of good health, adopting healthy behaviours, controlling the spread of disease and, of course, minimising harm and injury. The federal government’s Health Reform Agenda recognises there needs to be a greater emphasis on focusing on wellness, health promotion, primary health care, and illness prevention - and the Territory government agrees with this view. Our focus into the future will be on: health promotion and minimising the unhealthy behaviours and their impacts; improved health awareness on preventable chronic diseases so as to reduce cost pressures on our health system; and closing the gap in health outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Territorians.
That will require us to be promoting good health and managing chronic disease; improving men’s health; building a healthier workforce; promoting safety, reducing injuries and suicides; preventing outbreaks of disease; and addressing climate change impacts on the health and wellbeing of Territorians.
The Territory has a very high proportion of young people. Indeed, some 24.5% of our total population is under 14 years of age. In laying the foundations for a more healthy Territory, it is important we focus on our young. Good health outcomes in adult life must be planned for and implemented during childhood. So, into the future we are planning for a sharper focus on early detection and management of health and developmental problems to ensure a positive impact on current and future health of young Territorians.
Good antenatal care is vital to help optimise maternal and birth outcomes, and provide more Territory children with a good start in life. It must be accompanied by services to support parents, promote health childhood development and learning. In our first term, this government introduced the Child Health Initiative with $2.2m recurrent for the largest expansion ever of child health services across the Territory. This program has seen more child health nurses, Aboriginal Health Workers and nutritionists engaged to improve the health of our children.
We introduced the Growth Assessment and Action and Healthy School Aged Kids screening programs with 80% uptake, and our child immunisation rates are amongst the highest in Australia. The development of suitable approaches to antenatal care will provide more Territory children with a good start in life.
As I already mentioned, the consumption of alcohol takes a toll on the health of too many Territorians and places a burden on our health system. Smoking is the single greatest risk factor for disease in the Territory. It contributes to nearly 20% of all adult deaths. Aboriginal Territorians are at particular risk of smoking-related illness and death. The smoking rate among Aboriginal Territorians is 55.9%, and 31.3% among non-Indigenous Territorians. Territorians are also consuming high levels of alcohol. The alcohol-related death rate in the Territory is three times the national average.
Our future health plans must target smoking, alcohol and other substance abuse. This will require for planning around developing and delivering targeted health promotion and educational strategies and messages; assisting in the development and implementation of effective legislation and policy, including having legislative and clinical responsibility under the Volatile Substance Abuse Prevention Act, Tobacco Control Act, and Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act. It will also require offering a range of treatment and rehabilitation services and acute and primary health care.
We must continue to invest in improving the health of Territorians and the challenge of growth the Chief Minister has referred to. We can only achieve this by employing policies, strategies and initiatives which are grounded in the right preparatory framework. That framework is in place and we have begun the planning which we are confident will meet the health challenge thrown up by the Territory’s unique and now growing population.
Madam Speaker, I also wish to touch upon the growth of our primary industry, fisheries and resource sectors, some of the challenges this presents, the opportunities on offer and, importantly, what we are doing to grow the Territory.
Our mining and exploration sector will remain as a key driver of the Northern Territory’s economy. It accounts for around one-quarter of the Territory’s economy and employs around 4000 people. Mining companies are facing economic difficulties through low commodity prices and significant challenges in raising finance from the markets.
When it comes to access to capital, our $14.4m exploration investment attraction strategy will ensure the Territory will remain a preferred destination for exploration. Bringing Forward Discovery includes:
$11m over four years to provide data to industry players to stimulate exploration and reduce risk in greenfield areas;
We are undertaking strategic investments to encourage exploration now so we are well placed for the future. It is vital we invest in attracting exploration to the Territory - as there is a lag between exploration on the ground and the subsequent development of a mine - which will continue to underpin our economy into the future.
It is also why we are investing in infrastructure, particularly in the regions, in providing and upgrading our transport networks. When it comes to encouraging exploration and investment in the Territory, our China and Japan investment strategies are really having an impact.
Thanks to our China Investment Attraction Strategy, a venture agreement between Arafura Resources and East China Exploration and Development Bureau was signed at Parliament House in April. Funds raised through the joint venture will allow Arafura Resources to continue its exploration program, and also allow the Nolan’s rare earth project to continue to proceed with its feasibility studies and progress towards development in 2010.
We have not put all our eggs in one basket when it comes to investment attraction strategies. Given the success of the China investment strategy we also decided it was necessary to develop a Japan investment strategy. As part of this strategy, we have focused on building relationships with a key partner the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation, JOGMEC, which is a government organisation responsible for ensuring stable supply of oil and gas and nonferrous metal to Japan. This gives us access to advice on how to best target our programs to meet the specific needs of the Japanese market. JOGMEC supported two Northern Territory investment seminars in Tokyo in May 2008 and 2009, and the first Northern Territory Uranium Investment Seminar in Australia that was held before the Australian Uranium Conference in Fremantle in July 2009. One key outcome is the $17m joint venture between Western Desert Resources and Itochu Corporation to explore and develop the Roper Bar iron ore project.
By maintaining a healthy level of mineral exploration during the downturn, the Territory will be ideally placed to take maximum advantage of the next global upturn in the resources industry when it, inevitably, comes. This can only occur by making the Territory a preferred destination for the relatively limited funds currently available for exploration investment. This remains a priority for the Territory government through the Bringing Forward Discovery strategy.
Our primary industry sector continues to grow. The overall value was $584.2m in 2008-09, a rise of 9.9% on the previous year. The outlook is for a similar level of growth over the next few years. Pastoral production will continue as the mainstay of the primary industry sector and, particularly in the Top End, significant growth in production is foreshadowed.
The Indonesian market for Territory livestock is expected to remain buoyant. Exploring alternative market outlets for Territory cattle remains a priority for both industry and government, given our current reliance on a single market. Just last week, I witnessed the signing of an agreement between the North Australian Cattle Company and Vietnam’s trading and investment company to export 1000 head of cattle as a trial shipment. This shipment is the culmination of two years of work by government and industry.
When it comes to our horticultural sector, the overall value of the industry has doubled from around $95m in 2005-06 to more than an estimated $192m in 2008-09 - so we must be doing something right. The growth has been driven by increases in the value of our mango, melons and vegetable crops.
Climate change, access to land and water, biosecurity, labour requirements and infrastructure will continue as key issues confronting our primary industry sectors. Increasingly, the nation is looking to the north as water security and climate change impacts on southern producers. The Territory is well placed to take advantage of the opportunities to build upon the success of the existing industry base.
As we all know, fishing continues to be ‘the lure of the Territory’ and makes an important contribution to our great Territory lifestyle, our community and our economy. Recreational fishing is a way of life for many Territorians. We recognise how important recreational fishing is. We have a comprehensive plan to ensure its growing popularity does not pose a threat to its future sustainability. It is simply too important to leave it to chance.
Prominent among these is the buying back of commercial fishing licences and setting aside areas for recreational fishing. Three commercial barramundi licences have already been bought back and we are committed to removing a further three licences during this term. I am considering more than 230 submissions received about proposed closures to commercial fishers.
We have commenced a comprehensive survey of recreational fishing throughout the Territory to provide important information on catch, effort, participation and expenditure of both local and visiting anglers. This survey will assist in ensuring our recreational fishery remains sustainable into the future and continues to provide high-quality fishing opportunities. The information gathered through this survey will allow us to better plan for the future of fishing in the Territory.
A community-based working group has been established to compile a recreational fishing development plan. This will be an important document which will set the strategic directions for recreational fishing for the next five to 10 years. It will provide the road map for the future development of recreational fishing. It is important we manage the growing popularity of recreational fishing and protect the resource on which it depends. Pressures on fish stocks are increasing through growing numbers of recreational fishers and affordable technology such as bigger boats, global positioning systems, and colour sounders. I recently announced a number of new changes to recreational fishing controls to ensure future generations can also enjoy the unparalleled recreational fishing experience available today. These include a reduction in the possession limits for Spanish mackerel and black jewfish, and new limits for the take of sharks and cherabin. The new controls will commence in January 2010.
We are committed to improving facilities for recreational fishers, given the growing popularity of fishing and the increasing levels of boat ownership. In 2008, we increased annual infrastructure funding from $500 000 to $1m over four years, and we have already achieved a great deal including the new $4.6m East Arm boat ramp and commencing a $4m upgrade of the Palmerston boat ramp. When it comes to the Blue Mud Bay decision, we have a plan which will see anglers, Indigenous stakeholders, the fishing charter industry and the commercial sector negotiate a win/win outcome. In responding to the challenges and taking advantage of the opportunities which arise, we will ensure fishing remains the lure of the Territory
Madam Speaker, you heard the Chief Minister detail the magnitude of the population increase the Territory is expecting in coming years. As he said, the population forecast for the 25 years to 2030 is expected to be another 55% more people calling the Territory home. This remarkable level of population increase, coupled with the Territory’s unique demographics, will present all future governments with genuine challenges. That is why it is vital this government continues with the planning work it has committed to, so we can continue to provide an appropriate level of services to meet the challenges of the growth which will come the Territory’s way in the next 20 or so years.
Madam Speaker, I support the statement by the Chief Minister.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I thought long and hard about these sittings we are coming into. As with the Leader of the Opposition, I have had many people come into my office in tears about the situations they now find themselves in because of the lack of planning and good management by this government. I thought long and hard about how this government was going to respond to what they must have known was going to be a clear focus from this side of the House on the terrible mess they have us in. I thought: ‘How are they going to respond? What are they going to do?’ So, here we have it. We have a ministerial statement from the Chief Minister. When I heard about this I thought: ‘They are going to try to hit the ground running with all the great things they have done’ when, in reality, the average person out there has just about given up on all the spin.
I drew a little picture on this. I do not know if you can see it, but I have here the government, the foundation of spin and, then, all the voters in the electorates. They can clearly see the sand is eroding away from this government palace. They can see the results are not there. I wondered how they were going to respond. How were they going to come out and spin it so fast they could prove to all the people out there in voter land they were solid; that the foundation was not being eroded? I really thought this ministerial statement would have addressed some of those concerns. I have been disappointed again because it is full of more spin - more spin from this government which seems to just survive on spin.
I will talk about a few things I picked up in the Chief Minister’s statement where he talked about the growth of the Territory, the opportunities it provides, and the challenges. Many of these challenges are self-created because they are being created because of one thing - and we know what that is: the lack of land release. The Chief Minister also said he would report on the government’s progress from time to time in parliament. In fact, the previous media releases have indicated a more specific time frame. However, today they used ‘from time to time’ because that sounds like a little more spin. Also, the use of figures from the Bureau of Statistics and other statistical agencies are used ‘from time to time’. I find it interesting statistics can be used both in a positive and negative. The same figures, depending on who wants to use them and how they are used, can both show positive and negative.
On one hand, we hear government say when they took over things were in dire straits and, apparently, it was through their good government we had an economic turnaround which had nothing to do with the resources boom or anything like that but, purely and simply, their government policies. Then, they turn around and use the same statistics of: ‘Oh, now we are growing. We are growing and are one of the very few places in the world that is growing’. Unfortunately, they now find themselves in a crisis because they did not plan for it.
You also have to remember the figures we often get through the Bureau of Statistics are a snapshot at a given time, and many of these figures will come out from the 2006 Census. Times have changed; things have moved considerably since 2006. The Leader of the Opposition stated we have seen, even in 2007, clear evidence that we were already talking about a crisis in land release. What are we in today? 2009 and, yes, we do see work finally happening in suburbs like Bellamack. We do see work happing in places like Johnston. However, the reality is this should have happened years ago - like the schooling in Palmerston.
It is fantastic that, eventually, we will have a new middle school in Palmerston and a new primary school. We have been yearning for that for many years. I still talk about those three-odd years the tap turned off in Palmerston and there was no growth in relation to land release or growth in relation to schools - no growth whatsoever; and no indication from this government they wanted to do, or were willing to do, anything about it. Now, because of the arrangement in place, we can see things are starting to move forward.
However, we are moving forward at the same time as people are choking. The next time someone comes into my office in tears and explains to me their personal circumstances, I will simply tell them: ‘It is okay, you are just suffering a little “housing stress”’. And then, when I get myself off the floor from being knocked out for being a smart ‘a’, I will tell them: ‘Well, that is exactly what the Chief Minister said - it is just housing stress. We are just suffering a little housing stress’. Well, let me tell you, some of the stories of some of the horrible predicaments people are in today are certainly a little more then ‘housing stress’.
The report also suggests the strength in the Territory economy and the Territory’s lifestyle appeal. What it does not talk about is the 20% rise in power and water costs; the power failures; the high rents people pay; no land being released in a timely manner; and, of course, the general cost of living. However, they do say we are in a good position economically. They say we are leading the pack; in fact, we have had ministers say we are in the best position of probably any state or territory. But, then you come out and tell the public service you are going to cap their wages at 2.5%. So, on the one hand you are saying we are doing very well but, on the other hand, you are telling the public servants: ‘Sorry, we are going to cap any pay rises to 2.5%’. That is such a slap in the face for all public servants in the Northern Territory, given it is their hard work which has probably helped you deal with the current situation.
It says in the statement the Chief Minster is pleased to report, in 2008, the nett population gain from interstate was 691, with the figure, hopefully, set to be surpassed this year. Again, as the Leader of the Opposition said, growth is fantastic, but what are they moving into? Tell me, if we have 691 more people staying in the Territory this year, where are they going to live?
Apparently, there are still people leaving the Northern Territory. I was speaking to a refrigeration mechanic a few weeks ago who was earning around $300 a week more than he could earn in Adelaide. He was paying $530 a week rent for a three-bedroom home in Gunn and, with a one-income family, with overtime he was still earning about $20 000 a year more than he was earning in Adelaide. He has now packed up with his family and left – a refrigeration mechanic, and we all know we need as many skilled labourers here as we can, particularly in that area. He was earning $20 000 more a year in the Northern Territory - this place you say has lifestyle - but he has packed up and left to take his family back to Adelaide because he cannot afford to live here.
The current population projections, as it says in the statement, is the greater Darwin and Palmerston population is likely to increase by 19 000 people to 133 000 by 2013. Recently, the Chief Minister said we needed 1700 blocks a year just to keep abreast of growth. We are now in 2009, and what have we had released this year? What will we have released by Christmas? It will not be the 1700 blocks which are needed just to keep up with growth; it is nowhere near enough, and it is too late for many because of high prices. In fact, there are probably many people out there who have invested at a time when houses are at the cost they are today and, given the likelihood of interest rates going up and the way the economic cycle works, they are going to find themselves in increasing instability, and in positions where they, perhaps, will not be able to pay these high mortgages because of the price of houses today.
The statement states on page 7:
How can it be a hot spot when it has been trending upwards for some time? Places such as Yirrkala, Numbulwar, and Gapuwiyak have growth of 35%, 29%, and 24%. Yet, we have SIHIP, an opportunity two years ago from this government to take money which was offered by the federal government – two years ago and not a house. Yet, we are talking about a hot spot and a trend upwards. It is all here and, yet, two years later there is still not a house on the ground.
You talk about the high price of land and housing in our regional towns such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine. It all comes down to land release; there has not been anywhere near enough.
The Chief Minister went on to say he wants to focus on infrastructure, engaging Indigenous communities, and services for the aged. I sincerely trust this is truthful, but I believe it is more spin. The average Territorian, after eight years, has had enough of the spin and the failures of this government. Why I believe it is more spin is because you only have to go over the page and he brags about $1.3bn in infrastructure. That has been brought up time and time again by this government, when we know many of those works are revoted and there is also federal money in it. But you put it out there like you are doing so much to deliver for Territorians.
It then goes on to say in 2001 your budget was $334m in infrastructure and it has trebled in eight years. I really want you to look at the outcomes. You have trebled the money, but what are the outcomes? Something is seriously wrong if you can spend three times the amount and get little or nothing in return, or lead us to where we are today.
The statement says housing Territorians is a matter of ongoing high level action. Is this a recent phenomenon, or is it something government should be focused on for many years to come? I point to this document where it says by 2013, on present calculations, Darwin and Palmerston will have around 6000 lots released. Sounds great, but your own figures say 1700 a year. Over a five-year period, from 2008 to 2013, that will mean you need 8500 lots. You are 2500 lots short of your own calculations. What kind of planning is that?
The Chief Minister talked about accelerating land release and development, and there are a number of changes here. The DCA now meets fortnightly and longer-term planning for headworks. All of these things you feel should have been there in the first place. None of these would be needed today if it was managed better. The Chief Minister also alluded to planning areas with higher density living such as duplexes and triplexes, as well as high-rise zoning. I give a warning here: watch the rezoning. If anyone lives anywhere near land zoned for community use, watch out. At the moment in the suburb of Bakewell, we have a lot of land zoned community use and, without any consultation whatsoever with the residents in that area, this government is planning to build a Territory Housing unit complex. No one disagrees we should be building or replacing Territory Housing units, but to take land zoned for community use and change it, without any consultation with people in the area, is abysmal planning by this government. In fact, it is not planning at all.
We all know when towns and cities are planned, areas are put aside for hospitals, schools, parks, land and community use. When people are investing in those areas they look at the land titles, the land usage and they might choose to actually live somewhere because they are living next door to an area of community use. Tragically here, people have invested and now they are going to be living next door to a Territory Housing complex. Most people would not be concerned, unless they understood how this government manages Territory Housing units. Have a look at the antisocial behaviour which has occurred over many years. The socks need to be pulled up in this area.
I received a letter recently from the Minister for Housing regarding a number of issues, including I had alluded to the fact a unit had been vacant since November last year until July this year. I raised it in parliament before, suggesting it needs to be managed better. We need to be able to get people out of these homes; clean them up and put people back into them - have a quick turnaround similar to the private industry. In the letter from the minister he said:
I am happy to table these photos I took of that unit which was vacant for that time. I do not know what the information is the minister is getting. It is quite remarkable given, here on the front door, it has a little Territory Housing ‘Trespassers will be prosecuted’ notice. I am assuming the department knew that this unit was vacant. Why the minister is sending me letters to say words to the contrary, I do not know. It is misleading.
We need more public housing; no one disagrees. However, we have seen the issue at Bakewell with no consultation. We have seen the minister in charge not even aware of what goes on in the street; the mismanagement is unbelievable. In any other jurisdiction, I say the minister would have been sacked long ago. In fact, recently on a television interview, the minister was caught out providing misleading information. He was caught out by another reporter. Yet, the relationship between this government and our local media is so tight the best the Northern Territory News could do the next day was to state ‘the minister conceded’. You know what? In any other forum, in any other business, for someone to knowingly mislead anyone else, it is called a lie. I am not saying that here, but I am saying when you mislead someone, you are lying to them …
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, if I could interrupt for a moment. I did not hear but the Table Office advises that you did not seek leave to table those photos. If that is the case, could you seek leave to do so?
Mr CHANDLER: Sorry. I seek leave to table these photos.
Leave granted.
Mr CHANDLER: The Chief Minister speaks highly and appears proud of the results of his government to date when, as I said earlier, the average person out there can see it has eroded to the stage now it is falling down around them. Whether they believe their own spin, I am just not sure how it works.
There are a number of things happening out there and, I believe, in some cases, there are some ministers who really lack the foresight, the leadership, or the ability to do what is right for Territorians. We are talking about an emergency with public housing - about housing people in dire straights. I found it interesting, when the opposition released its emergency housing plan which involved a block of land in Yarrawonga which, of course, is private land, at that stage the member for Nelson said he did not want to see any housing plan which involved renting land from a private developer, and saw fit to say it should be government land and we can put the infrastructure in. Well, we have seen the evidence of how long it takes this government to do anything.
How in the world we are going to get people housed before the Wet Season is beyond me. Here was a perfect plan. It was a rather strange statement. Tell me how many offices, how many public buildings, are actually owned by government? Most of them are rented. My office certainly is; it is not one the government owns. The government rents many properties. They came out with a bizarre statement that I just do not understand.
We are talking an emergency here, and we had an opportunity where we could have had at least 60 families off the street before the Wet Season. It is not good enough. I have countless more I could mention, but I can see the clock is going to beat me.
I looked at the school part of the statement, and one of the things I missed was the fact kids with special needs miss out again. There is nothing in this at all about children in our schools with special needs. Yet, you say you are going to do all these marvellous things. You will look after the average people in the community. This government again lets Territorians down ...
Mr STYLES: Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek an extension of time for the member for Brennan pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed.
Mr CHANDLER: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
We have seen an investment in roads in recent times, yet the Chief Minister said they have been doing this over the last eight years. I have seen very little work on our roads system in the last eight years. Yes, it is fantastic to look around today and see all these new slip lanes being put in, and the work which has been started on Tiger Brennan Drive at great cost. It could have been done years ago for far less, but if you leave things to the last minute, it costs you more. You see these companies out there trying to get Johnston and Bellamack up and going - working day and night with the floodlights lighting up the forest - because this government needs it done quickly. I wonder what it is costing Territorians, the taxpayers. It is good to see it is finally happening.
The statement also said members will be aware of the comprehensive essential services investment this government has put into place. It talked about the $1.2bn already spent, or going to be spent, on infrastructure. Well, I would like to know a little about our power infrastructure but, of course, this open and accountable government would not even allow me to do a tour of the Weddell or the Channel Island Power Stations. How I am supposed to get that information is beyond me. Oh, yes, you can nod your head. Nod your head, yes. Very good. Very, very mature.
The statement talked about the infrastructure deficit in remote towns and communities. ‘We have been urgently working to reverse that problem in the last eight years’, said the Chief Minister. A deficit in remote towns and communities – ‘We have been urgently working to reverse that problem for the last eight years’. Do you know what? That is more spin because what you delivered is jack. The Chief Minister said the government has seen the need to address these issues, when it took the Howard government nine out of its 11 years before they paid any attention. Well, I put it to you: you have taken seven out of eight.
You have this new strategy, A Working Future, which, you said in the statement, has been acknowledged nationally. I say from what I have read in the national media, it has been criticised heavily. I do not know how you get ‘acknowledged’. It is acknowledged but it has been criticised.
The Chief Minister talked about engaging Indigenous communities. In my time at the Australian Bureau of Statistics, one of the comments I heard was Indigenous people were the most studied and counted people we have on this Earth. Maybe – just maybe - they are sick of it. Maybe they would prefer to see something actually happen rather than to just talk about it, because we have been talking about it for a long time – not just this government; many governments of all persuasions have been talking about it for a long time. Maybe they are sick to death of the spin, the countless stories, the countless talking which seems to go on, the countless consultations and planning they talk about - and nothing is ever delivered. Then the statement talked about education:
If that is not the biggest call I have ever heard any government deliver – oh, there was another one. Our Prime Minister promised - what was it? - a computer for every student in every school in the country - and they are still waiting for that one. There was one bit of news, and ERA should be congratulated on their program. Perhaps if more companies can take that lead, we could solve many of the issues we have today.
The Chief Minister said there will be a huge emphasis on attracting and retaining committed professionals. Let us talk about land release again, and the cost of accommodation. How sad is it when an average teacher cannot afford to pay rent? How sad is it when someone in a profession like a refrigeration mechanic cannot afford to pay the rent – was going backwards in the time they were here, and was putting more and more on credit card debt? Although their income was $20 000 a year more than they could earn in South Australia, they could not afford to live in this place of which we talk about the lifestyle. As I said before, if there are any lessons here, it is that the government should listen to Territorians. I also said before, in the whole spin about education, there was nothing for children with special needs - nothing at all.
The Chief Minister talked about increasing services to the aged, and no one here would disagree that is something we should be doing. However, you have policies in place such as reviewing rents, or reviewing incomes twice a year, when you talk about only putting up their rents once a year. Why would you be wasting resources to review something twice a year when you know the pensions only have an increase once a year?
There is one thing this government certainly does not do - and I have a letter here from the Minister for Senior Territorians. It was sad to see somebody has gone to the trouble of writing to the minister, asking in the letter for assistance in transporting a group of elderly people from Palmerston to the Territory Wildlife Park. The letter from the minister mentions nothing about that. What it says is this government provides free travel for seniors, pensioners, carers and students on our existing public bus system. We know that. It is great, but it has not answered the question the person had asked of the government. They wanted help with transport to the Territory Wildlife Park. I do not know if the ministers even read some of the letters sent to them, but this does not even address the issue.
So, if there is one lesson I can leave here today, is please …
Ms McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I am just wondering if the member for Brennan would like to table the document.
Mr CHANDLER: Absolutely. There are actually two letters. I will table them both if you like. I seek leave.
Leave granted.
Mr CHANDLER: To finish, the Chief Minister says the challenges are real. They are certainly real. They talk about the lifestyle being the envy of this nation. As I said earlier, in talking about the envy of the nation, you mention the 20% power increases, the cost of living, the cost of land, the fact you cannot get land - and you even have businesses collapsing with no insurances in place which this government promised Territorians years ago.
You certainly have not demonstrated you listened to the public at the last election, in the time most of us have been in this side of the House. Do more than just listen, do more than just spin it - start to deliver for Territorians and make a difference.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, this is a fairly broad document. You could nearly have a debate on a heading called Growing the Territory - the Opportunities and Challenges of Growth. There are opportunities but, sometimes, the challenges are bigger than the opportunities. Much of what I have heard today - I heard most of what the Leader of the Opposition said - I concur with. I have also stood in parliament and begged the government to release more land, especially for first homeowners. The answer I got back was: ‘We do not want to destroy the market. We do not want to have too much land on the market because we could upset the market’. I always felt it was disappointing coming from the Labor Party, which traditionally said it supported the battlers, the family, the workers, those sorts of people. It seemed to me they had lost their way; their concern was more about the market rather than the people they should represent.
I am not saying you do not need to be concerned about those battlers who may have invested in land and houses. However, the price today for land and houses is extraordinarily high. It has reached so high many people cannot afford to belong to the opportunities the Chief Minister talked about today. You only have the opportunity if you can get ahead. If you are resigned to the fact you will have a mortgage which will take you many years to pay - in fact, in some cases, may take you a lifetime and, as we know in other states, the mortgage will be passed onto the children simply because the mortgage has become too great to pay in a lifetime. We really have to ask the question: have we done our job for Territorians? Unfortunately, the government dropped the ball a number of years ago.
I went to a meeting at the Property Council about two-and-a-half or three years ago, and the public servant in charge of Planning talked about future developments for Darwin. The heading was ‘Weddell or Cox Peninsula?’ That was very interesting because it was the first time I heard Cox Peninsula was even on the radar for housing. During that meeting, I asked when we expected to see Weddell developed. Weddell has been on the plans of the Northern Territory since about 1984. The gentlemen said 10 to 15 years. That is only three years ago, yet we know we only have a limited number of housing blocks available in Palmerston and we have to use infill simply because we have not planned far enough ahead. This has all come back to bite the government. I recognise the government is trying to do something, but it is a bit like after the horse has bolted.
The government has announced certain projects it wants to speed up such as Johnston Stage 1 and Johnston Stage 2. It has mentioned putting medium development housing into Berrimah north. It is also looking at other possibilities. However, the reality is all this is catch-up. The only way the government is really going to catch up is to do, as I have sometimes said, a Snowy Mountains Scheme. It is going to have to find the money to get those headworks into Palmerston, and get the amount of land on to the market as soon as possible.
While I say that, I also believe the government should not be taking short cuts. There can be a danger the government, in its push to overcome the housing problem that it tends to look at smaller blocks of land, or develops blocks with large houses on small blocks of land. All these things are not really good for the long-term future of Darwin as a place for families to grow.
They have put forward the idea of Bellamack Gardens. I was not shy coming forward to criticise Bellamack Gardens as the Velcro subdivision. I have had a look at it since they did the changes to it, and it does have merit. Is not the answer for all our subdivisions. It does give some opportunity for affordable housing; a variety of housing for people who might find that type of housing suitable. The thing I liked about the Bellamack Gardens concept was it was more like a village within a suburb. There was more open space around each house, believe it or not, even though they were relatively small blocks. They looked at things such as having bigger eaves to protect the walls from the heat, and to reduce the need for air-conditioning. It was a village-type development with a park close by, with no through roads in it at all, which allowed people - not necessarily first homeowners - who only needed a small house to start with, a chance to buy into the particular market. I hope that type of development can be a bit cheaper.
Another area we have to push forward is the availability of land in the rural area. I do not know how many times I have asked for the forestry land to be developed. I believe time and time again. It fell on deaf ears until recent times. It was reflective of the government’s attitude to development of the rural area. I will give you a classic example. Humpty Doo is a district centre. Humpty Doo was planned by governments – well, I knew about it when I first started on Litchfield Council, which was 1984, and it was probably planned before that. Humpty Doo has room for housing. From my calculations, probably 100 houses could be built in Humpty Doo.
There has not been a house or a unit built for close on 15 years in Humpty Doo. Yet, there is water, sewerage and electricity. There are supermarkets, doctors’ surgeries, and schools, all there and, yet, for some reason that small parcel of land was not developed. This is a classic example of what the government should have been doing but, somehow, it went off the radar.
The same with forestry land. The forestry land in Howard Springs has been zoned residential for at least 15 years and, yet, nothing has happened. The government believes, if they put that land up for sale, it might upset some of the private developers. When you see 2 ha blocks at $400 000 apiece - even 1 ha blocks at nearly the same price - you know young people in the rural area cannot afford to live there. They either have to stay with their parents, or their parents have to build a granny flat, because that is the only way they are going stay in the rural area. I emphasise the rural area because I know Alice Springs has a rural area as well. Rural living is a type of lifestyle which should be encouraged.
I recently saw some figures from the prison and it showed me how many people were in the prison, and where they came from. There were four people in the prison who came from the Darwin rural area. It has a population of 20 000 people. Does that not say something about the rural lifestyle where kids can grow up with a bit of space around them? Are we developing suburbs where people are squashed in like flies simply because profit is the main reason we are developing, not social outcomes? I see the rural area as an area the government needs to pick up the ball and go with.
I congratulate the private developers who are putting forward a proposal to the government. It seems, with the cooperation of people like Billy Risk, we can overcome the native title issues fairly quickly. It also seems we have a proposal which the government should really look at for selling off land - suburban land as well - for first homeowners.
The concept the developers have put forward - and this is the opportunity side of what the Chief Minister is saying – is they will sell each 1 ha block in this subdivision - and they hope to have 500 blocks - at $100 000. That is a fairly cheap price today for a block of land. That will enable people not to go and get the whole $420 000 loan - they might just get a $150 000 or $200 000 loan. It is something within their reach to build a moderate house on a 1 ha block. They will have to build within a certain period, and they will not be able to sell it straightaway; this is not an investment scheme.
However, after five years - or how ever many years the government decides - they can sell the house, they will then have to return $100 000 to the government. So, the first $100 000 goes to the developer to cover their costs, and they will make a profit out of that. The second point is, because the land is Crown land, the government will get its return at the point of sale. So, no, the market is not being undercut by unfair advantage of the government owning its own land. The government will get its land. It encourages development, enabling young people to get a block of land in the rural area quickly and affordably. The government can show its willingness to support them by saying: ‘We will collect our $100 000 later when you sell your land’. That is a really good idea. It has come from some developers in my area, and it is, possibly, a way we should be developing suburban land in other places of the Territory.
I was pleased to see the Alice Springs draft airport plan which included some rural subdivision. That is an excellent concept. I had meetings with Ian Kew, the manager of the airports for Darwin, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. It is something I will be putting forward to the federal minister to support. The figures quoted in the draft Alice Springs report say the cost to develop those blocks of land with infrastructure is $12 000. I presume those blocks would have town water as they are small, and power. If he can do the development for $12 000, I have to ask how come we have such expensive land around the country? That is the figure in the draft master plan for Alice Springs.
I encourage - and I might say more on it tomorrow – the government to support this particular development. It is not in the aircraft corridor; it is on the side. It is a great opportunity to increase the amount of housing in Alice Springs. People have concerns. I have been there and I have been told in no uncertain terms they need housing, yet, here it is, part of the master plan. It is a great idea.
The other area is seniors. The minister mentioned the growth, not only of young people but of older people in the Northern Territory. I have said on occasion if we do not do something for older people, we will lose. When you lose the older people you affect the economy. There are also social issues; you will lose grandma and grandpa - they will go somewhere else. You will lose the wisdom of having older people in the community. We have to do more. I know there is a seniors village in Palmerston and it is good the government is putting money into that. However, we need to look at the rural area. Humpty Doo is an area - and I have taken the Minister for Family Services to Humpty Doo to show her the land which could be developed. We have a private developer in Howard Springs who is putting forward an over 55s development. That is good as well; you need to have both private and public input into seniors.
Talking about the rural area - and we mentioned previously the issue of the affordable housing rental company - one of the concerns is lack of public transport. We need more public transport in the rural area. Again, there are opportunities and challenges of growth. The rural area is growing; there is a huge amount of traffic on the road. We need to improve and promote the bus service. It is no good putting it there without promotion. I congratulate the government on the concept of park/drive. I believe there will be one at Coolalinga, one at Humpty Doo and, hopefully, one at Howard Springs. I hope that will increase the number of buses in the rural area.
In relation to education, the government might have dropped the ball again. Taminmin High School is full. Why is Taminmin High School full? Because it is a very popular high school. It has a range of services that many other schools do not provide. It is strong in VET, and in the Australian Technical College aspect. Unfortunately, that is disappearing this year because of changes by the federal government. Hopefully, it will be replaced by something else. The school offers a wide range of courses. It is attracting people from Palmerston as well as the rural area. In fact, I do not think it can now take anyone else outside the rural area because it is simply full. We need another high school in the rural area. We need to be doing it now. If we keep saying we are planning it, Taminmin High School will be bursting.
In this parliament in 2001 I asked why there was not a Catholic school being built in Palmerston. We are now in 2009 and, at last, in the Johnston subdivision, they have identified there will be either a middle or secondary Catholic school. I am a great believer in choice for people with education; it is good to have both government and non-government education. Yet, there was a belief by some arms of government, when this government came into being, they would not support independent schools for a long time. If someone can tell me how many independent schools were built since 2001, you will find it is very few. The Lutheran school got itself off the ground with a new school at Howard Springs, but not many other non-government schools have been built. I do not think there was very much encouragement from the government to do that.
I hope that changes because people will be surprised at the number of people who have no religious affiliation at all and prefer to send their kids to a non-government school simply because they believe the values they want for their kids to be taught are better met there. I do not say this as a put down to public schools because I know the public schools in my area are terrific schools, and some of the values they teach are fantastic. However, people see there is a different approach to values in a religious school and it is what they are looking for.
Talking about opportunities and challenges of growth, there is mention of the number of young people who are going to be in our suburbs in Darwin and Palmerston. You have to include the rural area; you also have to include Weddell. I am not putting other growth areas of the Territory down. When I spoke in Alice Springs I said, yes, Alice Springs is fine, but the reality of the Northern Territory is like every other state or Territory: the biggest population is around the seaboard. Two-thirds of the Territory’s population is right here, and that is a reality of life. It does not say Katherine, Tennant Creek or Alice Springs are any less important, but this is where the strong growth is, and we have to ensure that growth is catered for.
As I said, you could talk for a month of Sundays on this statement. I have not even touched SIHIP, which I have some pretty big concerns about as well. I heard the minister give me a response today regarding whether these houses are guaranteed for 30 years. He did not say they were guaranteed for 30 years; he said they should be. What concerns me is I recently saw the design of houses in Gunbalanya, and they had wooden floors on the patios and the back steps. I do not know whether the main part of the house was wooden. This was a Queensland design, and I have concerns that that kind of house is going to last 30 years.
I saw the houses just about to be refurbished at Bathurst Island and they were a kit home from Queensland - I just cannot think of the name of the company. Those houses are still being lived in - not a lot of them. They had compressed cement floors, and the reason they had them was because they were tough. They were tough, they could take wear and tear, they could take the odd sledge hammer. You could not rip them up and use them for the barbecue. They were a sensible design.
I believe there will be many questions about SIHIP. If there is time, I will probably speak on it later. There may be plenty of speakers on it anyway. I feel is has become bogged down in consultancies and forgotten what it was expected to do: build simple houses which are not only affordable but practical. I believe we have gone away from that.
I will tell you another thing about the design of the house I saw. The food preparation area was outside on one end of the building and the patio was at the other end. If you kill a wallaby, you do not drag it through the house up to the other end; you should put the patio and the food preparation area in the one place. I do not think the people who have consulted have asked the right questions - wallabies are generally killed out the back; they are not put in the sink. Some of those practical issues in relation to housing might have become lost in the process.
I have spoken on seniors. There is a whole range of issues about the ports, and that is going to be an interesting discussion.
The idea of growth towns …
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Talking about the growth towns, I have not had enough time to really look at the particular issue the government is putting forward. I have said recently at the NT Agricultural Association dinner on Friday night in Katherine, we have to think a little more outside the square. The government selected these number of growth towns - again, challenges and opportunities. I went to Timber Creek and west of Timber Creek, to Mistake Creek, Legune Station, Amanbidji, and Bulla. Where do they relate to? They relate to Kununurra.
Kununurra has just received $195m worth of Commonwealth funds to help improve its schools, its hospitals, all those sorts of things you would expect in a growth town. We should be rethinking. Forget the state boundaries. Why are we not making Kununurra the growth town for the area? The Commonwealth money is our money. The Western Australian government is putting a lot of money into Ord River Stage 2. We should not be cutting off the people in the area simply because there is a silly old state border going down the middle. We should even be looking at making it a local government from Timber Creek through to Kununurra, so those people relate to the area.
The other one is Alpurrurulam, Lake Nash. Where do people play football? They play it at Mount Isa. They go shopping at Mount Isa. Where do we have them? In the shire of Barkly. I am not sure how many people go to Barkly from Alpurrurulam, but I do not think it is many. Again, when we talk about growth towns, maybe Mount Isa should be the growth town. So what? Let us talk to the Mount Isa City Council and the people there. If this is the place which will give these people in Alpurrurulam an opportunity to go to school, let us talk to them. Let us not get stuck up on borders. Let us ensure, when we have growth towns, they are practical. I only put those ideas forward because I believe we have to think outside the square.
The Chief Minister is saying some good things in the statement. I might not always think they are on the right path, but we know there is going to be an increase in the population in many of the Aboriginal communities. We know we have to create employment and they have to get education. We need to be looking at all possible ways of doing this.
Regarding A Smart Territory and getting kids to school regularly, we have heard that many times. The government has had a program for quite a while on the television and the radio telling kids to attend school. We also have to get parents to really want to send their kids to school. If they need a little kick up the rear end to go to school, that is what we need. We also need to be pushing that it is important from a parental point of view. We know literacy and numeracy rates are still quite low.
There has been much discussion about bilingual education. I probably have a different view. I saw bilingual education introduced into Bathurst Island when I was there in the mid-1970s. I still have not been convinced it made any difference to someone reading a tractor manual because they do not come in an Aboriginal language, they come in English, and it will probably never be translated because it is a technical book which tells you how to maintain a tractor. If you want to get on in life you have to know how to do those sorts of things. The government’s policy is four hours, which means the rest of the time in school can still be taught in language.
I also think it is the responsibility of a community as well, if it wants to continue to protect its language, to encourage the use of its language, it has to be a partnership. I would like to see older people in the community who have the skills to teach their language be employed as adult educators who can open up the school on Saturday morning, or in the evening, and teach the kids in the community their language. The government gives the facilities for people to teach their language but, on the other side, the people who want their language to be retained have to take some responsibility for retaining it; it should not be a one-way street.
Other people will have a different point of view. Some of you might have received letters lately asking why bilingual education is better than the older type of education. Perhaps they should come around and see my wife. She received a better education, under the old system, than many Aboriginal kids today, and she can read and write pretty well. It is so disappointing to see kids today who have had the opportunity but, for some reason, they cannot read and write. How are they ever going to advance if they do not have a decent education?
A member: She married you, though.
Mr WOOD: Yes, she married me so she definitely did advance, did she not? She is a lovely lady.
We have many challenges and opportunities. The challenges are to help people in the Northern Territory get a good education, have the opportunity for employment, to have a reasonable opportunity to buy their own home, and to buy their own land without going into debt for the rest of their life, so they then can take part in the opportunities the Northern Territory will give.
We have to be careful in this debate. I say some things which are probably down on the government at times. I have to say we do live in a great place. Regardless of our political argy-bargy here today, it is a great place. I ran into a lady the other day who has only been here for three weeks; she says she is never going home. She reckons this is the best of both worlds; a bit of city life and a bit of country life, so she loves the place. Anyone who has travelled in the outback of the Territory says this is a great place. We have to do more because there are people who are not going to have a chance to enjoy it until we change the way people are educated, can afford to put a house over their heads, and can get a job. Until that happens, there will be a group of us who will not be able to enjoy the opportunities the Northern Territory gives us.
Dr BURNS (Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on Growing the Territory. In simple terms, the economy is about people, families, investments, profits, jobs, and opportunities for all Territorians. It is about government employees and employers working together to create strong and sustainable growth for present and future generations.
I acknowledge at the outset the innovation, hard work, resilience and entrepreneurship of Territory industry and business across all sectors. As Business Minister, I am constantly inspired by the outstanding results achieved by Territory businesses; they are the bedrock of our economy.
I mentioned earlier today the vital partnership between private sector employers and employees and government, which underpins our economy. In this, the government makes a fundamental contribution to sustainable economic growth; we are a pro-growth, pro-jobs government. The Territory has benefited from strong economic growth since 2001 and, although not immune from the challenges from the global financial crisis, the Territory is well positioned for sustainable growth into the future. Access Economics recently forecast the Territory will achieve 4.9% growth in state domestic product in 2008-09 - the highest of all jurisdictions and an outstanding result in challenging times. This growth forecast does not factor in the INPEX project.
As the Chief Minister alluded to in Question Time today, the ANZ commented the Territory economy is leading the nation. In their recent Regional and Rural Quarterly Report, ANZ stated the Northern Territory’s economy continues to brush aside the broader trends across Australia and the globe with the retail sector and employment market growing at the fastest rate of any Australian state or region. The Territory is also experiencing strong population growth, now at 2.2%, as people move to the Territory to take advantage of the employment opportunities.
Recent data highlights four consecutive quarters of positive nett interstate migration; a result seen for the first time in more then 20 years, highlighting our employment growth and strong business confidence are attracting work as we need to continue to grow our economy. This strong growth highlighted by these economic indicators delivers jobs and opportunities for Territory business. It also defines major challenges for policy and service delivery.
As the Chief Minister said in his statement, the government is facing unique challenges which come with a strong economy. In this context, we are developing and implementing a range of policies and initiatives to support economic and population growth.
I turn now to some of the relevant strategic initiatives within the areas covered by my portfolio responsibilities. The government recognises the need to support businesses and create jobs by making land available for businesses to grow and expand. The Darwin Business Park is an important strategic initiative integral to developing trade throughout South-East Asia. Located adjacent to the East Arm port and the railway terminal, it is the ideal location for a range of industries including oil and gas support services, mining support services and maintenance, marine services and maintenance, transport and logistics, and engineering fabrication and equipment. The government has committed $28m in the business park with work well under way. These works will support an estimated 37 full-time jobs and 19 indirect jobs during the construction phase.
The common user area, or CUA, is another strategic initiative with a focus on growth and jobs. The CUA provides a suitably located site for business to access the fabrication, modularisation, short-term storage, or construction solutions. The CUA can be utilised by an organisation to engage in a range of economic activity which ties in with the role of East Arm as an intermodal services hub. The CUA will be available to industry for short-term rental options on a first-come-first-served basis at market rates. The access road to the site has been completed and further works including a hard stand. Drainage, landscaping and fencing commenced in July 2009 by the Ostojic Group. $2.5m has been approved for the 2009-10 capital works program budget to further enhance the capabilities of the site.
The government is keenly aware of the contribution of Defence families and the Defence industries to the Territory. Defence will continue to be an important focus for jobs and growth. The Land Development Corporation is working to establish an industrial estate with the development of a Defence Support Hub in close proximity to Robertson Barracks. The hub will enable prime contractors and small businesses to cluster and deliver valuable support to Defence. The broad vision for the Defence Support Hub also includes attracting manufacturing research and development and associated activities which will both support Defence operations and provide benefits to the Northern Territory economy.
The government believes home ownership is crucial to the long-term economic and social development and progress of the Territory. Earlier this year, we expanded the role of the Land Development Corporation. In addition to its role in industrial land development, the corporation will oversee urban projects such as residential and affordable housing development, and work with the private sector to provide new, innovative and affordable housing development. LDC lodged the planning application for Bellamack Gardens on 28 September with an exhibition period of four weeks commencing on 2 October. This new medium-density residential development is designed to provide an affordable entry point to the Darwin/Palmerston residential market. Bellamack Gardens incorporates 28 ground-level town houses and units in a unit title development comprising 18 two-bedroom detached town houses, two one-bedroom detached adaptable town houses, and eight one-bedroom units. Expected completion date for the project is 2010.
The government recognises the vital contribution of small and medium businesses to economic growth, investment and jobs. We have established a range of programs to support business and to maximise local business and industry participation in our growing economy. In Question Time today, I alluded to a number of the support programs administered by the Department of Business. I talked about the Territory Growth program - a wonderful program; industry participation plans which are so vital to larger projects and provide opportunities for local contractors within that; the upskills program where businesses can receive help to improve their operations over all their business areas; and, of course, a development support program which really focuses on industry sectors such as Defence. Other areas are the NT Industry Capability Network which is going to supply, and has already supplied, much support for the INPEX project. These are vital programs I talked about today in Question Time. I refer people to the Parliamentary Record for further detail.
Regarding INPEX, it is important that I give just a little more detail. The work is well advanced on the development of an industry participation plan for the $20bn INPEX project. The project will provide unprecedented opportunities for local business. Between 2000 and 3000 jobs will be created during the construction phase of this great project alone.
Another business initiative I did not mention in Question Time today which is quite an important one is the ecoBiz NT program. Basically, this is a business response to the challenges of sustainable development and reducing the carbon footprint through upgrading to more energy-efficient products, practices, and resources. The main criteria for this program are: the proponent is a Territory-based SME; upgrades are to existing infrastructure; and a minimum of 20% reduction in energy, water and/or waste is achieved. Those upgrades mean a payback of three to five years. ecoBiz provides grants of up to $20 000 on a dollar-for-dollar basis for business implementing changes to existing infrastructure to improve their eco- performance. The program has provided $314 963 in rebates in the 2008-09 financial year.
As well as the record infrastructure budget the Treasurer was alluding to in Question Time today, which has provided much support for Territory construction businesses across a whole range of sectors and across regions, members would be aware the federal government delivered a $42bn Nation Building and Jobs Plan in February of this year. The Northern Territory government responded to the stimulus package by announcing our five-point plan for implementation. That plan includes: the Development Consent Authority to meet every fortnight instead of every month; a summit of construction industry leaders to be held to brief industry and get all ideas on the table; dedicated stimulus action squads set up in government departments to get projects up and running as fast as possible; a short, sharp review of procurement to streamline the development processes and cut red tape, including raising the threshold before going to tender; and getting contractors to be involved earlier in the process.
I am pleased to report to the House the plan has been implemented and projects are already being delivered on the ground. While the Northern Territory has withstood the effects of the global financial crisis and has remained strong, Operation Stimulus has further strengthened our economic position and will continue to do so. I add also that I am a little concerned when I hear sounds from the federal parliament and the federal opposition that they want stimulus spending curtailed and even stopped. I believe that would be a disastrous move. The Secretary of Treasury has already come out very publicly and, I suppose, put that idea in its place …
Mr Elferink: Tell us about the Federal Reserve decision to raise interest rates.
Dr BURNS: I note that the members opposite here are still persisting with it. Basically, they need to get in tune and hear what business is saying about the stimulus package and the projects. They need to hear what school councils are saying about it. They need to tune in a bit better than they are now, instead of being dictated to by Malcolm Turnbull and the federal sphere. He is looking a bit wobbly at present so, if I were them, I would be making up their own mind on such important issues.
Tourism is another vital sector of the Northern Territory economy. We recognise that tourism is vital to economic growth and the continued prosperity of the Northern Territory. It contributes 6.4% to GSP compared to 3.7% for the rest of Australia. It also indirectly employs about 17 000 Territorians and is worth an estimated $1.6bn to the Northern Territory economy. We know tourism has had challenging times of late, particularly with the financial downturn, but we, as a government, responded to the set of circumstances by delivering on our tourism stimulus package which was focused on stimulating demand for Northern Territory tourism experiences, supporting local tourism businesses, and particularly encouraging Australians to travel to the Northern Territory.
We have maintained Tourism NT’s budget at $42.5m for the 2009-10 year, representing a 55% increase since 2001 when this Labor government came to power. What has been the result in the 2008-09 financial year? I am advised total visitors to the Territory increased marginally by 0.6% in the 2008-09 financial year to just over 1 400 000 visitors. Our international holiday visitors fell slightly by 1.3% compared to the previous year, whereas nationally we saw a decline of 5.1%. However, visitor nights and holiday expenditure increased, which means they stayed longer and spent more while they were on holidays. This is very important as, despite the global economic circumstances, through our strategy with Tourism NT, we have been able to maintain our numbers, and even increase the revenue in some areas. I believe the stimulus package put together by this government for our tourism industry has been quite successful to date.
This government has also invested up to $5m in domestic marketing campaigns, such as the Get CeNTred campaign which ran between February and April this year, and Destination Darwin – VibraNT, Mix It Up In Darwin launched in August. We are also maintaining our presence internationally, and today I launched the $1.2m Global Red Centre Campaign, which will ensure we maintain our presence in the international markets. We have also had the Global Kakadu Campaign, which is very important and, I believe, has been instrumental in maintaining tourist numbers internationally into the Northern Territory. We need to maintain a balanced portfolio of target markets and spread our risk across various sectors where declines in one area can be offset with gains in another.
I could speak at length across all sectors, but one particular sector which catches my eye is the business events sector. There were 57 conferences and events held at the Darwin and Alice Springs Convention Centres last financial year, attracting just under 20 000 delegates and injecting an estimated $50m into our economy. I, once again, place on the Parliamentary Record just what a great asset the convention centre is here, with all the developments and the hotels which surround it. It is certainly adding to our tourism industry in the Top End. Of course, the asset in Alice Springs, which was built under a previous government - I acknowledge that - the Alice Springs Convention Centre is working well in Alice Springs. We know the story of the opposition really not wanting us to go forward with the Darwin Convention Centre and wave pool, but it has been shown to be an outstanding success.
Turning to international trade, in September I launched the government’s new international trade strategy Growing International Trade 2009-13. The strategy sets out the government’s strategic focus on growing the Territory’s trade performance over the next five years. It builds on our strengths and provides a very clear direction of our international trade strategy. I will be taking the opportunity, hopefully within these sittings some time, to talk more about our international trade strategy. It is very important; we are a government focused on leveraging on our international trade.
Madam Speaker, there is quite a lot I have covered here. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to this Assembly. The challenges we face are all about growth; this is a government which is focused on meeting those challenges. I am proud to support the Chief Minister’s statement.
Debate adjourned.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter from the member for Braitling:
It is signed by the member for Braitling.
Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, it is interesting to see we have left the statement just before 7 pm, which means with a two-hour MPI, we will be knocking off early again tonight. On the first day, we are supposed to go until 10.30 pm. Quite funny, right from the start.
Madam Speaker, I put this matter of public importance on the record today because I really believe it is a matter of public importance.
Last week, I wrote to the Prime Minister, and advised the federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Jenny Macklin, of my desire for federal parliament to conduct a Royal Commission into Indigenous housing. I did not take the decision lightly. It was based on my reaching an opinion there is no one in control of housing in the bush in the Northern Territory - no one in control of three separate things: the current state of housing in the Northern Territory; SIHIP - the Strategic Indigenous Housing Infrastructure Program; and the lack of future planning for Indigenous housing in the Northern Territory.
Indigenous housing is an important element in our roles as parliamentarians, and in the Northern Territory general, because it does not just affect Indigenous Territorians, it affects everybody. The current levels of homelessness and overcrowding, the management of housing, the future rebuilding of housing, has all been of great concern. We are all well aware of the massive backlog and the need for substantially more housing. We are unaware of how housing is going to be provided under this government.
We are also aware there is a substantial need for an increased level of infrastructure in communities, and also in towns, to supply housing for Indigenous Territorians.
I reached my decision on a recent visit to Santa Teresa, with the member for Macdonnell, Dan Moss from The Centralian Advocate and Sara Everingham from the AM program of the ABC. We were walking around the community with several things in the back of our minds, one of which was the sewer problems they had in Ampilatwatja. I am sure most people in the House would be aware of the problem; it was much publicised across the media - overflowing sewage in houses. People could not get it fixed, they moved out of their houses and out bush, and are still living out bush waiting for the federal minister for Indigenous Affairs to visit. We were waiting on Territory representatives, but ended up giving up. Whether they have been out since is despite the point. Those people are still waiting for Jenny Macklin to visit. That is just one example.
There are problems in the Barkly region where they could not get water for school kids and could not get water to houses. We made a bit of a drama about it and, apparently, someone is going to go out there now. That all comes under housing, under the portfolio of the Minister for Housing, and Essential Services.
We have heard a number of things about the Utopia region. This was playing in the back of my mind travelling the Utopia region, seeing the conditions of the houses of the people living there, and recognising this is not a growth town. It is not going to get any new houses and it will barely get any repair and maintenance work under SIHIP. People continue to still live in tin sheds. Seeing the style and condition of housing people live in, in town camps in Alice Springs, Darwin, and Katherine, these things play heavily on your mind and you wonder who is in control and what is going to happen. I seriously doubt anyone knows.
It is part of trying to understand what is happening with SIHIP. I have been asking the Minister for Housing whether he will build a house at any point in time. Since then, we have had the political turmoil and the government has just survived. I have requested a couple of briefings. I had a briefing with the CEO of the department of Housing, Dr David Ritchie, and he quite honestly provided me with information I did not think he would provide. He explained to me about the payment system or where the expenditure for SIHIP went: 20% to corporate overheads; 20% to profit; up to 15% additional for incentive payments on increased Indigenous employment; and then there were the other expenses which go with that.
I found that quite funny, but I also found it interesting when Dr Ritchie said he never expected any houses to be built this year. I said: ‘I beg your pardon, what was that?’ He said there were never going to be any houses built in 2009. I said: ‘How can that be the case when the Minister for Housing, the member for Daly, stood in this parliament in June this year and said there would be 100 houses built this year?’ He stood in this parliament in June only a few months ago saying there would be 100 houses built this year. Then, we had the CEO saying there was never going to be a house built. There will not be any built until at least next year. There will be nothing built before Christmas. What were his words here? ‘First houses to be delivered after Christmas’. I asked how many houses will have been started. This is on Monday, 7 September. He said fewer than half a dozen would have had slabs poured. We had the member for Daly saying 100 houses will be built this calendar year. That is clearly not the case at all. That is a lie. There is no way you could stand in this parliament and say you are going to build 100 houses when the CEO says there is never going to be a house.
The CEO has chief administration role of the program of the portfolio. The member for Daly said there would be 100 houses built and the CEO said there is never going to be a house built this year - never. Who is in control? This is before I went out to Santa Teresa.
I asked David Ritchie also - and he was forthright and provided a very good briefing and I was quite impressed; I was very happy with it. This is not an attack on David Ritchie at all. It is about the information provided. I mentioned there is $130m put down for town camps in Alice Springs - $100m for housing and infrastructure. ‘Can you tell me how many houses will be built?’ He said to me: ‘About 40 houses’. Not exactly 40 - about 40 houses. We have run the story through the media, raised some concerns. It comes down to about $2.5m a house. You have to ask yourself where the money is and who is in control. What will 40 houses do? How will that increase the sustainability of town camps in Alice Springs? What is it doing to normalise the town camps into suburbs in Alice Springs? The Chief Minister had previously said he would like to see Bagot turned into a suburb. Well, that is clearly not the case. It is not the case in Alice Springs. There were no particular answers.
I asked why the delays on the Tiwi Islands and what all the problems were. Dr Ritchie said to me: ‘What we were doing with the refurbs, we were going out there and planning on refurbishing and putting an extra bedroom on a house, or putting a verandah around a house, because we know a lot of people like to sleep on the veranda and an extra bedroom would provide more housing’. He said: ‘The problem was, under the outcomes under the Closing the Gap initiatives, one of the key things is to reduce the number of people who live in a house’.
The problem they are experiencing is, when they put a bedroom or a verandah on, more people were coming to stay there, so the indicators are actually looking worse than better. Now, they have decided to not put extra bedrooms or verandahs on houses so they can improve the indicators - not to meet the family need or the housing need, just to improve the indicators. I am now told they are going to one-bedroom units and two-bedroom houses so they can get their numbers up without actually housing people. That is what they are doing. It is deceitful! It is not addressing a need; it is an incompetent government managing figures to try to make themselves look good. How can you call a one-bedroom unit a house under SIHIP just so you can get to the 750? This is absolutely ballistic.
These things were playing on the back of my mind. Then, I had a meeting in Alice Springs - a briefing by DPI and someone from the Chief Minister’s Department – and I asked them about infrastructure in Alice Springs, particularly trying to find out what the constraints on land release and urban housing development were and how the impact of town camp redevelopment would impact on that infrastructure. I got to the point of how many houses were going to be built with this $100m, remembering that David Ritchie had told me ‘about 40 houses’. The bloke from the Chief Minister’s office said: ‘Substantially less than 40 houses’. I said: ‘I beg your pardon? $100m, is that all we get?’ Substantially less than 40 houses. I said: ‘I hope you know I am shadow Indigenous affairs and in the opposition. I am sure you know, because you are in the Chief Minister’s Department, what you have told me is pretty explosive stuff. This is the second time I have been told by a senior head of the Northern Territory government that fewer than 40 houses will be built for $100m’.
Jenny Macklin, the federal Aboriginal Affairs minister said: ‘Oh, no. We are going to get 85 houses’. We have the double-dealing Dutch over here: ‘Oh, we will do 40. We will save money so we can do something else’. That is exactly what is happening. This is just false; this is maladministration. This is lying to people of the Northern Territory ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I remind you, you can only make comments such as that by way of a substantive motion.
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member did not refer to any particular person.
Madam SPEAKER: You know the rules …
Mr TOLLNER: I think he was referring to an organisation of people. My understanding is he is entirely within the bounds of the standing orders.
Madam SPEAKER: That has never been the way it has been ruled in this parliament, member for Fong Lim. In fact, the ruling has been the opposite way. I ask you to reword what you said, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I will reword it, Madam Speaker. The minister responsible for the Housing portfolio in the Northern Territory government is saying one thing, the boss of his department saying another, and Jenny Macklin saying something else. The poor fellow out in the bush still does not have a house to live in. What is going on? This is costing squillions of dollars and no one is getting a house.
All this was in the back of my mind when I was going to Santa Teresa to visit and do the normal things I do when I go out bush. You would not believe it, Madam Speaker. I went there three days after radio reports about the three houses which had their roofs blown off in the sandstorm 12 months and two weeks ago still without their roofs replaced. Then I heard the Minister for Housing say: ‘Oh, gee, we must have forgot about that. I was not aware’. Well, you are the Minister for Housing. Surely, you are in control?
We went out there and had a look - the member for Macdonnell, Dan Watts, Sara Everingham and I. We thought we would just have to expose this incompetence. The member for Daly saying: ‘We will put the roofs back on the houses’ is all well and good. We went out there and there were no walls. He would put the roofs on when there are no walls! We were looking at houses which have been completely destroyed.
Alice Brennan of the ABC, 21 September, Monday, 5 pm:
That is how we run a government; we just presume things happen. We are not told; we just presume it. The article went on:
Who is running what? That is just amazing; just gross incompetence. He is saying: ‘Oh, the question has to be asked’. Well, we have to ask a question of him. He has not done the job.
Ms Carney: Where is the minister?
Mr GILES: He is hiding up the back because he knows he cannot manage us …
Ms Scrymgour: Oh come on, you know you cannot …
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw that, Madam Speaker.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I have no idea how he is still the Minister for Housing. I have some good photos. You would love to see the incompetence happening in Santa Teresa. We visited one house. I cannot remember the number of this particular house. You will see, Madam Speaker, for the benefit of the people in this room, there is a big gap in the wall of this house. Santa Teresa is a refurbishment and repairs and maintenance community. That means they do not get new houses; they just get some repairs and some houses are refurbished. We had a look at this house. We had a list of what houses will get done and which ones will not. Amazingly, this house - it is pretty hard to watch television when you have a big stream of light coming through your lounge room, because that is what happens. We saw the list of houses to be fixed - that is not one of them. I am sure when you have a gap two inches wide in your house, it is probably something that needs to be fixed. No repairs or maintenance, no refurbishment – it is just one which does not get fixed.
We walked around, and went to the Essential Services Officer, and he said: ‘Why do you not come and have a look at the power boards?’ So, we had a look at the power boards. He said: ‘Have a look here. You will see the electrical safety switch is jammed off’. I said: ‘What is going on with the electrical safety switch?’ He said: ‘When they put the power meters in, they put them in facing the wind, so when the wind comes up in a dusty community, the dust goes straight into the power boards’. They have these power boards without a lock, so the dust gets in the safety switch, then the safety switch jams off. In 80 houses in Santa Teresa, to cut a long story short, there are no safety switches.
This is the government looking after people. There are 80 houses in Santa Teresa, and not a safety switch working. The ESO was a fairly decent bloke. He rang the company - I think it was Hager. They wrote a report for them, which I happen to have. He sent the report saying they were incorrectly installed and dangerous, off to WorkSafe - to David Mallett, I think it was. ‘David, I am sending the results from the electrician regarding a problem with the faulty RCDs as discussed with you previously over the phone. I hope you can do something about it’. Anyway, I am told that NT WorkSafe is not investigating. We still have 80 houses in Santa Teresa with faulty electrical switches, so people could be electrocuted. This is the bloke who is not in charge - not in charge at all.
I will cut a long story short. We went into the council office and, you would not believe it, there is a great big map on the wall. I brought this along for visual purposes so you can see just how big this is - probably about 4 ft by 3 ft. I have had a look at this map - there were two on the wall - dated 4 October 2007. This one was not on the wall. There was another one which was dated 21 May 2008. This map shows all the houses in the community, and it has a little key here which is a cross through a little block which says, ‘If the house has a cross through it, it is beyond economic repair’. When you count them, there are 26 houses which are beyond economic repair; that is, it would cost more to replace them than is financially viable to build a new one. They are beyond economic repair - some of them are just completely unsafe.
When I looked at the difference between the 2007 map and the 2008 map, I realised there was an extra house with a cross through it. So, someone has, obviously, done an assessment between 2007 and 2008 to say they have an additional one which is beyond economic repair. Mind you, this is a Northern Territory government report produced by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. Surely, someone there is aware of what is going on - it is not the member for Daly.
I had a look at this, and then through the report from the Alliance contractor, the one who says there is a budget of $5.2m, 33 houses scheduled for repairs and maintenance, 59 possible inclusions for SIHIP, but they are only going to do 34. I questioned whether all the houses listed as beyond economic repair were going to be refurbished. The answer to that question is no. ‘We are not going to refurbish all the ones beyond economic repair, we will just pick some. We will pick some of them, not all of them, some of them’. Some people will have a nice new updated house; other people will still be living in houses beyond economic repair, and not fit to live in. The member for Daly would not be aware of that. He was not aware roofs were not put on. When he tried to put the roofs on, there were no walls. That is one thing.
The council said: ‘Oh no, we do not have $5.2m, we only have $2.82m now; it has been downgraded’. I know the member for Daly might say something else, and he might say it to the media. We know how it works because he said he would build 100 houses by the end of the year. That was at the end of June this year, just a few months ago. He should have known by then. We know if you set a budget of $5.2m marked down to $2.8m, you might think it cannot be right. Then, when you talk to 20 other communities and they all say the same thing, there is a pattern. They are all saying the same thing! They are all getting dudded - all getting dudded. Then what happens is …
A member: I move an extension of time …
Madam SPEAKER: There is no extension of time in an MPI.
Mr Knight: You should have read the standing orders, you idiot …
Mr GILES: Shut up, member for Daly …
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Withdraw, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. Sorry, Madam Speaker.
I will rest my case there. We have all these houses listed as beyond economic repair, the government is not going to fix them all under SIHIP, and the Alliance contractor is saying some houses should be demolished. What will happen at Santa Teresa is they will have fewer houses at the end of SIHIP than when they started. Every other community which is not a new housing community is going to be in exactly the same position. If we have 750 houses demolished out of those 60 communities which will not get new housing, we will be in a worse position than we started. We should have started in 2007, and the member for Daly has not built a house in two years.
Mr KNIGHT (Housing): Madam Speaker, this is a very important subject, and I welcome it. I guess it shows today was an opportunity for the opposition spokesperson for Indigenous Affairs, and who seems is the Indigenous housing minister as well, because the current Housing spokesperson does not seem to have much to say on anything to do with Indigenous housing. In fact, when we had a SIHIP briefing we asked the member for Braitling if the housing spokesperson was coming along. He said: ‘No, do not worry about her, I will do it’. So, left her right out …
Mr Giles: That is not what I said.
Mr KNIGHT: It was an opportunity. He has been in this parliament for over 12 months and here he is again with an MPI around Indigenous housing - a very important subject. Today, we have heard from the member for Braitling, but he has not a single plan for Indigenous housing. All he can do is criticise. He has no plan. He said he had a plan. On 17 October 2007, on 8HA, when he was the federal candidate for Lingiari, he said:
This was 2007:
That was in 2007. He went on radio, yet again, with the ABC, and talked about developing policies which would come out later in the campaign and would include housing. In 2007, he said he had a plan for Indigenous housing, and he was going to release it. Today, to this point - he has been a member of this parliament for 12 months - he still has no plan.
We do have a plan, and we are implementing it. One of the first things the member for Braitling needs to do is acknowledge the significance of the problem of Indigenous housing in the bush. It is a huge problem which has been growing for decades and decades, since the homelands movement, well before self-government. We had the Commonwealth operating through DAA and then there were various connotations of the delivery of Indigenous housing; more recently, through Indigenous community housing organisations and community government councils. Basically, it was insufficient ...
Ms Anderson: Yes, blame the poor black fella for your failures.
Mr KNIGHT: We had IHANT there for a while and ATSIC - the member for Macdonnell was a Commissioner of ATSIC for a while when all these houses were being delivered. They were being delivered piecemeal: a few houses here, a few houses there. For every single one of the allocations the individual ICHOs had a consultant; they had yet another design done for two houses here and three houses there. It was just money down the drain and, because of the cosy relationship which existed then, there were nice little deals done. It resulted in a waste of money for a start, poor workmanship, and inappropriate materials used.
Ms Anderson interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Those houses are out there today - 6000 houses sitting out in the bush today built over 30 or 40 years. Recently, we have had houses delivered under IHANT …
Ms Carney: This is about you and your government now. You are a coward!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat, minister.
Honourable members, apart from the level of interjections, I would like to comment on the large number of members today who have used completely unparliamentary – quite off - language in the Chamber. While I have asked members to withdraw those remarks, from now on, I will now be asking members to withdraw from the Chamber.
In relation to this debate, there are many interjections. It is a topic which is of concern to all Territorians, and you need to allow the member who is speaking to be heard. Minister, you have the call. Could you direct your comments through the Chair, please?
Mr KNIGHT: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
We had a piecemeal approach to Indigenous housing and also the method of ...
Mr Giles: We had houses being built then.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: We had a piecemeal approach, a large waste of money, and basically, the outcome was very poor training outcomes out of the whole program. We had inappropriate house designs …
Ms Anderson: They are still inappropriate now.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Macdonnell, cease interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: … and we had very poor workmanship. Those houses out there are ageing and deteriorating. People are still living in them because there is just not enough housing for the entire Indigenous population in all those 500-odd communities throughout the Territory. It is a significant problem.
It was more recently identified, apart from those 6000 houses, there was still a need for some $2bn of housing to go into those communities. That was about 12 months ago and it has, obviously, increased. What happened in April last year when we signed the remote Indigenous housing with Maningrida Progress Association was, for the first time in the Territory, the Northern Territory government actually took some responsibility for Indigenous housing in the bush. Before, the money was just given to ICHOs and it was really left up to them: ‘Spend the money, go look after it yourselves, we will give you a bit of money for R&M’. Basically, the government wiped their hands of the situation - of the construction, management and maintenance of these houses.
That has not been sustainable; it could not go on. The Northern Territory government has to take some responsibility for its citizens. It has to take responsibility for public housing. It has to take responsibility, but the reality is there is a $2bn backlog in the Northern Territory alone. On top of that, we have to maintain the housing which has been put out there in the last 30 or 40 years. That is a mammoth task when you have a situation of poor workmanship, poor materials, and houses which have been flogged for the last two or three decades. It is a mammoth undertaking.
Also, the management is going to be a huge challenge, but we are up for it because we, as a government, know we have to take responsibility for public housing in these remote communities. These are Territorians and we have to try to manage those properties better than we have done before, so the properties can last longer and be managed in a healthier way so people live a healthier life. It is a huge challenge, not just for the Labor government of today, but for this parliament going into the future ...
Mr Giles: It is for the CLP government of tomorrow.
Mr KNIGHT: Well, you never had a plan, member for Braitling. You had your opportunity today to talk about the plan you promised two years ago. You do not have a plan. You do not have single plan …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, this is the extent of the problem. That is what is facing not only this government, but this parliament into the future: how we manage, how we construct, and how we repair these houses.
SIHIP will deliver; it is delivering right now. There is work going on, not only on the first three packages at Tennant Creek, the Tiwis and on Groote Eylandt. Work has already commenced. It has been going for several months now at Wadeye, Maningrida and at Gunbalanya. That work is progressing very well. I have been out to Wadeye and spoken to them and they are just finalising the designs ...
Ms Anderson: Yes, they call you Silent Knight there.
Mr KNIGHT: Sorry? I will talk about the southern refurbishments. There has been a lot of scoping done already. Twenty-nine communities are part of the southern refurbishment. That work is commencing. We will deliver every one of those 750 homes, those 230 upgrades, and the 2500 refurbishments ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Oh, that is going to come back and bite you.
Mr KNIGHT: Well, it will not, because we will. What surprises me - and I do not know what they think was going to happen - in April last year we - the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments - said we have a five-year program; in June 2013 it was going to finish. There would be 750 homes over a five-year program, with the alliance contracting style of procurement, management and delivery. The opposition would have known that; it was a fairly public announcement - five years using alliance contracting. If you know anything about alliance contracting, the first thing you have to do is to get the alliances together. It was a national campaign to get those alliances together. There are Tier 1 companies in many of those alliances - Leighton, Laing O’Rouke - some fairly significant companies are involved in those alliances. The recruitment, the short listing, and the actual selection took up until October 2008. That was a reasonable time frame to get the alliances on board.
The first packages were allocated in December of that same year - the first three - and they have been working in those communities ever since. I do not know what they expected to happen in a five-year program - that they would deliver all the houses in the first year? With a major program with large packages, with that style of contracting, the ramping up takes a while but the delivery is much stronger, quicker, and more substantial through the middle years. That is exactly what this program is going to be doing.
The opposition knows this program will deliver quite significantly over the next two Dry Seasons and that is why they are getting in with a few cheap political points, to try to scaremonger people in the bush. It is really quite disappointing that the member for Braitling is out there spreading mistruths, putting little stories around ...
Ms Anderson: At least he has been out there, unlike you, the Minister for Housing – Silent Knight.
Mr KNIGHT: He goes on about Santa Teresa. The package for Santa Teresa has not changed; it is still $5m. Nothing has changed. The member for Macdonnell is yapping on there. We have said publicly ...
Mr Giles: She knows.
Mr KNIGHT: She does not know, she cannot add up.
Ms Anderson: I know the problems, unlike you.
Mr KNIGHT: In and around the program, 92% is going to be spent on the construction program …
Ms Anderson: You pretend to know …
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Macdonnell!
Mr KNIGHT: That is the reality of things; it will deliver that. It will deliver six packages, and we have more to come. Hopefully, the ...
Mr Giles: You are going to have fewer houses than before you started.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, hopefully, the negotiations will go well in those major southern communities such as Yuendumu and Hermannsburg, where we can get some leases, because that is a fundamental requirement. It is a requirement one of your previous Chief Ministers actually supported - the requirement to have secure land tenure. How can you properly manage a public housing dwelling anywhere in the world, anywhere in Australia, anywhere in the Northern Territory, unless you have secure land tenure? You have to have the ability to manage those properties, and that has been the requirement.
I thank the Northern Land Council for their vision and drive in getting that first lot of leases. I thank those traditional owners; they have seen they can actually move forward. I know the CLC is working to make it happen in the southern region as well, and I look forward to getting under way in many of those other communities.
It is a mammoth undertaking. I am disappointed with the member for Braitling, who is out there, not only spreading misinformation, he went out and talked about the …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr KNIGHT: He went out there, and not only told some untruths about Santa Teresa and how the figure had changed, but passed them on to his old mate, Tony Abbott, who repeated them. Well, it has not changed. He also went out there and spread some mistruths about the Alice Springs town camps. He was told, in writing, quite clearly, that it was 85 and, in a briefing with two of my …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Mr KNIGHT: No, no, I am finishing …
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I had to withdraw comments about mistruths before, and I ask the member for Daly to withdraw as well.
Madam SPEAKER: The minister was not talking about ‘lying’ as you were, member for Braitling – there is a difference. Minister, you could reword however; you are getting pretty close to wanting to do something by way of a substantive motion.
Mr KNIGHT: Misinformation? He was spreading vicious misinformation out there. He was clearly told in a briefing about the number of houses to be constructed in Alice Springs town camps. He was told it was going to be more than 40 and, subsequently, he was given in writing it was going to be 85. Yet, he still went out and told the public it was 40. Why would you want to do that? Why would you want to spread all those untruths out there - misinformation? It beggars belief you would do that. Also, going into communities and promising: ‘You should get all new houses here. You should get all this refurbishment’. The reality is we have $1.7bn over the next 10 years, including infrastructure as well. We have a $2bn backlog today, which is going to increase over time, so we have a significant challenge ahead of us.
Work is under way on this program, and it will deliver. I guess one of us is going to be eating humble pie next year when we start to knock these houses up and get the numbers starting to grow. It will be significant, and I look forward to having further discussions in this House. I look forward to the Auditor-General’s report in February next year, which will vindicate this government in relation to the administrative fees, and all the scuttlebutt and self-serving innuendo which has been put out to justify people’s actions.
Madam Speaker, this program is delivering, and it continues to do so. However, it is only one part of the …
Mr Giles: Delivering what? There is not a single house.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: It is only one part of providing a comprehensive plan for remote Indigenous housing. There has to be the management framework around it. There has to be comprehensive repairs and maintenance program around it. Part of SIHIP – a part which members on the other side want to forget and push aside with respect to this program - is the jobs. It is the training and the jobs. Why do we say they are so important? I have seen young men and women on Groote Eylandt working on those houses and getting accredited training, because we want these young men and women to be repairing and maintaining these houses into the future. It costs significantly less to have a local tradesperson, or a local skilled person, to do the repairs and maintenance. That is why we have the requirement in there. It is also about the human factor.
This program should not just leave houses. It should leave a skilled workforce, building up those communities. What we are seeing on Groote Eylandt, at Tiwi, and Tennant Creek is that human development, which is significant. People are working on their own houses; working on their family’s houses. That is the significant part of this. We will see hundreds of Aboriginal people from these local communities employed by SIHIP, skilled up through this process. There is also the requirement to transition them into either a local subcontractor, or offered work elsewhere. This is what we are trying to do, because we know in the future we are going to be looking for a workforce to repair and maintain these houses.
We also have staff out there in and around the housing management. This program is delivering, it will deliver. The CLP has no plan; we do.
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: They do not acknowledge the significance of the problem; we do. The CLP is making unfunded promises. Madam Speaker, we are being honest with Territorians and the CLP is very misleading.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, what a joke that was from the Housing Minister …
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms ANDERSON: Yes, what a joke. Pretend to know about Aboriginal poverty and disadvantage - you know nothing. That is why your own constituents call you ‘silent Knight’.
Madam Speaker, I support the MPI the member for Braitling has brought to this House. I correct some of the misinformation the Housing Minister has put onto the floor of this parliament about the so-called misinformation the member for Braitling has given to my constituents at Santa Teresa. It certainly did not happen. The member for Braitling was quite welcomed by my constituents at Santa Teresa. They took him around and showed him the house with the gap, which is not even going to be renovated under SIHIP. Northern Territory Housing has a charge called a poll tax - $45 per person. Every adult person who lives inside a house pays this $45.
The family who live in the house the Opposition Leader was talking about, without any roof - and the member for Braitling also spoke about it - still pays rent on the house. They have for the last 12 months. They are living inside their cousin’s home, but they are still paying rent for the house with no roof. It is a real shame - not just for us at politicians in this House, but as Territorians – that we have allowed this to happen to the most impoverished, disadvantaged people, who we continuously talk about, and for whom we go to the federal government and get national partnerships to make the lives of these people better.
Madam Speaker, I put this photograph up so people can see. This is the house the people are still paying rent for which has no roof. It is a real shame, in the 21st century, a Labor government would allow this, and allow a minister who does not even know what he is talking about, to talk to an MPI. It is absolutely disgraceful. I support the member for Braitling when he calls for a Royal Commission because I really do believe there needs to be a Royal Commission into the spending in the Northern Territory.
These are some of the saddest, most outrageous stories you will find. They have come out of my electorate, but you will see it in Stuart, Barkly, Arafura, Arnhem, and Katherine. You will see the homelessness. Homelessness does not have barriers, it does not have colours. I have seen non-Indigenous people homeless as well, sleeping in the long grass, sleeping in the creeks. When we talk about people with dementia and old age, just go down to the Todd River, Alice Springs, this side of Hoppy’s Camp. You will see an old lady called Valerie Nungerai she has dementia. Her home is a gum tree, this side of the Todd. Go and have a look at an amputee called David Wintjanana under the bridge in Alice Springs at the roundabout, crawling around. That is at the creek in Alice Springs, at the Todd River. This is real hopelessness and we should be absolutely, utterly ashamed of ourselves to stand in this parliament and pretend we are doing things about disadvantage and homelessness - not just for Indigenous people but non-Indigenous people in the Northern Territory as well.
I will go on with my written speech. I speak to this matter of public importance with a sense of despair in my heart. Of course, this is a matter of the greatest public importance. Our fellow citizens are badly housed and the policies of this government are to blame. This is not just an Indigenous policy issue; it is an issue for all of us. It concerns our fellow Territorians. Have we done the best for them? Can we hold up our heads proudly and say we have tried our best? You all know this is a question about which I care deeply.
I know the story from the inside; I know it very well. I came into this parliament knowing it had a ground level. I grew up in a humpy. When I was a girl at Papunya settlement, we dreamed of having good, solid houses of our own, homes for our families - well designed, peaceful, safe and quiet. Is it too much to ask the Northern Territory government, which has received vast funding from the Commonwealth of Australia, to spend some of that money ensuring the wellbeing of people on remote communities?
I knew when I was a child what every Aboriginal boy and girl on communities knows today: that bad, overcrowded houses and houses which are collapsing, almost guarantee failure in life. Bad housing is, in itself, enough to set most Aboriginal children on a path to illness, poor educational achievements, long-term unemployment, an unfulfilled life, and an early death. If you house people in kennels, they will have a dog’s life. I have watched and waited in this parliament over the past five years while we have done nothing. In that time, thousands of Aboriginal children have lived from five to 10 years old, their crucial years of development, in substandard accommodation, ill prepared for life.
I look at you, Madam Speaker, and around this Chamber at the men and women seated here, and I ask myself: what has gone wrong? Are we such bad, heartless people we cannot join together and ensure the correct spending of the $550m we were given to build houses in the bush? Do we not understand or care? Is it not a disgrace, a shame on all of us that we have sat here and watched for almost two years - two years - without a single house being built, even though the money for SIHIP has been announced?
This is not a political point. Put aside your politics a moment, forget you represent a party, or your actions keep a party in government. Just imagine what it is like to grow up in a small brick block house with 20 people, as our many community children do today. I want to paint that picture for you. I want you to think what it would be like. Nights are noisy, days are noisy too. There is no food in the kitchen; it gets eaten up at once. You are hungry, there are dogs everywhere, the floors are dirty, and the bathrooms are a mess. They clog up all the time. There is loud music playing and people talking, shouting, playing cards, children screaming and running around everywhere.
If you ever thought of reading or daydreaming, you would not have much chance. A computer is just a thing you see at school. You do not know much English living the way you do, but your own language is basic too. What you speak is simple Aboriginal English that stops you from having a way of speaking and communicating with outsiders, and being confident enough to even think of working with them. No, what you speak is the language of your house – the language of tension, fights, anger, and lack of privacy. You know in your heart there is very little hope of escaping from the fate awaiting you. You will not finish school; your home will not be stable and peaceful. You will be the one of the least advanced people in the Territory.
Does it really have to be this way? There are many things we cannot change, but the housing situation is one we can change - and fast. I have looked on as the government I was part of has failed in this area. There has been no sense of urgency at all; it has been total complacency. Suppose we try an experiment? Let us imagine you are sleeping at night in a community house, and every time you wanted to get up at night and have a cup of tea, you had to climb over eight bodies on mattresses. Suppose each time you closed your eyes, you were woken up by a fight, someone playing music, or some drunk bursting in. Suppose you could sleep an hour a night, which was the way it was, year after year. Would you be able to do your job well, deal with the pleasures of life, or look smart and well turned out?
I ask all honourable members, through you, Madam Speaker, the same question. Without basic accommodation, a roof and a quiet space, childhood is not childhood, school days are not school days, and life’s path is broken. It all starts at home. Just think of how your life would be if you had lived in a house with 20 people in a chaotic society when you were young and growing up. Would you be where you are now, Madam Speaker?
Let us look back a moment for years after you had won office and the Northern Territory Labor government complained it could not solve the housing problem in the bush. Then, along came the federal government with its emergency response, and Canberra agreed there was a link between poor housing and child abuse. It handed the Territory housing money - a first down payment. That became the basis for SIHIP which gave people in the bush some hope. What have we done with the stewardship for SIHIP? Consulting, bureaucratic talking, no houses - not one.
I do not want to use this MPI to score points. I invite us all here to pause and ask what the aim of public service really is. Why are we in politics? Surely, it is because we want to do good for society. We all know the plight of Indigenous community people is the most serious challenge we face in the Territory today. We all know it matters more than wave pools, water slides and V8 races. We all know it is the one thing by which we will be judged when we have left politics. Historians will not be sitting about discussing the Chief Minister and his attempts to bring a gas plant to the Territory. They will not be discussing the member for Nelson and his brilliant actions in getting new projects for his electorate. They will weigh and balance whether we did well by the poorest, the weakest, and the most disadvantaged in our midst.
Of course, I feel this very strongly because I am a bush person and I know all this on my skin. The consequences of bad housing hit me every day. They hit me in the funerals I go to - funerals of young men at the end of their wasted lives; funerals of women who died of preventable diseases too young; funerals of family members. We gather to say our farewells and we wonder why things have gone this way.
I feel we, as a parliament, have lost our way badly. The issue we should be talking about is basic housing. It should be in the front of our minds and at the tip of our tongues. It has to be introduced through an MPI. I know the government side and their new ally would rather talk about their new Council of Cooperation than on matters of significance.
This is a matter of significance and it should be talked about every day until we get results. Why not be radical? Why not introduce housing vouchers and give them to communities right now? Why not ask Canberra to devote military construction crews to mediate housing projects in the bush? Why not tell INPEX and all other resource corporations coming into the Territory they will have to fund housing in remote communities as a matter of basic corporate social responsibility? I have seen no evidence of new thinking on housing. We need that new thinking and we need it now, Madam Speaker.
When I was a child, as I mentioned, home was a humpy, and the humpy was our private family space. We had nothing, but we had everything – love, warmth, closeness. Sometimes in my despair at the failure of the Northern Territory to house my people, I wonder whether we would not be better just going back out into the bush and living our traditional lives. However, I know that time has gone and too much damage has been done to Aboriginal society in the name of progress.
I still remember sitting in the briefing I had on SIHIP when I was minister, and being told that only 30% of the program funds would end up in houses. I remember what I thought then. I remember the chill I felt. I thought: so this is the way it is? It is all words, it is all a game, and no one really cares. Now is the time for this parliament to show it cares. We were given $0.5bn by Canberra for remote community housing. Where is it? What has happened to it? It was meant for the bush, not for the pockets of consultants and government mates. I believe it is the responsibility of the Minister for Housing to come before the public every week and give a detailed account of progress. I believe a new Housing Minister should be named as a matter of urgency. I believe the failure of the government on this fund is total, and lost years will never be made up.
To pretend that all is well in the Territory today is simply a disgrace, Madam Speaker.
Ms Carney: Where are all their speakers?
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): No, they are not very interested.
Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak on this matter of public importance. It is an important matter. The way the government has handled this whole Indigenous housing program is totally shameful - absolutely appalling. They have had over $650m for the last two years, and have not completed one single house. We have heard from the member for Braitling how they are charging rent to people who are not even living in houses. I fail to see how members of the government - particularly people who have large remote electorates, or electorates containing Indigenous town camps - can come into this place and hold their heads up and not be completely embarrassed and shamed by this appalling situation going on in the Northern Territory.
Originally, this money was allocated for emergency housing. This money originally stemmed from a report which seems to have been lost on members of the other side - a report called the Little Children Are Sacred, which highlighted the degradation, the terrible living conditions, and some of the horrible things happening in Aboriginal communities and town camps across the Northern Territory. Of course, the report was commissioned by the Northern Territory government; it is not something some foreign body cooked up to attack the Northern Territory government. This was a report done for the Northern Territory government, and they seem to have turned their backs on the findings in the report - turned their backs, an absolutely shameful situation. I am staring at the member for Barkly sitting there.
I just noticed a media release from Mal Brough, the then federal Indigenous Affairs minister, on 7 August 2007 where he was lauding the fact there was an historic 99-year town care sublease agreed in Tennant Creek:
Within eight weeks!
There was $20m gifted from the Commonwealth to the Territory government for the upgrade of housing stock way back on 7 August 2007, over two years ago.
What has happened since then? Following that announcement, the Northern Territory government agreed to put $10m into the same program. The reason they did it was, in July 2007, the Northern Territory government Department of Family and Community Services put out an explanatory document called Connecting Neighbours, a program to upgrade essential services in Aboriginal urban living areas. The explanatory document is about the order of cost estimate assumptions for the Tennant Creek project. When you flick through it, you see the total project cost, excluding renovations to houses but including roads, electricity, water mains, sewerage and consultancy fees, was almost $22.5m – an estimation, at that time, by the Northern Territory government, of what the headworks and other programs would cost. Additional to that, they estimated, to upgrade 78 houses would cost somewhere around $9.24m. It was a total budget of $31.74m. Since that time, the federal government has committed a further $6.5m, taking the total up to $36.5m committed to the Tennant Creek area to upgrade 78 houses, and to build new houses.
How many houses have been built? How many upgrades have happened? Where is the money? Where is the money? There is nothing to be seen - absolutely nothing to be seen. Yet, sitting day, after sitting day, after sitting day, the member for Barkly waltzed in, never says ‘boo’ about what is happening in his electorate with his constituents and $36.5m allocated to fix their houses, plus the sewerage, the water mains, the electricity and the roads. $36.5m should be being spent in Tennant Creek. I ask you, Madam Speaker, is it? Is it being spent in Tennant Creek? If the government promised to spend $36.5m in Fong Lim, I would be keeping a close eye on it, and would be making sure every single cent of the promised money was spent in my electorate. If it was not; if there was the slightest possibility there had been some hocus-pocus going on …
Mr Styles: Mistruth.
Mr TOLLNER: … some mistruth or misinformation, I would be coming in here and kicking up a God Almighty stink. I would be absolutely outraged. Yet, we see the member for Barkly come here and not once - not once - has he complained about the lack of work taking place in his electorate.
Look across the other side of the room and you see them everywhere – the members for Arafura, Arnhem and Nhulunbuy. All these people have these places in their electorates and nothing is being done - absolutely nothing is being done!
We sit here and watch the member for Daly bumble through Question Time, failing to answer questions, talking about things that happened 10 or 15 years ago as if it is some shock, horror revelation to him. Look around the place, look around the Territory. We do have communities, the length and breadth of the Territory, which have houses in them. Did they just magically appear? Did they just magically come out of the ether? It was previous governments which did that. The member for Daly has the audacity to complain he has to perform maintenance on those places. Goodness me, the capital costs have been met and all of the work has been done on those places. The least you would think the government could do was to ensure they were standing and were habitable.
We heard stories today from the members for Braitling and Macdonnell of how people are living in houses with walls but no roof. Goodness me, what a ridiculous situation to be in. I have heard of people in Alice Springs town camps living under chicken coops and being charged rent - under corrugated iron, bits of stuff tied together, and cardboard and the like. They are paying rent for that. Not only are they paying rent, but there has been almost $700m worth of taxpayers’ money allocated to fixing this problem, or at least providing some emergency accommodation. What did we hear today in Question Time? The government is working on the plans and the design of these places two years later. They do not even have a design.
They have spent $45m and have nothing to show for it - absolutely nothing to show for it. Here we are, we run a matter of public importance on the issue, and we ran a whole Question Time on this housing issue, and we get one lame duck minister try to defend the indefensible. We heard nothing from the Chief Minister, nothing from the Treasurer - do not hear ‘boo’! It is like they are not even here. It is an appalling situation. It does not seem to matter where you go in the Northern Territory, this situation continues.
In the last week, the member for Braitling called for a Royal Commission. I believe it was an eminently sensible call. I heard the Chief Minister on the radio bat it away: ‘Oh, you do not have Royal Commissions into this sort of stuff. No one is alleging corruption’. I do not know what you call it, but when $45m just disappears, when we identify $36.5m in Tennant Creek which has just disappeared – plans, everything all with the Northern Territory government logo, all happened a year ago. ‘Yes we are going to do this. We are going to upgrade roads, we are going to upgrade sewerage, we have taken the money’. They have taken the money and it has just gone.
The member for Nelson has a thing he wants to get up called the Territory Council of Cooperation or something like that. The Council of Territory Cooperation is going to look into it. We have had minister Macklin, who seemed to be the person who was running the program, have an independent look at it. What a bizarre situation! Now we are going to get the Council of Territory Cooperation look at it. It will take another six months or so. Ultimately, where are we going to get? I tell you, I believe the only way to get to the bottom of this whole debacle is with a Royal Commission.
Members: Hear! Hear!
Mr TOLLNER: We need someone at a high level - independent, unobstructed - to get in there, root out what the problems are, find out where the problems are, and fix it and tell us. We are certainly not hearing it from the minister. We heard from the Planning minister today, in Question Time, saying we have this wonderful land release program. In 2007, they were making the same announcements they are today - exactly the same announcements. The really heartbreaking thing about this is these are human beings we are talking about. These are real people – real people - living in the most squalid conditions.
We have the bleeding hearts on the left coming in here saying how much they love Aboriginal people and Indigenous culture and all of that, and they cannot even provide them with a house, despite the fact they have had nearly $700m for two years. That is a disgrace! It is a total disgrace and every member on the other side should hang their head in shame - absolutely hang their head in shame ...
Mr Conlan: Or at least get up and give a defence.
Mr TOLLNER: Put up a defence or do something. Explain where this money is just disappearing. Explain why there are no houses being built. At one stage, I had a bit of respect for the member for Arafura. When she left the government, she said she could not tolerate this any more. Then, lo and behold, another Indigenous person left the government and the member for Arafura was back. That is just terrible. These people should not just be booted out of government; they should be made accountable - absolutely accountable. What are they doing on the Treasury benches? Where is that $700m? Almost $700m and not a single house to show for it - how absolutely disgraceful. Madam Speaker, every single one of them should hang their head in shame.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Policy): Madam Speaker, I contribute to this very important debate and go to the heart of the matter. We are reminded over a third of the Territory’s population is Indigenous, and 70% of that population lives outside our major cities and towns. Significantly, it is also a fact in the Territory over 60% of Indigenous people 15 years and older live in overcrowded housing. This situation did not occur over the last 10 years. It is a shameful circumstance which has bedevilled the Territory for decades. It is a circumstance which continues to burden families with unhealthy and unsafe places to live. It is a circumstance which continues to place unconscionable burdens and liabilities on the taxpayer - not just meeting the housing burden, but the health costs and lost opportunities associated with this deplorable state of affairs. How can we expect our most important resource - our families and our kids - to prosper, do well, and contribute to a better Territory while shackled by the miserable circumstances of overcrowding and unhealthy living? None of this is new to us. Many of us here know that circumstance intimately. That is why we are here: to do something about it.
I recently attended a meeting on Groote Eylandt with Tony Wurramarrba and James Anaya, the UN Special Rapporteur visiting Australia to review and report on the Northern Territory emergency response. There was a particular, telling moment, during their visit where Mr Wurramarrba was telling the Special Rapporteur of one of the fundamental problems which hindered progress in developing our remote communities.
Our government knows SIHIP is new. Our government knows SIHIP is a risk. We have known, in conjunction with the federal government, we were embarking on a very different process. It was a risk and a challenge we did not shy away from. In fact, the people of Groote Eylandt, under the leadership of the Anindilyakwa Land Council, knew the risk as well. We know it has had an impact on the very Chairmanship of the Anindilyakwa Land Council, who expressed in the meeting with the UN rapporteur there has to be change; there has to be risks taken. He took the risk of leasing; he took the risk of showing a vision for the future for his people.
I am reminded of this. I know this intimately. This is the pattern of ministers and well-meaning public servants coming to remote Indigenous communities to promise good things, but outcomes came to be measured in hollow promises, haphazard solutions, cost blowouts, fly in/fly out contractors, profiteering, and a culture of blame for poor asset and tenancy management over a long period of time. It should be no surprise Indigenous remote housing has been exempt from the Northern Territory’s Residential Tenancies Act. There has been no capacity for the same health, safety and tenancy management arrangements expected in our major towns, to be applied in our remote towns. Hours and hours of debate have been spent on how this came to be.
The real job at hand is to fix it, and that is what we, on this side of the House, are doing - working with a like-minded federal government which has accepted this is a national priority, not an emergency quick fix. Let me put the facts on the record, because it is important this House is clearly aware this process began long before the intervention. This process was not emergency housing as part of the intervention. This process began under the leadership of those who had been in housing prior to the current Minister for Housing - John Ah Kit and Elliot McAdam, who fought long and hard for the beginning of this housing process.
I am reminded, in 2006, the then Australian government commissioned a major review of a history of Commonwealth-funded remote Indigenous housing and housing management programs. What a woeful story that was: a history of failure of public policy, emanating from a program lurching along in various guises from the 1960s. In the understatement of a decade, the report concluded:
The Minister for Housing has outlined how the Northern Territory government, from day one of our election to government, understood its obligation to get this right. However, it was never going to be done just by ourselves. A durable, long-term fix was going to require the financial muscle of the Australian government, the expertise of the business community, the willingness and expertise of the non-government sectors, and the absolute commitment and desire of the local people of the Northern Territory. I am pleased our government took on this challenge knowing the risks because of the scale of the problem. I am reminded of the early commitment of then ministers John Ah Kit and Elliot McAdam.
I am reminded of our early commitment of $100m to remote Indigenous housing, and the mechanism to leverage greater federal government investment. That worked, and it took us to an agreement on an Indigenous housing memorandum of understanding which has now morphed into a national partnership agreement to remote Indigenous housing - recognition of the national significance of this priority.
Mr Tollner: You are a disgrace.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms McCARTHY: I will not waste time defending the indefensible. I visited Santa Teresa and saw the shells of housing still waiting for replacement roofs many months after storm damage - and you are right, it is indefensible. All involved in the business of government have to understand the priority that kind of work requires. Yes, members are right in that. We have seen results of the recent SIHIP review report and the all-too-familiar story of layers of bureaucracy and loose community engagement. There is no denying that.
I want to see mothers and families happy they have a safe place to live and raise their family, and kids have a place to call their own. However, I also want to see individual people, families and clans across the Northern Territory take responsibility to grab a hold of the opportunities out there as well. There are tremendous opportunities coming through within the employment and training programs - people can go to work, acquire assets and care for their families in a place they can call their own. I want to see landlords fulfilling the same obligations to their tenants expected in other part of the Territory. I want to see families supported in managing their tenancies, and a stop to the waste of public funds on ill-conceived and patchwork housing repairs and maintenance. I want to see the employment and training outcomes from this building work we have missed out on for decades.
I am reminded of an old man in Central Australia, who proudly would tell people how he was a painter. Many thought he was a canvas painter and he would laugh. He would probably say: ‘I am a house painter’. I guess we can all talk about personal experiences. I want to work with my ministerial colleagues committing to this training opportunity for our house painters, plumbers, and builders of the future. We recognise we are not just growing our houses in the communities, we are growing a social workforce in employment and training for future ongoing development ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms McCARTHY: We recognise we have to see a culture of change within our own communities, where individuals and families take responsibility and the opportunities.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 51, in relation to no interruption. I hope members opposite would show the minister some courtesy, and let the minister speak without countless interjections.
Mr GILES: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker. We have every right to interject against issues such as this.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent this House from censuring the Northern Territory Labor government for their complete neglect of Aboriginal housing in the Northern Territory.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, we will not be accepting the censure. This is a matter of public importance brought on by the opposition. They had more than enough time and opportunity to run a censure within Question Time today. This is just a cheap, stupid, political stunt …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the level of interjections, apart from anything else, is absolutely ridiculous. It is not a member’s right to interject. In fact, it is a member’s responsibility not to interject, member for Braitling; I am reminding you of that. The standing orders are very clear about that.
The member for Braitling has sought to suspend standing orders, and the government has indicated they will not be doing that, so I will put it the question.
The question is the standing orders be suspended ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Am I able to talk to the motion to put forward the censure?
Madam SPEAKER: No.
The Assembly divided:
Madam SPEAKER: The result of the division is an equality of votes. Pursuant to section 27(1) of the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act as there is not a majority of votes, the question is resolved in the negative.
Motion negatived.
Ms McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I want to work with my ministerial colleagues committing to training opportunities for our future plumbers and builders. We need to restore the pride and sense of ownership which comes from picking up the tools and being part of building something - not only as Aboriginal Australians, but as Territorians across the Northern Territory. As a government, that is our focus.
All these things are the things we have committed to as part of our reform to remote Indigenous housing. As Minister for Indigenous Policy, I am working to follow up the vision of the member for Macdonnell in cutting through and delivering A Working Future, which includes progressing land leasing and development to underpin more economic activity, and jobs and opportunities for private investment in housing including home ownership.
A few weeks ago I went to Nguiu with the members for Arafura and Nelson. The week before, we saw on television a despondent traditional owner waiting for a new house. On my trip around the corner on Nguiu I saw a site cleared for homes being built under the Home Ownership on Indigenous Land Program, houses being refurbished, and a resident of a new house built as part of the Nguiu lease.
On 5 October, the member for Braitling announced he had written to the Prime Minister requesting a Royal Commission into SIHIP. I do not support that call. The member for Braitling said the Royal Commission should look not just at SIHIP but should examine all aspects of the Henderson government’s housing strategy and alternative housing models, including private rental and ownership, as well as the provision of public and community housing.
There are a few things I would like to say about this request for a Royal Commission. In recent times, Royal Commissions have become quite uncommon. The Howard Coalition government, in its 11 years, only had four Royal Commissions, and the Rudd government has not held any. One of the main reasons is most likely Royal Commissions are extremely costly and time consuming. By way of example, the Australian Wheat Board 2005 Oil-for-Food Royal Commission cost approximately $13m and took over 12 months. The Royal Commission into the insurance giant, HIH, in 2001 cost approximately $47m. The Royal Commission into the building and construction industry cost $70m and took 18 months to complete.
The time and money associated with Royal Commissions is such the Commonwealth Attorney-General, Hon Robert McClelland, has ordered a review of the Royal Commission Act which is being undertaken by the Australian Law Reform Commission. In his terms of reference, the Attorney-General has requested the Law Reform Commission look at more flexible, less formal, and more cost-effective options of an inquiry than a Royal Commission.
On one hand, the member for Braitling has been very vocal - certainly over delays in government. The member for Macdonnell has clearly expressed frustration, disgust and disappointment. We are listening to them and working on it. On the other hand, encouraging the government to embark on a Royal Commission will be just as time-consuming and extremely costly in the process
There are already appropriate structures in place in this parliament, such as the review of the implementation of SIHIP. SIHIP is overseen by a joint steering committee, an intergovernmental body which overseas the program’s strategic direction and performance. The program will be the subject to review by the Northern Territory Auditor-General, ongoing media scrutiny, and there is also the opportunity for a Senate committee review of spending of Commonwealth money if so decided by the Senate. In addition, we have processes under the Westminster system, providing an appropriate form for proper scrutiny of the Northern Territory government, including Questions on Notice, Question Time and the estimates process.
The new Council of Cooperation will provide an additional avenue for appropriate scrutiny of government. SIHIP is specifically identified as a matter of public importance for inquiry by the Council of Cooperation in the parliamentary agreement between the Chief Minister and the member for Nelson. What this government is focused on is getting outcomes on the ground. As the local member in the seat of Arnhem, I am acutely aware of the need to do that.
Madam Speaker, I am mindful, as the Minister for Indigenous Policy, we need to demonstrate our housing improvements are not just occurring in the 15 communities targeted for township leasing and new houses under our COAG national partnership agreement. I will be working with the Minister for Housing and all my colleagues as part of A Working Future to ensure residents and, in particular families in these places, also benefit from housing improvements, job opportunities for the future, and a choice about the way they would like to see their children grow up.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I would have thought that was a great speech, except for the fact I have heard it before. I heard it from the former minister, Jack Ah Kit - all of the same rhetoric, all of the same issues. Guess what? None of it has materialised. This is the frustration we, on this side of the House but, more importantly, Aboriginal people on the ground, are feeling with this government’s response. It is all - I cannot say that – wind. It is all noise. It is all hyperbole. There is no structure and drive pushing those fine words.
If this minister believed Aboriginal people should have control of their assets, then she would understand the reason I got angry with the Minister for Housing earlier today; because he comes in here and likes to score stupid political points about which federal government did what, when there are people he can have a direct effect on, dying - literally dying out in those communities. We have heard it from the former member for Macdonnell. I have seen it, Madam Speaker. To win or try to score stupid political points when you are the Minister for Housing - for God’s sake! Why is this minister not sitting here with bags under his eyes like suitcases because he has been working all night on this stuff, driving this with passion, with the lust it needs to be driven with, to ensure those public servants and bureaucrats, and those other entities, the NGOs, which are driving this, are driving it with an equal level of passion?
This is a matter of life and death, quite literally. For the minister to think it is cute to win a political point in this House shows you how far and how recklessly he has abandoned the duty he swore he would maintain when he took on the Crown’s commission to become the Minister for Housing. That is what is disgraceful about this.
To hear the Minister for Indigenous Policy say Aboriginal people should have control of their own assets - absolutely, Madam Speaker. I have been saying that for years. Why is not she going with him to Canberra, saying: ‘For goodness sake, change the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act so Aboriginal people can own assets’? At the moment, they are simply land trusts - which means some sort of globular form of ownership. No individual Aboriginal person has any hope of lifting themselves whilst they continue to live on their traditional countries. This is what the problem is. It is a great type of utopia which is being created by the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, and what do we have? We have the North Korea of Australia stuck in the Northern Territory because of federal legislation which has built a prison around these people, and has condemned them to a life of poverty.
This argument we are currently having is about whether the $700m has been appropriately spent. How long is the $700m going to last? A decade, five years, one year? What happens then? At that point …
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: What is their asset base, and what is their interest to try to look after those assets? Zero. Why? Because they do not own the assets. They have to own the assets, and then they have to have the ownership of the businesses they need to build in conjunction with other people who are allowed to come on to that land and build businesses with them.
If that rendered a great dislocation, and Aboriginal people have different levels of wealth as a result, then I would say good, because I would rather see half of the Aboriginal people living in lower-income situations than all of them, which is what they are currently condemned to. They are condemned to this by a small-minded approach which continues to infect not only bureaucracies but the government opposite, members of which cannot bring themselves to look beyond this simple fact: unless these people are allowed to own their own futures, all the services in the world will not develop a result for them in any long-term effect.
We talk about Aboriginal ownership of land; let us talk about ownership which is meaningful to the people who own that land. What we have at the moment deprives people of hope. It is a crushing crime being committed on Aboriginal people at the moment. I cannot begin to express my dismay when the Minister for Housing, who probably works 9 am to 5 pm - goes into his office, listens to what the bureaucrats say to him, reads whatever speeches he is given to read out in this parliament. The Minister for Indigenous Policy comes in here and reads whatever speeches are written for her to come into parliament and read out. Where is the drive? Where is it? This is a plea to the government: for goodness sake, get involved with some passion so you can go out there and actually make a difference.
I cannot begin to imagine how some of the ministers opposite sleep at night with the enormity of the load they carry. The level of flippancy with which they carry it is criminal. I am not at all surprised the government did not want to take the censure motion from the member for Braitling, and with good reason, I imagine, because it would mean they would have to, at least for a moment, listen to the criticism being directed at them.
For goodness sake, for the sake of all things holy, go to some of these places; see you can make a difference. I tell you, Madam Speaker, as the member for Port Darwin, I should be the one in this room with the least amount of interest in what happens in those remote communities. However, I spent eight years in those communities, and I can well understand the current member for Macdonnell is frustrated. Certainly, the former member for Macdonnell is frustrated with what has been going on.
Nobody is blameless in this; I could have done more. However, the opportunity begs, the will is out there. Yet, what we have on the front page of The Australian, day after day, is the money is being wasted, the opportunity is being wasted. That opportunity is only to buy time to build a better future. If the Minister for Indigenous Policy believes Aboriginal people should own their own assets, then she should be on a plane tonight or tomorrow going to Canberra - as soon as possible saying to the federal minister: ‘For goodness sakes, make this work; make this possible’.
It is outside of our jurisdictional capacity to change the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, but it should be changed. It should be changed so traditional people can own their own land in a similar way I can, you can, Madam Speaker, and anyone else in this Chamber can. The traditional stories identify quite specifically which country belongs to which group of people. Surely, the anthropology can be done to secure land for those families directly. That anthropology can be done, but it is assiduously being avoided, year in and year out, because it will increase pressure on large bureaucracies which have more interest in being Sir Humphrey Appleby and looking after their own interests, than they actually have for Aboriginal people.
Madam Speaker, until bureaucracies are brought to heel by leaders who have the guts to stand up to these bureaucracies and say: ‘I am not going to take your rubbish, you are going to do your job or you are out of here. ‘I am not going to meekly read out a speech which has been written for me; I am going to drive this matter with the passion I claim to have in my prepared speech’, when that happens, when leadership is taken up by those whose responsibility it is to lead, then you will see some change. At the moment, we have a government more intent on avoiding its destruction than by the matters which should be driving it. That is the disgrace which is being highlighted here: the abject failure of this government, this minister, the federal government - both past and present - to be able to create an environment where Aboriginal people can rescue themselves.
I do not want to become the person who tells Aboriginal people how to run their own culture. I would no more tell an Aboriginal person to do that than I would tell a brain surgeon how to do brain surgery. What I do say, however, is we have it within our power to make those Aboriginal peoples the true custodians of their own future. At the moment, whilst we talk about what bureaucracy should be doing, we will deprive those Aboriginal people as they continue to be the experiment in our self-satisfied Petri dish.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, if ever there was a need for a statement from our Chief Minister to this House, SIHIP is certainly one of those areas we definitely need a response by the Territory government. I say that because, on 28 August, we received the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program review of program performance. The review told us what was wrong and, if we want to get it back on track, this is what we have to do. It is beholden on the government to respond to the review. At the moment, even though I have had a number of briefings - and I thank the government for those briefings on SIHIP - I share the general feeling amongst people in this House and also the wider community, that this program is really in trouble.
We have a Wet Season coming, and I know in some places the design has not yet been agreed. If the design has not been agreed to at this stage, in October, how are houses going to be built in places like Gunbalanya if you cannot get materials out there? It gives one the impression the government has lost its way. I am not saying it has lost its way completely, because there are some good stories in relation to what is going on. However, I feel the government needs to make a major statement in relation to this review. It raises some serious issues about money which has been spent on administration. It raises issues about how the project was managed. It is beholden on this government to tell the public what its response is to this review.
I look at this whole project, and we were going to build about – I have forgotten the exact number of houses …
Mr Giles: Seven hundred and fifty.
Mr WOOD: Right, 750 houses. That might sound a lot but it is actually not many at all. If you were to go to a suburb in Melbourne or Sydney, they would probably knock that up in a year. I would love to know who thought of the alliance process. I heard it discussed here when this first started to be debated. It was a brand new thing for me. I had never heard of it but people were speaking about it as if one should know what it was about. I wonder why it was not questioned more and why we did not look at getting a company through the tender process whose job was to build these houses - one tender for the whole of the Territory. It is not a huge number of houses.
All right, there are basic difficulties in building these houses in certain parts of the Territory; there is no doubt about that. It is going to cost more money to build one on Groote Eylandt and Bathurst Island than it probably is at Belyuen. I know that. Surely, companies we have today - big construction companies - would have been able to handle this issue much more efficiently than has happened so far. We still do not have answers on how much some of the consultants in this project actually made before they started to slim down the managerial side of things. For instance, in the old governance structure, my understanding is the program director and the program manager came from the same company.
Luckily, some of it has now been removed under the review. How much money was lost by using a fairly complicated system of managing this project? Again, if it was a company, would it have had all this, or would it have just been a case of the company being responsible to the Housing department? The department of Housing tells the company what sort of houses have to be built - end of story.
We seem to have made an awfully complicated process to deliver what should be - not rocket science - building houses. We have been building them for years. A house is not a new thing; it is something we have had for a long time. The other thing which concerns me is people have gone out for so-called consultation. I am not against people consulting, but let us be real. We are building houses under NT Housing. They are Housing Commission houses. They are there to try to solve a problem of overcrowding. They will belong to NT Housing. We know what is a good structure for housing.
I have mentioned this book before. This is a book called Pole Frame Structures. I am not saying we build them out of timber, by the way. They had some basic housing designs which were put forward by the then Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory. They were simple houses with two bedrooms, kitchen, laundry and toilet with a breezeway between - exactly the type of house on Bathurst Island, except they are actually made of stronger material. Some of those houses are being refurbished now. Why is that design so great? It works in the tropics. However, we have gone to enormous lengths to design something totally different. You really have to ask why did we have to go back to try to reinvent the wheel?
We spent time doing that. The time we spent doing it is time lost building houses. I really get concerned someone has made these alliances. As I said before today, there is an alliance called Earth Alliance. It might be a fine company. I do not know much about it, but I saw one of their designs for Gunbalanya. When I saw a wooden slatted floor, I thought: ‘Well, you might have discussed this with someone, but I do not know whether you talked to NT Housing about how real this design is when it comes to long-term maintenance’. How long will this wooden floor last? Thirty years? I doubt it very much. You really wonder whether it should have gone to someone who had a practical knowledge of housing in the Northern Territory. There are many builders in the Northern Territory who have worked outback, who know what houses will stand up to punishment, and which houses are of good and practical design.
They will know of people out bush; how they eat. They do not all eat in beautiful kitchens. Nothing to say we should not have a kitchen, but they also go out and get bush tucker and they kill that outside and put it on the barbecue. That is the way it is cooked. I know from my place when the turtle are in the laundry, they are not going to get cooked over the electric stove. They are out there on the wood fire getting cooked the way people would normally cook. I wonder whether the people who designed these houses have an understanding of how people out bush cook their meals. Yes, they will use a stove, but they also will use their traditional methods of just cooking in the ashes. That is the way it has been done. The first time I ever ate catfish it had been cooked in a pile of hot coals. People might denigrate catfish, but it tastes mighty good when it is cooked straight after it has been caught. I wonder whether there is basic understanding on the part of some of these companies on what they are intending to build.
We spent this much time and, yet, there are some moves to build houses at Bathurst Island. Listening to the member for Port Darwin about Aboriginal people being able to buy their own homes, one thing I noticed when I was at Bathurst, there are people actually buying their own homes. There are Aboriginal teachers putting up houses there now which I thought was really terrific to see. They put their money into their own house, and that is great. There was also some good quality houses from the existing Indigenous Housing Program. They were pulling down some houses, because there are some houses totally unliveable which are ready for SIHIP. I gather they are now starting to be developed. I do not want to say there are no good things happening but, if you look at the overall picture, you have to wonder how we reached this stage and had so little progress. It really is a worry.
I also wonder whether we have set up mechanisms on some of these communities which make life more complicated. We have local government, in some cases, now being told it looks after housing. We have also have NT Housing saying it is looking after housing in some cases, and the alliance is building them. In cases like Bathurst Island, we have the Bathurst Island Housing Association. Luckily, at Port Keats or Wadeye, at least the alliances are using an existing housing association. However, Aboriginal people must wonder how they got life so complicated with all these different people trying to build houses: the Indigenous Housing Program, the alliance program, and we had Bathurst Island Housing Association program. Boy, life must get muddled!
When I was at Areyonga recently, that was exactly what one lady said: ‘I am on this committee for housing and on another committee for different housing and another committee for another kind of housing’. There are only about 250 people living in Areyonga. You really need three committees for people to be on? You just want to build houses …
Mr Giles: And they still have not built a house.
Mr WOOD: Yes, well, Areyonga is not in the mix for the houses at the moment.
All I am saying is government has to say what it intends to do. This is a mess; there is no doubt about it. It has had a review. What is urgently needed in this parliament is a response to this review. Say what it is going to do; admit there have been mistakes. I cannot say it is entirely because of the Northern Territory government’s mistake things have gone wrong because this has also come from the Commonwealth. I do not know what some of those funny people in Canberra thought when they thought up this scheme to set up an alliance and consult people - as if no consultation with people had ever occurred in the last 30 years. Did they have any idea how people live where they were building these houses? How you can build a practical house?
I believe between the two governments they have made a mighty fine mess of things. We should not give up. We might want to give up, but the reality is, as the member for Port Darwin said, people need houses. It is important we get these houses built because Aboriginal people are living in overcrowded circumstances. They are living in houses, for instance at Bathurst Island, which are well past their use-by date. They have just died. They are metal houses near the coast. Life moves on. We need to stick with it, work our way through it and, hopefully, come out better at the other.
Yes, I have no problem criticising the government about it. We can keep criticising the government about it, but it is beholden upon us all to say: ‘Okay, let us all try to work together and fix this mess up’. Otherwise, the people who will lose out in the end will be the very people we are trying to build these houses for.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I speak on what is a very important matter of public importance. I thank the member for Braitling for bringing it on because it is a very important issue and one over which we can all beat our chests, tell personal stories, and recoil in shock and horror at what has gone on. However, at the end of the day, it is not about me, the members for Stuart, Macdonnell, or Arnhem – it is not about any of us - it is about all of us working together to try to ensure we can move forward and get this housing program, which is one of the biggest single investments ever, I suppose, of housing in those communities on Aboriginal land.
I was listening to the member for Port Darwin, who went to law school. He has probably completed his law degree and, no doubt, one day may make a fine lawyer. However, I believe he might need to read some legislation, because he was standing and beating his chest about why Aboriginal people cannot own their own home …
Mr Elferink: Why will we not let them?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Well, they can. That amendment has been made to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. I think it is section 20, but that amendment has now been made, member for Port Darwin. We have seen on the Tiwi Islands where home ownership on Indigenous land is happening. In talking to a lot of my constituents in both Gunbalanya and Maningrida, I have encouraged them to follow suit. The time has changed - you are right. The amendment has now been made to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act ...
Mr Elferink: A lot more has to happen than just that.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: When an individual gets a 99-year lease, it is the same lease requirement as any individual in Canberra. It is the same lease, or requirement - I do not know what the legal wording is. When an individual on Aboriginal land takes out a 99-year section 19 lease for their lot to get home ownership, they have the same title as a resident in Canberra. That is now available for Aboriginal people in those communities, which is fantastic. That barrier has now been broken.
One of the other issues I have been talking to people in my electorate about is outstations - taking leases in those outstations so they can also go towards home ownership. We have to start thinking outside the square. We have to look at ...
Mr Elferink: I was saying that 10 years ago.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Yes, the bucket is going to get smaller and smaller. We need investment to ensure we can work with the Commonwealth government to continue this investment beyond the five years of the allocation. The Minister for Indigenous Policy summed it up pretty well, I believe. The Minister for Housing outlined the facts of the program.
When I go around my electorate and talk to Aboriginal people on the ground, whether it is the Tiwi Islands or through the fantastic area of West Arnhem, Aboriginal people are sick of becoming political footballs. They are sick of hearing politicians beating their chest, and blaming each other. They also hear the comments, and it confuses some of them that the CLP is actually caring, because many of them have never forgotten the legacy. I say to them we have to move on. The money is there; let us try to get things happening.
I applaud the Northern Land Council. I believe it has moved pretty fast in getting the leases secured for both Gunbalanya and Maningrida, and for what has happened in both of those communities. Much of the focus was on Wadeye. Maningrida is the second-largest Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory. The speed in which those leases happened - the land council has moved pretty fast on them. I applaud the traditional owners; they have acted with a lot of courage. They are going down a road they have not gone down before. However, they continually say: ‘We do not want to be the political footballs here’. We have the leases. We want to have consultation about the houses; we want to look at some of the design and construction happening. However, we actually want to see the houses happening on the ground in those communities.
The member Nelson and I travelled to the Tiwi Islands with the member for Arnhem, and had a look at the housing. The Leader of the Opposition also went to the Tiwi Islands to look at some of the houses Bathurst Island Housing and the alliance partners, Sitzlers and others, have been constructing. There is a lot of activity happening on the Tiwi Islands. The Chief Minister and I had a full briefing with the alliance partners last week. We also had a look at all of the houses which were being refurbished and reconstructed. We were able to inspect the houses which are part of HOIL - Home Ownership on Indigenous Land - in those communities.
The fantastic part of the alliance project on the Tiwi Islands is the 45 young Tiwi men who are part of the project. This has not happened before - 45 young men who have been trained, and who will be employed full-time on this project. It does a lot for the morale of those young men. Sure, it is not enough; we need to do more in terms of employment. However, 45 is a great start.
The alliance partners, Earth Connect at Gunbalanya, are about to employee 26 young Binninj or Aboriginal men from the community to work as a part of the project. I am not saying it is all okay out there; we have to be vigilant and ensure things do move.
In the past, I have offered the member for Braitling to come and have a look at some of the other communities where things are happening, and where what is happening here could be translated to areas where it is not working. If you have the land councils, traditional owners, the community, and both governments working together, things can happen on the ground in those communities. That is what we are seeing on the Tiwi Islands, Gunbalanya and Maningrida ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Arafura, the overall time for the MPI has expired.
Discussion concluded.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I congratulate the winner of the Police Officer of the Year Award. Each year, the Rotary Club of Darwin coordinates the Police Officer of the Year Award. This award was established in 1991 to recognise the challenges police officers face, and to say a public thank you for a job well done.
This year, there were 51 nominations from members of the public. The Police Officer of the Year for 2008-09 was awarded to Senior Constable Anthony Clarke. Senior Constable Clarke is the 18th winner of this prestigious annual award, and is recognised for his work in remote community policing in the Pirlangimpi community on Melville Island.
Senior Constable Clarke is a proactive policeman who is thoroughly involved with the local community. A strong believer in training, he frequently organises local community development employment project training to enable the locals to gain the relevant heavy vehicle licences so they can help maintain the roads. Senior Constable Clarke has also helped to set up a new Northern Territory Emergency Services unit in the Tiwi Islands to service the community’s rescue needs.
Since joining the police force in January 2000, Senior Constable Clarke has served in Alice Springs, Kulgera, Yulara and Darwin. In May 2005, he was seconded to the Australia Federal Police for two years, serving in the Solomon Islands and Timor-Leste with the International Deployment Group in the Operations Response Team. During his time in the Solomons, Senior Constable Clarke was awarded a bravery citation. Policing can be difficult, demanding and, on occasions, dangerous, but is often very satisfying and rewarding. I congratulate the Rotary Club of Darwin for its ongoing coordination of this award, and I invite members of the Assembly to join with me in thanking Senior Constable Clarke for the service he has delivered to the Northern Territory community. I congratulate him, as I am sure we all do, in winning this award.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON: Around my electorate, the schools are still very busy. Holy Spirit Primary School held their annual fete just before Father’s Day. Although attendance was down this year, there was a fantastic vibe in the air and many dollars were raised for the school. Thanks to Karen and Brendon Watts, Trish and John Pini, Karen and Jamie Adams, Christine and John Crimmings, Michelle Richards, Alicia Westbrook, Maria Halkitis, Natasha and David Villa, Shelley and Winter Randolph, and Donna Johnson. Also, a huge thank you to all the staff and students at Holy Spirit for helping the day to run as smoothly as it did. It was a great day, and I enjoyed being there again, with the member for Arnhem who also attended the fete.
Holy Spirit also did well in the National Mathematics Competition. Holy Spirit students received three distinctions, four credits and two proficiencies. Well done to the students who took part.
At Leanyer Primary School, the new classrooms in Module 5 are very close to being finished, with the official opening day happening next month. I was able to duck down to the school and have a look through the new classrooms, which are absolutely fantastic. They are filled with colour and the brand new SMART Boards are amazing. The drop-off zone has also been completed, which gives the kids and parents at Leanyer all-weather access to a safe drop-off and pick-up area.
Leanyer Primary also recently held their swimming carnival, and Kakadu was able to take out the Golden Flipper with 524 points after already having won the Golden Slipper on sports day earlier this year. Litchfield came second with 381 points, followed closely by Uluru on 353 points, and Coburg slipped into fourth place with 217 points.
The 2009 swimming age champions are Saraya Prince and Kyle Ford in the eight-year-old group; Briana Pilicic and Ruamano Kouka-Waihi in the nine-year-olds; Courtney Pilicic and Jarrod Van Sambeek in the 10-year-olds; TeNgaro Kouka-Waihi, Joseph Looby and Joel Jettner in the 11-year-olds; and Shiane Hawke and Nik Quartermass in the 12-year-old age group.
I was lucky enough to head down to the Father’s Day breakfast at Wanguri Primary School this year. The breakfast was fantastic and it was wonderful to see so many kids at school with their dads. It has been a great thing at Wanguri over the last few years and I congratulate the school. It is a really big community effort.
There have been many kids achieving big things at Wanguri. The Beat performers put on a wonderful show at the 2009 Beat and Kath Whitson must be thanked for all her hard work with the choir this year. I congratulate the following students for their wonderful work in the choir: Ari Robinson, Michaela Marshall, Millie Hunt, Nikki Coggins, Niamh Marah, Kayla O’Grady, Eloni Landers, Amelia Dalrymple, Jenna Dearman, Anna Bergs, Jaymee Dyson-Holland, Dylan Li, Nyoaka Bell-Peckham, Jessie Oliver, Brooke Hudson, Yenda Callera, Izzy Jarvis and Kenaiesha Peckham-Allison. Congratulations to the following students for their fantastic dancing: Niamh Marah, Ciara Marah, Jenna Dearman, Amelia Dalrymple, Mia Jesson and Nikki Coggins.
Other outstanding students from Wanguri Primary School include: Isabelle Chin Quan, Izzah Majid, Rory Rose, Dylan Robertshaw, Jack Brooks, Teri Moliere, my beautiful daughter, Isabel Henderson, Harmony Robinson, James Bayliss, Kaelyn Girao, Ella Osmanovic, Yvonne Maillis, Kieran Schort, Jamie-Rae Robinson, Anna Bergs and Kirrily Hand. They all received certificates of participation in the 2009 Literacy and Young Territory Authors Awards presented by Darwin City Council libraries. Each student had to write and illustrate their own stories and submit them for judging. Congratulations to Kaelyn Girao who was an age-group winner and received a highly commended award.
For the past couple of years, Wanguri has been sending a group of students in Year 6, along with teachers and parent helpers, to Canberra to study democracy in action, and also to visit all of the wonderful attractions our capital city has to offer. This year, the Wanguri group were lucky enough to meet the Governor-General, Her Excellency, Ms Quentin Bryce. A big thank you to Jenny Robinson, our principal, as well as Lisa Rothwell, Olga Dalrymple, Vanda West, Wynyard Lum and Clio Marah for putting so much hard work and effort into planning the trip and looking after the group so well in Canberra. I also say thank to all the kids who went on the trip. By all reports, you behaved impeccably and did your school and community proud.
The children who went on the trip were Nyoaka Bell-Peckham, Clarissa Carter, Nikki Coggins, Courtney Craig, Amelia Dalrymple, Thomas Dalton-Lum, Shem Gardiner, Jordan Lockley, Amir Majid, Brandon Male, Niamh Marah, Ken Mitchell, Jack Panter and Nathan Tran. I know this trip is looked forward to by the Year 6 students every year and it really does give them a wonderful experience of our great capital city. They also enjoy going up to the snowfields, Madam Deputy Speaker, something our kids, obviously, do not see up in the tropics.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk on a matter of grave importance which is causing enormous grief to some of my constituents, as well as people elsewhere in the Darwin and Palmerston areas. It involves a matter of inappropriate behaviour by a builder. It is behaviour by this builder which highlights how this government has failed in providing a secure and confident environment for home builders through their complete lack of application of the building registration, investigation and registration and, more importantly, home warranty insurance.
The builder who is causing all of this grief is known to many. He is known to the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Group, to certifiers, to ASIC, well known to the department, by the minister’s office, and the Chief Minister’s Office. He is well known by the many contractors who are owed tens of thousands of dollars, and in the small claims court. This builder takes hard-earned money from Territory families, spins a complete web of deceit, and does not deliver a completed house, or one which would pass any inspection in a third world country.
This builder, through his shoddy work and deceitful practices, has caused relationships to be put under strain when families see their dreams shattered and, in another case, family members have sought medical assistance as they feel responsible for not getting their families into the new home. It is a tragic situation which should not be accepted or tolerated. I will provide three examples of this situation we currently have in the Top End with this builder.
Family 1 is part of a well-known and long-term Darwin family. The family has been part of the Darwin footy scene for over 40 years and has always contributed well to the Territory. This family’s would-be house is in Palmerston. They have paid 95% of their total build, and the builder has now cancelled their contract and they now have to find $300 000 to finish this house. It has been grossly underquoted. The house is only to lock-up stage, plus it has taken 17 months to get it to this stage of non-completion. It is an outrageous situation. I have met the mother of this family on many occasions over this matter and, to put it bluntly, she is distraught to the position of distraction. Her health has suffered and her whole family is suffering.
This family followed all of the right procedures through the Housing Industry Association and its standard contract, and the Building Board rules and regulations. Unfortunately, when dialogue broke down, the builder took this hard-working family to arbitration, which they subsequently lost on a technicality associated with the definition of lock-up. The family had to employ a lawyer, which cost them $15 000. After arbitration, the builder did nothing with the house. The house was locked out completely for this family. The builder had a date in October this year to finish the house and, now we are in October, he has cancelled their contract and walked away with their money right under the noses of the Housing Industry Association and the Building Practitioners Board, and left them with a substantially uncompleted house - no home warranty insurance safety net for this family.
The second case involves a couple who have a house which has walls, a roof, and a whole series of massive defects. I have seen this house and it is a shambles, sadly. In the rooms there are light switches on the walls, but there are no lights in the ceilings, so goodness knows what those switches are meant to turn on. There are cracks in the walls, gaps in the woodwork, and ants coming up through the concrete. The total build of this house was to be $355 800 which did not include the kitchen appliances or vanities. The builder has been paid about $254 000, which is about 74% of their money, and their house is not finished - not by a long way by my reckoning. It is about half built. An estimate of about $150 000 is required to finish the build, and an independent company has been engaged for an assessment of the work outstanding.
This house has seen three of the contractors take the builder to court for non-payment of work. Another contractor tried to get a lien across the property; however, could not as the builder was at fault and not the property owners. It is an appalling situation where the department and the minister’s office knew about this fellow. Letters have been written to the minister by the families. There have been numerous discussions with the Builders Practitioners Board and the department and, yet, no one seems to want to help these Territory families.
This couple’s case involves my electorate officer. As with the family before, it has created an enormous amount of pressure on her family’s situation, given she has recently become a grandmother and cannot accommodate her children and grandchildren in the house.
The third family lives in Nightcliff and is a family with five children. The family was so desperate to get into their home after delay after delay and non-performance of the work, the husband, the father, felt obliged to take the family into the house half completed. The builder then cancelled the contract without discussion but, after taking some $200 000 of their job and leaving a complete mess in the garden including hardened piles of concrete, this family will have to scrape together to find the funds to complete the house themselves.
This government has failed on all fronts, not only these three families. It has failed to provide a secure and competent environment for home builders; failed these three families and many more I do not have the time to detail here tonight; failed to ensure the building regulations and regulatory boards operate properly; and failed to act when they know a builder with a known reputation for deceit, fraud, intimidation and poor workmanship continues to operate in the industry and brings a bad name and a bad taste to everyone in the building and construction industry.
Where have been the audits of this builder under the Building Act? Where have been the investigations into the performance of this builder when it was brought to the attention of both the minister and the Chief Minister’s Offices? I know, and the minister knows, letters have been sent to her office. The minister knows also the Chief Minister’s Chief of Staff has become involved. However, what have been the outcomes? Nothing, sadly, which is typical of this government’s performance in this area, if not every other area of government.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I urge the government members to get out of their purpose-built, comfortable, safe, secure and fully completed homes and do something for these families who are continuing to live rough, and continue to suffer extreme duress and upset. The minister knows what to do. She needs to act, and act fast, before this builder takes any more hard-working Territorians’ money and dreams away.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Deputy Speaker, today I speak about my recent trip to Alice Springs, and from there, driving all the way to Darwin. I visited Alice Springs because I wanted to meet Mrs Di Deans, the President of Drovers, a group of people who are doing an excellent job at the Alice Springs Hospital. Totally voluntarily, they go around providing magazines, newspapers - all the essentials - to people who are in hospital and are unable to go out.
Recently, they received the Health and Community Service Award at the inaugural Australian Rural and Outback Awards, and I congratulate them. I intend to have a dinner with them when we have parliament in Alice Springs. I also invited Mrs Deans to come to Darwin and see if she can establish a similar organisation in the Royal Darwin Hospital and other hospitals around the Territory.
In addition to that, I had lunch with members of the Board of the Alice Springs Hospital, and dinner with Ben and Nicole Case from Undoolya Station. Ben is the Chairman of the Alice Springs Branch of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association.
From there, we drove to Aileron to have a look at the Anmatjere Man, the big statue sculpted by Ted Egan’s son, and admired the Namatjira paintings displayed throughout the stop, then continued to Tennant Creek.
In Tennant Creek, I visited the Tennant Creek Hospital, and the Acting General Manager, Mr Michael Wright took me around and showed me the theatre and emergency department upgrades - $2m upgrade for the Tennant Creek Hospital. I have to admit, I have been to Tennant Creek many times, I have looked at the hospital outside and thought it was a small regional hospital. When I visited the hospital, I was very impressed by the size of the hospital, how clean it was, and by the renal dialysis facility they have in place - brand new, purpose designed and very well looked after.
I called into the local Department of Regional Development, Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources and had a chat with the local people. I was very impressed by their professionalism. They are all young people working very hard in the Barkly region.
That night, I had dinner with Michael Wright, the Acting General Manager of Tennant Creek Hospital, and his partner, Vanessa; also Barbara Shaw, the manager of the Barkly Regionalisation Project representing Anyinginyi.
On Tuesday, we had a Cabinet meeting in Tennant Creek, and afterwards I walked the main street and talked to the local business people. I was very impressed at how vibrant Tennant Creek is. It was explained that night when I had dinner with George Scott from Lake Nash Station, Steve Russell from Emerson Resources, Ivan Henderson from Truscott Mining; Bill Darcy from Excalibur; Luke Meter from Westgold, Ted and Dianne Martin from DRDPIFR, and Gerry and Dawn McCarthy. I was advised that 12 exploration drills are currently working in Tennant Creek. About 25 people fly in/fly out, and most of the money is spent in Tennant Creek sourcing supplies, accommodation, fuel, servicing equipment. The results from the exploration are very encouraging.
On Wednesday, I drove to Bootu Creek Mine, and thanks to Mark Laing, the group mining engineer who took us around and showed us the development in Bootu Creek. I have to admit, I was very impressed. The existing plant operates at full capacity of 700 000 tonnes a year. They are extending the processing plant, and there will be a total of one million tonnes a year of manganese. They are increasing the number of carriages from 76 to 96, and from three days a week to four days a week. Recent drilling in the area has identified significant ore bodies which will extend the life of the mine for more than 50 years than is currently projected.
Following Bootu Creek, I travelled north and stopped at Beetaloo Station. I thank very much John and Trish Duncliffe for their hospitality, and also their daughter, Jane, and her husband, Scotty, and, of course, their four kids. John and Trish Duncliffe and their daughter and son-in-law own two leases totalling 10 000 km - nearly as big as a small European country. They are running about 45 000 head of Brahman and Brahman cross. They bought the property five years ago. When they bought the property they had 40 watering points. Now, they have 300, and their project for the next few years is to put in 600 watering points. In total, they are putting 1600 km of watering line. Their projection is, in five years time, they will nearly double the number of Brahman they will have in those two stations.
Currently, they breed the animals for the export market, and export most of these animals through the Port of Darwin. The way they did it is very intelligent. They do not have to drive around the watering points; they can actually fly in a helicopter and see from the air if the system operates, and if the tanks are full. It was very late in the season, and I have to admit the animals were a bit skinny. However, they assured me as soon as the rains start in the next two months, the animals would become fattened very quickly. I was very impressed with their approach. What impressed me the most was the station has many plateaux with grass and a lot of timbered area.
When I asked him why he was not clearing the timber to provide more grassed area and feedlots for the animals, he said his observation was when it rains, when there is a clear area the waters runs and sits and disappears but, where it falls in the grassed and timbered areas, it goes underground. That is the way he wants to keep it, so he can harvest the water later from underground. He is not a young person with young ideas, he is quite aged, but it is very interesting to see the change of attitude: do not clear everything to put feedlots but maintain some forest or timbered areas, because that is where the water is captured and recharges the aquifer.
Following that, I drove to Mataranka and stayed overnight. I had the opportunity to catch up with Ron and Sally Sullivan. Ron is from Cave Creek Station and also the President of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association. I also caught up with Brian and Kathy Lester from Larrizona Station, Garry and Mitchell Riggs from Lakefield Station, Max and Mabs Gorringe from Elsey Station and Neil MacDonald who is the Regional Director of Katherine Department of Primary Industries, Fisheries and Resources.
On Friday, I had a private tour of Cave Creek with Ron Sullivan, approximately 400 km with a reliable 800 mm of rainfall, very close to Mataranka, Katherine and Darwin. Ron runs Brahman and Droughtmasters and his father runs some Boran cattle. It was a good opportunity to catch up with the new president of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association and talk about the industry. The industry is very optimistic; they like the way the Indonesian market is still holding strong. They like even more that we opened a new market in Vietnam. An agreement was signed this week for 1000 animals, as first lot, to go to Vietnam. We have to open more markets; we cannot rely on one market only.
Following that, I went to Katherine and had dinner, as always, with who else but Warren de With, the president of AFANT. I always catch up and have a yarn with him, to find how the association is going and if there are any problems. I was advised they had a very good season in Katherine. Even today, there are still tourists.
I saw the site where the new McDonalds is under construction and, from the information I received, I believe Katherine will see two new projects. One will be a hotel and the other might be a shopping centre. I will let the developer disclose the details at a later date.
One thing which impressed me was the restrictions on alcohol - how well it worked in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek. I say from experience, because I had forgotten about the restrictions so I turned up about 12.30 pm to buy a cask of wine, and I was advised both in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, wine or beer is sold after 2 pm. In Tennant Creek, if you want to buy a cask of wine you have to go after 4 pm.
Of course, I did not complain; it is a restriction put in place for a very good reason. It was very interesting to hear, with the restrictions put in, in Alice Springs, we had a reduction of 18% in the consumption of alcohol in Alice Springs. In addition to that, I found 400 fewer casks were sold every day in Alice Springs. I also discovered about 25 people who tried to cheat the system and buy the second cask or the second bottle of port, were denied because the system recognised they had already purchased one, so they were not allowed to buy anymore.
What is distressing is the level of assaults because of alcohol. We know very well - and some of you, being ex-policemen, know - the effects of alcohol: after the first bottle or the first cask, mayhem happens. I have been advised 74% of all activities of the police in Alice Springs is alcohol-related – assaults, people hitting other people, or bashing their wives.
I was very surprised and disappointed to see the member for Araluen today put the motion to return the opening hours to 10 am, from the 2 pm of today. That is a big step backwards. We have four hours of peace and quiet until 2 pm when they start accessing alcohol. The member for Araluen has a motion for the next General Business Day to return back to 10 am. We have to draw a line in the sand here. This is not about politics; it is about what is happening out there because of alcohol. If we go back to that, then we go back to what we had before. Police now spend 74% of their time on alcohol-related offences, which will be translated to 95%.
I call on the Leader of the Opposition, if he has control of his people, he needs to stand up and say: ‘Enough is enough’. We cannot go back. We might not agree totally with what you do, but we cannot go back to opening the alcohol shops at 10 am. That is a recipe for disaster. It is up to you guys. We have to draw a line in the sand and be recognised for what we are doing.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I will speak about my trip last week to ANSTO in Lucas Heights, Sydney - the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation.
Before I do, it would be remiss of me - I am rather compelled to talk about the EPA’s annual report tabled today. I appreciate the EPA is still in its infancy and has contributed to the broader debate on a number of different issues. However, where I really find it tough to take it seriously is, under the Northern Territory government’s outlines on performance measures of all agencies, the Environment Protection Authority is an output group of the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, and the Arts and, therefore, it needs to report each year.
If you look at the performance measures of the EPA in the last 12 months, there are three key outputs: one is quality, one is quantity, and one is time limits. If you look at the first one, it has: ‘Quantity. Reports to government on outcome of strategic reviews’. The 2008-09 estimate was two and the actual was zero. ‘Referrals received and assessed’ - the estimate was two and the actual was zero. The ‘Quality; part of the output performance measures: ‘Stakeholders’ satisfaction with advice and processes’ - the estimate for 2008-09 was 60% and the actual was zero. It is actually down here as n/a and it is not applicable because they have not actually reported anything. So again, zero. ‘Timeliness’ is for ‘Reports delivered within identified delivery dates’ - the estimate is 100% and they have an actual of 67%. I do not know how they get 67% when they have not delivered a report. I am assuming they are part way through a report so, therefore, they are suggesting they are 67% through the report. I believe it is the Principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development but, to say you are actually halfway through does not really cut the mustard. It says the ‘timeliness of reports’. It is either delivered or not delivered, so it is zero.
We have a budget of just under $900 000 a year; we have estimates of two, two, 60% and 100% and we have 0, 0, 0 and, basically, 0. It is a lot of money to spend on little return.
On to better things. I first thank Dr Adi Paterson, Dr Jamie Schultz, Professor John Dodson, Mr Lubi Dimitrovski, and Ron Weiner from ANSTO. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation is a unique place, and was a unique experience for me. I know this will surprise you, but much of what they told me went over my head. It was pretty intense to learn about what they do there, about neutrons and nuclear accelerators, and things like this. It was a fantastic experience. They apply their expertise to health, climate change, water resource management, the environment, and a range of scientific research disciplines.
ANSTO is a federal government agency and operates Australia’s only nuclear reactor. ANSTO’s nuclear infrastructure includes the OPAL research reactor and particle accelerators, and they do some radio pharmaceutical production and a range of unique research facilities as well. Each year, ANSTO provides over 500 000 patient doses of lifesaving nuclear medicine to help in the diagnosis and treatment of a range of serious diseases.
A little about the reactor. It is a research reactor and significantly increases Australia’s nuclear science and technology capabilities. The reactor can operate for 340 days a year and it is 20 MW thermal power. I believe, from a nuclear reactor of about the size of a washing machine, they create enough energy to run 20 000 toasters. That is what it will do; however, it is not there for producing power.
Some of the things I was amazed at - and there are a few people here who may know a little more about this - you may not see here, but when they are looking at brain scans, for instance, you can see here an MRI, and how much the MRI shows up a tumour on someone’s brain. Using the new FET PET technology developed at ANSTO, you can actually see the brain tumour so much more clearly in these images. The advances in the medical field of what it can do is amazing.
I was particularly interested in the waste disposal and waste storage of radioactive waste. ANSTO has an international reputation for undertaking environmental work in climate change, air pollution, and sustainability of groundwater use. The operation of ANSTO’s facility produces small amounts of radioactive waste, and this is managed in accordance with national and international standards. It should be noted ANSTO has safely managed radioactive waste for over 50 years and places the highest priority on the safe management of its waste and used fuel.
It certainly blew away some of the myths I heard about the nuclear industry, particularly how waste is managed. It also opens up another issue we have. There is nuclear waste stored in over 100 different locations around this country. I have seen waste facility managed to the nth degree to all international standards, where waste is kept in drums, it is catalogued, it is measured, it is kept in a safe environment, and it is also periodically checked and measured again. I found it interesting because it really is monitored very well. What I worry about is, if we have waste stored in over 100 locations around the country, each of those may not be kept in such high standards or monitored. I hate to think some of these waste products could, potentially, do some damage to people.
I found out a little more about radiation. It is emitted both naturally, and a man-made source. It is around us every day and, without it, we could not live. Radiation can be classified into two main groups: ionising and non-ionising. We receive small amounts of iodising radiation from X-rays, air travel, smoke detectors, and the use of radioactive materials in medicine, industry and agriculture. Even the air we breathe, and our own bodies, contain naturally occurring radioactivity.
In regard to the waste, in Australia we have low-level waste and some intermediate-level waste. According to what I have been told, no high-level waste is either produced or is stored at the ANSTO facility. Some of the fuel used from the previous reactors which were at the location in – what is it called?
Mr Wood: Lucas Heights.
Mr CHANDLER: Thank you. … has been transported overseas to the United Kingdom and France for storage and reprocessing. This will eventually return to Australia as intermediate-level waste after reprocessing to extract recyclable material. From that, I can assume this country will need to, one day, make a decision we need to have a proper storage facility for nuclear waste. I believe, managed the right way, it is far better than having 100 different locations around the country with things which may or may not be monitored, cared for, or stored correctly.
Interestingly enough, I did not understand what a lot of this low-level waste was, but ANSTO shreds and compresses its low-level radioactive solid waste and places it into 200 L drums, which are stored on-site on racks in a dedicated building. The majority - 95% - of all the low-level waste, is simply rubber gloves, coveralls and such things used by staff who are working around reactors or with the medical products produced. Much of the stuff from the 1950s and 1960s has already been thrown into general landfills, because they have actually decayed to the extent where they provide no more of a problem than common household waste. In fact, it was interesting to discover there are probably more risks in many of our landfills around the country than there is in a proper storage facility for nuclear waste. People throw away batteries, mobile phones, TVs, computers, and all this toxic waste is going into our landfills - not managed – and, yet, the perception is we do not manage nuclear waste very well.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wanted to do a special adjournment on a very special man who passed away at Bulman. The funeral of Mr Tex Camfoo was held at Bulman community on 21 August 2009. Mr Camfoo was a Ngalakan elder, who was 91 years of age when he passed away at the Rocky Ridge Nursing Home in Katherine. He was a remarkable Territorian whose long and fruitful life spanned many changes in the broader Katherine region where he spent most of his life, both in the development of the region and changing race relations.
He grew up in the Roper Mission, now Ngukurr, before working in the Northern Territory pastoral industry as a stockman, drover and station manager. He had an exceptional knowledge of the bush and its resources and, as a Ngalakan elder, his incredible knowledge of country was vital in helping his people gain ownership of parts of their traditional estate under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and the Native Title Act. In particular, he was involved in the Urapunga land claim, the Roper Bar land claim, the Roper River beds and banks land claim, and the St Vidgeon native title claim.
Tex was a long-term and prominent member of the Northern Land Council. Though not formally a member of the Board of the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, he was often invited to attend AAPA meetings to advise the board on sacred site matters.
His funeral was a very big event. About 200 relatives and friends, assisted by the Ngalakan and Rembarrnga traditional dancers, paid their last respects to him in a shelter erected near the health clinic at Bulman. In fact, many people travelled hundreds of kilometres to Bulman to attend the funeral and to pay their respects to the family. A funeral service was conducted with songs performed by the Barunga Aboriginal Inland Mission Church, and a eulogy read by his granddaughter, Anita Painter.
Many people travelled, not only from the Katherine region, but as far as Central Australia to farewell him. Also attending were the CEO and Chairman of the Northern Land Council, the CEO and Acting Chairman of the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, Mr Bernard Abbott, both of whom spoke with great fondness of the humour, vision, and contribution Mr Camfoo made in his long life. I make special mention of the member for Katherine, Mr Westra van Holthe, who also spoke of Mr Camfoo’s community spirit and generosity from the times when he was a policeman at Mainoru. In fact, I even go so far as to say it was quite beautiful to hear the eulogy he gave at the funeral. I know it meant a tremendous amount to the families.
Professor Gillian Cowlishaw, who edited the autobiography called Love Against the Law: The autobiographies of Tex and Nelly Camfoo, spoke warmly of her long association with Tex and the community of Bulman. Many condolences were read from people in other parts of Australia who could not attend the funeral. Afterwards he was laid to rest in the Bulman cemetery.
He is survived by his wife, Mrs Nelly Camfoo, children Christine Camfoo, Tim Camfoo and Warren Camfoo, and many grandchildren and great-grandchildren. He will certainly be remembered, Madam Deputy Speaker, as a great leader, a great storyteller and a man of immense humour.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak on a number of local matters from Katherine, but I quickly wanted to touch on something the member for Casuarina spoke about, which was alcohol restrictions. I do not propose to spend too much time on it tonight, but perhaps I could flag it as the subject which really must be given due importance and should be brought up - if this government were courageous enough to do it - in a ministerial statement so they can be held accountable for their failures. In another case, it might be we will bring it up as a matter of public importance and discuss it then.
It is disappointing the government side can only hang their hat on one particular strategy to try to deal with these alcohol problems, where we know, notwithstanding the assertions made by the member for Casuarina, those restrictions are failing. They are simply just window dressing to try to deal with some really significant problems we have in the Northern Territory. Anyway, Madam Deputy Speaker, enough on that.
Tonight I speak on a couple of things which have occurred in Katherine in recent times. The first one I want to talk about is the charity fundraising walk that I undertook on 10, 11 and 12 September. It was an idea borne out of doing a little exercise to lose a bit of the parliamentary spread we all seem to get working in this House. It dawned on me I could get fit and raise some money for some local organisations in Katherine ...
Mr Giles: That was a smart one.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Wasn’t it? I decided to walk from Pine Creek to Katherine over the course of two-and-a-little days. There were two walkers who walked the whole way – me and a very tenacious young lady by the name of Lisa Elliot. Lisa is the executive officer of the local Katherine YMCA. I must say, despite the pain we both went through, the blisters we formed on our feet, it was inspiring to see a young lady of that calibre really putting the effort in, knowing full well how much she was hurting, because I was hurting equally as much. It was an experience I would not swap. We managed to raise $7000 or thereabouts for the Rotary Club of Katherine, and also for the YMCA.
I pay a special mention to a few people, the first one being Lisa Elliot. The second is Bob Mackie. Bob is the President of the Rotary Club of Katherine, and provided for us all the catering services and support services we needed over that two-and-a-bit days. I also want to say is how deeply the Rotary Club penetrates into the community. The Chief Minister mentioned before they are the major sponsors of the Police Officer of the Year Award. However, they go so much further into the community. Much of what they do we do not actually hear about. It is really heartening to see so many volunteers from the organisation putting in the hard yards and doing some really exceptional things in the community, which is one of the reasons why I thought to assist the Rotary Club of Katherine by raising funds, partly for them, through my walk.
I also thank the Katherine YMCA in general. I thank Somerville Community Services in Katherine, not only for their efforts in having the staff walk with us on day one, but for the significant monetary contribution they made as well. Also, all the other people who donated to or sponsored the walk - there are too many of them, of course, to name, but I appreciate the support. I am sure the YMCA and the Rotary Club in Katherine will be very pleased to receive the proceeds.
I also want to speak about a tourism dinner held in Katherine just a couple of weeks ago. It was called Experience the Magic tourism dinner. It was part of an initiative by Tourism Top End to reach into regional parts of Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria and focus on travel agents who are from smaller regional towns, bring them to the Top End to show them some of the wares the Top End has to offer in tourist destinations. They chose to spend an evening in Katherine. There was a dinner organised at Nitmiluk Gorge. It was an open air event by the new pool.
I had an opportunity to speak to the agents. It was a particularly warm afternoon; I noticed there was some clouds building. I happened to say to the crowd as I addressed them I hoped it rained because, if it rained we would all be saturated, we would be much cooler than we were, but it would also provide them with a memory of Katherine which they would take back to their home town so they would be able to sell Katherine properly and fittingly. Sure enough, about 10 minutes after I spoke, the heavens opened up, and we were all saturated. It was a terrific night notwithstanding. We had to move everything from the open air up to the Nitmiluk Visitors Centre and resettle there and we all had a great feed.
I acknowledge a couple of people who were instrumental in organising the evening: Sylvia Wolf of Tourism Top End; Tony Clementson; Alana Young, also of Tourism Top End; and Kelly Vrolyks from Nitmiluk Tours - Kelly is also Katherine’s representative on the Tourism Top End executive committee. I also pay special tribute to the staff of Nitmiluk Tours for the absolutely marvellous and wonderful job they did in crisis management, I suppose. Everything was getting saturated, all the food was getting rained upon and, without a fuss, everything was packed up, poste haste, into the cars, vans and trucks and taken back up to the centre. About 40 minutes later, we were all sitting down, none the wiser it had been raining. I pay tribute to the hard work they put in.
The other matter I quickly want to raise tonight is the Great Northern Clean Up Australia Day which was held on 4 October this year. In Katherine, it had slight change of name, and it manifested itself in a cleanup of our river corridor. There were probably 50 or 60 people who turned up on the Sunday morning for the cleanup. I was there with my wife for two-and-a-half hours or so, and we managed to clean up, between the two of us, about 25 to 30 big bags of rubbish. I know that was repeated across the whole of the river corridor area by everyone who put an effort in. I say to those who turned up, well done and congratulations. It was a stinking hot morning. We all worked extremely hard. The only downside is the fact that so much time was spent on the morning by so many people cleaning up the mess of inconsiderate people who choose to throw their rubbish all over the place around in the river.
Sadly, much of what was thrown away to be picked up were beer cans, beer bottles, wine bladders, and wine casks which, I suppose, just goes to show something else needs to be done with respect to drink restrictions in Katherine.
I particularly want to mention Jenny Duggan. Jenny organised the cleanup morning. She is instrumental in bringing together people to get involved in activities such as this, and she spends a lot of time with her friends doing very much the same thing. Well done.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I congratulate Sam - Manuel de Jesus de Sousa - who celebrated his 80th birthday on 16 September and has spent more than half a century in Australia.
Baptised Manuel de Jesus de Sousa, Sam de Sousa as he is very well known, was born in Paul do Mar, a parish in the municipality of Calheta, Madeira Island in Portugal. He belonged to the family of Sousa Barbeiro and was a third generation barber. At 18 years old, he was already the most requested barber of his business’s clientele, as he completed a hair cut in less than seven minutes.
However, Sam showed great promise at a much earlier age. At six, he learned alone to read and write. Later, still very young, he learned to play the guitar by himself and he also tried to play the piano accordion, but not as well as his guitar. He has worked very hard since he was 14 years old. During the day, he worked on his parent’s farm and, at night, in the barber shop. He knew very early in life to live comfortably he had to work hard.
At 21, Sam married Maria Idlia, his companion for life. Sam is the first to acknowledge beside a great man there is always a great woman - and she is certainly a great woman. One year after they married, Sam and Maria ventured forth to other lands. He believed his barbering profession would not take him far. He went to South Africa and, thereafter, to Australia, his destiny.
In Australia, Sam worked as a fisherman, bricklayer’s mate, barber, and again fisherman. As a fisherman in Western Australia, he was known as a very lucky man and he went on to study as a captain. With his own fishing vessel 19 m long, which was named Lady Fatima, Sam went after lobster. It is worthwhile to point out Sam actually crossed the ocean in a fishing boat from South Africa to Perth, Australia - no mean feat. I have been very interested to hear his stories about his time as a lobster fisherman because Sam had a technique with the bait he used for the lobsters. He tells a story of how he discovered that tuna carcasses and heads were very appealing to lobsters. He discovered this secret and, in the next five years with his fishing boat Lady Fatima, he became the most successful fisherman off Perth - which is no mean feat; there are generations of families who have been lobster fisherman. However, Sam knew the secret was in the bait. He certainly caught a lot of lobsters in his time, so much so, wags in the fishing industry operating out of Fremantle, instead of calling it Lady Fatima, they called it the Fat Lady because it always had a full load of lobsters. In what it would take others a few weeks to get, Sam de Sousa and his crew would take in a matter of days.
Sam went on to fish for shrimp, which he did because shrimp actually grows to its ideal size in one year. Lobsters, on the other hand, take at least five years before they are legally able to be fished. Sam saw an opportunity in a different fishery, just as he saw an opportunity to move to Darwin and build his business interests in Darwin through hard work.
Today, in Darwin, Mr de Sousa possesses a three-star hotel he built, where he now lives with Maria on Cavenagh Street. It is a very successful accommodation venue. He enjoys having his children, sons-in-law, daughters-in-law, and grandchildren visit there. Much can be said about this man. One thing I can say about him; he is very snazzily dressed. He comes to the markets at Rapid Creek - and that is how I have come to know Sam over the years. His wife, Maria, makes him beautiful clothes and, when he comes up the walkway at Rapid Creek shops, you cannot help but notice him because he is always dressed with a beautiful shirt, beautiful pants and, of course now, his walking stick. That all adds to the elegance and the fashion he has. At 80 years of age, he is still a very dashing man and a very vital person; someone I enjoy speaking to whenever he stops and has a bit of a chat with me at the markets.
I am sure all members join with me in congratulating Sam de Sousa on his 80th birthday and his remarkable life, and we all wish him many more happy birthdays beyond his 80th.
I also congratulate the quiet achievers in the schools in my electorate for the third semester of the school year. At Moil Primary School, Netanya Lai in 5/56K and Jeremy Mauludi in 1/2M were recognised as children who quietly go about their work.
At Wagaman Primary School, the two students who stood out this semester as quiet achievers were Naomi Jackson and Mikayla Condon.
At the Moil Primary School during Term 3, many students won awards for their academic achievement in the International Competitions and Assessments for Schools (ICAS). I congratulate the following students who received Certificates for Science.
In Year 3, Zachary Saynor was awarded a High Distinction – well done, Zachary, Matthew Chapman won a Distinction, and Rachel Fisher, a Credit. Athea Brannen, Andreas Kalambokas, Rebecca Rayner and Hannah Tregloan were all awarded Participation Certificates.
In Year 4, Johanna Hayes, Jason O’Meara, Micah Ramsay and Tyson Wallent won Distinctions, whilst Austin Bruekers, Nicholas Cowling, Rhys Lewis, Jesse Ramsay and Ellyane Wall were awarded a Credit. Sienna Bennett-Kellam and Ruby Hargrave received Participation Certificates. Well done to Year 4!
Issac Skultety of Year 5 was awarded a Distinction for his efforts, whilst Sean Johnston received a Credit and Hugh Harbeck a Participation Certificate.
In Year 6, Garwerd Liang achieved a High Distinction, Eugune Duffy, Helena Frewen-Lord, Jackie Liang and Mie Sorensen won Distinctions, and Credits went to Tess Harbeck and Nathan Ryan.
In the Computer Skills ICAS Competition in Year 3, Zachary Saynor again won a High Distinction, with Credits going to Macsen Chalmers, Matthew Chapman and Hannah Tregloan, with Participation Certificates to Andreas Kalambokas and Rachel Skultety.
In Year 4, Rhys Lewis not only won a High Distinction, but achieved the equal top score for the Territory. Rhys will be receiving a medal later this year for his outstanding result. Well done, Rhys! As well, Tyson Wallent was awarded a Distinction, Jesse Ramsay a Credit, and Sienna Bennett-Kellam, Austin Bruekers, Ruby Hargrave, Jason O’Meara and Micah Ramsay all received Participation Certificates.
Year 5 had Sac Gilchrist win a Distinction, with Hugh Harbeck, Sean Johnston and Isaac Skultety awarded Participation Certificates.
Distinctions in Year 6 went to Garwerd Liang, Jackie Liang, Ryan Nathan, Elliott Williams, with Credits to Eugene Duffy, Tess Harbeck and Mie Sorensen, and Participation Certificate to Alannah Tutt.
Moil students also took part in the 2009 Speaking Competition for the Primary Section of the German Competition which was held at CDU in August. Participating and winning students were Garwerd Liang and Nathan Ryan who won a 1st for Upper Primary, followed by Rachael Simmonds, Elliott Williams and Kaitlyn Cotton coming in 2nd, with Johanna Hayes and Ruby Hargraves 3rd. In the lower primary, Kimberley Keen, Sarah Suliman and Temika Carrodus came 1st; Rachel Skultety and Jade Manning received 2nd prize and Liam Cotton, Isaac Verity and Austin Bruekers won 3rd. What a fantastic effort for Moil Primary School and for Mrs Sutter who teaches with such enthusiasm and dedication the German program.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is with great pleasure I speak tonight knowing I have a few extra minutes, as it has been one of my missions to try to increase the time limits for these adjournment debates so we can get to speak about things in our electorate and those which are very important to us, without having to try to speak at 165 km/h. Also, one can actually spend a bit of time explaining some of the fantastic things which have been happening in our community by great community-spirited people.
Last Saturday night, 10 October 2009, I was very fortunate to attend the Australian Institute of Management Excellence Awards evening conducted at the Holiday Inn on the Esplanade in the ballroom. The evening was opened by the Chairman of the Northern Territory Council of the Australian Institute of Management, Ms Marie-Louise Pearson who, unfortunately for the Australian Institute of Management, is standing down as the chair of the organisation, having done many years of great and faithful work to improve the profile and standing in the community of the Australian Institute of Management.
There were some very kind words said by a number of people during the evening, and it was quite sad to see her go. We wish her the very best, and I must say the person who will try to fill her shoes has a very big task ahead of them. However, I am sure, in her capacity as chair of the organisation she has spent some time developing new leaders to follow in her footsteps. She took it to new highs, and we wish her well in whatever she wishes to do in the future.
There were a number of awards given out on the night. I give people listening, and those who read the Parliamentary Record, a quick understanding of what this particular organisation does, who it represents, and who it rewards for excellence. There are four categories in the awards, the first being Professional Manager of the Year - Public Sector. I quote from this fine booklet put together by the committee running these management awards headed up by Meriel Corbett-Weir, who did a fine job of introducing the awards, and spoke about Marie-Louise Pearson.
Professional Manager of the Year is a category which recognises those who embody excellence in the management of public administration within multifaceted community serving organisations. They demonstrate best practice in roles and projects engaging a rich array of employee, industry, and community stakeholders. There are a number of very fine people and, to get to the point, there were three finalists: Belinda Townsend, from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Jen Corke from Power and Water Authority, and Peter Boyce from the Department of Health and Families. The winner of the section award was Peter Boyce. There were some fine words said about his capacity and commitment to his role as a Senior Director of People and Services of the Department of Health and Families.
The next award is of the Young Manager of the Year. It was fantastic to see so many young people at this awards evening participating and supporting their colleagues, their peers, and being involved in the development of themselves, their peers, and putting forward young managers for this award. The Young Manager of the Year is a category for outstanding managers aged between 18 and 30 years. This category acknowledges rising stars and emerging leaders from business, government, and industry. Young business owners and entrepreneurs are also eligible. There were four finalists: Glenn Wallace, Kia Naylor, Jade Kudrenko and Melanie Lewis. The winner of the category was a lovely lady by the name of Melanie Lewis, who is the general manager of the Palms City Resort. It was fantastic to see the enthusiasm with which she gave her acceptance speech, and she showed for the future development of her business, and her professional and personal development.
The next category was the Professional Manager of the Year - Private Sector. This is a category which acknowledges senior leaders who have demonstrated exceptional management skill. Finalists are drawn from a wide range of professions, and have a demonstrable impact on their organisation and team through their ability to marshal people and resources with strategic agility. There were many wonderful things said about the finalists in this area.
There were six finalists: Gary Carter from Eagle Training Services in Alice Springs; Adam Glass who is the general manager of the Crowne Plaza in Alice Springs; Fiona Goulding who the Community Relations Manager of Perkins Shipping; Peter Perrin, the General Manager of Territory FM; Simone Saunders, the Deputy Chief Executive of Airnorth; and Andrew Simon, who is the General Manager of the Peanut Company of Australia. The winner of the category was Simone Saunders, Deputy Chief Executive of Airnorth. She gave a magnificent acceptance speech where she demonstrated some of the things she has been trying to do with her organisation, and the leadership and management skills she has developed and is using to progress the company she works for.
It is important I acknowledge there was a Medal for Management Excellence given out in this particular category. That was for the General Manager of the Peanut Company of Australia, Mr Andrew Simon. Andrew has just recently taken over as the general manager, having been part of the Peanut Company of Australia for some years working in the Katherine region managing and promoting the Peanut Company of Australia in Katherine where they grow a variety of agricultural products.
The last category, which was probably one of the major events of the night, was of the Owner/Manager of the Year. This category recognises and identifies individual business owners who manage and lead a business from within any industry sector. They may be the head of an innovative start-up, an entrepreneurial company which has taken on creative ideas to market, or an everyday business owner who operates with extraordinary business acumen. There were three finalists in this category: Annette Gillanders, the managing director of BiZnorth, a company which provides educational and training services to a wide variety of recipients across the Northern Territory; Tony Schelling, the owner/manager of Mortgage Choice Australia, a company which gives innovative mortgage loans to a wide variety of people; and Katy Sellwood, the Directing Manager of Advanced Body Image in the Nightcliff Shopping Centre. The winner of the category was Katy Sellwood. She gave another wonderful acceptance speech with a great tribute to her staff and the people around her, her family, and those who have contributed to her leadership and management skills and training, and have afforded her the opportunity to be part of this particular evening and, of course, the category winner for Owner/Manager of the Year.
It was a great night. The hospitality was from the Intercontinental Hotels Group, as one of the major sponsors for the evening. Also, the Northern Territory government needs to be acknowledged. They support these awards which encourages people from all areas of the community, especially the Young Manager of the Year. Other sponsors were: the Commonwealth Bank, Charles Darwin University, KPMG and Optus - all fine corporate citizens who support these awards and encourage people to do better and better. In doing so, they make the Northern Territory a fair but, better, place to do business, which will also create jobs for our kids.
They provide fine services which will encourage business to flourish in the Northern Territory. It is through these awards, those companies, and the community as a whole doing these things the Territory will be a far better place.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will comment on a couple of things. I was pleased to hear the member for Brennan had taken a trip to Lucas Heights. Anyone who wants to talk about anything in regard to radioactive research, molecular research, and radioactive waste needs to take a trip to Lucas Heights to see one of our most important research stations in Australia. It is one of the reasons we are leading the world in molecular research. Other people should make the effort to see exactly what is done at that research station. It is a brilliant place. As the member for Brennan said, it can be a bit of an issue trying to understand all the scientific ins and outs of the experiments going on there, but it is something that is good for Australia.
The second item I raise is in relation to what the member for Goyder spoke about. I have also been approached by the lady - the electorate officer for the member for Goyder - in relation to issues she has had with a builder. There is no doubt the government needs to do something to help this person. There is a builder in our community who, obviously, has very little care about what effect, emotionally and financially, his actions have on some people in our community. It is not only this lady - the electorate officer for the member for Goyder - who lives in Virginia, but also another family living in Palmerston who, I understand, only live down the road from the house of this particular builder.
You have this case where people are now experiencing financial difficulty and would like to get their house completed yet, the builder has completed his own house happily, having no regard for these people who have put their life savings into a house and cannot get a Certificate of Occupancy simply because this person will not finish off those houses.
My understanding is the government can do an audit on this particular builder. If that is the case - and I know they do audits on builders because I also had another person approach me saying he has been, or is to be, audited by the department. This particular builder the member for Goyder mentioned in her adjournment debate certainly needs to be audited. I raised this issue with the Chief Minister’s Department. I believe what has happened has deeply affected the lady from the rural area, and I imagine it has deeply affected the family in Palmerston. I do not know enough of the circumstances of this case to say whether the government’s so-called insurance protection it was going to put against builders failing, collapsing, or leaving town, is at the root of this particular problem. All I need to say is the government, after all the discussion undertaken in this parliament in relation to protecting homeowners from unscrupulous builders, or even builders who have died, does not seem to have protected these two people.
I believe the government needs to investigate and, if it requires an audit, so be it. If the auditor decides this person has done the wrong thing, and if there is no other mechanism within this House to do something about it, then I will be asking the media to at least ‘out’ this person if he is found to have left these people high and dry when the builder should have completed the job but, instead, has built his own house using the cash flow which should have been used to finish off these people’s houses.
When you see how distressed these people are, especially this lady from the rural area - and I have spoken to her a number of times – you realise the person is going through an awful amount of pain and suffering. When you know someone has no care in the world for what he has done to this person, you have to ask where the government is in this case; protecting those people who are most vulnerable? We are presenting legislation soon, hopefully, to protect the vulnerable. In one case, it is the sale of land legislation to ensure people are not caught up in buying a house which goes under water. That is what the legislation is about.
We are also looking at protecting the vulnerable in the case of people who are long-term residents in caravan parks who, at the present time and for the last 10 years, have had no legislation to protect them at all. The Tenancy Act does not cover long-term people in caravan parks.
Here is another case of vulnerable people - and sometimes it can be their fault, but we should still investigate to find out whether these people have been dealt with unscrupulously. It is a responsibility of government to do something. I am interested for either the minister for Planning, Infrastructure or Housing - whoever is responsible for the act - to come back to parliament and say whether they have investigated these cases; if so, what is the result of the investigation. Let us hope these people can, in the end, come to some happy conclusion, because this has been disastrous for those families involved.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I take this opportunity to reflect on the tourism industry in Central Australian, and congratulate Tourism Central Australia for hosting another wonderful awards night in Alice Springs. In particular, I thank Peter Grigg for all the hard work he does, and Letetia and Amy in the front office. I congratulate the tourism award winners for the industry held on the evening of 25 September at the Alice Springs Convention Centre.
Congratulations to Craig Jervis from Lasseters Hotel and Casino, who was the Young Achiever of the Year. Laurelle Halford took the award for DIY Tourguides, the winner of the New Tourism Innovation category with a product which has a CD people can play in their cars as they drive to Uluru or Kings Canyon, Devils Marbles, or somewhere like that. The Primary Tourism Operator was won by Mbantua Gallery - Tim Jennings continuing to do a splendid job promoting art in the Centre, especially throughout the Utopian region. The Community Festivals and Events Award went to Assa Abloy Henley-on-Todd Regatta - congratulations to them and also to Rotary which provides outstanding support to the event itself. Anita Meyer won the Industry Achiever Award with company Ontour NT. Anita has been involved in the industry for quite some time and continues to be an advocate for tourism in Central Australia. I congratulate Jan Hayes from Ooraminna Station Homestead for winning the Barry Bucholtz Award for Excellence. She is an outstanding citizen for Central Australia, an outstanding proponent for tourism, a proponent for the pastoral industry, and much regarded and respected by many in Alice Springs.
Once again, thank you to Amy Sabadin and Letetia Polychronopolous from Tourism Central Australia.
While I am talking about Tourism Central Australia, I want to also reflect on the state of the condition of the Mereenie Loop Road and the Ernest Giles Road, two roads commonly promoted as roads of significance in the tourism industry. They need a lot of work done. I know this government has promised for years and years to get work done on the Mereenie Loop Road and continues not to do it. As a person who has travelled the Mereenie Loop Road on many occasions, including last week, it is not just a hazard to vehicles, it is actually dangerous to drive. The government needs to get serious about what it is going to do. I know it has left it out of its budget this year, and it probably will not do it, but something needs to be done to rectify the road to make it safe for communities along the track, for residents along the track, and tourists who will travel along the Mereenie Loop Road. The same for the Ernest Giles Road, another road of significant importance. I am now told there are tour operators who refuse to travel the road because of running repairs and maintenance costs on their vehicles after travelling down the road. It is a serious matter of contention.
I also congratulate the 12-year-old girl who rescued her two-year-old baby brother from a burning car at the weekend in Tennant Creek. I understand police were called to a fire of a Mitsubishi Magna in Whippet Street in Tennant Creek after the boy was playing with a lighter in the car. The 12-year-old girl could be recommended for an act of bravery, if government sees fit.
I also sit on the Alice Springs School of the Air Council. The School of the Air is an unrewarded body, I believe - a body which ensures education gets out to the bush where it does not often get to. Leigh Mullin, the Principal, and Mark Tuckwell, the chairman of the school who is out at Yuendumu, do a fantastic job at administering the school. Mark provides great leadership to the council. I will go through the staff at the school and pay particular thanks to them. Bill Newman is the IT manager; Coreena Lucas does a fantastic job managing the Visitor Centre. They continue to get larger numbers of visitors through the School of the Air in Alice Springs, which continues to promote the work of the School of the Air, provide valuable resources to ensure their ongoing existence and performance. Belinda Pearson, the Assistant Principal, does a great job. She used to work at Braitling school next door, and is tenacious in her efforts to ensure the School of the Air operates as efficiently as it can.
The staff include: Vicki Skoff, who runs Kindergarten; Michele Turk in Transition; Alisha Ellis in Year 1; Ursula Dobbe in Year 2; Daniel Keane in Year 2/3; Paul Coughlin in Year 3; Jeffrey Kessel Year 4; John Dredge Year 5/6; Jacelyn Anderson Year 7; Yvonne Symons Year 8; Kay Shanahan, ESL and Middle School; Robyn Lindsay, ESL and Indigenous Unit Teacher; Judy Brand. Corella Creek; Heather Coughlin from the library; and Anne Winzar, Dorothy Crennan, Alice de Brenni, Laura Newman, and Derek Thomas all work in the administrative section.Without the work of these hard-working administrators and teachers, Alice Springs School of the Air would not be able to operate and the children out in the bush certainly would not get an education, which is very important.
Talking about education in the bush, although there have been many decades of failure by all governments - federal and Territory - to provide secondary education in the bush in the Northern Territory, this is 2009. While we talk about housing and the failure of the member for Daly, the Housing Minister, to actually do anything, the biggest national disgrace in the country is the failure to provide kids in the bush in the Northern Territory with a secondary education. It is a national disgrace, and something which should be considered further.
I have spoken before about the potential role of boarding schools - whether for preschool, kindergarten, primary, secondary and VET education. Something must be done about schooling in the bush. The federal government proposed to put three boarding schools in the bush and has done nothing about it. Something has to be done. It is a national disgrace, and something I will continue to talk more on in the future.
Going back to SIHIP, I find myself in a position right now where a matter of public importance was raised today, and the minister for hiding, the Member for Daly, did not have much to say - nor did anyone else on the other side of the Chamber. I recognise it is a bit of a problem and they seem to wash their hands and go home to bed at night. After being at Hoppy’s Creek Camp in Alice Springs last Monday evening, seeing the state of the properties; every resident I saw in the camp drunk; seeing a five-year-old girl running around with a Vodka Mudshake Cruiser bottle in her hand tripping over VB cans; seeing the condition of those houses, I will not rest on my laurels.
I thought about it after the member in hiding, blinky bill, the member for Daly, spoke. I thought what do I do? A five-year-old girl running around with a vodka bottle is just not good enough. This is a crisis. It is a crisis with a level of urgency. It is what Mal Brough spoke about in 2007 when he launched the intervention. I will not rest on my laurels. I will ensure something is done about this. I find it completely abhorrent the Northern Territory government refuses to take this seriously, and address this as a crisis. I call on the government right now to cancel every lease on Alice Springs town camps for being in breach of their lease conditions. They have the power to do that; they have the power to make change. There is no way I would let my dog live in those conditions on Hoppy’s Camp. It is an absolute disgrace - a national disgrace.
The Northern Territory government members sit on their hands and pontificate and play politics on this. The calling for a Royal Commission is not a political move. It is saying this government has lost control - charging tenants rent for houses they do not live in; charging tenants a rent of $45 a head and, if there are 20 people living in the house - guess what? - you pay $900 a week; not doing repairs and maintenance; safety switches not being fixed on houses; roofs not there; and a sewer overflowing outside a school, a preschool, a kindergarten, and the shops. This just has to end. This is an absolute disgrace and the government still does not take action on this - still does not see it as a crisis.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I find it absurd the communist lefties of the Labor government would look Aboriginal people in the eye and let this neglect go on. The vision of a five-year-old girl as she walked around with that vodka bottle will remain in my mind. The federal shadow Housing minister, when he walked away, was absolutely speechless. He has never seen anything like it in his life, and I doubt he ever will again. It is an absolute disgrace, and the member for Daly should be sacked.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Deputy Speaker, today for this adjournment speech, I will talk briefly on one of my primary schools, Driver Primary School. I will start by talking of their vision statement which I will quote:
Why that business statement seems to be so bold and true for me today is this school has embarked on one of the most inspirational projects I have seen a school do in my time. They have decided to set up a massive garden - a complete learning centre - to learn through, from and with. It is going to take some 3000m2 to 3300 m2 of land. They have agreement with the council, the neighbours, and the government. Many private people are putting in their efforts and their sponsorship. They are embarking on a project which could well be one of the most fundamentally important physical projects conducted on this scale in a city primary school anywhere in Australia.
These are sounding pretty big words, but I have never seen or heard of a garden - a living, growing, breathing, interactive, learning garden - of this size. I have to say my beautiful daughter’s school in New Zealand has a garden, but it is not this big. It is a little garden and she does amazing things. She talks beautifully about how much fun she has in that garden. However, this is 3300 m2 of land.
I also take time to say thank you to all the volunteers who came down last Saturday morning. We started at 7.30 am; I got there at 8 am, so I was running half-an-hour late for this working bee. From my count, there were some 20 men, women plus many more children there for this working bee. Rob Presswell and his team should be commended for the vigour with which they have started.
I have been looking at the plan for this garden for some time. It is a beautiful plan done by a lady by the name of Karen. We have now applied it to the ground and started the project. Saturday morning, I was joined by three young gentlemen, Brad, John and Stevo. Stevo is Mr Stevenson, one of teachers. We began laying Besser blocks, cementing them in, to create compost bins. None of us, of course, are brickies. It took us quite a while to actually get headway. We have started the process and have those bins under way. I think we will do some more this Saturday coming.
It is a fantastic vision which has come off the back of vibrant teachers of all ages at this school. It is a vision by which you the fundamentals of basic skills will be taught to these children so they get a real understanding of where fruit and vegetables come from, how they grow, and science behind it.
I believe they are also applying for a grant through the Stephanie Alexander Foundation to develop a kitchen. Not only will they be producing and understanding the growing of the fruit and vegetables, but they will be actually learning how to use them day-to-day in a kitchen format to better their own health and lifestyle. This should be highly commended.
When we were in Kintore, we had our own little garden out in the middle of the desert. You think it is all red sand and there is nothing much here, but we were able to reap many crops off the garden we had - and it was not that big at all. We probably pulled three wheelbarrow loads of squash, zucchinis, bok choy, and the like out of our garden. It certainly helped us to have a better, healthier lifestyle many hundreds of kilometres from a main area.
This garden is a brilliant idea; it delivers real skills, real results for our youth. They deserve the best opportunities they can. I look forward to working with those people in the coming weeks because it is a great project and I know those men and women and young children had a great deal of vigour when they were dancing around in the heat. Many plants were put in, and we will see in the next few weeks a dramatic change.
On a more sombre note, unfortunately, I had the great pleasure of meeting a lady quite a few months ago called Mrs Melanie Bulasch. This lady had a lot of fight. She was not a young lady by any means. She was part of the action group involved in the Marlow Lagoon power line issue. She was living along that power line. She got out; she came and walked with us. She came to all these meetings. She was a woman whose vigour was as if she was only 20 in that she fought hard.
I have to say I thought she was a lovely, cheeky lady because she took a dislike to the Minister for Essential Services when he behaved quite poorly in a public meeting. She was quite astounded by his behaviour.
She was a lady who fought like a 20-year-old but, unfortunately, cancer managed to take her life on 29 August this year. I have only just found out about it in recent times. I send my condolences to her son, Bob Bulasch, and hope things are going well for him in this difficult time. They were very supportive people of the community and, as I said, she fought like a 20-year-old. She had the vigour and the understanding of what was going on right through to the end. For tonight, I will leave it at that. I enjoyed your time, Melanie, so please rest peacefully and we will see you another time.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Video and Audio Stream on Internet
Video and Audio Stream on Internet
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise video and audio streaming of the parliamentary proceedings has commenced today. The rules and guidelines for media coverage of the parliamentary proceedings are determined by Speaker’s Determination, pursuant to the resolution of the Assembly on 25 February 1985.
TABLED PAPER
Speaker’s Determination No 5 2009
Speaker’s Determination No 5 2009
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table Speaker’s Determination No 5 of 2009 setting out the guidelines for media coverage of parliamentary sittings.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Message No 12
Message No 12
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from His Honour the Administrator Message No 12 notifying the assent to bills passed in August 2009 sittings of parliament.
PETITION
Independent Environment Protection Agency
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 306 petitioners praying that the Environment Protection Agency of the Northern Territory be independent. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory.
We, the undersigned, respectfully showeth that the Environment Protection Agency of the Northern Territory be independent and have its functions and authorities expanded so that it reports directly to the parliament without recourse to the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage.
Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray the that we, the undersigned, call on the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage establish an independent Environment Protection Agency outside the jurisdiction of government, that reports directly to parliament.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
Petition Nos 15, 17, 19, 22 and 23
Petition Nos 15, 17, 19, 22 and 23
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members the responses to petitions No 15, 17, 19, 22 and 23 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website. A copy of the response will be provided to the member who tabled the petition for distribution to petitioners.
Petition No 15
- Resident Obstetrician Service at Tennant Creek Hospital
Date presented: 9 June 2009
Presented by: Mr McCarthy
Referred to: Minister for Health
Date response due: 14 October 2009
Date response received: 24 September 2009
Date response presented: 12 October 2009
Response:
- Currently, Tennant Creek Hospital offers antenatal care and some limited postnatal care. Birthing services for Barkly women are provided by Alice Springs Hospital.
I would like to inform the Assembly that the Department of Health and Families (DHF) is actively investigating different models of care for a birthing service at Tennant Creek Hospital. A project officer will commence in October 2009 to undertake a feasibility study for an appropriate service model.
The project officer will be guided by the NT’s expert Maternity Services Clinical Reference Group (CRG), comprised of key obstetric and midwifery clinicians and consumer representatives. The CRG was established to guide the development of integrated maternity services across the Territory. I expect the findings and recommendations from the study will be presented to the Chief Executive Officer by the end of the year.
I await the outcomes of the feasibility study. I wish to emphasise the safety of mothers and their babies is of paramount concern. It is essential any birthing service at the Tennant Creek Hospital is developed to be safe, sustainable, and supported by qualified professionals with access to rapid retrieval services if it is required.
I commend the signatories of the petition for their concerns and support for the expectant mothers in the Barkly region.
- Petition No 17
Royal Darwin Hospital Review
Date presented: 9 June 2009
Presented by: Mr Conlan
Referred to: Minister for Health
Date response due: 14 October 2009
Date response received: 6 October 2009
Date response presented: 12 October 2009
Response:
- I note the concerns raised by those who have petitioned, and I am pleased to advise that the reports of four independent reviews were made publicly available on 16 March 2009 and may be found at www.health.nt.gov.au. The reports released were:
Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) Governance Review;
Nursing House per Patient Day implementation (Professor Christine Duffield);
Complaints Management Review (Mr Ray Norman); and
Security Audit Stage 1.
- As mentioned in my previous correspondence to you in February 2009, Royal Darwin Hospital has been actively addressing many of the areas of concern highlighted. The independent reports outline a way forward and I am pleased to state the Department of Health and Families and Royal Darwin Hospital continue to progress many initiatives towards improvement of patient care and safety.
I welcome the community’s support and interest in the operations of their hospital and I trust they will welcome, as I do, the consistent work towards improvement.
Petition No 19
- Traditional Owners’ Control of Country without the Central Land Council
Date presented: 11 June 2009
Presented by: Mr Giles
Referred to: Minister for Aboriginal Policy
Date response due: 19 October 2009
Date response received: 1 September 2009
Date response presented: 12 October 2009
Response:
The Central Land Council is an Aboriginal land council established under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, which is Australian government legislation.
Concerns about that legislation or the operation of its legislative bodies should be directed to the Australian government rather than the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly.
Petition No 22
- Connie Smith - Reinstatement
Date presented: 19 June 2009
Presented by: Mr Mills
Referred to: Minister for Health
Date response due: 19 October 2009
Date response received: 25 August 2009
Date response presented: 12 October 2009
Response:
- As the matter relates to staffing decisions taken by the department, I am precluded under section 22(2) of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act from giving the Chief Executive a direction in relation to this matter.
The Department of Health and Families (DHF) is committed to delivering quality health care services to the community and I am confident that DHF will continue to provide high-quality primary health care to clients in the Kings Canyon area.
Petition No 23
- Marrakai, Leaning Tree and Mt Bundy Excluded from Council or Body Corporate
Date presented: 17 August 2009
Presented by: Ms Purick
Referred to: Minister for Local Government
Date response due: 16 February 2010
Date response received: 23 September 2009
Date response presented: 12 October 2009
Response:
- The Northern Territory government is committee to a community-driven approach to local council boundary expansion that takes in currently unincorporated areas of the northern part of the Territory.
Coomalie Community Government Council, Belyuen Community Government Council, Wagait Shire Council and Litchfield Council are consulting with residents and stakeholders to share their insights on a future vision for the region.
These consultations, conducted by independent facilitators, seek to engage in dialogue with community members about local government and its implications for the region. The councils have sought to ensure that all sections of the community are able to participate in the consultations and express their views.
In particular, I recognise the opportunity to build consensus on a way forward, taking into account and respecting the diversity of views within the region. The issues and ideas raised during the consultations will guide the councils on determining the next steps in expanding local council boundaries.
- The government acknowledges the residents in Marrakai, Leaning Tree and Mt Bundy as valued members of the Northern Territory community. I invite all interested people to share their knowledge and expertise about their region to identify arrangements that enhance service delivery and strengthen representation for residents.
WARRANT
Deputy Chairmen of Committees
Deputy Chairmen of Committees
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to the provision of Standing Order 12, I lay on the Table my Warrant nominating members to be Deputy Chairmen of Committees:
- Pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 12, I hereby revoke all previous warrants nominating Members to act as Deputy Chairmen of Committees and nominate the following Members to act as Deputy Chairmen of Committees: Mr Michael Gunner and Ms Marion Scrymgour, when requested so to do by the Chairman of Committees.
MOTION
Extension of Adjournment Debate
Speech Time Limit
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, this is a very popular motion.
Madam Speaker, I move that Standing Order 77, Motion for adjournment of the Assembly to close the business of the day, be amended to read: ‘Each member 10 minutes’.
As a government, we have undertaken to embark on a whole range of parliamentary reforms …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: There are actually three motions I will be moving - and everyone is aware of what those motions are. Two of them relate to the adjournment debate, which is part of the reform; and the other relates to the removal of ministerial reports.
I believe these are very positive moves. There are further matters before the Standing Orders Committee which has been asked to report to the Assembly in November. I am very confident we will have more reforms to the way this parliament does business.
We are a government interested in openness and transparency of government; that is why we have embarked on a whole range of reforms, including the establishment of an Estimates Committee, where previously there was not one; opening up a discrete Estimates Committee along the lines of those operating in other parliaments; and also allowing cameras in the Chamber for Question Time.
This latest innovation of having streaming of both video and audio directly to the Internet is something this government supports in parliamentary reform.
Shifting the time limits from five minutes to 10 minutes for adjournment speeches is a positive move. Once this motion is passed, members from all sides will have the opportunity tonight of adjourning for 10 minutes. I appreciate the support of the opposition and the Independents in this matter. It is good we have been able to bring it on sooner rather than wait for the final report of the Standing Orders Committee into a whole range of issues.
Madam Speaker, as a government, we are demonstrating we are keen to take steps - this is evidence of those steps - to reform the way in which our parliament does business.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, listening to the minister, one could be forgiven for thinking this government is, indeed, a reform-minded institution which seeks to bring unto the people of the Northern Territory a world of openness, honesty, and accountability. One only needs to look briefly at the history of how we find ourselves in this situation, and this motion brought before the House, and we can see what a tissue thin, transparent, and enfeebled position the Leader of Government Business has taken - as he well knows.
I heard the Leader of Government Business say this was part of the positive moves of the Northern Territory government. Let us speak of the positive moves of this government in relation to its conduct inside this House. It is this government which reduced the speaking time of the adjournment debate from 15 minutes to five. Whilst we are going back to 10, we are not returning to 15, which might be a matter for some debate in the future. However, going back to 10 is at least a reasonable compromise. From the very moment this government sought to introduce the institution of the five-minute adjournment debate, I, for one - and other members in this House - railed against what this government was doing: bringing its dead hand upon the breathing orifices of this parliament - its nose, its mouth - and laying it straight across our faces trying to prevent us from speaking and raising issues in this place.
The government found its road to Damascus conversion - unlike Saul on the original road to Damascus who suddenly saw the light - because they had a gun put to their head - a gun which meant they could lose power. This government did not introduce the five-minute adjournment debate for the sake of the enhancing the quality of parliamentary debate; they did it because they had spite in their hearts and they wanted to silence their critics. That is the motivator for the introduction of the five-minute adjournment debate. If they had their will, they would have expunged the five-minute adjournment debate in its entirety. They would have made this parliament nothing more than a puppet of their own will.
It is only because of the ructions inside their own parliamentary team and Caucus - with members leaping in and out of the Caucus, jumping ship then rejoining, or leaving the ship entirely because of corruption within - this situation has been brought about. Their disillusion in the face of their critics internally and externally has now found this parliament in a situation where it can resist the will of this government and its Chief Minister to silence people in this place.
The Leader of Government Business talked about the interests of open and transparency - arrant nonsense! This government has not been interested in open and transparency at any stage. It has sought to smother, to smudge, to spin, to obfuscate and obnubilate. As far as I am concerned, this government has not changed its spots for any other reason than there is a gun to its head. Be warned, the moment the situation changes - or if the situation changes - and this government finds itself with an absolute majority again, its dead hand will again be visited upon the democracy we call the Northern Territory and woe betide them if they should try in such circumstances.
Madam Speaker, this is a positive step. It is one we supported from day one. I have railed against – as I know other members in this place have - what this government was doing. Finally, not through any choice exerted by this government, but something that was foisted upon them, they have seen the light of day. This does not cover them in glory. It simply means they have been forced into a position that, in the truth, they really did not want to take.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I do not want to be classified as a gun at the head of the government because I do not think that is the case regarding this motion. This motion actually came forward before the issues of last August. I had this as one of my motions for General Business Day at that time. It related to my concerns about the cutting back of time from 15 minutes to five minutes. Madam Speaker, I recall you were giving a eulogy about a good friend of mine at the time. The eulogy went longer than five minutes. I believe that was a classic example of why five minutes was definitely too short for an adjournment speech.
I also understand there was some research done into the average time adjournment debates went for, and that was around just a fraction less than 10 minutes. It seems, overall, people do want longer than five minutes but, on average, do not particularly need to speak for 15 minutes. With that in mind, I thought this was at least a reasonable compromise. Five minutes was certainly not enough for someone - as you found yourself, Madam Speaker - to be able to give a eulogy about a very important person who had lived most of their life in the Northern Territory. To have that eulogy cut off part way simply because the rules said you are restricted to five minutes was, to some extent, insulting to that person’s reputation and also to you, Madam Speaker, speaking of the life and the times of that person to parliament.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion. It is a motion I raised, and has come forward. It may have come forward a bit quicker simply because of the happenings …
Mr Elferink: It would not have happened, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: Well, it may or may not, but it was there before the issues of August arose.
Mr Elferink: I have been complaining for a year, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: We can argue whether that is or is not the case. However, the point is, at least the government has accepted the change has been required. I believe the 10 minutes will be a good compromise.
Adjournment debates are important. It allows all members of parliament to raise an issue, especially about their electorate, as many members of parliament do. You have seen, at times, what you might say is a farcical situation where members have had a prepared speech and realised they have five minutes to jam it in. It reminds me of Mr Jack Ah Kit, one time, when he was asked if he could speed up his speech because it was too long. Well, he rattled it off literally at 78 rpm - when you think about the old records. No one could understand him. We all had a bit of a laugh, but it did actually make a mockery of why you were standing in parliament to discuss issues. It also will remove the requirement by members of parliament to, literally, rattle off their adjournment debate, when they really need adequate time to put forward matters concerning their own electorate, and to do it in a proper way.
I also raise the issue that there has been a lot of discussion about the length of time we are in parliament, etcetera. I put myself down as one of those people who occasionally waffle. However, if we are looking at the way we use our time in parliament, we should also reflect on whether we are concise in what we say - whether we use our time well, like to waffle on, fill the day up with padding, or are doing parliament an injustice by not being more precise and coming to the point - so we are not just seen to be standing here blowing into the wind and making pronouncements which would be regarded as a lot of hot air; that we are being precise, putting our arguments to parliament in a concise and relevant manner so people do not go to sleep, especially now we are on television 24 hours a day, seven days a week ...
Mr Chandler: It is a reality show.
Mr WOOD: Well, it is a reality show. We need to be putting our arguments to the public so they understand what they are, and they do not fall asleep working out what we are trying to say.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the opposition supports this motion.
It is an argument that has been put on many fronts to this government. It is an argument which was run through the committee, I understand. It is a position that has been maintained in the face of a government which made a decision to restrict the capacity for members in the Chamber to speak - perhaps with the intention, on one front, to go home early. We have seen that as one of the results of this change brought about by government.
However, let us not be nave. Let us not conceal what is, in fact, revealed for all to see; that being, a government member can describe this as a reform. That is simply an adaptation in order to survive. Charles Darwin has identified this behaviour: you either adapt or you perish. That is the motivation behind this, which is quite plain to see. The arguments were strong before, the arguments are strong now. Why the change of behaviour? It is a reaction to a near-death experience which has been the only motivation - not in the interest of reform, openness in debate, ensuring Territorians get a fair deal and have a sense of increased integrity over the parliament, and an enhanced view of the operation of its members. It is simply a matter in order to survive politically.
It would be nave in the extreme to think this is only arrived at because they have dwelt on it for a period of time and it is just coincidental we are now in the Chamber with a government which has survived a political crisis as a result of a certain amount of pressure being placed upon it through the political process.
The member for Port Darwin referred to the phrase ‘leopard’ and ‘changing spots’. The member for Nelson would well recall the Ninth Assembly. This is the Eleventh. During the Tenth Assembly, there were only four opposition members and government could, effectively, do whatever it wanted. They would stand and read from media releases in the morning so they could maximise their take in the media and get their message out. It did not matter so much because you only had an opposition of four. The arguments were the same and put again and again: this was an abuse of parliamentary process. They were deaf to those calls. Why? It did not matter; the objective was a political one to ensure they could use the platform of this parliament to enlarge their message in the public domain.
Now, they have hearing restored as a result of what they would spuriously describe as a change of heart; a reform agenda. Nonsense! Absolute nonsense! In fact, I call that a dishonest representation of a new position taken and adopted by government. I am talking about the Tenth Assembly when there were only four of us and a couple of Independents. You were at your heyday. What did you do during the heyday? Maximised your opportunity to promote yourselves.
Go back to the Ninth Assembly; you were not in such a dominant position. At that time, you needed the numbers to secure a Speaker. You put the member for Braitling in the Chair, an Independent. Anyone could see you needed that. Did you admit that was why you put an Independent member of the Chamber in the Chair, with the Deputy being the member for Nelson, who is also an Independent? Did you describe that in terms of ‘We have to do this because we do not have the numbers on the floor’? No, you dressed it up by saying: ‘This is a demonstration of how noble we are and how truly we value the independent status of the Speaker and the Speaker’s Chair’. You dressed it up and promoted it as a virtue when, in fact, it was a response to your political survival - you dressed it up dishonestly.
When it came to the Tenth Assembly, you no longer needed that virtuous position and deception, so you abandoned it and put a Labor member in the Chair. Where was the much-vaunted position of independence and how virtuous you were when the fact was it was a dishonest position and was only to do with your political survival? You changed your spots. In fact, you have not changed at all, because what we have now, although it is all dressed up in fine words, is only an adaptation in order to survive. The arguments have been maintained and sustained, but you will only move when there is political pressure brought to bear upon a vulnerable government.
I only hope there is a lesson here which is sent out across the Northern Territory. I say: ‘Citizens, wake up and exert pressure on this government, because they are susceptible to change if pressure is applied. Continue applying pressure on this government because they will say one thing or another, but the fact is they are now vulnerable to pressure, and pressure must be brought upon this government’. That is the fact of this. Dress it up whatever way you like to make yourselves look good, but it is not about you; it is about delivering genuine change for the Northern Territory.
Of course, Madam Speaker, we support this motion, but not for a moment can I ignore what sits behind this.
______________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Darwin Middle School Year 7 students, together with teachers, Tara Kapoor and Carly Doyle. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
______________________
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, I also acknowledge the students of Darwin Middle School. I am trying to peel my eyes to look for my son; I thought he might be one of them. I see a whole range of his best friends there, but I cannot actually see him. Maybe he has been kicked out. It is great to see Darwin Middle School here today.
In relation to this motion, as the Leader of the Opposition said, we support it for a number of reasons. As has been quite rightly outlined, we railed against the motion to reduce and remove openness and accountability from the parliament; debates which only happened a few months ago in this Chamber. At that time we were told - I believe it was by the then Leader of Government Business, the Treasurer - that parliamentarians work too hard; people could not be expected to work past 9 pm, even though we start at 10 am, we have a two-hour lunch break, have an hour for dinner; it is not rational people should be working past 9 pm. All of a sudden we had to reduce the amount of debate we could have in adjournment, and in a range of other areas.
Now, lo and behold, a couple of months later, we are finding, no, the government wants to be more open and accountable. That is what they tell us. In the intervening period, of course, government almost keeled over from infighting. The infighting was not infighting anymore; it became very public. Everyone knew exactly what was going on. The member for Karama was sharpening the knives, waiting to despatch the Chief Minister, and the member for Macdonnell resigned from the Labor Party and left a great gulf. Prior to that, of course, the member for Arafura had resigned from the Labor Party, could not work with them, had a change of heart and, miraculously, came back.
Then, we came into this bizarre little scenario where the member for Nelson cooked up his grubby little deal that allowed the Labor Party to cling on to power. Now, because of this grubby little deal, the member for Nelson, in effect, holds a gun at the head of the government ...
Mr Wood: What was your deal? Did you go to China recently?
Mr TOLLNER: Do not go red in the face, mate.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Direct your comments through the Chair, member for Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: Certainly, Madam Speaker. I am dealing with interjections from my left, appropriately so. However, the member for Nelson, in effect, holds a very real gun to the head of the government. What the member for Nelson says in many cases goes because, the government knows if they upset the member for Nelson, they will fall over and be run out of office.
The member for Nelson not only holds a gun to the head of the government, but he has now become an apologist for government. The member for Nelson stood a couple of the minutes ago and told us it was part of the government’s plan to do this anyhow, and it was not really him holding a gun to their heads - they wanted to do this and he had this motion on the books long before we came to this place. Well, I did not see government acting on it then …
Mr Wood: They were. What you see and what you know are two different things.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Fong Lim well knows that he needs to direct his comments through the Speaker.
Mr TOLLNER: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker. I was directing my comments through you, and I am sure the Leader of Government Business realises that.
Madam SPEAKER: Just continue and direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr TOLLNER: Certainly, Madam Speaker. What we have here now is a situation where the member for Nelson feels it is his obligation to defend government. He said he had this motion on the books for months. I did not see, a couple of months ago when we were debating in the Chamber whether we should have reduced sitting times, the government taking a whole lot of notice of the member for Nelson at that particular point in time. However, the member for Nelson now has decided to jump into bed with the Labor Party in a very public way. Read his media pronouncements and the like. He talks about ‘we will do this’, ‘we will do that’. The member for Nelson clearly puts himself inside the government team in respect of his protestations suggesting he is not part of the Labor Party.
This motion demonstrates how far the Labor Party has come down the road, and now understands their own political survival depends on the member for Nelson. They came in and threw this motion on the Table; in effect running away from what they did only a few months ago - tails between their legs, run away from it. All of a sudden, they are saying no, they are doing this now to open up the parliament to make it more accountable and more transparent.
It is good to see we have cameras here. That was something I talked about in my maiden speech. I am very keen and glad to see we have cameras. Whilst we are talking about this, maybe when the Leader of Government Business sums up, he might be able to tell me whether we will now have access to archived footage, because we all know it exists. In fact, I have asked for footage in the past and been flatly rejected. However, I would like to know, in this new era - this wonderful new era, this dawn of accountability, transparency and openness - whether we will actually be able to access archived footage of past sittings ...
Mr Wood: We could have the history of the member for Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: Now what? The member for Nelson does not want it? I will respond to that interjection, Madam Speaker. The member for Nelson does not sound as though he wants access to archived footage ….
Mr Wood: No, you are just making it up again, Dave, as you go along. Keep going.
Mr TOLLNER: Maybe you can explain exactly what your position is in relation to this …
Mr Wood: No, you are just making it up as you go along, Dave.
Mr TOLLNER: In any case, it would be good if the Leader of Government Business could explain to the parliament whether we will be able to access the footage of the past.
Madam Speaker, I am quite happy that this motion has been put. It has taken a lot to get the government to do this, and I thank the member for Nelson for applying the required pressure to government to get this motion before the House.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank all sides for their support of this motion. As the member for Fong Lim stated, there are cameras here and members of the public have seen for themselves what has just happened in this little interchange over a fairly simple and positive change to a standing order regarding the length of adjournment debates.
People could see the over-dramatisation which occurred with the opposition, and the attacks which have become quite personal against the member for Nelson. This has become a hallmark of the opposition with their personal attacks on the member for Nelson, who is widely recognised in our community as someone with a lot of integrity and honesty. I do not think it does the opposition any good whatsoever to be attacking the member for Nelson on a personal level. This is a place of debate where we debate issues, ideas and policies. To personally attack the member for Nelson is counterproductive to the opposition’s cause.
What has unfolded here with the last speaker from the opposition really tells the story about the opposition. The member for Port Darwin, rightly so in his job as my equivalent on the other side, the Leader of Opposition Business, takes a lead in his role. I enjoy our discussions. He is quite knowledgeable in relation to standing orders and the operation of parliament. Then, the Leader of the Opposition spoke and, rightfully so. He wanted to make his political points, which he did. Then we had the member for Fong Lim trying to get in the limelight as well. It tells a story about what is going on in the opposition. Those who are watching can be very interested in the colour coordination on the other side. We have the member for Fong Lim with a lovely purple tie, and the Deputy Leader - they are well colour coordinated today. One wonders whether there is a bit of a conversation going on there not only about dress but other things as well.
People who are watching this broadcast really see how the opposition attends to its business; how it debates. I was particularly interested in the Leader of the Opposition relying on Darwinian theories to attack the government. I would have thought, given his background, he is probably a creationist. But, there you go! I suppose all is fair in love and war in debate within this parliament ...
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I have just heard a diatribe about personal attacks. Attacking a member’s faith, I believe, is disgraceful, quite frankly. He should be pulled into line.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Leader of the Opposition, are you offended by that comment?
Mr MILLS: No, Madam Speaker, that is fine.
Madam SPEAKER: Okay. Please continue, Leader of Government Business.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the spirit of robust debate, I will continue.
The best contribution was, indeed, from the member for Nelson. He gave quite a balanced view of this and its history. He was quite correct in his comments. One of the most important things he alluded to was the efficiency of debate within this place. In previous times, there was 15 minutes of adjournment debate. I was here for two Assemblies when that was the case. I have to say members on all sides, probably including me at various times, wandered within that 15 minutes. I believe 15 minutes was definitely too long. Some members used up their 15 minutes repeating themselves, or wandering off into some sidetrack of debate. With five minutes, as the member for Nelson alluded to, there were instances where members could not complete their adjournment debate. Allowing 10 minutes, given the fact - also alluded to by the member for Nelson - the average is just a little under 10 minutes, will give all members an opportunity to compile their adjournment debates and be quite efficient in the use of their time. We also have to remember, whilst there is freedom of speech, we cannot waste those opportunities.
Madam Speaker, without any further comments from me, I commend this motion to the House.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Adjournment of Assembly –
Standing Order 41A(a)
Adjournment of Assembly –
Standing Order 41A(a)
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move to extend the overall debate on adjournment of the Assembly for Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays. I move - That Standing Order 41A(a) be amended by omitting 10 pm and inserting in its stead 10.30 pm.
Those are on every day except for Wednesday, where there is unlimited time and all members of this Assembly can speak. It will provide a capacity for members to adjourn at least once, and even more, during sittings. It is a positive move which accommodates the needs of members. We know members adjourn on a whole range of issues, some of which are directly political, many relate to work in our electorate, or celebrating people who have made a fantastic contribution to the life of the Northern Territory.
It is opportune to say, generally, even when there was 15 minutes or even five minutes, not all members would avail themselves of the opportunity to adjourn every night. There were often times when there were a few adjournments every night, and the time was not exhausted. This is a step in keeping with the 10 minutes.
Madam, Speaker, I commend this motion to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I will do nothing more than to say to people who read future Parliamentary Records: read the previous motion for my comments in relation to this motion; they are inextricably linked. Once again, I am entirely supportive - in fact, we on this side of the House are entirely supportive - of the restoration of one of the great hallmarks of our democracy.
One of the things we enjoy in this Chamber, because of our physical size, is the capacity to use our time to speak more fully on issues before us. A parliament such as the federal parliament has many members. Whilst they have many more sitting days, there is rarely an opportunity to do anything other than the Government Business of the Day. This parliament affords us a different opportunity, particularly through the adjournment debates. That opportunity should be taken.
I state on the record I have always opposed the shortening of the adjournment debates. It is one of those rare occasions afforded to very few parliamentarians anywhere in the world to speak wholly and fully about the issues of particular concern to us - not often enjoyed in other jurisdictions. I can tell members in this House, if you are a member of the House of Commons, it is quite possible to sit in that Chamber for many decades and never get an opportunity to utter a single syllable.
This small Chamber of this small jurisdiction gives us a much broader scope in which to speak, and only the dead hand of government can reduce that if the dead hand of government so chooses.
I have spoken before in the past, and reiterate on this occasion; the parliament is the superior organ of the three separated powers. It is the superior organ by virtue of the fact a government cannot form until the members of this House, essentially, give life to it. That is why governments seek a majority, or at least a working minority, so desperately because without it and the support of this House any such government is doomed to failure.
It behoves the government to show some discipline, particularly in the unicameral system where they have an absolute majority, and use their power wisely, particularly in this House. There is a danger in a unicameral system that a government which is in absolute majority will seek to exert its authority over the parliament, using its numbers - and we have seen this government do this. It is only at the time - irrespective of what the member for Nelson might say he had proposed - they see the imperilled minority government they currently have, weakening by the hour, they suddenly find it within their capacity to show some grace and discipline towards this House.
Grace given under duress is not grace at all; it is an instinctive response. Discipline demands, when you do not have to do something, you do it anyhow for a better government of the Northern Territory. That has not occurred in this place. There is no grace being shown here today; the gossamer thin arguments from the members opposite - in fact, one member opposite; the rest are clearly too embarrassed to speak in relation to this motion because of the way they have conducted themselves in this place - means we finally get some oxygen. However, not oxygen given through good grace and discipline, and an appreciation of the system of government we operate under but, rather, because of fear.
I will accept this motion under the terms it has been offered; that is, a government with a gun to its head. In truth, what should have occurred in the first instance is a government showing discipline, grace and appreciation of the separation of powers we have - something this government has assiduously sought to avoid and, moreover, actively pursued to undermine.
I am grateful for the current situation for no other reason than, at least as a member of parliament - someone who carries the mandate of the majority of voters in the electorate I am fortunate enough to serve - I am in this place. No government, no public servant, enjoys that mandate - only members of parliament, not even judges. That is what gives us the ascendancy; that is what gives us the power. They may be ministers, but that is a warrant granted them under powers exercised by the Queen. However, there is another power we have been given; that is, the power given to us by the voters of the Northern Territory.
I urge the government in its future considerations to turn its mind to this important issue and act with grace and discipline, rather than with fear.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, it is lucky I actually have a shooter’s licence because that is the second time I have been told I am the gun being held to the head of the Labor Party ...
Members: It is true.
Mr WOOD: People might think it is true, but I do not think it is true; it is just a fact of life that I have an opportunity, and I hope to bring some change to parliament. I take very much into consideration what the Leader of the Opposition said. I believe he is dead right; it is time we had independent Speakers and the principle behind that. You might recall, Madam Speaker, I spoke at the opening of the second sittings I was elected to, and raised that very matter. It seemed when it was convenient there was a particular philosophy, a particular belief this is something which should happen and, when circumstances changed by the numbers on the floor, the philosophy went out the door.
I also have a long history in the Northern Territory, especially in relation to watching politics. I used to come to this House regularly to watch Question Time, and listen to the radio. Much of my work was on the back of a tractor, and I would always listen to Question Time. I can tell you - listening to the member for Port Darwin - when the CLP was in power some of the answers given by ministers were absolutely woeful; they were meant to fill up time. I believe the member for Port Darwin is right; when you have unicameral system it is a big temptation for the party in power to abuse that. I have seen it on both sides of parliament. I have spoken before about the importance of the committee stages. The reason I believe the committee stage should be given as much scope as possible is it is the only time one can actually question the government over its legislation thoroughly, because we do not have a second house in this parliament.
I am not nave enough to say some of what is happening today is not because of the circumstances the government finds itself in. However, I am happy to use that opportunity to bring in some reform. It might not be everything I support or agree with. This is not gun-to-the-head stuff; this is trying to get some changes one is going to have to mediate through ...
Mr Elferink: Would they have done if this had been otherwise?
Mr WOOD: That is right; I am not disagreeing. However, the point is the circumstances we have now allow me to influence the government. As I said, not everything I would like will I actually obtain, because it is a two-way street working through some of these issues. It is important we now have this extra time. It is very important for people on this side of parliament be given the opportunity to speak - again because of the unicameral system both crossbenches and opposition have the opportunity during adjournment to raise important issues.
The member for Port Darwin is a person who has raised many important issues during the adjournment debate. In fact, I recall him running downstairs in a hurry when there was something said in an adjournment debate which might have upset him. He came down and used his adjournment debate time to put forward his argument for or against what was being said at that time. That is really important.
The lengthening of time, obviously, reflects the maximum time one can speak. I reiterate this is a good change back to what it used to be. It may not be exactly what it was. I did not agree with what happened previously but, when you look at the average time people have spoken, this is probably a good commonsense, balanced response to the debate. Yes, I agree with the member for Port Darwin; it should not have happened in the first place. It was done in circumstances where the government thought it had the numbers so it did not really matter. The government really has to show in the coming months and years that it really believes in openness and transparency, and will not go back on some of these things.
After the next election - whatever happens - if Labor is voted in again, will it guarantee it will not go back and change this? Will these things stay and not be again debated and changed? The proof of the pudding will be whether these are genuine changes, or are just done because of the circumstances. I accept the Chief Minister has said he wants these changes. I believe he was genuine when he said that. However, I keep in mind exactly what the Leader of the Opposition said in relation to his leadership. I remember a quote from the Chief Minister in the Adelaide Advertiser about the importance of the independence of the Speaker and how this was a new era. When the numbers changed, this particular philosophy died. I am fully aware of the politics of parliament, but I also believe one has to have a little faith people of goodwill will try to do things, not simply because the members of the opposition believe it is a gun to their head or purely because of the circumstances the government finds itself in. Only time will tell.
I have to have faith to say there is genuine belief some changes should occur. They may be pushed into this corner but, in the end, if we get some good results and changes for this parliament and for the Territory, I welcome these changes.
Madam Speaker, I support the motion.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their support for this motion, and I commend it to the House.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Ministerial Reports - Standing Order 96A
Ministerial Reports - Standing Order 96A
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that Standing Order 96A, Ministerial Reports, be rescinded.
Ministerial reports became a feature of parliamentary business after the election of 2001. The opposition and Independents had many reservations about ministerial reports so, as part of the parliamentary reforms which have been moved, government is removing the ministerial reports.
I add briefly that approximately 35 minutes per sitting day was allocated to ministerial reports. I announce to the House approximately 35 minutes per sitting day is now in the mix, if you like, in the rest of time in our parliamentary day. It comes back to the issue of efficiency raised by the member for Nelson before. It is incumbent on all of us to use our time in this place efficiently, whether it is in debate or in committee. I am not suggesting we curtail debate in any way, but we all know in this place sometimes debate in some areas becomes quite repetitive and unproductive, long after people have made their point about a particular issue. It is incumbent on us, whether it is within parliament or estimates, to use our time wisely.
Parliament is a resource - opposition has its job, Independents have their job, and government has its job. We have to try to work better together to get efficiencies in the time we have, knowing the operation of this parliament is a very costly enterprise but, at the same time balancing that. In no way do we want to see debate curtailed.
We are omitting the ministerial reports with nothing specifically in its stead, except an exhortation to this parliament that we use the 35 minutes per day wisely.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, of course, the opposition supports this decision of the government.
I am particularly interested in the choice of the language which said government is aware opposition and Independent members had some ‘reservations’ about this particular practice employed by the Labor government after coming to office in 2001. I challenge the honourable member to enlarge upon what he means by ‘reservations’. What would be the nature of reservations other members of this Chamber who are not in government would have with employing such a strategy? I challenge you, honourable member, to describe what those reservations may be. Do you recall the arguments that have been put to you, again and again, about the abuse of parliamentary process; the opportunities taken by a rampant government to enlarge a space within the Chamber to promote themselves; and to reduce the opportunity for reasonable debate and response because there was no forewarning of the topics to be presented, or read out from a media release? No, none of those things are given any kind of articulation, just the vague term of ‘reservations’.
Madam Speaker, this is another astonishing reversal, and a new position by government. Clearly, for any person who has come to this point of discussion in the Parliamentary Record, I urge them to refer to my previous comments. It reflects quite badly upon the motivations and intent of the government which, finding itself in a precarious position, now proposes and supposes we can ignore the only reason there has been a change of heart. It is because of a desire to survive, rather than they have now come to their senses. How many times when there were four opposition members in here was this matter raised and they were completely deaf? Now, they can hear. Amazing, Madam Speaker!
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, in this case I concur with the Leader of the Opposition. I believe this whole process was set up for the government to promote itself - not always but, in general. I will repeat some of the things with which I had concerns. We did not know, generally speaking, what was going to happen. A statement was made on the floor and you had to scramble to write something down in a hurry so as to respond. From a parliamentary process point of view, that is not good. People want to hear alternative points of view across the floor of this House. If the government makes a statement on something, then you would expect the people on this side of the House had a fair time to absorb what was put forward and to speak on it. Of course, you then had the imbalance of five minutes for the government to speak, and two minutes for the opposition or the Independents.
This has now been removed, and it has been removed for good reasons. Sometimes, the government put forward matters that required urgent attention. However, it is something we should look at in the next year, perhaps in a different format altogether, perhaps a mini-statement.
For instance, we have issues about the port at the moment. That would be a good issue for debate, first of all for the government to tell the people - do not forget we are not just talking to one another here – and give a report on the port. Is it sinking? What is the story? Who will fix it? Tell the other side of parliament you are going to talk about it. Even if you give an hour’s notice, at least it gives this side of parliament some notice, and gives the opposition equal time to respond. I am not saying Independents need to have the same time to respond, but at least they should have the opportunity to speak on the subject. If we really believe in openness and transparency, and we are talking to the people - people will be interested in whether the port is sinking, and to know what the government is doing about it.
The government might want to talk about, for instance, the vine leaf rust outbreak. It was urgent at the time. It would be good if the minister for Primary Industry was able to speak on that issue, and notify this side of parliament he is going to speak so we can ring up some farmers, the department, or we can check some of the facts ourselves. You then get a much better quality debate. The minister would make a statement and, if you did not have much to talk about, you certainly could go off on a tangent and speak about something else, which might be irrelevant to what the minister was talking about.
Surely, we could do something good for parliament, and good for the Territory, and allow good debate in this parliament. I believe there is a need for something, and I would be happy to talk with the Leader of the Opposition and put something to the government about whether there is room to move on something like a mini-statement, as long as this side of parliament is informed of what is going on. I understand things can change and maybe just say: ‘We are not bringing that forward today because something has happened’. If you are flexible enough, both sides of parliament would understand that.
Madam Speaker, I am pleased it is gone, because the way it was used was political. Not all the time; there were times when the government had to make statements. However, there were a lot of little statements made that were just nice statements and meant to be feel good. We can use this better. We can produce a better quality statement, and we can produce better quality debate. I say to the government perhaps next year, let us look at that again and see if we can come up with some changes. It would make it better for parliamentary debate if we did.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, once again, it is nice to have a bit of history in this House. The ministerial report is singularly one of the most profound abuses of this parliamentary system I have ever seen. We must cast our mind back to the original organ which was the ministerial report. On that occasion, it was only possible for a minister to stand up, speak about an issue, and sit down. The standing order, as rammed through by the new government of the day - was only interested in hearing its voice. It was not until the opposition of the day was in a position to tell the government there was no point or they were not going to turn up for the first half hour of the day because they were not allowed to speak, the government suddenly realised how silly ministerial reports had become.
The minister would walk in here and expect to have a pliant and compliant parliament sitting there, listening to what they were doing and how good it was, without any right of reply. You only have to go to the word ‘parliament’ to discover how ridiculous the situation was where that was forced upon this House. So, finally, the opposition of the day said: ‘Well, we just will not go. There is no point being there. You guys are going to ride roughshod and we have no right of reply. We are not going to be a bloody – sorry, Madam Speaker, pardon the French; I withdraw that - cheer squad for the government of the day’.
It was only then the government thought: ‘Oh, goodness gracious me. Yes, we have to make it look like a debate’. What did they do? They said the opposition could have two minutes in reply and the minister, if they so chose, could climb to their feet and have a spray around the room for one minute. What we finally got was a situation where, because of those rules, the minister would spruik on for about five minutes to tell the House what the media release of the day was going to be, and what the spin doctors were planning for the day and, then finally, an opposition member would have a quick spray around the room and say what a pack of morons the government was, based on nothing other than preparation time of the five minutes the minister was on his or her feet. Finally, the minister would stand up and have a quick slag-off at the opposition member.
There was no informed debate whatsoever and, yet, despite the fact I and other members on this side of the House railed against this abuse of the parliamentary system, we have steadfastly adhered to it in the way chewing gum sticks to a blanket. Why? Because this government would decide, as a matter of pride - and we all know pride comes before a fall - would steadfastly stick to this ridiculous situation where even the press were not interested. This is something designed to attract the press to the press gallery - they were not coming. Therefore, towards the end of the reign of the ministerial reports, all we saw was ministers with a five minute blurb they would mouth off in a half-hearted fashion and, then, there would be this slanging match across the room - there was nothing parliamentary about it.
I have heard the defence of this system: ‘Well, questions without notice are without any form of warning’. That is true, but each minister should know their portfolio sufficiently well to be able to answer the question which is put to them. They have the support of entire departments around them. It is hardly appropriate to turn around and say: ‘We can spring things on the opposition’. We do not have whole departments around us and have to educate ourselves as to how the Territory is governed. To, essentially, create a situation which is a reverse Question Time, except have all the ammunition in your own hands, is bizarre.
That is what this government was doing to the first half hour of every sitting day - creating a bizarre situation which was not designed for the edification and advancement of the people of the Northern Territory; it was designed to capture the people who occupied the media boxes, except they turned off and were not interested. Therefore, the media releases went out and half-an-hour of every day was occupied with this farcical situation.
I also turn to the comments by the member for Nelson about not being a gun to the government’s head. If memory serves me, the agreement he struck with the government was some 18 pages long - 15, 18 pages, something like that. The Magna Carta was only one page long, yet it changed the way we are governed.
How many of those 18 pages would the member for Nelson have been prepared to trade away before he signed up to this arrangement with the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory? One page, two pages, five pages? The fact is we have heard him say here today that he came to an agreement with the government. He may not consider that as holding a metaphorical gun to the government’s head, but it could not but be otherwise because, unless the government has, and had, his acquiescence in relation to these issues, we would have gone to the polls. That is the gun to the government’s head no matter how the member for Nelson may choose to phrase it. It is the truth, and what is perceived to be happening out there. One only has to open the NT News and flick to Wicking’s cartoons to see the Chief Minister dressed up in a pinafore serving the interests of the member for Nelson to realise that is the way it is perceived out there.
The member for Nelson may wish to engage in semantics, but the fact is when we enter into an agreement which is conditional, those conditions must be enforced by some mechanism, otherwise it is not an agreement. In contract law, for example, there are the sanctions provided by the court system; in this agreement, this contract between the member for Nelson and government, there is a sanction: ‘I am not going to play ball unless I get these things’ - 18 pages worth. Whether the member for Nelson likes it or not, that is a gun to the government’s head.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contributions for this, the last of the three motions being brought forward.
The Leader of the Opposition articulated the reservations the opposition had in relation to ministerial reports. There was one reservation he did not mention which was, to some degree in some cases, ministerial reports pushed the opposition into a position where they had to articulate their position about something - either there were conflicting reports by various members of the opposition, or the opposition was lying quiet on a particular issue. Part of his and the opposition’s discomfort with ministerial reports - apart from the other areas he articulated - was the fact, in some cases, the opposition was called upon - and did not always respond - to articulate their position on a particular issue.
The opposition’s job is to draw attention and to criticise; I understand that. However, the opposition’s job is to articulate alternate policies over a whole range of things. I have been in this parliament eight years and I have seen very little in the way of policy substance from the opposition …
Mr Mills: You steal it all the time; you are using it. You took it into Cabinet the other day.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: They have the opportunity, over the next few years, to articulate their position on a whole range of issues. I am not saying they did not have any policy on any issue. However, over a whole range of portfolio areas, there was a policy vacuum from the opposition. The opposition needs to take some responsibility in articulating their position on issues.
It is fair enough, as the member for Port Darwin said, there are unequal questions without notice, and ministers should know their portfolio area well enough to be able to respond and answer questions. Yes, we accept that. By the same token, I would have thought shadow ministers should be in a position, particularly in relation to important issues, to articulate a policy position of the opposition. That is not always the case.
Much was made by both the member for Nelson and the Opposition Leader about the use of ministerial reports to promote government and the work of government. Yes, it was certainly true. However, I ask this House to remember - and put aside partisan politics for a while - there are good things governments do. There are good things, good policies, good achievements, and good outcomes for the people of the Northern Territory. I acknowledge, or try to acknowledge, some of the important things the CLP government did when it was in power, particularly in relation to the work Barry Coulter did for the port, which was built and developed initially under the CLP - a great project; a nation-building project, which the railway was also. There are achievements of government that stand the test of time.
It does not matter which party the government is or who the minister is, there are things the government achieves. Within this parliament, the opposition has an avenue to criticise and debate. I also think government should rightly have an opportunity and avenue to present positive issues it has achieved. It is unwise for any opposition, particularly one which wants to be the next government of the Northern Territory, to believe parliament should not be a place where a government cannot put forward its achievements. The ministerial reports were one avenue; obviously, Question Time is another. Given that - and I mentioned before about efficiencies of time within this parliament - members on the other side of the Chamber should not be so negative when a question is asked by a member on this side - a local member who has the interests of the Territory at heart - of a minister of such achievements.
The opposition should not be churlish about it, but should accept it is part of what governments do. Governments are keen to highlight their achievements just as oppositions are keen to point to flaws in policy, action or inaction, or whatever it is. It is a two-way street and all sides of parliament need to recognise that.
Finally, I was interested to hear what the member for Nelson had to say about a possible alternative to ministerial reports being looked at, possibly by the Standing Orders Committee. I believe I saw the Leader of the Opposition nodding in agreement. Government would be willing to enter into conversation and address some of the issues such as notice being given about the topic, the times, and the way in which such matters are conducted. For the time being, this motion rescinds ministerial reports and is part of the parliamentary reforms mooted by this government.
Madam Speaker, I commend the motion to the House.
Motion agreed to.
CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
(BUSHFIRES) BILL
(Serial 54)
(BUSHFIRES) BILL
(Serial 54)
Continued from 19 August 2009.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, from the outset, I indicate the opposition will be supporting this bill. Having said that, there are some comments to be made on the way through, noting the history of debate in this place about changes to legislation relating to bushfires, and also noting some federal matters.
As highlighted in the Attorney-General’s second reading speech, this bill is based on the 2001 - let me say that again, the 2001 - model Criminal Code. In the model Criminal Code, bushfire arson is defined by ‘the creation of risk, rather than the infliction of harm’.
The current Northern Territory provisions for arson and attempted arson in the code focus on the intent to damage someone’s property through fire rather than the recklessness of the act. What this bill proposes, by picking up the 2001 proposal in the model Criminal Code, is it provides a penalty for, or relating to, the creation of a risk and someone recklessly causing a fire.
It is interesting to the point of being remarkable that it has taken the government some eight years to introduce this change. The government’s amendments introduced penalties to apply to the reckless lighting of a fire, regardless of a person’s intention to inflict damage on private or public property as a result of that fire. I ask the Attorney-General - and I am sure all members would be interested to know - why it has taken eight years to implement or introduce something suggested in the model Criminal Code in 2001.
The second point I make, for those who were here from 2001, members will recall - in particular the member for Casuarina will because he was the then relevant minister - this bill has some similarities to an opposition bill which was brought in around 2003. The member for Casuarina will recall, in response to the bill brought in by the opposition, some months later, government produced its own amendments and introduced its own legislation.
A part of the bill we introduced in 2003 was to increase the penalty under section 241 of the Criminal Code for setting fire to crops and growing plants. The proposal was to increase the penalty from a maximum of 14 years to 20 years. The government did not agree to that part of the opposition’s bill. Why is this relevant today? It is relevant because, true to form, the current Attorney-General and aspiring Chief Minister, the member for Karama, issued a media release on 19 August with a bold headline, ‘Tough new bushfire penalties introduced to parliament’. This is a government which did not, in 2003, have the stomach for an increase of penalty from 14 years to 20 years, and it has ducked it again on this occasion, notwithstanding its potentially and, I suggest, deliberately, misleading headline in the media release of 19 August.
In this current bill, which is a belated attempt to implement a bushfire offence as produced in the model Criminal Code, the government has chosen to overlook other arson-related offences contained in the model Criminal Code, such as the threat to cause arson or bushfire which carries a maximum penalty of seven years. Why do I make this point? Because it shows the government has just run out of puff; it has been out of puff for some time now. Since the last election, its performance has been abysmal. This is a government which is very good at producing snappy little headlines but, in fact, cannot motivate itself to come up with wholesale detailed reform of legislation. It has taken a long time to implement a particular suggestion as per the model Criminal Code.
It has missed entirely another part of the model Criminal Code. It has not taken up the opportunity to further amend the Criminal Code, or the Bushfires Act for that matter, so those who set fire to crops and growing plants could face a maximum penalty of 20 years. This government thinks 14 years is fair enough. Ask those people whose crops and growing plants were destroyed by arsonists and fire bugs what they think about this particular penalty.
It just gets worse. Also, I have the federal Attorney-General’s media release of 17 April here. In it, he stated state and territory Attorneys-General will be considering introducing new offences to the model Criminal Code for the offence of bushfire or arson causing death, and bushfire or arson causing serious harm. He went on to say the penalties for those offences would be 25 years and 20 years respectively.
Yet, in this bill before us, when the government had an opportunity to lead, to punch above its weight, and this Attorney-General to say to other Attorneys-General: ‘This what we have done in our jurisdiction’, it was an opportunity lost as the Attorney-General just could not be bothered coming up with detailed wholesale reform. It is a lazy government; a government which has lost the plot. That is demonstrated by recent events, and the ongoing infighting within the Cabinet and the Caucus.
I have to say, whilst we are supportive of this part of overall reform, we are incredibly disappointed and dismayed the government has adopted such a piecemeal approach; it has delayed so much and has missed so many other opportunities. I ask the Attorney-General, in her reply, to comment on these things. Why did the government not attempt to improve to reform sections 240 and 241 of the Criminal Code in this amendment, or related to this amendment? Why has the government not introduced an offence in line with the model Criminal Code for threat to cause arson or bushfire? Why did the government not introduce in this bill a new offence for bushfire arson causing death and serious harm, as with the penalties suggested by the Commonwealth Attorney-General?
I ask the Attorney-General to comment on those three matters in particular. She may also - or perhaps one of her colleagues may wish to - enlighten us and, if my memory serves me correctly, the member for Nelson talked in 2003, or possibly since, about the Bushfires Council in the Northern Territory. I did not look at the recent budget for an allocation to the Bushfires Council, but I know the member and, indeed, members of the opposition have been concerned about the funding to the Bushfires Council over some period of time. In fact, I was approached several years ago by a relevant person at a Bushfires Council because his advice to me was that there was a concern about funding, if not being diminished then certainly not being increased. Perhaps the Attorney-General or one of her colleagues would consider that.
Finally, Madam Speaker, there is an interesting part of this bill which I would also like the Attorney-General to comment on and explain. I do not indicate at this stage we will be going to committee, but I feel certain the member for Nelson will contribute to this debate, and he may go to committee and, subject to the Attorney-General’s response, I may go into committee.
One of the other interesting parts is an exemption from liability for some people. It is referred to in the bill, and also in the Territory Attorney-General’s media release of 19 August. She was keen to make the point: t
- … there are circumstances in which people would be exempted from liability to reflect the unique land management practices in the Territory.
She went on to say:
- This will ensure that a person who causes fires in the course of activities such as fire fighting or hazard reduction burning will be exempt from liability.
The issue the opposition would like to raise is, given the purpose of this bill is to provide a provision or an offence as to the creation of risk and a reckless act - that is, to come up with a bill that specifically targets someone who is reckless in the lighting of a fire - then why is it people or organisations would be exempt? Why has that exemption from liability been included? Surely, the Attorney-General does not assert an individual or an organisation which causes a fire in the process of hazard reduction might not be reckless as to the lighting the fire? In other words, why are they exempted from liability? Surely, everyone should be included in a provision which is all about the reckless lighting of a fire? I do not know whether the Attorney-General is able to answer the question, but I look forward to her answer.
Having outlined those matters, Madam Speaker, we look forward to what the Attorney-General has to say in reply. With those remarks, I will conclude.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, this legislation is very important across my electorate and the rural area. As my colleague said, we will be supporting the amendments albeit they are well behind the game and a long way from having been brought into this parliament.
The destruction and loss from bushfires in the Territory, if not everywhere, is overwhelming and it is important this legislation comes into being, so that if there are illegal acts creating fires, then the people are caught and are severely penalised.
One of the biggest challenges with this legislation is not that the legislation is coming into existence. It is they actually have to be caught. The perpetrators have to be caught, and that is probably one of the more difficult parts which will flow from this legislation. It is also inspired partly from the tragedy of the Victorian bushfires. It is a sad situation we bring legislation to this parliament out of a tragedy. However, that is the way it is. Hopefully, when these penalties are implemented and we catch people, it might send a clear message to the community.
In my electorate, there are two regimes, mostly through the NT Fire Service, and the volunteer units across Lambells Lagoon, Koolpinyah, Humpty Doo and Virginia areas. Also, there is some overlap with the Bushfires Council. As my colleague from Araluen said, it is very important this Bushfires Council is adequately resourced to meet the challenges they confront across the rest of the Northern Territory, not just the Top End.
In bringing the amendments and this legislation forward, I urge the government to also look at ways to improve and assist the NT Fire Service and police, and perhaps the Bushfires Council, to apprehend the people who start these illegal fires in the rural area and elsewhere in the Territory. There seems to be a casual regard by many people in the Territory to wildfires, and we have to change this attitude. We have to get people to understand it is not acceptable to start fires, given the damage it does to the environment, and also the criminal consequences.
Many people who live in my electorate have a parcel of land and they might have a partially constructed house. Some of those people have lost their property through illegal lighting of bushfires. Whilst the volunteers and the paid NT Fire Service people do their very best to get these fires under control, sadly, much of the time we lose property, and a lot of livestock, not to mention the native animals which are destroyed in the bushfires.
We have to change the collective psyche of people that lighting fires, for whatever reason, is no longer acceptable. We also have to understand the damage this can do to the environment. I recall, some 10 years ago, there was a wildfire in the Arafura Swamp area of Arnhem Land which was the size of the state of Victoria. No one knew the fire was going through that part of the Northern Territory let alone what damage it may have done to the environment.
This year, the Fire Service had a campaign to investigate all illegally lit fires in the rural area, along with the police investigation. The public were asked to come forward to assist in the investigations. Regrettably, no one was apprehended, or has been apprehended to this day, in regard to the illegal lighting of bushfires.
One of the concerns I have - apart from actually catching the people and bringing them to justice - is this legislation does not impinge in any way on the NT Fire Service’s work in regard to their mottle burning, as I call it, or their right to burn in controlled burning, because it is a very important aspect of the rural area, trying to keep it a safe place, given we have the issues of gamba grass, mission grass and a whole lot of other grasses which contribute to our fuel load.
I place on the record and commend the work of the volunteer fire units in the rural area, both in my electorate and, obviously, the member for Nelson’s electorate. I also commend the work of the volunteers on the Bushfires Council. Somewhere in the future we need to work towards having a more cohesive and consistent working arrangement between the NT Fire Service and the Bushfires Council, because they are pretty much doing the same thing. As Darwin and surrounds get bigger and bigger, we are going to have to come up with a better system to meet the challenges of these fires. I place on the record their professionalism and the enormous amount of work and time they put in to responding, not only to bushfires, but also to road and vehicle accidents, because they do this as part of their voluntary work as well.
Mr KNIGHT (Local Government): Madam Speaker, I also, as a rural and bush member, thank the volunteer bushfire brigades in my electorate for the contribution they make. I support these amendments to the Criminal Code, and thank the minister for Justice for bringing them forward. It is an important bill which gives some strength to combating bushfires deliberately lit and reckless behaviour when people are lighting any type of fire.
This is not just a Territory issue; it is also a national issue. We have seen that recently with the bushfires in Sydney and the Victorian bushfires. Recently, there was quite moving debate in this Chamber about individual members’ knowledge of different people involved in the Victorian bushfires, either as CFA workers or people who lived in the area. More recently, on the Australian Story program, there was a story of twins who had lost their parents and brother in these bushfires. It was very moving, and the scars caused by the bushfires will go on for a very long time. The bush will regrow, but the people will be scarred for much longer.
However, bushfires are a part of our landscape. The member for Goyder talked about how bushfires have shaped the landscape in the Northern Territory for many thousands of years. It is about civilisation coming into contact with the bush and where those fires should and should not occur.
This bill ensures the gravity of the danger of lighting fires is understood by the average person, and there is appropriate enforcement. The introduction of a specific offence will act as a deterrent and a tool for authorities to use. I will be widely publicising these amendments throughout my electorate. The bushfires brigades are happy with the amendment, and every member of the public, in both the rural area and the bush, need to be made aware of the gravity of the offences which can be applied to anybody in the rural area.
As we heard in the second reading speech, the Northern Territory has a range of offences covering the destruction of property by fire, and offences under the Bushfires Act and the Fire and Emergency Act designed to prevent the occurrence of bushfires. However, there is no serious criminal offence dealing with the lighting of bushfires.
The bill before us today proposes to introduce the model bushfires offence, the same as those which form the basis of the bushfires offences in Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and South Australia. This bill targets people who intentionally or recklessly cause a fire and who then create the risk of the spread of fire.
I will give you one recent example from my electorate where we had 36 bushfires around the Berry Springs area. The fire raged for several days, and threatened many properties through the area. In that example, we had the volunteer Bushfires Council units not only from Berry Springs, but from Livingstone, Darwin River, Labasheeda, Lambells Lagoon, Manton, Elizabeth Valley, plus Bushfires NT. When there is a big fire, everyone comes together. Remember most of these people have jobs and they leave their jobs to fight these fires. Much of the time, they contribute their own vehicles; they may pull a water trailer with their own vehicle. There are bushfire units there but these people give a lot of themselves and they understand the situation of people in the rural area. Luckily, it did not threaten any houses, which I attribute to the quick response of the bushfire volunteers getting around the houses. It did take in a lot of the country around Cox Peninsula Road and also threatened the Territory Wildlife Park, and the Berry Springs Nature Park was closed because of the fire.
A few years ago, a major fire came up through Acacia Hills. It started further down through Manton and came through the Larrakia/Acacia area. By the time it reached Acacia Hills, moving up to the back of Humpty Doo, it had a fair head of steam. There were green mango orchards with very little debris under the trees which caught on fire. During that particular incident, one of the bushfire brigade captain’s property was destroyed, including his home. That was extremely regrettable. It is amazing there has not been any greater loss of life than there has been from these fires.
There is a changing aspect of the rural area; there are many people moving to the rural area. It is certainly a great place to live. They are building very valuable properties and they are taking their families out there with them. There is the change in the rural which is very significant. It is something we will have to keep a handle on and monitor. We have the volunteer brigades from Elizabeth River south. North of that, we have the red truck, a more permanent brigade. With 17 000 people living in the rural area now, and the number growing every day, it is something this government has to consider for the future.
We have increased their budget and there was a significant injection of protective equipment only a year or so ago. Those brigades are very grateful for that. We now have the air tractor permanently stationed at Batchelor airstrip. That aided the region with the fire at Berry Springs. We have the use of helicopters and large mobile tankers. Water is an integral part, and getting the watering point is quite significant.
This bill introduces a serious criminal offence which could be relied upon to prosecute the arsonist who lit the Berry Springs fire – a reckless act, and one which, under today’s regulatory regime, would be unlikely to attract significant legal ramifications. Even if we did fine that person, they would not worry about it. Now, it is something the firebugs think about.
As I said, this act targets intentional and reckless lighting of fire. It will not impede on normal uses of fire, whether it be for cultural use, camping, back-burning operations, and the like. People need to be made responsible for their actions and, if a person is aware of the substantial risk the fire they cause could spread to vegetation on another property, they need to be held accountable.
I get many reports about blocks in the rural area which have a lot of fuel load on them, which could be very dangerous, and people need to be very cautious about the way they go about bringing those fuel loads down, because a 5 m break does not stop a fire. All a 5 m break does is give access to the bushfire vehicles – that is all they do. In the incident I mentioned in Acacia Hills, the fire was leaping 500 m or more, advancing from the fire at Manton. People who are living there - and there are many new people – need to understand fire breaks are not actually going to stop a fire; they are there to allow the brigades to get in and, hopefully, start a back-burn.
However, we need to keep people accountable for their actions as they go about any fire activity. The bill provides the necessary tools to prosecute, and it is a difficult exercise in prosecuting with the large land mass we have in the Territory. Obviously, you cannot have a policeman on every block.
I was at Channel Island one day, talking to a gentleman who was recounting a story about – I think it was - Kerry Packer around the time there was much conflict occurring with Gulgul about the access road and the pastoralists on La Belle Downs Station. His comment was: ‘Why would you want to piss somebody off …
Madam SPEAKER: Order, minister! That comment is unparliamentary.
Mr KNIGHT: ‘Why would you want to upset somebody who could afford to buy a 20 box of matches and destroy millions of dollars worth of countryside?’ Destroying the country, and people’s livelihoods and properties is a very cheap exercise. There is a lot of country out there and sometimes it takes a long time for a fire to get going and you could be out of there in a matter of hours. We have to ramp up the knowledge that, if you are caught, you will have a fairly significant penalty applied to you.
As I said, this bill targets the intentional reckless lighting of fires. Obviously, people who go out camping need to be mindful of what they do, and I agree. Also, for cultural practices, you might travel through the bush. People are tracking throughout the Dry Season, burning off in a patchwork burning, which is something these people have done for many thousands of years, and is something which really should not change; it reduces the fuel load so you do not get the big, hot fires.
As I said, I thank the bushfire brigades for their actions. I have 12 brigades in my electorate. I acknowledge those at Acacia Hills, Batchelor, Berry Springs, Cox Peninsula, Darwin River, Daly River, Douglas Daly, Dundee, Livingstone, Manton, Milne, and Beatrice Hill. I acknowledge, in particular, members of the local bushfires brigade in the place I live on the Cox Peninsula.
It was only a few weeks ago, I was travelling home and received a phone call saying there was a fire near my house. Travelling back across the harbour, seeing the smoke, I did not know what I was going see when I arrived home. It was only the quick action of those volunteers who, in some cases, had left work early, and others who had retired to the community, had raced there. The fire came within metres of my house. They were able to put it out by mid-afternoon. They were still there mopping up – not only them, but another brigade came from Darwin River to fight the fire - at 10 pm to ensure the fire did not spread any further. I thank Ray and Ronnie for the work they do on Cox Peninsula and the Darwin River brigade. Much of the time, their work goes unappreciated. They not only give their time, but from the time they leave their families to inspect the situation, they put their lives on the line. That is one aspect which does not get a great deal of acknowledgement. Fighting fires is a very dangerous occupation. The fire brigade members in town receive intensive training and have years of experience to fight the fires in the urban area. In the bush, they receive training. They were working very recently in a very volatile environment they cannot necessarily control, and they did it on a shoestring. I thank them for all their efforts.
Wherever I can, I try to assist them with their Community Benefit Fund application, and it is good to see they have been successful and have the funds. They have the skills and I like to see them successful. Recently, we gave Acacia Hills $80 000 to establish themselves. They have a block but they needed water and power on the block. They are appreciative of that and look forward to opening the facility.
As members would be aware, the bushfire brigades become a community centre for many of the local communities, where people come along and perhaps have a drink. It brings the community together. There are times people are working in town and a fire starts, and the camaraderie may be a contribution – it certainly is helpful.
Our bushfires appear to be burning a lot hotter, with gamba grass spreading throughout our rural areas. Where gamba grass is and where the fires go through, it has certainly changed our environment. Where you get a really hot fire going through, the only thing which seems to survive and regrow is gamba grass. Therefore, you are creating monocultures there. I was recently in Batchelor and they have some money for a weed strategy for combating gamba grass. It is a huge challenge for those people. I am not sure if they actually have started planting gamba grass on Camp Creek Station. There are massive areas which have gamba grass. They are looking at a whole range of measures such as introducing cattle on smaller properties to get the gamba grass down so they can control it. Herbicides are expensive, and using herbicides on full-grown plants is very expensive. They are looking at a whole range of issues.
It was great to see gamba grass declared as an invasive weed in late 2008 - this was long overdue. It put many landholders on notice to try to remedy the situation. The heat of a bushfire when it comes on to dry gamba grass is incredible. Studies have shown that where a fire reaches gamba grass the intensity of the blaze is similar to an oxy torch, which is just incredible. Hopefully, we will see that addressed.
Madam Speaker, in conclusion, this is great news. Hopefully, it will make people think twice if they, for some reason, think lighting fires on a very hot day when the wind is up, it is dry, and there is a lot of fuel load is a good thing. It might make people think now that there are penalties and the police are gathering information to prosecute people. People can take the risk of lighting fires and trying to get away with it, but there are larger penalties through the courts nowadays. I will certainly be promoting this around my electorate.
Mr HAMPTON (Regional Development): Madam Speaker, there is a saying ‘it is an ill wind that blows no one any good’. It is hard to imagine that the baking hot winds that fanned the Victorian bushfires this year could bring any good to anyone.
Today, we see one element of a national response galvanised by this tragedy – the creation across Australia of uniform bushfire arson offences in the Criminal Code. This is a timely and appropriate amendment for the Territory. As the member for Daly said, in his electorate, we have recently seen a week where deliberately lit fires threatened homes, orchards, stock and iconic Territory tourism infrastructure.
On 27 September, a fire started before 6.30 am on Hopewell Road near Berry Springs. It quickly grew beyond the control of the first volunteer crews which attended and, within two hours, had become a major blaze. By lunchtime, a major mango plantation and the Territory Wildlife Park were under threat. Dozens of volunteer bushfire brigade crews, Bushfires NT staff, three aircraft, tankers, and loaders were called upon to contain the fire within the unmanaged bushland. The Cox Peninsula Road was closed because of heavy smoke, and visitors to the Wildlife Park and Berry Springs Nature Park were evacuated.
The strong south-easterly winds pushed embers over the Cox Peninsula Road and threatened to ignite the bushland in which the Wildlife Park is set. Prompt action by volunteers and the water bombing aircraft operating from Hughes Airfield managed to put these spot fires out. Wildlife Park staff implemented their fire plan and placed their crews on high alert. The fire was contained by late afternoon, with no loss of property or injury but, throughout the day, many hundreds of people were threatened by the fire. In the end, the multimillion dollar assets, including mango trees and the Wildlife Park, were saved by the skill and teamwork of our firefighters.
However, we need to keep firmly in mind this fire was deliberately lit. It was unnecessary, dangerous, and malicious. It was a typical of hundreds of fires which start in the Territory every year.
The following day, Monday, 28 September, four more fires were started in the catchment area. Volunteers, many of whom had helped with the fire on Sunday, stepped up again to protect lives and property. I am sure all members will join me in applauding the magnificent work undertaken by volunteer firefighters, some 450 of them in the Northern Territory through our 21 volunteer bushfire brigades.
In my own electorate, there have been large fires in the past few weeks on Mt Sanford Station, Limbunya Station and Gregory National Park. These were brought under control by staff from the stations, Bushfires NT, and Parks and Wildlife staff. Two fires at Newry Station and Rosewood Station are under control thanks to the station staff and, again Bushfires NT staff.
This morning, a fire at Keep River National Park has been brought under control, thanks to rain in the area, while Parks and Wildlife staff are currently fighting a new fire at Gregory National Park.
In the Katherine region, the fire status has been high due to the strong winds experienced over the last week. Our volunteer firefighters were kept busy tackling the blaze at Landsdowne Road where they saved houses, sheds, machinery, and a mango plantation. They were also called out to Ironwood Station where the fire extended from the Katherine River right up to Power Play Stud north of Katherine.
I pay tribute to the Katherine volunteers, especially some of our long-standing members in Katherine, Captain Bob Wright, Jan Murphy, John Munford, Jarrad De Vries, and Ron and Anne Humphries.
We have used the provisions of the Bushfires Act, which includes fines of up to $25 000 and five years imprisonment for setting fire to the bush, to prosecute people who start fires. We have had convictions, with substantial fines being levied by the courts. The bushfire arson provision within the Criminal Code ups the ante and sends a clear message that the people of Australia will not tolerate the selfish, stupid, and dangerous act of bushfire arson.
This amendment to the Criminal Code is one of 11 proposed actions being advanced by the Australian government as part of the national action plan to reduce bushfire arson. While still a draft, the actions are already being progressed because the issue is so important. The actions are:
1. utilise fuel reduction and community education programs in high-risk fire and arson areas at the urban/rural interface consistent with land management objectives;
4. develop programs targeting known arsonists and recidivist arsonists;
5. update the nationally accredited training programs for fire agency and police personnel to include bushfire arson prevention strategies;
6. encourage collaboration and information sharing regarding latest bushfire arson investigative techniques and technologies;
7. develop national strategies to raise community awareness of bushfire arson, and incorporate arson prevention messages into existing community awareness programs;
8. develop targeted awareness and prevention programs to arson-prone communities, including greater collaboration with education and welfare agencies;
9. investigate the viability of a nationally consistent framework for data collection on bushfire arson;
10. research socioeconomic and demographic factors indicating a propensity for bushfire arson; and
11. develop two-way information flow on arson prevention between practitioners, researchers and policy makers.
My department, through Bushfires NT, is working through these actions. I want to draw members’ attention to the first action: ‘utilise fuel reduction and community education programs in high-risk fire and arson areas at the urban/rural interface consistent with land management objectives’. It is our view this is crucial to the long-term management of fire, and maintenance of a safe and sustainable rural and semi-rural lifestyle.
This government increased funding for fuel management in the last budget and, in 2008-09, increased funding by some $2m. This funding has led to substantial increases in prescribed burns in the rural area in 2009, and a marked decrease in dangerous wildfires. We are also embarking on new community education programs. Last Sunday, Bushfires NT hosted the first of a series of individual property planning seminars at Adelaide River. Thirty residents of the Silkwood subdivision came along and, over breakfast, made fire plans for their properties. The participants went away with a plan that established where fire breaks, prescribed burns, and asset protection zones would be located. They also had a clear idea about their neighbour’s property, where fires have come from in the past, and how they can access support and resources to manage fires in the future.
Stiffer penalties and a strong deterrent to arsonists is a strong first step in protecting the community from this persistent evil. Together with a well-informed community undertaking fuel management, the impact of arson can be reduced.
In adding my support to this bill, I ask every member of this Chamber, particularly those whose electorates lie on the edge or outside the urban areas, to do everything in their power to help educate the community on fire management, and to ensure something good emerges from the Victorian tragedy.
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to support this bill.
Debate suspended.
CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
(BUSHFIRES) BILL
(Serial 54)
(BUSHFIRES) BILL
(Serial 54)
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I also support the amendment to the Criminal Code. Until you see the effects of fire firsthand, you do not realise how devastating very large bushfires can be. My brother was lucky to survive the Marysville fires. He has a house in Buxton which is just out of Marysville. Everything in the region was burnt down except his house - and him luckily. Until you see the effects of those fires, you do not understand what devastation they caused, and you get a better understanding of why so many people died in them.
What makes it worse is that you knew some of those fires were deliberately lit. Someone has been charged in relation to one of the fires in Gippsland. The introduction of this bill into parliament reinforces the lighting of fires, in a reckless manner, is more than just an offence against the Bushfires Act or the Fire and Emergency Act; it is a crime and that is a good reason to support this legislation.
This year we have had some major fires in the rural area. About two Saturdays ago, there was a fire, believed to have been deliberately lit, on the corner of Stow Road and Howard Springs Road, part of the forestry land. Not only was it set on fire, but the fire threatened houses in the Langton Road/Dutchies Lagoon area. It required large numbers of volunteers and regular firefighters to extinguish this fire. There have been fires at the back of the Lutheran school at Howard Springs, and major fires at Coolalinga at the rear of the stockfeed suppliers.
Although we talk about the effect of fires and the penalties, the reality is you can put as big a penalty as you like but, if you do not catch anyone, then it is just window dressing.
I know the local volunteers in my area are very frustrated at the number of fires which have been deliberately lit. The general feeling is it is someone on a motorbike who is flying past the area, throws out a few matches, and continues on their way. It is very hard to locate those people. We need to make an effort to see whether, through technology, we can bring some people to justice because once you have caught someone, and given them a decent fine or sent them to gaol for a period of time, you, at last, send out a message that this sort of behaviour is unacceptable. In the rural area the members for Goyder and Daly and I represent, people know full well the number of fires which have occurred this year, at times of the year when you know there is no lightning around, and these fires did not happen by magic - they were deliberately lit.
I ask the government to look at - and I have raised this before in regard to the hoon legislation - where there are areas which are known to be regular places for fire bugs - perhaps some technology, as in portable CCTV cameras, can be installed. They can operate through wireless access these days. I cannot guarantee they will stand up to a fire, but the reality is they may record what happened before the fire and we may be able to find out who lit the fire. Even if you do get visual information, the problem in relation to a lot of these off-road bikes is they are not registered and people wear helmets and it is very hard to get the information you need for a prosecution.
Legislation like this is good. However, if I come back in a couple of years time and say we have had 20 fires in the rural area and a couple of houses were burnt down, etcetera, and ask how many people were prosecuted, and the answer was none, then it is fair to ask what the point of legislation was. It is no good having legislation with big penalties if we do not put the effort into trying to catch people who cause this problem.
When the member for Araluen was speaking on this issue she raised some very important questions. One is about the exemptions. I am interested to know, for instance - and I am not putting anyone down here - if there might be someone working for the Bushfires Council or the Northern Territory Fire Service who lights the fire recklessly. I am interested to know whether the exemptions written in here cover someone for doing something that was reckless - they actually should not have lit a fire on the day; should have known it was not the opportune day to light, but went ahead and did it.
Whilst I understand why the exemptions need to be there, I am not sure the exemption would, therefore, be a substitute for careless behaviour just because a person works for one of those groups. It is the same dealing with people who are being exempted under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. Perhaps there is land which backs on to pastoral properties, and a person may say: ‘I thought it was my right to burn off some land here’ yet, they wiped out the entire pastoral property. Even though they may have had the right to burn off, I am not sure they should be exempted from burning off on a particular day in a particular place, when they know it will, more than likely, burn out a neighbouring property.
It could be the reverse. You might get someone who is burning their land as part of pastoral management. Again, if they do the wrong thing and burn off, say, the local national park, even though they might be permitted under their land management scheme, we need to find a balance, ensuring it is not used as an excuse.
The other area the member for Araluen raised - and it is an area I have mentioned before, but it needs raising again - is to ensure our volunteer fire brigades have adequate funding. I know the government every year gives funding to a number of these volunteer fire brigades. However, they are becoming more professional. I especially note the professionalism of the Northern Territory Fire Service volunteers, and, specifically, the captain of the Howard Springs volunteer group, Maxine Way, who has done an enormous amount of training, and also expects her volunteers to be trained in firefighting. Some of them are not only just involved in firefighting; they are involved in accident and rescue, which is part of their duties as local volunteers. We need to ensure they are equipped with the latest equipment, and are able to do their jobs and continue to be well trained.
It probably begs the question whether, in the rural areas as they are growing more and more, we should be looking at some permanence; that is, professional firefighters in those areas where the volunteers are now stationed. Perhaps the volunteers could be offered a more permanent job. We certainly are growing. The rural area has about 20 000 people now, many of whom are now well trained. However, to encourage younger people, we need to ensure they are attracted by the job. Maybe one way to attract people into the job in the rural area is to pay them - whether they are paid on a part-time basis, I am not sure. We need to encourage more people into the volunteer programs.
We have to realise those volunteers are sometimes our eyes and ears. If we are trying to catch these people who are lighting fires deliberately, sometimes the only people who have an idea of what is going on are the volunteers in the area. Word sometimes does get around that there is a fire bug in the area, and they try their best to keep their ear to the ground to find out what is going on.
Madam Speaker, I support the legislation. I reiterate it is all very well to bring in tough legislation, with tough maximum penalties but, if you do not catch anyone you might ask: what is the point? We have to do more work in producing techniques which enable us to catch these people who cause so much damage, not only to property, but to the environment, the quality of the air - which can be very annoying to people, especially those who have asthmatic problems. It is just the general destruction of the local area - it is all blackened off - people also find disappointing.
Madam Speaker, I support this legislation.
Mr McCARTHY (Transport): Madam Speaker, I also support the amendments to the Criminal Code Amendment (Bushfires) Bill introduced by the Attorney-General.
Like all other Australians, I was horrified by the damage caused by the Victorian bushfires in February this year; the loss of life and property is hard to comprehend. My personal experience with bushfires is both interstate and the Territory. In over 30 years in the Barkly, I have had to face and fight the ferocity of bushfires far too often. Across remote regions of the Territory it is often impractical for fire rescue service to travel the vast distance to the front of the bushfire. Instead, fighting bushfires in remote areas is more often than not coordinated by volunteers of Bushfires NT, with the help of local communities.
I have been inspired by the way Territorians pull together in tough times. I have seen stations under threat from bushfires, with livestock at risk, when neighbours rally together to do all they can to minimise the damage. I think it was in 2006, it seemed the whole of the Territory was burning. From the South Australian border right to the Gulf country fires were raging, and it was local volunteers who fought day after day to save property and protect lives. Communities pulled together and businesses volunteered whatever they could, including plant and equipment. Even local school teachers joined the ranks of volunteers fighting the fires. It was these groups of volunteers who put their lives at risk day after day, as they fought against the ferocity of the bushfires.
I have seen volunteers horribly burnt as they tried to save the property of someone else. In the bush, fires are part of Territory life, and fighting fires is accepted as something which must be done. However, it is hard to comprehend some of these fires are deliberately lit by people who intend to cause damage. Putting the lives of Territorians at risk like this is unacceptable.
Of course, fires in the Territory can also be started by accident, by people with the best intentions. I am pleased the bill recognises the difference between these circumstances. However, when someone deliberately lights a bushfire, knowing the potential damage they may cause, there is no excuse. I support this legislation which recognises the seriousness of deliberately lighting a bushfire. Across our bush communities, people must already contend with the many forces of nature. To put further stress on these communities by deliberately lighting a bushfire is totally unacceptable. It is appropriate the Criminal Code recognises lighting a bushfire is a serious criminal offence. The message must be clear: deliberately putting property and lives at risk by lighting a bushfire will not be tolerated.
The members of the Territory Fire and Rescue Service do a great job, as do many volunteers of Bushfires NT. All Territorians must work together to minimise the damage caused by bushfires across the Territory. The best way to do this is to prevent bushfires by being particularly careful with any fire in the dry months. As Territorians, we must work together to reduce the risk and damage caused by bushfires. This bill will provide appropriate punishment for anyone caught deliberately lighting a bushfire and putting Territory lives at risk.
Madam Speaker, I support the amendments to the bill.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I support the Criminal Code Amendment (Bushfires) Bill.
I, with all members of this House, witnessed and remember the devastation of the recent fires in Victoria. One can recall many other incidences in South Australia and, the year before in New South Wales and Queensland, where we saw the destructive nature of fires and what can happen when fires gather momentum, particularly in areas where the fire sweeps unspent fuel loads. As my colleague, the Minister for Correctional Services, was just saying, when fires are deliberately lit by the act of one or a number of individuals, all those individuals should suffer the full consequences of the law.
We all know, and have seen, it is not only infrastructure which has been destroyed, but people have lost their lives. When people lose their lives because of the reckless act of individuals, it is unforgivable. We all know buildings and infrastructure can be rebuilt, and we have seen that happening in Victoria. When the fires occurred, we saw on television the utter devastation where fires had gone through community after community. Then, seeing the rebuilding effort now happening in Victoria, it highlights the courage and conviction of people; where communities will bounce back and be rebuilt, which is very important.
When that destruction happens - and, as I said, infrastructure can be rebuilt - something which cannot be put back or a value put on is a human life. Because of the fragility and the valuable asset of a family, nothing can compensate that loss.
Uncontrolled fires or wildfires, as we know in the Northern Territory, cause about 40% of our greenhouse gas emissions. I was pleased to see, and I fully support the Attorney-General’s amendments which have been presented, because those amendments go to the heart of the West Arnhem Land. The Attorney-General, in her second reading speech said:
- Part of the exemption is for persons acting under a commercial agreement such as the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement - which is the greenhouse gas offset agreement with ConocoPhillips, the Northern Land Council, and traditional owners in west Arnhem Land - would also be exempt.
That is really important.
I was recently up on the escarpment country, part of which the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement covers. It is not just within the vicinity of my electorate; the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement covers an area which goes to and past the southern boundaries of Kakadu National Park and into Jawoyn country. It is really important the commercial agreement to offset ConocoPhillips’s greenhouse gases in Darwin allows this fire management project to go over such a big area. The West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement provides both the Wardekken Rangers, the Djelk Rangers, and those ranger groups in and around Jawoyn, nearly $20m of private investor funding to carry out this program. Recently, the Commonwealth government invested a further $3m under the Indigenous Protected Area Agreement, which will be additional funding for those rangers to continue that fantastic work.
I was listening to the member for Nelson’s contribution, and I know of his commitment to the Bushfires Council. He has previously raised in this parliament the wildfires and the pastoral properties where incidences of fire management practices have encroached or gone onto those pastoral properties. That is going to have to be looked at. In the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement, 100 000 tonnes was part of that agreement, as I understand it. What the project and those rangers have achieved has actually been better than what the Australian Greenhouse Office set, which means those fuel loads have actually decreased. So, that is good news. I fully support the amendments which included part of that commercial arrangement, particularly for those ranger groups carrying out the important work in my electorate.
I take this opportunity, as have other members of this parliament, to acknowledge the work of the Volunteer Bushfire Brigades. When I was the minister for Natural Resources, I went across the Northern Territory meeting these different volunteer brigades. The men and women who serve in these volunteer brigades have thankless work. They work tirelessly to save homes. Often, at times, it could be the place of these volunteers which is in danger or in the fire zone, and they are off trying to save someone else’s property from the devastation of fire. It is very important we continually recognise and support the men and women who work in these brigades. They do it tough, and government has increased its resourcing to those brigades. However, they continue to need support, particularly for their equipment. Without the support and the continual turnover of water trucks and other equipment they might need, it is going to pose a real danger.
I acknowledge the work of Stephen Sutton and his team within the department. They have done a fantastic job remodelling, working, and turning around the structures within Bushfires NT. Bushfires NT continues to play an important role in combating and preventing fires from becoming the destructive force we all know wildfires can be.
Madam Speaker, to sum up, people who deliberately light fires that can destroy property should suffer the consequences of the law. I thank the Attorney-General for bringing in the amendment. It is also important to recognise the work of West Arnhem Fire Management and what those rangers are doing.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contribution to this important debate. I am grateful for the spirit of bipartisan support we are seeing in the Chamber with this legislation. I want to step through the questions raised by the shadow Attorney-General, the member for Araluen.
Essentially, we are not adopting all of the model code provisions, and there is a reason for that. The Northern Territory, as I no doubt she appreciates, is a very different situation in relation to bushfires than other jurisdictions. Fire is a significant serious concern in the Territory, in the savannah regions in the north but, also the dry conditions in Central Australia. We are actually dealing with bushfires most of the time. We have the Top End season, which is countercyclical to the Central Australian seasons, so the reality and the nature of bushfires in land management is critical. That is the reason, for many years, we chose not to bring forward and adopt those Criminal Code amendments because we had to seriously consider how they could be adapted to meet the Territory’s circumstances.
When I became Attorney-General, which coincided with the tragedy in Victoria, I made the decision to bring forward one element of the model code provisions - which is what we have before us today - ahead of a broader review and discussion paper which would go out publicly on the raft of model code provisions. There was a body of work being done by the Department of Justice, working closely with the other agencies involved in this area - Police, Fire and Emergency Services but, equally, with Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage - in what they do for land management and Bushfires Council. While there was a broader review process under way of the model code provisions, I chose to pull this particular aspect of it forward out of that review to send a very clear message - in the context of the horrific Victorian bushfires we saw - the Territory equally viewed arson of this nature very seriously and people will face very harsh penalties.
We very much intend to continue with introducing a range of other provisions which sit in the model code. Because bushfires, by their nature, and by the nature of the Territory geographically and biologically, are so different, we want to have a robust review, and then a discussion paper and public debate on those other model Criminal Code provisions. A good issue raised by the shadow. However, as the incoming Attorney-General, I considered this aspect of the broader model Criminal Code provisions of arson and bushfires bring forward this aspect, because we wanted to say, very strongly, arson of this nature needs harsh penalties in light of what we saw of the tragedy in Victoria. We considered this aspect a priority. I took it out of that broader process which was occurring, and brought it forward, which is why it is was introduced last sittings and being debated today.
I am not discounting the importance of the other provisions, but I believe those provisions were less urgent than this one. That is why we are continuing with the broader review of the arson provisions in the code. I am advised by the Department of Justice the discussion paper will be due for release soon. They have been doing the work across the government agencies to get that ready. That really encapsulates the issue of the timing, and why we are proceeding with part but not all of the model Criminal Code provisions.
The members for Goyder, Araluen and Nelson, and others, raised the issue of having provisions sitting in your legislation, but what the reality is, on the ground, in the ability to tackle the bushfires and support not just our Police, Fire and Emergency Services personnel but, importantly, those bushfire volunteer brigades we so significantly rely on. It was the 2008-09 Budget which started the most significant increase in funding to the Bushfires Council NT, and that was continued through in the 2009-10 Budget this year, with an initiative of additional fire services. We have put an additional $3.44m into bushfire mitigation and wildfire suppression strategies; $3.5m over two years to boost fire services with an extra nine firefighters in Alice Springs and 11 in Darwin; $200 000 extra per year to fast-track the upgrade and replacement of fire and rescue trucks; and $280 000 for more training to support our firefighters.
When I was formerly minister for the Environment, the Bushfires Council spoke to me about these elements, and the critical importance of them. We have put $750 000 in increased support to our volunteer bushfire brigades which, as we have heard from all speakers in this debate, do an outstanding job for their community and neighbours.
The member for Araluen also asked why we have not proceeded with the proposal referred to in the media release of the Commonwealth Attorney-General. The proposal was considered by SCAG, and I can report it was abandoned. No other jurisdiction supported the proposal. The proposal would have reintroduced constructive murder and/or dangerous act, which were repealed as part of government reforms in 2006. There are already provisions, I am advised, which allow a person to be charged for causing a death.
There were questions regarding why, if the purpose of the bill is the creation of an offence which covers risk and recklessness, there are exemptions. This is an issue raised not only by the member for Araluen but also touched on by the member for Nelson. The provision recognises there are circumstances where people do create a substantial risk of fire spreading, but they have a legitimate reason for doing so. We need to ensure these people are not liable under this provision. The circumstances in which people are exempted from liability reflect these unique land management practices in our Territory. The geographical conditions here, particularly as I said, those expanses of subtropical savannah, do not exist in the southern states of Australia. This creates a need for us to recognise how a model Criminal Code becomes workable for the Territory, which is why we looked at the exemptions.
Northern Territory land management practices, such as savannah burning, are designed to save lives. They are designed to decrease the risk of catastrophic fire. The report I recently received from the Bushfires Council executive is the additional funding for the extra burn-offs they have been able to do in preparation for the Dry, has certainly seen a reduction in threatening fires.
Without the exemptions, people lighting fires in such circumstances could find themselves criminally responsible, which would be contrary to the intent of the legislation. Persons who cause a fire for the purposes of fire management or land management are exempted from liability, where the activity was done in accordance with a law in force in the Territory, or in accordance with an agreement entered into by the Territory. For example, persons causing fires in the course of activities such as firefighting or hazard reduction operations would fall within the exemptions. Persons acting under a commercial agreement, such as the West Arnhem Fire Management Agreement, which we heard the member for Arafura talk about - which is a greenhouse gas offset agreement between the NT government, ConocoPhillips, the Northern Land Council and traditional owners in West Arnhem Land - will also be exempt.
Further on the issue of exemptions - a legitimate issue raised about the exemptions by both the members for Araluen and Nelson - I am advised if anyone falling within the category of these exemptions, lights a fire which they should not have, in a manner which is criminally reckless - we think it would be highly unlikely if they were acting in accordance with the law - the exemption only applies if it was for the purpose of land or fire management. If recklessly or capriciously lit in circumstances where the risk of harm of fire would be likely to outweigh the good of fire management or containment practices, the person would be unlikely to be able to rely on the exemption. This will be tested in a determination by the court.
I have gone to the issues which have been raised during the debate. I sincerely thank members for their support of this legislation. As I said, I brought forward this one aspect, given the seriousness of the Victorian bushfires we witnessed. There is, as the shadow has indicated, a raft of other provisions in the model Criminal Code provisions relating to arson. They have been under review with a cross-agency body of work, and they will soon be released for a public discussion paper. I am anticipating, potentially, further amendments.
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
Growing the Territory
Growing the Territory
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I update the House today on the growth of the Territory, the opportunities it provides, the challenges it presents, and the strategies, policies and actions the government is employing to grow the Territory.
I have indicated in the past the government would be reporting to parliament on this issue from time to time to keep all members informed on growth issues. I reject utterly the half-glass-empty view of growth of the Territory. Some people look at the growth we are experiencing and see problems at every turn. I see challenges but, more importantly, opportunities. The government is grasping those opportunities to make our Territory a dynamic place for our children and future generations.
This is a timely update because, in September, the nation’s population figures were released by the ABS. Those figures showed the Territory is growing at a rate of 2.2% year on year, the third highest in Australia, and considerably higher than any population growth rates in the late 1990s and in the first five years of this decade. These figures alone do not reflect the reality of population growth in the Territory and, in fact, it is a trap for planning to assume that growth is consistent throughout the Territory. A review of the makeup of this growth shows a number of trends which impact on the way we have to respond to this growth.
There is a strong trend of population gain from interstate migration. Since the late 1980s, interstate migration has been more often negative than it has been positive, with the exception of the period when the military presence in the north was being rapidly expanded by the federal Labor government; there have been more negative quarters than positive quarters of interstate migration. In fact, since 1990 there have been 53 quarters of negative interstate migration, compared to 23 positive figures. Of those 23 quarters of growth, five, at least, are directly attributable to movements of the Army and other military forces. However, there have been seven quarters of growth in the last two-and-a-quarter years that can be attributed to the strength of the Territory’s economy and the Territory’s lifestyle appeal. The last four quarters of population statistics have all recorded positive growth from interstate migration; the first time this has occurred since 1983.
The Territory economy went into decline and then recession from around December 1997, with 1998 recording a nett loss of 688 people interstate; a loss of 817 people interstate in 1999; 1621 people lost interstate in 2000; 1751 lost in 2001, rising to a nett loss of 2283 in 2003 before the figures started to be turned around.
I am pleased to report, in 2008, the nett population gain from interstate was 691, with that figure, hopefully, to be surpassed this year. The importance of gaining population through interstate migration is straightforward. These migrants usually come as adults bringing skills a stressed Territory workforce desperately needs. Nonetheless, the Territory still needs to grow its own, and a strong, sustained natural increase from within the Territory population has been evident over the last 20 years. In the most recent figures, growth was recorded at 2805 in the year up to the March 2009 quarter.
International migration has always been a variable element of Territory growth. The March figures reveal that in the year to March 2009, the migration figure stands at growth of 1211, but with very strong growth figures in the March quarter which might indicate a higher than average growth this year.
A further breakdown of the figures focused on where the population growing is also important. Research indicates there is a significant population increase occurring in the greater Darwin and Palmerston areas. There is further significant population increase occurring in remote communities. In February, I presented the community and this House with some details on this. Darwin and Palmerston data has been collated from the 2006 Census and subsequent ABS Territory Growth Planning Unit, Treasury, and Charles Darwin University work. Current population projections suggest, from a base of 114 000 people in 2006, the greater Darwin and Palmerston population is likely to increase by 19 000 to 133 000 in 2013, and by 39 000 to 154 000 by 2021 - an increase of 34%. A straight-line forecast to 2030 will take the population to 177 000, an increase of 63 000 from 2006, or 55%.
Important in this is the type of population growth. Growth in Palmerston is at both ends of the age spectrum. The number of young people, particularly school-aged or to be school-aged children younger than 14 years old, will grow possibly as high as 60% during the period 2006 to 2021, from approximately 7500 to approximately 12 000. People aged over 65 are expected to grow in number, with the current 950 people jumping to around 3000 in 2021. The Indigenous population will remain at around 13% of the overall Palmerston population.
The second clear growth hot spot in the Territory is in remote communities. Here, the population growth has been trending upwards for some time. As I said in previous statements to this House, unlike the spectre of rural decline faced in so many other parts of Australia, towns in the bush are growing. I will preface my comments about growth in particular towns by stressing the figures are extremely volatile and hard to finally pin down. This is purely as a result of statistical size.
However, of the 20 identified growth towns contained in A Working Future, 16 will experience population growth rates of greater than 19% over the period 2006 to 2021. It is anticipated towns such as Yirrkala, Numbulwar and Gapuwiyak will grow by 35.4%, 29.7% and 24.8% respectively. In this period, the growth in 15- to 64-year-olds will be substantial, but the growth in those 65 and over will be phenomenal. Whilst the numbers are not high in numerical terms, the impact of trebling the aged population level in, for example Gapuwiyak, from 20 to above 60 cannot be underestimated. In our regional towns such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine, growth is expected to be between 6.4% in Tennant, 18% in Katherine, with Alice Springs sitting around 12% growth over the 2006 to 2021 period. In each of these communities, the growth is characterised by an increase in the Indigenous population and a significant increase in the aged population in all centres.
What do these numbers tell us and, more importantly, how are we planning to meet the challenges and maximise the opportunities presented by growth? The challenges are evident. The three I wish to focus on today are: the need to continue to invest heavily in infrastructure; be more effective in engaging the Indigenous community across the Territory in education, training and employment; and ensuring services for the aged are increasing. Ministers and other speakers will focus on other challenges faced by government and the responses to those challenges.
Investment in infrastructure: in the 2009-10 Budget, the Territory government invested $1.3bn in infrastructure. This investment is spread across the Territory; it is the highest investment in the Territory’s history. It comes on the back of a series of increasing infrastructure budgets since 2001. In our first budget, we invested $334m; this has now trebled in just eight years. It is evident that further large investment levels in infrastructure will remain as a priority for government for some time to come, to manage the growth in population which is being achieved.
The focus of infrastructure expenditure is going to continue to be on: housing Territorians; economic and community development infrastructure, such as roads and essential services; making up the infrastructure deficit in remote towns and surrounding communities; and matching growth needs, particularly in Palmerston and the rural areas.
Housing Territorians is a matter of ongoing high-level debate and action. The government has in place a strategy, Housing the Territory, which forms the basis of our response to this issue. Our actions are: we have brought forward around $50m-worth of headworks on Palmerston East; we have started the preliminary planning for a new city at Weddell; and we settled the Kenbi land claim so the Cox Peninsula can be used for development over the medium to longer term.
By 2013, on present calculations, Darwin and Palmerston will have around 6000 lots released for building, including private developments at Muirhead and Lyons, and on the university site of the Palmerston Campus. The Bellamack suburb is under way and selling. Johnston Stage 1 will start selling from the plan late this year, and service, headworks and planning are under way on Mitchell and Zuccoli. In five years time, Weddell will be under way, and that opens up space for 40 000 people. Combined with Cox Peninsula, we now have plans in place for the next 20 years worth of land release around this rapidly growing area.
We have also sold land in Katherine for a 40-lot development. We have settled the Mt John Valley development in Alice Springs, and have plans in place for further land release. We have released nine lots for development in Tennant Creek, and plans are under way for land release in Nhulunbuy. In our growth towns we are working overtime to make land available for housing and infrastructure developments.
We are also accelerating land release and development by internal process changes including: the DCA now meets fortnightly in Darwin instead of monthly; a one-stop shop for developers with Darwin City Council is in place; longer-term planning for headworks; parallel processing of approvals and design; master planning of subdivisions to incorporate community services, infrastructure and mandatory sustainability features; auction of subdivisions with design and development approvals in place; and, lots available off the plan.
We are also planning areas with higher density living, such as duplexes and triplexes, as well as high-rise zoning. We have expanded the role of the Land Development Corporation from industrial land only to include urban projects such as residential land and affordable housing development. Bellamack Gardens is the first of these projects. We are also examining options for infill housing. The OTC site is an example of this.
The majority of Territorians rent. There are not enough rental places available at an affordable level, and the public housing system is now reserved for welfare and social housing. To lift affordable rental property numbers, we have approved in principle the establishment of an affordable housing rental company, and work is nearing completion on options for going forward with this. This will be a non-government-run entity which will provide quality and affordable rental to those on more modest means. It will fit between the public and private housing markets, and it will utilise the National Rental Affordability Scheme as part of its operations.
The first project which will be assigned to the affordable housing rental company will be the Parap Gateway development. This project will be delivered as a medium-density, public/private housing development. It is the first part of a program to reinvigorate public housing estates across the Territory.
The Territory government currently operates public housing across the Territory. More public housing is needed. To achieve this, the government has undertaken several courses of action. The Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program, SIHIP, working with the federal government will deliver 750 new homes; 250 rebuilt homes; and 2500 upgraded homes. This is the most expansive housing program ever for the bush, and is aimed at turning around a generation of neglect in housing infrastructure, particularly in our growth towns.
More seniors housing: a new 44-unit seniors village is being worked on at Bellamack, and part of the Parap redevelopment will be for seniors. With an ageing population in Territory Housing houses, we will be offering seniors more appropriate housing options, which will have a knock-on effect of freeing up three-bedroom dwellings.
We are also working with the federal government and the stimulus program. Using federal stimulus money, we are refurbishing dwellings to get them back into use. Currently, around 289 are being refurbished. We are building 22 new Territory Housing dwellings through Stage 1 of the stimulus package, including the building of four-bedroom houses and 18 two-bedroom units. Through the second stimulus package round, and with non-government organisations, we are building 186 dwellings for crisis and transitional housing across the Territory, 50% of which must be completed by the end of next year.
We are also examining the development of a workers village. I welcome the suggestion from both the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Nelson, and these are all part of developing a plan for short-term workers accommodation, the details of which will be forthcoming in the near future. The Yarrawonga site nominated by the Leader of the Opposition is not viable as it is only available for a limited period of time.
The government has also called for expressions of interest from the non-government sector for some quick crisis accommodation solutions utilising their own land. We will bring forward funding to help support some solutions to crisis needs. The response to date has been strong, and we are soon closing those expressions of interest for assessment.
I will now talk about economic and community development infrastructure. The government is tackling this infrastructure requirement in a three-pronged way: we are proceeding at pace with investment; we are undertaking longer-term strategic planning for future investment; and we are working with the federal government, especially through Infrastructure Australia, to bring their funding capacity to focus on our needs.
Investment in roads and economic infrastructure has been an important part of our budget strategy for the last eight years. In Budget 2009-10, record levels of investment in our roads of $322m is matched by investment in our port of $100m from Territory sources, and a further $50m from the federal government. High levels of investment also occur in other economic infrastructure such as the multiuser complex.
The future planning for investment is focused on a 10-year road strategy and a 15-year infrastructure plan. Members will also be aware of the comprehensive essential services investment program being rolled out - over $1.2bn, with hundreds of millions already spent. This program has seen the building of a new power station at Weddell; major power infrastructure upgrades in Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek; new and improved substations right throughout Palmerston and Darwin; a major town-by-town infrastructure spending in the bush; together with heightened dam wall levels, the closing down of harbour outfalls and other works, and making up the infrastructure deficit in remote towns and surrounding communities.
No one in this House would dispute the fact infrastructure to remote towns and their surrounding areas was neglected for decades and allowed to backlog. We have been urgently working to reverse that problem for the last eight years. The Territory does not have the budget capacity to do this on its own, and we have been working with the federal government to address these needs. Since the election of the Rudd government, the task of obtaining federal infrastructure money has been much easier. The government saw the need to address these issues; it took the Howard government nine of their 11 years before they paid any attention at all.
Our strategy for overcoming this neglect is articulated in A Working Future, a comprehensive policy framework for infrastructure and service delivery to the bush which has been acknowledged nationally. Within that policy is the development of 20 growth areas into fully-fledged towns to operate as service hubs for surrounding communities. Each of these towns in their hub regions will be assessed for their infrastructure needs, and plans put in place over the short-, medium- and long-term to prioritise the needs and fund them accordingly. No one should be in any doubt about the size and cost of this task, but it is a task which has government focus. It is backed up by a structure for delivery within the public sector, and a very strict reporting and monitoring process. It is enmeshed with the Commonwealth’s infrastructure delivery plans through the national partnership arrangements, and places us well ahead of the rest of the nation in our organisation and delivery. Reporting through our own budget processes will also occur.
Matching growth needs will require ongoing planning and investment and infrastructure. Work is under way at finalising growth models which will allow the government to predict the consequent infrastructure needs in growth areas. In the case of Darwin and Palmerston, this modelling is backed up by an across-agency group, headed up by the Chief Minister’s Department, which effectively plans for managing growth. We already know we will need to build more schools. We also have work under way, nearing completion, on the future health needs for this area and Darwin as a whole. That work will come to government next year and will steer thinking on the developments of future hospital requirements.
In the meantime, we will continue to work with the federal government to deliver the super clinic. Work is also under way at the major transport corridor of Tiger Brennan Drive, with the completion of this road making a major difference to traffic flow.
I will now talk about engaging the Indigenous community. The second challenge facing the government arising from the Territory’s massive growth lies in the engagement of the entire Indigenous community, and the economic and social development of the Territory. This is not a new challenge but one which did not receive much attention or policy focus for many decades. This government has made this issue a priority and we have in place a number of strategies, plans, and actions to ensure we are able to close the gap in Indigenous disadvantage.
We should never ignore the successes occurring across the Territory. I was pleased the Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, in a major national speech, recently singled out Shepherdson College and Ntaria school as two leading national examples of significant educational improvement.
I wish to highlight three plans and strategies the government has in place for improving the economic and social development of Indigenous Territorians. Other ministers will highlight other plans. They are: a Smart Territory, the government’s education and training strategic plan; A Working Future; and the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy announced by my colleague, the minister, last week in Alice Springs.
A Smart Territory is a comprehensive and strategic plan aimed at delivering a real outcome for all students in the Territory. For the government, real outcomes mean students participating in senior secondary schooling and moving to real jobs and/or further education and training. Students who participate in senior secondary schools are immeasurably advantaged in life outcomes. Whilst students in our schools and major provincial centres do as well as anyone in the country, our very real challenge is to deliver real outcomes to students, in particular, our Indigenous students in our remote and very remote centres. It is this area of the plan I want to address.
To lift Indigenous education outcomes, the government has prioritised the development of education and training plans for each of the 20 growth towns and their surrounding communities, as well as areas not close to a growth town. The development of six of these plans is now under way with Jabiru and Gunbalanya the most advanced at this stage. Plans are also being developed for Maningrida, Umbakumba and Angurugu on Groote Eylandt, Ngukurr, Lajamanu and Ntaria.
In each case, we are beginning where we wish to end; that is, with the students and young people of the region having access to real jobs - jobs in the community and access to jobs beyond the community. The message is: ‘Education and training will lead to jobs. If you come to school regularly, participate in learning and behave, then we will ensure there is a pathway to a real job’. In fact, we will guarantee it. We have to give our young people a reason to engage in schooling and a reason for communities to see the school as the centre of their community. The ability for kids to have a choice about their future is the key. Access to jobs is the answer.
To ensure this is achievable, we are identifying jobs in each area. We are working with local employers to get guarantees they will employ young people who successfully complete their education and training. ERA has led the way in this by agreeing to take 30 students a year into their employment from the Jabiru/Gunbalanya area. I congratulate them on their willingness to be part of this important strategy, and also in leading the way in the Territory in this regard. That end point will determine what education and training we deliver in each location. In many cases and for many students, vocational education and training will be the answer, and this focused training may need to start as early as the middle schooling years. We need to be clever about ensuring our investment in training is focused on delivering a pathway to a real job and/or further training and education.
As we begin this process, I have asked my Department of Education and Training to provide me with real options for getting students to the point where they are able to begin on one of these pathways, and be assured of success. I have asked them to challenge existing models of service delivery where it is evident these have not worked. We are rethinking some of our existing strategies. Some of the solutions may involve making some of our homeland centres into schools, supplementing the face-to-face delivery in some centres and schools using virtual schooling technology; the introduction of term boarding and homestay arrangements; and the creation of hubs.
Last week, I opened a new high school at Alpara. This school is catering for students from Years 6 to 12. Over 70 students are being bussed into the school from all directions, and receiving access to real pathways amongst a substantial number of peers. These students talked to me about their frustration with having to try to learn middle and senior subjects while being surrounded by young children in their former homeland learning centres. They and their parents also talked with me about their absolute desire to have it all. They want our schools to prepare them to be global citizens, proficient in English and ready for work or further study, but they also want our schools to work with communities to support, acknowledge and value their unique culture, heritage and language.
We will build and refresh schools so they become places the community can use and access outside hours of schooling. Adult training, recreational activities, and community-led culture and language growth should have their base in our schools; after all, they are a community asset. The best delivery models in the world will not work if we cannot get families to engage in our schools, send their kids along regularly, and have students healthy and ready to start their education journey.
This plan addresses this in a number of ways. It focuses on engaging with parents at the earliest possible moment. The creation of early childhood hubs will support young families in developing their parenting, using in-reach and outreach models. Mobile preschools, culturally appropriate transition to school strategies, and an unrelenting focus on the explicit teaching of literacy and numeracy will characterise the early childhood years of schooling.
The plan will also focus on ensuring these students and parents have access to quality teachers and school leaders. There will be a huge emphasis on attracting and retaining committed professionals. This will ensure turnover is driven down and the average length of stay is driven up. We want our teachers and leaders to be part of the A Team. We want them to commit to us for three years and, in return, we will commit to them. They will get A class treatment. They will get the best induction, the best support, access to recall opportunities, and access to mentoring, networking and career planning, as well as the already generous salary and incentive packages on offer. This planning has now been extensively discussed with the Commonwealth as key partners, and will be made public for discussion and debate in the Territory when it is in the final stages.
A Smart Territory also contains major work to other areas which impact on Indigenous education. I urge members to look closely at the strategic plan.
I have already spoken about A Working Future and the importance of this plan in delivering for the bush. The Indigenous Economic Development Strategy launched by the Minister for Regional Development in Alice Springs last week also provides a strong basis for action in planning and delivering a better future for Indigenous Territorians. This strategy will be spoken of in greater detail by the minister, but includes a number of key initiatives to support the development of Indigenous enterprises on Aboriginal land; to work with land councils to negotiate secure leases for the development of local business; improve numeracy and literacy and offer students real pathways to employment; promote joint ventures and commercial partnerships; continue to support Indigenous entrepreneurs through the Indigenous Business Development Program; and develop and deliver work readiness programs.
By 2012, we are committed to seeing 3000 more Indigenous Territorians start employment across the private and public sectors - 10% Indigenous employment in the public sector, and 200 new Indigenous businesses.
I will also speak about increasing services to the aged. I wish to address this issue which arises from the growth and demographics of our ageing population. This growth is occurring right across the Territory. Not only is it a result of vastly improving health outcomes in Indigenous people, but it is also the result of more and more Territorians staying in the Territory, choosing to live here rather than travel elsewhere in the latter part of their life. This is a welcome outcome for all of us. The family unit is more complete with grandparents nearby and ageing Territorians make a significant contribution to our way of life.
In addressing the needs of ageing Territorians, we have a number of strategies in place - an extensive suite of pensioner concessions which work to reduce the cost of living for pensioners. These have been improved in recent times through free bus travel available to senior citizens. A housing plan will provide an increasing number of pensioner public housing units, and encourages the private sector to develop affordable housing. Work is being done to encourage the development of seniors villages through the private sector. There is health support through increasing health expenditure, effective hospitals, and an Active Ageing Strategy.
There is no doubt more will need to be done to ensure health facilities, in particular, are able to cope with an ageing Territory population. This is made even more complex in the Territory because of the deleterious health effects of substance abuse, particularly alcohol abuse which plays a critical role in dementia and other ageing problems. The challenge for government is to keep ahead of this service need, and the Minister for Senior Territorians will speak at greater length on this issue.
This has been an outline only of some of the major challenges facing government as a result of our rapid growth, the nature of that rapid growth, population growth, and economic growth, and the response that government is making to these challenges. I welcome the contribution of all members on these matters and any ideas they wish to contribute. There is no question that in all of our responses the need for effective planning is evident. I am now more convinced than ever the significant growth in people we have invested in as a government in key policy and planning areas is paying dividends in our ability, as a system, to predict and meet these challenges.
What is also evident is, to respond to this growth, the Territory is going to have to heavily invest in both infrastructure and expanding services into the future. Our policy position has been to enter into temporary deficit to ensure we can continue to fund the growth needs in both infrastructure and services. That remains our policy, priority, and position. The government is convinced the task of managing and dealing with growth is of such importance this is the only sensible policy option to take.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the challenges are real, but we also recognise these challenges are good things to have - get it right and the Territory will continue to boom, grow and develop as a modern leading-edge, innovative community with a lifestyle the envy of the nation. That is the task facing all of us in this House today; a task that this government is embracing eagerly.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, this is an important statement, and comes at a time when, clearly, the mind of our community is upon the effects of growth in quite painful ways. I only hope honourable members, particularly those on the other side, have genuinely heard the cry of those who are suffering as a result of the failure to plan; those who feel hope has evaporated in this time where most of us have had children and desire nothing more than to have a stable home life in which to raise those kids.
I spend Saturday in my office with constituents coming in, not just from my electorate, since my mobile number was placed in the headline of the NT News - my mobile number was never hidden in any event. The number of calls I received from people who simply told me their story, and were pleased to be able to tell me their story, is enough to move anyone to tears, when you recognise what it has come to. If you take their story on board and consider what the implications forward are of this, we really have to respond in a way which gives urgency to our actions.
In this context, when we are speaking of growth, we can speak into the disconnected and abstract terms of that growth. Of course, growth is good, but you must plan for growth. The failure to plan is evident in the stories which are being told again and again, some of them very painful to hear.
Yes, there is a positive aspect to growth. It is interesting that government, always with its eye on itself, will then describe this growth phenomena, and imply quite directly it is as a result of their own extraordinary achievement growth has occurred under the watch of the Labor administration in the Northern Territory. That is clearly implied in the way in which they construct their argument. However, they are completely negligent when it comes to any substantiating elements to their argument. Look at what has happened globally. The Territory government, at the time of the increase in population during a discrete period of time when the Defence build-up occurred as a result of a decision of the nation to relocate its Defence forces, probably skited about it and said: ‘Oh, we achieved that’. However, it was a reorientation of Defence thinking.
The time when people left the Territory was a time of national economic downturn across the board. In recent times, of course, there has been a return; people are coming back to the Territory. Always, all of us have believed the Territory has a great future; there have been documents, plans, and strategies of all kinds over the years. However, we were led to believe this growth has arisen as a result of the effects of the wondrous Labor administration, with complete disregard for the international phenomena of a resource boom. Is it no coincidence Queensland, which is resource rich; Western Australia, which is resource rich; and the Northern Territory, which is resource rich, have also benefited? Have those other two administrations also benefited from this Territory Labor administration which, single-handedly, created this marvellous opportunity of which Queensland and Western Australia are beneficiaries as well? Of course, that is a ridiculous proposition, but is the subliminal assertion.
The fact is there are elements which drive growth. Growth occurs, but the responsibility of a government is to respond to the growth, prepare for the growth. Therefore, the fundamental would be making land available upon which growth could expand. You cannot respond to growth by releasing land without having a plan.
We were at a forum the other day and I was making reference to the need for some deeper strategic thinking, over-the-horizon planning; visionary exercises to create a narrative so we feel we are all a part of something exciting and we are actually going somewhere. I was very curious to hear the Chief Minister respond by saying: ‘I know where Terry is going with this’ and, then, further revealed what he thought I was thinking by saying: ‘I have never been a supporter of a planned economy’. That betrays a complete misunderstanding of the need to establish a central idea - a plan and a vision.
If you do not have a direction or a plan which is being worked on at a deep level - which has occurred in the past - you do not end up with things like railways and ports. Following through the Chief Minister’s logic, just let people decide what they want to do; government does not really have an effective role in creating a vision and a direction - let people just decide.
How is it you end up with this coordination in response to a plan, a vision, or a grand narrative? You end up with railways connecting with ports, which are part of an engagement into the region. At the very same time, you have students of the schools learning Indonesian, and you have cross-cultural work so people in the public sector can understand how to engage in the region. That does not happen by accident; it is part of the leadership role of a government to set the agenda. If the agenda and the direction are incorrect, let the people decide. But, for goodness sake, occupy that space and establish a vision and a direction.
This was revealed on Friday where, clearly, it is a position the government does not want to occupy. They want to allow all these other things to occur around them and, if it turns out okay, take the credit. If it does not turn out okay, well, then someone else is responsible.
It was the private sector, in this case, which did not get those applications in on time, which is a damn shame. Hopefully, they will get it right next round. On the other hand, we have land being released - the private sector is doing all that and they are taking credit for it. There is, clearly, a complete abrogation of the central role of leadership by this government.
Growth occurs and, sometimes, it occurs dramatically. It has been referred to again and again in this Chamber. However, Labor came to office in 2001, and they came with a grand mandate: there was going to be significant change. The margin was not as they wished, so there was a concession made by the Labor Party to just attend to political business in the first cycle - 2001 to the next election. ‘Let us make sure we hold our political ground and extend upon it’. They played that game quite well and let go of some of their social obligations they had espoused so strongly and for such a long period of time. They put them on the backburner in 2001 until the next election.
When it came to the next election, they had a massive majority. The Chief Minister, at the time, holding Indigenous Affairs closely as a badge of honour, then had the opportunity to implement serious reform and deliver on the expectations. They could have burned up political capital; they could have been ahead of the game. Instead, no, they continued running the political agenda, playing the political game, to use the instrument of the parliament to promote themselves. They had the opportunity to do some deeper thinking and some longer-term planning and make a decisive move. They did not act.
As a result, there was a response from the federal government and outrage in the nation that there had been severe neglect and tragic disappointment for those who had their hopes raised. There was going to be something quite different - and there was not.
That is where we are at today. We now have a weakened government, in a situation where they failed to attend to basic business, such as simply release the land and ensure the processes work. They still cannot get out of the cycle of talk, and thinking talk is the result and achievement. I draw members’ attention to one example. In the last Assembly, which was the Tenth Assembly, make no mistake, the issue of land release was on the agenda again and again as a matter of urgency. The member for Nelson recognised this right from the beginning. Although the opposition was small, members ran these arguments.
There are some serious social consequences of failing to attend to the planning issues - just of housing, let alone industrial development, getting ahead of the game, and creating space in response to a vision. However, there was no vision other than a political one. Today, we reap the consequences of their attention to a political agenda. It is in the faces, in the stories, in the lives of families. If this proud Labor government would like to spend the time with me on a Saturday and listen to those people’s stories, and not feel aggrieved, for their fellow citizens there is no clear resolution in the short term of something very tragic.
If young teachers cannot find a place to stay in Darwin or Palmerston, even with their incomes, and are required to make very difficult decisions such as leave the Territory - think forward, where does that take us? Think of the teaching profession across the northern suburbs. I have visited over 20 schools in the last little while. One thing members would note is teaching, by and large, is an ageing profession. There has been planning on this, but the planning usually takes the place of just recognising this is the case. The planning should take us to the next stage; it has some pretty serious implications.
Those who are teaching in the northern suburbs schools, for example, generally are at the halfway of the latter stages of their career. Some of my colleagues are saying so how many more years? They love their vocation, they love their profession, but there is going to come a time when they will retire. Most of them own their houses not far from where they work. They bought them some time ago because they have been in the profession for 20 years or more. They are fortunate enough to have a place in the market. Let us just move forward, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight years; a number of them will make the decision, as they age, they want to downsize, and move into a unit. Some of them already have an investment property in other places, and they leave. Who can afford to move into that place? Which teacher on which salary can move into the place which has been occupied by a retiring teacher? Think about that. That is the grist we need to put into this mill.
I am pleased the Chief Minister said he is open to ideas. Well, for God’s sake, have a look at that. There has been an assessment done - called the key worker index, used as a measure. If you cannot find space in your community for teachers, nurses, firefighters and police, if you look at their salaries, and match that against the cost of servicing a mortgage. The index they use is, if the cost of the mortgage is five times their annual salary, it is deemed to be unaffordable. That judgment has been passed upon the Northern Territory quite savagely by this report, which was only released in June or July this year. It nominates Darwin as being unaffordable for key workers. Think of the social consequences of that!
Palmerston is unaffordable in all categories. Alice Springs is unaffordable in all categories. Project forward: if we are serious about planning, think about what that means. Do not tell me you have a plan, as though that is the solution because, not so long ago, in the last Assembly, the Tenth Assembly in 2007, this matter was raised yet again as a matter of public importance. Oh yes, in 2007, it was a matter of public importance in August.
The response by the Minister for Planning and Lands contained ideas such as ‘beware of flooding the market’. When being pressured to respond to this problem in 2007, it was ‘beware of flooding the market’ and ‘they are going to threaten a person’s wealth, a person’s asset if you flood the market’. Read that as, ‘if we make a decision and release land’. Under sustained pressure, there was another comment made by the minister for Housing at the time, the member for Karama: ‘You want us to completely distort the whole housing loan market and devalue people’s properties’. That was the argument against releasing land. Tell that to the people in my office on a Saturday morning. Tell that to the people who e-mail me, and the people who have phoned and told me their tragic stories.
However, it gets worse. In a final concession there needs to be some kind of action made by government - bear in mind there have been responses made through this statement and assertions made during Question Time of ‘Do not worry, we recognise that there is a problem and we have a plan – all rest’. In 2007, we also had the same language. The problem today is worse. The member for Karama said in 2007:
- ‘I have brought forward the Bellamack release’. They said: ‘Thank God’. Bellamack was not scheduled for release until 2008 …
She boasted …
Mr Tollner: When was that? When did she say that?
Mr MILLS: In 2007: ‘I brought it forward by a year’ - a whole year in response to the nature of this problem, ‘I acted decisively’ - all rest:
- When I was made the Minister for Planning and Lands, I asked the agency when Bellamack was scheduled for release. It was 2008. I asked the earliest time we could release it, and the answer was if they work like the clappers, mid-2007. I said: ‘Then it is mid-2007 ...
It is 2009, just shy of 2010, and you have shoe boxes ...
Ms Lawrie: Not shoe boxes. Have you been out there?
Mr MILLS: It is hardly a robust defence of this appalling record. You are telling us this is all about growth, it is all about ‘Do not worry about that, we have plans in place’. We have a whole list of them – a whole list of plans. The thing is, plan or no plan, there has been no result and no action - there have just been words.
When this was announced with accompanying glossy brochures and big-paged ads in the paper, guess what happened? People came into my office excited there was going to be land available in Bellamack. Palmerston residents who are growing up there, sharing cramped accommodation said: ‘Here is our chance to get in’. I said: ‘Well, just hang on. I certainly hope this is the case’. They responded to the glossy brochures, the big ads and, still, there is nothing there. Today, most of those people who came in at that time have lost hope, and they really have no chance of getting in to these properties which are still to be made available in real terms.
Then, the member for Karama went on - in condescending terms, quite surprising I suppose for some - describing how complicated these matters are and the level of ignorance of certain four members on the other side: ‘You have to understand these things’. Then she said:
- An announcement on the release of Bellamack will be made shortly, but it will include …
This is in 2007:
- … approximately 650 and, potentially, 700 lots. As I have said time and time again, there will be a component of this release that will include public housing and homes or land for first homebuyers, guaranteed. The things you are calling for are absolutely locked in ...
I interjected and said:
- This year?
Ms LAWRIE: Absolutely.
Mr Mills: On the market?
Ms LAWRIE: Expressions of interest, yes.
There is an interesting little paragraph in here - in fact, it is a couple of sentences. The member for Karama said:
- We could have done what previous governments have always done in the Territory …
No, not us:
- … which is just release the land to developers. We are not doing that this time because we want to address the need in the marketplace without distorting the market.
You are bloody not, believe me. No one can get in - no one can get it. People with a qualification cannot get in.
Are you talking about social housing? That is another aspect altogether. You talk about the great potential of the Northern Territory. If people invest in the Territory they are going to want to employ people with qualifications. They cannot get in. They cannot get into the marketplace, and we have this rubbish, these carefree assertions made in the Chamber in the face of a serious issue - but it was only a small opposition. ‘We were playing politics, after all. It is all about the glossy brochure. It is all about the plan, the task force, the action and this stuff, to allow us to create an impression’, but no difference other than a political one.
Well, to the great credit of the Territory community, they made their judgment at the last Territory election, and you are now in the hot seat. They are looking to see whether you are actually going to change. You are changing only because of the pressure. However, they do not care about this. They actually want to see a result. The things you have described in this plan are the very things which can be talked about and glossed over, but they have to be engaged in a very genuine way. It is far more than about plans, programs and amounts of money being spent; it is, ultimately, about decision-making. There have been very few real decisions made. The resolve to back up and drive through an outcome is as a result of strong leadership from a government because you are required to, because the citizens are demanding some kind of action.
Today, we should, in fact, be talking about the hospitals. There are forward plans and general thinking which may be on some book somewhere. If you really believe in the Territory, we should be talking about the hospitals. How is it, Palmerston - which is probably a microcosm of the Territory - for eight years, with overcrowded schools, expanded? I arrived when there were 6000 people; there are nearly 30 000 people now. Labor was elected in 2001. Not a single school was built as the population expanded and continued to expand, and kids were occupying spaces on stage and in withdrawal rooms. Now, reluctantly, when the money is slowing down - and it slowed with the GST - there has to be a response, although not until government was painted into a corner, because their preoccupation was largely on presentation purposes rather than genuine delivery for citizens in the longer term - the level of fire service delivery, and the police numbers in real terms for growing communities. I am pleased to see there has been a reference to health and a recognition education is critical. However, education, without a sound economic base, is really just going to be another exercise.
I am pleased to see in the report there is some further thinking around the regional towns as we are expanding this idea. However, if we look at the track record of the last eight years, I fear for what lies ahead because, in travelling through a number of these outstations, remote communities out of Alice Springs last week, it seems to be Labor’s enthusiasm for bureaucracy and layer upon layer of decision-making serve only as roadblocks rather than bridges. There are people out in some communities – I will not mention their communities by name – who had quite a clear grasp of what was going on and decided they have had enough. Four-wheel drive after four-wheel drive of people asking the same bloody questions - they have had enough of it. However, there are others who did not quite understand what was going on. People were continually arriving asking all sorts of questions. They are lovely. They are trying to engage, and they are just confused.
I went to one school which only had six kids. Out the back, there were two big four-wheel drives and three senior departmental people having a chat in the staffroom - probably chatting about the six kids in the classroom. We had an interesting chat. The community was concerned about matters related to kids who were short-term stay in the community; could they actually come into the classroom? Apparently, they were not allowed to come in. Hopefully, we found some resolution to that.
I will go into that, but there were more senior bods there than the six kids and three highly-paid folk. As we walked out, we noted in the playground there is a wall. It is one of those walls built some time ago. Probably someone had a bit of money around to build this wall so the kids could hit balls at it or something, have a bit of a target on there. It was built a long time ago. There was no internal reinforcing in this wall. If you push it, it shakes. Someone there said: ‘Here is the opportunity. I have to say, 18 months ago, I asked for that wall to be knocked down because it is dangerous’. The person’s response was: ‘Yes, we are going to let a tender to have this wall knocked down’. About a stone’s throw away were seven stockmen hoping someone will do something to give them some work to do.
I could have called those seven stockmen over and said: ‘Put your shoulder to this wall’, because there were two of us there. Tony Abbott will probably tell the same story. We could have pushed the wall over. You could have called those seven stockmen over and said: ‘We are going to bowl this wall over, pick up those besser blocks and throw them in the gully over there’. Eighteen months have passed; people with four-wheel drives are scooting around the place, and I bet today the wall is still up, because they are processing through some tortuous, convoluted process. Some request goes into Alice Springs and some bods will come out there in a ute and get rid of the wall.
Mr Elferink: Inspect the wall first and then get rid of it.
Mr MILLS: Oh, they would probably have a few consultants to ask everyone in the community what they think about the wall. In a very small way, that reveals the things going on. It seems to be happening at all levels, rather than someone on the ground making the decision in the best interests of those this whole exercise is about. It seems to be the enlargement of the process, the enlargement of the system, has then turned in on itself, and is serving itself. There are many people out there wondering what is going on, and they want some kind of action. They want someone to make a decision and do the right thing in their interest, right at the grassroots level.
You can talk about grand strategies, grand programs, and great responses to serious problems but, when it does not affect people in practical ways on the ground, we are dreaming. I do not want to go through the Eleventh Assembly and go into the Twelfth Assembly, and we still have the same thing.
If we are talking to the Council of Territory Cooperation, I want to see this vehicle actually fixes these problems. Otherwise, we are involved in the same kind of process. We all might feel a bit enhanced by being involved in something, but what about the people we are here to serve? What difference does it make to someone in Santa Teresa who, for 18 months, has been looking up and there is no roof on the house? Eighteen months! Not a roof. Where have they gone? To live at other houses already overcrowded. How can it take 18 months? If that was in Karama, how long do you reckon it would take before a roof of public housing was put back on? Pretty quick! Not 18 months - it would be an outrage. It would possibly be in the Northern Territory News, and there would be swift and decisive action. But not in Santa Teresa. They can wait 18 months while they have no roof on their house. There are stories the money is there and not spent. There is probably a process. We will have to send a few other people in there with clipboards to ask a few questions to find out what is going on. What sort of roof do they want after all? There seems to be the absence of decisive action rather than involvement in process.
If we are talking about growth, that is fine. Growth is occurring as though it was not to occur, yet it has occurred and that is fantastic. There are plans and strategies, but the deficiency is strategic thinking, the capacity to make decisions, and to provide leadership and direction. Otherwise, we will be talking about this in the Twelfth Assembly and many of those people who have come into my office or phoned me, will not be coming to my office because they will be going because they cannot find a place in the market. These are people who can make a contribution.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased the statement has been made. It gives us something to talk about. I hope it is just not talk. There has to be some kind of response to this which is meaningful to those who most need our leadership.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for bringing forward the statement. While we have enormous opportunities in the Territory, the growth also brings with it the challenges. The statement sets in detail what this government is doing to address those challenges.
We have seen significant population and economic growth in the Territory in recent years. This was not by accident. According to the ABS figures, since September 2002 when we look back, the Territory was the only jurisdiction in Australia with negative population growth. Our population had declined by 0.1% over the previous year and sat at 197 924. Our nett intrastate migration sat at negative 1025 over the previous quarter, and the government was naturally concerned. We wanted our population growth figures to turn the corner, so the government developed and launched a population strategy. It was a comprehensive strategy which covered everything from building the economy through to more entertainment and elite sporting fixtures.
Has it worked? Well, let us look at where we are seven years later. The latest ABS figures have our population growth at 2.2% above the national average. We now have 223 100 and our nett interstate migration is at 691 for last year. It has been in positive territory for the last two-and-a-half years. This is a very different picture than what we inherited seven years ago. Our population has grown by around 13%; an extra 26 000 people. We actually believe the 691 nett interstate migration figure from the ABS is lower than reality. The ABS uses Medicare change-of-address information, with adjustments for Defence personnel not covered by Medicare. This works well in other jurisdictions, but the Territory has a much higher level of population transience compared to other states. Many people moving to the Territory are young and, as such, they are less inclined to use medical services. They do not often update their Medicare address. Conversely, far more retired people leave rather than move to the Territory, but they are all counted because they update their Medicare address.
Of course, there was a reason we had negative population growth seven years ago. It was because the government had inherited an economy with zero growth and unemployment up over 7%. Under the Henderson government, we have been experiencing very strong economic and employment growth for several years now. Economic growth is at around 4%, employment growth at 3.5%, and unemployment holding steady at 4.2%. All these figures have been consistently strong and stable in recent years. Labour force figures released last week show that during the last year, despite the global financial crisis, more than 4000 new jobs were created in the Territory. Such strong economic, employment and population growth puts pressures on a range of government services. Population forecasts have been at and around 1% so, to have growth at double the rate forecast creates these pressures. Put simply, we are providing services for an extra 26 000 people.
This is why the Henderson government is planning across the board for the significant growth. Planning for significant growth requires a detailed demographic assessment of growth patterns the Chief Minister has outlined in his statement. The Territory has very complicated demographics, from our capital city of Darwin to some of the most remote communities in the world. Appropriate core services such as health, education, transport, and community safety can only be provided if there is a thorough understanding of growth patterns across the different regions of the Territory. All of these areas now have record budgets and we are building our infrastructure with an unprecedented $1.3bn budget this year.
We are also working critically with the Commonwealth. We are rolling out the stimulus packages to save jobs, and we are continuing to work with the Commonwealth on delivering infrastructure. We had a very good series of days with minister Albanese, showing him just what the economic stimulus is doing to the Territory.
We are acknowledging our rapid growth, and the Chief Minister has established Territory 2030 to look forward in casting the vision for the Territory to 2030. He has the stewardship and the co-chairs, Vicki O’Halloran and Bill Moss. The Territory 2030 Steering Committee released their draft strategy earlier this year. I have had a series of key industry figures talk to me about 2030 and the importance of it. With key focus areas on education, society, prosperity, health and wellbeing, environment, and knowledge, this strategy, we hope, will be owned by the community and will guide our growth.
As the Chief Minister mentioned, the government’s Housing the Territory Strategy is one of the core aspects of accommodating our growth. The ABS still rates Darwin as the second most affordable capital city in Australia for housing, but the government acknowledges the cost of housing is a burden to many families. As part of our strategy, as Lands minister, I am overseeing our expansive land release strategy. There are more than 6000 lots coming on to the market in coming years in the Darwin/Palmerston regions as a result of the turn-off of government-owned land. Just to name a few: Lyons, 230; Muirhead, 1000; Bellamack, around 700; Johnston, 850; Zuccoli, 1750; and Mitchell, 400. There are many more if you include the turn-off of private land. Of course, we will have the city of Weddell to follow. We are also releasing land in Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek.
In addition to land release, there is Homestart, administered by Territory Housing, and Buildstart, administered by Treasury - two initiatives which directly address the critical issue of affordability and availability of housing in the Territory. Importantly, there is a new aspect of the affordable housing rental company, which will be a semi-commercial operation, operating at arm’s length from government providing rental housing to low- to moderate-income households at an affordable level.
The Chief Minister has highlighted the rapid growth of Palmerston. With our land release strategy, the growth of Palmerston has only just begun to take off. This is why the government has such a range of initiatives for Palmerston: new schools, a hospital, Police Beat, sporting complex, and water park. We will have the Tiger Brennan Drive extension, and I invite people to attend that open day this Saturday.
Last week, I announced the first large-scale accommodation development for Palmerston, Quest Apartments being built by the Tomazos Group. This is a milestone for Palmerston because it will help establish the city as a tourist destination. It is becoming more than just a residential city.
In planning for significant growth, A Working Future policy is such a significant policy for addressing growth needs in the bush, where we already face a deficit of services and infrastructure. Our A Working Future outlines a strong vision for our remote and regional areas. It is about the government and local people working together to make our towns and communities better places to live.
A Working Future has six critical elements: the establishment of 20 towns across our Territory; a clear path for outstations and homelands; delivering remote services in a targeted and coordinated way with the Australian government; employment and economic development; a remote transport strategy; and Closing the Gap targets and evaluation.
In providing better education and training, it is one of the biggest challenges, but also one of our greatest opportunities for growth. Our Smart Territory Strategy is all about moving forward with education and training in our Territory. The Chief Minister’s statement gave details on this program, and I commend him for his work as Education minister, in this area which is just so important. The challenges of education are significant, but so are the opportunities. In our growing economy, the Territory is the best place in Australia to find a job. It is critically important as many Territorians as possible have the opportunity for education, to acquire the skills and training to fill the workforce capacity we will have with this growth.
I have mentioned how a growing economy and growing population puts pressure on housing, health, education, and infrastructure, but it also puts pressure on our environment. The Territory has a fairly pristine environment and we need to ensure, despite our growth, it remains that way. The government’s Greening the Territory Strategy will help ensure our unique Territory lifestyle and environment is protected as we grow.
While the Henderson government’s development credentials are proven, we have also proven we will not develop at any cost. The Arafura Harbour decision is, perhaps, the best evidence of this. The Territory’s growth in recent years has been outstanding. We have more challenges but, also importantly, more opportunities to come.
The major project of INPEX is a key opportunity and challenge. The government has a range of strategies and initiatives which will help ensure our growth continues to the benefit of all Territorians. We embrace the challenges the Territory confronts through strong economic and population growth. Equally, we embrace its opportunities.
It is interesting when, as Treasurer, I meet with other Treasurers, and as Planning and Lands Minister, I meet with other ministers. I have had the opportunity to meet with key industry groups. I recently talked about the opportunities of the Territory to the Australian Industry Group at a meeting in Sydney. All of them are blown away by the strong economic data and the opportunities we have in the Territory, particularly in the area of resources such as LNG. We talk about the opportunities for regional economic development, particularly in the resources base, and of working to the north in the LNG space. We have a government, I believe, is open for debate and discussion with industry, and working with the public sector to see how we can more innovatively address these challenges to create the opportunities Territorians can, quite rightly, enjoy into our future.
We are the growth centre going forward, I believe, for our nation. That is why it is critically important to have such a strong and collegiate working relationship with the federal government of the day. It is welcome, as an Infrastructure minister, to have a federal government which is prepared to be in the infrastructure space. They have moved boldly into it and they are truly about nation building. In that sense, the Territory is lobbying hard to be in the forefront of their considerations of infrastructure spending, and the nation building opportunities it brings our nation but, critically important, opens up opportunities here in the Territory for Territorians.
A stark example of this was having the opportunity to take minister Albanese to the Douglas Daly region, where he met with cattlemen, saw firsthand the challenges confronted by our underdeveloped road network, and heard the need for improvement in roads funding to help deliver produce to market, particularly in the live cattle export trade. It is good to see industry working with both tiers of government and talking about how we meet those challenges to provide for the opportunity of expansion of the livestock trade. I commend our minister for Primary Industry, because he has worked very closely with the industry to not only ensure we have seen significant growth in Indonesia in the livestock trade, but to open up that new market of Vietnam, with the very timely announcement last week. Given the federal minister was in town, I have been talking to him and getting him to meet the cattle station owners in the Douglas Daly to talk about the opportunities, but also the nation building opportunities of infrastructure the federal minister has responsibility of.
That being said, the work the government is doing to engage with new markets, to drive regional economic development, is critically important. I commend the work being done by the Chief Minister in steering through and securing the INPEX project but, also, following up and having a good working relationship with INPEX in delivering on that vital major project for the Territory. I also commend the Mining minister for his continued frequent trips to China. We cannot underestimate the importance of China in our resources base. The strength of the relationship between our Resources minister and China is tremendous. It is in the business sector in the Asian region. He not only has opportunities to explain the resources which are available here, but also create those personal relationships with the key traders. Our minister is doing this very well.
We have put together a master plan and a significant bid into Infrastructure Australia for the port expansion. The government has put its own investment into the port expansion of $100m. That being said, we have secured $50m from the federal government to put with that for the port expansion. Also, we are going after additional funding in subsequent rounds of Infrastructure Australia.
We have worked very closely to provide the appropriate level of economic analysis to mount the argument for the port expansion. It was a good opportunity, while minister Albanese was in town, to fly him over the port, explain what we were doing with the expansion, and land him in a chopper at the port. Through a quirk of timing, while he was in town the NT News decided to sensationalise the subsidence at the port and the tie rods issue, which we have been managing for years - an issue we inherited, but we are managing it well. We have spared no expense in that. We have had Professor Littlejohn in place and working well in ensuring the tie rods are dealt with in a comprehensive way. Much work has been done and the port is in sound condition. Contrary to the article, it will not be closing for two years. We regularly maintain and ensure the port is in good condition.
We have had significant expansion under Labor at the port in the bulk mineral loader and the conveyor belt facilities. We have been increasing the conveyor facilities. We are reclaiming land. We are putting in additional hard stand, and we are continuing to grow the port facilities. Why? Because bulk mineral exports will continue to grow. We know which mines are, potentially, coming online and what their volumes would provide for, so we are ahead of the game in that respect. We also know the projections on the livestock export trade. All that is scoped into the master plan and the work that has been done.
I want to take this opportunity, when talking about challenges and opportunities, to say it is good to be able to work with the board of the port. I acknowledge the passion and commitment of those port board members working with my Executive Officer, Robert Ritchie, at the port.
I know we are well placed in the planning we have undertaken to meet the challenges of growth the port will see. They are challenges we embrace. In fact, we have ensured key people in the port have gone to trade shows to talk up the port, have gone to ports around the world to look at how they are run, and to see the opportunities and best practices which occur in ports around the world. We will be, and continue to be, competitive with ports in the north of Australia. We have always matched our pricing rates on needing to be competitive.
Much work has been done at the port on restructuring and making it a more efficient business. That, of course, brings with it workplace angst. I believe we have seen some of that angst come to the fore in public comments from unnamed sources. Everything being done at the port has been fully tested in whether or not it is robust restructuring and efficient business. I am very confident of the work being done.
We now have contemporary pilotage practices occurring in our harbour which needed to occur. We have contemporary management structures for the onshore side of the port business. Why am I spending time focusing on the port? Because, at the end of the day, regarding economic growth, the port is critical in ensuring we can get produce to market, and can shift the produce across our port - be that bulk minerals or livestock and we are also looking at growing the freight business as well. We have Mariano Express providing a very good service - a new service following the closure of Hai Win – and the feedback I am getting from customers has been very positive.
I do not shy away from the fact, with an extra 26 000 people following strong economic and population growth, there are challenges. We do not shy away from the fact we inherited significant challenges, particularly in the bush. We embrace the opportunities of the Territory. I enjoy the opportunity of being in a government with a very close and collaborative working relationship with industry and business, and which has an eye on the ball of the environment so we ensure we take care of the environment while we provide for growth and development as well. We recognise the critical importance of education within this picture of growth - education linked to training, skills, and real jobs.
Growing our own and giving Territorians’ opportunities to pick up the jobs we are creating is significant, and industry recognises it as well. Government cannot do it on its own. Working collaboratively with industry is critical to it. I thank all the key industries I work with on a regular basis for their recognition of the role they play in training.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the Chamber. It is a good opportunity to have a look at the challenges confronting the Territory but, equally, the opportunities those challenges bring. We are a government which has shown we are open to business, to working with all industry sectors, and to ensuring we recognise the great work done by our public service in delivering services for Territorians. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I hope to bring a Treasury perspective to this debate. At the outset, before I actually attend to the matters in this statement, I, with some curiosity, heard during Question Time today - and continue to hear today from the Treasurer - the relationship the Northern Territory government has developed with the new Rudd government in Canberra, and how all this borrowed money will be good in expenditure here in the Northern Territory. I heard during Question Time today the comment that the stimulus spending was so vitally important to the people of the Northern Territory and, indeed, to the people in this nation, and Ken Henry, the head of the federal Treasury, made comments in support - which were widely reported, I might add - of the stimulus expenditure. What Ken Henry has not explained and no one else seems to be able to explain - and I look forward to a comment from the Treasurer on this - is why the Reserve Bank of Australia does not agree with Ken Henry.
I base this comment on this simple observation: we have currently large amounts of money - billions of dollars - flowing into the Australian economy from borrowed money from the federal government. That is, indeed, supporting jobs - and I would not doubt it - but we are propping up an economy which is not in recession. The added observation I make is the Reserve Bank has chosen to raise interest rates because the economy is starting to show signs of warming up again.
You have a rather interesting situation where the Reserve Bank on one hand feels the economy is starting to show signs of needing some sort of restraint being brought to bear, whilst the federal government - at the suggestion, I suspect, of the federal Treasury - is busy trying to warm up the economy. You seem to have monetarist policy on one hand, and an interventionist policy on the other, working at odds with each other. No one seems to be able to explain why this is occurring. I look forward to any explanation which could shed some light on this, because there is currently a dislocation between the position of the Federal Reserve and the federal Treasury, which I find difficult to reconcile.
Turning to this particular statement, one could be forgiven for thinking the Northern Territory, prior to the arrival of the Labor Party, was a desolate wasteland where people were sent bereft of hope, without any ambition for the future, like some tropical Siberia, because it was clearly such a horrible place to live. People were running away in their thousands according to the Chief Minister - could not stand the place; leaving.
I find that this statement is diminished because even this Labor government’s own budget paperwork said in 2001 with their first mini-budget on page 3 of the Budget Paper No 3, Chapter 1, Overview:
- During the mid to late 1990s, the Territory economy outperformed the rest of Australia.
Why would the government be so focused on trying to spin things to their advantage they totally lose sight of their role, which is to govern for the good order and for the people of the Northern Territory? It has now become so much about message it has nothing to do with reality. Even their own budget papers in 2001 clearly demonstrated that during the late to mid-1990s the Territory economy was outperforming.
There were years of strong growth. Yes, in 2000-01 as part of the natural cycles which have been following the Territory economy for decades, there was a downturn. This happens. It will continue to happen into the future; economies all over the world do it. The Chief Minister does not bother to mention any of this because it is all about how we make the story look. However, in Chapter 1 of that overview on page 1, there is an interesting comment that belies a little as to the priorities of this government. This is the comment:
- Total initiatives were estimated to cost $19.6m in 2001-02 rising to $69m in 2004-05, with the cost of these initiatives being met through a combination of savings identified in a number of specific areas and reduced capital works expenditure.
In the 2001 mini-budget, the Northern Territory government determined it would reduce capital works expenditure. Part of the capital works expenditure process includes doing things - as was done at the time; I know the system has changed now – such as completing headworks, when the rapacious and evil CLP government would go around releasing land to developers. Shock, horror! Awful, dreadful things! We heard the quote the Leader of the Opposition used. In fact, it is worth visiting once again:
- We could have done what previous governments have always done in the Territory, which is just release the land to developers. We are not doing that this time because we want to address the need in the marketplace without distorting the market.
I could not think of a more satisfying way to distort a marketplace than withholding necessary capital works expenditure as described in the 2001 mini-budget, as well as compounding short-term world view with an approach of ‘We are not going to release land, therefore, we do not have to spend money on capital works expenditure’. Whilst I realise there is a five-year space between those two particular comments, you can see a consistent philosophy operating: ‘We are not going to do that’. The given excuse was because ‘We did not want to distort the marketplace’. The fact is ‘We wanted to engage in those things which are more important to us as lefties’; that is, ‘We wanted to expend the money on social expenditure’.
They had a mandate to do so. When they were elected to office, they had a mandate to make these determinations. It is not that they lied about it; they put it in their 2001 mini-budget. However, they did so in the face of multiple warnings from this side of the House and other areas. Those warnings were saying: ‘You need to start preparing yourself to release land. You need to start preparing yourself to have headworks and capital infrastructure in place’. Added to that: ‘You need to position yourself in such a fashion which leaves large amounts of GST revenue - which is coming through in amounts much greater than your own Treasury even dared, in its wildest dreams, suggest - to position yourself in such a way so you can meet the upturn when the upturn comes’.
A sensible government would have said: ‘Let us rein in on the social expenditure a little’. I am not saying they should not have done it; I am saying rein in on the social expenditure. Or even: ‘Let us just keep the windfalls. Let us actually stick to our budgets and not spend the windfalls when they come in’. That alone would have freed $1.2bn over the first seven years of this particular government. However, they did not choose to do that; they chose to spend every dollar as it came in.
I note the Chief Minister said: ‘In the 2009-10 Budget, the Territory government invested $1.3bn in infrastructure’. True. The vast majority of it - no, a large slice of it, to be more correct – is federal money and another part of it is borrowings. Despite the fact this government has received a huge amount of extra money our budget currently is about twice – in fact, more than twice – the amount of the last CLP budget in expenditure. They could have squirreled a bit of it away, actually aimed to reduce debt to zero - as the federal government has done in the period following from 1996 - and positioned themselves so, if they had to go back and borrow - shock, horror, actually saved some money; become a little firmer and saved some money - they would be in a much better position than to have had to rack it all up on the credit card, which is what they are doing now.
I visit this quote again from the government, because the Chief Minister said he has invested $1.3bn - and I am sure that I heard him and the Treasurer say this was the biggest expenditure in history of the Northern Territory. It is an interesting figure, $1.3bn. From the 2001 mini-budget, I quote from page 4 of Budget Paper No 3, Economic And Fiscal Outlook:
- Growth will be driven by domestic factors, notably, construction of the $1.3bn Alice Springs to Darwin railway …
Yet, the minister is claiming this $1.3bn on infrastructure is the big spend. I am curious to find out what they classify the railway to be, if it was not an infrastructure project? Maybe it was a social project of some sort. I realise, of course, the truth is the railway expenditure was over a couple of budgets. Nevertheless, it is all about dressing it up and making it appear like something it is not.
The government claims Bellamack is this great result. It is not a good result for government. Even during the election campaign, I heard the Planning minister, the now Treasurer, claim on at least one occasion, Bellamack would be turning off blocks by early 2009. It did not happen. The goal was not achieved. We heard from the Leader of the Opposition who pointed out the Treasurer was talking about Bellamack land releases in 2007. The problem for this government is they have now exhausted their credibility in the public mind. Every utterance, everything which is jammed into the letterboxes, everything they see on television presented by this government, even if it is true, is now met with a level of cynicism. People are indifferent to the capacity of this government to provide them with good leadership. The reason they are indifferent is because they have become so used to having expectations developed, only to have them dashed because the capacity to deliver does not live up to the spin. It has led Territorians to a place where, after hearing this government, or watching this government’s lips move, they no longer think to themselves: ‘Yes, I believe what I am being told’.
When you create a chasm between announcement and result, which becomes increasingly wide as the level of spin becomes increasingly hysterical, it soon becomes impossible to bridge the credibility gap. This government has presented itself, particularly in the last few months, as a government barely capable of keeping itself together, with members jumping in and out of government, members leaving, and all sorts of things occurring. It is all about management - how we manage this, how do we manage our way through this? It is all about how we can get the message managed so the actual results have failed to matter at all. Well, the real results are not being felt by anybody in this Chamber. The real results are being felt by those people who have to sleep in cars, who have to sleep in friends’ spare rooms because, as employees in a jurisdiction where they are the highest average full-time weekly earners in the country, they still are unable to meet the basic necessities of life, such as food and shelter.
This government has prided itself on its social programs. The assumption amongst the left in this country continues to be that social programs are something you do through various departments and service delivery. I argue the best social program you can engage in is one which provides shelter for people and the capacity to make a living. This government mouths platitudes about being able to provide a living to Territorians, but does nothing to address the fundamentals.
I heard the Chief Minister talk about Aboriginal employment and education and, whilst I accept education is an important component of employment, it is not the only component. You can get as many people educated as you like in Ntaria or Hermannsburg, and it will not make one jot of difference if the jobs are not there. This means there needs to be fundamental reform of the land ownership and management systems which currently exist on land trusts. I have said this now 1000 times in this House, and I will continue to say it. Whilst we continually talk about leases, lease arrangements, and those things, for goodness sake, make it happen. If it is not within your capacity as a government to make it happen, then bring pressure to bear on those governments in whose area of authority it is to make this happen. So, when people get an education in Ntaria, there is a job at the other end because - shock, horror! - some company, not even an Aboriginal company, takes the time to invest in building a business in Ntaria.
I would love to see Aboriginal people become part of the general economy of this country. It was the comment I made in 1997 when I came into this House, and started saying we cannot afford to lower this glass dome over Aboriginal people. Yet, we continue to do so by isolating them with a system of land management and ownership which is designed to prevent effective investment on their land. People forget this is a product of the 1970s. This is a product of Justice Woodward’s Royal Commission where he tried to build a fence around Aboriginal people and protect them. That fence has now become their prison. We can bleat and talk about all these great opportunities we are giving Aboriginal people but, you will not start to see some developments unless we allow them some form of private property ownership rights - albeit if it is just leases; some sort of proprietary right over access and egress from property. Aboriginal people should not be isolated from the world of investment as they currently are. We are fiddling; we continue to fiddle while Rome burns.
SIHIP has just brought into sharp relief Aboriginal degradation in the bush. We have to build them houses. How much better would it be if they just built their own houses because they had a job and they could actually get a bank loan to fund this house because there was a 99-year lease or a perpetual lease underneath the house they were trying to build, supported by the job? That is how economies work. I often find myself fascinated by the debate about the redistribution of wealth - who has wealth and who has not when it pertains to Aboriginal people. It is a pointless conversation to have until such time as you generate some wealth. It is purely academic. Until Aboriginal land starts to generate wealth for Aboriginal people, whether you want to redistribute that wealth or not, you are not going to get anywhere. We pour billions of dollars into these remote communities - for no result.
Bureaucracies and private businesses on government funds and contracts who receive grants to do something, just soak up all this money, and it gets pissed up against a wall. I am wholly sick of just watching this same circular argument go forward. I note the Chief Minister said he has settled the Kenbi land claim so the Cox Peninsula can be used for development over the medium to longer term. Why not the short term? Why can they not get the thing signed off by the federal minister - I understand it is sitting in her in-tray at the moment; has been there for a while - and start releasing some of that land? Get it involved …
Mr Knight: It has been in your in-tray for eight years. It sat in the federal Coalition’s in-tray for eight years.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, and what a stupid idea that was. I will pick up on this interjection. You are absolutely right. What a disgrace it was! What an absolute disgrace and it continues to be a disgrace! And what are you doing about it? You are just sitting on your bum doing nothing, mate!
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, I would like you to withdraw that comment, and direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, Madam Speaker, I withdraw the comment. It is incredible this minister has the audacity to play with these issues. He sits there as the member who wants to see housing in places like Wadeye and he wants to play the blame game. I agree: the federal government buggered it up! I absolutely agree. I can tell you something: unless people like him, with his ministerial commission, get off his backside and go down and make these things happen, they will continue to fail. It is this minister’s job. I do not care about the politics of it, I care about the results. I wish this minister would do the same.
Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, interesting outburst! I enjoy it when John gets a fire in his belly!
Of the many factors that underpin our capacity to deal with future challenges such as developing the policies needed to promote the growth of the Territory, perhaps the most important is the health of our people. Our government has an unshakeable commitment to a healthy Territory. That is why we are working on the demands of today by developing workable plans to best meet the challenges of the future. It is well documented we have already invested heavily in providing more doctors, nurses, hospital beds and infrastructure. Having the right number of technical staff and the latest medical equipment in our five hospitals is vital to support people who require acute care; to provide the wide range of surgery now available in the Northern Territory.
Supporting the health care needs of people in remote communities will continue to be a special priority for our government. Aboriginal people have an unacceptably high burden of disease and my department continues to work closely with partner organisations and communities to deliver primary health care support in a timely manner. At this historic time in the Australian health care debate – indeed, the debate which has been heard in all developed nations - the purpose is as much in planning for people’s wellness as of treating illness. Of course, both areas are important but it is the field of illness prevention I wish to focus on today.
Planning for the future is not just about allocating more resources and developing more facilities. It is also about ensuring we get the mix of services and facilities right, and maintaining the correct balance into the future in order to provide Territorians with quality health services which are both safe and sustainable. Getting future planning right always entails making tough decisions around the best allocation and mix of resources. This can only be done whilst using the best possible evidence and information. Health can be an emotive area, and we must, as a government, understand people’s needs and have an empathy for what they feel. Yet, it is important to make decisions based on the facts and around proper planning, and to explain why we are acting the way we are. That is the reason for my words in this place today. No services, however urgently required, can be delivered effectively without developing the right framework.
Of our many and varied challenges the greatest is the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Territorians. While Aboriginal Territorians make up about 30% of our population, they use about 50% of our medical resources. We must continue our work around bridging the gap in health outcomes and life expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Territorians. By further closing this gap, we will ensure more Indigenous Territorians can fulfil their true potential and, in so doing, we will improve the capacity for more Indigenous Territorians to actively participate in the Territory economy.
Central to this aim is a requirement to shape a framework which gives Aboriginal people a greater say in development and management of primary health care and community care services. We have to do this in a way which not only meets the aspirations of Indigenous Territorians, but is consistent with the delivery of effective and efficient health systems. One of the partnerships we have developed to assist this end is between the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance of the Northern Territory (AMSANT), the Australian government, and ourselves.
I am pleased to say we are already beginning to see the benefits of planning around Indigenous health outcomes. This is, in part, because the Territory spends three times more on preventative health than the rest of the country on a per capita basis. Life expectancy has improved for Aboriginal women by three years. Infant mortality has improved for Aboriginal children by 35%. Anaemia in Aboriginal children living in remote communities has fallen from almost 50% in 1999 to the most recent reports of below 30%. Many of these achievements may be out of sight for the general population, even the media, but they are firmly on this government’s radar. We will continue to closely monitor all the good work which has been done and the positive outcomes that have been achieved.
Another example is cervical cancer. The rate of this disease has declined in Territory women by 61%. There has been an even more dramatic decline in mortality from cervical cancer, falling by 64% in non-Aboriginal women, and by 92% for Aboriginal women between 1991 and 2003. While we are experiencing success in tackling Aboriginal health challenges, we recognise we have a long way to go. Future success requires solid, ongoing work and the development of further strategic alliances and investment.
I am also pleased to note, for the first time, we have seen the life expectancy of Aboriginal Territorians on dialysis equate with that of other Australians with end-stage renal failure. Just a few years ago, there was a seven-year difference in the life expectancy between Territorians on dialysis and those of other Australians on dialysis. This success is in no small part due to the significant investment of this government in renal dialysis over the last eight years. As part of ongoing planning around renal dialysis, in Budget 2007-08 we announced a major new investment in renal services, with $24.4m over four years to 2011 to provide improved services. While we continue to plan for further growth in renal dialysis demand in coming years, it is vital we also work with Aboriginal Territorians to develop preventative health strategies which will ensure, in time, we will turn around the Territory’s renal dialysis challenge.
Proper planning and delivery of health services requires that a solid base be established. The work this government has done since 2001 in regard to health service delivery ensures our plans for the future are based on solid foundations. In Budget 2009-10, the Labor government delivered the Territory’s first billion-dollar Health and Families budget. At $1.05bn, Health and Families funding has more than doubled; it is up by 117% from when we came to government. The extra funding has translated to real investment in frontline staff and resources. This includes an extra 179 doctors, an extra 632 nurses, an extra 127 fully-funded hospital beds, and significant reduction of overdue elective surgery waiting lists.
We heard the Chief Minister talk about the Territory’s remarkable growth - particularly that experienced in the Top End in recent years. Of course, growth can come with costs and, in the field of health, this cost can be high, so it is even more important to get the planning right. This growth demands health planning to provide better prevention measures, better primary health care, better health facilities, better specialist care, better clinical workforce, and better health technology.
As you would know, each year the Australian government publishes a report on the performance of hospitals across Australia called The State of Our Public Hospitals. The latest such report, published in June this year, again highlights how the Territory’s hospitals have further expanded the level of care provided to manage the acute health needs of Territorians. We have the most public hospital beds per weighted population. In 2007-08, the Northern Territory had an average of 3.6 public hospital beds per 1000 population – well above the national average of 2.5 beds. Northern Territory hospitals have the busiest emergency departments in Australia, with 740 presentations per 1000 weighted population, which is more than double the national average of 321. This means Royal Darwin Hospital’s emergency department is even busier than the biggest hospitals in Sydney or Melbourne. The Northern Territory is well ahead of other jurisdictions, with 510 hospital patient admissions per 1000 population. This is nearly three times the national average of 184 admissions per 1000 population. This level of demand, coupled with our strong population growth, presents genuine challenges into the future.
The Territory employs the most hospital doctors and nurses in Australia per weighted population. In Budget 2009-10, a record $421m investment has been made in our hospitals. The government is preparing to undertake a project to plan the model and proposed implementation and delivery of hospital services across the Northern Territory for the next 20 years. This will take into account demographic, morbidity, burden of disease, technology, and workforce projections over the next 20 years.
The blueprint will need to clearly identify links with health and community services provided outside the Northern Territory hospital network, including non-hospital service provision and non-government organisations delivering health and community services. A tender process has been concluded, and I will soon be able to announce the name of a highly-regarded company which will be undertaking this important study. The blueprint will provide us with a strategic and systematic approach to the development of hospital services in the Territory for the next 20 years. I am expecting the blueprint for hospital services to be on my desk by the middle of next year.
This future blueprint for ongoing delivery of hospital services will consider a series of priorities including:
projected population demographics;
consideration of the status of the Northern Territory’s public hospitals;
estimates of the projected volume, speciality, type and level of hospital service required by region;
identification of hospital services and specialities which should be provided in the Territory and those which should be referred to larger jurisdictions;
identifying links and potential streamlining of hospital services with government and non-government health and community services;
the changing nature and composition of our hospital workforce; and
One key priority of the project will be an analysis and consideration of the scope and range of services for the proposed Palmerston hospital. While speaking about hospitals, I want to make it plain, as Health Minister, I do not believe it is in the interests of Territorians for Canberra bureaucrats to be running our hospitals in the future. It has happened before, and Territorians who have been around for a while will recall it was not a success. Territorians can do the job more effectively, and I want to warn federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, through the National Health Reform Agenda, to ensure Territory hospitals will continue to be run by Territorians into the future. I will again discuss this issue, together with other important health topics, when minister Roxon visits the Territory early next month.
We have heard the Chief Minister speak about the population growth projections for Palmerston. Importantly, the construction process for the new facility for the Palmerston GP Super Clinic is under way, with Norbuilt being awarded the tender in July. Planning approval process is now under way, and we expect the facility to be operational mid-2010. Once operational, the super clinic will provide important health services in the region: 24-hour medical services; outpatient medical specialist services from Royal Darwin Hospital; coordinated care for people with chronic diseases and complex care needs; more allied health services for children and aged or disabled people; and dental services.
As I have said, along with ensuring health service delivery and system improvement which focuses on patient welfare, we must develop plans around health promotion and health prevention strategies. To promote, protect and improve the wellbeing of Territorians into the future, we must work in partnership with individuals, families and the community to get the best possible results in this area. That means working in key areas such as tobacco and alcohol control, as well as system-wide safety and quality protocols. Tobacco and alcohol-related hospital admissions place an unnecessary burden on our health system, and our planning around the future of health services must, and will, take into account ways of reducing this demand. In short, we have to plan to keep more Territorians out of hospital, and to work with Territorians to ensure a successful partnership which can make this happen.
The key to improving health outcomes into the future is dependent on a strong focus on the promotion of good health, adopting healthy behaviours, controlling the spread of disease and, of course, minimising harm and injury. The federal government’s Health Reform Agenda recognises there needs to be a greater emphasis on focusing on wellness, health promotion, primary health care, and illness prevention - and the Territory government agrees with this view. Our focus into the future will be on: health promotion and minimising the unhealthy behaviours and their impacts; improved health awareness on preventable chronic diseases so as to reduce cost pressures on our health system; and closing the gap in health outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Territorians.
That will require us to be promoting good health and managing chronic disease; improving men’s health; building a healthier workforce; promoting safety, reducing injuries and suicides; preventing outbreaks of disease; and addressing climate change impacts on the health and wellbeing of Territorians.
The Territory has a very high proportion of young people. Indeed, some 24.5% of our total population is under 14 years of age. In laying the foundations for a more healthy Territory, it is important we focus on our young. Good health outcomes in adult life must be planned for and implemented during childhood. So, into the future we are planning for a sharper focus on early detection and management of health and developmental problems to ensure a positive impact on current and future health of young Territorians.
Good antenatal care is vital to help optimise maternal and birth outcomes, and provide more Territory children with a good start in life. It must be accompanied by services to support parents, promote health childhood development and learning. In our first term, this government introduced the Child Health Initiative with $2.2m recurrent for the largest expansion ever of child health services across the Territory. This program has seen more child health nurses, Aboriginal Health Workers and nutritionists engaged to improve the health of our children.
We introduced the Growth Assessment and Action and Healthy School Aged Kids screening programs with 80% uptake, and our child immunisation rates are amongst the highest in Australia. The development of suitable approaches to antenatal care will provide more Territory children with a good start in life.
As I already mentioned, the consumption of alcohol takes a toll on the health of too many Territorians and places a burden on our health system. Smoking is the single greatest risk factor for disease in the Territory. It contributes to nearly 20% of all adult deaths. Aboriginal Territorians are at particular risk of smoking-related illness and death. The smoking rate among Aboriginal Territorians is 55.9%, and 31.3% among non-Indigenous Territorians. Territorians are also consuming high levels of alcohol. The alcohol-related death rate in the Territory is three times the national average.
Our future health plans must target smoking, alcohol and other substance abuse. This will require for planning around developing and delivering targeted health promotion and educational strategies and messages; assisting in the development and implementation of effective legislation and policy, including having legislative and clinical responsibility under the Volatile Substance Abuse Prevention Act, Tobacco Control Act, and Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act. It will also require offering a range of treatment and rehabilitation services and acute and primary health care.
We must continue to invest in improving the health of Territorians and the challenge of growth the Chief Minister has referred to. We can only achieve this by employing policies, strategies and initiatives which are grounded in the right preparatory framework. That framework is in place and we have begun the planning which we are confident will meet the health challenge thrown up by the Territory’s unique and now growing population.
Madam Speaker, I also wish to touch upon the growth of our primary industry, fisheries and resource sectors, some of the challenges this presents, the opportunities on offer and, importantly, what we are doing to grow the Territory.
Our mining and exploration sector will remain as a key driver of the Northern Territory’s economy. It accounts for around one-quarter of the Territory’s economy and employs around 4000 people. Mining companies are facing economic difficulties through low commodity prices and significant challenges in raising finance from the markets.
When it comes to access to capital, our $14.4m exploration investment attraction strategy will ensure the Territory will remain a preferred destination for exploration. Bringing Forward Discovery includes:
$11m over four years to provide data to industry players to stimulate exploration and reduce risk in greenfield areas;
We are undertaking strategic investments to encourage exploration now so we are well placed for the future. It is vital we invest in attracting exploration to the Territory - as there is a lag between exploration on the ground and the subsequent development of a mine - which will continue to underpin our economy into the future.
It is also why we are investing in infrastructure, particularly in the regions, in providing and upgrading our transport networks. When it comes to encouraging exploration and investment in the Territory, our China and Japan investment strategies are really having an impact.
Thanks to our China Investment Attraction Strategy, a venture agreement between Arafura Resources and East China Exploration and Development Bureau was signed at Parliament House in April. Funds raised through the joint venture will allow Arafura Resources to continue its exploration program, and also allow the Nolan’s rare earth project to continue to proceed with its feasibility studies and progress towards development in 2010.
We have not put all our eggs in one basket when it comes to investment attraction strategies. Given the success of the China investment strategy we also decided it was necessary to develop a Japan investment strategy. As part of this strategy, we have focused on building relationships with a key partner the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation, JOGMEC, which is a government organisation responsible for ensuring stable supply of oil and gas and nonferrous metal to Japan. This gives us access to advice on how to best target our programs to meet the specific needs of the Japanese market. JOGMEC supported two Northern Territory investment seminars in Tokyo in May 2008 and 2009, and the first Northern Territory Uranium Investment Seminar in Australia that was held before the Australian Uranium Conference in Fremantle in July 2009. One key outcome is the $17m joint venture between Western Desert Resources and Itochu Corporation to explore and develop the Roper Bar iron ore project.
By maintaining a healthy level of mineral exploration during the downturn, the Territory will be ideally placed to take maximum advantage of the next global upturn in the resources industry when it, inevitably, comes. This can only occur by making the Territory a preferred destination for the relatively limited funds currently available for exploration investment. This remains a priority for the Territory government through the Bringing Forward Discovery strategy.
Our primary industry sector continues to grow. The overall value was $584.2m in 2008-09, a rise of 9.9% on the previous year. The outlook is for a similar level of growth over the next few years. Pastoral production will continue as the mainstay of the primary industry sector and, particularly in the Top End, significant growth in production is foreshadowed.
The Indonesian market for Territory livestock is expected to remain buoyant. Exploring alternative market outlets for Territory cattle remains a priority for both industry and government, given our current reliance on a single market. Just last week, I witnessed the signing of an agreement between the North Australian Cattle Company and Vietnam’s trading and investment company to export 1000 head of cattle as a trial shipment. This shipment is the culmination of two years of work by government and industry.
When it comes to our horticultural sector, the overall value of the industry has doubled from around $95m in 2005-06 to more than an estimated $192m in 2008-09 - so we must be doing something right. The growth has been driven by increases in the value of our mango, melons and vegetable crops.
Climate change, access to land and water, biosecurity, labour requirements and infrastructure will continue as key issues confronting our primary industry sectors. Increasingly, the nation is looking to the north as water security and climate change impacts on southern producers. The Territory is well placed to take advantage of the opportunities to build upon the success of the existing industry base.
As we all know, fishing continues to be ‘the lure of the Territory’ and makes an important contribution to our great Territory lifestyle, our community and our economy. Recreational fishing is a way of life for many Territorians. We recognise how important recreational fishing is. We have a comprehensive plan to ensure its growing popularity does not pose a threat to its future sustainability. It is simply too important to leave it to chance.
Prominent among these is the buying back of commercial fishing licences and setting aside areas for recreational fishing. Three commercial barramundi licences have already been bought back and we are committed to removing a further three licences during this term. I am considering more than 230 submissions received about proposed closures to commercial fishers.
We have commenced a comprehensive survey of recreational fishing throughout the Territory to provide important information on catch, effort, participation and expenditure of both local and visiting anglers. This survey will assist in ensuring our recreational fishery remains sustainable into the future and continues to provide high-quality fishing opportunities. The information gathered through this survey will allow us to better plan for the future of fishing in the Territory.
A community-based working group has been established to compile a recreational fishing development plan. This will be an important document which will set the strategic directions for recreational fishing for the next five to 10 years. It will provide the road map for the future development of recreational fishing. It is important we manage the growing popularity of recreational fishing and protect the resource on which it depends. Pressures on fish stocks are increasing through growing numbers of recreational fishers and affordable technology such as bigger boats, global positioning systems, and colour sounders. I recently announced a number of new changes to recreational fishing controls to ensure future generations can also enjoy the unparalleled recreational fishing experience available today. These include a reduction in the possession limits for Spanish mackerel and black jewfish, and new limits for the take of sharks and cherabin. The new controls will commence in January 2010.
We are committed to improving facilities for recreational fishers, given the growing popularity of fishing and the increasing levels of boat ownership. In 2008, we increased annual infrastructure funding from $500 000 to $1m over four years, and we have already achieved a great deal including the new $4.6m East Arm boat ramp and commencing a $4m upgrade of the Palmerston boat ramp. When it comes to the Blue Mud Bay decision, we have a plan which will see anglers, Indigenous stakeholders, the fishing charter industry and the commercial sector negotiate a win/win outcome. In responding to the challenges and taking advantage of the opportunities which arise, we will ensure fishing remains the lure of the Territory
Madam Speaker, you heard the Chief Minister detail the magnitude of the population increase the Territory is expecting in coming years. As he said, the population forecast for the 25 years to 2030 is expected to be another 55% more people calling the Territory home. This remarkable level of population increase, coupled with the Territory’s unique demographics, will present all future governments with genuine challenges. That is why it is vital this government continues with the planning work it has committed to, so we can continue to provide an appropriate level of services to meet the challenges of the growth which will come the Territory’s way in the next 20 or so years.
Madam Speaker, I support the statement by the Chief Minister.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I thought long and hard about these sittings we are coming into. As with the Leader of the Opposition, I have had many people come into my office in tears about the situations they now find themselves in because of the lack of planning and good management by this government. I thought long and hard about how this government was going to respond to what they must have known was going to be a clear focus from this side of the House on the terrible mess they have us in. I thought: ‘How are they going to respond? What are they going to do?’ So, here we have it. We have a ministerial statement from the Chief Minister. When I heard about this I thought: ‘They are going to try to hit the ground running with all the great things they have done’ when, in reality, the average person out there has just about given up on all the spin.
I drew a little picture on this. I do not know if you can see it, but I have here the government, the foundation of spin and, then, all the voters in the electorates. They can clearly see the sand is eroding away from this government palace. They can see the results are not there. I wondered how they were going to respond. How were they going to come out and spin it so fast they could prove to all the people out there in voter land they were solid; that the foundation was not being eroded? I really thought this ministerial statement would have addressed some of those concerns. I have been disappointed again because it is full of more spin - more spin from this government which seems to just survive on spin.
I will talk about a few things I picked up in the Chief Minister’s statement where he talked about the growth of the Territory, the opportunities it provides, and the challenges. Many of these challenges are self-created because they are being created because of one thing - and we know what that is: the lack of land release. The Chief Minister also said he would report on the government’s progress from time to time in parliament. In fact, the previous media releases have indicated a more specific time frame. However, today they used ‘from time to time’ because that sounds like a little more spin. Also, the use of figures from the Bureau of Statistics and other statistical agencies are used ‘from time to time’. I find it interesting statistics can be used both in a positive and negative. The same figures, depending on who wants to use them and how they are used, can both show positive and negative.
On one hand, we hear government say when they took over things were in dire straits and, apparently, it was through their good government we had an economic turnaround which had nothing to do with the resources boom or anything like that but, purely and simply, their government policies. Then, they turn around and use the same statistics of: ‘Oh, now we are growing. We are growing and are one of the very few places in the world that is growing’. Unfortunately, they now find themselves in a crisis because they did not plan for it.
You also have to remember the figures we often get through the Bureau of Statistics are a snapshot at a given time, and many of these figures will come out from the 2006 Census. Times have changed; things have moved considerably since 2006. The Leader of the Opposition stated we have seen, even in 2007, clear evidence that we were already talking about a crisis in land release. What are we in today? 2009 and, yes, we do see work finally happening in suburbs like Bellamack. We do see work happing in places like Johnston. However, the reality is this should have happened years ago - like the schooling in Palmerston.
It is fantastic that, eventually, we will have a new middle school in Palmerston and a new primary school. We have been yearning for that for many years. I still talk about those three-odd years the tap turned off in Palmerston and there was no growth in relation to land release or growth in relation to schools - no growth whatsoever; and no indication from this government they wanted to do, or were willing to do, anything about it. Now, because of the arrangement in place, we can see things are starting to move forward.
However, we are moving forward at the same time as people are choking. The next time someone comes into my office in tears and explains to me their personal circumstances, I will simply tell them: ‘It is okay, you are just suffering a little “housing stress”’. And then, when I get myself off the floor from being knocked out for being a smart ‘a’, I will tell them: ‘Well, that is exactly what the Chief Minister said - it is just housing stress. We are just suffering a little housing stress’. Well, let me tell you, some of the stories of some of the horrible predicaments people are in today are certainly a little more then ‘housing stress’.
The report also suggests the strength in the Territory economy and the Territory’s lifestyle appeal. What it does not talk about is the 20% rise in power and water costs; the power failures; the high rents people pay; no land being released in a timely manner; and, of course, the general cost of living. However, they do say we are in a good position economically. They say we are leading the pack; in fact, we have had ministers say we are in the best position of probably any state or territory. But, then you come out and tell the public service you are going to cap their wages at 2.5%. So, on the one hand you are saying we are doing very well but, on the other hand, you are telling the public servants: ‘Sorry, we are going to cap any pay rises to 2.5%’. That is such a slap in the face for all public servants in the Northern Territory, given it is their hard work which has probably helped you deal with the current situation.
It says in the statement the Chief Minster is pleased to report, in 2008, the nett population gain from interstate was 691, with the figure, hopefully, set to be surpassed this year. Again, as the Leader of the Opposition said, growth is fantastic, but what are they moving into? Tell me, if we have 691 more people staying in the Territory this year, where are they going to live?
Apparently, there are still people leaving the Northern Territory. I was speaking to a refrigeration mechanic a few weeks ago who was earning around $300 a week more than he could earn in Adelaide. He was paying $530 a week rent for a three-bedroom home in Gunn and, with a one-income family, with overtime he was still earning about $20 000 a year more than he was earning in Adelaide. He has now packed up with his family and left – a refrigeration mechanic, and we all know we need as many skilled labourers here as we can, particularly in that area. He was earning $20 000 more a year in the Northern Territory - this place you say has lifestyle - but he has packed up and left to take his family back to Adelaide because he cannot afford to live here.
The current population projections, as it says in the statement, is the greater Darwin and Palmerston population is likely to increase by 19 000 people to 133 000 by 2013. Recently, the Chief Minister said we needed 1700 blocks a year just to keep abreast of growth. We are now in 2009, and what have we had released this year? What will we have released by Christmas? It will not be the 1700 blocks which are needed just to keep up with growth; it is nowhere near enough, and it is too late for many because of high prices. In fact, there are probably many people out there who have invested at a time when houses are at the cost they are today and, given the likelihood of interest rates going up and the way the economic cycle works, they are going to find themselves in increasing instability, and in positions where they, perhaps, will not be able to pay these high mortgages because of the price of houses today.
The statement states on page 7:
- The second clear growth hot spot in the Territory is in remote communities. Here, the population growth has been trending upwards for some time.
How can it be a hot spot when it has been trending upwards for some time? Places such as Yirrkala, Numbulwar, and Gapuwiyak have growth of 35%, 29%, and 24%. Yet, we have SIHIP, an opportunity two years ago from this government to take money which was offered by the federal government – two years ago and not a house. Yet, we are talking about a hot spot and a trend upwards. It is all here and, yet, two years later there is still not a house on the ground.
You talk about the high price of land and housing in our regional towns such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine. It all comes down to land release; there has not been anywhere near enough.
The Chief Minister went on to say he wants to focus on infrastructure, engaging Indigenous communities, and services for the aged. I sincerely trust this is truthful, but I believe it is more spin. The average Territorian, after eight years, has had enough of the spin and the failures of this government. Why I believe it is more spin is because you only have to go over the page and he brags about $1.3bn in infrastructure. That has been brought up time and time again by this government, when we know many of those works are revoted and there is also federal money in it. But you put it out there like you are doing so much to deliver for Territorians.
It then goes on to say in 2001 your budget was $334m in infrastructure and it has trebled in eight years. I really want you to look at the outcomes. You have trebled the money, but what are the outcomes? Something is seriously wrong if you can spend three times the amount and get little or nothing in return, or lead us to where we are today.
The statement says housing Territorians is a matter of ongoing high level action. Is this a recent phenomenon, or is it something government should be focused on for many years to come? I point to this document where it says by 2013, on present calculations, Darwin and Palmerston will have around 6000 lots released. Sounds great, but your own figures say 1700 a year. Over a five-year period, from 2008 to 2013, that will mean you need 8500 lots. You are 2500 lots short of your own calculations. What kind of planning is that?
The Chief Minister talked about accelerating land release and development, and there are a number of changes here. The DCA now meets fortnightly and longer-term planning for headworks. All of these things you feel should have been there in the first place. None of these would be needed today if it was managed better. The Chief Minister also alluded to planning areas with higher density living such as duplexes and triplexes, as well as high-rise zoning. I give a warning here: watch the rezoning. If anyone lives anywhere near land zoned for community use, watch out. At the moment in the suburb of Bakewell, we have a lot of land zoned community use and, without any consultation whatsoever with the residents in that area, this government is planning to build a Territory Housing unit complex. No one disagrees we should be building or replacing Territory Housing units, but to take land zoned for community use and change it, without any consultation with people in the area, is abysmal planning by this government. In fact, it is not planning at all.
We all know when towns and cities are planned, areas are put aside for hospitals, schools, parks, land and community use. When people are investing in those areas they look at the land titles, the land usage and they might choose to actually live somewhere because they are living next door to an area of community use. Tragically here, people have invested and now they are going to be living next door to a Territory Housing complex. Most people would not be concerned, unless they understood how this government manages Territory Housing units. Have a look at the antisocial behaviour which has occurred over many years. The socks need to be pulled up in this area.
I received a letter recently from the Minister for Housing regarding a number of issues, including I had alluded to the fact a unit had been vacant since November last year until July this year. I raised it in parliament before, suggesting it needs to be managed better. We need to be able to get people out of these homes; clean them up and put people back into them - have a quick turnaround similar to the private industry. In the letter from the minister he said:
- In regards to your reference to a public housing unit vacant in Altair Court, Woodroffe, between November 2008 and July 2009, I am advised that no particular unit was left vacant for repairs in this locality during the time.
I am happy to table these photos I took of that unit which was vacant for that time. I do not know what the information is the minister is getting. It is quite remarkable given, here on the front door, it has a little Territory Housing ‘Trespassers will be prosecuted’ notice. I am assuming the department knew that this unit was vacant. Why the minister is sending me letters to say words to the contrary, I do not know. It is misleading.
We need more public housing; no one disagrees. However, we have seen the issue at Bakewell with no consultation. We have seen the minister in charge not even aware of what goes on in the street; the mismanagement is unbelievable. In any other jurisdiction, I say the minister would have been sacked long ago. In fact, recently on a television interview, the minister was caught out providing misleading information. He was caught out by another reporter. Yet, the relationship between this government and our local media is so tight the best the Northern Territory News could do the next day was to state ‘the minister conceded’. You know what? In any other forum, in any other business, for someone to knowingly mislead anyone else, it is called a lie. I am not saying that here, but I am saying when you mislead someone, you are lying to them …
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, if I could interrupt for a moment. I did not hear but the Table Office advises that you did not seek leave to table those photos. If that is the case, could you seek leave to do so?
Mr CHANDLER: Sorry. I seek leave to table these photos.
Leave granted.
Mr CHANDLER: The Chief Minister speaks highly and appears proud of the results of his government to date when, as I said earlier, the average person out there can see it has eroded to the stage now it is falling down around them. Whether they believe their own spin, I am just not sure how it works.
There are a number of things happening out there and, I believe, in some cases, there are some ministers who really lack the foresight, the leadership, or the ability to do what is right for Territorians. We are talking about an emergency with public housing - about housing people in dire straights. I found it interesting, when the opposition released its emergency housing plan which involved a block of land in Yarrawonga which, of course, is private land, at that stage the member for Nelson said he did not want to see any housing plan which involved renting land from a private developer, and saw fit to say it should be government land and we can put the infrastructure in. Well, we have seen the evidence of how long it takes this government to do anything.
How in the world we are going to get people housed before the Wet Season is beyond me. Here was a perfect plan. It was a rather strange statement. Tell me how many offices, how many public buildings, are actually owned by government? Most of them are rented. My office certainly is; it is not one the government owns. The government rents many properties. They came out with a bizarre statement that I just do not understand.
We are talking an emergency here, and we had an opportunity where we could have had at least 60 families off the street before the Wet Season. It is not good enough. I have countless more I could mention, but I can see the clock is going to beat me.
I looked at the school part of the statement, and one of the things I missed was the fact kids with special needs miss out again. There is nothing in this at all about children in our schools with special needs. Yet, you say you are going to do all these marvellous things. You will look after the average people in the community. This government again lets Territorians down ...
Mr STYLES: Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek an extension of time for the member for Brennan pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed.
Mr CHANDLER: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
We have seen an investment in roads in recent times, yet the Chief Minister said they have been doing this over the last eight years. I have seen very little work on our roads system in the last eight years. Yes, it is fantastic to look around today and see all these new slip lanes being put in, and the work which has been started on Tiger Brennan Drive at great cost. It could have been done years ago for far less, but if you leave things to the last minute, it costs you more. You see these companies out there trying to get Johnston and Bellamack up and going - working day and night with the floodlights lighting up the forest - because this government needs it done quickly. I wonder what it is costing Territorians, the taxpayers. It is good to see it is finally happening.
The statement also said members will be aware of the comprehensive essential services investment this government has put into place. It talked about the $1.2bn already spent, or going to be spent, on infrastructure. Well, I would like to know a little about our power infrastructure but, of course, this open and accountable government would not even allow me to do a tour of the Weddell or the Channel Island Power Stations. How I am supposed to get that information is beyond me. Oh, yes, you can nod your head. Nod your head, yes. Very good. Very, very mature.
The statement talked about the infrastructure deficit in remote towns and communities. ‘We have been urgently working to reverse that problem in the last eight years’, said the Chief Minister. A deficit in remote towns and communities – ‘We have been urgently working to reverse that problem for the last eight years’. Do you know what? That is more spin because what you delivered is jack. The Chief Minister said the government has seen the need to address these issues, when it took the Howard government nine out of its 11 years before they paid any attention. Well, I put it to you: you have taken seven out of eight.
You have this new strategy, A Working Future, which, you said in the statement, has been acknowledged nationally. I say from what I have read in the national media, it has been criticised heavily. I do not know how you get ‘acknowledged’. It is acknowledged but it has been criticised.
The Chief Minister talked about engaging Indigenous communities. In my time at the Australian Bureau of Statistics, one of the comments I heard was Indigenous people were the most studied and counted people we have on this Earth. Maybe – just maybe - they are sick of it. Maybe they would prefer to see something actually happen rather than to just talk about it, because we have been talking about it for a long time – not just this government; many governments of all persuasions have been talking about it for a long time. Maybe they are sick to death of the spin, the countless stories, the countless talking which seems to go on, the countless consultations and planning they talk about - and nothing is ever delivered. Then the statement talked about education:
- If you come to school regularly, participate in learning and behave, then we will ensure there is a pathway to a real job. In fact, we will guarantee it.
If that is not the biggest call I have ever heard any government deliver – oh, there was another one. Our Prime Minister promised - what was it? - a computer for every student in every school in the country - and they are still waiting for that one. There was one bit of news, and ERA should be congratulated on their program. Perhaps if more companies can take that lead, we could solve many of the issues we have today.
The Chief Minister said there will be a huge emphasis on attracting and retaining committed professionals. Let us talk about land release again, and the cost of accommodation. How sad is it when an average teacher cannot afford to pay rent? How sad is it when someone in a profession like a refrigeration mechanic cannot afford to pay the rent – was going backwards in the time they were here, and was putting more and more on credit card debt? Although their income was $20 000 a year more than they could earn in South Australia, they could not afford to live in this place of which we talk about the lifestyle. As I said before, if there are any lessons here, it is that the government should listen to Territorians. I also said before, in the whole spin about education, there was nothing for children with special needs - nothing at all.
The Chief Minister talked about increasing services to the aged, and no one here would disagree that is something we should be doing. However, you have policies in place such as reviewing rents, or reviewing incomes twice a year, when you talk about only putting up their rents once a year. Why would you be wasting resources to review something twice a year when you know the pensions only have an increase once a year?
There is one thing this government certainly does not do - and I have a letter here from the Minister for Senior Territorians. It was sad to see somebody has gone to the trouble of writing to the minister, asking in the letter for assistance in transporting a group of elderly people from Palmerston to the Territory Wildlife Park. The letter from the minister mentions nothing about that. What it says is this government provides free travel for seniors, pensioners, carers and students on our existing public bus system. We know that. It is great, but it has not answered the question the person had asked of the government. They wanted help with transport to the Territory Wildlife Park. I do not know if the ministers even read some of the letters sent to them, but this does not even address the issue.
So, if there is one lesson I can leave here today, is please …
Ms McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I am just wondering if the member for Brennan would like to table the document.
Mr CHANDLER: Absolutely. There are actually two letters. I will table them both if you like. I seek leave.
Leave granted.
Mr CHANDLER: To finish, the Chief Minister says the challenges are real. They are certainly real. They talk about the lifestyle being the envy of this nation. As I said earlier, in talking about the envy of the nation, you mention the 20% power increases, the cost of living, the cost of land, the fact you cannot get land - and you even have businesses collapsing with no insurances in place which this government promised Territorians years ago.
You certainly have not demonstrated you listened to the public at the last election, in the time most of us have been in this side of the House. Do more than just listen, do more than just spin it - start to deliver for Territorians and make a difference.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, this is a fairly broad document. You could nearly have a debate on a heading called Growing the Territory - the Opportunities and Challenges of Growth. There are opportunities but, sometimes, the challenges are bigger than the opportunities. Much of what I have heard today - I heard most of what the Leader of the Opposition said - I concur with. I have also stood in parliament and begged the government to release more land, especially for first homeowners. The answer I got back was: ‘We do not want to destroy the market. We do not want to have too much land on the market because we could upset the market’. I always felt it was disappointing coming from the Labor Party, which traditionally said it supported the battlers, the family, the workers, those sorts of people. It seemed to me they had lost their way; their concern was more about the market rather than the people they should represent.
I am not saying you do not need to be concerned about those battlers who may have invested in land and houses. However, the price today for land and houses is extraordinarily high. It has reached so high many people cannot afford to belong to the opportunities the Chief Minister talked about today. You only have the opportunity if you can get ahead. If you are resigned to the fact you will have a mortgage which will take you many years to pay - in fact, in some cases, may take you a lifetime and, as we know in other states, the mortgage will be passed onto the children simply because the mortgage has become too great to pay in a lifetime. We really have to ask the question: have we done our job for Territorians? Unfortunately, the government dropped the ball a number of years ago.
I went to a meeting at the Property Council about two-and-a-half or three years ago, and the public servant in charge of Planning talked about future developments for Darwin. The heading was ‘Weddell or Cox Peninsula?’ That was very interesting because it was the first time I heard Cox Peninsula was even on the radar for housing. During that meeting, I asked when we expected to see Weddell developed. Weddell has been on the plans of the Northern Territory since about 1984. The gentlemen said 10 to 15 years. That is only three years ago, yet we know we only have a limited number of housing blocks available in Palmerston and we have to use infill simply because we have not planned far enough ahead. This has all come back to bite the government. I recognise the government is trying to do something, but it is a bit like after the horse has bolted.
The government has announced certain projects it wants to speed up such as Johnston Stage 1 and Johnston Stage 2. It has mentioned putting medium development housing into Berrimah north. It is also looking at other possibilities. However, the reality is all this is catch-up. The only way the government is really going to catch up is to do, as I have sometimes said, a Snowy Mountains Scheme. It is going to have to find the money to get those headworks into Palmerston, and get the amount of land on to the market as soon as possible.
While I say that, I also believe the government should not be taking short cuts. There can be a danger the government, in its push to overcome the housing problem that it tends to look at smaller blocks of land, or develops blocks with large houses on small blocks of land. All these things are not really good for the long-term future of Darwin as a place for families to grow.
They have put forward the idea of Bellamack Gardens. I was not shy coming forward to criticise Bellamack Gardens as the Velcro subdivision. I have had a look at it since they did the changes to it, and it does have merit. Is not the answer for all our subdivisions. It does give some opportunity for affordable housing; a variety of housing for people who might find that type of housing suitable. The thing I liked about the Bellamack Gardens concept was it was more like a village within a suburb. There was more open space around each house, believe it or not, even though they were relatively small blocks. They looked at things such as having bigger eaves to protect the walls from the heat, and to reduce the need for air-conditioning. It was a village-type development with a park close by, with no through roads in it at all, which allowed people - not necessarily first homeowners - who only needed a small house to start with, a chance to buy into the particular market. I hope that type of development can be a bit cheaper.
Another area we have to push forward is the availability of land in the rural area. I do not know how many times I have asked for the forestry land to be developed. I believe time and time again. It fell on deaf ears until recent times. It was reflective of the government’s attitude to development of the rural area. I will give you a classic example. Humpty Doo is a district centre. Humpty Doo was planned by governments – well, I knew about it when I first started on Litchfield Council, which was 1984, and it was probably planned before that. Humpty Doo has room for housing. From my calculations, probably 100 houses could be built in Humpty Doo.
There has not been a house or a unit built for close on 15 years in Humpty Doo. Yet, there is water, sewerage and electricity. There are supermarkets, doctors’ surgeries, and schools, all there and, yet, for some reason that small parcel of land was not developed. This is a classic example of what the government should have been doing but, somehow, it went off the radar.
The same with forestry land. The forestry land in Howard Springs has been zoned residential for at least 15 years and, yet, nothing has happened. The government believes, if they put that land up for sale, it might upset some of the private developers. When you see 2 ha blocks at $400 000 apiece - even 1 ha blocks at nearly the same price - you know young people in the rural area cannot afford to live there. They either have to stay with their parents, or their parents have to build a granny flat, because that is the only way they are going stay in the rural area. I emphasise the rural area because I know Alice Springs has a rural area as well. Rural living is a type of lifestyle which should be encouraged.
I recently saw some figures from the prison and it showed me how many people were in the prison, and where they came from. There were four people in the prison who came from the Darwin rural area. It has a population of 20 000 people. Does that not say something about the rural lifestyle where kids can grow up with a bit of space around them? Are we developing suburbs where people are squashed in like flies simply because profit is the main reason we are developing, not social outcomes? I see the rural area as an area the government needs to pick up the ball and go with.
I congratulate the private developers who are putting forward a proposal to the government. It seems, with the cooperation of people like Billy Risk, we can overcome the native title issues fairly quickly. It also seems we have a proposal which the government should really look at for selling off land - suburban land as well - for first homeowners.
The concept the developers have put forward - and this is the opportunity side of what the Chief Minister is saying – is they will sell each 1 ha block in this subdivision - and they hope to have 500 blocks - at $100 000. That is a fairly cheap price today for a block of land. That will enable people not to go and get the whole $420 000 loan - they might just get a $150 000 or $200 000 loan. It is something within their reach to build a moderate house on a 1 ha block. They will have to build within a certain period, and they will not be able to sell it straightaway; this is not an investment scheme.
However, after five years - or how ever many years the government decides - they can sell the house, they will then have to return $100 000 to the government. So, the first $100 000 goes to the developer to cover their costs, and they will make a profit out of that. The second point is, because the land is Crown land, the government will get its return at the point of sale. So, no, the market is not being undercut by unfair advantage of the government owning its own land. The government will get its land. It encourages development, enabling young people to get a block of land in the rural area quickly and affordably. The government can show its willingness to support them by saying: ‘We will collect our $100 000 later when you sell your land’. That is a really good idea. It has come from some developers in my area, and it is, possibly, a way we should be developing suburban land in other places of the Territory.
I was pleased to see the Alice Springs draft airport plan which included some rural subdivision. That is an excellent concept. I had meetings with Ian Kew, the manager of the airports for Darwin, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. It is something I will be putting forward to the federal minister to support. The figures quoted in the draft Alice Springs report say the cost to develop those blocks of land with infrastructure is $12 000. I presume those blocks would have town water as they are small, and power. If he can do the development for $12 000, I have to ask how come we have such expensive land around the country? That is the figure in the draft master plan for Alice Springs.
I encourage - and I might say more on it tomorrow – the government to support this particular development. It is not in the aircraft corridor; it is on the side. It is a great opportunity to increase the amount of housing in Alice Springs. People have concerns. I have been there and I have been told in no uncertain terms they need housing, yet, here it is, part of the master plan. It is a great idea.
The other area is seniors. The minister mentioned the growth, not only of young people but of older people in the Northern Territory. I have said on occasion if we do not do something for older people, we will lose. When you lose the older people you affect the economy. There are also social issues; you will lose grandma and grandpa - they will go somewhere else. You will lose the wisdom of having older people in the community. We have to do more. I know there is a seniors village in Palmerston and it is good the government is putting money into that. However, we need to look at the rural area. Humpty Doo is an area - and I have taken the Minister for Family Services to Humpty Doo to show her the land which could be developed. We have a private developer in Howard Springs who is putting forward an over 55s development. That is good as well; you need to have both private and public input into seniors.
Talking about the rural area - and we mentioned previously the issue of the affordable housing rental company - one of the concerns is lack of public transport. We need more public transport in the rural area. Again, there are opportunities and challenges of growth. The rural area is growing; there is a huge amount of traffic on the road. We need to improve and promote the bus service. It is no good putting it there without promotion. I congratulate the government on the concept of park/drive. I believe there will be one at Coolalinga, one at Humpty Doo and, hopefully, one at Howard Springs. I hope that will increase the number of buses in the rural area.
In relation to education, the government might have dropped the ball again. Taminmin High School is full. Why is Taminmin High School full? Because it is a very popular high school. It has a range of services that many other schools do not provide. It is strong in VET, and in the Australian Technical College aspect. Unfortunately, that is disappearing this year because of changes by the federal government. Hopefully, it will be replaced by something else. The school offers a wide range of courses. It is attracting people from Palmerston as well as the rural area. In fact, I do not think it can now take anyone else outside the rural area because it is simply full. We need another high school in the rural area. We need to be doing it now. If we keep saying we are planning it, Taminmin High School will be bursting.
In this parliament in 2001 I asked why there was not a Catholic school being built in Palmerston. We are now in 2009 and, at last, in the Johnston subdivision, they have identified there will be either a middle or secondary Catholic school. I am a great believer in choice for people with education; it is good to have both government and non-government education. Yet, there was a belief by some arms of government, when this government came into being, they would not support independent schools for a long time. If someone can tell me how many independent schools were built since 2001, you will find it is very few. The Lutheran school got itself off the ground with a new school at Howard Springs, but not many other non-government schools have been built. I do not think there was very much encouragement from the government to do that.
I hope that changes because people will be surprised at the number of people who have no religious affiliation at all and prefer to send their kids to a non-government school simply because they believe the values they want for their kids to be taught are better met there. I do not say this as a put down to public schools because I know the public schools in my area are terrific schools, and some of the values they teach are fantastic. However, people see there is a different approach to values in a religious school and it is what they are looking for.
Talking about opportunities and challenges of growth, there is mention of the number of young people who are going to be in our suburbs in Darwin and Palmerston. You have to include the rural area; you also have to include Weddell. I am not putting other growth areas of the Territory down. When I spoke in Alice Springs I said, yes, Alice Springs is fine, but the reality of the Northern Territory is like every other state or Territory: the biggest population is around the seaboard. Two-thirds of the Territory’s population is right here, and that is a reality of life. It does not say Katherine, Tennant Creek or Alice Springs are any less important, but this is where the strong growth is, and we have to ensure that growth is catered for.
As I said, you could talk for a month of Sundays on this statement. I have not even touched SIHIP, which I have some pretty big concerns about as well. I heard the minister give me a response today regarding whether these houses are guaranteed for 30 years. He did not say they were guaranteed for 30 years; he said they should be. What concerns me is I recently saw the design of houses in Gunbalanya, and they had wooden floors on the patios and the back steps. I do not know whether the main part of the house was wooden. This was a Queensland design, and I have concerns that that kind of house is going to last 30 years.
I saw the houses just about to be refurbished at Bathurst Island and they were a kit home from Queensland - I just cannot think of the name of the company. Those houses are still being lived in - not a lot of them. They had compressed cement floors, and the reason they had them was because they were tough. They were tough, they could take wear and tear, they could take the odd sledge hammer. You could not rip them up and use them for the barbecue. They were a sensible design.
I believe there will be many questions about SIHIP. If there is time, I will probably speak on it later. There may be plenty of speakers on it anyway. I feel is has become bogged down in consultancies and forgotten what it was expected to do: build simple houses which are not only affordable but practical. I believe we have gone away from that.
I will tell you another thing about the design of the house I saw. The food preparation area was outside on one end of the building and the patio was at the other end. If you kill a wallaby, you do not drag it through the house up to the other end; you should put the patio and the food preparation area in the one place. I do not think the people who have consulted have asked the right questions - wallabies are generally killed out the back; they are not put in the sink. Some of those practical issues in relation to housing might have become lost in the process.
I have spoken on seniors. There is a whole range of issues about the ports, and that is going to be an interesting discussion.
The idea of growth towns …
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Talking about the growth towns, I have not had enough time to really look at the particular issue the government is putting forward. I have said recently at the NT Agricultural Association dinner on Friday night in Katherine, we have to think a little more outside the square. The government selected these number of growth towns - again, challenges and opportunities. I went to Timber Creek and west of Timber Creek, to Mistake Creek, Legune Station, Amanbidji, and Bulla. Where do they relate to? They relate to Kununurra.
Kununurra has just received $195m worth of Commonwealth funds to help improve its schools, its hospitals, all those sorts of things you would expect in a growth town. We should be rethinking. Forget the state boundaries. Why are we not making Kununurra the growth town for the area? The Commonwealth money is our money. The Western Australian government is putting a lot of money into Ord River Stage 2. We should not be cutting off the people in the area simply because there is a silly old state border going down the middle. We should even be looking at making it a local government from Timber Creek through to Kununurra, so those people relate to the area.
The other one is Alpurrurulam, Lake Nash. Where do people play football? They play it at Mount Isa. They go shopping at Mount Isa. Where do we have them? In the shire of Barkly. I am not sure how many people go to Barkly from Alpurrurulam, but I do not think it is many. Again, when we talk about growth towns, maybe Mount Isa should be the growth town. So what? Let us talk to the Mount Isa City Council and the people there. If this is the place which will give these people in Alpurrurulam an opportunity to go to school, let us talk to them. Let us not get stuck up on borders. Let us ensure, when we have growth towns, they are practical. I only put those ideas forward because I believe we have to think outside the square.
The Chief Minister is saying some good things in the statement. I might not always think they are on the right path, but we know there is going to be an increase in the population in many of the Aboriginal communities. We know we have to create employment and they have to get education. We need to be looking at all possible ways of doing this.
Regarding A Smart Territory and getting kids to school regularly, we have heard that many times. The government has had a program for quite a while on the television and the radio telling kids to attend school. We also have to get parents to really want to send their kids to school. If they need a little kick up the rear end to go to school, that is what we need. We also need to be pushing that it is important from a parental point of view. We know literacy and numeracy rates are still quite low.
There has been much discussion about bilingual education. I probably have a different view. I saw bilingual education introduced into Bathurst Island when I was there in the mid-1970s. I still have not been convinced it made any difference to someone reading a tractor manual because they do not come in an Aboriginal language, they come in English, and it will probably never be translated because it is a technical book which tells you how to maintain a tractor. If you want to get on in life you have to know how to do those sorts of things. The government’s policy is four hours, which means the rest of the time in school can still be taught in language.
I also think it is the responsibility of a community as well, if it wants to continue to protect its language, to encourage the use of its language, it has to be a partnership. I would like to see older people in the community who have the skills to teach their language be employed as adult educators who can open up the school on Saturday morning, or in the evening, and teach the kids in the community their language. The government gives the facilities for people to teach their language but, on the other side, the people who want their language to be retained have to take some responsibility for retaining it; it should not be a one-way street.
Other people will have a different point of view. Some of you might have received letters lately asking why bilingual education is better than the older type of education. Perhaps they should come around and see my wife. She received a better education, under the old system, than many Aboriginal kids today, and she can read and write pretty well. It is so disappointing to see kids today who have had the opportunity but, for some reason, they cannot read and write. How are they ever going to advance if they do not have a decent education?
A member: She married you, though.
Mr WOOD: Yes, she married me so she definitely did advance, did she not? She is a lovely lady.
We have many challenges and opportunities. The challenges are to help people in the Northern Territory get a good education, have the opportunity for employment, to have a reasonable opportunity to buy their own home, and to buy their own land without going into debt for the rest of their life, so they then can take part in the opportunities the Northern Territory will give.
We have to be careful in this debate. I say some things which are probably down on the government at times. I have to say we do live in a great place. Regardless of our political argy-bargy here today, it is a great place. I ran into a lady the other day who has only been here for three weeks; she says she is never going home. She reckons this is the best of both worlds; a bit of city life and a bit of country life, so she loves the place. Anyone who has travelled in the outback of the Territory says this is a great place. We have to do more because there are people who are not going to have a chance to enjoy it until we change the way people are educated, can afford to put a house over their heads, and can get a job. Until that happens, there will be a group of us who will not be able to enjoy the opportunities the Northern Territory gives us.
Dr BURNS (Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on Growing the Territory. In simple terms, the economy is about people, families, investments, profits, jobs, and opportunities for all Territorians. It is about government employees and employers working together to create strong and sustainable growth for present and future generations.
I acknowledge at the outset the innovation, hard work, resilience and entrepreneurship of Territory industry and business across all sectors. As Business Minister, I am constantly inspired by the outstanding results achieved by Territory businesses; they are the bedrock of our economy.
I mentioned earlier today the vital partnership between private sector employers and employees and government, which underpins our economy. In this, the government makes a fundamental contribution to sustainable economic growth; we are a pro-growth, pro-jobs government. The Territory has benefited from strong economic growth since 2001 and, although not immune from the challenges from the global financial crisis, the Territory is well positioned for sustainable growth into the future. Access Economics recently forecast the Territory will achieve 4.9% growth in state domestic product in 2008-09 - the highest of all jurisdictions and an outstanding result in challenging times. This growth forecast does not factor in the INPEX project.
As the Chief Minister alluded to in Question Time today, the ANZ commented the Territory economy is leading the nation. In their recent Regional and Rural Quarterly Report, ANZ stated the Northern Territory’s economy continues to brush aside the broader trends across Australia and the globe with the retail sector and employment market growing at the fastest rate of any Australian state or region. The Territory is also experiencing strong population growth, now at 2.2%, as people move to the Territory to take advantage of the employment opportunities.
Recent data highlights four consecutive quarters of positive nett interstate migration; a result seen for the first time in more then 20 years, highlighting our employment growth and strong business confidence are attracting work as we need to continue to grow our economy. This strong growth highlighted by these economic indicators delivers jobs and opportunities for Territory business. It also defines major challenges for policy and service delivery.
As the Chief Minister said in his statement, the government is facing unique challenges which come with a strong economy. In this context, we are developing and implementing a range of policies and initiatives to support economic and population growth.
I turn now to some of the relevant strategic initiatives within the areas covered by my portfolio responsibilities. The government recognises the need to support businesses and create jobs by making land available for businesses to grow and expand. The Darwin Business Park is an important strategic initiative integral to developing trade throughout South-East Asia. Located adjacent to the East Arm port and the railway terminal, it is the ideal location for a range of industries including oil and gas support services, mining support services and maintenance, marine services and maintenance, transport and logistics, and engineering fabrication and equipment. The government has committed $28m in the business park with work well under way. These works will support an estimated 37 full-time jobs and 19 indirect jobs during the construction phase.
The common user area, or CUA, is another strategic initiative with a focus on growth and jobs. The CUA provides a suitably located site for business to access the fabrication, modularisation, short-term storage, or construction solutions. The CUA can be utilised by an organisation to engage in a range of economic activity which ties in with the role of East Arm as an intermodal services hub. The CUA will be available to industry for short-term rental options on a first-come-first-served basis at market rates. The access road to the site has been completed and further works including a hard stand. Drainage, landscaping and fencing commenced in July 2009 by the Ostojic Group. $2.5m has been approved for the 2009-10 capital works program budget to further enhance the capabilities of the site.
The government is keenly aware of the contribution of Defence families and the Defence industries to the Territory. Defence will continue to be an important focus for jobs and growth. The Land Development Corporation is working to establish an industrial estate with the development of a Defence Support Hub in close proximity to Robertson Barracks. The hub will enable prime contractors and small businesses to cluster and deliver valuable support to Defence. The broad vision for the Defence Support Hub also includes attracting manufacturing research and development and associated activities which will both support Defence operations and provide benefits to the Northern Territory economy.
The government believes home ownership is crucial to the long-term economic and social development and progress of the Territory. Earlier this year, we expanded the role of the Land Development Corporation. In addition to its role in industrial land development, the corporation will oversee urban projects such as residential and affordable housing development, and work with the private sector to provide new, innovative and affordable housing development. LDC lodged the planning application for Bellamack Gardens on 28 September with an exhibition period of four weeks commencing on 2 October. This new medium-density residential development is designed to provide an affordable entry point to the Darwin/Palmerston residential market. Bellamack Gardens incorporates 28 ground-level town houses and units in a unit title development comprising 18 two-bedroom detached town houses, two one-bedroom detached adaptable town houses, and eight one-bedroom units. Expected completion date for the project is 2010.
The government recognises the vital contribution of small and medium businesses to economic growth, investment and jobs. We have established a range of programs to support business and to maximise local business and industry participation in our growing economy. In Question Time today, I alluded to a number of the support programs administered by the Department of Business. I talked about the Territory Growth program - a wonderful program; industry participation plans which are so vital to larger projects and provide opportunities for local contractors within that; the upskills program where businesses can receive help to improve their operations over all their business areas; and, of course, a development support program which really focuses on industry sectors such as Defence. Other areas are the NT Industry Capability Network which is going to supply, and has already supplied, much support for the INPEX project. These are vital programs I talked about today in Question Time. I refer people to the Parliamentary Record for further detail.
Regarding INPEX, it is important that I give just a little more detail. The work is well advanced on the development of an industry participation plan for the $20bn INPEX project. The project will provide unprecedented opportunities for local business. Between 2000 and 3000 jobs will be created during the construction phase of this great project alone.
Another business initiative I did not mention in Question Time today which is quite an important one is the ecoBiz NT program. Basically, this is a business response to the challenges of sustainable development and reducing the carbon footprint through upgrading to more energy-efficient products, practices, and resources. The main criteria for this program are: the proponent is a Territory-based SME; upgrades are to existing infrastructure; and a minimum of 20% reduction in energy, water and/or waste is achieved. Those upgrades mean a payback of three to five years. ecoBiz provides grants of up to $20 000 on a dollar-for-dollar basis for business implementing changes to existing infrastructure to improve their eco- performance. The program has provided $314 963 in rebates in the 2008-09 financial year.
As well as the record infrastructure budget the Treasurer was alluding to in Question Time today, which has provided much support for Territory construction businesses across a whole range of sectors and across regions, members would be aware the federal government delivered a $42bn Nation Building and Jobs Plan in February of this year. The Northern Territory government responded to the stimulus package by announcing our five-point plan for implementation. That plan includes: the Development Consent Authority to meet every fortnight instead of every month; a summit of construction industry leaders to be held to brief industry and get all ideas on the table; dedicated stimulus action squads set up in government departments to get projects up and running as fast as possible; a short, sharp review of procurement to streamline the development processes and cut red tape, including raising the threshold before going to tender; and getting contractors to be involved earlier in the process.
I am pleased to report to the House the plan has been implemented and projects are already being delivered on the ground. While the Northern Territory has withstood the effects of the global financial crisis and has remained strong, Operation Stimulus has further strengthened our economic position and will continue to do so. I add also that I am a little concerned when I hear sounds from the federal parliament and the federal opposition that they want stimulus spending curtailed and even stopped. I believe that would be a disastrous move. The Secretary of Treasury has already come out very publicly and, I suppose, put that idea in its place …
Mr Elferink: Tell us about the Federal Reserve decision to raise interest rates.
Dr BURNS: I note that the members opposite here are still persisting with it. Basically, they need to get in tune and hear what business is saying about the stimulus package and the projects. They need to hear what school councils are saying about it. They need to tune in a bit better than they are now, instead of being dictated to by Malcolm Turnbull and the federal sphere. He is looking a bit wobbly at present so, if I were them, I would be making up their own mind on such important issues.
Tourism is another vital sector of the Northern Territory economy. We recognise that tourism is vital to economic growth and the continued prosperity of the Northern Territory. It contributes 6.4% to GSP compared to 3.7% for the rest of Australia. It also indirectly employs about 17 000 Territorians and is worth an estimated $1.6bn to the Northern Territory economy. We know tourism has had challenging times of late, particularly with the financial downturn, but we, as a government, responded to the set of circumstances by delivering on our tourism stimulus package which was focused on stimulating demand for Northern Territory tourism experiences, supporting local tourism businesses, and particularly encouraging Australians to travel to the Northern Territory.
We have maintained Tourism NT’s budget at $42.5m for the 2009-10 year, representing a 55% increase since 2001 when this Labor government came to power. What has been the result in the 2008-09 financial year? I am advised total visitors to the Territory increased marginally by 0.6% in the 2008-09 financial year to just over 1 400 000 visitors. Our international holiday visitors fell slightly by 1.3% compared to the previous year, whereas nationally we saw a decline of 5.1%. However, visitor nights and holiday expenditure increased, which means they stayed longer and spent more while they were on holidays. This is very important as, despite the global economic circumstances, through our strategy with Tourism NT, we have been able to maintain our numbers, and even increase the revenue in some areas. I believe the stimulus package put together by this government for our tourism industry has been quite successful to date.
This government has also invested up to $5m in domestic marketing campaigns, such as the Get CeNTred campaign which ran between February and April this year, and Destination Darwin – VibraNT, Mix It Up In Darwin launched in August. We are also maintaining our presence internationally, and today I launched the $1.2m Global Red Centre Campaign, which will ensure we maintain our presence in the international markets. We have also had the Global Kakadu Campaign, which is very important and, I believe, has been instrumental in maintaining tourist numbers internationally into the Northern Territory. We need to maintain a balanced portfolio of target markets and spread our risk across various sectors where declines in one area can be offset with gains in another.
I could speak at length across all sectors, but one particular sector which catches my eye is the business events sector. There were 57 conferences and events held at the Darwin and Alice Springs Convention Centres last financial year, attracting just under 20 000 delegates and injecting an estimated $50m into our economy. I, once again, place on the Parliamentary Record just what a great asset the convention centre is here, with all the developments and the hotels which surround it. It is certainly adding to our tourism industry in the Top End. Of course, the asset in Alice Springs, which was built under a previous government - I acknowledge that - the Alice Springs Convention Centre is working well in Alice Springs. We know the story of the opposition really not wanting us to go forward with the Darwin Convention Centre and wave pool, but it has been shown to be an outstanding success.
Turning to international trade, in September I launched the government’s new international trade strategy Growing International Trade 2009-13. The strategy sets out the government’s strategic focus on growing the Territory’s trade performance over the next five years. It builds on our strengths and provides a very clear direction of our international trade strategy. I will be taking the opportunity, hopefully within these sittings some time, to talk more about our international trade strategy. It is very important; we are a government focused on leveraging on our international trade.
Madam Speaker, there is quite a lot I have covered here. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to this Assembly. The challenges we face are all about growth; this is a government which is focused on meeting those challenges. I am proud to support the Chief Minister’s statement.
Debate adjourned.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Indigenous Housing
Indigenous Housing
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter from the member for Braitling:
- Madam Speaker,
I propose for discussion this day the following definite matter of public importance:
The status of Indigenous housing in the Northern Territory and resolution of the current situation and future needs.
It is signed by the member for Braitling.
Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, it is interesting to see we have left the statement just before 7 pm, which means with a two-hour MPI, we will be knocking off early again tonight. On the first day, we are supposed to go until 10.30 pm. Quite funny, right from the start.
Madam Speaker, I put this matter of public importance on the record today because I really believe it is a matter of public importance.
Last week, I wrote to the Prime Minister, and advised the federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Jenny Macklin, of my desire for federal parliament to conduct a Royal Commission into Indigenous housing. I did not take the decision lightly. It was based on my reaching an opinion there is no one in control of housing in the bush in the Northern Territory - no one in control of three separate things: the current state of housing in the Northern Territory; SIHIP - the Strategic Indigenous Housing Infrastructure Program; and the lack of future planning for Indigenous housing in the Northern Territory.
Indigenous housing is an important element in our roles as parliamentarians, and in the Northern Territory general, because it does not just affect Indigenous Territorians, it affects everybody. The current levels of homelessness and overcrowding, the management of housing, the future rebuilding of housing, has all been of great concern. We are all well aware of the massive backlog and the need for substantially more housing. We are unaware of how housing is going to be provided under this government.
We are also aware there is a substantial need for an increased level of infrastructure in communities, and also in towns, to supply housing for Indigenous Territorians.
I reached my decision on a recent visit to Santa Teresa, with the member for Macdonnell, Dan Moss from The Centralian Advocate and Sara Everingham from the AM program of the ABC. We were walking around the community with several things in the back of our minds, one of which was the sewer problems they had in Ampilatwatja. I am sure most people in the House would be aware of the problem; it was much publicised across the media - overflowing sewage in houses. People could not get it fixed, they moved out of their houses and out bush, and are still living out bush waiting for the federal minister for Indigenous Affairs to visit. We were waiting on Territory representatives, but ended up giving up. Whether they have been out since is despite the point. Those people are still waiting for Jenny Macklin to visit. That is just one example.
There are problems in the Barkly region where they could not get water for school kids and could not get water to houses. We made a bit of a drama about it and, apparently, someone is going to go out there now. That all comes under housing, under the portfolio of the Minister for Housing, and Essential Services.
We have heard a number of things about the Utopia region. This was playing in the back of my mind travelling the Utopia region, seeing the conditions of the houses of the people living there, and recognising this is not a growth town. It is not going to get any new houses and it will barely get any repair and maintenance work under SIHIP. People continue to still live in tin sheds. Seeing the style and condition of housing people live in, in town camps in Alice Springs, Darwin, and Katherine, these things play heavily on your mind and you wonder who is in control and what is going to happen. I seriously doubt anyone knows.
It is part of trying to understand what is happening with SIHIP. I have been asking the Minister for Housing whether he will build a house at any point in time. Since then, we have had the political turmoil and the government has just survived. I have requested a couple of briefings. I had a briefing with the CEO of the department of Housing, Dr David Ritchie, and he quite honestly provided me with information I did not think he would provide. He explained to me about the payment system or where the expenditure for SIHIP went: 20% to corporate overheads; 20% to profit; up to 15% additional for incentive payments on increased Indigenous employment; and then there were the other expenses which go with that.
I found that quite funny, but I also found it interesting when Dr Ritchie said he never expected any houses to be built this year. I said: ‘I beg your pardon, what was that?’ He said there were never going to be any houses built in 2009. I said: ‘How can that be the case when the Minister for Housing, the member for Daly, stood in this parliament in June this year and said there would be 100 houses built this year?’ He stood in this parliament in June only a few months ago saying there would be 100 houses built this year. Then, we had the CEO saying there was never going to be a house built. There will not be any built until at least next year. There will be nothing built before Christmas. What were his words here? ‘First houses to be delivered after Christmas’. I asked how many houses will have been started. This is on Monday, 7 September. He said fewer than half a dozen would have had slabs poured. We had the member for Daly saying 100 houses will be built this calendar year. That is clearly not the case at all. That is a lie. There is no way you could stand in this parliament and say you are going to build 100 houses when the CEO says there is never going to be a house.
The CEO has chief administration role of the program of the portfolio. The member for Daly said there would be 100 houses built and the CEO said there is never going to be a house built this year - never. Who is in control? This is before I went out to Santa Teresa.
I asked David Ritchie also - and he was forthright and provided a very good briefing and I was quite impressed; I was very happy with it. This is not an attack on David Ritchie at all. It is about the information provided. I mentioned there is $130m put down for town camps in Alice Springs - $100m for housing and infrastructure. ‘Can you tell me how many houses will be built?’ He said to me: ‘About 40 houses’. Not exactly 40 - about 40 houses. We have run the story through the media, raised some concerns. It comes down to about $2.5m a house. You have to ask yourself where the money is and who is in control. What will 40 houses do? How will that increase the sustainability of town camps in Alice Springs? What is it doing to normalise the town camps into suburbs in Alice Springs? The Chief Minister had previously said he would like to see Bagot turned into a suburb. Well, that is clearly not the case. It is not the case in Alice Springs. There were no particular answers.
I asked why the delays on the Tiwi Islands and what all the problems were. Dr Ritchie said to me: ‘What we were doing with the refurbs, we were going out there and planning on refurbishing and putting an extra bedroom on a house, or putting a verandah around a house, because we know a lot of people like to sleep on the veranda and an extra bedroom would provide more housing’. He said: ‘The problem was, under the outcomes under the Closing the Gap initiatives, one of the key things is to reduce the number of people who live in a house’.
The problem they are experiencing is, when they put a bedroom or a verandah on, more people were coming to stay there, so the indicators are actually looking worse than better. Now, they have decided to not put extra bedrooms or verandahs on houses so they can improve the indicators - not to meet the family need or the housing need, just to improve the indicators. I am now told they are going to one-bedroom units and two-bedroom houses so they can get their numbers up without actually housing people. That is what they are doing. It is deceitful! It is not addressing a need; it is an incompetent government managing figures to try to make themselves look good. How can you call a one-bedroom unit a house under SIHIP just so you can get to the 750? This is absolutely ballistic.
These things were playing on the back of my mind. Then, I had a meeting in Alice Springs - a briefing by DPI and someone from the Chief Minister’s Department – and I asked them about infrastructure in Alice Springs, particularly trying to find out what the constraints on land release and urban housing development were and how the impact of town camp redevelopment would impact on that infrastructure. I got to the point of how many houses were going to be built with this $100m, remembering that David Ritchie had told me ‘about 40 houses’. The bloke from the Chief Minister’s office said: ‘Substantially less than 40 houses’. I said: ‘I beg your pardon? $100m, is that all we get?’ Substantially less than 40 houses. I said: ‘I hope you know I am shadow Indigenous affairs and in the opposition. I am sure you know, because you are in the Chief Minister’s Department, what you have told me is pretty explosive stuff. This is the second time I have been told by a senior head of the Northern Territory government that fewer than 40 houses will be built for $100m’.
Jenny Macklin, the federal Aboriginal Affairs minister said: ‘Oh, no. We are going to get 85 houses’. We have the double-dealing Dutch over here: ‘Oh, we will do 40. We will save money so we can do something else’. That is exactly what is happening. This is just false; this is maladministration. This is lying to people of the Northern Territory ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I remind you, you can only make comments such as that by way of a substantive motion.
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member did not refer to any particular person.
Madam SPEAKER: You know the rules …
Mr TOLLNER: I think he was referring to an organisation of people. My understanding is he is entirely within the bounds of the standing orders.
Madam SPEAKER: That has never been the way it has been ruled in this parliament, member for Fong Lim. In fact, the ruling has been the opposite way. I ask you to reword what you said, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I will reword it, Madam Speaker. The minister responsible for the Housing portfolio in the Northern Territory government is saying one thing, the boss of his department saying another, and Jenny Macklin saying something else. The poor fellow out in the bush still does not have a house to live in. What is going on? This is costing squillions of dollars and no one is getting a house.
All this was in the back of my mind when I was going to Santa Teresa to visit and do the normal things I do when I go out bush. You would not believe it, Madam Speaker. I went there three days after radio reports about the three houses which had their roofs blown off in the sandstorm 12 months and two weeks ago still without their roofs replaced. Then I heard the Minister for Housing say: ‘Oh, gee, we must have forgot about that. I was not aware’. Well, you are the Minister for Housing. Surely, you are in control?
We went out there and had a look - the member for Macdonnell, Dan Watts, Sara Everingham and I. We thought we would just have to expose this incompetence. The member for Daly saying: ‘We will put the roofs back on the houses’ is all well and good. We went out there and there were no walls. He would put the roofs on when there are no walls! We were looking at houses which have been completely destroyed.
Alice Brennan of the ABC, 21 September, Monday, 5 pm:
- The Northern Territory Minister for Housing says he was unaware storm damaged public housing in a Central Australian community have not been fixed after almost a year.
…
Housing Minister Rob Knight says he heard about the damage, but presumed the houses had been fixed.
That is how we run a government; we just presume things happen. We are not told; we just presume it. The article went on:
- ‘Well I guess the question has to be asked, who is doing the R and M on these buildings and who should report forward something to put forward a proposal to fix them. So, I will wait to get a response from the department’.
Who is running what? That is just amazing; just gross incompetence. He is saying: ‘Oh, the question has to be asked’. Well, we have to ask a question of him. He has not done the job.
Ms Carney: Where is the minister?
Mr GILES: He is hiding up the back because he knows he cannot manage us …
Ms Scrymgour: Oh come on, you know you cannot …
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw that, Madam Speaker.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I have no idea how he is still the Minister for Housing. I have some good photos. You would love to see the incompetence happening in Santa Teresa. We visited one house. I cannot remember the number of this particular house. You will see, Madam Speaker, for the benefit of the people in this room, there is a big gap in the wall of this house. Santa Teresa is a refurbishment and repairs and maintenance community. That means they do not get new houses; they just get some repairs and some houses are refurbished. We had a look at this house. We had a list of what houses will get done and which ones will not. Amazingly, this house - it is pretty hard to watch television when you have a big stream of light coming through your lounge room, because that is what happens. We saw the list of houses to be fixed - that is not one of them. I am sure when you have a gap two inches wide in your house, it is probably something that needs to be fixed. No repairs or maintenance, no refurbishment – it is just one which does not get fixed.
We walked around, and went to the Essential Services Officer, and he said: ‘Why do you not come and have a look at the power boards?’ So, we had a look at the power boards. He said: ‘Have a look here. You will see the electrical safety switch is jammed off’. I said: ‘What is going on with the electrical safety switch?’ He said: ‘When they put the power meters in, they put them in facing the wind, so when the wind comes up in a dusty community, the dust goes straight into the power boards’. They have these power boards without a lock, so the dust gets in the safety switch, then the safety switch jams off. In 80 houses in Santa Teresa, to cut a long story short, there are no safety switches.
This is the government looking after people. There are 80 houses in Santa Teresa, and not a safety switch working. The ESO was a fairly decent bloke. He rang the company - I think it was Hager. They wrote a report for them, which I happen to have. He sent the report saying they were incorrectly installed and dangerous, off to WorkSafe - to David Mallett, I think it was. ‘David, I am sending the results from the electrician regarding a problem with the faulty RCDs as discussed with you previously over the phone. I hope you can do something about it’. Anyway, I am told that NT WorkSafe is not investigating. We still have 80 houses in Santa Teresa with faulty electrical switches, so people could be electrocuted. This is the bloke who is not in charge - not in charge at all.
I will cut a long story short. We went into the council office and, you would not believe it, there is a great big map on the wall. I brought this along for visual purposes so you can see just how big this is - probably about 4 ft by 3 ft. I have had a look at this map - there were two on the wall - dated 4 October 2007. This one was not on the wall. There was another one which was dated 21 May 2008. This map shows all the houses in the community, and it has a little key here which is a cross through a little block which says, ‘If the house has a cross through it, it is beyond economic repair’. When you count them, there are 26 houses which are beyond economic repair; that is, it would cost more to replace them than is financially viable to build a new one. They are beyond economic repair - some of them are just completely unsafe.
When I looked at the difference between the 2007 map and the 2008 map, I realised there was an extra house with a cross through it. So, someone has, obviously, done an assessment between 2007 and 2008 to say they have an additional one which is beyond economic repair. Mind you, this is a Northern Territory government report produced by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. Surely, someone there is aware of what is going on - it is not the member for Daly.
I had a look at this, and then through the report from the Alliance contractor, the one who says there is a budget of $5.2m, 33 houses scheduled for repairs and maintenance, 59 possible inclusions for SIHIP, but they are only going to do 34. I questioned whether all the houses listed as beyond economic repair were going to be refurbished. The answer to that question is no. ‘We are not going to refurbish all the ones beyond economic repair, we will just pick some. We will pick some of them, not all of them, some of them’. Some people will have a nice new updated house; other people will still be living in houses beyond economic repair, and not fit to live in. The member for Daly would not be aware of that. He was not aware roofs were not put on. When he tried to put the roofs on, there were no walls. That is one thing.
The council said: ‘Oh no, we do not have $5.2m, we only have $2.82m now; it has been downgraded’. I know the member for Daly might say something else, and he might say it to the media. We know how it works because he said he would build 100 houses by the end of the year. That was at the end of June this year, just a few months ago. He should have known by then. We know if you set a budget of $5.2m marked down to $2.8m, you might think it cannot be right. Then, when you talk to 20 other communities and they all say the same thing, there is a pattern. They are all saying the same thing! They are all getting dudded - all getting dudded. Then what happens is …
A member: I move an extension of time …
Madam SPEAKER: There is no extension of time in an MPI.
Mr Knight: You should have read the standing orders, you idiot …
Mr GILES: Shut up, member for Daly …
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Withdraw, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. Sorry, Madam Speaker.
I will rest my case there. We have all these houses listed as beyond economic repair, the government is not going to fix them all under SIHIP, and the Alliance contractor is saying some houses should be demolished. What will happen at Santa Teresa is they will have fewer houses at the end of SIHIP than when they started. Every other community which is not a new housing community is going to be in exactly the same position. If we have 750 houses demolished out of those 60 communities which will not get new housing, we will be in a worse position than we started. We should have started in 2007, and the member for Daly has not built a house in two years.
Mr KNIGHT (Housing): Madam Speaker, this is a very important subject, and I welcome it. I guess it shows today was an opportunity for the opposition spokesperson for Indigenous Affairs, and who seems is the Indigenous housing minister as well, because the current Housing spokesperson does not seem to have much to say on anything to do with Indigenous housing. In fact, when we had a SIHIP briefing we asked the member for Braitling if the housing spokesperson was coming along. He said: ‘No, do not worry about her, I will do it’. So, left her right out …
Mr Giles: That is not what I said.
Mr KNIGHT: It was an opportunity. He has been in this parliament for over 12 months and here he is again with an MPI around Indigenous housing - a very important subject. Today, we have heard from the member for Braitling, but he has not a single plan for Indigenous housing. All he can do is criticise. He has no plan. He said he had a plan. On 17 October 2007, on 8HA, when he was the federal candidate for Lingiari, he said:
- The level of housing has not been sufficient, there has been a lack of services and infrastructure and development. I have got a plan for the future and over the next six weeks …
This was 2007:
- … I will be detailing my plan for the future.
That was in 2007. He went on radio, yet again, with the ABC, and talked about developing policies which would come out later in the campaign and would include housing. In 2007, he said he had a plan for Indigenous housing, and he was going to release it. Today, to this point - he has been a member of this parliament for 12 months - he still has no plan.
We do have a plan, and we are implementing it. One of the first things the member for Braitling needs to do is acknowledge the significance of the problem of Indigenous housing in the bush. It is a huge problem which has been growing for decades and decades, since the homelands movement, well before self-government. We had the Commonwealth operating through DAA and then there were various connotations of the delivery of Indigenous housing; more recently, through Indigenous community housing organisations and community government councils. Basically, it was insufficient ...
Ms Anderson: Yes, blame the poor black fella for your failures.
Mr KNIGHT: We had IHANT there for a while and ATSIC - the member for Macdonnell was a Commissioner of ATSIC for a while when all these houses were being delivered. They were being delivered piecemeal: a few houses here, a few houses there. For every single one of the allocations the individual ICHOs had a consultant; they had yet another design done for two houses here and three houses there. It was just money down the drain and, because of the cosy relationship which existed then, there were nice little deals done. It resulted in a waste of money for a start, poor workmanship, and inappropriate materials used.
Ms Anderson interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Those houses are out there today - 6000 houses sitting out in the bush today built over 30 or 40 years. Recently, we have had houses delivered under IHANT …
Ms Carney: This is about you and your government now. You are a coward!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat, minister.
Honourable members, apart from the level of interjections, I would like to comment on the large number of members today who have used completely unparliamentary – quite off - language in the Chamber. While I have asked members to withdraw those remarks, from now on, I will now be asking members to withdraw from the Chamber.
In relation to this debate, there are many interjections. It is a topic which is of concern to all Territorians, and you need to allow the member who is speaking to be heard. Minister, you have the call. Could you direct your comments through the Chair, please?
Mr KNIGHT: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
We had a piecemeal approach to Indigenous housing and also the method of ...
Mr Giles: We had houses being built then.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: We had a piecemeal approach, a large waste of money, and basically, the outcome was very poor training outcomes out of the whole program. We had inappropriate house designs …
Ms Anderson: They are still inappropriate now.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Macdonnell, cease interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: … and we had very poor workmanship. Those houses out there are ageing and deteriorating. People are still living in them because there is just not enough housing for the entire Indigenous population in all those 500-odd communities throughout the Territory. It is a significant problem.
It was more recently identified, apart from those 6000 houses, there was still a need for some $2bn of housing to go into those communities. That was about 12 months ago and it has, obviously, increased. What happened in April last year when we signed the remote Indigenous housing with Maningrida Progress Association was, for the first time in the Territory, the Northern Territory government actually took some responsibility for Indigenous housing in the bush. Before, the money was just given to ICHOs and it was really left up to them: ‘Spend the money, go look after it yourselves, we will give you a bit of money for R&M’. Basically, the government wiped their hands of the situation - of the construction, management and maintenance of these houses.
That has not been sustainable; it could not go on. The Northern Territory government has to take some responsibility for its citizens. It has to take responsibility for public housing. It has to take responsibility, but the reality is there is a $2bn backlog in the Northern Territory alone. On top of that, we have to maintain the housing which has been put out there in the last 30 or 40 years. That is a mammoth task when you have a situation of poor workmanship, poor materials, and houses which have been flogged for the last two or three decades. It is a mammoth undertaking.
Also, the management is going to be a huge challenge, but we are up for it because we, as a government, know we have to take responsibility for public housing in these remote communities. These are Territorians and we have to try to manage those properties better than we have done before, so the properties can last longer and be managed in a healthier way so people live a healthier life. It is a huge challenge, not just for the Labor government of today, but for this parliament going into the future ...
Mr Giles: It is for the CLP government of tomorrow.
Mr KNIGHT: Well, you never had a plan, member for Braitling. You had your opportunity today to talk about the plan you promised two years ago. You do not have a plan. You do not have single plan …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, this is the extent of the problem. That is what is facing not only this government, but this parliament into the future: how we manage, how we construct, and how we repair these houses.
SIHIP will deliver; it is delivering right now. There is work going on, not only on the first three packages at Tennant Creek, the Tiwis and on Groote Eylandt. Work has already commenced. It has been going for several months now at Wadeye, Maningrida and at Gunbalanya. That work is progressing very well. I have been out to Wadeye and spoken to them and they are just finalising the designs ...
Ms Anderson: Yes, they call you Silent Knight there.
Mr KNIGHT: Sorry? I will talk about the southern refurbishments. There has been a lot of scoping done already. Twenty-nine communities are part of the southern refurbishment. That work is commencing. We will deliver every one of those 750 homes, those 230 upgrades, and the 2500 refurbishments ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Oh, that is going to come back and bite you.
Mr KNIGHT: Well, it will not, because we will. What surprises me - and I do not know what they think was going to happen - in April last year we - the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments - said we have a five-year program; in June 2013 it was going to finish. There would be 750 homes over a five-year program, with the alliance contracting style of procurement, management and delivery. The opposition would have known that; it was a fairly public announcement - five years using alliance contracting. If you know anything about alliance contracting, the first thing you have to do is to get the alliances together. It was a national campaign to get those alliances together. There are Tier 1 companies in many of those alliances - Leighton, Laing O’Rouke - some fairly significant companies are involved in those alliances. The recruitment, the short listing, and the actual selection took up until October 2008. That was a reasonable time frame to get the alliances on board.
The first packages were allocated in December of that same year - the first three - and they have been working in those communities ever since. I do not know what they expected to happen in a five-year program - that they would deliver all the houses in the first year? With a major program with large packages, with that style of contracting, the ramping up takes a while but the delivery is much stronger, quicker, and more substantial through the middle years. That is exactly what this program is going to be doing.
The opposition knows this program will deliver quite significantly over the next two Dry Seasons and that is why they are getting in with a few cheap political points, to try to scaremonger people in the bush. It is really quite disappointing that the member for Braitling is out there spreading mistruths, putting little stories around ...
Ms Anderson: At least he has been out there, unlike you, the Minister for Housing – Silent Knight.
Mr KNIGHT: He goes on about Santa Teresa. The package for Santa Teresa has not changed; it is still $5m. Nothing has changed. The member for Macdonnell is yapping on there. We have said publicly ...
Mr Giles: She knows.
Mr KNIGHT: She does not know, she cannot add up.
Ms Anderson: I know the problems, unlike you.
Mr KNIGHT: In and around the program, 92% is going to be spent on the construction program …
Ms Anderson: You pretend to know …
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Macdonnell!
Mr KNIGHT: That is the reality of things; it will deliver that. It will deliver six packages, and we have more to come. Hopefully, the ...
Mr Giles: You are going to have fewer houses than before you started.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, hopefully, the negotiations will go well in those major southern communities such as Yuendumu and Hermannsburg, where we can get some leases, because that is a fundamental requirement. It is a requirement one of your previous Chief Ministers actually supported - the requirement to have secure land tenure. How can you properly manage a public housing dwelling anywhere in the world, anywhere in Australia, anywhere in the Northern Territory, unless you have secure land tenure? You have to have the ability to manage those properties, and that has been the requirement.
I thank the Northern Land Council for their vision and drive in getting that first lot of leases. I thank those traditional owners; they have seen they can actually move forward. I know the CLC is working to make it happen in the southern region as well, and I look forward to getting under way in many of those other communities.
It is a mammoth undertaking. I am disappointed with the member for Braitling, who is out there, not only spreading misinformation, he went out and talked about the …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr KNIGHT: He went out there, and not only told some untruths about Santa Teresa and how the figure had changed, but passed them on to his old mate, Tony Abbott, who repeated them. Well, it has not changed. He also went out there and spread some mistruths about the Alice Springs town camps. He was told, in writing, quite clearly, that it was 85 and, in a briefing with two of my …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Mr KNIGHT: No, no, I am finishing …
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I had to withdraw comments about mistruths before, and I ask the member for Daly to withdraw as well.
Madam SPEAKER: The minister was not talking about ‘lying’ as you were, member for Braitling – there is a difference. Minister, you could reword however; you are getting pretty close to wanting to do something by way of a substantive motion.
Mr KNIGHT: Misinformation? He was spreading vicious misinformation out there. He was clearly told in a briefing about the number of houses to be constructed in Alice Springs town camps. He was told it was going to be more than 40 and, subsequently, he was given in writing it was going to be 85. Yet, he still went out and told the public it was 40. Why would you want to do that? Why would you want to spread all those untruths out there - misinformation? It beggars belief you would do that. Also, going into communities and promising: ‘You should get all new houses here. You should get all this refurbishment’. The reality is we have $1.7bn over the next 10 years, including infrastructure as well. We have a $2bn backlog today, which is going to increase over time, so we have a significant challenge ahead of us.
Work is under way on this program, and it will deliver. I guess one of us is going to be eating humble pie next year when we start to knock these houses up and get the numbers starting to grow. It will be significant, and I look forward to having further discussions in this House. I look forward to the Auditor-General’s report in February next year, which will vindicate this government in relation to the administrative fees, and all the scuttlebutt and self-serving innuendo which has been put out to justify people’s actions.
Madam Speaker, this program is delivering, and it continues to do so. However, it is only one part of the …
Mr Giles: Delivering what? There is not a single house.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: It is only one part of providing a comprehensive plan for remote Indigenous housing. There has to be the management framework around it. There has to be comprehensive repairs and maintenance program around it. Part of SIHIP – a part which members on the other side want to forget and push aside with respect to this program - is the jobs. It is the training and the jobs. Why do we say they are so important? I have seen young men and women on Groote Eylandt working on those houses and getting accredited training, because we want these young men and women to be repairing and maintaining these houses into the future. It costs significantly less to have a local tradesperson, or a local skilled person, to do the repairs and maintenance. That is why we have the requirement in there. It is also about the human factor.
This program should not just leave houses. It should leave a skilled workforce, building up those communities. What we are seeing on Groote Eylandt, at Tiwi, and Tennant Creek is that human development, which is significant. People are working on their own houses; working on their family’s houses. That is the significant part of this. We will see hundreds of Aboriginal people from these local communities employed by SIHIP, skilled up through this process. There is also the requirement to transition them into either a local subcontractor, or offered work elsewhere. This is what we are trying to do, because we know in the future we are going to be looking for a workforce to repair and maintain these houses.
We also have staff out there in and around the housing management. This program is delivering, it will deliver. The CLP has no plan; we do.
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: They do not acknowledge the significance of the problem; we do. The CLP is making unfunded promises. Madam Speaker, we are being honest with Territorians and the CLP is very misleading.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, what a joke that was from the Housing Minister …
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms ANDERSON: Yes, what a joke. Pretend to know about Aboriginal poverty and disadvantage - you know nothing. That is why your own constituents call you ‘silent Knight’.
Madam Speaker, I support the MPI the member for Braitling has brought to this House. I correct some of the misinformation the Housing Minister has put onto the floor of this parliament about the so-called misinformation the member for Braitling has given to my constituents at Santa Teresa. It certainly did not happen. The member for Braitling was quite welcomed by my constituents at Santa Teresa. They took him around and showed him the house with the gap, which is not even going to be renovated under SIHIP. Northern Territory Housing has a charge called a poll tax - $45 per person. Every adult person who lives inside a house pays this $45.
The family who live in the house the Opposition Leader was talking about, without any roof - and the member for Braitling also spoke about it - still pays rent on the house. They have for the last 12 months. They are living inside their cousin’s home, but they are still paying rent for the house with no roof. It is a real shame - not just for us at politicians in this House, but as Territorians – that we have allowed this to happen to the most impoverished, disadvantaged people, who we continuously talk about, and for whom we go to the federal government and get national partnerships to make the lives of these people better.
Madam Speaker, I put this photograph up so people can see. This is the house the people are still paying rent for which has no roof. It is a real shame, in the 21st century, a Labor government would allow this, and allow a minister who does not even know what he is talking about, to talk to an MPI. It is absolutely disgraceful. I support the member for Braitling when he calls for a Royal Commission because I really do believe there needs to be a Royal Commission into the spending in the Northern Territory.
These are some of the saddest, most outrageous stories you will find. They have come out of my electorate, but you will see it in Stuart, Barkly, Arafura, Arnhem, and Katherine. You will see the homelessness. Homelessness does not have barriers, it does not have colours. I have seen non-Indigenous people homeless as well, sleeping in the long grass, sleeping in the creeks. When we talk about people with dementia and old age, just go down to the Todd River, Alice Springs, this side of Hoppy’s Camp. You will see an old lady called Valerie Nungerai she has dementia. Her home is a gum tree, this side of the Todd. Go and have a look at an amputee called David Wintjanana under the bridge in Alice Springs at the roundabout, crawling around. That is at the creek in Alice Springs, at the Todd River. This is real hopelessness and we should be absolutely, utterly ashamed of ourselves to stand in this parliament and pretend we are doing things about disadvantage and homelessness - not just for Indigenous people but non-Indigenous people in the Northern Territory as well.
I will go on with my written speech. I speak to this matter of public importance with a sense of despair in my heart. Of course, this is a matter of the greatest public importance. Our fellow citizens are badly housed and the policies of this government are to blame. This is not just an Indigenous policy issue; it is an issue for all of us. It concerns our fellow Territorians. Have we done the best for them? Can we hold up our heads proudly and say we have tried our best? You all know this is a question about which I care deeply.
I know the story from the inside; I know it very well. I came into this parliament knowing it had a ground level. I grew up in a humpy. When I was a girl at Papunya settlement, we dreamed of having good, solid houses of our own, homes for our families - well designed, peaceful, safe and quiet. Is it too much to ask the Northern Territory government, which has received vast funding from the Commonwealth of Australia, to spend some of that money ensuring the wellbeing of people on remote communities?
I knew when I was a child what every Aboriginal boy and girl on communities knows today: that bad, overcrowded houses and houses which are collapsing, almost guarantee failure in life. Bad housing is, in itself, enough to set most Aboriginal children on a path to illness, poor educational achievements, long-term unemployment, an unfulfilled life, and an early death. If you house people in kennels, they will have a dog’s life. I have watched and waited in this parliament over the past five years while we have done nothing. In that time, thousands of Aboriginal children have lived from five to 10 years old, their crucial years of development, in substandard accommodation, ill prepared for life.
I look at you, Madam Speaker, and around this Chamber at the men and women seated here, and I ask myself: what has gone wrong? Are we such bad, heartless people we cannot join together and ensure the correct spending of the $550m we were given to build houses in the bush? Do we not understand or care? Is it not a disgrace, a shame on all of us that we have sat here and watched for almost two years - two years - without a single house being built, even though the money for SIHIP has been announced?
This is not a political point. Put aside your politics a moment, forget you represent a party, or your actions keep a party in government. Just imagine what it is like to grow up in a small brick block house with 20 people, as our many community children do today. I want to paint that picture for you. I want you to think what it would be like. Nights are noisy, days are noisy too. There is no food in the kitchen; it gets eaten up at once. You are hungry, there are dogs everywhere, the floors are dirty, and the bathrooms are a mess. They clog up all the time. There is loud music playing and people talking, shouting, playing cards, children screaming and running around everywhere.
If you ever thought of reading or daydreaming, you would not have much chance. A computer is just a thing you see at school. You do not know much English living the way you do, but your own language is basic too. What you speak is simple Aboriginal English that stops you from having a way of speaking and communicating with outsiders, and being confident enough to even think of working with them. No, what you speak is the language of your house – the language of tension, fights, anger, and lack of privacy. You know in your heart there is very little hope of escaping from the fate awaiting you. You will not finish school; your home will not be stable and peaceful. You will be the one of the least advanced people in the Territory.
Does it really have to be this way? There are many things we cannot change, but the housing situation is one we can change - and fast. I have looked on as the government I was part of has failed in this area. There has been no sense of urgency at all; it has been total complacency. Suppose we try an experiment? Let us imagine you are sleeping at night in a community house, and every time you wanted to get up at night and have a cup of tea, you had to climb over eight bodies on mattresses. Suppose each time you closed your eyes, you were woken up by a fight, someone playing music, or some drunk bursting in. Suppose you could sleep an hour a night, which was the way it was, year after year. Would you be able to do your job well, deal with the pleasures of life, or look smart and well turned out?
I ask all honourable members, through you, Madam Speaker, the same question. Without basic accommodation, a roof and a quiet space, childhood is not childhood, school days are not school days, and life’s path is broken. It all starts at home. Just think of how your life would be if you had lived in a house with 20 people in a chaotic society when you were young and growing up. Would you be where you are now, Madam Speaker?
Let us look back a moment for years after you had won office and the Northern Territory Labor government complained it could not solve the housing problem in the bush. Then, along came the federal government with its emergency response, and Canberra agreed there was a link between poor housing and child abuse. It handed the Territory housing money - a first down payment. That became the basis for SIHIP which gave people in the bush some hope. What have we done with the stewardship for SIHIP? Consulting, bureaucratic talking, no houses - not one.
I do not want to use this MPI to score points. I invite us all here to pause and ask what the aim of public service really is. Why are we in politics? Surely, it is because we want to do good for society. We all know the plight of Indigenous community people is the most serious challenge we face in the Territory today. We all know it matters more than wave pools, water slides and V8 races. We all know it is the one thing by which we will be judged when we have left politics. Historians will not be sitting about discussing the Chief Minister and his attempts to bring a gas plant to the Territory. They will not be discussing the member for Nelson and his brilliant actions in getting new projects for his electorate. They will weigh and balance whether we did well by the poorest, the weakest, and the most disadvantaged in our midst.
Of course, I feel this very strongly because I am a bush person and I know all this on my skin. The consequences of bad housing hit me every day. They hit me in the funerals I go to - funerals of young men at the end of their wasted lives; funerals of women who died of preventable diseases too young; funerals of family members. We gather to say our farewells and we wonder why things have gone this way.
I feel we, as a parliament, have lost our way badly. The issue we should be talking about is basic housing. It should be in the front of our minds and at the tip of our tongues. It has to be introduced through an MPI. I know the government side and their new ally would rather talk about their new Council of Cooperation than on matters of significance.
This is a matter of significance and it should be talked about every day until we get results. Why not be radical? Why not introduce housing vouchers and give them to communities right now? Why not ask Canberra to devote military construction crews to mediate housing projects in the bush? Why not tell INPEX and all other resource corporations coming into the Territory they will have to fund housing in remote communities as a matter of basic corporate social responsibility? I have seen no evidence of new thinking on housing. We need that new thinking and we need it now, Madam Speaker.
When I was a child, as I mentioned, home was a humpy, and the humpy was our private family space. We had nothing, but we had everything – love, warmth, closeness. Sometimes in my despair at the failure of the Northern Territory to house my people, I wonder whether we would not be better just going back out into the bush and living our traditional lives. However, I know that time has gone and too much damage has been done to Aboriginal society in the name of progress.
I still remember sitting in the briefing I had on SIHIP when I was minister, and being told that only 30% of the program funds would end up in houses. I remember what I thought then. I remember the chill I felt. I thought: so this is the way it is? It is all words, it is all a game, and no one really cares. Now is the time for this parliament to show it cares. We were given $0.5bn by Canberra for remote community housing. Where is it? What has happened to it? It was meant for the bush, not for the pockets of consultants and government mates. I believe it is the responsibility of the Minister for Housing to come before the public every week and give a detailed account of progress. I believe a new Housing Minister should be named as a matter of urgency. I believe the failure of the government on this fund is total, and lost years will never be made up.
To pretend that all is well in the Territory today is simply a disgrace, Madam Speaker.
Ms Carney: Where are all their speakers?
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): No, they are not very interested.
Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak on this matter of public importance. It is an important matter. The way the government has handled this whole Indigenous housing program is totally shameful - absolutely appalling. They have had over $650m for the last two years, and have not completed one single house. We have heard from the member for Braitling how they are charging rent to people who are not even living in houses. I fail to see how members of the government - particularly people who have large remote electorates, or electorates containing Indigenous town camps - can come into this place and hold their heads up and not be completely embarrassed and shamed by this appalling situation going on in the Northern Territory.
Originally, this money was allocated for emergency housing. This money originally stemmed from a report which seems to have been lost on members of the other side - a report called the Little Children Are Sacred, which highlighted the degradation, the terrible living conditions, and some of the horrible things happening in Aboriginal communities and town camps across the Northern Territory. Of course, the report was commissioned by the Northern Territory government; it is not something some foreign body cooked up to attack the Northern Territory government. This was a report done for the Northern Territory government, and they seem to have turned their backs on the findings in the report - turned their backs, an absolutely shameful situation. I am staring at the member for Barkly sitting there.
I just noticed a media release from Mal Brough, the then federal Indigenous Affairs minister, on 7 August 2007 where he was lauding the fact there was an historic 99-year town care sublease agreed in Tennant Creek:
- Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Mal Brough, said today a memorandum of understanding was signed this afternoon committing Julalikari Council to facilitate 99-year subleases to the Northern Territory government within eight weeks.
Within eight weeks!
- ‘The Commonwealth has agreed to provide $20m towards the upgrade of essential services and infrastructure such as roads and upgrade of existing housing stock and construct new houses’, Mr Brough said.
There was $20m gifted from the Commonwealth to the Territory government for the upgrade of housing stock way back on 7 August 2007, over two years ago.
What has happened since then? Following that announcement, the Northern Territory government agreed to put $10m into the same program. The reason they did it was, in July 2007, the Northern Territory government Department of Family and Community Services put out an explanatory document called Connecting Neighbours, a program to upgrade essential services in Aboriginal urban living areas. The explanatory document is about the order of cost estimate assumptions for the Tennant Creek project. When you flick through it, you see the total project cost, excluding renovations to houses but including roads, electricity, water mains, sewerage and consultancy fees, was almost $22.5m – an estimation, at that time, by the Northern Territory government, of what the headworks and other programs would cost. Additional to that, they estimated, to upgrade 78 houses would cost somewhere around $9.24m. It was a total budget of $31.74m. Since that time, the federal government has committed a further $6.5m, taking the total up to $36.5m committed to the Tennant Creek area to upgrade 78 houses, and to build new houses.
How many houses have been built? How many upgrades have happened? Where is the money? Where is the money? There is nothing to be seen - absolutely nothing to be seen. Yet, sitting day, after sitting day, after sitting day, the member for Barkly waltzed in, never says ‘boo’ about what is happening in his electorate with his constituents and $36.5m allocated to fix their houses, plus the sewerage, the water mains, the electricity and the roads. $36.5m should be being spent in Tennant Creek. I ask you, Madam Speaker, is it? Is it being spent in Tennant Creek? If the government promised to spend $36.5m in Fong Lim, I would be keeping a close eye on it, and would be making sure every single cent of the promised money was spent in my electorate. If it was not; if there was the slightest possibility there had been some hocus-pocus going on …
Mr Styles: Mistruth.
Mr TOLLNER: … some mistruth or misinformation, I would be coming in here and kicking up a God Almighty stink. I would be absolutely outraged. Yet, we see the member for Barkly come here and not once - not once - has he complained about the lack of work taking place in his electorate.
Look across the other side of the room and you see them everywhere – the members for Arafura, Arnhem and Nhulunbuy. All these people have these places in their electorates and nothing is being done - absolutely nothing is being done!
We sit here and watch the member for Daly bumble through Question Time, failing to answer questions, talking about things that happened 10 or 15 years ago as if it is some shock, horror revelation to him. Look around the place, look around the Territory. We do have communities, the length and breadth of the Territory, which have houses in them. Did they just magically appear? Did they just magically come out of the ether? It was previous governments which did that. The member for Daly has the audacity to complain he has to perform maintenance on those places. Goodness me, the capital costs have been met and all of the work has been done on those places. The least you would think the government could do was to ensure they were standing and were habitable.
We heard stories today from the members for Braitling and Macdonnell of how people are living in houses with walls but no roof. Goodness me, what a ridiculous situation to be in. I have heard of people in Alice Springs town camps living under chicken coops and being charged rent - under corrugated iron, bits of stuff tied together, and cardboard and the like. They are paying rent for that. Not only are they paying rent, but there has been almost $700m worth of taxpayers’ money allocated to fixing this problem, or at least providing some emergency accommodation. What did we hear today in Question Time? The government is working on the plans and the design of these places two years later. They do not even have a design.
They have spent $45m and have nothing to show for it - absolutely nothing to show for it. Here we are, we run a matter of public importance on the issue, and we ran a whole Question Time on this housing issue, and we get one lame duck minister try to defend the indefensible. We heard nothing from the Chief Minister, nothing from the Treasurer - do not hear ‘boo’! It is like they are not even here. It is an appalling situation. It does not seem to matter where you go in the Northern Territory, this situation continues.
In the last week, the member for Braitling called for a Royal Commission. I believe it was an eminently sensible call. I heard the Chief Minister on the radio bat it away: ‘Oh, you do not have Royal Commissions into this sort of stuff. No one is alleging corruption’. I do not know what you call it, but when $45m just disappears, when we identify $36.5m in Tennant Creek which has just disappeared – plans, everything all with the Northern Territory government logo, all happened a year ago. ‘Yes we are going to do this. We are going to upgrade roads, we are going to upgrade sewerage, we have taken the money’. They have taken the money and it has just gone.
The member for Nelson has a thing he wants to get up called the Territory Council of Cooperation or something like that. The Council of Territory Cooperation is going to look into it. We have had minister Macklin, who seemed to be the person who was running the program, have an independent look at it. What a bizarre situation! Now we are going to get the Council of Territory Cooperation look at it. It will take another six months or so. Ultimately, where are we going to get? I tell you, I believe the only way to get to the bottom of this whole debacle is with a Royal Commission.
Members: Hear! Hear!
Mr TOLLNER: We need someone at a high level - independent, unobstructed - to get in there, root out what the problems are, find out where the problems are, and fix it and tell us. We are certainly not hearing it from the minister. We heard from the Planning minister today, in Question Time, saying we have this wonderful land release program. In 2007, they were making the same announcements they are today - exactly the same announcements. The really heartbreaking thing about this is these are human beings we are talking about. These are real people – real people - living in the most squalid conditions.
We have the bleeding hearts on the left coming in here saying how much they love Aboriginal people and Indigenous culture and all of that, and they cannot even provide them with a house, despite the fact they have had nearly $700m for two years. That is a disgrace! It is a total disgrace and every member on the other side should hang their head in shame - absolutely hang their head in shame ...
Mr Conlan: Or at least get up and give a defence.
Mr TOLLNER: Put up a defence or do something. Explain where this money is just disappearing. Explain why there are no houses being built. At one stage, I had a bit of respect for the member for Arafura. When she left the government, she said she could not tolerate this any more. Then, lo and behold, another Indigenous person left the government and the member for Arafura was back. That is just terrible. These people should not just be booted out of government; they should be made accountable - absolutely accountable. What are they doing on the Treasury benches? Where is that $700m? Almost $700m and not a single house to show for it - how absolutely disgraceful. Madam Speaker, every single one of them should hang their head in shame.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Policy): Madam Speaker, I contribute to this very important debate and go to the heart of the matter. We are reminded over a third of the Territory’s population is Indigenous, and 70% of that population lives outside our major cities and towns. Significantly, it is also a fact in the Territory over 60% of Indigenous people 15 years and older live in overcrowded housing. This situation did not occur over the last 10 years. It is a shameful circumstance which has bedevilled the Territory for decades. It is a circumstance which continues to burden families with unhealthy and unsafe places to live. It is a circumstance which continues to place unconscionable burdens and liabilities on the taxpayer - not just meeting the housing burden, but the health costs and lost opportunities associated with this deplorable state of affairs. How can we expect our most important resource - our families and our kids - to prosper, do well, and contribute to a better Territory while shackled by the miserable circumstances of overcrowding and unhealthy living? None of this is new to us. Many of us here know that circumstance intimately. That is why we are here: to do something about it.
I recently attended a meeting on Groote Eylandt with Tony Wurramarrba and James Anaya, the UN Special Rapporteur visiting Australia to review and report on the Northern Territory emergency response. There was a particular, telling moment, during their visit where Mr Wurramarrba was telling the Special Rapporteur of one of the fundamental problems which hindered progress in developing our remote communities.
Our government knows SIHIP is new. Our government knows SIHIP is a risk. We have known, in conjunction with the federal government, we were embarking on a very different process. It was a risk and a challenge we did not shy away from. In fact, the people of Groote Eylandt, under the leadership of the Anindilyakwa Land Council, knew the risk as well. We know it has had an impact on the very Chairmanship of the Anindilyakwa Land Council, who expressed in the meeting with the UN rapporteur there has to be change; there has to be risks taken. He took the risk of leasing; he took the risk of showing a vision for the future for his people.
I am reminded of this. I know this intimately. This is the pattern of ministers and well-meaning public servants coming to remote Indigenous communities to promise good things, but outcomes came to be measured in hollow promises, haphazard solutions, cost blowouts, fly in/fly out contractors, profiteering, and a culture of blame for poor asset and tenancy management over a long period of time. It should be no surprise Indigenous remote housing has been exempt from the Northern Territory’s Residential Tenancies Act. There has been no capacity for the same health, safety and tenancy management arrangements expected in our major towns, to be applied in our remote towns. Hours and hours of debate have been spent on how this came to be.
The real job at hand is to fix it, and that is what we, on this side of the House, are doing - working with a like-minded federal government which has accepted this is a national priority, not an emergency quick fix. Let me put the facts on the record, because it is important this House is clearly aware this process began long before the intervention. This process was not emergency housing as part of the intervention. This process began under the leadership of those who had been in housing prior to the current Minister for Housing - John Ah Kit and Elliot McAdam, who fought long and hard for the beginning of this housing process.
I am reminded, in 2006, the then Australian government commissioned a major review of a history of Commonwealth-funded remote Indigenous housing and housing management programs. What a woeful story that was: a history of failure of public policy, emanating from a program lurching along in various guises from the 1960s. In the understatement of a decade, the report concluded:
- The housing needs of Indigenous Australians in remote areas have not been well served, and the interests and expectations of taxpayers have not been met.
The Minister for Housing has outlined how the Northern Territory government, from day one of our election to government, understood its obligation to get this right. However, it was never going to be done just by ourselves. A durable, long-term fix was going to require the financial muscle of the Australian government, the expertise of the business community, the willingness and expertise of the non-government sectors, and the absolute commitment and desire of the local people of the Northern Territory. I am pleased our government took on this challenge knowing the risks because of the scale of the problem. I am reminded of the early commitment of then ministers John Ah Kit and Elliot McAdam.
I am reminded of our early commitment of $100m to remote Indigenous housing, and the mechanism to leverage greater federal government investment. That worked, and it took us to an agreement on an Indigenous housing memorandum of understanding which has now morphed into a national partnership agreement to remote Indigenous housing - recognition of the national significance of this priority.
Mr Tollner: You are a disgrace.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms McCARTHY: I will not waste time defending the indefensible. I visited Santa Teresa and saw the shells of housing still waiting for replacement roofs many months after storm damage - and you are right, it is indefensible. All involved in the business of government have to understand the priority that kind of work requires. Yes, members are right in that. We have seen results of the recent SIHIP review report and the all-too-familiar story of layers of bureaucracy and loose community engagement. There is no denying that.
I want to see mothers and families happy they have a safe place to live and raise their family, and kids have a place to call their own. However, I also want to see individual people, families and clans across the Northern Territory take responsibility to grab a hold of the opportunities out there as well. There are tremendous opportunities coming through within the employment and training programs - people can go to work, acquire assets and care for their families in a place they can call their own. I want to see landlords fulfilling the same obligations to their tenants expected in other part of the Territory. I want to see families supported in managing their tenancies, and a stop to the waste of public funds on ill-conceived and patchwork housing repairs and maintenance. I want to see the employment and training outcomes from this building work we have missed out on for decades.
I am reminded of an old man in Central Australia, who proudly would tell people how he was a painter. Many thought he was a canvas painter and he would laugh. He would probably say: ‘I am a house painter’. I guess we can all talk about personal experiences. I want to work with my ministerial colleagues committing to this training opportunity for our house painters, plumbers, and builders of the future. We recognise we are not just growing our houses in the communities, we are growing a social workforce in employment and training for future ongoing development ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms McCARTHY: We recognise we have to see a culture of change within our own communities, where individuals and families take responsibility and the opportunities.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 51, in relation to no interruption. I hope members opposite would show the minister some courtesy, and let the minister speak without countless interjections.
Mr GILES: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker. We have every right to interject against issues such as this.
________________
Suspension of Standing Orders
Proposed Motion of Censure
Proposed Motion of Censure
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent this House from censuring the Northern Territory Labor government for their complete neglect of Aboriginal housing in the Northern Territory.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, we will not be accepting the censure. This is a matter of public importance brought on by the opposition. They had more than enough time and opportunity to run a censure within Question Time today. This is just a cheap, stupid, political stunt …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the level of interjections, apart from anything else, is absolutely ridiculous. It is not a member’s right to interject. In fact, it is a member’s responsibility not to interject, member for Braitling; I am reminding you of that. The standing orders are very clear about that.
The member for Braitling has sought to suspend standing orders, and the government has indicated they will not be doing that, so I will put it the question.
The question is the standing orders be suspended ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Am I able to talk to the motion to put forward the censure?
Madam SPEAKER: No.
The Assembly divided:
- Ayes 12 Noes 12
Ms Anderson Mrs Aagaard
Mr Bohlin Dr Burns
Ms Carney Mr Gunner
Mr Chandler Mr Hampton
Mr Conlan Mr Henderson
Mr Elferink Mr Knight
Mr Giles Ms Lawrie
Mr Mills Mr McCarthy
Ms Purick Ms McCarthy
Mr Styles Ms Scrymgour
Mr Tollner Mr Vatskalis
Mr Westra van Holthe Mrs Walker
Madam SPEAKER: The result of the division is an equality of votes. Pursuant to section 27(1) of the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act as there is not a majority of votes, the question is resolved in the negative.
Motion negatived.
__________________
Ms McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I want to work with my ministerial colleagues committing to training opportunities for our future plumbers and builders. We need to restore the pride and sense of ownership which comes from picking up the tools and being part of building something - not only as Aboriginal Australians, but as Territorians across the Northern Territory. As a government, that is our focus.
All these things are the things we have committed to as part of our reform to remote Indigenous housing. As Minister for Indigenous Policy, I am working to follow up the vision of the member for Macdonnell in cutting through and delivering A Working Future, which includes progressing land leasing and development to underpin more economic activity, and jobs and opportunities for private investment in housing including home ownership.
A few weeks ago I went to Nguiu with the members for Arafura and Nelson. The week before, we saw on television a despondent traditional owner waiting for a new house. On my trip around the corner on Nguiu I saw a site cleared for homes being built under the Home Ownership on Indigenous Land Program, houses being refurbished, and a resident of a new house built as part of the Nguiu lease.
On 5 October, the member for Braitling announced he had written to the Prime Minister requesting a Royal Commission into SIHIP. I do not support that call. The member for Braitling said the Royal Commission should look not just at SIHIP but should examine all aspects of the Henderson government’s housing strategy and alternative housing models, including private rental and ownership, as well as the provision of public and community housing.
There are a few things I would like to say about this request for a Royal Commission. In recent times, Royal Commissions have become quite uncommon. The Howard Coalition government, in its 11 years, only had four Royal Commissions, and the Rudd government has not held any. One of the main reasons is most likely Royal Commissions are extremely costly and time consuming. By way of example, the Australian Wheat Board 2005 Oil-for-Food Royal Commission cost approximately $13m and took over 12 months. The Royal Commission into the insurance giant, HIH, in 2001 cost approximately $47m. The Royal Commission into the building and construction industry cost $70m and took 18 months to complete.
The time and money associated with Royal Commissions is such the Commonwealth Attorney-General, Hon Robert McClelland, has ordered a review of the Royal Commission Act which is being undertaken by the Australian Law Reform Commission. In his terms of reference, the Attorney-General has requested the Law Reform Commission look at more flexible, less formal, and more cost-effective options of an inquiry than a Royal Commission.
On one hand, the member for Braitling has been very vocal - certainly over delays in government. The member for Macdonnell has clearly expressed frustration, disgust and disappointment. We are listening to them and working on it. On the other hand, encouraging the government to embark on a Royal Commission will be just as time-consuming and extremely costly in the process
There are already appropriate structures in place in this parliament, such as the review of the implementation of SIHIP. SIHIP is overseen by a joint steering committee, an intergovernmental body which overseas the program’s strategic direction and performance. The program will be the subject to review by the Northern Territory Auditor-General, ongoing media scrutiny, and there is also the opportunity for a Senate committee review of spending of Commonwealth money if so decided by the Senate. In addition, we have processes under the Westminster system, providing an appropriate form for proper scrutiny of the Northern Territory government, including Questions on Notice, Question Time and the estimates process.
The new Council of Cooperation will provide an additional avenue for appropriate scrutiny of government. SIHIP is specifically identified as a matter of public importance for inquiry by the Council of Cooperation in the parliamentary agreement between the Chief Minister and the member for Nelson. What this government is focused on is getting outcomes on the ground. As the local member in the seat of Arnhem, I am acutely aware of the need to do that.
Madam Speaker, I am mindful, as the Minister for Indigenous Policy, we need to demonstrate our housing improvements are not just occurring in the 15 communities targeted for township leasing and new houses under our COAG national partnership agreement. I will be working with the Minister for Housing and all my colleagues as part of A Working Future to ensure residents and, in particular families in these places, also benefit from housing improvements, job opportunities for the future, and a choice about the way they would like to see their children grow up.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I would have thought that was a great speech, except for the fact I have heard it before. I heard it from the former minister, Jack Ah Kit - all of the same rhetoric, all of the same issues. Guess what? None of it has materialised. This is the frustration we, on this side of the House but, more importantly, Aboriginal people on the ground, are feeling with this government’s response. It is all - I cannot say that – wind. It is all noise. It is all hyperbole. There is no structure and drive pushing those fine words.
If this minister believed Aboriginal people should have control of their assets, then she would understand the reason I got angry with the Minister for Housing earlier today; because he comes in here and likes to score stupid political points about which federal government did what, when there are people he can have a direct effect on, dying - literally dying out in those communities. We have heard it from the former member for Macdonnell. I have seen it, Madam Speaker. To win or try to score stupid political points when you are the Minister for Housing - for God’s sake! Why is this minister not sitting here with bags under his eyes like suitcases because he has been working all night on this stuff, driving this with passion, with the lust it needs to be driven with, to ensure those public servants and bureaucrats, and those other entities, the NGOs, which are driving this, are driving it with an equal level of passion?
This is a matter of life and death, quite literally. For the minister to think it is cute to win a political point in this House shows you how far and how recklessly he has abandoned the duty he swore he would maintain when he took on the Crown’s commission to become the Minister for Housing. That is what is disgraceful about this.
To hear the Minister for Indigenous Policy say Aboriginal people should have control of their own assets - absolutely, Madam Speaker. I have been saying that for years. Why is not she going with him to Canberra, saying: ‘For goodness sake, change the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act so Aboriginal people can own assets’? At the moment, they are simply land trusts - which means some sort of globular form of ownership. No individual Aboriginal person has any hope of lifting themselves whilst they continue to live on their traditional countries. This is what the problem is. It is a great type of utopia which is being created by the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, and what do we have? We have the North Korea of Australia stuck in the Northern Territory because of federal legislation which has built a prison around these people, and has condemned them to a life of poverty.
This argument we are currently having is about whether the $700m has been appropriately spent. How long is the $700m going to last? A decade, five years, one year? What happens then? At that point …
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: What is their asset base, and what is their interest to try to look after those assets? Zero. Why? Because they do not own the assets. They have to own the assets, and then they have to have the ownership of the businesses they need to build in conjunction with other people who are allowed to come on to that land and build businesses with them.
If that rendered a great dislocation, and Aboriginal people have different levels of wealth as a result, then I would say good, because I would rather see half of the Aboriginal people living in lower-income situations than all of them, which is what they are currently condemned to. They are condemned to this by a small-minded approach which continues to infect not only bureaucracies but the government opposite, members of which cannot bring themselves to look beyond this simple fact: unless these people are allowed to own their own futures, all the services in the world will not develop a result for them in any long-term effect.
We talk about Aboriginal ownership of land; let us talk about ownership which is meaningful to the people who own that land. What we have at the moment deprives people of hope. It is a crushing crime being committed on Aboriginal people at the moment. I cannot begin to express my dismay when the Minister for Housing, who probably works 9 am to 5 pm - goes into his office, listens to what the bureaucrats say to him, reads whatever speeches he is given to read out in this parliament. The Minister for Indigenous Policy comes in here and reads whatever speeches are written for her to come into parliament and read out. Where is the drive? Where is it? This is a plea to the government: for goodness sake, get involved with some passion so you can go out there and actually make a difference.
I cannot begin to imagine how some of the ministers opposite sleep at night with the enormity of the load they carry. The level of flippancy with which they carry it is criminal. I am not at all surprised the government did not want to take the censure motion from the member for Braitling, and with good reason, I imagine, because it would mean they would have to, at least for a moment, listen to the criticism being directed at them.
For goodness sake, for the sake of all things holy, go to some of these places; see you can make a difference. I tell you, Madam Speaker, as the member for Port Darwin, I should be the one in this room with the least amount of interest in what happens in those remote communities. However, I spent eight years in those communities, and I can well understand the current member for Macdonnell is frustrated. Certainly, the former member for Macdonnell is frustrated with what has been going on.
Nobody is blameless in this; I could have done more. However, the opportunity begs, the will is out there. Yet, what we have on the front page of The Australian, day after day, is the money is being wasted, the opportunity is being wasted. That opportunity is only to buy time to build a better future. If the Minister for Indigenous Policy believes Aboriginal people should own their own assets, then she should be on a plane tonight or tomorrow going to Canberra - as soon as possible saying to the federal minister: ‘For goodness sakes, make this work; make this possible’.
It is outside of our jurisdictional capacity to change the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, but it should be changed. It should be changed so traditional people can own their own land in a similar way I can, you can, Madam Speaker, and anyone else in this Chamber can. The traditional stories identify quite specifically which country belongs to which group of people. Surely, the anthropology can be done to secure land for those families directly. That anthropology can be done, but it is assiduously being avoided, year in and year out, because it will increase pressure on large bureaucracies which have more interest in being Sir Humphrey Appleby and looking after their own interests, than they actually have for Aboriginal people.
Madam Speaker, until bureaucracies are brought to heel by leaders who have the guts to stand up to these bureaucracies and say: ‘I am not going to take your rubbish, you are going to do your job or you are out of here. ‘I am not going to meekly read out a speech which has been written for me; I am going to drive this matter with the passion I claim to have in my prepared speech’, when that happens, when leadership is taken up by those whose responsibility it is to lead, then you will see some change. At the moment, we have a government more intent on avoiding its destruction than by the matters which should be driving it. That is the disgrace which is being highlighted here: the abject failure of this government, this minister, the federal government - both past and present - to be able to create an environment where Aboriginal people can rescue themselves.
I do not want to become the person who tells Aboriginal people how to run their own culture. I would no more tell an Aboriginal person to do that than I would tell a brain surgeon how to do brain surgery. What I do say, however, is we have it within our power to make those Aboriginal peoples the true custodians of their own future. At the moment, whilst we talk about what bureaucracy should be doing, we will deprive those Aboriginal people as they continue to be the experiment in our self-satisfied Petri dish.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, if ever there was a need for a statement from our Chief Minister to this House, SIHIP is certainly one of those areas we definitely need a response by the Territory government. I say that because, on 28 August, we received the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program review of program performance. The review told us what was wrong and, if we want to get it back on track, this is what we have to do. It is beholden on the government to respond to the review. At the moment, even though I have had a number of briefings - and I thank the government for those briefings on SIHIP - I share the general feeling amongst people in this House and also the wider community, that this program is really in trouble.
We have a Wet Season coming, and I know in some places the design has not yet been agreed. If the design has not been agreed to at this stage, in October, how are houses going to be built in places like Gunbalanya if you cannot get materials out there? It gives one the impression the government has lost its way. I am not saying it has lost its way completely, because there are some good stories in relation to what is going on. However, I feel the government needs to make a major statement in relation to this review. It raises some serious issues about money which has been spent on administration. It raises issues about how the project was managed. It is beholden on this government to tell the public what its response is to this review.
I look at this whole project, and we were going to build about – I have forgotten the exact number of houses …
Mr Giles: Seven hundred and fifty.
Mr WOOD: Right, 750 houses. That might sound a lot but it is actually not many at all. If you were to go to a suburb in Melbourne or Sydney, they would probably knock that up in a year. I would love to know who thought of the alliance process. I heard it discussed here when this first started to be debated. It was a brand new thing for me. I had never heard of it but people were speaking about it as if one should know what it was about. I wonder why it was not questioned more and why we did not look at getting a company through the tender process whose job was to build these houses - one tender for the whole of the Territory. It is not a huge number of houses.
All right, there are basic difficulties in building these houses in certain parts of the Territory; there is no doubt about that. It is going to cost more money to build one on Groote Eylandt and Bathurst Island than it probably is at Belyuen. I know that. Surely, companies we have today - big construction companies - would have been able to handle this issue much more efficiently than has happened so far. We still do not have answers on how much some of the consultants in this project actually made before they started to slim down the managerial side of things. For instance, in the old governance structure, my understanding is the program director and the program manager came from the same company.
Luckily, some of it has now been removed under the review. How much money was lost by using a fairly complicated system of managing this project? Again, if it was a company, would it have had all this, or would it have just been a case of the company being responsible to the Housing department? The department of Housing tells the company what sort of houses have to be built - end of story.
We seem to have made an awfully complicated process to deliver what should be - not rocket science - building houses. We have been building them for years. A house is not a new thing; it is something we have had for a long time. The other thing which concerns me is people have gone out for so-called consultation. I am not against people consulting, but let us be real. We are building houses under NT Housing. They are Housing Commission houses. They are there to try to solve a problem of overcrowding. They will belong to NT Housing. We know what is a good structure for housing.
I have mentioned this book before. This is a book called Pole Frame Structures. I am not saying we build them out of timber, by the way. They had some basic housing designs which were put forward by the then Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory. They were simple houses with two bedrooms, kitchen, laundry and toilet with a breezeway between - exactly the type of house on Bathurst Island, except they are actually made of stronger material. Some of those houses are being refurbished now. Why is that design so great? It works in the tropics. However, we have gone to enormous lengths to design something totally different. You really have to ask why did we have to go back to try to reinvent the wheel?
We spent time doing that. The time we spent doing it is time lost building houses. I really get concerned someone has made these alliances. As I said before today, there is an alliance called Earth Alliance. It might be a fine company. I do not know much about it, but I saw one of their designs for Gunbalanya. When I saw a wooden slatted floor, I thought: ‘Well, you might have discussed this with someone, but I do not know whether you talked to NT Housing about how real this design is when it comes to long-term maintenance’. How long will this wooden floor last? Thirty years? I doubt it very much. You really wonder whether it should have gone to someone who had a practical knowledge of housing in the Northern Territory. There are many builders in the Northern Territory who have worked outback, who know what houses will stand up to punishment, and which houses are of good and practical design.
They will know of people out bush; how they eat. They do not all eat in beautiful kitchens. Nothing to say we should not have a kitchen, but they also go out and get bush tucker and they kill that outside and put it on the barbecue. That is the way it is cooked. I know from my place when the turtle are in the laundry, they are not going to get cooked over the electric stove. They are out there on the wood fire getting cooked the way people would normally cook. I wonder whether the people who designed these houses have an understanding of how people out bush cook their meals. Yes, they will use a stove, but they also will use their traditional methods of just cooking in the ashes. That is the way it has been done. The first time I ever ate catfish it had been cooked in a pile of hot coals. People might denigrate catfish, but it tastes mighty good when it is cooked straight after it has been caught. I wonder whether there is basic understanding on the part of some of these companies on what they are intending to build.
We spent this much time and, yet, there are some moves to build houses at Bathurst Island. Listening to the member for Port Darwin about Aboriginal people being able to buy their own homes, one thing I noticed when I was at Bathurst, there are people actually buying their own homes. There are Aboriginal teachers putting up houses there now which I thought was really terrific to see. They put their money into their own house, and that is great. There was also some good quality houses from the existing Indigenous Housing Program. They were pulling down some houses, because there are some houses totally unliveable which are ready for SIHIP. I gather they are now starting to be developed. I do not want to say there are no good things happening but, if you look at the overall picture, you have to wonder how we reached this stage and had so little progress. It really is a worry.
I also wonder whether we have set up mechanisms on some of these communities which make life more complicated. We have local government, in some cases, now being told it looks after housing. We have also have NT Housing saying it is looking after housing in some cases, and the alliance is building them. In cases like Bathurst Island, we have the Bathurst Island Housing Association. Luckily, at Port Keats or Wadeye, at least the alliances are using an existing housing association. However, Aboriginal people must wonder how they got life so complicated with all these different people trying to build houses: the Indigenous Housing Program, the alliance program, and we had Bathurst Island Housing Association program. Boy, life must get muddled!
When I was at Areyonga recently, that was exactly what one lady said: ‘I am on this committee for housing and on another committee for different housing and another committee for another kind of housing’. There are only about 250 people living in Areyonga. You really need three committees for people to be on? You just want to build houses …
Mr Giles: And they still have not built a house.
Mr WOOD: Yes, well, Areyonga is not in the mix for the houses at the moment.
All I am saying is government has to say what it intends to do. This is a mess; there is no doubt about it. It has had a review. What is urgently needed in this parliament is a response to this review. Say what it is going to do; admit there have been mistakes. I cannot say it is entirely because of the Northern Territory government’s mistake things have gone wrong because this has also come from the Commonwealth. I do not know what some of those funny people in Canberra thought when they thought up this scheme to set up an alliance and consult people - as if no consultation with people had ever occurred in the last 30 years. Did they have any idea how people live where they were building these houses? How you can build a practical house?
I believe between the two governments they have made a mighty fine mess of things. We should not give up. We might want to give up, but the reality is, as the member for Port Darwin said, people need houses. It is important we get these houses built because Aboriginal people are living in overcrowded circumstances. They are living in houses, for instance at Bathurst Island, which are well past their use-by date. They have just died. They are metal houses near the coast. Life moves on. We need to stick with it, work our way through it and, hopefully, come out better at the other.
Yes, I have no problem criticising the government about it. We can keep criticising the government about it, but it is beholden upon us all to say: ‘Okay, let us all try to work together and fix this mess up’. Otherwise, the people who will lose out in the end will be the very people we are trying to build these houses for.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I speak on what is a very important matter of public importance. I thank the member for Braitling for bringing it on because it is a very important issue and one over which we can all beat our chests, tell personal stories, and recoil in shock and horror at what has gone on. However, at the end of the day, it is not about me, the members for Stuart, Macdonnell, or Arnhem – it is not about any of us - it is about all of us working together to try to ensure we can move forward and get this housing program, which is one of the biggest single investments ever, I suppose, of housing in those communities on Aboriginal land.
I was listening to the member for Port Darwin, who went to law school. He has probably completed his law degree and, no doubt, one day may make a fine lawyer. However, I believe he might need to read some legislation, because he was standing and beating his chest about why Aboriginal people cannot own their own home …
Mr Elferink: Why will we not let them?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Well, they can. That amendment has been made to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. I think it is section 20, but that amendment has now been made, member for Port Darwin. We have seen on the Tiwi Islands where home ownership on Indigenous land is happening. In talking to a lot of my constituents in both Gunbalanya and Maningrida, I have encouraged them to follow suit. The time has changed - you are right. The amendment has now been made to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act ...
Mr Elferink: A lot more has to happen than just that.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: When an individual gets a 99-year lease, it is the same lease requirement as any individual in Canberra. It is the same lease, or requirement - I do not know what the legal wording is. When an individual on Aboriginal land takes out a 99-year section 19 lease for their lot to get home ownership, they have the same title as a resident in Canberra. That is now available for Aboriginal people in those communities, which is fantastic. That barrier has now been broken.
One of the other issues I have been talking to people in my electorate about is outstations - taking leases in those outstations so they can also go towards home ownership. We have to start thinking outside the square. We have to look at ...
Mr Elferink: I was saying that 10 years ago.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Yes, the bucket is going to get smaller and smaller. We need investment to ensure we can work with the Commonwealth government to continue this investment beyond the five years of the allocation. The Minister for Indigenous Policy summed it up pretty well, I believe. The Minister for Housing outlined the facts of the program.
When I go around my electorate and talk to Aboriginal people on the ground, whether it is the Tiwi Islands or through the fantastic area of West Arnhem, Aboriginal people are sick of becoming political footballs. They are sick of hearing politicians beating their chest, and blaming each other. They also hear the comments, and it confuses some of them that the CLP is actually caring, because many of them have never forgotten the legacy. I say to them we have to move on. The money is there; let us try to get things happening.
I applaud the Northern Land Council. I believe it has moved pretty fast in getting the leases secured for both Gunbalanya and Maningrida, and for what has happened in both of those communities. Much of the focus was on Wadeye. Maningrida is the second-largest Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory. The speed in which those leases happened - the land council has moved pretty fast on them. I applaud the traditional owners; they have acted with a lot of courage. They are going down a road they have not gone down before. However, they continually say: ‘We do not want to be the political footballs here’. We have the leases. We want to have consultation about the houses; we want to look at some of the design and construction happening. However, we actually want to see the houses happening on the ground in those communities.
The member Nelson and I travelled to the Tiwi Islands with the member for Arnhem, and had a look at the housing. The Leader of the Opposition also went to the Tiwi Islands to look at some of the houses Bathurst Island Housing and the alliance partners, Sitzlers and others, have been constructing. There is a lot of activity happening on the Tiwi Islands. The Chief Minister and I had a full briefing with the alliance partners last week. We also had a look at all of the houses which were being refurbished and reconstructed. We were able to inspect the houses which are part of HOIL - Home Ownership on Indigenous Land - in those communities.
The fantastic part of the alliance project on the Tiwi Islands is the 45 young Tiwi men who are part of the project. This has not happened before - 45 young men who have been trained, and who will be employed full-time on this project. It does a lot for the morale of those young men. Sure, it is not enough; we need to do more in terms of employment. However, 45 is a great start.
The alliance partners, Earth Connect at Gunbalanya, are about to employee 26 young Binninj or Aboriginal men from the community to work as a part of the project. I am not saying it is all okay out there; we have to be vigilant and ensure things do move.
In the past, I have offered the member for Braitling to come and have a look at some of the other communities where things are happening, and where what is happening here could be translated to areas where it is not working. If you have the land councils, traditional owners, the community, and both governments working together, things can happen on the ground in those communities. That is what we are seeing on the Tiwi Islands, Gunbalanya and Maningrida ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Arafura, the overall time for the MPI has expired.
Discussion concluded.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I congratulate the winner of the Police Officer of the Year Award. Each year, the Rotary Club of Darwin coordinates the Police Officer of the Year Award. This award was established in 1991 to recognise the challenges police officers face, and to say a public thank you for a job well done.
This year, there were 51 nominations from members of the public. The Police Officer of the Year for 2008-09 was awarded to Senior Constable Anthony Clarke. Senior Constable Clarke is the 18th winner of this prestigious annual award, and is recognised for his work in remote community policing in the Pirlangimpi community on Melville Island.
Senior Constable Clarke is a proactive policeman who is thoroughly involved with the local community. A strong believer in training, he frequently organises local community development employment project training to enable the locals to gain the relevant heavy vehicle licences so they can help maintain the roads. Senior Constable Clarke has also helped to set up a new Northern Territory Emergency Services unit in the Tiwi Islands to service the community’s rescue needs.
Since joining the police force in January 2000, Senior Constable Clarke has served in Alice Springs, Kulgera, Yulara and Darwin. In May 2005, he was seconded to the Australia Federal Police for two years, serving in the Solomon Islands and Timor-Leste with the International Deployment Group in the Operations Response Team. During his time in the Solomons, Senior Constable Clarke was awarded a bravery citation. Policing can be difficult, demanding and, on occasions, dangerous, but is often very satisfying and rewarding. I congratulate the Rotary Club of Darwin for its ongoing coordination of this award, and I invite members of the Assembly to join with me in thanking Senior Constable Clarke for the service he has delivered to the Northern Territory community. I congratulate him, as I am sure we all do, in winning this award.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON: Around my electorate, the schools are still very busy. Holy Spirit Primary School held their annual fete just before Father’s Day. Although attendance was down this year, there was a fantastic vibe in the air and many dollars were raised for the school. Thanks to Karen and Brendon Watts, Trish and John Pini, Karen and Jamie Adams, Christine and John Crimmings, Michelle Richards, Alicia Westbrook, Maria Halkitis, Natasha and David Villa, Shelley and Winter Randolph, and Donna Johnson. Also, a huge thank you to all the staff and students at Holy Spirit for helping the day to run as smoothly as it did. It was a great day, and I enjoyed being there again, with the member for Arnhem who also attended the fete.
Holy Spirit also did well in the National Mathematics Competition. Holy Spirit students received three distinctions, four credits and two proficiencies. Well done to the students who took part.
At Leanyer Primary School, the new classrooms in Module 5 are very close to being finished, with the official opening day happening next month. I was able to duck down to the school and have a look through the new classrooms, which are absolutely fantastic. They are filled with colour and the brand new SMART Boards are amazing. The drop-off zone has also been completed, which gives the kids and parents at Leanyer all-weather access to a safe drop-off and pick-up area.
Leanyer Primary also recently held their swimming carnival, and Kakadu was able to take out the Golden Flipper with 524 points after already having won the Golden Slipper on sports day earlier this year. Litchfield came second with 381 points, followed closely by Uluru on 353 points, and Coburg slipped into fourth place with 217 points.
The 2009 swimming age champions are Saraya Prince and Kyle Ford in the eight-year-old group; Briana Pilicic and Ruamano Kouka-Waihi in the nine-year-olds; Courtney Pilicic and Jarrod Van Sambeek in the 10-year-olds; TeNgaro Kouka-Waihi, Joseph Looby and Joel Jettner in the 11-year-olds; and Shiane Hawke and Nik Quartermass in the 12-year-old age group.
I was lucky enough to head down to the Father’s Day breakfast at Wanguri Primary School this year. The breakfast was fantastic and it was wonderful to see so many kids at school with their dads. It has been a great thing at Wanguri over the last few years and I congratulate the school. It is a really big community effort.
There have been many kids achieving big things at Wanguri. The Beat performers put on a wonderful show at the 2009 Beat and Kath Whitson must be thanked for all her hard work with the choir this year. I congratulate the following students for their wonderful work in the choir: Ari Robinson, Michaela Marshall, Millie Hunt, Nikki Coggins, Niamh Marah, Kayla O’Grady, Eloni Landers, Amelia Dalrymple, Jenna Dearman, Anna Bergs, Jaymee Dyson-Holland, Dylan Li, Nyoaka Bell-Peckham, Jessie Oliver, Brooke Hudson, Yenda Callera, Izzy Jarvis and Kenaiesha Peckham-Allison. Congratulations to the following students for their fantastic dancing: Niamh Marah, Ciara Marah, Jenna Dearman, Amelia Dalrymple, Mia Jesson and Nikki Coggins.
Other outstanding students from Wanguri Primary School include: Isabelle Chin Quan, Izzah Majid, Rory Rose, Dylan Robertshaw, Jack Brooks, Teri Moliere, my beautiful daughter, Isabel Henderson, Harmony Robinson, James Bayliss, Kaelyn Girao, Ella Osmanovic, Yvonne Maillis, Kieran Schort, Jamie-Rae Robinson, Anna Bergs and Kirrily Hand. They all received certificates of participation in the 2009 Literacy and Young Territory Authors Awards presented by Darwin City Council libraries. Each student had to write and illustrate their own stories and submit them for judging. Congratulations to Kaelyn Girao who was an age-group winner and received a highly commended award.
For the past couple of years, Wanguri has been sending a group of students in Year 6, along with teachers and parent helpers, to Canberra to study democracy in action, and also to visit all of the wonderful attractions our capital city has to offer. This year, the Wanguri group were lucky enough to meet the Governor-General, Her Excellency, Ms Quentin Bryce. A big thank you to Jenny Robinson, our principal, as well as Lisa Rothwell, Olga Dalrymple, Vanda West, Wynyard Lum and Clio Marah for putting so much hard work and effort into planning the trip and looking after the group so well in Canberra. I also say thank to all the kids who went on the trip. By all reports, you behaved impeccably and did your school and community proud.
The children who went on the trip were Nyoaka Bell-Peckham, Clarissa Carter, Nikki Coggins, Courtney Craig, Amelia Dalrymple, Thomas Dalton-Lum, Shem Gardiner, Jordan Lockley, Amir Majid, Brandon Male, Niamh Marah, Ken Mitchell, Jack Panter and Nathan Tran. I know this trip is looked forward to by the Year 6 students every year and it really does give them a wonderful experience of our great capital city. They also enjoy going up to the snowfields, Madam Deputy Speaker, something our kids, obviously, do not see up in the tropics.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk on a matter of grave importance which is causing enormous grief to some of my constituents, as well as people elsewhere in the Darwin and Palmerston areas. It involves a matter of inappropriate behaviour by a builder. It is behaviour by this builder which highlights how this government has failed in providing a secure and confident environment for home builders through their complete lack of application of the building registration, investigation and registration and, more importantly, home warranty insurance.
The builder who is causing all of this grief is known to many. He is known to the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Group, to certifiers, to ASIC, well known to the department, by the minister’s office, and the Chief Minister’s Office. He is well known by the many contractors who are owed tens of thousands of dollars, and in the small claims court. This builder takes hard-earned money from Territory families, spins a complete web of deceit, and does not deliver a completed house, or one which would pass any inspection in a third world country.
This builder, through his shoddy work and deceitful practices, has caused relationships to be put under strain when families see their dreams shattered and, in another case, family members have sought medical assistance as they feel responsible for not getting their families into the new home. It is a tragic situation which should not be accepted or tolerated. I will provide three examples of this situation we currently have in the Top End with this builder.
Family 1 is part of a well-known and long-term Darwin family. The family has been part of the Darwin footy scene for over 40 years and has always contributed well to the Territory. This family’s would-be house is in Palmerston. They have paid 95% of their total build, and the builder has now cancelled their contract and they now have to find $300 000 to finish this house. It has been grossly underquoted. The house is only to lock-up stage, plus it has taken 17 months to get it to this stage of non-completion. It is an outrageous situation. I have met the mother of this family on many occasions over this matter and, to put it bluntly, she is distraught to the position of distraction. Her health has suffered and her whole family is suffering.
This family followed all of the right procedures through the Housing Industry Association and its standard contract, and the Building Board rules and regulations. Unfortunately, when dialogue broke down, the builder took this hard-working family to arbitration, which they subsequently lost on a technicality associated with the definition of lock-up. The family had to employ a lawyer, which cost them $15 000. After arbitration, the builder did nothing with the house. The house was locked out completely for this family. The builder had a date in October this year to finish the house and, now we are in October, he has cancelled their contract and walked away with their money right under the noses of the Housing Industry Association and the Building Practitioners Board, and left them with a substantially uncompleted house - no home warranty insurance safety net for this family.
The second case involves a couple who have a house which has walls, a roof, and a whole series of massive defects. I have seen this house and it is a shambles, sadly. In the rooms there are light switches on the walls, but there are no lights in the ceilings, so goodness knows what those switches are meant to turn on. There are cracks in the walls, gaps in the woodwork, and ants coming up through the concrete. The total build of this house was to be $355 800 which did not include the kitchen appliances or vanities. The builder has been paid about $254 000, which is about 74% of their money, and their house is not finished - not by a long way by my reckoning. It is about half built. An estimate of about $150 000 is required to finish the build, and an independent company has been engaged for an assessment of the work outstanding.
This house has seen three of the contractors take the builder to court for non-payment of work. Another contractor tried to get a lien across the property; however, could not as the builder was at fault and not the property owners. It is an appalling situation where the department and the minister’s office knew about this fellow. Letters have been written to the minister by the families. There have been numerous discussions with the Builders Practitioners Board and the department and, yet, no one seems to want to help these Territory families.
This couple’s case involves my electorate officer. As with the family before, it has created an enormous amount of pressure on her family’s situation, given she has recently become a grandmother and cannot accommodate her children and grandchildren in the house.
The third family lives in Nightcliff and is a family with five children. The family was so desperate to get into their home after delay after delay and non-performance of the work, the husband, the father, felt obliged to take the family into the house half completed. The builder then cancelled the contract without discussion but, after taking some $200 000 of their job and leaving a complete mess in the garden including hardened piles of concrete, this family will have to scrape together to find the funds to complete the house themselves.
This government has failed on all fronts, not only these three families. It has failed to provide a secure and competent environment for home builders; failed these three families and many more I do not have the time to detail here tonight; failed to ensure the building regulations and regulatory boards operate properly; and failed to act when they know a builder with a known reputation for deceit, fraud, intimidation and poor workmanship continues to operate in the industry and brings a bad name and a bad taste to everyone in the building and construction industry.
Where have been the audits of this builder under the Building Act? Where have been the investigations into the performance of this builder when it was brought to the attention of both the minister and the Chief Minister’s Offices? I know, and the minister knows, letters have been sent to her office. The minister knows also the Chief Minister’s Chief of Staff has become involved. However, what have been the outcomes? Nothing, sadly, which is typical of this government’s performance in this area, if not every other area of government.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I urge the government members to get out of their purpose-built, comfortable, safe, secure and fully completed homes and do something for these families who are continuing to live rough, and continue to suffer extreme duress and upset. The minister knows what to do. She needs to act, and act fast, before this builder takes any more hard-working Territorians’ money and dreams away.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Deputy Speaker, today I speak about my recent trip to Alice Springs, and from there, driving all the way to Darwin. I visited Alice Springs because I wanted to meet Mrs Di Deans, the President of Drovers, a group of people who are doing an excellent job at the Alice Springs Hospital. Totally voluntarily, they go around providing magazines, newspapers - all the essentials - to people who are in hospital and are unable to go out.
Recently, they received the Health and Community Service Award at the inaugural Australian Rural and Outback Awards, and I congratulate them. I intend to have a dinner with them when we have parliament in Alice Springs. I also invited Mrs Deans to come to Darwin and see if she can establish a similar organisation in the Royal Darwin Hospital and other hospitals around the Territory.
In addition to that, I had lunch with members of the Board of the Alice Springs Hospital, and dinner with Ben and Nicole Case from Undoolya Station. Ben is the Chairman of the Alice Springs Branch of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association.
From there, we drove to Aileron to have a look at the Anmatjere Man, the big statue sculpted by Ted Egan’s son, and admired the Namatjira paintings displayed throughout the stop, then continued to Tennant Creek.
In Tennant Creek, I visited the Tennant Creek Hospital, and the Acting General Manager, Mr Michael Wright took me around and showed me the theatre and emergency department upgrades - $2m upgrade for the Tennant Creek Hospital. I have to admit, I have been to Tennant Creek many times, I have looked at the hospital outside and thought it was a small regional hospital. When I visited the hospital, I was very impressed by the size of the hospital, how clean it was, and by the renal dialysis facility they have in place - brand new, purpose designed and very well looked after.
I called into the local Department of Regional Development, Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources and had a chat with the local people. I was very impressed by their professionalism. They are all young people working very hard in the Barkly region.
That night, I had dinner with Michael Wright, the Acting General Manager of Tennant Creek Hospital, and his partner, Vanessa; also Barbara Shaw, the manager of the Barkly Regionalisation Project representing Anyinginyi.
On Tuesday, we had a Cabinet meeting in Tennant Creek, and afterwards I walked the main street and talked to the local business people. I was very impressed at how vibrant Tennant Creek is. It was explained that night when I had dinner with George Scott from Lake Nash Station, Steve Russell from Emerson Resources, Ivan Henderson from Truscott Mining; Bill Darcy from Excalibur; Luke Meter from Westgold, Ted and Dianne Martin from DRDPIFR, and Gerry and Dawn McCarthy. I was advised that 12 exploration drills are currently working in Tennant Creek. About 25 people fly in/fly out, and most of the money is spent in Tennant Creek sourcing supplies, accommodation, fuel, servicing equipment. The results from the exploration are very encouraging.
On Wednesday, I drove to Bootu Creek Mine, and thanks to Mark Laing, the group mining engineer who took us around and showed us the development in Bootu Creek. I have to admit, I was very impressed. The existing plant operates at full capacity of 700 000 tonnes a year. They are extending the processing plant, and there will be a total of one million tonnes a year of manganese. They are increasing the number of carriages from 76 to 96, and from three days a week to four days a week. Recent drilling in the area has identified significant ore bodies which will extend the life of the mine for more than 50 years than is currently projected.
Following Bootu Creek, I travelled north and stopped at Beetaloo Station. I thank very much John and Trish Duncliffe for their hospitality, and also their daughter, Jane, and her husband, Scotty, and, of course, their four kids. John and Trish Duncliffe and their daughter and son-in-law own two leases totalling 10 000 km - nearly as big as a small European country. They are running about 45 000 head of Brahman and Brahman cross. They bought the property five years ago. When they bought the property they had 40 watering points. Now, they have 300, and their project for the next few years is to put in 600 watering points. In total, they are putting 1600 km of watering line. Their projection is, in five years time, they will nearly double the number of Brahman they will have in those two stations.
Currently, they breed the animals for the export market, and export most of these animals through the Port of Darwin. The way they did it is very intelligent. They do not have to drive around the watering points; they can actually fly in a helicopter and see from the air if the system operates, and if the tanks are full. It was very late in the season, and I have to admit the animals were a bit skinny. However, they assured me as soon as the rains start in the next two months, the animals would become fattened very quickly. I was very impressed with their approach. What impressed me the most was the station has many plateaux with grass and a lot of timbered area.
When I asked him why he was not clearing the timber to provide more grassed area and feedlots for the animals, he said his observation was when it rains, when there is a clear area the waters runs and sits and disappears but, where it falls in the grassed and timbered areas, it goes underground. That is the way he wants to keep it, so he can harvest the water later from underground. He is not a young person with young ideas, he is quite aged, but it is very interesting to see the change of attitude: do not clear everything to put feedlots but maintain some forest or timbered areas, because that is where the water is captured and recharges the aquifer.
Following that, I drove to Mataranka and stayed overnight. I had the opportunity to catch up with Ron and Sally Sullivan. Ron is from Cave Creek Station and also the President of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association. I also caught up with Brian and Kathy Lester from Larrizona Station, Garry and Mitchell Riggs from Lakefield Station, Max and Mabs Gorringe from Elsey Station and Neil MacDonald who is the Regional Director of Katherine Department of Primary Industries, Fisheries and Resources.
On Friday, I had a private tour of Cave Creek with Ron Sullivan, approximately 400 km with a reliable 800 mm of rainfall, very close to Mataranka, Katherine and Darwin. Ron runs Brahman and Droughtmasters and his father runs some Boran cattle. It was a good opportunity to catch up with the new president of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association and talk about the industry. The industry is very optimistic; they like the way the Indonesian market is still holding strong. They like even more that we opened a new market in Vietnam. An agreement was signed this week for 1000 animals, as first lot, to go to Vietnam. We have to open more markets; we cannot rely on one market only.
Following that, I went to Katherine and had dinner, as always, with who else but Warren de With, the president of AFANT. I always catch up and have a yarn with him, to find how the association is going and if there are any problems. I was advised they had a very good season in Katherine. Even today, there are still tourists.
I saw the site where the new McDonalds is under construction and, from the information I received, I believe Katherine will see two new projects. One will be a hotel and the other might be a shopping centre. I will let the developer disclose the details at a later date.
One thing which impressed me was the restrictions on alcohol - how well it worked in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek. I say from experience, because I had forgotten about the restrictions so I turned up about 12.30 pm to buy a cask of wine, and I was advised both in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, wine or beer is sold after 2 pm. In Tennant Creek, if you want to buy a cask of wine you have to go after 4 pm.
Of course, I did not complain; it is a restriction put in place for a very good reason. It was very interesting to hear, with the restrictions put in, in Alice Springs, we had a reduction of 18% in the consumption of alcohol in Alice Springs. In addition to that, I found 400 fewer casks were sold every day in Alice Springs. I also discovered about 25 people who tried to cheat the system and buy the second cask or the second bottle of port, were denied because the system recognised they had already purchased one, so they were not allowed to buy anymore.
What is distressing is the level of assaults because of alcohol. We know very well - and some of you, being ex-policemen, know - the effects of alcohol: after the first bottle or the first cask, mayhem happens. I have been advised 74% of all activities of the police in Alice Springs is alcohol-related – assaults, people hitting other people, or bashing their wives.
I was very surprised and disappointed to see the member for Araluen today put the motion to return the opening hours to 10 am, from the 2 pm of today. That is a big step backwards. We have four hours of peace and quiet until 2 pm when they start accessing alcohol. The member for Araluen has a motion for the next General Business Day to return back to 10 am. We have to draw a line in the sand here. This is not about politics; it is about what is happening out there because of alcohol. If we go back to that, then we go back to what we had before. Police now spend 74% of their time on alcohol-related offences, which will be translated to 95%.
I call on the Leader of the Opposition, if he has control of his people, he needs to stand up and say: ‘Enough is enough’. We cannot go back. We might not agree totally with what you do, but we cannot go back to opening the alcohol shops at 10 am. That is a recipe for disaster. It is up to you guys. We have to draw a line in the sand and be recognised for what we are doing.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I will speak about my trip last week to ANSTO in Lucas Heights, Sydney - the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation.
Before I do, it would be remiss of me - I am rather compelled to talk about the EPA’s annual report tabled today. I appreciate the EPA is still in its infancy and has contributed to the broader debate on a number of different issues. However, where I really find it tough to take it seriously is, under the Northern Territory government’s outlines on performance measures of all agencies, the Environment Protection Authority is an output group of the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, and the Arts and, therefore, it needs to report each year.
If you look at the performance measures of the EPA in the last 12 months, there are three key outputs: one is quality, one is quantity, and one is time limits. If you look at the first one, it has: ‘Quantity. Reports to government on outcome of strategic reviews’. The 2008-09 estimate was two and the actual was zero. ‘Referrals received and assessed’ - the estimate was two and the actual was zero. The ‘Quality; part of the output performance measures: ‘Stakeholders’ satisfaction with advice and processes’ - the estimate for 2008-09 was 60% and the actual was zero. It is actually down here as n/a and it is not applicable because they have not actually reported anything. So again, zero. ‘Timeliness’ is for ‘Reports delivered within identified delivery dates’ - the estimate is 100% and they have an actual of 67%. I do not know how they get 67% when they have not delivered a report. I am assuming they are part way through a report so, therefore, they are suggesting they are 67% through the report. I believe it is the Principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development but, to say you are actually halfway through does not really cut the mustard. It says the ‘timeliness of reports’. It is either delivered or not delivered, so it is zero.
We have a budget of just under $900 000 a year; we have estimates of two, two, 60% and 100% and we have 0, 0, 0 and, basically, 0. It is a lot of money to spend on little return.
On to better things. I first thank Dr Adi Paterson, Dr Jamie Schultz, Professor John Dodson, Mr Lubi Dimitrovski, and Ron Weiner from ANSTO. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation is a unique place, and was a unique experience for me. I know this will surprise you, but much of what they told me went over my head. It was pretty intense to learn about what they do there, about neutrons and nuclear accelerators, and things like this. It was a fantastic experience. They apply their expertise to health, climate change, water resource management, the environment, and a range of scientific research disciplines.
ANSTO is a federal government agency and operates Australia’s only nuclear reactor. ANSTO’s nuclear infrastructure includes the OPAL research reactor and particle accelerators, and they do some radio pharmaceutical production and a range of unique research facilities as well. Each year, ANSTO provides over 500 000 patient doses of lifesaving nuclear medicine to help in the diagnosis and treatment of a range of serious diseases.
A little about the reactor. It is a research reactor and significantly increases Australia’s nuclear science and technology capabilities. The reactor can operate for 340 days a year and it is 20 MW thermal power. I believe, from a nuclear reactor of about the size of a washing machine, they create enough energy to run 20 000 toasters. That is what it will do; however, it is not there for producing power.
Some of the things I was amazed at - and there are a few people here who may know a little more about this - you may not see here, but when they are looking at brain scans, for instance, you can see here an MRI, and how much the MRI shows up a tumour on someone’s brain. Using the new FET PET technology developed at ANSTO, you can actually see the brain tumour so much more clearly in these images. The advances in the medical field of what it can do is amazing.
I was particularly interested in the waste disposal and waste storage of radioactive waste. ANSTO has an international reputation for undertaking environmental work in climate change, air pollution, and sustainability of groundwater use. The operation of ANSTO’s facility produces small amounts of radioactive waste, and this is managed in accordance with national and international standards. It should be noted ANSTO has safely managed radioactive waste for over 50 years and places the highest priority on the safe management of its waste and used fuel.
It certainly blew away some of the myths I heard about the nuclear industry, particularly how waste is managed. It also opens up another issue we have. There is nuclear waste stored in over 100 different locations around this country. I have seen waste facility managed to the nth degree to all international standards, where waste is kept in drums, it is catalogued, it is measured, it is kept in a safe environment, and it is also periodically checked and measured again. I found it interesting because it really is monitored very well. What I worry about is, if we have waste stored in over 100 locations around the country, each of those may not be kept in such high standards or monitored. I hate to think some of these waste products could, potentially, do some damage to people.
I found out a little more about radiation. It is emitted both naturally, and a man-made source. It is around us every day and, without it, we could not live. Radiation can be classified into two main groups: ionising and non-ionising. We receive small amounts of iodising radiation from X-rays, air travel, smoke detectors, and the use of radioactive materials in medicine, industry and agriculture. Even the air we breathe, and our own bodies, contain naturally occurring radioactivity.
In regard to the waste, in Australia we have low-level waste and some intermediate-level waste. According to what I have been told, no high-level waste is either produced or is stored at the ANSTO facility. Some of the fuel used from the previous reactors which were at the location in – what is it called?
Mr Wood: Lucas Heights.
Mr CHANDLER: Thank you. … has been transported overseas to the United Kingdom and France for storage and reprocessing. This will eventually return to Australia as intermediate-level waste after reprocessing to extract recyclable material. From that, I can assume this country will need to, one day, make a decision we need to have a proper storage facility for nuclear waste. I believe, managed the right way, it is far better than having 100 different locations around the country with things which may or may not be monitored, cared for, or stored correctly.
Interestingly enough, I did not understand what a lot of this low-level waste was, but ANSTO shreds and compresses its low-level radioactive solid waste and places it into 200 L drums, which are stored on-site on racks in a dedicated building. The majority - 95% - of all the low-level waste, is simply rubber gloves, coveralls and such things used by staff who are working around reactors or with the medical products produced. Much of the stuff from the 1950s and 1960s has already been thrown into general landfills, because they have actually decayed to the extent where they provide no more of a problem than common household waste. In fact, it was interesting to discover there are probably more risks in many of our landfills around the country than there is in a proper storage facility for nuclear waste. People throw away batteries, mobile phones, TVs, computers, and all this toxic waste is going into our landfills - not managed – and, yet, the perception is we do not manage nuclear waste very well.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wanted to do a special adjournment on a very special man who passed away at Bulman. The funeral of Mr Tex Camfoo was held at Bulman community on 21 August 2009. Mr Camfoo was a Ngalakan elder, who was 91 years of age when he passed away at the Rocky Ridge Nursing Home in Katherine. He was a remarkable Territorian whose long and fruitful life spanned many changes in the broader Katherine region where he spent most of his life, both in the development of the region and changing race relations.
He grew up in the Roper Mission, now Ngukurr, before working in the Northern Territory pastoral industry as a stockman, drover and station manager. He had an exceptional knowledge of the bush and its resources and, as a Ngalakan elder, his incredible knowledge of country was vital in helping his people gain ownership of parts of their traditional estate under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and the Native Title Act. In particular, he was involved in the Urapunga land claim, the Roper Bar land claim, the Roper River beds and banks land claim, and the St Vidgeon native title claim.
Tex was a long-term and prominent member of the Northern Land Council. Though not formally a member of the Board of the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, he was often invited to attend AAPA meetings to advise the board on sacred site matters.
His funeral was a very big event. About 200 relatives and friends, assisted by the Ngalakan and Rembarrnga traditional dancers, paid their last respects to him in a shelter erected near the health clinic at Bulman. In fact, many people travelled hundreds of kilometres to Bulman to attend the funeral and to pay their respects to the family. A funeral service was conducted with songs performed by the Barunga Aboriginal Inland Mission Church, and a eulogy read by his granddaughter, Anita Painter.
Many people travelled, not only from the Katherine region, but as far as Central Australia to farewell him. Also attending were the CEO and Chairman of the Northern Land Council, the CEO and Acting Chairman of the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, Mr Bernard Abbott, both of whom spoke with great fondness of the humour, vision, and contribution Mr Camfoo made in his long life. I make special mention of the member for Katherine, Mr Westra van Holthe, who also spoke of Mr Camfoo’s community spirit and generosity from the times when he was a policeman at Mainoru. In fact, I even go so far as to say it was quite beautiful to hear the eulogy he gave at the funeral. I know it meant a tremendous amount to the families.
Professor Gillian Cowlishaw, who edited the autobiography called Love Against the Law: The autobiographies of Tex and Nelly Camfoo, spoke warmly of her long association with Tex and the community of Bulman. Many condolences were read from people in other parts of Australia who could not attend the funeral. Afterwards he was laid to rest in the Bulman cemetery.
He is survived by his wife, Mrs Nelly Camfoo, children Christine Camfoo, Tim Camfoo and Warren Camfoo, and many grandchildren and great-grandchildren. He will certainly be remembered, Madam Deputy Speaker, as a great leader, a great storyteller and a man of immense humour.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak on a number of local matters from Katherine, but I quickly wanted to touch on something the member for Casuarina spoke about, which was alcohol restrictions. I do not propose to spend too much time on it tonight, but perhaps I could flag it as the subject which really must be given due importance and should be brought up - if this government were courageous enough to do it - in a ministerial statement so they can be held accountable for their failures. In another case, it might be we will bring it up as a matter of public importance and discuss it then.
It is disappointing the government side can only hang their hat on one particular strategy to try to deal with these alcohol problems, where we know, notwithstanding the assertions made by the member for Casuarina, those restrictions are failing. They are simply just window dressing to try to deal with some really significant problems we have in the Northern Territory. Anyway, Madam Deputy Speaker, enough on that.
Tonight I speak on a couple of things which have occurred in Katherine in recent times. The first one I want to talk about is the charity fundraising walk that I undertook on 10, 11 and 12 September. It was an idea borne out of doing a little exercise to lose a bit of the parliamentary spread we all seem to get working in this House. It dawned on me I could get fit and raise some money for some local organisations in Katherine ...
Mr Giles: That was a smart one.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Wasn’t it? I decided to walk from Pine Creek to Katherine over the course of two-and-a-little days. There were two walkers who walked the whole way – me and a very tenacious young lady by the name of Lisa Elliot. Lisa is the executive officer of the local Katherine YMCA. I must say, despite the pain we both went through, the blisters we formed on our feet, it was inspiring to see a young lady of that calibre really putting the effort in, knowing full well how much she was hurting, because I was hurting equally as much. It was an experience I would not swap. We managed to raise $7000 or thereabouts for the Rotary Club of Katherine, and also for the YMCA.
I pay a special mention to a few people, the first one being Lisa Elliot. The second is Bob Mackie. Bob is the President of the Rotary Club of Katherine, and provided for us all the catering services and support services we needed over that two-and-a-bit days. I also want to say is how deeply the Rotary Club penetrates into the community. The Chief Minister mentioned before they are the major sponsors of the Police Officer of the Year Award. However, they go so much further into the community. Much of what they do we do not actually hear about. It is really heartening to see so many volunteers from the organisation putting in the hard yards and doing some really exceptional things in the community, which is one of the reasons why I thought to assist the Rotary Club of Katherine by raising funds, partly for them, through my walk.
I also thank the Katherine YMCA in general. I thank Somerville Community Services in Katherine, not only for their efforts in having the staff walk with us on day one, but for the significant monetary contribution they made as well. Also, all the other people who donated to or sponsored the walk - there are too many of them, of course, to name, but I appreciate the support. I am sure the YMCA and the Rotary Club in Katherine will be very pleased to receive the proceeds.
I also want to speak about a tourism dinner held in Katherine just a couple of weeks ago. It was called Experience the Magic tourism dinner. It was part of an initiative by Tourism Top End to reach into regional parts of Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria and focus on travel agents who are from smaller regional towns, bring them to the Top End to show them some of the wares the Top End has to offer in tourist destinations. They chose to spend an evening in Katherine. There was a dinner organised at Nitmiluk Gorge. It was an open air event by the new pool.
I had an opportunity to speak to the agents. It was a particularly warm afternoon; I noticed there was some clouds building. I happened to say to the crowd as I addressed them I hoped it rained because, if it rained we would all be saturated, we would be much cooler than we were, but it would also provide them with a memory of Katherine which they would take back to their home town so they would be able to sell Katherine properly and fittingly. Sure enough, about 10 minutes after I spoke, the heavens opened up, and we were all saturated. It was a terrific night notwithstanding. We had to move everything from the open air up to the Nitmiluk Visitors Centre and resettle there and we all had a great feed.
I acknowledge a couple of people who were instrumental in organising the evening: Sylvia Wolf of Tourism Top End; Tony Clementson; Alana Young, also of Tourism Top End; and Kelly Vrolyks from Nitmiluk Tours - Kelly is also Katherine’s representative on the Tourism Top End executive committee. I also pay special tribute to the staff of Nitmiluk Tours for the absolutely marvellous and wonderful job they did in crisis management, I suppose. Everything was getting saturated, all the food was getting rained upon and, without a fuss, everything was packed up, poste haste, into the cars, vans and trucks and taken back up to the centre. About 40 minutes later, we were all sitting down, none the wiser it had been raining. I pay tribute to the hard work they put in.
The other matter I quickly want to raise tonight is the Great Northern Clean Up Australia Day which was held on 4 October this year. In Katherine, it had slight change of name, and it manifested itself in a cleanup of our river corridor. There were probably 50 or 60 people who turned up on the Sunday morning for the cleanup. I was there with my wife for two-and-a-half hours or so, and we managed to clean up, between the two of us, about 25 to 30 big bags of rubbish. I know that was repeated across the whole of the river corridor area by everyone who put an effort in. I say to those who turned up, well done and congratulations. It was a stinking hot morning. We all worked extremely hard. The only downside is the fact that so much time was spent on the morning by so many people cleaning up the mess of inconsiderate people who choose to throw their rubbish all over the place around in the river.
Sadly, much of what was thrown away to be picked up were beer cans, beer bottles, wine bladders, and wine casks which, I suppose, just goes to show something else needs to be done with respect to drink restrictions in Katherine.
I particularly want to mention Jenny Duggan. Jenny organised the cleanup morning. She is instrumental in bringing together people to get involved in activities such as this, and she spends a lot of time with her friends doing very much the same thing. Well done.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I congratulate Sam - Manuel de Jesus de Sousa - who celebrated his 80th birthday on 16 September and has spent more than half a century in Australia.
Baptised Manuel de Jesus de Sousa, Sam de Sousa as he is very well known, was born in Paul do Mar, a parish in the municipality of Calheta, Madeira Island in Portugal. He belonged to the family of Sousa Barbeiro and was a third generation barber. At 18 years old, he was already the most requested barber of his business’s clientele, as he completed a hair cut in less than seven minutes.
However, Sam showed great promise at a much earlier age. At six, he learned alone to read and write. Later, still very young, he learned to play the guitar by himself and he also tried to play the piano accordion, but not as well as his guitar. He has worked very hard since he was 14 years old. During the day, he worked on his parent’s farm and, at night, in the barber shop. He knew very early in life to live comfortably he had to work hard.
At 21, Sam married Maria Idlia, his companion for life. Sam is the first to acknowledge beside a great man there is always a great woman - and she is certainly a great woman. One year after they married, Sam and Maria ventured forth to other lands. He believed his barbering profession would not take him far. He went to South Africa and, thereafter, to Australia, his destiny.
In Australia, Sam worked as a fisherman, bricklayer’s mate, barber, and again fisherman. As a fisherman in Western Australia, he was known as a very lucky man and he went on to study as a captain. With his own fishing vessel 19 m long, which was named Lady Fatima, Sam went after lobster. It is worthwhile to point out Sam actually crossed the ocean in a fishing boat from South Africa to Perth, Australia - no mean feat. I have been very interested to hear his stories about his time as a lobster fisherman because Sam had a technique with the bait he used for the lobsters. He tells a story of how he discovered that tuna carcasses and heads were very appealing to lobsters. He discovered this secret and, in the next five years with his fishing boat Lady Fatima, he became the most successful fisherman off Perth - which is no mean feat; there are generations of families who have been lobster fisherman. However, Sam knew the secret was in the bait. He certainly caught a lot of lobsters in his time, so much so, wags in the fishing industry operating out of Fremantle, instead of calling it Lady Fatima, they called it the Fat Lady because it always had a full load of lobsters. In what it would take others a few weeks to get, Sam de Sousa and his crew would take in a matter of days.
Sam went on to fish for shrimp, which he did because shrimp actually grows to its ideal size in one year. Lobsters, on the other hand, take at least five years before they are legally able to be fished. Sam saw an opportunity in a different fishery, just as he saw an opportunity to move to Darwin and build his business interests in Darwin through hard work.
Today, in Darwin, Mr de Sousa possesses a three-star hotel he built, where he now lives with Maria on Cavenagh Street. It is a very successful accommodation venue. He enjoys having his children, sons-in-law, daughters-in-law, and grandchildren visit there. Much can be said about this man. One thing I can say about him; he is very snazzily dressed. He comes to the markets at Rapid Creek - and that is how I have come to know Sam over the years. His wife, Maria, makes him beautiful clothes and, when he comes up the walkway at Rapid Creek shops, you cannot help but notice him because he is always dressed with a beautiful shirt, beautiful pants and, of course now, his walking stick. That all adds to the elegance and the fashion he has. At 80 years of age, he is still a very dashing man and a very vital person; someone I enjoy speaking to whenever he stops and has a bit of a chat with me at the markets.
I am sure all members join with me in congratulating Sam de Sousa on his 80th birthday and his remarkable life, and we all wish him many more happy birthdays beyond his 80th.
I also congratulate the quiet achievers in the schools in my electorate for the third semester of the school year. At Moil Primary School, Netanya Lai in 5/56K and Jeremy Mauludi in 1/2M were recognised as children who quietly go about their work.
At Wagaman Primary School, the two students who stood out this semester as quiet achievers were Naomi Jackson and Mikayla Condon.
At the Moil Primary School during Term 3, many students won awards for their academic achievement in the International Competitions and Assessments for Schools (ICAS). I congratulate the following students who received Certificates for Science.
In Year 3, Zachary Saynor was awarded a High Distinction – well done, Zachary, Matthew Chapman won a Distinction, and Rachel Fisher, a Credit. Athea Brannen, Andreas Kalambokas, Rebecca Rayner and Hannah Tregloan were all awarded Participation Certificates.
In Year 4, Johanna Hayes, Jason O’Meara, Micah Ramsay and Tyson Wallent won Distinctions, whilst Austin Bruekers, Nicholas Cowling, Rhys Lewis, Jesse Ramsay and Ellyane Wall were awarded a Credit. Sienna Bennett-Kellam and Ruby Hargrave received Participation Certificates. Well done to Year 4!
Issac Skultety of Year 5 was awarded a Distinction for his efforts, whilst Sean Johnston received a Credit and Hugh Harbeck a Participation Certificate.
In Year 6, Garwerd Liang achieved a High Distinction, Eugune Duffy, Helena Frewen-Lord, Jackie Liang and Mie Sorensen won Distinctions, and Credits went to Tess Harbeck and Nathan Ryan.
In the Computer Skills ICAS Competition in Year 3, Zachary Saynor again won a High Distinction, with Credits going to Macsen Chalmers, Matthew Chapman and Hannah Tregloan, with Participation Certificates to Andreas Kalambokas and Rachel Skultety.
In Year 4, Rhys Lewis not only won a High Distinction, but achieved the equal top score for the Territory. Rhys will be receiving a medal later this year for his outstanding result. Well done, Rhys! As well, Tyson Wallent was awarded a Distinction, Jesse Ramsay a Credit, and Sienna Bennett-Kellam, Austin Bruekers, Ruby Hargrave, Jason O’Meara and Micah Ramsay all received Participation Certificates.
Year 5 had Sac Gilchrist win a Distinction, with Hugh Harbeck, Sean Johnston and Isaac Skultety awarded Participation Certificates.
Distinctions in Year 6 went to Garwerd Liang, Jackie Liang, Ryan Nathan, Elliott Williams, with Credits to Eugene Duffy, Tess Harbeck and Mie Sorensen, and Participation Certificate to Alannah Tutt.
Moil students also took part in the 2009 Speaking Competition for the Primary Section of the German Competition which was held at CDU in August. Participating and winning students were Garwerd Liang and Nathan Ryan who won a 1st for Upper Primary, followed by Rachael Simmonds, Elliott Williams and Kaitlyn Cotton coming in 2nd, with Johanna Hayes and Ruby Hargraves 3rd. In the lower primary, Kimberley Keen, Sarah Suliman and Temika Carrodus came 1st; Rachel Skultety and Jade Manning received 2nd prize and Liam Cotton, Isaac Verity and Austin Bruekers won 3rd. What a fantastic effort for Moil Primary School and for Mrs Sutter who teaches with such enthusiasm and dedication the German program.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is with great pleasure I speak tonight knowing I have a few extra minutes, as it has been one of my missions to try to increase the time limits for these adjournment debates so we can get to speak about things in our electorate and those which are very important to us, without having to try to speak at 165 km/h. Also, one can actually spend a bit of time explaining some of the fantastic things which have been happening in our community by great community-spirited people.
Last Saturday night, 10 October 2009, I was very fortunate to attend the Australian Institute of Management Excellence Awards evening conducted at the Holiday Inn on the Esplanade in the ballroom. The evening was opened by the Chairman of the Northern Territory Council of the Australian Institute of Management, Ms Marie-Louise Pearson who, unfortunately for the Australian Institute of Management, is standing down as the chair of the organisation, having done many years of great and faithful work to improve the profile and standing in the community of the Australian Institute of Management.
There were some very kind words said by a number of people during the evening, and it was quite sad to see her go. We wish her the very best, and I must say the person who will try to fill her shoes has a very big task ahead of them. However, I am sure, in her capacity as chair of the organisation she has spent some time developing new leaders to follow in her footsteps. She took it to new highs, and we wish her well in whatever she wishes to do in the future.
There were a number of awards given out on the night. I give people listening, and those who read the Parliamentary Record, a quick understanding of what this particular organisation does, who it represents, and who it rewards for excellence. There are four categories in the awards, the first being Professional Manager of the Year - Public Sector. I quote from this fine booklet put together by the committee running these management awards headed up by Meriel Corbett-Weir, who did a fine job of introducing the awards, and spoke about Marie-Louise Pearson.
Professional Manager of the Year is a category which recognises those who embody excellence in the management of public administration within multifaceted community serving organisations. They demonstrate best practice in roles and projects engaging a rich array of employee, industry, and community stakeholders. There are a number of very fine people and, to get to the point, there were three finalists: Belinda Townsend, from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Jen Corke from Power and Water Authority, and Peter Boyce from the Department of Health and Families. The winner of the section award was Peter Boyce. There were some fine words said about his capacity and commitment to his role as a Senior Director of People and Services of the Department of Health and Families.
The next award is of the Young Manager of the Year. It was fantastic to see so many young people at this awards evening participating and supporting their colleagues, their peers, and being involved in the development of themselves, their peers, and putting forward young managers for this award. The Young Manager of the Year is a category for outstanding managers aged between 18 and 30 years. This category acknowledges rising stars and emerging leaders from business, government, and industry. Young business owners and entrepreneurs are also eligible. There were four finalists: Glenn Wallace, Kia Naylor, Jade Kudrenko and Melanie Lewis. The winner of the category was a lovely lady by the name of Melanie Lewis, who is the general manager of the Palms City Resort. It was fantastic to see the enthusiasm with which she gave her acceptance speech, and she showed for the future development of her business, and her professional and personal development.
The next category was the Professional Manager of the Year - Private Sector. This is a category which acknowledges senior leaders who have demonstrated exceptional management skill. Finalists are drawn from a wide range of professions, and have a demonstrable impact on their organisation and team through their ability to marshal people and resources with strategic agility. There were many wonderful things said about the finalists in this area.
There were six finalists: Gary Carter from Eagle Training Services in Alice Springs; Adam Glass who is the general manager of the Crowne Plaza in Alice Springs; Fiona Goulding who the Community Relations Manager of Perkins Shipping; Peter Perrin, the General Manager of Territory FM; Simone Saunders, the Deputy Chief Executive of Airnorth; and Andrew Simon, who is the General Manager of the Peanut Company of Australia. The winner of the category was Simone Saunders, Deputy Chief Executive of Airnorth. She gave a magnificent acceptance speech where she demonstrated some of the things she has been trying to do with her organisation, and the leadership and management skills she has developed and is using to progress the company she works for.
It is important I acknowledge there was a Medal for Management Excellence given out in this particular category. That was for the General Manager of the Peanut Company of Australia, Mr Andrew Simon. Andrew has just recently taken over as the general manager, having been part of the Peanut Company of Australia for some years working in the Katherine region managing and promoting the Peanut Company of Australia in Katherine where they grow a variety of agricultural products.
The last category, which was probably one of the major events of the night, was of the Owner/Manager of the Year. This category recognises and identifies individual business owners who manage and lead a business from within any industry sector. They may be the head of an innovative start-up, an entrepreneurial company which has taken on creative ideas to market, or an everyday business owner who operates with extraordinary business acumen. There were three finalists in this category: Annette Gillanders, the managing director of BiZnorth, a company which provides educational and training services to a wide variety of recipients across the Northern Territory; Tony Schelling, the owner/manager of Mortgage Choice Australia, a company which gives innovative mortgage loans to a wide variety of people; and Katy Sellwood, the Directing Manager of Advanced Body Image in the Nightcliff Shopping Centre. The winner of the category was Katy Sellwood. She gave another wonderful acceptance speech with a great tribute to her staff and the people around her, her family, and those who have contributed to her leadership and management skills and training, and have afforded her the opportunity to be part of this particular evening and, of course, the category winner for Owner/Manager of the Year.
It was a great night. The hospitality was from the Intercontinental Hotels Group, as one of the major sponsors for the evening. Also, the Northern Territory government needs to be acknowledged. They support these awards which encourages people from all areas of the community, especially the Young Manager of the Year. Other sponsors were: the Commonwealth Bank, Charles Darwin University, KPMG and Optus - all fine corporate citizens who support these awards and encourage people to do better and better. In doing so, they make the Northern Territory a fair but, better, place to do business, which will also create jobs for our kids.
They provide fine services which will encourage business to flourish in the Northern Territory. It is through these awards, those companies, and the community as a whole doing these things the Territory will be a far better place.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will comment on a couple of things. I was pleased to hear the member for Brennan had taken a trip to Lucas Heights. Anyone who wants to talk about anything in regard to radioactive research, molecular research, and radioactive waste needs to take a trip to Lucas Heights to see one of our most important research stations in Australia. It is one of the reasons we are leading the world in molecular research. Other people should make the effort to see exactly what is done at that research station. It is a brilliant place. As the member for Brennan said, it can be a bit of an issue trying to understand all the scientific ins and outs of the experiments going on there, but it is something that is good for Australia.
The second item I raise is in relation to what the member for Goyder spoke about. I have also been approached by the lady - the electorate officer for the member for Goyder - in relation to issues she has had with a builder. There is no doubt the government needs to do something to help this person. There is a builder in our community who, obviously, has very little care about what effect, emotionally and financially, his actions have on some people in our community. It is not only this lady - the electorate officer for the member for Goyder - who lives in Virginia, but also another family living in Palmerston who, I understand, only live down the road from the house of this particular builder.
You have this case where people are now experiencing financial difficulty and would like to get their house completed yet, the builder has completed his own house happily, having no regard for these people who have put their life savings into a house and cannot get a Certificate of Occupancy simply because this person will not finish off those houses.
My understanding is the government can do an audit on this particular builder. If that is the case - and I know they do audits on builders because I also had another person approach me saying he has been, or is to be, audited by the department. This particular builder the member for Goyder mentioned in her adjournment debate certainly needs to be audited. I raised this issue with the Chief Minister’s Department. I believe what has happened has deeply affected the lady from the rural area, and I imagine it has deeply affected the family in Palmerston. I do not know enough of the circumstances of this case to say whether the government’s so-called insurance protection it was going to put against builders failing, collapsing, or leaving town, is at the root of this particular problem. All I need to say is the government, after all the discussion undertaken in this parliament in relation to protecting homeowners from unscrupulous builders, or even builders who have died, does not seem to have protected these two people.
I believe the government needs to investigate and, if it requires an audit, so be it. If the auditor decides this person has done the wrong thing, and if there is no other mechanism within this House to do something about it, then I will be asking the media to at least ‘out’ this person if he is found to have left these people high and dry when the builder should have completed the job but, instead, has built his own house using the cash flow which should have been used to finish off these people’s houses.
When you see how distressed these people are, especially this lady from the rural area - and I have spoken to her a number of times – you realise the person is going through an awful amount of pain and suffering. When you know someone has no care in the world for what he has done to this person, you have to ask where the government is in this case; protecting those people who are most vulnerable? We are presenting legislation soon, hopefully, to protect the vulnerable. In one case, it is the sale of land legislation to ensure people are not caught up in buying a house which goes under water. That is what the legislation is about.
We are also looking at protecting the vulnerable in the case of people who are long-term residents in caravan parks who, at the present time and for the last 10 years, have had no legislation to protect them at all. The Tenancy Act does not cover long-term people in caravan parks.
Here is another case of vulnerable people - and sometimes it can be their fault, but we should still investigate to find out whether these people have been dealt with unscrupulously. It is a responsibility of government to do something. I am interested for either the minister for Planning, Infrastructure or Housing - whoever is responsible for the act - to come back to parliament and say whether they have investigated these cases; if so, what is the result of the investigation. Let us hope these people can, in the end, come to some happy conclusion, because this has been disastrous for those families involved.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I take this opportunity to reflect on the tourism industry in Central Australian, and congratulate Tourism Central Australia for hosting another wonderful awards night in Alice Springs. In particular, I thank Peter Grigg for all the hard work he does, and Letetia and Amy in the front office. I congratulate the tourism award winners for the industry held on the evening of 25 September at the Alice Springs Convention Centre.
Congratulations to Craig Jervis from Lasseters Hotel and Casino, who was the Young Achiever of the Year. Laurelle Halford took the award for DIY Tourguides, the winner of the New Tourism Innovation category with a product which has a CD people can play in their cars as they drive to Uluru or Kings Canyon, Devils Marbles, or somewhere like that. The Primary Tourism Operator was won by Mbantua Gallery - Tim Jennings continuing to do a splendid job promoting art in the Centre, especially throughout the Utopian region. The Community Festivals and Events Award went to Assa Abloy Henley-on-Todd Regatta - congratulations to them and also to Rotary which provides outstanding support to the event itself. Anita Meyer won the Industry Achiever Award with company Ontour NT. Anita has been involved in the industry for quite some time and continues to be an advocate for tourism in Central Australia. I congratulate Jan Hayes from Ooraminna Station Homestead for winning the Barry Bucholtz Award for Excellence. She is an outstanding citizen for Central Australia, an outstanding proponent for tourism, a proponent for the pastoral industry, and much regarded and respected by many in Alice Springs.
Once again, thank you to Amy Sabadin and Letetia Polychronopolous from Tourism Central Australia.
While I am talking about Tourism Central Australia, I want to also reflect on the state of the condition of the Mereenie Loop Road and the Ernest Giles Road, two roads commonly promoted as roads of significance in the tourism industry. They need a lot of work done. I know this government has promised for years and years to get work done on the Mereenie Loop Road and continues not to do it. As a person who has travelled the Mereenie Loop Road on many occasions, including last week, it is not just a hazard to vehicles, it is actually dangerous to drive. The government needs to get serious about what it is going to do. I know it has left it out of its budget this year, and it probably will not do it, but something needs to be done to rectify the road to make it safe for communities along the track, for residents along the track, and tourists who will travel along the Mereenie Loop Road. The same for the Ernest Giles Road, another road of significant importance. I am now told there are tour operators who refuse to travel the road because of running repairs and maintenance costs on their vehicles after travelling down the road. It is a serious matter of contention.
I also congratulate the 12-year-old girl who rescued her two-year-old baby brother from a burning car at the weekend in Tennant Creek. I understand police were called to a fire of a Mitsubishi Magna in Whippet Street in Tennant Creek after the boy was playing with a lighter in the car. The 12-year-old girl could be recommended for an act of bravery, if government sees fit.
I also sit on the Alice Springs School of the Air Council. The School of the Air is an unrewarded body, I believe - a body which ensures education gets out to the bush where it does not often get to. Leigh Mullin, the Principal, and Mark Tuckwell, the chairman of the school who is out at Yuendumu, do a fantastic job at administering the school. Mark provides great leadership to the council. I will go through the staff at the school and pay particular thanks to them. Bill Newman is the IT manager; Coreena Lucas does a fantastic job managing the Visitor Centre. They continue to get larger numbers of visitors through the School of the Air in Alice Springs, which continues to promote the work of the School of the Air, provide valuable resources to ensure their ongoing existence and performance. Belinda Pearson, the Assistant Principal, does a great job. She used to work at Braitling school next door, and is tenacious in her efforts to ensure the School of the Air operates as efficiently as it can.
The staff include: Vicki Skoff, who runs Kindergarten; Michele Turk in Transition; Alisha Ellis in Year 1; Ursula Dobbe in Year 2; Daniel Keane in Year 2/3; Paul Coughlin in Year 3; Jeffrey Kessel Year 4; John Dredge Year 5/6; Jacelyn Anderson Year 7; Yvonne Symons Year 8; Kay Shanahan, ESL and Middle School; Robyn Lindsay, ESL and Indigenous Unit Teacher; Judy Brand. Corella Creek; Heather Coughlin from the library; and Anne Winzar, Dorothy Crennan, Alice de Brenni, Laura Newman, and Derek Thomas all work in the administrative section.Without the work of these hard-working administrators and teachers, Alice Springs School of the Air would not be able to operate and the children out in the bush certainly would not get an education, which is very important.
Talking about education in the bush, although there have been many decades of failure by all governments - federal and Territory - to provide secondary education in the bush in the Northern Territory, this is 2009. While we talk about housing and the failure of the member for Daly, the Housing Minister, to actually do anything, the biggest national disgrace in the country is the failure to provide kids in the bush in the Northern Territory with a secondary education. It is a national disgrace, and something which should be considered further.
I have spoken before about the potential role of boarding schools - whether for preschool, kindergarten, primary, secondary and VET education. Something must be done about schooling in the bush. The federal government proposed to put three boarding schools in the bush and has done nothing about it. Something has to be done. It is a national disgrace, and something I will continue to talk more on in the future.
Going back to SIHIP, I find myself in a position right now where a matter of public importance was raised today, and the minister for hiding, the Member for Daly, did not have much to say - nor did anyone else on the other side of the Chamber. I recognise it is a bit of a problem and they seem to wash their hands and go home to bed at night. After being at Hoppy’s Creek Camp in Alice Springs last Monday evening, seeing the state of the properties; every resident I saw in the camp drunk; seeing a five-year-old girl running around with a Vodka Mudshake Cruiser bottle in her hand tripping over VB cans; seeing the condition of those houses, I will not rest on my laurels.
I thought about it after the member in hiding, blinky bill, the member for Daly, spoke. I thought what do I do? A five-year-old girl running around with a vodka bottle is just not good enough. This is a crisis. It is a crisis with a level of urgency. It is what Mal Brough spoke about in 2007 when he launched the intervention. I will not rest on my laurels. I will ensure something is done about this. I find it completely abhorrent the Northern Territory government refuses to take this seriously, and address this as a crisis. I call on the government right now to cancel every lease on Alice Springs town camps for being in breach of their lease conditions. They have the power to do that; they have the power to make change. There is no way I would let my dog live in those conditions on Hoppy’s Camp. It is an absolute disgrace - a national disgrace.
The Northern Territory government members sit on their hands and pontificate and play politics on this. The calling for a Royal Commission is not a political move. It is saying this government has lost control - charging tenants rent for houses they do not live in; charging tenants a rent of $45 a head and, if there are 20 people living in the house - guess what? - you pay $900 a week; not doing repairs and maintenance; safety switches not being fixed on houses; roofs not there; and a sewer overflowing outside a school, a preschool, a kindergarten, and the shops. This just has to end. This is an absolute disgrace and the government still does not take action on this - still does not see it as a crisis.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I find it absurd the communist lefties of the Labor government would look Aboriginal people in the eye and let this neglect go on. The vision of a five-year-old girl as she walked around with that vodka bottle will remain in my mind. The federal shadow Housing minister, when he walked away, was absolutely speechless. He has never seen anything like it in his life, and I doubt he ever will again. It is an absolute disgrace, and the member for Daly should be sacked.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Deputy Speaker, today for this adjournment speech, I will talk briefly on one of my primary schools, Driver Primary School. I will start by talking of their vision statement which I will quote:
- To be a hands-on, vibrant and engaging learning centre implementing new and innovative programs in a secure, collaborative and sustainable environment for our community.
Why that business statement seems to be so bold and true for me today is this school has embarked on one of the most inspirational projects I have seen a school do in my time. They have decided to set up a massive garden - a complete learning centre - to learn through, from and with. It is going to take some 3000m2 to 3300 m2 of land. They have agreement with the council, the neighbours, and the government. Many private people are putting in their efforts and their sponsorship. They are embarking on a project which could well be one of the most fundamentally important physical projects conducted on this scale in a city primary school anywhere in Australia.
These are sounding pretty big words, but I have never seen or heard of a garden - a living, growing, breathing, interactive, learning garden - of this size. I have to say my beautiful daughter’s school in New Zealand has a garden, but it is not this big. It is a little garden and she does amazing things. She talks beautifully about how much fun she has in that garden. However, this is 3300 m2 of land.
I also take time to say thank you to all the volunteers who came down last Saturday morning. We started at 7.30 am; I got there at 8 am, so I was running half-an-hour late for this working bee. From my count, there were some 20 men, women plus many more children there for this working bee. Rob Presswell and his team should be commended for the vigour with which they have started.
I have been looking at the plan for this garden for some time. It is a beautiful plan done by a lady by the name of Karen. We have now applied it to the ground and started the project. Saturday morning, I was joined by three young gentlemen, Brad, John and Stevo. Stevo is Mr Stevenson, one of teachers. We began laying Besser blocks, cementing them in, to create compost bins. None of us, of course, are brickies. It took us quite a while to actually get headway. We have started the process and have those bins under way. I think we will do some more this Saturday coming.
It is a fantastic vision which has come off the back of vibrant teachers of all ages at this school. It is a vision by which you the fundamentals of basic skills will be taught to these children so they get a real understanding of where fruit and vegetables come from, how they grow, and science behind it.
I believe they are also applying for a grant through the Stephanie Alexander Foundation to develop a kitchen. Not only will they be producing and understanding the growing of the fruit and vegetables, but they will be actually learning how to use them day-to-day in a kitchen format to better their own health and lifestyle. This should be highly commended.
When we were in Kintore, we had our own little garden out in the middle of the desert. You think it is all red sand and there is nothing much here, but we were able to reap many crops off the garden we had - and it was not that big at all. We probably pulled three wheelbarrow loads of squash, zucchinis, bok choy, and the like out of our garden. It certainly helped us to have a better, healthier lifestyle many hundreds of kilometres from a main area.
This garden is a brilliant idea; it delivers real skills, real results for our youth. They deserve the best opportunities they can. I look forward to working with those people in the coming weeks because it is a great project and I know those men and women and young children had a great deal of vigour when they were dancing around in the heat. Many plants were put in, and we will see in the next few weeks a dramatic change.
On a more sombre note, unfortunately, I had the great pleasure of meeting a lady quite a few months ago called Mrs Melanie Bulasch. This lady had a lot of fight. She was not a young lady by any means. She was part of the action group involved in the Marlow Lagoon power line issue. She was living along that power line. She got out; she came and walked with us. She came to all these meetings. She was a woman whose vigour was as if she was only 20 in that she fought hard.
I have to say I thought she was a lovely, cheeky lady because she took a dislike to the Minister for Essential Services when he behaved quite poorly in a public meeting. She was quite astounded by his behaviour.
She was a lady who fought like a 20-year-old but, unfortunately, cancer managed to take her life on 29 August this year. I have only just found out about it in recent times. I send my condolences to her son, Bob Bulasch, and hope things are going well for him in this difficult time. They were very supportive people of the community and, as I said, she fought like a 20-year-old. She had the vigour and the understanding of what was going on right through to the end. For tonight, I will leave it at that. I enjoyed your time, Melanie, so please rest peacefully and we will see you another time.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016