2006-06-14
Mr Acting Speaker Kiely took the Chair at 10 am.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Bachelor of Education students from the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education accompanied by Robyn Ober. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition from 29 petitioners praying that the Marrakai Downs bus route be changed. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read.
Mr WARREN (Goyder): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition from 31 petitioners praying that the Middle Point School be given two permanent teachers for 2007 and 2008. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read.
Mr WARREN (Goyder): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition from 202 petitioners praying that approval for a kennel and cattery at Lot 3296 De Caen Close, Virginia, be overturned. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it complies with requirements of standing orders. Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read.
Kennel and Cattery in Virginia –
Request to Overturn Approval
Mr WARREN (Goyder)(by leave): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition, not conforming with standing orders, from 17 petitioners relating to approval for a kennel and cattery at Lot 3296, De Caen Close, Virginia.
Mr Acting Speaker, I do not propose that the petition be read as it is similar in terms to a petition presented earlier in these sittings.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Speaker, today I inform the House of more good news in the area of indigenous tourism with the creation of special development tours for entrepreneurial Aboriginal women considering a future in the tourism industry. The Women and Indigenous Tourism Development Initiative is part of an innovative approach to tourism development. Its main aim is to help Aboriginal women gain confidence and experience in tourism. The developmental tour concept will allow Aboriginal women the opportunity to witness close up the levels of service required when dealing with visitors to the Territory. It will also help these women understand the kinds of experiences our travellers are searching for.
Tourism is not for everyone; operating a successful and reliable small business can be extremely hard work. The developmental tours will give these budding entrepreneurs an idea of the level of commitment that is required, and the skills and abilities they will need to be successful.
I am delighted to inform the House that on Sunday, 4 June 2006, 20 women from around the nation who are involved in indigenous tourism development arrived in Darwin. They joined Aboriginal women from the Top End to participate in the first women’s developmental tour. These visiting women embarked on an eight-day tour across the Top End meeting Aboriginal women from Larrakia, Wagiman, Jawoyn, Murrumburr, Bolmo, Mirrar and Yolngu country. A major aim of this travelling workshop is for our visitors to share their vast knowledge of indigenous tourism with our local women. The share of knowledge goes both ways with our visitors learning much about the way we do things in the Territory. A number of these interstate women are tour leaders who are assessing the Territory as a possible annual destination for special interest tours. The tour is, obviously, very beneficial for them.
On departing Darwin, the group travelled to Tjuwaliyn; that is, Douglas Hot Springs. It is a sacred women’s area for the people of the Wagiman language group and the perfect location for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women to sit and discuss women’s issues. The group then travelled to Kakadu National Park to meet with Bessie Coleman at Gunlom Falls. Bessie is a Jawoyn traditional owner who welcomed the group to her country and told how she wanted to be involved in the tourism sector. Their journey continued through Kakadu to Patonga Homestead where the women took part in a tour with Murdudjurl Pty Ltd. Mandy Muir and her family began operating in October last year and have already achieved a level of professionalism that is a must see for any emerging Aboriginal tour operator. The group then went on to Kakadu Culture Camp, which I had the pleasure of opening a few weeks ago, and saw firsthand the work being done by Fred and Jen Hunter.
All in all, the tour was an outstanding success. It gave Aboriginal Territorians with an interest in tourism the chance to meet leaders in the area and discuss their ideas. The development of indigenous tourism product and experience is a key priority for this government and the Women and Indigenous Tourism Development Initiative is an excellent example of that commitment.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her ministerial report this morning. Indigenous tourism has great opportunity in the Northern Territory to develop even further than it has. There is not one person in this Assembly who does not encourage indigenous tourism ventures within the Territory.
One of the challenges that we have had in the past with indigenous tourism is ensuring that those ventures which are marketed and advertised are able to fulfil their commitment. One of the problems that we have had in the past - for instance, I will use the example of the corroboree at Springvale Homestead in Katherine. For 20 years, it ran very successfully, but then it became impossible to run that tour any longer because of the lack of commitment by the performers.
It is extremely important for us to market internationally and nationally the fact that we can fulfil that promise with indigenous tourism. I strongly support it, but we must give it as much support as possible to ensure that the commitment is fulfilled and we are able to give that experience to the tourists.
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Mr Acting Speaker, I wish to report on a series of meetings I recently initiated with Defence prime contractors based interstate who will be competing for the Through Life Support contracts for the Abrams tanks and ASLAVs based at Robertson Barracks. Members will recall from earlier proceedings in the House that the Australian government is purchasing a fleet of 59 Abrams Main Battle tanks from the US government to replace the aging fleet of Leopard tanks at a cost of around $530m. Forty-one of the tanks will be based with 1st Brigade at Robertson Barracks from 2007. In addition to the tanks, the US is providing advance gunnery and driver training simulators, training and other support equipment, a range of spares, refuelling vehicles, tank transporters and ammunition, and seven Hercules armoured recovery vehicles, four of which will be based in Darwin. This acquisition has provided the opportunity to convince Defence and the successful contractors that the through life support for the tanks should be undertaken as close to Robertson Barracks as possible instead of being undertaken interstate.
On 14 February this year, the government announced plans for the development of an industrial park, including a Defence support hub, near Robertson Barracks. The 60 ha site on Thorngate Road, Holtze, will give the Territory a strong competitive edge to target the Through Life Support and maintenance contracts for the Abrams tanks and other Defence equipment based at the barracks. Such a Defence support hub could accommodate the prime contractor that wins the contract for the Abrams tanks, and establish land for other prime contractors and SMEs which deliver strategic support to 1st Brigade; that is, it will provide a physical platform for business to establish strategic clusters.
The developments of the Defence support hub aims to attract Defence prime contractors, projects and activities that are currently not undertaken here in the Northern Territory, with a subsequent flow-on of work to local SMEs. Defence would benefit strategically from most of the repairs and maintenance on its armoured vehicles being undertaken close to where they are based as it would substantially reduce transportation risks and costs and the turnaround time, which would thereby increase the readiness and preparedness of the equipment and the regiments to deploy. Naturally, if the work was done in the Territory instead of interstate, it would benefit our local business community and our economy by creating jobs, increasing our population and broadening our industry base.
We have made the point very strongly that undertaking as much as possible of the through life support for the tanks and other armoured vehicles locally would be consistent with the more contemporary arrangements Defence has made in respect of its other major platforms, such as the Tiger helicopters and the Armidale Class patrol boats, which will both be based and supported in Darwin.
In December 2005, the Australian government called for expressions of interest from industry in respect of Through Life Support contracts for the Abrams and ASLAVs. In March 2006, officers from my department attended the Defence Materiel Organisation briefings to industry in relation to the Through Life Support contracts. The briefing was attended by all those companies which had registered an expression of interest. The Territory government was the only state or territory government in attendance at the briefing. The DMO has since released a draft statement of work for the Abrams tanks and we understand is holding consultations with the companies concerned.
Over the past two weeks I have travelled to Sydney and Adelaide and held confidential discussions with the prime contractors who are likely to lead bids for these Through Life Support contracts. The meetings, held in commercial-in-confidence, were attended by the CEOs of the companies and, in most cases, their senior management team, including the managers who will frame the company tenders for the work.
At each meeting, I delivered a presentation on the proposed Defence support hub, on the strategic and commercial rationale for undertaking this work in Darwin instead of being undertaken interstate. I also shared with the companies the third party expert analysis that the government commissioned on the cost effectiveness of doing the work on armoured vehicles in Darwin compared to the cost of transporting the vehicles and undertaking the work interstate. I also met with key Defence people and other Commonwealth government officials and industry people in Canberra last week, advocating the through life support case for Darwin. As an example, the report prepared by ACIL Tasman stated that, when considering the cost of freight and equipment down time while it is transported across long distances over the life of the contract, it would cost more than six times as much to maintain the Abrams tanks in Bandiana as it would in Darwin.
The government is actively pursuing the opportunity to increase the number and size of Defence support activities undertaken in the Territory. The Chief Minister and I have both met with Defence officials, Defence prime contractors, and the new Minister for Defence, Hon Brendan Nelson MP. We are strongly lobbying for this work to be undertaken in Darwin in recognition of the benefits it would be deliver to our local business and economy, and jobs that it will provide Territorians. This government is engaged with prime contractors and the Commonwealth government, and will continue pursuing this initiative to ensure that the Territory option is well understood and given due consideration.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the minister for his report which is appropriate in all of the circumstances. I know that he has been working on this. I have had some representations over the last six months by both interested and potential contractors. I am interested to hear the minister, quite rightly, saying that he is going into bat, as we would, to ensure that the hub does exist in Darwin. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to work out that it is desirable in all of the circumstances, both from a Defence point of view but also for the future benefit of the Territory economy.
However, I am aware of one contractor that is a Territory company. I hope the minister’s commitment to getting the hub here in Darwin is equalled by his commitment to ensuring, to the extent that he is able, that the job actually goes to a Darwin- or Territory-based company.
I thank the minister for his report. I have been expecting a report like the one he has just delivered for some time. I am very pleased to hear that he is seriously going into bat. All of us want to see this Defence hub in action, and it makes perfect sense for it to be here in Darwin. Thank you very much, minister, for your report.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Speaker, I welcome the minister’s report on the industrial Defence hub network. It is good that we can have a Through Life Support program. There is no doubt that will be beneficial to the Territory. However, in this big push for helping the economy and talking these things up, we forget that it has to go somewhere. The minister said that there is some land set aside for this hub on Thorngate Road, just south of Robertson Barracks. We should not lose sight that this particular area set aside, as normally happens with planners, is a square, and it is going to the minister as an amendment to the Litchfield Area Plan. The fact is that there is a large quantity of wetlands right next to this particular site. Some of the area that is proposed is a wetland, and it is called a priority environmental area under the Litchfield Land Use Objectives.
Even though I support what is going on, I would like the government to put equally as much attention as to the siting of this particular hub so that there are no detrimental effects to the environment. After all, it is going to be an industrial site right next to a priority environmental area. In addition, there will be an increase in traffic which belongs to Litchfield Shire. I am not sure who is going to pay for the upgrading of the road. Defence does not pay rates, and I am not sure whether the government would pay rates if they owned this network.
The other issue that has been raised with me is that some companies feel by setting up this special area, they may be at a disadvantage in doing some of the work because they have set up in other areas that the government has set aside for industrial development. They are just wondering whether they will be at some disadvantage at not being so close to a site which, when they bought their site in another industrial area, they did not even know was going to happen.
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank members for their contributions. I can say to the Leader of the Opposition that the local Territory-based company that is bidding for this work is receiving the same attention and assistance as are other companies. At the end of the day, we have to cover the field, and we want to see this through life support based here in Darwin. It is not a Territory government tender; it is a Commonwealth tender. We have to work with all companies because we do not know who is going to win. I wish the Territory-based company the best of luck.
In regard to the concerns raised by the member for Nelson, all environmental legislation and regulations, and planning regulations, will be complied with. We are developing this in the same way we develop any other piece of land. If local companies are running the argument that somehow by establishing this industrial park they are at a disadvantage, the Leopard tanks are currently maintained at Bandiana in Victoria; they are not maintained here. We are trying to bring new work to the Territory that is going to give existing businesses in the Territory an opportunity to partner with the new companies that are coming in. If we do not do it, we will not get the tanks and they will stay in Bandiana in Victoria.
Ms LAWRIE (Sport and Recreation): Mr Acting Speaker, this Dry Season might have brought some cold shivers to Territorians, but for those who love their sport these will soon be replaced with shivers of excitement as the government continues to deliver elite sporting events. The Dry is the best time of the year for playing sport and we see many codes nationally vying for the Territory as an attractive destination to escape the very bitter southern winter.
Over the Queen’s Birthday long weekend a great Territory event has taken place in the Centre. This, of course, is the mighty Finke Desert Race. I congratulate our Minister for Central Australia for competing and finishing the course. The Finke Desert Race hosted competitors from throughout Australia and also overseas in a battle to complete the 235 km gruelling track. I am told that some 10 000 to 15 000 spectators lined the track to witness some of the action. I congratulate Mr Antony Yoffa, an outstanding sporting administrator, and his Finke Desert Race organising committee on delivering another sporting event into the Centre.
It just gets better. Next week, we will be welcoming the very best up and coming cricketers to Darwin from not only Australia but also Pakistan, India and New Zealand to compete in an A Series with Australian players vying for potential Ashes selection. Territorians will get to see some top class cricket and an early glimpse of our many future national reps in action, with players who have also competed at the elite level for their nations. This is going to be a fantastic spectacle with a mix of four day games, one day games and, for the first time in the Top End, 20/20 cricket; the new form of the code. I am certain we will witness many great international battles at TIO Stadium and Gardens Oval.
At the very end of the month, a great highlight of our sporting calendar, the V8s will again roar through Darwin and down to our Hidden Valley Motorsports Complex. The V8s are a great feature of not only the Territory sporting calendar but also its social calendar, bringing with it enormous benefits to our lifestyle and our tourism economy. I am very pleased that the Chief Minister has been able to negotiate the long-term presence of the V8s in Darwin until at least 2012.
There is more to come. This is a very exciting time of the year for the minister for Racing with the Darwin Cup being run on 7 August with all the colour and festival spirit that this cup carnival brings. I will be looking forward to attending Ladies Day in the lead-up to cup day, and welcoming many of our interstate visitors to the Territory for this great racing carnival. The Martin Labor government is spending $6.8m next year to support thoroughbred racing right across the Territory.
On 12 August, the Western Bulldogs are back in Darwin for their Round 19 clash with Port Adelaide at TIO Stadium. Both teams enjoy a strong following in the Territory. I anticipate that Territory footy fans will fill the stadium to capacity in support of these two great teams. I have been working with the AFLNT, the Western Bulldogs, and representatives of the AFL to look at growing our crowds at TIO Stadium. I am looking forward to welcoming the Bulldogs back to Darwin. I like to refer to them as the ‘Darwin Doggies’. I thank them for their very strong, ongoing commitment to hosting home games in the Territory. They have enjoyed a flying start to the year, despite a recent horrible run with injuries and, with Port Adelaide now hitting their straps, it should be a great game right on the eve of the finals.
The Territory is also a great place for local sports to host national championships. This Dry Season we will see Veterans Women’s Hockey and Callisthenics hosting teams from all over Australia. These will provide a boost for local tourism and the economy as many athletes choose to bring with them family and friends and stay a while longer to enjoy the great Territory hospitality for which we are well renowned.
Territorians’ lifestyle is the envy of the nation. I am certain that the many sporting events on offer can only increase our passion for choosing to live here.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Speaker, the CLP opposition welcomes the statement on the many events which are occurring in the Top End and Central Australia; it is good to hear. At the risk of copping a response from the minister, I will proceed down this line.
One, the report is welcomed. The issue needs to be further separated into two components. What is the purpose of these events? If we can clearly describe the purpose of these events, particularly in the Northern Territory as we are in a place unique in our nation, we have a strategic advantage in much of our sporting infrastructure. For example, the cricket is fantastic and is a great event. It provides us with a great opportunity for further engagement within the region. In the racing industry also, we have a great strategic advantage to be able to draw in people from around the country and internationally. However, the facilities in swimming, particularly, with strategic focus, could also be elevated to a place where, in this continent, we would have a premier facility that could attract international events.
So too, with soccer. I appreciate the moves that have already been made in recognition of the potential for soccer, which is enormous, as the minister well knows. We have heard many comments to the effect that now that soccer has gained a greater prominence within the country, the Northern Territory is strategically located to progress our engagement in the immediate region.
On these sporting engagements rides our the capacity to engage our near communities to our north, which brings on the industry and business engagements through Asian Relations and Trade. I would like to hear more of that talk rather than just a description of the great events that we are all going to enjoy. I would like to hear another level where the potential of these events will allow us engagement with our regions, both within the country and externally in Asia, and even further beyond. That kind of talk will allow us to elevate and strengthen our strategic advantage.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Speaker, the place is buzzing at the moment. You have to admit, with the Finke Desert Race, Alice Springs is buzzing. We had the bike challenge. There is so much going on it is a great feeling. I say to the Minister for Central Australia, good on you for having a go. Is it true that you did not use the ablution block though; that you had a pee behind a bush instead?
Dr Toyne: The human bladder holds only 400 ml.
Mrs BRAHAM: You need not tell us now, tell me later.
There is also an interesting program – I am not sure if it was on Imparja or SBS - showing the Aboriginal people who were involved in the Finke Desert Race. I hope all members of the House saw that program. It was really great.
I congratulate the people involved in the bike challenge. People came from all over Australia and it was huge.
I ask the minister, though, if she has seen the pamphlet put out by the Office of Central Australia called Centre Spokes about all the sporting events happening? Did you see it? Have you proof read it? I suggest you have a look at it, minister, because it is an interesting document that highlights things like the grandstand at Traeger Park. It lists in the editorial section the contents. It lists an ‘Update for Masters Games’. Okay, where is this update for the Masters Games in this pamphlet? Does it mean to say that nothing has happened for the Masters Games? Perhaps you ought to have a look at that pamphlet, minister, which has your and the Chief Minister’s photos on it, bragging about what is happening in Central Australia. Obviously, it reflects the inefficiency of the Office of Central Australia, or the fact that someone cannot proof read very well. I am not quite sure which.
Well done for promoting all the sports. Do not forget; we are still waiting for the Demons to come up and thrash some of the other teams around Australia, and we look forward to seeing them in the premiership.
Ms LAWRIE (Sport and Recreation): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the opposition, for a change, in welcoming the events. The shadow spokesperson has consistently called for a review of the elite sporting events that we bring to the Territory. He does not understand the contents …
Mr MILLS: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I have never called for a review. I have asked for a consideration of cost benefit analysis so that we know we are getting value for money in the long term. That is rubbish!
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Blain, if you feel you have been misquoted, you can make …
Mr Mills: I have been!
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Please continue.
Ms LAWRIE: The shadow spokesperson has called for a cost benefit analysis review while, at the same time, saying that the government holds too many reviews. It is a bit like Darwin City Council trying to track down where they are with their swimming venue. First of all, they are talking about a swimming venue at one place, then they are talking about needing another pool. I agree with you; I would like to see a great swimming venue in the Top End. However, Darwin City Council, which has the pools, does not seem to have a consistent line yet on where it is going to put the $20m-odd it has sitting in its funds account into building an aquatic centre. As minister for sport, I am going to have a meeting with the Lord Mayor. I am really keen to hear from Darwin City Council about what they want to do.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Your time has expired, minister.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Acting Speaker, I rise to talk about this government’s EnvironmeNT Grants and the lucky 2006 recipients of the schools component of the grants.
The EnvironmeNT Grants is a scheme introduced by the Northern Territory government in 2003 to enable all Territorians to be able to apply for grants for community environment and heritage projects. Before the introduction of this hugely popular grants program, Territorians who were not involved with larger community organisations had no real avenue for applying for grants if they had a great idea for an environment initiative. A recommendation from the Youth Round Table saw our Labor government initiate this unique and equitable grants program that provides all Territorians with the benefit of applying for assistance.
From the very first round, the response from the public has been unprecedented. Territorians have truly taken these environment grants to heart. I know I have said it many times, but I will say it again: we truly have one of the best environments in the world. It is the basis of our wonderful unmatched lifestyle, a haven that we want to preserve for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren to enjoy.
Dr Lim: You will go skindiving in Larrakeyah, will you?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Can you tell that annoying little voice over there to be quiet?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order!
Ms SCRYMGOUR: The Martin Labor government has a strong commitment to balancing growth with the protection of the environment by supporting local community groups …
Mr Henderson: Did you bring your box of tissues today?
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I would ask you to direct the Leader of Government Business to withdraw his offensive remark directed squarely and fairly at my colleague, the member for Greatorex. The Leader of Government Business interjected and said to the member for Greatorex: ‘Did you bring your box of tissues today?’ That is outrageous and insensitive. I ask that you ask him to withdraw it.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I do not find any offence in what he actually said. However, in the interests of keeping peace in the parliament, if the minister believes it was an offensive remark, would he kindly withdraw it.
Mr HENDERSON: If I have offended anybody’s sensitivities, I withdraw.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Acting Speaker, the Martin Labor government has a strong commitment to balancing growth with the protection of the environment by supporting local community groups and ordinary Territorians who want to make a difference. The importance of the EnvironmeNT Grants is not to be underestimated. Having a specific grants program that allows our youth and young kids to be involved with their environment is a worthy investment for the future as it will be theirs to look after in years to come.
This brings me to the lucky recipients of the schools component of the grants. The Northern Territory government has just awarded $25 000 in grants to schools across the Northern Territory, both in our remote areas and our urban schools. Grants for individual projects that are non-school related are still being assessed and will be announced next month. I look forward to reporting on these lucky recipients also.
In 2006-07, two subcategories of school projects grants were established – the Sustainable Schools Project and the Schools Environment Education Project – and there are many varied projects right across the board. Projects include: funding to the Jabiru Area School to create habitat havens post-Cyclone Monica; Ludmilla School for Ludmilla Creek Environment Project; Nhulunbuy High School for a horticulture project; a Bird Habitat Awareness and Improvement Project by Redsand Hill Homelands Centre; funding to Darwin High School to create a stage production on global environment issues; funding to Berry Springs School for a multisensory environmental garden. This government has certainly searched high and low for great projects. The Kintore Campus at Yirara College of the Finke Desert Mission is one of the most remote indigenous secondary schools in the Territory but that has not stopped the school from securing funding from these grants to install a drip irrigation system to ensure plant survival and demonstrate good water usage.
I would like to comment on the innovation, creativity and uniqueness of each of these projects, in particular this round. Moil Primary School students are again going to compost organic scraps from their school canteen as part of their anti-cane toad garden and install a solar powered pump to demonstrate other sustainability issues.
I am proud to be the minister giving out these grants to these schools, and the students who have come up with some great projects that will undoubtedly help our environment. It is because of our young ones and their diligence and commitment that our environment will benefit both today and in the future.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the minister for her report this morning. It is very encouraging to see that there is so much money being offered to school children so that they become involved in environmental issues. It is very important that our young people are trained at a very young age to become aware of the environment.
Unfortunately, there are two environmental issues that still have not been addressed and they are fairly important ones for the Territory. One of them is the Berry Springs Nature Park: it is still not open and is causing quite a few headaches as far as tourists and local people are concerned.
The other issue is highlighted in the media at the moment and that is the environmental issue of effluent being pumped into our harbour. If the minister could give us an update on what is being planned by the government to address this issue in the short term it would be appreciated.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Speaker, I know that the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage is dying for me to say something, and I will. I congratulate the government on its environmental grants. They are a great idea and they certainly encourage young people to look at ways of improving their environment.
Howard Springs school has a cane toad-free garden. The kids who put it together enjoyed doing it and it is something they are very proud of. Children do become proud of those particular projects. It is very important.
This report is about environmental grants. It is a good concept. It is part of the overall education of children and especially in remote areas where they usually do not get a chance to do some of these things. It is a great initiative from the government and I support what the government is doing as regards to the environmental grants.
We will say something else on those other areas of environmental issues later today.
Reports noted.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of visitors as part of the Parliament House Public Tour Program. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, Hear!
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The Darwin Waterfront and Convention Centre Development includes three main elements: the Darwin Convention Centre with a 1500 seat plenary capacity and 4000 m2 of exhibition space; community facilities including sea wall, wave lagoons, swimming areas, public promenade, parklands and picnic areas; and commercial developments including a Medina hotel, harbour side cafes and restaurants, and a staged residential development.
The community infrastructure components of the development will contain a number of public elements including the convention centre, swimming lagoons, a wave pool and sea wall. Infrastructure of this kind will require ongoing management, maintenance, and regulation.
The residential components of the development are staged with the first 141 units to be completed in 2008. The introduction of residents into the development in 2008 will necessitate the delivery of municipal services to the precinct. In this regard, the Territory has entered into arrangements with both the residential developer and the Darwin City Council under which the Territory has agreed to establish a statutory authority to, among other things, provide municipal services to the precinct.
This bill seeks to establish the Darwin Waterfront Corporation, a statutory corporation which will be responsible for these functions.
I now turn to the details of the bill. The development area, to be known as the Darwin Waterfront Precinct, will be severed from the municipality of Darwin and regulations made under the bill will define the areas of land forming the precinct. In the first instance, the corporation will be comprised of at least three but not more than seven members appointed by the minister. The minister will appoint a chairperson of the corporation. On the recommendation of the corporation, the minister will appoint a chief executive officer of the corporation who will be a member of that corporation and will exercise the powers and functions of the corporation under the direction of the members. The CEO will not be eligible for appointment as chairperson. The bill contains provisions which will provide the minister with powers to terminate the appointment of members in certain circumstances.
The general functions of the corporation as proposed in this bill include:
to do anything for the development of the land within the precinct owned or controlled by it;
to manage property in the precinct owned or controlled by it;
to promote the precinct as a place of residence, and a venue for public events and entertainment;
to preserve good order in the precinct;
to do anything for the provision of municipal services in the precinct;
to develop and maintain facilities in the precinct;
to advise the minister about the precinct on request;
to develop and manage land not forming part of the precinct; and
to perform other functions specified in the regulations.
Municipal functions are dealt with separately in the bill. Specifically, the bill requires the corporation to ensure that municipal services and amenities are provided for the precinct as specified in the bill and, additionally, in the regulations when drafted.
The bill provides the corporation with all the powers necessary for the performance of its functions including power to acquire, hold and dispose of land and personal property. The bill provides for the Territory to be able to transfer the ownership or control of land to the corporation. This applies to land within and outside the precinct.
The bill gives the corporation the power to levy rates on land within the precinct in order for it to fund all or part of its municipal functions. To ensure consistency and integration between the precinct and the municipality of Darwin, the bill provides a cap on rates within the precinct such as the rates for a year must not be greater than 120% of the rates imposed by the Darwin City Council. The corporation may only use amounts received in rates for the performance of its municipal functions.
To assist the corporation in promoting the precinct, the corporation will also have the power to impose a promotional levy on persons who conduct business within the precinct. Such levies may only be used by the corporation for promotional purposes.
The bill provides that the corporation may make by-laws in relation to the precinct, as well as in relation to meetings, procedures, and the common seal of the corporation. The bill allows the corporation to adopt the by-laws of a municipal council, and it is envisaged that to ensure integration between the precinct and the CBD, the corporation will adopt Darwin City Council by-laws.
The chairperson is required to convene as many meetings as are necessary for the corporation to perform its functions. In addition, the minister may direct the chairperson to convene a meeting to deal with a particular matter. A quorum for a meeting will be a majority of the corporation’s members, and questions will be determined by a majority of votes. The chairperson will have a deliberative vote and also have a casting vote in the event of an equal number of votes. The corporation will be required to keep proper accounts and records of all of its transactions, and ensure that adequate control is maintained over the corporation’s liabilities and property owned or under the control of the corporation.
The Treasurer will have the ability to request information with respect to the corporation’s financial position and affairs. The corporation’s financial statements will be subject to audit by the Auditor-General on an annual basis. In addition, the corporation will be required to prepare an annual report for each financial year, which will include directions given by the minister, financial statements, and the Auditor-General’s report on the financial statements. The minister will table a copy of the annual report in the Legislative Assembly.
It is recognised that as residents commence moving into the precinct from 2008, there will need to be a system set in place whereby residents are represented either as members of the corporation or otherwise. To address this, the bill requires the corporation to conduct a review of the act and the operations of the corporation within 12 months of the first residential occupancy permit being issued. Following the review, the corporation will be required to prepare a report with recommendations on the management of the precinct; the representation of individuals and groups in the membership of the corporation; the devolution of the powers and functions of the corporation to another body, for example, a municipal authority; and any other matters which the minister requests or the corporation considers appropriate. Consultations with respect to the bill have occurred with the Darwin City Council; TOGA, as the residential developer; and Darwin Cove Convention Centre Pty Ltd, the community infrastructure developer.
In short, this bill is about the business of setting in place a body that will ensure that the Darwin waterfront precinct is properly serviced and managed in all respects.
Mr Acting Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I advise honourable members in the presence of the gallery of the past Speaker of the House, Mr Terry McCarthy. On behalf of members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Mr Acting Speaker, I move the bill be now read a second time.
The Territory’s Motor Accident Compensation, or MACA scheme, is a statutory monopoly operated for the benefit of motorists with a self-funding not-for-profit based focus. The scheme is currently administered by the Territory Insurance Office. However, the relationship between TIO and the MACA scheme is not clearly defined in the legislation although, historically, the scheme has been run as a not-for-profit arm of TIO’s business.
As part of the reform of its governance arrangements in recent years, TIO has developed a service level agreement describing the nature of the services that it provides to the MACA scheme and the basis of the allocation of costs to that scheme. Further, in 2005, TIO segregated the assets of the MACA scheme from those of TIO so that the MACA scheme assets can now be separately identified. This has provided greater transparency in the information available to government on the MACA scheme, and has also meant that an appropriate investment strategy for the MACA scheme assets, which are separate to, and different from, the investment strategy for TIO, can be developed.
While there are benefits to both TIO and the MACA scheme from operating the MACA scheme in conjunction with TIO, the entities are fundamentally different in their objectives and operations. TIO is a commercial insurer and finance company operating in competitive markets with the objective of making a profit, while the MACA scheme is for the benefit of motorists with a self-funding but not profit-based focus. Housing these disparate operations within the one entity is not an optimum structure for the management of funds or for their oversight by government. The measures being introduced in this bill represent the next step in addressing this problem.
First, the bill sets out that the assets and liabilities of the MACA scheme must be held in a separate fund. The assets and liabilities will still be under the same legal ownership as TIO’s commercial assets, but they will be quarantined in separate accounts and will be separately reported in financial statements. This will provide transparency in the dealings of the MACA scheme fund. One consequence of this change is that there will need to be a separate legislative guarantee of the liabilities of the MACA scheme. The liabilities of the MACA scheme are implicitly guaranteed by government at present through government’s guarantee of TIO’s commercial liabilities. In more formally separating the scheme from TIO, this bill provides for an explicit government guarantee of the liabilities of the MACA scheme.
The bill will also establish a number of improvements to the corporate governance arrangements applying to the MACA scheme. TIO will be required to prepare two statements of corporate intent – one for its commercial business and a separate one for the MACA scheme which reflects its community-based self-funding requirements. At the same time, the bill will align the provisions for preparing TIO’s statement of corporate intent for its commercial business with those of the Government Owned Corporations Act. TIO has already adopted such a framework under an informal agreement, and this amendment will formalise that arrangement. This will mean that, in my capacity as the responsible minister, I will have to formally agree to the statements of corporate intent for TIO’s commercial business and for the MACA scheme. In the case of TIO’s commercial business statement of corporate intent, the bill requires that a version excluding commercially confidential material be tabled in parliament much like the Power and Water Corporation’s tabled SCI.
There are a number of potential conflicts of interest between TIO and the MACA scheme relating to matters such as the allocation of costs. In order to ensure that any potential conflicts of interest are managed in an open and transparent manner, the bill introduces two significant amendments. First, TIO will be required to prepare a conflict of interest policy that sets out the range of possible conflicts that could arise and the processes that will be adopted to manage them. This document will be subject to the Treasurer’s approval. The second reform will be the appointment of a special board member as advocate of the MACA scheme. This board member will only vote on matters relating to the MACA scheme, and the board could not consider such matters unless that board member or an alternate is present. The bill provides that, in the case of a conflict between TIO and the MACA scheme, resolutions of the board will only be valid if supported by the MACA scheme board member.
TIO has been consulted on all matters with regard to this bill and embraces the scope of the changes. To the benefit of all Territory motorists, the reforms embodied in the legislation will promote greater transparency and accountability in the operation and administration of the MACA scheme. Mr Acting Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Section 14 of the current Northern Territory Human Tissue Transplant Act states that:
The act has no provision for people aged less than 18 years to consent to the donation of blood.
During 2004, the Northern Territory Australian Red Cross Blood Services realised that this provision did not match the legislative situation in most other jurisdictions where 16- or 17-year-olds can donate blood. Maximising the number of potential donors who can safely give blood is essential to maintaining adequate blood supplies and, thus, help Territorians. Over the last two decades, the regulations for accepting donations of blood have become tighter, resulting in a smaller pool of potential donors. This has been partly the result of increased awareness of health risks such as HIV and mad cow disease - Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease - and because of the raising of the required donor haemoglobin level.
These tighter regulations have partly contributed to a number of national blood shortages over the last year. The recent television advertising campaign by the Australian Red Cross highlights the number of donors who are no longer eligible to give blood. It is very important to maximise the blood donor pool available in Australia to help sustain our blood services.
Consequently, the proposed amendment to the Human Tissue Transplant Act seeks to allow a person who is of sound mind and at least 16 years of age to donate blood. There is no medical contra-indication to people aged 16 and 17 donating blood. In addition, they are likely to have less exposure to blood-borne diseases. All other jurisdictions, with the exception of Tasmania, allow 16- and 17-year-old persons to donate blood. By reducing the age limit, new acceptable young donors can be recruited, who often may remain long-term blood donors, thus contributing to the long-term availability of blood for Territorians in need of it.
Mr Acting Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Family and Community Service): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of introducing this bill, which includes a Northern Territory carers charter is, first and foremost, to acknowledge and recognise the role of carers as a critical partner in the caring role in our community.
Carers Northern Territory Incorporated report that there are approximately 25 000 carers in the Northern Territory providing a crucial and often hidden role in the lives of countless Territorians. Carers are an integral part of our community providing support for many of our frail aged people or people with a disability, a chronic or terminal illness, or with a mental illness. Without this support, many of our Territorians would simply not be able to stay in their own homes. The role of carers should be formally recognised by including carers in the assessment, planning, delivery, and review of services that impact on them and their caring role.
The bill provides a mechanism for this to occur and is enshrined in the Northern Territory carers charter which is a schedule of the bill. The carers charter has eight key principles, and organisations and agencies must take all practical measures to ensure the organisation and its officers, employees or agents take action to reflect these principles of the charter in providing relevant services of their organisation. The eight key principles of the Northern Territory carers charter are:
carers must be treated with respect and dignity;
A very practical way for organisations to remember and bring attention to this charter is to display it in their working environment. It is important that the community, organisations and agencies know who the carers are and, for the purpose of this act, a person is a carer if a person is an individual who provides ongoing care or assistance to:
a person who has a disability within the meaning of the Disability Services Act;
a person who has a mental illness within the meaning of the Mental Health and Related Services Act;
a person who has a chronic illness;
a person who, because of frailty, requires assistance with the carrying out of their everyday tasks; or
a person of a class prescribed by regulation.
However, a person is not a carer if the person provides the care or assistance under a contract for services or a contract of service; or in the course of ongoing community work organised by a community organisation. Also, a person is not a carer only because the person is a spouse, de facto partner, parent or guardian of the person to whom the care or assistance is being provided, or provides care to a child who has been placed in the care of that person under the Community Welfare Act.
Carers are also individuals with their own needs within and beyond the role of carer. This bill outlines agencies and organisations’ obligations to carers and their responsibility to comply with the act including the Northern Territory carers charter. The bill provides the mechanism for an applicable organisation, as defined in the act as:
a reporting organisation;
an entity providing relevant services under a contract with reporting organisations other than a contract of employment; or
another entity declared by regulation to be an applicable organisation,
to report annually on their compliance or non-compliance to the act and carers charter. This report may be combined with the annual report of their organisation. The bill also makes provision for the act to be reviewed within five years after its commencement. The bill also amends the Health and Community Services Complaints Act to ensure that the meaning of ‘applicable organisation’ has the same meaning as in the carers recognition act and that the carers charter has the same meaning as in the carers recognition act.
The bill also amends the Health and Community Services Complaints Act to allow for a complaint to be made on the basis that an applicable organisation has failed to comply with the carers charter and to ensure that the carers charter is considered when the commissioner is investigating such a complaint.
Mr Acting Speaker, on behalf of the carers and people in their care, I take this opportunity to thank all the individuals and organisations, in particular Carers NT, who have contributed positively to this initiative. I commend the bill to honourable members. I table its accompanying explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 6 and 7 students from Durack Primary School accompanied by their teacher, Mr Craig Brown. On behalf of honourable members I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from 4 May 2006.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Acting Speaker, the bill is not opposed for all of the reasons you would imagine. I do not propose to go through them. However, there are some important points that should be placed on the Parliamentary Record.
Noting the intentions of the government prior to the 2001 election campaign when Labor said it would introduce a Freedom of Information Act, for my own party, before entering politics, I long held the view that all governments in this country should have freedom of information legislation.
However, it needs to be good legislation. Members who were around in the last Assembly will remember the debate that we had about the government’s freedom of information legislation. We did not think it was good. We appreciated the spin that the government put on it having regard to their position. They said that they would always do it. The CLP said that they would always do it too, and were working on but had not introduced their drafts. Labor spun it pretty significantly by saying words to the effect of: ‘Halleluiah, thank God for Labor, all Territorians can feel safe and secure because we have introduced freedom of information legislation’. It was somewhat surprising that, when looking at the amendment to the bill, the government did not, publicly at least, undertake a more significant review of the act. We and Territorians know - and I am sure government members will know even though they probably will not admit it - that the act has a number of difficulties.
The Leader of the Opposition’s office, both in the last term and this term, continues to experience great difficulties with it. You will remember, Attorney-General, that in the last term the Leader of the Opposition’s office copped a bill – I think it was in the region of about $50 000 to $80 000 for information sought. When we received the information a great deal of it was blacked out with a big black texta, so we paid seemingly squillions of dollars for zilch: the words ‘and’, ‘the’, and full stops and semicolons were left there, but there was very little in it.
For my own part since I have become Leader of the Opposition, following the last Estimates Committee hearing, we have sought quite a bit of information and it has been pretty close to 12 months. We continue to experience difficulty. We have received some, but not very much. Indeed, the information we have received has been for the most part blacked out, as I am told.
My staff wrote an e-mail to the relevant officer in the Department of Justice just the other day saying that we would appeal. We encourage the powers-that-be to go back to the principles that they proudly enunciated when they came to office, of openness and transparency, and that they provide us with the information that we sought on behalf of Territorians, which is, of course, our duty when performing the role of Her Majesty’s loyal opposition. I am not sure what is going to happen with my staff’s letter, but I encourage those who read it to get to a situation where they can give us the information that we have requested.
The fees business - well, we will cop that on the chin, but it is not the sort of legislation that Labor members and Labor supporters expected. The reality does not reflect the model and the spin associated with the model prior to 2001 or, indeed, in the last term.
I note that Queensland has had ongoing difficulties with their freedom of information. The last time I heard or read a report about it, I got the impression that the Labor government there was resisting any change, as much as politically possible. I would hate the Northern Territory …
Mr Bonson: Is that a reflection on us, is it?
Ms CARNEY: … government to be as belligerent …
Ms CARNEY: What was that, Matthew?
Mr Bonson: Is that a reflection on us, is it?
Ms CARNEY: When you say something sensible, member for Millner, I will reply. The fact that the sentence contained only a few words but was very well strung together is a credit to you.
In any case, I would not like to see the rather belligerent stance adopted by Peter Beattie’s government being adopted here. I suspect it will.
Mr Bonson: Is that a reflection on us, is it?
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, you made the point yesterday that a member should not interrupt when another member is speaking. I ask that you direct the member for Millner accordingly.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Certainly, member for Araluen. However, I also ask you not to indulge in any cross-floor conversation. Perhaps we can get on with it.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. Got it, Matthew? I know you are thick, but have you got it? Do you understand it?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I ask you to withdraw that comment. That is a personal attack. I wish you to withdraw that offensive comment.
Ms CARNEY: I will withdraw it, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr Bonson: A class act. You are a class act.
Ms CARNEY: Are you going to have a go, are you?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Please! Get on with it, Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Bonson: Alternative leader? You are joking?
Ms CARNEY: He continues, Mr Acting Speaker. For the purposes of Hansard, it is probably appropriate that, on account of the difficulties that the member for Millner has with pretty much everything, the Acting Speaker did, I think, indicate that the member for Millner should refrain from ongoing activity.
However, we digress ...
Mrs Miller: Unbiased, Mr Acting Speaker, unbiased.
Ms CARNEY: Perhaps the member for Millner - how long do I have? I have another 40 minutes; I am happy to keep going.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: One moment please, Leader of the Opposition. Are you reflecting on the Chair, member for Katherine?
Mrs MILLER: I was, and I withdraw that.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Thank you.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, it is interesting in light of the comments - I think the member for Millner said that when I called him thick, which I subsequently withdrew, that it was a personal attack. In this Chamber earlier this morning, we heard the Leader of Government Business make a comment which was much more offensive and much more insensitive than the member for Millner could ever hope to manufacture …
Mr Henderson: Which I withdrew, I apologised.
Ms CARNEY: It is interesting in the context of talking about freedom of information that, in dinner party conversations around this country, when you are talking about freedom of information you are probably also talking about freedom of expression. It is great that my colleague, the member for Greatorex, was so moved by the debate of what has occurred in this country over the last few weeks that he wept. Not allegedly wept; that he wept. I have been moved to tears in this Chamber on more than one occasion. Other parliamentary colleagues on the other side of this Chamber have similarly been moved to tears. I can name them. I remember when the new member for Drysdale was …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! The debate currently before the Chair is on the second reading on the Information Amendment Bill. I call on you, Mr Acting Speaker, to get the Leader of the Opposition back on track to debate the bill that is currently before the Assembly?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I ask you to retain relevance to the debate before the Chair please, Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. Relevant it is because, when we are talking about freedom of information, it does include some discussion about freedom of expression. Often, that is the reason why citizens will make freedom of information requests - to see the expressions of others, the information of others, etcetera.
It is in that context that it is more than appropriate, given the inane interjection of the member for Millner, that we, as a parliament and as an opposition, reflect on the outrageous conduct of the minister, the member for Wanguri, who, of course, has form on this. He is the same bloke who, during a debate on domestic violence, sought to ridicule the issue and anyone who cared about it and, in a way, actively discouraged anyone from talking about this issue. This is the personality of the man who would have some people believe that he is the next Chief Minister of the Northern Territory.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I am quite happy to have this debate with the Leader of the Opposition at any time. Again, I point out that the subject before this House at the moment is the second reading debate on amendments to the Information Act. I remind all honourable members, through you, Mr Acting Speaker, that this is a debate about legislation that is currently before this House, not a debate about previous comments on previous legislation. In regard to a comment I made earlier today, I apologised and withdrew. I am not being sensitive about this, but we have business to pass through this House and currently we are debating the Information Amendment Bill.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, there is a valid point that the Leader of Government Business is making in regard to relevance. I advise that should I consider you rambling too far from the relevant point then I will ask you to get back on track.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker, for your wise ruling. It may, of course, serve to discourage members from the Labor side from making absurd, silly, provocative and cretinous interjections when we are having a debate about freedom of information, something that I thought the Australian Labor Party took fairly seriously. I can keep going, I have 35 minutes left. I can take it up if you like.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of visitors taking part in the Parliament House Public Tour Program. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I heard only part of the Attorney-General’s grab on the ABC this morning, and I am happy to be corrected on it, but I understood that at least the effect of it was, this is great, we are making freedom of information better and better. I am not sure whether these amendments actually do that, and that will remain to be seen. It is important that I get back to some of the difficulties the Leader of the Opposition’s office has experienced, and they are demonstrated, I believe, in the very well written article that appeared in the Alice Springs News on 1 June. There is quite a bit of it I want to put on the record. It starts as follows:
The journalist then described how my office, in relation to the information we sought about those matters, copped a bill for nearly $5000 with no answers to nearly half of the questions. The journalist spoke to the Information Commissioner, Peter Shoyer.
Mr Henderson: You should meet him, a good bloke.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I do not have the standing orders in front of me, but if the member for Wanguri wants to participate in the debate, then he should do so from his own chair. I note that leave was not granted for him to sit in the other chair, therefore, he should be precluded from participating in the debate.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I will be able to manage the House, thank you, Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: I am sure you can. You are a man who in recent times has demonstrated he is more than capable of so doing, Mr Acting Speaker. However - oh! what a relief he is off. Whilst you are able to manage the House it is disconcerting, to say the least, to hear the mumblings of the member for Wanguri, who I note has now absented himself.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: You know quite well, Leader of the Opposition, that you are not allowed to refer to the presence or otherwise of a member in the House. You know that quite clearly.
Ms CARNEY: I forgot, Mr Acting Speaker, my apologies.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Would you please withdraw?
Ms CARNEY: Yes, I withdraw …
Mr Bonson: You have been here long enough to know that.
Ms CARNEY: What? Mr Acting Speaker, I do ask that in asserting your authority …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I shall, Leader of the Opposition, if you would only give me a chance.
Ms CARNEY: … as Acting Speaker of this House, that you assist me during the course of my contribution by plugging a hole in the member for Millner who is being provocative and irritating to say the least.
Dr Burns: Get on with it!
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker, and thank you for the barracking from the sidelines, member for Johnston.
In any event, the journalist said that he had put some questions about our inability to obtain information about the member for Macdonnell and the Information Commissioner has said that he would apply the public interest in balancing what information to release and what not to release. As the journalist said and I quote:
Indeed we do. The author goes on:
has defaulted on a string of financial reporting requirements …
The journalist goes on to say:
He goes on:
It then goes on to talk about the fees. As I said earlier, in the last term the Leader of the Opposition’s office spent something in the vicinity of $80 000 in its quest to get to the heart of various difficulties, problems - some would say potential scandals - brought on by this government, but we were blocked. This is not the freedom of information touted by the Australian Labor Party prior to the last election, nor is it the one touted by government since, nor is it the one touted by the Attorney-General this morning.
I thought it was important to read part of this article into the Parliamentary Record because it is but one demonstration of the difficulties of this legislation; the amendments do not seek, in my view, to overcome them. There are plenty of other examples. When we had the debate last night about the process for the Estimates Committee hearing, I quoted the words of the now Treasurer in the speech that he made in May 2002, in which he was talking about the lofty principles of opening the books of government and how Labor’s estimates process was going to be fantastic because it would ensure that it would be of benefit to all Territorians and the opposition. However, when measured with the reality, those words can be forgotten, because the reality does not fit with the model. The same can be said of this government’s freedom of information legislation.
I suspect that as the years roll on and Territorians actually get to use, or try to seek to use, freedom of information more in such a way that you might see in a jurisdiction like Queensland, that I have a deal of confidence that other Territorians will encounter the same sorts of difficulties that we have experienced. I do not have the figures - maybe I should make a freedom of information request - but I do not know how many citizens of the Northern Territory have applied for information. I doubt there would have been many. I only hope that they have not been blocked and obstructed in the same way that Her Majesty’s loyal opposition has been.
Which leads nicely to my old favourite: ‘Labor, a new direction, good government’. This is the one I keep in this drawer here. I pull it out from time to time because it is a walk down memory lane in assessing where Labor was prior to coming to government and where they are now. They promised all sorts of things. They said they would not do glossy brochures - they have gone ballistic on that. We look forward to interrogating government ministers at estimates next week on how much Territorians’ money they have spent promoting themselves. In estimates gone by, we have not always got the answers. I note, by way of digression, that for the Estimates Committee hearing last year, I provided a number of written questions on notice to the Attorney-General as a matter of courtesy trying to encourage him, or at least his staff or his department, to look at the issues and questions that I wanted to raise. Lo and behold! We get to estimates and the Attorney-General said, in relation to a number of issues: ‘I am not answering this, I am not answering that’.
You compare that with the Labor good government policy and what a walk down memory lane it is. This document, which I understand has been removed from Labor’s website, is a document that they are clearly now very embarrassed about. It was in documents like this that they espoused principles of openness, accountability and transparency. Apart from becoming arrogant in the extreme, they are now a government that operates pretty much in a cloud of secrecy.
I note with interest that in this good government paper on page 4, it has the heading ‘Freedom of Information’ - they did it badly, but they did it – and whistleblowers legislation. On the Notice Paper we have notice of a bill that I gave during the last sittings that if Labor was not going to introduce whistleblowers legislation, we would. We would do it. Do I have a commitment to whistleblowers legislation? Absolutely! I believe all governments in this country should have it. Why was it not introduced in the year 1900 and whatever, in the Northern Territory? Because I was not around. I am around now; I will introduce whistleblowers legislation. It is ironic in this game that politicians go through election campaigns and promise the punters the world and then, in the final wash-up, it is the opposition that has to implement Labor’s policies. You get that, and what a funny world it is.
Getting back to the Information Act, in Labor’s Good Government paper it says:
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah – it goes on, and on, and on:
Some of our requests were made – we must have had estimates – what, last year in July? We do not have all of the stuff. We have some stuff, and most of it is blacked out. I am a patient woman, Attorney-General, however, I will grow old by the time I get this information. I turned 40 in December. I look forward to my 50th birthday, but I do not really want to wait 10 years for some of this stuff we have asked about.
Then, of course, the very quaint line:
I remember, because I have always been interested in politics even before I became a member of the CLP, Labor Party people …
A member: That is when you were a member of the Labor Party, was it?
Ms CARNEY: If you have something to contribute, you can have your turn, sport!
I remember when Labor Party people were going around the Northern Territory having a go at the CLP and saying: ‘Oh, when they are on the ropes they will always resort to commercial confidentiality’. How the worm has turned! How many times have we heard the expression ‘commercial confidentiality’ here?
A smart observer would say that governments, regardless of their political colour, do need to adhere to those principles of commercial confidentiality in appropriate circumstances. However, governments throughout this country – it does not matter what side they are on; particularly this government, and there are ample examples of it - hide behind commercial confidentiality. I commend this Good Government document to anyone interested in politics and freedom of information. As I said earlier, it does include a discussion about freedom of expression.
I am delighted to serve on this side of the Chamber with my colleague, the member for Greatorex, who expresses his emotion in the same way that any decent human being would when we were debating the sorts of issues that we were yesterday. I am proud to stand on this side of the House with a bloke who is genuinely moved by what he sees. At least we are moved! If you people are not moved by what you have seen in the national media, or by what Dr Nanette Rogers had to say, you should not be here …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition!
Ms CARNEY: You should not be here!
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition. Relevance? I have warned you about that - relevance.
Ms CARNEY: It is illustrative of the point, Mr Acting Speaker, but I will come back to it.
Dr Toyne: It has nothing to do with the debate before us.
Ms CARNEY: It has everything to do with it, because this is a bill to amend the Information Act. The Information Act is what you said it would be in this paper:
When the Leader of Government Business has a go at my colleague with the cheek and the …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker!
Ms CARNEY: … insensitive lies …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition!
Ms CARNEY: … it is appropriate that I comment on it in the context of this discussion …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition! Please stop. Stop!
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! The Leader of the Opposition knows full well she has to address her comments through you as Chair, and not address them across the Chamber here.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Please continue, Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: In fact, it generally assists if I have my back turned, member for Johnston. I think it was the former member for Arnhem who deliberately, in the course of one debate, turned his back because he made the comment that he turned his back on someone because he said they were very ugly and it was best that he not see them.
Good government; we say it is bad government. Territorians thought that they deserved another spin at the last election, and we are entirely focused on ensuring that these people do not get another spin at the next election.
As I said at the beginning, we are supportive of the amendment. I am sure the Attorney-General will appreciate that I was not going to walk down memory lane when it comes to the Good Government paper and so on. However, on account of the unnecessary and mindless provocation provided by both the members for Millner and Wanguri, it was entirely irresistible, for which I sort of apologise.
In any case, it does demonstrate the point that the freedom of information legislation is not what it was cracked up to be. If there is a message that I can get through to Territorians, it is that, the Attorney-General will appreciate, I do not intend to send the Hansard of this debate to Territorians, although it is always there for them to see it. Fortunately, they need not make an application under the Information Act to see the Hansard of the parliament of the Northern Territory, and we hope that that would never occur. However, there is something they understand, and that is the hypocrisy of the Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party. Just be fair dinkum. If you are going to make a promise, a bit like the oncology unit, at least be consistent, follow through with it, and if you do not want to end up promising what you did, then explain the reasons.
There has been no explanation for the duplicity shown by the members of government. They have adopted a smoke and mirrors approach. They have introduced something they spun to Territorians as being fantastic. It is not, and there are ample examples of why that is so.
Attorney-General, I am sure you will be delighted that I have finished. I look forward to your contribution. I also look forward to the contribution of the member for Millner. I will be very interested to listen to what he has to say. If you are going to barrack from the sidelines, you may as well get in, have a bit of a go, and have the courage of your convictions. Stand up and put your comments properly on the Parliamentary Record.
That, of course, fits in with the broad discussion about freedom of information and freedom of expression. The member for Millner has the ability to freely, if not on occasion, completely incoherently and incompetently express himself. I invite him to contribute to this debate. The member for Johnston, of course, is never a man who takes a backward step, even when he should. I look forward to his contribution. Most of all, I look forward to the Attorney-General.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Mr Acting Speaker, I speak in support of the Information Amendment Bill. I made reference to the Information Act in my support of the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill when the Assembly last sat in May. Members may recall that I raised the ire of members of the opposition for my comparison of the Attorney-General to a chief engineer of one of the V8 Supercar teams. I take this opportunity to thank all of those who told me they very much enjoyed my contribution to that debate. It speaks volumes, honourable members, does it not, that the opposition and those on the cross benches did not have anything to say at that time about my reference to the Information Act.
Mr Acting Speaker, you may well wonder, why was that so? I believe it is important to remember that five of the six members who make up the non-government part of this Chamber are, or were, part of the CLP. Some of them were part of the CLP in government. The reason for their deafening silence is simple: it is the record of the CLP governments of the past that makes it impossible for these members to credibly state that they actively sought to achieve open and accountable government. Labor in opposition repeatedly called for freedom of information legislation. The response of successive CLP governments from the Paul Everingham era right the way to the Denis Burke era was: ‘No. No way, not on our watch, it ain’t happening’. Nothing about: ‘Oh yes, we will look into it’. Nothing about: ‘We are not ready for it’. Just a deafening: ‘No. We are not even going to look at it. The Northern Territory does not need an information act’. That was one of the things that one of these administrations said. To listen to the CLP now start talking about their desire for an information act is an interesting experience to say the least.
I cannot remember exactly which particular administration it was but one of the CLP governments highly interesting argument was that somehow, having a freedom of information act or legislation of that nature, was contrary to openness and accountability and access to information. It was against the whole proposition. Not only under these CLP governments was there not legislation for freedom of information, but there were many legislative instances where ministers had authority to make decisions without publishing reasons. This legislative authority, this imprimatur given by legislation, was actively and regularly exercised by CLP ministers. How open and accountable is that? ‘Here is our decision. It affects your lives, it affects your interest, but we are not telling you why we made it’. There are plenty of instances where that happened.
Freedom of information legislation was part of the legal revolution that began during the mid-1970s and early 1980s. It swept the country everywhere except the Northern Territory. It was during this time that administrative law took great leaps forward. This era saw the creation of Administrative Appeals Tribunals by the federal government and the various state and ACT governments. Not the Northern Territory! These tribunals looked into administrative decisions and were vested the power to overturn decisions and replace decisions with the tribunals’ own, refer back to the original decision-maker for it to reconsider its original decision, or to uphold the original decision.
These were watershed developments, taken for granted now, but monumental in their time. Prior to this, the only recourse was litigation by the courts. Often the cost of pursuing this avenue far outweighed the possible benefit that action may bring. Further, often the court did not have the jurisdiction to hear the claim as there were no legal questions for it to determine. Administrative failure does not always amount to a failure to meet legal requirements. An administrative decision can be wrong, unfair or unfortunate without being an abuse of power or a decision outside the scope of the decision-maker. Yet it was recognised that many administrative decisions can fundamentally affect people’s lives. The revolution that swept administrative law sought to fill the void that courts were unable to fill. Freedom of information legislation formed part of that matrix.
It is interesting that what failed to happen in the Territory was totally counter to the rest of the country. Arguments against the administrative law reforms were swept aside down south but were championed by the CLP government of the Northern Territory and held sway in this jurisdiction. I can remember the government lines at the time. We were told government departments can review their own decisions; we did not need external review. We were told we would have the Ombudsman to investigate complaints; that is external review. Another argument was that government already provided much information. People should trust the government; if it chose not to provide the information, they should just accept there were good reasons for it.
All of these arguments are true to a point. Government departments can review their own decisions. The Ombudsman can investigate complaints, and government does choose to release a great deal of information. Elsewhere in the country this was decided not to be enough, that there should be some legislative framework backing up the right of individuals to access information.
Freedom of information legislation and information privacy form part of the administrative law revolution of elsewhere. Freedom of information legislation was introduced by the Commonwealth in 1982 when it passed what I think was the first Freedom of Information Act. Freedom of information legislation provides the public with a right of access to information held by government agencies. It is characterised by its cheapness, in contrast to the pursuit of rights through a court. It is characterised also certainly in respect of personal information held by government by the starting point that access to information ought be granted unless there are good reasons not to.
The Attorney-General, in his second reading speech introducing the Information Bill in 2002, made the point that courts of equity recognised and I quote:
However, the courts did not challenge that government owned that information. The position for information held by government was analogous to the present position of medical records of private medical practitioners and private medical institutions. Those practitioners and those institutions own the records they produce, notwithstanding they record very personal information about their patients. Those patients do not have a right to access the original medical record unless there is legislation in place which grants that right. In the case of public hospitals and public clinics, there is a right to access personal information and, indeed, to correct that information if it has been found to be wrong. That is not a right that individuals have to look at medical records held by even their general practitioner.
Let me say at the outset, so that I am not annoying any of the medical profession, that they are often and usually more than willing to write a report or summarise the notes that they have accurately reflecting what is recorded there. However, there is a desire by doctors not to hand over original medical records and there are some very good reasons behind that.
I am reminded of a case a few years back where an Australian citizen was able to be part of a class action in America against a corporation that manufactured breast implants. The American courts ruled that she had to present evidence by way of her original medical records. Although her Australian practitioner was not in danger of any litigation, he agreed to provide a comprehensive medical report but refused to hand over the original documents. This led to litigation in this country to force the handover of the medical records, and it failed - the point being that, under the openness and accountability that governments across this country now subscribe to, those medical records in a public institution could have been provided and, if there was some refusal, there would have been avenues to pursue that complaint and facilitate obtaining those records. In this case, the courts upheld the right of a medical practitioner to ownership over those records and to determine whether they would release those medical records. Freedom of information legislation goes a great way to ensuring people can get hold of personal information held by the public sector.
The Territory’s Information Act passed through the Assembly in 2002, some 20 years after the Commonwealth’s legislation – 20 years behind the times on that particular front. Well, better late than never. People should be left in no doubt, however, that even this advance would not have occurred if it had not been for a Labor government. At no time in government did the CLP show any interest - not even feigned interest. It is important, however, that I give recognition where it is due. In opposition, the CLP has adopted FOI with gusto. It has been a panacea for them - and good luck to them for using the legislation; that is what it is for. Many other Territorians are also using the legislation.
The Information Amendment Bill extends the operation of the secrecy provision. It now includes the Ombudsman’s Office, Auditor-General, Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner, and the board or commissioner appointed under the Inquiries Act, or commissioner within the meaning of the Local Government Act. These agencies perform special functions such as investigations into the activities of other agencies. Much of the information they hold is likely to be found in the original material held by the agency itself. The same information in the control of the agency subject to the investigation will not attract the exemption from freedom of information that the investigative officers enjoy for their records. To put it more succinctly, if the Ombudsman has a copy of a document that is held by the original agency, the person will not get a copy of that document through FOI from the Ombudsman, but may well obtain a copy of that document from the original agency. Therefore, the source information that caused any referral for investigation is still subject to the requirements of the act.
As the minister said in his second reading speech for the Information Amendment Bill - and again I quote:
The Information Act included sunset clauses dealing with inconsistencies between the Information Act and other legislation. In his address, the minister said:
Yes, the principal act as amended will continue to exclude some information from FOI applications. Like many areas of enterprise, public and private, good reasons do exist for non-release. Public interest is a very fluid concept and public interest can be, on both sides of the argument, for release or withholding of information. The Information Act amendment bill fulfils the commitment by government to review the operation of the Information Act and implement any changes necessary.
As the minister advised this Assembly - and for the sake of completeness, it is not a direct quote; it does closely follow the minister’s second reading speech: all agencies be given the opportunity to examine the legislation for which they are responsible. They considered provisions inconsistent with the Information Act and those that made it an offence to release information. The minister advised that a panel was established. It included the Information Commissioner and senior officers from the Departments of Chief Minister and Justice. I note with approval the minister’s advice that the panel considered, in the majority of cases, that no additional protection was required. The minister advised:
I commend the panel for its work and its commitment to not extending exemptions unless absolutely necessary.
I also add my thanks for the briefing I received from the Department of Justice on the operation of the amendment act and the Information Act, and thank the Information Commissioner for his briefing and his views on the operation of the act to date.
As I have just spoken about the refusal of release of information for being an unreasonable interference to with a person’s privacy, let me make reference to an issue that the Leader of the Opposition raised: the CLP have had a vendetta against the member for Macdonnell since her election. They have not yet got over the fact that their candidate was crushed – not defeated, crushed. The Leader of the Opposition - and I cannot recall if other members of the opposition have, but certainly the Leader of the Opposition - has made use of parliamentary privilege and quoting what is arguably defamatory media reports regarding the member for Macdonnell as an attack. That she has used the debate about freedom of information legislation and the amendment act to continue those groundless attacks on my colleague, the member for Macdonnell, is reprehensible.
The member for Macdonnell has been cleared and still you are using these spurious media reports. The Opposition Leader comes in, carefully not adopting them, just quoting them for the interest of the Parliamentary Record. Well, let us get it on the Parliamentary Record: the investigations found that there was no wrongdoing by the member for Macdonnell. It is time the Leader of the Opposition stated that fact in this House and stopped using this mechanism of quoting media reports which just cannot be substantiated in fact. It is a gutter campaign and should be left in the gutter and not brought into this House.
The Leader of the Opposition, in reference to her information amendment bill, made reference to the showing of emotion in this House. I commend members for the showing of emotion. I do not subscribe to the view that debates should be totally without emotion. However, it is difficult not to accept the genuine feelings of the member for Greatorex, but to view that against an active opposition by the CLP in government to education in the bush and education for Aboriginal people, the active opposition to providing suitable health care for indigenous people in remote areas, and the active opposition to providing economic development in those regional Aboriginal communities. It is very hard to stand back and accept - I have no problem in accepting the genuine feeling, but it runs contrary the policy position and all that I have seen of that the party to which the member for Greatorex belongs.
Not that you would know it. The Leader of the Opposition said: ‘Oh, freedom of information, yes, you know we were actively working on that’. Well, I personally have my doubts; I could be proved wrong. However, just to check I went to the Country Liberal Party website and looked up policies - huge numbers of policies from the CLP - two! Two stated policies on their website: a stronger, safer Territory, safe streets policy; and their commitment to getting middle schools right. Indigenous affairs? No, not a sausage. Freedom of information? Nope, not there. Two. That is it.
Just so I could not be caught out, I went to my own party’s website - just the Northern Territory branch, I did not go to the national branch - and I tried to have a look at our policies. You have to scroll down the screen; they do not all fit on one page. Starting off with Aboriginal affairs, arts, culture, business and economic development, community safety and justice, education and training, electricity and energy, environment, conservation and natural resources, the list goes on. The Labor Party has put out its policy documents, they can be read; they can be found. The CLP has put out two. There is a very consistent thread running through this because when they were in government and there were repeated calls for freedom of information, the reply was: ‘Don’t you worry about that, trust us, we will look after it’.
I find that very similar to the argument I have heard here today from the Leader of the Opposition: yes, we have the policies, but we do not actually have them published them anywhere, but trust us, we have them. We know they are there. So if there is some degree of incredulity coming from the member for Brennan, I hope that I have explained the basis for that.
Before wrapping up, I note that there is an added bonus of the amending bill and that is the better protection of meteorite sites. Meteorite fragments, like fossils, are in high demand on a commercial level. There is a great industry in stealing both fossils and meteorite fragments. I note Western Australia recently had a major investigation trying to relocate some dinosaur fossils which had been discovered. The scientific community, as it generally does, took great pains to try to keep secret the location of these fossils. Unfortunately, they were not able to and great damage was done to our scientific heritage in the way that those thieves made off with the fossils. I believe they were recovered but the damage to the surrounding area, I understand, was irreversible.
Another added bonus and another example of where there are legitimate reasons for wanting to keep information confidential and out of the public domain and why public interest is best served in doing so. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Speaker, first of all I thank the opposition for their support for these amendments, and commend the member for Brennan for his wide-ranging and informative speech. Probably the only thing that he did not cover that I probably needed to comment on was the names of each of the individual meteorites and where they were.
The purpose of this bill and the benefit it visits on the act is quite obvious. It clarifies exactly the relationship of the Information Act to the 120 other Territory pieces of legislation. Seventeen of those have now been brought into schedules; one with exempt provisions that need to be exempted from the action of the Information Act. That is a considerable and significant contraction of the areas that have previously been inaccessible in Territory legislation. It is a furthering opening up of information to the Territory public. I believe that it will benefit Territorians as the act continues into the future.
In regard to the opposition’s application for documents, they applied for some 3500 documents and only paid for the access to those documents under the terms of the regulations of the act some five months after they originally indicated that they were going to seek that information. That was the starting point of the process. Given the number of documents and the fact that the Information Commissioner regularly got back to the opposition to report progress and seek extensions of time as required, I do not think they have much to complain about.
They went fishing for a whale. They were going to bring down the government with all this stuff. However, a whale takes a bit of time to catch and tow back to port. It is a real smoke screen that they have put up. I do not think I need to say anymore. It has been covered in the debate in the second reading speech and the contributions. I thank the members for their contribution and support.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General) (by leave): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery this morning of visitors as part of the Parliament House Public Tour program. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery this afternoon of People to People students from the United States of America, accompanies by Fiona Furletti. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Speaker, issues facing Aboriginal Australians have received much attention in recent weeks. We in the Territory are not surprised about the level of attention these issues have attracted. They are truly matters of national importance. We are well aware of the challenges facing our communities as we have been on the ground tackling them since coming to office in 2001.
The disorder and violence, the incidence of child abuse, and the dysfunction and disarray in some of our communities is simply unacceptable for this day and age. While there is a great deal of work to be done over a long period of time, it will remain a fundamental priority of this government to continue to find sustainable solutions to the problems we are seeing in these communities and to make them safe and healthy places to live.
To make a real difference, to bring about profound and lasting change, the causes of the violence and dysfunction we are seeing need to be tackled. Attacking the symptoms is necessary sometimes, and can bring short-term relief. However, real change means identifying and attacking the real causes of the problems, and that is what we have been doing in communities across the Northern Territory for some time now.
We have invested heavily in addressing the lack of education and skills, and the lack of employment opportunities in these communities. We have worked with communities in areas such as alcohol abuse, child abuse and domestic violence. It is a slow process, and we are making some headway, but the scale of the problem demands a national approach and a national commitment to Aboriginal Australia.
Some people have been very vocal over the past few weeks about the importance of law and order, and they are right to say that law and order should be a priority. We agree - just look at our record over the past five years. It is a vital component for family safety and for a just and sustainable community. However, law and order is just one component, a necessary one, but one that attacks the symptoms of dysfunction in these communities, not the causes.
Make no mistake, a focus on law and order alone cannot deliver Aboriginal people a healthy and sustainable future. If we do not succeed in addressing alcohol and drug abuse and grossly overcrowded housing, if people in these communities have little or no access to education and employment opportunities, we - governments and Aboriginal communities together - will have failed the next generation of Aboriginal children.
When an offender emerges from gaol, or when an alcoholic completes his course of rehabilitation, unless there are incentives, new opportunities in the communities they return to, it is very likely that their behaviour will be repeated. That is our challenge, and it goes to the heart of many of the problems we are seeing.
It is also important to remember that not all Aboriginal communities are in disarray. There are many that are as safe as any small country town in Australia. The first priority for those communities is not a police station and a lock-up.
We have made some important gains in addressing the real causes of the problems we are seeing. We set out to engage with Aboriginal communities and to lay the foundations for Aboriginal people to contribute to, and benefit from, our growing economy. We have taken government out to remote communities for the first time through Community Cabinet visits, and we have listened to what Aboriginal people are saying. Aboriginal Territorians are now represented at the highest levels of government. In 2001, we had our first Aboriginal Cabinet minister. Today, we have two, and a total of five Aboriginal members of this parliament.
We have invested in jobs and economic development for Aboriginal Territorians. In May last year, I launched the Northern Territory Economic Development Strategy. The goal of the strategy is to improve quality of life through a dramatic improvement in the economic status of Aboriginal Territorians. The strategy addresses opportunities for Aboriginal economic development within 13 key industry sectors: construction; tourism; community services; mining and production; retail and services; pastoral; horticultural; natural resource management; government; forestry and agribusiness; arts; knowledge and culture; and aquaculture and fisheries.
A key aim of the strategy is to create 2000 jobs per year for the next 10 years, and to achieve parity between economic indicators for indigenous and non-indigenous Territorians by 2020. It is a big ask but one we are determined to achieve.
We have made some progress. Pastoral enterprises have been formed on Aboriginal land; marine ranger units have been established in consultation with the Northern Land Council; and we have supported aquaculture projects and invested in indigenous arts and tourism enterprises. My ministerial colleagues will provide more detail about these and other initiatives, but I would like to briefly mention a couple of success stories in tourism - businesses that are creating jobs for Aboriginal people and bringing benefits to Aboriginal communities across the Territory.
Anangu Tours, which operates out of Uluru, has just celebrated its 10th birthday - in fact, late last year. Ten years ago it broke new ground by giving visitors authentic experiences of the Territory’s unique Red Centre, and in doing so, it generated jobs for local Aboriginal people.
Titjikala is now following in its footsteps. Locals have worked with the Sydney-based Gunya Tourism to establish a five-star camp site in the desert as a base for hunting and bush tucker trips. They use local Aboriginal people as expert guides and resource staff.
Just last week, I opened the Kakadu Culture Camp at Djarradjin, which has been developed by the local traditional owners and their extended family. Jen and Fred Hunter are a brother and sister team, who with the help of Jen’s partner, Andy, have developed a terrific tourism attraction. Visitors to Djarradjin will experience nice billabong cruises, bush tucker dinners, safari camp and bush walking tours.
These are all examples of local Aboriginal people tapping into our growing tourism sector and the demand for top quality natural and cultural experiences. Their enterprise has created jobs and has brought significant economic benefits to their communities.
Improving educational outcomes has been a priority for us. School retention rates have improved and there have been significant gains in performance against national numeracy and literacy benchmarks. Between 2001 and 2004, the number of indigenous children receiving the Year 3 reading benchmark increased by 31%; the Year 5 benchmark by 43%; and the Year 7 benchmark by 46%. We are now for the very first time delivering secondary education in the bush, and exploring innovative ways of delivering education to students in remote parts of the Territory.
We are the first Territory government to do this since self-government, but the task is by no means straightforward. It will amaze you to know that when we came to office in 2001, no Aboriginal student had ever graduated anywhere in the Territory while living in a remote bush community. It just did not happen. But three years ago, Rhonda Rankin, Lianna Brown and Meschach Paddy graduated through Year 12 in a bush school in the Kalkarindji community. These three young pioneers have gone from strength to strength. Rhonda is in her third year at Flinders University doing a Bachelor of Cultural Tourism; Lianna is at Charles Darwin University doing a Bachelor of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies; and Meschach is undertaking a Bachelor of Teaching also at Charles Darwin University.
The following year, in 2004, another six students graduated, and last year that number rose to 25 including seven from Wadeye. I am pleased to report that this year the number is set to rise to 30.
Attitudes to school and education are changing in many of our remote communities and we are intent on keeping this groundbreaking momentum going. Aboriginal people are genuinely excited about getting their children an education.
Overcrowding in housing is a crucial issue. The World Health Organisation has identified overcrowded living conditions, resulting in stress and poverty, as key risk factors associated with child abuse. We need the Australian government to commit to ongoing work and increased funding in this area, and we need for them to commit to it soon. We need more houses, better infrastructure and improved services across the Territory. I believe it is only right that some of the substantial federal budget surplus be invested where it can be used the most in our most under-resourced communities.
We have quadrupled the child protection budget since we came to government and there are now an extra 51 child protection staff on the ground across the Territory. The Department of Health and Community Services and the Territory police are forming a joint Territory-wide task force to respond to the increasing rates of reported child abuse in the Territory. The task force will see departmental staff and police co-located and working as a team on both investigations and follow-up work with families in communities. This joint task force approach is already in place as a response to family and domestic violence in Katherine through the Peace at Home initiative. It is just one of a number of new programs to have started over the past 12 months, in addition to our mainstream domestic violence programs.
In 2003, I launched the Northern Territory Domestic and Aboriginal Violence Strategies. Police now have domestic and personal violence protection units operating in four regional centres across the Territory, and indigenous family violence programs are delivered at both Alice Springs and Darwin Correctional Centres.
We have also boosted remote health services. In 2004, 18 additional child health nurses, Aboriginal health workers, and community workers were employed to work in new Territory-wide child health teams, which run maternal, child and youth health programs in remote areas. Maternal and child health protocols have been developed for both government and non-government health services to ensure best practice services in this critical area.
We are willing to take tough measures to tackle the problems of alcohol abuse. We are progressively developing local area alcohol management plans with communities across the Territory. Plans are already in place on Groote Eylandt and in Nhulunbuy. On Groote Eylandt, a permit is now required to buy takeaway alcohol. This was thrashed out with local indigenous leaders like Tony Wurramarrba, president of the Anindilyakwa Land Council, other community organisations, government officials, police and licensees. These measures have already seen a reduction of up to 75% in crime and antisocial behaviour on Groote Eylandt in a 12-month period.
The new antisocial behaviour legislation which introduces alcohol courts will commence in July. The minister responsible for licensing has agreed to strict new licensing conditions for Alice Springs, and has foreshadowed amendments to the Liquor Act to introduce urban dry areas and to restrict future takeaway licences to hotels and clubs.
When land claims have had a strong legal basis, we have, wherever possible, negotiated ‘win-win’ settlements, rather than wasting millions of taxpayers’ money on protracted litigation in courts. The parks agreement will see traditional landowners involved in joint management of 27 parks and reserves across the Territory.
In 2001, we made a strategic decision to establish the Office of Indigenous Policy within my own department, rather than create an indigenous affairs department. This model is now being emulated in other jurisdictions, where junior indigenous affairs portfolios have been unable to deliver tangible results.
We have been able to develop a coordinated, whole-of-government approach to indigenous policy. Central to this approach has been the establishment of the Chief Executives Taskforce on Indigenous Affairs which is chaired by the head of my department. This group, which meets regularly, ensures a coherent and coordinated response to indigenous issues across government agencies. This is reflected in our Agenda for Action in Indigenous Affairs which was published earlier this year and summarises current Territory commitments and priorities in Aboriginal areas. The agenda outlines six priority areas:
a whole-of-government approach;
The agenda demonstrates our commitment to tackle the difficult issues head on. Its major aim is to realise the huge potential of our natural and human resources.
We have also, where possible, collaborated with the Australian government on programs and initiatives. In April 2005, I signed the Overarching Agreement on Indigenous Affairs with the Prime Minister. We were the first jurisdiction to establish such an agreement with the Australian government under the framework established by COAG. The agreement is already producing action.
It provides an agreed framework for federal and Territory agencies to work together to achieve priority outcomes and includes schedules on housing; regional governance; arts; economic development; and employment. Additional areas such as land and sea rangers, youth at risk and education are currently under discussion. We are also working closely with the Australian government in the area of Aboriginal health on strategies to combat petrol sniffing and family violence, and on development strategies targeting specific communities.
There are no instant solutions in Aboriginal affairs. We are dealing today with a legacy that goes back many decades. Achieving sustainable results requires a long-term commitment from all tiers of government and Aboriginal people themselves. Governments alone cannot solve these problems.
Unfortunately, Aboriginal affairs is also littered with well intentioned short-term initiatives and a cut and run mentality when the going gets tough. New enthusiasm, new ideas and a sense of urgency are important and I welcome them. However, what we really need is a commitment for the long haul.
Wadeye is a case in point. Wadeye was identified as a national trial site under the COAG framework in 2002. A shared responsibility agreement was signed in March 2003 by the three parties to the trial: the Thamarrurr Regional Council, the Northern Territory government and the federal government. We would all agree at this point the results have been disappointing but that is not a reason to walk away. Wadeye’s underlying problems are not new and they were never going to be solved in the space of three years. We need to stand firm and work together to find a way forward.
The federal Minister for Family and Community Services and Indigenous Affairs has rightly said that law and order must be restored before anything else can be achieved, and it has been. The police presence at Wadeye has been boosted to eight permanent officers and additional task group officers have been deployed to assist local police put an end to the destruction and the intimidatory behaviour by local gangs. Court processes are being expedited to finalise court hearings and new anti-gang measures were announced yesterday.
The Territory has appointed David Coles as coordinator for Territory government services at Wadeye. I hope that the federal government will take up our suggestion that David Coles also coordinates federal government programs to minimise the red tape and duplication.
The 2005-06 Territory budget included funding for a new secondary school at Wadeye. I hope that the federal government will move quickly to lift the remote area exemption for the CDEP program at Wadeye and provide appropriate training and resources which will see significant additional jobs created in Wadeye through CDEP.
We now need to commit to achieving real outcomes at Wadeye. We need to take stock of what we have learnt over the past three years and push on to ensure tangible outcomes are achieved in housing and infrastructure, in opportunities for children and youth, and in services for families. I welcome the federal minister’s interest in Galiwinku and other Territory communities, but we cannot walk away from Wadeye. We need to stay and finish the job we have started. If we do not, we have learnt nothing from the past.
One of three key priorities identified by Wadeye people at the beginning of the COAG trial was housing and infrastructure. At the time of self-government in 1978, we inherited a massive backlog in housing and infrastructure - a situation that has been exacerbated by population growth since then. Almost two-thirds of Aboriginal Territorians live in overcrowded houses, and this has severe health implications. Domestic hygiene is difficult to maintain and the spread of infections has accelerated. Aboriginal infant mortality has been falling steadily but it is still three times the rate of other Territorians. Life expectancy for Aboriginal males is 20 years less than non-indigenous males. Aboriginal labour force participation is less than 40%, and the imprisonment rate for Aboriginal adults in the Territory, although less than the national average, is over three times that of the rest of the Territory population. It will take 20 years or more to achieve a permanent turnaround in some of these key indicators.
The estimated backlog in indigenous housing in the Territory is valued at over $1bn. Even if the money was available, we could not transform this situation in the short term. We need to tackle alcohol and substance abuse, education and opportunities for employment at the same time. The instant provision of new housing and infrastructure will not, by itself, create sustainable communities.
The major causes of reduced indigenous life expectancy in the Territory are adult chronic diseases such as coronary disease, renal disease and diabetes. While adult lifestyle factors such as diet, lack of exercise and smoking rates are very important, some of the contributing factors to this situation are thought to have their origins in early childhood infections. Improvements in child health today are, therefore, absolutely essential if we are to reduce adult death rates in 40 to 50 years time.
Education is also a key factor in health. Third World studies have found that the most important determining factor in child health is the level of education of the mothers. The achievement of national education benchmarks, and ensuring employment opportunities for the majority of Aboriginal people across the Territory, will be realistically a challenge for the next 20 years. One of the quick fix solutions thrown up over the last few weeks - I think it was from the Menzies Institute - was to close down remote communities and bring Aboriginal people into towns where they have access to jobs. Apparently the prescription was that we must forget all about this culture nonsense and just get back to economics. Anybody familiar with some of the underlying issues at Wadeye, or at a number of communities in the Territory, would know that is hardly a recipe for success. I would have thought that anyone who has seen the slums occupied by rural migrants in the fringes of some Third World cities would understand the failure of that approach. Some of the problems of our own town camps should be evidence enough that this is no solution. Single solutions, one program approaches with three years funding, are not going to deliver real changes in our Aboriginal communities.
In the Territory, Aboriginal people make up nearly 30% of our population. More significantly, Aboriginal children make up 40% of our school population. The Aboriginal population in the Territory is growing and projected to double every 20 years. It stands to reason then that, in this part of the world, Aboriginal issues are mainstream issues. They are central to the future of the Territory. We need to build on the whole-of-government approach we have established, which provides a coherent framework to which individual agencies are accountable and within which they exercise their responsibilities.
We must start with the five foundational issues that I have raised with the federal minister: community safety; responsible management of alcohol; housing; sound governance; and welfare reform. Schooling and health care are also fundamental. We need to ensure that children get the best start possible in life.
A sustainable future for Aboriginal people must also involve access to adult education, vocational training, opportunities for employment, and economic development.
The scale of the challenge we are dealing with means that we cannot tackle it alone. This is a national issue and the Australian government is a key player. It requires a national partnership, but one where the Territory must show leadership. We need to adopt a strategic approach to achieving sustainable outcomes for Aboriginal people, one tailored to the different circumstances in which they now live.
Some Aboriginal people live permanently on outstations, many live in emerging Aboriginal towns, some in town camps. Others live in the suburbs of Darwin, Alice Springs and other regional centres, and many Aboriginal people are highly mobile and transit between these different living environments. It is essential that Aboriginal people are engaged as key partners with government. We cannot prescribe a future for these Territorians; it is one that must be forged in partnership. It needs to be a 20-year generational plan, because it will take at least 20 years of serious commitment to make a real and lasting difference. The commitment must be sustained, across the three or four year cycles of Territory, state and national elections.
The stark differences in outcomes against indicators for indigenous and non-indigenous Australians in health, housing, education, employment and imprisonment means that this must be a generational plan. We need to establish five-, 10-, 15- and 20-year targets for improvement, and be prepared to reassess progress and strategies at each stage. It will be important to review progress every five years, and to reset the compass, if necessary, even though we know that we still have some way to go.
There are precedents for long-term national plans. The National Competition Policy was a 10-year plan, and the Living Murray Initiative is an eight year plan. Surely the future of Aboriginal Australians warrants a national 20-year plan. I have written to the Prime Minister requesting that this be a special agenda item at COAG, involving Premiers, Chief Ministers and the Prime Minister on 14 July.
I believe that the current national focus on Aboriginal issues is an opportunity to achieve a national commitment to fundamental change, change that will see a permanent shift in outcomes for Aboriginal Australians. We must seize the opportunity now. The events of the last few weeks remind me of Philip Ruddock’s words back in 1979 on the release of the Aboriginal Health report, when he said:
How prescient it was back in 1979 with those words of Philip Ruddock.
This government is taking up the challenge. We will raise these issues at the Ministerial Council on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, and the Housing Ministers Conference on Friday this week. Three members of Cabinet will participate in the inter-governmental meeting convened by the federal Minister for Family and Children’s Services and Indigenous Affairs on the 26th of this month. I have also requested that Aboriginal Affairs be an agenda item at the Council of Australian Governments meeting involving the Premiers, Chief Ministers and the Prime Minister on 14 July.
We need a strategic approach to achieving sustainable outcomes for Aboriginal people, tailored to the circumstances in which they live. We must tackle the causes, not just the symptoms of the problems we are seeing. It is essential that Aboriginal people play their part and are engaged as key partners with government. A 20-year commitment is required, but with defined milestones for improvement every five years and a reassessment of achievements. It must continue to be a whole-of-government approach and it has to be a national approach with all states, territories and the Australian government committed.
Mr Acting Speaker, if the next generation of Aboriginal people is to be healthier and safer and enjoy the same opportunities as other Australians, we have to work together now. We also have to realise that we are in this for the long haul, beyond politics. That is the only way we will achieve real and lasting change.
Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Acting Speaker, I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement to this extent: at least it is something. It has been nearly a month – yes, 15 May 2006 was the interview and it has been nearly a month until we have had anything that even vaguely resembles something coherent from this Chief Minister. I do not propose to repeat it in its entirety but, as I said yesterday, the Chief Minister has been slammed, and rightly so, by the national media on this issue. She kept digging herself holes she could not get out of. Someone obviously said: ‘In order to give yourself credibility, you need a plan’. Then, mischievously in my view, a media release was issued a week or so ago saying: ‘We have a plan, we have a 20-year plan’. As I said yesterday, the word ‘violence’ was not even mentioned. I will come back to the issue of violence. There were many things I could have said yesterday but, unfortunately, due to constraints, I ran out of time.
In relation to this so-called plan, I said in the media interview I did after Question Time that it was, for all intents and purposes, a statement with a bundle of sentences strung together with the word ‘plan’ attached to it by the Chief Minister and government. Before this so-called plan was delivered to my office last night, I was hopeful. I thought this is great. They have had a month to work on it. Some of them are more committed than others …
Ms Scrymgour: She is reading the same speech – the spiel that she did for child protection.
Ms CARNEY: If the member for Arnhem wants to contribute to this debate …
Members: Arafura.
Ms CARNEY: … I certainly look forward to it because she has been silent, Mr Acting Speaker. She should know better than most being an indigenous woman who regards herself as fairly close to her community, but not a word from the member for Arnhem – sorry, Arafura, my apologies - for the last four weeks. When media and other were saying: ‘You have five indigenous members, why do you not come out and have a bit of a say’ at least the member for Macdonnell actually came out and said something. I know they were carpeted by the Chief Minister subsequently. However, at least they had the guts to say something. Unlike you, member for Arafura. I expected much more, as did a lot of your supporters. It has not gone unnoticed, I might say, the length and breadth of the Northern Territory. You can have your say and I look forward to it. If anyone on that side of politics is able to bring something to this debate, I would have thought it was you.
Mr Stirling: You cannot debate anything without personalising, can you? Incapable of rational debate.
Ms CARNEY: And you do not have much to say, sport, so you can just be silent.
Members interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I look forward to hearing a contribution from the member for Arafura.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Government members, I have a feeling that this could be provocative sort of debate, so please I would ask you not to rise to the moment.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker.
I was expecting great things and it was underwhelming. Yes, it has 30 pages or something like that, but it is, with the greatest of respect, underwhelming. I thought there might be some vision. There is not, there is just a bunch of words. Do you know why it is a 20-year plan, Mr Acting Speaker? Because they do not have any answers at all. They have been called upon to provide answers for the last five years. God knows, prior to 2001 they said they controlled everything, and now they have presented this thing called a plan.
In relation to the debate that has occurred in this country in the last month, even though Dr Nanette Rogers and Tony Jones talked about the issue of and the culture of male violence in Aboriginal communities perpetrated on women and children, their debate, not surprisingly, has strayed into a number of other areas. That has been a good thing. However, I, for one, am not going to be swept up in all of these issues as important as they are. I get a feel from this government that they want to talk about pretty much everything except violence against women and children, and I am not going to let that happen. The reasons for that are well known. I have been interested in this area for many years. Therefore, I am not going to let that happen.
I welcome the broad-ranging discussion that many of Australians have undertaken. The broad-ranging discussion has been, not surprisingly, picked up by the Chief Minister in this statement, which some would say amounts to an attempt to placate the federal government, to say to Mal Brough: ‘Oh yes, we do agree that this is about law and order’. Most Australians believe that law and order is the most important issue. This government and the Chief Minister in particular had been resisting that, so they will give this to Mal Brough and say: ‘Well, sir, we have said something about law and order’.
The reasonably specific initiatives at Wadeye are to be welcomed. However, there are no answers as to the issue of the culture of violence perpetrated in this community. As an Australian, I lament and feel very sad about the fact that so many Aboriginal kids do not go to school. I feel very sad about what is a broad and high level of disadvantage endured by my fellow Australians particularly in the Northern Territory. I lament the fact that some Aboriginal housing in various communities is not up to scratch. However, do you know what I cannot stand more than anything else? I really do not like it when women and kids are bashed and beaten and raped. If you want my list, there it is. That is what I care most about and any discussion, regardless of politics, about the other issues are to be welcomed and encouraged because all of us want to see better outcomes.
I am not going to stand by and have the Chief Minister take the issue away from this ingrained culture of violence that exists. We had a discussion in the censure debate yesterday where I quoted research - which I might say the Chief Minister was hysterically hostile about - where I said alcohol does not cause violence. We all know people who get drunk. Do they beat women, do they rape children? No. Overcrowding does not cause violence. We know big families. Do they, as the Chief Minister is on the record as saying, cause people to beat women and rape children? I do not think so.
Let us be honest, because the Chief Minister fails to do so, and I will remind members that in the censure motion yesterday we specifically stated that she lied on numerous occasions. If you read the Hansard …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I seek a ruling on this. It is certainly an offence against standing orders to accuse any member of lying outside of a substantive motion on that debate. To refer to a previous debate is not substantive, it is in regards to a substantive motion, it is on the Parliamentary Record and it was lost. It was negatived. The Leader of the Opposition failed to prosecute, by way of substantive motion yesterday in debate, that the Chief Minister has lied. Therefore, she cannot get up here again and make that allegation unless she does it by way of substantive motion.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, speaking to the point of order, it would be a sad day, indeed, if we could not refer to the Hansard of this parliament …
Mr Henderson: But you lost.
Ms CARNEY: You have had your say. … if we cannot refer to the Hansard of this parliament. Here it is, here is the censure motion. Whether it was lost is neither here nor there. The fact is I said …
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition …
Ms CARNEY: Can I please finish, Mr Acting Speaker?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, please stop. No.
Ms CARNEY: I said we suggested that she lied, it is as simple as that.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I shall take advice on this. Could you kindly take your seat?
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I have sought advice. Would you please withdraw the remark?
Ms CARNEY: Which remark, Mr Acting Speaker? There have been a few.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Guess which one it would be. It would be the one of you using the word ‘lied’ again.
Ms CARNEY: Can I seek clarification, Mr Acting Speaker? Is it the case that we cannot refer to censure motions that were debated in this parliament …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Referring to the previous debate, that is correct.
Ms CARNEY: That is correct?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Yes.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. I am sure …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Have you withdrawn?
Ms CARNEY: Yes. I am sure …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Could you properly withdraw it, please.
Ms CARNEY: I properly withdraw it.
I am sure members of the Australian Labor Party will be feeling very gleeful that, after the Acting Speaker’s ruling, we made a number of points yesterday during the censure motion and we cannot refer to them again today. In any event, it is on the Parliamentary Record and people can go and have a look at it.
I made a number of very serious allegations yesterday about the Chief Minister and her conduct following the Dr Nanette Rogers’ interview on Lateline. Her conduct has been atrocious and she has told a number of untruths in relation to it. It is unfortunate that, even in her statement she still tells whoppers. One of them is she does not even …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! It is akin to lying and I ask the member to withdraw it.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, we are all aware of what the term ‘whoppers’ means. Would you withdraw that remark, please?
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw that remark and say the Chief Minister tells yet another untruth. She said on page 13: ‘In 2003, I launched the Northern Territory Domestic and Aboriginal Violence Strategy’. Two issues about that: first, you did not even get the name of your own strategy right. I have it here. It is actually called the Northern Territory Domestic and Aboriginal Family Violence Strategy. You have typed it, you said it, and you do not even know the name of your own strategies, which anywhere else in this country you would have thought would get a column somewhere in a newspaper.
With respect, you did not launch those strategies, Chief Minister. You relaunched those strategies. As I usually do, I have lots of information about domestic violence and related issues. The Domestic Violence Strategy has been ongoing in this Territory since about 1994; there are occasional papers written about Aboriginal family violence; there is the Aboriginal Family Violence Strategy launched by the former government - and it goes on and on.
The Chief Minister just does not know anything about this issue. I wish her staff would wind her up and give her the right words. I know she is very good at twisting out of things as she sought to do in yesterday’s censure motion. Time is again against me on the further prosecution of that case.
The point is that the Chief Minister does not have any credibility. To come in here with a 30-page document of cobbled together sentences, with well-meaning expressions - there are some points that are reasonable, but it does not amount to a 20-year plan. I ask the Chief Minister if she has not been sufficiently moved by the interview or the national debate since, that she might be minded to give some consideration to immediate action that will address the abuse of women and children in indigenous communities.
By letter dated 19 May 2006, I took the liberty of writing to the Chief Minister and saying that we should have a bipartisan approach to this. I suggested a number of options or draft plans. They were under the headings short-term, medium-term and long-term. I have not received a response to that letter. Therefore, regarding the Chief Minister’s almost academy award winning performance where she says: ‘I care and everyone needs to work together’ - you do not even respond to my correspondence and I certainly know that you do not respond to others as well.
She would not have been interested but, in a speech I made in the parliament on 12 October 2006, I referred to an initiative that was being trialled in Austria and Germany where the perpetrators of sexual violence are evicted from the household after charges are laid. While periods of removal or eviction vary, underlying the scheme is a belief that the victims need to be protected and must have sufficient time in order to consider options. The victim may elect to move from home. I gather that, in such circumstances, the perpetrator can return. However, the point is there are other places in the world that are undertaking quite innovative responses to the issue of domestic violence.
I listed a number of initiatives, but I said that a bold initiative, such as evicting a perpetrator for a significantly longer period than what already exists, may have application in the Territory’s remote communities. The mechanics of producing a scheme such as the one I have outlined would be difficult. However, decision-makers should at least try to rise to the challenge. Nothing - nothing by this government; they have not even bothered to have a look at it. I am well aware of what we can and cannot do in opposition, but I am not going to stop giving suggestions to the representatives in this parliament. I live in hope that occasionally their staffers, at least, might even look at some of the initiatives and whether they do or not, I will bat on regardless.
In a letter to Territorians on 24 May this year, I said that I well understood that some initiatives have been tried over the years when the CLP was in government. I said that although much was done, the achievements were disappointing. I also wrote that in the last five years, though the ALP has also made considerable efforts, the results are disappointing. This demonstrates that a much more comprehensive approach, driven by delivering real and sustained outcomes, must be our collective focus. I meant every word of what I said.
I am not going to stand here and say everything the CLP did was perfect. It was not. But I do not stomach, and cannot stomach for a moment, some of the comments that come flying across this Chamber about how the CLP did not care about education; domestic violence; and law and order.
The Chief Minister, and I believe even the Education minister, are on record as saying you cannot put police in every single community where, for instance, there might be 50 people. You cannot build schools in remote communities where there are 50 people. I thought the Chief Minister’s comments about outstations were very interesting. My position is that I favour the one generally outlined by Senator Amanda Vanstone when she was Indigenous Affairs minister and, although it was only maybe six months ago, they were considered to be a little controversial. She was saying: ‘Outstations are not sustainable. What we need to do as a society is, instead of having Aboriginal people at communities and outstations, have them in towns’. Give them the same sort of rights that I enjoy as a citizen of Alice Springs. Read the article, member for Drysdale, if you bother.
There has been much said and written over the last few months. Yesterday, I referred to well known anthropologist in Alice Springs, Jane Lloyd, who did a great many interviews after the Nan Rogers interview because Jane Lloyd is regarded as an expert in this area. I know the Chief Minister does not like it when I quote from experts; however, I will continue to do so. I thought Ms Lloyd made a very interesting point when talking to Julia Christensen the next day on Tuesday, 16 May. She said: ‘… and there is a responsibility on the part of Aboriginal communities here, it is great that a bunch of whitefellas are going to sit around and talk about solutions but we need it with the assistance of the indigenous community’. I remind people about a very interesting report on Four Corners a couple of weeks ago by Liz Jackson. If ever there was a dysfunctional community that did not have its act together, it was Imanpa, and if no one has seen that program, I urge them to have a look at it.
In any case, Jane Lloyd, on ABC said:
Certainly, there are some great remote communities. We have all talked about them in this parliament, but we are not talking about those communities that are doing well. The tenor of this national debate is about those communities that are doing really badly. At Papunya, the nurses tell me that there is about a 50% STI rate of children there. Does that not move you, Chief Minister? I am not going to second-guess a nurse who bothers to ring my office and tell me that. I think that is incredibly alarming.
The Chief Minister can go through the motions of stringing the sentences together but it does need real action. It definitely needs more than her usual academy award winning performance. It certainly needs a commitment from her to address the issue of violence in the communities. I am not going to let her get away with moving the debate away from the very issue that sparked this national discussion, and I will return to that issue soon.
In the time I have left I will spend a little time talking about what the Commonwealth government has contributed to some of the indigenous law and justice initiatives in this country. The Territory receives its fair share of Commonwealth funding ...
Mr Henderson: They could give us back the juvenile diversion money. That would be a start.
Ms CARNEY: I look forward to your contribution. I know you do not care about this, however, some of us do.
In the last budget, for instance, the Commonwealth government made an allocation, just for the next year, of …
Mr Henderson: They de-funded juvenile diversion.
Ms CARNEY: Can I finish, Mr Acting Speaker? … $23.6m to fund an expansion in the number of family violence prevention legal services from 26 to 31; $14.9m to support prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, restorative justice initiatives as part of an integrated package to combat substance abuse, initially focusing on petrol sniffing in Central Australia - which this government still refuses to make illegal despite my pleas asking them to do so; $5.1m in a continuing joint funding initiative with the Northern Territory government to improve indigenous access to interpreter services in the Northern Territory; and so on.
The budget material is all there. I assume the Chief Minister has people in her office who can go through this stuff. I would hate to think that the Chief Minister will continue her aggressive and belligerent position with respect to the federal Indigenous Affairs minister and his intentions. She has said some very scathing things about Mal Brough whom I said yesterday was clearly a man very moved by what he had seen, unlike the Chief Minister. For my colleague, the member for Greatorex, to be reduced to tears – and it was not alleged tears, he wept, he was right behind me, he wept – I am proud to stand by him and with him any day of the week.
Do you know who I have not seen shed a tear in this parliament, Mr Acting Speaker? The Chief Minister and the Leader of Government Business. Everyone’s make-up is different, but the only conclusion I can draw is that the only thing they care about is getting back into power. I would substitute compassion over ambition any day of the week.
The Chief Minister has deservedly, as I said, come under sustained criticism in the national media. I would like to quote just an extract from the editorial in the Weekend Australian on 20 May, only a few days after the interview. The editorial that I quote is in relation to Dr Rogers’ revelations:
I make three points: one is the conduct of the Chief Minister has been atrocious; second, whilst every government wants to put more and more money into just about everything there is always a limit – the federal government is putting in the hard yards and will continue to do so; the third point is, this persistent and regular mantra of ‘give us more money’ is not going to solve the problems and the 20-year plan is deficient. I am very happy to sit around for 20 years. I hope I am still alive in 20 years time, you never know. However, what I wanted to see from the Chief Minister’s so called plan is a plan of action.
Returning to domestic violence, if you look at the domestic violence strategies that have been produced by governments in the Northern Territory over a period of years, you will see a similarity. People change, public service changes, government changes, everyone has new ideas. Any suggestion that the former Country Liberal Party government did not do work in this area is wrong. In fact, I remember the government receiving a number of coveted national awards for their various domestic violence programs.
It should not go unnoticed that on 19 May 2006, four days after Nanette Rogers did her interview with Tony Jones, the Chief Executive of Health sent an e-mail to pretty much everyone, a copy of which was provided to my office. It had a photo of the Chief Executive Officer, Mr Robert Griew, with his little smile, and it had a big heading: ‘Reminder on reporting child abuse’. I know from departmental staff who have contacted me. I do not think that departmental staff, particularly those who work in child protection, need any reminding from their Chief Executive Officer. What we want to see, what they want to see, is leadership from the relevant minister.
We had two cases today where remote area nurses were saying that they had experienced difficulties - to put it politely - and had not seen outcomes. We referred to the difference between the number of notifications as measured with prosecutions. The Chief Minister said she would provide me with some answers. I look forward to that though I suspect she probably will not.
In any case it demonstrates that there are a number of sexual offences committed every day. There are not enough prosecutions that occur. For the Chief Executive Officer of Health to somewhat opportunistically send around a reminder on reporting child abuse was unfortunate, to say the least. I know that many people were pretty upset about it. If the Chief Executive Officer is concerned that his departmental officials are not reporting child abuse, then come up with a program. Do something about it. Do not send around a one liner saying: ‘Reminder on reporting child abuse’. If you do not think your officers are doing as much as they should then you need to help them. It is not just about putting more workers in the bush, etcetera, if you believe there is a serious problem you must address it.
I have received, as I said in Question Time today, a surprising number of e-mails and phone calls from many remote area nurses. I am politically sensible enough to know that many nurses who work in remote communities are not the natural constituents of the Country Liberal Party. However, to their credit they have written to me and told me many of their stories, some of which were quite distressing. One of them was unusual in the sense that it was sent to government ministers and carbon-copied to me, I thought it was relevant for the purposes of this debate to quote from it. It was addressed to the Chief Minister:
The main point, Mr Acting Speaker, is that this person does not think that the government is doing enough.
I end by referring to what I heard some time ago from a violent offender when being interviewed about violence he committed on his partner. This violent husband is known to have told police about the assault on his wife: ‘I thought she would eventually wake up after I bashed her, she usually does’. Please, Chief Minister, can you address those issues and the culture of violence, because if ever there was a time for all of us to step up to the plate, it is now.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Mr Acting Speaker, I want to contribute to the debate today from the focus of what we have been doing and continue to do in areas of indigenous education. I also want to pick up some of the actions that the government is taking in relation to alcohol abuse - an area of social policy that has come very fixed under the spotlight of government over the last six to eight months.
I want to pick up on more the tone and tenor of the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution to the debate, rather than what she had to say. She continues to demonstrate an inability to come to grips with the topic in any rational, logical form of debate. She is reduced to personal attacks. We saw it in Question Time in relation to the member for Macdonnell. The first 15 minutes of her contribution today was at a level of hysteria; personal abuse of the member for Arafura in the first instance, and then personal abuse of the Chief Minister and a personal attack before she lowered the decibels. I thought, momentarily at least, that we might have had something positive by way of contribution, by way of suggestion - some idea from the opposition about what they think government should be doing.
It is easier to listen to the Leader of the Opposition when she reduces her voice, but I found nothing worthwhile even when she did show signs of settling down. Maybe, at one stage, I thought, yes, she was going to produce something positive. However, no, that is all a little too much for the Leader of the Opposition. I do not want to sound patronising, but she is easier to listen to when she lowers her voice. The next step she has to take is actually say something useful and positive in that contribution, because there comes a point where all of the credibility points have been burned up. If people take the time to listen and not get anything worthwhile out of that, the next thing they do is slowly but surely stop listening because they do not think that there is going to be anything worthwhile said.
In education, I want to take as an example a small community at Emu Point. Every day, the children went to a school that consisted of nothing more than a tin roof on a sweltering black mud plain. In the 40C pre-Wet Season heat there were 36 young students. That is one of the legacies of the CLP that I had to fix up: 40C heat with 36 young students learning in a galvanised iron roof under a bough shelter. I am proud that they now have a brand new $1.3m school to learn in.
I want to pick up on the issue of Amanda Vanstone setting the hare running last year in relation to homelands. I believe she was a little general in the statement that they were cultural museums and they ought to be done away with. I do not think she was actually meaning they should all be done away with. I join with my colleague, the Minister for Housing, that there are genuine questions about some homelands. However, the worst definitional criterion that you could measure a homeland’s viability or success or, indeed any community, is the size. I can take members to some of the smallest homelands in the Northern Territory and they are the most viable in what the people do, how they go about their work, the art work they create, and the income they get in product to either Buku Larrnggay Arts or Nambara Arts and Craft in north-east Arnhem Land. I suppose every rural member sitting in this parliament would have examples of quite small, but highly effective and well-run, healthy, happy people living their lives productively in those small homelands.
We do not need to look past Wadeye to say the bigger the better. In fact, the bigger the more social problems, and the more dysfunction we see, apparently in the case of Wadeye. The last thing that ought be on the table in terms of viability of homelands is the question of size. I just put that on the record. As I said, my colleague, the member for Barkly, is on the record regarding that, but I wanted to make sure that it was not a question of size only that was considered.
In some of those smaller communities, absolutely outstanding achievements are occurring. I look around this Assembly and I see five indigenous colleagues, two ministers of the Crown, all articulate advocates for not just indigenous world, not just the electorate they represent but, indeed, for the whole community of the Northern Territory. I think something is going right out there.
Two weeks ago, over two days, I watched with pride the achievements of two of our bush schools. What was evident in both was the overwhelming engagement between those Territory schools and their communities. I saw pride and success, and I can tell members, I see outstanding children and students in all of my travels through bush schools.
However, I can also tell the other side of the story. As a member for a bush electorate over 16 years, the number of times I have had to sit in despair at yet another funeral of another promising young leader who drank themselves to death; young men who went on the campaign trail with me back in October 1990, who helped me get elected, are no longer with us. I sat in this Chamber and listened to Brian Ede recount similar stories from his time as the member for Stuart, where the people who worked with him when he was first elected were no longer alive when his time came to leave this Assembly.
These are enormous dichotomies across our community. They characterise our community and they are not new. The great divide between urban and remote communities, and between indigenous and non-indigenous in our community, goes back many years. In that time we have seen many solutions tried and failed, and many phases come and gone.
Today, we are spending time expressing concern about town camps, and I join that concern. But no one should forget that town camps were established in an effort to get those people displaced by the development of urban society into a house and into some sort of security on their own land. For many years, it was town camps that provided the only form of housing and security for people displaced in this way. The fact now that in the 21st century they no longer provide the effective role that they once did does not make them failures. It means it is time for the policy response to be updated, and this government is doing exactly that.
I remember the outstation movement - now condemned because of the cost - once hailed by the federal government as the antidote to the problems created by white governments bringing together disparate groups and dumping them in one place, like Papunya, Wadeye and other communities. If we want to look at some of these unviable little homelands, it was the federal government that created them. It was the federal government that put expensive infrastructure into some of these places and it is those little communities that are no longer effective or viable.
In fact, the homeland movement that spread from Yirrkala in the early 1970s right through to the Layna homelands was all home grown, all driven on the back - all went out and built their own houses, cut down the trees and built their own airstrips. They are as viable today as when they were set up in the early 1970s. Not so when the federal government tipped in buckets of money and shifted people to little unviable communities.
I look at one of the solutions being offered to Wadeye, and I see again an outstation approach being used as a means to reduce tension in the community. What I learnt from that is that nothing should ever be ruled out as a policy response, and no policy should ever be accepted as a sacred cow which cannot be touched on the other hand. There is no doubt over the years governments have sometimes clung to policy positions for too long, either based on ownership of that policy or philosophical attachment to it. If we learn nothing from this debate, I hope we learn that policy positions should be regularly examined. They should be turfed out if they do not result in the improvement of life. It is time for us to carefully assess how well the policies we come to take for granted really do impact on people. However, we need to take care, and we need to take time through that approach.
That is why I am strongly supportive of the 20-year approach taken by the Chief Minister publicly in her discussions with the federal government and outlined today: an overarching 20-year plan, with five-yearly assessments and goals across a number of critical areas will focus the minds of government. It will mean policies will be outcome driven, real gains will be measured, and it will have the ownership of people in the government. It will take the debate out of the political cycle and into a discussion about real outcomes. I find the reluctance of the federal government to adopt this approach quite bewildering.
The Martin government is taking a carefully planned approach to the delivery of services across a range of areas. We have health plans, education plans, and law and justice plans. We would place all of those under the umbrella of the larger overarching plan and ensure they are part of the reporting and assessment process. This planning will have a positive effect.
Before I go to alcohol education, I want to also reflect on the role of federal and Territory governments over the last 30 years. Decisions made by governments in the Territory in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s laid the groundwork for the difficulties and problems we face today. In the 1970s, Aboriginal people were only breaking through the consciousness of Australians. It was only in 1967 - in fact, three years prior to that - that Aboriginal Australians were granted their citizenship and their right to vote. That is probably to the shame of all Australians that it took so long. In the 1970s, the awakening of the demand for rights, the promotion of land rights by the Whitlam and Fraser governments, began to correct the neglect of individual and collective rights which have characterised governments since federation. These calls for rights were met consistently with sullen resentment by the Territory government of the day, and that resentment and political wedging characterised their every approach to dealing with indigenous issues in the Northern Territory.
Probably the watershed for Aboriginal people in the Territory as a whole came with that Ayres Rock campaign and subsequent election of 1983. It was in that campaign, the pretext of the return to the traditional owners of Uluru, that was used to divide the white urban vote from the largely indigenous rural and remote voters by then CLP Chief Minister, Paul Everingham. That election began what became a morally bankrupt procession of subsequent elections that lasted more than 20 years in the Northern Territory.
What was begun then as a political tool was refined, and was used repeatedly over many years by subsequent governments led by the Country Liberal Party. Even the Centralian Advocate in its editorial of Friday, 26 May 2006, recognised that divisive government campaign.
Most vivid in my mind was the campaign used by the Perron government in 1994. Faced with a dip in the polls, the 1994 campaign was run almost entirely on the issue of two laws. In that campaign the CLP portrayed the Labor opposition as preparing to set up a separate legal system for Aboriginal Territorians with heavy implications of bias and leniency. To drive that home, the CLP staged a mock declaration by an Aboriginal man placing a native title claim on Darwin 48 hours before the polls. To reinforce that spurious event, they push polled Territorians in key marginal seats alleging that Labor would give Darwin away to Aboriginal people.
That was the sort of campaign that Territorians became used to over those years, laden with the undertone of the threat to urban society presented by the Aboriginal hordes, out there in the bush, ready to come back in and claim the back yard. It was a disgraceful episode in Territory history. The short-term political gain that was generated for the government has come at the price of the long-term alienation of indigenous issues from the mainstream of politics in the Northern Territory. Issues of rural and remote poverty have all been kept off that political mainstream sheet.
CLP governments felt free to ignore issues raised by people in the bush, instead relying on spending the largesse of the immediate post-self-government days on political priorities. That is where the real deficit in housing comes from. Sure, we started off on the back foot in 1978, but there was loads of dough at the time of self-government, and very little of it found its way to housing, education, health facilities, or health programs. That is a deficit that this government is struggling to dislodge and change. We have not been assisted by the poorly coordinated efforts by federal governments, and I include Labor federal governments in that, which have blustered and ignored these issues from the afar.
Efforts in education over the last five years: in an effort to try to overcome the policy and practical deficit left in this area, when we came to office we immediately implemented the vast majority of the recommendations of the Collins Report, widely acknowledged as providing some solutions, but sat gathering dust on the shelf of the CLP. We then made indigenous education core business of the agency. In the last five years, I have worked with the chief executives of DEET to dismantle the Indigenous Education Branch to ensure that indigenous education is a core responsibility of all divisions across the agency.
We implemented mandatory requirements for all students no matter where they lived to participate in the multilevel assessment program. It is impossible to believe, but remote students were not required to participate in this fundamental testing and assessment. Until we came to government, they were not even required to enrol.
That is the state that indigenous education was left in by our predecessors. We have reversed all those policies, including the one which said ‘No secondary education programs out bush’ - a more discriminatory policy could you ever see on the books than that one. We have full secondary education programs at Maningrida, Kalkarindji, Papunya, Minyerri, and Yirrkala, and other communities are developing secondary education programs. We have spent $27m on major infrastructure in bush schools, not counting minor new works, or the equipment and housing grants programs, or housing of teachers. We have new secondary schools and facilities at Minyerri, Kalkarindji, Maningrida, Shepherdson, Wadeye to commence shortly, and Papunya. There are significant upgrades at Utopia, Mulga Bore, Alcoota, Milyakburra, Gunbalanya, Mapuru and Doindji. New primary schools built at Emu Point, Manyallaluk, and Wugularr to commence this year. Mamaruni is being rebuilt after being destroyed by Cyclone Ingrid.
In terms of the 100 new teachers that we brought on, 31 of those went to remote areas; 12 for Accelerated Literacy; 10 for ESL; five assistant principals for small remote group schools; two music teachers; two working on a remote resource package; three new regional director positions being created; 18 teachers will go to remote school under middle years; pools of specialist teachers, 20; distance education regional learning agents will be a further 10; mobile preschools, one full-time and 17 part-time 0.4 positions; teacher support trial, one; Garrthalaia homelands secondary trial position, one. Reaffirmed commitment to bilingual education, $3m recurrent. Distance education will impact on remote schools. We are rolling out collaborative school sites and in the education vote we have money for remote housing furniture.
There is always more to do and I am proud of the fact that this government has started to reverse the deficit of action built up over many years because of those discriminatory policies that our predecessors exercised. This will see results in these communities and I am looking forward to the outcomes of the planned community engagement process. It is an engagement that will bring together government and communities in the delivery of, and participation in, education and training in each community.
I turn to alcohol abuse, a problem which has been part of the Territory for many years and one in which, again, various policies have had some success and many failures. It is something that we have to get right. We recognise one size does not fit all, which is why we are developing local area alcohol management plans. These will act to bring the community into the process as well as industry and the government. We will build on this mutual ownership of the issue to set in place solutions endorsed and supported by the community. On a Territory-wide basis, the moratorium on takeaway liquor licences, the permanent ban on takeaway licences for any other than hotels and clubs, will draw a line in the sand about the way forward for alcohol outlets. It has already been criticised by the opposition. I say this: it does give communities valuable breathing space in which to draw up local area management plans without the threat of more licences coming on the market. Racing, Gaming and Licensing is increasing its educative role in responsible service of alcohol for takeaway licensees, and we will be following that up with covert inspections to ensure compliance. Having been visited by in-your-face Racing, Gaming and Licensing inspectors, reminded of their responsibilities and their obligations, it would be very difficult for any licensee to defend any subsequent breach so detected in terms of that compliance.
We will be releasing a draft bill for dry areas legislation for community consultation over the next month or so. We want to hear the views of Territorians around this bill. We have a long way to go on alcohol abuse. We will continue to work with communities on local area alcohol management plans. The example of Groote Eylandt, which was referred to by the Chief Minister, is a strong one. It is an encouraging signal of what can occur if you empower a local community to make decisions and get them made by the Liquor Commission.
We are working across a broad range of alcohol-related issues in our community. Just to touch on all of the initiatives undertaken recently: the antisocial behaviour package, the Chief Minister’s Alice Springs alcohol task force, the restricted premises legislation, and the new dry public places in urban areas amendments to the Liquor Act. I want to acknowledge the work of the licensing commission’s chairman, John Flynn, who wrote to me recently requesting that a moratorium be declared on the issue of takeaway licences throughout the Territory. We have acted on that request; a 12 month moratorium has been announced.
In their support of the licensing commission, I acknowledge the efforts of hard-working public servants. I am sure that members of this House will join me in recognising the dedicated contributions of those public servants whose job it is to provide government with a range of policy options from which government can determine an appropriate direction. In particular, the Director of the Office of Alcohol Policy, Dr Ian Crundall, and the staff in the Office of Alcohol Policy and Coordination, who have been working on liquor policy in general and alcohol management plans in particular. Alison Brown and Karen Avery have been out and about in the Territory talking to communities about how alcohol management plans can be developed to meet community needs. I thank them for their work and contribution. In many ways, it is just the beginning.
In closing, when I saw the member for Greatorex with tears in his eyes yesterday, talking about these Aboriginal issues and indigenous difficulties we have now, it would do him well to cast his mind back to when he was a minister in the government that did nothing about it, and reflect on the 26 years that they were in power in this place and had the opportunity to do something meaningful and positive for indigenous communities, and did nothing.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Speaker, I start by acknowledging the problem. In terms of the justice issues that I will be talking about in relation to the Chief Minister’s statement, I will be talking about indigenous violence and referring to not only the recent debate nationally, but also what has been said in this House over the last couple of days.
For any member of this House who represents a remote or indigenous electorate, to be representing that community is to be in a permanent state of mourning for the losses that we are suffering in our electorates, both through the chronic ill-health of our constituents, and the level of violence and trauma that is occurring in our communities. There is no question that there is a problem. In just this last seven days, in my electorate, there are three people whom I will not be able to say G’day to when I go out to my communities in the next run through there. That is typical and it is average. It is not unusual to have that loss. If bush members occasionally look a bit morbid or intense about issues, perhaps you will understand why that is. I am sure the member for Millner would also understand that with the indigenous community here in Darwin; it is not just out bush. There is no question that there is a problem.
What is the problem? We have seen so many things put forward over the last four to six weeks in the debate about indigenous violence and abuse of women and kids that it is important to try to put that into some sort of order so that we can deal with it rationally in terms of policy and the action we take to combat it. We have heard about customary law as being the root of all evil. We have heard about housing, alcohol abuse, crowding and lack of employment and education, and all of the things that have been mentioned, as being very important. I have to say straight up that we are probably going to have to look for part of the answer in all of those areas.
Are we talking here about a culture of violence or are we talking about culture? That is the first major issue that needs to be dealt with. To be saying that customary law is the root of all evil and the moment you get rid of customary law all this violence will disappear is simply nonsense. I challenge anyone prosecuting that case to tell us what customary law is. That seems to be taken as a given. The way it is presented is that it is this secret code of violence that is applied within a community. Can you really imagine a culture surviving for tens of thousands of years based on a precept of ‘the law allows you to be randomly violent to your own people’? It would never have survived on that basis.
It is not what I have seen over 25 years of living with, working with, befriending and talking to people in what is now my electorate. What I heard about customary law is that it is the way you look after your country and your family. It is the responsibilities you bear to the community that you are part of. It is a whole lot of taboos about what you cannot do to other people around you in the way of unjust, violent or unjustified acts. It is a system of social order that made sure that Aboriginal people were able to survive in all of the environments here in the Northern Territory for that huge length of time - and are continuing to survive under that system.
I cannot accept the starting point of the debate about customary law because it is not informed by what customary law actually is. I believe that we have to get that very straight in people’s minds before we go making judgments about whether it is a good or a bad influence. I have seen customary law involving physical punishment; that was, and is, still a feature of customary law. I have seen Aboriginal people go to war, just as we go to war in the European heritage. That is not unusual. In fact, in every human culture around the globe there has to be the capacity to defend your territory and that, not surprisingly, was a feature of customary law.
What are Aboriginal groups trying to tell us about, other than the personal exchanges and discussions that I know every bush member would have on a regular basis about these sorts of issues? What is formally going on to try to give a picture of what customary law is? Mawul Rom in Arnhem Land has attempted an early codification of what the traditional law is saying about your duties, your responsibilities, and what you can and cannot do around your country and around your community. Those are incredibly generous gestures from groups that have held these traditions for an immense amount of time to adopt the traditional way of passing the law on into a form that is at least accessible to those of us that are not initiated or knowledgeable in the law in the normal way. Kurduju in Warlpiri lands is similarly attempting now to describe what the traditional arrangements are.
Traditional arrangements did not say you went and got an 11-year-old kid and took her into bed - it did not say that at all. The senior women are saying, absolutely consistently, both in my conversations with them and when they formally presented their points of view at things like the combined land council meetings that I know the member for Macdonnell played a very key part in, they were telling the men: ‘That is not traditional law. It was never traditional law’. What we have to be very careful about is what is put forward as customary law. If we are going to have a debate about it, let us at least start by having an accurate picture put forward of what it is, and then we can go from there.
I believe, very strongly, that there is a culture of violence amongst our Aboriginal communities just as there is in the non-Aboriginal communities. It is more pronounced in our Aboriginal communities. That is a given because of the statistics like 81% of those apprehended for assault were indigenous, and the vast majority of those apprehended were males, 92%; 55% of those cases involved alcohol; 48% of assault victims were DV; and 51% of them are re-offenders. That is the picture, and that is not a picture of customary law. That is a picture of violent tendencies within the contemporary Aboriginal community. We know that is there, we do not deny that. That is why we are trying to produce programs to counter some of those terrible effects of this behaviour.
Let us look at what the communities have tried to do with these new developments. These were not traditional problems that the indigenous community had to deal with through their traditional culture. There were no houses, there was no alcohol, there was not all the consumerism and the crowding, and the attack of the identity, particularly of the men. The men are really caught between the two worlds without a lot of respect in either in some cases. If you start with a very low self-esteem, of course you have two choices: you are either going to feel very sad or you are going to feel very angry. They are the emotions that many of the indigenous men are grappling with, and often through a distorted picture from alcohol or drugs, and that is a toxic mixture in human behaviour. That is a contemporary problem. It is not a problem that has come out of the teachings or the traditions of the law.
Let us start with that. What are the root causes and what are the things that are going to amplify those toxic feelings, I guess, amongst indigenous people, indigenous males particularly? If you take those fundamentals as why we have this huge problem that we have, let us look at groups that have actually done something about it. The Chief Minister mentioned Groote Eylandt, the Anindilyakwa groups. I went to Groote Eylandt on three occasions. One was when we had a Community Cabinet there several years ago. I went back as the Justice Minister to attend the early meetings of the Regional Crime Prevention Council. At that stage, you could walk around Angurugu and it felt absolutely like a war zone. There was tension there. There was a dysfunction. The school felt like it was under siege. The clinic was in a constant state of tension. You can see that today: if you go to the clinic and the school, they look like fortresses. They are completely surrounded by heavy security screens and with barriers to get through to where the staff are working and where the school lessons or the treatments were going on. Those buildings are still there as a living testament of the situation a year or two ago.
Of you go there today - and I was there some two weeks ago - you can walk around that community and it is functioning. The school is open to the community and the community is open to the school. The clinic and the nurses I spoke to were saying: ‘It is fine now. We can be nurses now. We are not under siege anymore. We can go around without fear for our personal safety. We can go to houses and attend people when we are called out at night’. What is the difference? The difference is not because they got rid of customary law; they are very strongly traditional community on Groote Eylandt. The difference is because they have taken action against alcohol and they have managed to cut the supply of alcohol to the people who cannot handle alcohol without becoming violent or antisocial to their community. They have done that through local solutions that work for them. It may not work for anyone else, but it certainly worked for Groote. The only two people who have now lost the ability to buy takeaway grog are two whitefellas who contravened the conditions of that grog.
Another example of why we really should not be looking at the abolition of customary law to reduce violence is the community of Ali Curung where Kurduju began. It has had a police station for many years, probably about 20 years. I went there in the 1980s and there were police there at that stage. Despite the fact the police station was within 100 m of any house within that community, the violence was escalating relentlessly over the 1990s and early 2000s to the point where the community decided that nothing else was going to work unless you did something about the violence, despite the fact they had three police there. What worked? What worked was that they went back to the basic strength of the family relationships - customary law - the responsibilities under the social constraints that customary law talks about, looking after the people that you have to look after in your own community. They managed to get the violence down by 50%. They managed to get the school kids back into school. They managed to get women’s health programs and child nutrition programs going, because they had a stable community. They no longer had to constantly battle to get enough security around the activities that they were trying to sustain within their community.
That is a pretty clear clue that while police need to be and should be out in remote communities, it is not the answer unless the community itself is mobilised. One of the best ways to mobilise a community is to use its strong social traditions, and that is exactly what was going on at Ali Curung. It is exactly what has to happen in many other of our communities if we are going to work together to get an impact on these levels of violence.
I could point to any other of a dozen other communities that have police stations right in them. In Yuendumu, where I lived for 15 years, there were rapes within 100 m of the police station. It is no solution of preventing violence to have a police station right next door. You have to have some action within the community. What did the Warlpiri people do when they were seeing that happen? They recognised that you cannot sit there depending on the police and the government to keep your community safe; you have to participate and engage the problem and do what you can in partnership with what the government can offer.
Yuendumu was the place where the Night Patrols system started and it was the senior people, men and women, who got out into their community and went side by side with the police to link the police and the government support to what was happening household by household around that community. That started to work. The level of offending went down significantly in Yuendumu on the inception of that night patrol. It is very difficult to maintain that system voluntarily over long periods of time, and there are issues that need to be sorted out to get a more sustainable situation. Certainly the thinking is absolutely logical that if the community takes action under its own authorities and links in with what is done through the authorities of government, you are going to get the possible chance to make impacts on people’s behaviour.
We are recognising that in many new directions, and with the community courts that we have trialled in Arnhem Land, that if you bring the family authorities into the decisions being made by magistrates, you put the offender under far more responsibility because they are not only responsible to the formal outcomes of the court hearings, but they are also responsible to their own senior family members for their future behaviour. That is a very good route to go through to rehabilitation. It is a very good basis on which to work towards reparation towards the victims, reparation towards the community, as well as paying their debt to the broader society through the formal outcome of the court. That is the direction I believe we need to be going. And guess what? Customary law is the best base on which to put that, because it defines within the societies that constitute all of our remote communities what your responsibilities are, so you know which person to go, to put in front of the offender and in support of the victim so that we can get the best possible social framework to put that offender into so that they do not re-offend.
At the moment, we put 2000 violent offenders into gaol every year here on the current state. One thousand of those are going to re-offend unless we do something different. Part of that is in our prison program, sure, but if we can find some other mechanisms to put these offenders under much greater social constraint and responsibility to their community, that is going to work much better than taking them through a lot of the current arrangements. They are the very difficult areas that we are starting to work our way into.
If we consign customary law to this negative, threatening and absolutely inaccurate definition of it, we are going to lose these valuable contributions that that can make to the question of stabilisation of the communities. I have argued - and the Chief Minister referred to it in her speech - that stabilisation has to come as the first step in doing what you have to do in a much broader way. The worst thing that can happen to this debate about violence in indigenous communities is that it gets too narrowed. We need to be talking about stages and layers that we have to lay one on top of the other. We need to start with a social order and then we can talk about education and housing and all the things that would need to be done to stabilise the situation into the future.
Part of the stability equation is substance abuse - not only alcohol, which is a huge problem for the Territory, but also drug abuse and that is a huge problem in remote communities. It is increasing so we need to take very broad action. I know my colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, minister for Education and Racing, Gaming and Licensing, has indicated that we are doing that very thing regarding substance abuse.
Substance abuse and low self-esteem, and loss of customary law, are fuelling much of the male violence in the inner culture of violence, which is a contemporary culture - it is nothing to do with traditional culture. That is the problem that we have to start from. The solution is, as the Chief Minister said, five years’ work, 10 years’ work, 15 years’ work, 20 years’ work. If we can get to each of those milestones, seeing that we have made some inroads on this problem, that is what we are going to have to look for.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Speaker, I am not sure where to begin. I did have a points plan, but I need to respond to some of the comments made by the Minister for Central Australia. This is a complex issue; Aboriginal affairs is not easy, it is not cut and dried. I have been a little concerned at the tone of some of the debates occurring in the House. I am not going to list a whole litany of the wrongs that are occurring out there, or the harm that is being caused to Aboriginal people. We know that - we all know that; we have all seen it.
I believe the minister is on the right track when he talks about customary law, for the simple reason that the women continually say to me: ‘This wrong customary law’, or ‘This is gammon’, as they say. I ask the minister if he remembers the law and justice unit that was doing some great work in some Aboriginal communities. They were at Ali Curung, Lajamanu and Yuendumu. After the last election, you abolished that unit. I was very disappointed when you did that. I thought the work they were doing was very valuable. They were really …
Dr Toyne: We have just funded them $150 000.
Mrs BRAHAM: That is not happening at the moment though, is it? You took the funding out.
Dr Toyne: We just funded them. It is …
Mrs BRAHAM: But it was working. It was working.
Dr Toyne: What?
Mrs BRAHAM: Ali Curung was, perhaps, one the great examples of how people took on responsibility. It was great. I do not know why you did not continue that. In fact, the minutes of their last workshop talked about customary law. They said - and I will not say who said it:
What they are saying is we have two laws, let us try to work them together. They say there is a difference between wrong payback, customary law and payback. They say much of violence is unplanned, uncontrolled and often alcohol-fuelled. It concerned them that people involved in these attacks are attempting to justify their action as the result of practising customary law, or for reasons of payback but, in fact, customary law is a totally different situation. I believe we all recognised that. In fact, it is a name given to a complex structure of arrangements that govern many indigenous communities. They often have a major effect on the daily life of the people. They are not laws as such, but are social and contractual obligations. Perhaps we are using the wrong word when we use the word ‘law’ to describe them because we tend to get a little confused. When the minister talks about customary law - and I understand what he is saying - perhaps he should also think about bringing back that law and justice unit as it was doing a good job spreading the right words.
One of the things this government made a mistake in was abolishing the department of Aboriginal Development. I say that because you put it into your department; it became a policy unit, not an operational unit. That is where I see the difference - that we do not have those officers on the ground going out doing work as the law and justice unit did before. It has become more a policy unit than an operational one. Instead of this cross-government policy we have in which it is easy to get lost, if you have one department focusing on a particular area and going to other departments which have to respond to that one department, it is a far more effective way of doing things.
The Chief Minister talked about a 20-year plan. I was looking at this agenda for action the government put out not long ago. In 2002, we had Building a Better Territory; in 2003 we had Building Stronger Regions; in 2004, Building Safer Communities. That is only a few of them. In 2005, Aboriginal Health and Families, Indigenous Economic Development, and now we have a 20-year plan. I believe that for many years we have had a lot of rhetoric about Aboriginal affairs and what I am going to concentrate on today is a little of positive action - options for the government, things you should think about doing.
I do not want to dwell on the cases that have been in the courts, because they are disturbing. However, Victoria’s move to set up a sentencing advisory council is worth looking at. As an independent statutory body, if we had one in the Territory, then the community could have more input into what they think should be involved in that. The sentencing advisory council has recommended the phasing out of suspended sentences and the phasing in of a new range of sentencing orders. Many people would say that the system suspends too many sentences at the moment. Often, after all the work of the police and the person is found guilty, the sentence is then suspended. That is heartbreaking for the police who worked so hard on that.
The lawyer who recently said that he believed the original sentence handed down by the Northern Territory Chief Justice was right worked as an Aboriginal Legal Aid lawyer for more than a decade. He said that he felt the original sentence was the correct one. I wondered whether this lawyer ever sat down with the Aboriginal women and children who have been affected by this and seen and heard what effect it has on them.
Victorian judges would be trained in cultural issues, particularly matters relating to the Vietnamese and Aboriginal communities. What we are talking about for the Territory is, obviously, right across Australia, it is not new to anyone. It is something that we all have to live with.
I worry that your statement, Chief Minister, does not have the action that I would like to see. There are a lot of generalisations and motherhood statements. Many Aboriginal people in Alice Springs have said to me that they are very ashamed of what happened in the media over the past few weeks. They feel very shamed because it made them look as though all Aboriginal people were this violent, bad mob - and it is not true. It is just not true. We are talking about a few people who do it. The majority of Aboriginal people are law-abiding, family-oriented; they are good citizens, whether it is in their community or in the town. As I was delivering my newsletter in my electorate last week, I came across some very long-term Aboriginal residents who had worked in Alice Springs for many years. Their feeling is, ‘What can we do? What will happen?’ They say to me: ‘Are you going to leave this town?’ I say: ‘No, no I have been here too long to leave. Where would I go?’ They just feel ashamed and they say: ‘We need to recover. We need to say to the media, this is not the picture of Aboriginal people. This is the picture of Aboriginal people. Look at the good things that we do’.
We do not ever portray the good things that Aboriginal people do. You can go to many communities where there are great things happening. I was a bit annoyed when I saw a card game on the John Flynn Church lawns - a ring of Aboriginal people playing this card game for money. I know that is against the law, so I rang the town council. I rang this one and that one so it could be moved on. I thought, this is almost sacrilegious playing cards here. Then I find out that Laramba has a policy that if they see a pack of cards they take it off the people and burn it. It is a simple thing like that to stop the destruction of what card games do when they are played for money, when some person loses so much, and other people win so much. I thought why don’t we start this constructive, positive action rather than always reacting to a situation that is not good.
We talk about town camps and communities and, when we go into them, we think there is so much that could be done to make them a better place. That is what I would like you to do, Chief Minister. I would like you to set up a task force to work with the communities and town camps to work out what needs to be done. Just do a stock take - I think you used that word in your speech - of all the things that need to be done in this community. Get the Aboriginal people to have input into it. When you get the list of things that should be done, start working on that. We talk about generating employment and a better lifestyle. If we want to do that, we have to start making the communities a better place to live. I am quite sure that if you ask them what the problems are, they will talk about law and order; nutrition, health, truancy and so on. Let us see if we can identify in Aboriginal communities what needs to be done to make it a better place to live.
In Alice Springs, we also need to copy some of the things that you have done in the Top End. I would like there to be an audit of who are in the town camps, from what communities, and bring those elders into the town camps to talk to those people about why they are there and why they will not go back to their community. We do not seem to do this face-to-face personal thing with Aboriginal people. We tend to look at them as though they are some big global mob. We have to start talking to them as individuals and as people.
There needs to be, as I said to the minister for Education, a solution on how we get those children to school, be it in remote communities or in town camps. I love Ali Curung. Do you remember the old smoko whistle that used to go? The whistle goes early in the morning when work starts, smoko time it blows again, and lunchtime it blows again to get people back. Everyone in the community knows that is when school starts, that is when you front up. It may be a simple thing but you cannot say: ‘I did not know what the time was’. It gets the whole community attached to this time machine, I guess, and we should be doing more of that.
I would like to see through IAD, or someone, a program on how you manage your money. I cannot think of any program that has ever targeted Aboriginal people that says: ‘This is the money you get; this is the way it should be spent: you should be putting this much to your rent, this much to your power, this much to your food, this much for your clothing, and this much for a rainy day’. I do not think I have ever seen that happen. I am sure IAD or Batchelor could do something like that, and then go out to communities and run these programs where people could understand the value of their money, so they just do not think all you do is go to an ATM, put your card in and it throws money at you. That is not how you get your money and that is not how you manage it.
I went to the IAD graduation recently. They are mature aged students; Aboriginal people who decided later that they would do something, and they are great examples of what can be done. Myra Ah Chee was there. Myra must be my age at least - or I might be insulting her, she might be younger. She was there getting her certificate for a course she had finished. I just thought what a shame all those young kids in the high schools are not at this graduation so they can see these role models fronting up to receive a certificate they have worked for. I am going to suggest to IAD the next time they have a graduation to not have it just for the adults but get out and show the kids what can be done so they are not ashamed to go to school and learn something.
We have talked about homemakers and living skills programs. I know the Minister for Housing will be introducing the living skills program. I worry that you might be giving it to Tangentyere. It should be further than that, not just town camps, or public housing and schools. I think it should be in communities.
Mr McAdam: It is also right across the board, public housing included.
Mrs BRAHAM: Good. Ali Curung did that, didn’t they? They introduced a homemaker’s type program. They had a booklet with information like: ‘This is the way we clean the toilet. This is the way you use the stove; you don’t throw this into the stove whole without a dish’. It may be simple things but it worked. They are the some of the programs I would like to see.
I do not know what we do about the Alice Springs Town Council. I would like to give them a big shake. They have responsibility at town camps for litter, dogs, health, and camping, yet they do not enforce their by-laws. Some of the dogs at communities and town camps are not healthy. We talk about the health of young children; we either get those dogs fixed up, or we reach them, as I do, and we make sure they are cared for and fed so they do not become a nuisance. The government should be working with town councils to make sure they pull their weight and do not say: ‘It is too hard’.
I have also talked about the ‘back to country’ program. It has been said to me in Alice Springs that people do not want to go back and we cannot make them; it has to be voluntary. The people who are on the grog do not want to go back. I am quite sure we can identify the habitual drunks in Alice Springs; they go through that revolving door of DASA, the sobering-up shelter. If they are one of those who have been through that two or three times then there should be case management. They should be told: ‘Part of your case management is to go back to your community and we are going to work with your family and sort out your problem’. By letting them just go in and out of the sobering-up shelter all the time; we are achieving nothing and neither are they. We need to look at the way we do the ‘back to country’ program.
There is no reason why you cannot ask Centrelink if it is possible to arrange direct debits if necessary. We seem to be able to do it in other ways. For goodness sake, let us start helping the people understand that they would be healthier and happier living with the family at home rather than the Todd River.
I know the Day and Night Patrols in Alice try to do a good job. However, I do not see how you can get untrained people to do a job that is a policing-type role. We should be training these people. I do not say they have to be an ACPO or police officer. Somehow or other, we have to make sure they are trained to deal with all sorts of disturbances, that they are trained in communication, and that they have authority. There is no point going into a town camp when they get a message; finding there is someone being uncontrollable, and then ringing the police to come and help. They should have some authority to do something; to be able to take that person down to the sobering-up shelter or be able to take the grog off them. But we tend to put untrained people in these very difficult jobs and then wonder why they get frustrated; abused; and humbugged by their relatives.
We need to make sure anyone who is in this type of position should be a bit like an actor. They should be trained; they should be skilled. They should be part of the – when I say policing, they should have authority to do something. I would like to see a program where these officers are trained.
I am not sure what the minister for Licensing said he was going to do about the liquor problem. There are a couple of things I would do straight away in Alice Springs. I would close the two drive-through outlets that open on Sundays. They are the only two public places you can get takeaway grog on a Sunday except for clubs. It is not clubs that abuse any system. I would close those two takeaway outlets on Sundays. I would also change the trading hours. Opening at 2 pm is too late in the day. Closing at 9 pm is too late. I would open at 10 am and close at 7 pm. As a worker, if I want to buy a bottle of wine I usually do it after work; I usually do it before 7 pm. I do not think you are going to disadvantage someone. We have to change the hours of trading in Alice Springs.
There has been a media campaign on Imparja from the Lhere Artepe people. I have to admit the only feedback I get from people is that they are laughing at it. It is not giving the message it should because this cartoon character is a bit humorous. The government should look at funding some of these messages to communities on the BRACS – the Broadcasting for Remote Aboriginal Communities Scheme - in language. We could help them make sure the people who are supposed to be getting the message get it, and they get it in their language. At the moment, the cute cartoon that has been run for Lhere Artepe is not having the effect that it was intended.
I can see my time is running out. There are many things we need to do. I would like to see an independent coordinator. I would like to see other Aboriginal organisations become involved in it, but I would like to see someone quite independent who would make sure things happen. Sometimes, departments need that little boost, that overseeing, to make sure they are getting things done, so I would like to see someone appointed. I would also like them to have the combined Aboriginal people get together to try to put an action plan down that can be implemented. Most of all, we have to start rewarding communities that are doing well. Far too often, we concentrate on the bad communities. Let us say to the communities that are doing well: ‘Here are the things you can have or you need …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, your time has expired.
Mrs BRAHAM: … to make your community even better’. When we get those role models up then we can move on to the not so good ones.
Mr VATSKALIS (Multicultural Affairs): Mr Acting Speaker, I am not going to go into statistics. I am going to tell you what I think about the whole issue - how I want to be part of the solution rather than talking about the problem.
The first time I saw Aboriginal people, was in an encyclopaedia photograph in 1967. It was a picture of two semi-naked indigenous people. The man was holding a spear, and the female was holding a baby - real bush people. I had never seen anything like that. I was familiar with American Indians and African people from geography lessons, but Australian Aborigines were something different.
I first saw a real Aboriginal person when I arrived in Perth in 1983. These people were no different than me. They were wearing clothes, they had cars, they had houses, and they had jobs. Some of them were a bit darker than me, but they were just normal people.
The first time I became familiar with Aboriginal problems was when my first wife, Linda, got a job in the Aboriginal legal service. Then I found out about how these people were treated in every aspect of life in Perth. You see, Western Australia was a free colony. People came there as free settlers. As free settlers they had rights that people in other states did not. One of the rights that they had was to come to Western Australia and take as much land as they liked. If there were Aboriginals living there it was bad luck; they had to be pushed out. It was Western Australia where I found out about the dispossession of the Aboriginal people from their land - the dispossession of their lives; taking away their children; taking women and men to put in camps; where Aboriginal men and women, if they wanted to get married, had to ask permission from the Controller of Aboriginal Affairs. It is a tragic history that was never taught in Western Australian schools until recently.
I found out more about Aboriginal people when I moved from Perth to Port Hedland with Margaret, my new wife. Port Hedland is miles away from Perth; it is another planet –1700 km away in the Pilbara, very similar to the Northern Territory with regards to composition of population with Aboriginal people. The Pilbara has a very interesting story. In the next few months, we will be celebrating 40 years of the Wave Hill walk-off by the Gurindji people. The reality is that it is a very new history. On 1 May 1946, Don McLeod took the Aboriginal people out of the stations. That was the first strike ever to take place with Aboriginal people anywhere in Australia. Don McLeod was a communist union organiser. He went to the Pilbara to organise the maritime workers. He found out the conditions of the indigenous people there, and he organised the indigenous people to walk off the stations, asking for money not rations, better living conditions, and to be in control of their lives. What happened then was that the police persecuted them - imprisoned them without sending them to court. The station masters threw them off the station with the barrel of a gun. Then the Aboriginal movement became stronger and stronger. Unfortunately, Aboriginal people did not get control of their lives, did not get their wages. They were simply pushed off the stations and they finished up in different coastal towns around the Pilbara.
Things had not changed much in 1999 when I went to Port Hedland. I recall driving into Port Hedland and seeing an Aboriginal settlement where Aboriginal people were living in railway carriages; they had no real houses. Even when the Commonwealth and the state governments provided money to build houses and create a new neighbourhood, the Port Hedland Town Council refused to give them rubbish bins because these people were not paying rates. That was the idea of the town at that time in 1999 - it was only 15 years ago. It was only when I spoke to the mayor of the town and informed her that the government was taking one of the local governments in the north of Western Australia to court for failing to provide services to Aboriginal communities, as required by the Health Act, that the town council asked for rubbish bins to be given to indigenous communities in the area and for the service to be expanded to include rubbish removal from Aboriginal communities.
Housing was a very interesting situation. The Housing Commission of Western Australia would house indigenous people they were bringing in from the desert and the outstations, but would pay nothing at all to upgrade the houses or provide some advice to the Aboriginal people who had came from a community to a modern city. There were jokes around town that the people coming from the desert would light a fire in the oven in order to cook on top of the stove. I thought that was a joke until I went into some of the Housing Commission houses of indigenous people and saw the fire in the oven with evidence of kangaroo on top of the stove. I had to issue an order under the Health Act to the state Housing Commission to threaten to take them to court if they did not fix the houses. They were some of the incredible things I saw in Western Australia.
Some other things were more tragic. My wife worked at the local high school. Kids would come to high school hungry, suffering from lack of sleep, with no homework done. They could not do homework because Mum and Dad were in the house with their friends drinking until early in the morning, and the kids could not sleep. They did not have a safe place, a quiet place, to do their homework. There were ditches In Port Hedland to take away the stormwater to the sea. Indigenous people would be living in those ditches and they would be called ‘ditchies’. Some of these people were prostituting themselves or their children in front of the South Hedland Tavern to get money to go and drink. The situation was absolutely deplorable.
Things like that do not only happen in the Northern Territory. They happen in other places. If you have a look around in the past few years you will find names like Wilcannia and Cape York, Redfern, and Halls Creek. In the outskirts of Perth child abuse in a particular indigenous community was rife. The state government did not take action until a couple of years ago when an Aboriginal girl hanged herself on the fence of the Aboriginal community. The state government ordered an inquiry, and the inquiry found out that the traditional leader and his son were responsible for abusing children in the community. They finished up in prison. A few years previously, that particular leader had led the fight against the construction of a casino on the banks of the Swan River in order to protect the traditional ground for the indigenous Aboriginal people. How come in 10 or 15 years he changed from a traditional leader to a person who would abuse his own people? The answer is simple: alcohol and marijuana. That was widespread in the community and affected many people there. Unfortunately, it affects many Aboriginal people in the Territory.
I was very surprised when I came to Australia that the Aboriginal people did not gain full rights until 1967. Full rights in Europe were gained in the 18th century after the French Revolution. Here we were, an industrial country, 300 years later, agreeing to give full rights to some of its citizens. I understand how people can feel guilty, and probably because of their guilt, they took some actions which, instead of benefiting Aboriginal people, their original intention, were to the detriment of the indigenous people. I have had indigenous people in Western Australia and here telling me many times that the ‘sit down’ money has ruined their communities. Week in, week out, money was received by people in the communities which was then spent on card games, alcohol and marijuana. That causes some of the fundamental problems.
Money is not spent in the communities; programs are not available in communities. If we have a problem with a group in our population – let us say it is breast cancer in women – immediately there is a program available to find the focus, to find the solution. There are programs available to find solutions for prostate cancer and to provide the necessary treatment and facilities for these patients. If you have a group of children with ADD, there are programs and money available from government to do assist. We have a problem with a group within the Australian population and it is a multifaceted problem. It is housing, health, alcohol, and marijuana. There is a lot of talk but no programs, and no money. We have to face this situation.
The Opposition Leader says alcohol is not a problem, neither is overcrowding. Of course, they are problems - and I am not just talking about indigenous people. I have seen the same problems in European countries. After World War II, we had the very same problems with some of the European countries which had suffered great disasters as a result of the war. Overcrowding led to problems we face today in Aboriginal communities. Alcohol does and will continue to create problems. We have seen it every day in other countries. There are notorious cases I have heard on the Greek media about some English tourists going on paid holidays to Greece. Everything was paid for - food and accommodation, and as much as you could drink. The tragic result of this binge drinking that we have seen, and I have read about, is no different from what we have seen in some of the Aboriginal communities.
When I came to the Territory, I worked for the Health department and part of my job, as the person responsible for the Top End, was to travel to many of the communities. I travelled to Nhulunbuy, outside Nhulunbuy, to Ngukurr and some of the other communities. Some communities were very good but in some communities it was heartbreaking to see the condition of people living there. I will never forget when I went to a community and the people were disempowered. In the morning, they would turn up to the takeaway shop to buy their breakfast, probably deep fried chicken wings, or sausage, or mince and rice. Lunchtime would come and they would go back to this particular shop to buy similar food, and at 6 pm they would return to the takeaway shop to buy something similar. There was no fresh food; there was no good quality food. Everything was very expensive. People did not even have the facilities, or the knowledge, to prepare food for their children.
All of us have identified the problem. We are all sitting here, talking to each other, and accusing each other. The reality is that this is our problem. We are all guilty of that problem. It does not matter what side of the politics you are – Labor or Liberal; it does not matter if you are of a non-English speaking background or of an English speaking background. It does not matter whether you are a member of the opposition or a member of the government. This is our problem and we are all guilty of it. We are not guilty directly, but we are guilty of ignoring it: out of sight, out of mind. We are guilty because we are sitting here talking about the problems in the Aboriginal communities but nobody has come forward with a solid solution.
To be truthful, when I heard what Mal Brough said, I did not hear anything new. We all knew what was happening. When I heard the Chief Minister say she was not going to the summit, my first reaction was: ‘Why not?’ But, when I thought about it, I thought: ‘What is the point?’ How many summits have we attended in the past 20 years? How many times have we had committees after committees identifying the problem? How much money has been spent on travel, accommodation and dinners, and experts, to tell us what is happening in the indigenous communities? We know what is happening in the indigenous communities. We have known about that for the past 25 years.
If you do not know, just take a trip south to Katherine to find out. We hear about people in Katherine getting drunk in the main street. How many takeaway liquor licences have been given in Katherine? We all talk about Alice Springs. How many liquor outlets are there in Alice Springs? Are we genuine about it - any government, Labor or Liberal? Simple, reduce the number. How can you open a liquor outlet from 10 am until 10 pm and expect people not to get drunk? I go to Woolworths in Nightcliff to buy a bottle of wine and a couple of beers. At 10 am on Saturday there will be a large number of people waiting outside for the doors to open so they can buy casks. The solution is simple. We know where the problem is. We have identified the causes. Let us be genuine and do something about it. We know what the problem is.
We are talking about customary law. What is the law? The law is something from the dawn of civilisation; an agreement of people to live together. The first legislation was found in some of the ruins in Assyria. It was drafted 5000 years ago. It was a set of rules for people to live together as a society. We are talking about the customary law identified by my colleague, the Attorney-General, and the member for Araluen. It is a contractual agreement for people to live together. It might be a solution actually: have a customary law convention, get all the people together, and define what customary law is. If necessary, put it in writing. It might not be the same everywhere but we have to, and we can, find common elements. Everybody will know what customary law is. Everybody will know where it starts and finishes. Also, people have to realise that customary law has to evolve. It cannot stay the same as it was 1000 years ago. Things have changed. We live in a different situation with different conditions. We might find indigenous leaders who will come forward and propose some change and they might have to be adopted. Let us find out about it. It might be one of the solutions. Unless we discuss it and consider it there will not be a solution.
The Chief Minister proposed a 20-year plan. A 20-year plan might be a long-term plan but the reality is that, if you go back to history and have a look at the Marshall Plan in Europe after the war, it took 20 years for Europe to recover from the disaster of World War II. The Marshall Plan is familiar to me. My family was living in a country that the Marshall Plan was applied to. My mother recalls that the first thing the Marshall Plan did was to organise a United Nations relief agency to come around with food. My mother recalls that when they came with bags of rice she used the empty rice bags to make trousers and dresses. I have seen photos of my mother wearing a dress and on the front of the dress is a big American flag and the letters ‘UNRA’. That was the only dress she had. She remembers when the Americans came they lined up the kids and sprayed them with DDT, the only pesticide they had, to get rid of the fleas and lice they had.
Under the Marshall Plan, the governments established community nurses and homemaker projects. The young boys were learning a trade - the basics in the beginning but more advanced later. Because of the social conditions, the girls would stay home. They were taught dressmaking, how to look after the house and to cook. They were taught to cook preserves using the foods from the different seasons. It took 20 years; it finished in the 1960s. If you look at the health indicators and the conditions in Europe today, they are a very good indication of the success of a plan like that.
The Chief Minister said that there are five fundamental issues that she has raised with the federal minister: community safety; the special management of alcohol; housing; some governance; and welfare reform. One more would be the provision of jobs. I said before I would like to be part of the solution, not identify the problem and then sit down and let somebody else fix the problem.
When I became the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, and Mines and Energy, I said that this is the portfolio that can provide economic development to the regions, and to indigenous people. We have tried to make this a reality. We have tried to work very closely with indigenous communities and I will give you some examples. There is a trainee program to introduce Anmatjere people to horticulture and train them in the basic skills required to obtain employment in the industry. That is taking place in the Ti Tree area, in the horticultural industry and especially with the grape industry.
We have also tried to bring gardens back to the communities, teaching people in the communities how to establish little gardens so they can have their own fresh fruit and vegetables. We have some success. I was very proud to see some slides and photographs of young indigenous people in communities lining up the polypipe for the sprinklers for growing their own vegetables, and the success they had in doing that. Not all of them were 100% successful; some of them failed. However, many of them were successful. The moment you start getting some of them sowing their own produce, other people become envious and want to do the same. We will be there to help them.
The Indigenous Pastoral Program is one of the most successful programs run by my department. We have managed to bring back 105 000 km2 of indigenous land to production. To date, we have negotiated 10 grazing licences over indigenous land. Through the Indigenous Pastoral Program development activities we have increased the numbers of cattle on indigenous land by 25 000 head. We provide employment for 21 people in stock camps and short-term fencing positions. We will continue for the next five years opening more land, and bringing back into production indigenous land and establishing more cattle herds on this land. We are talking about 10 000 to 20 000 head of cattle. Oenpelli is a very good example; I have been there. I was very proud to see the indigenous people working the other abattoir.
We have had success in mining. With new mines, I have given instruction to the department that no new mine will be approved unless it has an indigenous employment plan. Indigenous people can drive trucks and dozers, and can work in the mines, or in the service support in the mines.
Mr Acting Speaker, we have a problem; we know that. We have discussed it to death in the past 30 years. It is about time we found solutions and applied those solutions to the indigenous communities in the Territory.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Acting Speaker, as an Aboriginal woman, a Territorian in a very privileged position as a parliamentary representative for my electorate of Arafura, I take very seriously my role as their member and the privilege that has been bestowed upon me. At the outset of this speech, I state very clearly that I am proud of my heritage and my culture. There are problems in our society and in my own culture. I am not blind to that. There are issues that happen which often make me ashamed. That is the reason why I decided to stand for parliament: to be able to have effect at the highest level of government.
However, over the last two months or so, I have had the sensation, as an Aboriginal Territorian, of being swamped by a tsunami of misinformation. Time and time again we are being confronted and berated with truisms and homilies that we acknowledge and accept. I have stood in this Chamber a number of times and said that there is absolutely no excuse – and I am sure all of us in this Chamber know that there is no excuse - for customary law-based or otherwise - any - sexual violence against minors, or anyone else for that matter.
All children should go to school; private ownership by Aboriginal families is to be encouraged; and public life - in particular, court proceedings - should be open and transparent. The truth and merit of these statements is self-evident but, of themselves, they are hardly capable of assisting in the formulation of practical and effective policy. That requires the hard work and attention to detail that always comes with the application of basic principles to real life situations.
However, the self-designated visionaries, and iconoclasts, who are promising roots and branch reform of Aboriginal affairs policy enthusiastically encouraged by most of the mainstream media, are quick to draw ‘one size fits all’ conclusions from statements like the ones that I will set out:
‘There is no excuse - and we all agree with that – for customary law-based or otherwise sexual violence against minors’ becomes ‘Aboriginal customary law is being used as a defence to justify the actions of male sexual offenders, and we need to change our laws to stop Aboriginal customary law being taken into account at all’.
‘All children should go to school’ becomes ‘Local government bodies in dysfunctional Aboriginal communities should have their funding withheld unless all children go to school’.
‘Private home ownership by Aboriginal families is to be encouraged’ becomes ‘We need to change the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to enable Aboriginal families to own their own homes’.
‘Public life, in particular things like court proceedings, should be open and transparent’ becomes ‘We need to scrap the permit system’.
Let us just quickly give some analysis of each of these four expanded propositions.
I have made it a point to research for myself over the last couple of months various court transcripts and court lists over the years to ascertain what outcomes, or whether there is acceptance in our judicial system in respect of this specific issue. There was never any customary law-derived defence to rape in Territory criminal law. It was us, the Territory Labor government, of which I am very proud to be part, which removed the anachronistic customary law marriage defence to the charge of carnal knowledge of a minor.
The current debate is over whether customary law matters. The argument that is being run by the federal Aboriginal Affairs minister, and by the member for Araluen, is that the Yarralin case is an example of how Aboriginal customary law is being put forward to excuse the sort of behaviour that was engaged in by the likes of GJ, the perpetrator in this case; in other words, to say that such behaviour is in accordance with Aboriginal customary law. The summary of the Yarralin case is obviously very useful to the cause of Mr Brough and the member for Araluen but is completely false.
I urge all members to read the transcript in full and to be better informed in relation to the issue of the alleged role of Aboriginal customary law as an excuse factor in the Yarralin case. An important point is encapsulated in one of the paragraphs, and that is that he did not argue that customary law in fact permitted him to have sex with S. He accepted that he had a choice as to how to respond and he chose wrongly. He pleaded guilty to doing the wrong thing and no defence was argued. The Chief Justice further noted that: ‘there was nothing in your Aboriginal law which required you to strike the child or to have intercourse with her’.
Is it the case that courts are being told that Aboriginal customary law excuses and justifies the sort of behaviour engaged in by the likes of GJ? The answer is no. In that case, and certainly for that young girl and what she went through, there was no customary law defence to run in that.
For those of us who live and work in the communities, we have seen this all before: the shock, the hysteria, the grandstanding, the useless responses and the further erosion of traditional culture and respect for Aboriginal people. It is a cycle that keeps repeating itself. The same mistakes keep being made.
The federal government and the dominant culture generally always manage to avoid accepting responsibility. The debate becomes hijacked with an agenda of cultural dismantling and assimilation. It seems that as long as we have the boomerang, the didgeridoo and dot paintings, we are happy to demonise and destroy the rest. The Howard vision of Australia is a monoculture dominated by Anglo-Saxon values where there is no need for special programs and schemes to assist those with different needs. It is virtually guaranteed that if the federal government does not take a radically different, politically unpopular and culturally appropriate response this state of affairs will be the same, if not worse, in 12 months.
The federal government can express outrage, grandstand and promise solutions all it wants, but history shows that in 218 years it has failed time and time again. It is time to wake up, Australia! I always say that to the Northern Territory as well. Questions need to be asked and solutions found. A starting point is to look beyond the rhetoric and the grandstanding to the facts.
What are the facts? Let us start with some of the facts. If we read history it will show that Aboriginal people did not have these problems before colonisation. Sure, traditional society was not perfect, and I am not saying that it is perfect now. It had the same problems and conflicts that all normally-functioning societies have. But for more than 40 000 years, it did not have to deal with petrol sniffing, youth suicide and child sex abuse. The government created the conditions for this state of affairs to exist and then they turn their backs on it.
Why is that Mal Brough made no mention of the seriousness of the issue until Nanette Rogers went public? He was the Aboriginal Affairs minister for three months before that. Anyone working on the ground would have told him what was happening. I have been telling anyone who would listen, particularly for the last 10 years when working at the coalface of health. Now the media has coined it a ‘crisis’. It was a bloody crisis 30 years ago! The government’s response has been to blame and demonise Aboriginal men and culture. The reality is that it is, in fact, the continued erosion of customary law that is the problem. This debate needs to be turned on its head.
The last comment about the debate needing to be turned on its head has come through to me loud and clear in meetings that I have had with my various constituents in communities in my electorate over the last few week. Regarding the empty, half-baked rhetoric that the member for Greatorex, whenever he chooses to attempt to play political wedging, putting out press releases and calling for the Aboriginal members to speak up and join in the debate – well, member for Greatorex, let me make it clear: (1) I, like many Aboriginal members on this side of the House, have every confidence in our Chief Minister as the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs in handling this situation in a very effective and efficient manner; and (2), the empty platitudes from you are not worth giving any oxygen to. You were part of a government that did nothing. Yes, we are government now, and we will take full responsibility for all our services in remote communities, something you never did nor accepted.
There are some arrangements and some agencies and entities in Aboriginal communities that have been established especially for Aboriginal people which are not replicated in mainstream communities. Two things which do not fall into that category are education and local government. Primary responsibility for ensuring that a child attends school rests with its parents. That is first and foremost the responsibility that we must put back: parents have the primary responsibility for their children going to school. Then there is a secondary, but inescapable, responsibility that falls on the relevant government, in this case the Northern Territory government. One idea that has been floated and debated over the last couple of years is the tying of welfare payments received by parents to school attendance by their children. Administration of welfare payments is a Commonwealth matter. I have discussed this issue with communities in my electorate, particularly with the women. I am certainly in favour of that. However, I believe it should apply to all Australians and not just Aboriginal people.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Local government functions on Aboriginal communities are undertaken by councils, either established or recognised under the Northern Territory Local Government Act. The council at Wadeye has actually been established as a Northern Territory local government body under the Northern Territory act. It is, essentially, the same as any other local government body in the Territory in that its principal responsibilities and functions have to do with things like roads, parks, garbage collection, sewerage and other essential services and public amenities generally. As is the case in relation to other local government bodies in the Territory, the council at Wadeye is not responsible for education.
The recent interaction between the emissaries of minister Brough and the members of the council at Wadeye apparently involved an ultimatum made on behalf of the minister to the effect that ‘ongoing Commonwealth government funding would be conditional on all local children attending school’. I understand that there are school attendance problems amongst children at the Bagot community and, indeed, in relation to children in many non-Aboriginal Darwin families. I am not sure to what extent the Darwin City Council has been receiving any direct Commonwealth funding. Indirectly, it all comes from the Commonwealth, of course, but if there is any such funding, when can we expect minister Brough to put the same ultimatum to Darwin City Council that he has put to the council at Wadeye?
These are just a few words that I have put forward, I suppose, highlighting a sense of real frustration that we might add some facts to this debate and deal with the issues which are confronting Aboriginal Australians. The days for political football games - our mob is getting used to the political football games and they know when they see genuine attempts being made and when governments are being disingenuous. There are feelings of sadness and anger.
Whenever the federal government needs to have an issue to distract from their appalling record with the industrial relations laws, their inept and disgraceful handling of immigration, what better than to jump on the one issue that has always been the best handling techniques of many governments; that is, Aboriginal affairs.
Yesterday, we saw the member for Greatorex and his tears. Well, member for Greatorex, we Aboriginal Australians have been crying real tears for the many lost lives, the helplessness, the feeling of hopelessness at the discrimination that has been rampant in this country for 218 years. I will talk briefly on an issue that is close to my heart and that is the matter of the Stolen Generation. We have a federal government, and particularly pertinent to the issue of the Northern Territory, which has direct constitutional responsibility for what happened and still today refuses to apologise for past wrongs. This is the federal government which, despite the many court proceedings had evidence of real and ongoing child sex abuse and physical and mental torture, refuses to acknowledge their responsibility for any of those atrocities that happened to those children.
I am proud to be a member of the Martin Labor government. If any person can stand up here and say that it has been easy and that the solutions are simple, then they have not lived on the ground in remote Aboriginal communities. It is not easy and the Chief Minister is right when she says that a multipronged strategy is needed and that it does require bipartisan support. This is what the Chief Minister is trying to achieve through the Overarching Agreement on Indigenous Affairs with the federal government. We have achieved more in the last four years in the areas of health and education than the previous government.
Secondary education is a major investment. In particular, at one community in my electorate, we met 16 young men who have gone through Year 12 for the first time. Maningrida School was established in 1947 and last year was the first time that community ever saw any Year 12 graduates. That is a disgrace. The former government and representatives of the CLP ought to hang their heads in shame that they can stand up here with the hypocrisy of looking at their achievements. They should look at their achievements. Communities such as Maningrida has persevered, not because of government support or help. I believe that is one community which has had to pay over the years due to its political alliance. When we came to government in 2001, the $2m that went into upgrading that school was the first time that community had seen any money for over 20 years - $2m in 20 years that that school had received for any upgrades. Established in 1947, and last year, 2004, saw the first 16 young men graduate from Year 12.
I am proud of the achievements of this government in education. We can see where education has become a priority. If we are going to overcome any of these areas, education is certainly a key area.
The Minister for Housing will talk about housing. The Chief Minister was right: there is a link with overcrowding. Put yourselves in the shoes of any of those young kids. Imagine a young six-year-old child in a house in any remote community living with 16 to 20 people. We expect that child to get up at 8 am and go to school to learn. How can you learn with 20 people in your house? How can you feel safe when half of the people in that house are drunk when they come home? Yes, we do have a problem; the kids are wandering the streets. People scratch their heads: why are these kids out in the streets? Look at their home situation. Overcrowding is a major issue.
I know that it has been a contentious issue in the CLP in regard to joint management of parks. However, across that portfolio under the joint management program, we have seen, for the first time, 200 people employed on more than 70 projects in the last year. The program will continue to expand in all regions. We have seen our first three fully-accredited rangers, with eight more rangers going through that accreditation and training process.
I will read out the names of some of the indigenous rangers: Donald Turner and Kevin Ronberg are completing a Certificate II in Conservation and Land Management through the Batchelor Institute; and Jeremy Dawson, who is based in Tennant Creek, is studying a Certificate III in Conservation and Land Management. Without joint management in place, it is likely that none of these men would have had these opportunities.
Additionally, we gave $90 000 in ongoing funding to the Ntaria community in Hermannsburg in Central Australia. This will allow for a program coordinator and operational costs for a ranger group that has been involved in progressing the joint management initiative with the Parks and Wildlife Service.
The West Arnhem Fire Abatement Project, which is a joint collaboration between the Northern Territory government, the Northern Land Council and traditional owners, has been working in west Arnhem Land for the past eight years. That project will bring over $1m for the next 20 years to look at greenhouse emissions from the project area through more effective fire management. As we know, in our greenhouse strategy, approximately 48% of the Northern Territory’s greenhouse gases are produced by fires in the northern savannah. That project is well and truly on the way.
The indigenous ranger program, the community-based ranger groups’ success comes through Aboriginal people’s connection to country and their recognition. These groups have established, and continue through underlying support of the CDEP program together with external funding through the Territory. For example, the DPIFM sea ranger program …
Dr BURNS: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Thank you. The Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines sea ranger program is about $360 000 of various cash and in-kind support for group development training, etcetera, which comes through my department. That is about $1.6m. The Commonwealth’s program is the National Heritage Trust. The land management branches within the land council have been essential in the formation of many groups for the provision of facilitation, planning and coordination. There is a great opportunity for Territory and Commonwealth governments to work in partnership through bilateral agreements to maintain, expand and better fund this developing network.
In the Alice Springs region, the Central Land Council has facilitated the development of four community ranger groups active in Central Australia; in Lajamanu, Yuendumu, Tennant Creek, and Hermannsburg. In the north, 24 community-based ranger and land management groups exist through Arnhem, Darwin, Daly, Katherine and the VRD regions. Each group has between five and 15 members. Groups cover a broad range of activities including coastal surveillance, weed and feral animal control, and fire management and threatened species management. In addition, they collaborate with the Northern Territory and Commonwealth government departments to assist in fulfilling their objectives such as quarantine screening, fisheries patrols and wildlife surveys. Most groups include formal land management training from Charles Darwin University or the Batchelor Institute as part of their work program.
The most successful groups have well-developed governance structures in place which combine traditional decision-making process with advice and support from the external agencies particularly the Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines, my Department of Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage, and the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development.
Mr Acting Speaker, I fully support the Chief Minister’s statement on indigenous affairs. There is still more to do, but at least we have laid that foundation - a 20-year plan. Never before has there been that sort of commitment. Aboriginal Australia does deserve a 20-year plan, and that needs to be on the agenda at COAG. In talks with my constituents, Aboriginal people applaud the Chief Minister for getting that level of commitment at that level, at COAG, because it does need to happen. Never before has there been such commitment and seriousness. I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement.
Dr BURNS (Planning and Lands): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on Indigenous Affairs. The Department of Planning and Infrastructure has the responsibility for delivering essential services to remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. The 2005-06 budget for these essential services, which include utilities services, aerodromes and barge landings, was $64.1m. In addition, Power and Water revenue collection of approximately $12m from remote operations is reinvested into the remote program. This brings the total allocation to remote utilities, aerodromes and barge landings in 2005-06 to approximately $76m. A major expenditure item is the purchase of fuel for remote electricity generation; almost $30m in 2005-06. Major utilities works completed in remote communities in the last three years include new power stations at Kaltukatjara, Nyirripi and Daly River. The Daly River project included extending power down Wooliana Road. I enjoyed going down there for a lighting up ceremony, and also enjoyed the comments of Mrs Norma McLeod, a very long-term resident. She said there were a number of things she never expected to see in her lifetime: a Labor government in the Northern Territory, and a power line in Wooliana Road. Once she got the first, the second was bound to follow, so that was all in good spirit.
The other major utilities works completed in remote communities in the last three years include: generation upgrades in Minyerri, Nguiu, and Yuendumu; an upgrade of the high voltage reticulation at Palumpa; electrification of the bore fields at Angwala and Ntaria; new fuel storage tanks at Numbulwar; increased fuel storage capacity at Peppimenarti and Palumpa; new bores at Numbulwar, Palumpa, Yirrkala, Harts Range, Papunya, Nyirripi, and Gunbalanya; and new ground tanks at Belyuen, Gapuwiyak, Gunbulunya, Peppimenarti, Harts Bluff and Lajamanu. There is also a new rising main at Lajamanu, and a new bore field collection tank at Santa Teresa.
Fluoridation injection trials have also taken place in Nguiu and Maningrida. A groundwater injection project to increase water storage is being conducted at Warruwi; Ali Curung has a new sewage pond; and, at Ntaria, the sewage treatment ponds have been extended. This is essential infrastructure that maintains health in a community and this government has been investing heavily in that. You cannot have health without the basic infrastructure that I have mentioned: electricity, power, sewerage and water. It is very important to any community.
Over the past three years, the Martin government has undertaken an extensive program of upgrading aerodromes that service our remote communities. Pirlangimpi was the first to benefit, with the aerodrome being fully reconstructed and sealed at a cost of $1.09m. Then came the aerodromes at Kintore, Kalkarindji and Gapuwiyak; all were fully reconstructed and sealed at a total cost of $3m. In 2004-05, the government reconstructed and sealed aerodromes at Ramingining and Papunya at a total cost of $1.75m. In September last year, I was very pleased to travel to Ramingining with my colleague, the member for Arnhem, to officially declare open the new runway. We received a very warm welcome from Ramingining residents who put on a spectacular show of singing and dancing to celebrate the opening of the new all-weather airstrip.
In 2005-06, it has been the turn of Minyerri and Bulman. Their aerodromes have been fully reconstructed and sealed at a total cost of $1.43m. Upgrading these aerodromes to all weather standard has a clear impact on the lives of local residents, not least of all when it comes to improving emergency medical evacuation.
As well as funding the network of 73 remote aerodromes in the Northern Territory, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Indigenous Infrastructure Unit is also responsible for funding 14 community barge landings. So far this year, the Ramingining barge landing has been extended and repaired at a total cost of more than $130 000. Work to repair the damage caused by Cyclone Ingrid to the barge landing on Goulburn Island is complete and the total expenditure was $220 000. Meanwhile, a grant to the Tiwi Land Council of $35 000 is available for a safety upgrade to the Nguiu ferry terminal.
The Department of Planning and Infrastructure is also responsible for managing the Northern Territory Indigenous Housing Construction Program, acting as the agent for the Department of Local Government, Housing and Sport. Construction expenditure since 2001-02 totals approximately $130m. In addition, $13m has been allocated to land servicing to extend utilities services to new subdivisions. Approximately 450 new houses and 300 major renovations and upgrades have been completed in this period.
The extent of overcrowding in indigenous housing has negative flow-on effects across a broad range of social and economic outcomes. I would add for members opposite, that this is well established in all sorts of international and local literature. There has been quite a bit of research carried on through the Menzies School of Health Research in relation to this particular matter, particularly in relation to infectious disease. Housing, and overcrowding in housing, certainly has a very negative effect across a whole range of social and economic outcomes.
The total investment required to overcome overcrowding in the Northern Territory indigenous communities has been estimated at $1bn. The Commonwealth has stated its reluctance to inject additional housing funding into the Northern Territory unless there is demonstrated capacity to expend that additional funding. To date, the main method of delivering indigenous housing construction has been by way of grants provided to community housing organisations otherwise known as ICHOs. In order to increase the rate at which construction dollars can be delivered, it is planned that in 2006-07 to use the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Construction Division to directly project manage a proportion of the annual construction program.
The provision of training in housing construction and maintenance through the Indigenous Housing Construction program is a priority objective of the Northern Territory government. In recent years, positions have been developed for trainees at a number of Central Australian communities as well as at Wadeye. Trainees in this program have worked with a builder/trainer to gain competencies in Certificate II or Certificate III in General Construction. Consultation has commenced with a number of communities to roll this training program out into additional communities and broaden its geographical spread in 2006-07 with training placements for approximately 40 trainees. It is anticipated that this training program will provide a pathway to paid employment in local building and maintenance crews. The housing construction training program provides a means for increasing the capacity of local work crews to contractual works related to the government’s capital works and general repairs and maintenance programs. Increasing the volume of government’s works that is contracted to capable local construction crews is a key priority to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.
Recent examples of the Northern Territory government contracts that have been awarded to capable local work crews include major subdivision works worth $2.4m at Wadeye; general repairs and maintenance and school extensions at Groote Eylandt, Bickerton Island, Numbulwar and Gunbalanya; and a $4m joint venture to supply gravel for road works on the West Macdonnell tourism loop road project.
In my role as Minister for Public Employment, I would like to share some good news on what the Northern Territory public sector has achieved in indigenous employment. Since the Martin government launched the Northern Territory public service Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy in November 2002, the number of indigenous people employed in the Northern Territory public sector has increased by approximately 60% from 725 to 1154 as of May 2006. We are proud of what we have achieved but there is clearly more to do when you consider that the Northern Territory has the highest proportion of indigenous people when compared to other jurisdictions.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 28% of Territorians identifies as indigenous compared with a national average of 2.2% for all Australians. For the first time, the Northern Territory government has a clear picture of where indigenous people are in the Northern Territory public sector and can monitor trends across the sector. In 2003, the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment met with every chief executive and their executive team throughout the Territory to strengthen the implementation of the strategy. There is a clear message that this is a key policy and a high priority of the Northern Territory government, and we also clarified the roles of agencies in implementing this strategy. During the initial implementation phase, agencies were encouraged to develop agency implementation plans; review recruitment and retention practices to ensure that they were inclusive of and targeted indigenous people; improve the collection of EEO data and review their data systems; and develop clear reporting systems on indigenous employment.
There have also been a number of forums conducted through the Territory. These forums sought the contribution of hundreds of stakeholders throughout the Territory and have culminated in the development of a Northern Territory Public Sector Indigenous Employment Tool Kit, a practical resource for managers in recruiting and retaining indigenous people. The purpose of the Indigenous Employment Tool Kit is to provide a reference guide for employers and managers on recruiting and retaining indigenous people in the Northern Territory public sector workforce. The tool kit is a first for the Northern Territory public sector, and perhaps, Australia. It has been heralded as a significant achievement for the Northern Territory public sector and is an exciting addition to the growing number of initiatives in the Northern Territory.
As well as developing best practice initiatives through the Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy, a parallel initiative, the Remote Workforce Development Strategy has been established. This aims to encourage and support our existing remote-based indigenous and non-indigenous employees to develop new skills in many professions. Under the strategy, government provides a special scholarship program for remote employees, an innovative grants program, and a series of Revive and Refocus forums for NTPS employees who are working in remote locations. Under the scholarship program, 12 remote indigenous employees have been supported to undertake a range of professional development activities including VET and undergraduate study and to attend sector-specific conferences and workshops.
Another innovative professional development initiative is the indigenous leadership development program for both men and women. The pilot, Kigaruk indigenous men’s leadership development program was conducted by OCPE in 2003 following consultation with indigenous men who identified the need for an accredited course to be held in a culturally-appropriate learning environment. Their qualification is a Diploma of Business (Frontline Management). Following the success of the pilot program, from which all 25 participants graduated in 2004, an independent evaluation was undertaken. The findings of the evaluation concluded that the program was an outstanding success. Subsequently, a second Kigaruk program for indigenous men, and a pilot Lookrukin indigenous women’s leadership development program, have recently concluded with 22 participants graduating at CDU in May. The major objective of these programs is to redress the lack of representation of indigenous men and women in senior management positions in the Northern Territory public sector, and to provide opportunities for indigenous men and women to gain knowledge and skills necessary to assist their ongoing career development.
As I said earlier, we are proud of what we have achieved to date, although there is much more work to do. I would just like to use the last couple of minutes to congratulate the Chief Minister and the government on having a vision to look 20 years ahead. There is a great need for a strategic view on this. I have lived in the Territory for about 27 years now and, in much of that time, I have been involved with Aboriginal people, particularly in the health area, and it is very difficult. If it was easy, it would have been done a long time ago.
The member for Greatorex showed emotion yesterday. I also have shown emotion when people, such as close friends, have died. When we had the debate in this place about the Stolen Generation, I told the story that was told to me of Luke Morcom and what he suffered. There is tragedy, there are tears, but there is also hope. That hope is the relationships and understanding that we can build up with Aboriginal people and Aboriginal communities. In this government, in particular, there are indigenous members, but there are also many people who have been around for a long time who are very committed to improving outcomes for our Aboriginal community.
In my maiden speech in this place, I alluded to the fact that we needed to do this as a government, to unlock the boundless social, cultural and economic potential for Aboriginal people, and to have a Territory where there is equality and equity, where we can look each other in the eye and move forward. I am still committed to that. I know all members of this government are committed to that. I join with the Chief Minister in reiterating and reconfirming our commitment to have that Territory that we all desire.
It is not easy; it is going to be a long haul. It has been a long haul for me personally, for a long while, and there have been tears along the way. I acknowledge the emotion that was shown here yesterday by the member for Greatorex. We have to work together and, if we do that, the outcomes will be positive. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to the House.
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Mr Acting Speaker, I support of the Chief Minister’s statement on indigenous affairs. At the beginning, I wish to make a very important point - one which has been made previously by the Chief Minister on a number of occasions. Unlike other jurisdictions in Australia, the Northern Territory does not have a separate department of indigenous affairs. The reason for this is very simple. In the Northern Territory, all ministers have indigenous affairs as a core focus of their work so that, in effect, we have nine ministers responsible for indigenous advancement in the Northern Territory. All agencies of government are similarly tasked.
Unlike other jurisdictions, Aboriginal people are not a footnote to government policy. We are not an afterthought. We are an integral part of the equation. Although we constitute around 30% of the population, no one could pretend that indigenous Territorians have an equitable share of opportunity and material advantage enjoyed by most Territorians - far from it.
I want to digress for a minute and make an observation of what has occurred over the last few months, and particularly over the last three weeks where there has been much focus on Alice Springs and the town camps task force. There was a situation where, quite genuinely I believe, minister Brough came to Alice Springs and was genuinely concerned, and attempted to try to address issues in regards to town camps. From that very moment onwards, I knew that, in a way, for us to make any gains, we would have to go through a fair degree of pain. It is fair to say that all the people in the Northern Territory, particularly indigenous Northern Territory people, have been through that pain, because they have been the forgotten equation in this particular exercise. Indeed, in the past, they became almost a political football. What is new? Having said that, I think Brough is genuine; he really wanted to do something.
Quite apart from being a member of parliament and just a normal person out there, I became very cynical because you had in the background snooping Senator Nigel Scullion. I do not think he was there for any good reason. I do not think he was there in the interests of the indigenous people. I do not think he was there in the interests of the people of the Northern Territory. I do not think he was there in the interests of the people of Australia. I believe Nigel Scullion was there for pure political purposes - pure political expediency. He was skulking around in the background, while you had Mal Brough delivering people in the Night Patrol vehicle to the hospital, or whatever the venue it was. Again, I do not have a problem with that because that is the political side of it. I do have objections when you have cheapskate politicians like Scullion who are essentially there for short-term political gain.
That is the sort of issue that we have to overcome in the Northern Territory. That is why I am very confident that we, as a government under the leadership of the Chief Minister – indeed, all other members in this House - have the capacity, the will and commitment to get there. We are not going to get there by this cheap political skulduggery and political game that has been exercised by people like Scullion, and Scullion has to be aware that he has a lot to answer for to the Northern Territory.
Quite apart from his little game in regards to this particular exercise, he has usurped the rights of Northern Territorians in respect to our proposed nuclear waste dump. He has concocted a superficial response to a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory. He has engaged with certain organisations here in the Northern Territory for their own short-term benefit. They know who I am talking about. By doing so, they have usurped the rights of Territorians. They have also, in effect, given the Commonwealth government the right to overturn the Northern Territory government, as we know in this House, if we pass legislation in respect to a ‘no nuclear waste dump’ legislation in the Northern Territory. He went there at the same time, and, basically, under the national Environment and Heritage Act, in effect, caused the capacity of the Commonwealth to override a whole set of circumstances here in the Northern Territory. I want to make it very clear tonight, Nigel Scullion, that you gave no favours by your superficial, shallow responses to the needs of the Northern Territory, quite apart from the needs of the indigenous people.
Of course, it just not a matter of idle interest. It is critical to the future of the Northern Territory. Not only it is an issue of social justice, it is also an issue that goes to the centre of the Territory’s long-term future as a political institution and economic entity. As long as such social and economic disparity persists, as long as 30% of our population remains at such levels of impoverishment, it is difficult to imagine the Territory having a long-term future other than as a mendicant territory to the rest of the nation.
It is for this reason that the Chief Minister’s call for a 20-year plan not only makes sense, it is the only logical approach to the seemly impractical problems we face. It is for no other reason than of self-interest. Territorians must support such a long-term approach to our future. The alternative of ad hoc and politically opportunist attempts to paper over cracks is doomed to failure. I have already made reference to Nigel Scullion.
I believe that indigenous people have been forgotten in this whole equation. Whilst we are out there scoring political points, there is a lot of hurt, and high levels of uncertainty being experienced by many indigenous people. Much has been said about self-determination and what it means, and everyone has a view on it. Far too often in the past - and we can refer to the Binjaris and Imanpas of this world, and to Tangentyere Council and I will come back to that in a minute - we have used that as an excuse, not only us as a government, but the Commonwealth government as well, and most certainly, the CLP in the past. They have used self-determination as an excuse to not do anything.
You have already heard from the member for Arafura talking about the roles of local governments out there. I believe she is absolutely correct. We sat idly by and said: ‘You fix up education, you fix up the health problems in your community, you fix up the law and order issues in your community, you tackle all the other issues in your community’, which no other comparable white community council would be expected to do in Australia.
We have to change the whole focus. We have to accept responsibility in how we apply equity and service provision to indigenous communities. That is why I am confident that this government, despite the difficulties we might have into the future, we have no other option but to go down this path and treat indigenous people as equal, with the same rights as anyone, as equal partners in this whole process.
I am referring to long-term planning. We have listened to the Chief Minister over the last particular week or so regarding the 20-year plan, and local government is no exception in terms of planning. It is in the area of local government and governance issues generally as applied to remote area organisations such as Indigenous Community Housing Organisations which are more likely than not run by local government. That is your point, member for Arafura.
Current legislation for local government outside the municipalities of our major towns, specifically community government councils, is 20 years old. Over that period much has changed, not least the size of many of the towns and communities to which the legislation applies, and the level of responsibility and the compliance these bodies must embrace. Right back to the days when Bob Beadman was running the Local Government department, it has been pointed out that many of our remote area community councils have functional responsibility over areas far in excess of what they are equipped to do, and I have already referred to that. It is readily recognised and accepted that municipal councils such as the Darwin City Council, Katherine Town Council, Tennant Creek Town Council, and Alice Springs Town Council have great financial and corporate capacity; quite different from what we apply to those communities out bush. It is in this context, and as part of the 20-year vision as enunciated by the Chief Minister, we are looking to major reforms of local government throughout the Northern Territory.
In the coming months, the scope and direction of those reforms will be announced, as well as the methods by which we may achieve them. These reforms will be geared to carry local government through to the 2020s with clear identifiable outcomes to be achieved over that period. Clearly, increased regionalisation of local governments will be a focus of these major reforms while some advances have been made in the last few years in establishing regional structures such as Nyirranggulung. They have not been without problems. Such bodies are a move in the right direction but not necessarily the whole solution.
We have 63 local community government councils. We must acknowledge that many are too small and lack the capacity to ever fulfil their proper roles, and for obvious reasons. Recruitment into the bush is always difficult. Imagine how difficult it is to recruit 63 CEOs and 63 financial officers across so many disparate organisations. Local Government ministers both under the CLP and the present government - and I have referred to this before - quite honestly have very conveniently oversighted it under the guise of self-determination. It is not something which is unique or peculiar to the Northern Territory government. It is important to understand that the Commonwealth government has a role.
Most people will be aware that since the demise of ATSIC there have been high levels of uncertainty. There have been high levels of angst in the community about service provision. That is something which many communities and, indeed, this government and me personally, are still coming to grips with. You have a situation where you now have ICCs, Indigenous Coordinating Centres, which are effectively silos operating alone, in isolation, not talking to community organisations, and certainly not talking to this government or to their people in Canberra. We only have to go to an example that occurred over the last few weeks in respect of Bawinanga.
Bawinanga is, without a doubt, one of the most reputable CDEP organisations in the Northern Territory. It has a turnover, I have been advised, of around $26m, and they have done it all by themselves. It is very important to understand this: this is a good news story. It is something they have done themselves. They have not had to rely on big forestry-type projects or mining-type operations. They have done it all themselves under CDEP, a program which some members in this House and others would like to see scrapped. The point is that is all they had and that is where they reached today with a turnover of $26m. What did you do? You add ICC and DEWR going in there, basically saying to those people: ‘Get lost. We have nothing to do with you any more. We are going to hand you over to someone else’.
How do you think people out there feel? How do you think those people who worked so hard, who have had the guts, the courage, the determination to get where they are, feel when you get some idiot coming in from ICC or DEWR saying: ‘You no longer exist, get lost’? It is a very demoralising thing that goes on out there when you apply this sort of disrespect to those communities. ICC has much to learn. It is not something that I have just said here for the first time. I have said this previously and to Mal Brough, and other ministers. If you are talking about an Indigenous Coordinating Centre, well let it be just that. Do not go operating in isolation, do not go operating in silos; talk to each other.
I had another example in my electorate only the other day where DEWR has been able to negotiate an arrangement with the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development for indigenous business economic opportunities. They are able to negotiate in Katherine, Darwin and Alice Springs. But guess what? They choose not to do that in Tennant Creek. They arbitrarily, unilaterally, said: ‘We are going to do something different’. I would just say to ICC, to those people in charge of ICC: take a step back, have a look at what you are doing, work in unison, work in conjunction with the community organisations, and work with the Northern Territory government, and part of the issues and problems we have today will be alleviated to a certain extent.
I want to quickly mention indigenous housing which is something I am going to speak about in more detail tomorrow. I want to make a point that that the Leader of the Opposition has implied, or inferred, that housing does not have in role in some of the dysfunction that goes on in indigenous communities. We know for a fact that you have to accept it; there are some high levels of dysfunction that goes on when you have excessive grog abuse. The member for Arafura and other speakers have mentioned this evening that, where you have 16 to 17 people living in a house, surely there must be a degree of dysfunction, there must be a degree of impact upon children, and there must be a degree of impact on mothers and fathers. There is absolutely no doubt that if the federal government were able to see their way forward in providing 1000 houses right across Australia over the next 10 years, as they do have a $10m surplus, then it would go part of the way to alleviating this particular issue that we now face today.
I was going to talk about housing. I do not think I will go into it. I will deal with it tomorrow. In conclusion I want to say two things. The first is that the Leader of the Opposition has been in the media - I suppose everyone has been in the media having their go over this. The only person I have not heard from is Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck, but I am sure they will come forward and they might come up with some more sensible ideas than some of the other commentators have come up with over the last few weeks.
However, I want to say to the Leader of the Opposition that I, as an indigenous person, feel very pained with what has been going on in this community. Not for me as a politician, not at all. As I said you have to through this sort of pain to get any sort of gain. I am more than happy to sacrifice that. But I do feel for indigenous people out there, whom I honestly believe have been trodden and trampled on. That is not saying to indigenous organisations and indigenous people that you do not have a role to play because you do have a role to play. It is also your responsibility to address some of these issues. I care for those people out there who are powerless and do not have the opportunity to address these issues. I know there are many gutsy and courageous people out there who are working their backsides off to make their lives better. I just want to make that important point.
It has been said: ‘You did not get up and speak about this particular issue’. I had no reason to speak about this issue because we are a government with a Chief Minister who happens to be the Minister for Indigenous Affairs. I can tell you, quite frankly, that is good enough for us. That is good enough for people on this side of the House. Regardless of what the opposition likes to go on about, so be it. We do not care. The fact is, the Chief Minister is the spokesperson on indigenous affairs and that is it. Go on as much as you want.
We have heard very passionate debates this evening and none more so than a point made by the member for Nhulunbuy, the minister for Education, and it was also raised by the member for Arafura. It is a very pertinent point. It is a home truth that people should understand: there was a deliberate policy decision over the life of the previous CLP government not to provide secondary education for people who lived in the bush. That is indigenous people. Collectively over that side, think about it. Collectively, you made the decision not to provide any form of secondary education to people in the bush. In doing so, you have denied many people out there a real opportunity.
I want to take up one last point in respect to the Leader of the Opposition. She seemed to suggest yesterday that the Chief Minister had dug herself a hole in this particular debate. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Chief Minister’s 20-year strategy, 20-year vision, is the way to go. I will tell you who dug a hole. It was the CLP. The Leader of the Opposition is a member of the CLP. She dug a hole and, in doing so, she buried the educational aspirations of two generations of indigenous people out there. Well may Richard Lim shed a tear!
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, your time is up. Do you want an extension?
Mr McADAM: No, that is it.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s 20-year plan. I want to start off with painting a picture. I do this reluctantly. We talk about the issue of Aboriginal people and communities and, in some ways, we are slightly removed. However, for the people I know out in those communities, it is very personal. You are talking about them; you are talking about their lives. I would not like my personal life, my house and my children to be talked about on the national scene. Having said that, it is an important issue. The issues facing those people are also extremely important and they do need to be relayed. I do it reluctantly.
What we are basically talking about is poverty in its rawest, most obvious sense. Whether you are an Aboriginal person living in Australia, an Inuit person living in Canada, a minority group living in the United States, if you are in poverty you probably have many of the same disadvantages associated with health, education, and domestic violence issues as Aboriginal people do in Australia. I do not accept that it is totally the same, but there are other issues associated with it. Basically, it is poverty. People are poor; they live in very harsh conditions and have done for decades. It has not happened overnight. It has been generation after generation. I guess the wider society wakes up and says: ‘This looks pretty bad, we better do something about it’, then drifts off, and we forget about it again. However, it is always there.
To give a comparison of what the difference is and why people are the way they are, is the comparison of my life. I was born into a family home. Many of the people living in communities share a home, or they do not have a home - they move from home to home; they do not their own home. That is very disruptive. My parents worked. Many children born today have parents who do not have a job; whose parents have never had a job. There has never been a role model that they have seen regarding work. The town I was born in had an economy. It went up and down, but it had a higher level economy than any one of the communities in the Northern Territory. There were prospects for work. There were sporting facilities; I had a choice of sporting facilities. Many of the communities you go to now do not have those facilities. There were health facilities and I had job choices as I grew up. As I moved out of home, I had housing opportunities. I had good roads to drive on. That does not occur in those communities.
One of the stark reminders of those figures that we hear all the time was in a couple of real life instances that I have had. We talk about Aboriginal health and those indicators and how bad they are. My wife had to go into hospital in Katherine for two weeks, and because there were many people in the main ward she was put in the children’s ward. I visited her for several hours every day. There would have been 10 to 12 beds in her room. There were three or four other rooms in that ward, plus the main Jack Maroney Ward. In that whole time, the whole two weeks that I visited her, of those 40 or 50 beds in the Katherine Hospital, there was only one white child - one white child in two weeks in a ward with 40 beds. That is the reality of Aboriginal health. Some children were there the first week, were discharged at the end of the first week and were back in the second week. That is the reality of indigenous health.
The member for Arnhem and I visited the Berrimah prison last week. In that prison, of the total population of prisoners, 80% are indigenous. The population in the Northern Territory is 30%, so you have this vast contradiction in the incarceration rates for Aboriginal people. You have recidivism rates of 40% to 50% coming in and out of that gaol. That has become life. Life has become going to gaol. Life has become going to hospital. That is not the life that we want for Aboriginal people in the Territory.
The Chief Minister’s statement talked about how we have to attack the symptoms, but we also have to change those underlying causes. I look at it in these terms: we can put as many band-aids on a wound as we like. Underneath that band-aid, it is still infected. It is still a store that is constantly infected. It may look nice for a while but, eventually, it will come through that band-aid. We have to give that person antibiotics to cure it from the inside so that the wound heals from the inside. That is the approach we need to take. There needs to be a massive injection of money into all areas of Aboriginal affairs.
One of the real examples of the failure in that area has been with the Commonwealth government’s treatment of ATSIC and now, through the ICCs. One of those programs which looks after homeland outstation communities is the CHP program. With that program – you imagine any program that is operating through Australia - that budget has not changed for 10 years. A program which looks after outstations across Australia has not changed in 10 years. That program looks after generators, roads, airstrips, bores, sewage - all those things. It has not changed in 10 years. The community infrastructure and municipal services part of the CHP program has not changed. What happens to all these outstations with generators breaking down? The depreciation is probably two or three times the size of that portion of the CHP program, and they are wondering why many of these outstations are looking a bit rough.
The IHANT money has not made major leaps. What has been commented on today has been the backlog of $800m to $1bn within the Northern Territory of indigenous housing need. Even if we met that tomorrow, the current allocation for construction of indigenous housing is about $15m. That allocation annually would have to quadruple just to meet the need. The population in communities is growing. At one of my communities the birth rate is between 80 and 100 children a year. They only get allocated two or three, maybe four, houses a year. It is not even keeping up with the population growth in those communities. That is a bit of a picture about what is actually out there. People are struggling to have a go.
I will particularly talk about Wadeye. I hate in some ways having to use Wadeye because they are always talked about, but let us talk about them. That people who turn up to council or committee meetings are the people who carry the load of that community. They are the ones who see the problem, and commit their time. They put a whole lot of pressure on themselves and their families. Over the years that I have been involved in that community, people have fallen by the wayside because they cannot commit to it because there is so much pressure on their families. The action of a senior public servant out there recently was to insult those people who turn up to those meetings, who try to do the best for their communities - and they were insulted. Their houses are not the ones that are the so-called problem, but they are insulting those people.
What is being done? When we visited the gaol at Berrimah there were many educational programs running, and that is a big emphasis of that prison. You have libraries and training programs to allow inmates to come out a little better than they went in, so that they have a chance of getting on with their lives. That is something that the NT government is doing; providing an education facility within the gaol system.
Not all communities are in disarray and that has been said here today. I have communities where I have turned up at 8 am and everybody is up working flat out. They are doing everything they can to make their community a beautiful place and they do. One of those is Emu Point. There is no economy there but they are looking after their community; every house is looked after. Recently, the government put in a learning centre. Until then, they were teaching their children underneath a bough shelter. It was a new community but they knew education was important. There is a community looking at economic opportunities, looking after their children, looking after everything they are given by the government. That does not get reported because only the bad things are reported much of the time.
Today, we had a group of indigenous students from the Batchelor Institute here. They were not necessarily young - you would call them middle aged - all training to be primary school teachers. You have some good stories out there. There will not be a single solution. It will be addressing many of the social problems. It will be looking at economic development opportunities. The economic development strategy the Chief Minister commented on today, there is a heap of potential in the Daly electorate.
I will use the Port Keats Daly Reserve as an example. Here you have a block of land in the Territory with probably 200 km to 300 km of coastline. At the moment it is not productive, nothing is being done; there is no economy. On the eastern side of the land trust you have Elizabeth Downs Station. On one side of the barbed wire fence you have a multimillion dollar station turning off thousands of head of cattle every year making a great deal of money. On the other side of the fence there is no economic development. Further to the north are the Channel Point blocks where there are houses selling for $700 000 because they sit on the coast in a nice little isolated spot. Their sea frontage would only be 400 m. Yet we have a coastline of 200 km to 300 km of pristine beaches which is not being utilised. Everything about economic development is about the consent of the traditional owners and that is the primary issue. I know a lot of traditional owners, I have spoken to them and they do want to develop their land. There is so much potential there that I do not think that many people can fathom it.
There are plenty of tourism opportunities throughout the Victoria River Downs region and through the Daly River area that is untapped. l will tell a very simple story about business opportunities. When I came to the Territory in 1988 I worked at Cooinda. There was a gentleman there whose name I will not mention as he has passed away. He lived close by and he used to come up in the morning and tell the tour desk to put a note in the window saying ‘local Aboriginal man available for bush tucker walks’, and people would pay $10. That tour would fill up very quickly with 20-odd people. He would come up around 5 pm, walk people down to the home billabong around the Yellow Waters. It would take them a couple of hours and they absolutely loved it. There are business opportunities right under our nose. It is a matter of linking people to those opportunities.
The strategy that I mentioned about talked about creating 2000 jobs in 10 years. This is a huge challenge, although it can be done with the cooperation of the federal and Territory governments, and with the private sector. We need to draw a line between where we are now and that target in 10 years and try to achieve that in that time. When we look at solutions you need to know what they want. You look at the spectrum of their lifestyle. You heard the comments about the way people are living in poverty with overcrowded housing and generational unemployment. Then you have a person staying in a house, working 80 hours a week, perhaps not seeing their family very often, on a fairly good wage. So what do people want? What do we expect of people?
What is currently happening in many of our communities is not acceptable to anybody. I do not expect people to be working the sort of hours we work in this House. There has to be some point in between where people can choose where their standard of living is something that is internationally recognised to be sufficient. I have visited many Aboriginal people in their homelands. They are living by the beach, they go fishing every day, and have their families around them. They look after their outstation and that is a beautiful way of life. However, for those people who aspire to something better we need to provide that opportunity to make it happen.
My vision for Wadeye and the surrounding area is quite simple. They have indicated that most of the people living at Wadeye are not from there; they have their land outside of Wadeye. We need to map the boundaries of those clans. There should be defined boundaries and these are suburbs as we might call them in the future, or their little cattle stations. We need to look at the hydrology of those areas. Look at the vegetation, the tourist potential and the geology of those areas. We almost need to put it in a prospectus and put that out to the marketplace, because nothing has greater success of survival if the market will absorb that. Let the market judge what can be done with that country. I am sure there will be proposals that will come back which the traditional owners would be very interested in. I believe that is the way forward, and it has certainly been articulated to me at Wadeye.
The liquor management plans are an excellent tool. They are not a long-term solution; they are a breathing space for people to give them opportunity. We have seen it at Groote Eylandt where people have a chance to go to school, to get healthy, to get a job - do all those things. It is a moment in time. When I say it is not a long-term solution, it is certainly going to be around for a few years, so people can get on with their lives.
There are examples of greater cooperation. The Katherine West Health Board is an example of cooperation between the Commonwealth and Territory governments and the community, producing those outcomes.
The lifting of the remote area exemption is a good move but it has to be staged; you cannot just drop those things on people and expect people to suddenly get a job. There needs to be something for the rest of the community. In a community of 1000 people, there may only be 30, 40, 50 jobs currently. There needs to be something for those other people to do because ‘idle hands do the devil’s work’. I do not think I could be in that situation.
The projection for the Northern Territory over the next 20 years is that the indigenous population of the Northern Territory will be about 50%. What is …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Daly, your time has expired.
Ms McCARTHY: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time to allow the member to complete his remarks, in accordance with Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr KNIGHT: I will be brief. What is going to be the socioeconomic level of that community of 50% of the Northern Territory population in the coming 20 years? We have to do something about it. This plan is a way forward. It is saying we are serious about it; that we have to draw a line in the sand and aim for somewhere a lot higher than where we are now. We have to start today for a whole number of reasons.
I will tell a story. I went to funeral recently in the Nemarluk community. A young 12-year-old Aboriginal boy had been with his father in his house. His father said: ‘Let us go down to the floodplains. Let us go hunting together’. This little boy did not drink, did not smoke; never touched any sort of drugs. He had an extended family and everybody loved him. He said: ‘No, no, I am staying here’. So his father went away. His father came back a couple of hours later and this little boy had hung himself.
That is why we need to draw a line in the sand and aim for the sky and take a step every single day. I say to everybody in this House: I support this 20-year plan. Let us get started.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the focus on Aboriginal affairs in the Northern Territory hits at the heart of the concerns that affect Aboriginal people right across Australia. In the ministerial statement on indigenous affairs, the Chief Minister said that it can only be with the absolute support of all governments - state, territory and federal – that positive generational change over two decades can occur. I urge the Chief Minister to pursue vigorously her fellow state leaders and, indeed, the Prime Minister, for that help.
The question amongst Aboriginal Australians in my electorate of Arnhem is: ‘Do governments really care about this country’s first Australians?’ The question is not so much about politics, it is about compassion. It is a word that does not sit well in politics. Nowhere have we been in such great need of compassion within our own country than today. As a nation, we are quick to move to support our nearest neighbours in Dili for a second time as the country struggles with civil strife. We send federal police to the Solomon Islands to help stabilise law and order. We send our soldiers halfway around the world to help a country build a democratic structure in the battle against terrorism. Yet, only a short plane trip to the south-west of the Territory’s capital, hundreds of people live like refugees in makeshift tents because there are not enough homes, and those homes that are there are trashed, for various reasons, largely related to violence. In Arnhem, there are communities consumed by the avalanche of poverty. Poverty not just of a material nature, but spiritual poverty where the ache is so deep and the burden of despair so heavy no one knows anything different.
It is clear that such national media focus has stirred many emotions, ranging from confusion, despair, disbelief and a helpless frustration, to sadness, anger and outrage. It is good to see such feelings are coming to the core, because apathy and numbness appear to have been the silent winners under the decade-long reign of the Howard government - so silent that the federal policies against Aboriginal people in this country have crept into the Australian psyche by deadly stealth. I say to the Prime Minister and your government, that your federal policies have paved the way for dehumanising the most vulnerable people in our country – the Aborigines - where the voices of the 2% of the Australian population have been silenced by the systematic stripping of the one organisation that represented Aboriginal people – ATSIC. Dividing it into two arms, ATSIC and ATSIS, under the guise of efficient service delivery, weakening its political arm by legal means, undermining the very real access to information that people in our bush regions felt they had, was so that the fatal and final injection of abolishment could occur without even a whimper.
All of this so that when Phase 2 of the federal government’s operation began by dismantling the Aboriginal agencies into mainstream departments, the Aboriginal people of this country could only sit and stare in wounded disbelief, perhaps still not quite aware of the enormity of the political and social consequences.
It has been in this environment of numbness that Phase 2 of the federal government’s political agenda to stifle and stamp out the passionate hearts of indigenous Australians that the foundations of the Prime Minister’s so-called shared responsibility agreement was set. While people in Numbulwar, Ngukurr and Bulman were trying to come to terms with the fact that they would no longer have the Garrak-Jarru Regional Council or a Miwatj Regional Council, let alone a representative or two to speak on their behalf to Canberra, the federal government bowled in with ideas that did not belong to the community. Ideas about how to share responsibility with people who were, and still are, struggling to live without decent housing and third world health conditions and with inadequate road access, insisting that this was the way forward, where such responsibilities would be the only avenue for releasing urgently needed funding for basic human rights, demanding that communities find a way to meet the Prime Minister halfway.
I say to the Prime Minister, it may sound fair in theory. It may even work for those suburbs where homelessness is not an issue, where overcrowding of 17 to 20 people is unheard of, where job opportunities overcome any problems with substance abuse, and where children do not go to school hungry and have had a good night’s sleep. But it is so unfair for our Aboriginal communities. Not only is it unfair, it is unjust, and discriminates against those who are most impoverished in our country. Homelessness is a very real issue. In the Northern Territory, we need 4000 houses right now to relieve the burden of those homes with 17 to 20 people. When the Prime Minister says it is not about funding, I tell him he is wrong.
Problems with substance abuse occur largely because there are no real job opportunities where individuals can walk with dignity and pride, providing for their families in a job that makes them feel worthwhile. Children go to school hungry because of the overcrowding, and our schools try to cater for them by having breakfast programs funded by the Martin Labor government. I visited Wadeye recently to spend time with the school and the men and women in the community, and the vision of the trashed homes is well documented. Wadeye is not alone in this. There are many communities of similar vision.
We have heard the calls by our Chief Minister to urgently provide more dollars for housing. I ask again: how is it that as a nation, rich as we are, we can assist our nearest neighbours, but in our own country, nearly 400 people lives as refugees in their own community? A further 3000 share or go without in other communities and towns. Ninety babies a year are born in Wadeye. In Arnhem Land, the birth rate is just as high. We have thousands of people in remote communities, yet they do not receive the adequate services of equivalent populations known as towns in southern states. These statistics are sadly not new. The population growth in our remote areas has been growing all the time.
Under the previous CLP government, they did nothing to address the urgent need of building schools, providing secondary education, planning for the future with decent jobs and adequate housing. I am absolutely staggered by such a disregard of the needs of nearly 30% of the Territory’s population. The Country Liberal Party’s inability to plan and to prepare for the growth of our regions during 27 years was, and is, a disgrace. Now we are seeing and living the effects of such gross negligence and inaction.
It took a major statement by my predecessor, the former member for Arnhem, John Ah Kit, to reveal the depth of despair by speaking of the dysfunctional communities across the Territory. His courageous stand began the earnest road of our Labor government to improve the lives of the most vulnerable in the Territory – those in our communities. Mr Ah Kit’s statement made national headlines. That was in March 2002. The Martin Labor government moved to improve education in the bush, not just primary but secondary education. No secondary school was ever built before Labor came to government. No child in the bush had graduated from Year 12 either.
I would like to just digress a little and support what the member for Barkly said. By not allowing the future and further education of children in those remote areas where the population growth is the greatest, is an absolute shocking indictment on our previous government who ruled for 27 years. Now we have a government determined to ensure a future for the children of the Northern Territory, black and white, in urban and bush areas. No ifs and buts: this government knows that the future of our communities depends on our children knowing how to read and write in English, be just as strong in their own language, and maintain cultural connections to country.
This is the essence of valuing human beings for who they are, and knowing one’s own identity, and where they fit in, is fundamental to a person’s wellbeing. Unlike the Prime Minister, his federal Education minister, Senator Julie Bishop, wants Aboriginal people to forget their identify, their link to country and culture. It is a call that only complements the outrageous comments by the previous Indigenous Affairs minister, Amanda Vanstone, when she referred to outstations as ‘cultural museums’.
Now the federal government is focused on amending the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. The Prime Minister and his ministers say the Land Rights Act has failed Aboriginal people. But I say how can you say that to people like the Yanyuwa, my people, who have spent 30 years struggling to receive the islands back? Twenty-seven of those 30 years were spent fighting a Northern Territory CLP government completely opposed to land claims, a government that refused to recognise the rights of Aboriginal people for 27 years.
Look now at the Anindilyakwa people who are moving in leaps and bounds because they are strong in their own cultural identity and relationships to land, and because they have a government which sincerely cares about the culture of Aboriginal people right across the Northern Territory.
Federally, there has been a double standard that has been there for Aboriginal people, largely as a result of failed government policies. For more than three decades, we have had the CDEP program in our communities and it was decades still before white Australians were exposed to the scheme. No superannuation, no long service leave, no holiday pay, yet clearly it has been the core of so-called job opportunities for all Aboriginal people in our communities and for our children who have been encouraged to complete high school, just so they can go on to CDEP. Even if they do not finish high school, they can still go on CDEP.
The recent national media focus began because of the appearance of Dr Nanette Rogers on Lateline about child sexual abuse. I say – and I am sure, my colleagues, because we know that we need to have a good look at the good and bad things that are happening right across the Northern Territory - to Dr Rogers, thank you for your courage to speak publicly Thank you to Dr Paul Bauert, the president of the NT AMA for your consistent dedication to the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal children. Your call for the Army into Wadeye created mixed debate across the nation. Whatever people may think it maintained the spotlight on a community in desperate need. To you and Dr Pat Rebgetz at Wadeye, I say thank you. We know that child sex abuse is abhorrent. The Chief Minister and her ministers and Caucus are not afraid to deal with this issue, publicly, openly because we want to deal with it, we are not afraid to deal with it.
I have heard here in this Assembly in the accusations made against the Chief Minister and our government about how the people of the Northern Territory have been ashamed, how our opposition has felt ashamed and how we should be so embarrassed at our handling of the situation. I say to you and all those who accuse the Chief Minister and our government of not being able to stand up and openly face the problems of our community, just remember this: that just as gold is tested in fire, the strength of the human character is tested in the furnace of humiliation.
I say thank you to my colleagues who have stood and are standing to defend the rights of Aboriginal people not only in the Northern Territory but right across this country. It is because of them that there are five indigenous MLAs today. It is because of the Labor Party’s belief in the future for all Territorians, but in particular Aboriginal Territorians, that we have five indigenous MLAs in this Assembly.
Child sex abuse is abhorrent. It is one of society’s evils and we must all be vigilant against it in every family, city, town or community right across Australia. I call on all Australians, media commentators, leaders of all persuasions: please do not be so narrow in your view to believe it only happens in black families and by black men.
Our government has quadrupled the budget for Family and Community Services to deal with this issue simply because we know it exists. We do not hide from it nor do we pretend it is not there. It is. The Martin Labor government will continue to protect our children through the good people we have working on the ground in our communities and in the strategies to deal with it. The five indigenous members of this parliament as are all members of the Labor government are only too aware of the struggles of Aboriginal people. It is what fires my heart.
I remind our political leaders of all persuasions right across this country that it is when we sincerely seek justice and true equality for the most impoverished in our society, and only then, will we remove the walls of impossibility that block our sight from seeing a future of peace and prosperity for the first Australians, for all Australians. To those of you who are in our communities, who are at the forefront of working against this huge tide of poverty, you are our unsung heroes; not caught up in the debate but deeply affected by it. I say to you stay strong. It is to all of you that I also say on behalf of the Martin Labor government, thank you.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on Indigenous Affairs brought to this House by the Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. I begin by talking about being born and bred in a remote Aboriginal community, living in overcrowded housing, and growing up in an abusive community with an abusive family.
I was born and bred on a remote Aboriginal community. I roamed between Haasts Bluff and Hermannsburg, living with family all the time, within my culture, speaking my language and practising my culture. That is the strength of people like me. You cannot blame abuse and violence on culture. That is not something we brought into our society. It is not part of our culture; it is not part of our society. You have abuse in the white society as well. You have violence within the white society as well. We have not seen the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory or the Prime Minister of this country ask for an overhaul of white society because of the appalling abuse and violence within white society.
There was an occasion a couple of weeks ago when I was ready to board a plane to go to a couple of communities with my committee. An Aboriginal woman came up to me and said: ‘Can you, as a politician and especially as my local member, tell people how we feel as Aboriginal people in remote Aboriginal communities about the way that people are talking about abuse in Aboriginal communities?’ She said: ‘I feel absolutely filthy, absolutely dirty, that Aboriginal people are being spoken about on national media by a white saviour who has never had experience with the Aboriginal people, never been to a remote Aboriginal community’.
The white saviour in shining armour is Mal Brough, who thinks that he can come in, go to a few town camps, fly into Wadeye, disregard our Chief Minister of the Northern Territory - who is duly elected by the people of the Territory - and start getting brownie points from the most disadvantaged people of this country. It is an absolute shame on the Howard government. I feel ashamed on behalf of all Australians as an Aboriginal person, that we have this person who calls himself an Aboriginal Affairs minister, who has come in overnight on a white horse to try to talk about issues that are 200 years old.
I remember sitting at the summit with the Prime Minister only three years ago in 2003. There were people like Jackie Huggins there, Professor Bonnie Robertson, and many other people. To stand here and try to remember some of the stories that were told to the Prime Minister of the nation that day at the summit hurts me. If the Prime Minister of the nation cannot take any notice of what people were saying three years ago, what is going to change?
I want to go back to something the Local Government minister said. It is like our life is destined, from the time we were born, to death. I want to go back because there are many other issues as well. We know that abuse and violence is not part of our culture. We do not tolerate it. However, as a nation, we are all responsible for the abuse and violence – not just in indigenous communities but in the whole of Australian society. We have to stop stereotyping abuse and violence as only happening in indigenous communities, because it is 10 times that of ours in your society, and you are too ashamed to talk about it. You have not come out and said there needs to be an overhaul of our own society so that we, as a nation, can heal and say that we as a nation should not tolerate this abuse. It does not matter in what kind of society it happens.
I remember Aboriginal people talking about violence 30 years ago. There have been many reports written, many reports shelved. That is why you have the hopelessness in communities, because they believed in you - they believed in us. They believe in the very people who sit inside this Chamber, and the people who sit in the Chambers in Canberra. They see these people going into the communities and saying: ‘We need to address these issues’.
The Northern Territory Labor government and the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory has absolute guts to come up with a long-term strategy, a 20-year strategy, to say that we will take an holistic approach to dealing with the issues of abuse and violence, poor housing, infrastructure, education, and health. We, as Territory politicians, need to give credit where credit is due, rather than grandstand and say: ‘This is not going to work. You are blaming overcrowded houses for abuse’. I say to the Opposition Leader, she would not know because she has never been to an Aboriginal community. She has never had to live in an overcrowded house. I stand here with the experience of being born and bred, not in a hospital bed, but down by the river, and expertise of living with my culture, and living in an overcrowded house with 35 to 40 people.
I still take comfort in going back to some of my communities, and going back to the overcrowded houses at Papunya or Hermannsburg and sharing the dining room with my family and my aunties when I have to hop into bed with them in the swag, because it is the closeness of our culture that makes us who we are and makes us strong.
I commend the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory for having the guts to stand up and say that these issues are not easy. If it was easy we would have dealt with them a long time ago. You would have dealt with them. You reigned the Territory for 27 years. You could not cope with it. You did not understand. You did not know. Like all members in this House have said, you failed indigenous people for in remote Aboriginal communities 27 years. I can say as part of Clare Martin’s Labor government, as an Aboriginal person born and bred in a community that speaks my language and upholds my law and my culture, that has not made me violent and abusive. I commend the Chief Minister for having the guts to stand up and say to the nation, not just to Territorians, but to the whole Australian nation: ‘These things are not easy. If it was easy, you would have dealt with them, we would have dealt with them four years ago’. It is a hard struggle that we are all going to have to work to find a solution.
The holistic approach, the 20-year strategy that the Chief Minister has put up, is the only solution that we have to combating all these problems, not just the violence and abuse in remote Aboriginal communities, but the poor housing, the overcrowding, the infrastructure problems, the health, the education. You have heard every minister in this House say how much money the Northern Territory government is putting in extra to these services, unlike the previous government that just was out to destroy Aboriginal culture, Aboriginal law.
You still say that everything to do with violence and abuse is linked to our culture. Is your culture linked to the abuse and violence that you tolerate in this nation? No, it is not. I believe it is an absolute shame that we have to stand there and stereotype Aboriginal people to the extent that you have Aboriginal women - you have heard the member for Braitling say that as well, and you have heard the Chief Minister say that, how Aboriginal people feel and how they felt four weeks ago. They feel absolutely dirty, absolutely gutted by people who come into the Northern Territory just to get brownie points, so that they can go back to Canberra, and like the Chief Minister said, hold another summit.
We should not be talking and doing more talking about the problems that we already know. It is bad action and the Chief Minister has made this quite clear. I stand here proudly to commend to this House the statement by the Chief Minister, the Minister for Indigenous Affairs.
Ms LAWRIE (Family and Community Services): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister for her statement on Indigenous Affairs. It is, obviously, a timely statement given the national debate that has been going on for about the last month since the whirly whirly travelled through the town camps of Alice Springs.
I have wholehearted support for the Chief Minister’s 20-year plan, a national plan, as it is a national plan that is needed to raise the living conditions of indigenous Australians. We have heard many speakers from the government this evening talk about the range of issues that confront people living in disadvantage, and specifically indigenous Australians living in disadvantage. We know there are no quick fixes, no one magic solution to the myriad of issues that confront people in disadvantage and poverty in Australia.
Every minister in the Martin Labor government has carriage of indigenous issues right across their portfolios. The hallmark of the Martin government has been to work with communities from the ground up because imposing solutions from top down just does not work. That is the way of the past that has proven to fail people living in their community. Within both of my portfolio areas I wish to speak on tonight, I want to talk about the issues and the program and service delivery of Family and Community Services, but also the role that Sport and Recreation plays for many indigenous Territorians in enhancing their life.
First of all, Family and Community Services: we provide programs across the area of child protection, alcohol rehabilitation, addressing petrol sniffing, providing mental health services and addressing domestic violence. Sport and Recreation plays a very important role in the prevention of what is otherwise potentially disruptive behaviour.
Within the area of child protection, I point out our achievements to date but also outline the challenges that we continue to face. It is important in this debate to put things in context, to have a look at where we were when the Martin Labor government came to government in 2001. I will never forget reading the SNAIC - the national indigenous child organisation - authoritative report on the state of neglect and the provision of child protection services in the Territory, and feeling shocked to the core at the decades of neglect that has existed. When you come to government you have access to information, and some of the information is quite stark.
Child protection services were radically under-funded under CLP governments. In 2001, the child protection budget was less than $8m. There had been no additional staff hired in child protection for 10 years. For an entire decade, FACS was driven into the ground under the CLP. There was no specific after-hours service because, one would presume, the prevailing view of the policy makers from the CLP at the time was that child abuse just did not happen after 5 pm. There were no remote staff for the delivery of Family and Community Services and, importantly, child protection. Remote child abuse, in that context, had simply been swept under the carpet. What an abhorrent range of situations to encounter.
I acknowledge the work done by my predecessors in the portfolio, both the Minister for Health and Family and Community Services, the member for Nightcliff, followed by the member for Arafura in her role as Minister for Family and Community Services. Both of them actively went into reshaping policy and putting resources into these areas of significant neglect.
We know we cannot do much in changing people’s behaviour - the violence, the neglect, and providing the appropriate protection for children - if you just do not resource the workers in the field. Putting in the resources is exactly what the Martin Labor government has done. We have quadrupled the child protection budget, raising it from $7.8m to $31.6m today.
We have a young population but we are now spending more than twice as much per child under 17 on child protection than some other jurisdictions do. The 51 new child protection positions are working at the coalface in the in-take process and the investigation process of child protection. Also importantly, within our regional areas we have increased staff. Our remote strength is increasing. We have a whole range of workers dispersed right across the Territory working in conjunction with police. That was a huge challenge in the reforms that have happened within the FACS system to get the two agencies, the police and FACS, to come together and work together. They are both critical to the role of investigation within child abuse and within serious child neglect cases. I have the utmost respect for the police and the child protection workers who are at the coalface, who have had to learn a new set of skills, embrace a whole new way of working, and go into new areas of the Territory where, in the past, the shutters were up. The shutters were up under the CLP government.
I acknowledge the work done in raising the awareness of child abuse. We have heard in previous debates in the Assembly that there have been significant reports of notifications of child abuse. The Leader of the Opposition was very critical of that in Question Time today. She found it appalling that the government is acknowledging the increasing rates of notifications into our system as an outcome that we want. Why do we want increasing notifications? Because we know that there was a whole lot of under-reporting occurring in this area. The previous minister, the member for Arafura, took it upon herself in her role as minister to travel through the communities and deliver the message at the community level: ‘We will not and cannot tolerate violence towards our women and violence towards our children. We must provide safe communities for our women and our children’.
At that time, in 2003 and 2004, with the raft of work that the former minister was doing, was a DVD funded and created through Warlpiri Media called Shout It Out Loud which is about sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities. It has an extremely powerful message. It is indigenous people, women, children, with an indigenous minister responsible for the area at the time, sending the message directly to indigenous people saying: ‘We cannot tolerate sexual abuse’, and what is wrong with sexual abuse, and what to do if you are concerned about sexual abuse.
To the federal minister, we have been out there for years now in the Territory in communities, delivering this information in a way and a medium that is good for people to hear, through the BRACS system, to the frontlines, to the schools, and to the health clinics. The result of that is the significant increase in the notifications of child abuse. We have seen them go from 623 in 2000-01 doubling to 1219 in the 2004-05 financial year. When children are in danger, we are a government that acts. The number of Aboriginal children removed from a dangerous environment and taken into care during that time has also doubled – up from 100 children to 218 children over the same period. Despite these increases, we are clearly saying we want to do more to encourage people to speak out.
That is why you have heard members of parliament through this debate thank Dr Nanette Rogers and Dr Paul Bauert for speaking out about any concerns they have. We are not a government that says: ‘Do not mention it. We do not want to hear the bad news. We do not want to discuss the worst aspects of society’. We are a government that says: ‘Let us have that debate’. Let us have that public debate because every time someone is out there talking about child abuse in our community, hopefully it strengthens someone else to be prepared to provide evidence to the police or FACS. Hopefully, it strengthens someone in the community to report any suspicions they have. We are calling for the community to work with us in protecting our children and importantly, in the area of domestic violence, protecting our women as well.
Moving away from just a response perspective, the government also tries to be proactive and that is very much the tenor of the Chief Minister’s 20-year plan. On a local level, we are working with Charlie King who has been an advocate of safety for women and children, particularly indigenous women and children, for many years. He chairs the Family and Community Services Advisory Council that reports directly to me as minister. He has reported directly in the past to the member for Arafura. It has been a passion of Charlie King’s for many years to say: ‘Let us bring together the indigenous men, the leaders in our communities, and let them be a part of the solution. Let them be a part of standing up and saying we want to protect our women and protect our children. We do not accept violence’.
I am working with Charlie King, for him to host forums funded by the Territory government, through his role as Family and Community Services Advisory Council chair, in Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Nhulunbuy. We are aiming for forums in July, depending on venue availability across all those regional centres, where we directly invite indigenous men, community leaders, those working for organisations across a whole variety of roles in their communities to the forums.
I have struck an agreement with Charlie. I said: ‘Charlie, I do not just want it to be another talkfest. It is important that the discussion that occurs as indigenous men’s business occurs within the context of the reality that we are seeing within the reports within our system, and really provide them with information as well’. Charlie is quite happy with the proposal I put forward, where we are able to get our staff in first to talk about child protection, what the system is, what the notifications are, what they are seeing; get our sexual assault team in, talk about the sexual assault notifications they are seeing and the impact of that.
In talking to Willy Tilmouth in Alice Springs, he came up with another suggestion which we are putting into the forums - talking about the STIs and how they are occurring in communities, and notifications. Tangentyere had very good information from the Health department about STIs and he thought that was a very important part of the indigenous men’s forum. It will be putting in context to the men’s business discussions the serious concerns and issues that we have as a community; that we are certainly not shirking as a government in trying to change any tolerance that may exist anywhere towards the issue of violence against our children, and often in the those circumstances, it includes violence against the women.
Another proactive way that we are working is we have worked collaboratively with the Commonwealth government to put in place - some of it is just our funding in some areas and some of it is combined funding Territory and government in other regional areas - intensive family support services. The simplistic view of ‘a child is at risk therefore remove that child from that family’, is wrong. It is absolutely wrong to put a child through the trauma of being torn away from its mother, or mother and father when, in fact, it is not their mother and father who are putting them at risk; it is the extended environment in which they are living that puts them at risk. We are working with families in an intensive support program to build up the family’s capacity to better protect and care for their child, and watch and monitor that, and no way allow a situation where children are at risk, but accept that we need to work with families to turn the situation around.
The Police Commissioner today made an announcement about creating the task force. I know this has been months of detailed work between police and Family and Community Services. It is a very senior, well resourced, proactive, effective way of providing investigations into child abuse, but also proactively looking for trends within communities; creating the relationships at the community level - whether it is with the school, the health clinic worker, the community government council, whoever the relevant leaders in the community are - providing those networks and information so that if abuse does occur, or if an STI does occur, within a community we do not get the closed door syndrome, or the veil of secrecy. We have a good investigative team with the relationships, skills, and knowledge to get the information required to prosecute and to get a gaol sentence at the end of that prosecution. That is what we are doing, that is what we are resourcing, and that is what we are committed to do.
We have been proactive about the Magellan Project. FACS has signed up an agreement with the Family Court which provides better sharing of information between what FACS holds and what the Family Court system wants. Regarding the reforms that needed to occur in the FACS side of the agency, we found that in previous policy there was really a ‘shutters down’ syndrome where ‘do not provide the information’. The Magellan project was a project that the Family Court pursued. Under the member for Arafura, the agency was encouraged to negotiate and sign up to the Magellan Project, which means FACS, where appropriate, provides information to the Family Court when the Family Court is looking at orders around children. If there is information the Family Court needs to know to make an order about whom a child resides with, etcetera, the Magellan Project links up to provide that information.
It is an important part of the role that FACS plays in child protection within our system. We are working within Justice, in close concert with the federal justice system and the family law system, to try to improve the protections we have for our children in our community. We do not have the shutters down. We are actively working and collaborating with the federal government, through its range of different agencies, whether it is Attorney-General’s, courts, right across the spectrum, to provide information, to share information and to be able to get the best outcome for the children. I congratulate the FACS staff who worked very hard on signing us up to that Magellan Project.
There has been a lot of misinformation during the debate that I want to dispel. The member for Greatorex continues to try to underline that we do not investigate every report of child abuse. Let me say, on the Parliamentary Record, I have said it on radio, I have issued statements to the paper and I will say it in here today: yes, FACS investigates absolutely every notification. What happens is that an initial investigation will indicate the suspicion of abuse or not. If it is not substantiated, it is not registered as an investigation in the department’s annual report. If that initial investigation is substantiated, it then goes on to what is a full investigation and registered as an investigation within the statistics of the annual report. Often, those investigations are, quite naturally, quite appropriately, in conjunction with the police.
In the Northern Territory, every single report of child abuse becomes an official notification. This certainly is not the same in the other states, where reports are often filtered prior to becoming notifications. We take on every notification.
This fact, combined with our mandatory reporting of child abuse, does lead to a number of child reports that are not substantiated. I have been asked: ‘What does that mean?’ I said: ‘Well, the kid who falls off their bike, scrapes their head, their knee, has a bruise’. If you look at my 19-month-old son, he is a walking pin board of bruises on his forehead at the moment. He seems to navigate the lounge room furniture by using his head. Someone could see my child and notify me to FACS, and then what? That is going to be a full blown investigation? No, the most senior FACS workers do the intakes investigate at that initial investigation level. They say: ‘Yes, he is well cared for, 19 months old, keeps walking into furniture. No, it will not go on to a full investigation’. That is the level that does not go on to full investigation. I will say yet again to the member for Greatorex, because he does not seem to want to get it: every notification is investigated.
Protecting the identity of the child is not only the law, but it is something that, as minister, I will never compromise. I will never be drawn into debates and discussions about specific cases which may lead to the identification of a potential victim. This often makes it difficult in being unable to properly address false information or accusations, but I say that is a small price to pay to protect the children involved. By and large, most of the media in the Territory understand this and are cooperative. We have some southern-based journalists working for The Age who do not seem to get that.
In terms of alcohol, there has to be, as the Chief Minister has outlined, an overarching approach. We have the minister for Justice who is overseeing the new alcohol courts and antisocial behaviour, because we know …
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the minister’s time be extended to allow her to finish her response pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: The minister for Police has further increased police funding to target the hot spots, and community patrols have been transformed to see the appointment of additional Aboriginal Community Police Officers with additional patrol vehicles. We have the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing overseeing the implementation of the Alcohol Framework, licensing issues and, importantly, alcohol management plans. The Minister for Local Government is overseeing the Community Harmony Strategy and the Town Camps Task Force.
As a government, we are taking the lid off the causes of the violence in our community. We are putting the resources into tackling the causes of violence in our communities, and we are not shirking it one iota. As Minister for Family Services, I oversee our rehabilitation treatment programs. We spend $10.7m in grants to non-government organisations to provide these critical programs. DASA, Bush Mob, Amity, Centrecare, FORWAARD, KARPU, and Salvation Army, are among the agencies where we provide funding directly to them to provide rehabilitation. You cannot operate without these rehabilitation programs if you want to get to the root cause of the violence in our communities.
Violence in some of our communities stems from petrol sniffing. We know that in the past it has been a serious scourge for many indigenous Territorians, and particularly in some of the Central Australian remote communities and some Top End communities. We were absolutely slammed by the CLP over our volatile substance abuse legislation. Again, I acknowledge the hard work, and tenacity, vision and strength of my predecessor, the member for Arafura, in pushing through the VSA legislation. People said it would not work: ‘No, it is not going to work’. Well, let me say here - and I will bring further information and further debates to the Assembly - it is working on the ground. People are saying that in hard-core petrol sniffing communities like Papunya and Mutitjulu, the VSA legislation is working.
I have signed off on compulsory treatment orders of adults. We have a whole raft of people coming in for voluntary petrol sniffing rehab treatment. We have police tipping out petrol. In some of the worst communities, reports are coming through that it is almost completely gone - an amazing turnaround through action of the Martin Labor government. We have put $10m extra into our system to tackle the rehab requirements of petrol sniffing. We have urged the Commonwealth at every stage to continue its roll-out of Opal, the non-sniffable fuel. It is critically important to the success of the work we are doing to stamp out the destructive, violent scourge of petrol sniffing in our communities.
A big factor in our communities, and a need in our indigenous communities, is the issue of mental health services. We will stand by our record. We have doubled the budget from $13.5m under the CLP to $32m now. We did this in the context of the Commonwealth cutting services to our remote positions. The Commonwealth had funded areas under its normal trick of ‘let us fund something for a while’ and then pulled the funding out of it. They like to do that regularly. You are lucky if you get more than three years’ worth of funding out of the Commonwealth. They gave some funding for remote Aboriginal mental health workers across some communities for three years and then stopped it. It did not matter whether it was an important program. It did not matter that those positions were fundamental in the work they were doing to save lives in their communities. They ripped the funding out of it while the Territory government put the funding back in. We increased the funding to the Top End of Indigenous General Practice which runs the Aboriginal mental health worker program. I acknowledge the work being done on the ground by those Aboriginal mental health workers to help deal with the issues of family violence and supporting people who have a range of mental illnesses to be able to live within their communities in a peaceful way.
Domestic and family violence is an area that has just recently come over to my agency. I will touch on an area briefly that requires a greater deal of time, but I am running out of time. The key services we provide and fund include: women’s shelters in all major centres, and youth and family crisis accommodation services in Darwin, Katherine and Alice Springs - these are SAAP-funded services; domestic violence counselling services in all of the main Territory towns that are again SAAP-funded - Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy; we are funding domestic violence community trainers in Darwin and Alice Springs; FACS community workers are now based in Numbulwar, Maningrida, Galiwinku, Tiwi Health; and safe houses have been put in place in Ali Curung and Borroloola. These are all Martin Labor government initiatives to tackle domestic violence.
The Strong Family program that has recently been transferred across from the Department of the Chief Minister to my agency includes a team which goes out to support people in remote communities to be strong family support workers working with families in their own region who are identified as being at risk of family violence.
The Strong Family, Strong Community, Strong Future program is indigenous-designed, led and staffed. It is training family support workers in the remote Tiwi Islands, Katherine East and Alice Springs West communities; this is an NT government funded program. A new Certificate III course in Remote Family Violence Prevention and Early Intervention was developed by Strong Family staff in collaboration with Charles Darwin University. The first 15 students from the Tiwi Islands and the Katherine region will graduate later this year.
The Supported Accommodation Assistance Program, otherwise known as SAAP, is the primary funding source for our women’s refuge and crisis accommodation. We have negotiated a new SAAP agreement with the Commonwealth government despite the Commonwealth wanting to reduce funding - which they did; they changed the ratios and dropped it down to 50:50. The Territory government responded by putting more funding into that SAAP agreement. Aboriginal women receive 71% of the support provided to women under these SAAP services. Aboriginal women come in to our urban services from remote areas for residential domestic violence support.
In regard to the Territory government working with the Australian government to co-fund a range of initiatives to break the cycle of violence, we have a whole raft of them that are about to get up and running. I want to name them; these are new initiatives. This is work that was being done, negotiated and put in place before Mal Brough came on his white charger, Mr Whirly Whirly, and said: ‘I have the solution. It is law and order’, and then said: ‘Oh no, the next solution is the courts’ and ‘Oh no, the next solution is get kids to school’.
These are programs that are identified to work:
an integrated family violence service in the Katherine and Borroloola regions with police and FACS and community partners called, ‘Peace At Home’, a program for family violence offenders now being rolled out to 12 remote communities;
development and support of eight remote community patrols focused on preventing local violence;
interventions for children exposed to family violence, school-based counselling and anti-violence education for 12 to 15-year-olds;
piloting a method to monitor and respond to changing levels of violence in remote communities; and
enhanced accommodation for unaccompanied minors and families fleeing violence to Alice Springs.
I will briefly touch on sport and recreation in the time that is left. Sport plays an important preventative role in our indigenous communities. It is often described as the social fabric of our indigenous communities. We know there is a vast talent amongst indigenous Territorians when it comes to sport. Like all Territorians, indigenous Territorians love their sport. In the communities it is often the centre of the social activity. We have had our elite sports people who are an inspiration - Maurice Rioli, Michael Long, and Daryl White; there are just far too many to name. In women’s sport, Nova Peris is an Olympic gold medallist. We also know that at the grassroots level it is important that our kids get out there and play the games, our teenagers, and our adults.
We have seen how a playing field can transform a community. I went to Angurugu on Groote Eylandt not long after they had finished, through their petrol sniffing rehab program, reforming and transforming their football oval, and it is the centrepiece of the community. They were very proud of the work they had done. That project had got those young men off petrol sniffing and turned them around to the point where, when the community wanted to sort out a bit of a blue between opposing families, they respectfully asked if they could go onto the oval to have a bit of a blue to sort out the issues. The former petrol sniffer said: ‘Yes, but you are not allowed to take any weapons because you are not going to damage our oval’. They ended up having a bit of a fisticuffs there to sort out the issues between the two rival families in a far less violent situation - all because they had a decent oval.
It is important that we look at improving our indigenous sports programs right across the regional and remote parts of the Territory. I am passionate about it and I have been working on it ever since I became Sports minister. I am meeting with the federal minister for sport, minister Kemp, on Friday to talk specifically about a sport indigenous agreement underneath the overarching indigenous agreement. Progress has been made and is being made. It will not be solved tomorrow. The range of issues confronting disadvantaged Territorians will not be solved overnight, it has been generational.
I congratulate the Chief Minister for her 20-year plan; it will take at least 20 years of a concerted plan. We have had all the studies. We know what needs to happen. We want the action. We do not want the rhetoric, the blame game anymore.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for bringing this statement to the House. I started to write some notes last night and this morning, and reached the point where I am not sure that was getting me anywhere. This particular issue has been raised in parliament many times. In fact, my first speech in parliament, excluding my opening address as to why I was here, was about the Stolen Generation.
When I first came to the Northern Territory I went to the Aboriginal community that was then called Daly River Mission. I am married to an Aboriginal person, Imelda, of the Wadjigan tribe. I sometimes feel uncomfortable talking about these issues. I would hate to be seen as paternalistic for putting forward some concepts that I believe are important in this issue. I prefer to speak as if we were speaking about anybody who was disadvantaged. I may be able to put it in this context. I have never been a fan of Austudy and Abstudy. I have been a fan of providing assistance for people in need, regardless of colour. If that is mainly Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, then they should get that assistance. I have been brought up in the belief - from the way my mother and father brought me up and from my religious background - that we should care for one another. The basic precept of being Christian is to love your neighbour. The hard part is to love your enemy. At times there is not enough of that in this House.
I have heard many discussions, and much of it is filtered or mixed with politics. The minister for Employment once said to me: ‘Gerry, you have to understand this place is about politics’. That is true, but there are times when I do not believe that always advances the cause of such a serious subject as we are discussing tonight. There have been some unkind things said at times in the last day or two between people on both sides, which I do not think achieves anything. If we are to reconcile the problems we have in Australia with some of the issues we have with the original people who lived here, then we have to reconcile our own differences. If we cannot do it in this House on an issue like this, how can we expect our indigenous people to do the same thing? There are some matters which go beyond politics. That does not mean I am here to criticise the government about its policies. However, I do so believing that I have an alternative opinion on these matters which I believe would be of some benefit.
We all have a responsibility to work towards a solution. The Commonwealth government, the Northern Territory government, Aboriginal people, and non-Aboriginal people all have a role to play in trying to advance the wellbeing of our most disadvantaged people in Australia. I hope something positive comes out of this debate today, because there have been many accusations. For instance, ‘if we have a summit it will be another talkfest’ - and that is probably a reasonable assumption. I hope it does not happen. However, even from the government’s point of view – and, again, take this as a positive criticism - the government had a framework for partnership with indigenous Territorians in 2001. It talked about the establishment of a high level task force to address critical and immediate issues. It talked about the overarching agreement on indigenous affairs between the Commonwealth of Australia 2005. It has had an agenda for action. Recently, the minister said we are going to have a 20-year plan. There has been a lot of effort.
I sometimes think Aboriginal people become the point of experimentation - we have all these theories. I will say something tonight that I feel is based on experience. That experience relates to my experience of working directly with Aboriginal people. I have at least worked on the ground, doing the hard yakka. I worked in an Aboriginal community at Daly River in the garden - I can tell you, working in the garden in October, in Daly River, in the middle of the day is not a pleasant thing; it is hard yakka. Planting sweet potatoes by hand at Bathurst Island and picking bananas is not easy work. It is work I enjoy. I worked with Aboriginal people, so I not only come from that experience, I have seen the downsides and I have seen the good sides.
When I first went to Daly River, I saw alcohol, and things have not changed much. I was 19, arrived out of middle-class Melbourne, turned up at Daly River and saw drunk men taking part in corroborees. They were not taking place for good, traditional reasons. They were taking place because people were drunk. I saw a woman lying on the ground with her husband standing over her with a steel bar. That impression has always stayed in my mind. I have seen a woman outside the church with blood covering one half of her body. When you are 19 or 20, that is a rude shock if you are from middle-class Melbourne.
I have also seen the good side. My wife comes from Daly River. I looked after the dormitory at Daly River. I had great times looking after kids. I used to show movies twice a week. We had a pile of great movies. We had the westerns and the romances. When the westerns were on, all the Aboriginal people stayed and watched. When a romance was on, all you had was the nuns! We had a good time. We had boxing matches. We went out on the weekend. They are memories that I treasure. It was the same at Bathurst Island. I suppose the sad thing about the Daly River is that many of those boys have died, and I have mentioned that before. There were wonderful people at Bathurst Island. I would have liked to have stayed there for a lot longer but there were two reasons why I left. One is that I felt that most men at Bathurst Island drank and, as I had three daughters, I felt they needed an opportunity to see the world outside of Bathurst Island and to give them a chance to meet people who perhaps did not drink. Not that I have anything against Bathurst Island people; they are lovely people, but I had to give my children opportunities elsewhere. That is just some of the background from where I come. I do not want to be seen as preaching. I see them as suggestions and I hope they are taken in that way.
The Chief Minister has said we need to start off with five foundational issues, and she has raised them: community safety; responsible management of alcohol; housing; sound governance; and welfare reform. I would say that the one area that she is missing – although it could be said to be part of welfare reform – is employment. There is no doubt - it has been said here many times - that we have a whole range of issues that you could possibly say totalled up to some of the problems we have in Aboriginal communities. We have overcrowding in housing, lack of education, alcohol and, I believe, unemployment. It is no good sending kids to school if they cannot get a job. What is the point? I used to say: ‘Why do you want to have 20 welders at Bathurst Island if you have no work?’ I do not have an answer for that yet. It is just one of these difficult problems we have to work through. What I say is: at least have some work. It may not be the most skilled work in the world.
I have just been reading a little about the New Deal in the United States during the Depression. It had a range of measures about helping the economy during the Depression, but one of them was to create jobs. They created jobs also for black people at that time. They were segregated, but the president, Theodore Roosevelt, made sure there was money put aside for jobs. It seems to me, in a country so rich – we have a budget surplus of billions of dollars - we cannot afford to create jobs on Aboriginal communities.
I know people say I want to get rid of the CDEP. It is not for the sake of getting rid of CDEP. To me, it is merely putting people down and saying ‘I work for the dole’. No, I do not; I work for the community. I work; it is a job - not a work-for-the dole job. I work because the government says we will provide you enough work on your community to give you work at a proper pay that is not that low it is easier to sit down and get social security. No, it says we will provide jobs for all the people in these communities. To put it in context, I am not saying that should justify Aboriginal communities, but many of our Aboriginal communities are small and it is easy to apply. That is exactly what should happen in many of our country towns which are losing their populations throughout Australia. Maybe it should happen in places like Darwin, and have programs like people putting an adventure trail down the old railway line - all sorts of things.
We do not seem to put our mind to saying we should have a government that provides enough funds to give people work. If you supply people with work you give them dignity. You supply people with work they enjoy it. All right, sometimes it is hot and sometimes it is terrible, but I have said before, many Aboriginal people when they work together are doing something that is social as well as work. That is what we forget. I always quote the fact that we used to have on the Nguiu Shire Council two old people who went out with a tractor and a trailer and collected firewood for the pensioners. They did not get the biggest pile of firewood you would ever see but they went out and worked. They enjoyed one another’s company, they rolled a cigarette, they sharpened up the old chainsaw blade and came back with the firewood for the pensioners in that community. They were doing something.
Look at housing, for instance. Mal Brough has spoken about many of the houses being vandalised, etcetera. Why are we not paying people full-time wages to fix them up? I am not saying they should be vandalised but the fact is that we have a shortage of housing – there is employment.
Which also brings me to another question about housing - and I know the minister is going to be talking about it tomorrow. Why is it costing so much for housing? Why can’t we build kit homes? At Bathurst Island we used to have kit homes that came to the island from Queensland. In this case, Aboriginal people with a non-Aboriginal supervisor used to erect those houses. The minister today made a statement about housing at Groote Eylandt. He said 12 units and nine houses cost $11.72m. That means one of those houses cost $588 000. That is an absolute disgrace. I know they are for police and a few other people but are we really going to overcome the housing issues when we have to pay $0.5m each for a house? Get the Country Life or the Land magazine and have a look at what kit homes cost. I have rung one of the kit home companies in Brisbane and they said: ‘Yes, we supply them for cyclone areas’. You will see them in there for $20 000, $30 000, $40 000 and, yet, we are putting up houses for $588 000.
Mr Stirling: It is being looked at, let me assure you.
Mr WOOD: Okay, but I am putting it as a suggestion that it really needs some good thought. I am interested in what the minister has to say tomorrow about that.
Governance is another area. I sometimes think it is unfortunately the case that a lot of theorists have come in and said: ‘Councils are in disarray, they are falling apart’. There have been real problems with councils, not from the council’s point of view but from whoever decided that they could take on functions which are not council functions. You have councils which took on the post office, the bank, whatever else. They took on stacks of things that Litchfield Shire and the Darwin City Council does not take on, but we made Aboriginal councils take on functions that were not their role.
We have also confused local government governance with traditional governance. Traditional governance is about the management of the land that the people own. Local governance is about a democratic system of government which provides services to the community. It is not a traditional thing; it is a human rights thing that, as a council, we will provide a rubbish service, we will put in a road, we will clean up the litter, etcetera. They are not traditional matters. They require a different form of governance. What we are trying to do in some cases is a mish-mash of the two. I am not saying there cannot be some hybridising of the two, but we must be careful that when it comes to local government, we retain an element of democratic democracy; that is, people who are on the councils are elected fairly to provide services. How you do local governance is another issue.
We have muddled the two and we have given councils far too much of what they should not be doing. If the department of Health decided to hand over health to the Litchfield Shire there would be a hue and cry: ‘That is the department of Health’s job’. You want to create a health clinic; you fund it. You want to open a post office, Australia Post; you fund it. Do not go putting people on CDEP. Do not ask the councils to do it. Do it properly as if it was any other town. Maybe you want to combine Australia Post with the bank. That is fair enough, but both of you provide the funds. Do not ask the council to do it. That is one of the fundamentals we have got away from. We have blamed councils for being dysfunctional. I would be dysfunctional if we did not have enough money.
The government did cut back on operational funding for local government. I remember reading the lists and the previous minister for Local Government did say: ‘We are going to do a little boost up again’. But they were struggling for money. Even if a council is small, it does not have to mean it is dysfunctional if it gets adequate funds to operate.
We should encourage that. If you can get the grassroots of democracy in a small council, then you have a better chance. We have also wasted lots of money. As much as I love Bathurst Island and the Tiwi Islands, I would love to know how much money has gone into that regional council. It is a council that does not even elect directly its representatives; it elects a management board, something I have been on about for many years. We have given the Tiwis a form of democracy which is less than you would expect in Litchfield or Darwin. In Darwin, you elect your representative directly. We have given the Tiwi Islands a system which says: ‘We will elect the management board, and they can elect the councillors’. Why have we done that? We would not do it to anyone else but we have done it there. That is bad. We have spent a fortune on that particular governance at Bathurst Island. Have we really achieved anything? I do not think so. We have to be a bit careful making statements that local government is dysfunctional if we have set up them up to fail.
I agree with the member for Arafura about education; we should encourage the withdrawal of social security to increase school attendance. My daughter works in the Department of Education, Science and Training, and I should say if we are talking about positives, she is now an AO5 in the Department of Education, Science and Training in Perth, one of the highest positions you can get in that department. She was in Kununurra for many years. She saw what happened with Halls Creek. She said it was a great improvement. Unfortunately, some lawyers came in and said: ‘That is discrimination. You are only picking on the Aboriginal people’. But attendance in Halls Creek went through the roof. I think it should apply right across Australia. The member for Macdonnell said you apply these things to other people. I am saying you should apply it to everyone.
You also mentioned education achievement and the increase in literacy. I still am concerned that we are not really looking at the facts. I have the annual reports for the Department of Education from last year and the year before. In 2003-04, 20% of Year 5 indigenous students achieved that numeracy benchmark. It dropped to 16% last year. There was an increase in Year 3 for achieving the national reading benchmark - it was 9%. These are figures which you have to get out of this report; not out of the budget. It was 9% in 2003-04. It went to 20%, which is an improvement. That still means one in five indigenous children are not reaching national benchmarks. There are plenty of reasons for that. We need to work hard on that. If we are pushing for employment, you cannot do it unless your children are educated. If their standards are low at that stage, it is going to take a big effort to get them up to secondary education ...
Mrs MILLER: Mr Acting Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member for Nelson to complete his remarks, in accordance with Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: I will be as quick as I can.
I know the government has an Alcohol Framework. It has been a bit slow in getting some of those recommendations out. I know the minister has been talking about these problems. I would like to say one thing - and again, I agree with the member for Macdonnell. Yes, alcohol is a major problem in Aboriginal communities. However, I also attend cricket, footy and other functions in my community and non-indigenous people drink an awful lot of alcohol - far more than they might say. Many of our clubs depend on alcohol sales to exist. If we were to attack that, you could imagine the hue and cry. They would say: ‘That is our responsibility’. When Senator Scullion said he might support the idea of a pub card, I heard a person say: ‘We have a right to drink’. That is the difficulty governments would have in trying to restrict alcohol. There would be talks about prohibition, etcetera. We have binge drinking. There was a party at Howard River Park with hundreds of kids throwing stones at the police and the ambulance. They were all drunk - well, not all of them, but quite a few of them were well and truly drunk. There is that sort of attitude. I have said before some of the advertising we have is aimed at young people. Yes, there are major problems with alcohol with Aboriginal people but I see that as a reflection of our own society. It is not an easy one to overcome.
The member for Karama talked about sport. I thought I would try to put some positives in here. We had the Litchfield Gift recently - $2000 first prize. Guess who won it? Daniel Tedcastle. No, I did not win it. I came third in the Masters, sorry. He is a 15-year-old Aboriginal. His father is Bob Tedcastle, somebody I have known for years who works for Murin Air Services. His mother is Anne Sam. I used to look after her brother when I was first married. He used to have a hole in the heart. They come from Emu Point. Fifteen years old, he has been running one year and he wins the Litchfield Gift - a great achievement. There are plenty of other people. We could do the more famous people such as Richard Tambling, and all those sorts of people. They are great role models. We should be very careful when we are discussing these issues that we do not dwell on everything that is bad, because that is not good.
People say they felt depressed because Mal Brough said something that upset them. I do not agree with everything Mal Brough said, but it did at least kick us into life; we are having this debate today. The Chief Minister has brought out a 20-year plan. You may not always agree with what people say, but at least he came out and said some things. Perhaps we needed a kick in the rear end to get these things out in the open again.
There has been all this talk about the summit. I know some people say: ‘The Chief Minister is the right person to go to the summit’. I do not have a problem with that. I made the comment that I would like to see Aboriginal representatives - especially women Aboriginal representatives. When I said that, we were talking about sexual abuse. I said that as I felt that the Aboriginal members of this parliament - whom I am proud of, even though I might not agree with everything they say. This is one of the great things in the Northern Territory that we have Aboriginal people here, and especially the Aboriginal women. However, we should show them off. I say to the Chief Minister: please go to the summit and take these three Aboriginal women. You can take the member for Barkly – he is a good fellow too. The reason I am saying that is because, with all the negatives that have been occurring, you have three fine people here - whom many Australians would not even know – you could use to say: ‘Look at what these people have achieved’. It is not all about doom and gloom.
People do achieve. It is not all about football stars; it is about people who have taken an active part in public life, and they are Aboriginal people. It would be good, Chief Minister, to take these people to the summit and show people that the Northern Territory is mature enough; there are Aboriginal people here who take their equal part in our society. That is great. As I said, I might not agree with everything you good people say. That is irrelevant. You are representing your constituents, or your party, and that is your right. However, we should tell the rest of the world that you do exist. I ask the Chief Minister whether she would rethink the summit, even from the point of view of telling the rest of Australia that we have good things going for us.
The other issue that concerns me is the number of people in prison. You can read in the paper that there are more and more people being arrested at Wadeye, who are part of the gangs, and that means more and more people in gaol. I have said a number of times that we have to look at the alternatives. I am not saying that people should not go to prison for doing the wrong thing. I have mentioned work camps a number of times and I have got nowhere. I say it again: why can’t some of these Aboriginal kids go to work camps, run by the department of Correctional Services, on a pastoral property? I cannot see any point in putting these kids in gaol. They will end up being gangs in gaol and they will go back saying: ‘We were at Berrimah’, or ‘We were at Alice Springs’.
We have try other ways to be more proactive in ensuring these kids get some skills, they are separated so they cannot have this gang mentality. Port Keats has always had a bit of a reputation for using the gaol as a right of passage. I do not believe that is what we should be trying to promote. I hope the government looks at alternatives. Yes, these people who have caused violence in the community should be given some punishment, but let us make it, hopefully, the last time that this sort of punishment happens.
In the short time I have had here, you may have heard me say these things before. I believe we need action. You cannot have people doing nothing. Boredom is part of the reason we have vandalism. We need full-time employment. If people do not want to work, that is their right, but if the government offers full employment to the community, then that should be taken up. There will be people who cannot work and they can get social security like everyone else. If we are to change some of these communities, give people a chance, I do not mind if some of this money is used to start tourist enterprises. So what? You are not going to complete with anyone out there. You are going to create an economy in that part of the world.
We have to make some real changes. We need cheaper, more affordable housing and full employment. We need to continually try to get people to school, and one way is to look at the social security payments. We need a goal and, in the end, we need reconciliation. I will say it again. It is nice to say we will move people out to their country from Wadeye. That is fine. But what we forget is that, one of the theories for the reasons the mission existed at Wadeye - even though people say it is the cause of the problem by bringing people together - was that they were fighting and it would bring them together and, hopefully, pacify them. One can say that all it did was make the problem worse. I do not know; you can argue that case.
In the end, if Aboriginal people say to non-Aboriginal people like me that we must be part of the reconciliation process, they cannot say that if they cannot reconcile some of the differences that they have between yourselves. That is not to say we do not continue that process, but Aboriginal people have to live together eventually. You cannot have communities that are always fighting with one another. That will never advance those communities. That will be a hard road, especially if it is thousands of years that there has been this dispute amongst people.
Surely, no matter where you are in the world, you must look for peace, whether it is with our neighbours, families, or other people. Whilst that might sound like rhetoric, I still believe it is important because all we have been talking about is the concrete things, the housing the employment, law and order, etcetera. However, we also have to change people. That is something we should strive for. We need to put the means to people to get together to overcome and to try to work through those issues. In the end it has to come from somewhere deep inside that they will change, just like alcohol. To assist people, they are going to have to work through some of those issues themselves.
I hope that my contribution is of some benefit to members here today. I enjoyed listening to our Aboriginal members. That is not to say that other contributions were not good but, yes, it is nice to get another point of view, to take the politics out. Behind that politics are some really good ideas that everyone should listen to.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Speaker, the issues that have been highlighted so dramatically in the media of late are truly distressing and are of serious concern to every Australian. We are all only too well aware of the complexity of the issue of indigenous affairs and that there is no short-term fix. That is very obvious to all of us. The frustrations that have been experienced by both indigenous and non-indigenous people over many years has taken up countless hours of meetings, consultations, plenty of quick fixes, not to mention millions of words spoken with all the best intentions. It is all too obvious that not a great deal has been achieved over all.
A few weeks ago, when federal minister Mal Brough dared to speak out about how appalled he was at what he saw, and realising that the issues were so complex that there needed to be a whole-of-government, whole-of-community approach, he called a summit to get all indigenous affairs ministers together to collectively discuss a national approach. I applaud him for doing that. It may be considered as another talkfest but he is new in his position and he was sincerely moved by what he saw.
I would have thought that our Minister for Indigenous Affairs, the Chief Minister, would go to that summit and that she would also - I support what the member for Nelson has just said - take along the indigenous elected representatives of this Assembly. That would really show very clearly to the federal minister how successful the indigenous members are within the Territory.
As far as I am concerned, there should be no stone unturned in a bipartisan approach to addressing indigenous issues that will take several generations to turn around. This side of the Assembly is very sincere when saying we will work with all levels of government to ensure that the appalling state in which some of our communities exist has to change. There is dispute as to whether the most important issue to deal with in dysfunctional communities is housing, law and order, education, or which one of those should be tackled first. I do not think it is reasonable to argue which is the most in need; all of them are integral to the satisfactory functioning of a community. I do know from what I witnessed recently when I visited Wadeye with the Select Committee on Substance Abuse that, without law and order, there was total destruction of many houses in that community. Without high levels of law and order there was wholesale destruction of valuable housing.
On the other hand, I also witnessed, along with the other members of the committee, the deep sadness of the women we interviewed. This sadness was quite heart wrenching when we listened to how these women have to live, how many people live in each of their houses - and in some instances I am talking about a three-room house in which there were 20 - and the fear that they feel. The four of them said they feel it all the time. It was really was quite heartbreaking and there was not one of us listening who was not deeply moved. I do not know how these women get through each day.
In the argument of which is the more important of those two - law and order or housing - I have to say that I believe law and order has to come first. What is the point of building much needed houses which are very expensive in these communities to have them trashed? It is a fact that they do get trashed. It is not acceptable. I suggest that the federal minister’s statement that law and order be established first in these communities is not an unreasonable statement at all.
I have made some very brief comments on what we saw at Wadeye which was very confronting and very complex to deal with. It is heartening to hear good stories about how some other indigenous communities are working successfully. That was what we experienced when the same committee visited Groote Eylandt. It was heartening to listen to what can be achieved when everyone works together.
The alcohol permit system, which took them several years and several drafts to get agreement on after extensive community consultation, has been working very successfully for 12 months. Everyone on the island knows what the rules are and the permit system applies to everyone, visitors alike, without any prejudice. It is probably easier to implement this permit system on the island than it is on mainland areas because the boundaries are the ocean. I believe that with a few minor adjustments to suit that a permit system for alcohol could be implemented in the regional areas where there are so many problems caused by alcohol abuse across the Territory.
One of the communities in my electorate that has been working well for a long period of time, for over 16 years, is Binjari. The Binjari community is about 10 minutes out of Katherine on the Victoria Highway. There are between 200 and 300 people living in that community. It has two housing sections. The bottom section, which is the oldest section, is made of up 12 dwellings in which families live without running water or power. There are also three ablution blocks that service those 12 dwellings, a store, a health clinic, a council facility, a preschool, a family support building, and a workshop. The top section is the newer area which has 22 homes and a community shed, and they look in very good condition.
I support what the member for Nelson said regarding too much responsibility being put on these communities to try to provide services in the community as well as looking after the community itself. This has actually shown up in Binjari. The community had a community bus, a Night Patrol, and were governed by a community government council. Funding was always tight but managed reasonably well until this past 12 months or so when the community struggled to keep afloat. Just recently, they were advised that their future funding had been stopped. To clear their debts they sold their coaster bus that they used to go into Katherine. They sold their Night Patrol vehicle along with four other community vehicles. The financial debt was cleared but that has left this good community without those important facilities. Unfortunately, the community is slipping backwards at a fast rate of knots.
The Department of Local Government and the Katherine Town Council are looking at a proposal at this moment for the services at Binjari. The proposal is that Katherine Town Council takes over responsibility for those services in the Binjari community. Ongoing discussions have taken place with all parties during last week. I attended a meeting with Katherine Town Council representatives, Department of Local Government, and Binjari community members in their community shed. I believe it will be better for their community for their services to be provided by Katherine Town Council and to just let them concentrate on their cultural affairs. They need ongoing reassurance to this change and all parties are happy to do that. However, the community has taken a step backwards in some of the most important areas and that is where, if this government is really serious about addressing indigenous issues and has acknowledged that each community has its own special needs, then you have an obligation to assist the good people at Binjarri before their community falls into social disarray.
Before they sold their Night Patrol vehicle, it used to sit out on the side of the road with two or three members of the community manning that patrol and absolutely nobody got past them. Everybody’s car was checked – including mine when I went out there to visit one night. Now there is no community patrol and they are already having problems with alcohol going into that community and it is of great concern to members of the community. The community government members I have spoken with are very upset that the community is falling into disarray.
It is a huge step backwards. Additional problems are the number of children not going to school, the uncertainty of the community’s future, and the loss of jobs for those people who were employed by the community government council - a huge loss of self-esteem. All of these important functions need to be reinstated to sustain a community that has worked well and has strong leaders in it. It is important not to let that community slip backwards. Whilst we talk about the huge challenges that lie ahead for so many communities across the Territory and throughout Australia, show some support for communities that really care about their future like Binjari.
Much has been said by government members about how little was done by the previous CLP government to address housing in remote communities. It makes me smile to listen to some of those who are just spouting the Labor rhetoric. For five years when I first arrived in Katherine, I was working for a construction and maintenance company which had the contract for repairs and maintenance for all communities in the Katherine region. It was a huge eye opener for me to see the enormous amounts of money continually being put into communities over and over again and, in most instances, to repair the same houses over and over again. There could probably be an argument that the houses should have been built differently, or that the brick building designs were not suitable - whatever. The point is that there were enormous amounts of money put into those communities over and over again. I find it damned annoying to listen to the rhetoric from this government.
I might add I am very pleased to have looked at your 20-year vision that we will talk about tomorrow, which highlights the number of buildings that were built by the CLP government in indigenous communities compared to what is being built now. I am sick of the rhetoric.
A member: Good on you!
Mrs MILLER: According to them, the Northern Territory did not exist until Labor came into power - well, you are wrong. I will address some of those facts tomorrow when we reply to that.
While on the subject of housing, when my husband and I had Red Gum Tourist Park in Katherine for 10 years, we were located next to the cluster of Housing Commission units in Bernard Street, Katherine, which housed, in the majority, indigenous families. I cannot begin to imagine what the cost of maintaining those units was over the years. They were in a constant state of rotating tenancies. Following the 1998 Katherine floods they were completely renovated. I can assure you that several of them were trashed within months and needed to be completely refitted again. I did go and look at them so I know that I am stating fact. It is very pleasing to see those units have had extensive renovations done once again. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the opening of these newly-renovated units, but I congratulate the minister for the extensive redevelopment of this area. I sincerely hope and pray that this time they will be maintained appropriately by everyone who lives there.
On the subject of indigenous tourism, there have been two success stories that have stood out over the years and they are Anangu Tours in Central Australia and Manyallaluk in the Katherine region. These indigenous tourism ventures were very successful in achieving recognition - firstly at the annual Northern Territory Brolga Awards, and following on with the National Tourism Awards. When a tourism venture wins three National Tourism Awards, they are inducted into the National Tourism Hall of Fame. It is with great pride that Anangu Tours and Manyallaluk are in the National Tourism Hall of Fame. They have led the way and shown that indigenous tourism can achieve great success.
I listened to the Chief Minister’s report this morning, and wish the new indigenous ventures well, and hope that they can achieve great success. Indigenous tourism plays a very important part in attracting tourists to the Northern Territory. As I said this morning, the failure of some indigenous tourism ventures in the past has been due to the inconsistency of provision of the ventures as advertised and marketed. These operators in indigenous tourism need plenty of support and encouragement and, in some instances, mentoring from the tourism industry to help them establish themselves.
Nitmiluk Tours at Nitmiluk Gorge, Katherine, is another great success story for indigenous tourism, working in partnership with TravelNorth for 10 years, and now working in cooperation with the Voyages chain. Nitmiluk employs many indigenous rangers and continues to offer more opportunities all the time.
Another area of indigenous affairs that I have talked consistently about in the time I have been in this Assembly is the work that Sheila Miller does through her healing centre at Dalinya. Sheila has the expertise to rehabilitate indigenous people from alcohol abuse and has great success. Both Sheila and I find it very frustrating that, despite the knowledge and skills that Sheila has to help so many of her people, she is ignored by this government - for what reasons, I do not know or understand. It really makes me question this government’s motives. What is it about Sheila and the work that she does that makes you ignore her? I would have thought you would have welcomed a skilled, indigenous alcohol counsellor who can help so many of her people. What is the issue here? Sheila would like to know. Obviously the Katherine Branch of the Labor Party thinks she is onto a good thing - they have been trying to get her to join the Labor Party in Katherine for some time. Didn’t you know that, Rob? Is that the catch? She has to be a member of the Labor Party before she gets any help.
Mr Acting Speaker, the word ‘complex’ has been used over and over in talking about the problems in indigenous affairs, and there is no doubt about it; it is. As I said earlier, it will take generations and billions of dollars to make a real difference. It will not be until all the politics is taken out of the issue and everyone is totally committed to moving forward that there will begin to be positive inroads for the future. We on this side of the House are committed to working in a bipartisan relationship with all members of government to that end.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Acting Speaker, I welcome the statement from the Chief Minister. I believe it is high time we had a long debate about this topic for everybody in the Northern Territory to try to move forward. I could not help being cynical though. Had it not been for Question Time yesterday, had it not been for the censure motion against the Chief Minister, I wonder whether we would have had this statement at all.
I have been here a long time, I know how politics work, and I bet the typewriters were running hot upstairs yesterday to get this statement out. When you compare what the Chief Minister had to say on her feet yesterday against this statement that she has today, somebody upstairs has been engineering the words, putting it all together, to try to get some semblance of order of her quite woolly thinking yesterday.
Ms Lawrie: You are wrong. You lost that bet.
Dr LIM: Let me start with, apart from … Methinks they protest too much.
Let me start, after having that little swipe, to be as conciliatory as possible. I do not know whether anybody has read this paper produced by the Menzies School of Health Research by Bob Beadman titled Do Indigenous Youth Have a Dream. I have been carrying this with me for many weeks. It was written in 2003. I know Bob Beadman very well. He worked with me and supported me when I was the Minister for Housing and Local Government. I have tremendous respect for this man. I do not propose to quote any part of this document because I will be doing it out of context which would be doing a dishonour to this man whom I greatly respect. Suffice that I use one sentence from that report - his last line - where he says: ‘We must fix things for the kids’. That is where it is at. We must fix things for the kids. If we do not, we will be forever debating this issue and continuing in this hopeless, conflicting path that we have for many years.
The statement contains many good motherhood statements that I cannot object to. This is what we all aspire to. But, for goodness sake, Chief Minister, have some substance in it, otherwise it just does not go any further. It is just a lot of smoke and mirrors, a lot of fancy light shows but, at the end of the day, we get no further. I believe it is important that you put your hand out and try to be conciliatory with the federal government and the federal minister. That is a good first step. I hope we can continue to progress this. I will come back to your statement in a minute. I want to comment on a few points that some of the ministers have made earlier today.
The member for Nhulunbuy labelled the CLP as racist, accusing the CLP of push polling, accusing the CLP of having racist policies, deliberately enacting policies to disadvantage indigenous people ...
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I may well have used the word ‘racist’. It would have been accurate. In fact, I did not. If he reads the transcript, I used the word ‘discriminatory’. Do not invent what I said.
Dr LIM: Speaking to the point of order, there should be no point of order, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I can rule on that if you want me to.
Dr LIM: Okay, you rule on that.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: If you feel that you have been maligned in any way, you can make a personal explanation, Deputy Chief Minister. Please continue.
Dr LIM: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. He accused the CLP of push polling when, in fact, it was the ALP which push polled during the Pauline Hanson era, when they even rang my own electorate in 2001. That is the hypocrisy of the man who sits across the Chamber and calls himself a Deputy Chief Minister. Do not attribute things to the CLP when that was not the case.
Another thing for the Deputy Chief Minister to recall was that the IHANT program was started under the Country Liberal Party, and has been picked up and carried on by this government. In fact, IHANT has delivered many homes into Aboriginal communities, a program that we did first and foremost which has been copied by many other jurisdictions. That is the problem with this minister. He gets up here, tries to rewrite history, and expects us to work in a conciliatory manner with him. How can we do that when he gets up, rewrites history and abuses what good the CLP has done in the past?
If you look at the course of history of the Northern Territory from 1974 to now, and the history of the CLP in the 34 years we have looked after ourselves even though self-government started in 1978, many indigenous people have had their lives improved. Law and order had improved. Housing had increased. All those things did happen. In fact, if you ask any commentator today, they will tell you that over the last five years, law and order has deteriorated, alcohol abuse has increased, there is widespread drug abuse of marijuana, kava - you name it - out in the bush.
I am not saying that the government has caused it directly. It has happened and there is no denying it. For the Minister for Central Australia to say that he dares not walk into a town camp after 2 pm in the afternoon has to be his own admission that the Labor policies have not worked these last five years. That is why he dares not to go into a town camp now, whereas five years ago, under the Country Liberal Party government, he could. There has to be an open admission that something went wrong this last five years. I am not going to listen to the diatribe coming from the minister who calls himself the Deputy Chief Minister.
Quoting the words from the member for Stuart: ‘The culture of violence is something that …’ – of course, he recognises that. Then he used Groote Eylandt as an example that we have taken strong action out there to, in his own words: ‘… to cut alcohol from people who cannot deal with alcohol’. Sure, they are two white fellas; irrespective of that, that policy is fine in Groote Eylandt. When we said to him and to the government that your alcohol policy should be directed at the drunks, at the people who abuse alcohol, he said: ‘No, you cannot do that’. Now he decides he is going to do that in Nhulunbuy. Who cares about the rest of the Territory? Recently, he came out with a statement that he is not going to allow any more takeaway licences in the Territory as if that was going to fix the current drunken problem in the Territory. Surely, if you are going to fix it, you have to slow down the supply and target the demand.
That gives me the example of how I see this Chief Minister’s policy on the run trying to write something up before she is shamed even more. Within minutes of the Deputy Chief Minister coming out with his media release that he was going to stop providing takeaway licences, the Chief Minister says: ‘Yes, that can be our way of dealing with drunks and alcohol abuse’. As I said before, you have to fix the problem. By saying you cannot have any more alcohol outlets, would not prevent those drunks from getting their supplies from the current outlets. If you want to do something about supply, then deal with the outlets.
I am not quite sure whether the Attorney-General was talking about two laws for the Territory. Obviously, he was very keen to continue to support customary law and allow that to be part of the legal system in the Northern Territory. If it is, I would like to hear him make a full statement expressing exactly what he meant by his comments. Surely, there should be one law for the Northern Territory - one law for all. Yes, take your customs, traditions, into consideration when a judge makes his ruling but, surely, there should be one law applied to all people. If it is not, then there should be two laws for everybody in the Territory. If you start making two laws in the Territory, one law for one group and a law for another group, is that not considered racist?
I remember a few months back in the last term of parliament, we in this Chamber, wrote legislation to prevent female genital mutilation because another group of people, who have now made Australia their home, have decided that female genital mutilation was customary, was part of their customary law. We unanimously said: ‘No, we cannot do it. If you live in Australia, you will not be allowed to do that’. It does not matter about their customs or their customary law. But here, if you are Aboriginal - sorry, you have to do something different. Is that not racist?
Think about it. Some of the ministers, including the Chief Minister, say: ‘We now need to have a 20-year program’. Not one year; not two years. This will be worked on, five years, 10 years, 15 years, 20 years. You have had your first five years, if you do not remember that. Why are things going so bad? Why have we suffered the ridicule of the nation, the ridicule of the world? Why do we have a Chief Minister who has been unable to put the Territory in a better light?
The member for Braitling mentioned the Law and Justice program. Again, that was started during the Country Liberal Party years. In Ali Curung, I remember talking about it and meeting with people at Lajamanu. It was a very good program; people liked it and found it empowered them to maintain law and order in their communities. However, this government removed it. You have to ask the question: why?
The member for Casuarina talked about people overseas and his own experience. Look at refugees who have come to this country with nought, from countries where they have been subject to all sorts of bad experiences - whether it be war or persecution. They come to this country with absolutely nothing and, within a few scant years, have been able to establish themselves, getting themselves employed, some of them even purchasing their own homes. Their families are all going to school. They could be from South-East Asia or the African continent, but they can make it.
Some of the members opposite mentioned our foreign aid policy - how we can spend so much money assisting people overseas and yet, somehow, we are not doing enough in our own country. Maybe we need to compare those two issues and say: ‘Okay, money has been spent overseas; equally, money has been spent in Australia’. There are people overseas grasping the opportunity with both hands. Ask yourself what has happened that our people in Australia, in the Northern Territory, have not done the same. Perhaps they would have benefited if they did.
I was in Oenpelli about two or three years ago at a substance abuse committee meeting. I met an old timer there who showed me a painting of the community of Oenpelli in the 1930s or 1940s. It showed a community with a homestead, vegetable garden, market garden, domesticated animals, pigs, donkeys, chooks - a whole string of things, with a huge orchard, and people depicted as working in that painting. I asked him what happened to that community and if he was there. He said: ‘Yes, I was a little boy when that was done’. I said: ‘What happened to it?’ He said: ‘Well, it is all gone’. I asked: ‘Why is it all gone?’ ‘Nobody wants to work’. I asked why not and he just shrugged his shoulders. I then asked him how many people lived in Oenpelli and he said about 350 people. I said if I brought 350 Chinamen into Oenpelli tomorrow, within three months this place will be thriving. He looked at me and acknowledged that yes, that would happen. I said: ‘Why? What is the difference? There are 350 people here, bring another 350 people here and it will thrive. So, what is the difference?’ …
Ms Scrymgour: If you went back out there you would see that they are doing it.
Dr LIM: I take on the interjection and I am glad they are doing it. Perhaps it was my little comment to him that made him think about it and …
Ms Scrymgour: I do not think so. You had nothing to do with it.
Dr LIM: … as a traditional owner and leader he might have got the community working. I am glad that has happened.
Laramba is a classic example. It is a very progressive community and it works very well out there. There are some that can do so well and others which continue to fail. You would think that if you put resources in a community they would grasp it with both hands, but they do not seem to want to.
The Minister for Family and Community Services mocked the federal minister. This is one man who has been so determined to do something right for the Territory. I mentioned Graham Richardson. He actually turned up in the Northern Territory when he was the minister. He visited, he swanned around the Territory. He was in Katherine. As I said at another time, he came, he saw, he moaned and groaned, he made all the right noises, and then he left and forgot about it all - forgot about it all. What he did was whatever it takes to make it look good. That was the greatest disappointment that I had with that minister.
At least the present federal minister for Indigenous Affairs is prepared to do the tough things. Law and order is essential. Without that, nothing better will happen. People need law and order if they are to get the rest of their lives together. Without it, they cannot. If they are forever in terror for their own personal safety, they are not going to be able to concentrate on anything else. Therefore, law and order is essential. If you do not have law and order, you can build a million homes out there and it will all be trashed within a short time. Law and order has to happen. The Chief Minister says: ‘No, no, you cannot do that. We will do something else first’. I mean, where do you start?
The Chief Minister is trying to be conciliatory with the federal minister, and I am pleased that she is trying to do that. I hope she will meet with the ministers in Canberra, and with the Prime Minister, to progress this. The Leader of the Opposition has put a conciliatory position to the Chief Minister. I believe the Chief Minister should sit down quietly, away from the heat of all this debate, and read the letter thoroughly and reconsider how we can progress this. Nobody in this Chamber denies that we need to have help.
Mrs MILLER: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek leave for an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr LIM: Nobody in this Chamber denies that it is well past politics. It is time to move forward together. Yes, we will always have our differences, there is no denial. We will see things differently on that side of the Chamber and this side of the Chamber. We need to somehow put those things aside. But I will not bare my breast and put it aside if I know that there are going to be knives thrown at it. No way. So, I am saying this: I am happy to work with you cooperatively, but you have to put down your weapons before I put down mine. If we do that, I believe we can move together and let us make sure that, quoting from Mr Bob Beadman’s paper, ‘we must fix things for the kids’.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this has been a long debate and a very important one. If we extract the chaff from all that has been said, we are left with a common message. We recognise as one that this is a very serious problem and it demands a solution. Put the chaff back in and we have a fence on both sides of the Chamber. We have accusations made, one to another, backwards and forward, and the argument is largely locked into those kinds of dynamics. There seems to be genuine anger about things that happened some time ago.
Rightly or wrongly, whether we have had that debate right to the very end, and everyone has their spleen vented and gets it off their liver, they may then find that we can move on. But I know that is not the case. It is far more satisfactory to find someone to blame. Whilst we are, in a sense, talking about a clearly recognised problem that we have a moral obligation to respond to, we descend too quickly into debates that are endeavouring, as much as possible, to create an impression and to sheet home responsibility elsewhere as far as possible. Whilst all that is going on, there will be no change to the families that are in crowded homes even as we occupy this Chamber and the time that we spend here in debate.
There needs to be change. A number of years ago there was talk of reconciliation. As we started to explore that concept we understood, ultimately, that it required two parties to be able to agree in order to walk together. For two parties to agree and be able to walk together is easier said than done. Take this Chamber, for example. The edge that enters the debates where there appears, as I said before, genuine anger and distress about things of the past, and offence from those who seem to be responsible for the sins of the past having to stand up and to justify that perhaps it is not all as it seems, will not get us anywhere. If we have any hope to take from our time in this Chamber we have to be able to find a better way forward. There is much truth on both sides.
As individual members there is much experience here. There is a 20-year plan. Take a cynical political view: we could spend all our time discussing it from that perspective and there is much that could be discussed regarding time limits of the report, the substance of the report, how sincere it is in its construction and intent. Is it generally intended to make a noticeable and long term difference at personal expense or political expense? Or is it really primarily to serve a political objective and that is to get ourselves out of a bind? We could spend a lot of time having that discussion.
I wish the Chief Minister were in attendance to be able to weigh these words because we are going somewhere. We have to go somewhere. We cannot sit in this Chamber and have these discussions year after year. We cannot go onto the Internet and get all the papers that have been written on this issue, read all the newspaper reports, about journalists who get distressed and politicians that get distressed, substance abuse committees that trail around the place and visit these communities and their hearts are moved, year after year. We just cannot keep doing that and find ourselves just moving in circles.
If our eye is on the politics of this even a bit, we are standing condemned because, with that comes division, reaction and self-interest, and there is no difference made to anybody who actually needs our help. The primary responsibility of a parliament and those who have been elected to serve is to provide care and support for the vulnerable. We have to do that.
In considering all the words that have been uttered, it was difficult as a member of the CLP, a member of the opposition - four of us sitting here, a couple of Independents, 19 looming larger than life, brimming with confidence and a sense of justification for this righteous indignation to correct some horrible thing that happened. However, I do not want to go too far down that track because right or wrong it will make no difference. You would all go upstairs on the balcony and laugh about the comments that were made as we had the chuckles in here from the senior ranks, chuckling away, making snide comments as though they really cared. It sounds like some cheap classroom antic to tease and belittle, and lower the standards of debate to score a small point so you can have a little chuckle amongst your mates. Do not even try it. This is too serious.
This is too serious for fun and games and sniggering and point scoring and blaming. It is too serious. If this is all about the quality of the 20-year plan, what is the point in spending all this time? It is not about the quality of the 20-year plan. It is about the plight of those who need our help. Not whether someone has the courage and foresight to come up with a 20-year plan to be commended. But it requires the action. That action cannot occur, no matter how well we define the problem, until we courageously implement the solution. We can carefully dissect the problem. I have been moved on those substance abuse committee visits. It is something I would do again and again because I have much to learn. But there are some basic human things that are occurring in our community. I thank God we are starting to see things that were previously hidden, and largely being hidden by politics.
Mal Brough is the baddie: ‘Let us direct our salvo at Mal Brough. Let us distract to the past of the last 27 years. Let us fire shots that way. Let us fire all over the place’. Forget it. Let us put our energies into finding a solution. Consider this: it is not about the quality or otherwise of the 20-year plan. That is a proposed direction and maybe it moves us toward a solution. Let us recognise that we have an obligation as members who sit in chairs behind desks representing constituents. I represent indigenous and non-indigenous constituents, whether I am CLP or not. Here, here, here, all the way around; we all represent indigenous and non-indigenous; we represent Territorians. As Australians too, we have an obligation not to score a point but to make a difference. I say that it is not the quality of the 20-year plan that is at stake here; it is the capacity to find and implement a genuine solution and work towards that in a constructive way.
A proposal was placed before the Chief Minister by the Opposition Leader. Instantly minds are going to click into political gear and say: ‘Well, well, well, here we go’. Consider this: outside this Chamber and the dynamics that occur in here, a letter was written to the Chief Minister seeking a way where we could work together to bring our combined resources to work in a bipartisan way to solve problems that are the obligation of all of us.
I will table that letter and urge you to read the letter. I will not say that everything contained in this letter should trump that which is in the 20-year plan. I will not say that the 20-year plan is rubbish and this is the one that must be adopted. In the interests of working towards a bipartisan solution, I put this on the table. I must add, honourable members, it has not been responded to. It is not written in a provocative or political way. It is written as a genuine attempt to try to find a proper and constructive response to the problem that grieves all of us. There has been no response. I seek leave to table this.
Leave granted.
Mr MILLS: Thank you. The proposal, if we are to consider working in a bipartisan manner is this: we are not talking about whether we then become the cheer squad for the 20-year plan, or whether we have an argument that this is the best plan versus that plan. It is that we find a means - and I ask the Chief Minister to respond to this – whereby we could work together in a genuine way and put all of our energies into the issue and to make a genuine effort to put differences aside. That is the proposition that I, as shadow indigenous spokesperson for the CLP, and on behalf of the CLP, place before the Chief Minister for consideration. We need to find a better way of doing our business.
As I said at the beginning, two parties cannot walk together unless they are agreed. This places before honourable members a challenge. If we expect to conjure up a solution that will affect a third party, which many of us do not know very well – perhaps we have not spent much time walking in the shoes of those who walk in pain, concern, fear and dread. However, if we are going to conjure up solutions that will affect people distant from this wonderful Chamber, I reckon we will really be able to test that if we have the capacity - as mature and experienced people who have had the trust of our own communities to place us in this Chamber - to work together, put aside our differences, and bring together our joint resources and experience. Then we might have some hope. However, if we cannot, we stumble at the first hurdle. Whether it is education, improved infrastructure, houses or whatever - all of those could be provided and there could be no internal change in those families and in the hearts of the mums and the dads. If we want to make a difference, we have to find the means to rebuild capacity within a community.
Palmerston comes to mind. I have had issues in Palmerston. It is not an easy to propose a solution and then whack that solution out there in a press release and have a few characters run around the place and advertise it and talk about it. It is sweat, it is hard work, tears and pain to actually make a difference to your own community. How much more difficult will it be to make a difference to a community a long way from us, distant from our own experience? Fortunately, we have members in this Chamber who have intimate experience. They have knowledge that we should be able to gain strength from.
As a group, we could do this. The truth is that we have issues in our own electorates. It is not an easy thing to fix. Do not even think for a moment that whacking together a plan - whether it is the CLP plan, or the ALP plan, or a plan that any member might want to put up - is going to be the solution. That is just a plan. The next part is the hardest bit - as hard as it will be for us to work together. If we cannot find some creative, proactive and courageous way of working together, we may as well continue on with the word games - the theatre for the ugly.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I make these comments on behalf of the CLP. Chief Minister, I place that correspondence and the attached plan for your consideration. Primarily, it is a simple request that you would consider a means whereby there could be a bipartisan approach in this Chamber to address the issues that concern us all.
Mr HENDERSON (Business and Economic Development): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I proudly support the Chief Minister’s statement this evening. Before reading from my prepared remarks, in response to the member for Blain’s comments about a bipartisan approach, I believe that each and every one of the 25 members who are elected to this parliament want better outcomes for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory.
However, respecting the member for Blain’s position and the genuineness of his sentiments, a bipartisan approach on these issues is pretty hard to take seriously on this side of the House when one considers the personal and bitter bile and venom that has been directed by the Leader of the Opposition in this House this evening in this debate towards not only the Chief Minister, but other members of Cabinet in our response to this issue. I respect the member for Blain. He is a man of integrity. Even though we differ on our politics, I do not think we differ at all in the reasons why we came to this parliament and were sworn in on the same day. The venom and bitterness and the diatribe from the Leader of the Opposition in her contribution to this statement is a long way from the olive branch that was held out there by the member for Blain.
Having said that, I move on to my comments and the position of the agencies I have responsibility for in regard to improving outcomes for Aboriginal people across the Northern Territory.
Much has been said about the Northern Territory Police Force over the past few weeks and its handling of law and order in our remote communities. I place on the record today my absolute support for the efforts being made by our police - each and every one of them - to tackle crime and violence in our remote communities. Talk to serving police officers on the ground, and I know the Chief Minister had the same presentation from the domestic violence reduction squad in Alice Springs. When you see that type of presentation from those officers and the issues that they are dealing with on a day-to-day basis, the criticisms that are being applied to the effectiveness of our Northern Territory Police Force across the Territory are pretty galling.
I will outline some of the strategies that have put in place to do this, and the support and resources this government has provided them to carry out their job. The police, our frontline officers, know better than most that crime and violence in indigenous communities is a symptom of the enormous disadvantage being faced by so many of our Aboriginal Territorians. Access to health and education services, adequate housing and other infrastructure and good governance are the basis of sustainable healthy communities, but many indigenous Territorians are denied these basic rights.
The Chief Minister today has outlined a 20-year plan to address these issues, alongside issues of law and order, in a systematic, sustainable way that will lead to positive change in our remote communities. It is a mammoth task and we cannot do it alone. We need the significant resources of the federal government if we are to achieve real outcomes for indigenous people over the next 20 years. In the meantime, the Northern Territory government will continue to tackle the unacceptably high levels of substance abuse, crime and violence in our remote communities, and police will continue to play a major frontline role in this effort.
I will put some facts on the table about this government’s and the Northern Territory Police Force’s ongoing efforts to build safer communities in the Territory. The Northern Territory Police, like this government, has a fundamental belief that Territorians have a right to feel safe in their communities. That belief is led from the top by our Commissioner. Government and police are working with communities to tackle the causes of crime and violence, such as substance abuse, and boosting frontline community policing. Here in the Territory, we have the most police per capita of any Australian jurisdiction. Funding for Northern Territory Police is also the highest per capita of anywhere in Australia. The Territory government continues to invest strongly in our police force, after it was left to run down by previous CLP governments. Budget 2006-07 delivers another record year of funding for the police, $212m, marking a 55% increase since the Martin government came to office in 2001. The member for Greatorex talked about substance and said the government had done nothing by way of substance: ‘There was nothing of substance in the Chief Minister’s statement’, and for the first four years of our government. I think a 55% increase in funding for police is pretty substantial. The ability of police to deliver 17 000 hours of general duties patrols, a boost compared to last year, stems from the government’s record injection of resources over the past three years through the $75m Building our Police Force plan. $32m has been committed in this year’s budget for the final year of our Building our Police Force plan and we are well on track of meeting our targets.
There is no doubt that our police have a difficult job to do. Whilst we have the highest ratio of police per capita, they are responsible for policing the 1 400 000 km that make up the Northern Territory from 38 police stations, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Whilst funding for NT Police well and truly outstretched spending on police in other jurisdictions, three times the national average in fact, the cost of police service, delivery especially in remote areas, is very high.
Police also deal on a daily basis with substance abuse and other social and economic factors that are major contributors to the crime rate. The Northern Territory Police Force, like the government, continues to face these challenges with their eyes wide open and continues to put in place strategies to tackle not only the crime but the causes of crime. A major focus for the government and police is protecting women and children from family violence and abuse. The Violent Crime Reduction Strategy has been in place for two years and has shown significant success in targeting perpetrators of domestic violence, sexual assault and aggravated assaults particularly recidivist offenders, and supporting the victims of this violence.
One of the most significant achievements of this strategy is the establishment of the Domestic and Personal Violence Protection Units in Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. The establishment of these units has effectively doubled the number of police officers specialising in the investigation of domestic violence in the Northern Territory. To the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Greatorex - double the effort.
Domestic violence unit members proactively target recidivist offenders and repeat victims. They provide an investigative support role to the frontline patrol officers in domestic violence-related criminal offences. Quality assurance is conducted on every domestic violence incident reported across the Territory to ensure compliance with the policy. As a result of this new approach reports of assault have increased by almost 20%. That is not the incidence of domestic violence increasing across the Territory by 20% as the member for Greatorex would have, but increasing confidence by victims of domestic violence to report to police because they know police will act.
Whilst applications for domestic violence orders have increased markedly, breaches of these orders have increased by almost 90%. That is, people who were the subject of breaches of domestic violence orders previously not being breached, continued to be the subjects of abuse and assault. A 90% increase in the number of breaches means many more protected women across the Northern Territory but sadly, still not enough.
Apprehension orders have also increased markedly. Domestic violence units are providing in-service training to patrol officers to ensure the new practices and policy are known and applied throughout the whole organisation. In addition, a Victims of Crime Charter has been integrated throughout the police. The charter reflects the principles of the Northern Territory government’s Victims of Crime Charter and aims to enhance the quality of service to victims by a range of methods including timely contact over the progress of investigations, court outcomes and counselling services.
The Territory has seen a continuing decline in the rate of aggravated and non-aggravated sexual assaults. This trend has coincided with the emphasis by police on recidivist offenders in domestic and personal violence-related cases.
Substance abuse continues to be the biggest contributor to crime, particularly violent crime in the Territory. It is another area that the police are tackling with new strategies and a stronger focus. The Remote Community Drug Desk was formed in May 2004 and is comprised of seven members of the Drug Enforcement Unit who are dedicated to targeting people involved in the distribution of illicit drugs to remote communities. Members, including an intelligence officer, are tasked with the coordination, implementation and leadership of strategic and tactical operations aimed at disrupting the distribution of drugs to remote communities.
Since May 2004, this strategy has resulted in the seizure of more than $216 000 in cash, 34 firearms, 36 kg of cannabis, 512 cannabis plants, 225 gm of amphetamine and 911 kg of kava. Seventy-five people have been arrested, 113 summonsed, and 427 formal charges laid. There have also been 141 drug infringement notices issued. To the member for Greatorex, there is certainly substance in those figures. This initiative has now been recognised nationally. It is one of three finalists at the National Drug and Alcohol Awards for Excellence in Drug and Alcohol Law Enforcement.
Following on from the success of this initiative, a similar tri-state initiative was launched in Alice Springs at the beginning of this year. This combined initiative between Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory is being developed in response to petrol sniffing, and alcohol and illicit drug abuse problems in remote Aboriginal communities in Central Australia. Central to the strategy was the establishment of a substance abuse intelligence desk which is based on the same principles as the remote community drug desk in the Top End. The desk is staffed by an intelligence officer and an investigations officer based in Alice Springs. Desk staff collate and disseminate intelligence and coordinate policing activities in the cross-border region specifically in relation to the trafficking of petrol, illicit drugs and alcohol. The desk also undertakes an educational role throughout the cross-border region by developing the capacity of local police and communities to respond to suspicious behaviour as well as local fuel supply outlets and other service delivery agencies within or near remote communities in the region.
For the period of 20 April to 31 May - that is just over one month - in the cross-border region of the Northern Territory, Western Australia, South Australia, the following results have been achieved: seven drug-related charges have been laid; one drug infringement notice issued; four arrests; seizure of 363 gm of cannabis; $15 110 in cash seized, and 0.35 litres of petrol seized.
Government is giving police more tools in the fight against violence and substance abuse in our communities with new drug house legislation and civil asset forfeiture for criminal activity; new volatile substance abuse legislation; and new domestic violence legislation. We are also supporting the efforts of our police officers with more resources and more remote police stations. Last month, I had the pleasure of officially opening the new $1.3m Numbulwar police station with the Police Commissioner and the member for Arnhem. Member for Greatorex - more substance.
The police station means for the first time Numbulwar has a permanent police presence. It is the third police facility to be constructed since the Martin government came to office in 2001 following the Humpty Doo Police and Fire Station and the Kintore police station that were opened earlier in our term. In addition, a new police post is currently under construction at Mutitjulu. Member for Greatorex - more substance.
These remote police posts allow police to more effectively tackle crime and alcohol and drug related behaviour in the community and that, in turn, flows through to positives in other areas such as better health and education outcomes. It also allows those police who previously had to police those communities from remote areas to concentrate more on their local areas. It is a double whammy, a double bang for the buck by putting police stations in remote communities.
The Aboriginal Community Police Officer program is a great example of what can be achieved through partnerships between community members, government and police working together. ACPOs play an important role in the front line against crime and violence right across the Territory. Yet, until recently, remote communities bore the cost alone of supplying, running and maintaining a vehicle for ACPOs to carry out their duties. Last year, I announced a new initiative that recognises the valuable work that ACPOs do and the importance of partnerships between government, police and the community to deliver the program. As of 1 July last year, the government took over all of the running costs for current ACPO vehicles in communities delivering an immediate financial release of an average of $10 000 a year for communities, and for some communities, easing the burden of more than $30 000 a year. In addition to taking over the maintenance and running costs of vehicles, the government is also providing, over four years, police-owned vehicles for ACPOs in remote communities at a cost of $2m.
Last financial year, the government delivered six new police-owned vehicles to Milikapiti, Galiwinku, Finke, Maranboy, Numbulwar and Alyangula. The vehicle for Finke is pending the appointment of an ACPO to the community. In Budget 2006-07, the government has committed $440 000 to deliver the second instalment of this program. Another six new vehicles are expected to be delivered this financial year to Mutitjulu, Santa Teresa, Timber Creek, Daly River and Ngukurr. An assessment on the allocation of a final vehicle will be made in due course.
Government has also delivered improved working conditions for ACPOs including fares out from isolated localities and freight allowances for foodstuffs for the first time. As part of our Building Our Police Force plan, the Territory government wants to recruit an additional 28 ACPOs across the Territory. An intake of about 10 ACPOs is planned to start in Alice Springs on 26 June this year. A further intake of 10 to 12 is scheduled for later in 2006-07. Where this training takes place will depend on from where the majority of ACPOs are recruited. Northern Territory police will also be seeking expressions of interest from serving ACPOs in urban areas to go to remote communities on either permanent or term appointments. We are particularly hopeful that this may lead to at least one experienced ACPO being appointed to Mutitjulu. These are all positive steps and real substance, member for Greatorex, that will lead to more ACPOs in remote communities.
Recruiting new ACPOs has always been and continues to be a challenge to a range of reasons. LGANT, communities and Northern Territory police are planning to hold an officer level workshop to explore alternative strategies to improve effectiveness of the ACPO scheme and explore options to deal with those issues that present a barrier to ACPO recruitment. Both the Police Commissioner and I have a strong focus on developing pathways for indigenous people to become mainstream police officers, a main policy setting that I am charge with and with the Police Commissioner want to see - not just ACPOs.
There has been a great deal of media attention on Wadeye in recent weeks; some of it for good reason. Gang-led violence has affected this community for many decades and it has been exacerbated recently by the extended Wet Season which has forced many people from different clans to remain in Wadeye due to road closures. The Police Commissioner recently announced that the total police establishment at Wadeye would be increased to eight to enhance police response to problems in the community. The tender was recently let for construction of a duplex in the community to house the extra police officers who will be stationed there. Whilst construction of the duplex is under way, government is working to supply two two-bedroom demountables to house the extra police in the short term. Those demountables should be in place and liveable by next month.
In the meantime, four Territory response section members are presently located at Wadeye to assist in maintaining law and order. The commissioner has advised that they will remain there for as long as necessary. Police have also developed operational plans to deal with gang-related issues in the community should they recur. These plans can be quite quickly implemented using existing police resources in Wadeye, and then backed up with additional resources from Darwin if the need arises.
The key elements of the plans are gathering intelligence in relation to all gang members, associates and their level of involvement; regular police patrols during the day and late into the night to prevent gang activity; if and when necessary offenders will be arrested; and matters including bail considerations will be vigorously pursued. In addition, a targeted law and order task force comprising of Police and Justice has been working on two fronts: preparing for speedy prosecution of gang members already arrested, and considering possible new offences to tackle the unique gang situation at Wadeye, as well as in relation to gangs across the Territory. Extra resources have been provided to police and courts to ensure court matters can be dealt with quickly, where possible, in consultation with relevant defence lawyers. Extra court sitting days, including yesterday and today, have been put on to deal with Wadeye matters, and extra days will be scheduled if necessary.
The local police members are also closely involved in the process of preparing to move a number of community members to various outstations. Many of these people have been involved in the recent violence, and moving them to outstations is seen as an effective means of providing the township and remaining occupants with some respite. To date, approximately 200 people from the community have moved to outstations. I am pleased to report the community has not had any significant gang-related activity since TRS members were sent to Wadeye in late May, but police continue to monitor the situation carefully.
Alice Springs continues to be affected by antisocial issues, and government is tackling those issues with a whole-of-government approach, with a particular focus on liquor supply and demand. It is absolutely crucial that we tackle grog issues in Alice Springs if we are to see real reductions in antisocial behaviour. That work is under way. In the meantime, police have engaged in a number of targeted strategies and operations that focus on recidivist offenders, using additional resources from Darwin. The outcomes of these operations have resulted in an increase in apprehensions for protective custody. However, it is clear that reducing both the demand and supply of liquor is fundamental to long-term solutions. My colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, has already outlined how the government is tackling this issue.
I support 100% the efforts of our police in tackling crime and the causes of crime in our remote communities. It is a difficult job …
Ms MARTIN: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time for the minister to complete his remarks in accordance with Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr HENDERSON: I thank members. I will be quick.
It is a difficult job; it is one the police are performing with enormous commitment and courage, and they are achieving results. Government will continue to support their efforts by providing them with the resources they need to do this difficult job.
To suggest that cracking down on law and order is the only answer to problems in our indigenous communities is simplistic and ignorant. Police are at the frontline of this issue; they deal with it every day. They would tell me that you cannot expect levels of violence to drop if you do not address the reasons behind the crimes and violence.
As well as law and order, we must tackle indigenous disadvantage on a number of fronts including infrastructure, governance, employment, education, and health. Another focus of this government is the developments of local economies and job opportunities for our regions and remote communities. The government is making great strides in rolling out secondary education for remote communities, and we are seeing kids graduate for the first time in these communities. However, we also need to ensure they are able to find meaningful employment in or near their communities when they have finished their studies. We are close to finalising a 10-year economic development framework which focuses on five key objectives: encouraging investment; productivity; skilled people; sharing our prosperity; and taking care of the environment.
One of those clear objectives is ensuring that economic participation and benefits are extended to all Territorians, including indigenous Territorians. There is a wide range of activity currently being undertaken by government to promote economic development. To further our focus on regional development, the government has moved to establish regional economic committees across the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory government is committed to driving sustainable economic growth that will lead to greater opportunities for Territorians wherever they live.
I was pleased to announce last week that four of these committees have now been established: Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, East Arnhem and Katherine. They will commence meeting over the next few months. Over the next 12 months, we expect up to 12 committees will be established across the Territory. The government has also established the $300 000 Indigenous Business Development Program last year. The program aims to assist indigenous people start their own business, support the formation of partnerships and joint ventures between indigenous organisations and other corporate entities, and provide business support services to indigenous people.
So far, the response to the program has been very pleasing. Sixteen applications have been funded, totalling $281 000, with 13 applications under consideration. For example:
a food cooperative at Mapurru homeland, four years in the planning, established at the request of elders who did not want to have to charter planes to Galiwinku for supplies. The cooperative sells mostly non-perishable food low in fat, sugar and salt, and high in fibre. It is also selling fishing and hunting gear to encourage locals to actively hunt and gather their food. Nurses at Galiwinku report that children from Mapurru are in far better health than children from Galiwinku; and
There are many more projects like this being developed across the Territory.
In conclusion, whilst the media attention our indigenous communities have received over the past week has caused shock and outrage in the southern states, we are well aware of the massive task ahead of us. We have made some progress, but we know we cannot achieve all that needs to be done by acting alone. We need the assistance of the federal government to address these issues in a systemic and structured way. We need a 20-year plan, with five-, 10- and 15-year goals. We need to tackle this issue in a structured, long-term way if we are to achieve genuine outcomes for indigenous Territorians.
I commend the Chief Minister for bringing this proposal to the House today, and wish the Chief Minister the best of luck at the forthcoming COAG meeting in attempting to get the Commonwealth on board.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank everyone who contributed to this important debate. There were many references during the debate to the national discussion that happened over the last three weeks. When you listened to that debate, which I did, there was anger and blame attached by some speakers. It was interesting to hear other speakers -- and our Aboriginal members were probably strongest on this - talk about the hurt and the level of shame at the way that discussion was held over the last three to four weeks, and the impact it has had on our Aboriginal community.
I will recount something that happened in that context with me. When I was at Wadeye last week, the community was talking about the national debate and how the focus had been for much of that time on Wadeye and the gang warfare. A number of key members of the community said to me: ‘You know we are not like this most of the time. You know that we are fairly peaceful. We get on with things. Do we have challenges? Yes. But could you not explain better in the national media what it is like here?’ And I said: ‘I tried’. I tried to explain that it was not what the national media or the local media wanted to hear, and they were very disappointed in me. I sat there with people who said: ‘We wanted you to be able to explain what we were like and what we saw was a failure from you to be able to do it’. I felt bad about that. I could have gone on longer and said: ‘I tried. I said that Wadeye is not like that most of the time’, but it was not what was reported. It was not of interest to anyone.
You try to talk in a positive way about things that were happening. Probably what has been the most frustrating part of this debate for the last month is that nobody has denied that we do not have problems. Nobody has denied that the issue of child sex abuse is not a real one for the Territory, or domestic violence, or gang warfare in communities like Wadeye. I think it is the only place with gang warfare at the moment but there are other troubles in other communities of different natures and much of it alcohol-fuelled or drug-fuelled. Nobody denied that. But it was this sense that you could not even begin to talk about the other part of the equation, that it was not all bad, that because of working with communities there were really positive things happening. It was that smothering of any attempt to be positive over that month that I personally found the most frustrating. It possibly reflected, in part, how little the rest of Australia understands about the Territory. We know that they do not understand much about Darwin, but do they understand anything about Wadeye? Not at all.
A number of journalists rang me, castigating me about the situation at Wadeye, with words like ‘the Territory and you are a national disgrace’. They were the lead items coming from journalists. One of them from a very reputable newspaper said: ‘And the community of Wadeye is 7500 people. How could …’, and I said: ‘Hold on, hold on. Where do you get these things from?’ Others said to me: ‘Where is the mandatory reporting in the Territory for child abuse? Why don’t you have it?’. Trying to explain the reality of here compared with the conclusions they had drawn about issues they knew very little about was incredibly frustrating.
However, it was not so hurtful to me compared with the Aboriginal people. I know people here have spoken to Aboriginal people around the community, around the Territory. Many spoke to me about their deep shame of all being cast as drunken, violent, sex abusing people. We know how wrong that is. In a better world, or one in which you could manage the public debate, people would speak honestly about what was happening and not try to generalise or cast everyone in the same light. That was the frustration. I attempted to say in every interview I did, for example: ‘Yes, we have problems; yes, it is unacceptable; it is very serious. These are the actions we are taking but just look to where things have changed a bit,’ and it was just ignored. You just could not get any traction on those kinds of issues.
Reflecting on where we were, and trying to find a real positive out of where we were, the idea was to stop the eruption of these issues which happen on a fairly regular basis. The 2003 Domestic Violence Summit held by the Prime Minister was in response to the same kind of issues that emerged, and the frustration that nothing really of substance came out of that meeting. I looked at those meetings, which people said to me were talkfests, and what happened and thought we have to have a better strategy, one that actually engages this nation, makes a commitment from governments of all levels to bring about profound change. I asked one of my staff to get me a list of the national plans we have and I have read part of it out here.
We have national plans on everything. I have said it before: we have them ranging from energy strategies to cane toads. Yet, when it comes to one of the most significant issues facing Australia and one that, quite rightly, gets us condemnation both domestically and internationally - no plan, no commitment. No saying to Aboriginal people across Australia: ‘Governments will work with you, we will work with you’. It is not governments doing all for Aboriginal people, not at all. It is governments working with Aboriginal people across Australia to get real change, to get real generational change. That is where this plan came from. It was not some knee-jerk response. It was looking and reflecting on what had happened and how we could change that.
We know in the Territory we have plans; we have educational plans, we have plans for policing, we have economic development plans for Aboriginal people. However, we know we do not have the resources to deliver in the remote areas. We know that we are working in small chunks and if we could get more assistance - I know that the Opposition Leader said that more money will not make a difference; I beg to differ. More money will make a difference. It is not as though you are going to throw $1bn at the Territory and say: ‘Use it now’. Of course, that is crazy. However, if we could get, as I said, the federal government to give $50m a year to assist with housing, do it in a way of a shared relationship or mutual obligation, we could work with communities with that additional housing money to get a lot of achievements all wrapped up in that. It is tangible and it is practical. It is about governments working coherently, but it is also about more dollars coming in. This plan is a very practical approach. It does need money from the federal government and it certainly has support from the other states and other Chief Ministers.
I thank everyone for their contribution. It has been a fairly long afternoon debating a very important topic. Thank you for the passion with which you addressed this issue, the knowledge that you brought to the debate. The member for Nhulunbuy showed his long-term understanding of the issues. Other members did that as well. We heard from the opposition about how can you cast this in terms of what CLP did or what Labor did in government. But the issue raised by the Education minister really came to the heart of it: that we for so long in the Territory never even had - in fact, had an active policy of not delivering - secondary education to Aboriginal Territorians who live remotely. That is a disgrace.
On this side of the House we are proud we have turned that around because we know, and every bit of research shows us, that education is the way to affect so many different aspects of life of any individual. Babies are healthier when mothers are better educated; opportunities for jobs are better when you have education. Education is fundamental; yet for 27 years we told Aboriginal Territorians in the bush to: ‘Forget it. We do not deliver secondary education to your communities’.
I cannot be more delighted and the Education minister, obviously, is delighted with the results we are getting. There were 25 students at the end of last year and, hopefully, we will do better this year with 30. This provides an inspiration to other communities. When Kalkarindji did it for the first time three years ago, the Education minister said to us all, the other communities across the Top End will say if they can do it, we will do it too, and it was a ripple effect. That is the role model you get when you put positive and successful initiatives in place. Those three students from Kalkarindji all went through to tertiary studies and that is great.
I have a final comment about the two different views on this. We have heard from the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Police minister did make a comment that yes, we can be bipartisan about this. We would like to see that happen. But as the Police minister said, when you get the level of vitriol and personal attack coming into the topic from the Leader of the Opposition, it is hard to take the word of the deputy seriously. It is very hard to take it seriously.
We have an Opposition Leader who cannot debate a topic without being personally offensive. I am not going to stand here and sob about it and neither, I am sure, is the member for Arafura. If you are going to have reasonable debates in here about issues then to listen to the Leader of the Opposition spend her time on her feet just being vitriolic and attacking people personally, does not warm you to a bipartisan approach. It does not.
To say that I will ignore all other topics and I will only talk about domestic violence and child sex abuse when there is a substantial statement about many issues that affect Aboriginal Territorians, is not taking a very important topic seriously. She spent a significant proportion of her time reading out a list from the federal budget of all of the good things the federal government has done to help Aboriginal people in the Territory. We could give an equal list, probably longer, of how many programs the federal government had said they would fund, funded for a small time or not at all, and then walked away from. That list is a very long, very embarrassing list.
To the Opposition Leader who says: ‘Look at the good things the federal government has done’, we want to work cooperatively with them. We have an overarching agreement with a number of schedules within it, but it has to be a partnership. It does not rely on one party bullying the other or racing around making one-line statements that cannot be supported, or verballing Police Commissioners. That is not going to be useful; that is not going to be a partnership. What we want from the federal government is a partnership about delivering services and getting results for Aboriginal people in our remote areas.
I listened carefully to the Leader of the Opposition. There was nothing of any substance in what she said. She quoted from her own speeches, and referred to German models of how to deal with domestic violence. I wondered what the relationship between domestic violence in a first world country in the middle of Europe was to how we might deal with it in the Northern Territory. I thought it was a very weird comment to make, but that is what the Opposition Leader wanted to quote. Her pice de rsistance was that I and the Police minister do not care about the issues she raised because she has not seen us cry in the House. If that is the strength of her argument, I do not think we have bipartisan support on this. I do not think we can work in bipartisanship with you.
I know that Aboriginal Territorians will embrace the fact that this government and other governments around Australia want to see a national commitment to make things better - to make things better for Aboriginal people in a generation. Let me assure Territorians, I am going to fight for that. Thank you to everyone who supported the 20-year plan. It is a fight worth having.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Dhimurru Management Team welcomed over 50 Commonwealth, Territory and local representatives to their Sea Country Workshop in late May to negotiate the implementation of the Dhimurru Sea Country Plan. The plan aims to involve local Yolngu in sea country management, and work with partner organisations to ensure sustainable management of sea country. Working with key stakeholders, Dhimurru aims to develop sustainable working arrangements and be involved in monitoring, research and surveillance of sea country. Dhimurru seeks to provide a good model for sea country management based on working together in strong partnerships, and will continue to work with key stakeholders to formalise an implementation schedule for progression of sea country commitments. I am looking forward to being part of the launch of the Sea Country Plan at the Garma Festival in early August.
I am very pleased to welcome Mr Charles Rue to the position of Manager of Alcan Gove’s Community Affairs Department, replacing Mr Klaus Helms. Charles is well-known in the community as a former senior police officer for a number of years in Gove, and was awarded the National Surf Life Saving Title recently in Queensland. Our own Charles Rue from the Gove Surf Life Saving Club was, in fact, the National Surf Life Saving individual in Australia. Fantastic result!
Charles will bring extensive community relations experience with him to the position, as he has worked on many of the local projects such as the combined reference group, community patrol and the Harmony Group. Charles has a real commitment to the community. I wish him well in the new position. He is already making impact with significant decisions and insight into local issues.
Excessive alcohol and drug consumption, coupled with associated family violence constitutes a major threat to the wellbeing of the indigenous population in all communities of the region. I am pleased and proud to report on the East Arnhem Harmony Mawaya Mala Group which, with an extensive representative committee from both Yolngu and non-Aboriginal communities, have worked collectively for approximately three years to provide a safe and harmonious environment for our children and families. The objective is to foster a cooperative and coordinated regional approach to strategies, projects and initiatives, with particular emphasis on law and social justice development, substance abuse issues, itinerant issues and crime prevention.
I acknowledge the participants involved in supporting the Harmony Group and thank them for their continued support: Aboriginal Resource and Development Service; Alcan Gove; Anglicare NT; Centrelink; Crisis Accommodation; community representatives in Nhulunbuy; Department of Local Government; Housing and Sport; Department of Health and Community Services; Department of Justice; Gumatj Indigenous Coordination Centre; Marngarr Community Government Council; Nhulunbuy Corporation; Miwatj Health Aboriginal Corporation; Northern Land Council; Northern Territory Police; Rirratjingu clan; Women Representing Marngarr; Women Representing Yirrkala; Yirrkala Dhanbul Community Council; and Laynhapuy Homelands Association.
Harmony’s first major project is nearing completion, with the establishment of a special care centre to provide shelter and primary intervention services for the treatment and rehabilitation of people suffering from the abuse of alcohol and other substances.
The second major project is the Gove Peninsula Community Patrols, providing a community patrol to mediate and assist individuals and families suffering from substance abuse, antisocial behaviour, children’s issues and family violence.
These two initiatives have been developed by the Harmony Group over the past three years, with hours of consultation and commitment to providing positive outcomes. I thank John Cook and the committee for their part in establishing effective regional networks to ensure the implementation of these programs.
The East Arnhem Liquor Management Plan is in the process of being introduced to the community, with a hearing by the Liquor Commission set down for August. I thank Senior Sergeant Tony Fuller for his guidance and direction following his involvement in the development of a successful liquor plan at Groote Eylandt. Tony has put together a PowerPoint presentation to be presented to the public for discussion in regard to alcohol restrictions and boundaries and the concept of an alcohol takeaway ID card. We are grateful for Tony’s contribution to our community and the strong sense of leadership and direction that he provides.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak about a successful organisation in my electorate, the Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation. Bawinanga was incorporated in 1979 as an outstation resource association. Early core business was the provision of basic support to Aboriginal people who elected to reside on their traditional land rather than in the emerging community of Maningrida. The organisation and the outstation movement have grown and prospered, and Bawinanga now supports 32 outstation communities with a population of some 800. Services include the construction and maintenance of housing, roads, water supplies and solar power, a mobile store, support for land management and cultural activities, and assistance in the delivery of education and health programs.
Turnover has grown from $150 000 in 1979 to greater than $26m in 2005-06. Bawinanga has been delivering CDEP since 1989. CDEP is the economic lifeblood of the community, and there are now 615 participants. Some 300 of these live on outstations and the remainder live and work in Maningrida, a community of 2500 people in north central Arnhem Land.
Bawinanga has structured itself so the majority of participants are employed in businesses rather than in CDEP activities. Some participants work for other agencies within the community, such as the council, school and clinic, and they also deliver municipal services such as garbage collection, fencing and maintenance of parks and gardens. The most engaging aspect of Bawinanga’s CDEP is the growth of a group of business enterprises and the employment scope this provides.
Bawinanga Enterprises include Maningrida Arts and Culture; the Djelk Rangers; a mechanical workshop; mud brick factory; welding shop; the Women’s Centre; the Good Food Kitchen; Aged Care Services; Bawinanga’s fuel, BAC Fuel; a fabricating and sheet metal workshop; a camping and outdoor supply shop; a plant nursery; a wildlife business; tourism; a sport fishing joint venture; a vehicle wrecking and recycling business; earth moving; a supermarket; commercial crabbing; and building, construction and maintenance.
There is immediate scope for the development of new enterprises, such as engaging in the detection, management and destruction of forfeit illegal foreign fishing vessels; coast watch activities; entering into competition with outside interests controlling barge and air services to Maningrida; establishing a land management college for Aboriginal rangers; and increasing the contribution and value of carbon abatement trading and engaging in a host of import replacement strategies.
There is no doubt that the vision, energy and entrepreneurial spirit of Bawinanga is largely responsible for the Maningrida success story. This is not a basket case community. It could be used as an example to other communities, and to Australians generally as a model of functionality and success in Aboriginal Australia. The Bawinanga employment model is not conjecture; it has been proved to work. This success has occurred in a remote location without access to mining, manufacturing or agriculture as employers or economic primers, and without access to business development funding.
The Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation and the Maningrida community, up until a week ago, was under threat. The imminent defunding of Bawinanga CDEP could have been a death blow to much that has been achieved and comes at a time when the corporation is achieving unprecedented success. It seems illogical not to continue to build on this success. I am glad, after my conversations with the organisation, that the Australian government has viewed CDEP in that community as an investment that, inevitably, has resulted and will result in the broad scale engagement with the mainstream economy that government urges many of our Aboriginal communities to aspire to.
The Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation provides a model which can be applied elsewhere. It was heartening and good news that their loss of their CDEP program - which there was real potential and real threat – has now been taken away as the Commonwealth has now had a change of heart. It is great to know that all the fighting and the pushing from those Aboriginal members on the board of Bawinanga was successful in ensuring that they were able to recover and keep their CDEP program - but only for the next 12 months. That organisation is hoping that over that 12 months they will be able to convince the Commonwealth to put in place a more sustainable program and deliver on what they see as real jobs out in those communities.
To that organisation, which is a success, it was fantastic news to know that the Commonwealth had backed away from their claims of defunding that organisation and that the CDEP will stay.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight it gives me great pleasure to mention some of the achievements made by kids in my electorate.
As patron of the Jingili BMX Club, I was very pleased to hear that Jesse Brown of Moil qualified first overall for the NT state titles and ranked 4th overall in the Australian national titles in Adelaide in 2006. What a fantastic result. Jesse also recently was placed first in the 5-year-old boys and won five out of five races at the Jingili open BMX. Jesse’s brother, Billy, qualified 14th place overall in the NT state titles and ranked 33rd overall for 9-year-old boys at the nationals. Braxton Carruthers won the trophy for the Jingili Open ‘Sprocket Rocket’ at the Open.
Moil Primary School produced some exceptional talent at the recent Eisteddfod. There were many small groups and individual entries. Amazing results included Sau-ching Leung who was awarded a trophy for her Piano Australian Composition; first prize for recital for solo; first prize original composition; first prize Mime Prepared solo; first prize in the Ballet Classical flat shoe group; CYM Shop Competition trophy; Meryl Brock Award Pianoforte solo; and overall winner of the Rita McGregor Memorial Trophy for the best performance in recital, prose and poetry from all sections from 8 years and under, 10 years and under, and 12 years and under. That is a fantastic achievement.
Jane Anderson was awarded first prize in the Orchestral String solo 8 years and under; first prize Orchestral Strings duet; first prize Pianoforte solo; first prize Prepared Reading; first prize Scripture reading; and together with Chloe Wallent and Georgia Bliss, won first prize in the Recorder trio 10 years and under. That is fantastic. These are great results for these young girls and they must spend a lot of time practising. It is great to see their hard work get such tremendous results.
Benjamin Lu won the Pianoforte duet 12 years and under and, with his friend, Raymond, was awarded the NS and BM McCleary Award for the Most Promising Duo Pianoforte for 12 years and under. Kenny Lee won first prize in the Pianoforte solo 10 years and under. Jedda Bennett-Kellam won first prize in the Brass solo. Jason O’Meara won first prize in the Pianoforte solo 6 years and under. Lucy Anderson and Katie Rehrmann won first prize in the Mixed Instrumental Ensemble trio and first prize in the Orchestral Strings duet.
Lucy and Katie with Claudia Baggley and Rachel Quong won first prize in the Orchestral String Quartet.
Adrienne Turner was awarded the Lily Vita Ballet Award for most promising junior dancer 10 years and under, and won first prize in the Musical Theatre Solo; Jazz/Hip Hop Solo and Tap Solo. Felicity Lay was highly commended for her Orchestral String Solo, and Lucy Anderson was highly and very highly commended for her Piano Solo, Violin Solo and Scripture Reading. Lucy and Vaanathy Kandiah were highly recommended for their Piano Duet 12 years and under.
In the 8 years and under there were more wonderful results. Jackie and Garwerd Liang, first prize Pianoforte Duet, and Garwerd also won first prize Pianoforte Solo - Australian composer. Both Jackie and Garwerd received high commendations in the Pianoforte Solos. Margaret Harrison was highly commended for her performance in the Piano Solo 11 years and under for playing less than 18 months.
More fantastic results included first prizes to the Moil German Choir in the Modern Song Ensemble; Moil School Choir in Section 213; and the Moil School Band in the Band Medley. These choirs could not have achieved such fantastic results without the dedication of their teachers Mrs Sutter, Mrs Simmonds and Ms Tracey Etherington.
On the sporting front it is great tonight to be talking about Valentina Dillon who won the certificate for the best and fairest at soccer whilst Jarod Luis received a certificate for determination and commitment. Valentina and Jarod play for the Mindil Aces Soccer Club. Madison and Imogen Campbell won trophies at callisthenics. Madison won a first for Graceful Solo and for Solo, whilst Imogen came second in the Duo and third in the Graceful Solo.
I have been hearing fantastic things about Jingili Primary School community. The kids there go out of their way to help the disadvantaged. Over the last couple of months, Caroline Hughes’ class of 1/2H have encouraged their schoolmates to donate their 10 pieces to help Gonzalo of Guatemala through World Vision. They are hoping to raise $500.
The preschool and its subcommittee has taken up the challenge of sponsoring Shipra Mojumder through World Vision. The children will be learning all about Shipra and her family challenges. Shipra is four years old and lives in Bangladesh. The preschoolers will be discussing how they can help people and the difference they can make through a commitment and caring.
With the recent tragic earthquake in Java, Mr Burke’s class decided to raise money for the victims with a cake and ice cup stall. I hear the girls did all the organising and they should be commended for their hard work.
The generosity of the students at Jingili does not stop there. The Student Representative Council organised and held a disco with a ‘bring and buy’ cake stall last Friday, with all the money raised going to the Red Cross. I am sure the kids had lots of fun whilst raising money for a good cause. Then there was the World’s Biggest Morning Tea for the Cancer Council of Australia raising $114 from staff and parents.
Everyone in the Jingili School gets in on the act of helping out people in need. I commend their generous spirit, initiative and hard work.
On the sporting front, tonight I would like to talk about some of the great kids in my electorate. Congratulations to Neil Vea-Vea of Jingili who has been selected in the NT Primary Rugby League team, and Ben Rioli who has been chosen to play in the NT Primary Australian Rules, the championships of which will be played in Darwin in August. No doubt these boys worked very hard to be given the honour of playing in these representative sides.
I would also like to talk about Wagaman Primary School; there are some great things going on there. Madeleine Birch, Abbie Burke, Nicole Larking, Dale Wilson and Megan Burke have all performed exceptionally well for the Wagaman Primary School in cross country. Well done also to Trevor Nickels, and Jack and Daniel Russell whom I understand played some great footy in the AFL exchange held in Alice Springs at the end of May playing for the Northern Suburbs Stars team.
It is important that we acknowledge the hard work of our public servants, particularly over a long period of time and the excellence with which they service the people and government of the Northern Territory.
Tonight, I acknowledge the hard work that George Curran, a constituent of mine who lives in Moil, has done for the Territory. George will be leaving the Northern Territory public sector, effective this Friday, after 24 years of great service. George has made a valuable contribution to the Territory, and his achievements, personality, honesty, and loyalty have been respected and well known by all those who have worked with him.
George joined the Northern Territory government in 1982, coming from Vic Roads - then the Country Roads Board - where he commenced his engineering career nine years earlier as a cadet engineer. During his employment with the Northern Territory government, George worked in the structural design section of the department in Darwin. There, he further developed his structural skills, particularly in the bridge design area, eventually becoming the manager of the section.
From 1984 to 1986, George took leave from the Northern Territory government to join the Australian Staffing Assistance Scheme, where he provided bridge building skills and training for the local population in the developing country of Kenya in Africa.
Upon his return in the Northern Territory government in 1986, he quickly established himself as the highly-skilled and experienced bridge design engineer that he is known for throughout the public and private sector of the Northern Territory. George has designed or managed and designed nearly all government bridges built in the last two generations in the Northern Territory. I understand he was the first to be called upon to provide structural advice for the restoration of building structures following natural disasters. He is affectionately known throughout government and industry as the ‘principal structural advisor to government’. His resignation will leave a massive gap in structural experience and knowledge within the public sector.
It is great to know that George will be staying in the Territory, so his experience and expertise will not be lost. I again thank George for his dedication to all the projects he has been involved in over the years, particularly the bridges throughout the Northern Territory road network.
Tonight, I also thank Mr Mac Whitaker, who is a Supervisor Electrical with the Construction Division of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, who has given valuable service and commitment to the Northern Territory public sector for a period spanning over 24 years. Mac is about to embark on accumulated leave prior to his formal retirement in February 2007.
Mac’s personal effort within the department over this period has been greatly appreciated; in particular, his provision of building/electrical expertise to the supervision of construction and maintenance on many government buildings in the Northern Territory, and his ongoing support and commitment to the development and quality of public infrastructure. Work colleagues speak highly of the dedication and support that Mac has provided to them to meet project standards and time frames. He should be applauded for his commitment and dedication to his profession, and the organisation generally.
I understand that Mac is planning to retire in Queensland and spend time with his family. I wish him the very best in his retirement and acknowledge his tremendous contribution in the Northern Territory.
I would like to talk about the Philippine Independence Day celebration. Recently, I was invited to attend the Philippine Independence Day celebration held at the SKYCITY Casino by the Filipino Community Council of the Northern Territory. The President of the council, Elena Ralph, together with her committee of Arsenio de Guzman, Senior Vice President; Benita Bernabe, Treasurer; Cristina Black, executive committee member; Nanette Thiel, executive committee member; Rosalinda Isorina, Secretary; and Edgar Negosa, executive committee member, did a wonderful job organising a fantastic night with incredible entertainment.
The Filipino Community Council of the NT is an advocacy body whose main role is to study, respond, and contribute to the policies and procedures that impact on the lives on Filipino migrants and their families. FILCONT is made up of member organisations and is affiliated with the national body, the Filipino Community Council of Australia.
The celebration was in recognition of the Philippines liberation from foreign domination in 1898. Reading from the program for the night’s festivities it said:
It was great to see the unity of the member organisation of FILCONT to achieve such a successful night.
The guests who attended the 108th Independence Day were entertained by the singing of Grepil Jakubowski, and then a glimpse of Filipino dances through the years, with a pre-Spanish period dance by Merle Masterson; the Spanish period evoked by Che-Che Cabunsol and Edgar Negosa; and the post-Spanish period by Jackie Debuque, Katrina Jap, Christienne Javier and Andrea Ocampo performing the Itik-Itik; Angie Cope and Susanna Dizon dancing the Pandanggo Sa Ilaw; and Christina Black, Julie McCool, Cynthia Molina and Tess Tabuzo doing the Bakya Mo Neneng. The last category was contemporary dance with Gina and Zaldy doing the Samba.
To cap off the performances, the crowd were delighted with a surprise performance by the Toreador dancers – Nol McCaulay, Lala Powers, Josephine Brutti and Elena Ralph - who donned Zorro costumes, and their partners, the ‘Spanish Senoritas’ - Henry Barbajo, Peter Labayog, Dido Laurente and Reggie Lazaro. This dynamic performance thrilled the crowd and caused a great amount of laughter. The trumpet player who heralded the Toreadors was Andrea Ocampo.
It was a great night, great food and great company. Manny Cruz was there, as were Daryl and Maureen Manzie, Arsenio and Ricarda de Guzman, Judith Ventic, and Maria and Danilo Cabunsol.
I was sad to hear that Elena is retiring as President of FILCONT after so many years, but we are confident that someone will step into the breach. The Saturday night celebration was a glowing example of her efforts with the Filipino community and just what a wonderful community they are. They are very talented. They have much fun and really rejoice in their Filipino culture.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I have a couple of matters to talk about tonight. One is on behalf of some pensioners who came to see me in relation to the Pensioner Concession Scheme that so many of our senior Territorians use on a regular basis, or as often as they possibly can. The scheme is for interstate flights every two years, and aged pensioners are entitled to a 50% concession on the cost of a return flight to any capital city in Australia. Alternatively, they can have a 100% concession once every four years. As we know, the flights can be used for overseas travel, in which case the concession is 50%, or 100% in four years, of the cost of the return economy airfare to Adelaide, or the actual fare, whichever is the lesser amount.
I note that Labor changed the scheme slightly by including the ability for pensioners to use the scheme to fly a family member or friend to Darwin from interstate. However, the scheme continues to fall short for two reasons. It has been raised with me on more than one occasion, and it relates to the possibility of intrastate travel. I am calling on the government tonight to introduce intrastate travel, as it will benefit a great number of senior Territorians and pensioners, in particular. For pensioners, there is a certain level of bizarreness, if you like, about the system where they can go interstate but they cannot go intrastate.
If you have Territorians who live in Darwin, they cannot avail themselves of this scheme to travel from Darwin to see family members in Alice Springs or vice versa. I know this issue has been kicking around for some years, but with all of the money the government has received from GST revenues, I ask the relevant minister to seriously look at the scheme and amend it so that intrastate travel for pensioners can be allowed. I am sure it will be used and I am sure it will benefit a number of pensioners in the Territory.
Another issue these people raised with me was the fact that the existing scheme interstate and overseas does not have an accommodation component. It was put to me that with so many package deals being available these days, particularly on the Internet, deals can be secured at prices that are often lower than the general return economy airfare to another capital city. It was a good point, I thought, because these people were asking me to urge government to look at making the scheme a bit more flexible. The government could set a dollar amount – it could be an agreed figure, an economy return airfare from Darwin or indeed, Alice Springs – but if those pensioners are able to look up the Net, or through agents, get a package deal that might include, for instance, three days away for a cheap airfare inclusive of accommodation and a hotel or motel in another capital city, then it seems to me to be a fairly persuasive argument. There would not be a cost disadvantage to government. It would be providing pensioners with an additional opportunity to avail themselves of interstate travel but also to pay some accommodation.
Some people do not necessarily want to go away for weeks at a time. Some people, particularly couples from my experience, are happy to go down to see their sons and daughters, their grandkids, only for a few days, and we all know of the great deals that can be obtained on the Internet or through a fairly dynamic travel agent.
I am asking the Minister for Senior Territorians to look at this matter. I would be most grateful if she would formally, or informally, let me know her response so that I can get back to the pensioners, these senior Territorians, who specially set aside their time to see me and talk me through this issue.
I have always taken the view that a good idea will get a run pretty much by anyone. I know that in this parliament, particularly over the last couple of days, there have been some differences on a number of important issues. However, this is a good idea. It is for pensioners, and any government worth their salt will try to be flexible in their endeavours to ensure that better outcomes are achieved for Territorians.
The CLP, of course, introduced the Pensioner Concession Scheme. I know that intrastate travel came up from time to time. I am not sure why the CLP government did not change it so that intrastate travel could be used by pensioners but what was presumably right then may not be right now. The government certainly has significantly more money, courtesy of Peter Costello’s GST, so I would certainly be urging government to look favourably at this proposal because it struck me as a good idea.
Tonight, I would like to talk about Gillen Primary School. Gillen Primary School is in the heart of my electorate and I have been to Gillen Primary School a couple of times in recent times, and in the past. The relatively new principal was the former deputy principal, Mr David Glyde, and going back into the school recently showed me the amount of energy that exists at Gillen Primary School. It is always a pleasure to walk into any school in my electorate but there was a very positive energy. The teachers were upbeat and the students were certainly upbeat as well.
I was asked by a teacher, Lisa Wallace, to talk to the representatives of the Student Representative Council. I, as I do with schools, contact the student representative bodies as the local member - I am sure I am not alone in this regard - and offer to come and see the students. I was truly delighted to be asked by Ms Wallace to talk to the students, which I did only a few weeks ago. What a dynamic group of students they were. They took me through some of the things they were doing. I was introduced to all of them and I will name them shortly so that their names will be permanently recorded on the Parliamentary Record. I will come to that soon.
When they were talking to me about what they were doing there was no doubt in my mind that these kids were bright, dynamic and innovative, and were well versed in the general political situation in the Northern Territory. I was happy to answer many of their questions but they knew a lot as well. Under the direction of Ms Lisa Wallace I am sure they will continue to do great things. I met the office bearers, president, vice president, treasurer and so on, and we went around the table and they fired as many questions at me as any media pack will do and what very good questions they were.
I would like to place their names on the Parliamentary Record: Shanice Sevallos-Smith, Thomas Smith, Zarah Butcher, Zianna Clarke, Sean Chalmers, Terrence Curly, Vithan Thillairajah, Emma Farrelly, Nathan Dingjan-Birchall, Patrick Cole-Manolis and Jayleen Sabino.
As I have said, they were very impressive young students. If those kids are the future of the Northern Territory then the Territory is going to be in very safe hands. We went around the table and all of them told me what they were interested in doing when they left school. I am sure all of them have a bright future.
I was then invited back to Gillen Primary School by another teacher, Henni Zwerwer, whose class was doing a project on the history of television. That involved discussions about various media and they wanted their local politician to talk to them as well as be interviewed. I was interviewed by some budding young journalists. If they do not pursue a journalistic path I am sure whatever path they pursue they will impress and they will be fine Territorians. They are already fine young Territorians. I was put through the mill by Emma and Karissa. It was a very difficult interview on occasion because of the hard-hitting nature of their questions. I do not usually get asked some of the questions by the media representatives in the Territory but they were good questions from young Territorians. It was part of the project they were doing in their study and research of the 50 years of television. I hope I assisted them with that project.
The students were Emma Farrelly, Karissa Nogler-Wells and Shayne Sales. We had the camera and the interview set up and it was a very interesting interview. I have not seen the finished product as there was some editing to be done. I hope the students found it as enjoyable as I did and that I will get to see the interview. I thought it was important to place their names, as well as their teacher’s name, on the Parliamentary Record so that they would be forever recorded in the permanent Hansard of the parliament of the Northern Territory.
I know the Territory is in good hands when you meet such exciting, bright kids as the ones you do at Gillen Primary School.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
VISITORS
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Bachelor of Education students from the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education accompanied by Robyn Ober. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
PETITIONS
Marrakai Downs Bus Route
Marrakai Downs Bus Route
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition from 29 petitioners praying that the Marrakai Downs bus route be changed. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read.
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory. We, the undersigned, respectfully showeth that the existing bus route collecting children from Marrakai Downs is too dangerous for all those who use the main highway and for those waiting for the bus (being 14 children on the side of the highway) being passed by trucks from the mines and coaches for tourism.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the bus route be changed, as a matter of safety reasons, to Marrakai Road where the children will be picked up on the Burnside Road away from the busy highway. Your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Middle Point School –
Request for Permanent Teachers
Request for Permanent Teachers
Mr WARREN (Goyder): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition from 31 petitioners praying that the Middle Point School be given two permanent teachers for 2007 and 2008. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read.
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory. We the undersigned parents and members of the school community of Middle Point School, respectfully showeth that we are seriously concerned about the ongoing teacher/teaching changes (six in lower primary in the past three years plus three in the upper primary by the end of this year), which is seriously affecting the emotional behaviour and educational wellbeing of our children.
We are a two-teacher primary school with a current student population of 37. We feel our school is being treated as a temporary halfway point for teachers on the move. But we acknowledge the temporary teaching changes that are already set in place for this year cannot be changed.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that starting next year the Education Department will treat our children on an equal status with other schools. We demand that the current practice of employing temporary teachers cease and that we be given two permanent teachers for at least the full 2007 and 2008 calendar years.
Kennel and Cattery in Virginia –
Request to Overturn Approval
Request to Overturn Approval
Mr WARREN (Goyder): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition from 202 petitioners praying that approval for a kennel and cattery at Lot 3296 De Caen Close, Virginia, be overturned. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it complies with requirements of standing orders. Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read.
To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory. We, the undersigned, respectfully showeth that the Development Consent Authority has approved the development of a kennel and cattery on Lot 3296 De Caen Close, Virginia, that is not compatible with the current dense housing in the area. Despite the current RL1 zoning (which should be RR) the block in question is too small (1.75 ha) according to the Litchfield Area Plan 2004 for such a development, and far too close to many existing homes, all within 500 m.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Development Consent Authority approval be overturned by our parliament. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Kennel and Cattery in Virginia –
Request to Overturn Approval
Mr WARREN (Goyder)(by leave): Mr Acting Speaker, I present a petition, not conforming with standing orders, from 17 petitioners relating to approval for a kennel and cattery at Lot 3296, De Caen Close, Virginia.
Mr Acting Speaker, I do not propose that the petition be read as it is similar in terms to a petition presented earlier in these sittings.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Indigenous Women in Tourism
Indigenous Women in Tourism
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Speaker, today I inform the House of more good news in the area of indigenous tourism with the creation of special development tours for entrepreneurial Aboriginal women considering a future in the tourism industry. The Women and Indigenous Tourism Development Initiative is part of an innovative approach to tourism development. Its main aim is to help Aboriginal women gain confidence and experience in tourism. The developmental tour concept will allow Aboriginal women the opportunity to witness close up the levels of service required when dealing with visitors to the Territory. It will also help these women understand the kinds of experiences our travellers are searching for.
Tourism is not for everyone; operating a successful and reliable small business can be extremely hard work. The developmental tours will give these budding entrepreneurs an idea of the level of commitment that is required, and the skills and abilities they will need to be successful.
I am delighted to inform the House that on Sunday, 4 June 2006, 20 women from around the nation who are involved in indigenous tourism development arrived in Darwin. They joined Aboriginal women from the Top End to participate in the first women’s developmental tour. These visiting women embarked on an eight-day tour across the Top End meeting Aboriginal women from Larrakia, Wagiman, Jawoyn, Murrumburr, Bolmo, Mirrar and Yolngu country. A major aim of this travelling workshop is for our visitors to share their vast knowledge of indigenous tourism with our local women. The share of knowledge goes both ways with our visitors learning much about the way we do things in the Territory. A number of these interstate women are tour leaders who are assessing the Territory as a possible annual destination for special interest tours. The tour is, obviously, very beneficial for them.
On departing Darwin, the group travelled to Tjuwaliyn; that is, Douglas Hot Springs. It is a sacred women’s area for the people of the Wagiman language group and the perfect location for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women to sit and discuss women’s issues. The group then travelled to Kakadu National Park to meet with Bessie Coleman at Gunlom Falls. Bessie is a Jawoyn traditional owner who welcomed the group to her country and told how she wanted to be involved in the tourism sector. Their journey continued through Kakadu to Patonga Homestead where the women took part in a tour with Murdudjurl Pty Ltd. Mandy Muir and her family began operating in October last year and have already achieved a level of professionalism that is a must see for any emerging Aboriginal tour operator. The group then went on to Kakadu Culture Camp, which I had the pleasure of opening a few weeks ago, and saw firsthand the work being done by Fred and Jen Hunter.
All in all, the tour was an outstanding success. It gave Aboriginal Territorians with an interest in tourism the chance to meet leaders in the area and discuss their ideas. The development of indigenous tourism product and experience is a key priority for this government and the Women and Indigenous Tourism Development Initiative is an excellent example of that commitment.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her ministerial report this morning. Indigenous tourism has great opportunity in the Northern Territory to develop even further than it has. There is not one person in this Assembly who does not encourage indigenous tourism ventures within the Territory.
One of the challenges that we have had in the past with indigenous tourism is ensuring that those ventures which are marketed and advertised are able to fulfil their commitment. One of the problems that we have had in the past - for instance, I will use the example of the corroboree at Springvale Homestead in Katherine. For 20 years, it ran very successfully, but then it became impossible to run that tour any longer because of the lack of commitment by the performers.
It is extremely important for us to market internationally and nationally the fact that we can fulfil that promise with indigenous tourism. I strongly support it, but we must give it as much support as possible to ensure that the commitment is fulfilled and we are able to give that experience to the tourists.
Defence Support - Competing for
Through Life Support Contracts
Through Life Support Contracts
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Mr Acting Speaker, I wish to report on a series of meetings I recently initiated with Defence prime contractors based interstate who will be competing for the Through Life Support contracts for the Abrams tanks and ASLAVs based at Robertson Barracks. Members will recall from earlier proceedings in the House that the Australian government is purchasing a fleet of 59 Abrams Main Battle tanks from the US government to replace the aging fleet of Leopard tanks at a cost of around $530m. Forty-one of the tanks will be based with 1st Brigade at Robertson Barracks from 2007. In addition to the tanks, the US is providing advance gunnery and driver training simulators, training and other support equipment, a range of spares, refuelling vehicles, tank transporters and ammunition, and seven Hercules armoured recovery vehicles, four of which will be based in Darwin. This acquisition has provided the opportunity to convince Defence and the successful contractors that the through life support for the tanks should be undertaken as close to Robertson Barracks as possible instead of being undertaken interstate.
On 14 February this year, the government announced plans for the development of an industrial park, including a Defence support hub, near Robertson Barracks. The 60 ha site on Thorngate Road, Holtze, will give the Territory a strong competitive edge to target the Through Life Support and maintenance contracts for the Abrams tanks and other Defence equipment based at the barracks. Such a Defence support hub could accommodate the prime contractor that wins the contract for the Abrams tanks, and establish land for other prime contractors and SMEs which deliver strategic support to 1st Brigade; that is, it will provide a physical platform for business to establish strategic clusters.
The developments of the Defence support hub aims to attract Defence prime contractors, projects and activities that are currently not undertaken here in the Northern Territory, with a subsequent flow-on of work to local SMEs. Defence would benefit strategically from most of the repairs and maintenance on its armoured vehicles being undertaken close to where they are based as it would substantially reduce transportation risks and costs and the turnaround time, which would thereby increase the readiness and preparedness of the equipment and the regiments to deploy. Naturally, if the work was done in the Territory instead of interstate, it would benefit our local business community and our economy by creating jobs, increasing our population and broadening our industry base.
We have made the point very strongly that undertaking as much as possible of the through life support for the tanks and other armoured vehicles locally would be consistent with the more contemporary arrangements Defence has made in respect of its other major platforms, such as the Tiger helicopters and the Armidale Class patrol boats, which will both be based and supported in Darwin.
In December 2005, the Australian government called for expressions of interest from industry in respect of Through Life Support contracts for the Abrams and ASLAVs. In March 2006, officers from my department attended the Defence Materiel Organisation briefings to industry in relation to the Through Life Support contracts. The briefing was attended by all those companies which had registered an expression of interest. The Territory government was the only state or territory government in attendance at the briefing. The DMO has since released a draft statement of work for the Abrams tanks and we understand is holding consultations with the companies concerned.
Over the past two weeks I have travelled to Sydney and Adelaide and held confidential discussions with the prime contractors who are likely to lead bids for these Through Life Support contracts. The meetings, held in commercial-in-confidence, were attended by the CEOs of the companies and, in most cases, their senior management team, including the managers who will frame the company tenders for the work.
At each meeting, I delivered a presentation on the proposed Defence support hub, on the strategic and commercial rationale for undertaking this work in Darwin instead of being undertaken interstate. I also shared with the companies the third party expert analysis that the government commissioned on the cost effectiveness of doing the work on armoured vehicles in Darwin compared to the cost of transporting the vehicles and undertaking the work interstate. I also met with key Defence people and other Commonwealth government officials and industry people in Canberra last week, advocating the through life support case for Darwin. As an example, the report prepared by ACIL Tasman stated that, when considering the cost of freight and equipment down time while it is transported across long distances over the life of the contract, it would cost more than six times as much to maintain the Abrams tanks in Bandiana as it would in Darwin.
The government is actively pursuing the opportunity to increase the number and size of Defence support activities undertaken in the Territory. The Chief Minister and I have both met with Defence officials, Defence prime contractors, and the new Minister for Defence, Hon Brendan Nelson MP. We are strongly lobbying for this work to be undertaken in Darwin in recognition of the benefits it would be deliver to our local business and economy, and jobs that it will provide Territorians. This government is engaged with prime contractors and the Commonwealth government, and will continue pursuing this initiative to ensure that the Territory option is well understood and given due consideration.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the minister for his report which is appropriate in all of the circumstances. I know that he has been working on this. I have had some representations over the last six months by both interested and potential contractors. I am interested to hear the minister, quite rightly, saying that he is going into bat, as we would, to ensure that the hub does exist in Darwin. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to work out that it is desirable in all of the circumstances, both from a Defence point of view but also for the future benefit of the Territory economy.
However, I am aware of one contractor that is a Territory company. I hope the minister’s commitment to getting the hub here in Darwin is equalled by his commitment to ensuring, to the extent that he is able, that the job actually goes to a Darwin- or Territory-based company.
I thank the minister for his report. I have been expecting a report like the one he has just delivered for some time. I am very pleased to hear that he is seriously going into bat. All of us want to see this Defence hub in action, and it makes perfect sense for it to be here in Darwin. Thank you very much, minister, for your report.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Speaker, I welcome the minister’s report on the industrial Defence hub network. It is good that we can have a Through Life Support program. There is no doubt that will be beneficial to the Territory. However, in this big push for helping the economy and talking these things up, we forget that it has to go somewhere. The minister said that there is some land set aside for this hub on Thorngate Road, just south of Robertson Barracks. We should not lose sight that this particular area set aside, as normally happens with planners, is a square, and it is going to the minister as an amendment to the Litchfield Area Plan. The fact is that there is a large quantity of wetlands right next to this particular site. Some of the area that is proposed is a wetland, and it is called a priority environmental area under the Litchfield Land Use Objectives.
Even though I support what is going on, I would like the government to put equally as much attention as to the siting of this particular hub so that there are no detrimental effects to the environment. After all, it is going to be an industrial site right next to a priority environmental area. In addition, there will be an increase in traffic which belongs to Litchfield Shire. I am not sure who is going to pay for the upgrading of the road. Defence does not pay rates, and I am not sure whether the government would pay rates if they owned this network.
The other issue that has been raised with me is that some companies feel by setting up this special area, they may be at a disadvantage in doing some of the work because they have set up in other areas that the government has set aside for industrial development. They are just wondering whether they will be at some disadvantage at not being so close to a site which, when they bought their site in another industrial area, they did not even know was going to happen.
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank members for their contributions. I can say to the Leader of the Opposition that the local Territory-based company that is bidding for this work is receiving the same attention and assistance as are other companies. At the end of the day, we have to cover the field, and we want to see this through life support based here in Darwin. It is not a Territory government tender; it is a Commonwealth tender. We have to work with all companies because we do not know who is going to win. I wish the Territory-based company the best of luck.
In regard to the concerns raised by the member for Nelson, all environmental legislation and regulations, and planning regulations, will be complied with. We are developing this in the same way we develop any other piece of land. If local companies are running the argument that somehow by establishing this industrial park they are at a disadvantage, the Leopard tanks are currently maintained at Bandiana in Victoria; they are not maintained here. We are trying to bring new work to the Territory that is going to give existing businesses in the Territory an opportunity to partner with the new companies that are coming in. If we do not do it, we will not get the tanks and they will stay in Bandiana in Victoria.
Elite Sporting Events in the Territory
Ms LAWRIE (Sport and Recreation): Mr Acting Speaker, this Dry Season might have brought some cold shivers to Territorians, but for those who love their sport these will soon be replaced with shivers of excitement as the government continues to deliver elite sporting events. The Dry is the best time of the year for playing sport and we see many codes nationally vying for the Territory as an attractive destination to escape the very bitter southern winter.
Over the Queen’s Birthday long weekend a great Territory event has taken place in the Centre. This, of course, is the mighty Finke Desert Race. I congratulate our Minister for Central Australia for competing and finishing the course. The Finke Desert Race hosted competitors from throughout Australia and also overseas in a battle to complete the 235 km gruelling track. I am told that some 10 000 to 15 000 spectators lined the track to witness some of the action. I congratulate Mr Antony Yoffa, an outstanding sporting administrator, and his Finke Desert Race organising committee on delivering another sporting event into the Centre.
It just gets better. Next week, we will be welcoming the very best up and coming cricketers to Darwin from not only Australia but also Pakistan, India and New Zealand to compete in an A Series with Australian players vying for potential Ashes selection. Territorians will get to see some top class cricket and an early glimpse of our many future national reps in action, with players who have also competed at the elite level for their nations. This is going to be a fantastic spectacle with a mix of four day games, one day games and, for the first time in the Top End, 20/20 cricket; the new form of the code. I am certain we will witness many great international battles at TIO Stadium and Gardens Oval.
At the very end of the month, a great highlight of our sporting calendar, the V8s will again roar through Darwin and down to our Hidden Valley Motorsports Complex. The V8s are a great feature of not only the Territory sporting calendar but also its social calendar, bringing with it enormous benefits to our lifestyle and our tourism economy. I am very pleased that the Chief Minister has been able to negotiate the long-term presence of the V8s in Darwin until at least 2012.
There is more to come. This is a very exciting time of the year for the minister for Racing with the Darwin Cup being run on 7 August with all the colour and festival spirit that this cup carnival brings. I will be looking forward to attending Ladies Day in the lead-up to cup day, and welcoming many of our interstate visitors to the Territory for this great racing carnival. The Martin Labor government is spending $6.8m next year to support thoroughbred racing right across the Territory.
On 12 August, the Western Bulldogs are back in Darwin for their Round 19 clash with Port Adelaide at TIO Stadium. Both teams enjoy a strong following in the Territory. I anticipate that Territory footy fans will fill the stadium to capacity in support of these two great teams. I have been working with the AFLNT, the Western Bulldogs, and representatives of the AFL to look at growing our crowds at TIO Stadium. I am looking forward to welcoming the Bulldogs back to Darwin. I like to refer to them as the ‘Darwin Doggies’. I thank them for their very strong, ongoing commitment to hosting home games in the Territory. They have enjoyed a flying start to the year, despite a recent horrible run with injuries and, with Port Adelaide now hitting their straps, it should be a great game right on the eve of the finals.
The Territory is also a great place for local sports to host national championships. This Dry Season we will see Veterans Women’s Hockey and Callisthenics hosting teams from all over Australia. These will provide a boost for local tourism and the economy as many athletes choose to bring with them family and friends and stay a while longer to enjoy the great Territory hospitality for which we are well renowned.
Territorians’ lifestyle is the envy of the nation. I am certain that the many sporting events on offer can only increase our passion for choosing to live here.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Speaker, the CLP opposition welcomes the statement on the many events which are occurring in the Top End and Central Australia; it is good to hear. At the risk of copping a response from the minister, I will proceed down this line.
One, the report is welcomed. The issue needs to be further separated into two components. What is the purpose of these events? If we can clearly describe the purpose of these events, particularly in the Northern Territory as we are in a place unique in our nation, we have a strategic advantage in much of our sporting infrastructure. For example, the cricket is fantastic and is a great event. It provides us with a great opportunity for further engagement within the region. In the racing industry also, we have a great strategic advantage to be able to draw in people from around the country and internationally. However, the facilities in swimming, particularly, with strategic focus, could also be elevated to a place where, in this continent, we would have a premier facility that could attract international events.
So too, with soccer. I appreciate the moves that have already been made in recognition of the potential for soccer, which is enormous, as the minister well knows. We have heard many comments to the effect that now that soccer has gained a greater prominence within the country, the Northern Territory is strategically located to progress our engagement in the immediate region.
On these sporting engagements rides our the capacity to engage our near communities to our north, which brings on the industry and business engagements through Asian Relations and Trade. I would like to hear more of that talk rather than just a description of the great events that we are all going to enjoy. I would like to hear another level where the potential of these events will allow us engagement with our regions, both within the country and externally in Asia, and even further beyond. That kind of talk will allow us to elevate and strengthen our strategic advantage.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Speaker, the place is buzzing at the moment. You have to admit, with the Finke Desert Race, Alice Springs is buzzing. We had the bike challenge. There is so much going on it is a great feeling. I say to the Minister for Central Australia, good on you for having a go. Is it true that you did not use the ablution block though; that you had a pee behind a bush instead?
Dr Toyne: The human bladder holds only 400 ml.
Mrs BRAHAM: You need not tell us now, tell me later.
There is also an interesting program – I am not sure if it was on Imparja or SBS - showing the Aboriginal people who were involved in the Finke Desert Race. I hope all members of the House saw that program. It was really great.
I congratulate the people involved in the bike challenge. People came from all over Australia and it was huge.
I ask the minister, though, if she has seen the pamphlet put out by the Office of Central Australia called Centre Spokes about all the sporting events happening? Did you see it? Have you proof read it? I suggest you have a look at it, minister, because it is an interesting document that highlights things like the grandstand at Traeger Park. It lists in the editorial section the contents. It lists an ‘Update for Masters Games’. Okay, where is this update for the Masters Games in this pamphlet? Does it mean to say that nothing has happened for the Masters Games? Perhaps you ought to have a look at that pamphlet, minister, which has your and the Chief Minister’s photos on it, bragging about what is happening in Central Australia. Obviously, it reflects the inefficiency of the Office of Central Australia, or the fact that someone cannot proof read very well. I am not quite sure which.
Well done for promoting all the sports. Do not forget; we are still waiting for the Demons to come up and thrash some of the other teams around Australia, and we look forward to seeing them in the premiership.
Ms LAWRIE (Sport and Recreation): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the opposition, for a change, in welcoming the events. The shadow spokesperson has consistently called for a review of the elite sporting events that we bring to the Territory. He does not understand the contents …
Mr MILLS: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I have never called for a review. I have asked for a consideration of cost benefit analysis so that we know we are getting value for money in the long term. That is rubbish!
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Blain, if you feel you have been misquoted, you can make …
Mr Mills: I have been!
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Please continue.
Ms LAWRIE: The shadow spokesperson has called for a cost benefit analysis review while, at the same time, saying that the government holds too many reviews. It is a bit like Darwin City Council trying to track down where they are with their swimming venue. First of all, they are talking about a swimming venue at one place, then they are talking about needing another pool. I agree with you; I would like to see a great swimming venue in the Top End. However, Darwin City Council, which has the pools, does not seem to have a consistent line yet on where it is going to put the $20m-odd it has sitting in its funds account into building an aquatic centre. As minister for sport, I am going to have a meeting with the Lord Mayor. I am really keen to hear from Darwin City Council about what they want to do.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Your time has expired, minister.
EnvironmeNT Grants - Schools
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Acting Speaker, I rise to talk about this government’s EnvironmeNT Grants and the lucky 2006 recipients of the schools component of the grants.
The EnvironmeNT Grants is a scheme introduced by the Northern Territory government in 2003 to enable all Territorians to be able to apply for grants for community environment and heritage projects. Before the introduction of this hugely popular grants program, Territorians who were not involved with larger community organisations had no real avenue for applying for grants if they had a great idea for an environment initiative. A recommendation from the Youth Round Table saw our Labor government initiate this unique and equitable grants program that provides all Territorians with the benefit of applying for assistance.
From the very first round, the response from the public has been unprecedented. Territorians have truly taken these environment grants to heart. I know I have said it many times, but I will say it again: we truly have one of the best environments in the world. It is the basis of our wonderful unmatched lifestyle, a haven that we want to preserve for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren to enjoy.
Dr Lim: You will go skindiving in Larrakeyah, will you?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Can you tell that annoying little voice over there to be quiet?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order!
Ms SCRYMGOUR: The Martin Labor government has a strong commitment to balancing growth with the protection of the environment by supporting local community groups …
Mr Henderson: Did you bring your box of tissues today?
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I would ask you to direct the Leader of Government Business to withdraw his offensive remark directed squarely and fairly at my colleague, the member for Greatorex. The Leader of Government Business interjected and said to the member for Greatorex: ‘Did you bring your box of tissues today?’ That is outrageous and insensitive. I ask that you ask him to withdraw it.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I do not find any offence in what he actually said. However, in the interests of keeping peace in the parliament, if the minister believes it was an offensive remark, would he kindly withdraw it.
Mr HENDERSON: If I have offended anybody’s sensitivities, I withdraw.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Acting Speaker, the Martin Labor government has a strong commitment to balancing growth with the protection of the environment by supporting local community groups and ordinary Territorians who want to make a difference. The importance of the EnvironmeNT Grants is not to be underestimated. Having a specific grants program that allows our youth and young kids to be involved with their environment is a worthy investment for the future as it will be theirs to look after in years to come.
This brings me to the lucky recipients of the schools component of the grants. The Northern Territory government has just awarded $25 000 in grants to schools across the Northern Territory, both in our remote areas and our urban schools. Grants for individual projects that are non-school related are still being assessed and will be announced next month. I look forward to reporting on these lucky recipients also.
In 2006-07, two subcategories of school projects grants were established – the Sustainable Schools Project and the Schools Environment Education Project – and there are many varied projects right across the board. Projects include: funding to the Jabiru Area School to create habitat havens post-Cyclone Monica; Ludmilla School for Ludmilla Creek Environment Project; Nhulunbuy High School for a horticulture project; a Bird Habitat Awareness and Improvement Project by Redsand Hill Homelands Centre; funding to Darwin High School to create a stage production on global environment issues; funding to Berry Springs School for a multisensory environmental garden. This government has certainly searched high and low for great projects. The Kintore Campus at Yirara College of the Finke Desert Mission is one of the most remote indigenous secondary schools in the Territory but that has not stopped the school from securing funding from these grants to install a drip irrigation system to ensure plant survival and demonstrate good water usage.
I would like to comment on the innovation, creativity and uniqueness of each of these projects, in particular this round. Moil Primary School students are again going to compost organic scraps from their school canteen as part of their anti-cane toad garden and install a solar powered pump to demonstrate other sustainability issues.
I am proud to be the minister giving out these grants to these schools, and the students who have come up with some great projects that will undoubtedly help our environment. It is because of our young ones and their diligence and commitment that our environment will benefit both today and in the future.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the minister for her report this morning. It is very encouraging to see that there is so much money being offered to school children so that they become involved in environmental issues. It is very important that our young people are trained at a very young age to become aware of the environment.
Unfortunately, there are two environmental issues that still have not been addressed and they are fairly important ones for the Territory. One of them is the Berry Springs Nature Park: it is still not open and is causing quite a few headaches as far as tourists and local people are concerned.
The other issue is highlighted in the media at the moment and that is the environmental issue of effluent being pumped into our harbour. If the minister could give us an update on what is being planned by the government to address this issue in the short term it would be appreciated.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Speaker, I know that the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage is dying for me to say something, and I will. I congratulate the government on its environmental grants. They are a great idea and they certainly encourage young people to look at ways of improving their environment.
Howard Springs school has a cane toad-free garden. The kids who put it together enjoyed doing it and it is something they are very proud of. Children do become proud of those particular projects. It is very important.
This report is about environmental grants. It is a good concept. It is part of the overall education of children and especially in remote areas where they usually do not get a chance to do some of these things. It is a great initiative from the government and I support what the government is doing as regards to the environmental grants.
We will say something else on those other areas of environmental issues later today.
Reports noted.
VISITORS
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I advise honourable members of the presence in the gallery of visitors as part of the Parliament House Public Tour Program. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, Hear!
DARWIN WATERFRONT CORPORATION BILL
(Serial 55)
(Serial 55)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The Darwin Waterfront and Convention Centre Development includes three main elements: the Darwin Convention Centre with a 1500 seat plenary capacity and 4000 m2 of exhibition space; community facilities including sea wall, wave lagoons, swimming areas, public promenade, parklands and picnic areas; and commercial developments including a Medina hotel, harbour side cafes and restaurants, and a staged residential development.
The community infrastructure components of the development will contain a number of public elements including the convention centre, swimming lagoons, a wave pool and sea wall. Infrastructure of this kind will require ongoing management, maintenance, and regulation.
The residential components of the development are staged with the first 141 units to be completed in 2008. The introduction of residents into the development in 2008 will necessitate the delivery of municipal services to the precinct. In this regard, the Territory has entered into arrangements with both the residential developer and the Darwin City Council under which the Territory has agreed to establish a statutory authority to, among other things, provide municipal services to the precinct.
This bill seeks to establish the Darwin Waterfront Corporation, a statutory corporation which will be responsible for these functions.
I now turn to the details of the bill. The development area, to be known as the Darwin Waterfront Precinct, will be severed from the municipality of Darwin and regulations made under the bill will define the areas of land forming the precinct. In the first instance, the corporation will be comprised of at least three but not more than seven members appointed by the minister. The minister will appoint a chairperson of the corporation. On the recommendation of the corporation, the minister will appoint a chief executive officer of the corporation who will be a member of that corporation and will exercise the powers and functions of the corporation under the direction of the members. The CEO will not be eligible for appointment as chairperson. The bill contains provisions which will provide the minister with powers to terminate the appointment of members in certain circumstances.
The general functions of the corporation as proposed in this bill include:
to do anything for the development of the land within the precinct owned or controlled by it;
to manage property in the precinct owned or controlled by it;
to promote the precinct as a place of residence, and a venue for public events and entertainment;
to preserve good order in the precinct;
to do anything for the provision of municipal services in the precinct;
to develop and maintain facilities in the precinct;
to advise the minister about the precinct on request;
to develop and manage land not forming part of the precinct; and
to perform other functions specified in the regulations.
Municipal functions are dealt with separately in the bill. Specifically, the bill requires the corporation to ensure that municipal services and amenities are provided for the precinct as specified in the bill and, additionally, in the regulations when drafted.
The bill provides the corporation with all the powers necessary for the performance of its functions including power to acquire, hold and dispose of land and personal property. The bill provides for the Territory to be able to transfer the ownership or control of land to the corporation. This applies to land within and outside the precinct.
The bill gives the corporation the power to levy rates on land within the precinct in order for it to fund all or part of its municipal functions. To ensure consistency and integration between the precinct and the municipality of Darwin, the bill provides a cap on rates within the precinct such as the rates for a year must not be greater than 120% of the rates imposed by the Darwin City Council. The corporation may only use amounts received in rates for the performance of its municipal functions.
To assist the corporation in promoting the precinct, the corporation will also have the power to impose a promotional levy on persons who conduct business within the precinct. Such levies may only be used by the corporation for promotional purposes.
The bill provides that the corporation may make by-laws in relation to the precinct, as well as in relation to meetings, procedures, and the common seal of the corporation. The bill allows the corporation to adopt the by-laws of a municipal council, and it is envisaged that to ensure integration between the precinct and the CBD, the corporation will adopt Darwin City Council by-laws.
The chairperson is required to convene as many meetings as are necessary for the corporation to perform its functions. In addition, the minister may direct the chairperson to convene a meeting to deal with a particular matter. A quorum for a meeting will be a majority of the corporation’s members, and questions will be determined by a majority of votes. The chairperson will have a deliberative vote and also have a casting vote in the event of an equal number of votes. The corporation will be required to keep proper accounts and records of all of its transactions, and ensure that adequate control is maintained over the corporation’s liabilities and property owned or under the control of the corporation.
The Treasurer will have the ability to request information with respect to the corporation’s financial position and affairs. The corporation’s financial statements will be subject to audit by the Auditor-General on an annual basis. In addition, the corporation will be required to prepare an annual report for each financial year, which will include directions given by the minister, financial statements, and the Auditor-General’s report on the financial statements. The minister will table a copy of the annual report in the Legislative Assembly.
It is recognised that as residents commence moving into the precinct from 2008, there will need to be a system set in place whereby residents are represented either as members of the corporation or otherwise. To address this, the bill requires the corporation to conduct a review of the act and the operations of the corporation within 12 months of the first residential occupancy permit being issued. Following the review, the corporation will be required to prepare a report with recommendations on the management of the precinct; the representation of individuals and groups in the membership of the corporation; the devolution of the powers and functions of the corporation to another body, for example, a municipal authority; and any other matters which the minister requests or the corporation considers appropriate. Consultations with respect to the bill have occurred with the Darwin City Council; TOGA, as the residential developer; and Darwin Cove Convention Centre Pty Ltd, the community infrastructure developer.
In short, this bill is about the business of setting in place a body that will ensure that the Darwin waterfront precinct is properly serviced and managed in all respects.
Mr Acting Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
VISITORS
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I advise honourable members in the presence of the gallery of the past Speaker of the House, Mr Terry McCarthy. On behalf of members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 56)
(Serial 56)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Mr Acting Speaker, I move the bill be now read a second time.
The Territory’s Motor Accident Compensation, or MACA scheme, is a statutory monopoly operated for the benefit of motorists with a self-funding not-for-profit based focus. The scheme is currently administered by the Territory Insurance Office. However, the relationship between TIO and the MACA scheme is not clearly defined in the legislation although, historically, the scheme has been run as a not-for-profit arm of TIO’s business.
As part of the reform of its governance arrangements in recent years, TIO has developed a service level agreement describing the nature of the services that it provides to the MACA scheme and the basis of the allocation of costs to that scheme. Further, in 2005, TIO segregated the assets of the MACA scheme from those of TIO so that the MACA scheme assets can now be separately identified. This has provided greater transparency in the information available to government on the MACA scheme, and has also meant that an appropriate investment strategy for the MACA scheme assets, which are separate to, and different from, the investment strategy for TIO, can be developed.
While there are benefits to both TIO and the MACA scheme from operating the MACA scheme in conjunction with TIO, the entities are fundamentally different in their objectives and operations. TIO is a commercial insurer and finance company operating in competitive markets with the objective of making a profit, while the MACA scheme is for the benefit of motorists with a self-funding but not profit-based focus. Housing these disparate operations within the one entity is not an optimum structure for the management of funds or for their oversight by government. The measures being introduced in this bill represent the next step in addressing this problem.
First, the bill sets out that the assets and liabilities of the MACA scheme must be held in a separate fund. The assets and liabilities will still be under the same legal ownership as TIO’s commercial assets, but they will be quarantined in separate accounts and will be separately reported in financial statements. This will provide transparency in the dealings of the MACA scheme fund. One consequence of this change is that there will need to be a separate legislative guarantee of the liabilities of the MACA scheme. The liabilities of the MACA scheme are implicitly guaranteed by government at present through government’s guarantee of TIO’s commercial liabilities. In more formally separating the scheme from TIO, this bill provides for an explicit government guarantee of the liabilities of the MACA scheme.
The bill will also establish a number of improvements to the corporate governance arrangements applying to the MACA scheme. TIO will be required to prepare two statements of corporate intent – one for its commercial business and a separate one for the MACA scheme which reflects its community-based self-funding requirements. At the same time, the bill will align the provisions for preparing TIO’s statement of corporate intent for its commercial business with those of the Government Owned Corporations Act. TIO has already adopted such a framework under an informal agreement, and this amendment will formalise that arrangement. This will mean that, in my capacity as the responsible minister, I will have to formally agree to the statements of corporate intent for TIO’s commercial business and for the MACA scheme. In the case of TIO’s commercial business statement of corporate intent, the bill requires that a version excluding commercially confidential material be tabled in parliament much like the Power and Water Corporation’s tabled SCI.
There are a number of potential conflicts of interest between TIO and the MACA scheme relating to matters such as the allocation of costs. In order to ensure that any potential conflicts of interest are managed in an open and transparent manner, the bill introduces two significant amendments. First, TIO will be required to prepare a conflict of interest policy that sets out the range of possible conflicts that could arise and the processes that will be adopted to manage them. This document will be subject to the Treasurer’s approval. The second reform will be the appointment of a special board member as advocate of the MACA scheme. This board member will only vote on matters relating to the MACA scheme, and the board could not consider such matters unless that board member or an alternate is present. The bill provides that, in the case of a conflict between TIO and the MACA scheme, resolutions of the board will only be valid if supported by the MACA scheme board member.
TIO has been consulted on all matters with regard to this bill and embraces the scope of the changes. To the benefit of all Territory motorists, the reforms embodied in the legislation will promote greater transparency and accountability in the operation and administration of the MACA scheme. Mr Acting Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
HUMAN TISSUE TRANSPLANT
AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 57)
AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 57)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Section 14 of the current Northern Territory Human Tissue Transplant Act states that:
- A person who –
(a) has attained the age of 18 years …
may consent to the removal of blood from his body for transfusion to another person or for use of the blood or of any of its constituents for other therapeutic purposes or for medical or scientific purposes.
The act has no provision for people aged less than 18 years to consent to the donation of blood.
During 2004, the Northern Territory Australian Red Cross Blood Services realised that this provision did not match the legislative situation in most other jurisdictions where 16- or 17-year-olds can donate blood. Maximising the number of potential donors who can safely give blood is essential to maintaining adequate blood supplies and, thus, help Territorians. Over the last two decades, the regulations for accepting donations of blood have become tighter, resulting in a smaller pool of potential donors. This has been partly the result of increased awareness of health risks such as HIV and mad cow disease - Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease - and because of the raising of the required donor haemoglobin level.
These tighter regulations have partly contributed to a number of national blood shortages over the last year. The recent television advertising campaign by the Australian Red Cross highlights the number of donors who are no longer eligible to give blood. It is very important to maximise the blood donor pool available in Australia to help sustain our blood services.
Consequently, the proposed amendment to the Human Tissue Transplant Act seeks to allow a person who is of sound mind and at least 16 years of age to donate blood. There is no medical contra-indication to people aged 16 and 17 donating blood. In addition, they are likely to have less exposure to blood-borne diseases. All other jurisdictions, with the exception of Tasmania, allow 16- and 17-year-old persons to donate blood. By reducing the age limit, new acceptable young donors can be recruited, who often may remain long-term blood donors, thus contributing to the long-term availability of blood for Territorians in need of it.
Mr Acting Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
CARERS RECOGNITION BILL
(Serial 54)
(Serial 54)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Family and Community Service): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of introducing this bill, which includes a Northern Territory carers charter is, first and foremost, to acknowledge and recognise the role of carers as a critical partner in the caring role in our community.
Carers Northern Territory Incorporated report that there are approximately 25 000 carers in the Northern Territory providing a crucial and often hidden role in the lives of countless Territorians. Carers are an integral part of our community providing support for many of our frail aged people or people with a disability, a chronic or terminal illness, or with a mental illness. Without this support, many of our Territorians would simply not be able to stay in their own homes. The role of carers should be formally recognised by including carers in the assessment, planning, delivery, and review of services that impact on them and their caring role.
The bill provides a mechanism for this to occur and is enshrined in the Northern Territory carers charter which is a schedule of the bill. The carers charter has eight key principles, and organisations and agencies must take all practical measures to ensure the organisation and its officers, employees or agents take action to reflect these principles of the charter in providing relevant services of their organisation. The eight key principles of the Northern Territory carers charter are:
carers must be treated with respect and dignity;
A very practical way for organisations to remember and bring attention to this charter is to display it in their working environment. It is important that the community, organisations and agencies know who the carers are and, for the purpose of this act, a person is a carer if a person is an individual who provides ongoing care or assistance to:
a person who has a disability within the meaning of the Disability Services Act;
a person who has a mental illness within the meaning of the Mental Health and Related Services Act;
a person who has a chronic illness;
a person who, because of frailty, requires assistance with the carrying out of their everyday tasks; or
a person of a class prescribed by regulation.
However, a person is not a carer if the person provides the care or assistance under a contract for services or a contract of service; or in the course of ongoing community work organised by a community organisation. Also, a person is not a carer only because the person is a spouse, de facto partner, parent or guardian of the person to whom the care or assistance is being provided, or provides care to a child who has been placed in the care of that person under the Community Welfare Act.
Carers are also individuals with their own needs within and beyond the role of carer. This bill outlines agencies and organisations’ obligations to carers and their responsibility to comply with the act including the Northern Territory carers charter. The bill provides the mechanism for an applicable organisation, as defined in the act as:
a reporting organisation;
an entity providing relevant services under a contract with reporting organisations other than a contract of employment; or
another entity declared by regulation to be an applicable organisation,
to report annually on their compliance or non-compliance to the act and carers charter. This report may be combined with the annual report of their organisation. The bill also makes provision for the act to be reviewed within five years after its commencement. The bill also amends the Health and Community Services Complaints Act to ensure that the meaning of ‘applicable organisation’ has the same meaning as in the carers recognition act and that the carers charter has the same meaning as in the carers recognition act.
The bill also amends the Health and Community Services Complaints Act to allow for a complaint to be made on the basis that an applicable organisation has failed to comply with the carers charter and to ensure that the carers charter is considered when the commissioner is investigating such a complaint.
Mr Acting Speaker, on behalf of the carers and people in their care, I take this opportunity to thank all the individuals and organisations, in particular Carers NT, who have contributed positively to this initiative. I commend the bill to honourable members. I table its accompanying explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
VISITORS
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Year 6 and 7 students from Durack Primary School accompanied by their teacher, Mr Craig Brown. On behalf of honourable members I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
INFORMATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 53)
(Serial 53)
Continued from 4 May 2006.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Acting Speaker, the bill is not opposed for all of the reasons you would imagine. I do not propose to go through them. However, there are some important points that should be placed on the Parliamentary Record.
Noting the intentions of the government prior to the 2001 election campaign when Labor said it would introduce a Freedom of Information Act, for my own party, before entering politics, I long held the view that all governments in this country should have freedom of information legislation.
However, it needs to be good legislation. Members who were around in the last Assembly will remember the debate that we had about the government’s freedom of information legislation. We did not think it was good. We appreciated the spin that the government put on it having regard to their position. They said that they would always do it. The CLP said that they would always do it too, and were working on but had not introduced their drafts. Labor spun it pretty significantly by saying words to the effect of: ‘Halleluiah, thank God for Labor, all Territorians can feel safe and secure because we have introduced freedom of information legislation’. It was somewhat surprising that, when looking at the amendment to the bill, the government did not, publicly at least, undertake a more significant review of the act. We and Territorians know - and I am sure government members will know even though they probably will not admit it - that the act has a number of difficulties.
The Leader of the Opposition’s office, both in the last term and this term, continues to experience great difficulties with it. You will remember, Attorney-General, that in the last term the Leader of the Opposition’s office copped a bill – I think it was in the region of about $50 000 to $80 000 for information sought. When we received the information a great deal of it was blacked out with a big black texta, so we paid seemingly squillions of dollars for zilch: the words ‘and’, ‘the’, and full stops and semicolons were left there, but there was very little in it.
For my own part since I have become Leader of the Opposition, following the last Estimates Committee hearing, we have sought quite a bit of information and it has been pretty close to 12 months. We continue to experience difficulty. We have received some, but not very much. Indeed, the information we have received has been for the most part blacked out, as I am told.
My staff wrote an e-mail to the relevant officer in the Department of Justice just the other day saying that we would appeal. We encourage the powers-that-be to go back to the principles that they proudly enunciated when they came to office, of openness and transparency, and that they provide us with the information that we sought on behalf of Territorians, which is, of course, our duty when performing the role of Her Majesty’s loyal opposition. I am not sure what is going to happen with my staff’s letter, but I encourage those who read it to get to a situation where they can give us the information that we have requested.
The fees business - well, we will cop that on the chin, but it is not the sort of legislation that Labor members and Labor supporters expected. The reality does not reflect the model and the spin associated with the model prior to 2001 or, indeed, in the last term.
I note that Queensland has had ongoing difficulties with their freedom of information. The last time I heard or read a report about it, I got the impression that the Labor government there was resisting any change, as much as politically possible. I would hate the Northern Territory …
Mr Bonson: Is that a reflection on us, is it?
Ms CARNEY: … government to be as belligerent …
Ms CARNEY: What was that, Matthew?
Mr Bonson: Is that a reflection on us, is it?
Ms CARNEY: When you say something sensible, member for Millner, I will reply. The fact that the sentence contained only a few words but was very well strung together is a credit to you.
In any case, I would not like to see the rather belligerent stance adopted by Peter Beattie’s government being adopted here. I suspect it will.
Mr Bonson: Is that a reflection on us, is it?
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, you made the point yesterday that a member should not interrupt when another member is speaking. I ask that you direct the member for Millner accordingly.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Certainly, member for Araluen. However, I also ask you not to indulge in any cross-floor conversation. Perhaps we can get on with it.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. Got it, Matthew? I know you are thick, but have you got it? Do you understand it?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I ask you to withdraw that comment. That is a personal attack. I wish you to withdraw that offensive comment.
Ms CARNEY: I will withdraw it, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr Bonson: A class act. You are a class act.
Ms CARNEY: Are you going to have a go, are you?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Please! Get on with it, Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Bonson: Alternative leader? You are joking?
Ms CARNEY: He continues, Mr Acting Speaker. For the purposes of Hansard, it is probably appropriate that, on account of the difficulties that the member for Millner has with pretty much everything, the Acting Speaker did, I think, indicate that the member for Millner should refrain from ongoing activity.
However, we digress ...
Mrs Miller: Unbiased, Mr Acting Speaker, unbiased.
Ms CARNEY: Perhaps the member for Millner - how long do I have? I have another 40 minutes; I am happy to keep going.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: One moment please, Leader of the Opposition. Are you reflecting on the Chair, member for Katherine?
Mrs MILLER: I was, and I withdraw that.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Thank you.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, it is interesting in light of the comments - I think the member for Millner said that when I called him thick, which I subsequently withdrew, that it was a personal attack. In this Chamber earlier this morning, we heard the Leader of Government Business make a comment which was much more offensive and much more insensitive than the member for Millner could ever hope to manufacture …
Mr Henderson: Which I withdrew, I apologised.
Ms CARNEY: It is interesting in the context of talking about freedom of information that, in dinner party conversations around this country, when you are talking about freedom of information you are probably also talking about freedom of expression. It is great that my colleague, the member for Greatorex, was so moved by the debate of what has occurred in this country over the last few weeks that he wept. Not allegedly wept; that he wept. I have been moved to tears in this Chamber on more than one occasion. Other parliamentary colleagues on the other side of this Chamber have similarly been moved to tears. I can name them. I remember when the new member for Drysdale was …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! The debate currently before the Chair is on the second reading on the Information Amendment Bill. I call on you, Mr Acting Speaker, to get the Leader of the Opposition back on track to debate the bill that is currently before the Assembly?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I ask you to retain relevance to the debate before the Chair please, Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. Relevant it is because, when we are talking about freedom of information, it does include some discussion about freedom of expression. Often, that is the reason why citizens will make freedom of information requests - to see the expressions of others, the information of others, etcetera.
It is in that context that it is more than appropriate, given the inane interjection of the member for Millner, that we, as a parliament and as an opposition, reflect on the outrageous conduct of the minister, the member for Wanguri, who, of course, has form on this. He is the same bloke who, during a debate on domestic violence, sought to ridicule the issue and anyone who cared about it and, in a way, actively discouraged anyone from talking about this issue. This is the personality of the man who would have some people believe that he is the next Chief Minister of the Northern Territory.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I am quite happy to have this debate with the Leader of the Opposition at any time. Again, I point out that the subject before this House at the moment is the second reading debate on amendments to the Information Act. I remind all honourable members, through you, Mr Acting Speaker, that this is a debate about legislation that is currently before this House, not a debate about previous comments on previous legislation. In regard to a comment I made earlier today, I apologised and withdrew. I am not being sensitive about this, but we have business to pass through this House and currently we are debating the Information Amendment Bill.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, there is a valid point that the Leader of Government Business is making in regard to relevance. I advise that should I consider you rambling too far from the relevant point then I will ask you to get back on track.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker, for your wise ruling. It may, of course, serve to discourage members from the Labor side from making absurd, silly, provocative and cretinous interjections when we are having a debate about freedom of information, something that I thought the Australian Labor Party took fairly seriously. I can keep going, I have 35 minutes left. I can take it up if you like.
____________________
Visitors
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of visitors taking part in the Parliament House Public Tour Program. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
____________________
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I heard only part of the Attorney-General’s grab on the ABC this morning, and I am happy to be corrected on it, but I understood that at least the effect of it was, this is great, we are making freedom of information better and better. I am not sure whether these amendments actually do that, and that will remain to be seen. It is important that I get back to some of the difficulties the Leader of the Opposition’s office has experienced, and they are demonstrated, I believe, in the very well written article that appeared in the Alice Springs News on 1 June. There is quite a bit of it I want to put on the record. It starts as follows:
- Freedom of information is neither free nor necessarily informative in the Territory, at least not when the government’s controversial MLA Alison Anderson (Macdonnell, pictured) is involved, as well as the council at Papunya, which her clan is apparently running like a private fiefdom.
The journalist then described how my office, in relation to the information we sought about those matters, copped a bill for nearly $5000 with no answers to nearly half of the questions. The journalist spoke to the Information Commissioner, Peter Shoyer.
Mr Henderson: You should meet him, a good bloke.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I do not have the standing orders in front of me, but if the member for Wanguri wants to participate in the debate, then he should do so from his own chair. I note that leave was not granted for him to sit in the other chair, therefore, he should be precluded from participating in the debate.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I will be able to manage the House, thank you, Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: I am sure you can. You are a man who in recent times has demonstrated he is more than capable of so doing, Mr Acting Speaker. However - oh! what a relief he is off. Whilst you are able to manage the House it is disconcerting, to say the least, to hear the mumblings of the member for Wanguri, who I note has now absented himself.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: You know quite well, Leader of the Opposition, that you are not allowed to refer to the presence or otherwise of a member in the House. You know that quite clearly.
Ms CARNEY: I forgot, Mr Acting Speaker, my apologies.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Would you please withdraw?
Ms CARNEY: Yes, I withdraw …
Mr Bonson: You have been here long enough to know that.
Ms CARNEY: What? Mr Acting Speaker, I do ask that in asserting your authority …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I shall, Leader of the Opposition, if you would only give me a chance.
Ms CARNEY: … as Acting Speaker of this House, that you assist me during the course of my contribution by plugging a hole in the member for Millner who is being provocative and irritating to say the least.
Dr Burns: Get on with it!
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker, and thank you for the barracking from the sidelines, member for Johnston.
In any event, the journalist said that he had put some questions about our inability to obtain information about the member for Macdonnell and the Information Commissioner has said that he would apply the public interest in balancing what information to release and what not to release. As the journalist said and I quote:
- But for the moment it’s open slather for the department to reject, delay and bamboozle. The first two rounds are just between the inquirer and the government instrumentality being quizzed. The first round is the asking the questions. If the responses are unsatisfactory the second round is an appeal. The questions are now asked again, this time directed to someone higher up in the departmental food chain.
If the reaction to that is still not good enough Mr Shoyer takes over. And if you don’t like what he does you have recourse to the Supreme Court. Nearly a third of Ms Carney’s questions were rejected or ‘edited’ …
… rejected or ‘edited’ because they are ‘not within the scope of the application’. Mr Shoyer says this is another way of the department saying ‘this isn’t what you asked for’. One would have thought that a person making the inquiry, and paying for it, would know very well what they want to know …
Indeed we do. The author goes on:
- More than 20 questions were rejected by the department because ‘disclosure of the information would be an unreasonable interference with a person’s privacy’. For example, there are several documents called ‘Field trip to Papunya Community Council Inc’ all in 2004. Those dated 29 January [2004], 18 June [2004] and 28 September [2004] were refused on privacy reasons. Those dated 12 and 19 February [2004], 29 April [2004], 19 August [2004], 10 September [2004] and 29 October [2004] were refused because they were ‘not within the scope of the application’. The one on 5 October [2004] was declined both on the grounds of privacy and scope.
It would be fascinating to know what could be legitimately concealed from the public about:
has defaulted on a string of financial reporting requirements …
The journalist goes on to say:
- Another bizarre reason why information can be withheld is when it ‘was communicated in confidence and disclosure of the information would be reasonably likely to impair [sic] the ability of the department to obtain similar information in the future and it is in the pubic interest that such information continues to be obtained’. This is brilliant: if you tell a department something in confidence it can keep mum about it if it can prove that getting confidential information is a good thing.
He goes on:
- There is another beauty: the document ‘Grant Agreement between OSP and Papunya 26 June 2002’ was withheld by the department ‘as the information is of a financial nature and disclosure of the information is likely to expose the Papunya Community Government Council unreasonably to disadvantage’. Like what disadvantage? Getting prosecuted for mishandling public money, may be?
Another blow to the information seeker is that you don’t only pay for what you get.
It then goes on to talk about the fees. As I said earlier, in the last term the Leader of the Opposition’s office spent something in the vicinity of $80 000 in its quest to get to the heart of various difficulties, problems - some would say potential scandals - brought on by this government, but we were blocked. This is not the freedom of information touted by the Australian Labor Party prior to the last election, nor is it the one touted by government since, nor is it the one touted by the Attorney-General this morning.
I thought it was important to read part of this article into the Parliamentary Record because it is but one demonstration of the difficulties of this legislation; the amendments do not seek, in my view, to overcome them. There are plenty of other examples. When we had the debate last night about the process for the Estimates Committee hearing, I quoted the words of the now Treasurer in the speech that he made in May 2002, in which he was talking about the lofty principles of opening the books of government and how Labor’s estimates process was going to be fantastic because it would ensure that it would be of benefit to all Territorians and the opposition. However, when measured with the reality, those words can be forgotten, because the reality does not fit with the model. The same can be said of this government’s freedom of information legislation.
I suspect that as the years roll on and Territorians actually get to use, or try to seek to use, freedom of information more in such a way that you might see in a jurisdiction like Queensland, that I have a deal of confidence that other Territorians will encounter the same sorts of difficulties that we have experienced. I do not have the figures - maybe I should make a freedom of information request - but I do not know how many citizens of the Northern Territory have applied for information. I doubt there would have been many. I only hope that they have not been blocked and obstructed in the same way that Her Majesty’s loyal opposition has been.
Which leads nicely to my old favourite: ‘Labor, a new direction, good government’. This is the one I keep in this drawer here. I pull it out from time to time because it is a walk down memory lane in assessing where Labor was prior to coming to government and where they are now. They promised all sorts of things. They said they would not do glossy brochures - they have gone ballistic on that. We look forward to interrogating government ministers at estimates next week on how much Territorians’ money they have spent promoting themselves. In estimates gone by, we have not always got the answers. I note, by way of digression, that for the Estimates Committee hearing last year, I provided a number of written questions on notice to the Attorney-General as a matter of courtesy trying to encourage him, or at least his staff or his department, to look at the issues and questions that I wanted to raise. Lo and behold! We get to estimates and the Attorney-General said, in relation to a number of issues: ‘I am not answering this, I am not answering that’.
You compare that with the Labor good government policy and what a walk down memory lane it is. This document, which I understand has been removed from Labor’s website, is a document that they are clearly now very embarrassed about. It was in documents like this that they espoused principles of openness, accountability and transparency. Apart from becoming arrogant in the extreme, they are now a government that operates pretty much in a cloud of secrecy.
I note with interest that in this good government paper on page 4, it has the heading ‘Freedom of Information’ - they did it badly, but they did it – and whistleblowers legislation. On the Notice Paper we have notice of a bill that I gave during the last sittings that if Labor was not going to introduce whistleblowers legislation, we would. We would do it. Do I have a commitment to whistleblowers legislation? Absolutely! I believe all governments in this country should have it. Why was it not introduced in the year 1900 and whatever, in the Northern Territory? Because I was not around. I am around now; I will introduce whistleblowers legislation. It is ironic in this game that politicians go through election campaigns and promise the punters the world and then, in the final wash-up, it is the opposition that has to implement Labor’s policies. You get that, and what a funny world it is.
Getting back to the Information Act, in Labor’s Good Government paper it says:
- Labor will introduce freedom of information legislation that will be a force for disclosure. The legislation will apply to all Territory government agencies, and bodies …
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah – it goes on, and on, and on:
- Our freedom of information legislation will ensure that requests are responded to within time lines.
Some of our requests were made – we must have had estimates – what, last year in July? We do not have all of the stuff. We have some stuff, and most of it is blacked out. I am a patient woman, Attorney-General, however, I will grow old by the time I get this information. I turned 40 in December. I look forward to my 50th birthday, but I do not really want to wait 10 years for some of this stuff we have asked about.
Then, of course, the very quaint line:
- Labor will address the issue of commercial confidentiality that has been used to conceal government activities in some jurisdictions to restrict the information provided in response to the inquiries of concerned citizens.
I remember, because I have always been interested in politics even before I became a member of the CLP, Labor Party people …
A member: That is when you were a member of the Labor Party, was it?
Ms CARNEY: If you have something to contribute, you can have your turn, sport!
I remember when Labor Party people were going around the Northern Territory having a go at the CLP and saying: ‘Oh, when they are on the ropes they will always resort to commercial confidentiality’. How the worm has turned! How many times have we heard the expression ‘commercial confidentiality’ here?
A smart observer would say that governments, regardless of their political colour, do need to adhere to those principles of commercial confidentiality in appropriate circumstances. However, governments throughout this country – it does not matter what side they are on; particularly this government, and there are ample examples of it - hide behind commercial confidentiality. I commend this Good Government document to anyone interested in politics and freedom of information. As I said earlier, it does include a discussion about freedom of expression.
I am delighted to serve on this side of the Chamber with my colleague, the member for Greatorex, who expresses his emotion in the same way that any decent human being would when we were debating the sorts of issues that we were yesterday. I am proud to stand on this side of the House with a bloke who is genuinely moved by what he sees. At least we are moved! If you people are not moved by what you have seen in the national media, or by what Dr Nanette Rogers had to say, you should not be here …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition!
Ms CARNEY: You should not be here!
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition. Relevance? I have warned you about that - relevance.
Ms CARNEY: It is illustrative of the point, Mr Acting Speaker, but I will come back to it.
Dr Toyne: It has nothing to do with the debate before us.
Ms CARNEY: It has everything to do with it, because this is a bill to amend the Information Act. The Information Act is what you said it would be in this paper:
- Freedom of information and freedom of expression are things most Australians hold dear.
When the Leader of Government Business has a go at my colleague with the cheek and the …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker!
Ms CARNEY: … insensitive lies …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition!
Ms CARNEY: … it is appropriate that I comment on it in the context of this discussion …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition! Please stop. Stop!
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! The Leader of the Opposition knows full well she has to address her comments through you as Chair, and not address them across the Chamber here.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Please continue, Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: In fact, it generally assists if I have my back turned, member for Johnston. I think it was the former member for Arnhem who deliberately, in the course of one debate, turned his back because he made the comment that he turned his back on someone because he said they were very ugly and it was best that he not see them.
Good government; we say it is bad government. Territorians thought that they deserved another spin at the last election, and we are entirely focused on ensuring that these people do not get another spin at the next election.
As I said at the beginning, we are supportive of the amendment. I am sure the Attorney-General will appreciate that I was not going to walk down memory lane when it comes to the Good Government paper and so on. However, on account of the unnecessary and mindless provocation provided by both the members for Millner and Wanguri, it was entirely irresistible, for which I sort of apologise.
In any case, it does demonstrate the point that the freedom of information legislation is not what it was cracked up to be. If there is a message that I can get through to Territorians, it is that, the Attorney-General will appreciate, I do not intend to send the Hansard of this debate to Territorians, although it is always there for them to see it. Fortunately, they need not make an application under the Information Act to see the Hansard of the parliament of the Northern Territory, and we hope that that would never occur. However, there is something they understand, and that is the hypocrisy of the Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party. Just be fair dinkum. If you are going to make a promise, a bit like the oncology unit, at least be consistent, follow through with it, and if you do not want to end up promising what you did, then explain the reasons.
There has been no explanation for the duplicity shown by the members of government. They have adopted a smoke and mirrors approach. They have introduced something they spun to Territorians as being fantastic. It is not, and there are ample examples of why that is so.
Attorney-General, I am sure you will be delighted that I have finished. I look forward to your contribution. I also look forward to the contribution of the member for Millner. I will be very interested to listen to what he has to say. If you are going to barrack from the sidelines, you may as well get in, have a bit of a go, and have the courage of your convictions. Stand up and put your comments properly on the Parliamentary Record.
That, of course, fits in with the broad discussion about freedom of information and freedom of expression. The member for Millner has the ability to freely, if not on occasion, completely incoherently and incompetently express himself. I invite him to contribute to this debate. The member for Johnston, of course, is never a man who takes a backward step, even when he should. I look forward to his contribution. Most of all, I look forward to the Attorney-General.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Mr Acting Speaker, I speak in support of the Information Amendment Bill. I made reference to the Information Act in my support of the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill when the Assembly last sat in May. Members may recall that I raised the ire of members of the opposition for my comparison of the Attorney-General to a chief engineer of one of the V8 Supercar teams. I take this opportunity to thank all of those who told me they very much enjoyed my contribution to that debate. It speaks volumes, honourable members, does it not, that the opposition and those on the cross benches did not have anything to say at that time about my reference to the Information Act.
Mr Acting Speaker, you may well wonder, why was that so? I believe it is important to remember that five of the six members who make up the non-government part of this Chamber are, or were, part of the CLP. Some of them were part of the CLP in government. The reason for their deafening silence is simple: it is the record of the CLP governments of the past that makes it impossible for these members to credibly state that they actively sought to achieve open and accountable government. Labor in opposition repeatedly called for freedom of information legislation. The response of successive CLP governments from the Paul Everingham era right the way to the Denis Burke era was: ‘No. No way, not on our watch, it ain’t happening’. Nothing about: ‘Oh yes, we will look into it’. Nothing about: ‘We are not ready for it’. Just a deafening: ‘No. We are not even going to look at it. The Northern Territory does not need an information act’. That was one of the things that one of these administrations said. To listen to the CLP now start talking about their desire for an information act is an interesting experience to say the least.
I cannot remember exactly which particular administration it was but one of the CLP governments highly interesting argument was that somehow, having a freedom of information act or legislation of that nature, was contrary to openness and accountability and access to information. It was against the whole proposition. Not only under these CLP governments was there not legislation for freedom of information, but there were many legislative instances where ministers had authority to make decisions without publishing reasons. This legislative authority, this imprimatur given by legislation, was actively and regularly exercised by CLP ministers. How open and accountable is that? ‘Here is our decision. It affects your lives, it affects your interest, but we are not telling you why we made it’. There are plenty of instances where that happened.
Freedom of information legislation was part of the legal revolution that began during the mid-1970s and early 1980s. It swept the country everywhere except the Northern Territory. It was during this time that administrative law took great leaps forward. This era saw the creation of Administrative Appeals Tribunals by the federal government and the various state and ACT governments. Not the Northern Territory! These tribunals looked into administrative decisions and were vested the power to overturn decisions and replace decisions with the tribunals’ own, refer back to the original decision-maker for it to reconsider its original decision, or to uphold the original decision.
These were watershed developments, taken for granted now, but monumental in their time. Prior to this, the only recourse was litigation by the courts. Often the cost of pursuing this avenue far outweighed the possible benefit that action may bring. Further, often the court did not have the jurisdiction to hear the claim as there were no legal questions for it to determine. Administrative failure does not always amount to a failure to meet legal requirements. An administrative decision can be wrong, unfair or unfortunate without being an abuse of power or a decision outside the scope of the decision-maker. Yet it was recognised that many administrative decisions can fundamentally affect people’s lives. The revolution that swept administrative law sought to fill the void that courts were unable to fill. Freedom of information legislation formed part of that matrix.
It is interesting that what failed to happen in the Territory was totally counter to the rest of the country. Arguments against the administrative law reforms were swept aside down south but were championed by the CLP government of the Northern Territory and held sway in this jurisdiction. I can remember the government lines at the time. We were told government departments can review their own decisions; we did not need external review. We were told we would have the Ombudsman to investigate complaints; that is external review. Another argument was that government already provided much information. People should trust the government; if it chose not to provide the information, they should just accept there were good reasons for it.
All of these arguments are true to a point. Government departments can review their own decisions. The Ombudsman can investigate complaints, and government does choose to release a great deal of information. Elsewhere in the country this was decided not to be enough, that there should be some legislative framework backing up the right of individuals to access information.
Freedom of information legislation and information privacy form part of the administrative law revolution of elsewhere. Freedom of information legislation was introduced by the Commonwealth in 1982 when it passed what I think was the first Freedom of Information Act. Freedom of information legislation provides the public with a right of access to information held by government agencies. It is characterised by its cheapness, in contrast to the pursuit of rights through a court. It is characterised also certainly in respect of personal information held by government by the starting point that access to information ought be granted unless there are good reasons not to.
The Attorney-General, in his second reading speech introducing the Information Bill in 2002, made the point that courts of equity recognised and I quote:
- … that governments act, or at all events are required to act, in the public interest. Information is held, received and imparted by governments, their departments and agencies, to further public interest.
However, the courts did not challenge that government owned that information. The position for information held by government was analogous to the present position of medical records of private medical practitioners and private medical institutions. Those practitioners and those institutions own the records they produce, notwithstanding they record very personal information about their patients. Those patients do not have a right to access the original medical record unless there is legislation in place which grants that right. In the case of public hospitals and public clinics, there is a right to access personal information and, indeed, to correct that information if it has been found to be wrong. That is not a right that individuals have to look at medical records held by even their general practitioner.
Let me say at the outset, so that I am not annoying any of the medical profession, that they are often and usually more than willing to write a report or summarise the notes that they have accurately reflecting what is recorded there. However, there is a desire by doctors not to hand over original medical records and there are some very good reasons behind that.
I am reminded of a case a few years back where an Australian citizen was able to be part of a class action in America against a corporation that manufactured breast implants. The American courts ruled that she had to present evidence by way of her original medical records. Although her Australian practitioner was not in danger of any litigation, he agreed to provide a comprehensive medical report but refused to hand over the original documents. This led to litigation in this country to force the handover of the medical records, and it failed - the point being that, under the openness and accountability that governments across this country now subscribe to, those medical records in a public institution could have been provided and, if there was some refusal, there would have been avenues to pursue that complaint and facilitate obtaining those records. In this case, the courts upheld the right of a medical practitioner to ownership over those records and to determine whether they would release those medical records. Freedom of information legislation goes a great way to ensuring people can get hold of personal information held by the public sector.
The Territory’s Information Act passed through the Assembly in 2002, some 20 years after the Commonwealth’s legislation – 20 years behind the times on that particular front. Well, better late than never. People should be left in no doubt, however, that even this advance would not have occurred if it had not been for a Labor government. At no time in government did the CLP show any interest - not even feigned interest. It is important, however, that I give recognition where it is due. In opposition, the CLP has adopted FOI with gusto. It has been a panacea for them - and good luck to them for using the legislation; that is what it is for. Many other Territorians are also using the legislation.
The Information Amendment Bill extends the operation of the secrecy provision. It now includes the Ombudsman’s Office, Auditor-General, Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner, and the board or commissioner appointed under the Inquiries Act, or commissioner within the meaning of the Local Government Act. These agencies perform special functions such as investigations into the activities of other agencies. Much of the information they hold is likely to be found in the original material held by the agency itself. The same information in the control of the agency subject to the investigation will not attract the exemption from freedom of information that the investigative officers enjoy for their records. To put it more succinctly, if the Ombudsman has a copy of a document that is held by the original agency, the person will not get a copy of that document through FOI from the Ombudsman, but may well obtain a copy of that document from the original agency. Therefore, the source information that caused any referral for investigation is still subject to the requirements of the act.
As the minister said in his second reading speech for the Information Amendment Bill - and again I quote:
- This clause recognises the special nature of the work being undertaken by these accountability bodies, which already provide a considerable amount of information to the community and are accountable through direct parliamentary scrutiny. The panel considered that commissioners should also be provided with additional protection as a consequence of their judicial and quasi-judicial functions, although their decision-making functions are, arguably, already excluded from the act.
The Information Act included sunset clauses dealing with inconsistencies between the Information Act and other legislation. In his address, the minister said:
- … section 9 of the act provides that if there is an inconsistency between the Information Act and another act, the Information Act does not apply. This bill provides that the Information Act will prevail to the extent to which it is inconsistent with another law of the Territory, whether that law is made before or after 1 July 2006.
Yes, the principal act as amended will continue to exclude some information from FOI applications. Like many areas of enterprise, public and private, good reasons do exist for non-release. Public interest is a very fluid concept and public interest can be, on both sides of the argument, for release or withholding of information. The Information Act amendment bill fulfils the commitment by government to review the operation of the Information Act and implement any changes necessary.
As the minister advised this Assembly - and for the sake of completeness, it is not a direct quote; it does closely follow the minister’s second reading speech: all agencies be given the opportunity to examine the legislation for which they are responsible. They considered provisions inconsistent with the Information Act and those that made it an offence to release information. The minister advised that a panel was established. It included the Information Commissioner and senior officers from the Departments of Chief Minister and Justice. I note with approval the minister’s advice that the panel considered, in the majority of cases, that no additional protection was required. The minister advised:
- Exemptions frequently cited were that the information may be refused if its disclosure would be an unreasonable interference with a person’s privacy, if it would prejudice the maintenance of law and order, or if it revealed a confidential source.
I commend the panel for its work and its commitment to not extending exemptions unless absolutely necessary.
I also add my thanks for the briefing I received from the Department of Justice on the operation of the amendment act and the Information Act, and thank the Information Commissioner for his briefing and his views on the operation of the act to date.
As I have just spoken about the refusal of release of information for being an unreasonable interference to with a person’s privacy, let me make reference to an issue that the Leader of the Opposition raised: the CLP have had a vendetta against the member for Macdonnell since her election. They have not yet got over the fact that their candidate was crushed – not defeated, crushed. The Leader of the Opposition - and I cannot recall if other members of the opposition have, but certainly the Leader of the Opposition - has made use of parliamentary privilege and quoting what is arguably defamatory media reports regarding the member for Macdonnell as an attack. That she has used the debate about freedom of information legislation and the amendment act to continue those groundless attacks on my colleague, the member for Macdonnell, is reprehensible.
The member for Macdonnell has been cleared and still you are using these spurious media reports. The Opposition Leader comes in, carefully not adopting them, just quoting them for the interest of the Parliamentary Record. Well, let us get it on the Parliamentary Record: the investigations found that there was no wrongdoing by the member for Macdonnell. It is time the Leader of the Opposition stated that fact in this House and stopped using this mechanism of quoting media reports which just cannot be substantiated in fact. It is a gutter campaign and should be left in the gutter and not brought into this House.
The Leader of the Opposition, in reference to her information amendment bill, made reference to the showing of emotion in this House. I commend members for the showing of emotion. I do not subscribe to the view that debates should be totally without emotion. However, it is difficult not to accept the genuine feelings of the member for Greatorex, but to view that against an active opposition by the CLP in government to education in the bush and education for Aboriginal people, the active opposition to providing suitable health care for indigenous people in remote areas, and the active opposition to providing economic development in those regional Aboriginal communities. It is very hard to stand back and accept - I have no problem in accepting the genuine feeling, but it runs contrary the policy position and all that I have seen of that the party to which the member for Greatorex belongs.
Not that you would know it. The Leader of the Opposition said: ‘Oh, freedom of information, yes, you know we were actively working on that’. Well, I personally have my doubts; I could be proved wrong. However, just to check I went to the Country Liberal Party website and looked up policies - huge numbers of policies from the CLP - two! Two stated policies on their website: a stronger, safer Territory, safe streets policy; and their commitment to getting middle schools right. Indigenous affairs? No, not a sausage. Freedom of information? Nope, not there. Two. That is it.
Just so I could not be caught out, I went to my own party’s website - just the Northern Territory branch, I did not go to the national branch - and I tried to have a look at our policies. You have to scroll down the screen; they do not all fit on one page. Starting off with Aboriginal affairs, arts, culture, business and economic development, community safety and justice, education and training, electricity and energy, environment, conservation and natural resources, the list goes on. The Labor Party has put out its policy documents, they can be read; they can be found. The CLP has put out two. There is a very consistent thread running through this because when they were in government and there were repeated calls for freedom of information, the reply was: ‘Don’t you worry about that, trust us, we will look after it’.
I find that very similar to the argument I have heard here today from the Leader of the Opposition: yes, we have the policies, but we do not actually have them published them anywhere, but trust us, we have them. We know they are there. So if there is some degree of incredulity coming from the member for Brennan, I hope that I have explained the basis for that.
Before wrapping up, I note that there is an added bonus of the amending bill and that is the better protection of meteorite sites. Meteorite fragments, like fossils, are in high demand on a commercial level. There is a great industry in stealing both fossils and meteorite fragments. I note Western Australia recently had a major investigation trying to relocate some dinosaur fossils which had been discovered. The scientific community, as it generally does, took great pains to try to keep secret the location of these fossils. Unfortunately, they were not able to and great damage was done to our scientific heritage in the way that those thieves made off with the fossils. I believe they were recovered but the damage to the surrounding area, I understand, was irreversible.
Another added bonus and another example of where there are legitimate reasons for wanting to keep information confidential and out of the public domain and why public interest is best served in doing so. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Speaker, first of all I thank the opposition for their support for these amendments, and commend the member for Brennan for his wide-ranging and informative speech. Probably the only thing that he did not cover that I probably needed to comment on was the names of each of the individual meteorites and where they were.
The purpose of this bill and the benefit it visits on the act is quite obvious. It clarifies exactly the relationship of the Information Act to the 120 other Territory pieces of legislation. Seventeen of those have now been brought into schedules; one with exempt provisions that need to be exempted from the action of the Information Act. That is a considerable and significant contraction of the areas that have previously been inaccessible in Territory legislation. It is a furthering opening up of information to the Territory public. I believe that it will benefit Territorians as the act continues into the future.
In regard to the opposition’s application for documents, they applied for some 3500 documents and only paid for the access to those documents under the terms of the regulations of the act some five months after they originally indicated that they were going to seek that information. That was the starting point of the process. Given the number of documents and the fact that the Information Commissioner regularly got back to the opposition to report progress and seek extensions of time as required, I do not think they have much to complain about.
They went fishing for a whale. They were going to bring down the government with all this stuff. However, a whale takes a bit of time to catch and tow back to port. It is a real smoke screen that they have put up. I do not think I need to say anymore. It has been covered in the debate in the second reading speech and the contributions. I thank the members for their contribution and support.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General) (by leave): Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
VISITORS
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery this morning of visitors as part of the Parliament House Public Tour program. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
VISITORS
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery this afternoon of People to People students from the United States of America, accompanies by Fiona Furletti. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to our visitors.
Members: Hear, hear!
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Indigenous Affairs
Indigenous Affairs
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Speaker, issues facing Aboriginal Australians have received much attention in recent weeks. We in the Territory are not surprised about the level of attention these issues have attracted. They are truly matters of national importance. We are well aware of the challenges facing our communities as we have been on the ground tackling them since coming to office in 2001.
The disorder and violence, the incidence of child abuse, and the dysfunction and disarray in some of our communities is simply unacceptable for this day and age. While there is a great deal of work to be done over a long period of time, it will remain a fundamental priority of this government to continue to find sustainable solutions to the problems we are seeing in these communities and to make them safe and healthy places to live.
To make a real difference, to bring about profound and lasting change, the causes of the violence and dysfunction we are seeing need to be tackled. Attacking the symptoms is necessary sometimes, and can bring short-term relief. However, real change means identifying and attacking the real causes of the problems, and that is what we have been doing in communities across the Northern Territory for some time now.
We have invested heavily in addressing the lack of education and skills, and the lack of employment opportunities in these communities. We have worked with communities in areas such as alcohol abuse, child abuse and domestic violence. It is a slow process, and we are making some headway, but the scale of the problem demands a national approach and a national commitment to Aboriginal Australia.
Some people have been very vocal over the past few weeks about the importance of law and order, and they are right to say that law and order should be a priority. We agree - just look at our record over the past five years. It is a vital component for family safety and for a just and sustainable community. However, law and order is just one component, a necessary one, but one that attacks the symptoms of dysfunction in these communities, not the causes.
Make no mistake, a focus on law and order alone cannot deliver Aboriginal people a healthy and sustainable future. If we do not succeed in addressing alcohol and drug abuse and grossly overcrowded housing, if people in these communities have little or no access to education and employment opportunities, we - governments and Aboriginal communities together - will have failed the next generation of Aboriginal children.
When an offender emerges from gaol, or when an alcoholic completes his course of rehabilitation, unless there are incentives, new opportunities in the communities they return to, it is very likely that their behaviour will be repeated. That is our challenge, and it goes to the heart of many of the problems we are seeing.
It is also important to remember that not all Aboriginal communities are in disarray. There are many that are as safe as any small country town in Australia. The first priority for those communities is not a police station and a lock-up.
We have made some important gains in addressing the real causes of the problems we are seeing. We set out to engage with Aboriginal communities and to lay the foundations for Aboriginal people to contribute to, and benefit from, our growing economy. We have taken government out to remote communities for the first time through Community Cabinet visits, and we have listened to what Aboriginal people are saying. Aboriginal Territorians are now represented at the highest levels of government. In 2001, we had our first Aboriginal Cabinet minister. Today, we have two, and a total of five Aboriginal members of this parliament.
We have invested in jobs and economic development for Aboriginal Territorians. In May last year, I launched the Northern Territory Economic Development Strategy. The goal of the strategy is to improve quality of life through a dramatic improvement in the economic status of Aboriginal Territorians. The strategy addresses opportunities for Aboriginal economic development within 13 key industry sectors: construction; tourism; community services; mining and production; retail and services; pastoral; horticultural; natural resource management; government; forestry and agribusiness; arts; knowledge and culture; and aquaculture and fisheries.
A key aim of the strategy is to create 2000 jobs per year for the next 10 years, and to achieve parity between economic indicators for indigenous and non-indigenous Territorians by 2020. It is a big ask but one we are determined to achieve.
We have made some progress. Pastoral enterprises have been formed on Aboriginal land; marine ranger units have been established in consultation with the Northern Land Council; and we have supported aquaculture projects and invested in indigenous arts and tourism enterprises. My ministerial colleagues will provide more detail about these and other initiatives, but I would like to briefly mention a couple of success stories in tourism - businesses that are creating jobs for Aboriginal people and bringing benefits to Aboriginal communities across the Territory.
Anangu Tours, which operates out of Uluru, has just celebrated its 10th birthday - in fact, late last year. Ten years ago it broke new ground by giving visitors authentic experiences of the Territory’s unique Red Centre, and in doing so, it generated jobs for local Aboriginal people.
Titjikala is now following in its footsteps. Locals have worked with the Sydney-based Gunya Tourism to establish a five-star camp site in the desert as a base for hunting and bush tucker trips. They use local Aboriginal people as expert guides and resource staff.
Just last week, I opened the Kakadu Culture Camp at Djarradjin, which has been developed by the local traditional owners and their extended family. Jen and Fred Hunter are a brother and sister team, who with the help of Jen’s partner, Andy, have developed a terrific tourism attraction. Visitors to Djarradjin will experience nice billabong cruises, bush tucker dinners, safari camp and bush walking tours.
These are all examples of local Aboriginal people tapping into our growing tourism sector and the demand for top quality natural and cultural experiences. Their enterprise has created jobs and has brought significant economic benefits to their communities.
Improving educational outcomes has been a priority for us. School retention rates have improved and there have been significant gains in performance against national numeracy and literacy benchmarks. Between 2001 and 2004, the number of indigenous children receiving the Year 3 reading benchmark increased by 31%; the Year 5 benchmark by 43%; and the Year 7 benchmark by 46%. We are now for the very first time delivering secondary education in the bush, and exploring innovative ways of delivering education to students in remote parts of the Territory.
We are the first Territory government to do this since self-government, but the task is by no means straightforward. It will amaze you to know that when we came to office in 2001, no Aboriginal student had ever graduated anywhere in the Territory while living in a remote bush community. It just did not happen. But three years ago, Rhonda Rankin, Lianna Brown and Meschach Paddy graduated through Year 12 in a bush school in the Kalkarindji community. These three young pioneers have gone from strength to strength. Rhonda is in her third year at Flinders University doing a Bachelor of Cultural Tourism; Lianna is at Charles Darwin University doing a Bachelor of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies; and Meschach is undertaking a Bachelor of Teaching also at Charles Darwin University.
The following year, in 2004, another six students graduated, and last year that number rose to 25 including seven from Wadeye. I am pleased to report that this year the number is set to rise to 30.
Attitudes to school and education are changing in many of our remote communities and we are intent on keeping this groundbreaking momentum going. Aboriginal people are genuinely excited about getting their children an education.
Overcrowding in housing is a crucial issue. The World Health Organisation has identified overcrowded living conditions, resulting in stress and poverty, as key risk factors associated with child abuse. We need the Australian government to commit to ongoing work and increased funding in this area, and we need for them to commit to it soon. We need more houses, better infrastructure and improved services across the Territory. I believe it is only right that some of the substantial federal budget surplus be invested where it can be used the most in our most under-resourced communities.
We have quadrupled the child protection budget since we came to government and there are now an extra 51 child protection staff on the ground across the Territory. The Department of Health and Community Services and the Territory police are forming a joint Territory-wide task force to respond to the increasing rates of reported child abuse in the Territory. The task force will see departmental staff and police co-located and working as a team on both investigations and follow-up work with families in communities. This joint task force approach is already in place as a response to family and domestic violence in Katherine through the Peace at Home initiative. It is just one of a number of new programs to have started over the past 12 months, in addition to our mainstream domestic violence programs.
In 2003, I launched the Northern Territory Domestic and Aboriginal Violence Strategies. Police now have domestic and personal violence protection units operating in four regional centres across the Territory, and indigenous family violence programs are delivered at both Alice Springs and Darwin Correctional Centres.
We have also boosted remote health services. In 2004, 18 additional child health nurses, Aboriginal health workers, and community workers were employed to work in new Territory-wide child health teams, which run maternal, child and youth health programs in remote areas. Maternal and child health protocols have been developed for both government and non-government health services to ensure best practice services in this critical area.
We are willing to take tough measures to tackle the problems of alcohol abuse. We are progressively developing local area alcohol management plans with communities across the Territory. Plans are already in place on Groote Eylandt and in Nhulunbuy. On Groote Eylandt, a permit is now required to buy takeaway alcohol. This was thrashed out with local indigenous leaders like Tony Wurramarrba, president of the Anindilyakwa Land Council, other community organisations, government officials, police and licensees. These measures have already seen a reduction of up to 75% in crime and antisocial behaviour on Groote Eylandt in a 12-month period.
The new antisocial behaviour legislation which introduces alcohol courts will commence in July. The minister responsible for licensing has agreed to strict new licensing conditions for Alice Springs, and has foreshadowed amendments to the Liquor Act to introduce urban dry areas and to restrict future takeaway licences to hotels and clubs.
When land claims have had a strong legal basis, we have, wherever possible, negotiated ‘win-win’ settlements, rather than wasting millions of taxpayers’ money on protracted litigation in courts. The parks agreement will see traditional landowners involved in joint management of 27 parks and reserves across the Territory.
In 2001, we made a strategic decision to establish the Office of Indigenous Policy within my own department, rather than create an indigenous affairs department. This model is now being emulated in other jurisdictions, where junior indigenous affairs portfolios have been unable to deliver tangible results.
We have been able to develop a coordinated, whole-of-government approach to indigenous policy. Central to this approach has been the establishment of the Chief Executives Taskforce on Indigenous Affairs which is chaired by the head of my department. This group, which meets regularly, ensures a coherent and coordinated response to indigenous issues across government agencies. This is reflected in our Agenda for Action in Indigenous Affairs which was published earlier this year and summarises current Territory commitments and priorities in Aboriginal areas. The agenda outlines six priority areas:
a whole-of-government approach;
The agenda demonstrates our commitment to tackle the difficult issues head on. Its major aim is to realise the huge potential of our natural and human resources.
We have also, where possible, collaborated with the Australian government on programs and initiatives. In April 2005, I signed the Overarching Agreement on Indigenous Affairs with the Prime Minister. We were the first jurisdiction to establish such an agreement with the Australian government under the framework established by COAG. The agreement is already producing action.
It provides an agreed framework for federal and Territory agencies to work together to achieve priority outcomes and includes schedules on housing; regional governance; arts; economic development; and employment. Additional areas such as land and sea rangers, youth at risk and education are currently under discussion. We are also working closely with the Australian government in the area of Aboriginal health on strategies to combat petrol sniffing and family violence, and on development strategies targeting specific communities.
There are no instant solutions in Aboriginal affairs. We are dealing today with a legacy that goes back many decades. Achieving sustainable results requires a long-term commitment from all tiers of government and Aboriginal people themselves. Governments alone cannot solve these problems.
Unfortunately, Aboriginal affairs is also littered with well intentioned short-term initiatives and a cut and run mentality when the going gets tough. New enthusiasm, new ideas and a sense of urgency are important and I welcome them. However, what we really need is a commitment for the long haul.
Wadeye is a case in point. Wadeye was identified as a national trial site under the COAG framework in 2002. A shared responsibility agreement was signed in March 2003 by the three parties to the trial: the Thamarrurr Regional Council, the Northern Territory government and the federal government. We would all agree at this point the results have been disappointing but that is not a reason to walk away. Wadeye’s underlying problems are not new and they were never going to be solved in the space of three years. We need to stand firm and work together to find a way forward.
The federal Minister for Family and Community Services and Indigenous Affairs has rightly said that law and order must be restored before anything else can be achieved, and it has been. The police presence at Wadeye has been boosted to eight permanent officers and additional task group officers have been deployed to assist local police put an end to the destruction and the intimidatory behaviour by local gangs. Court processes are being expedited to finalise court hearings and new anti-gang measures were announced yesterday.
The Territory has appointed David Coles as coordinator for Territory government services at Wadeye. I hope that the federal government will take up our suggestion that David Coles also coordinates federal government programs to minimise the red tape and duplication.
The 2005-06 Territory budget included funding for a new secondary school at Wadeye. I hope that the federal government will move quickly to lift the remote area exemption for the CDEP program at Wadeye and provide appropriate training and resources which will see significant additional jobs created in Wadeye through CDEP.
We now need to commit to achieving real outcomes at Wadeye. We need to take stock of what we have learnt over the past three years and push on to ensure tangible outcomes are achieved in housing and infrastructure, in opportunities for children and youth, and in services for families. I welcome the federal minister’s interest in Galiwinku and other Territory communities, but we cannot walk away from Wadeye. We need to stay and finish the job we have started. If we do not, we have learnt nothing from the past.
One of three key priorities identified by Wadeye people at the beginning of the COAG trial was housing and infrastructure. At the time of self-government in 1978, we inherited a massive backlog in housing and infrastructure - a situation that has been exacerbated by population growth since then. Almost two-thirds of Aboriginal Territorians live in overcrowded houses, and this has severe health implications. Domestic hygiene is difficult to maintain and the spread of infections has accelerated. Aboriginal infant mortality has been falling steadily but it is still three times the rate of other Territorians. Life expectancy for Aboriginal males is 20 years less than non-indigenous males. Aboriginal labour force participation is less than 40%, and the imprisonment rate for Aboriginal adults in the Territory, although less than the national average, is over three times that of the rest of the Territory population. It will take 20 years or more to achieve a permanent turnaround in some of these key indicators.
The estimated backlog in indigenous housing in the Territory is valued at over $1bn. Even if the money was available, we could not transform this situation in the short term. We need to tackle alcohol and substance abuse, education and opportunities for employment at the same time. The instant provision of new housing and infrastructure will not, by itself, create sustainable communities.
The major causes of reduced indigenous life expectancy in the Territory are adult chronic diseases such as coronary disease, renal disease and diabetes. While adult lifestyle factors such as diet, lack of exercise and smoking rates are very important, some of the contributing factors to this situation are thought to have their origins in early childhood infections. Improvements in child health today are, therefore, absolutely essential if we are to reduce adult death rates in 40 to 50 years time.
Education is also a key factor in health. Third World studies have found that the most important determining factor in child health is the level of education of the mothers. The achievement of national education benchmarks, and ensuring employment opportunities for the majority of Aboriginal people across the Territory, will be realistically a challenge for the next 20 years. One of the quick fix solutions thrown up over the last few weeks - I think it was from the Menzies Institute - was to close down remote communities and bring Aboriginal people into towns where they have access to jobs. Apparently the prescription was that we must forget all about this culture nonsense and just get back to economics. Anybody familiar with some of the underlying issues at Wadeye, or at a number of communities in the Territory, would know that is hardly a recipe for success. I would have thought that anyone who has seen the slums occupied by rural migrants in the fringes of some Third World cities would understand the failure of that approach. Some of the problems of our own town camps should be evidence enough that this is no solution. Single solutions, one program approaches with three years funding, are not going to deliver real changes in our Aboriginal communities.
In the Territory, Aboriginal people make up nearly 30% of our population. More significantly, Aboriginal children make up 40% of our school population. The Aboriginal population in the Territory is growing and projected to double every 20 years. It stands to reason then that, in this part of the world, Aboriginal issues are mainstream issues. They are central to the future of the Territory. We need to build on the whole-of-government approach we have established, which provides a coherent framework to which individual agencies are accountable and within which they exercise their responsibilities.
We must start with the five foundational issues that I have raised with the federal minister: community safety; responsible management of alcohol; housing; sound governance; and welfare reform. Schooling and health care are also fundamental. We need to ensure that children get the best start possible in life.
A sustainable future for Aboriginal people must also involve access to adult education, vocational training, opportunities for employment, and economic development.
The scale of the challenge we are dealing with means that we cannot tackle it alone. This is a national issue and the Australian government is a key player. It requires a national partnership, but one where the Territory must show leadership. We need to adopt a strategic approach to achieving sustainable outcomes for Aboriginal people, one tailored to the different circumstances in which they now live.
Some Aboriginal people live permanently on outstations, many live in emerging Aboriginal towns, some in town camps. Others live in the suburbs of Darwin, Alice Springs and other regional centres, and many Aboriginal people are highly mobile and transit between these different living environments. It is essential that Aboriginal people are engaged as key partners with government. We cannot prescribe a future for these Territorians; it is one that must be forged in partnership. It needs to be a 20-year generational plan, because it will take at least 20 years of serious commitment to make a real and lasting difference. The commitment must be sustained, across the three or four year cycles of Territory, state and national elections.
The stark differences in outcomes against indicators for indigenous and non-indigenous Australians in health, housing, education, employment and imprisonment means that this must be a generational plan. We need to establish five-, 10-, 15- and 20-year targets for improvement, and be prepared to reassess progress and strategies at each stage. It will be important to review progress every five years, and to reset the compass, if necessary, even though we know that we still have some way to go.
There are precedents for long-term national plans. The National Competition Policy was a 10-year plan, and the Living Murray Initiative is an eight year plan. Surely the future of Aboriginal Australians warrants a national 20-year plan. I have written to the Prime Minister requesting that this be a special agenda item at COAG, involving Premiers, Chief Ministers and the Prime Minister on 14 July.
I believe that the current national focus on Aboriginal issues is an opportunity to achieve a national commitment to fundamental change, change that will see a permanent shift in outcomes for Aboriginal Australians. We must seize the opportunity now. The events of the last few weeks remind me of Philip Ruddock’s words back in 1979 on the release of the Aboriginal Health report, when he said:
- When innumerable reports on the poor state of Aboriginal health are released, there are expressions of shock or surprise and outraged cries for immediate action. However … the appalling state of Aboriginal health is soon forgotten until another report is released.
How prescient it was back in 1979 with those words of Philip Ruddock.
This government is taking up the challenge. We will raise these issues at the Ministerial Council on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, and the Housing Ministers Conference on Friday this week. Three members of Cabinet will participate in the inter-governmental meeting convened by the federal Minister for Family and Children’s Services and Indigenous Affairs on the 26th of this month. I have also requested that Aboriginal Affairs be an agenda item at the Council of Australian Governments meeting involving the Premiers, Chief Ministers and the Prime Minister on 14 July.
We need a strategic approach to achieving sustainable outcomes for Aboriginal people, tailored to the circumstances in which they live. We must tackle the causes, not just the symptoms of the problems we are seeing. It is essential that Aboriginal people play their part and are engaged as key partners with government. A 20-year commitment is required, but with defined milestones for improvement every five years and a reassessment of achievements. It must continue to be a whole-of-government approach and it has to be a national approach with all states, territories and the Australian government committed.
Mr Acting Speaker, if the next generation of Aboriginal people is to be healthier and safer and enjoy the same opportunities as other Australians, we have to work together now. We also have to realise that we are in this for the long haul, beyond politics. That is the only way we will achieve real and lasting change.
Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Acting Speaker, I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement to this extent: at least it is something. It has been nearly a month – yes, 15 May 2006 was the interview and it has been nearly a month until we have had anything that even vaguely resembles something coherent from this Chief Minister. I do not propose to repeat it in its entirety but, as I said yesterday, the Chief Minister has been slammed, and rightly so, by the national media on this issue. She kept digging herself holes she could not get out of. Someone obviously said: ‘In order to give yourself credibility, you need a plan’. Then, mischievously in my view, a media release was issued a week or so ago saying: ‘We have a plan, we have a 20-year plan’. As I said yesterday, the word ‘violence’ was not even mentioned. I will come back to the issue of violence. There were many things I could have said yesterday but, unfortunately, due to constraints, I ran out of time.
In relation to this so-called plan, I said in the media interview I did after Question Time that it was, for all intents and purposes, a statement with a bundle of sentences strung together with the word ‘plan’ attached to it by the Chief Minister and government. Before this so-called plan was delivered to my office last night, I was hopeful. I thought this is great. They have had a month to work on it. Some of them are more committed than others …
Ms Scrymgour: She is reading the same speech – the spiel that she did for child protection.
Ms CARNEY: If the member for Arnhem wants to contribute to this debate …
Members: Arafura.
Ms CARNEY: … I certainly look forward to it because she has been silent, Mr Acting Speaker. She should know better than most being an indigenous woman who regards herself as fairly close to her community, but not a word from the member for Arnhem – sorry, Arafura, my apologies - for the last four weeks. When media and other were saying: ‘You have five indigenous members, why do you not come out and have a bit of a say’ at least the member for Macdonnell actually came out and said something. I know they were carpeted by the Chief Minister subsequently. However, at least they had the guts to say something. Unlike you, member for Arafura. I expected much more, as did a lot of your supporters. It has not gone unnoticed, I might say, the length and breadth of the Northern Territory. You can have your say and I look forward to it. If anyone on that side of politics is able to bring something to this debate, I would have thought it was you.
Mr Stirling: You cannot debate anything without personalising, can you? Incapable of rational debate.
Ms CARNEY: And you do not have much to say, sport, so you can just be silent.
Members interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I look forward to hearing a contribution from the member for Arafura.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Government members, I have a feeling that this could be provocative sort of debate, so please I would ask you not to rise to the moment.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker.
I was expecting great things and it was underwhelming. Yes, it has 30 pages or something like that, but it is, with the greatest of respect, underwhelming. I thought there might be some vision. There is not, there is just a bunch of words. Do you know why it is a 20-year plan, Mr Acting Speaker? Because they do not have any answers at all. They have been called upon to provide answers for the last five years. God knows, prior to 2001 they said they controlled everything, and now they have presented this thing called a plan.
In relation to the debate that has occurred in this country in the last month, even though Dr Nanette Rogers and Tony Jones talked about the issue of and the culture of male violence in Aboriginal communities perpetrated on women and children, their debate, not surprisingly, has strayed into a number of other areas. That has been a good thing. However, I, for one, am not going to be swept up in all of these issues as important as they are. I get a feel from this government that they want to talk about pretty much everything except violence against women and children, and I am not going to let that happen. The reasons for that are well known. I have been interested in this area for many years. Therefore, I am not going to let that happen.
I welcome the broad-ranging discussion that many of Australians have undertaken. The broad-ranging discussion has been, not surprisingly, picked up by the Chief Minister in this statement, which some would say amounts to an attempt to placate the federal government, to say to Mal Brough: ‘Oh yes, we do agree that this is about law and order’. Most Australians believe that law and order is the most important issue. This government and the Chief Minister in particular had been resisting that, so they will give this to Mal Brough and say: ‘Well, sir, we have said something about law and order’.
The reasonably specific initiatives at Wadeye are to be welcomed. However, there are no answers as to the issue of the culture of violence perpetrated in this community. As an Australian, I lament and feel very sad about the fact that so many Aboriginal kids do not go to school. I feel very sad about what is a broad and high level of disadvantage endured by my fellow Australians particularly in the Northern Territory. I lament the fact that some Aboriginal housing in various communities is not up to scratch. However, do you know what I cannot stand more than anything else? I really do not like it when women and kids are bashed and beaten and raped. If you want my list, there it is. That is what I care most about and any discussion, regardless of politics, about the other issues are to be welcomed and encouraged because all of us want to see better outcomes.
I am not going to stand by and have the Chief Minister take the issue away from this ingrained culture of violence that exists. We had a discussion in the censure debate yesterday where I quoted research - which I might say the Chief Minister was hysterically hostile about - where I said alcohol does not cause violence. We all know people who get drunk. Do they beat women, do they rape children? No. Overcrowding does not cause violence. We know big families. Do they, as the Chief Minister is on the record as saying, cause people to beat women and rape children? I do not think so.
Let us be honest, because the Chief Minister fails to do so, and I will remind members that in the censure motion yesterday we specifically stated that she lied on numerous occasions. If you read the Hansard …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I seek a ruling on this. It is certainly an offence against standing orders to accuse any member of lying outside of a substantive motion on that debate. To refer to a previous debate is not substantive, it is in regards to a substantive motion, it is on the Parliamentary Record and it was lost. It was negatived. The Leader of the Opposition failed to prosecute, by way of substantive motion yesterday in debate, that the Chief Minister has lied. Therefore, she cannot get up here again and make that allegation unless she does it by way of substantive motion.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, speaking to the point of order, it would be a sad day, indeed, if we could not refer to the Hansard of this parliament …
Mr Henderson: But you lost.
Ms CARNEY: You have had your say. … if we cannot refer to the Hansard of this parliament. Here it is, here is the censure motion. Whether it was lost is neither here nor there. The fact is I said …
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition …
Ms CARNEY: Can I please finish, Mr Acting Speaker?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, please stop. No.
Ms CARNEY: I said we suggested that she lied, it is as simple as that.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I shall take advice on this. Could you kindly take your seat?
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I have sought advice. Would you please withdraw the remark?
Ms CARNEY: Which remark, Mr Acting Speaker? There have been a few.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Guess which one it would be. It would be the one of you using the word ‘lied’ again.
Ms CARNEY: Can I seek clarification, Mr Acting Speaker? Is it the case that we cannot refer to censure motions that were debated in this parliament …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Referring to the previous debate, that is correct.
Ms CARNEY: That is correct?
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Yes.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. I am sure …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Have you withdrawn?
Ms CARNEY: Yes. I am sure …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Could you properly withdraw it, please.
Ms CARNEY: I properly withdraw it.
I am sure members of the Australian Labor Party will be feeling very gleeful that, after the Acting Speaker’s ruling, we made a number of points yesterday during the censure motion and we cannot refer to them again today. In any event, it is on the Parliamentary Record and people can go and have a look at it.
I made a number of very serious allegations yesterday about the Chief Minister and her conduct following the Dr Nanette Rogers’ interview on Lateline. Her conduct has been atrocious and she has told a number of untruths in relation to it. It is unfortunate that, even in her statement she still tells whoppers. One of them is she does not even …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! It is akin to lying and I ask the member to withdraw it.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, we are all aware of what the term ‘whoppers’ means. Would you withdraw that remark, please?
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw that remark and say the Chief Minister tells yet another untruth. She said on page 13: ‘In 2003, I launched the Northern Territory Domestic and Aboriginal Violence Strategy’. Two issues about that: first, you did not even get the name of your own strategy right. I have it here. It is actually called the Northern Territory Domestic and Aboriginal Family Violence Strategy. You have typed it, you said it, and you do not even know the name of your own strategies, which anywhere else in this country you would have thought would get a column somewhere in a newspaper.
With respect, you did not launch those strategies, Chief Minister. You relaunched those strategies. As I usually do, I have lots of information about domestic violence and related issues. The Domestic Violence Strategy has been ongoing in this Territory since about 1994; there are occasional papers written about Aboriginal family violence; there is the Aboriginal Family Violence Strategy launched by the former government - and it goes on and on.
The Chief Minister just does not know anything about this issue. I wish her staff would wind her up and give her the right words. I know she is very good at twisting out of things as she sought to do in yesterday’s censure motion. Time is again against me on the further prosecution of that case.
The point is that the Chief Minister does not have any credibility. To come in here with a 30-page document of cobbled together sentences, with well-meaning expressions - there are some points that are reasonable, but it does not amount to a 20-year plan. I ask the Chief Minister if she has not been sufficiently moved by the interview or the national debate since, that she might be minded to give some consideration to immediate action that will address the abuse of women and children in indigenous communities.
By letter dated 19 May 2006, I took the liberty of writing to the Chief Minister and saying that we should have a bipartisan approach to this. I suggested a number of options or draft plans. They were under the headings short-term, medium-term and long-term. I have not received a response to that letter. Therefore, regarding the Chief Minister’s almost academy award winning performance where she says: ‘I care and everyone needs to work together’ - you do not even respond to my correspondence and I certainly know that you do not respond to others as well.
She would not have been interested but, in a speech I made in the parliament on 12 October 2006, I referred to an initiative that was being trialled in Austria and Germany where the perpetrators of sexual violence are evicted from the household after charges are laid. While periods of removal or eviction vary, underlying the scheme is a belief that the victims need to be protected and must have sufficient time in order to consider options. The victim may elect to move from home. I gather that, in such circumstances, the perpetrator can return. However, the point is there are other places in the world that are undertaking quite innovative responses to the issue of domestic violence.
I listed a number of initiatives, but I said that a bold initiative, such as evicting a perpetrator for a significantly longer period than what already exists, may have application in the Territory’s remote communities. The mechanics of producing a scheme such as the one I have outlined would be difficult. However, decision-makers should at least try to rise to the challenge. Nothing - nothing by this government; they have not even bothered to have a look at it. I am well aware of what we can and cannot do in opposition, but I am not going to stop giving suggestions to the representatives in this parliament. I live in hope that occasionally their staffers, at least, might even look at some of the initiatives and whether they do or not, I will bat on regardless.
In a letter to Territorians on 24 May this year, I said that I well understood that some initiatives have been tried over the years when the CLP was in government. I said that although much was done, the achievements were disappointing. I also wrote that in the last five years, though the ALP has also made considerable efforts, the results are disappointing. This demonstrates that a much more comprehensive approach, driven by delivering real and sustained outcomes, must be our collective focus. I meant every word of what I said.
I am not going to stand here and say everything the CLP did was perfect. It was not. But I do not stomach, and cannot stomach for a moment, some of the comments that come flying across this Chamber about how the CLP did not care about education; domestic violence; and law and order.
The Chief Minister, and I believe even the Education minister, are on record as saying you cannot put police in every single community where, for instance, there might be 50 people. You cannot build schools in remote communities where there are 50 people. I thought the Chief Minister’s comments about outstations were very interesting. My position is that I favour the one generally outlined by Senator Amanda Vanstone when she was Indigenous Affairs minister and, although it was only maybe six months ago, they were considered to be a little controversial. She was saying: ‘Outstations are not sustainable. What we need to do as a society is, instead of having Aboriginal people at communities and outstations, have them in towns’. Give them the same sort of rights that I enjoy as a citizen of Alice Springs. Read the article, member for Drysdale, if you bother.
There has been much said and written over the last few months. Yesterday, I referred to well known anthropologist in Alice Springs, Jane Lloyd, who did a great many interviews after the Nan Rogers interview because Jane Lloyd is regarded as an expert in this area. I know the Chief Minister does not like it when I quote from experts; however, I will continue to do so. I thought Ms Lloyd made a very interesting point when talking to Julia Christensen the next day on Tuesday, 16 May. She said: ‘… and there is a responsibility on the part of Aboriginal communities here, it is great that a bunch of whitefellas are going to sit around and talk about solutions but we need it with the assistance of the indigenous community’. I remind people about a very interesting report on Four Corners a couple of weeks ago by Liz Jackson. If ever there was a dysfunctional community that did not have its act together, it was Imanpa, and if no one has seen that program, I urge them to have a look at it.
In any case, Jane Lloyd, on ABC said:
- And I think for a long time there’s been an attitude, and that’s slowly changing – oh look it’s up to the Aboriginal community to fix these problems themselves, you know, it’s up to them to police their own communities, it’s up to them to find solutions. And we certainly don’t apply those same attitudes and values to our own community. We don’t expect our own communities to police themselves or deal with very complex social issues.
Certainly, there are some great remote communities. We have all talked about them in this parliament, but we are not talking about those communities that are doing well. The tenor of this national debate is about those communities that are doing really badly. At Papunya, the nurses tell me that there is about a 50% STI rate of children there. Does that not move you, Chief Minister? I am not going to second-guess a nurse who bothers to ring my office and tell me that. I think that is incredibly alarming.
The Chief Minister can go through the motions of stringing the sentences together but it does need real action. It definitely needs more than her usual academy award winning performance. It certainly needs a commitment from her to address the issue of violence in the communities. I am not going to let her get away with moving the debate away from the very issue that sparked this national discussion, and I will return to that issue soon.
In the time I have left I will spend a little time talking about what the Commonwealth government has contributed to some of the indigenous law and justice initiatives in this country. The Territory receives its fair share of Commonwealth funding ...
Mr Henderson: They could give us back the juvenile diversion money. That would be a start.
Ms CARNEY: I look forward to your contribution. I know you do not care about this, however, some of us do.
In the last budget, for instance, the Commonwealth government made an allocation, just for the next year, of …
Mr Henderson: They de-funded juvenile diversion.
Ms CARNEY: Can I finish, Mr Acting Speaker? … $23.6m to fund an expansion in the number of family violence prevention legal services from 26 to 31; $14.9m to support prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, restorative justice initiatives as part of an integrated package to combat substance abuse, initially focusing on petrol sniffing in Central Australia - which this government still refuses to make illegal despite my pleas asking them to do so; $5.1m in a continuing joint funding initiative with the Northern Territory government to improve indigenous access to interpreter services in the Northern Territory; and so on.
The budget material is all there. I assume the Chief Minister has people in her office who can go through this stuff. I would hate to think that the Chief Minister will continue her aggressive and belligerent position with respect to the federal Indigenous Affairs minister and his intentions. She has said some very scathing things about Mal Brough whom I said yesterday was clearly a man very moved by what he had seen, unlike the Chief Minister. For my colleague, the member for Greatorex, to be reduced to tears – and it was not alleged tears, he wept, he was right behind me, he wept – I am proud to stand by him and with him any day of the week.
Do you know who I have not seen shed a tear in this parliament, Mr Acting Speaker? The Chief Minister and the Leader of Government Business. Everyone’s make-up is different, but the only conclusion I can draw is that the only thing they care about is getting back into power. I would substitute compassion over ambition any day of the week.
The Chief Minister has deservedly, as I said, come under sustained criticism in the national media. I would like to quote just an extract from the editorial in the Weekend Australian on 20 May, only a few days after the interview. The editorial that I quote is in relation to Dr Rogers’ revelations:
- Her statement was such shocking stuff that at first it seemed Australia would be shamed into acting. The next day, the federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Mal Brough, spoke out, saying that the misery must end. He sounded like he meant it. And it seemed as if a paradigm shift had occurred, that instead of academic debates about abstract indigenous rights, people in power would finally act to protect women and children. But not for long. Northern Territory Chief Minister, Clare Martin, said her government was trying hard and that she would not attend the summit Mr Brough proposed, because indigenous violence was already on the agenda of the Council of Australian Governments. And then she came up with an inane excuse for inaction by calling on Canberra to provide more money for housing in remote areas. This sounded familiar to anybody interested in the wellbeing of indigenous Australians because for a generation we have heard how money is the answer. But it’s not. Whatever Ms Martin thinks, sexual assaults in remote settlements will not be stopped by bigger public service budgets.
I make three points: one is the conduct of the Chief Minister has been atrocious; second, whilst every government wants to put more and more money into just about everything there is always a limit – the federal government is putting in the hard yards and will continue to do so; the third point is, this persistent and regular mantra of ‘give us more money’ is not going to solve the problems and the 20-year plan is deficient. I am very happy to sit around for 20 years. I hope I am still alive in 20 years time, you never know. However, what I wanted to see from the Chief Minister’s so called plan is a plan of action.
Returning to domestic violence, if you look at the domestic violence strategies that have been produced by governments in the Northern Territory over a period of years, you will see a similarity. People change, public service changes, government changes, everyone has new ideas. Any suggestion that the former Country Liberal Party government did not do work in this area is wrong. In fact, I remember the government receiving a number of coveted national awards for their various domestic violence programs.
It should not go unnoticed that on 19 May 2006, four days after Nanette Rogers did her interview with Tony Jones, the Chief Executive of Health sent an e-mail to pretty much everyone, a copy of which was provided to my office. It had a photo of the Chief Executive Officer, Mr Robert Griew, with his little smile, and it had a big heading: ‘Reminder on reporting child abuse’. I know from departmental staff who have contacted me. I do not think that departmental staff, particularly those who work in child protection, need any reminding from their Chief Executive Officer. What we want to see, what they want to see, is leadership from the relevant minister.
We had two cases today where remote area nurses were saying that they had experienced difficulties - to put it politely - and had not seen outcomes. We referred to the difference between the number of notifications as measured with prosecutions. The Chief Minister said she would provide me with some answers. I look forward to that though I suspect she probably will not.
In any case it demonstrates that there are a number of sexual offences committed every day. There are not enough prosecutions that occur. For the Chief Executive Officer of Health to somewhat opportunistically send around a reminder on reporting child abuse was unfortunate, to say the least. I know that many people were pretty upset about it. If the Chief Executive Officer is concerned that his departmental officials are not reporting child abuse, then come up with a program. Do something about it. Do not send around a one liner saying: ‘Reminder on reporting child abuse’. If you do not think your officers are doing as much as they should then you need to help them. It is not just about putting more workers in the bush, etcetera, if you believe there is a serious problem you must address it.
I have received, as I said in Question Time today, a surprising number of e-mails and phone calls from many remote area nurses. I am politically sensible enough to know that many nurses who work in remote communities are not the natural constituents of the Country Liberal Party. However, to their credit they have written to me and told me many of their stories, some of which were quite distressing. One of them was unusual in the sense that it was sent to government ministers and carbon-copied to me, I thought it was relevant for the purposes of this debate to quote from it. It was addressed to the Chief Minister:
- Your statement that you have strategies for dealing with these problems is simply ridiculous. I have worked closely with Aboriginal people who are receiving no support from your so-called well publicised strategies that are not delivering anything on the ground where it is needed. The NT government has few resources most of which seem to be going on the Darwin waterfront and few competent public service employees to deliver services.
The main point, Mr Acting Speaker, is that this person does not think that the government is doing enough.
I end by referring to what I heard some time ago from a violent offender when being interviewed about violence he committed on his partner. This violent husband is known to have told police about the assault on his wife: ‘I thought she would eventually wake up after I bashed her, she usually does’. Please, Chief Minister, can you address those issues and the culture of violence, because if ever there was a time for all of us to step up to the plate, it is now.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Mr Acting Speaker, I want to contribute to the debate today from the focus of what we have been doing and continue to do in areas of indigenous education. I also want to pick up some of the actions that the government is taking in relation to alcohol abuse - an area of social policy that has come very fixed under the spotlight of government over the last six to eight months.
I want to pick up on more the tone and tenor of the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution to the debate, rather than what she had to say. She continues to demonstrate an inability to come to grips with the topic in any rational, logical form of debate. She is reduced to personal attacks. We saw it in Question Time in relation to the member for Macdonnell. The first 15 minutes of her contribution today was at a level of hysteria; personal abuse of the member for Arafura in the first instance, and then personal abuse of the Chief Minister and a personal attack before she lowered the decibels. I thought, momentarily at least, that we might have had something positive by way of contribution, by way of suggestion - some idea from the opposition about what they think government should be doing.
It is easier to listen to the Leader of the Opposition when she reduces her voice, but I found nothing worthwhile even when she did show signs of settling down. Maybe, at one stage, I thought, yes, she was going to produce something positive. However, no, that is all a little too much for the Leader of the Opposition. I do not want to sound patronising, but she is easier to listen to when she lowers her voice. The next step she has to take is actually say something useful and positive in that contribution, because there comes a point where all of the credibility points have been burned up. If people take the time to listen and not get anything worthwhile out of that, the next thing they do is slowly but surely stop listening because they do not think that there is going to be anything worthwhile said.
In education, I want to take as an example a small community at Emu Point. Every day, the children went to a school that consisted of nothing more than a tin roof on a sweltering black mud plain. In the 40C pre-Wet Season heat there were 36 young students. That is one of the legacies of the CLP that I had to fix up: 40C heat with 36 young students learning in a galvanised iron roof under a bough shelter. I am proud that they now have a brand new $1.3m school to learn in.
I want to pick up on the issue of Amanda Vanstone setting the hare running last year in relation to homelands. I believe she was a little general in the statement that they were cultural museums and they ought to be done away with. I do not think she was actually meaning they should all be done away with. I join with my colleague, the Minister for Housing, that there are genuine questions about some homelands. However, the worst definitional criterion that you could measure a homeland’s viability or success or, indeed any community, is the size. I can take members to some of the smallest homelands in the Northern Territory and they are the most viable in what the people do, how they go about their work, the art work they create, and the income they get in product to either Buku Larrnggay Arts or Nambara Arts and Craft in north-east Arnhem Land. I suppose every rural member sitting in this parliament would have examples of quite small, but highly effective and well-run, healthy, happy people living their lives productively in those small homelands.
We do not need to look past Wadeye to say the bigger the better. In fact, the bigger the more social problems, and the more dysfunction we see, apparently in the case of Wadeye. The last thing that ought be on the table in terms of viability of homelands is the question of size. I just put that on the record. As I said, my colleague, the member for Barkly, is on the record regarding that, but I wanted to make sure that it was not a question of size only that was considered.
In some of those smaller communities, absolutely outstanding achievements are occurring. I look around this Assembly and I see five indigenous colleagues, two ministers of the Crown, all articulate advocates for not just indigenous world, not just the electorate they represent but, indeed, for the whole community of the Northern Territory. I think something is going right out there.
Two weeks ago, over two days, I watched with pride the achievements of two of our bush schools. What was evident in both was the overwhelming engagement between those Territory schools and their communities. I saw pride and success, and I can tell members, I see outstanding children and students in all of my travels through bush schools.
However, I can also tell the other side of the story. As a member for a bush electorate over 16 years, the number of times I have had to sit in despair at yet another funeral of another promising young leader who drank themselves to death; young men who went on the campaign trail with me back in October 1990, who helped me get elected, are no longer with us. I sat in this Chamber and listened to Brian Ede recount similar stories from his time as the member for Stuart, where the people who worked with him when he was first elected were no longer alive when his time came to leave this Assembly.
These are enormous dichotomies across our community. They characterise our community and they are not new. The great divide between urban and remote communities, and between indigenous and non-indigenous in our community, goes back many years. In that time we have seen many solutions tried and failed, and many phases come and gone.
Today, we are spending time expressing concern about town camps, and I join that concern. But no one should forget that town camps were established in an effort to get those people displaced by the development of urban society into a house and into some sort of security on their own land. For many years, it was town camps that provided the only form of housing and security for people displaced in this way. The fact now that in the 21st century they no longer provide the effective role that they once did does not make them failures. It means it is time for the policy response to be updated, and this government is doing exactly that.
I remember the outstation movement - now condemned because of the cost - once hailed by the federal government as the antidote to the problems created by white governments bringing together disparate groups and dumping them in one place, like Papunya, Wadeye and other communities. If we want to look at some of these unviable little homelands, it was the federal government that created them. It was the federal government that put expensive infrastructure into some of these places and it is those little communities that are no longer effective or viable.
In fact, the homeland movement that spread from Yirrkala in the early 1970s right through to the Layna homelands was all home grown, all driven on the back - all went out and built their own houses, cut down the trees and built their own airstrips. They are as viable today as when they were set up in the early 1970s. Not so when the federal government tipped in buckets of money and shifted people to little unviable communities.
I look at one of the solutions being offered to Wadeye, and I see again an outstation approach being used as a means to reduce tension in the community. What I learnt from that is that nothing should ever be ruled out as a policy response, and no policy should ever be accepted as a sacred cow which cannot be touched on the other hand. There is no doubt over the years governments have sometimes clung to policy positions for too long, either based on ownership of that policy or philosophical attachment to it. If we learn nothing from this debate, I hope we learn that policy positions should be regularly examined. They should be turfed out if they do not result in the improvement of life. It is time for us to carefully assess how well the policies we come to take for granted really do impact on people. However, we need to take care, and we need to take time through that approach.
That is why I am strongly supportive of the 20-year approach taken by the Chief Minister publicly in her discussions with the federal government and outlined today: an overarching 20-year plan, with five-yearly assessments and goals across a number of critical areas will focus the minds of government. It will mean policies will be outcome driven, real gains will be measured, and it will have the ownership of people in the government. It will take the debate out of the political cycle and into a discussion about real outcomes. I find the reluctance of the federal government to adopt this approach quite bewildering.
The Martin government is taking a carefully planned approach to the delivery of services across a range of areas. We have health plans, education plans, and law and justice plans. We would place all of those under the umbrella of the larger overarching plan and ensure they are part of the reporting and assessment process. This planning will have a positive effect.
Before I go to alcohol education, I want to also reflect on the role of federal and Territory governments over the last 30 years. Decisions made by governments in the Territory in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s laid the groundwork for the difficulties and problems we face today. In the 1970s, Aboriginal people were only breaking through the consciousness of Australians. It was only in 1967 - in fact, three years prior to that - that Aboriginal Australians were granted their citizenship and their right to vote. That is probably to the shame of all Australians that it took so long. In the 1970s, the awakening of the demand for rights, the promotion of land rights by the Whitlam and Fraser governments, began to correct the neglect of individual and collective rights which have characterised governments since federation. These calls for rights were met consistently with sullen resentment by the Territory government of the day, and that resentment and political wedging characterised their every approach to dealing with indigenous issues in the Northern Territory.
Probably the watershed for Aboriginal people in the Territory as a whole came with that Ayres Rock campaign and subsequent election of 1983. It was in that campaign, the pretext of the return to the traditional owners of Uluru, that was used to divide the white urban vote from the largely indigenous rural and remote voters by then CLP Chief Minister, Paul Everingham. That election began what became a morally bankrupt procession of subsequent elections that lasted more than 20 years in the Northern Territory.
What was begun then as a political tool was refined, and was used repeatedly over many years by subsequent governments led by the Country Liberal Party. Even the Centralian Advocate in its editorial of Friday, 26 May 2006, recognised that divisive government campaign.
Most vivid in my mind was the campaign used by the Perron government in 1994. Faced with a dip in the polls, the 1994 campaign was run almost entirely on the issue of two laws. In that campaign the CLP portrayed the Labor opposition as preparing to set up a separate legal system for Aboriginal Territorians with heavy implications of bias and leniency. To drive that home, the CLP staged a mock declaration by an Aboriginal man placing a native title claim on Darwin 48 hours before the polls. To reinforce that spurious event, they push polled Territorians in key marginal seats alleging that Labor would give Darwin away to Aboriginal people.
That was the sort of campaign that Territorians became used to over those years, laden with the undertone of the threat to urban society presented by the Aboriginal hordes, out there in the bush, ready to come back in and claim the back yard. It was a disgraceful episode in Territory history. The short-term political gain that was generated for the government has come at the price of the long-term alienation of indigenous issues from the mainstream of politics in the Northern Territory. Issues of rural and remote poverty have all been kept off that political mainstream sheet.
CLP governments felt free to ignore issues raised by people in the bush, instead relying on spending the largesse of the immediate post-self-government days on political priorities. That is where the real deficit in housing comes from. Sure, we started off on the back foot in 1978, but there was loads of dough at the time of self-government, and very little of it found its way to housing, education, health facilities, or health programs. That is a deficit that this government is struggling to dislodge and change. We have not been assisted by the poorly coordinated efforts by federal governments, and I include Labor federal governments in that, which have blustered and ignored these issues from the afar.
Efforts in education over the last five years: in an effort to try to overcome the policy and practical deficit left in this area, when we came to office we immediately implemented the vast majority of the recommendations of the Collins Report, widely acknowledged as providing some solutions, but sat gathering dust on the shelf of the CLP. We then made indigenous education core business of the agency. In the last five years, I have worked with the chief executives of DEET to dismantle the Indigenous Education Branch to ensure that indigenous education is a core responsibility of all divisions across the agency.
We implemented mandatory requirements for all students no matter where they lived to participate in the multilevel assessment program. It is impossible to believe, but remote students were not required to participate in this fundamental testing and assessment. Until we came to government, they were not even required to enrol.
That is the state that indigenous education was left in by our predecessors. We have reversed all those policies, including the one which said ‘No secondary education programs out bush’ - a more discriminatory policy could you ever see on the books than that one. We have full secondary education programs at Maningrida, Kalkarindji, Papunya, Minyerri, and Yirrkala, and other communities are developing secondary education programs. We have spent $27m on major infrastructure in bush schools, not counting minor new works, or the equipment and housing grants programs, or housing of teachers. We have new secondary schools and facilities at Minyerri, Kalkarindji, Maningrida, Shepherdson, Wadeye to commence shortly, and Papunya. There are significant upgrades at Utopia, Mulga Bore, Alcoota, Milyakburra, Gunbalanya, Mapuru and Doindji. New primary schools built at Emu Point, Manyallaluk, and Wugularr to commence this year. Mamaruni is being rebuilt after being destroyed by Cyclone Ingrid.
In terms of the 100 new teachers that we brought on, 31 of those went to remote areas; 12 for Accelerated Literacy; 10 for ESL; five assistant principals for small remote group schools; two music teachers; two working on a remote resource package; three new regional director positions being created; 18 teachers will go to remote school under middle years; pools of specialist teachers, 20; distance education regional learning agents will be a further 10; mobile preschools, one full-time and 17 part-time 0.4 positions; teacher support trial, one; Garrthalaia homelands secondary trial position, one. Reaffirmed commitment to bilingual education, $3m recurrent. Distance education will impact on remote schools. We are rolling out collaborative school sites and in the education vote we have money for remote housing furniture.
There is always more to do and I am proud of the fact that this government has started to reverse the deficit of action built up over many years because of those discriminatory policies that our predecessors exercised. This will see results in these communities and I am looking forward to the outcomes of the planned community engagement process. It is an engagement that will bring together government and communities in the delivery of, and participation in, education and training in each community.
I turn to alcohol abuse, a problem which has been part of the Territory for many years and one in which, again, various policies have had some success and many failures. It is something that we have to get right. We recognise one size does not fit all, which is why we are developing local area alcohol management plans. These will act to bring the community into the process as well as industry and the government. We will build on this mutual ownership of the issue to set in place solutions endorsed and supported by the community. On a Territory-wide basis, the moratorium on takeaway liquor licences, the permanent ban on takeaway licences for any other than hotels and clubs, will draw a line in the sand about the way forward for alcohol outlets. It has already been criticised by the opposition. I say this: it does give communities valuable breathing space in which to draw up local area management plans without the threat of more licences coming on the market. Racing, Gaming and Licensing is increasing its educative role in responsible service of alcohol for takeaway licensees, and we will be following that up with covert inspections to ensure compliance. Having been visited by in-your-face Racing, Gaming and Licensing inspectors, reminded of their responsibilities and their obligations, it would be very difficult for any licensee to defend any subsequent breach so detected in terms of that compliance.
We will be releasing a draft bill for dry areas legislation for community consultation over the next month or so. We want to hear the views of Territorians around this bill. We have a long way to go on alcohol abuse. We will continue to work with communities on local area alcohol management plans. The example of Groote Eylandt, which was referred to by the Chief Minister, is a strong one. It is an encouraging signal of what can occur if you empower a local community to make decisions and get them made by the Liquor Commission.
We are working across a broad range of alcohol-related issues in our community. Just to touch on all of the initiatives undertaken recently: the antisocial behaviour package, the Chief Minister’s Alice Springs alcohol task force, the restricted premises legislation, and the new dry public places in urban areas amendments to the Liquor Act. I want to acknowledge the work of the licensing commission’s chairman, John Flynn, who wrote to me recently requesting that a moratorium be declared on the issue of takeaway licences throughout the Territory. We have acted on that request; a 12 month moratorium has been announced.
In their support of the licensing commission, I acknowledge the efforts of hard-working public servants. I am sure that members of this House will join me in recognising the dedicated contributions of those public servants whose job it is to provide government with a range of policy options from which government can determine an appropriate direction. In particular, the Director of the Office of Alcohol Policy, Dr Ian Crundall, and the staff in the Office of Alcohol Policy and Coordination, who have been working on liquor policy in general and alcohol management plans in particular. Alison Brown and Karen Avery have been out and about in the Territory talking to communities about how alcohol management plans can be developed to meet community needs. I thank them for their work and contribution. In many ways, it is just the beginning.
In closing, when I saw the member for Greatorex with tears in his eyes yesterday, talking about these Aboriginal issues and indigenous difficulties we have now, it would do him well to cast his mind back to when he was a minister in the government that did nothing about it, and reflect on the 26 years that they were in power in this place and had the opportunity to do something meaningful and positive for indigenous communities, and did nothing.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Speaker, I start by acknowledging the problem. In terms of the justice issues that I will be talking about in relation to the Chief Minister’s statement, I will be talking about indigenous violence and referring to not only the recent debate nationally, but also what has been said in this House over the last couple of days.
For any member of this House who represents a remote or indigenous electorate, to be representing that community is to be in a permanent state of mourning for the losses that we are suffering in our electorates, both through the chronic ill-health of our constituents, and the level of violence and trauma that is occurring in our communities. There is no question that there is a problem. In just this last seven days, in my electorate, there are three people whom I will not be able to say G’day to when I go out to my communities in the next run through there. That is typical and it is average. It is not unusual to have that loss. If bush members occasionally look a bit morbid or intense about issues, perhaps you will understand why that is. I am sure the member for Millner would also understand that with the indigenous community here in Darwin; it is not just out bush. There is no question that there is a problem.
What is the problem? We have seen so many things put forward over the last four to six weeks in the debate about indigenous violence and abuse of women and kids that it is important to try to put that into some sort of order so that we can deal with it rationally in terms of policy and the action we take to combat it. We have heard about customary law as being the root of all evil. We have heard about housing, alcohol abuse, crowding and lack of employment and education, and all of the things that have been mentioned, as being very important. I have to say straight up that we are probably going to have to look for part of the answer in all of those areas.
Are we talking here about a culture of violence or are we talking about culture? That is the first major issue that needs to be dealt with. To be saying that customary law is the root of all evil and the moment you get rid of customary law all this violence will disappear is simply nonsense. I challenge anyone prosecuting that case to tell us what customary law is. That seems to be taken as a given. The way it is presented is that it is this secret code of violence that is applied within a community. Can you really imagine a culture surviving for tens of thousands of years based on a precept of ‘the law allows you to be randomly violent to your own people’? It would never have survived on that basis.
It is not what I have seen over 25 years of living with, working with, befriending and talking to people in what is now my electorate. What I heard about customary law is that it is the way you look after your country and your family. It is the responsibilities you bear to the community that you are part of. It is a whole lot of taboos about what you cannot do to other people around you in the way of unjust, violent or unjustified acts. It is a system of social order that made sure that Aboriginal people were able to survive in all of the environments here in the Northern Territory for that huge length of time - and are continuing to survive under that system.
I cannot accept the starting point of the debate about customary law because it is not informed by what customary law actually is. I believe that we have to get that very straight in people’s minds before we go making judgments about whether it is a good or a bad influence. I have seen customary law involving physical punishment; that was, and is, still a feature of customary law. I have seen Aboriginal people go to war, just as we go to war in the European heritage. That is not unusual. In fact, in every human culture around the globe there has to be the capacity to defend your territory and that, not surprisingly, was a feature of customary law.
What are Aboriginal groups trying to tell us about, other than the personal exchanges and discussions that I know every bush member would have on a regular basis about these sorts of issues? What is formally going on to try to give a picture of what customary law is? Mawul Rom in Arnhem Land has attempted an early codification of what the traditional law is saying about your duties, your responsibilities, and what you can and cannot do around your country and around your community. Those are incredibly generous gestures from groups that have held these traditions for an immense amount of time to adopt the traditional way of passing the law on into a form that is at least accessible to those of us that are not initiated or knowledgeable in the law in the normal way. Kurduju in Warlpiri lands is similarly attempting now to describe what the traditional arrangements are.
Traditional arrangements did not say you went and got an 11-year-old kid and took her into bed - it did not say that at all. The senior women are saying, absolutely consistently, both in my conversations with them and when they formally presented their points of view at things like the combined land council meetings that I know the member for Macdonnell played a very key part in, they were telling the men: ‘That is not traditional law. It was never traditional law’. What we have to be very careful about is what is put forward as customary law. If we are going to have a debate about it, let us at least start by having an accurate picture put forward of what it is, and then we can go from there.
I believe, very strongly, that there is a culture of violence amongst our Aboriginal communities just as there is in the non-Aboriginal communities. It is more pronounced in our Aboriginal communities. That is a given because of the statistics like 81% of those apprehended for assault were indigenous, and the vast majority of those apprehended were males, 92%; 55% of those cases involved alcohol; 48% of assault victims were DV; and 51% of them are re-offenders. That is the picture, and that is not a picture of customary law. That is a picture of violent tendencies within the contemporary Aboriginal community. We know that is there, we do not deny that. That is why we are trying to produce programs to counter some of those terrible effects of this behaviour.
Let us look at what the communities have tried to do with these new developments. These were not traditional problems that the indigenous community had to deal with through their traditional culture. There were no houses, there was no alcohol, there was not all the consumerism and the crowding, and the attack of the identity, particularly of the men. The men are really caught between the two worlds without a lot of respect in either in some cases. If you start with a very low self-esteem, of course you have two choices: you are either going to feel very sad or you are going to feel very angry. They are the emotions that many of the indigenous men are grappling with, and often through a distorted picture from alcohol or drugs, and that is a toxic mixture in human behaviour. That is a contemporary problem. It is not a problem that has come out of the teachings or the traditions of the law.
Let us start with that. What are the root causes and what are the things that are going to amplify those toxic feelings, I guess, amongst indigenous people, indigenous males particularly? If you take those fundamentals as why we have this huge problem that we have, let us look at groups that have actually done something about it. The Chief Minister mentioned Groote Eylandt, the Anindilyakwa groups. I went to Groote Eylandt on three occasions. One was when we had a Community Cabinet there several years ago. I went back as the Justice Minister to attend the early meetings of the Regional Crime Prevention Council. At that stage, you could walk around Angurugu and it felt absolutely like a war zone. There was tension there. There was a dysfunction. The school felt like it was under siege. The clinic was in a constant state of tension. You can see that today: if you go to the clinic and the school, they look like fortresses. They are completely surrounded by heavy security screens and with barriers to get through to where the staff are working and where the school lessons or the treatments were going on. Those buildings are still there as a living testament of the situation a year or two ago.
Of you go there today - and I was there some two weeks ago - you can walk around that community and it is functioning. The school is open to the community and the community is open to the school. The clinic and the nurses I spoke to were saying: ‘It is fine now. We can be nurses now. We are not under siege anymore. We can go around without fear for our personal safety. We can go to houses and attend people when we are called out at night’. What is the difference? The difference is not because they got rid of customary law; they are very strongly traditional community on Groote Eylandt. The difference is because they have taken action against alcohol and they have managed to cut the supply of alcohol to the people who cannot handle alcohol without becoming violent or antisocial to their community. They have done that through local solutions that work for them. It may not work for anyone else, but it certainly worked for Groote. The only two people who have now lost the ability to buy takeaway grog are two whitefellas who contravened the conditions of that grog.
Another example of why we really should not be looking at the abolition of customary law to reduce violence is the community of Ali Curung where Kurduju began. It has had a police station for many years, probably about 20 years. I went there in the 1980s and there were police there at that stage. Despite the fact the police station was within 100 m of any house within that community, the violence was escalating relentlessly over the 1990s and early 2000s to the point where the community decided that nothing else was going to work unless you did something about the violence, despite the fact they had three police there. What worked? What worked was that they went back to the basic strength of the family relationships - customary law - the responsibilities under the social constraints that customary law talks about, looking after the people that you have to look after in your own community. They managed to get the violence down by 50%. They managed to get the school kids back into school. They managed to get women’s health programs and child nutrition programs going, because they had a stable community. They no longer had to constantly battle to get enough security around the activities that they were trying to sustain within their community.
That is a pretty clear clue that while police need to be and should be out in remote communities, it is not the answer unless the community itself is mobilised. One of the best ways to mobilise a community is to use its strong social traditions, and that is exactly what was going on at Ali Curung. It is exactly what has to happen in many other of our communities if we are going to work together to get an impact on these levels of violence.
I could point to any other of a dozen other communities that have police stations right in them. In Yuendumu, where I lived for 15 years, there were rapes within 100 m of the police station. It is no solution of preventing violence to have a police station right next door. You have to have some action within the community. What did the Warlpiri people do when they were seeing that happen? They recognised that you cannot sit there depending on the police and the government to keep your community safe; you have to participate and engage the problem and do what you can in partnership with what the government can offer.
Yuendumu was the place where the Night Patrols system started and it was the senior people, men and women, who got out into their community and went side by side with the police to link the police and the government support to what was happening household by household around that community. That started to work. The level of offending went down significantly in Yuendumu on the inception of that night patrol. It is very difficult to maintain that system voluntarily over long periods of time, and there are issues that need to be sorted out to get a more sustainable situation. Certainly the thinking is absolutely logical that if the community takes action under its own authorities and links in with what is done through the authorities of government, you are going to get the possible chance to make impacts on people’s behaviour.
We are recognising that in many new directions, and with the community courts that we have trialled in Arnhem Land, that if you bring the family authorities into the decisions being made by magistrates, you put the offender under far more responsibility because they are not only responsible to the formal outcomes of the court hearings, but they are also responsible to their own senior family members for their future behaviour. That is a very good route to go through to rehabilitation. It is a very good basis on which to work towards reparation towards the victims, reparation towards the community, as well as paying their debt to the broader society through the formal outcome of the court. That is the direction I believe we need to be going. And guess what? Customary law is the best base on which to put that, because it defines within the societies that constitute all of our remote communities what your responsibilities are, so you know which person to go, to put in front of the offender and in support of the victim so that we can get the best possible social framework to put that offender into so that they do not re-offend.
At the moment, we put 2000 violent offenders into gaol every year here on the current state. One thousand of those are going to re-offend unless we do something different. Part of that is in our prison program, sure, but if we can find some other mechanisms to put these offenders under much greater social constraint and responsibility to their community, that is going to work much better than taking them through a lot of the current arrangements. They are the very difficult areas that we are starting to work our way into.
If we consign customary law to this negative, threatening and absolutely inaccurate definition of it, we are going to lose these valuable contributions that that can make to the question of stabilisation of the communities. I have argued - and the Chief Minister referred to it in her speech - that stabilisation has to come as the first step in doing what you have to do in a much broader way. The worst thing that can happen to this debate about violence in indigenous communities is that it gets too narrowed. We need to be talking about stages and layers that we have to lay one on top of the other. We need to start with a social order and then we can talk about education and housing and all the things that would need to be done to stabilise the situation into the future.
Part of the stability equation is substance abuse - not only alcohol, which is a huge problem for the Territory, but also drug abuse and that is a huge problem in remote communities. It is increasing so we need to take very broad action. I know my colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, minister for Education and Racing, Gaming and Licensing, has indicated that we are doing that very thing regarding substance abuse.
Substance abuse and low self-esteem, and loss of customary law, are fuelling much of the male violence in the inner culture of violence, which is a contemporary culture - it is nothing to do with traditional culture. That is the problem that we have to start from. The solution is, as the Chief Minister said, five years’ work, 10 years’ work, 15 years’ work, 20 years’ work. If we can get to each of those milestones, seeing that we have made some inroads on this problem, that is what we are going to have to look for.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Speaker, I am not sure where to begin. I did have a points plan, but I need to respond to some of the comments made by the Minister for Central Australia. This is a complex issue; Aboriginal affairs is not easy, it is not cut and dried. I have been a little concerned at the tone of some of the debates occurring in the House. I am not going to list a whole litany of the wrongs that are occurring out there, or the harm that is being caused to Aboriginal people. We know that - we all know that; we have all seen it.
I believe the minister is on the right track when he talks about customary law, for the simple reason that the women continually say to me: ‘This wrong customary law’, or ‘This is gammon’, as they say. I ask the minister if he remembers the law and justice unit that was doing some great work in some Aboriginal communities. They were at Ali Curung, Lajamanu and Yuendumu. After the last election, you abolished that unit. I was very disappointed when you did that. I thought the work they were doing was very valuable. They were really …
Dr Toyne: We have just funded them $150 000.
Mrs BRAHAM: That is not happening at the moment though, is it? You took the funding out.
Dr Toyne: We just funded them. It is …
Mrs BRAHAM: But it was working. It was working.
Dr Toyne: What?
Mrs BRAHAM: Ali Curung was, perhaps, one the great examples of how people took on responsibility. It was great. I do not know why you did not continue that. In fact, the minutes of their last workshop talked about customary law. They said - and I will not say who said it:
- Members reported town camp violence has often been legitimised by families involved as being customary or payback, and this is further confusing and dividing families in the outlying communities. They report the two laws must work together on these issues. They see a role in working with magistrates, lawyers, and police as well as town campers.
What they are saying is we have two laws, let us try to work them together. They say there is a difference between wrong payback, customary law and payback. They say much of violence is unplanned, uncontrolled and often alcohol-fuelled. It concerned them that people involved in these attacks are attempting to justify their action as the result of practising customary law, or for reasons of payback but, in fact, customary law is a totally different situation. I believe we all recognised that. In fact, it is a name given to a complex structure of arrangements that govern many indigenous communities. They often have a major effect on the daily life of the people. They are not laws as such, but are social and contractual obligations. Perhaps we are using the wrong word when we use the word ‘law’ to describe them because we tend to get a little confused. When the minister talks about customary law - and I understand what he is saying - perhaps he should also think about bringing back that law and justice unit as it was doing a good job spreading the right words.
One of the things this government made a mistake in was abolishing the department of Aboriginal Development. I say that because you put it into your department; it became a policy unit, not an operational unit. That is where I see the difference - that we do not have those officers on the ground going out doing work as the law and justice unit did before. It has become more a policy unit than an operational one. Instead of this cross-government policy we have in which it is easy to get lost, if you have one department focusing on a particular area and going to other departments which have to respond to that one department, it is a far more effective way of doing things.
The Chief Minister talked about a 20-year plan. I was looking at this agenda for action the government put out not long ago. In 2002, we had Building a Better Territory; in 2003 we had Building Stronger Regions; in 2004, Building Safer Communities. That is only a few of them. In 2005, Aboriginal Health and Families, Indigenous Economic Development, and now we have a 20-year plan. I believe that for many years we have had a lot of rhetoric about Aboriginal affairs and what I am going to concentrate on today is a little of positive action - options for the government, things you should think about doing.
I do not want to dwell on the cases that have been in the courts, because they are disturbing. However, Victoria’s move to set up a sentencing advisory council is worth looking at. As an independent statutory body, if we had one in the Territory, then the community could have more input into what they think should be involved in that. The sentencing advisory council has recommended the phasing out of suspended sentences and the phasing in of a new range of sentencing orders. Many people would say that the system suspends too many sentences at the moment. Often, after all the work of the police and the person is found guilty, the sentence is then suspended. That is heartbreaking for the police who worked so hard on that.
The lawyer who recently said that he believed the original sentence handed down by the Northern Territory Chief Justice was right worked as an Aboriginal Legal Aid lawyer for more than a decade. He said that he felt the original sentence was the correct one. I wondered whether this lawyer ever sat down with the Aboriginal women and children who have been affected by this and seen and heard what effect it has on them.
Victorian judges would be trained in cultural issues, particularly matters relating to the Vietnamese and Aboriginal communities. What we are talking about for the Territory is, obviously, right across Australia, it is not new to anyone. It is something that we all have to live with.
I worry that your statement, Chief Minister, does not have the action that I would like to see. There are a lot of generalisations and motherhood statements. Many Aboriginal people in Alice Springs have said to me that they are very ashamed of what happened in the media over the past few weeks. They feel very shamed because it made them look as though all Aboriginal people were this violent, bad mob - and it is not true. It is just not true. We are talking about a few people who do it. The majority of Aboriginal people are law-abiding, family-oriented; they are good citizens, whether it is in their community or in the town. As I was delivering my newsletter in my electorate last week, I came across some very long-term Aboriginal residents who had worked in Alice Springs for many years. Their feeling is, ‘What can we do? What will happen?’ They say to me: ‘Are you going to leave this town?’ I say: ‘No, no I have been here too long to leave. Where would I go?’ They just feel ashamed and they say: ‘We need to recover. We need to say to the media, this is not the picture of Aboriginal people. This is the picture of Aboriginal people. Look at the good things that we do’.
We do not ever portray the good things that Aboriginal people do. You can go to many communities where there are great things happening. I was a bit annoyed when I saw a card game on the John Flynn Church lawns - a ring of Aboriginal people playing this card game for money. I know that is against the law, so I rang the town council. I rang this one and that one so it could be moved on. I thought, this is almost sacrilegious playing cards here. Then I find out that Laramba has a policy that if they see a pack of cards they take it off the people and burn it. It is a simple thing like that to stop the destruction of what card games do when they are played for money, when some person loses so much, and other people win so much. I thought why don’t we start this constructive, positive action rather than always reacting to a situation that is not good.
We talk about town camps and communities and, when we go into them, we think there is so much that could be done to make them a better place. That is what I would like you to do, Chief Minister. I would like you to set up a task force to work with the communities and town camps to work out what needs to be done. Just do a stock take - I think you used that word in your speech - of all the things that need to be done in this community. Get the Aboriginal people to have input into it. When you get the list of things that should be done, start working on that. We talk about generating employment and a better lifestyle. If we want to do that, we have to start making the communities a better place to live. I am quite sure that if you ask them what the problems are, they will talk about law and order; nutrition, health, truancy and so on. Let us see if we can identify in Aboriginal communities what needs to be done to make it a better place to live.
In Alice Springs, we also need to copy some of the things that you have done in the Top End. I would like there to be an audit of who are in the town camps, from what communities, and bring those elders into the town camps to talk to those people about why they are there and why they will not go back to their community. We do not seem to do this face-to-face personal thing with Aboriginal people. We tend to look at them as though they are some big global mob. We have to start talking to them as individuals and as people.
There needs to be, as I said to the minister for Education, a solution on how we get those children to school, be it in remote communities or in town camps. I love Ali Curung. Do you remember the old smoko whistle that used to go? The whistle goes early in the morning when work starts, smoko time it blows again, and lunchtime it blows again to get people back. Everyone in the community knows that is when school starts, that is when you front up. It may be a simple thing but you cannot say: ‘I did not know what the time was’. It gets the whole community attached to this time machine, I guess, and we should be doing more of that.
I would like to see through IAD, or someone, a program on how you manage your money. I cannot think of any program that has ever targeted Aboriginal people that says: ‘This is the money you get; this is the way it should be spent: you should be putting this much to your rent, this much to your power, this much to your food, this much for your clothing, and this much for a rainy day’. I do not think I have ever seen that happen. I am sure IAD or Batchelor could do something like that, and then go out to communities and run these programs where people could understand the value of their money, so they just do not think all you do is go to an ATM, put your card in and it throws money at you. That is not how you get your money and that is not how you manage it.
I went to the IAD graduation recently. They are mature aged students; Aboriginal people who decided later that they would do something, and they are great examples of what can be done. Myra Ah Chee was there. Myra must be my age at least - or I might be insulting her, she might be younger. She was there getting her certificate for a course she had finished. I just thought what a shame all those young kids in the high schools are not at this graduation so they can see these role models fronting up to receive a certificate they have worked for. I am going to suggest to IAD the next time they have a graduation to not have it just for the adults but get out and show the kids what can be done so they are not ashamed to go to school and learn something.
We have talked about homemakers and living skills programs. I know the Minister for Housing will be introducing the living skills program. I worry that you might be giving it to Tangentyere. It should be further than that, not just town camps, or public housing and schools. I think it should be in communities.
Mr McAdam: It is also right across the board, public housing included.
Mrs BRAHAM: Good. Ali Curung did that, didn’t they? They introduced a homemaker’s type program. They had a booklet with information like: ‘This is the way we clean the toilet. This is the way you use the stove; you don’t throw this into the stove whole without a dish’. It may be simple things but it worked. They are the some of the programs I would like to see.
I do not know what we do about the Alice Springs Town Council. I would like to give them a big shake. They have responsibility at town camps for litter, dogs, health, and camping, yet they do not enforce their by-laws. Some of the dogs at communities and town camps are not healthy. We talk about the health of young children; we either get those dogs fixed up, or we reach them, as I do, and we make sure they are cared for and fed so they do not become a nuisance. The government should be working with town councils to make sure they pull their weight and do not say: ‘It is too hard’.
I have also talked about the ‘back to country’ program. It has been said to me in Alice Springs that people do not want to go back and we cannot make them; it has to be voluntary. The people who are on the grog do not want to go back. I am quite sure we can identify the habitual drunks in Alice Springs; they go through that revolving door of DASA, the sobering-up shelter. If they are one of those who have been through that two or three times then there should be case management. They should be told: ‘Part of your case management is to go back to your community and we are going to work with your family and sort out your problem’. By letting them just go in and out of the sobering-up shelter all the time; we are achieving nothing and neither are they. We need to look at the way we do the ‘back to country’ program.
There is no reason why you cannot ask Centrelink if it is possible to arrange direct debits if necessary. We seem to be able to do it in other ways. For goodness sake, let us start helping the people understand that they would be healthier and happier living with the family at home rather than the Todd River.
I know the Day and Night Patrols in Alice try to do a good job. However, I do not see how you can get untrained people to do a job that is a policing-type role. We should be training these people. I do not say they have to be an ACPO or police officer. Somehow or other, we have to make sure they are trained to deal with all sorts of disturbances, that they are trained in communication, and that they have authority. There is no point going into a town camp when they get a message; finding there is someone being uncontrollable, and then ringing the police to come and help. They should have some authority to do something; to be able to take that person down to the sobering-up shelter or be able to take the grog off them. But we tend to put untrained people in these very difficult jobs and then wonder why they get frustrated; abused; and humbugged by their relatives.
We need to make sure anyone who is in this type of position should be a bit like an actor. They should be trained; they should be skilled. They should be part of the – when I say policing, they should have authority to do something. I would like to see a program where these officers are trained.
I am not sure what the minister for Licensing said he was going to do about the liquor problem. There are a couple of things I would do straight away in Alice Springs. I would close the two drive-through outlets that open on Sundays. They are the only two public places you can get takeaway grog on a Sunday except for clubs. It is not clubs that abuse any system. I would close those two takeaway outlets on Sundays. I would also change the trading hours. Opening at 2 pm is too late in the day. Closing at 9 pm is too late. I would open at 10 am and close at 7 pm. As a worker, if I want to buy a bottle of wine I usually do it after work; I usually do it before 7 pm. I do not think you are going to disadvantage someone. We have to change the hours of trading in Alice Springs.
There has been a media campaign on Imparja from the Lhere Artepe people. I have to admit the only feedback I get from people is that they are laughing at it. It is not giving the message it should because this cartoon character is a bit humorous. The government should look at funding some of these messages to communities on the BRACS – the Broadcasting for Remote Aboriginal Communities Scheme - in language. We could help them make sure the people who are supposed to be getting the message get it, and they get it in their language. At the moment, the cute cartoon that has been run for Lhere Artepe is not having the effect that it was intended.
I can see my time is running out. There are many things we need to do. I would like to see an independent coordinator. I would like to see other Aboriginal organisations become involved in it, but I would like to see someone quite independent who would make sure things happen. Sometimes, departments need that little boost, that overseeing, to make sure they are getting things done, so I would like to see someone appointed. I would also like them to have the combined Aboriginal people get together to try to put an action plan down that can be implemented. Most of all, we have to start rewarding communities that are doing well. Far too often, we concentrate on the bad communities. Let us say to the communities that are doing well: ‘Here are the things you can have or you need …
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, your time has expired.
Mrs BRAHAM: … to make your community even better’. When we get those role models up then we can move on to the not so good ones.
Mr VATSKALIS (Multicultural Affairs): Mr Acting Speaker, I am not going to go into statistics. I am going to tell you what I think about the whole issue - how I want to be part of the solution rather than talking about the problem.
The first time I saw Aboriginal people, was in an encyclopaedia photograph in 1967. It was a picture of two semi-naked indigenous people. The man was holding a spear, and the female was holding a baby - real bush people. I had never seen anything like that. I was familiar with American Indians and African people from geography lessons, but Australian Aborigines were something different.
I first saw a real Aboriginal person when I arrived in Perth in 1983. These people were no different than me. They were wearing clothes, they had cars, they had houses, and they had jobs. Some of them were a bit darker than me, but they were just normal people.
The first time I became familiar with Aboriginal problems was when my first wife, Linda, got a job in the Aboriginal legal service. Then I found out about how these people were treated in every aspect of life in Perth. You see, Western Australia was a free colony. People came there as free settlers. As free settlers they had rights that people in other states did not. One of the rights that they had was to come to Western Australia and take as much land as they liked. If there were Aboriginals living there it was bad luck; they had to be pushed out. It was Western Australia where I found out about the dispossession of the Aboriginal people from their land - the dispossession of their lives; taking away their children; taking women and men to put in camps; where Aboriginal men and women, if they wanted to get married, had to ask permission from the Controller of Aboriginal Affairs. It is a tragic history that was never taught in Western Australian schools until recently.
I found out more about Aboriginal people when I moved from Perth to Port Hedland with Margaret, my new wife. Port Hedland is miles away from Perth; it is another planet –1700 km away in the Pilbara, very similar to the Northern Territory with regards to composition of population with Aboriginal people. The Pilbara has a very interesting story. In the next few months, we will be celebrating 40 years of the Wave Hill walk-off by the Gurindji people. The reality is that it is a very new history. On 1 May 1946, Don McLeod took the Aboriginal people out of the stations. That was the first strike ever to take place with Aboriginal people anywhere in Australia. Don McLeod was a communist union organiser. He went to the Pilbara to organise the maritime workers. He found out the conditions of the indigenous people there, and he organised the indigenous people to walk off the stations, asking for money not rations, better living conditions, and to be in control of their lives. What happened then was that the police persecuted them - imprisoned them without sending them to court. The station masters threw them off the station with the barrel of a gun. Then the Aboriginal movement became stronger and stronger. Unfortunately, Aboriginal people did not get control of their lives, did not get their wages. They were simply pushed off the stations and they finished up in different coastal towns around the Pilbara.
Things had not changed much in 1999 when I went to Port Hedland. I recall driving into Port Hedland and seeing an Aboriginal settlement where Aboriginal people were living in railway carriages; they had no real houses. Even when the Commonwealth and the state governments provided money to build houses and create a new neighbourhood, the Port Hedland Town Council refused to give them rubbish bins because these people were not paying rates. That was the idea of the town at that time in 1999 - it was only 15 years ago. It was only when I spoke to the mayor of the town and informed her that the government was taking one of the local governments in the north of Western Australia to court for failing to provide services to Aboriginal communities, as required by the Health Act, that the town council asked for rubbish bins to be given to indigenous communities in the area and for the service to be expanded to include rubbish removal from Aboriginal communities.
Housing was a very interesting situation. The Housing Commission of Western Australia would house indigenous people they were bringing in from the desert and the outstations, but would pay nothing at all to upgrade the houses or provide some advice to the Aboriginal people who had came from a community to a modern city. There were jokes around town that the people coming from the desert would light a fire in the oven in order to cook on top of the stove. I thought that was a joke until I went into some of the Housing Commission houses of indigenous people and saw the fire in the oven with evidence of kangaroo on top of the stove. I had to issue an order under the Health Act to the state Housing Commission to threaten to take them to court if they did not fix the houses. They were some of the incredible things I saw in Western Australia.
Some other things were more tragic. My wife worked at the local high school. Kids would come to high school hungry, suffering from lack of sleep, with no homework done. They could not do homework because Mum and Dad were in the house with their friends drinking until early in the morning, and the kids could not sleep. They did not have a safe place, a quiet place, to do their homework. There were ditches In Port Hedland to take away the stormwater to the sea. Indigenous people would be living in those ditches and they would be called ‘ditchies’. Some of these people were prostituting themselves or their children in front of the South Hedland Tavern to get money to go and drink. The situation was absolutely deplorable.
Things like that do not only happen in the Northern Territory. They happen in other places. If you have a look around in the past few years you will find names like Wilcannia and Cape York, Redfern, and Halls Creek. In the outskirts of Perth child abuse in a particular indigenous community was rife. The state government did not take action until a couple of years ago when an Aboriginal girl hanged herself on the fence of the Aboriginal community. The state government ordered an inquiry, and the inquiry found out that the traditional leader and his son were responsible for abusing children in the community. They finished up in prison. A few years previously, that particular leader had led the fight against the construction of a casino on the banks of the Swan River in order to protect the traditional ground for the indigenous Aboriginal people. How come in 10 or 15 years he changed from a traditional leader to a person who would abuse his own people? The answer is simple: alcohol and marijuana. That was widespread in the community and affected many people there. Unfortunately, it affects many Aboriginal people in the Territory.
I was very surprised when I came to Australia that the Aboriginal people did not gain full rights until 1967. Full rights in Europe were gained in the 18th century after the French Revolution. Here we were, an industrial country, 300 years later, agreeing to give full rights to some of its citizens. I understand how people can feel guilty, and probably because of their guilt, they took some actions which, instead of benefiting Aboriginal people, their original intention, were to the detriment of the indigenous people. I have had indigenous people in Western Australia and here telling me many times that the ‘sit down’ money has ruined their communities. Week in, week out, money was received by people in the communities which was then spent on card games, alcohol and marijuana. That causes some of the fundamental problems.
Money is not spent in the communities; programs are not available in communities. If we have a problem with a group in our population – let us say it is breast cancer in women – immediately there is a program available to find the focus, to find the solution. There are programs available to find solutions for prostate cancer and to provide the necessary treatment and facilities for these patients. If you have a group of children with ADD, there are programs and money available from government to do assist. We have a problem with a group within the Australian population and it is a multifaceted problem. It is housing, health, alcohol, and marijuana. There is a lot of talk but no programs, and no money. We have to face this situation.
The Opposition Leader says alcohol is not a problem, neither is overcrowding. Of course, they are problems - and I am not just talking about indigenous people. I have seen the same problems in European countries. After World War II, we had the very same problems with some of the European countries which had suffered great disasters as a result of the war. Overcrowding led to problems we face today in Aboriginal communities. Alcohol does and will continue to create problems. We have seen it every day in other countries. There are notorious cases I have heard on the Greek media about some English tourists going on paid holidays to Greece. Everything was paid for - food and accommodation, and as much as you could drink. The tragic result of this binge drinking that we have seen, and I have read about, is no different from what we have seen in some of the Aboriginal communities.
When I came to the Territory, I worked for the Health department and part of my job, as the person responsible for the Top End, was to travel to many of the communities. I travelled to Nhulunbuy, outside Nhulunbuy, to Ngukurr and some of the other communities. Some communities were very good but in some communities it was heartbreaking to see the condition of people living there. I will never forget when I went to a community and the people were disempowered. In the morning, they would turn up to the takeaway shop to buy their breakfast, probably deep fried chicken wings, or sausage, or mince and rice. Lunchtime would come and they would go back to this particular shop to buy similar food, and at 6 pm they would return to the takeaway shop to buy something similar. There was no fresh food; there was no good quality food. Everything was very expensive. People did not even have the facilities, or the knowledge, to prepare food for their children.
All of us have identified the problem. We are all sitting here, talking to each other, and accusing each other. The reality is that this is our problem. We are all guilty of that problem. It does not matter what side of the politics you are – Labor or Liberal; it does not matter if you are of a non-English speaking background or of an English speaking background. It does not matter whether you are a member of the opposition or a member of the government. This is our problem and we are all guilty of it. We are not guilty directly, but we are guilty of ignoring it: out of sight, out of mind. We are guilty because we are sitting here talking about the problems in the Aboriginal communities but nobody has come forward with a solid solution.
To be truthful, when I heard what Mal Brough said, I did not hear anything new. We all knew what was happening. When I heard the Chief Minister say she was not going to the summit, my first reaction was: ‘Why not?’ But, when I thought about it, I thought: ‘What is the point?’ How many summits have we attended in the past 20 years? How many times have we had committees after committees identifying the problem? How much money has been spent on travel, accommodation and dinners, and experts, to tell us what is happening in the indigenous communities? We know what is happening in the indigenous communities. We have known about that for the past 25 years.
If you do not know, just take a trip south to Katherine to find out. We hear about people in Katherine getting drunk in the main street. How many takeaway liquor licences have been given in Katherine? We all talk about Alice Springs. How many liquor outlets are there in Alice Springs? Are we genuine about it - any government, Labor or Liberal? Simple, reduce the number. How can you open a liquor outlet from 10 am until 10 pm and expect people not to get drunk? I go to Woolworths in Nightcliff to buy a bottle of wine and a couple of beers. At 10 am on Saturday there will be a large number of people waiting outside for the doors to open so they can buy casks. The solution is simple. We know where the problem is. We have identified the causes. Let us be genuine and do something about it. We know what the problem is.
We are talking about customary law. What is the law? The law is something from the dawn of civilisation; an agreement of people to live together. The first legislation was found in some of the ruins in Assyria. It was drafted 5000 years ago. It was a set of rules for people to live together as a society. We are talking about the customary law identified by my colleague, the Attorney-General, and the member for Araluen. It is a contractual agreement for people to live together. It might be a solution actually: have a customary law convention, get all the people together, and define what customary law is. If necessary, put it in writing. It might not be the same everywhere but we have to, and we can, find common elements. Everybody will know what customary law is. Everybody will know where it starts and finishes. Also, people have to realise that customary law has to evolve. It cannot stay the same as it was 1000 years ago. Things have changed. We live in a different situation with different conditions. We might find indigenous leaders who will come forward and propose some change and they might have to be adopted. Let us find out about it. It might be one of the solutions. Unless we discuss it and consider it there will not be a solution.
The Chief Minister proposed a 20-year plan. A 20-year plan might be a long-term plan but the reality is that, if you go back to history and have a look at the Marshall Plan in Europe after the war, it took 20 years for Europe to recover from the disaster of World War II. The Marshall Plan is familiar to me. My family was living in a country that the Marshall Plan was applied to. My mother recalls that the first thing the Marshall Plan did was to organise a United Nations relief agency to come around with food. My mother recalls that when they came with bags of rice she used the empty rice bags to make trousers and dresses. I have seen photos of my mother wearing a dress and on the front of the dress is a big American flag and the letters ‘UNRA’. That was the only dress she had. She remembers when the Americans came they lined up the kids and sprayed them with DDT, the only pesticide they had, to get rid of the fleas and lice they had.
Under the Marshall Plan, the governments established community nurses and homemaker projects. The young boys were learning a trade - the basics in the beginning but more advanced later. Because of the social conditions, the girls would stay home. They were taught dressmaking, how to look after the house and to cook. They were taught to cook preserves using the foods from the different seasons. It took 20 years; it finished in the 1960s. If you look at the health indicators and the conditions in Europe today, they are a very good indication of the success of a plan like that.
The Chief Minister said that there are five fundamental issues that she has raised with the federal minister: community safety; the special management of alcohol; housing; some governance; and welfare reform. One more would be the provision of jobs. I said before I would like to be part of the solution, not identify the problem and then sit down and let somebody else fix the problem.
When I became the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, and Mines and Energy, I said that this is the portfolio that can provide economic development to the regions, and to indigenous people. We have tried to make this a reality. We have tried to work very closely with indigenous communities and I will give you some examples. There is a trainee program to introduce Anmatjere people to horticulture and train them in the basic skills required to obtain employment in the industry. That is taking place in the Ti Tree area, in the horticultural industry and especially with the grape industry.
We have also tried to bring gardens back to the communities, teaching people in the communities how to establish little gardens so they can have their own fresh fruit and vegetables. We have some success. I was very proud to see some slides and photographs of young indigenous people in communities lining up the polypipe for the sprinklers for growing their own vegetables, and the success they had in doing that. Not all of them were 100% successful; some of them failed. However, many of them were successful. The moment you start getting some of them sowing their own produce, other people become envious and want to do the same. We will be there to help them.
The Indigenous Pastoral Program is one of the most successful programs run by my department. We have managed to bring back 105 000 km2 of indigenous land to production. To date, we have negotiated 10 grazing licences over indigenous land. Through the Indigenous Pastoral Program development activities we have increased the numbers of cattle on indigenous land by 25 000 head. We provide employment for 21 people in stock camps and short-term fencing positions. We will continue for the next five years opening more land, and bringing back into production indigenous land and establishing more cattle herds on this land. We are talking about 10 000 to 20 000 head of cattle. Oenpelli is a very good example; I have been there. I was very proud to see the indigenous people working the other abattoir.
We have had success in mining. With new mines, I have given instruction to the department that no new mine will be approved unless it has an indigenous employment plan. Indigenous people can drive trucks and dozers, and can work in the mines, or in the service support in the mines.
Mr Acting Speaker, we have a problem; we know that. We have discussed it to death in the past 30 years. It is about time we found solutions and applied those solutions to the indigenous communities in the Territory.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Acting Speaker, as an Aboriginal woman, a Territorian in a very privileged position as a parliamentary representative for my electorate of Arafura, I take very seriously my role as their member and the privilege that has been bestowed upon me. At the outset of this speech, I state very clearly that I am proud of my heritage and my culture. There are problems in our society and in my own culture. I am not blind to that. There are issues that happen which often make me ashamed. That is the reason why I decided to stand for parliament: to be able to have effect at the highest level of government.
However, over the last two months or so, I have had the sensation, as an Aboriginal Territorian, of being swamped by a tsunami of misinformation. Time and time again we are being confronted and berated with truisms and homilies that we acknowledge and accept. I have stood in this Chamber a number of times and said that there is absolutely no excuse – and I am sure all of us in this Chamber know that there is no excuse - for customary law-based or otherwise - any - sexual violence against minors, or anyone else for that matter.
All children should go to school; private ownership by Aboriginal families is to be encouraged; and public life - in particular, court proceedings - should be open and transparent. The truth and merit of these statements is self-evident but, of themselves, they are hardly capable of assisting in the formulation of practical and effective policy. That requires the hard work and attention to detail that always comes with the application of basic principles to real life situations.
However, the self-designated visionaries, and iconoclasts, who are promising roots and branch reform of Aboriginal affairs policy enthusiastically encouraged by most of the mainstream media, are quick to draw ‘one size fits all’ conclusions from statements like the ones that I will set out:
‘There is no excuse - and we all agree with that – for customary law-based or otherwise sexual violence against minors’ becomes ‘Aboriginal customary law is being used as a defence to justify the actions of male sexual offenders, and we need to change our laws to stop Aboriginal customary law being taken into account at all’.
‘All children should go to school’ becomes ‘Local government bodies in dysfunctional Aboriginal communities should have their funding withheld unless all children go to school’.
‘Private home ownership by Aboriginal families is to be encouraged’ becomes ‘We need to change the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to enable Aboriginal families to own their own homes’.
‘Public life, in particular things like court proceedings, should be open and transparent’ becomes ‘We need to scrap the permit system’.
Let us just quickly give some analysis of each of these four expanded propositions.
I have made it a point to research for myself over the last couple of months various court transcripts and court lists over the years to ascertain what outcomes, or whether there is acceptance in our judicial system in respect of this specific issue. There was never any customary law-derived defence to rape in Territory criminal law. It was us, the Territory Labor government, of which I am very proud to be part, which removed the anachronistic customary law marriage defence to the charge of carnal knowledge of a minor.
The current debate is over whether customary law matters. The argument that is being run by the federal Aboriginal Affairs minister, and by the member for Araluen, is that the Yarralin case is an example of how Aboriginal customary law is being put forward to excuse the sort of behaviour that was engaged in by the likes of GJ, the perpetrator in this case; in other words, to say that such behaviour is in accordance with Aboriginal customary law. The summary of the Yarralin case is obviously very useful to the cause of Mr Brough and the member for Araluen but is completely false.
I urge all members to read the transcript in full and to be better informed in relation to the issue of the alleged role of Aboriginal customary law as an excuse factor in the Yarralin case. An important point is encapsulated in one of the paragraphs, and that is that he did not argue that customary law in fact permitted him to have sex with S. He accepted that he had a choice as to how to respond and he chose wrongly. He pleaded guilty to doing the wrong thing and no defence was argued. The Chief Justice further noted that: ‘there was nothing in your Aboriginal law which required you to strike the child or to have intercourse with her’.
Is it the case that courts are being told that Aboriginal customary law excuses and justifies the sort of behaviour engaged in by the likes of GJ? The answer is no. In that case, and certainly for that young girl and what she went through, there was no customary law defence to run in that.
For those of us who live and work in the communities, we have seen this all before: the shock, the hysteria, the grandstanding, the useless responses and the further erosion of traditional culture and respect for Aboriginal people. It is a cycle that keeps repeating itself. The same mistakes keep being made.
The federal government and the dominant culture generally always manage to avoid accepting responsibility. The debate becomes hijacked with an agenda of cultural dismantling and assimilation. It seems that as long as we have the boomerang, the didgeridoo and dot paintings, we are happy to demonise and destroy the rest. The Howard vision of Australia is a monoculture dominated by Anglo-Saxon values where there is no need for special programs and schemes to assist those with different needs. It is virtually guaranteed that if the federal government does not take a radically different, politically unpopular and culturally appropriate response this state of affairs will be the same, if not worse, in 12 months.
The federal government can express outrage, grandstand and promise solutions all it wants, but history shows that in 218 years it has failed time and time again. It is time to wake up, Australia! I always say that to the Northern Territory as well. Questions need to be asked and solutions found. A starting point is to look beyond the rhetoric and the grandstanding to the facts.
What are the facts? Let us start with some of the facts. If we read history it will show that Aboriginal people did not have these problems before colonisation. Sure, traditional society was not perfect, and I am not saying that it is perfect now. It had the same problems and conflicts that all normally-functioning societies have. But for more than 40 000 years, it did not have to deal with petrol sniffing, youth suicide and child sex abuse. The government created the conditions for this state of affairs to exist and then they turn their backs on it.
Why is that Mal Brough made no mention of the seriousness of the issue until Nanette Rogers went public? He was the Aboriginal Affairs minister for three months before that. Anyone working on the ground would have told him what was happening. I have been telling anyone who would listen, particularly for the last 10 years when working at the coalface of health. Now the media has coined it a ‘crisis’. It was a bloody crisis 30 years ago! The government’s response has been to blame and demonise Aboriginal men and culture. The reality is that it is, in fact, the continued erosion of customary law that is the problem. This debate needs to be turned on its head.
The last comment about the debate needing to be turned on its head has come through to me loud and clear in meetings that I have had with my various constituents in communities in my electorate over the last few week. Regarding the empty, half-baked rhetoric that the member for Greatorex, whenever he chooses to attempt to play political wedging, putting out press releases and calling for the Aboriginal members to speak up and join in the debate – well, member for Greatorex, let me make it clear: (1) I, like many Aboriginal members on this side of the House, have every confidence in our Chief Minister as the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs in handling this situation in a very effective and efficient manner; and (2), the empty platitudes from you are not worth giving any oxygen to. You were part of a government that did nothing. Yes, we are government now, and we will take full responsibility for all our services in remote communities, something you never did nor accepted.
There are some arrangements and some agencies and entities in Aboriginal communities that have been established especially for Aboriginal people which are not replicated in mainstream communities. Two things which do not fall into that category are education and local government. Primary responsibility for ensuring that a child attends school rests with its parents. That is first and foremost the responsibility that we must put back: parents have the primary responsibility for their children going to school. Then there is a secondary, but inescapable, responsibility that falls on the relevant government, in this case the Northern Territory government. One idea that has been floated and debated over the last couple of years is the tying of welfare payments received by parents to school attendance by their children. Administration of welfare payments is a Commonwealth matter. I have discussed this issue with communities in my electorate, particularly with the women. I am certainly in favour of that. However, I believe it should apply to all Australians and not just Aboriginal people.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Local government functions on Aboriginal communities are undertaken by councils, either established or recognised under the Northern Territory Local Government Act. The council at Wadeye has actually been established as a Northern Territory local government body under the Northern Territory act. It is, essentially, the same as any other local government body in the Territory in that its principal responsibilities and functions have to do with things like roads, parks, garbage collection, sewerage and other essential services and public amenities generally. As is the case in relation to other local government bodies in the Territory, the council at Wadeye is not responsible for education.
The recent interaction between the emissaries of minister Brough and the members of the council at Wadeye apparently involved an ultimatum made on behalf of the minister to the effect that ‘ongoing Commonwealth government funding would be conditional on all local children attending school’. I understand that there are school attendance problems amongst children at the Bagot community and, indeed, in relation to children in many non-Aboriginal Darwin families. I am not sure to what extent the Darwin City Council has been receiving any direct Commonwealth funding. Indirectly, it all comes from the Commonwealth, of course, but if there is any such funding, when can we expect minister Brough to put the same ultimatum to Darwin City Council that he has put to the council at Wadeye?
These are just a few words that I have put forward, I suppose, highlighting a sense of real frustration that we might add some facts to this debate and deal with the issues which are confronting Aboriginal Australians. The days for political football games - our mob is getting used to the political football games and they know when they see genuine attempts being made and when governments are being disingenuous. There are feelings of sadness and anger.
Whenever the federal government needs to have an issue to distract from their appalling record with the industrial relations laws, their inept and disgraceful handling of immigration, what better than to jump on the one issue that has always been the best handling techniques of many governments; that is, Aboriginal affairs.
Yesterday, we saw the member for Greatorex and his tears. Well, member for Greatorex, we Aboriginal Australians have been crying real tears for the many lost lives, the helplessness, the feeling of hopelessness at the discrimination that has been rampant in this country for 218 years. I will talk briefly on an issue that is close to my heart and that is the matter of the Stolen Generation. We have a federal government, and particularly pertinent to the issue of the Northern Territory, which has direct constitutional responsibility for what happened and still today refuses to apologise for past wrongs. This is the federal government which, despite the many court proceedings had evidence of real and ongoing child sex abuse and physical and mental torture, refuses to acknowledge their responsibility for any of those atrocities that happened to those children.
I am proud to be a member of the Martin Labor government. If any person can stand up here and say that it has been easy and that the solutions are simple, then they have not lived on the ground in remote Aboriginal communities. It is not easy and the Chief Minister is right when she says that a multipronged strategy is needed and that it does require bipartisan support. This is what the Chief Minister is trying to achieve through the Overarching Agreement on Indigenous Affairs with the federal government. We have achieved more in the last four years in the areas of health and education than the previous government.
Secondary education is a major investment. In particular, at one community in my electorate, we met 16 young men who have gone through Year 12 for the first time. Maningrida School was established in 1947 and last year was the first time that community ever saw any Year 12 graduates. That is a disgrace. The former government and representatives of the CLP ought to hang their heads in shame that they can stand up here with the hypocrisy of looking at their achievements. They should look at their achievements. Communities such as Maningrida has persevered, not because of government support or help. I believe that is one community which has had to pay over the years due to its political alliance. When we came to government in 2001, the $2m that went into upgrading that school was the first time that community had seen any money for over 20 years - $2m in 20 years that that school had received for any upgrades. Established in 1947, and last year, 2004, saw the first 16 young men graduate from Year 12.
I am proud of the achievements of this government in education. We can see where education has become a priority. If we are going to overcome any of these areas, education is certainly a key area.
The Minister for Housing will talk about housing. The Chief Minister was right: there is a link with overcrowding. Put yourselves in the shoes of any of those young kids. Imagine a young six-year-old child in a house in any remote community living with 16 to 20 people. We expect that child to get up at 8 am and go to school to learn. How can you learn with 20 people in your house? How can you feel safe when half of the people in that house are drunk when they come home? Yes, we do have a problem; the kids are wandering the streets. People scratch their heads: why are these kids out in the streets? Look at their home situation. Overcrowding is a major issue.
I know that it has been a contentious issue in the CLP in regard to joint management of parks. However, across that portfolio under the joint management program, we have seen, for the first time, 200 people employed on more than 70 projects in the last year. The program will continue to expand in all regions. We have seen our first three fully-accredited rangers, with eight more rangers going through that accreditation and training process.
I will read out the names of some of the indigenous rangers: Donald Turner and Kevin Ronberg are completing a Certificate II in Conservation and Land Management through the Batchelor Institute; and Jeremy Dawson, who is based in Tennant Creek, is studying a Certificate III in Conservation and Land Management. Without joint management in place, it is likely that none of these men would have had these opportunities.
Additionally, we gave $90 000 in ongoing funding to the Ntaria community in Hermannsburg in Central Australia. This will allow for a program coordinator and operational costs for a ranger group that has been involved in progressing the joint management initiative with the Parks and Wildlife Service.
The West Arnhem Fire Abatement Project, which is a joint collaboration between the Northern Territory government, the Northern Land Council and traditional owners, has been working in west Arnhem Land for the past eight years. That project will bring over $1m for the next 20 years to look at greenhouse emissions from the project area through more effective fire management. As we know, in our greenhouse strategy, approximately 48% of the Northern Territory’s greenhouse gases are produced by fires in the northern savannah. That project is well and truly on the way.
The indigenous ranger program, the community-based ranger groups’ success comes through Aboriginal people’s connection to country and their recognition. These groups have established, and continue through underlying support of the CDEP program together with external funding through the Territory. For example, the DPIFM sea ranger program …
Dr BURNS: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Thank you. The Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines sea ranger program is about $360 000 of various cash and in-kind support for group development training, etcetera, which comes through my department. That is about $1.6m. The Commonwealth’s program is the National Heritage Trust. The land management branches within the land council have been essential in the formation of many groups for the provision of facilitation, planning and coordination. There is a great opportunity for Territory and Commonwealth governments to work in partnership through bilateral agreements to maintain, expand and better fund this developing network.
In the Alice Springs region, the Central Land Council has facilitated the development of four community ranger groups active in Central Australia; in Lajamanu, Yuendumu, Tennant Creek, and Hermannsburg. In the north, 24 community-based ranger and land management groups exist through Arnhem, Darwin, Daly, Katherine and the VRD regions. Each group has between five and 15 members. Groups cover a broad range of activities including coastal surveillance, weed and feral animal control, and fire management and threatened species management. In addition, they collaborate with the Northern Territory and Commonwealth government departments to assist in fulfilling their objectives such as quarantine screening, fisheries patrols and wildlife surveys. Most groups include formal land management training from Charles Darwin University or the Batchelor Institute as part of their work program.
The most successful groups have well-developed governance structures in place which combine traditional decision-making process with advice and support from the external agencies particularly the Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines, my Department of Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage, and the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development.
Mr Acting Speaker, I fully support the Chief Minister’s statement on indigenous affairs. There is still more to do, but at least we have laid that foundation - a 20-year plan. Never before has there been that sort of commitment. Aboriginal Australia does deserve a 20-year plan, and that needs to be on the agenda at COAG. In talks with my constituents, Aboriginal people applaud the Chief Minister for getting that level of commitment at that level, at COAG, because it does need to happen. Never before has there been such commitment and seriousness. I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement.
Dr BURNS (Planning and Lands): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on Indigenous Affairs. The Department of Planning and Infrastructure has the responsibility for delivering essential services to remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. The 2005-06 budget for these essential services, which include utilities services, aerodromes and barge landings, was $64.1m. In addition, Power and Water revenue collection of approximately $12m from remote operations is reinvested into the remote program. This brings the total allocation to remote utilities, aerodromes and barge landings in 2005-06 to approximately $76m. A major expenditure item is the purchase of fuel for remote electricity generation; almost $30m in 2005-06. Major utilities works completed in remote communities in the last three years include new power stations at Kaltukatjara, Nyirripi and Daly River. The Daly River project included extending power down Wooliana Road. I enjoyed going down there for a lighting up ceremony, and also enjoyed the comments of Mrs Norma McLeod, a very long-term resident. She said there were a number of things she never expected to see in her lifetime: a Labor government in the Northern Territory, and a power line in Wooliana Road. Once she got the first, the second was bound to follow, so that was all in good spirit.
The other major utilities works completed in remote communities in the last three years include: generation upgrades in Minyerri, Nguiu, and Yuendumu; an upgrade of the high voltage reticulation at Palumpa; electrification of the bore fields at Angwala and Ntaria; new fuel storage tanks at Numbulwar; increased fuel storage capacity at Peppimenarti and Palumpa; new bores at Numbulwar, Palumpa, Yirrkala, Harts Range, Papunya, Nyirripi, and Gunbalanya; and new ground tanks at Belyuen, Gapuwiyak, Gunbulunya, Peppimenarti, Harts Bluff and Lajamanu. There is also a new rising main at Lajamanu, and a new bore field collection tank at Santa Teresa.
Fluoridation injection trials have also taken place in Nguiu and Maningrida. A groundwater injection project to increase water storage is being conducted at Warruwi; Ali Curung has a new sewage pond; and, at Ntaria, the sewage treatment ponds have been extended. This is essential infrastructure that maintains health in a community and this government has been investing heavily in that. You cannot have health without the basic infrastructure that I have mentioned: electricity, power, sewerage and water. It is very important to any community.
Over the past three years, the Martin government has undertaken an extensive program of upgrading aerodromes that service our remote communities. Pirlangimpi was the first to benefit, with the aerodrome being fully reconstructed and sealed at a cost of $1.09m. Then came the aerodromes at Kintore, Kalkarindji and Gapuwiyak; all were fully reconstructed and sealed at a total cost of $3m. In 2004-05, the government reconstructed and sealed aerodromes at Ramingining and Papunya at a total cost of $1.75m. In September last year, I was very pleased to travel to Ramingining with my colleague, the member for Arnhem, to officially declare open the new runway. We received a very warm welcome from Ramingining residents who put on a spectacular show of singing and dancing to celebrate the opening of the new all-weather airstrip.
In 2005-06, it has been the turn of Minyerri and Bulman. Their aerodromes have been fully reconstructed and sealed at a total cost of $1.43m. Upgrading these aerodromes to all weather standard has a clear impact on the lives of local residents, not least of all when it comes to improving emergency medical evacuation.
As well as funding the network of 73 remote aerodromes in the Northern Territory, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Indigenous Infrastructure Unit is also responsible for funding 14 community barge landings. So far this year, the Ramingining barge landing has been extended and repaired at a total cost of more than $130 000. Work to repair the damage caused by Cyclone Ingrid to the barge landing on Goulburn Island is complete and the total expenditure was $220 000. Meanwhile, a grant to the Tiwi Land Council of $35 000 is available for a safety upgrade to the Nguiu ferry terminal.
The Department of Planning and Infrastructure is also responsible for managing the Northern Territory Indigenous Housing Construction Program, acting as the agent for the Department of Local Government, Housing and Sport. Construction expenditure since 2001-02 totals approximately $130m. In addition, $13m has been allocated to land servicing to extend utilities services to new subdivisions. Approximately 450 new houses and 300 major renovations and upgrades have been completed in this period.
The extent of overcrowding in indigenous housing has negative flow-on effects across a broad range of social and economic outcomes. I would add for members opposite, that this is well established in all sorts of international and local literature. There has been quite a bit of research carried on through the Menzies School of Health Research in relation to this particular matter, particularly in relation to infectious disease. Housing, and overcrowding in housing, certainly has a very negative effect across a whole range of social and economic outcomes.
The total investment required to overcome overcrowding in the Northern Territory indigenous communities has been estimated at $1bn. The Commonwealth has stated its reluctance to inject additional housing funding into the Northern Territory unless there is demonstrated capacity to expend that additional funding. To date, the main method of delivering indigenous housing construction has been by way of grants provided to community housing organisations otherwise known as ICHOs. In order to increase the rate at which construction dollars can be delivered, it is planned that in 2006-07 to use the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Construction Division to directly project manage a proportion of the annual construction program.
The provision of training in housing construction and maintenance through the Indigenous Housing Construction program is a priority objective of the Northern Territory government. In recent years, positions have been developed for trainees at a number of Central Australian communities as well as at Wadeye. Trainees in this program have worked with a builder/trainer to gain competencies in Certificate II or Certificate III in General Construction. Consultation has commenced with a number of communities to roll this training program out into additional communities and broaden its geographical spread in 2006-07 with training placements for approximately 40 trainees. It is anticipated that this training program will provide a pathway to paid employment in local building and maintenance crews. The housing construction training program provides a means for increasing the capacity of local work crews to contractual works related to the government’s capital works and general repairs and maintenance programs. Increasing the volume of government’s works that is contracted to capable local construction crews is a key priority to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.
Recent examples of the Northern Territory government contracts that have been awarded to capable local work crews include major subdivision works worth $2.4m at Wadeye; general repairs and maintenance and school extensions at Groote Eylandt, Bickerton Island, Numbulwar and Gunbalanya; and a $4m joint venture to supply gravel for road works on the West Macdonnell tourism loop road project.
In my role as Minister for Public Employment, I would like to share some good news on what the Northern Territory public sector has achieved in indigenous employment. Since the Martin government launched the Northern Territory public service Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy in November 2002, the number of indigenous people employed in the Northern Territory public sector has increased by approximately 60% from 725 to 1154 as of May 2006. We are proud of what we have achieved but there is clearly more to do when you consider that the Northern Territory has the highest proportion of indigenous people when compared to other jurisdictions.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 28% of Territorians identifies as indigenous compared with a national average of 2.2% for all Australians. For the first time, the Northern Territory government has a clear picture of where indigenous people are in the Northern Territory public sector and can monitor trends across the sector. In 2003, the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment met with every chief executive and their executive team throughout the Territory to strengthen the implementation of the strategy. There is a clear message that this is a key policy and a high priority of the Northern Territory government, and we also clarified the roles of agencies in implementing this strategy. During the initial implementation phase, agencies were encouraged to develop agency implementation plans; review recruitment and retention practices to ensure that they were inclusive of and targeted indigenous people; improve the collection of EEO data and review their data systems; and develop clear reporting systems on indigenous employment.
There have also been a number of forums conducted through the Territory. These forums sought the contribution of hundreds of stakeholders throughout the Territory and have culminated in the development of a Northern Territory Public Sector Indigenous Employment Tool Kit, a practical resource for managers in recruiting and retaining indigenous people. The purpose of the Indigenous Employment Tool Kit is to provide a reference guide for employers and managers on recruiting and retaining indigenous people in the Northern Territory public sector workforce. The tool kit is a first for the Northern Territory public sector, and perhaps, Australia. It has been heralded as a significant achievement for the Northern Territory public sector and is an exciting addition to the growing number of initiatives in the Northern Territory.
As well as developing best practice initiatives through the Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy, a parallel initiative, the Remote Workforce Development Strategy has been established. This aims to encourage and support our existing remote-based indigenous and non-indigenous employees to develop new skills in many professions. Under the strategy, government provides a special scholarship program for remote employees, an innovative grants program, and a series of Revive and Refocus forums for NTPS employees who are working in remote locations. Under the scholarship program, 12 remote indigenous employees have been supported to undertake a range of professional development activities including VET and undergraduate study and to attend sector-specific conferences and workshops.
Another innovative professional development initiative is the indigenous leadership development program for both men and women. The pilot, Kigaruk indigenous men’s leadership development program was conducted by OCPE in 2003 following consultation with indigenous men who identified the need for an accredited course to be held in a culturally-appropriate learning environment. Their qualification is a Diploma of Business (Frontline Management). Following the success of the pilot program, from which all 25 participants graduated in 2004, an independent evaluation was undertaken. The findings of the evaluation concluded that the program was an outstanding success. Subsequently, a second Kigaruk program for indigenous men, and a pilot Lookrukin indigenous women’s leadership development program, have recently concluded with 22 participants graduating at CDU in May. The major objective of these programs is to redress the lack of representation of indigenous men and women in senior management positions in the Northern Territory public sector, and to provide opportunities for indigenous men and women to gain knowledge and skills necessary to assist their ongoing career development.
As I said earlier, we are proud of what we have achieved to date, although there is much more work to do. I would just like to use the last couple of minutes to congratulate the Chief Minister and the government on having a vision to look 20 years ahead. There is a great need for a strategic view on this. I have lived in the Territory for about 27 years now and, in much of that time, I have been involved with Aboriginal people, particularly in the health area, and it is very difficult. If it was easy, it would have been done a long time ago.
The member for Greatorex showed emotion yesterday. I also have shown emotion when people, such as close friends, have died. When we had the debate in this place about the Stolen Generation, I told the story that was told to me of Luke Morcom and what he suffered. There is tragedy, there are tears, but there is also hope. That hope is the relationships and understanding that we can build up with Aboriginal people and Aboriginal communities. In this government, in particular, there are indigenous members, but there are also many people who have been around for a long time who are very committed to improving outcomes for our Aboriginal community.
In my maiden speech in this place, I alluded to the fact that we needed to do this as a government, to unlock the boundless social, cultural and economic potential for Aboriginal people, and to have a Territory where there is equality and equity, where we can look each other in the eye and move forward. I am still committed to that. I know all members of this government are committed to that. I join with the Chief Minister in reiterating and reconfirming our commitment to have that Territory that we all desire.
It is not easy; it is going to be a long haul. It has been a long haul for me personally, for a long while, and there have been tears along the way. I acknowledge the emotion that was shown here yesterday by the member for Greatorex. We have to work together and, if we do that, the outcomes will be positive. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement to the House.
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Mr Acting Speaker, I support of the Chief Minister’s statement on indigenous affairs. At the beginning, I wish to make a very important point - one which has been made previously by the Chief Minister on a number of occasions. Unlike other jurisdictions in Australia, the Northern Territory does not have a separate department of indigenous affairs. The reason for this is very simple. In the Northern Territory, all ministers have indigenous affairs as a core focus of their work so that, in effect, we have nine ministers responsible for indigenous advancement in the Northern Territory. All agencies of government are similarly tasked.
Unlike other jurisdictions, Aboriginal people are not a footnote to government policy. We are not an afterthought. We are an integral part of the equation. Although we constitute around 30% of the population, no one could pretend that indigenous Territorians have an equitable share of opportunity and material advantage enjoyed by most Territorians - far from it.
I want to digress for a minute and make an observation of what has occurred over the last few months, and particularly over the last three weeks where there has been much focus on Alice Springs and the town camps task force. There was a situation where, quite genuinely I believe, minister Brough came to Alice Springs and was genuinely concerned, and attempted to try to address issues in regards to town camps. From that very moment onwards, I knew that, in a way, for us to make any gains, we would have to go through a fair degree of pain. It is fair to say that all the people in the Northern Territory, particularly indigenous Northern Territory people, have been through that pain, because they have been the forgotten equation in this particular exercise. Indeed, in the past, they became almost a political football. What is new? Having said that, I think Brough is genuine; he really wanted to do something.
Quite apart from being a member of parliament and just a normal person out there, I became very cynical because you had in the background snooping Senator Nigel Scullion. I do not think he was there for any good reason. I do not think he was there in the interests of the indigenous people. I do not think he was there in the interests of the people of the Northern Territory. I do not think he was there in the interests of the people of Australia. I believe Nigel Scullion was there for pure political purposes - pure political expediency. He was skulking around in the background, while you had Mal Brough delivering people in the Night Patrol vehicle to the hospital, or whatever the venue it was. Again, I do not have a problem with that because that is the political side of it. I do have objections when you have cheapskate politicians like Scullion who are essentially there for short-term political gain.
That is the sort of issue that we have to overcome in the Northern Territory. That is why I am very confident that we, as a government under the leadership of the Chief Minister – indeed, all other members in this House - have the capacity, the will and commitment to get there. We are not going to get there by this cheap political skulduggery and political game that has been exercised by people like Scullion, and Scullion has to be aware that he has a lot to answer for to the Northern Territory.
Quite apart from his little game in regards to this particular exercise, he has usurped the rights of Northern Territorians in respect to our proposed nuclear waste dump. He has concocted a superficial response to a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory. He has engaged with certain organisations here in the Northern Territory for their own short-term benefit. They know who I am talking about. By doing so, they have usurped the rights of Territorians. They have also, in effect, given the Commonwealth government the right to overturn the Northern Territory government, as we know in this House, if we pass legislation in respect to a ‘no nuclear waste dump’ legislation in the Northern Territory. He went there at the same time, and, basically, under the national Environment and Heritage Act, in effect, caused the capacity of the Commonwealth to override a whole set of circumstances here in the Northern Territory. I want to make it very clear tonight, Nigel Scullion, that you gave no favours by your superficial, shallow responses to the needs of the Northern Territory, quite apart from the needs of the indigenous people.
Of course, it just not a matter of idle interest. It is critical to the future of the Northern Territory. Not only it is an issue of social justice, it is also an issue that goes to the centre of the Territory’s long-term future as a political institution and economic entity. As long as such social and economic disparity persists, as long as 30% of our population remains at such levels of impoverishment, it is difficult to imagine the Territory having a long-term future other than as a mendicant territory to the rest of the nation.
It is for this reason that the Chief Minister’s call for a 20-year plan not only makes sense, it is the only logical approach to the seemly impractical problems we face. It is for no other reason than of self-interest. Territorians must support such a long-term approach to our future. The alternative of ad hoc and politically opportunist attempts to paper over cracks is doomed to failure. I have already made reference to Nigel Scullion.
I believe that indigenous people have been forgotten in this whole equation. Whilst we are out there scoring political points, there is a lot of hurt, and high levels of uncertainty being experienced by many indigenous people. Much has been said about self-determination and what it means, and everyone has a view on it. Far too often in the past - and we can refer to the Binjaris and Imanpas of this world, and to Tangentyere Council and I will come back to that in a minute - we have used that as an excuse, not only us as a government, but the Commonwealth government as well, and most certainly, the CLP in the past. They have used self-determination as an excuse to not do anything.
You have already heard from the member for Arafura talking about the roles of local governments out there. I believe she is absolutely correct. We sat idly by and said: ‘You fix up education, you fix up the health problems in your community, you fix up the law and order issues in your community, you tackle all the other issues in your community’, which no other comparable white community council would be expected to do in Australia.
We have to change the whole focus. We have to accept responsibility in how we apply equity and service provision to indigenous communities. That is why I am confident that this government, despite the difficulties we might have into the future, we have no other option but to go down this path and treat indigenous people as equal, with the same rights as anyone, as equal partners in this whole process.
I am referring to long-term planning. We have listened to the Chief Minister over the last particular week or so regarding the 20-year plan, and local government is no exception in terms of planning. It is in the area of local government and governance issues generally as applied to remote area organisations such as Indigenous Community Housing Organisations which are more likely than not run by local government. That is your point, member for Arafura.
Current legislation for local government outside the municipalities of our major towns, specifically community government councils, is 20 years old. Over that period much has changed, not least the size of many of the towns and communities to which the legislation applies, and the level of responsibility and the compliance these bodies must embrace. Right back to the days when Bob Beadman was running the Local Government department, it has been pointed out that many of our remote area community councils have functional responsibility over areas far in excess of what they are equipped to do, and I have already referred to that. It is readily recognised and accepted that municipal councils such as the Darwin City Council, Katherine Town Council, Tennant Creek Town Council, and Alice Springs Town Council have great financial and corporate capacity; quite different from what we apply to those communities out bush. It is in this context, and as part of the 20-year vision as enunciated by the Chief Minister, we are looking to major reforms of local government throughout the Northern Territory.
In the coming months, the scope and direction of those reforms will be announced, as well as the methods by which we may achieve them. These reforms will be geared to carry local government through to the 2020s with clear identifiable outcomes to be achieved over that period. Clearly, increased regionalisation of local governments will be a focus of these major reforms while some advances have been made in the last few years in establishing regional structures such as Nyirranggulung. They have not been without problems. Such bodies are a move in the right direction but not necessarily the whole solution.
We have 63 local community government councils. We must acknowledge that many are too small and lack the capacity to ever fulfil their proper roles, and for obvious reasons. Recruitment into the bush is always difficult. Imagine how difficult it is to recruit 63 CEOs and 63 financial officers across so many disparate organisations. Local Government ministers both under the CLP and the present government - and I have referred to this before - quite honestly have very conveniently oversighted it under the guise of self-determination. It is not something which is unique or peculiar to the Northern Territory government. It is important to understand that the Commonwealth government has a role.
Most people will be aware that since the demise of ATSIC there have been high levels of uncertainty. There have been high levels of angst in the community about service provision. That is something which many communities and, indeed, this government and me personally, are still coming to grips with. You have a situation where you now have ICCs, Indigenous Coordinating Centres, which are effectively silos operating alone, in isolation, not talking to community organisations, and certainly not talking to this government or to their people in Canberra. We only have to go to an example that occurred over the last few weeks in respect of Bawinanga.
Bawinanga is, without a doubt, one of the most reputable CDEP organisations in the Northern Territory. It has a turnover, I have been advised, of around $26m, and they have done it all by themselves. It is very important to understand this: this is a good news story. It is something they have done themselves. They have not had to rely on big forestry-type projects or mining-type operations. They have done it all themselves under CDEP, a program which some members in this House and others would like to see scrapped. The point is that is all they had and that is where they reached today with a turnover of $26m. What did you do? You add ICC and DEWR going in there, basically saying to those people: ‘Get lost. We have nothing to do with you any more. We are going to hand you over to someone else’.
How do you think people out there feel? How do you think those people who worked so hard, who have had the guts, the courage, the determination to get where they are, feel when you get some idiot coming in from ICC or DEWR saying: ‘You no longer exist, get lost’? It is a very demoralising thing that goes on out there when you apply this sort of disrespect to those communities. ICC has much to learn. It is not something that I have just said here for the first time. I have said this previously and to Mal Brough, and other ministers. If you are talking about an Indigenous Coordinating Centre, well let it be just that. Do not go operating in isolation, do not go operating in silos; talk to each other.
I had another example in my electorate only the other day where DEWR has been able to negotiate an arrangement with the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development for indigenous business economic opportunities. They are able to negotiate in Katherine, Darwin and Alice Springs. But guess what? They choose not to do that in Tennant Creek. They arbitrarily, unilaterally, said: ‘We are going to do something different’. I would just say to ICC, to those people in charge of ICC: take a step back, have a look at what you are doing, work in unison, work in conjunction with the community organisations, and work with the Northern Territory government, and part of the issues and problems we have today will be alleviated to a certain extent.
I want to quickly mention indigenous housing which is something I am going to speak about in more detail tomorrow. I want to make a point that that the Leader of the Opposition has implied, or inferred, that housing does not have in role in some of the dysfunction that goes on in indigenous communities. We know for a fact that you have to accept it; there are some high levels of dysfunction that goes on when you have excessive grog abuse. The member for Arafura and other speakers have mentioned this evening that, where you have 16 to 17 people living in a house, surely there must be a degree of dysfunction, there must be a degree of impact upon children, and there must be a degree of impact on mothers and fathers. There is absolutely no doubt that if the federal government were able to see their way forward in providing 1000 houses right across Australia over the next 10 years, as they do have a $10m surplus, then it would go part of the way to alleviating this particular issue that we now face today.
I was going to talk about housing. I do not think I will go into it. I will deal with it tomorrow. In conclusion I want to say two things. The first is that the Leader of the Opposition has been in the media - I suppose everyone has been in the media having their go over this. The only person I have not heard from is Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck, but I am sure they will come forward and they might come up with some more sensible ideas than some of the other commentators have come up with over the last few weeks.
However, I want to say to the Leader of the Opposition that I, as an indigenous person, feel very pained with what has been going on in this community. Not for me as a politician, not at all. As I said you have to through this sort of pain to get any sort of gain. I am more than happy to sacrifice that. But I do feel for indigenous people out there, whom I honestly believe have been trodden and trampled on. That is not saying to indigenous organisations and indigenous people that you do not have a role to play because you do have a role to play. It is also your responsibility to address some of these issues. I care for those people out there who are powerless and do not have the opportunity to address these issues. I know there are many gutsy and courageous people out there who are working their backsides off to make their lives better. I just want to make that important point.
It has been said: ‘You did not get up and speak about this particular issue’. I had no reason to speak about this issue because we are a government with a Chief Minister who happens to be the Minister for Indigenous Affairs. I can tell you, quite frankly, that is good enough for us. That is good enough for people on this side of the House. Regardless of what the opposition likes to go on about, so be it. We do not care. The fact is, the Chief Minister is the spokesperson on indigenous affairs and that is it. Go on as much as you want.
We have heard very passionate debates this evening and none more so than a point made by the member for Nhulunbuy, the minister for Education, and it was also raised by the member for Arafura. It is a very pertinent point. It is a home truth that people should understand: there was a deliberate policy decision over the life of the previous CLP government not to provide secondary education for people who lived in the bush. That is indigenous people. Collectively over that side, think about it. Collectively, you made the decision not to provide any form of secondary education to people in the bush. In doing so, you have denied many people out there a real opportunity.
I want to take up one last point in respect to the Leader of the Opposition. She seemed to suggest yesterday that the Chief Minister had dug herself a hole in this particular debate. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Chief Minister’s 20-year strategy, 20-year vision, is the way to go. I will tell you who dug a hole. It was the CLP. The Leader of the Opposition is a member of the CLP. She dug a hole and, in doing so, she buried the educational aspirations of two generations of indigenous people out there. Well may Richard Lim shed a tear!
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, your time is up. Do you want an extension?
Mr McADAM: No, that is it.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s 20-year plan. I want to start off with painting a picture. I do this reluctantly. We talk about the issue of Aboriginal people and communities and, in some ways, we are slightly removed. However, for the people I know out in those communities, it is very personal. You are talking about them; you are talking about their lives. I would not like my personal life, my house and my children to be talked about on the national scene. Having said that, it is an important issue. The issues facing those people are also extremely important and they do need to be relayed. I do it reluctantly.
What we are basically talking about is poverty in its rawest, most obvious sense. Whether you are an Aboriginal person living in Australia, an Inuit person living in Canada, a minority group living in the United States, if you are in poverty you probably have many of the same disadvantages associated with health, education, and domestic violence issues as Aboriginal people do in Australia. I do not accept that it is totally the same, but there are other issues associated with it. Basically, it is poverty. People are poor; they live in very harsh conditions and have done for decades. It has not happened overnight. It has been generation after generation. I guess the wider society wakes up and says: ‘This looks pretty bad, we better do something about it’, then drifts off, and we forget about it again. However, it is always there.
To give a comparison of what the difference is and why people are the way they are, is the comparison of my life. I was born into a family home. Many of the people living in communities share a home, or they do not have a home - they move from home to home; they do not their own home. That is very disruptive. My parents worked. Many children born today have parents who do not have a job; whose parents have never had a job. There has never been a role model that they have seen regarding work. The town I was born in had an economy. It went up and down, but it had a higher level economy than any one of the communities in the Northern Territory. There were prospects for work. There were sporting facilities; I had a choice of sporting facilities. Many of the communities you go to now do not have those facilities. There were health facilities and I had job choices as I grew up. As I moved out of home, I had housing opportunities. I had good roads to drive on. That does not occur in those communities.
One of the stark reminders of those figures that we hear all the time was in a couple of real life instances that I have had. We talk about Aboriginal health and those indicators and how bad they are. My wife had to go into hospital in Katherine for two weeks, and because there were many people in the main ward she was put in the children’s ward. I visited her for several hours every day. There would have been 10 to 12 beds in her room. There were three or four other rooms in that ward, plus the main Jack Maroney Ward. In that whole time, the whole two weeks that I visited her, of those 40 or 50 beds in the Katherine Hospital, there was only one white child - one white child in two weeks in a ward with 40 beds. That is the reality of Aboriginal health. Some children were there the first week, were discharged at the end of the first week and were back in the second week. That is the reality of indigenous health.
The member for Arnhem and I visited the Berrimah prison last week. In that prison, of the total population of prisoners, 80% are indigenous. The population in the Northern Territory is 30%, so you have this vast contradiction in the incarceration rates for Aboriginal people. You have recidivism rates of 40% to 50% coming in and out of that gaol. That has become life. Life has become going to gaol. Life has become going to hospital. That is not the life that we want for Aboriginal people in the Territory.
The Chief Minister’s statement talked about how we have to attack the symptoms, but we also have to change those underlying causes. I look at it in these terms: we can put as many band-aids on a wound as we like. Underneath that band-aid, it is still infected. It is still a store that is constantly infected. It may look nice for a while but, eventually, it will come through that band-aid. We have to give that person antibiotics to cure it from the inside so that the wound heals from the inside. That is the approach we need to take. There needs to be a massive injection of money into all areas of Aboriginal affairs.
One of the real examples of the failure in that area has been with the Commonwealth government’s treatment of ATSIC and now, through the ICCs. One of those programs which looks after homeland outstation communities is the CHP program. With that program – you imagine any program that is operating through Australia - that budget has not changed for 10 years. A program which looks after outstations across Australia has not changed in 10 years. That program looks after generators, roads, airstrips, bores, sewage - all those things. It has not changed in 10 years. The community infrastructure and municipal services part of the CHP program has not changed. What happens to all these outstations with generators breaking down? The depreciation is probably two or three times the size of that portion of the CHP program, and they are wondering why many of these outstations are looking a bit rough.
The IHANT money has not made major leaps. What has been commented on today has been the backlog of $800m to $1bn within the Northern Territory of indigenous housing need. Even if we met that tomorrow, the current allocation for construction of indigenous housing is about $15m. That allocation annually would have to quadruple just to meet the need. The population in communities is growing. At one of my communities the birth rate is between 80 and 100 children a year. They only get allocated two or three, maybe four, houses a year. It is not even keeping up with the population growth in those communities. That is a bit of a picture about what is actually out there. People are struggling to have a go.
I will particularly talk about Wadeye. I hate in some ways having to use Wadeye because they are always talked about, but let us talk about them. That people who turn up to council or committee meetings are the people who carry the load of that community. They are the ones who see the problem, and commit their time. They put a whole lot of pressure on themselves and their families. Over the years that I have been involved in that community, people have fallen by the wayside because they cannot commit to it because there is so much pressure on their families. The action of a senior public servant out there recently was to insult those people who turn up to those meetings, who try to do the best for their communities - and they were insulted. Their houses are not the ones that are the so-called problem, but they are insulting those people.
What is being done? When we visited the gaol at Berrimah there were many educational programs running, and that is a big emphasis of that prison. You have libraries and training programs to allow inmates to come out a little better than they went in, so that they have a chance of getting on with their lives. That is something that the NT government is doing; providing an education facility within the gaol system.
Not all communities are in disarray and that has been said here today. I have communities where I have turned up at 8 am and everybody is up working flat out. They are doing everything they can to make their community a beautiful place and they do. One of those is Emu Point. There is no economy there but they are looking after their community; every house is looked after. Recently, the government put in a learning centre. Until then, they were teaching their children underneath a bough shelter. It was a new community but they knew education was important. There is a community looking at economic opportunities, looking after their children, looking after everything they are given by the government. That does not get reported because only the bad things are reported much of the time.
Today, we had a group of indigenous students from the Batchelor Institute here. They were not necessarily young - you would call them middle aged - all training to be primary school teachers. You have some good stories out there. There will not be a single solution. It will be addressing many of the social problems. It will be looking at economic development opportunities. The economic development strategy the Chief Minister commented on today, there is a heap of potential in the Daly electorate.
I will use the Port Keats Daly Reserve as an example. Here you have a block of land in the Territory with probably 200 km to 300 km of coastline. At the moment it is not productive, nothing is being done; there is no economy. On the eastern side of the land trust you have Elizabeth Downs Station. On one side of the barbed wire fence you have a multimillion dollar station turning off thousands of head of cattle every year making a great deal of money. On the other side of the fence there is no economic development. Further to the north are the Channel Point blocks where there are houses selling for $700 000 because they sit on the coast in a nice little isolated spot. Their sea frontage would only be 400 m. Yet we have a coastline of 200 km to 300 km of pristine beaches which is not being utilised. Everything about economic development is about the consent of the traditional owners and that is the primary issue. I know a lot of traditional owners, I have spoken to them and they do want to develop their land. There is so much potential there that I do not think that many people can fathom it.
There are plenty of tourism opportunities throughout the Victoria River Downs region and through the Daly River area that is untapped. l will tell a very simple story about business opportunities. When I came to the Territory in 1988 I worked at Cooinda. There was a gentleman there whose name I will not mention as he has passed away. He lived close by and he used to come up in the morning and tell the tour desk to put a note in the window saying ‘local Aboriginal man available for bush tucker walks’, and people would pay $10. That tour would fill up very quickly with 20-odd people. He would come up around 5 pm, walk people down to the home billabong around the Yellow Waters. It would take them a couple of hours and they absolutely loved it. There are business opportunities right under our nose. It is a matter of linking people to those opportunities.
The strategy that I mentioned about talked about creating 2000 jobs in 10 years. This is a huge challenge, although it can be done with the cooperation of the federal and Territory governments, and with the private sector. We need to draw a line between where we are now and that target in 10 years and try to achieve that in that time. When we look at solutions you need to know what they want. You look at the spectrum of their lifestyle. You heard the comments about the way people are living in poverty with overcrowded housing and generational unemployment. Then you have a person staying in a house, working 80 hours a week, perhaps not seeing their family very often, on a fairly good wage. So what do people want? What do we expect of people?
What is currently happening in many of our communities is not acceptable to anybody. I do not expect people to be working the sort of hours we work in this House. There has to be some point in between where people can choose where their standard of living is something that is internationally recognised to be sufficient. I have visited many Aboriginal people in their homelands. They are living by the beach, they go fishing every day, and have their families around them. They look after their outstation and that is a beautiful way of life. However, for those people who aspire to something better we need to provide that opportunity to make it happen.
My vision for Wadeye and the surrounding area is quite simple. They have indicated that most of the people living at Wadeye are not from there; they have their land outside of Wadeye. We need to map the boundaries of those clans. There should be defined boundaries and these are suburbs as we might call them in the future, or their little cattle stations. We need to look at the hydrology of those areas. Look at the vegetation, the tourist potential and the geology of those areas. We almost need to put it in a prospectus and put that out to the marketplace, because nothing has greater success of survival if the market will absorb that. Let the market judge what can be done with that country. I am sure there will be proposals that will come back which the traditional owners would be very interested in. I believe that is the way forward, and it has certainly been articulated to me at Wadeye.
The liquor management plans are an excellent tool. They are not a long-term solution; they are a breathing space for people to give them opportunity. We have seen it at Groote Eylandt where people have a chance to go to school, to get healthy, to get a job - do all those things. It is a moment in time. When I say it is not a long-term solution, it is certainly going to be around for a few years, so people can get on with their lives.
There are examples of greater cooperation. The Katherine West Health Board is an example of cooperation between the Commonwealth and Territory governments and the community, producing those outcomes.
The lifting of the remote area exemption is a good move but it has to be staged; you cannot just drop those things on people and expect people to suddenly get a job. There needs to be something for the rest of the community. In a community of 1000 people, there may only be 30, 40, 50 jobs currently. There needs to be something for those other people to do because ‘idle hands do the devil’s work’. I do not think I could be in that situation.
The projection for the Northern Territory over the next 20 years is that the indigenous population of the Northern Territory will be about 50%. What is …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Daly, your time has expired.
Ms McCARTHY: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time to allow the member to complete his remarks, in accordance with Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr KNIGHT: I will be brief. What is going to be the socioeconomic level of that community of 50% of the Northern Territory population in the coming 20 years? We have to do something about it. This plan is a way forward. It is saying we are serious about it; that we have to draw a line in the sand and aim for somewhere a lot higher than where we are now. We have to start today for a whole number of reasons.
I will tell a story. I went to funeral recently in the Nemarluk community. A young 12-year-old Aboriginal boy had been with his father in his house. His father said: ‘Let us go down to the floodplains. Let us go hunting together’. This little boy did not drink, did not smoke; never touched any sort of drugs. He had an extended family and everybody loved him. He said: ‘No, no, I am staying here’. So his father went away. His father came back a couple of hours later and this little boy had hung himself.
That is why we need to draw a line in the sand and aim for the sky and take a step every single day. I say to everybody in this House: I support this 20-year plan. Let us get started.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the focus on Aboriginal affairs in the Northern Territory hits at the heart of the concerns that affect Aboriginal people right across Australia. In the ministerial statement on indigenous affairs, the Chief Minister said that it can only be with the absolute support of all governments - state, territory and federal – that positive generational change over two decades can occur. I urge the Chief Minister to pursue vigorously her fellow state leaders and, indeed, the Prime Minister, for that help.
The question amongst Aboriginal Australians in my electorate of Arnhem is: ‘Do governments really care about this country’s first Australians?’ The question is not so much about politics, it is about compassion. It is a word that does not sit well in politics. Nowhere have we been in such great need of compassion within our own country than today. As a nation, we are quick to move to support our nearest neighbours in Dili for a second time as the country struggles with civil strife. We send federal police to the Solomon Islands to help stabilise law and order. We send our soldiers halfway around the world to help a country build a democratic structure in the battle against terrorism. Yet, only a short plane trip to the south-west of the Territory’s capital, hundreds of people live like refugees in makeshift tents because there are not enough homes, and those homes that are there are trashed, for various reasons, largely related to violence. In Arnhem, there are communities consumed by the avalanche of poverty. Poverty not just of a material nature, but spiritual poverty where the ache is so deep and the burden of despair so heavy no one knows anything different.
It is clear that such national media focus has stirred many emotions, ranging from confusion, despair, disbelief and a helpless frustration, to sadness, anger and outrage. It is good to see such feelings are coming to the core, because apathy and numbness appear to have been the silent winners under the decade-long reign of the Howard government - so silent that the federal policies against Aboriginal people in this country have crept into the Australian psyche by deadly stealth. I say to the Prime Minister and your government, that your federal policies have paved the way for dehumanising the most vulnerable people in our country – the Aborigines - where the voices of the 2% of the Australian population have been silenced by the systematic stripping of the one organisation that represented Aboriginal people – ATSIC. Dividing it into two arms, ATSIC and ATSIS, under the guise of efficient service delivery, weakening its political arm by legal means, undermining the very real access to information that people in our bush regions felt they had, was so that the fatal and final injection of abolishment could occur without even a whimper.
All of this so that when Phase 2 of the federal government’s operation began by dismantling the Aboriginal agencies into mainstream departments, the Aboriginal people of this country could only sit and stare in wounded disbelief, perhaps still not quite aware of the enormity of the political and social consequences.
It has been in this environment of numbness that Phase 2 of the federal government’s political agenda to stifle and stamp out the passionate hearts of indigenous Australians that the foundations of the Prime Minister’s so-called shared responsibility agreement was set. While people in Numbulwar, Ngukurr and Bulman were trying to come to terms with the fact that they would no longer have the Garrak-Jarru Regional Council or a Miwatj Regional Council, let alone a representative or two to speak on their behalf to Canberra, the federal government bowled in with ideas that did not belong to the community. Ideas about how to share responsibility with people who were, and still are, struggling to live without decent housing and third world health conditions and with inadequate road access, insisting that this was the way forward, where such responsibilities would be the only avenue for releasing urgently needed funding for basic human rights, demanding that communities find a way to meet the Prime Minister halfway.
I say to the Prime Minister, it may sound fair in theory. It may even work for those suburbs where homelessness is not an issue, where overcrowding of 17 to 20 people is unheard of, where job opportunities overcome any problems with substance abuse, and where children do not go to school hungry and have had a good night’s sleep. But it is so unfair for our Aboriginal communities. Not only is it unfair, it is unjust, and discriminates against those who are most impoverished in our country. Homelessness is a very real issue. In the Northern Territory, we need 4000 houses right now to relieve the burden of those homes with 17 to 20 people. When the Prime Minister says it is not about funding, I tell him he is wrong.
Problems with substance abuse occur largely because there are no real job opportunities where individuals can walk with dignity and pride, providing for their families in a job that makes them feel worthwhile. Children go to school hungry because of the overcrowding, and our schools try to cater for them by having breakfast programs funded by the Martin Labor government. I visited Wadeye recently to spend time with the school and the men and women in the community, and the vision of the trashed homes is well documented. Wadeye is not alone in this. There are many communities of similar vision.
We have heard the calls by our Chief Minister to urgently provide more dollars for housing. I ask again: how is it that as a nation, rich as we are, we can assist our nearest neighbours, but in our own country, nearly 400 people lives as refugees in their own community? A further 3000 share or go without in other communities and towns. Ninety babies a year are born in Wadeye. In Arnhem Land, the birth rate is just as high. We have thousands of people in remote communities, yet they do not receive the adequate services of equivalent populations known as towns in southern states. These statistics are sadly not new. The population growth in our remote areas has been growing all the time.
Under the previous CLP government, they did nothing to address the urgent need of building schools, providing secondary education, planning for the future with decent jobs and adequate housing. I am absolutely staggered by such a disregard of the needs of nearly 30% of the Territory’s population. The Country Liberal Party’s inability to plan and to prepare for the growth of our regions during 27 years was, and is, a disgrace. Now we are seeing and living the effects of such gross negligence and inaction.
It took a major statement by my predecessor, the former member for Arnhem, John Ah Kit, to reveal the depth of despair by speaking of the dysfunctional communities across the Territory. His courageous stand began the earnest road of our Labor government to improve the lives of the most vulnerable in the Territory – those in our communities. Mr Ah Kit’s statement made national headlines. That was in March 2002. The Martin Labor government moved to improve education in the bush, not just primary but secondary education. No secondary school was ever built before Labor came to government. No child in the bush had graduated from Year 12 either.
I would like to just digress a little and support what the member for Barkly said. By not allowing the future and further education of children in those remote areas where the population growth is the greatest, is an absolute shocking indictment on our previous government who ruled for 27 years. Now we have a government determined to ensure a future for the children of the Northern Territory, black and white, in urban and bush areas. No ifs and buts: this government knows that the future of our communities depends on our children knowing how to read and write in English, be just as strong in their own language, and maintain cultural connections to country.
This is the essence of valuing human beings for who they are, and knowing one’s own identity, and where they fit in, is fundamental to a person’s wellbeing. Unlike the Prime Minister, his federal Education minister, Senator Julie Bishop, wants Aboriginal people to forget their identify, their link to country and culture. It is a call that only complements the outrageous comments by the previous Indigenous Affairs minister, Amanda Vanstone, when she referred to outstations as ‘cultural museums’.
Now the federal government is focused on amending the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. The Prime Minister and his ministers say the Land Rights Act has failed Aboriginal people. But I say how can you say that to people like the Yanyuwa, my people, who have spent 30 years struggling to receive the islands back? Twenty-seven of those 30 years were spent fighting a Northern Territory CLP government completely opposed to land claims, a government that refused to recognise the rights of Aboriginal people for 27 years.
Look now at the Anindilyakwa people who are moving in leaps and bounds because they are strong in their own cultural identity and relationships to land, and because they have a government which sincerely cares about the culture of Aboriginal people right across the Northern Territory.
Federally, there has been a double standard that has been there for Aboriginal people, largely as a result of failed government policies. For more than three decades, we have had the CDEP program in our communities and it was decades still before white Australians were exposed to the scheme. No superannuation, no long service leave, no holiday pay, yet clearly it has been the core of so-called job opportunities for all Aboriginal people in our communities and for our children who have been encouraged to complete high school, just so they can go on to CDEP. Even if they do not finish high school, they can still go on CDEP.
The recent national media focus began because of the appearance of Dr Nanette Rogers on Lateline about child sexual abuse. I say – and I am sure, my colleagues, because we know that we need to have a good look at the good and bad things that are happening right across the Northern Territory - to Dr Rogers, thank you for your courage to speak publicly Thank you to Dr Paul Bauert, the president of the NT AMA for your consistent dedication to the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal children. Your call for the Army into Wadeye created mixed debate across the nation. Whatever people may think it maintained the spotlight on a community in desperate need. To you and Dr Pat Rebgetz at Wadeye, I say thank you. We know that child sex abuse is abhorrent. The Chief Minister and her ministers and Caucus are not afraid to deal with this issue, publicly, openly because we want to deal with it, we are not afraid to deal with it.
I have heard here in this Assembly in the accusations made against the Chief Minister and our government about how the people of the Northern Territory have been ashamed, how our opposition has felt ashamed and how we should be so embarrassed at our handling of the situation. I say to you and all those who accuse the Chief Minister and our government of not being able to stand up and openly face the problems of our community, just remember this: that just as gold is tested in fire, the strength of the human character is tested in the furnace of humiliation.
I say thank you to my colleagues who have stood and are standing to defend the rights of Aboriginal people not only in the Northern Territory but right across this country. It is because of them that there are five indigenous MLAs today. It is because of the Labor Party’s belief in the future for all Territorians, but in particular Aboriginal Territorians, that we have five indigenous MLAs in this Assembly.
Child sex abuse is abhorrent. It is one of society’s evils and we must all be vigilant against it in every family, city, town or community right across Australia. I call on all Australians, media commentators, leaders of all persuasions: please do not be so narrow in your view to believe it only happens in black families and by black men.
Our government has quadrupled the budget for Family and Community Services to deal with this issue simply because we know it exists. We do not hide from it nor do we pretend it is not there. It is. The Martin Labor government will continue to protect our children through the good people we have working on the ground in our communities and in the strategies to deal with it. The five indigenous members of this parliament as are all members of the Labor government are only too aware of the struggles of Aboriginal people. It is what fires my heart.
I remind our political leaders of all persuasions right across this country that it is when we sincerely seek justice and true equality for the most impoverished in our society, and only then, will we remove the walls of impossibility that block our sight from seeing a future of peace and prosperity for the first Australians, for all Australians. To those of you who are in our communities, who are at the forefront of working against this huge tide of poverty, you are our unsung heroes; not caught up in the debate but deeply affected by it. I say to you stay strong. It is to all of you that I also say on behalf of the Martin Labor government, thank you.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on Indigenous Affairs brought to this House by the Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. I begin by talking about being born and bred in a remote Aboriginal community, living in overcrowded housing, and growing up in an abusive community with an abusive family.
I was born and bred on a remote Aboriginal community. I roamed between Haasts Bluff and Hermannsburg, living with family all the time, within my culture, speaking my language and practising my culture. That is the strength of people like me. You cannot blame abuse and violence on culture. That is not something we brought into our society. It is not part of our culture; it is not part of our society. You have abuse in the white society as well. You have violence within the white society as well. We have not seen the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory or the Prime Minister of this country ask for an overhaul of white society because of the appalling abuse and violence within white society.
There was an occasion a couple of weeks ago when I was ready to board a plane to go to a couple of communities with my committee. An Aboriginal woman came up to me and said: ‘Can you, as a politician and especially as my local member, tell people how we feel as Aboriginal people in remote Aboriginal communities about the way that people are talking about abuse in Aboriginal communities?’ She said: ‘I feel absolutely filthy, absolutely dirty, that Aboriginal people are being spoken about on national media by a white saviour who has never had experience with the Aboriginal people, never been to a remote Aboriginal community’.
The white saviour in shining armour is Mal Brough, who thinks that he can come in, go to a few town camps, fly into Wadeye, disregard our Chief Minister of the Northern Territory - who is duly elected by the people of the Territory - and start getting brownie points from the most disadvantaged people of this country. It is an absolute shame on the Howard government. I feel ashamed on behalf of all Australians as an Aboriginal person, that we have this person who calls himself an Aboriginal Affairs minister, who has come in overnight on a white horse to try to talk about issues that are 200 years old.
I remember sitting at the summit with the Prime Minister only three years ago in 2003. There were people like Jackie Huggins there, Professor Bonnie Robertson, and many other people. To stand here and try to remember some of the stories that were told to the Prime Minister of the nation that day at the summit hurts me. If the Prime Minister of the nation cannot take any notice of what people were saying three years ago, what is going to change?
I want to go back to something the Local Government minister said. It is like our life is destined, from the time we were born, to death. I want to go back because there are many other issues as well. We know that abuse and violence is not part of our culture. We do not tolerate it. However, as a nation, we are all responsible for the abuse and violence – not just in indigenous communities but in the whole of Australian society. We have to stop stereotyping abuse and violence as only happening in indigenous communities, because it is 10 times that of ours in your society, and you are too ashamed to talk about it. You have not come out and said there needs to be an overhaul of our own society so that we, as a nation, can heal and say that we as a nation should not tolerate this abuse. It does not matter in what kind of society it happens.
I remember Aboriginal people talking about violence 30 years ago. There have been many reports written, many reports shelved. That is why you have the hopelessness in communities, because they believed in you - they believed in us. They believe in the very people who sit inside this Chamber, and the people who sit in the Chambers in Canberra. They see these people going into the communities and saying: ‘We need to address these issues’.
The Northern Territory Labor government and the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory has absolute guts to come up with a long-term strategy, a 20-year strategy, to say that we will take an holistic approach to dealing with the issues of abuse and violence, poor housing, infrastructure, education, and health. We, as Territory politicians, need to give credit where credit is due, rather than grandstand and say: ‘This is not going to work. You are blaming overcrowded houses for abuse’. I say to the Opposition Leader, she would not know because she has never been to an Aboriginal community. She has never had to live in an overcrowded house. I stand here with the experience of being born and bred, not in a hospital bed, but down by the river, and expertise of living with my culture, and living in an overcrowded house with 35 to 40 people.
I still take comfort in going back to some of my communities, and going back to the overcrowded houses at Papunya or Hermannsburg and sharing the dining room with my family and my aunties when I have to hop into bed with them in the swag, because it is the closeness of our culture that makes us who we are and makes us strong.
I commend the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory for having the guts to stand up and say that these issues are not easy. If it was easy we would have dealt with them a long time ago. You would have dealt with them. You reigned the Territory for 27 years. You could not cope with it. You did not understand. You did not know. Like all members in this House have said, you failed indigenous people for in remote Aboriginal communities 27 years. I can say as part of Clare Martin’s Labor government, as an Aboriginal person born and bred in a community that speaks my language and upholds my law and my culture, that has not made me violent and abusive. I commend the Chief Minister for having the guts to stand up and say to the nation, not just to Territorians, but to the whole Australian nation: ‘These things are not easy. If it was easy, you would have dealt with them, we would have dealt with them four years ago’. It is a hard struggle that we are all going to have to work to find a solution.
The holistic approach, the 20-year strategy that the Chief Minister has put up, is the only solution that we have to combating all these problems, not just the violence and abuse in remote Aboriginal communities, but the poor housing, the overcrowding, the infrastructure problems, the health, the education. You have heard every minister in this House say how much money the Northern Territory government is putting in extra to these services, unlike the previous government that just was out to destroy Aboriginal culture, Aboriginal law.
You still say that everything to do with violence and abuse is linked to our culture. Is your culture linked to the abuse and violence that you tolerate in this nation? No, it is not. I believe it is an absolute shame that we have to stand there and stereotype Aboriginal people to the extent that you have Aboriginal women - you have heard the member for Braitling say that as well, and you have heard the Chief Minister say that, how Aboriginal people feel and how they felt four weeks ago. They feel absolutely dirty, absolutely gutted by people who come into the Northern Territory just to get brownie points, so that they can go back to Canberra, and like the Chief Minister said, hold another summit.
We should not be talking and doing more talking about the problems that we already know. It is bad action and the Chief Minister has made this quite clear. I stand here proudly to commend to this House the statement by the Chief Minister, the Minister for Indigenous Affairs.
Ms LAWRIE (Family and Community Services): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister for her statement on Indigenous Affairs. It is, obviously, a timely statement given the national debate that has been going on for about the last month since the whirly whirly travelled through the town camps of Alice Springs.
I have wholehearted support for the Chief Minister’s 20-year plan, a national plan, as it is a national plan that is needed to raise the living conditions of indigenous Australians. We have heard many speakers from the government this evening talk about the range of issues that confront people living in disadvantage, and specifically indigenous Australians living in disadvantage. We know there are no quick fixes, no one magic solution to the myriad of issues that confront people in disadvantage and poverty in Australia.
Every minister in the Martin Labor government has carriage of indigenous issues right across their portfolios. The hallmark of the Martin government has been to work with communities from the ground up because imposing solutions from top down just does not work. That is the way of the past that has proven to fail people living in their community. Within both of my portfolio areas I wish to speak on tonight, I want to talk about the issues and the program and service delivery of Family and Community Services, but also the role that Sport and Recreation plays for many indigenous Territorians in enhancing their life.
First of all, Family and Community Services: we provide programs across the area of child protection, alcohol rehabilitation, addressing petrol sniffing, providing mental health services and addressing domestic violence. Sport and Recreation plays a very important role in the prevention of what is otherwise potentially disruptive behaviour.
Within the area of child protection, I point out our achievements to date but also outline the challenges that we continue to face. It is important in this debate to put things in context, to have a look at where we were when the Martin Labor government came to government in 2001. I will never forget reading the SNAIC - the national indigenous child organisation - authoritative report on the state of neglect and the provision of child protection services in the Territory, and feeling shocked to the core at the decades of neglect that has existed. When you come to government you have access to information, and some of the information is quite stark.
Child protection services were radically under-funded under CLP governments. In 2001, the child protection budget was less than $8m. There had been no additional staff hired in child protection for 10 years. For an entire decade, FACS was driven into the ground under the CLP. There was no specific after-hours service because, one would presume, the prevailing view of the policy makers from the CLP at the time was that child abuse just did not happen after 5 pm. There were no remote staff for the delivery of Family and Community Services and, importantly, child protection. Remote child abuse, in that context, had simply been swept under the carpet. What an abhorrent range of situations to encounter.
I acknowledge the work done by my predecessors in the portfolio, both the Minister for Health and Family and Community Services, the member for Nightcliff, followed by the member for Arafura in her role as Minister for Family and Community Services. Both of them actively went into reshaping policy and putting resources into these areas of significant neglect.
We know we cannot do much in changing people’s behaviour - the violence, the neglect, and providing the appropriate protection for children - if you just do not resource the workers in the field. Putting in the resources is exactly what the Martin Labor government has done. We have quadrupled the child protection budget, raising it from $7.8m to $31.6m today.
We have a young population but we are now spending more than twice as much per child under 17 on child protection than some other jurisdictions do. The 51 new child protection positions are working at the coalface in the in-take process and the investigation process of child protection. Also importantly, within our regional areas we have increased staff. Our remote strength is increasing. We have a whole range of workers dispersed right across the Territory working in conjunction with police. That was a huge challenge in the reforms that have happened within the FACS system to get the two agencies, the police and FACS, to come together and work together. They are both critical to the role of investigation within child abuse and within serious child neglect cases. I have the utmost respect for the police and the child protection workers who are at the coalface, who have had to learn a new set of skills, embrace a whole new way of working, and go into new areas of the Territory where, in the past, the shutters were up. The shutters were up under the CLP government.
I acknowledge the work done in raising the awareness of child abuse. We have heard in previous debates in the Assembly that there have been significant reports of notifications of child abuse. The Leader of the Opposition was very critical of that in Question Time today. She found it appalling that the government is acknowledging the increasing rates of notifications into our system as an outcome that we want. Why do we want increasing notifications? Because we know that there was a whole lot of under-reporting occurring in this area. The previous minister, the member for Arafura, took it upon herself in her role as minister to travel through the communities and deliver the message at the community level: ‘We will not and cannot tolerate violence towards our women and violence towards our children. We must provide safe communities for our women and our children’.
At that time, in 2003 and 2004, with the raft of work that the former minister was doing, was a DVD funded and created through Warlpiri Media called Shout It Out Loud which is about sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities. It has an extremely powerful message. It is indigenous people, women, children, with an indigenous minister responsible for the area at the time, sending the message directly to indigenous people saying: ‘We cannot tolerate sexual abuse’, and what is wrong with sexual abuse, and what to do if you are concerned about sexual abuse.
To the federal minister, we have been out there for years now in the Territory in communities, delivering this information in a way and a medium that is good for people to hear, through the BRACS system, to the frontlines, to the schools, and to the health clinics. The result of that is the significant increase in the notifications of child abuse. We have seen them go from 623 in 2000-01 doubling to 1219 in the 2004-05 financial year. When children are in danger, we are a government that acts. The number of Aboriginal children removed from a dangerous environment and taken into care during that time has also doubled – up from 100 children to 218 children over the same period. Despite these increases, we are clearly saying we want to do more to encourage people to speak out.
That is why you have heard members of parliament through this debate thank Dr Nanette Rogers and Dr Paul Bauert for speaking out about any concerns they have. We are not a government that says: ‘Do not mention it. We do not want to hear the bad news. We do not want to discuss the worst aspects of society’. We are a government that says: ‘Let us have that debate’. Let us have that public debate because every time someone is out there talking about child abuse in our community, hopefully it strengthens someone else to be prepared to provide evidence to the police or FACS. Hopefully, it strengthens someone in the community to report any suspicions they have. We are calling for the community to work with us in protecting our children and importantly, in the area of domestic violence, protecting our women as well.
Moving away from just a response perspective, the government also tries to be proactive and that is very much the tenor of the Chief Minister’s 20-year plan. On a local level, we are working with Charlie King who has been an advocate of safety for women and children, particularly indigenous women and children, for many years. He chairs the Family and Community Services Advisory Council that reports directly to me as minister. He has reported directly in the past to the member for Arafura. It has been a passion of Charlie King’s for many years to say: ‘Let us bring together the indigenous men, the leaders in our communities, and let them be a part of the solution. Let them be a part of standing up and saying we want to protect our women and protect our children. We do not accept violence’.
I am working with Charlie King, for him to host forums funded by the Territory government, through his role as Family and Community Services Advisory Council chair, in Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Nhulunbuy. We are aiming for forums in July, depending on venue availability across all those regional centres, where we directly invite indigenous men, community leaders, those working for organisations across a whole variety of roles in their communities to the forums.
I have struck an agreement with Charlie. I said: ‘Charlie, I do not just want it to be another talkfest. It is important that the discussion that occurs as indigenous men’s business occurs within the context of the reality that we are seeing within the reports within our system, and really provide them with information as well’. Charlie is quite happy with the proposal I put forward, where we are able to get our staff in first to talk about child protection, what the system is, what the notifications are, what they are seeing; get our sexual assault team in, talk about the sexual assault notifications they are seeing and the impact of that.
In talking to Willy Tilmouth in Alice Springs, he came up with another suggestion which we are putting into the forums - talking about the STIs and how they are occurring in communities, and notifications. Tangentyere had very good information from the Health department about STIs and he thought that was a very important part of the indigenous men’s forum. It will be putting in context to the men’s business discussions the serious concerns and issues that we have as a community; that we are certainly not shirking as a government in trying to change any tolerance that may exist anywhere towards the issue of violence against our children, and often in the those circumstances, it includes violence against the women.
Another proactive way that we are working is we have worked collaboratively with the Commonwealth government to put in place - some of it is just our funding in some areas and some of it is combined funding Territory and government in other regional areas - intensive family support services. The simplistic view of ‘a child is at risk therefore remove that child from that family’, is wrong. It is absolutely wrong to put a child through the trauma of being torn away from its mother, or mother and father when, in fact, it is not their mother and father who are putting them at risk; it is the extended environment in which they are living that puts them at risk. We are working with families in an intensive support program to build up the family’s capacity to better protect and care for their child, and watch and monitor that, and no way allow a situation where children are at risk, but accept that we need to work with families to turn the situation around.
The Police Commissioner today made an announcement about creating the task force. I know this has been months of detailed work between police and Family and Community Services. It is a very senior, well resourced, proactive, effective way of providing investigations into child abuse, but also proactively looking for trends within communities; creating the relationships at the community level - whether it is with the school, the health clinic worker, the community government council, whoever the relevant leaders in the community are - providing those networks and information so that if abuse does occur, or if an STI does occur, within a community we do not get the closed door syndrome, or the veil of secrecy. We have a good investigative team with the relationships, skills, and knowledge to get the information required to prosecute and to get a gaol sentence at the end of that prosecution. That is what we are doing, that is what we are resourcing, and that is what we are committed to do.
We have been proactive about the Magellan Project. FACS has signed up an agreement with the Family Court which provides better sharing of information between what FACS holds and what the Family Court system wants. Regarding the reforms that needed to occur in the FACS side of the agency, we found that in previous policy there was really a ‘shutters down’ syndrome where ‘do not provide the information’. The Magellan project was a project that the Family Court pursued. Under the member for Arafura, the agency was encouraged to negotiate and sign up to the Magellan Project, which means FACS, where appropriate, provides information to the Family Court when the Family Court is looking at orders around children. If there is information the Family Court needs to know to make an order about whom a child resides with, etcetera, the Magellan Project links up to provide that information.
It is an important part of the role that FACS plays in child protection within our system. We are working within Justice, in close concert with the federal justice system and the family law system, to try to improve the protections we have for our children in our community. We do not have the shutters down. We are actively working and collaborating with the federal government, through its range of different agencies, whether it is Attorney-General’s, courts, right across the spectrum, to provide information, to share information and to be able to get the best outcome for the children. I congratulate the FACS staff who worked very hard on signing us up to that Magellan Project.
There has been a lot of misinformation during the debate that I want to dispel. The member for Greatorex continues to try to underline that we do not investigate every report of child abuse. Let me say, on the Parliamentary Record, I have said it on radio, I have issued statements to the paper and I will say it in here today: yes, FACS investigates absolutely every notification. What happens is that an initial investigation will indicate the suspicion of abuse or not. If it is not substantiated, it is not registered as an investigation in the department’s annual report. If that initial investigation is substantiated, it then goes on to what is a full investigation and registered as an investigation within the statistics of the annual report. Often, those investigations are, quite naturally, quite appropriately, in conjunction with the police.
In the Northern Territory, every single report of child abuse becomes an official notification. This certainly is not the same in the other states, where reports are often filtered prior to becoming notifications. We take on every notification.
This fact, combined with our mandatory reporting of child abuse, does lead to a number of child reports that are not substantiated. I have been asked: ‘What does that mean?’ I said: ‘Well, the kid who falls off their bike, scrapes their head, their knee, has a bruise’. If you look at my 19-month-old son, he is a walking pin board of bruises on his forehead at the moment. He seems to navigate the lounge room furniture by using his head. Someone could see my child and notify me to FACS, and then what? That is going to be a full blown investigation? No, the most senior FACS workers do the intakes investigate at that initial investigation level. They say: ‘Yes, he is well cared for, 19 months old, keeps walking into furniture. No, it will not go on to a full investigation’. That is the level that does not go on to full investigation. I will say yet again to the member for Greatorex, because he does not seem to want to get it: every notification is investigated.
Protecting the identity of the child is not only the law, but it is something that, as minister, I will never compromise. I will never be drawn into debates and discussions about specific cases which may lead to the identification of a potential victim. This often makes it difficult in being unable to properly address false information or accusations, but I say that is a small price to pay to protect the children involved. By and large, most of the media in the Territory understand this and are cooperative. We have some southern-based journalists working for The Age who do not seem to get that.
In terms of alcohol, there has to be, as the Chief Minister has outlined, an overarching approach. We have the minister for Justice who is overseeing the new alcohol courts and antisocial behaviour, because we know …
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Acting Speaker, I move that the minister’s time be extended to allow her to finish her response pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: The minister for Police has further increased police funding to target the hot spots, and community patrols have been transformed to see the appointment of additional Aboriginal Community Police Officers with additional patrol vehicles. We have the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing overseeing the implementation of the Alcohol Framework, licensing issues and, importantly, alcohol management plans. The Minister for Local Government is overseeing the Community Harmony Strategy and the Town Camps Task Force.
As a government, we are taking the lid off the causes of the violence in our community. We are putting the resources into tackling the causes of violence in our communities, and we are not shirking it one iota. As Minister for Family Services, I oversee our rehabilitation treatment programs. We spend $10.7m in grants to non-government organisations to provide these critical programs. DASA, Bush Mob, Amity, Centrecare, FORWAARD, KARPU, and Salvation Army, are among the agencies where we provide funding directly to them to provide rehabilitation. You cannot operate without these rehabilitation programs if you want to get to the root cause of the violence in our communities.
Violence in some of our communities stems from petrol sniffing. We know that in the past it has been a serious scourge for many indigenous Territorians, and particularly in some of the Central Australian remote communities and some Top End communities. We were absolutely slammed by the CLP over our volatile substance abuse legislation. Again, I acknowledge the hard work, and tenacity, vision and strength of my predecessor, the member for Arafura, in pushing through the VSA legislation. People said it would not work: ‘No, it is not going to work’. Well, let me say here - and I will bring further information and further debates to the Assembly - it is working on the ground. People are saying that in hard-core petrol sniffing communities like Papunya and Mutitjulu, the VSA legislation is working.
I have signed off on compulsory treatment orders of adults. We have a whole raft of people coming in for voluntary petrol sniffing rehab treatment. We have police tipping out petrol. In some of the worst communities, reports are coming through that it is almost completely gone - an amazing turnaround through action of the Martin Labor government. We have put $10m extra into our system to tackle the rehab requirements of petrol sniffing. We have urged the Commonwealth at every stage to continue its roll-out of Opal, the non-sniffable fuel. It is critically important to the success of the work we are doing to stamp out the destructive, violent scourge of petrol sniffing in our communities.
A big factor in our communities, and a need in our indigenous communities, is the issue of mental health services. We will stand by our record. We have doubled the budget from $13.5m under the CLP to $32m now. We did this in the context of the Commonwealth cutting services to our remote positions. The Commonwealth had funded areas under its normal trick of ‘let us fund something for a while’ and then pulled the funding out of it. They like to do that regularly. You are lucky if you get more than three years’ worth of funding out of the Commonwealth. They gave some funding for remote Aboriginal mental health workers across some communities for three years and then stopped it. It did not matter whether it was an important program. It did not matter that those positions were fundamental in the work they were doing to save lives in their communities. They ripped the funding out of it while the Territory government put the funding back in. We increased the funding to the Top End of Indigenous General Practice which runs the Aboriginal mental health worker program. I acknowledge the work being done on the ground by those Aboriginal mental health workers to help deal with the issues of family violence and supporting people who have a range of mental illnesses to be able to live within their communities in a peaceful way.
Domestic and family violence is an area that has just recently come over to my agency. I will touch on an area briefly that requires a greater deal of time, but I am running out of time. The key services we provide and fund include: women’s shelters in all major centres, and youth and family crisis accommodation services in Darwin, Katherine and Alice Springs - these are SAAP-funded services; domestic violence counselling services in all of the main Territory towns that are again SAAP-funded - Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy; we are funding domestic violence community trainers in Darwin and Alice Springs; FACS community workers are now based in Numbulwar, Maningrida, Galiwinku, Tiwi Health; and safe houses have been put in place in Ali Curung and Borroloola. These are all Martin Labor government initiatives to tackle domestic violence.
The Strong Family program that has recently been transferred across from the Department of the Chief Minister to my agency includes a team which goes out to support people in remote communities to be strong family support workers working with families in their own region who are identified as being at risk of family violence.
The Strong Family, Strong Community, Strong Future program is indigenous-designed, led and staffed. It is training family support workers in the remote Tiwi Islands, Katherine East and Alice Springs West communities; this is an NT government funded program. A new Certificate III course in Remote Family Violence Prevention and Early Intervention was developed by Strong Family staff in collaboration with Charles Darwin University. The first 15 students from the Tiwi Islands and the Katherine region will graduate later this year.
The Supported Accommodation Assistance Program, otherwise known as SAAP, is the primary funding source for our women’s refuge and crisis accommodation. We have negotiated a new SAAP agreement with the Commonwealth government despite the Commonwealth wanting to reduce funding - which they did; they changed the ratios and dropped it down to 50:50. The Territory government responded by putting more funding into that SAAP agreement. Aboriginal women receive 71% of the support provided to women under these SAAP services. Aboriginal women come in to our urban services from remote areas for residential domestic violence support.
In regard to the Territory government working with the Australian government to co-fund a range of initiatives to break the cycle of violence, we have a whole raft of them that are about to get up and running. I want to name them; these are new initiatives. This is work that was being done, negotiated and put in place before Mal Brough came on his white charger, Mr Whirly Whirly, and said: ‘I have the solution. It is law and order’, and then said: ‘Oh no, the next solution is the courts’ and ‘Oh no, the next solution is get kids to school’.
These are programs that are identified to work:
an integrated family violence service in the Katherine and Borroloola regions with police and FACS and community partners called, ‘Peace At Home’, a program for family violence offenders now being rolled out to 12 remote communities;
development and support of eight remote community patrols focused on preventing local violence;
interventions for children exposed to family violence, school-based counselling and anti-violence education for 12 to 15-year-olds;
piloting a method to monitor and respond to changing levels of violence in remote communities; and
enhanced accommodation for unaccompanied minors and families fleeing violence to Alice Springs.
I will briefly touch on sport and recreation in the time that is left. Sport plays an important preventative role in our indigenous communities. It is often described as the social fabric of our indigenous communities. We know there is a vast talent amongst indigenous Territorians when it comes to sport. Like all Territorians, indigenous Territorians love their sport. In the communities it is often the centre of the social activity. We have had our elite sports people who are an inspiration - Maurice Rioli, Michael Long, and Daryl White; there are just far too many to name. In women’s sport, Nova Peris is an Olympic gold medallist. We also know that at the grassroots level it is important that our kids get out there and play the games, our teenagers, and our adults.
We have seen how a playing field can transform a community. I went to Angurugu on Groote Eylandt not long after they had finished, through their petrol sniffing rehab program, reforming and transforming their football oval, and it is the centrepiece of the community. They were very proud of the work they had done. That project had got those young men off petrol sniffing and turned them around to the point where, when the community wanted to sort out a bit of a blue between opposing families, they respectfully asked if they could go onto the oval to have a bit of a blue to sort out the issues. The former petrol sniffer said: ‘Yes, but you are not allowed to take any weapons because you are not going to damage our oval’. They ended up having a bit of a fisticuffs there to sort out the issues between the two rival families in a far less violent situation - all because they had a decent oval.
It is important that we look at improving our indigenous sports programs right across the regional and remote parts of the Territory. I am passionate about it and I have been working on it ever since I became Sports minister. I am meeting with the federal minister for sport, minister Kemp, on Friday to talk specifically about a sport indigenous agreement underneath the overarching indigenous agreement. Progress has been made and is being made. It will not be solved tomorrow. The range of issues confronting disadvantaged Territorians will not be solved overnight, it has been generational.
I congratulate the Chief Minister for her 20-year plan; it will take at least 20 years of a concerted plan. We have had all the studies. We know what needs to happen. We want the action. We do not want the rhetoric, the blame game anymore.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for bringing this statement to the House. I started to write some notes last night and this morning, and reached the point where I am not sure that was getting me anywhere. This particular issue has been raised in parliament many times. In fact, my first speech in parliament, excluding my opening address as to why I was here, was about the Stolen Generation.
When I first came to the Northern Territory I went to the Aboriginal community that was then called Daly River Mission. I am married to an Aboriginal person, Imelda, of the Wadjigan tribe. I sometimes feel uncomfortable talking about these issues. I would hate to be seen as paternalistic for putting forward some concepts that I believe are important in this issue. I prefer to speak as if we were speaking about anybody who was disadvantaged. I may be able to put it in this context. I have never been a fan of Austudy and Abstudy. I have been a fan of providing assistance for people in need, regardless of colour. If that is mainly Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, then they should get that assistance. I have been brought up in the belief - from the way my mother and father brought me up and from my religious background - that we should care for one another. The basic precept of being Christian is to love your neighbour. The hard part is to love your enemy. At times there is not enough of that in this House.
I have heard many discussions, and much of it is filtered or mixed with politics. The minister for Employment once said to me: ‘Gerry, you have to understand this place is about politics’. That is true, but there are times when I do not believe that always advances the cause of such a serious subject as we are discussing tonight. There have been some unkind things said at times in the last day or two between people on both sides, which I do not think achieves anything. If we are to reconcile the problems we have in Australia with some of the issues we have with the original people who lived here, then we have to reconcile our own differences. If we cannot do it in this House on an issue like this, how can we expect our indigenous people to do the same thing? There are some matters which go beyond politics. That does not mean I am here to criticise the government about its policies. However, I do so believing that I have an alternative opinion on these matters which I believe would be of some benefit.
We all have a responsibility to work towards a solution. The Commonwealth government, the Northern Territory government, Aboriginal people, and non-Aboriginal people all have a role to play in trying to advance the wellbeing of our most disadvantaged people in Australia. I hope something positive comes out of this debate today, because there have been many accusations. For instance, ‘if we have a summit it will be another talkfest’ - and that is probably a reasonable assumption. I hope it does not happen. However, even from the government’s point of view – and, again, take this as a positive criticism - the government had a framework for partnership with indigenous Territorians in 2001. It talked about the establishment of a high level task force to address critical and immediate issues. It talked about the overarching agreement on indigenous affairs between the Commonwealth of Australia 2005. It has had an agenda for action. Recently, the minister said we are going to have a 20-year plan. There has been a lot of effort.
I sometimes think Aboriginal people become the point of experimentation - we have all these theories. I will say something tonight that I feel is based on experience. That experience relates to my experience of working directly with Aboriginal people. I have at least worked on the ground, doing the hard yakka. I worked in an Aboriginal community at Daly River in the garden - I can tell you, working in the garden in October, in Daly River, in the middle of the day is not a pleasant thing; it is hard yakka. Planting sweet potatoes by hand at Bathurst Island and picking bananas is not easy work. It is work I enjoy. I worked with Aboriginal people, so I not only come from that experience, I have seen the downsides and I have seen the good sides.
When I first went to Daly River, I saw alcohol, and things have not changed much. I was 19, arrived out of middle-class Melbourne, turned up at Daly River and saw drunk men taking part in corroborees. They were not taking place for good, traditional reasons. They were taking place because people were drunk. I saw a woman lying on the ground with her husband standing over her with a steel bar. That impression has always stayed in my mind. I have seen a woman outside the church with blood covering one half of her body. When you are 19 or 20, that is a rude shock if you are from middle-class Melbourne.
I have also seen the good side. My wife comes from Daly River. I looked after the dormitory at Daly River. I had great times looking after kids. I used to show movies twice a week. We had a pile of great movies. We had the westerns and the romances. When the westerns were on, all the Aboriginal people stayed and watched. When a romance was on, all you had was the nuns! We had a good time. We had boxing matches. We went out on the weekend. They are memories that I treasure. It was the same at Bathurst Island. I suppose the sad thing about the Daly River is that many of those boys have died, and I have mentioned that before. There were wonderful people at Bathurst Island. I would have liked to have stayed there for a lot longer but there were two reasons why I left. One is that I felt that most men at Bathurst Island drank and, as I had three daughters, I felt they needed an opportunity to see the world outside of Bathurst Island and to give them a chance to meet people who perhaps did not drink. Not that I have anything against Bathurst Island people; they are lovely people, but I had to give my children opportunities elsewhere. That is just some of the background from where I come. I do not want to be seen as preaching. I see them as suggestions and I hope they are taken in that way.
The Chief Minister has said we need to start off with five foundational issues, and she has raised them: community safety; responsible management of alcohol; housing; sound governance; and welfare reform. I would say that the one area that she is missing – although it could be said to be part of welfare reform – is employment. There is no doubt - it has been said here many times - that we have a whole range of issues that you could possibly say totalled up to some of the problems we have in Aboriginal communities. We have overcrowding in housing, lack of education, alcohol and, I believe, unemployment. It is no good sending kids to school if they cannot get a job. What is the point? I used to say: ‘Why do you want to have 20 welders at Bathurst Island if you have no work?’ I do not have an answer for that yet. It is just one of these difficult problems we have to work through. What I say is: at least have some work. It may not be the most skilled work in the world.
I have just been reading a little about the New Deal in the United States during the Depression. It had a range of measures about helping the economy during the Depression, but one of them was to create jobs. They created jobs also for black people at that time. They were segregated, but the president, Theodore Roosevelt, made sure there was money put aside for jobs. It seems to me, in a country so rich – we have a budget surplus of billions of dollars - we cannot afford to create jobs on Aboriginal communities.
I know people say I want to get rid of the CDEP. It is not for the sake of getting rid of CDEP. To me, it is merely putting people down and saying ‘I work for the dole’. No, I do not; I work for the community. I work; it is a job - not a work-for-the dole job. I work because the government says we will provide you enough work on your community to give you work at a proper pay that is not that low it is easier to sit down and get social security. No, it says we will provide jobs for all the people in these communities. To put it in context, I am not saying that should justify Aboriginal communities, but many of our Aboriginal communities are small and it is easy to apply. That is exactly what should happen in many of our country towns which are losing their populations throughout Australia. Maybe it should happen in places like Darwin, and have programs like people putting an adventure trail down the old railway line - all sorts of things.
We do not seem to put our mind to saying we should have a government that provides enough funds to give people work. If you supply people with work you give them dignity. You supply people with work they enjoy it. All right, sometimes it is hot and sometimes it is terrible, but I have said before, many Aboriginal people when they work together are doing something that is social as well as work. That is what we forget. I always quote the fact that we used to have on the Nguiu Shire Council two old people who went out with a tractor and a trailer and collected firewood for the pensioners. They did not get the biggest pile of firewood you would ever see but they went out and worked. They enjoyed one another’s company, they rolled a cigarette, they sharpened up the old chainsaw blade and came back with the firewood for the pensioners in that community. They were doing something.
Look at housing, for instance. Mal Brough has spoken about many of the houses being vandalised, etcetera. Why are we not paying people full-time wages to fix them up? I am not saying they should be vandalised but the fact is that we have a shortage of housing – there is employment.
Which also brings me to another question about housing - and I know the minister is going to be talking about it tomorrow. Why is it costing so much for housing? Why can’t we build kit homes? At Bathurst Island we used to have kit homes that came to the island from Queensland. In this case, Aboriginal people with a non-Aboriginal supervisor used to erect those houses. The minister today made a statement about housing at Groote Eylandt. He said 12 units and nine houses cost $11.72m. That means one of those houses cost $588 000. That is an absolute disgrace. I know they are for police and a few other people but are we really going to overcome the housing issues when we have to pay $0.5m each for a house? Get the Country Life or the Land magazine and have a look at what kit homes cost. I have rung one of the kit home companies in Brisbane and they said: ‘Yes, we supply them for cyclone areas’. You will see them in there for $20 000, $30 000, $40 000 and, yet, we are putting up houses for $588 000.
Mr Stirling: It is being looked at, let me assure you.
Mr WOOD: Okay, but I am putting it as a suggestion that it really needs some good thought. I am interested in what the minister has to say tomorrow about that.
Governance is another area. I sometimes think it is unfortunately the case that a lot of theorists have come in and said: ‘Councils are in disarray, they are falling apart’. There have been real problems with councils, not from the council’s point of view but from whoever decided that they could take on functions which are not council functions. You have councils which took on the post office, the bank, whatever else. They took on stacks of things that Litchfield Shire and the Darwin City Council does not take on, but we made Aboriginal councils take on functions that were not their role.
We have also confused local government governance with traditional governance. Traditional governance is about the management of the land that the people own. Local governance is about a democratic system of government which provides services to the community. It is not a traditional thing; it is a human rights thing that, as a council, we will provide a rubbish service, we will put in a road, we will clean up the litter, etcetera. They are not traditional matters. They require a different form of governance. What we are trying to do in some cases is a mish-mash of the two. I am not saying there cannot be some hybridising of the two, but we must be careful that when it comes to local government, we retain an element of democratic democracy; that is, people who are on the councils are elected fairly to provide services. How you do local governance is another issue.
We have muddled the two and we have given councils far too much of what they should not be doing. If the department of Health decided to hand over health to the Litchfield Shire there would be a hue and cry: ‘That is the department of Health’s job’. You want to create a health clinic; you fund it. You want to open a post office, Australia Post; you fund it. Do not go putting people on CDEP. Do not ask the councils to do it. Do it properly as if it was any other town. Maybe you want to combine Australia Post with the bank. That is fair enough, but both of you provide the funds. Do not ask the council to do it. That is one of the fundamentals we have got away from. We have blamed councils for being dysfunctional. I would be dysfunctional if we did not have enough money.
The government did cut back on operational funding for local government. I remember reading the lists and the previous minister for Local Government did say: ‘We are going to do a little boost up again’. But they were struggling for money. Even if a council is small, it does not have to mean it is dysfunctional if it gets adequate funds to operate.
We should encourage that. If you can get the grassroots of democracy in a small council, then you have a better chance. We have also wasted lots of money. As much as I love Bathurst Island and the Tiwi Islands, I would love to know how much money has gone into that regional council. It is a council that does not even elect directly its representatives; it elects a management board, something I have been on about for many years. We have given the Tiwis a form of democracy which is less than you would expect in Litchfield or Darwin. In Darwin, you elect your representative directly. We have given the Tiwi Islands a system which says: ‘We will elect the management board, and they can elect the councillors’. Why have we done that? We would not do it to anyone else but we have done it there. That is bad. We have spent a fortune on that particular governance at Bathurst Island. Have we really achieved anything? I do not think so. We have to be a bit careful making statements that local government is dysfunctional if we have set up them up to fail.
I agree with the member for Arafura about education; we should encourage the withdrawal of social security to increase school attendance. My daughter works in the Department of Education, Science and Training, and I should say if we are talking about positives, she is now an AO5 in the Department of Education, Science and Training in Perth, one of the highest positions you can get in that department. She was in Kununurra for many years. She saw what happened with Halls Creek. She said it was a great improvement. Unfortunately, some lawyers came in and said: ‘That is discrimination. You are only picking on the Aboriginal people’. But attendance in Halls Creek went through the roof. I think it should apply right across Australia. The member for Macdonnell said you apply these things to other people. I am saying you should apply it to everyone.
You also mentioned education achievement and the increase in literacy. I still am concerned that we are not really looking at the facts. I have the annual reports for the Department of Education from last year and the year before. In 2003-04, 20% of Year 5 indigenous students achieved that numeracy benchmark. It dropped to 16% last year. There was an increase in Year 3 for achieving the national reading benchmark - it was 9%. These are figures which you have to get out of this report; not out of the budget. It was 9% in 2003-04. It went to 20%, which is an improvement. That still means one in five indigenous children are not reaching national benchmarks. There are plenty of reasons for that. We need to work hard on that. If we are pushing for employment, you cannot do it unless your children are educated. If their standards are low at that stage, it is going to take a big effort to get them up to secondary education ...
Mrs MILLER: Mr Acting Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member for Nelson to complete his remarks, in accordance with Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: I will be as quick as I can.
I know the government has an Alcohol Framework. It has been a bit slow in getting some of those recommendations out. I know the minister has been talking about these problems. I would like to say one thing - and again, I agree with the member for Macdonnell. Yes, alcohol is a major problem in Aboriginal communities. However, I also attend cricket, footy and other functions in my community and non-indigenous people drink an awful lot of alcohol - far more than they might say. Many of our clubs depend on alcohol sales to exist. If we were to attack that, you could imagine the hue and cry. They would say: ‘That is our responsibility’. When Senator Scullion said he might support the idea of a pub card, I heard a person say: ‘We have a right to drink’. That is the difficulty governments would have in trying to restrict alcohol. There would be talks about prohibition, etcetera. We have binge drinking. There was a party at Howard River Park with hundreds of kids throwing stones at the police and the ambulance. They were all drunk - well, not all of them, but quite a few of them were well and truly drunk. There is that sort of attitude. I have said before some of the advertising we have is aimed at young people. Yes, there are major problems with alcohol with Aboriginal people but I see that as a reflection of our own society. It is not an easy one to overcome.
The member for Karama talked about sport. I thought I would try to put some positives in here. We had the Litchfield Gift recently - $2000 first prize. Guess who won it? Daniel Tedcastle. No, I did not win it. I came third in the Masters, sorry. He is a 15-year-old Aboriginal. His father is Bob Tedcastle, somebody I have known for years who works for Murin Air Services. His mother is Anne Sam. I used to look after her brother when I was first married. He used to have a hole in the heart. They come from Emu Point. Fifteen years old, he has been running one year and he wins the Litchfield Gift - a great achievement. There are plenty of other people. We could do the more famous people such as Richard Tambling, and all those sorts of people. They are great role models. We should be very careful when we are discussing these issues that we do not dwell on everything that is bad, because that is not good.
People say they felt depressed because Mal Brough said something that upset them. I do not agree with everything Mal Brough said, but it did at least kick us into life; we are having this debate today. The Chief Minister has brought out a 20-year plan. You may not always agree with what people say, but at least he came out and said some things. Perhaps we needed a kick in the rear end to get these things out in the open again.
There has been all this talk about the summit. I know some people say: ‘The Chief Minister is the right person to go to the summit’. I do not have a problem with that. I made the comment that I would like to see Aboriginal representatives - especially women Aboriginal representatives. When I said that, we were talking about sexual abuse. I said that as I felt that the Aboriginal members of this parliament - whom I am proud of, even though I might not agree with everything they say. This is one of the great things in the Northern Territory that we have Aboriginal people here, and especially the Aboriginal women. However, we should show them off. I say to the Chief Minister: please go to the summit and take these three Aboriginal women. You can take the member for Barkly – he is a good fellow too. The reason I am saying that is because, with all the negatives that have been occurring, you have three fine people here - whom many Australians would not even know – you could use to say: ‘Look at what these people have achieved’. It is not all about doom and gloom.
People do achieve. It is not all about football stars; it is about people who have taken an active part in public life, and they are Aboriginal people. It would be good, Chief Minister, to take these people to the summit and show people that the Northern Territory is mature enough; there are Aboriginal people here who take their equal part in our society. That is great. As I said, I might not agree with everything you good people say. That is irrelevant. You are representing your constituents, or your party, and that is your right. However, we should tell the rest of the world that you do exist. I ask the Chief Minister whether she would rethink the summit, even from the point of view of telling the rest of Australia that we have good things going for us.
The other issue that concerns me is the number of people in prison. You can read in the paper that there are more and more people being arrested at Wadeye, who are part of the gangs, and that means more and more people in gaol. I have said a number of times that we have to look at the alternatives. I am not saying that people should not go to prison for doing the wrong thing. I have mentioned work camps a number of times and I have got nowhere. I say it again: why can’t some of these Aboriginal kids go to work camps, run by the department of Correctional Services, on a pastoral property? I cannot see any point in putting these kids in gaol. They will end up being gangs in gaol and they will go back saying: ‘We were at Berrimah’, or ‘We were at Alice Springs’.
We have try other ways to be more proactive in ensuring these kids get some skills, they are separated so they cannot have this gang mentality. Port Keats has always had a bit of a reputation for using the gaol as a right of passage. I do not believe that is what we should be trying to promote. I hope the government looks at alternatives. Yes, these people who have caused violence in the community should be given some punishment, but let us make it, hopefully, the last time that this sort of punishment happens.
In the short time I have had here, you may have heard me say these things before. I believe we need action. You cannot have people doing nothing. Boredom is part of the reason we have vandalism. We need full-time employment. If people do not want to work, that is their right, but if the government offers full employment to the community, then that should be taken up. There will be people who cannot work and they can get social security like everyone else. If we are to change some of these communities, give people a chance, I do not mind if some of this money is used to start tourist enterprises. So what? You are not going to complete with anyone out there. You are going to create an economy in that part of the world.
We have to make some real changes. We need cheaper, more affordable housing and full employment. We need to continually try to get people to school, and one way is to look at the social security payments. We need a goal and, in the end, we need reconciliation. I will say it again. It is nice to say we will move people out to their country from Wadeye. That is fine. But what we forget is that, one of the theories for the reasons the mission existed at Wadeye - even though people say it is the cause of the problem by bringing people together - was that they were fighting and it would bring them together and, hopefully, pacify them. One can say that all it did was make the problem worse. I do not know; you can argue that case.
In the end, if Aboriginal people say to non-Aboriginal people like me that we must be part of the reconciliation process, they cannot say that if they cannot reconcile some of the differences that they have between yourselves. That is not to say we do not continue that process, but Aboriginal people have to live together eventually. You cannot have communities that are always fighting with one another. That will never advance those communities. That will be a hard road, especially if it is thousands of years that there has been this dispute amongst people.
Surely, no matter where you are in the world, you must look for peace, whether it is with our neighbours, families, or other people. Whilst that might sound like rhetoric, I still believe it is important because all we have been talking about is the concrete things, the housing the employment, law and order, etcetera. However, we also have to change people. That is something we should strive for. We need to put the means to people to get together to overcome and to try to work through those issues. In the end it has to come from somewhere deep inside that they will change, just like alcohol. To assist people, they are going to have to work through some of those issues themselves.
I hope that my contribution is of some benefit to members here today. I enjoyed listening to our Aboriginal members. That is not to say that other contributions were not good but, yes, it is nice to get another point of view, to take the politics out. Behind that politics are some really good ideas that everyone should listen to.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Speaker, the issues that have been highlighted so dramatically in the media of late are truly distressing and are of serious concern to every Australian. We are all only too well aware of the complexity of the issue of indigenous affairs and that there is no short-term fix. That is very obvious to all of us. The frustrations that have been experienced by both indigenous and non-indigenous people over many years has taken up countless hours of meetings, consultations, plenty of quick fixes, not to mention millions of words spoken with all the best intentions. It is all too obvious that not a great deal has been achieved over all.
A few weeks ago, when federal minister Mal Brough dared to speak out about how appalled he was at what he saw, and realising that the issues were so complex that there needed to be a whole-of-government, whole-of-community approach, he called a summit to get all indigenous affairs ministers together to collectively discuss a national approach. I applaud him for doing that. It may be considered as another talkfest but he is new in his position and he was sincerely moved by what he saw.
I would have thought that our Minister for Indigenous Affairs, the Chief Minister, would go to that summit and that she would also - I support what the member for Nelson has just said - take along the indigenous elected representatives of this Assembly. That would really show very clearly to the federal minister how successful the indigenous members are within the Territory.
As far as I am concerned, there should be no stone unturned in a bipartisan approach to addressing indigenous issues that will take several generations to turn around. This side of the Assembly is very sincere when saying we will work with all levels of government to ensure that the appalling state in which some of our communities exist has to change. There is dispute as to whether the most important issue to deal with in dysfunctional communities is housing, law and order, education, or which one of those should be tackled first. I do not think it is reasonable to argue which is the most in need; all of them are integral to the satisfactory functioning of a community. I do know from what I witnessed recently when I visited Wadeye with the Select Committee on Substance Abuse that, without law and order, there was total destruction of many houses in that community. Without high levels of law and order there was wholesale destruction of valuable housing.
On the other hand, I also witnessed, along with the other members of the committee, the deep sadness of the women we interviewed. This sadness was quite heart wrenching when we listened to how these women have to live, how many people live in each of their houses - and in some instances I am talking about a three-room house in which there were 20 - and the fear that they feel. The four of them said they feel it all the time. It was really was quite heartbreaking and there was not one of us listening who was not deeply moved. I do not know how these women get through each day.
In the argument of which is the more important of those two - law and order or housing - I have to say that I believe law and order has to come first. What is the point of building much needed houses which are very expensive in these communities to have them trashed? It is a fact that they do get trashed. It is not acceptable. I suggest that the federal minister’s statement that law and order be established first in these communities is not an unreasonable statement at all.
I have made some very brief comments on what we saw at Wadeye which was very confronting and very complex to deal with. It is heartening to hear good stories about how some other indigenous communities are working successfully. That was what we experienced when the same committee visited Groote Eylandt. It was heartening to listen to what can be achieved when everyone works together.
The alcohol permit system, which took them several years and several drafts to get agreement on after extensive community consultation, has been working very successfully for 12 months. Everyone on the island knows what the rules are and the permit system applies to everyone, visitors alike, without any prejudice. It is probably easier to implement this permit system on the island than it is on mainland areas because the boundaries are the ocean. I believe that with a few minor adjustments to suit that a permit system for alcohol could be implemented in the regional areas where there are so many problems caused by alcohol abuse across the Territory.
One of the communities in my electorate that has been working well for a long period of time, for over 16 years, is Binjari. The Binjari community is about 10 minutes out of Katherine on the Victoria Highway. There are between 200 and 300 people living in that community. It has two housing sections. The bottom section, which is the oldest section, is made of up 12 dwellings in which families live without running water or power. There are also three ablution blocks that service those 12 dwellings, a store, a health clinic, a council facility, a preschool, a family support building, and a workshop. The top section is the newer area which has 22 homes and a community shed, and they look in very good condition.
I support what the member for Nelson said regarding too much responsibility being put on these communities to try to provide services in the community as well as looking after the community itself. This has actually shown up in Binjari. The community had a community bus, a Night Patrol, and were governed by a community government council. Funding was always tight but managed reasonably well until this past 12 months or so when the community struggled to keep afloat. Just recently, they were advised that their future funding had been stopped. To clear their debts they sold their coaster bus that they used to go into Katherine. They sold their Night Patrol vehicle along with four other community vehicles. The financial debt was cleared but that has left this good community without those important facilities. Unfortunately, the community is slipping backwards at a fast rate of knots.
The Department of Local Government and the Katherine Town Council are looking at a proposal at this moment for the services at Binjari. The proposal is that Katherine Town Council takes over responsibility for those services in the Binjari community. Ongoing discussions have taken place with all parties during last week. I attended a meeting with Katherine Town Council representatives, Department of Local Government, and Binjari community members in their community shed. I believe it will be better for their community for their services to be provided by Katherine Town Council and to just let them concentrate on their cultural affairs. They need ongoing reassurance to this change and all parties are happy to do that. However, the community has taken a step backwards in some of the most important areas and that is where, if this government is really serious about addressing indigenous issues and has acknowledged that each community has its own special needs, then you have an obligation to assist the good people at Binjarri before their community falls into social disarray.
Before they sold their Night Patrol vehicle, it used to sit out on the side of the road with two or three members of the community manning that patrol and absolutely nobody got past them. Everybody’s car was checked – including mine when I went out there to visit one night. Now there is no community patrol and they are already having problems with alcohol going into that community and it is of great concern to members of the community. The community government members I have spoken with are very upset that the community is falling into disarray.
It is a huge step backwards. Additional problems are the number of children not going to school, the uncertainty of the community’s future, and the loss of jobs for those people who were employed by the community government council - a huge loss of self-esteem. All of these important functions need to be reinstated to sustain a community that has worked well and has strong leaders in it. It is important not to let that community slip backwards. Whilst we talk about the huge challenges that lie ahead for so many communities across the Territory and throughout Australia, show some support for communities that really care about their future like Binjari.
Much has been said by government members about how little was done by the previous CLP government to address housing in remote communities. It makes me smile to listen to some of those who are just spouting the Labor rhetoric. For five years when I first arrived in Katherine, I was working for a construction and maintenance company which had the contract for repairs and maintenance for all communities in the Katherine region. It was a huge eye opener for me to see the enormous amounts of money continually being put into communities over and over again and, in most instances, to repair the same houses over and over again. There could probably be an argument that the houses should have been built differently, or that the brick building designs were not suitable - whatever. The point is that there were enormous amounts of money put into those communities over and over again. I find it damned annoying to listen to the rhetoric from this government.
I might add I am very pleased to have looked at your 20-year vision that we will talk about tomorrow, which highlights the number of buildings that were built by the CLP government in indigenous communities compared to what is being built now. I am sick of the rhetoric.
A member: Good on you!
Mrs MILLER: According to them, the Northern Territory did not exist until Labor came into power - well, you are wrong. I will address some of those facts tomorrow when we reply to that.
While on the subject of housing, when my husband and I had Red Gum Tourist Park in Katherine for 10 years, we were located next to the cluster of Housing Commission units in Bernard Street, Katherine, which housed, in the majority, indigenous families. I cannot begin to imagine what the cost of maintaining those units was over the years. They were in a constant state of rotating tenancies. Following the 1998 Katherine floods they were completely renovated. I can assure you that several of them were trashed within months and needed to be completely refitted again. I did go and look at them so I know that I am stating fact. It is very pleasing to see those units have had extensive renovations done once again. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the opening of these newly-renovated units, but I congratulate the minister for the extensive redevelopment of this area. I sincerely hope and pray that this time they will be maintained appropriately by everyone who lives there.
On the subject of indigenous tourism, there have been two success stories that have stood out over the years and they are Anangu Tours in Central Australia and Manyallaluk in the Katherine region. These indigenous tourism ventures were very successful in achieving recognition - firstly at the annual Northern Territory Brolga Awards, and following on with the National Tourism Awards. When a tourism venture wins three National Tourism Awards, they are inducted into the National Tourism Hall of Fame. It is with great pride that Anangu Tours and Manyallaluk are in the National Tourism Hall of Fame. They have led the way and shown that indigenous tourism can achieve great success.
I listened to the Chief Minister’s report this morning, and wish the new indigenous ventures well, and hope that they can achieve great success. Indigenous tourism plays a very important part in attracting tourists to the Northern Territory. As I said this morning, the failure of some indigenous tourism ventures in the past has been due to the inconsistency of provision of the ventures as advertised and marketed. These operators in indigenous tourism need plenty of support and encouragement and, in some instances, mentoring from the tourism industry to help them establish themselves.
Nitmiluk Tours at Nitmiluk Gorge, Katherine, is another great success story for indigenous tourism, working in partnership with TravelNorth for 10 years, and now working in cooperation with the Voyages chain. Nitmiluk employs many indigenous rangers and continues to offer more opportunities all the time.
Another area of indigenous affairs that I have talked consistently about in the time I have been in this Assembly is the work that Sheila Miller does through her healing centre at Dalinya. Sheila has the expertise to rehabilitate indigenous people from alcohol abuse and has great success. Both Sheila and I find it very frustrating that, despite the knowledge and skills that Sheila has to help so many of her people, she is ignored by this government - for what reasons, I do not know or understand. It really makes me question this government’s motives. What is it about Sheila and the work that she does that makes you ignore her? I would have thought you would have welcomed a skilled, indigenous alcohol counsellor who can help so many of her people. What is the issue here? Sheila would like to know. Obviously the Katherine Branch of the Labor Party thinks she is onto a good thing - they have been trying to get her to join the Labor Party in Katherine for some time. Didn’t you know that, Rob? Is that the catch? She has to be a member of the Labor Party before she gets any help.
Mr Acting Speaker, the word ‘complex’ has been used over and over in talking about the problems in indigenous affairs, and there is no doubt about it; it is. As I said earlier, it will take generations and billions of dollars to make a real difference. It will not be until all the politics is taken out of the issue and everyone is totally committed to moving forward that there will begin to be positive inroads for the future. We on this side of the House are committed to working in a bipartisan relationship with all members of government to that end.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Acting Speaker, I welcome the statement from the Chief Minister. I believe it is high time we had a long debate about this topic for everybody in the Northern Territory to try to move forward. I could not help being cynical though. Had it not been for Question Time yesterday, had it not been for the censure motion against the Chief Minister, I wonder whether we would have had this statement at all.
I have been here a long time, I know how politics work, and I bet the typewriters were running hot upstairs yesterday to get this statement out. When you compare what the Chief Minister had to say on her feet yesterday against this statement that she has today, somebody upstairs has been engineering the words, putting it all together, to try to get some semblance of order of her quite woolly thinking yesterday.
Ms Lawrie: You are wrong. You lost that bet.
Dr LIM: Let me start with, apart from … Methinks they protest too much.
Let me start, after having that little swipe, to be as conciliatory as possible. I do not know whether anybody has read this paper produced by the Menzies School of Health Research by Bob Beadman titled Do Indigenous Youth Have a Dream. I have been carrying this with me for many weeks. It was written in 2003. I know Bob Beadman very well. He worked with me and supported me when I was the Minister for Housing and Local Government. I have tremendous respect for this man. I do not propose to quote any part of this document because I will be doing it out of context which would be doing a dishonour to this man whom I greatly respect. Suffice that I use one sentence from that report - his last line - where he says: ‘We must fix things for the kids’. That is where it is at. We must fix things for the kids. If we do not, we will be forever debating this issue and continuing in this hopeless, conflicting path that we have for many years.
The statement contains many good motherhood statements that I cannot object to. This is what we all aspire to. But, for goodness sake, Chief Minister, have some substance in it, otherwise it just does not go any further. It is just a lot of smoke and mirrors, a lot of fancy light shows but, at the end of the day, we get no further. I believe it is important that you put your hand out and try to be conciliatory with the federal government and the federal minister. That is a good first step. I hope we can continue to progress this. I will come back to your statement in a minute. I want to comment on a few points that some of the ministers have made earlier today.
The member for Nhulunbuy labelled the CLP as racist, accusing the CLP of push polling, accusing the CLP of having racist policies, deliberately enacting policies to disadvantage indigenous people ...
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Acting Speaker! I may well have used the word ‘racist’. It would have been accurate. In fact, I did not. If he reads the transcript, I used the word ‘discriminatory’. Do not invent what I said.
Dr LIM: Speaking to the point of order, there should be no point of order, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I can rule on that if you want me to.
Dr LIM: Okay, you rule on that.
Mr ACTING SPEAKER: If you feel that you have been maligned in any way, you can make a personal explanation, Deputy Chief Minister. Please continue.
Dr LIM: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. He accused the CLP of push polling when, in fact, it was the ALP which push polled during the Pauline Hanson era, when they even rang my own electorate in 2001. That is the hypocrisy of the man who sits across the Chamber and calls himself a Deputy Chief Minister. Do not attribute things to the CLP when that was not the case.
Another thing for the Deputy Chief Minister to recall was that the IHANT program was started under the Country Liberal Party, and has been picked up and carried on by this government. In fact, IHANT has delivered many homes into Aboriginal communities, a program that we did first and foremost which has been copied by many other jurisdictions. That is the problem with this minister. He gets up here, tries to rewrite history, and expects us to work in a conciliatory manner with him. How can we do that when he gets up, rewrites history and abuses what good the CLP has done in the past?
If you look at the course of history of the Northern Territory from 1974 to now, and the history of the CLP in the 34 years we have looked after ourselves even though self-government started in 1978, many indigenous people have had their lives improved. Law and order had improved. Housing had increased. All those things did happen. In fact, if you ask any commentator today, they will tell you that over the last five years, law and order has deteriorated, alcohol abuse has increased, there is widespread drug abuse of marijuana, kava - you name it - out in the bush.
I am not saying that the government has caused it directly. It has happened and there is no denying it. For the Minister for Central Australia to say that he dares not walk into a town camp after 2 pm in the afternoon has to be his own admission that the Labor policies have not worked these last five years. That is why he dares not to go into a town camp now, whereas five years ago, under the Country Liberal Party government, he could. There has to be an open admission that something went wrong this last five years. I am not going to listen to the diatribe coming from the minister who calls himself the Deputy Chief Minister.
Quoting the words from the member for Stuart: ‘The culture of violence is something that …’ – of course, he recognises that. Then he used Groote Eylandt as an example that we have taken strong action out there to, in his own words: ‘… to cut alcohol from people who cannot deal with alcohol’. Sure, they are two white fellas; irrespective of that, that policy is fine in Groote Eylandt. When we said to him and to the government that your alcohol policy should be directed at the drunks, at the people who abuse alcohol, he said: ‘No, you cannot do that’. Now he decides he is going to do that in Nhulunbuy. Who cares about the rest of the Territory? Recently, he came out with a statement that he is not going to allow any more takeaway licences in the Territory as if that was going to fix the current drunken problem in the Territory. Surely, if you are going to fix it, you have to slow down the supply and target the demand.
That gives me the example of how I see this Chief Minister’s policy on the run trying to write something up before she is shamed even more. Within minutes of the Deputy Chief Minister coming out with his media release that he was going to stop providing takeaway licences, the Chief Minister says: ‘Yes, that can be our way of dealing with drunks and alcohol abuse’. As I said before, you have to fix the problem. By saying you cannot have any more alcohol outlets, would not prevent those drunks from getting their supplies from the current outlets. If you want to do something about supply, then deal with the outlets.
I am not quite sure whether the Attorney-General was talking about two laws for the Territory. Obviously, he was very keen to continue to support customary law and allow that to be part of the legal system in the Northern Territory. If it is, I would like to hear him make a full statement expressing exactly what he meant by his comments. Surely, there should be one law for the Northern Territory - one law for all. Yes, take your customs, traditions, into consideration when a judge makes his ruling but, surely, there should be one law applied to all people. If it is not, then there should be two laws for everybody in the Territory. If you start making two laws in the Territory, one law for one group and a law for another group, is that not considered racist?
I remember a few months back in the last term of parliament, we in this Chamber, wrote legislation to prevent female genital mutilation because another group of people, who have now made Australia their home, have decided that female genital mutilation was customary, was part of their customary law. We unanimously said: ‘No, we cannot do it. If you live in Australia, you will not be allowed to do that’. It does not matter about their customs or their customary law. But here, if you are Aboriginal - sorry, you have to do something different. Is that not racist?
Think about it. Some of the ministers, including the Chief Minister, say: ‘We now need to have a 20-year program’. Not one year; not two years. This will be worked on, five years, 10 years, 15 years, 20 years. You have had your first five years, if you do not remember that. Why are things going so bad? Why have we suffered the ridicule of the nation, the ridicule of the world? Why do we have a Chief Minister who has been unable to put the Territory in a better light?
The member for Braitling mentioned the Law and Justice program. Again, that was started during the Country Liberal Party years. In Ali Curung, I remember talking about it and meeting with people at Lajamanu. It was a very good program; people liked it and found it empowered them to maintain law and order in their communities. However, this government removed it. You have to ask the question: why?
The member for Casuarina talked about people overseas and his own experience. Look at refugees who have come to this country with nought, from countries where they have been subject to all sorts of bad experiences - whether it be war or persecution. They come to this country with absolutely nothing and, within a few scant years, have been able to establish themselves, getting themselves employed, some of them even purchasing their own homes. Their families are all going to school. They could be from South-East Asia or the African continent, but they can make it.
Some of the members opposite mentioned our foreign aid policy - how we can spend so much money assisting people overseas and yet, somehow, we are not doing enough in our own country. Maybe we need to compare those two issues and say: ‘Okay, money has been spent overseas; equally, money has been spent in Australia’. There are people overseas grasping the opportunity with both hands. Ask yourself what has happened that our people in Australia, in the Northern Territory, have not done the same. Perhaps they would have benefited if they did.
I was in Oenpelli about two or three years ago at a substance abuse committee meeting. I met an old timer there who showed me a painting of the community of Oenpelli in the 1930s or 1940s. It showed a community with a homestead, vegetable garden, market garden, domesticated animals, pigs, donkeys, chooks - a whole string of things, with a huge orchard, and people depicted as working in that painting. I asked him what happened to that community and if he was there. He said: ‘Yes, I was a little boy when that was done’. I said: ‘What happened to it?’ He said: ‘Well, it is all gone’. I asked: ‘Why is it all gone?’ ‘Nobody wants to work’. I asked why not and he just shrugged his shoulders. I then asked him how many people lived in Oenpelli and he said about 350 people. I said if I brought 350 Chinamen into Oenpelli tomorrow, within three months this place will be thriving. He looked at me and acknowledged that yes, that would happen. I said: ‘Why? What is the difference? There are 350 people here, bring another 350 people here and it will thrive. So, what is the difference?’ …
Ms Scrymgour: If you went back out there you would see that they are doing it.
Dr LIM: I take on the interjection and I am glad they are doing it. Perhaps it was my little comment to him that made him think about it and …
Ms Scrymgour: I do not think so. You had nothing to do with it.
Dr LIM: … as a traditional owner and leader he might have got the community working. I am glad that has happened.
Laramba is a classic example. It is a very progressive community and it works very well out there. There are some that can do so well and others which continue to fail. You would think that if you put resources in a community they would grasp it with both hands, but they do not seem to want to.
The Minister for Family and Community Services mocked the federal minister. This is one man who has been so determined to do something right for the Territory. I mentioned Graham Richardson. He actually turned up in the Northern Territory when he was the minister. He visited, he swanned around the Territory. He was in Katherine. As I said at another time, he came, he saw, he moaned and groaned, he made all the right noises, and then he left and forgot about it all - forgot about it all. What he did was whatever it takes to make it look good. That was the greatest disappointment that I had with that minister.
At least the present federal minister for Indigenous Affairs is prepared to do the tough things. Law and order is essential. Without that, nothing better will happen. People need law and order if they are to get the rest of their lives together. Without it, they cannot. If they are forever in terror for their own personal safety, they are not going to be able to concentrate on anything else. Therefore, law and order is essential. If you do not have law and order, you can build a million homes out there and it will all be trashed within a short time. Law and order has to happen. The Chief Minister says: ‘No, no, you cannot do that. We will do something else first’. I mean, where do you start?
The Chief Minister is trying to be conciliatory with the federal minister, and I am pleased that she is trying to do that. I hope she will meet with the ministers in Canberra, and with the Prime Minister, to progress this. The Leader of the Opposition has put a conciliatory position to the Chief Minister. I believe the Chief Minister should sit down quietly, away from the heat of all this debate, and read the letter thoroughly and reconsider how we can progress this. Nobody in this Chamber denies that we need to have help.
Mrs MILLER: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek leave for an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr LIM: Nobody in this Chamber denies that it is well past politics. It is time to move forward together. Yes, we will always have our differences, there is no denial. We will see things differently on that side of the Chamber and this side of the Chamber. We need to somehow put those things aside. But I will not bare my breast and put it aside if I know that there are going to be knives thrown at it. No way. So, I am saying this: I am happy to work with you cooperatively, but you have to put down your weapons before I put down mine. If we do that, I believe we can move together and let us make sure that, quoting from Mr Bob Beadman’s paper, ‘we must fix things for the kids’.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this has been a long debate and a very important one. If we extract the chaff from all that has been said, we are left with a common message. We recognise as one that this is a very serious problem and it demands a solution. Put the chaff back in and we have a fence on both sides of the Chamber. We have accusations made, one to another, backwards and forward, and the argument is largely locked into those kinds of dynamics. There seems to be genuine anger about things that happened some time ago.
Rightly or wrongly, whether we have had that debate right to the very end, and everyone has their spleen vented and gets it off their liver, they may then find that we can move on. But I know that is not the case. It is far more satisfactory to find someone to blame. Whilst we are, in a sense, talking about a clearly recognised problem that we have a moral obligation to respond to, we descend too quickly into debates that are endeavouring, as much as possible, to create an impression and to sheet home responsibility elsewhere as far as possible. Whilst all that is going on, there will be no change to the families that are in crowded homes even as we occupy this Chamber and the time that we spend here in debate.
There needs to be change. A number of years ago there was talk of reconciliation. As we started to explore that concept we understood, ultimately, that it required two parties to be able to agree in order to walk together. For two parties to agree and be able to walk together is easier said than done. Take this Chamber, for example. The edge that enters the debates where there appears, as I said before, genuine anger and distress about things of the past, and offence from those who seem to be responsible for the sins of the past having to stand up and to justify that perhaps it is not all as it seems, will not get us anywhere. If we have any hope to take from our time in this Chamber we have to be able to find a better way forward. There is much truth on both sides.
As individual members there is much experience here. There is a 20-year plan. Take a cynical political view: we could spend all our time discussing it from that perspective and there is much that could be discussed regarding time limits of the report, the substance of the report, how sincere it is in its construction and intent. Is it generally intended to make a noticeable and long term difference at personal expense or political expense? Or is it really primarily to serve a political objective and that is to get ourselves out of a bind? We could spend a lot of time having that discussion.
I wish the Chief Minister were in attendance to be able to weigh these words because we are going somewhere. We have to go somewhere. We cannot sit in this Chamber and have these discussions year after year. We cannot go onto the Internet and get all the papers that have been written on this issue, read all the newspaper reports, about journalists who get distressed and politicians that get distressed, substance abuse committees that trail around the place and visit these communities and their hearts are moved, year after year. We just cannot keep doing that and find ourselves just moving in circles.
If our eye is on the politics of this even a bit, we are standing condemned because, with that comes division, reaction and self-interest, and there is no difference made to anybody who actually needs our help. The primary responsibility of a parliament and those who have been elected to serve is to provide care and support for the vulnerable. We have to do that.
In considering all the words that have been uttered, it was difficult as a member of the CLP, a member of the opposition - four of us sitting here, a couple of Independents, 19 looming larger than life, brimming with confidence and a sense of justification for this righteous indignation to correct some horrible thing that happened. However, I do not want to go too far down that track because right or wrong it will make no difference. You would all go upstairs on the balcony and laugh about the comments that were made as we had the chuckles in here from the senior ranks, chuckling away, making snide comments as though they really cared. It sounds like some cheap classroom antic to tease and belittle, and lower the standards of debate to score a small point so you can have a little chuckle amongst your mates. Do not even try it. This is too serious.
This is too serious for fun and games and sniggering and point scoring and blaming. It is too serious. If this is all about the quality of the 20-year plan, what is the point in spending all this time? It is not about the quality of the 20-year plan. It is about the plight of those who need our help. Not whether someone has the courage and foresight to come up with a 20-year plan to be commended. But it requires the action. That action cannot occur, no matter how well we define the problem, until we courageously implement the solution. We can carefully dissect the problem. I have been moved on those substance abuse committee visits. It is something I would do again and again because I have much to learn. But there are some basic human things that are occurring in our community. I thank God we are starting to see things that were previously hidden, and largely being hidden by politics.
Mal Brough is the baddie: ‘Let us direct our salvo at Mal Brough. Let us distract to the past of the last 27 years. Let us fire shots that way. Let us fire all over the place’. Forget it. Let us put our energies into finding a solution. Consider this: it is not about the quality or otherwise of the 20-year plan. That is a proposed direction and maybe it moves us toward a solution. Let us recognise that we have an obligation as members who sit in chairs behind desks representing constituents. I represent indigenous and non-indigenous constituents, whether I am CLP or not. Here, here, here, all the way around; we all represent indigenous and non-indigenous; we represent Territorians. As Australians too, we have an obligation not to score a point but to make a difference. I say that it is not the quality of the 20-year plan that is at stake here; it is the capacity to find and implement a genuine solution and work towards that in a constructive way.
A proposal was placed before the Chief Minister by the Opposition Leader. Instantly minds are going to click into political gear and say: ‘Well, well, well, here we go’. Consider this: outside this Chamber and the dynamics that occur in here, a letter was written to the Chief Minister seeking a way where we could work together to bring our combined resources to work in a bipartisan way to solve problems that are the obligation of all of us.
I will table that letter and urge you to read the letter. I will not say that everything contained in this letter should trump that which is in the 20-year plan. I will not say that the 20-year plan is rubbish and this is the one that must be adopted. In the interests of working towards a bipartisan solution, I put this on the table. I must add, honourable members, it has not been responded to. It is not written in a provocative or political way. It is written as a genuine attempt to try to find a proper and constructive response to the problem that grieves all of us. There has been no response. I seek leave to table this.
Leave granted.
Mr MILLS: Thank you. The proposal, if we are to consider working in a bipartisan manner is this: we are not talking about whether we then become the cheer squad for the 20-year plan, or whether we have an argument that this is the best plan versus that plan. It is that we find a means - and I ask the Chief Minister to respond to this – whereby we could work together in a genuine way and put all of our energies into the issue and to make a genuine effort to put differences aside. That is the proposition that I, as shadow indigenous spokesperson for the CLP, and on behalf of the CLP, place before the Chief Minister for consideration. We need to find a better way of doing our business.
As I said at the beginning, two parties cannot walk together unless they are agreed. This places before honourable members a challenge. If we expect to conjure up a solution that will affect a third party, which many of us do not know very well – perhaps we have not spent much time walking in the shoes of those who walk in pain, concern, fear and dread. However, if we are going to conjure up solutions that will affect people distant from this wonderful Chamber, I reckon we will really be able to test that if we have the capacity - as mature and experienced people who have had the trust of our own communities to place us in this Chamber - to work together, put aside our differences, and bring together our joint resources and experience. Then we might have some hope. However, if we cannot, we stumble at the first hurdle. Whether it is education, improved infrastructure, houses or whatever - all of those could be provided and there could be no internal change in those families and in the hearts of the mums and the dads. If we want to make a difference, we have to find the means to rebuild capacity within a community.
Palmerston comes to mind. I have had issues in Palmerston. It is not an easy to propose a solution and then whack that solution out there in a press release and have a few characters run around the place and advertise it and talk about it. It is sweat, it is hard work, tears and pain to actually make a difference to your own community. How much more difficult will it be to make a difference to a community a long way from us, distant from our own experience? Fortunately, we have members in this Chamber who have intimate experience. They have knowledge that we should be able to gain strength from.
As a group, we could do this. The truth is that we have issues in our own electorates. It is not an easy thing to fix. Do not even think for a moment that whacking together a plan - whether it is the CLP plan, or the ALP plan, or a plan that any member might want to put up - is going to be the solution. That is just a plan. The next part is the hardest bit - as hard as it will be for us to work together. If we cannot find some creative, proactive and courageous way of working together, we may as well continue on with the word games - the theatre for the ugly.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I make these comments on behalf of the CLP. Chief Minister, I place that correspondence and the attached plan for your consideration. Primarily, it is a simple request that you would consider a means whereby there could be a bipartisan approach in this Chamber to address the issues that concern us all.
Mr HENDERSON (Business and Economic Development): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I proudly support the Chief Minister’s statement this evening. Before reading from my prepared remarks, in response to the member for Blain’s comments about a bipartisan approach, I believe that each and every one of the 25 members who are elected to this parliament want better outcomes for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory.
However, respecting the member for Blain’s position and the genuineness of his sentiments, a bipartisan approach on these issues is pretty hard to take seriously on this side of the House when one considers the personal and bitter bile and venom that has been directed by the Leader of the Opposition in this House this evening in this debate towards not only the Chief Minister, but other members of Cabinet in our response to this issue. I respect the member for Blain. He is a man of integrity. Even though we differ on our politics, I do not think we differ at all in the reasons why we came to this parliament and were sworn in on the same day. The venom and bitterness and the diatribe from the Leader of the Opposition in her contribution to this statement is a long way from the olive branch that was held out there by the member for Blain.
Having said that, I move on to my comments and the position of the agencies I have responsibility for in regard to improving outcomes for Aboriginal people across the Northern Territory.
Much has been said about the Northern Territory Police Force over the past few weeks and its handling of law and order in our remote communities. I place on the record today my absolute support for the efforts being made by our police - each and every one of them - to tackle crime and violence in our remote communities. Talk to serving police officers on the ground, and I know the Chief Minister had the same presentation from the domestic violence reduction squad in Alice Springs. When you see that type of presentation from those officers and the issues that they are dealing with on a day-to-day basis, the criticisms that are being applied to the effectiveness of our Northern Territory Police Force across the Territory are pretty galling.
I will outline some of the strategies that have put in place to do this, and the support and resources this government has provided them to carry out their job. The police, our frontline officers, know better than most that crime and violence in indigenous communities is a symptom of the enormous disadvantage being faced by so many of our Aboriginal Territorians. Access to health and education services, adequate housing and other infrastructure and good governance are the basis of sustainable healthy communities, but many indigenous Territorians are denied these basic rights.
The Chief Minister today has outlined a 20-year plan to address these issues, alongside issues of law and order, in a systematic, sustainable way that will lead to positive change in our remote communities. It is a mammoth task and we cannot do it alone. We need the significant resources of the federal government if we are to achieve real outcomes for indigenous people over the next 20 years. In the meantime, the Northern Territory government will continue to tackle the unacceptably high levels of substance abuse, crime and violence in our remote communities, and police will continue to play a major frontline role in this effort.
I will put some facts on the table about this government’s and the Northern Territory Police Force’s ongoing efforts to build safer communities in the Territory. The Northern Territory Police, like this government, has a fundamental belief that Territorians have a right to feel safe in their communities. That belief is led from the top by our Commissioner. Government and police are working with communities to tackle the causes of crime and violence, such as substance abuse, and boosting frontline community policing. Here in the Territory, we have the most police per capita of any Australian jurisdiction. Funding for Northern Territory Police is also the highest per capita of anywhere in Australia. The Territory government continues to invest strongly in our police force, after it was left to run down by previous CLP governments. Budget 2006-07 delivers another record year of funding for the police, $212m, marking a 55% increase since the Martin government came to office in 2001. The member for Greatorex talked about substance and said the government had done nothing by way of substance: ‘There was nothing of substance in the Chief Minister’s statement’, and for the first four years of our government. I think a 55% increase in funding for police is pretty substantial. The ability of police to deliver 17 000 hours of general duties patrols, a boost compared to last year, stems from the government’s record injection of resources over the past three years through the $75m Building our Police Force plan. $32m has been committed in this year’s budget for the final year of our Building our Police Force plan and we are well on track of meeting our targets.
There is no doubt that our police have a difficult job to do. Whilst we have the highest ratio of police per capita, they are responsible for policing the 1 400 000 km that make up the Northern Territory from 38 police stations, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Whilst funding for NT Police well and truly outstretched spending on police in other jurisdictions, three times the national average in fact, the cost of police service, delivery especially in remote areas, is very high.
Police also deal on a daily basis with substance abuse and other social and economic factors that are major contributors to the crime rate. The Northern Territory Police Force, like the government, continues to face these challenges with their eyes wide open and continues to put in place strategies to tackle not only the crime but the causes of crime. A major focus for the government and police is protecting women and children from family violence and abuse. The Violent Crime Reduction Strategy has been in place for two years and has shown significant success in targeting perpetrators of domestic violence, sexual assault and aggravated assaults particularly recidivist offenders, and supporting the victims of this violence.
One of the most significant achievements of this strategy is the establishment of the Domestic and Personal Violence Protection Units in Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. The establishment of these units has effectively doubled the number of police officers specialising in the investigation of domestic violence in the Northern Territory. To the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Greatorex - double the effort.
Domestic violence unit members proactively target recidivist offenders and repeat victims. They provide an investigative support role to the frontline patrol officers in domestic violence-related criminal offences. Quality assurance is conducted on every domestic violence incident reported across the Territory to ensure compliance with the policy. As a result of this new approach reports of assault have increased by almost 20%. That is not the incidence of domestic violence increasing across the Territory by 20% as the member for Greatorex would have, but increasing confidence by victims of domestic violence to report to police because they know police will act.
Whilst applications for domestic violence orders have increased markedly, breaches of these orders have increased by almost 90%. That is, people who were the subject of breaches of domestic violence orders previously not being breached, continued to be the subjects of abuse and assault. A 90% increase in the number of breaches means many more protected women across the Northern Territory but sadly, still not enough.
Apprehension orders have also increased markedly. Domestic violence units are providing in-service training to patrol officers to ensure the new practices and policy are known and applied throughout the whole organisation. In addition, a Victims of Crime Charter has been integrated throughout the police. The charter reflects the principles of the Northern Territory government’s Victims of Crime Charter and aims to enhance the quality of service to victims by a range of methods including timely contact over the progress of investigations, court outcomes and counselling services.
The Territory has seen a continuing decline in the rate of aggravated and non-aggravated sexual assaults. This trend has coincided with the emphasis by police on recidivist offenders in domestic and personal violence-related cases.
Substance abuse continues to be the biggest contributor to crime, particularly violent crime in the Territory. It is another area that the police are tackling with new strategies and a stronger focus. The Remote Community Drug Desk was formed in May 2004 and is comprised of seven members of the Drug Enforcement Unit who are dedicated to targeting people involved in the distribution of illicit drugs to remote communities. Members, including an intelligence officer, are tasked with the coordination, implementation and leadership of strategic and tactical operations aimed at disrupting the distribution of drugs to remote communities.
Since May 2004, this strategy has resulted in the seizure of more than $216 000 in cash, 34 firearms, 36 kg of cannabis, 512 cannabis plants, 225 gm of amphetamine and 911 kg of kava. Seventy-five people have been arrested, 113 summonsed, and 427 formal charges laid. There have also been 141 drug infringement notices issued. To the member for Greatorex, there is certainly substance in those figures. This initiative has now been recognised nationally. It is one of three finalists at the National Drug and Alcohol Awards for Excellence in Drug and Alcohol Law Enforcement.
Following on from the success of this initiative, a similar tri-state initiative was launched in Alice Springs at the beginning of this year. This combined initiative between Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory is being developed in response to petrol sniffing, and alcohol and illicit drug abuse problems in remote Aboriginal communities in Central Australia. Central to the strategy was the establishment of a substance abuse intelligence desk which is based on the same principles as the remote community drug desk in the Top End. The desk is staffed by an intelligence officer and an investigations officer based in Alice Springs. Desk staff collate and disseminate intelligence and coordinate policing activities in the cross-border region specifically in relation to the trafficking of petrol, illicit drugs and alcohol. The desk also undertakes an educational role throughout the cross-border region by developing the capacity of local police and communities to respond to suspicious behaviour as well as local fuel supply outlets and other service delivery agencies within or near remote communities in the region.
For the period of 20 April to 31 May - that is just over one month - in the cross-border region of the Northern Territory, Western Australia, South Australia, the following results have been achieved: seven drug-related charges have been laid; one drug infringement notice issued; four arrests; seizure of 363 gm of cannabis; $15 110 in cash seized, and 0.35 litres of petrol seized.
Government is giving police more tools in the fight against violence and substance abuse in our communities with new drug house legislation and civil asset forfeiture for criminal activity; new volatile substance abuse legislation; and new domestic violence legislation. We are also supporting the efforts of our police officers with more resources and more remote police stations. Last month, I had the pleasure of officially opening the new $1.3m Numbulwar police station with the Police Commissioner and the member for Arnhem. Member for Greatorex - more substance.
The police station means for the first time Numbulwar has a permanent police presence. It is the third police facility to be constructed since the Martin government came to office in 2001 following the Humpty Doo Police and Fire Station and the Kintore police station that were opened earlier in our term. In addition, a new police post is currently under construction at Mutitjulu. Member for Greatorex - more substance.
These remote police posts allow police to more effectively tackle crime and alcohol and drug related behaviour in the community and that, in turn, flows through to positives in other areas such as better health and education outcomes. It also allows those police who previously had to police those communities from remote areas to concentrate more on their local areas. It is a double whammy, a double bang for the buck by putting police stations in remote communities.
The Aboriginal Community Police Officer program is a great example of what can be achieved through partnerships between community members, government and police working together. ACPOs play an important role in the front line against crime and violence right across the Territory. Yet, until recently, remote communities bore the cost alone of supplying, running and maintaining a vehicle for ACPOs to carry out their duties. Last year, I announced a new initiative that recognises the valuable work that ACPOs do and the importance of partnerships between government, police and the community to deliver the program. As of 1 July last year, the government took over all of the running costs for current ACPO vehicles in communities delivering an immediate financial release of an average of $10 000 a year for communities, and for some communities, easing the burden of more than $30 000 a year. In addition to taking over the maintenance and running costs of vehicles, the government is also providing, over four years, police-owned vehicles for ACPOs in remote communities at a cost of $2m.
Last financial year, the government delivered six new police-owned vehicles to Milikapiti, Galiwinku, Finke, Maranboy, Numbulwar and Alyangula. The vehicle for Finke is pending the appointment of an ACPO to the community. In Budget 2006-07, the government has committed $440 000 to deliver the second instalment of this program. Another six new vehicles are expected to be delivered this financial year to Mutitjulu, Santa Teresa, Timber Creek, Daly River and Ngukurr. An assessment on the allocation of a final vehicle will be made in due course.
Government has also delivered improved working conditions for ACPOs including fares out from isolated localities and freight allowances for foodstuffs for the first time. As part of our Building Our Police Force plan, the Territory government wants to recruit an additional 28 ACPOs across the Territory. An intake of about 10 ACPOs is planned to start in Alice Springs on 26 June this year. A further intake of 10 to 12 is scheduled for later in 2006-07. Where this training takes place will depend on from where the majority of ACPOs are recruited. Northern Territory police will also be seeking expressions of interest from serving ACPOs in urban areas to go to remote communities on either permanent or term appointments. We are particularly hopeful that this may lead to at least one experienced ACPO being appointed to Mutitjulu. These are all positive steps and real substance, member for Greatorex, that will lead to more ACPOs in remote communities.
Recruiting new ACPOs has always been and continues to be a challenge to a range of reasons. LGANT, communities and Northern Territory police are planning to hold an officer level workshop to explore alternative strategies to improve effectiveness of the ACPO scheme and explore options to deal with those issues that present a barrier to ACPO recruitment. Both the Police Commissioner and I have a strong focus on developing pathways for indigenous people to become mainstream police officers, a main policy setting that I am charge with and with the Police Commissioner want to see - not just ACPOs.
There has been a great deal of media attention on Wadeye in recent weeks; some of it for good reason. Gang-led violence has affected this community for many decades and it has been exacerbated recently by the extended Wet Season which has forced many people from different clans to remain in Wadeye due to road closures. The Police Commissioner recently announced that the total police establishment at Wadeye would be increased to eight to enhance police response to problems in the community. The tender was recently let for construction of a duplex in the community to house the extra police officers who will be stationed there. Whilst construction of the duplex is under way, government is working to supply two two-bedroom demountables to house the extra police in the short term. Those demountables should be in place and liveable by next month.
In the meantime, four Territory response section members are presently located at Wadeye to assist in maintaining law and order. The commissioner has advised that they will remain there for as long as necessary. Police have also developed operational plans to deal with gang-related issues in the community should they recur. These plans can be quite quickly implemented using existing police resources in Wadeye, and then backed up with additional resources from Darwin if the need arises.
The key elements of the plans are gathering intelligence in relation to all gang members, associates and their level of involvement; regular police patrols during the day and late into the night to prevent gang activity; if and when necessary offenders will be arrested; and matters including bail considerations will be vigorously pursued. In addition, a targeted law and order task force comprising of Police and Justice has been working on two fronts: preparing for speedy prosecution of gang members already arrested, and considering possible new offences to tackle the unique gang situation at Wadeye, as well as in relation to gangs across the Territory. Extra resources have been provided to police and courts to ensure court matters can be dealt with quickly, where possible, in consultation with relevant defence lawyers. Extra court sitting days, including yesterday and today, have been put on to deal with Wadeye matters, and extra days will be scheduled if necessary.
The local police members are also closely involved in the process of preparing to move a number of community members to various outstations. Many of these people have been involved in the recent violence, and moving them to outstations is seen as an effective means of providing the township and remaining occupants with some respite. To date, approximately 200 people from the community have moved to outstations. I am pleased to report the community has not had any significant gang-related activity since TRS members were sent to Wadeye in late May, but police continue to monitor the situation carefully.
Alice Springs continues to be affected by antisocial issues, and government is tackling those issues with a whole-of-government approach, with a particular focus on liquor supply and demand. It is absolutely crucial that we tackle grog issues in Alice Springs if we are to see real reductions in antisocial behaviour. That work is under way. In the meantime, police have engaged in a number of targeted strategies and operations that focus on recidivist offenders, using additional resources from Darwin. The outcomes of these operations have resulted in an increase in apprehensions for protective custody. However, it is clear that reducing both the demand and supply of liquor is fundamental to long-term solutions. My colleague, the member for Nhulunbuy, has already outlined how the government is tackling this issue.
I support 100% the efforts of our police in tackling crime and the causes of crime in our remote communities. It is a difficult job …
Ms MARTIN: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time for the minister to complete his remarks in accordance with Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr HENDERSON: I thank members. I will be quick.
It is a difficult job; it is one the police are performing with enormous commitment and courage, and they are achieving results. Government will continue to support their efforts by providing them with the resources they need to do this difficult job.
To suggest that cracking down on law and order is the only answer to problems in our indigenous communities is simplistic and ignorant. Police are at the frontline of this issue; they deal with it every day. They would tell me that you cannot expect levels of violence to drop if you do not address the reasons behind the crimes and violence.
As well as law and order, we must tackle indigenous disadvantage on a number of fronts including infrastructure, governance, employment, education, and health. Another focus of this government is the developments of local economies and job opportunities for our regions and remote communities. The government is making great strides in rolling out secondary education for remote communities, and we are seeing kids graduate for the first time in these communities. However, we also need to ensure they are able to find meaningful employment in or near their communities when they have finished their studies. We are close to finalising a 10-year economic development framework which focuses on five key objectives: encouraging investment; productivity; skilled people; sharing our prosperity; and taking care of the environment.
One of those clear objectives is ensuring that economic participation and benefits are extended to all Territorians, including indigenous Territorians. There is a wide range of activity currently being undertaken by government to promote economic development. To further our focus on regional development, the government has moved to establish regional economic committees across the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory government is committed to driving sustainable economic growth that will lead to greater opportunities for Territorians wherever they live.
I was pleased to announce last week that four of these committees have now been established: Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, East Arnhem and Katherine. They will commence meeting over the next few months. Over the next 12 months, we expect up to 12 committees will be established across the Territory. The government has also established the $300 000 Indigenous Business Development Program last year. The program aims to assist indigenous people start their own business, support the formation of partnerships and joint ventures between indigenous organisations and other corporate entities, and provide business support services to indigenous people.
So far, the response to the program has been very pleasing. Sixteen applications have been funded, totalling $281 000, with 13 applications under consideration. For example:
a food cooperative at Mapurru homeland, four years in the planning, established at the request of elders who did not want to have to charter planes to Galiwinku for supplies. The cooperative sells mostly non-perishable food low in fat, sugar and salt, and high in fibre. It is also selling fishing and hunting gear to encourage locals to actively hunt and gather their food. Nurses at Galiwinku report that children from Mapurru are in far better health than children from Galiwinku; and
There are many more projects like this being developed across the Territory.
In conclusion, whilst the media attention our indigenous communities have received over the past week has caused shock and outrage in the southern states, we are well aware of the massive task ahead of us. We have made some progress, but we know we cannot achieve all that needs to be done by acting alone. We need the assistance of the federal government to address these issues in a systemic and structured way. We need a 20-year plan, with five-, 10- and 15-year goals. We need to tackle this issue in a structured, long-term way if we are to achieve genuine outcomes for indigenous Territorians.
I commend the Chief Minister for bringing this proposal to the House today, and wish the Chief Minister the best of luck at the forthcoming COAG meeting in attempting to get the Commonwealth on board.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank everyone who contributed to this important debate. There were many references during the debate to the national discussion that happened over the last three weeks. When you listened to that debate, which I did, there was anger and blame attached by some speakers. It was interesting to hear other speakers -- and our Aboriginal members were probably strongest on this - talk about the hurt and the level of shame at the way that discussion was held over the last three to four weeks, and the impact it has had on our Aboriginal community.
I will recount something that happened in that context with me. When I was at Wadeye last week, the community was talking about the national debate and how the focus had been for much of that time on Wadeye and the gang warfare. A number of key members of the community said to me: ‘You know we are not like this most of the time. You know that we are fairly peaceful. We get on with things. Do we have challenges? Yes. But could you not explain better in the national media what it is like here?’ And I said: ‘I tried’. I tried to explain that it was not what the national media or the local media wanted to hear, and they were very disappointed in me. I sat there with people who said: ‘We wanted you to be able to explain what we were like and what we saw was a failure from you to be able to do it’. I felt bad about that. I could have gone on longer and said: ‘I tried. I said that Wadeye is not like that most of the time’, but it was not what was reported. It was not of interest to anyone.
You try to talk in a positive way about things that were happening. Probably what has been the most frustrating part of this debate for the last month is that nobody has denied that we do not have problems. Nobody has denied that the issue of child sex abuse is not a real one for the Territory, or domestic violence, or gang warfare in communities like Wadeye. I think it is the only place with gang warfare at the moment but there are other troubles in other communities of different natures and much of it alcohol-fuelled or drug-fuelled. Nobody denied that. But it was this sense that you could not even begin to talk about the other part of the equation, that it was not all bad, that because of working with communities there were really positive things happening. It was that smothering of any attempt to be positive over that month that I personally found the most frustrating. It possibly reflected, in part, how little the rest of Australia understands about the Territory. We know that they do not understand much about Darwin, but do they understand anything about Wadeye? Not at all.
A number of journalists rang me, castigating me about the situation at Wadeye, with words like ‘the Territory and you are a national disgrace’. They were the lead items coming from journalists. One of them from a very reputable newspaper said: ‘And the community of Wadeye is 7500 people. How could …’, and I said: ‘Hold on, hold on. Where do you get these things from?’ Others said to me: ‘Where is the mandatory reporting in the Territory for child abuse? Why don’t you have it?’. Trying to explain the reality of here compared with the conclusions they had drawn about issues they knew very little about was incredibly frustrating.
However, it was not so hurtful to me compared with the Aboriginal people. I know people here have spoken to Aboriginal people around the community, around the Territory. Many spoke to me about their deep shame of all being cast as drunken, violent, sex abusing people. We know how wrong that is. In a better world, or one in which you could manage the public debate, people would speak honestly about what was happening and not try to generalise or cast everyone in the same light. That was the frustration. I attempted to say in every interview I did, for example: ‘Yes, we have problems; yes, it is unacceptable; it is very serious. These are the actions we are taking but just look to where things have changed a bit,’ and it was just ignored. You just could not get any traction on those kinds of issues.
Reflecting on where we were, and trying to find a real positive out of where we were, the idea was to stop the eruption of these issues which happen on a fairly regular basis. The 2003 Domestic Violence Summit held by the Prime Minister was in response to the same kind of issues that emerged, and the frustration that nothing really of substance came out of that meeting. I looked at those meetings, which people said to me were talkfests, and what happened and thought we have to have a better strategy, one that actually engages this nation, makes a commitment from governments of all levels to bring about profound change. I asked one of my staff to get me a list of the national plans we have and I have read part of it out here.
We have national plans on everything. I have said it before: we have them ranging from energy strategies to cane toads. Yet, when it comes to one of the most significant issues facing Australia and one that, quite rightly, gets us condemnation both domestically and internationally - no plan, no commitment. No saying to Aboriginal people across Australia: ‘Governments will work with you, we will work with you’. It is not governments doing all for Aboriginal people, not at all. It is governments working with Aboriginal people across Australia to get real change, to get real generational change. That is where this plan came from. It was not some knee-jerk response. It was looking and reflecting on what had happened and how we could change that.
We know in the Territory we have plans; we have educational plans, we have plans for policing, we have economic development plans for Aboriginal people. However, we know we do not have the resources to deliver in the remote areas. We know that we are working in small chunks and if we could get more assistance - I know that the Opposition Leader said that more money will not make a difference; I beg to differ. More money will make a difference. It is not as though you are going to throw $1bn at the Territory and say: ‘Use it now’. Of course, that is crazy. However, if we could get, as I said, the federal government to give $50m a year to assist with housing, do it in a way of a shared relationship or mutual obligation, we could work with communities with that additional housing money to get a lot of achievements all wrapped up in that. It is tangible and it is practical. It is about governments working coherently, but it is also about more dollars coming in. This plan is a very practical approach. It does need money from the federal government and it certainly has support from the other states and other Chief Ministers.
I thank everyone for their contribution. It has been a fairly long afternoon debating a very important topic. Thank you for the passion with which you addressed this issue, the knowledge that you brought to the debate. The member for Nhulunbuy showed his long-term understanding of the issues. Other members did that as well. We heard from the opposition about how can you cast this in terms of what CLP did or what Labor did in government. But the issue raised by the Education minister really came to the heart of it: that we for so long in the Territory never even had - in fact, had an active policy of not delivering - secondary education to Aboriginal Territorians who live remotely. That is a disgrace.
On this side of the House we are proud we have turned that around because we know, and every bit of research shows us, that education is the way to affect so many different aspects of life of any individual. Babies are healthier when mothers are better educated; opportunities for jobs are better when you have education. Education is fundamental; yet for 27 years we told Aboriginal Territorians in the bush to: ‘Forget it. We do not deliver secondary education to your communities’.
I cannot be more delighted and the Education minister, obviously, is delighted with the results we are getting. There were 25 students at the end of last year and, hopefully, we will do better this year with 30. This provides an inspiration to other communities. When Kalkarindji did it for the first time three years ago, the Education minister said to us all, the other communities across the Top End will say if they can do it, we will do it too, and it was a ripple effect. That is the role model you get when you put positive and successful initiatives in place. Those three students from Kalkarindji all went through to tertiary studies and that is great.
I have a final comment about the two different views on this. We have heard from the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Police minister did make a comment that yes, we can be bipartisan about this. We would like to see that happen. But as the Police minister said, when you get the level of vitriol and personal attack coming into the topic from the Leader of the Opposition, it is hard to take the word of the deputy seriously. It is very hard to take it seriously.
We have an Opposition Leader who cannot debate a topic without being personally offensive. I am not going to stand here and sob about it and neither, I am sure, is the member for Arafura. If you are going to have reasonable debates in here about issues then to listen to the Leader of the Opposition spend her time on her feet just being vitriolic and attacking people personally, does not warm you to a bipartisan approach. It does not.
To say that I will ignore all other topics and I will only talk about domestic violence and child sex abuse when there is a substantial statement about many issues that affect Aboriginal Territorians, is not taking a very important topic seriously. She spent a significant proportion of her time reading out a list from the federal budget of all of the good things the federal government has done to help Aboriginal people in the Territory. We could give an equal list, probably longer, of how many programs the federal government had said they would fund, funded for a small time or not at all, and then walked away from. That list is a very long, very embarrassing list.
To the Opposition Leader who says: ‘Look at the good things the federal government has done’, we want to work cooperatively with them. We have an overarching agreement with a number of schedules within it, but it has to be a partnership. It does not rely on one party bullying the other or racing around making one-line statements that cannot be supported, or verballing Police Commissioners. That is not going to be useful; that is not going to be a partnership. What we want from the federal government is a partnership about delivering services and getting results for Aboriginal people in our remote areas.
I listened carefully to the Leader of the Opposition. There was nothing of any substance in what she said. She quoted from her own speeches, and referred to German models of how to deal with domestic violence. I wondered what the relationship between domestic violence in a first world country in the middle of Europe was to how we might deal with it in the Northern Territory. I thought it was a very weird comment to make, but that is what the Opposition Leader wanted to quote. Her pice de rsistance was that I and the Police minister do not care about the issues she raised because she has not seen us cry in the House. If that is the strength of her argument, I do not think we have bipartisan support on this. I do not think we can work in bipartisanship with you.
I know that Aboriginal Territorians will embrace the fact that this government and other governments around Australia want to see a national commitment to make things better - to make things better for Aboriginal people in a generation. Let me assure Territorians, I am going to fight for that. Thank you to everyone who supported the 20-year plan. It is a fight worth having.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Dhimurru Management Team welcomed over 50 Commonwealth, Territory and local representatives to their Sea Country Workshop in late May to negotiate the implementation of the Dhimurru Sea Country Plan. The plan aims to involve local Yolngu in sea country management, and work with partner organisations to ensure sustainable management of sea country. Working with key stakeholders, Dhimurru aims to develop sustainable working arrangements and be involved in monitoring, research and surveillance of sea country. Dhimurru seeks to provide a good model for sea country management based on working together in strong partnerships, and will continue to work with key stakeholders to formalise an implementation schedule for progression of sea country commitments. I am looking forward to being part of the launch of the Sea Country Plan at the Garma Festival in early August.
I am very pleased to welcome Mr Charles Rue to the position of Manager of Alcan Gove’s Community Affairs Department, replacing Mr Klaus Helms. Charles is well-known in the community as a former senior police officer for a number of years in Gove, and was awarded the National Surf Life Saving Title recently in Queensland. Our own Charles Rue from the Gove Surf Life Saving Club was, in fact, the National Surf Life Saving individual in Australia. Fantastic result!
Charles will bring extensive community relations experience with him to the position, as he has worked on many of the local projects such as the combined reference group, community patrol and the Harmony Group. Charles has a real commitment to the community. I wish him well in the new position. He is already making impact with significant decisions and insight into local issues.
Excessive alcohol and drug consumption, coupled with associated family violence constitutes a major threat to the wellbeing of the indigenous population in all communities of the region. I am pleased and proud to report on the East Arnhem Harmony Mawaya Mala Group which, with an extensive representative committee from both Yolngu and non-Aboriginal communities, have worked collectively for approximately three years to provide a safe and harmonious environment for our children and families. The objective is to foster a cooperative and coordinated regional approach to strategies, projects and initiatives, with particular emphasis on law and social justice development, substance abuse issues, itinerant issues and crime prevention.
I acknowledge the participants involved in supporting the Harmony Group and thank them for their continued support: Aboriginal Resource and Development Service; Alcan Gove; Anglicare NT; Centrelink; Crisis Accommodation; community representatives in Nhulunbuy; Department of Local Government; Housing and Sport; Department of Health and Community Services; Department of Justice; Gumatj Indigenous Coordination Centre; Marngarr Community Government Council; Nhulunbuy Corporation; Miwatj Health Aboriginal Corporation; Northern Land Council; Northern Territory Police; Rirratjingu clan; Women Representing Marngarr; Women Representing Yirrkala; Yirrkala Dhanbul Community Council; and Laynhapuy Homelands Association.
Harmony’s first major project is nearing completion, with the establishment of a special care centre to provide shelter and primary intervention services for the treatment and rehabilitation of people suffering from the abuse of alcohol and other substances.
The second major project is the Gove Peninsula Community Patrols, providing a community patrol to mediate and assist individuals and families suffering from substance abuse, antisocial behaviour, children’s issues and family violence.
These two initiatives have been developed by the Harmony Group over the past three years, with hours of consultation and commitment to providing positive outcomes. I thank John Cook and the committee for their part in establishing effective regional networks to ensure the implementation of these programs.
The East Arnhem Liquor Management Plan is in the process of being introduced to the community, with a hearing by the Liquor Commission set down for August. I thank Senior Sergeant Tony Fuller for his guidance and direction following his involvement in the development of a successful liquor plan at Groote Eylandt. Tony has put together a PowerPoint presentation to be presented to the public for discussion in regard to alcohol restrictions and boundaries and the concept of an alcohol takeaway ID card. We are grateful for Tony’s contribution to our community and the strong sense of leadership and direction that he provides.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak about a successful organisation in my electorate, the Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation. Bawinanga was incorporated in 1979 as an outstation resource association. Early core business was the provision of basic support to Aboriginal people who elected to reside on their traditional land rather than in the emerging community of Maningrida. The organisation and the outstation movement have grown and prospered, and Bawinanga now supports 32 outstation communities with a population of some 800. Services include the construction and maintenance of housing, roads, water supplies and solar power, a mobile store, support for land management and cultural activities, and assistance in the delivery of education and health programs.
Turnover has grown from $150 000 in 1979 to greater than $26m in 2005-06. Bawinanga has been delivering CDEP since 1989. CDEP is the economic lifeblood of the community, and there are now 615 participants. Some 300 of these live on outstations and the remainder live and work in Maningrida, a community of 2500 people in north central Arnhem Land.
Bawinanga has structured itself so the majority of participants are employed in businesses rather than in CDEP activities. Some participants work for other agencies within the community, such as the council, school and clinic, and they also deliver municipal services such as garbage collection, fencing and maintenance of parks and gardens. The most engaging aspect of Bawinanga’s CDEP is the growth of a group of business enterprises and the employment scope this provides.
Bawinanga Enterprises include Maningrida Arts and Culture; the Djelk Rangers; a mechanical workshop; mud brick factory; welding shop; the Women’s Centre; the Good Food Kitchen; Aged Care Services; Bawinanga’s fuel, BAC Fuel; a fabricating and sheet metal workshop; a camping and outdoor supply shop; a plant nursery; a wildlife business; tourism; a sport fishing joint venture; a vehicle wrecking and recycling business; earth moving; a supermarket; commercial crabbing; and building, construction and maintenance.
There is immediate scope for the development of new enterprises, such as engaging in the detection, management and destruction of forfeit illegal foreign fishing vessels; coast watch activities; entering into competition with outside interests controlling barge and air services to Maningrida; establishing a land management college for Aboriginal rangers; and increasing the contribution and value of carbon abatement trading and engaging in a host of import replacement strategies.
There is no doubt that the vision, energy and entrepreneurial spirit of Bawinanga is largely responsible for the Maningrida success story. This is not a basket case community. It could be used as an example to other communities, and to Australians generally as a model of functionality and success in Aboriginal Australia. The Bawinanga employment model is not conjecture; it has been proved to work. This success has occurred in a remote location without access to mining, manufacturing or agriculture as employers or economic primers, and without access to business development funding.
The Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation and the Maningrida community, up until a week ago, was under threat. The imminent defunding of Bawinanga CDEP could have been a death blow to much that has been achieved and comes at a time when the corporation is achieving unprecedented success. It seems illogical not to continue to build on this success. I am glad, after my conversations with the organisation, that the Australian government has viewed CDEP in that community as an investment that, inevitably, has resulted and will result in the broad scale engagement with the mainstream economy that government urges many of our Aboriginal communities to aspire to.
The Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation provides a model which can be applied elsewhere. It was heartening and good news that their loss of their CDEP program - which there was real potential and real threat – has now been taken away as the Commonwealth has now had a change of heart. It is great to know that all the fighting and the pushing from those Aboriginal members on the board of Bawinanga was successful in ensuring that they were able to recover and keep their CDEP program - but only for the next 12 months. That organisation is hoping that over that 12 months they will be able to convince the Commonwealth to put in place a more sustainable program and deliver on what they see as real jobs out in those communities.
To that organisation, which is a success, it was fantastic news to know that the Commonwealth had backed away from their claims of defunding that organisation and that the CDEP will stay.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight it gives me great pleasure to mention some of the achievements made by kids in my electorate.
As patron of the Jingili BMX Club, I was very pleased to hear that Jesse Brown of Moil qualified first overall for the NT state titles and ranked 4th overall in the Australian national titles in Adelaide in 2006. What a fantastic result. Jesse also recently was placed first in the 5-year-old boys and won five out of five races at the Jingili open BMX. Jesse’s brother, Billy, qualified 14th place overall in the NT state titles and ranked 33rd overall for 9-year-old boys at the nationals. Braxton Carruthers won the trophy for the Jingili Open ‘Sprocket Rocket’ at the Open.
Moil Primary School produced some exceptional talent at the recent Eisteddfod. There were many small groups and individual entries. Amazing results included Sau-ching Leung who was awarded a trophy for her Piano Australian Composition; first prize for recital for solo; first prize original composition; first prize Mime Prepared solo; first prize in the Ballet Classical flat shoe group; CYM Shop Competition trophy; Meryl Brock Award Pianoforte solo; and overall winner of the Rita McGregor Memorial Trophy for the best performance in recital, prose and poetry from all sections from 8 years and under, 10 years and under, and 12 years and under. That is a fantastic achievement.
Jane Anderson was awarded first prize in the Orchestral String solo 8 years and under; first prize Orchestral Strings duet; first prize Pianoforte solo; first prize Prepared Reading; first prize Scripture reading; and together with Chloe Wallent and Georgia Bliss, won first prize in the Recorder trio 10 years and under. That is fantastic. These are great results for these young girls and they must spend a lot of time practising. It is great to see their hard work get such tremendous results.
Benjamin Lu won the Pianoforte duet 12 years and under and, with his friend, Raymond, was awarded the NS and BM McCleary Award for the Most Promising Duo Pianoforte for 12 years and under. Kenny Lee won first prize in the Pianoforte solo 10 years and under. Jedda Bennett-Kellam won first prize in the Brass solo. Jason O’Meara won first prize in the Pianoforte solo 6 years and under. Lucy Anderson and Katie Rehrmann won first prize in the Mixed Instrumental Ensemble trio and first prize in the Orchestral Strings duet.
Lucy and Katie with Claudia Baggley and Rachel Quong won first prize in the Orchestral String Quartet.
Adrienne Turner was awarded the Lily Vita Ballet Award for most promising junior dancer 10 years and under, and won first prize in the Musical Theatre Solo; Jazz/Hip Hop Solo and Tap Solo. Felicity Lay was highly commended for her Orchestral String Solo, and Lucy Anderson was highly and very highly commended for her Piano Solo, Violin Solo and Scripture Reading. Lucy and Vaanathy Kandiah were highly recommended for their Piano Duet 12 years and under.
In the 8 years and under there were more wonderful results. Jackie and Garwerd Liang, first prize Pianoforte Duet, and Garwerd also won first prize Pianoforte Solo - Australian composer. Both Jackie and Garwerd received high commendations in the Pianoforte Solos. Margaret Harrison was highly commended for her performance in the Piano Solo 11 years and under for playing less than 18 months.
More fantastic results included first prizes to the Moil German Choir in the Modern Song Ensemble; Moil School Choir in Section 213; and the Moil School Band in the Band Medley. These choirs could not have achieved such fantastic results without the dedication of their teachers Mrs Sutter, Mrs Simmonds and Ms Tracey Etherington.
On the sporting front it is great tonight to be talking about Valentina Dillon who won the certificate for the best and fairest at soccer whilst Jarod Luis received a certificate for determination and commitment. Valentina and Jarod play for the Mindil Aces Soccer Club. Madison and Imogen Campbell won trophies at callisthenics. Madison won a first for Graceful Solo and for Solo, whilst Imogen came second in the Duo and third in the Graceful Solo.
I have been hearing fantastic things about Jingili Primary School community. The kids there go out of their way to help the disadvantaged. Over the last couple of months, Caroline Hughes’ class of 1/2H have encouraged their schoolmates to donate their 10 pieces to help Gonzalo of Guatemala through World Vision. They are hoping to raise $500.
The preschool and its subcommittee has taken up the challenge of sponsoring Shipra Mojumder through World Vision. The children will be learning all about Shipra and her family challenges. Shipra is four years old and lives in Bangladesh. The preschoolers will be discussing how they can help people and the difference they can make through a commitment and caring.
With the recent tragic earthquake in Java, Mr Burke’s class decided to raise money for the victims with a cake and ice cup stall. I hear the girls did all the organising and they should be commended for their hard work.
The generosity of the students at Jingili does not stop there. The Student Representative Council organised and held a disco with a ‘bring and buy’ cake stall last Friday, with all the money raised going to the Red Cross. I am sure the kids had lots of fun whilst raising money for a good cause. Then there was the World’s Biggest Morning Tea for the Cancer Council of Australia raising $114 from staff and parents.
Everyone in the Jingili School gets in on the act of helping out people in need. I commend their generous spirit, initiative and hard work.
On the sporting front, tonight I would like to talk about some of the great kids in my electorate. Congratulations to Neil Vea-Vea of Jingili who has been selected in the NT Primary Rugby League team, and Ben Rioli who has been chosen to play in the NT Primary Australian Rules, the championships of which will be played in Darwin in August. No doubt these boys worked very hard to be given the honour of playing in these representative sides.
I would also like to talk about Wagaman Primary School; there are some great things going on there. Madeleine Birch, Abbie Burke, Nicole Larking, Dale Wilson and Megan Burke have all performed exceptionally well for the Wagaman Primary School in cross country. Well done also to Trevor Nickels, and Jack and Daniel Russell whom I understand played some great footy in the AFL exchange held in Alice Springs at the end of May playing for the Northern Suburbs Stars team.
It is important that we acknowledge the hard work of our public servants, particularly over a long period of time and the excellence with which they service the people and government of the Northern Territory.
Tonight, I acknowledge the hard work that George Curran, a constituent of mine who lives in Moil, has done for the Territory. George will be leaving the Northern Territory public sector, effective this Friday, after 24 years of great service. George has made a valuable contribution to the Territory, and his achievements, personality, honesty, and loyalty have been respected and well known by all those who have worked with him.
George joined the Northern Territory government in 1982, coming from Vic Roads - then the Country Roads Board - where he commenced his engineering career nine years earlier as a cadet engineer. During his employment with the Northern Territory government, George worked in the structural design section of the department in Darwin. There, he further developed his structural skills, particularly in the bridge design area, eventually becoming the manager of the section.
From 1984 to 1986, George took leave from the Northern Territory government to join the Australian Staffing Assistance Scheme, where he provided bridge building skills and training for the local population in the developing country of Kenya in Africa.
Upon his return in the Northern Territory government in 1986, he quickly established himself as the highly-skilled and experienced bridge design engineer that he is known for throughout the public and private sector of the Northern Territory. George has designed or managed and designed nearly all government bridges built in the last two generations in the Northern Territory. I understand he was the first to be called upon to provide structural advice for the restoration of building structures following natural disasters. He is affectionately known throughout government and industry as the ‘principal structural advisor to government’. His resignation will leave a massive gap in structural experience and knowledge within the public sector.
It is great to know that George will be staying in the Territory, so his experience and expertise will not be lost. I again thank George for his dedication to all the projects he has been involved in over the years, particularly the bridges throughout the Northern Territory road network.
Tonight, I also thank Mr Mac Whitaker, who is a Supervisor Electrical with the Construction Division of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, who has given valuable service and commitment to the Northern Territory public sector for a period spanning over 24 years. Mac is about to embark on accumulated leave prior to his formal retirement in February 2007.
Mac’s personal effort within the department over this period has been greatly appreciated; in particular, his provision of building/electrical expertise to the supervision of construction and maintenance on many government buildings in the Northern Territory, and his ongoing support and commitment to the development and quality of public infrastructure. Work colleagues speak highly of the dedication and support that Mac has provided to them to meet project standards and time frames. He should be applauded for his commitment and dedication to his profession, and the organisation generally.
I understand that Mac is planning to retire in Queensland and spend time with his family. I wish him the very best in his retirement and acknowledge his tremendous contribution in the Northern Territory.
I would like to talk about the Philippine Independence Day celebration. Recently, I was invited to attend the Philippine Independence Day celebration held at the SKYCITY Casino by the Filipino Community Council of the Northern Territory. The President of the council, Elena Ralph, together with her committee of Arsenio de Guzman, Senior Vice President; Benita Bernabe, Treasurer; Cristina Black, executive committee member; Nanette Thiel, executive committee member; Rosalinda Isorina, Secretary; and Edgar Negosa, executive committee member, did a wonderful job organising a fantastic night with incredible entertainment.
The Filipino Community Council of the NT is an advocacy body whose main role is to study, respond, and contribute to the policies and procedures that impact on the lives on Filipino migrants and their families. FILCONT is made up of member organisations and is affiliated with the national body, the Filipino Community Council of Australia.
The celebration was in recognition of the Philippines liberation from foreign domination in 1898. Reading from the program for the night’s festivities it said:
- Independence was gained through the cohesive effort of Filipinos in fighting foreign aggression. Unity was the key to their success.
It was great to see the unity of the member organisation of FILCONT to achieve such a successful night.
The guests who attended the 108th Independence Day were entertained by the singing of Grepil Jakubowski, and then a glimpse of Filipino dances through the years, with a pre-Spanish period dance by Merle Masterson; the Spanish period evoked by Che-Che Cabunsol and Edgar Negosa; and the post-Spanish period by Jackie Debuque, Katrina Jap, Christienne Javier and Andrea Ocampo performing the Itik-Itik; Angie Cope and Susanna Dizon dancing the Pandanggo Sa Ilaw; and Christina Black, Julie McCool, Cynthia Molina and Tess Tabuzo doing the Bakya Mo Neneng. The last category was contemporary dance with Gina and Zaldy doing the Samba.
To cap off the performances, the crowd were delighted with a surprise performance by the Toreador dancers – Nol McCaulay, Lala Powers, Josephine Brutti and Elena Ralph - who donned Zorro costumes, and their partners, the ‘Spanish Senoritas’ - Henry Barbajo, Peter Labayog, Dido Laurente and Reggie Lazaro. This dynamic performance thrilled the crowd and caused a great amount of laughter. The trumpet player who heralded the Toreadors was Andrea Ocampo.
It was a great night, great food and great company. Manny Cruz was there, as were Daryl and Maureen Manzie, Arsenio and Ricarda de Guzman, Judith Ventic, and Maria and Danilo Cabunsol.
I was sad to hear that Elena is retiring as President of FILCONT after so many years, but we are confident that someone will step into the breach. The Saturday night celebration was a glowing example of her efforts with the Filipino community and just what a wonderful community they are. They are very talented. They have much fun and really rejoice in their Filipino culture.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I have a couple of matters to talk about tonight. One is on behalf of some pensioners who came to see me in relation to the Pensioner Concession Scheme that so many of our senior Territorians use on a regular basis, or as often as they possibly can. The scheme is for interstate flights every two years, and aged pensioners are entitled to a 50% concession on the cost of a return flight to any capital city in Australia. Alternatively, they can have a 100% concession once every four years. As we know, the flights can be used for overseas travel, in which case the concession is 50%, or 100% in four years, of the cost of the return economy airfare to Adelaide, or the actual fare, whichever is the lesser amount.
I note that Labor changed the scheme slightly by including the ability for pensioners to use the scheme to fly a family member or friend to Darwin from interstate. However, the scheme continues to fall short for two reasons. It has been raised with me on more than one occasion, and it relates to the possibility of intrastate travel. I am calling on the government tonight to introduce intrastate travel, as it will benefit a great number of senior Territorians and pensioners, in particular. For pensioners, there is a certain level of bizarreness, if you like, about the system where they can go interstate but they cannot go intrastate.
If you have Territorians who live in Darwin, they cannot avail themselves of this scheme to travel from Darwin to see family members in Alice Springs or vice versa. I know this issue has been kicking around for some years, but with all of the money the government has received from GST revenues, I ask the relevant minister to seriously look at the scheme and amend it so that intrastate travel for pensioners can be allowed. I am sure it will be used and I am sure it will benefit a number of pensioners in the Territory.
Another issue these people raised with me was the fact that the existing scheme interstate and overseas does not have an accommodation component. It was put to me that with so many package deals being available these days, particularly on the Internet, deals can be secured at prices that are often lower than the general return economy airfare to another capital city. It was a good point, I thought, because these people were asking me to urge government to look at making the scheme a bit more flexible. The government could set a dollar amount – it could be an agreed figure, an economy return airfare from Darwin or indeed, Alice Springs – but if those pensioners are able to look up the Net, or through agents, get a package deal that might include, for instance, three days away for a cheap airfare inclusive of accommodation and a hotel or motel in another capital city, then it seems to me to be a fairly persuasive argument. There would not be a cost disadvantage to government. It would be providing pensioners with an additional opportunity to avail themselves of interstate travel but also to pay some accommodation.
Some people do not necessarily want to go away for weeks at a time. Some people, particularly couples from my experience, are happy to go down to see their sons and daughters, their grandkids, only for a few days, and we all know of the great deals that can be obtained on the Internet or through a fairly dynamic travel agent.
I am asking the Minister for Senior Territorians to look at this matter. I would be most grateful if she would formally, or informally, let me know her response so that I can get back to the pensioners, these senior Territorians, who specially set aside their time to see me and talk me through this issue.
I have always taken the view that a good idea will get a run pretty much by anyone. I know that in this parliament, particularly over the last couple of days, there have been some differences on a number of important issues. However, this is a good idea. It is for pensioners, and any government worth their salt will try to be flexible in their endeavours to ensure that better outcomes are achieved for Territorians.
The CLP, of course, introduced the Pensioner Concession Scheme. I know that intrastate travel came up from time to time. I am not sure why the CLP government did not change it so that intrastate travel could be used by pensioners but what was presumably right then may not be right now. The government certainly has significantly more money, courtesy of Peter Costello’s GST, so I would certainly be urging government to look favourably at this proposal because it struck me as a good idea.
Tonight, I would like to talk about Gillen Primary School. Gillen Primary School is in the heart of my electorate and I have been to Gillen Primary School a couple of times in recent times, and in the past. The relatively new principal was the former deputy principal, Mr David Glyde, and going back into the school recently showed me the amount of energy that exists at Gillen Primary School. It is always a pleasure to walk into any school in my electorate but there was a very positive energy. The teachers were upbeat and the students were certainly upbeat as well.
I was asked by a teacher, Lisa Wallace, to talk to the representatives of the Student Representative Council. I, as I do with schools, contact the student representative bodies as the local member - I am sure I am not alone in this regard - and offer to come and see the students. I was truly delighted to be asked by Ms Wallace to talk to the students, which I did only a few weeks ago. What a dynamic group of students they were. They took me through some of the things they were doing. I was introduced to all of them and I will name them shortly so that their names will be permanently recorded on the Parliamentary Record. I will come to that soon.
When they were talking to me about what they were doing there was no doubt in my mind that these kids were bright, dynamic and innovative, and were well versed in the general political situation in the Northern Territory. I was happy to answer many of their questions but they knew a lot as well. Under the direction of Ms Lisa Wallace I am sure they will continue to do great things. I met the office bearers, president, vice president, treasurer and so on, and we went around the table and they fired as many questions at me as any media pack will do and what very good questions they were.
I would like to place their names on the Parliamentary Record: Shanice Sevallos-Smith, Thomas Smith, Zarah Butcher, Zianna Clarke, Sean Chalmers, Terrence Curly, Vithan Thillairajah, Emma Farrelly, Nathan Dingjan-Birchall, Patrick Cole-Manolis and Jayleen Sabino.
As I have said, they were very impressive young students. If those kids are the future of the Northern Territory then the Territory is going to be in very safe hands. We went around the table and all of them told me what they were interested in doing when they left school. I am sure all of them have a bright future.
I was then invited back to Gillen Primary School by another teacher, Henni Zwerwer, whose class was doing a project on the history of television. That involved discussions about various media and they wanted their local politician to talk to them as well as be interviewed. I was interviewed by some budding young journalists. If they do not pursue a journalistic path I am sure whatever path they pursue they will impress and they will be fine Territorians. They are already fine young Territorians. I was put through the mill by Emma and Karissa. It was a very difficult interview on occasion because of the hard-hitting nature of their questions. I do not usually get asked some of the questions by the media representatives in the Territory but they were good questions from young Territorians. It was part of the project they were doing in their study and research of the 50 years of television. I hope I assisted them with that project.
The students were Emma Farrelly, Karissa Nogler-Wells and Shayne Sales. We had the camera and the interview set up and it was a very interesting interview. I have not seen the finished product as there was some editing to be done. I hope the students found it as enjoyable as I did and that I will get to see the interview. I thought it was important to place their names, as well as their teacher’s name, on the Parliamentary Record so that they would be forever recorded in the permanent Hansard of the parliament of the Northern Territory.
I know the Territory is in good hands when you meet such exciting, bright kids as the ones you do at Gillen Primary School.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016